Loading...
2025-03-26 Meeting MinutesDRB March 26, 2025 Page 1 of 6 City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board or Committee: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting Date and Time: Wednesday, March 26, 2025, at 6:00 pm Meeting Location: Virtual Zoom Meeting DRB Members Present: Chair Paul Durand, Marc Perras, Catherine Miller, Sarah Tarbet, Kate Martin DRB Members Absent: Leeann Leftwich, Elizabeth Murray Others Present: Stephanie Owens, Senior Planner Recorder: Christine Petryszyn The meeting was called to order at 6:02pm. Roll call was taken. Signs in the Urban Renewal Area 1. 100 Washington Street: Black Cat Curiosity Shoppe VOTE: Ms. Miller made a motion to continue the application to next month’s meeting. Seconded by: Tarbet. Roll Call: Durand, Martin, Miller, Perras, and Tarbet. 5-0 in favor. 2. 253 Essex Street: Blackcraft A-Frames Kristie Phillips was present to discuss the project: • Ms. Phillips shared her screen showing both A-frame signs, which includes wayfinding arrows to help direct customers. • There is one sign for 253 Essex and one 259 Essex St. There is no sign at the rear entrance. • The signage on the windows has been removed. There were no comments from the public. VOTE: Ms. Miller made a motion to approve the sign as presented. Seconded by: Perras. Roll Call: Durand, Martin, Miller, Perras, and Tarbet. 5-0 in favor. Projects in the Urban Renewal Area 1. 20 Central Street: Small Project Review – Repair of courtyard plaza surface to include adjoining stairs and walkways – Request to withdraw without prejudice. 2. 288 Derby Street: Small Project Review – Construction of a new accessible ramp and landing deck on the north side of the Salem Wax Museum building. Mr. Durand recused himself from reviewing this project. DRB March 26, 2025 Page 2 of 6 Mark Meche from Winter Street Architects, and Kayla Lumbra from Salem Wax Museum were present to discuss the proposal: • Mr. Meche discussed the SRA’s concern about the accessibility and use of the gate. • Mr. Meche reported that Ms. Newhall-Smith said that the gate is not used and that no ROW was found in the deed. He said that the site design shows the gate to be reasonably accessible. • Mr. Meche acknowledged that he worked to incorporate as many comments as possible including using less brick and more wood. Unilocked paver in a herringbone pattern will be used. There will be a level landing and the retaining wall will be granite. • Site plans, profiles, and finishes were shared. • Ms. Martin noted that she thinks the design is very cohesive and improved from when it was last before the DRB. • Ms. Miller noted that the engineers plan does not have the flat area at the bottom of the ramp. She said the applicant needed a 2% landing before going to 5%. She suggested a company in Maine that makes water struck brick and expressed support for the paint choice. There were no comments from the public. VOTE: Ms. Miller made a motion to approve the project as presented. Seconded by: Martin. Roll Call: Martin, Miller, Perras, and Tarbet. 4-0 in favor. 3. 41 Lafayette Street: Extension of Premise for Outdoor Dining for Barrio – Review of design of outdoor dining area, which is nearly identical to the 2024 season, though with an additional on- street parking space for a total of three parking spaces being used. Maggie Osborn, owner of Barrio, was present to discuss the project: • Ms. Osborn said that everything will be the same as in the 2024 season but with the addition of another space. • Illustrations were shared. • Ms. Osborn reported that at they have not been utilizing the table indicated by the bold line. • Ms. Owens noted that the DRB is not deciding of the licensing of the parking spot, solely the design. • Mr. Perras said if the applicant is replicating what was there last year and there is an accessible entrance, he is fine with the proposal. • A portion of the space is in front of the adjacent property, and the applicant has acknowledgement and permission from that owner to use the space. • The applicant has received permission from the licensing board to use the parking space. • The applicant said that the accessible ramp is built flush to the curb. • Photos were shared. • Ms. Owens will confirm that the Disability Commission will review the platforms and ramps once installed. The meeting was open for public comment. Ms. Owens noted that there were two public moments received before the meeting which were included in the project folder. DRB March 26, 2025 Page 3 of 6 Councilor Jerzylo, Ward One Councilor, acknowledged that the third space encompasses a portion of the spaces in front of the smoke shop, but said she understands that they are fine with the proposal. She also noted the concerns neighbors have about the noise and outdoor speakers, but understands that is not in the purview of the DRB. Councilor Jeff Cohen, Ward Five Councilor, 12 Hancock St, and also liaison to the Disabilities Commission, reported that he was part of the team that evaluated every outside dining establishment and reported that this restaurant did very well. He said they will review the plans as part of the process. Mr. Perras requested the Commission does visit the site. Mr. Durand closed the public comment. VOTE: Ms. Tarbet made a motion to approve the project. Seconded by: Martin. Roll Call: Martin, Miller, Perras, Durand, and Tarbet. 