ChairpersonCITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board
DATE: February 6, 2020
LOCATION: Beverly City Hall — Council Chamber /Conference Room B
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sandra Cook (Chair), Joel Margolis (Vice Chair), Ellen Flannery, Emily
Hutchings, Caroline Baird Mason, Rachel Poor, Matthew Ulrich
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
RECORDER: Sharlyne Woodbury
Chairperson Cook called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Siens
1. 254 Cabot Street North Shore Bank (continued)
The applicant returns with revisions to the original design of the proposed projecting sign in the CC
zoning district. The revised design includes a slight reduction in size from 16 feet to 12.67 feet, and a
change from internal illumination to illumination from the top of the sign. Current renderings are
submitted that detail the sign, including the raised lettering and lighting.
Richard Batten from Batten Bros. introduces himself, representing North Shore Bank. Mr. Batten reviews
the renderings with the Board. The applicant states he feels the size is appropriate to maintain visibility
from Cabot Street, which remains a main issue and concern. Members begin discussion and debate the
sign size. Board members agree the district has undergone many renovations, and some larger,
grandfathered signs are not appropriate to the current street character. Moving forward, the Board
agrees they strive for a cohesive look in keeping with the urban character. Several members state they
do not believe a sign larger than 7 square feet is appropriate for the district. The Board and Mr. Batten
converse about the size. Mr. Batten verifies that if the sign complies the Sign Ordinance, the applicant
would not be required to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals for sign approval. The Board confirms
this information. Cook encourages the applicant to use a blade sign as opposed to a bulkier projecting
sign. Mr. Batten considers the proposal but states the business prefers to remain with the proposed
projecting sign, again citing visibility as a main concern.
The discussion moves to the illumination of the sign. Mr. Batten discusses the various ways to illuminate
the projecting sign, including using LED strips, which soften the sign appearance. He also discusses lights
shining down onto the sign using a conduit. Board members reiterate the architecture of the building in
the current district is important, and should be considered with the lighting. They acknowledge the
building is not historic, but the building is located within a National Register historic district. Mr. Batten
describes a compromise to install lights on the sign bracket instead of on the building, as a potentially
less intrusive method. Board members concur keeping the sign, including the lighting, as simple as
possible is best. Hutchings explains the goal of the Ordinance as it pertains to the district, and how signs
should complement and respect building architecture. Mr. Batten states he understands the design
purview of the Board. The Board agrees that regarding the proposed design of the projecting sign, a
positive recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals is not likely. With that understanding, the
applicant requests a continuance, to return to the Design Review Board at a later date with updated
renderings.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Page 1 of 4
Design Review Board
February 6, 2020 Meeting Minutes
Cook: Motion to continue the topic of the North Shore Bank projecting sign for 254
Cabot Street to the March 5, 2020 meeting. Flannery seconded. The motion
carried (7 -0).
2. 63 Dodge Street North Shore Bank
The applicant had previously applied for a wall sign that was larger than permitted by right, for which
the Board made a positive recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The applicant is returning
to seek approval for a sign that complies with the Sign Ordinance and does not require a Special Permit.
The applicant is proposing one wall sign in the CG zoning district.
Sign maker Batten Bros. represents the applicant and explains the revised sign design. Members of the
Board have no issues with the sign as proposed. They feel the sign maintains continuity with other signs
between Enon and Dodge Streets and is appropriate for the location. Board members note the revised
design is an improvement.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Flannery: Motion to approve the sign as presented. Mason seconded. The motion carried
(7 -0).
3. 181 Elliott Street. Cummines Center Beverly Athletic Club
The applicant is proposing one wall sign in the IR zoning district and is in compliance with the Sign
Ordinance. Sign maker Batten Bros. represents the applicant. They explain their request for a set of
internally illuminated channel letters (in white) for the wall sign. The background will match the
building. Mr. Batten also presents sign dimensions to the Board. Members discuss the sign illumination
and confirm it is compliance.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Flannery: Motion to approve the sign as presented. Ulrich seconded. The motion carried
(7 -0).
4. 226 Rantoul Street Safelite Auto Glass
The applicant is proposing two wall signs in the CC zoning district. The Rantoul Street facade sign
replaces an existing sign of equal size and the wall sign on Bow Street facade complies with the
Ordinance. No special permits are required. Anna Haluch of JN Phillips explains the rebranding of the
Safelite Auto Glass sign. Members of the Board review and state no concerns with the signs.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Cook: Motion to recommend the proposed signs as presented. Poor seconded. The
motion carried (7 -0).
S. 29 Enon Street Starbucks
The applicant is proposing one wall sign in the CC zoning district which complies with the Sign
Ordinance. Sign maker Serrato Signs LLC represents Starbucks. They detail the remodel and redesign of
signs at all Starbucks locations. The sign maker notes that as a result they are changing the sign color
from green to white. They chose white letter halo lighting and are removing the word "coffee ". Board
members confirm the sign is internally lit and agree the sign complies with the Ordinance.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Page 2 of 4
Design Review Board
February 6, 2020 Meeting Minutes
Flannery: Motion to recommend the proposed sign as presented. Cook seconded. The
motion carried (7 -0).
