2002-09-05Design Review Board
Meeting Minutes – September 5, 2002
Page 1
CITY OF BEVERLY
Public Meeting Minutes
BOARD: Design Review Board
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: September 5, 2002
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Margaret O’Brien, Debra Hurlburt & Douglas
Haring
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: William Finch & Jennifer Palardy
OTHERS PRESENT: Leah Zambernardi
RECORDER: Diane Presutti
Ms. Hurlburt called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
1. Preferred Air Inc. - Thomas Favazza/81 Rantoul Street/Sign
Mr. Favazza approached the Board explaining he has recently purchased the building
located at 81 Rantoul Street. He continues to explain that he wishes to display a sign to
identify his business on the building. His sign is 2’ x 3’ and contains his company name
in blue on white. The sign also contains the words “24 hour Service” and a phone
number. There will be a yellow sunburst and a blue snowflake. He also explains that this
is an existing sign he had on display at a previous location. Mr. Favazza also states that
he plans to erect a neon sign in the near future and will return to the Board at that time.
Ms. Hurlburt asks if Mr. Favazza has discussed this matter with Mr. Brennan. She
addresses the freestanding sign in the front of the building and states that if a building
changes hands, there is question to whether a nonconforming sign must come down. She
continues to explain to Mr. Favazza that he must check the variance on the non-
conforming sign with Mr. Brennan. Mr. Favazza states that this application is for another
sign on the side of the building so clients will know where his business is. The
freestanding sign will not change. Ms. Hurlburt also states that he is allowed 20 square
feet for a sign. She also explains that the ordinance states a company sign is for
identification only and phone numbers and unrelated phrases such as “24 hour service”
need to be removed.
Mr. Haring suggests enlarging company name when removing unnecessary information
from the sign. Ms. O’Brien concurs.
Mr. Favazza states he will white out the phone number and “24 hour service” to
accommodate the Board.
Ms. Hurlburt asks the Board for any further questions.
Ms. Hurlburt asks for a motion to accept the sign contingent upon elimination of phone
number and the text reading “24 hour service”.
Design Review Board
Meeting Minutes – September 5, 2002
Page 2
Ms. O’Brien motions to accept sign with the contingency, seconded by Mr. Haring.
Motion carries 3-0.
2. Mobil - Michael Benoit/455 Essex Street/Sign
Mr. Benoit approaches the Board with pictures of the existing canopy at the Mobil gas
station at 455 Essex Street. He explains that the current canopy displays “Mobil” only
and the company wishes to add blue fascia around the entire canopy. The “Mobil” is
currently illuminated and the new fascia will be illuminated as well. He also states that
the Mobil station does not have a freestanding sign.
Mr. Haring states that the Mobil at 455 Essex Street is located fairly close to a residential
neighborhood. He urges the Board to consider the neighbors regarding additional
illumination.
Ms. O’Brien agrees.
Ms. Hurlburt explains that under the ordinance, Mr. Brennan states that these fascias are
allowable. She emphasizes also that the Board has to consider the neighborhood.
Ms. Hurlburt asks Mr. Benoit how many sides the fascia will be added to. Mr. Benoit
explains that 3 sides of the canopy will be affected. He states that the blue fascia
represents the company that serves gasoline. He adds that Exxon Mobil is pushing these
aesthetic standards.
Mr. Benoit asks the Board if they would look at it more favorably if the new fascia were
not illuminated.
Mr. Haring suggests they only use the blue fascia on the side with the Mobil sign and
eliminate the other two fascias. Ms. O’Brien states that there should be no blue fascia.
Ms. Hurlburt states that she would look at it more favorably with only one side having a
blue fascia.
Mr. Benoit asks the Board to table his application so he may consult with Mobil.
The Board agrees to table until Mr. Benoit contacts Ms. Hurlburt.