5-0 in favor. Projects Outside of the Urban Renewal Area 1. 266 Canal Street: Entrance Corridor – Revisions to prior-approved architectural elevations and landscaping. Chris Koeplin, Steve Tedesco, and Joe Genga were present, representing the residents at Canal Street, LLP, to discuss the project: • The applicant had filed with the Planning Board in February and met with the Board on March 6th. The proposal before the DRB incorporates the Planning Board’s feedback. The applicant is hoping to be back before the Planning Board at their April 3rd meeting. • The project is about 40% complete. Building One is due to be delivered in late August. • Changes since the DRB last reviewed the project include updates to the landscape plan, siding materials, windows, and lights. • Mr. Tedesco, from Icon Architecture, reviewed the shared images and changes that were intended to provide more consistency between the buildings. • The louvers will be color matched to the siding and cladding. The gray indicates the garage. • On the main façade of Building One, a louver was added and a door so people can get in and out the front with their bikes. • The side elevation shows the exterior lighting. • Louvers were added to the bigger buildings in the rear. A lobby at the window was removed. • The louvers will be color matched to the darker CMU color. Gray siding was introduced at the top section of Building Three for consistency. • Mr. Genga reviewed the changes to the landscape architecture plans. The main change to the plan is the sunken amphitheater. There are seating areas with grill stations. Steps are provided between the bleacher seating. There are accessible routes. • More greenspaces are provided to screen the utility area. • Renderings were shared. • The rise on the stadium seats are between 18 and 20 inches and the height and depth is between 18 and 24 inches. DRB March 26, 2025 Page 4 of 6 • Ms. Miller noted that she was happy with the improvements. • The surface will be stabilized stone dust. All shapes will be flush. There were no comments from the public. VOTE: Mr. Perras made a motion to approve the project as submitted. Seconded by: Tarbet. Roll Call: Martin, Miller, Perras, Durand, and Tarbet. 5-0 in favor. 2. 17 Canal Street: Entrance Corridor – Design review for proposed AC Hotel by Marriott. Scott Grover, an attorney representing Canal Area, LLC, Ken McClure and Kevin Steele from the DeNunzio Group, and David Sherborne from Opechee Construction were present to discuss the project: • The current site is occupied by a decaying two-story building. The site is covered entirely by pavement and building and is entirely impervious. • There are two tenants, Brito Ice and Sammy’s Roast Beef. • The property is located in the B5 Zoning District and is just outside the Urban Renewal District. It is located at an entrance corridor in the Overlay District. • The proposal includes the construction of a mixed-use six-story Marriot AC Hotel with 132 guest rooms, a restaurant and bar to serve both guests and public patrons. • There will be 60 parking spaces accessible by valet only. • Primary approvals include PUD, Special Permit and Site Plan Review from the Planning Board. The DRB’s recommendation is needed by the Planning Board. • The Historical Commission also has jurisdiction, and a request for a waiver from the demolition delay ordinance has been requested. • Mr. McClure gave a brief overview of the applicant’s vision. • Mr. Sherborne shared images, site plan, and illustrations of the proposal. • Project consultations with City staff began in November 2024. A community meeting was held in February, Historical Commission public meeting was held March 10th, and the initial Planning Board meeting was held March 20th. • A fitness room, meeting room, and market area will also be located within the footprint of the hotel. • The applicant is compliant with zoning, except for PUD for maximum coverage and the overlay district for which they are requesting relief. • Landscaping around the building perimeter is included, as well as sidewalk improvements which will be red brick pavers. • The applicant worked to be very intentional in terms of creating public spaces and draw pedestrian traffic to the building. • The third floor is where guest rooms are introduced. • The project utilizes a lot of masonry and