DRB Minutes 08.06.2020CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board
DATE: August 6, 2020
LOCATION: Virtual Meeting
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sandra Cook (Chair), Joel Margolis (Vice Chair), Ellen Flannery, Emily
Hutchings, Caroline Baird Mason, Rachel Poor
MEMBERS ABSENT: Matthew Ulrich
RECORDER: Sharlyne Woodbury
Chair Cook calls the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Cook describes how, due to the Coronavirus outbreak Governor Baker has issued a state mandated
order to suspend all public meetings and gatherings, and has permitted virtual meetings with certain
conditions. Tonight's meeting will be held on Google Hangouts and will follow specific meeting
requirements for live video feed and chat. Hutchings describes how the meeting will be recorded by the
City of Beverly. Cook describes how the meeting will progress, and states procedures for voting and for
public comment. Cook takes roll of meeting attendees, and confirms the attendance of Board members,
Staff, and applicants.
S!K
1. 12 Congress Street (cont.) Sedna Apartments
Andrew Layman and George Bertocchi reintroduce themselves as the sign maker and the applicant, and
return with an updated design and new renderings for the proposed freestanding sign for a residential
development. Mr. Layman describes how the size of the sign has been reduced to 33 square feet, and
describes the revised renderings. Margolis discusses the height of the sign and seeks clarification to the
exact size. Mr. Layman confirms the 6'3" measurement is a typo on the renderings and notes the correct
height. The Board reviews the updated renderings, noting the exact height of the sign and the height of
the berm. Mr. Layman clarifies the sign will be in front of the berm slightly higher than the sidewalk, not
on the top of the berm. The Board discusses the size of the sign and the shiplap base. Mr. Layman notes
that the portion of the sign with writing is only 20 square feet. Hutchings comments that the area of a
sign, by Ordinance definition, includes any base of the sign. Layman states the font size for "Beverly
Waterfront" is two inches in height, and that reducing the size of the sign would mean the words would
not be sufficiently visible. Poor and Cook agree the size of the sign matches the scale of the building.
Members discuss a variety of possibilities to reduce the size of the sign, including reducing the shiplap
base. Mr. Bertocchi notes concerns about plowed snow blocking the sign if it reduced in height. Cook
asks if the sign is one sided, and Mr. Layman confirms it is. Hutchings asks about additional public way
signs for the waterfront and walkway access.
The Board discusses the sign lighting. Mason and Margolis note they visited the site individually to
review the area. Mason states she is not in favor of internal lighting due to the waterfront location and
residential district. Other members agree with Mason. Cook asks if there is a dimming capability to
control the intensity of the lighting. Mr. Bertocchi confirms the lighting will maintain consistency with
the whole site to match the parking lot, streetlamps and pathway, and states he is amenable to
dimmable lighting. Members agree the applicant may submit a lighting plan for administrative review
and approval to staff.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Page 1 of 3
Design Review Board
August 6, 2020 Meeting Minutes
Cook: Motions to recommend the Zoning Board of Appeals grant the Special Permit
for the proposed sign with the conditions: (1) the top of the concrete sign
base /foundation is set to be flush with grade (23.0 feet above sea level), to be
no more than six (6) inches above the final grade of the immediate sidewalk;
and (2) the applicant will submit a lighting specification, to include (to the
greatest extent possible) lighting fixtures that includes lighting control, to the
Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Department and
Chair of the Design Review Board. Flannery seconds. The motion carries 6 -0.
2. 377 Cabot Street Gentle Dental
Andrew Clark, Expose Signs Inc. & Graphics, Inc. introduces himself as the sign maker representing the
applicant. Mr. Clark clarifies that they are seeking approval for one window sign, as well as a door
graphic that lists the practicing dentists per state law. Hutchings reviews the Ordinance and the
application and notes that she had previously incorrectly stated the application was for the existing,
non - conforming window signs; Hutchings confirmed that the window sign for which approval is being
requested does meet the Ordinance's requirement of covering less than 20% of the windows, and
therefore, no Special Permit is required. Members discuss the busy design and graphics. Mr. Clark
describes the sign as a promotional banner that can be changed by the business owner when they want
to advertise different promotions. Cook explains the signage cannot be changed again without further
review from the Board. Mr. Clark confirms the sign is set and part of the business' marketing strategy,
which can change on occasion, but that any changes will come back to the Board.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Hutchings: Motions to approve the proposed sign as presented with the condition that the
Building Inspector confirms the sign is in compliance with the Ordinance, and
noting that any change to the sign will require the applicant to return to the
Board for review and approval. Margolis seconds. The motion carries 6 -0.
3. 30 Rantoul Street Station 2 Salon
Linda Bucci and Christine Bouchard introduce themselves as the applicants and business owners. Ms.
Bucci describes the proposed freestanding sign, noting it is a simple design and will occupy the same
space as the existing sign. Ms. Bucci states she will also use the same designer who created the
previously existing sign. Members review and generally approve of the sign. Poor recommends the word
"Salon" be changed to white to improve readability.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Cook: Motions to approve the proposed sign as presented with the recommendation
that the color of the word "Salon" be changed from gold to white. Mason
seconds. The motion carries 6 -0.
4. 211 Rantoul Street Soall Viet Kitchen
Sa Nguyen introduces herself as the applicant and business owner, and states she is returning to the
Board to discuss the addition of signage on four windows. Ms. Nguyen states the graphics were initially
used to for marketing and were considered temporary; however, Ms. Nguyen states she decided to
return to seek approval to make the signs permanent based on the positive feedback she received from
members of the public. Poor inquires about the varied scale and color of the lettering between the front
Page 2 of 3
Design Review Board
August 6, 2020 Meeting Minutes
and side windows. Ms. Nguyen clarifies the text is all white, the bowl graphic is blue with clear
background. Ms. Nguyen also confirms the difference in scale of one of the window signs is due to the
different size of the side window where the sign is located. Board members review the signage and
agree it is tasteful and appropriate to the area.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Flannery: Motions to approve the proposed signs as presented. Hutchings seconds. The
motion carries 6 -0.
S. 7 Abbott Street HM Aesthetics
Haley Macarelli introduces herself as the applicant and business owner, and describes her salon
business. Ms. Macarelli informs the Board she is proposing a small 2 -foot by 2 -foot wall sign for the
space located above the window in the left side panel of the sign band. Poor recommends a border to
help frame the sign and recommends the text be a thicker font for better visibility. Margolis states he
would like to see the sign centered over the two windows. The Board reviews the building and existing
sign band, where there is a two -panel division preventing the sign from being perfectly centered.
Members discuss possibilities to center the sign to facilitate visibility and clarify the business location.
Ms. Macarelli agrees to move the sign closer to the panel above the door to center the sign and will
provide Hutchings with updated renderings before the sign's installation.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Flannery: Motions to approve the proposed sign as presented with the conditions that (1)
a white line border be placed around the perimeter of the sign, and (2) the sign
is centered in the middle panel of the sign band; and with the recommendation
to use a heavier line weight for the lettering and white portions of the sign.
Margolis seconds. The motion carries 6 -0.
6. New /Other Business
a. Draft meeting minutes
Flannery: Motions to approve July 9, 2020 minutes as amended. Mason seconds. The
motion carries 6 -0.
7. Adjourn:
Cook: Motions to adjourn. Flannery seconds. The motion carries 6 -0.
Meeting adjourned at 7:42 pm.
Next meeting September 3, 2020.
Page 3 of 3