Loading...
2025-05-14 SRA Meeting MinutesSRA May 14, 2025 Page 1 of 8 City of Salem, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board or Committee: Redevelopment Authority Date and Time: Wednesday, May 14, 2025, at 6:00 pm Meeting Location: Virtual Zoom Meeting SRA Members Present: Chair Grace Napolitano, Dean Rubin, Christine Madore, Glenn Larose, Christopher Dunn Others Present: Kate Newhall-Smith, Principal Planner, Tom Daniel, Executive Director Executive Directors Report Mr. Daniel reported on talks with the community about the impacts from the tariffs on their businesses, tourism, etc. He believes it’s primarily anecdotal information at this point, but some retailors do receive inventory from China, which will impact pricing. Mr. Daniel believes Salem as a destination will remain strong, though there is an expected drop in tourism from Canada, which may impact Salem, though a strong domestic interest should buffer that impact. He said restaurants have set up their outdoor dining, and energy and enthusiasm is strong. Rinus Oosthoek, Executive Director of the Salem Chamber of Commerce, is retiring after 20 years. A send-off for him will be held on May 29th at the Hawthorne Hotel and everyone is invited. Mr. Daniel and Ms. Newhall-Smith will circulate details on the event. Ms. Newhall-Smith reported that the downtown area near Charlotte Fortin Park is under construction. Due to the soils at the park, work on the shade structure was paused out of concern about the footings. A Geotech engineer was brought in to take samples, which are scheduled to be taken May 21st and results are expected in a week. She will be meeting with the consultant and contractor about reducing the size of the construction zone. She said there is a lot to happen in terms of scope of work, obtaining quotes, change orders and fund ing, but they are looking to make it happen as soon as possible. She reported that Anthem is hoping to open, but have had to pivot due to construction fencing. The City of Salem is paying for the Geotech work. There is no SRA money involved with the shade structure project. Mr. Rubin noted that a mini-documentary film about the Charlotte Forten Memorial project is being developed, and they are targeting Juneteenth as the day that the film will debut. Members of the committee were sent an advance copy for their feedback. A celebration will be held at the park on Juneteenth. Santander Bank at 22 New Derby will be closing. Ms. Newhall-Smith will be in touch with the owner of the building. Sea Witch, a retail and event class space, is open at One Derby Square with retail on the second floor. She reported that they are seeing more and more second floor retail. Georgia’s Little Salem Shop on Front Street is open. Artist Row has all new tenants and is open. All the Daily Table stores are closing due to the economic climate, food costs, and reduced grant funding. The Salem store was their one store that was breaking even. Ms. Newhall-Smith will be meeting with the building owner and organization. The Cove Hotel at 40 Bridge Street is partially open with the SRA May 14, 2025 Page 2 of 8 remaining to open in about a month. Trade House, a restaurant, at 156 Derby Street is open. There was some shuffling of tenants around Pickering Wharf which has quieted down. Projects in the Urban Renewal Area 1. 283R Derby Street: Extension of Premise for Outdoor Dining for Notch Brewery & Tap Room – Review of proposed outdoor dining area on the South River Harborwalk Chris Lohring, owner of Notch, was present to discuss the proposal: • He reported that their lease with the City expired on November 1st. Mr. Lohring shared images of existing conditions and photos of the tables they had on the Harborwalk that were protected with bollards and rope, which was problematic. • Images of the proposed plan were shared that include a better barrier between the public and the tables. • The plan is not yet approved by the Disabilities Commission. • Mr. Lohring is proposing to use planters as an additional barrier, but noted the sidewalk program seems focused on a streetscape, not a river. • He also asked what height and type barrier must be used. He proposed using different furniture, half the size, from the other tables to allow for an accessible aisle and use. • He would like to have bollards and chains that are 27’ or lower, to satisfy the Disabilities Commissions for cane users. Mr. Rubin was supportive of the ADA table design. The bollards and chains will be black. The meeting was open for public comment. Russ Tanzer expressed support for the change and the switch to the one table allowing accessible access. VOTE: Rubin made a motion to approve and forward the proposal to the DRB and noted that he does not feel the project needs to come back to the DRB pending approval by the DRB and ADA review. Second: Dunn. Roll Call: Larose, Madore, Dunn, Rubin, and Napolitano. 5-0 in favor. 