The URL can be used to link to this page

DRB MINUTES 2004-2008 a D ny - aoc�� Salem CRedevelopment Authority Design Review Board Meeting Schedule, 2008 Unless otherwise noted, all meetings of the Design Review Board (DRB) are held on the fourth Wednesday of each month at 6:00pm in the Third Floor Conference Room at 120 Washington Street. All submittals are due by 12:00 noon on the submittal deadline date shown. Meeting Date Submittal Deadline January 23, 2008 January 11, 2008 February 27, 2008 February 15, 2008 March 26, 2008 March 14, 2008 April 23, 2008 April 11, 2008 May 28, 2008 May 16, 2008 June 25, 2008 June 13, 2008 July 23, 2008 July 11, 2008 September 24, 2008 September 12, 2008 October 22, 2008 October 10, 2008 November 19, 2008* November 7, 2008 December 17, 2008* December 5, 2008 *Date for the November and December meetings are being held on different nights than normally scheduled due to the holidays. Salem CRedevelopment Authority Design Review Board Meeting Schedule, 2007 Unless otherwise noted, all meetings of the Design Review Board (DRB) are held on the fourth Wednesday of each month at 6:OOpm in the Third Floor Conference Room at 120 Washington Street. All submittals are due by 12:00 noon on the submittal deadline date shown. Meeting Date Submittal Deadline January 24, 2007 January 12, 2007 February 28, 2007 February 16, 2007 March 28, 2007 March 16, 2007 April 25, 2007 April 13, 2007 May 23, 2007 May 11, 2007 June 27, 2007 June 15, 2007 July 25, 2007 July 13, 2007 August 22, 2007 August 10, 2007 September 26, 2007 September 14, 2007 October 24, 2007 October 12, 2007 November 28, 2007* November 16, 2007 December 19, 2007* December 7, 2007 *Date for the November and December meetings are being held on different nights than normally scheduled due to the holidays. s� Salem Redevelopment Authority Design Review Board Meeting Schedule; 2006 Unless otherwise noted, all meetings of the Design Review Board (DRB) are held on the fourth Wednesday of each month at 6:00pm in the Third Floor Conference Room at 120 Washington Street. All submittals are due by 12:00 noon on the submittal deadline date shown. Meeting Date Submittal Deadline January 25, 2006 January 13, 2006 February 22, 2006 February 10, 2006 March 22, 2006 March 10, 2006 April 26, 2006 April 14, 2006 May 24, 2006 May 12, 2006 June 28, 2006 June 16, 2006 July 26, 2006 July 14, 2006 August 23, 2006 August 11, 2006 September 27, 2006 September 15, 2006 October 25, 2006 October 13, 2006 November 15, 2006* November 3, 2006 December 20, 2006* December 8, 2006 *Date for the November and December meetings are one week earlier than normally scheduled due to the holiday. Design Review Board Meeting Schedule, 2005 Unless otherwise noted, all meetings of the Design Review Board (DRB) are held on the fourth Wednesday of each month at 6:OOpm in the Third Floor Conference Room at 120 Washington Street. All submittals are due by 12:00 noon on the submittal deadline date shown. Meeting Date Submittal Deadline January 26, 2005 January 14, 2005 February 23, 2005 February 11, 2005 March 23, 2005 March 11, 2005 April 27, 2005 April 15, 2005 May 25, 2005 May 13, 2005 June 22, 2005 June 10, 2005 July 27, 2005 July 15, 2005 August 24, 2005 August 12, 2005 September 28, 2005 September 16, 2005 October 26, 2005 October 14, 2005 November 16, 2005* November 4, 2005 December 28, 2005 December 16, 2005 *Date for the November meeting is one week earlier than normally scheduled due to the holiday. Design Review Board Meeting Schedule, 2004 Unless otherwise noted, all meetings of the Design Review Board (DRB) are held on the fourth Wednesday of each month at 6:OOpm in the Third Floor Conference Room at 120 Washington Street. All submittals are due by 12:00 noon on the submittal deadline date shown. Meeting Date Submittal Deadline January 28, 2004 January 16, 2004 February 25, 2004 February 13, 2004 March 24, 2004 March 12, 2004 April 28, 2004 April 16, 2004 May 26, 2004 May 14, 2004 June 23, 2004 June 11, 2004 July 28, 2004 July 16, 2004 August 25, 2004 August 13, 2004 September 22, 2004 September 10, 2004 October 27, 2004 October 15, 2004 November 17, 2004* November 5, 2004 December 15, 2004* December 3, 2004 *Dates for November and December are one week earlier than normally scheduled due to the holidays. Salem Redevelopment e r Authority rn �r N r fi Design Review Board 3 REVISED Meeting Agenda m �' o Wednesday, September 3, 2014 —6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Christopher Dynia J. Michael Sullivan David Jaquith Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review 1. 209 Essex Street(LEAP for Education): Discussion of proposed A-Frame sign 2. 30 Federal Street: Discussion of installation of rooftop solar panels • 3. 230 Essex Street(Tibet Arts & Healing): Discussion of proposed blade sign 4. 7 Central Street(New England Dog Biscuit Company): Discussion of proposed signage 5. City of Salem: Discussion of proposed pole mounted cigarette butt recycling receptacles for Downtown North River Canal Corridor Projects Under Review 6. 28 Goodhue Street(North River Apartments): Discussion of proposed freestanding sign 7. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place): Continued discussion of design revisions to proposed residential and commercial development Old / New Business This notice posted oft "Offici Iletin Board" Minutes City Hall. Salem. Mass. on g l at n accordance wi GL(Chap. 30 , Approval of the minutes from the July 23, 28j t I ing. Adjournment Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A §18-25 and City Ordinance Sections 2-028 through 2-2033. Salem Redevelopment Authority tQOB ITEC -9 P 3 31 FILE. M Design Review Board CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. Meeting Agenda Wednesday, December 17, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. South River Harborwalk: Discussion of design revision • Minutes Approval of the minutes from the November 12, 2008 special meeting and November 19, 2008 regular meeting. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Sfilam, Ms a0 of, DEC - 9 2P8 . r �� i� . 'p��n � �4 h;e� Py�7 r a g r �I o f d r �' IFA Y S e.�S• 'PID s l e•. ,r 3at'w '� � v.1 -'�IJ'.y t: Salem Redevelopment Authority 2608 FFV 13 P 2: 40 FILE trr Design Review Board CITY CLE"if. SALEK MASS. Meeting Agenda Wednesday, November 19, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 155-189 Washington Street (Tavern in the Square): Discussion of proposed exterior facade, signage, and lighting 2. South River Harborwalk: Discussion of design revision • 3. 15 Peabody Street Park: Discussion of design revision 4. 6 Central Street (China Trade House): Discussion of proposed signage North River Canal Corridor Projects under Review 1. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design Minutes Approval of the minutes from the October 22, 2008 meeting. Adjournment Thi® Win posted on "Official BLilletin Board" ON Udall Salem, Ni n NOY 1. 3 Z€�Q pu in €°iva.u3¢.._.. v -j'a ..• ''.T�. S� Fn' - , coag,.. rLi��o CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday,November 19, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, P Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy, Helen Sides MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Approval of Meeting Schedule • Blier: Motion to approve the meeting schedule, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. Urban Renewal Area Proiects Under Review 1. 155-189 Washineton Street (Tavern in the Square): Discussion of proposed exterior fagade, signage, and lighting Architect Stephen Sousa describes the design for the color scheme, signage, and lighting. Sousa discusses the photos of the other locations. He says they will introduce the "practical beige" color on the recessed portion of the sign band as requested by the Board. He presents samples of the brick, window trim, and building colors. Sousa says the building sign will be a dimensional letter that is halo-lit by LED. He describes the way in which the sign is constructed. He states that the blade sign will have a multi-colored background with dimensional letters, lit with a small blade-sign light. Sousa states that they will use bronze gooseneck lights above the awnings. He shows a photo of the wall sconces. Sides expresses concern about the beige band interrupting the color scheme for the storefront. She states that she prefers the uniform brown that was originally presented. • Sousa states that there will be a polished absolute granite base. DRB November 19, 2008 Page 2 of 11 • Durand agrees that he doesn't like the beige stripe and would prefer the original proposal. Jaquith states that the trees enhance the base and provide richness to the look. DeMaio agrees with Sides and Durand in preferring the original color scheme. He expresses concern about the relationship of the awnings to the sign, because the red awnings are much taller on the other locations, and perhaps the awnings are too small in this case. He states likes the all dark scheme when there is horizontal trim on the pilasters, and he prefers having a silver band on the sign instead of the black band on the tavern sign. DeMaio says that he thinks the blade sign is oversized, as it extends about 5 -feet over the sidewalk with the bracket. He requests clarification for the location of the blade signs. Sousa indicates the location of each blade sign on the plan. DeMaio states that the blade signs' locations are consistent with that shown in the elevation. Kennedy agrees that the band should be darker, and that the blade sign is long and wide he and would prefer it be shorter, maybe 6 inches shorter. Kennedy states that there is a disconnect with the front sign. He states that the "in the square"in aligned wrong, and he doesn't understand why"Salem" is necessary on the sign, and he prefers the look of the front sign of the Central Square location. He states that the silver band should be lined up with the top of the awning. Durand steps out. Jaquith take the Chair. Owner Joey Arcari agrees to make the front sign identical to the one at Central Square. Kennedy states that he prefers fewer gooseneck lights across the front. He states that he doesn't have any issue with the sconce, and he prefers the lighting on the Central Square location. Jaquith agrees that the decorative wall sconces that are on the Central Square location might look better. Daniel clarifies that the members are in agreement that the original wall sconces are preferred with the urns and the trees. Kennedy asks about the height of the letters on the wall sign, and Arcari says that the "T" • is 30-inches and it is the biggest letter. DRB November 19,2008 Page 3 of 11 • Kennedy expresses concern about the letters being too big. Sides states that the letter sign looks okay to her because of the proportion of it and the building. Much discussion ensues about the lighting and the letters. Kennedy states that he would like to have the silver sign band moved down to the top of the awning and have the letter height within the brown color so it won't move into the second story. He suggests using the "T"to establish the middle of the top brown band and the other letters will be lower. Sousa agrees and states that the silver sign band will be in brushed aluminum. Daniel reviews the recommendations: Return to the whole brown base scheme Use horizontal trim on all of the pilasters Location of the blade signs as in the elevations Blade sign will be about 6 inches shorter (less wide) The awnings will be extended up • Gooseneck lighting will move to the top band, and there will be fewer lights than shown in the Central Square photos Tavern sign will be moved slightly down so the silver band aligns with the top of the canopy, and the top of the "T"marks the middle of the top brown band The horizontal line in the sign (below Tavern) will be in brushed aluminum The wall sconces will be those originally proposed Salem will not be included in the sign - Urns will be those shown in the photos and planted year-round - The awnings will fill the sign band as in Central Square DeMain adds that the presence of the urns should not reduce the width of the sidewalk so as to impede pedestrian traffic. DeMaio: Motion to approve the design with the above recommendations, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Jaquith, Kennedy, Sides. Jaquith steps out. DeMaio takes the Chair. 