3. Stoneridge Children’s Montessori/Endicott South Campus - 290 Hale St./Sign
Mr. Alexander approaches the Board on behalf of Stoneridge Children’s Montessori
School (SCMS) and Endicott College South Campus. He continues to explain that SCMS
has signed a 99 year lease with Endicott College and they wish to display a 1 ½” Med X
smooth face plywood sign to be externally illuminated. The location of SCMS is across
from Tucker Hall and has 1200’ of frontage allowing for no visibility of the school.
The sign will display “Stoneridge Children’s Montessori School” along with “Toddler to
th
8 Grade” and the property address.
Design Review Board
Meeting Minutes – September 5, 2002
Page 3
Mr. Dave Lash, a consultant for SCMS states that the perception of a Montessori School
th
is pre-school, therefore the need for the phrase “Toddler to 8 Grade”. He continues to
state that the sign will be brown with beige letters and will be externally illuminated from
both sides of the sign.
Mr. Alexander notes that the building is ¼ mile away and there is no visibility of the
building.
th
Ms. Hurlburt states that the phrase “Toddler to 8 Grade” is not necessary in her opinion.
She also questions the location of the sign.
Mr. Haring asks if it might be possible to reduce the verbage.
Ms. O’Brien states that given the reason for the phrase, she would accept.
Mr. Haring states that the combination of signs is subtle.
Mr. Lash states that the stone structure extends from the existing stone wall which
supports the signs. It does a 90 degree angle.
Ms. Hurlburt questions if there will be any removal of trees and Mr. Lash replies no.
Ms. Hurlburt asks for any further questions from the Board.
Ms. Hurlburt asks for a motion to accept.
Ms. O’Brien motions to accept the sign as presented, seconded by Mr. Haring.
Motion carries 2-1. (Hurlburt opposed.)
4. The Pickled Onion - Derek Duffy & Kenneth Hanson /355-357 Rantoul
Street/Sign
Mr. Duffy and Mr. Hanson approach the Board with a black and white computer sketch
of the sign face they wish to display on the existing “Freddie’s” sign. Mr. Hanson shows
the Board a color chart and describes which sections of the sign will be which colors.
Ms. O’Brien states that the Zoning Board ruling on the old “Freddie’s” sign was that it be
taken down.
Mr. Duffy states that he understood that he could keep the sign and reface it according to
the DRB approval.
Ms. Hurlburt states that Mr. Brennan has made a ruling that the business was opened
when Mr. Duffy purchased it; therefore, the sign may stay. She continues to state that
the City Solicitor at the time also looked into it. She notes that absent members Bill
Finch liked the 1950’s era style of the sign.
Mr. Hurlburt continues the meeting by reviewing the fonts and colors with Mr. Hanson
and Mr. Duffy. She states that she would like to see all the fonts uniform. Mr. Duffy
notes that the fonts in the “Pickled Onion” text are part of their logo.
Design Review Board
Meeting Minutes – September 5, 2002
Page 4
Ms. O’Brien states that she is against refacing the sign but recommends to Mr. Duffy and
Mr. Hanson to provide the Board with a color sketch of the sign, preferably on
photographic printer paper.
Ms. Hurlburt states she is interested in the colors. Mr. Hanson states it is toned down in
comparison to the Freddie’s sign.
Ms. Hurlburt asks the Board for any further question.
Ms. Hurlburt asks for a motion.
Mr. Haring motions to accept contingent upon a color sketch and revised fonts be sent to
Ms. Hurlburt, seconded by Ms. Hurlburt.
Motion carries 2-1. (O’Brien opposed.)
6. Whitehall Hill Realty Trust - Henry Bertolon/2 Boyles Street/Site Plan Review
Mr. Alexander approaches the Board and introduces Bob Griffin of Griffin Engineering
Group; Gary Snyder, Architect; and Mike Wasser, Landscape Architect. He continues to
explain that the development will consist of 92 units of senior housing with 6.5 acres
preserved for open space.