2. 20 Central Street: Small Project Review – Review of DRB Recommendation on the proposal to repair existing stairs, walkway, and courtyard. Richard Frank, Central Plaza Condominium, was present to discuss the proposal which had been referred to the SRA by the DRB: • Mr. Frank shared an aerial of the plaza highlighting nearby landmarks and buildings and paver patterns. • They are looking to upgrade a deteriorated deck that has lost watertight integrity. • While the site is private property, it is viewed as a quasi-public space. • They will be replacing and re-grading the brick, installing new drains and new pavers, along with replacing all the concrete stairs with granite stairs to match what is nearby. SRA May 14, 2025 Page 3 of 8 • Additional images, including existing conditions and renderings, that were shared with the SRA were also shared with the DRB. • 24” pavers will be used and stabilized below with sand to facilitate drainage. • Mr. Frank noted that the proposed 120-day timeline may need to be shifted or expanded as their neighbor is doing construction now and there is an abutment that it going to require coordination with the City and City Engineering Department. • It is likely that the project won’t happen until 2026 due to the fall season. • The stairs do need to be repaired more quickly for safety reasons. • Ms. Madore inquired about the location of construction staging and any conflicts with the Old Town Hall work. Mr. Frank said they are going to wait until the work at Old Town Hall is finished before beginning their work. There were no comments from the public. VOTE: Rubin made a motion to approve the project as presented with the understanding that the approval is good for two years and with the preference that construction shall not happen after September 1st. Second: Dunn. Roll Call: Larose, Madore, Dunn, Rubin, and Napolitano. 5-0 in favor. 3. 301 Essex Street: Schematic Design Review – Proposed amendment to the previously approved project that seeks to expand the square footage of the approved commercial space to the entire basement and ground floor, which will require additional permitting via the Zoning Board of Appeals for the removal of the proposed ground floor parking spaces, continued from April 9, 2025. Dave Ricciarelli, Seger Architects, 83 North Street, Mike Becker, and Charissa Vitas, owners, were present to discuss 301 Essex Street: • The changes made are due to the increasing number of units and are relatively minor. • Plans were shared. • Expanded retail will be on the 1st floor and expand into the basement. • All parking was moved offsite. • Retail spaces have been introduced along Summer and Essex Streets. There will be a dedicated lobby for the residents’ entrance. • The new unit configuration was shown for a total of 30 units. • A variance is already in place for one-to-one parking. The project still needs to go before the Planning Board and ZBA for additional review and relief. • There will be townhouse penthouses. The building will be raised slightly but is still within zoning-required height maximums. More windows are visible above the existing parapet. • Essex St. and Summe St. elevation plans were shown. The elevator penthouse no longer must go through the roof. The main bay was shifted minimally. The windows were flipped to facilitate the unit layout. There are two banks of windows. The door on Summer St. has been moved to Essex Street. • New storefront openings were shown. The cantilever was dropped. • The applicant is hoping to attract a small café that would use the alleyway for outdoor dining. SRA May 14, 2025 Page 4 of 8 • The east elevation shows the modified penthouse and smaller deck along with a screen for some of the condensing units. The fenestration or materiality of the building has not changed. • The applicant reached out to the list of tenants provided by Ms. Newhall-Smith. He has one letter of intent so far from a food and beverage tenant. Realtors can market the property on MSL as commercial/residential rental and a commercial broker could pick it up. • Mr. Rubin noted his preference for a year-round business as opposed to seasonal. • The smallest unit is 360 sq ft and 1,100 for largest unit. • The alternative option for the café window looks into the alleyway which is part of the property. The alleyway is 9’ wide at its widest point. It abuts the Salem Inn. It will not be fenced. • Ms. Madore wondered if it might be susceptible to vandalism. She added that the Board is mostly interested in the outcome of who occupies the property and that they serve the neighborhood year-round such as those on Ms. Newhall-Smith’s list which is comprised of businesses based on Salem that are looking to expand. She emphasized that she would like the applicant to keep working with those tenants. • As of now, there is no layout for the basement. It depends on whether each tenant uses a piece, or if a