2. South River Harborwalk: Discussion of design revision Susan St. Pierre of Vine Associates states that they have been looking into ways to alter the design to reduce the costs. She describes the various items that she looked into. She • says that the ship lofting diagram idea for the plaza was difficult for the contractors to understand and added that it is fragile and is public art. DRB November 19,2008 Page 4 of 11 • St. Pierre states that they will use a timber pile-supported walk in front of the electric company and timber walk on the slope up to Congress Street. The rest of the walk will be concrete. She adds that the removal of the concrete curbing in the parking lot would save $14,000, and they can use DPW supplies instead. Kirsten Kinzer states that using a PVC rail will save about $97,000. She states that she has researched the Board's questions about repairing scratches on the PVC. She explains that if the scratch is not too deep it can be sanded and waxed, and deeper scratches could be fixed with a heat gun, and it is possible to replace sections within the post. She adds that the rail and posts are steel and are coated with PVC. Blier states that PVC is not the preferred material but it is more stable than it used to be. DeMaio states that if the two rail types can be scratched but one is easier to fix, the fixable one would be preferred. Kinzer states that she called manufacturers to get names of buyers for the PVC. She says that the largest number of linear feet for this fence is at Disneyland. The Family Circle Stadium in North Carolina has had this for two years, and they have not needed to have • any repairs and it is in full sunlight all day. She adds that if a steel railing is scratched and not repainted it will rust and the rail will need to be replaced in five years. Kinzer states that she feels comfortable with this rail after doing the research. Daniel confirms that tonight the DRB needs to decide on the rail. DeMaio expresses concern about having a rail that will be difficult to maintain and therefore will not be maintained. He adds that this project will be precedent-setting for other fencing along the river. Kinzer states that the City cannot spend $100,000 extra. DeMaio states that he understands but as a Board they need to make a recommendation for a design that the City can support, and he would prefer that some money be found so they can use a steel rail. He agrees that the steel will scratch just as easily but it can be repaired easily. Sides asks about the cap on the posts, and Kinzer shows a sketch. Kennedy states that he would prefer metal but using PVC is better than having no harborwalk. • Blier states that in the perfect world he would like the metal,but there is not enough funding, and it is better to use PVC than to forego the walkway. DRB November 19,2008 Page 5 of 11 • Kennedy asks how this material can be recycled 30-years down the road when the fence is replaced. Kinzer states that it is more difficult to recycle than metal. DeMaio opens to the public. Jane Arlander of 93 Federal Street asks about the possibility of children getting their heads caught between the rails. She also asks if PVC is as strong as the metal. DeMaio states that the PVC fencing will meet the same building and safety standards as the metal fencing would. He suggests that the Board make it clear in the motion that the preference is for metal, but because there is a strict budget, they have a choice between a harborwalk and no harborwalk, so they will accept the PVC fence. Blier asks if there they could install a temporary fence, possibly black chain link, until there is enough money for the metal rail. Kinzer states that they don't know when more funding will be available. DeMaio suggests that the Board make a recommendation that the City look into alternate ways to raise funds so they can afford to install the metal rail. Kinzer agrees to look into it and states that if the timing works they could do a change order. DeMaio makes the following motion: Given the choice between a harbor-walk and no harborwalk, the Board would agree to use the PVC. Given the choice between the PVC and the metal the Board would prefer the metal, and they recommend that the City look into ways to afford the metal. This motion is seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Kennedy, Sides. St. Pierre states that the Board can also decide on the new treatment shifting from concrete to timber pile-supported structures to save $90,000. Kennedy confirms that there would be a combination of wood and concrete. He states that for the visceral feel of walking around on the water, he prefers wood, so he has no issue with the wood. Blier states that he doesn't mind the wood. DRB November 19, 2008 Page 6 of 11 Kennedy: Motion to approve the timber pile-supported structure and portions of timber walk, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Kennedy, Sides. 3. 15 Peabody Street Park: Discussion of design revision Michael Blier recuses himself from this item. Daniel states that this design is approved and one element will be discussed. Letitia Tormay from Landworks Studio explains that they need to reduce the costs of construction by about $200,000, and they eliminated the cantilevered walk over the water and pulled it back, and pushed the core area to the center. She describes the low concrete seating wall from Peabody Street to the water, adorned with artwork and tile and notes it will start on the water side and move through the property. Tormay shows the diagram of the canopy and states that it will still sit in the same corner as originally proposed and have four black steel posts along the back and one that sits at the corner of the green. She explains that the multi colored canopy of red, orange and blue will wrap down the back of the structure at various levels. Tormay states that the art wall will be turned in about three feet to the east at the waterfront and the tiles will begin at the waterfront. Tormay explains that stone dust will be used at the Peabody Street entrance, where there is the existing sidewalk, and then a new band of concrete, and the stone dust will be about '/4 inch below the concrete to produce a small grade change to keep the stone dust in. Tormay says that the metal frame used for the art wall is a flush system and not deep at all. Blier says that the art wall will worm through the park. Kennedy states that he likes the color of the canopy, but he is not in favor of having the back panels with the various heights. Blier states that the idea is that the view gets progressively better as you get closer to the water. Kennedy asks if the artwork wall has ever been used. Blier states that he hasn't used it before, but he cannot see why it will not work well. He • adds that he looked at forming the wall directly into the concrete floor but that would DRB November 19, 2008 Page 7 of 11 cause a depletion of the art, and they are looking for a way to grow the display as the tiles become available. Durand steps back in. Kennedy expresses concern about having too many edges on the art wall. Blier states that there is a round corner that is not chamfered, and no plywood is showing, and the contours are not as robust as to appear jagged. DeMain states that he likes this version of the canopy better than the last one. He clarifies that on the previous design he liked the way the canopy was more of a focal point. Although he understands the desire to open the view closer to the water, DeMain says that this feature will be one of the few three-dimensional objects in the park that can be seen from far away, and it might be better if a small piece were to wrap down the back at the waterfront corner. Sides suggests that the roof and the back panel not connect and allow light to come through. DeMain suggests having a slight pitch to the roof to make it show up better from a distance. He says that he has no issue with the stone dust ust detail. He agrees with Kennedy about the art wall's curvy nature of the previous scheme. He suggests that some of the green space might become more organic with curvy edges. Regarding the art wall detail, DeMaio says that he has a problem with it because it is metal and it turns corners and kids can get hurt. He suggests having a small recess, which can be a feature whether or not there is artwork. Blier states that there is not a lot of wall that is exposed, and much of the wall is planting area. Durand confirms that there is no vote necessary tonight because this was already approved and this session was only commentary tonight. 4. 6 Central Street(China Trade House): Discussion of proposed signage Daniel states that this sign will have a red background,but the owner will go along with blue or black if the Board prefers, and the lettering and image will be gold and hand- carved. The members agree that the red background would be best. • Durand states that the thickness should be a minimum of/o inch. DRB November 19, 2008 Page 8 of 11 Kennedy: Motion to approve this sign design with the red background, seconded by Sides. Passes 5-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Kennedy, Sides. Kennedy steps out. North River Canal Corridor Projects under Review 5. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a/Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design Attorney Scott Grover states that they are here to present some of the deign changes and will not look for approval tonight,but they wish to get an understanding of what more the Board would like to see. Chris Huntress, Landscape Architect, describes the landscape plan, which includes sidewalks, curbing, street trees,plantings, and lighting. He states that they intend to develop a main streetscape that relates to the buildings, featuring a promenade that opens to the river. He describes the various plantings including evergreens and ornamentals to screen and provide variety. He says that the downcast lighting will be minimally invasive. Huntress states that there will be benches and lights along the walkway. He • adds that this design has changed since last time because they have added details on the sidewalks. Stephen Livermore, architect, speaks about the buildings stating that the Board was uncomfortable with the transition on building two between the mill building design and the more residential design. He describes two alternatives at to the uncomfortable transition. He adds that he screened the parked cars under the building by adding carriage type doors at the base of the building. Livermore states that he has added more detail to the drawings, site elevations coming up the hill from the river from both sides and coming across the street, and provided bigger scale elevations depicting the materials on the fagade which include brick, roll-formed aluminum crown molding, diamond-shaped 16-inch aluminum shingles, asphalt shingles, and cement clapboard (hardiplank). He says that the railing will feature a balustrade on the residential buildings, and on the mill buildings it will appear more commercial looking with a metal rail. Livermore describes the construction for the big buildings using a steel frame and the smaller residential buildings with a wood frame. He explains that the systems on the roof would be screened and he hasn't designed the screening yet. Sides states that she is bothered by having no real base to building two. She adds that the • garage doors help compared to the last version, but it might look too much like a long DRB November 19,2008 Page 9 of 11 ribbon and there isn't enough relationship to the space above. It appears the residential style "houses" are floating without a base. DeMaio states that for future presentations they should present new information in advance of the meeting because it is difficult to discuss these issues when it is being presented tonight. He describes the elevations being of details and vignettes but not of what the building looks like from one end of the building to the other. He says that he has no problem with each building having its own personality, but he has a problem with buildings with multiple personalities, turning the corner from one style to another. He asks why the materials on the brick building changes. Livermore states that it is partially for economy and to keep the piers vertical. DeMaio states that the challenge becomes real when the project progresses from paper and is constructed. He says that the mixed surfaces present a disconnect within each of the fagades. He says that the site and landscaping plans have not gone very far, and he would like to see a more developed landscape plan dealing with speed bumps and other items. He notes that the central pedestrian spine doesn't carry through well. DeMaio states that he would like to see a plan that shows, short-term and long-term, before Commercial Street cuts through and after Commercial Street cuts through, because this • change will be critical, and he currently can't see how it will work when Commercial Street runs through. He agrees with Sides about the garage doors. Blier agrees with DeMaio on the connection back to Mason Street, stating that there is inconsistency between the plan and the perspective drawing with the light posts and plantings, and he has the sense that more time needs to be spent exploring the nature of these spaces. He adds that, along the promenade, the plantings need to reinforce that transition moving from the wide walkway to the four-foot walkway, and on Flint Street the street edge could be planted with trees. He describes the plant palette as very good, and he likes the tree species. He suggests that they look at the landscape plan more carefully to achieve the look they are seeking. He asks about the storm water system and how it would engage into the landscaping. Huntress states that they don't have the civil engineer here tonight to provide a description of the drainage system. Durand states that he would like to see the site plan including the adjacent properties to show how it ties into the neighborhood, and to see how this scale fits into the fabric of the neighborhood. He agrees with DeMaio about needing to see plans with a Commercial Street extension. He expresses disappointment that there are not more site amenities, stating that the site needs to be looked at from a human scale. Regarding the construction of the buildings, Durand says that he doesn't want to see the design go down a path that • cannot be delivered, as it relates to the construction. He says that he would like to see some details through the walls. He clarifies that if this is the design the developer wants DRB November 19, 2008 Page 10 of 11 to do, the