2010-06-22CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
These minutes are not a verbatim transcript of the public hearing or public meeting
of the Board of Appeals. Reviews of the decision or outcome of the public
hearing should include an examination of the Board's Decision for that hearing.
Board: Zoning Board of Appeals
Date: June 22, 2010
Place: Beverly City Hall, Council Chamber, 191Cabot Street
Board Members Present: Full Members Day Ann Kelley, Chairperson, Margaret
O'Brien, Scott Ferguson, Joel Margolis and Jane Brusca
Alternate Members Pamela Gougian, Sally Koen and
John Harden
Others Present: Building Commissioner — Director Steven Frederickson
Clerk for the Board — Diane Rogers
Chairperson Day Ann Kelley opened the meeting to the public at 7:00 p.m. She
introduced John Harden, a new alternate member of the Board. The first case to be heard
tonight is a carryover from the May 25, 2010 meeting relative to a new proposed sign at
CVS Pharmacy.
446 Rantoul Street -- CC Zone —CVS Pharmacy — Agent Gary MCCoy/Poyant Sign
withdrew without prejudice
Mr. Richard Westergren, Regional Vice President of Poyant Signs Inc. spoke on behalf of
CVS Pharmacy. He is proposing to install a 6 -foot by 7- foot -4 inch monument sign. He
added that in a "CC" District, a free- standing sign is not allowed. The overall height is
10 -feet and would be located at the intersection of Elliott and Rantoul Streets as per site
plan. Mr. Westergren stated CVS Pharmacy has been open since early 2010 and has had
the time to experience the success of their current signage. At this point, they feel that
the addition of a small monument sign on the corner of Rantoul and Elliott Street would
provide the necessary identification that they feel is lacking for their customers. He
commented that the lack of signage on the corner creates a hardship for easy visibility
and identification for CVS customers.
Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any comments or questions. Mr.
Frank Cuoco of 153 Park Street stated the new building was nice but he wondered where
the proposed sign would be located and how it would affect traffic. He commented he
believed the proposed sign was too high.
Chairperson Kelley then asked the Board for their questions and comment. Ms. O'Brien
and Mr. Margolis felt the proposed sign was too large and commented that most people
know where the new CVS store is located. Mr. Margolis questioned if the gable on the
top of the sign could be eliminated to bring down the height. Chairperson Kelley
commented that the Board was looking for the minimal relief available. She asked if this
project had gone before Design Review. Mr. Westergren responded the project had not
gone before the Design Review Board. Ms. O'Brien stated the design of the sign was
nice but a smaller sign is how she was thinking. Mr. Ferguson stated he believed the sign
was too big and in the wrong place. He suggested Mr. Westergren might want to
redesign the sign. Chairperson Kelley suggested Mr. Westergren go before the Design
Review Board before returning to this Board. Ms. Gougian commented that the
Walgreen's sign was substantially larger.
Ms. O'Brien made a motion to allow Mr. Westergren, of Poyant Sign to withdraw
without prejudice the petition for a free- standing sign 6 -feet by 7 -feet —4- inches located
at CVS Pharmacy at 446 Rantoul Street. Seconded by Mr. Ferguson. Motion carries 5 —
0. ( Kelley, Ferguson, O'Brien, Margolis and Brusca in favor)
6 Gove Avenue — RMD Zone — Katherine M. Almeida
Section 6 Finding Request
Ms. Almedia spoke on her own behalf. She proposed to construct a 12 -feet by 24 -feet
addition that contains kitchen expansion and mudroom on the 1 floor and bedroom
expansion on the 2nd floor. Ms. Almedia stated she has a small kitchen that she always
wished to expand. She added that the structure would be increasing the floor area from
2,178 sq. feet to 2,970 sq. feet. Chairperson Kelley asked what the size of the lot was.
The lot has 4,565 square feet where 8,000 square feet is required by zoning. Chairperson
Kelley stated there was a 5 -feet encroachment into the 20 -feet front yard setback but that
the side yard conformed. The addition would have the same setbacks.
Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone in the public had any questions or comments
regarding this petition. There being no one present she asked the Board members for
their questions and comments. Ms. Gougian asked if the addition would affect the
parking area. Mr. Margolis questioned the proposed open deck. The deck is allowed if it
extends only 10 feet off the foundation. Ms. O'Brien was concerned by the volume of
the proposal. She asked if a vehicle could drive out back past the new addition. Ms.
2
Almeida responded that there is enough room to drive out in the rear yard but that she did
not plan to do that. Chairperson Kelley stated this is a small lot but you have spoken to
your neighbors and received support. She asked if there was anything in writing. Ms.
Almeida responded she did not. Mr. Ferguson had no questions at this time.
