Loading...
2026-07-23 JPH with DRB minutesJoint Public Hearing with Design Review Board and Planning Board July 23, 2026 Page 1 of 6 JOINT MEETING WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING AGENDA A joint public hearing of the Salem Planning Board and the Design Review Board was held on Thursday, July 23, 2026, at 6:30 p.m. via remote access. Public participation was possible via Zoom video and conference call. Chair Kirt Rieder calls the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. Chair Rieder introduces Elena Eimert as a new Planning Board member and gives thanks to Carole Hamilton for her help and her many years of service. Ms. Chiancola echoes what Mr. Rieder said and states that the Mayor has awarded Ms. Hamilton a City Seal. Mr. Furey echoes the preceding words. I. ROLL CALL Planning Board Present: Chair Kirt Rieder, Vice Chair Sarah Tarbet, Jonathan Berk, Graham Wing, Josh Turiel, Helen Sides, Zach Caunter, Tom Furey, and Elena Eimert (9) Absent: (0) Arriving Late: (0) Leaving Early: (0) Design Review Board Present: Sarah Tarbet, Paul Durand, Catherine Miller, Daniel Estes, Elizabeth Murray, Marc Perras Absent: (0) Arriving Late: (0) Leaving Early: (0) Also in attendance: Claudia Cunningham, Planner, and Stephanie Owens, Senior Planner. CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Joint Public Hearing with Design Review Board and Planning Board July 23, 2026 Page 2 of 6 II. AGENDA A. 56 Margin Street, 54 Margin Street, 7 High Street, 20 Endicott Street (Map 25, Lot 597), 24 Endicott Street (Map 25, Lot 595) Applicant: Harborlight Homes and Lifebridge North Shore Description: A continuance of a public hearing for all persons interested in the application of Harborlight Homes and Lifebridge North Shore at 56, 54 Margin Street, 20 Endicott Street, 7 High Street (Map 25, Lot 597) and 24 Endicott Street (Map 25, Lot 595) in the Residential Two-Family District (R2), Coastal Resilience Overlay District (C-ROD), Flood Hazard Overlay District (FHOD), and Smart Growth Overlay District (SGOD) for Smart Growth Overlay Plan Review and Coastal Resilience Overlay Site Plan Review in accordance with the following sections of the Salem Zoning Ordinance: Section 7.4 Smart Growth Overlay District and Section 8.9 Coastal Resiliency Overlay District. Specifically, the applicant proposes the demolition of the buildings at 24 Endicott Street (Map 25, Lot 595) and 56 Margin Street (Map 25, Lot 597), the adaptive reuse of 54 Margin Street (Map 25, Lot 597), and the preservation of the façade of 20 Endicott Street (Map 25, Lot 597) to accommodate for a 22,806 square foot building comprised of 53 affordable homes, a shelter with 70 beds, and supportive programing space along with other site improvements. Thirteen parking spaces are proposed on site. Ms. Eimert discloses that she has submitted an appearance of conflict of interest form with the Mayor’s Office given her connection to the development of the 40R zoning. and will not be voting on this project. Andrew DeFranza, Harborlight Homes and Stefano Basso, SV Architects, are in attendance for the Applicant. Mr. DeFranza recaps the project overview. Mr. Basso runs through changes based on feedback. They have decreased the number of siding changes and matched the brick of the church as much as possible; streamlined the roofs and carried flat cornice line through. Incorporated a precast stone based and kept the storefront curtain wall. Eliminated sloped roofs on Endicott Street and incorporated more Italianate features. There has been discussion among the project team to have a pop of color on some sort of detail. Memorial Park area with bricks, bell, and benches; the bell is to be moved to front of the church. Public Comment Written Public Comment Joe Cultrera Prescott Street Joint Public Hearing with Design Review Board and Planning Board July 23, 2026 Page 3 of 6 Compliments Mr. DeFranza on the new look of the building; it seems to fit the block better. Still concerned that it is wall to wall buildings and there is no space for clients to hang out. Concerned about people walking past that block when there is no pla ce for anyone to hang out. Glad peaks are gone and that the color is better. Says that the neighborhood has never been consulted about the design of the project despite promises from previous ward councilors. Does not think the bell outside the church is the proper place for it; thinks it will be damaged. Steve Kapantais 23 Wisteria Street Tells Mr. Rieder that there is a possible meeting violation regarding Ms. Eimert as having a conflict of interest and remaining in the room when the proper procedure is considered that the member recuses themselves and not be in the room, potentially influencing the decision. Asks that Chair Rieder report the violation to the Ethics Commission. Polly Wilbert 7 Cedar Street Hopes the DRB will consider that the development is a “bridge site” between downtown and the post-fire residential neighborhood. The development must transition from the hard edges of downtown to the soft edges of the neighborhood. Favors gables to help with the transition and break-up the massing. Hopes people have looked at the designed standards for the 40R. Doesn’t like the box/panel construction design. Post fire construction is a detail and characteristic that should be respected. Mark Stevens 69 Summer Street Submitted photos of what his view is of the property. He is concerned about the façade. What will Pratt Street look like? It looks like 2 windows so he will look at a wall of siding and there is no bump out on the rendering and there is no setback on the street. There is opportunity to put sidewalk in place. On 2nd floor floorplan, looks like a tree is being planted. Wonders what the HVAC will look like to him. What about lighting. Is the stairwell exiting on Pratt Street for emergency use only? Barbara Mann and Bob Femino 29 Endicott 32 Endicott Wants to see the plan for 24 Endicott Street. Ms. Cunninham reminds that the public comment period is for comments, not discussion. Mr. Femino says