Board will be happy to go down that road with him. He asks them to memorialize the construction details, but he wants it to be real. He explains that he will follow this project through the construction. Durand explains that having density is fine as long as it comes with quality in design. He will not compromise the design quality. Emily Udy of 7 Phelps Street, with Historic Salem, agrees that the building with multiple personalities would be better in a single building type. She wonders how this building, which is attractive and trendy looking, will appear in 20 years. She states that the parking garage elevations have no detail. She says that the scale on Mason Street is appropriate but was hoping the decks could look more like porches, and the site plan view from Flint Street has too much parking lot and needs screening. She remarks that the parking count is very high for the number of units, and if the parking could be reduced then the amount of green space on the site could be increased, or the number of parking spaces in the garage could be reduced. Darrow Lebovici of 122 Federal Street describes the role that the DRB has in the North River context, stating that the DRB needs to certify as a requirement of the special permit that the project proposed meets the requirements and are compatible with the North River • Canal Ordinance, and this project doesn't. Scott Grover states that the ZBA issued variances to the ordinance. Lebovici states that the ZBA can grant a variance, which allows the DRB to determine if this is compliant, and the fact is that it is not compliant. He adds that the master plan was designed to encourage an "Urban Village" and this project is not that. Edward Nilsson whose office is at 262 Essex Street, with Historic Salem, questions the design philosophy in taking a mill building down and then rebuilding it to look like a mill. He recommends having an all residential design or changing the use in the mill buildings to be something other than residential. Morris Schot of 1 Carey Street states that the diversity of forms is not bad but it is not clearly defined in terms of materials and treatments, and there are too many buildings, too close together, crammed into too big a parking lot, and too much of the site is devoted to parking, and accommodation ought to be made in favor of open space. Durand states that the comments are the same as what the Board has been alluding to when asking for context and further details. He adds that he would like to see this project be more friendly with the surrounding neighborhood, and he will not view this project as being confined to a site. He says that this is a good project, and it is important. • DRB November 19, 2008 Page 11 of 1 I Jane Arlander of 93 Federal Street asks for illustrations of what the buildings would look like at eye level. Durand agrees. Sides states that she doesn't think that the whole project can go to the residential type because it is too big and the imagery of the mill building is more as a type to adapt and can be quite repetitive in a very simple way. She explains that this reference to a mill building is good and she would like the mill building to come around the corner of building two and the residential units should come all the way to the ground. She says that there are too many balconies. Livermore explains how this will look when coming up the street across the tracks from Bridge Street and the city and the overpass you are seeing the mill form. Blier asks what the finished floor elevation is, and Livermore says 10 or 11. Much discussion ensues about the building types. Scott Grover clarifies the role of the DRB stating that the ordinance does not require • DRB certification for the plan to conform to the master plan. Durand agrees and states that they can look at it in context of the master plan. He thanks the public for their comments. DeMaio: Motion to continue this issue, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Sides. Approval of Minutes —November 22, 2008 Meeting Blier: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Sides. Blier: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Sides. The meeting is adjourned at 9:30 PM. Salem Redevelopment ti hority n r a. t*t O Design Review Board "= Special Meeting Agenda p;'`M Cr Wednesday, November 12, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference R�sm U.) o0 Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. South River Harborwalk: Discussion of design revision 2. 15 Peabody Street Park: Discussion of design revision • Adjournment This notice posted on ,"Official Bulls in BOlfQ" City al salp n, mlass. on- / at �A(3� g y j{ pp ippn --00r me vdith 233 -3 of &I.G.L. CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Special Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Blier, Helen Sides OTHERS PRESENT: Lynn Duncan, Executive Director and City Planner; Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner; Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. CDBG Manager Kirstin Kinzer explains to the public that the purpose of tonight's special • meeting is to discuss the revisions to the plans for the Harborwalk and 15 Peabody Street Park. She states that all of the bids for the development of these projects were too high, and the City need to cut the costs of both of these projects or face the possibility of not seeing them built. Kinzer explains that the completion deadline for the park is the end of June 2009, and at that point all unspent grant money must be returned to the Urban Self Help program. Urban Renewal Area Proiects Under Review 1. South River Harborwalk—Discussion of the Railing Kinzer shows a sample of the approved rail and describes it as a hollow steel painted railing. Because this railing was one of the most expensive items in the construction bids received, Kinzer explains that she is proposing they substitute a PVC coated steel rail. She provides photographs and a sample of the proposed rail for the board to review. She states that the rail will save about $90,000 in costs, and the ongoing maintenance costs will be significantly lower. DeMaio asks how scratches or dents can be repaired or replaced on the PVC rail. Kinzer states that it depends on the damage, whereas small scratches will remain and any • areas with extensive damage will need to be replaced. DRB Spel Mtg November 12, 2008 Page 2 of 7 • DeMaio states that prior to the meeting he used his key to scratch the plastic rail coating to see how easily it will scratch, and found that it will scratch pretty easily. He expresses concern that this rail will look bad over time if it sustains many scratches that cannot be repaired. Much discussion ensues about the damageability, reparability and sturdiness of the PVC coated rail. DeMaio states that the PVC coated rail is a nice but he is concerned that someone will carve their initials into it and that will stay like that for years and look bad. Shirley Walker, a resident of Derby Lofts, expresses her concern about the strength of the PVC coated railing when installed at the seawall. She explains that someone could fall off the seawall into the water, which occurred at the site recently. Kennedy states that the questions that the Board is asking now are questions that are based in those concerns. Jaquith states that all rails must meet the Building Code and both rails do. . Walker expresses concern about aesthetics. Durand states that the PVC probably weathers the salt air conditions better than the metal rail, and the one at Hampton Beach looks good. He explains that if the Board recommends that the City does not use the PVC then there will be no harborwalk, so they are looking for affordable changes. He says that aesthetically, it looks pretty good, and he doesn't mind it. Kinzer states that the City needs to come back next week with answers to these questions. She states that the Board is raising valid concerns and she will research the answers to their questions. Durand states that he would like to know some history of other locations that have used the PVC coated rail. He suggests that Kinzer call some places that had this rail installed for a number of years to get their opinion on the durability and damageability of the rail. DeMaio states that he needs to have some comfort level to know that there is a way to approach long term maintenance of the rail, to make this a worthwhile trade off for the dollars. He explains that people take ownership of the park and if the perception is that it is run down people become detached from the ownership and it is a bad policy on how we want people to feel about the Harborwalk. • Durand states that he would like to know how the PVC coated rail is attached to the ground or the base. DRB Spel Mtg November 12, 2008 Page 3 of 7 • The Chair tables this issue until the next meeting. 2. 15 Peabody Street Park Kinzer states that Michael Blier and Letitia Tormay of Landworks have completed an extensive reworking of the park design that came out of the meetings with the Point neighborhood residents. She explains that Landworks also spoke to the contractors that submitted the bids to determine what items drove the costs up. She says that the City wishes to have the revised design reviewed by the DRB and they wish to retain the elements of the design that the residents feel most strongly about. She states that with the timeline on the funding, they need to move forward with the park construction as quickly as possible. She adds that the City loses any money that they haven't spent in construction at the end of June 2009. Designer_ Letitia Tormay, of Landworks Studios, reviews the old design and then the new design. On the old design, Tormay describes the following features. - Two concrete plazas, one on the Peabody Street side, and the other on the water • side, which cantilevered over the water creating a larger gathering area. Two pedestrian walks through the park, one that was slightly raised and constructed of glass pavers and the other that ran along the National Grid property line and was a mixture of the concrete and the poured rubber surface for the play area. - Seating and game tables on the Peabody Street side. - Play equipment and a custom rail in the play area. - Large screening wall made out of a Green Screen fence system with artwork panels along the top. - Canopy structure alone the end of the wall to provide shelter and performance space. - Grass gathering mound. - Various concrete seating structures. - Low wall along part of the mound. On the new design, Tormay describes the following features: - There will still be a plaza on the Peabody Street side. - Two primary pedestrian routes of travel, but they have shifted to the sides of the park - The program has become more central to the park, and plaza, play area and gathering mound are more in the center of the park. - Series of cross paths which provide more circulation. - The cantilevered walkway has been removed. The colored concrete has been removed. DRB Spcl Mtg November 12, 2008 Page 4 of 7 • - The recycled glass pavers have been retained but the shape is now square rather than hexagonal. Stone dust is now a ground plane material, which is commonly used in urban parks, and is ADA compliant. A low concrete wall now snakes through the park and is at seating height. The Play area has the same amount of equipment and is the same color. The Remediation Garden will use the same drainage structure, which is crushed stone wrapped in filter fabric to collect the run off. The green mound area remains. The screen wall will now be a tight mesh chain link fence with plants trained up it. It will still provide a screen to the power plant but will be much less expensive than the original screen wall. There will be a low evergreen hedge in front of the wall. They are retaining the artwork component by using the bases of the walls to place art tiles onto one face or the other. Many of the plantings are the same. The have extended the grass from the mound to be planted at the Remediation Garden and at the wall. They have added a band of sea grasses between the Harborwalk and the parking lot. • = The canopy will be smaller with a steel support system. There will be fewer uplights, 3 pole lights along the wall and a line of aluminum grade finish or black bollards with lights. There will be backless wooden benches. The style of the play tables will be different to save costs. There will still be two big belly trash compactors on the site. Jaquith states that he likes the design, perhaps more then the original one. He explains that he likes the concrete wall, because it brings the whole park together. Regarding the canopy, Jaquith says that maybe they are working too hard on that item and he would rather see them spend the money on the ground rather than items that are above the heads of the people in the park. He states that he is worried a little bit about the stone dust, but he doesn't see what else they can do. Durand agrees with Jaquith about keeping the canopy simple. He adds that this plan has a more urban approach and seems to fit better to the area, and the fact that it saves money and can actually be built makes it even better. Kinzer states that one of the residents specifically requested a shelter that someone could use in the rain. Durand says that perhaps corrugated metal would work just fine here and they don't need • the double layer system with the corrugated fiberglass and the lattice. DRB Spcl Mtg November 12, 2008 Page 5 of 7 DeMaio agrees with Jaquith about the canopy, and keeping it simple. He states that if he had not seen the original design and was seeing the park design for the first time he would find that there is quite a lot to like about this plan. He adds that a little is being lost in the discovery, because the previous plan was so dynamic. Now you move though the site so differently and he wishes there was something more unanticipated in the new design, because it is very straight forward and it works well for what it is. You get the sense in the previous design that it was completely new and you didn't quite know what you were going to experience. Tormay says that she believes the artwork will achieve that because it is not always on the same face of the wall. DeMaio asks if it is because of cost that the original scheme was so much more curvilinear. Tormay states that curvilinear items cost a lot more, so they have straightened things out. DeMaio suggests that they be looser with the way they treat the green. He states that he is concerned with the idea of having aluminum frames for the artwork, and wonders if they could use details that are more flush or recessed. • Kennedy states that he likes the statement of the previous design and he likes what feels like more usable space in the new design. He says that the new design is a dramatic shift in the use of space because of material. He says that he likes both of them but the new design seems like a strong reactionary response. He says that the new design seems like it would be a lot more usable and he can envision it better from looking across the water. He expresses concern about the stone dust being too messy, especially on the walkway, which will be the highest traffic areas. He expresses concern about the green screen and what it will look like in the winter. Tormay says that they have proposed an evergreen vine. Kennedy states that he really likes the sea grass because it brings a whole different feel to the experience on the water, but he knows what that looks like in the winter. Kennedy explains that you can cut it down to about 6-8 inches in the late fall, and it will come back up in the spring, but after 5-6 years you can get dead spots or holes in the middle of the clumps. Jaquith says that at the end of the wall, it should turn the corner. Durand states that it could die down and Jaquith says that it would be fine. • Durand opens to the public. DRB Spcl Mtg November 12,2008 Page 6 of 7 • Tim Smith from Beverly Cooperative bank asks about the total extent of the rail. Kinzer states that the railing will go on the waterside of the Harborwalk Smith expresses concern about having an egress from the parking lot, and Kinzer states that it will remain open to the parking lot. He asks if his chain link fence will need to be pulled up. Lynn Duncan states that they should wait to look at this when they are considering the Harborwalk. She adds that they will be changing the type of railing but not the location of the railing. Smith states that he was never clear on the exact location of the railing. Duncan states that she can provide him with the information that he needs after this meeting. Smith asks about the lighting plan. Tormay states that there are two pole lights along this stretch near the bank. • Lucy Corchado states that she is a little disappointed because some of the materials (the wooden bench and the tables) chosen look cheap to her. Tormay explains that the reason for the new table is because the installation costs were too high for the concrete tables. Corchado expresses concern about the screening material. Tormay says that the new screen is tighter. Corchado states that skateboards could be on the concrete wall and the artwork will be damaged or exposed to graffiti. Kinzer states that the artwork will be placed on tile and it cannot be destroyed. She adds that part of the problem of putting the artwork up high is that a supporting structure would be needed. Durand states that high graffiti would be far more visible, and it might be the idea of visibility that would encourage graffiti, and they might be less likely to place graffiti on a place that is lower. • DRB Spc]Mtg November 12,2008 Page 7 of 7 Corchado asks the amount of the park grant, and Kinzer says that it is approximately $470,000 and the remediation grant is approximately$200,000, and they are about $200,000 over budget Duncan states that they were all shocked by the bids. Corchado clarifies that the covered area was meant for two reasons, to shelter people from the rain, and to hold performances. Duncan states that it would still serve those purposes. Barbara Warren states that the new concept doesn't grab her because it feels too linear. She states that she likes the ground water recovery area, and asks about the grass. Tormay states that there will be no standing water in this area. Warren asks about the trees, and Tormay points out the plantings on the plan. Ward states that she doesn't like the screening material. Tormay states that is would be better to use bigger plants and spread them out more, • because they will have a longer train. She adds that the play area is the same as in the original design. Durand states that they can make a motion to approve the revised design pending a review of the detail of the top and end of concrete wall, the simplified canopy and the detail of the stone dust at the park edges. Jaquith: Motion to approve the design with the above conditions, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. Kennedy: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. • Salem Redevelopment Authority Design Review Board Meeting AgendaCD r r, Wednesday, October 22, 2008 — 6:00 pm s 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room -C Roll Call w Michael Blier David Jaquith cNn Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 203 Washington Street (H&R Block): Discussion of proposed signage 2. Solar Trash Compactors and Recycling Kiosks: Review of installed solar trash compactors and new recycling kiosks • 3. 155-189 Washington Street (Tavern in the Square): Discu ssion of proposed exterior fagade, signage, and lighting Minutes Approval of the minutes from the September 24 and October 1, 2008 meetings. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official Bu, Off" Boards CRY Hell Salem, Mass. on Iu Ilium X3.4 23$ of Mi.G,a rdwith Chep CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Helen Sides MEMBERS ABSENT: Glenn Kennedy OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Proiects Under Review 1. 203 Washington Street (H&R Block): Discussion of proposed signage • DeMaio asks about the status of awnings. Schnipp states that the awnings have been proposed to the tenants and some have elected to put them in. He adds that the awning over this space was planned to be red, but H&R Block has not committed to using the awning yet. Daniel states that Kennedy is in favor of approving this design as proposed. Sides: Motion to approve the sign design, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. 2. Solar Trash Compactors and Recycling Kiosks: Review of installed solar trash compactors and new recycling kiosks Tom Watkins, with the Mayors office, states that they would like to make these units permanent by bolting them down, and he is seeking the DRB's approval of the locations. Jaquith states that any advertising on the kiosks would need DRB approval. Daniel states that the SRA has acknowledged that advertising signage would need DRB and SRA approval, and should have a uniform look. • Watkins states that the 3 units in front of the courthouse could be pushed together to look more uniform. DRB October 22,2008 Page 2 of 5 Sides states that this would make more sense to the users. DeMain states that in general some locations are placed in front of parking areas and rather close to the curb, which might impede a car door. He suggests relocating those units, if possible, to a curb that has no parking adjacent to it. He adds that some units are dispersed, or in a random order, such as those near the Salem Five Bank, and might be better sited. He adds that they fit in better if they have a real place, and stand closer to poles, if possible, or along benches or tucked into a corner rather than having them floating out in the sidewalk. Daniel asks if the 3 units at Salem Five could be pushed together somehow on one side of the fire pole. He suggests that the same could be done for the three at Front Street, and to follow that theme for all of them. Daniel reads Kennedy's comments: Agree that they should be in a little less conspicuous locations, but not to the point as to be hidden and not used. I'll leave any other comments to the rest of the board. • Jaquith: Motion to approve the solar trash compactors and recycling kiosks with the above recommendations, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. 3. 155-189 Washington Street (Tavern in the Square): Discussion of proposed exterior fagade, signage, and lighting Daniel introduces architect Stephen Sousa and owner Joey Arcari and RCG's Alex Schnipp. Souse states that tonight they will talk about storefront colors, signage, awnings, and lighting, and architectural elements. He explains that there will be three blade signs along the front with awnings over all of the doors. Sousa describes the door as an operable storefront system the total length of the restaurant which will open in good weather. He clarifies that each bay opens up totally. He provides a material sample for the metal trim on the windows/doors, stating that it will be bronze and will match the wall color. He adds that the signs the awnings will be lit with goose-neck fixtures. He presents samples of the 2 awning colors and the fagade color. Sousa explains that there will be four signs, one main sign(53 square feet) lit solely by • the goosenecks above it, and 3 blade signs with dimensional letters on the black/brown background. DRB October 22,2008 Page 3 of 5 • Sousa provides details of the storefront system, with fixed transoms above and operable doors below. Durand asks if they intend to have outdoor seating. Alex Schnipp of RCG states that no outdoor seating is yet approved, but they are working on a proposal. Durand asks if this color is part of the theme with his other locations. Souse states that it is part of the branding strategy. He adds that the sign band is synthetic polymer. DeMaio asks about the recessed panels. Sousa states that they will be one color. Durand expresses concern about the color being a bit drab, or disturbing to the streetscape by being so overpowering and dark. • Sousa states that the strategy is to allow the dark color to produce a base to the building. Durand states that he doesn't see a good depiction of this, and he would like to see photos of his other locations with this color. DeMaio states that some samples of the brick and mullion color above would be helpful in determining the compatibility of this color scheme for the storefront. Schnipp states that the coloring of the hardy panel is practical beige. DeMaio states that he would have less of a problem with the brown if it has some relief to it, but now that it is monolithic it becomes too dark. Jaquith agrees that the brown may be too dark. DeMaio states that the lighter bronze of the mullions on the windows above could be carried down. Sides states that during the day it will look dark and at night the illumination will make it appear lighter. • Durand states that the beige band could remain beige and the brown could remain there but it doesn't integrate with in the architecture. He agrees with DeMaio about the DRB October 22,2008 Page 4 of 5 • presence of the panels, which would work better with the brown color. He says that there is a double band, and the top piece could remain beige, and then have the darker band below, and to have relief on the columns. He adds that he would like to see a mock-up. He concedes that the Board doesn't want to go against their theme. Jaquith states that the asymmetrical arrangement of the large sign bothers him. Sousa states that the "TAVERN" is part of the branding. DeMaio cites the section on the enlarged elevation sheet, which shows the large goose- neck fixtures,which are high over the sign then low at the awnings. He says he has a problem with the goose-neck lighting color being black, and if they go on the beige trim they will be too stark. Sousa states they can locate them on the brown band rather than the beige band. Sides states that it is the surface mounted fixture that bothers her. DeMaio states that according to the drawing it will be too low. Sousa states that they will light the pilasters. DeMaio says there are ADA compliant fixtures, which will not project more than 4 inches and will not present a problem for people walking on the sidewalk. He suggests that Souse look into that option. DeMaio states that he would like more detail on the blade sign bracket, particularly the way that it meets the building. He adds that it looks like it is 2 rods that come to the brick somehow, but obviously there will be more to it than that. Jaquith expresses concern about the fixture because it might be too modem, and the chains for the blade signs should be rigid, not swaying. He says that where the awning sticks in underneath the soffit, it should be moved out. He adds that he wishes to see more of the fastening of the Tavern wall sign. He says that he doesn't like the brown valance on the awning. Durand states that he would like to see photos of the awnings. Jaquith states that he