Mr. Margolis made a motion to grant the Section 6 Finding at 6 Gove Avenue to
construct a 12 -feet by 24 -feet addition that contains kitchen expansion and mudroom on
the 1s floor and a bedroom expansion on the 2nd floor. The proposed extension will not
be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the
neighborhood. Seconded by Ms. O'Brien. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson,
O'Brien, Margolis, and Gougian in favor)
7 Pine Road — R -10 Zone — Dana DeFuria
Variance Request
Mr. Dana DeFuria spoke on his own behalf. He proposed to construct a detached two -car
garage, 24 -feet by 24 -feet, with a rear yard setback of 10 -feet 2- inches rather than the 25-
feet required by zoning. A resident of Beverly for over 22 years, he will be moving to
this location to accommodate his medical conditions. The lot has 90 -feet of frontage with
a 147 -foot rear lot line. Mr. De Furia stated the dwelling is located in such a way that it
is difficult to situate a proposed two -car garage. Chairperson Kelley asked if there would
be a second floor on the garage. Mr. DeFuria responded that there would be a storage
area above the garage with a pull down access stairway. Mr. DeFuria submitted a
petition to the Board from 15 abutters that approved the plans for the construction of the
two -car garage. Mr. DeFuria stated the garage structure would match the exterior feature
of the existing dwelling.
Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone from the public had questions or comments regarding
this petition. There being no one present she asked the Board members for their
questions and comments. Mr. Margolis asked what the hardship of the variance was and
why a two -car garage rather than a one. Mr. DeFuria responded that his right to enjoy his
land plus the fact he hasl47 -feet lot line in the rear and 90 -feet of frontage would deny
his right for a two -car garage. He added that his closest neighbor in the rear would be
144 -feet away. He commented that there is also a 40 -feet right of way behind the
property by the rear of Corning Street. This property is vacant and unkempt land. Ms.
O'Brien stated that she believed if the proposed garage were located differently it would
encroach on the side yard setback and be too close to the neighbor's property.
Chairperson Kelley stated she was of the opinion the 2 -car garage was of standard size,
and would not impact the neighbors. She added that the lot meets the requirement of
10,000 sq. feet and the way the dwelling was located upon the lot, with the 40 -feet Right
of Way in the rear, the hardship of the variance is proven and she has no issues with this
petition. Ms. Brusca concurs. Mr. Margolis discussed the width of the hot top driveway
with Mr. DeFuria. The driveway is to be two widths so one can back out the truck and
then reduce in width to be no wider than one -car width.
3
Ms. O'Brien made a motion to approve the request of a variance for a two -car detached
garage given that the neighbors were in favor of the proposal and the lot is oddly shaped
and it would be the minimum relief requested and the addition will be built according to
the plans submitted. Petition seconded by Mr. Margolis and motion carries 5 — 0.
(Kelley, Margolis, O'Brien, Ferguson, and Brusca in favor)
157 Essex Street — CN Zone — Amit Patel
Section 6 Finding Request
Mr. Gregory Smith, Architect for GSD Associates, LLC spoke on behalf of Mr. Patel.
He is proposing to demolish existing grocery store structure and reconstruct new grocery
store structure within the existing structure setbacks. The new structure would be no
more nonconforming to the zoning regulations than the existing structure.
Mr. Smith stated Mr. Patel would like to have a small local grocery store for the
neighborhood. He added that the existing building had been neglected and is disrepair.
The structure is outdated and will have to be brought up to today's standard codes. Mr.
Smith stated as per Section 29 27.2 the nonconforming building would be voluntary
demolished and rebuilt in the approximately the same location.
Mr. Smith commented that on Saturday, June 19 he met with some of the neighbors and
they requested a few changes in the existing plan. He then updated the plan and
submitted the documents to the Board for review this evening. He explained that the
building was moved 3 -feet and the curb cut was decreased. The existing stair entry ramp
encroached into sidewalk over the property line. The new proposed design lowers finish
floor to sidewalk level and entry is handicapped accessible. A new sidewalk will be
provided at the entrance. The new proposed building is set 2 -feet back from the front lot
line and 4 -feet — 5- inches from the side lot facing Gardner Street. There will be
landscaping added in the front of the building and a small grass area on the side. The
dumpster will be relocated and the 9 -feet by 11 -feet dumpster pad will have a fence to
enclose the debris. (The existing wood fence along the side and rear lot line fence will be
6 -feet high and repaired or replaced)
Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone in the public had questions or comments relative to
this petition. Mr. Jeff H. Prince, AIA of 12 Gardner Street stated the building and site
has been seriously neglected and that he would be happy to see a brand new store. He
added that he would like to see additional green spaces on both the east and west side of
the lot. He would also like to request additional screening of the parking lot to be
provided by a continuation of the public sidewalk green strip, about 3 -feet wide by 18-
feet long, located at the south of the Gardner Street curb cut parallel to the handicapped
parking space and painted to a height of 5 -feet maintained by the Owner.
Mr. Kevin Hobin of 6 Gardner Street, Ward 4 Councilor spoke in favor of this project.
0
Mr. Jack Kelleher, Contractor for this proposal stated he was in favor of this project. He
added that he had spoken with Mr. William Burke Director of the Beverly Board of
Health who oversees rodent control.
Beverly Tompkins and her husband of 17 Gardner were concerned with lead paint
removal, varmints, traffic and deliveries of products.
Chairperson Kelley asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Ms.