ACM panels. The main entrance will be differentiated with larger windows for high public use areas. • A canopy entrance with silent signage will be used at the entryway. DRB March 26, 2025 Page 5 of 6 • Feedback from the Historical Commission included a request for contextual materials relative to the Eagle Iron Foundry that was on site at the time of the Salem Fire and rebuilt in 1915, as well as any significance of the Sammy’s Roast Beef sign. Red brick was requested as was lower contrasting materials. The Planning Board raised the issue of the fenestration treatment of the parking levels. Concerns were raised about the proximity of the transformer related to the main entrance and architecture of the building. Feasibility of an accessible sidewalk from Pond Street and incorporation of public art was raised. • A plaque commemorating the original building can be reused at the new building. • Mr. Perras confirmed with Ms. Owens that the size of the building is not under the DRB’s purview, but noted that he felt that the building was very large for this site. Ms. Martin agreed. • Mr. Perras believes the AC Portland Building should not be used as a model because he thinks the masonry here should be used in a more three-dimensional volumetric way and suggested incorporating more historic details. He encouraged the applicant to look at the Hampton Inn as precedent for a crisper edge. Mr. Perras was supportive of the masonry as it wraps around corners. • The exit out of the parking garage will be right turn only. • Ms. Miller expressed a preference for the white façade/metal shingle on the AC Portland building. • A pre-patinaed texture would be more desirable. • Ms. Miller raised the issue of potential confusion between the hotels in Salem having the same name. She expressed support for trying to make sure the area is pedestrian friendly. She also wants to know more about the plantings. • Ms. Tarbet noted that additional design on the big walls would be helpful. She is supportive of the brick piece on the front by the lobby. She agrees with Mr. Perras comment regarding the cornice. She is concerned that that aperture design framing element might become dated. • There was discussion surrounding the materials used for the parking garage; glazed, opaque windows, or screens. • Mr. Durand expressed support for the DRB’s comments, and reiterated that the cornice should be removed. There were no comments from the public. VOTE: Mr. Perras made a motion to proceed to continue with the comments that were provided at this meeting. Seconded by: Miller. Roll Call: Martin, Miller, Perras, Durand, and Tarbet. 5-0 in favor. Mr. Perras noted that the DRB will want to see the materials. New / Old Business 1. Approval of Minutes: a. February 26, 2025 DRB March 26, 2025 Page 6 of 6 VOTE: Mr. Perras made a motion to approve the February 26, 2025 minutes. Seconded by: Tarbet. Roll Call: Durand, Martin, Miller, Perras, and Tarbet. 5-0 in favor. 2. In-Person Meetings, April 1, 2025 • Ms. Miller asked if the applicant needs to be in-person. Mr. Durand said he believes the main applicant should be in-person, but that other consultants can be remote. • Ms. Miller said she believes there is value added in seeing the plans on screen and opportunities for the public to see and participate more. • Ms. Owens noted there is a possibility for an extension for remote meetings at the state level, but as of now the plan is to be in-person as of April 1st. • Ms. Martin noted that she has a newborn and may need to step down if there is an issue with a member being remote. • A quorum of the Board needs to be in-person, but the chair can give permission for a member to be remote with 48 hours notice. 3. Staff updates, if any • Ms. Owens provided an update on the Bayview Condos located at 18-20 Franklin Street. She said the developer will be painting everything that was shown to the board on the renderings. There will be no vertical white stripes. • Ms. Owens reported that they are in contact with the PEM about the vinyl exhibit. They will also be making it very clear in the sign manual update that vinyls are not permitted. • Mr. Perras suggested the Ms. Owens reach out to the new owners of Flatbread and make sure they are clear that a backlit sign is not permitted. She said she has done so. • Mr. Perras said he agreed with the HSI letter and felt the new colors for the Crescent Street mockup were not good. Ms. Owens said they are in the process of arranging for more discussion and are asking for new yellow color samples. They will be meeting directly with the architect. Upcoming Meetings 1. SRA: April 9th 2. DRB: April 23rd Adjournment VOTE: Miller: Motion to adjourn. Seconded by: Tarbet. All in favor. The meeting is adjourned at 7:58PM. Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 39 §23B and City Ordinance Sections 2-028 through 2-2033