likes the idea of a restaurant that opens up to the street. Arcari states that the restaurant will seat 300. • Sides asks how the lower words on the sign are mounted. DRB October 22, 2008 Page 5 of 5 Sousa states that they are on the sign band. The members express confusion about this because it appears that they are floating, so Durand states that he would like to see an example of this. Daniel reads Kennedy's comments: I'm okay with the overall design of the exterior. For the signage, overall, unfortunately the typography is very generic and lacks any character. I appreciate the attempt on the main entry sign to create some type of playfulness by hanging the "in the square" and "SALEM"below the fapade, but unfortunately, again, it just doesn't work. Nothing holds together. I'd at least prefer to see something influenced more by their Central Square location sign- even if they must use the san serif style font. I don't see any need for the "SALEM" type as it does not exist on several of their other locations and does not appear to be part of an ongoing "Branding" effort. Fine with the blade signs—although is there a need for two of them on Washington SO Daniel asks why there are two blade signs on Washington Street. • Sousa says it is because it is such a long fagade. Jaquith says he doesn't have a problem with it. Sousa states that they will keep the double doors with each side being operable. Daniel confirms that the blade signs have no reference to points of entry into the restaurant. Sousa reviews the additional information requested for the next meeting, including new color scheme on the exterior elevation, ADA compliant sconces, a section of the sign, the fastening for the main sign, and the lighting of the central sign. DeMaio states that they tend to want signs to be remotely lit. Jaquith: Motion to continue this hearing until the next meeting, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. Approval of Minutes Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. • JLit Sale RERedevelopment Authority Design Review Board Special Meeting Agenda Wednesday, October 1, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMain Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita's Water Ice): Discussion of proposed outdoor cafe seating • 2. 281 Essex Street Unit 3 (Body Empowered Wellness): Discussion of proposed signage North River Canal Corridor Projects under Review 1. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design Adjournment • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Special Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, October 1, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy, Helen Sides MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Proiects Under Review • 1. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita's Water Ice): Discussion of proposed outdoor cafe seating Durand recuses himself from this issue. Voting members are DeMaio, Jaquith, Kennedy, and Sides. Proprietor Cynthia Weaver states that the seating will almost be identical to the other tables and chairs in the area. The members review the plans and agree that the design is good. DeMaio: Motion to approve the seating design, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. 2. 281 Essex Street, Unit 3 (Body Empowered Wellness): Discussion of proposed signage DeMaio recuses himself from this issue. Voting members are Durand, Jaquith, Kennedy, and Sides. Daniel states that Dale Gienapp is here to present the revised design. Gienapp states that he has modified the design after getting information from the owner. • He adds that the lettering will be the same as in the original plan, and the sign will be flat with a 3M coating on it. DRB October 1,2008 Page 2 of 9 Sides confirms that the steel plate will be painted the green color. Kennedy agrees that the metal could be green or remain natural, and Durand suggests that the green may appear too heavy. Gienapp clarifies that all the metal and the plate will be green. Sides suggests that he go with the unfinished aluminum for the scrollwork and the plates. Durand agrees that the bracket will be best in clear aluminum or silver. Kennedy asks Gienapp if he would have any objections to having the metal be black. Gienapp states that he would not object to black but he would prefer green. Durand states that the black references things that are more appropriate for the sign bracket. He states that if he saw the other side of the building he might feel better about Sh it. He says that he dislikes submissions without context and this has very little context except the immediate area. • Daniel states that the applicant isopen to the black. Jaquith: Motion to approve this sign as presented with the frame and mounting brackets in black, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. North River Canal Corridor Proiects under Review 3. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design Jaquith recuses himself from this issue. Blier arrives in time for this presentation. Voting members are Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Kennedy, and Sides. Daniel clarifies that the Planning Board requested that the DRB review the design elements of this plan, specifically the massing and the design. Attorney Scott Grover, representing Riverview Place, acknowledges that David Zion and Michael O'Brien (developers) are also here tonight, as well as Steve Livermore, the principal architect on the project. He requests that the DRB review the project in a way similar to the way they treat projects in the urban renewal district, which is to make a recommendation on schematic design initially, and then later a final recommendation on all of the design details. DRB October 1,2008 Page 3 of 9 Grover provides a history of the project, stating that it originally consisted of 184 units in the summer of 2007, and then later reduced down to 164 units, still in four buildings. He adds that it was finally approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals with 130 units permitted in three buildings and 13 of those units designated as affordable. He states that the project also went through a major design modification based on the comments from the neighbors and the DRB. Architect Steve Livermore states that original project presented to the DRB had three buildings with 51 units, 57 units, and 22 units, respectively, and with almost all of the parking on the surface and much of that parking was in the front of the buildings. There was little pedestrian access from Mason Street down to the river, and the landscaping was intermittent. He adds that this was all changed as a result of the comments from the board. Livermore explains that the new design which includes: • A 196-car parking garage, which is two floors above grade and one partial floor below grade. • The surface parking around the buildings has been reduced by about 100 cars. • The vehicular access and pedestrian access has been taken up through the middle of the site. The pedestrian access continues up through to Mason Street. • • There is now a view from Mason Street down through to the canal. • There is a 50-foot buffer between the Flint Street and the Mason Street properties. • He changed the image of the buildings, so the appearance from North Street down Bridge Street would be that of a renovated mill, and from Flint Street and Mason Street the image is much more residential in nature. Livermore shows several images of the proposed site, and describes each image. DeMaio states that this design is a vast improvement in the scheme, particularly in the way Livermore is working within the existing context to create massing that is sympathetic to the neighborhood, and to get back to the NRCC guidelines and the intent of the master plan. DeMaio states that the commercial space in the basement of building 3, and perhaps Masons Street might want to be more residential in character, so the commercial use might migrate to the 67 unit building, either the west side of building 1 or the east side of building 2,where the public will be more likely to access them from Commercial Street or Bridge Street. DeMaio states the landscaping might need the most work in order to extend the waterfront to Mason Street and to encourage permeability through the site. He suggests that Livermore consider how sidewalks or paving materials can encourage the passage of is DRB October 1,2008 Page 4 of 9 pedestrians from the neighborhood to the waterfront and make this area more pedestrian friendly. DeMaio states that there might be some ways to create islands of green in the parking areas rather than have vast areas of pavement. DeMaio states that it is important not to think of the Commercial Street extension to Flint Street as what could potentially happen,but to think of how the landscape connection to the building and the canal will be done when the buildings are first completed and then, if Commercial Street were to happen, to have in mind how that transition would be made. DeMaio acknowledges that this project is precedent-setting for the North River and the DRB would like this project and all future projects to have a strong connection to the Canal. DeMaio explains that there was great care in making each one of the buildings somewhat different from the other because the site has different personalities, as does the neighboring context. He encourages Livermore to consider having some variety in the texture, colors, and materials in each of the three buildings to give the project the look of having evolved rather than being placed here. He adds that a little differentiation will help to break down the scale and make each building feel more comfortable in context. Sides expresses concern with the "awkward"transitioning of the exterior design on Building Two at the corner where the"residential" image changes to the "industrial mile' image. Additionally, she points to the fact that these buildings have parking underneath them which makes them feel less residential. She cites the buildings that are up on stilts. Livermore states that they eliminated that as part of the project, but there is one piece that still has parking under, and he agrees to look at that. Sides asks how the path from Mason Street on the other side of that building will look as you are walking down past it. Livermore states that the grade climbs from the access road up almost a full level at the back of the Mason Street building so that the buildings, as they go up the new access road, will be on a hill. He offers to bring those elevations to the next meeting. Sides asks if the elevation will change to look like a mill, and Livermore says that it will. Livermore states that as you go up the access road you will have mills on either side, so the general intent that you are walking down a street that is renovated mills that are now residential buildings. DRB October 1,2008 Page 5 of 9 Livermore states that the people that are looking out of the rear of the Flint Street properties will be looking at landscaping and fencing, and they won't look down at the parking. He adds that the surrounding area on Mason Street is more residential, so he was trying to make the buildings relate to the residences on this side of the property. Kennedy states that he appreciates the improvement in the plan since the last meeting, particularly on the Bridge Street view. He states that the transition at the corner of Building Two is uncomfortable, even though he understands the reasoning. He asks Livermore to examine that more closely. Livermore agrees to look at that corner. Kennedy states that he likes the renovated mill look. He says that the open parking under the building doesn't quite look finished. Livermore states that they could make it into garages. Kennedy mentions the transition from brick to the other material of the three stories, stating that he would prefer more brick. • Livermore states that he is trying to maintain some economy, therefore portraying a renovated mill rather than just a huge mill building. Durand explains that there is a reason why we can't build mill buildings today because of the economy and the lack of skilled craftsmen. He adds that these buildings do not have brick walls,but veneer walls,but the details in this plan are effectively portraying the character of the old mill buildings. He cites the extensive brick corbelling and arched windows as beneficial to this design. He then explains that, when the budget is tight, these details might have to come out of the design, and the building ends up looking like an imitation mill building without any character. He expresses concern about this happening in this case. Having expressed his concern, Durand states that he would like to know what the materials are, what the brick construction will be, what the material is on top of that, what the siding is on the residential section, and the materials of the stone walls. Livermore states that he does not have anything to show the DRB today regarding the materials. He adds that the brick walls will not be 16-inch brick walls and although they intend to do some corbelling it will be fairly simple corbelling work. Durand states that they can agree now that this will look like the current plan and have all of the corbelling shown, but what will happen when the economy does not allow them to do this, and the building ends up looking nothing like this. He states that it might end up DRB October 1,2008 Page 6 of 9 • looking like a cheap housing project. He cautions everyone that this may be the