Mr. Griffin proceeds to explain that this development will consist of townhouse units as
well as condos. The buildings themselves will be duplex, 3plex and 4plex. The
development will have a separate entrance from 28 Boyles Street and 30 Boyles Street.
The buildings will be 125’ from the property line and the development will be restricted
to age 55. The development will have a club house, recreational facilities and private
rooms for functions.
Mr. Snyder approaches the Board and begins to explain that the residents will be 55 and
older. The designs put before the Board are to accommodate the needs of this market.
The designs show a balance between formal and informal spaces. Each unit will have an
entry way foyer which opens to dining space and continues to family area and kitchen.
Each unit will contain flex space or customized space. The exterior design includes New
England, cedar shingles, claps for accents and stone veneer. There will also be stone
chimneys and columns.
Mr. Wasser continues to explain that the existing landscaping will be enhanced. He
continues that the wetlands will be for wildlife watching. He states that non-evasive
plants will be planted and the secret wall garden may be restored. The specific unit design
will allow for owners to do their own gardening. There will be special paving and low
landscaping as not to hide the architecture. The lighting will consist of 12’ street lights,
not too overwhelming to the community but at a safe level.
Mr. Haring questions the entrance on Hale Street and if it passed the Fire Department’s
requirements.
Design Review Board
Meeting Minutes – September 5, 2002
Page 5
Mr. Griffin replies stating that they are in discussion with the Parking and Traffic
Commission regarding entrance grades.
Mr. Alexander states that a traffic engineer designed the entrance.
Ms. Hurlburt asks for an elevation for the detached garage. She also states that the
elevations provided are for 3 units and wishes to see elevations for 2 and 4 units. She also
questions if the garage entrances will be visible from the street.
Mr. Snyder responds stating that whenever the design allows a non-visible garage it will
be done, however; more important is driving in and walking in rather than walking up.
Mr. Griffin explains that some houses will have a couple foot rises. There will be 20’ or
more from unit to street. All garages will be for 2 vehicles and the elevation will not
decline.
Mr. Bertolon states that he will provide garage elevations but that he feels the elevations
are representative of what all of the units may look like.
Ms. Hurlburt questions the 12’ light posts and the degree of projection of light. She also
explains she is concerned that the abutters may be disturbed by the lighting.
Mr. Wasser explains that the projection will be 36’ out and shorter light inward. He also
explains that some lights can be eliminated and/or be directed toward the development.
Ms. Hurlburt addresses Mr. Wasser for specific number and plants be provided. She also
states that the City Arborist needs to review the landscaping specifics. She also states that
the Planning Board will also require more specifics.
At this time, Ms. Virginia McGlynn, as a private citizen, wishes to urge the Board to
reread the “Master Plan”. She reminds the Board to keep “Quality” in Beverly. She
continues to explain that she likes the concept but feels the architecture is overwhelming.
She states that the development is much too big.
Ms. Zambernardi states that the units may be staggered and that would affect how they
look..
Mr. Alexander states that they are allowed 4 units per acre and the development is 3.3
units per acre.
Ms. Hurlburt questions the test pits on the plan and also states that a natural stain or
bleach stain would be nice on the townhouses.
Ms. Hurlburt asks the Board for a motion contingent upon Mr. Wasser providing
landscaping specifics for the Arborist to review and upon Mr. Snyder providing elevation
plans for the detached garages.
Mr. Haring motions to accept the site plan contingent upon garage elevations be provided
to Ms. Hurlburt for approval and specific landscaping details be provided to Phil
Klimowitz, City Arborist, for his approval.
Design Review Board
Meeting Minutes – September 5, 2002
Page 6
Seconded by Ms. O’Brien. Motion carries 3-0.
Ms. Hurlburt states for the record that she spoke to Mr. Finch and he feels strongly that
the windows on the art gallery buildings remain same and that it should have interior
storms not exterior storms. She adds the building has a preservation restriction on it.
7. Approval of Minutes
The approval of the minutes of July 11, 2002 will be tabled until the next DRB meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.