2022-09-28 Meeting MinutesCity of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Board or Committee: Design Review Board – Regular Meeting
Date and Time: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 6:00 pm
Meeting Location: Remote Participation via Zoom
DRB Members Present: Chair Paul Durand, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy,
Marc Perras, J. Michael Sullivan, Sarah Tarbet
DRB Members Absent: Catherine Miller
Others Present: Kate Newhall-Smith
Recorder: Colleen Brewster
Chair Durand calls the meeting to order at 6:00PM. Roll call was taken.
Signs in the Urban Renewal Area
1. 196 Essex Street: Flying Monkey
Gabe Manukyan (Owner) was present to discuss the project.
Manukyan stated that a 23-inches wide x 24-inches high blade sign is proposed with
matching vinyl decal both on and above the windows. He considered adhering vinyl
lettering directly onto the granite surface. Perras questioned allowing temp vinyl signs.
Newhall-Smith noted that the PEM does it to promote events. She noted that this should
not be considered temporary sign but questioned being comfortable with it being up over
the winter. Manukyan replied that it may be applied for 1-year at the most, however, the
blade and window signs would be permanent. A sign is needed now for the current
season, but the theme of the signs would change next year. Newhall-Smith asked if the
blade sign bracket was existing. Manukyan replied yes.
Kennedy raised concerns with adhesive being stuck on the granite which could change
the surface and/or leave an outline of the lettering overtime. Manukyan suggested
temporary vinyl signs. Perras stated that he had no issue with the use of a vinyl sign for
1-year and suggested compressing and centering the text above the window. Manukyan
suggested centering the text between the door and window. Jaquith suggested the vinyl
text remain spaces out for readability. Kennedy replied that either centering option
would work but the lettering should be reduced in scale and suggested keeping the
Aerial Bold text but to hyphen “goth-ish”. Chair Durand suggested adding dots or
squares to the temporary “Flying Monkey” signs. Tarbet raised concern with the
spacing/kerning of the lettering. Manukyan replied that text was meant to look jumbled
and is based on the blade sign. Kennedy noted that the spacing is better understood on
the blade sign than the vinyl sign. Manukyan agreed to match the kerning. Kennedy
also suggested increasing the contrast between the lettering on all the signage for
consistency but that it not be made a condition and to adjust the kerning in “shop” to
match “flying monkey”.
Tarbet stated that she is not a fan of vinyl sign even if it is temporary and suggested that
the mounting for a flat sign be applied even temporarily. Jaquith suggested
incorporating a limit on the use of the temporary sign. Manukyan stated that if the sign
begins to deteriorate, he will remove it. Sullivan suggested that a vinyl sign would make
City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
it look very temporary and he too is not comfortable with vinyl being applied to the
granite. Manukyan replied that some vinyl looks as if it is painted on, and it is not a
banner style sign it would be applied to the granite surface and the joints of the granite
would show through the sign. Perras noted that the PEM has applied similar vinyl signs
to brick and granite walls, and they did look good.
Chair Durand opened public comment.
No one in the assembly wished to speak.
Jaquith: Motion to approve with the following comments: to center the lettering over
either the window or the window and door, reduce the scale of the lettering, to
hyphenate “goth-ish”, add dots or squares to the temporary “Flying Monkey” signs,
applicant to work with Glenn Kennedy on matching the kerning used on all signs for
consistency. Seconded by: Sullivan.
Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet and Chair Durand were in favor.
Passes 7-0.
Projects in the Urban Renewal Area
1. 140 Washington Street: Small Project Review – Roof replacement
Andrew Brockaway (architect) and Debbie Tucker (Salem Housing Authority) was
present to discuss the project.
Tucker stated that they went before the SRA to replace the roof due to lack of insulation
and the parapet roof needing to be raised.
Brockaway stated that the Washington Street elevation has an aluminum coping that will
be replaced, the parapet is along Washington street only and a gravel fascia at the
remaining perimeter. The existing structure has a built-up roof with a gravel stop and 1-
inch of insulation that is saturated and in need of replacement. They will leave the deck
but must meet current energy code by adding 5-½–inches of insulation, increasing the
height of the front parapet by 5-inches, and a new gravel stop at the perimeter. The
existing roof is very close to the current roof edge at two locations and raising the
parapet height will ensure the parapet is higher than the insulation. They would also add
a coping extender that would extend no lower than the existing and cover any additional
brick.
Perras noted that the details look sound and suggested the blocking be stepped back so
the new fascia is set into the roof maintaining the existing reveal visible from the street.
Jaquith requested the new coping finish color. Brockaway replied white to match
existing with a new modified bituminous white roof. Perras suggested that while the
coping had discolored and now appear to be grey, the new coping should be grey
because white would draw too much attention. Chair Durand, Jaquith, and Sullivan
agreed adding that it would respond better to the granite sills at the windows.
City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Chair Durand opened public comment.
No one in the assembly wished to speak.
Perras: Motion to approve as submitted with the upper fascia to be stepped back to
create a reveal, to adjust for drainage, and install grey coping. Seconded by: Jaquith.
Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Chair Durand were in favor.
Passes 6-0.
2. 252 Bridge Street and 32-34 Federal Street: Final Design Review – The Exchange
Salem – Part 1: Redevelopment of 252 Bridge Street, the ‘Crescent Lot’ into a six -
story mixed use building with approximately 7,325 square feet of commercial space,
up to 120 residential units that will be offered at varying levels of affordability,
creation of public spaces, and site improvements, continued from 8/10/22.
Ramie Schneider (WinnDevelopment), Steve Prestejohn (Cube3), and Michael Blier
(Landworks Studio) were present to discuss the project.
Ms. Schneider stated that they went before the SRA on September 14, 2022, and the
Planning Board on September 15, 2022, and received good feedback from both. They
are working on the crescent lot which needs to be permit ready. They went before the
Historical Commission in August seeking a letter of support that is required with the
historic tax credit submission. They are searching for resources for the new program
and are meeting with potential operators on possible uses for the courthouses as well as
preforming other behind-the-scenes work. They’ve heard comments about the
buildability of the curved façade and that is the focus of this presentation.
Blier stated that they are thinking about landscape as a continuous movement through
the site and the pedestrian connections between the downtown and north Salem, and it’s
the buildings figure and topography that creates the connections through the site. The
major public space on the north, the connection at Bridge Street, and to the lower level
are activated by the pedestrian connections at the grand stair and by cyclists at the
sloped pathway. The vibrancy of the grand stair and promenade leave nothing is
isolated. History is guiding the future and they are using the language of the railyard and
movement of the railway system by utilizing the left-over granite slabs as benches or in
the planting zones, to tell a bigger story and create an important pedestrian space in
Salem. The reclaimed stone will brand and anchor the site, lighting will be integrated for
safe pedestrian passage and to highlight the sloped pathway. They will utilize planting
materials that are flood tolerant, with permeable paved areas, a charge area, and snow
areas. Expressions of public art will also be integrated to reinforce the flow of the
building, in simple yet meaningful ways.
Prestejohn stated that they previously heard concerns with material color, texture, and
the constructability of the building. The curved façade reads as a pebble smoothed by
the flow of the river, with dynamic curves that wraps over one another. They submitted a
City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
physical materials board to the Ms. Newhall-Smith at the Planning Department and are
proposing predominantly Hardie panel with a wood-look cedar mill material in two wood
tones. The lower level will have a natural stone-look also in two-tones of grey and a
dark Night Grey at the upper level that allows the wood-look material to stand out in the
foreground while the upper-level color to recede into the background.
Prestejohn presented a plan view of the exterior wall section, with 2x6 curved stud wall
segments, girts to pick up the radius of the curve, and vertical furring strips to attach the
Hardie panels too. The panels will be field bent in 8-foot length to maximize their
flexibility and 15-inches-high and will be spaced equally between the windowsills and
heads. The black PVC window frames are triple pane and non-flanged, with a break
metal surround. The passive house building will have 4-inch metal reveals at floor lines
that could match the window frame color and coping at the top of the parapet.
Schneider added that a window sample will be provided to the Planning Department as
well.
Chair Durand stated that only two colors were proposed but there seem to be more.
Prestejohn suggested the rendering provided additional color variation. Kennedy noted
that he preferred the horizontality of the material and paneling in the rendering
Prestejohn noted that the horizontal joints are proposed at 1/4-inch but could be smaller.
Perras asked why the stair still narrows at the lower park level. Blier replied to ease the
entrance at the fire pump and service door below and alleviate the notched area below.
Prestejohn noted that the stair width would widen as someone goes up the stair. Perras
stated that the landscape plan in tremendous and the lighting at ground plane and soffit
is critical. He noted that a letter received spoke mostly about pedestrian safety, they
should continue to make it a point of emphasis. He is still leery of curving a cement
board panel on the building due to his prior experience. He reviewed the sample board
and is struggling with making a cement panel look like wood and noted that he sees as
solid color terra cotta material being more successful. The two-color variation is
important but doesn’t believe it will ever look like wood and he is having difficulty
processing the building wholistically. Schneider replied that they didn’t have time to
address the Bridge Street façade concern which they will continue to review, however,
the curved side is critically important. Chair Durand was also troubled by the wood-look
that doesn’t look like a quality material and noted that he also sees this as a two-toned
terra cotta façade. Sullivan agreed with Perras on the texture on a non-wood material,
suggested eliminating the grained look, and questioned whether the rendering showed a
joint greater than 1/4-inch. Prestejohn replied that they will have a small Z-channel for
drainage. Sullivan asked if the panels at grade would have the same portions as the
upper panels. Prestejohn replied that the lower panels will be a larger size and
suggested eliminating the wood grain material. Kennedy requested examples of the
wood grain look on other projects. Tarbet stated that she was in favor of the design
concept, the urban size on Bridge Street, and the more natural side facing the water, but
it’s anticlimactic to have faux wood-look and she suggested a material that would
weather and read as more natural. Jaquith agreed with Perras.