reality. He suggests addressing the economy in the initial design. DeMaio suggests that the board point out exactly what it is that they would like to have in terms of materials and construction for this project. Durand agrees but states that he is trying to provide full disclosure. Much discussion ensues regarding this point. Durand asks the budget of the building. Livermore states that it is $15-16 million. Much more discussion ensues regarding this point. Blier states that there is a bigimprovement in this new plan because he addressed the P scale and now the site planning makes sense. He states that the massing is strong. He adds that it creates a sense of community in the streets and an opportunity to create some beautiful pedestrian ways. He suggests that he work on the screening for the parking lot. • Blier states that the last time Livermore was here, he presented a plan with buildings that could have been anywhere, and parking that separated the development from the canal, and a pedestrian path that took you around the back side of the building and up to the street. He goes on to acknowledge that Livermore has reversed those issues, and made a really strong connection to the park to the canal through the center of your project, and addressed the issue of scale along Mason Street. He adds that the overall design is vastly improved. Blier states that the typologies on the site are the gabled roofs and the mill buildings of this site's history and that seems like a reasonable jumping off point. He adds that, from a site plan point of view, the ways that LIvermore dispersed the architecture across the site seems to make sense, and the parking is in the back off to the side, and the smaller buildings are up behind and the mill buildings are close to the canal. He says that the massing is relatively strong. He commends Livermore's design strategy that creates community streets. He says that if you have the mill building facing the mill building you think of mill yards, and you could integrate beautiful pedestrian ways and vehicular ways that share a certain kind of landscape. He continues by stating that the other streets are residential connectors, and the screening presents other issues because there is a lot of fence. He expresses his desire to also see the site plan, which would help the board determine whether or not that central street is ADA compliant, or where the stormwater is going, as well as some other systems. Livermore states that they have held off designing some of the engineering issues for the • site until they have an idea that they are going in the right direction. DRB October 1,2008 Page 7 of 9 • Durand states that the massing has been handled fairly well, and Livermore did a good job transitioning from the old neighborhood into the new neighborhood. He acknowledges that there are a lot of good things happening from the site planning perspective. Durand opens to the public. Ana Gordon of 167 Federal Street agrees that the schematic is vastly improved over the previous one, but she expresses concern about the increase of traffic in the area. She says that she likes the concept of the street going through the development. She objects to the veneer aspect of the shell and is concerned about the transition on the corner of Building Two from the"residential" to the "industrial mill' image. Jean Arlander at 93 Federal Street states her family has owned the property on Federal Street since 1818, and that the Federal Street residents view themselves as the stewards of the North River Canal. She makes the following points: • The scale of this project is incongruous with the abutting historic neighborhoods, because it is too dense. • Current density in this area is 8 units per acre, and the density being proposed is 130 units per 4.14 acres, which is 31.4 units per acre. • • She cites an example of density in the Jefferson Apartments at Salem Station, which has 14.69 acres and 266 units, which equals 18.11 units per acre. • The Massachusetts Smart Growth Policy is 20 units per acre. • The proposed density is 2.5 times the density permitted by the North River Canal Corridor, which is 1 unit per 3500 square feet. • By right this property can have 52 units. She suggests one solution would be to remove one floor from each building. She says that this is a mixed-use district, and she would like to see more commercial retail in the area because it would generate jobs and increase the tax base with less stress on the human resources in the city. Betsy Burns of 22 Beckford Street states that the density is inappropriate for this area. She expresses concern about the traffic. She concludes by saying that all of the concern about the construction, materials, the traffic could be addressed by reducing the density. She asks if the parking lot is okay to have within the buffer. Grover states that one of the conditions that was imposed with the special permit was that there would be limited activity within the buffer, and parking was allowed to be there. Mary Whitney of Essex Street states that they are moving in the right direction, but it is still not in line with the vision of the master plan for the North River Canal Corridor. The • vision was that at some point it would be pleasant to walk along the North River. She DRB October 1,2008 Page 8 of 9 states that the project is too oversized, and the parking in the buffer is inappropriate. She adds that the pedestrian ways need work to look more attractive, and there is not an ample amount of green space on the site, and this will have a negative effect on the North River because the land slopes toward the river. She states that they need to look at the total effect on the North River profile, and that there should be more commercial use on this site. She requests an elevation depicting eye level views from the sidewalk and would like to see a shadow study with the impact on the houses. Emily Udy, representing Historic Salem Inc, states that this is precedent-setting, and agrees with the board members that they must pay attention to the materials. She says that Building Two should have a cohesive look on both sides. She explains that they are not necessarily looking for a project that looks historically accurate but one that responds intelligently to the context. Udy states that parking under Building Two with the columns looks bad, and if any thing in the landscape could shield that it would be good. Regarding the Mason Street buildings, Udy says that it is nice that those buildings can be seen from the street but the decks look bad and should be more like porches. Nick Nowak of 356 Essex Street stresses the importance of the DRB's vigilance in working with the project to ensure that the development conforms to the vision for the North River Canal Corridor. • Rich Laperchia of 7 and 9 Oak Street states that his concern for the building was the traffic, even though this plan has improved since the last time. He expresses concern about the Flint Street/Mason Street/Bridge Street traffic. Cheryl Callaghan of 14 Oak Street states that these changes represent a large improvement and expresses concern about the traffic and emphasizes the importance of paying attention to the materials. Mark Callaghan of 14 Oak Street expresses concern about the infrastructure surrounding the site, i.e., the water main, sewer line, and traffic. Ward 6 City Councilor Paul Prevey of 26 Tremont Street states that he is opposed to the density of the project. His chief concern is the impact of the traffic. He acknowledges that, from a design standpoint, it is a vast improvement from where it was before. He commends Grover and Livermore for meeting with the community and making these changes. He states that he appreciates the board's insight, and thanks the board and emphasizes the importance of making sure this project fits into the neighborhood without destroying the neighborhood. City Councilor Steven Pinto of 55 Columbus Avenue states that the traffic issue was addressed and it was found that more commercial use creates more traffic. He states that • the design has improved greatly. He states that he would like to see this project happen. He is hopeful that a design can be agree upon. DRB October 1,2008 Page 9 of 9 Grover states that this project is still in the middle of site plan review with the Planning Board and looking at some larger issues which will help the traffic in that area. He explains that the traffic experts are saying that this project will not add much to the traffic in this area. He requests that the board consider this plan in two phases, first the schematic approval and then the final design. He explains that hey have been at the Planning Board for 5 months so far. Kennedy asks Daniel if he knows how they were approved for this density. Daniel states that he doesn't have the details of the Zoning Board hearings, but the decision from the Zoning Board allows for 130 units and 309 parking spaces. Grover states that according to the zoning, if this were a commercial project, a building over 300,000 square feet could be built on that property by right. Blier expresses concern about approving the schematic design without having seen any site plan. Durand states that some of the concerns that were brought up tonight must be addressed • before he can make a decision. He states that he has reservations about some of the issues that were discussed tonight. The other members agree. Much discussion ensues regarding the nature of the information that is currently available vs. what will be needed to make a decision. Durand cautions the public about having this development become too small because the quality will be poor, given the economics of the project. Betsy Burns asks if scale is within the review purview of the DRB. Durand responds that scale is within the DRB's purview and adds that the proposal has very good scale. The proposed buildings meet other buildings well and the proposal works with the topography. Grover says that the comments tonight have been extremely helpful. Sides: Motion to continue this hearing until the next meeting, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0. • jAhL Salem. Redevelopment Authority Design Review Board Meeting Agenda Wednesday, September 24, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of revised exterior design 2. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita's Water Ice): Discussion of proposed • outdoor cafe seating 3. 73 Lafayette Street (Beverly Cooperative Bank): Discussion of proposed rooftop screening plans 4. 60 Washington Street (Dunkin' Donuts): Discussion of proposed signage 5. 24 New Derby Street, Units 1 and 2 (Artists' Row): Discussion of proposed banners 6. 281 Essex Street Unit 3 (Body Empowered Wellness): Discussion of proposed signage North River Canal Corridor Projects under Review 1. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design Minutes Approval of the minutes from the August 20, 2008 meeting. • Adjournment CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy, Helen Sides MEMBERS ABSENT: Ernest DeMaio OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review 1. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of revised exterior design • Daniel explains that this project had final DRB approval, but during the National Park Service's (NPS) review ofNBV's historic tax credit application, NPS had comments about some elements. Architect Dan Ricciarelli of Feingold Alexander Associates describes the design. He explains that NPS had an issue with the lowering of the main entrance to the jail. They will maintain it at its current elevation and will adjust the grade in order to have an ADA compliant slope of 1:20. He adds that this works much better with the new building, and with the interior of the building. Ricciarelli states that NPS did not want the windows to be lowered for the ground floor terraces, but they would accept punching new windows into the base, to make them work with the garden apartments. He adds that they wanted to see more of the original fabric inside the building and wanted to keep the main stair. Ricciarelli explains that they will be keeping the original lobby fabric and removing the bars on the exterior. Jaquith states that the lower windows get a little thin but he understands the situation, as long as they are functional. He acknowledges that some of these changes are improvements. • Kennedy states that he is okay with the design. DRB September 24,2008 Page 2 of 5 Daniel states that DeMaio has no objections. Jaquith: Motion to approve the new design as stated, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. 2. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita's Water Ice): Discussion of proposed outdoor caf6 seating Daniel tables this issue until the special meeting. 3. 73 Lafayette Street (Beverly Cooperative Bank): Discussion of proposed rooftop screening plans Attorney George Atkins, representing Beverly Cooperative Bank, states that he is here to discuss the roof screening. He explains that the bank had a dispute with the contractor that did the work, and the roof had an on-going problem with leaking, and he is here to submit a new screen design. He confirms that there are two structures on the bank roof, one on the Derby Street side and one on the side facing the South River. He states that it will be a vertical screening (Willard flat picket screen), making sure there is enough air • getting to the HVAC equipment. He presents a color sample for the board to review. Kennedy states that the grey does not seem to fit. Sides states that it looks like each elevation presents a different condition. Durand suggests using a color that matches the top trim piece. Kennedy suggests using something that has a,little bit of warmth to it. The members agree to the "Surrey Beige"color. Daniel reads DeMaio's comments: I have no objection to the screening detail as proposed. I do not think we should approve the screen without a colored view of the facade, so that we can see the color of the screens in relation to the facade. I'm not sure how the grey screens will look compared to the building and without a drawing I am not willing to take a leap of faith that it will look good. I would recommend a follow-up view of the building, in color, with the screens shown, in color. Sides: Motion to approve the design as submitted with the condition that the • "Surrey Beige" color is used, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. DRB September 24,2008 Page 3 of 5 • 4. 60 Washington Street (Dunkin' Donuts): Discussion of proposed signage Ed Juralowicz with the United Sign Company states that he is applying for approval of two signs, a carved wall sign(12 feet long), and a projecting sign double sided on a scroll bracket (18"x36"). He adds that the blade sign will be positioned the same way as the sign for the Boston Hotdog Company on the brick column. He says that both signs will be a Spanish cedar sign, carved and painted, and unlit, and there will be no flag. Jaquith asks why they won't use the colors of the other Dunkin' Donuts location on Washington Street. Juralowicz states that the franchise is no longer approving anything that is outside of their colors. Jaquith states that the sign color will not affect their business at all. He iterates that he would like the gold on black. Juralowicz states that the franchise is pushing these colors. Jaquith states that from a business point-of-view it will have a better effect. Kennedy states that, in the past, the board has made changes when a design was considered inappropriate. Juralowicz suggests having the one sign with the gold on black, and the other with the original colors. Durand disagrees and states that there is enough name recognition that this location does not need to stand out, and this street has slow traffic so the visibility will be good. He suggests that Juralowicz resubmit the sign with the gold on black colors. Durand states that all of the other aspects of the sign are acceptable. Juralski searches his file and presents a wall sign design in gold on black, and states that he will get a new copy of the blade sign. Daniel reads DeMaio's comments: I have no objection to either sign as proposed, except to question the mounting location of the blade sign. The 3-D view of the blade sign appears to show the bracket mounted to the white mullions of the storefront, where the straight-on view of the facade appears to show the bracket mounted on the brick pier just to • the left of the windows. We should get clarification of the mounting location. If the sign is mounted on the brick pier, I have no objections and would recommend DRB September 24, 2008 Page 4 of 5 approval. Kennedy: Motion to approve in the gold on black with white upon submittal and the bracket will be installed on the brick, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. 5. 24 New Derby Street, Unit 1 and 2 (Artists' Row): Discussion of proposed banners Gary LaParl states that these will hang on the building and will not be lighted. Daniel states that DeMaio has not objections. Sides: Motion to approve banners as presented, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. 6. 281 Essex Street Unit 3 (Body Empowered Wellness): Discussion of proposed signage Dale Gienapp presents the design with the entire business name for the door. He states that it is a two-sided sign and the background color is based on the owner's logo, and the bracket is made of anodized aluminum. • Kennedy states that he doesn't get this sign at all because it doesn't work with the bracket, the type is nearly illegible, it is left heavy, and he doesn't understand the positioning of it. He adds that the symbol is nice, and he likes the bracket, but the bracket color doesn't work with the sign. Sides agrees that the bracket doesn't go with the sign, because the sign shape has a lot of flourish and the bracket is too straight. Durand states that he doesn't disagree with anything that Kennedy says, and he thinks that combining the gold and silver is wrong. Much discussion ensues regarding the design. Kennedy suggests matching the sign to the logo shown on the business card. He describes the visibility issue with the color in great detail. Kennedy suggests he resubmit another design at the special meeting, and the board agrees with Kennedy. Kennedy: Motion to continue this issue until the special meeting, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. • Daniel states that DeMaio has recused himself from this issue: DRB September 24,2008 Page 5 of 5 • North River Canal Corridor Protects under Review 7. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place Uk/a Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design Daniel tables this discussion until the special meeting. Approval of Minutes: August 20, 2008 Meeting Voting members are Kennedy, Jaquith and Durand. Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 3-0. Daniel agrees to contact the members to arrange the special meeting. Kennedy: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. The meting J is adjourned at 7:25 PM. • ASalem • Redevelopment ent Authority Design Review Board Meeting Agenda m RESCHEDULED TO 5:30 pm � G`S Wednesday, August 20, 2008 — 5:30 pm ^ -0 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Roel yr, Roll Call o p U'1 Michael Blier David Jaquith ` °O Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. Public Tables and Chairs: Discussion of proposed public tables and chairs in Derby Square • 2. 60 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed changes to two entrances 3. 230 Essex Street (Urban Elements): Discussion of proposed signage 4. 185-189 Essex Street (Pamplemousse): Discussion of proposed signage Minutes Approval of the minutes from the July 23, 2008 meeting. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Salem, Mass. on Civ i9_ZUo� at I o°S i^s at,, in a= dance with Chlp. 39 SM 23A A 23B of M.G.L. CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy MEMBERS ABSENT: Ernest DeMaio, Helen Sides OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review 1. Public Tables and Chairs: Discussion of proposed pubic tables and chairs in Derby • Square Daniel states that the DPW director has agreed to manage the tables and chairs in collaboration with Gordon College. He adds that the ideal table and chair design busts the budget so the new design consists of a shorter chair and a 42"table, and both will be black and perforated. Durand expresses concern not with the management but with the policing of this fiarniture. Daniel states that these items will be checked throughout the day on an ongoing basis. He adds that they will be cabled up at night, and stored in the hanger on Winter Island during the off season. Durand states that he thinks the new design for the tables and chairs are fine. Daniel reads Ernest DeMaio's comments: I love the tables and chairs. My earlier concerns still apply, however: I believe if the tables and chairs are left outside overnight, they will be abused, and they pose a danger to kids/young adults who play with/on them. If they can be stored indoors after hours, I am completely supportive of them, otherwise I • believe there are many safety and abuse issues left unresolved, and potential liability for the City if left unpoliced. DRB August 20,2008 Page 2 of 5 • Jaquith: Motion to approve the design for the tables and chairs, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. 2. 60 Washineton Street: Discussion of proposed changes to two entrances Bill Goldberg speaks about the evolution of this plan for the entrances, and states that the rail will be green and will not protrude onto the sidewalk and the brackets will be simple. He presents a color sample for the rail. Jaquith asks how the rail will be painted. Goldberg states that he assumes that it will be painted with a brush. Jaquith expresses concern about the paint chipping. Kennedy asks if the inside rail will be the same color and Goldberg says that it will. Durand asks if the railing does not have to protrude into the sidewalk and Goldberg says that it is his presumption that it need not protrude if it creates a hazard. Durand says that • he is not able to usurp any federal or state laws but he doesn't want the rail to protrude into the sidewalk. He adds that this new design is a much simpler solution than the one originally presented. Daniel reads the comments from Ernest DeMaio into the record: The applicant is ultimately responsible for making sure their project meets all applicable code and access requirements. Having said that, if the railings and steps proposed in this package meet applicable codes, I have no objection to this proposal. It is a far leap from the original proposal, and a great improvement. Jaquith: Motion to approve the design with the condition that the railing match the trim, seconded by Blier. Passes 4-0. 3. 230 Essex Street (Urban Elements): Discussion of proposed signage Kim Tanenbaum, owner of Urban Elements, says they are requesting approval for window lettering, a blade sign, and flagpoles. She adds that the letters will be a flat silver resembling stainless steel, and flagpoles are tangle-free spinning white aluminum 6-foot, and the flags will be taken down at the end of the each day. • Durand asks what the flags are. DRB August 20,2008 Page 3 of 5 • Tanenbaum states that there is one "Open" flag and one"Rainbow—Gay Pride" flag. Durand states that he has no problem with the content of the flags but they look like low- quality"Home Depot"products. Tanenbaum says the she could use a different style of"Open" flag, and she feels strongly about using the gay-pride flag. Durand says that she might just want to use two gay-pride flags, and no "Open" flag. Kennedy states that the flags are almost twice the size of the sign and they are too prominent. He expresses concern about the flags obstructing the sidewalk and the view of the sign. Tanenbaum says that she has no preference for the size of the flags. The members agree that the flags should be 2x3, and the poles should be about 3 feet. Kennedy states that the font on the sign has been squeezed. • Daniel reads Ernest DeMaio's comments for the record: I like the blade sign as submitted. I also like the window graphic, although I would ask Glenn if the green letter"E" from the blade sign would be visually successful on the glass as well. If so, that would be my preference, to tie the two signs together better. I am not a fan in any way, however, of the flags. I believe the storefront is fairly narrow and the clear space in front of the store is very tight, as it is constrained by planting beds, a tree, light poles, street furniture, etc. I believe the flags not only add to the visual clutter of the area, but (much to the detriment of the applicant) I believe they will cut down the visibility of the storefront window and the product when the store is viewed from down the street. I am opposed to the flags—they add nothing in my opinion, are not nearly as nice as the signs, and actually detract from a potentially good storefront and sign package. Jaquith: Motion to approve with the above recommendations, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. 4. 185-189 Essex Street (Pamplemousse): Discussion of proposed signage Diane Manahan says that the marquis will be wrapped with painted aluminum. • Durand suggests locating the blade sign closer to the entry. DRB August 20,2008 Page 4 of 5 • Kennedy asks about the bracket. Manahan says that it will be a non-decorative L-bracket. Kennedy asks about the dimensions of the sign. Manahan says that it is 20 and Kennedy says that, according to the graphic illustration, those dimensions don't make sense. Jaquith states that he has no problem with the curved sign except for the "established" note. Manahan agrees to take it out. Kennedy says that he likes the "established"note. Durand and Blier say they have no preference either way, and she can keep the "established"note. Kennedy says that the proportion is great but it must fit into the height regulation. • Manahan agrees to check into that. Durand states that they have the concept and the aesthetic approval and they have to get the technical aspects finalized. He offers to work this out. Daniel states that they board can approve the corner sign. He reads DeMaio's comments for the record: I like the curved sign as is. I like the style of thea hics for the blade si b'r P gn as well. The blade sign, however, is called out as being 2' x 3' in the cover letter, but the proportion of the sign in the drawing is all wrong—it is drawn more like 2' x 4' (or 1' 6" x 3' 0"...it is about half as wide as it is tall). I would not approve the blade signs without: a) a revised, scaled drawing of the blade sign, and b) without a bracket submission and a mounting plan showing height and location. Kennedy: Motion to approve the curved sign as is, seconded by Blier. Passes 4-0. Kennedy: Motion to approve the blade signs upon review and approval of the members, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. • Durand agrees to work with this design. DRB August 20, 2008 Page 5 of 5 Approval of Minutes—July 23, 2008 Meeting Daniel reads DeMaio's comments on the minutes for the record: I have no real objections or corrections to the minutes from July 23`d, except to state that I believe the DRB was more emphatic than the memo reads that the tables and chairs proposed for the plaza created numerous difficulties and potential hazards that required more study and consideration. The memo states this to some extent, but my recollection is that Uwe were much more concemed/skeptical than the memo reads. I believe the residents who attended the meeting that night shared that opinion, rather clearly. Blier: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 3-0. Voting members are Jaquith, Blier, and Durand. Kennedy: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Blier. Passes 4-0. The meeting is adjourned at 6:30 PM. • • Salem Redevelopment AuthoritV Design Review Board Meeting Agenda .. ....... ......