Loading...
2024-10-09 Meeting MinutesSRA October 9, 2024 Page 1 of 6 City of Salem, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board or Committee: Redevelopment Authority, Regular Meeting Date and Time: Wednesday, October 9, 2024, at 6:00 pm Meeting Location: Virtual Zoom Meeting SRA Members Present: Chair Grace Napolitano, Dean Rubin, Christine Madore, Christopher Dunn SRA Members Absent: Cynthia Nina-Soto Others Present: Kate Newhall-Smith, Principal Planner, Tom Daniel, Executive Director Executive Director’s Report Mr. Daniel provided an update on the Charlotte Forten memorial statue. The festivities planned around the structure had to be rescheduled due to extended time needed for the fabrication process. The sculpture is expected to be delivered in the next week or so. The memorial will be dedicated on Saturday, November 16th. The SRA will be notified prior to the event. Ms. Newhall-Smith reported that the interpretative signage at Charlotte Forten has been installed and looks very nice. She added that the Anthem Group is doing a soft launch on October 10th and will be doing programming all weekend. The shade structure was expected October 1st, but delivery is now expected in another week or so, with installation planned for November. Design Review Board Membership 1. Appointee for Consideration: Kate Martin Ms. Newhall-Smith reported that she and Stephanie Owens met with Ms. Martin over the summer as she expressed interest in joining the DRB. Ms. Martin said that she lives in North Salem and is an architect who has been working in the construction field for 10 years. She has a master’s degree from UVA and is currently working at a residential design firm in Rockport. She has experience working in commercial and public buildings, and now focuses on residential buildings. She has experience working in both new construction and historic buildings, with her passion being in historic buildings. Ms. Madore thanked Ms. Martin for stepping up to volunteer time. She inquired whether Ms. Martin would have to recuse herself from potential DRB-sponsored CPA projects as she sits on the CPC. Ms. Martin said that other CPC members do recuse themselves from items where they have interests. Mr. Rubin expressed his support for Ms. Martin. Mr. Daniel reported that Ms. Martin would be taking the place of David Jaquith, who has served on the DRB for an extended period of time. He added that he, Ms. Owens, and Ms. Newhall- Smith will be providing a presentation on the history of the SRA to the DRB in the coming months. There were no comments from the public. VOTE: Rubin made a motion to appoint Ms. Martin to the DRB for a three-year term to expire on October 9, 2027. Seconded by: Madore. SRA October 9, 2024 Page 2 of 6 Roll Call: Dunn, Madore, Rubin, and Napolitano. 4-0 in favor. Projects in the Urban Renewal Area There are no projects to review. New/Old Business 1. Presentation: SRA Sign Manual Update Ms. Newhall-Smith reported that she has long-wanted to update the SRA Sign Manual, which was pulled together 50 years ago. She noted that the information in the Manual is good, and some continues to be relevant. The information needs to be updated to reflect current technologies and the Manual itself needs to a visual overhaul. She felt she could update the manual with the help of volunteers. The purpose was to review the 1973 SRA Sign Manual and update it to reflect current technologies, Board practices, and address new sign types, while ensuring consistency with the Salem Sign Ordinance. The Sign Manual acts as a guidance document. City staff use it to assist applicants with the type and amount of signage they are permitted. The manual is referenced in staff reports to DRB members. The manual sets the design framework for all signs in the downtown renewal area, and is a comprehensive, but balanced system for private sign design. It establishes criteria to: • Bring visual vitality to the area. • Be compatible with the architecture. • Be appropriate to the type of activity to which they pertain. • Be legible. • Provide motivation for other signs in Salem. The project approach included: • “In-house” via Planning Staff and DRB volunteers • Evaluate current Manual • Determine obsolete and missing guidelines • Improve format and visuals • Review with Planning Director, DRB, and SRA. Ms. Newhall-Smith notes that she was very fortunate to have three DRB members assist her; Paul Durand, Leeann Leftwich, and Elizabeth Murray. Many photos in the manual were provided by City Councillor, Ty Hapworth. New section titles and sections were created. Live links to the sign code and DRB website were provided for supporting information, and photos of successful sign designs around the downtown were provided. Ms. Leftwich created diagrams that illustrate the sign types and locations. Content definitions were updated so they match those in the Salem Sign Code. Restrictions were removed where awnings could be used, and text regarding wall sign height was clarified. The ability to use bare lightbulbs and mechanical movement was removed. The allowance for SRA October 9, 2024 Page 3 of 6 temporary construction signage was updated, and a placeholder for temporary murals and window art was created. Simplified amortization text was included, and the removal of the prohibition on vertical sign text. Language for upper story businesses was reworked. Sign accessibility was addressed, and the existing design review section was removed, and an update on the process was included, as well as the process for appeal. Ms. Newhall-Smith requested comments by October 21st, and she thanked the board members for their assistance. Mr. Rubin thought the revised Manual was very well done but felt that there was still a large placeholder before he felt comfortable approving. He said he would send any comments tomorrow. Ms. Madore also thought the report looked fantastic and will review and provide comments. She asked whether there is any non-conformance in signs based on the changes outlined. Ms. Newhall-Smith believes there are probably signs that fall into that category, but they could remain as pre-existing, non-conforming signs and can stay as long as there are no changes made to them. Ms. Madore recommended that the Commission on Disabilities review the document. Ms. Newhall-Smith noted that the SRA approves all signage in the downtown area, but signs still have to go through the DRB for design review to ensure compliance with sign code and the sign manual. The Executive Director of the SRA approves all signs. The hope is to have the SRA adopt the manual at their November meeting. The meeting was opened for public comment. Mark Perras, 6 Union St., DRM member commented on the need to address the temporary nature of mural/artwork on storefronts, some of which has been in place for a number of years. He asked how signage requirements are enforced, and if it was the responsibility of the Building Department. He also inquired about how the manual will be distributed. Ms. Newhall-Smith reported that there is nothing in the sign code that permits these banners. While she is reluctant to do so, she does bring in the Building Commissioner, but prefers to first have staff reach out to the business owner. She will work with Main Streets, Destination Salem, and other partners to spread the word about the manual. 