Loading...
1999-09-09 City of Beverly, Massachusetts Design Review Board Meeting Minutes Board: Design Review Board Subcommittee: Date: September 9, 1999 Place: City Hall, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly Board Members Present: Jennifer Palardy, Peggy O'Brien and Bill Finch Members Absent: Doug Hating, Debra Huffburr, Assistant Planning Director Other Present: Recorder: Kim Lauranzano Bill Finch calls meeting to order at 6:30 P.M. 1. Site Plan Modification - Stephy's Kitchen, 398 Cabot Street Attorney Alexander introduces himself to the Board and explained the most recent set of site plans for Stephy's Kitchen to the Board. He indicated the species of plantings that were discussed with the city' s arborous are yews, Blue Star Juniper, Holly, Blue Spruce and Princes spire. These plantings will be an addition to what is already existing. Attorney Alexander added that the dumpster will be enclosed by a fence. He added that the design change to the front entrance of Stephy's Kitchen were made to protect customers from the weather elements. Mr. Finch asked if the old building will be removed. Attorney Alexander explained that the old building will remain and the new building is being constructed next to it. He added that they have already had the site plan approved but he is here only because of the design change to the from entrance that the new design gives a nlcer roof line and adds more depth to the front. They have also added a window on the side. Members voted unanimously to approve the modifications. 2. Site Plan Modification - Cassis Bakery & Apts., 261-263 Cabot Street Michael Oratovsky introduces himelf to the Board, he explained that the Planning board wanted a buffer zone around parking lot, however they were unable to do that so they dropped the mount ofuhits to 3 two -bedroom units from the original 6 units. He added that they have a preliminary contract with a trash company who will be able to pick up as often as needed. Mr. Oratorsky stated that the height of the building was an issue with the Planning Board so that also has been reduced, but they would like to keep the existing red brick on the lower half of the building and use a white aluminum siding on the upper half of the building with shutters on the windows. Ms. Palardy asked if the old plans were for a 2- story addition, and the new plan will be for a I story addition and if the peaked roof will be steeper. Mr. Oratorsky responded yes, that he has worked with the church next door and the roof will be just a little steeper than the original design. Ms. O'Brien asked if the original plans were for 2 - 2 badroom, I - 1 bedroom and 3 - 3 bedroom apartments. Mr. Oratorsky responded yes but now it will be just 3 -2 bedroom apartments with 1 parking space for commercial. Mr. Finch asked if they are retaining the brick panel on the front. Mr. Oratovsky responded yes, they are going to try to keep it but they don't know what is inside it, and they know until we start. Mr. Finch asked are they leaving the current 111 wood stuff there. M~. Oratovsky responded at the moment he's not sure, the owners do not like it but he is simply not sure. Mr. Finch stated if he is, he would like to know what the materisl is going to be that is being used. Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 9, 1999 Pages 2 Mr. Oratovsky stated that in the ~ture they will be working on the canopies and the signs before they will replace that material. Mr. Finch asked what does canopies mean. Mr. Oratovsky stated the sign. Mr. Finch added that if there am any changes to the storefront he thinks that they are obligated to come back in. Ms. Palardy agrees with Mr. Finch. Mr. Oratorsky commented that he understood, that he doesn't want to delay the process. Mr. Finch added that he has some questions about the windows, and whether these shutters are separate eliminates because they are drawn like they are boxed into the windows. Mr. Oratorsky stated that it depends on what kind of windows they choose, they might be, and they will be as long as the windows. Mr. Finch asked if they are separate shutters because the way these are drawn it looks like they are set in some kind of trim board. Mr. Oratorsky responded yes that is the only way to buy them. Mr. Finch comments that the window configuration shows four panes over four panes with a horizontal double pane, and is that what they are planning to use. Mr. Oratovsky responded yes, four panes that are double hung. Mr. Finch responded that he understands that they are double hung but that is not very traditional, and whether that is what they are planning to do. Mr. Oratovsky responded if we can buy them that way, but it is a matter of the market. Mr. Finch commented that the purpose of this is to review what you are planning to do. Mr. Finch stated that he questions whether the applicant is going to put a traditional window there or whether they are you going to