tenant uses the entire basement. • The Planning Board is requiring one bicycle space per unit which is a policy of the Planning Board which comes from the Bicycle Committee. Ms. Madore noted that she finds there is not enough bike storage downtown and believes bike storage would be a real amenity in this building. • Mr. Larose inquired about the increase in the height of the building and wondered whether there were any structural concerns. The applicant noted that they had a schematic structural design completed and that the project has the same loading. • Ms. Madore noted that the smallest unit is 259 sq. ft. and inquired whether that meets health codes. The applicant will review the requirement. • Mr. Daniel inquired about the build-out for the space. The applicant noted that they are not ruling out a restaurant and have included some mechanical spaces if hoods and refrigeration are needed. The build-out of other spaces will depend on the tenant. • It is unlikely the applicant will be managing the commercial spaces. • The windows on the east elevation are the same window molded together, probably for a living room, but Mr. Ricciarelli noted that more work and design is needed. • Mr. Rubin raised the issue of retail again. He inquired about the business model being dependent on first floor tenants. The applicant noted that allowing flexibility to split the first-floor tenant spaces. He said their business plan is dependent on being at least partially occupied. The building is occupied right now with the previous tenant. • Mr. Daniel noted that there is pressure from tourism. He said businesses that don’t support the year-round neighborhood are not usually the ones willing to pay more. He said there are property owners who turn down prospective tenants who are willing to pay double the neighborhood rate because they have made a commitment to have business that are oriented towards year-round neighborhood needs. • Ms. Madore inquired about construction staging. The applicant noted that most of the structural work will take place within the existing envelope. The punched opening would be from Summer St. There are some days where there will be concrete trucks and SRA May 14, 2025 Page 5 of 8 pumps on the sidewalk. Ms. Madore expressed surprise that it has not been more detailed given how heavily traveled the area is. She emphasized again how critically important tenant selection is the SRA. There were no comments from public. Mr. Rubin said he is concerned about the very small units. He does not have an objection to moving the project to the DRB because his primary concerns are related to tenancy, not design. VOTE: Rubin made a motion to advance the project to the DRB knowing that the ongoing review will include feedback on the higher first floor roof line, window treatments and footprints. Second: Dunn. Roll Call: Larose, Madore, Dunn, Rubin, and Napolitano. 5-0 in favor. 4. 288 Derby Street: Small Project Review – Review of proposal to modify the rear façade by adding faux storefronts with display windows Mark Meche, Winter Street Architects, and Kayla Lumbra were present to discuss the project: • Mr. Meche shared images, including existing conditions and the ramp and deck that is under construction. He reported that the design work is being done by another team. • The proposed storefront was shared, which was designed by Wicked Amusements. He reported that the Salem Wax Museum is dying and so they are changing their whole business model. They are looking to appeal to families, young children, and couples. • They wish to maintain a strong level of seriousness related to the story of 1692, but with some fun, while keeping all of their people employed. • They came up with the idea of creating a village with different shops and that they will need to start it outside. • It will be lit stores, radiating dimly at night. • During the Christmas holiday season, it is proposed to turn it into a holiday village. • The applicant noted that there isn’t anything similar on the North Shore and that people are excited about it. • The proposal includes businesses coming in showing their wares and cooking their food. • He believes visitors want vintage props, correct history, incredible visuals, and selfies. • Ms. Madore thanked the applicant and noted that the SRA wants to help them succeed. She noted another fake storefront, East India Goods, and is always disappointed that it is not real. She wondered whether some of the storefronts can be replicated to what previously existed in Salem based on that particular time period. • There is no space behind the facades. They are applied to the wall like a theatre set. The materials will be high end, and work completed by carpenters. • The space has similar architecture to the storefronts that the PEM owns on Essex St. and they are looking to replicate that type of look. • Ms. Madore suggested that bridging the tourist seasons