2013-07-11CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Approved
BOARD:
DATE:
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
RECORDER:
Design Review Board
July 11, 2013
William Finch, Jane Brusca, Ellen Flannery, Karen
Bebergal
Rachel Matthews
Kirk Baker
Kirk Baker
Finch calls the meeting to order and introduces the first item on the agenda:
1. Sign — 45 Broadway —North Shore Veterans Counseling Services, Inc.
The agent (sign contractor) for the applicant, North Shore Veterans Counseling Services, Inc.,
stated that his client must have the signage in order to meet their Federal requirements. They
propose a freestanding sign that is 36 "wide by 24" in height for a total of 6 square feet. The
DRB noted that 10 square feet was the maximum allowed in this situation and that this
application will also require a Special Permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). No
lighting was proposed.
Flannery made a motion to approve the sign as presented. Finch seconded the motion. The
members voted unanimously, 5 -0, to approve the freestanding sign as submitted.
2. Site Plan — 128 Park Street — Loading Dock
Mr. Dennis Britton, the applicant, presented his request to install a new loading dock onto the
western side of Building A that will serve the needs of Unit 9 that is owned by PCS company.
The reason given is that a loading dock is required for the loading /unloading of newspapers for
distribution. The applicant notes that the current plan does not depict any pavement leading up
to the loading dock. He then shows the members a revised exhibit that he plans to show to the
Planning Board the following week that depicts connecting pavement. The members note that
several parking spaces are eliminated but Flannery reminds the members that the Planning Board
will deal with site layout issues in regards to access to the loading dock and pertaining to the
parking requirements for the facility as a whole. Finch stated that the proposed dock will be out
of the public view and, as such, sees no issue with it from a design point of view.
The members asked what would be the hours of operation. The applicant stated that the
proposed loading dock will be used primarily during overnight hours. Baker questioned the
location and intensity of any proposed lighting for the use. The applicant stated the loading dock
would have the same lighting fixtures for the dock as those that are currently used on the front of
the building. Finch noted that lighting would be less of an issue due to the dock's location far
from any public area.
Flannery asked if the DRB should make a recommendation for approval of the loading dock to
the Planning Board or if the Board should simply give the project clearance from a design point
of view and make specific recommendations as to things the Planning Board should be looking
at as part of the final approval. Brusca stated that the DRB should be forwarding its opinion in
regards to the acceptability of the design, and should recommend changes to the plan for the
Planning Board's consideration. Finch concurred with Brusca's statement.
Baker asked whether a recommendation should be made in regards to lighting. Brusca
formulated a recommendation that the Planning Board be made aware of the lighting issue, and
requests that the Planning Board place conditions on the lighting so that it will be contained
within the area of the loading dock. Finch expressed agreement with this recommendation.
Finch made a motion that the Board finds the proposed loading dock acceptable with the
exception that it requests that the Planning Board consider determining setting conditions for
tamping down light illumination levels. Finch also expressed his own separate concern about the
potential reduction in parking but did recognize that such a concern was solely an issue to be
dealt with by the Planning Board. Bebergal seconded the motion. The members voted
unanimously for approval of the motion 5 -0.
3. Sign — 8 Bow Street — Bow Beauty Salon
Jerry Brown from Bow Beauty Salon, the applicant, proposed a projecting sign that will be
38.64" wide by 25.76" in height, and will project 42" from the building facade. Finch asked the
applicant if there was already a sign there. Mr. Brown said that there had been a facade sign
there but that this new sign will take its place. He noted that the Zoning Official had confirmed
that the proposed sign complies with the zoning ordinance. He proposed that also there will be
no sign illumination in this case.
Brusca made a motion to approve the sign as presented. Flannery seconds the motion. The
Board votes and the motion approved unanimously 5 -0.
4. Election of Chairmen:
Baker noted that all Board members, except for Matthews, who has been on maternity leave,
were currently present, and, that the issue of the election of a Chairman could now be addressed..
The members asked Finch if he was interested in serving as Chairmen. Flannery made a motion
that Finch be the Chairman of the Design Review Board. Bebergal seconds the motion. The
Board voted (Finch abstained) 4 -0 in favor of the motion.
5. Minutes
Flannery moved to approve the minutes from June 6, 2013. Brusca seconded the motion. The
Board members, except for Finch, who abstained, since he was not present at the June 6th
meeting, voted on the motion. The motion passed 4 -0.
6. Adi ournment
Finch made motion to adjourn. Brusca seconded the motion. All members voted in favor of
adjournment.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:00 p.m.