Loading...
2023-04-26 Meeting MinutesCity of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board or Committee: Design Review Board – Regular Meeting Date and Time: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 at 6:00 pm Meeting Location: Remote Participation via Zoom DRB Members Present: Chair Paul Durand, Glenn Kennedy, Catherine Miller, Marc Perras, J. Michael Sullivan, Sarah Tarbet DRB Members Absent: David Jaquith 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. 260 Essex Street: Silly Bunny Chrissy Lebel of Lebel Signs and Denise Kent and Mike Gibson owners of Wicked Good Books were present to discuss the project. Gibson stated that the proposed double-sided blade sign is 30-inches in diameter, constructed using MDO, it would be mounted over the front entry door on a new bracket. Chair Durand asked if they would be drilling new holes into the granite to install the bracket. Mr. Gibson replied yes. Sullivan requested the bracket material. Gibson replied metal. Perras asked which space they would be occupying in the building. Gibson replied the dentist’s office. Gibson stated that the words “toys & books” would be added to windows on either side of the entrance using 10-inch-high x 60-inch-wide vinyl decals, using Aerial font, in white. A vinyl decal matching the blade sign, the color bunny with the store name underneath, would be install on the entry door but with a clear background. He noted that the “260” address was removed during construction, but it will be reinstalled. Perras stated that since there is no precedent for installing a bracket into the granite, he suggested the bracket be mounted higher up and into the brick. Kennedy agreed. Chair Durand stated that the sign should be mounted into the mortar rather than the brick which is repairable. Miller noted that there is a similar installation method at a neighboring sign. Kennedy agreed. Kennedy asked if there would be an orange circle around the blade sign. Kent replied that it was a design choice. Gibson added that it was an accent color to keep the sign from looking too plain. Kennedy suggested that the outline is either not needed or should be thicker to match the thickness of the lettering. Chair Durand suggested it not be included to make it simpler. Kennedy suggested its inclusion comes out of nowhere and the bunny is nicer without it because it takes away from the visual. Perras agreed. Gibson replied that the color is secondary to their interior design. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Miller suggested giving the “toys & books” decals more spacing between it and the window frame. Kent and Gibson agreed. Kent suggested raising the height of the decals to see over the vehicles parked on the street. Sullivan asked how Option B would be implemented. Gibson replied that it was proposed by Lebel Signs for the entry door, with straight across lettering rather than in a semi-circle. Option B will be used on the entry door. Miller asked if signage will be included for their hours of operation. Kent replied not permanently since Salem is seasonal and their hours will change throughout the year. David Jaquith joined the meeting. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Perras: Motion to approve as presented. Kennedy amended the motion to include mounting the blade sign bracket to the mortar of the brick rather than on the granite. Miller amended the motion to include reducing the size of the window decals and mounting them higher in the window. Seconded by: Miller. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. Kent and Gibson stated that the shop will open on May 13, 2023. Chrissy Lebel of Lebel Signs stated that the proposed bracket will be stainless steel. 2. 245 Derby Street: Destination Salem A-Frame Kate Fox of Destination Salem was present to discuss the project. Fox stated that the same graphic designer who created the exterior banners on the South Harbor Garage and above the entry door to Destination Salem has proposed the color matched posters that would be mounted on both sides of the A-frame. Perras raised concerns with accessibility of the sidewalk. Fox replied that the A-frame sign will be placed next to a light pole and the sidewalk in this area is wide. Kennedy requested the sign material. Fox replied, plastic but it will be weighted down. Kennedy stated that this is a great location for Destination Salem. Fox replied that they love their location and have had more than 11,000 visitors since they opened in October. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Kennedy: Motion to approve as presented. Seconded by: Miller. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. 3. 