Gougian asked if the proposed building would be lower than the previous one. Mr. Smith
responded the new building would be lower for handicap reasons. Ms. Kelley asked
about the dry well not working. She suggested meeting with the City Engineer to perhaps
tie into the drains in Essex Street. Ms. O'Brien stated she would like the window signs to
be the minimal allowed by zoning. Ms. Gougian asked what the operating hours of the
store would be. Mr. Smith responded the store would open at 6:00 a.m. and close at 9:00
p.m. Ms. Kelley asked what Mr. Patels background was. Mr. Patel stated he had been
operating stores for ten years or so. Ms. O'Brien asked what time during the day the
deliveries would be in effect. Ms. Gougian asked how many signs would be on the
building. Mr. Smith responded two signs maximum 40 s. f. externally lit. He added they
will require Design Review Board Variance. The existing projecting sign is 4 -feet from
the building facade. Mr. Ferguson asked how many parking spaces would be on the lot.
Mr. Smith responded there will be (10) parking spaces and (1) Handicapped space. He
added there would be minimal lighting cut off at a low level near the parking spaces. He
added that all external lighting would be shielded downward with exception to the
security lighting in the parking lot. Mr. Ferguson asked if the planters (flowers) would be
in the ground not in Teflon tubs. Mr. Smith responded that the planters are to be open to
ground water. Mr. Ferguson discussed the hours of deliveries. It was determined the
hours of delivery would be 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Ms. Kelley asked the height of the
tower that was located at the front entrance. Mr. Smith responded that the tower design
on the front entrance was approximately 19 -feet high with a 6 -feet metal roof (peak)
total: 26 -feet high. Ms. Kelley stated she has concerns regarding subsequent uses of the
building in the future. Mr. Margolis asked if this proposal has to go before the Historical
Society because of the age of the building. Mr. Smith responded yes it does. Mr. Smith
commented that there would be more than one employee working at a time, which the
previous store did not provide.
Mr. Ferguson made a motion to approve the Section 6 Finding subject to the following
conditions. Seconded by Ms. O'Brien
Discussion: on Motion for Conditions:
1. Hours of operation: 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.( lights out 9:00 p.m.)
2. Deliveries would be made during the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
3. All external lighting on the building to be shielded downward pointing toward the
interior of the locus with the exception of security lighting in parking lot.
4. Signs to be externally lit.
5. The (3) planters on the Garden Street side are to be maintained by the owner
5
along with the (2) on the Essex Street side, according to plan submitted.
6. Grass will be planted on the 5 -feet strip. (which might be city property)
7. Extend the city sidewalk strip (approx 3 -feet by 18 -feet) along the Garden Street
side of locus.
8. Trash containers are to be placed around the lot.
9. Signs are to go before the Design Review Board.
10. The siding will be a cement vinyl clapboard material.
11. The dumpster will be fenced with (2) gates 15 -feet high with a 9' by 11' concrete
dumpster pad.
12. HVAC Mechanical units will be located on the roof and will be acoustically and
visually screened to minimize effects.
Ms. O'Brien stated the canvas awning signs are allowed by right in the front of the
building.
Ms. Gougian asked if there would be any shopping carts. Mr. Patel stated no, there
would not.
This proposal must go to Planning's "Site Plan Review" to replace the building. The
proposed plans may be altered by the Planning Department.
Motion granted 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, Margolis, O'Brien and Brusca in favor)
19 Jewett Road — R -10 Zone — Mary Chapman
Section 6 Finding Request
Mr. Kenneth Chapman spoke on behalf of his wife. He is proposing to construct a 2-
story 22 -feet by 12 -feet rear addition to contain family room and full bath on the 1 st floor
and study on 2" d ° to the existing nonconforming dwelling. Mr. Chapman stated he had
spoken to his neighbors and submitted two letters in favor of the petition from Richard
Cunningham of 21 Jewett Road and Joan Hay of 17 Jewett Road. Mr. Chapman
commented that the railroad tracks were to the rear of his property. He added he had a
contractor waiting to begin the construction.
Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone in the public had any questions or comments
regarding this proposal. They're being no one present she asked the Board members for
their questions and comments. Mr. Ferguson stated the abutters on both sides of Mr.
Chapman's dwelling have signed in favor of the project. Chairperson Kelley stated this
project was of reasonable relief. Building Commissioner Steven Frederickson stated that
this construction would be passed as a "legal right" in a few more weeks because the lot
meets all setbacks.
A motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to approve the Section 6 Finding to construct a
proposed two - story, 22 -feet by 12 -feet rear addition to contain family room and full bath
on 1 floor and study on 2 nd . That the plans submitted with the application are strictly
complied with, are identified in, and incorporated into, the Board's decision, and
recorded with the decision. That the proposed alteration will not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood. In
31
accordance with Section 29 27 C (2) A, C, D, E,& F — The Board finds those criteria
are satisfied. Both abutters were in favor of the proposal. Petition seconded by Mr.
Margolis and motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, O'Brien, Margolis, and Brusca in
favor)
7