Loading...
April 4 2019 DRB MinutesQ zf_121 CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board SUBCOMITTEE: DATE: April 4, 2018 LOCATION: Beverly City Hall Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Sandra Cook, Caroline Baird Mason, Ellen Flannery, Emily Hutchings, Rachel Poor, Matthew Ulrich MEMBERS ABSENT: Joel Margolis RECORDER: Sophia Wetzig Signs 1) 47 Dodge Street — AT &T Applicant: Arnco Sign Company The applicant proposed two wall signs in the CG zoning district. The wall signs include the name of the business and the logo, and will be internally illuminated. The proposed signs replace existing signs due to a change in the business logo, and comply with the Ordinance. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: Cook: Motion to approve the signs as presented. Mason seconded. The motion carried. (6 -0) 2) 299 Rantoul Street — Supreme Pizza Applicant: Kevin Shrestha The applicant proposed one awning sign and window signage in the CC zoning district. The awning sign includes the name of the business and will not be illuminated. The awning sign complies with the Ordinance. The window signage is larger than what is permitted by right and requires a Special Permit. Please note that the application states the incorrect size of the signs. The awning sign is 4'H x 55W, and the window signage is 1'H x 35W each (with four windows). The size of the windows is 45H x 35W each. The height of the lettering on the awning sign will be 6" (six inches). Applicant was not present when called; The Board continued to review the next item on the agenda. 3) 14 Elliott Street — SweatFixx Applicant: Elise Caira The applicant proposed one wall sign and one projecting sign in the CC zoning district. The wall sign includes the name of the business and the term "Row, Sculpt," and the projecting sign includes a logo only. Both signs will be externally illuminated. The signs comply with the Ordinance. The applicant explained that the new wall sign will be a band sign made of aluminum and will replace the current band sign in the same location and of the same size. The applicant provided a sample of the aluminum. The new projecting sign will replace a current scroll bracket with a 20 -inch round projecting sign. The DRB commented that the new signs were small and appropriate for the location. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: Ulrich: Motion to approve the two signs as presented. Poor seconded. The motion carried. (6 -0) 4) 45 Enon Street — Fit Ritual Applicant: Stephanie Rodolico The applicant proposed one wall sign in the CG zoning district. The wall sign includes the name of the business and will be internally illuminated. The applicant stated that the sign would be located on the exterior of the building and would be 5 inches in depth. Cook commented that the letters on the sign appear taller than necessary. The applicant stated that the business is set back in the plaza and that a bigger logo would be better for street visibility. The sign complies with the Ordinance. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: Hutchings: Motion to approve the sign as presented. Flannery seconded. The motion passed (6 -0). Note: The pylon sign was not included in this application and would typically be submitted for approval by the landlord. The applicant agreed to send the dimensions to Hutchings, who would include the pylon sign in the application fee. Cook: Motion to approve the pylon sign on condition that it display the same style and color of lettering and logo as the wall sign and fit within the dimensions of the pylon space. Flannery seconded. The motion passed (6 -0). 2 continued) 299 Rantoul Street — Supreme Pizza The applicant explained that he had taken over the former 3 Dogs Pizza location. Cook explained that, based on the Downtown Design Guidelines, the DRB prefers signs without photographic images and that the applicant's current window signage covers more than the allocated 20% of window space. Poor added that the current window signage might be to the disadvantage of the business, as it reduces street visibility. Contrary to the submitted design of the awning sign, the new awning would not list a phone number or the term "free delivery," but would read only "Supreme Pizza" to ensure that the sign includes only one line of text and complies with the Ordinance. The applicant agreed to adapt the window signs to fit the ordinance but expressed a desire to show photographic images of menu items. The DRB recommended window lettering rather than imagery; Poor suggested white lettering on a black background or directly on the window for improved visibility. The applicant asked about the possibility of painting portions of the window red and lettering directly on them. Hutchings explained that this would require a revised application. Cook explained that the primary concern with the current signage was the photographic images and compatibility with the downtown district. Hutchings added that the window signage was slightly too large and explained that the applicant would need to present an accurate design of the proposed signage at a future meeting. The applicant further explained that there is an additional lit sign reading "open" in the window and that a blinking sign and hanging flag had been taken down by request of the City Building Department. Hutchings explained that DRB would like the business to succeed and design recommendations are intended to attract potential customers. The DRB explained that applications need to accurately reflect the intended final signage. Ulrich recommended that the applicant work with a designer to create plans and signs. Cook stated that the applicant's design was not to scale and did not reflect the intended final product, which hindered the DRB's ability to approve design plans. The applicant stated that the current window signs, including the photographic images, had been glued on to the window by the applicant himself and stated the belief that food photos appeal to customers. Several DRB members stated that food pictures do not do justice to the food itself. The applicant agreed to continue the application to a future Board meeting, and to remove the current food photos from the window. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: Hutchings: Motion to continue this application to the May 2019 meeting. Flannery seconded. The motion carried (6 -0) 5) 127 Bridge Street — Aqua Salon & Spa Applicant: Amanda Barror The applicant proposed one wall sign and one sandwich board sign in the CN zoning district. The wall sign includes the name of the business and is externally illuminated. The sandwich board sign includes information directing customers to the front door of the establishment. The signage complies with the Ordinance. The applicant stated that the sandwich board is located within 12 feet of the business, on the deck to instruct clients to the main entrance. Hutchings explained that sandwich board signs must be presented to the City Council. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: Cook: Motion to approve wall sign as presented and to recommend that City Council approve the sandwich board sign. Mason seconded. The motion passed (6 -0). 6) 12 West Street — Wild Oats Health Food Store Applicant: Tammy Marciano The applicant proposed one sandwich board sign in the CN zoning district. The sandwich board sign includes information about the products sold within the establishment. The signage complies with the Ordinance. The DRB asked the applicant if she already had a sandwich board sign. The applicant stated that she did not and had been intending to apply for one for the 23 years that she had been in business. She then explained that she had occasionally leaned a sandwich board sign against window, but not placed out on the street. Cook explained that sandwich board signs must be presented to City Council for approval. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: Cook: Motion to recommend that City Council approve the sandwich board sign as presented. Flannery seconded. The motion passed. (6 -0) 7) 276 Cabot Street — Kind Lab Applicant: Angela Foster The applicant is proposing window signage in the CC zoning district. The window signage includes the name of the business and the phrase "Must be 18+ to Shop." The signage complies with the Ordinance. The applicant explained that products sold in the shop were infused with hemp extract and that the proposed sign would hopefully deter underage shoppers from entering. The applicant would like a door sign for immediate use but expects to apply for a blade sign in the near future. The DRB agreed that a blade sign would be appropriate for the location. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: Flannery: Motion to approve the sign as presented. Hutchings seconded. The motion passed (6 -0). Open Space Residential Design Site Plan Review 8) Thaxton Road & Grover Street, Hickory Street Realty Trust The applicant is submitting an OSRD plan for a new 250 -foot dead end private roadway and three new single - family residences. Hutchings explained that the design was for an open -space subdivision that the DRB would review in the case that it may apply to the DRB. The Planning Department would be reviewing this site plan on April 9, 2019 at the regular meeting and public hearing, and had circulated the plans for comment from the DRB and other City boards. Flannery explained the location, on Wenham line, was near to a new, abutting development in Wenham called "Spring Hill." Ulrich noted that a landscape architect was listed on the title sheet, but that limited landscaping was shown in the plans. Ulrich stated an interest to see what type of trees would be planted, and if the proposed plantings would be appropriate to the site. Flannery noted this was the third plan that had been presented, and that the first had contained four homes. The Planning Department has not approved the 4 -home plan. The DRB discussed that the site, or portions of it, were conservation land. The general comments were to ensure that appropriate tree species be planted on site and noted that the homes appeared somewhat randomly placed. New /Other Business: 9) A. Draft of March 7, 2019 minutes: Flannery suggested the following changes to the 3.7.19 DRB minutes: Page 4, 59 Dunham Rd., item 5, "the site is developed and now actively marketed." The site is not developed, just actively marketed. Also under 59 Dunham Rd, the applicant explained that building has not yet been sold. The building will not be sold. It will be rented, and "the final design plans will depend on future tenant's needs." Cook: Motion to approve the minutes with the corrections as presented. Flannery seconded. The motion passed (6 -0). B. A representative from Salem Plumbing Supply Co. explained to the DRB that the business received a message informing them that their exterior hanging banner sign was out of compliance with the temporary sign ordinance. The applicant attended the April 2019 meeting to see what Salem Plumbing Supply Co. would need to do to come into compliance. The DRB explained that a sign of that size would require a special permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals and that the business could submit an application to the May 2019 DRB meeting. Cook explained that banner sign applications are granted for a certain amount of time, in this case likely 6 months, and the special permit could likely be extended after the permitted time expires. Hutchings explained that she was not certain if the DRB was allowed to vote on items that had not been included on the agenda, but that she would find out for future reference. C. Hutchings stated that the Building Department is actively approaching businesses with discrepancies and violations, and that DRB members could help by reporting discrepancies and violations to the Building Department or to Hutchings directly. D. Mason brought up the question of billboard lease- terms, specifically regarding the billboards at Dane Street and Cabot Street. The DRB also discussed the billboards near the Salem Bridge at the intersection of Cabot and Rantoul Streets, agreeing that they were an unattractive welcome into downtown Beverly. Hutchings was not certain of the lease terms for billboards, and the topic is to be continued at a later meeting. Adjourn: Cook: Motion to adjourn the meeting. Hutchings seconded. The motion carried (6 -0). The meeting adjourned at 7:42pm.