90 Washington Street: Koto Chrissy Lebel of Lebel Signs and Yan Lin were present to discuss the project. Lebel stated that the proposed blade sign would be 24-inches-high x 40-inches-wide with a live edge. The text and sub-text would be carved into the sign, the red square would be relief carved, and the gold would be flush with the face of the sign. Perras asked if the proposed would replace the existing sign. Lebel replied yes, and they want to make the height consistent with neighboring signs, but to move it away from the tree which blocks visibility. They will also remove the old bracket and repair the holes. Kennedy asked how the new sign would be mounted. Lebel replied using a steel fabricated bracket to the side of the sign with two brackets, and a guide wire to stabilize the sign in during strong winds. Miller asked if this sign would stick out even further because the neighboring signs are narrow. Lebel replied yes. Kennedy noted that he was in favor of the proposed design. Perras asked if the vinyl window banner would be removed because it looks temporary. Lebel replied no, but she can let the owner know if it is an issue. Perras was in favor of the proposed sign. Public Comment: Yan Lin stated that upgrades are planned for next year and he asked if lighting could be added because it is dark at night and the tree conceals them in the summer. Newhall- Smith replied yes, gooseneck lighting can be proposed at a later meeting. Miller suggested the existing electrical connection on the building could be used. Kennedy stated that the conduit location would need to be identified. Chair Durand added that the Board would not want to see exposed conduit. No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Perras: Motion to approve as presented, with the repair of the existing bracket holes and a lighting design to be presented to the Board prior to its installation. Seconded by: Jaquith. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. 4. 12 Front Street: Biss Jackie Malboeuf and Michaela Mann were present to discuss the project. Mann stated that they will reuse existing hardware, the sign will be made of PVC panel, double-sided, 28-inches-wide x 19-inches-high, a similar size to neighboring signs. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Perras asked if window signage was proposed. Mann replied no and the temporary sign in the window will be removed. The board was in favor of the proposed design. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Tarbet: Motion to approve. Seconded by: Perras. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. 5. 24 New Derby Street (Artists’ Row): Melon Rose + Robbersdaughter Maia Mattson was present to discuss the project. Mattson stated that they will use existing bracket, the sign will be 27-inches-high x 3-feet wide sign will be double-sided and hand painted on plywood. Perras asked why there was no space between Robbersdaughter. Mattson replied that it was a last name, it’s Icelandic. She added that the sign will be double sided and someone from the city will hang it. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Jaquith: Motion to approve as presented. Seconded by: Perras. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. 6. 60 Washington Street: Au Gratin Luncheonette Ken McTague of Concept Signs and Michael Denk were present to discuss the project. McTague stated that Boston Hotdog is considering rebranding and all new signs would remain close to the same size. The wall sign would be 14-inches-high x 110.74-inches- wide, and the double-sided blade sign would be oval shaped at 22-inches-high x 36- inches-wide. The signs would be carved PVC carved with a raised fork and spoon graphic. A window graphic is also proposed at 28-inches-high x 31-inches-wide. Perras asked if a sign with a black background was considered to match the neighboring signs. McTague replied that a dark grey was proposed but the owner wanted a white background. Other signs use black and gold making all signs unique. Perras stated that he had no issue but the white background which does work with the storefront. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Miller asked if the sign would be the same height. McTague replied that the blade sign may be narrower but other signs are the same proportions. Miller noted that she preferred maintaining the same horizontal spacing. Miller asked if a second decal could be proposed in both windows to match the other businesses. Denk replied that he had no issue using a second window graphic. Kennedy suggested that the oval within the window graphic cramps the lettering and creates unnecessary tension while removing it would open it up more. He added that the blue on the white background has a nice Brittany French feel and looks good. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Perras: Motion to approve with a consideration for removing the grey oval on the vinyl window decal, to placing the vinyl decal in both windows. Seconded by: Miller. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. Projects in the Urban Renewal Area 1. 