with year-round businesses could be successful. SRA May 14, 2025 Page 6 of 8 • Mr. Rubin asked for clarification on the store set-up. The applicant described an immersion type village, where someone would enter a toy shop to find vintage toys, and see history as well. They are looking to depict a mid-19th century environment. • Mr. Larose inquired about the scale of the storefronts. Mr. Meche reported that the building is almost 50’ in length. And the storefronts would face the parking lot. • Mr. Larose shared some of the concerns previously expressed and noted that it was a juxtaposition of location. • The word “museum” is going away, as it’s too static. • Mr. Daniel said he was supportive of the idea of researching the history of businesses from Salem itself. There were no comments from the public. VOTE: Dunn made a motion to advance the project to the DRB. Second: Madore. Roll Call: Larose, Madore, Dunn, and Napolitano. 4-1 in favor. Rubin voted no. New/Old Business 1. Remote Meetings Ms. Newhall-Smith gathered and circulated a summary of preferences with most members wishing to have some level of in-person meeting in varying quantities. Mr. Rubin inquired about the logistics of meeting in person. Ms. Newhall -Smith said they will be able to work out the logistics. She said that what may be challenging is managing applicants in regard to the project presenter being in-person. Mr. Daniel said it would be helpful if there was an easily remembered, regular pattern of in - person meeting times. Ms. Madore agreed with the regularity of meeting dates but would be open to starting out meeting once a year. Mr. Rubin suggested meeting quarterly. Ms. Napolitano was supportive of quarterly meetings in months 3, 6, 9 and 12. She suggested they begin with meeting in-person in September for their Annual Meeting. VOTE: Madore made a motion to return to in-person/hybrid meetings starting at the September Annual Meeting and continuing in-person every three months; December, March, June, and September, when the board will revisit and determine if the in -person meeting schedule is working. Second: Dunn. Roll Call: Larose, Madore, Rubin, Dunn, and Napolitano. 5-0 in favor. Mr. Daniel clarified that since the law was extended, they do not need a quorum to be physically present, but hopes that more than one person will be there. Members can still participate remotely. SRA May 14, 2025 Page 7 of 8 2. Redevelopment of the Historic Courthouses and the Crescent Lot: Update on Project Status Mr. Daniel reported that they are continuing to work hard on advancing the project. He noted that the Chapter 91 permit for the new outfall pipe is moving, with a next hearing scheduled for the 26th which will be followed by a period for public comment. It is expected to pass easily. They are continuing to work on the exterior color pallet for the Exchange Building. The DRB will be discussing that at their next meeting. An additional $600,000 in tax credits was allocated to the project, bringing the total up to $1.5M. They are working have Wynn come in to update the SRA. A phased approach to the Superior Court Building is being discussed, which will require the SRA to vote to allow that , likely at the July meeting. Wynn is eager to begin work. They are working on the land development agreements, one for the Exchange Crescent Lot and one for the courthouses. Mr. Rubin inquired about any funding that might expire. Mr. Daniel said it will all be spent. There is a new round of funding that is coming up. 3. SRA Financials Ms. Newhall-Smith received the April statement and was able to figure out the March interest, so the financials are now current. 4. Other Approval of Minutes 1. April 9, 2025 VOTE: Madore made a motion to approve the joint meeting minutes. Second: Dunn. Roll Call: Madore, Larose, Dunn, and Rubin. 4-0 in favor. Ms. Newhall-Smith noted that they will be bringing the design team from Lappin Park back to review the drawings, which are now at 50% design. She is working with Ms. Owens to attract people to attend, particularly nearby residents and abutters. It will be a co-posted meeting with the DRB. Mr. Daniel noted that the former Senior Center on Broad Street is expected to close in the next six weeks now that funding has been secured. SRA May 14, 2025 Page 8 of 8 He also provided an update on mall occupancy, which should be viewed in terms of public parking supply availability. He said that Ms. Owens is working on a scope for public engagement that looks at a shared vision for the Church St. lots. The City needs to take into consideration the dynamic between the parking garage and the private property owner. Mr. Daniel also reported on the Arts Fest the first weekend of June. Upcoming Meetings 1. DRB: May 28 2. SRA: June 11 Adjournment VOTE: Madore made a motion to adjourn meeting. Seconded by: Dunn Roll Call: Larose, Madore, Dunn, and Rubin. 4-0 in favor. SRA adjourned.