put some kind of modern window, that he doesn't know what their intentions are. Mr. Oratorsky stated that is his intention. Mr. Finch responded that it is a very strange looking window, not usually seen on the street. Ms. Palardy commented that she would prefer a more traditioanl kind of window. Mr. Oratorsky responded that he can come back with sketches. Mr. Finch commented that if he remembers correctly this is going to be vinyl siding not wood. Mr. Oratovsk-y responded most likely. Mr. Finch responded that he would like to know what it is going to be, not what it most likely going to be. Mr. Oratovsky responded vinyl. Mr. Finch asked what color the vinyl would be. Ms. Palardy added that the Board needs to see a sample of it. Mr. Oratorsky responded that he can make a sample available to the Board. Mr. Finch commented that he is concerned because this thing seems to be floating in the air, the details don't seem to be set. Mr. Oratovsky responded that if ha knew all these questions in advance, he certainly could have been more prepared. Mr. Finch asked what color are the roof shingles. Mr. Oratovsky responded dark gray. Ms. Palardy asked the partitioner if he wanted to come back. Mr. Oratovsky responded that wi/l be fine. Mr, Finch commented that he doesn't have a problem with the changes; he thinks they look better than original plans, but the Board needs to know what kind of materials going to be use. ( windows, if storefront design is going to change, vinyl) He added the Board will send a letter aski~8 for more details on the windows, the color of the siding and the material, any changes proposed to the storefront and the shutters. Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 9, 1999 Page 3 3. Sign - North Shore Bank, 50 Dodge Street Mr. Robitallle of Metro Sign Co. introduces himself to the Board. He stated that his client would like to replace the wood sign that was lighted at one time but not now. Mr. Finch asked if the size of this is the same size that is currently on the building Mr. Robitaille responded no, what he did war he went down to the Building Inspector's Office and he took the formula that is normally given and came up with that size for the sign. Mr. Finch asked which is 35 square feet. Mr. Robitaille responded yes, the landlord approved this and the Building Inspector tentatively approved it. Mr. Finch responded OK and asked if it is 2 1/3 fL by 15 ~. in size. Mr. Robitaille responded yes. Ms. O'Brien asked if this is instead of the red sign. Mr. Robitaille responded yes, the red sign is gone. Member~ voted unanimously to approve the sign. 4. Sign - Cabot Shoe Repair, 296A Cabot Street, Beverly Mr. Finch arked what is currently there. Is there a sign. Mr. Vicktor Kharlov responded no, there is no sign there that people call everyday arking where he is located. Mr. Finch arked if this is a vertical sign. Mr. Kharlov responds Yes. Mr. Finch arked if the sign is internally illuminated. Mr. Kharlov responded Yes, it is very expensive, and the size is 3 ~. by 4 ft. Mr. Finch commented that the Board needs to review the ordinance to see if it is allowed or not. Ms. O'Brien arked if'he met with the Building Inspector Tim Breanan. Mr. Kharlov responded No. Mr. Finch commented that he is not sure if an applicant can hang a sign in addition to a flat sign. Mr. Kharlov stated that they just painted the flat sign, that there is no sign there now, work has already been started on the sign, that he didn't know he needed permission. Mr. Finch commented that the Board needed to know where the sign will be going, that the Board would prefer a painted wood sign with lights hanging over it. Mr. Khariov responded that he can't change, that work has already started on the sign. The Board directed Mr. Kharlov to the Building Inspector' s office. No action war taken. Attorney Alexander introduces himself to the Board, and he explains the original site plan to committee. He stated that basically the parking and the premises will remain the same as it was in 1999. He commented that the tenant brought a suit against the applicant, and that they tried to work this out but now have decided to reduce the project back and leave that area alone. Attorney Alexander added that currently there are four Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 9, 1999 Page 4 curb cuts, but we were going to cut it down to two, but now we will keep the one in front of his storefront and have a total of three curb cuts. He stated that the original design will remain the same that they are just not going to touch his store, that it will remain the same until his lease runs out and that they will deal with it at that time. Mr. Finch asked if what they are looking at is 6 bays. Attorney Alexander responded, Yes. Mr. Finch asked if the tenants building will stay the same. Attorney Alexander responded, Yes Board Members voted unanimously to approve the sign. Meeting adjourned at 8 p.m.