304 Essex Street: Small Project Review – Painting exterior trim white and adding window boxes to match the exterior of The Good Witch of Salem that fronts on North Street. Ashley Tina was present to discuss the project. Tina stated that she will expand into Unit 6, the adjacent unit towards the corner of Essex Street, and it will be painted the same colors as on Unit 7, White Main Sail to continue to clean and fresh look. The window boxes haven’t been added yet, but they be added to all windows after the expansion. They will mimic the flower boxes on Front Street, at 8-inches-deep x 60-inches-long and will allow for a 78-inch-wide clearance for pedestrians. She noted that there is more space on that side of the building than on North Street. Perras requested the height off the ground of the flower boxes. Tina estimated the height at 24-inches and noted that they would be level with the windowsills. Perras noted that the bottom of the flower box cannot be higher than 27-inches and the clearance at the walkway cannot be pinched any less than 36-inches. He noted that is a mailbox at the corner which may affect it. Tina replied that she will make sure the other items on the street aren’t in the way either. Public Comment: City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Polly Wilbert, 7 Cedar Street. Suggested that window boxes be 4-seasons to keep visual interest rather than them being empty for half the year. The suggestion applied to future window boxes too. No one else in the assembly wished to speak. Perras asked if the existing window decals would be removed. Tina replied that the current tenant has the lease until May 2024 so his signage will remain until that time. She will return to the Board at a later meeting to propose additional signage. VOTE: Perras: Motion to approve as presented and to keep in mind accessibility and code requirements regarding window boxes and clearances and using 4-season window boxes. Seconded by: Miller. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. Newhall-Smith noted that the applicant will need to present to the SRA on May 10, 2023. Projects Outside the Urban Renewal Area 1. 266 Canal Street: Design Review for Entrance Corridor Overlay District – Redevelop the property by removing all existing buildings and infrastructure and constructing five new buildings for a total of approximately 73,615 square feet with 250 residential units (of which 20% will be affordable), commercial space along Canal Street, and preservation of nine acres of open space. The project also includes construction of 117 surface parking spaces, 196 garage parking spaces, and supporting infrastructure. Continued from 3/22/23. David Seibert of BK Architects, Robert Uhlig of Halverson Design Partnership, Inc., Marc Tranos and Chris Koeplin of Canal Street Station, LLC were present to discuss the project. Koeplin stated that the design team will present revisions made at the direction of the DRB and Planning Board (PB), and they met with the PB who had favorable responses to the changes. At the DRB’s request they included the electrical wiring in the renderings, simplified the façade paneling, and Salem’s new Tree Warden has approved of the proposed tree planting plan, but most of the changes relate to the landscape plan. Landscape Design Uhlig stated that the five buildings are proposed, the feedback they received on the group of buildings on either side of boulevard was that they were too symmetrical, so some form of modulation was suggested. They went from 50-feet to 80-foot clearing between the buildings, a pool and gathering space were added towards the wetland. They reduced parking next to Building C and swapped impervious paving for floodable open space, they introduced native planting, and provided some accessible spaces. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes The connection to Salem Rail Trail now occurs further to the north, and that change is based on comments received. Uhlig stated that along Canal Street and based on feedback from the DRB and PB, Building A was modified along Canal Street to include continuous trees between the Rail Trail and Kimball Road. Utility poles and overhead wiring is now shown in the rendering, which shows how the height of the ornamental scale trees are below the overhead wiring. The trees will be spaced 25-feet apart and after reviewing the Salem Tree Guidelines, the planting plan was modified, and 5 (five) native species were introduced. There will be three groupings of street trees, Ironwood, Eastern Redbud, and Winter King Hawthorn (to provide a spring variety) below the overhead wiring, and Black Gum and Swamp White Oak as canopy trees along the Rail Trail and Kimball Road. He reiterated that the city arborist had reviewed and approved the plan. Uhlig stated that in the open space to the upper left of Building C, they introduced a serpentine pathway to the lower level along with stairs and edge seating surrounded by native plantings that overlook the wetland. Koeplin noted that they relocated the trash area further from the buildings to allow for a cleaner parking run and relocated the vehicular entry to Building C to the end of the building, reducing the number of vehicles that need to travel down the boulevard. Uhlig added that Buildings B & D continue to have a midpoint entry, while Building C has an additional end point entry. A green buffer was introduced where there was a shared concrete for vehicular and pedestrian paving, between buildings C and E. They added a pick-up and drop-off on either side of the Boulevard