2. Discussion: In-Person Meetings Ms. Newhall-Smith reported that unless there is an extension to the temporary order by the Commonwealth to permit remote meetings, or a change in open meeting law, the SRA will need to go back to in-person/hybrid meetings beginning on April 1st, 2025. Current open meeting laws allow for only one person to participate remotely, and that person cannot count toward the quorum, but their vote on agenda items does count. The Chair of the board, or the person designated as Chair, must be physically at the meeting – the meeting cannot be run by someone who is participating remotely. SRA October 9, 2024 Page 4 of 6 Ms. Madore said her request to include this on the agenda was to explore the idea of meeting in- person quarterly, or at least for the annual meeting. She would like the Board to consider this request if an extension and/or a change to the law continues to allow for remote meetings. She believes the quality and respect of a discussion is improved in-person. Ms. Napolitano said she would support some level of in-person meetings. 3. Discussion: Temporary Murals and Temporary Window Art Ms. Napolitano noted that at the last meeting, only three members were present, and it was not time for a decision on this topic. Paul Durand, Chair of the DRB, was also present for the last meeting. There was some discussion about doing a trial run, but those in attendance felt there was a need for a broader board discussion. Mr. Rubin noted that he was still against them and feels they can be a slippery slope. They can cover historic buildings, and it will be difficult to decide what is art and what is an advertisement. The issue arose over the PEM’s request to do a vinyl mural over the brick, which was approved on a temporary basis. But a question arose over whether this type of installation should be permitted at all, and if so, what guidelines should be in place. Mr. Daniel said he has personally concluded that unless the public sector initiated the mural, it is being done to generate profit. He acknowledged the top-quality work the PEM provides. He added that the SRA was set up to preserve the architecture of downtown Salem, and that the wraps obscure that. After the current PEM mural was approved, staff were charged with reviewing guidelines that could be adopted, but after further thought and discussion, it became apparent that the murals perhaps weren’t a good idea. Mr. Rubin suggested that the placeholder in the manual state the murals are not permitted. Mark Perras, 6 Union St., DRM member added that he believes the DRB is of the same opinion as the SRA. He asked for clarification that this includes murals and wraps. Permanent murals are permitted through the Board’s Small Project Review process in conjunction with the Public Art Commission’s review and approval process. He discusses temporary murals and temporary window art. Ms. Newhall-Smith responds that temporary murals, permanent murals, and temporary window art are all different things and need to be addressed separately. For window art, she has some ideas, based on past DRB conversations that could be incorporated into the Sign Manual. A vote now could focus on the temporary vinyl murals and wraps. VOTE: Rubin made a motion to prohibit temporary vinyl/wrap murals on the outside of buildings. Seconded by: Madore. Roll Call: Dunn, Madore, Rubin, and Napolitano. 3-1 (Dunn in opposition). 4. FY25 Community Preservation Plan – Request for Comment/Input Ms. Newhall-Smith reported on the annual request to provide comments on the Community Preservation Plan. If board members have comments they can submit comments by Friday, October 18th or Monday, the 21st. SRA October 9, 2024 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Rubin said he was disappointed that the CPC did not incorporate their comments last year. He asked if the SRA should consider requesting CPA funds for a project. Mr. Daniel said that if there are ideas for projects to let him know because the City does submit requests for CPA funding, 5. Redevelopment of the Historic Courthouses and the Crescent Lot: Update on Project Status Mr. Daniel reported that they continue to have regular meetings with DCAMM on the exchange. Chapter 91 and Conservation Commission applications are being submitted this month. The drainage plan has changed which requires a new Chapter 91 filing. Permitting is with the Planning Board. They will be back before the SRA in November or December. There will be 12-15 units of housing in the gray building, and then a mix on non- residential uses in the red brick building. The Massachusetts National Guard is looking for a museum location in Salem for six or seven years. Mr. Daniel and Ms. Newhall-Smith met with them to discuss the idea of the using the courthouse and they were open to the idea. It would require coordination among local, state, and federal government. There are challenges with the different components and their timing. It would include some operations, training, and archives. Ms. Napolitano said the Mayor brought up good points such as the promotion of public access, and public activity in that space. Ms. Madore said she would need to get used to this proposed idea, and feels a mixed use is a better use of the building. Mr. Rubin agreed. Mr. Dunn felt it was an exciting idea. 6. SRA Financials No discussion. 7. Other Approval of Minutes 1. September 11, 2024 VOTE: Rubin made a motion to approve the September 11th minutes as submitted. Seconded by: Madore. Roll Call: Dunn, Madore, Rubin, and Napolitano. 4-0 in favor. Mr. Daniel reported that Cynthia Nina-Soto has resigned from the SRA. He and Ms. Newhall-Smith will be working to generate some names for a replacement. Ms. Napolitano thanked Ms. Nina-Soto for her service and that she will be missed. Upcoming Meetings 1. Site Visit: October 10 2. DRB: October 23 3. SRA: November 13 Adjournment of Regular Meeting VOTE: Rubin made a motion to adjourn the meeting. SRA October 9, 2024 Page 6 of 6 Seconded by: Dunn. Roll Call: Dunn, Madore, Rubin, and Napolitano. 4-0 in favor. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.