6. 279 Cabot Street Wended
The applicant is proposing window signage in the CC zoning district which complies with the Sign
Ordinance. Business owner Ariana Puopolo introduces herself and details the vinyl window signage
including the lettering and color. At present the applicant is seeking only the window signage, but may
return in the future. Board members inquire about future signs. Ms. Puopolo explains the landlord plans
to reface the exterior facade of the building. Hutchings succinctly describes the upcoming project plans
to the Board.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Cook: Motion to recommend the proposed sign as presented. Flannery seconded. The
motion carried (7 -0).
7. 175 Cabot Street TD Bank
Hutchings states the applicant is unable to attend tonight's meeting, and has requested a continuance
to the next meeting.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Flannery: Motion to continue the item to March 5, 2020. Cook seconded. The motion
carried (7 -0).
8. 312 Cabot Street Enterprise rent -a -car
The applicant is proposing three wall signs and window signage in the CC zoning district. The Cabot and
Roundy Street facade signs comply with the ordinance. The parking lot facing sign is before the Building
Inspector to confirm compliance with the ordinance. The window signage requires a special permit
covering more than 10 sq. ft. of area. Staff informed the applicant the poster and window signage do
not comply with the ordinance.
Becky Marcinkovich, Property Manager, introduces herself, and explains that Enterprise is relocating to
the old Papa Gino's location on Cabot Street. She details the wall signs and material, which are replacing
existing signs. Hutchings confirms the wall signs comply with the Sign Ordinance, according to the
Building Inspector. Ms. Marcinkovich states that the proposed window signs are being withdrawn from
the application due to the fact that they require a Special Permit. She further explains Enterprise intends
to relocate the main entrance from Cabot Street to what was the side entrance of Papa Gino's.
Hutchings clarifies for the applicant that exit and entrance signs do not require DRB approval or review
per the Sign Ordinance, but do require review from the Building Inspector for a sign permit.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Cook: Motion to approve the three wall signs as presented. Flannery seconded. The
motion carried 7 -0.
Site Plan Review
9. 245 Cabot Street (YMCA Renovations) — Site Plan Review #198 -17
This project was previously reviewed and approved by the Board in September 2017, with a condition
placed upon the approval that required the applicant return to the Board for review of additional
architectural details prior to filing for a building permit. The application proposed the removal of the 4th
floor squash court in order to create room for an addition; the addition allows for the renovation and
Page 3 of 4
Design Review Board
February 6, 2020 Meeting Minutes
enlargement of the existing 45 rooming house units with the addition of 24 new units. Attorney Tom
Alexander of Alexander & Femino introduces himself and architect Ben Scott of Siemasko & Verbridge,
representing the client. Mr. Alexander states the team is returning per the condition placed on the
Planning Board's approval. The team briefs the Board on all updates to the original approved plan, which
involved additional architectural and material details. A computer presentation was not available and
Board reviews the renderings disbursed by Mr. Scott. Mr. Alexander also briefs the Board on the funding
received from various sources for the project. Mr. Scott details the design specifics, including the
cornices, metal panels, materials & textures, window treatments, and setbacks. Mr. Scott further details
the true pilaster added to the new fourth floor of the building and describes the removal of the fourth
floor squash court. Mr. Scott also notes despite a discrepancy in one of the renderings, all pilasters are
corrugated, not fluted. The metal panel described will be ribbed. The windows remain the same as
originally approved, wood clad with aluminum maintaining a brick mold facade.
Members begin discussion on the updates and inquire about specific features. Mason particularly
inquired about the historic sign. The team stated the sign will remain, and Hutchings noted the North
Shore YMCA went to great lengths to retain and restore the sign. Mr. Scott provides a sample of the
green metal material to the Board for approval as the renderings make the material appear to be several
shades of green. Members agree the colors look appropriate. Mr. Alexander informs the Board in
October 2019 the Planning Board granted another extension for the project. The Board agrees that the
applicant has met the condition previously recommended by the Design Review Board and incorporated
into the Planning Board's decision to approve the application in 2017.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Cook: Motion to approve the architectural details as presented. Flannery seconded.
The motion carried (7 -0).
8. New /Other Business
a. Draft meeting minutes —December 12, 2019 & January 9, 2020
Cook: Motion to approve the December 12, 2019, minutes as amended. Mason
seconded. All in favor. The motion carried (7 -0).
Cook: Motion to approve the January 9, 2020, minutes as amended. Ulrich seconded.
All in favor. The motion carried (7 -0).
b. Other Business
Members discuss the most optimal way to review and report Beverly businesses with signs in
violation of the Sign Ordinance. Several businesses are discussed that are either beyond their
original time allotment as temporary signs, or that have signs that have not been approved and do
not comply with the Sign Ordinance. Members agree going forward a mechanism should be in place
to determine and track the unapproved signs or signs violating the Ordinances. The Board requests
that Hutchings maintain the list and agrees to send photos of signs in violation to Hutchings.
Adjourn:
Cook: Motion to adjourn the meeting. Flannery seconded. The motion carried 7 -0.
Meeting adjourned at 7:50 pm.
Next meeting March 5, 2020.
Page 4 of 4