and maintained the overhead catenary lighting. Building E will also have a pick-up and drop-off area and the turnaround at the end of the boulevard will remain in place. The pool, cabana and short-term parking will be located between Buildings C and E and the Rail Trail entrance has been extended to the north with an elongated pathway utilizing two groups of remnant railroad ties and additional seating elements to recognize its prior use. Miller requested information on the proposed fencing around the pool. Uhlig replied that the perimeter would be permeable, and an accessible route would be added down into the area. Koeplin suggested standard black aluminum fencing. Miller replied that the fencing should be of the same quality as the balconies, so it looks as if it fits. Perras stated that there have been some favorable improvements to the proposed site plan and asked if they considered switching Building C with the parking to open the site more. Koeplin replied that it does not fit because the building is too long, and it felt better centralized. Architectural Design Seibert stated that showing the utility lines calls out the scale of the proposed building. They calmed down the panel treatment to Buildings B – E and Building A didn’t change other than the proposed landscape design at the streetscape. Building E moved north 18-feet and Building C was shortened by 18-feet, creating 36-feet of open space between the two structures for the pool and patio area. Koeplin noted that they City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes eliminated some paneling and banding across the top of various facades and continued the wood panel coloration along the body for a cohesive design. Perras suggested that the base on Building A may not match the color of other buildings. Seibert replied that the color will be the same and the terrace wall at Canal Street will match the darker color. Tarbet stated that she was in favor of the landscape improvements but was still concerned with facades and the use of large paneling that will look dated quickly. The larger banding framing the gym entry is a hold over from the previous design, it doesn’t work, and is not contextual to Salem, which is concerning. She also raised concerns with Building A along Canal Street that lacks public space. This is a huge development with such limited public engagement space. Some stair towers are nice, with their masonry and proportions, while others look very different and like the building designs don’t mesh well. The screening at the parking level is nice and perhaps that design could be incorporated into the pool area. Perras requested clarification from Tarbet on her areas of concern. Tarbet replied, on the use of 4-foot x 8-foot white cement panels which are seen everywhere, although the corrugated metal she likes because it has more texture. Sullivan agreed with Tarbet, raised concerns with use of the large panels and a long flat uninterrupted elevation so close to the street. It is a horizontal scale issue that reads as an office building rather than residential, while the other buildings divert away from Canal Street and have less of an impact. He asked if Canal Street was the main entrance and if parking was proposed under each building. Koeplin replied yes to both and noted that the DRB did request simplified paneling along Canal Street layout. Sullivan stated that there is a repetitive monotonous to the elevation and varied window fenestrations might be an improvement, but whether this design fits in Salem is the million-dollar question while there is a time to not replicate old buildings. Whether this building is an office building or residential should be differentiated. Tarbet stated that the issue is textural, the use of historical materials is not what she is suggestion. She was in favor of corrugated metal for its texture and nuance but it’s hard to achieve the balance between more visual interest and being too busy. She suggested the proportion between the top of the window and the cornice may be making the façade appear stout and long. Perras stated that he likes the simplicity of façade at the entrance between Buildings A and B, and the ganging together of windows reinforces the intermediate scale. He advocated against a pixelated strategy but perhaps the design has been oversimplified, however; the ganging together of windows strategy is being applied elsewhere and that logic could be applied to the longer Canal Street façade. He also suggested that the use of smaller size panels would provide a nicer texture, such as 2-foot-wide white planks rather than 4-foot-wide. Mr. Koeplin presented the first version which included ganged windows along Canal Street with more joints. Jaquith suggested creating window bays rather than balconies which many use to collect bicycles and barbeques. He was still not happy with the site plan which reads as 1960’s, didn’t believe the concept would be successful for families, but could be a dorm. Ms. Wilbert made many of these points in previous public comment letters, points he’s also raised before. He questioned what could be limiting the site plan design. Mr. Koeplin replied that 20% of the units are being City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes offered at 60% AMI is one of the drivers, balconies are an amenity used extensively, and barbeques aren’t allowed. They chose to not create bays along Canal Street due to their proximity to the power lines, but they believe their design frames the street rather than a parking lot and a building beyond. Jaquith noted that buildings B-E are all the same height and monolithic. Sullivan agreed. Koeplin replied that the height of Building B has been cut down at the corner closet to Canal Street. Jaquith asked if they were limited in height. Koeplin replied that the ZBA approved Building B-E for 5-stories and 3-stories for Building A. They will revisit the heights at Building B to fit the structure. Jaquith noted that a variety in building height would be an improvement. Sullivan noted the arrangement of brown and white panels on the northern façade of Building A, which breaks down the horizontal run of the building, while older elevations used vertical stripes. Seibert stated that that same strategy could be applied to the Canal Street façade. Perras suggested that a symmetrical alignment may not be necessary, but something can be applied to break up the run along the façade. Variation of the panel sizes would be preferred over all panel sizes being simplified. Seibert and Koenig replied that a variation has been applied to align with the window sizes. Sullivan suggested using a different panel color or projections to disrupt the uninterrupted horizontal scale. Seibert agreed. Koeplin suggested raising the heights of the end bays to make them more prominent and as if they were 3 buildings. Perras stated that neither will alleviate Tarbet or Jaquith’s concerns. Sullivan noted Tarbet’s concerns with the commercial spaces and spaces open to the public. There aren’t many commercial establishments nearby and the project could benefit from having more commercial/residential focus spaces on the ground floor. Jaquith agreed. Koeplin replied that City Councilors have weighed in saying that 1,500 square-feet can take a long time to lease. Jaquith noted that the numbers of residential tenants will become the customers. Tarbet asked if community spaces for the residents have been considered. Koeplin replied yes, it will be within the leasing office. Sullivan asked if the parking ratio was at 1.2. Koeplin replied that the ratio is 1.22 and the PB suggested a reduction, but they don’t believe with the current market 1 space per unit would be sufficient, and he suggested 1.4. Jaquith suggestion 1.5. Sullivan asked if charging stations will be available. Koeplin replied yes, 30; however, the garages have open ceilings and lines for future EV charging stations can be run. National Grid only allows a certain percentage of EV charging stations because they don’t have the capacity to deliver that option for over 300 vehicles. Sullivan asked if the roof decks would be green or outdoor plaza space. Koeplin replied both, a small green roof will act as a buffer between the common area deck and a private deck that belongs to a neighboring unit. The common area deck will have some planters to break up the seating pods. The main roofs on top of the 5-story buildings are not green roofs but will house the bifacial solar panels that were suggested by Councillor Jeff Cohen. All the buildings will be electric so energy can be purchased from various sustainable sources. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Miller stated that the site is less than ½ a mile from Crosbys and there are other stores as well, so that shouldn’t be as much of a concern. If Salem were to create a new train station, this site would be well poised for that. She was surprised to see a pool added, but she would be just as happy with more usable open space, since a pool is usable three months a year. Sullivan and Jaquith agreed. Koeplin stated that a pool is an amenity that most residents will be looking for with a project of this scale and there is enough space around the perimeter of the pool for people to gather when the pool is not in use. Chair Durand asked if the elevator services are adequate with 1 per building, especially if it is out of order in a 5-story building. Koeplin replied that their cut-off is 100 units and neither of the buildings has more than 100 units. Jaquith agreed that one elevator per building could lead to problems. Sullivan noted that some elevators are at the opposite end of the buildings requiring tenants to walk to the opposite end. Chair Durand agreed with their inconvenient locations. Sullivan suggested they reconsider how best to articulate the building entry points. Koeplin replied that they’ve used eyebrows over the entries, catenary lighting, landscaping, and bollards. Once residents move in they will know their way around the site; however, their building lettering can be enlarged. Sullivan and Jaquith agreed that guests will need clear direction. Tarbet stated that the PB will have two more opportunities to review