City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Perras stated that he is pleased with the overall design, concerned about what the
proposed soffit material, loved the horizontality and reveals at the floor lines, and
suggested the columns be aligned with the outside wall since it is the same material.
Presetjohn replied that they would explore other color variations if no wood grain were
successful but could maintain the color combination if it was still amenable. Sullivan
replied that the current 5 proposed colors would be appropriate. Jaquith noted that the
wood grain would not be visible from a distance, he likes the flowing look of the north
façade, and the plan keeps improving. Perras stated that he is in favor of a
brick/masonry feel for this building.
Newhall-Smith stated that the materials board was helpful, she was not in favor of the
yellowish wood colors that she does not feel compliment the grey and is too much of a
contrast. She questioned the shape of the columns and the look of a building on stilts
and noted her preference for square/thicker columns clad in granite to tie in with the
lower façade material. She noted that the Artic White soffit color may not wear well at
the pedestrian level, suggested that would be a good place to incorporate a brick look
that ties in with Salem, and suggested a curve mock-up be constructed. Schneider
replied that mock-ups are expensive, but they could create one closer to construction.
Newhall-Smith reiterated the request for photos of the curved material.
Chair Durand opened public comment.
Newhall-Smith stated that three comment letters were received prior to the meeting.
1. Philip Johns and Edith Bross Johns, 6 Southwick Street. Dated September 27,
2022.
2. Filipe Zamborlini, 62 Perkins Street, #3. Dated September 28, 2022.
3. Historic Salem, Inc. (HSI). Dated September 28, 2022.
Emily Udy, Historic Salem, Inc. Their comments aren’t being addressed tonight, but they
have questions they’d like to see answered by the design team regarding the Bridge
Street façade. The Night Gray Hardi panel looks much darker in person than in the
rendering, the rendering color should be darkened so the two colors match.
No one else in the assembly wished to speak.
Tarbet noted that the Bridge Street facade is gray on gray and asked if a color board for
what occurs below the soffit has not been created. Prestejohn replied that the gray field
was the same as the upper story, the bays were a distinct tone.
Perras noted his concern with the columns and suggested the perimeter could be “of the
façade” and those underneath the building could match the granite base. He noted that
he was in favor of the shark fin style columns. Prestejohn replied that that not all of the
columns have the same treatment and the secondary columns do match the street level
so they fade away.
City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Perras requested the next steps for the review of this project. Newhall-Smith replied that
the design team will return to the DRB in October to review the Bridge Street elevation,
when they should provide a specification sheet for the windows and door system,
landscape plan, and more details. Whether or that that it the only meeting needed, will
depend upon their feedback, but this project shouldn’t be rushed, and the timeline is to
be determined.
Perras: Motion to continue to October 26, 2022 and to provide elevations of the Bridge
Street façade, landscape plan, and more details. Seconded by: Jaquith.
Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Chair Durand were in favor.
Passes 6-0.
3. 231 Essex Street: Small Project Review – Remove six windows, replace three with
new windows and restore and reinstall three at Rockafellas.
Newhall-Smith stated that the contractor was not able to obtain the detailed drawings
and measurements on the removed and proposed windows in time for this meeting.
Chair Durand added that the new windows didn’t match the existing windows at all, and
the applicant could use some help their presentation. Newhall-Smith noted that she
would connect the applicant with Patti Kelleher, Preservation Planner, to provide
additional feedback.
Jaquith: Motion to continue to the October 26, 2022 regular meeting. Seconded by:
Tarbet.
Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Chair Durand were in favor.
Passes 6-0.
Projects Outside the Urban Renewal Area
There are no projects outside the Urban Renewal area to review.
New / Old Business
1. Approval of Minutes:
a. July 27, 2022
Perras: Motion to approve. Seconded by: Jaquith.
Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Perras, Sullivan, and Chair Durand were in favor. Tarbet
abstained due to her not being a Board member at the time of that meeting. Passes 5-0.
b. August 22, 2022
Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Perras, Sullivan, and Chair Durand were in favor. Tarbet
abstained due to her not being a Board member at the time of that meeting. Passes 5-0.
2. Staff Updates, if any:
City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Newhall-Smith stated that the 2023 meeting calendar has been provided and the Board
can remain remote until March 2023.
Adjournment
Jaquith: Motion to adjourn. Seconded by: Perras.
Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Chair Durand were in favor. Passes
6-0.
Meeting is adjourned at 7:30PM.
Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A §18-25 and City
Ordinance Sections 2-028 through 2-203