they couldn’t see view from Endicott Street. Mr. Rieder asks for a clarification on plan or rendering. Mr. Basso says that there isn’t a rendering of Endicott Street. Ms. Mann clarifies that she only cared about peaks on Endicott Street. Still curious about HVAC condensers and what they will look like on the roof, the garage, and the memorial yard. Why a Joint Public Hearing with Design Review Board and Planning Board July 23, 2026 Page 4 of 6 13 car garage when there are available spaces at Riley Plaza. Mr. Femino agrees with Ms. Wilbert regarding the roof. Understands that some prefer the changes, but they [the neighborhood] were never brought to the table regarding what they would like to see. The height matters, gables take away sun and breeze. Eliminating the garage would preserve the memorial. Ms. Mann invites everyone to visit the site. Mr. Rieder re-welcomes Ms. Eimert and thanks her for recusing herself from voting on this project. Mr. Rieder says that it is typical for those who have a conflict of interest step away for that agenda item and he invites her to do so. Ms. Eimert removes herself from the meeting for the remainder of the discussion. Planning Board Comments Mr. Furey commends the revised version of the plan. He reminds everyone that there is a human face to homelessness, that Salem is a welcoming city of neighborhoods, and this whole complex is part of the neighborhood onto Riley Plaza. This new facility is a positive for the people. Ms. Sides commends the team for responding with vast improvements and is looking forward to seeing the other elevations. Mr. Rieder calls an audible and invites James Z. to speak as he was unable to join during the public comment period. James Zaviglia 25 High Street Reiterates what others have said about the memorial park and the bell. The Italian Club was built by the people in the neighborhood. The memorial is important because of the names on the bricks. Appreciates that change happens but would like some of the past preserved. Ms. Tarbet agrees with Ms. Sides. Encourages the team to seek a complimentary brick rather than a brick match. Likes the introduction of color on the base and agrees with the public comment on the screening of the roof HVACs. Wonders if there is room to locate the bell and memorial closer to its original location and if the team could work with the community to do this. Mr. Rieder is familiar with the area. Echoes the need for renders of Endicott Street and Pratt Street. In the previous presentation the thirteen (13) parking spaces were stated for employees. Is there potential for parking in Riley Plaza? Echoes the issue with placing the bell in the front. The rendering makes the bell seem ill at ease; the tri-fold interpretative board is also an issue. In the last meeting, Chair Rieder commented on the removal of trees so that the Applicant could replace the soils and Joint Public Hearing with Design Review Board and Planning Board July 23, 2026 Page 5 of 6 plant new species, does not think Honey Locust is a good choice for this area. Agrees with Mr. Cultrera on the lack of open space. Design Review Board Comments Mr. Perras thinks the project is moving in the right direction. He would like to see a true elevation, especially going up Endicott Street to see the context. This will allow the DRB to have a better contextual understanding. Wonders how far back the connector pieces between the brick massing can be pushed. Could they be pushed back to create green space? Does not love the pop of color idea. Does not love the big cornices at the top. Ms. Miller clarifies that the DRB has not seen the full presentation and she happened to attend the last Planning Board meeting. It is hard to assess design when they don’t know program and entries. The first rendering is better than the second. Feels that if you are a person who needs a place to live, you want it to look like a normal looking apartment. Interested in seeing a developed landscape plan. Mr. Rieder confirms with Ms. Cunningham that the project has not been referred to the DRB. Mr. Estes agrees that the project is moving in the right direction and there is a need for green space. There is a massive HVAC unit on the center block. Ms. Murray lives in the neighborhood and appreciates the work done from the original plans to now. Agrees with Ms. Tarbet on the brick. Mr. Durand agrees with previous comments. Prefers this massing. Recommends investigating brick matching sooner rather than later. Concerned with HVAC screening. Would like to see the Endicott Street elevation as well. Feels the bell at the front of the building will suffer from vandalism. Also does not like the white on the side. Mr. Rieder agrees with Mr. Perras on the pop of color. There is no tree in the traffic island [as shown on the rendering]. Doesn’t know how you can reduce parking to allow for more open space. Imperative to have a set of true elevations on at least the three (3) primary sides. Astonished that Mr. Furey has not recommended that Mr. DeFranza meet with the neighborhood. These neighborhood meetings reduce tensions in public meetings and reduce the fear of the unknown. A motion to refer the project to the Design Review Board is made by Helen Sides, seconded by Sarah Tarbet and passes 8-0 in a roll call vote. Joint Public Hearing with Design Review Board and Planning Board July 23, 2026 Page 6 of 6 Kirt Rieder Y Sarah Tarbet Y Zach Caunter Y Jonathan Berk Y Helen Sides Y Tom Furey Y Graham Wing Y Josh Turiel Y III. ADJOURNMENT A motion to adjourn the Design Review Board from the Joint Public Hearing is made by Marc Perras, seconded by Catherine Miller, and passes 6-0 in a roll call vote. Paul Durand Y Sarah Tarbet Y Catherine Miller Y Daniel Estes Y Elizabeth Murray Y Marc Perras Y A motion to adjourn the Planning Board from the Joint Public Hearing is made by Tom Furey, seconded by Helen Sides, and passes 8-0 in a roll call vote. Kirt Rieder Y Sarah Tarbet Y Zach Caunter Y Jonathan Berk Y Helen Sides Y Tom Furey Y Graham Wing Y Josh Turiel Y Adjourned at: 7:38 Approved on: