DRB minutes 04.12.22 Final CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board
DATE and TIME: April 12, 2022; 6:00 PM
LOCATION: Beverly City Hall, 191 Cabot Street, Conference Room A
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sandi Cook, Ellen Flannery, Caroline Baird Mason, Rachel Poor
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Emily Hutchings; Heather Hopkins Dudko;
Alisha Etheridge; Jeff Sara; Bill Gavigan;Tom Alexander; David Cutler;
Michael Mosko; George Zambouras
RECORDER: Emily Hutchings
Chair Sandi Cook calls the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Signs
1. Citizens, 2 Enon Street Heather Hopkins Dudko
The application includes two wall signs, one panel on an existing freestanding sign, two freestanding
directional signs, and one awning sign. The wall signs and directional freestanding signs require a Special
Permit. The panel and awning sign comply with the Ordinance. The property is located in the CN zoning
district.
Heather Hopkins Dudko provides an overview of the signs, reviewing their respective sizes, lighting
types, and locations. She reviews the locations of the directional freestanding signs with a site map (not
included in the application). Poor discusses concerns about traffic flow in and out of the site with the
proposed layout. Other members agree. Board members note that although they have concerns, review
of the parking layout is not before them tonight. Ms. Dudko reviews the proposed ATM signage, and
notes that it will not be visible from a public way. Hutchings confirms that because the signage is not
visible from a public way, it does not require DRB review. All Board members agree that they have no
concerns about the proposed signage, and although they have concerns about the traffic flow, that is
not being considered at this meeting.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Cook: Moves to approve the proposed panel on the existing freestanding sign and the awning
sign as presented. Flannery seconds. The motion carries 4-0.
Cook: Moves to recommend the Zoning Board of Appeals approve a Special Permit for the wall
signs and freestanding directional signs as presented. Mason seconds. The motion
carries 4-0.
2. Andalin Thai Kitchen and Bar at Beverly Farms, 24 West Street Alisha Etheridge
The application includes one projecting sign and one awning sign. The signs comply with the Ordinance.
The property is located in the CN zoning district.
Alisha Etheridge reviews the signs, noting that the projecting sign will be circular in shape. She presents
the Board with an updated rendering. Flannery confirms that "Farms"will be spelled with a capital "F".
Page 1 of 3
Design Review Board
April 12, 2022 Meeting Minutes
Ms. Etheridge states that yes that will be the case. Cook and Flannery state that they like the circular
sign shape, and Poor and Mason agree.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Flannery: Moves to approve the proposed signage as proposed. Mason seconds. The motion
carries 4-0.
3. Beth Israel Lahey Health Primary Care Batten Bros Signs
The application is for two wall signs, which comply with the Ordinance. The property is in the IR zoning
district.
Jeff Sara is present from Batten Bros Signs and presents to the Board. He reviews the amended signs,
which are slightly smaller than what was initially submitted to the Board, in order to comply with the
Ordinance. Mr. Sara reviews the signage and reasoning for the name change—stating a business merger
—and reviews the logo. Board members comment about the logo and discuss how it appears.They note
no concerns.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Cook: Moves to approve the proposed signage as proposed. Flannery seconds. The motion
carries 4-0.
4. DD,41 Enon Street Poyant Signs
The application includes one wall sign, which complies with the Ordinance. The property is located in the
CG zoning district.
Bill Gavigan from Poyant Signs reviews the sign for the Board, and states that if faces REV Kitchen. Board
members state that it is clean and they have no concerns.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Mason: Moves to approve the signage as presented. Cook seconds. The motion carries 4-0.
5. Site Plan Modification: 108 Bridge Street 108 Bridge Street Development LLC
Attorney Tom Alexander introduces the project, stating the request for a project modification. Atty.
Alexander states that the team is coming in for a modification after the work has been completed and
apologies for coming in after the fact. He discusses the needs of the project and provides a brief
summary of the changes, noting landscaping and architectural changes that are relevant to the Board's
review, as well as an easement on the property of 106 Bridge Street. He introduces other members of
the project, including owner David Cutler, owner/contractor Michael Mosko, and civil engineer George
Zambouras.
Atty. Alexander shares additional hard copies of the proposed elevation changes, landscape plan, and
site plan. Hutchings prints additional photographs of the property for the Board's review. Atty.
Alexander reviews each change to the elevations. He explains the needs for landscaping changes, noting
the significant ledge on the property. He reviews the retaining wall and the fence at 106 Bridge Street,
and describes the proposed easement. Atty. Alexander states that, due to the comments and concerns
Page 2 of 3
Design Review Board
April 12, 2022 Meeting Minutes
from the Planning Board, they have reduced the easement area by 40%, and have added language to the
easement allowing the owners of 106 Bridge Street to have explicit access rights for maintenance
purposes. Mr.Zambouras states that the easements are being reduced from 83 inches in width to 63.5
inches in width.
Cook asks Board members for comments. Poor states she has no concerns. Mason notes frustration that
applicants cannot continue to come to the Board with after the fact changes; she states she isn't
concerned by the changes. Flannery states that her concerns are related to the easements, which will be
addressed at the Planning Board level. She states that she has no concerns with the architectural and
landscaping changes. Flannery asks about the fencing, and Atty. Alexander states that the fence is
entirely on the property of 106 Bridge Street, and therefore is not subject to review. Cook states she
thinks the property looks attractive, and notes the Board's role in ensuring such. She confirms that the
easement will be addressed at the Planning Board level.
There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter:
Cook: Moves to recommend that the Planning Board approve the Site Plan Review
Modification, with the proposed change to the easement. Poor seconds.The motion
carries 4-0.
6. New/Other Business
a. Approve draft meeting minutes
i. January 6, 2022
ii. February 3, 2022
Flannery states that she has no edits to the January minutes, but she has one question about a motion in
the February minutes.The Board reviews the discussion and motion, and Hutchings states she will go
back and consider the recording, to ensure the minutes accurately reflect the motion.
Cook: Moves to approve the January 2022 minutes as presented and to continue the
consideration of the February 2022 minutes to the next meeting. Mason seconds.The
motion carries 4-0.
b. Elect Vice Chair: Continued to the following meeting.
7. Adiournment
Cook: Moves to adjourn. Flannery seconds.The motion carries 4-0.
Meeting adjourned 7:00 p.m.
Next meeting Thursday, May 5,2022.
List of attachments:
• 4-12-2022 DRB Agenda • 41 Enon St_DD_DRB Application
• 4-12-2022 DRB Staff Report • 108 Bridge St_3-29-22_Complete App
• 2 Enon St—Citizens—DRB Application • 108 Bridge St_Revised Site Plan_4-11-22
• 24 West St_Andalin_DRB Application • 108 Bridge St_Seger Architects Memo_4-11-22
• 152 Conant St_Beth Israel_DRB Application
• 152 Conant St—Beth Israel_Updated Sign Designs
Page 3 of 3