the project. Public Comment: Councillor Jeff Cohen. Spent 7 years as the Vice-Chair to the Sustainability Energy and Resiliency Committee, and there are more innovative solar panels that can produce up to 30% more energy. It’s great to have an all-electric sustainable project. They need to create more capacity for EV charging for more electric vehicles, which can be expensive. Having 10% of the parking for EV’s is significant. A previous ordinance was before the city that would have inhibited the amount of affordable housing and those two should be balanced. He’s excited to have all rental units and workforce housing in this complex, which is within walking distance of Amazon, Salem Hospital, and Salem State University, all which problems obtaining and retaining employees. A future train station will enhance this development even further. What’s proposed is the highest ratio of affordable housing of any private development proposed in Salem, and it exceeds the 10% recommended by the PB and the city. They are considering an inclusionary zoning ordinance although they may not be able to reach the amount proposed by the developers. This proposed complex is within his ward and the design team has been very responsive to each board they’ve presented to. The added greenspace and sensitivity to the residents on both Kimball and Adams Streets who were positively responsive at the community meetings. He arranged an in-person community meeting and the previous Ward Councillor, Josh Turiel, who is now on the PB, arranged a Zoom community meeting as well, and the neighboring residents also had positive viewpoints. The changes that would provide more variation to the design would be positive. He believed this development would be the flagship for Canal Street which doesn’t have much of an identity, except for its high number of coffee shops. He believes the City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes increase in residents would encourage commercial businesses. He thanked the Board for their time. Polly Wilbert, 7 Cedar Street. Asked any Board members that hadn’t read her previous letter to do so. The relocated garage entrance at Building C raised concerns with the main entrance to Building A, leaving some residents to walk by up to 14 apartments to access the elevator. The proposed vehicular entrance at Building C is where two flows of traffic will cross, so a better location would be at the center of the building, and the Board should consider that. It’s unfortunate that 2 elevators aren’t being considered which could become a great difficulty. She suggested eliminating some washer and dryers in some units and creating a laundry room on each floor, which could provide some flexibility with the budget to add a second elevator. 1 elevator in a building that could house 90 people is an unfortunate limitation on what could be a quality development. No one else in the assembly wished to speak. Kennedy stated that Brooksy Village, the senior living community, has a single elevator in 5 of their buildings, there are more units between the elevator and the end of the building than in the proposed project. While he understands the concern for multiple elevators from a usage perspective if an elevator breaks down, he doesn’t find it to be that big of an issue. Koeplin replied that they designed a 90-unit 5-story-high building in 2019 at 480 Rantoul Street in Beverly with 1 elevator and they’ve had no issues. VOTE: Perras: Motion to continue to the May 24, 2023 regular meeting and to look at the design elements discussed. Seconded by: Jaquith. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Durand were in favor. Passes 7-0. Tarbet left the meeting. 2. 1 Harmony Grove Road: Entrance Corridor Overlay District – Review of Construction Plans. Dennis Swart and Zachary Silva Architect of DJSA Architects, Anthony Roberto of the LAR Properties, and Steve Foley of Essex Builders Corp (GC) were present to discuss the project. Swart stated that they received an initial DRB recommendation of approval in November 2021 and the exterior design has remained as approved except for four items, two related to discontinued products and two value engineering changes requested by the owner. Item 1: The originally specified and approved siding type labeled as FC-A (Hardi Aspire beveled channel siding) has been discontinued and the proposed material is Nichiha Vintage Wood in the color Ash, which is a similar factory finished cement board product. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Perras asked if the size and spacing of the newly proposed product matched what was previously approved. Swart replied that the Hardi Apsire was a lap siding while the Nichiha is a panel with the appearance lap siding with a horizontal alignment and a groove. Perras asked whether the proposed is a routed panel product. Silva clarified that both panels were routed but the previous was beveled. Item 2: The originally specified and approved precast concrete sill was Arriscraft Renaissance with a graphite finish, and the graphite finish has been discontinued, but the proposed color will now be a Carbon, the closest match to Graphite. Item 3: Due to pricing concerns, they are not proposing to eliminate the 3-foot projected balconies and install Juliette balcony railings mounted flush to the building façade, which in their opinion will have a better aesthetic and eliminate items from being stored outside each unit. Item 4: Owner has proposed to change the window apartments from aluminum to a Marvin Elevate fiberglass system. The same color and outward appearance would remain. The comparison façade material was presented. Perras and Jaquith preferred the newly proposed Nichiha Vintage wood panel system. Miller suggested a non-faux wood option continuing the Boards strong opposition to it’s use in Salem. Foley noted that the advantage from the Nichiha is to maintain the flat vertical surface vs. having the bottom of each Hardie siding panel flare outward. The smooth board finish would return to a traditional looking clapboard siding. Jaquith and Chair Durand were not opposed to the faux wood grain. Swart noted that the woodgrain would not be overly pronounced. Miller asked if this product would only be used at the upper levels. Silva replied that the first-floor material will remain masonry. Perras asked if the Latura product line was considered which has a V-Groove without texture because he would not be opposed to a smooth version in that product line. Swart replied no, but they can ask the GC to compare the costs. Perras noted that the elimination of the project balconies but there are enough projected bays to make it less of a concern. Jaquith agreed. Foley stated that the window change was a combination of value engineering and having a prefinished softer residential feel on the interior of the units rather than aluminum storefront. Jaquith was in favor of the Marvin Elevate window change and the awning style. Foley noted that all main entrances and common areas will remain aluminum. He reiterated that the grids at the residences will be customed to match. Miller asked if the windows would have screens. Foley replied yes, interior screens. Kenney was also in favor of the product. Miller stated that upon closer review of the Nichiha paneling she has no issue with the proposed material because it is not trying to be rough cedar clapboard. Chair Durand agreed. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Public Comment: Celeste Riviera, ownership group. Anthony Roberto was dropped from the call but is trying to rejoin the meeting. No one else in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Jaquith: Motion to approve the four changes as presented. Seconded by: Perras. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Durand were in favor. Passes 6-0. Perras noted that the Latura product line no longer needs to be considered. New / Old Business 1. Approval of Minutes: a. March 22, 2023 VOTE: Miller: Motion to approve the March 22, 2023 regular meeting minutes. Seconded by: Perras. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Durand were in favor. Passes 6-0. 2. Staff Updates, if any: Newhall-Smith stated that she is in the process of enforcing the following; a. She’s had no success with the Flatbread sign that continues to be illuminated and she’s sent a noted to the Building Inspector the week of April 17th to enforce the issue. b. Notch Brewery still has their banner sign up on the façade of Home Décor and the owner was traveling at the time so she will reach out again. c. Real Pirates still have their banners up and their response is that the park has not been activated as the city said it would and they require visibility. She will follow Perras’ suggestion of a hard deadline and to remove it by June 1st, 2023. Charlotte Forten Park: The memorial project is underway with public art in the form of a statue of Charlotte Forten by the Public Art Planner and a committee. She’s working with staff and the original landscape architects to create shade structures using funds that former Mayor Driscoll set aside. They received one response the previous week for a programming manager at the park and the response will be reviewed the following week. A consistent and set number of free public family-friendly and inclusive programming would be required from the time they start until Haunted Happenings. The pandemic put everything on pause, but the plans are now underway. Jerry’s at 301 Essex Street. The applicant made it through the April SRA meeting although they did not like the proposed color palette and requested a red brick option. City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Miller noted that Rockafella’s was installing windows today. Newhall-Smith noted that those are the DRB approved windows. Their building permit referenced all of the decisions made and included the window specifications sheet. Adjournment Jaquith: Motion to adjourn. Seconded by: Perras. Roll Call: Jaquith, Kennedy, Miller, Perras, Sullivan, Tarbet, and Durand were in favor. Passes 6-0. Meeting is adjourned at 8:15PM. Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A §18-25 and City Ordinance Sections 2-028 through 2-203