_...... Wednesday, August 20, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Ro¢Fn m rn �' Roll Call wn; � Michael Blier David Jaquith rx Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides n 47 Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. Public Tables and Chairs: Discussion of proposed public tables and chairs in Derby Square • 2. 60 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed changes to two entrances 3. 230 Essex Street (Urban Elements): Discussion of proposed signage 4. 185-189 Essex Street (Pamplemousse): Discussion of proposed signage Minutes Approval of the minutes from the July 23, 2008 meeting. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official tau etin Board" City H i Salem, Mass. 0 / o?Qd� at o7 f �'� in accordance wlth . 38 Sm ?3A i 23B Of M.G.L. Salem Redevelopment Authorl v ZHO JUL I l P 5= 18 Design Review Board . _ . Meeting Agenda CITYCLEN. SRtL`I, MASS. Wednesday, July 23, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 27 Charter Street (Salem Housing Authority): Discussion of proposed wireless facility • 2. Solar Trash Compactors and Recycling Kiosks: Discussion of proposed installation of additional solar trash compactors and new recycling kiosks 3. Public Tables and Chairs: Discussion of proposed public tables and chairs in Derby Square 4. 60 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed changes to two entrances Minutes Approval of the minutes from the June 25, 2008 meeting. Adjournment This notice pasted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Salem, Mass. on J L f 7 0 at S.-2 B of hA in L. accordance with oohap. 33096c, CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Helen Sides MEMBERS ABSENT: Glenn Kennedy OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Proiects Under Review 1. 27 Charter Street(Salem Housine Authority): Discussion of proposed wireless • facility Daniel introduces Kristen LeDuc of Wellman Associates, and states that this item was approved by the Planning Board with the condition that the facility was painted the same color as the building. LeDuc explains that the new equipment would be screened within a wall and the back door would be painted grey to match the penthouse. She states that the present penthouse height is 16 feet. The members review the plan. Durand states that he sees this as an acceptable design and it provides an amenity, and he has no objection. DeMaio states he has no problem with this design except that he as seen no detail of the material for the screen wall. LeDuc states that the material will look like brick. DeMaio states this would probably be fine but he would like to see the material before approving it. • DRB July 23,2008 Page 2 of 6 • Blier states that he has no issues with this design because it is high enough so it will not be visible. Durand suggests approval conditioned upon review of the material. Jaquith says he has no problem with this. He asks about maintenance. LeDuc says that the Planning Board has spelled out the maintenance requirements. Jaquith: Motion to approve conditioned upon review of the material for screening, and provided the site is maintained according to the Planning Board's specifications, seconded by Sides. Passes 5-0. Daniel suggests deferring the material review to a member. DeMaio agrees to review the material. 2. Solar Trash Compactors and Recvelin2 Kiosks: Discussion of proposed installation of additional solar trash compactors and new recycling kiosks • Tom Watkins of the Mayor's Office states that these compactors are supporting the city's green policy, and the city plans to add about 20 units to areas throughout the city. He adds that many of the new models will replace the older models downtown. He says that there will be no kiosk at the mall entrance even though the plan indicates that one will be there. Daniel asks Watkins to describe the recycling kiosk. Watkins states that it is a Big Belly solar trash compactor with a paper recycler on one side and a bottle/can recycler on the other side. Sides states that the bus stop near the Elks is a serious trash location as is the library. Watkins agrees to consider this. Julie Rose with the Engineering Office states that the basic compactors cost $3,900 and the kiosks cost $5,800. Durand states that he would like to see the locations of these on a map indicating the adjacent site. DeMaio agrees. Watkins agrees to work on this. • DeMaio asks if all of these units come in the same color. DRB July 23,2008 Page 3 of 6 • Watkins states that they will all be black. Jaquith expresses concern with the appearance of the ads on the sides of these units. DeMaio says that he wonders if anyone has looked at all of the public infrastructure currently being added around the city, including the ashtrays, the bike racks and now the compactors/kiosks. He recommends that the city appoint someone to examine this issue. Durand suggests approval conditioned upon allowing the board to review the locations after they are in place and, if the board has an issue with a location, the kiosk/compactor can be relocated. Blier: Motion to approve the installation of the compactors/kiosks subject to the board's approval of the locations after installation. If the board determines that a unit has been installed in an inappropriate location, the unit will be relocated to a more appropriate site. The board also recommends that a city official examine the locations of the many pieces of public infrastructure/street furniture being installed throughout the city including ashtrays, bike racks, and compactors/kiosks and develop a plan to avoid congestion and visual clutter. The motion is seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0. • 3. Public Tables and Chairs: Discussion of proposed public tables and chairs in Derby Square Daniel states that he is presenting this item for Kirstin Kinzer, CDBG Planner. He explains that the Mayor and others have been interested in adding tables and chairs to Derby Square. During the Old Town Hall lease discussions with Gordon College, the College agreed to secure the furniture every night with a cable. The current proposal consists of 7 tables and 25 chairs. He describes the chairs as durable and stackable, and the table will have a tilt top for stacking. The members review a diagram of the potential layout configuration for morning, when the table and chairs are oriented on the left hand side of the square, away from the tables next to Maria's. The also examine a potential layout for a performance or special activity. Sides says that she thinks that this is a great idea,but it is a hot spot and is in the sun all day long. She thinks that the tabletop should be mesh because it will not collect the rain and will not get as hot. Durand states that he understands Sides' concern about the sun in that plaza, but Salem is not always hot. He agrees with Sides' idea on using mesh tables. He says that he is in favor of this concept. • Jaquith agrees with the mesh idea. DRB July 23,2008 Page 4 of 6 • Blier states that this might be slightly more idealistic than ideal. He expresses concern about the policing of this area for any antisocial people that might spend all day there. Daniel states that it would be policed like any other public space. Blier says that he wonders how long the tables and chairs will actually stay there before someone takes them. DeMaio agrees with Blier and states that after hours in Salem can be a lively place and there are no eyes watching that plaza at 1:00 AM. Blier says that maybe with the increased life in Old Town Hall this idea could work. Steve Goldberg asks if permanent chairs would work better there. DeMain says that the beauty of the Old Town Hall square is that it is a flexible space and using removable furniture would be ideal. Clay Colarusso, a condominium owner in the Distillery at 141 Washington Street, • expresses concern about the type of activity this amenity might attract. Lee Wolf, owner of the Lobster Shanty, expresses concern about the hours of operation and the policing need. Steve Goldberg, owner of 2-26 Front Street, says that they have had break-ins and vandalism and the police have not been able to curb the incidents. Durand suggests assigning someone to oversee this area so it will remain clean and safe. He says that this idea needs more thought. Daniel agrees to advise Kirsten Kinzer of the concerns of the board. Jaquith: Motion to continue this item, seconded by sides. Passes 5-0. 4. 60 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed changes to two entrances Daniel states that there was a field-visit since the last meeting. Steve Goldberg states that the existing main entrance will be lowered 5-7 inches and they will add a railing on the outside and an automatic door button. Additionally, he says that on the other door(to Courthouse Deli) there will be two six-inch steps going in. He adds • that this space will soon be used by another tenant. DRB July 23,2008 Page 5 of 6 • DeMaio suggest placing the rail inside the building. Goldberg states that an inside rail would ruin the lobby of the building. Durand states that he doesn't have a problem with the two steps but he doesn't think that it meets code. He adds that he can't make a decision about the railing because there is no drawing, and he wishes to see the design on paper. He agrees that having rails inside would not be aesthetically pleasing. Sides states that it is contingent on the design of the rail but she prefers the shorter rail, which would be outside. DeMaio describes the design for the rail on the inside with a 1:20 sloped floor, stating that it would look much better than the proposed outside rail. Daniel clarifies that a piece of molding will be above the door that is lowered. He asks if the sidelights will also be lowered. Goldberg states that the sidelights will also be lowered. • Durand states that he would prefer a decorative railing rather than the standard ADA compliant rail. DeMaio states that he could place the nice brass hand rail inside the building and it would look good, and the outside rail would look bad if it extends out to the sidewalk. Goldberg expresses his frustration with the board. Durand states that the board cannot make an aesthetic decision without having the drawings. Much discussion ensues about this design and the members agree that they need to see a plan with the rail placement and specific information about the material for the rail. Goldberg asks for approval pending review of the handrail. He expresses his disappointment. Sides: Motion to continue this item, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0. Approval of Minutes: June 25, 2008 Meeting Voting members are Durand, Jaquith, DeMaio and Sides. • Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. DRB July 23,2008 Page 6 of 6 • Sides: Motion to adjourn, seconded Blier. Passes 5-0. The meeting is adjourned at 7:30 PM. • • i • ,x. S$ { C . IICIA dR7 :V x 2999 J13114 30 A II: 58 _:, city Notice Design Review Board Site Visit The DRB will conduct a site visit on Wednesday, July 2 2008 at 8:00 am to review the proposed sidewalk elevation change at 60 Washington Street. This notice posted on 'Official Bulls" ,�oard' City Hall Salem, (Mess. on Jn :., 0 . at il 'S8 f' 'm• in acoordar'ow Vllth Chap. 39 23A & 238 of M.G.L. Salem Redevelopment Authority 2fiQ8 JtlPi 19 P 3- 51 Design Review Board FILE Meeting Agenda CITY CLERK,SALEM, MASS. Wednesday, June 25, 2008 —6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Helen Sides Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 139 Washington Street (Treasures Over Time): Discussion of proposed signage 2. 186 Essex Street, #3 (Witch City Ink): Discussion of proposed signage • 3. 203 Essex Street (Lizzie Borden Museum): Discussion of proposed signage 4. Banners at Artists' Row: Discussion of proposed banners 5. 155-189 Washington Street (Old Salem News Building): Discussion of proposed temporary fence 6. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of proposed phase one site plan 7. 2-26 Front Street: Discussion of replacement of screening fence 8. 60 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed sidewalk elevation change Minutes Approval of the minutes from the May 28, 2008 meeting. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official Bletin Boardo City Hall Salem, Mass. on 19 awot at 3:s7P11 in accord�an a ori Chap, 39 Sm 23A & 23B of M.G.L CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3 Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand Ernest DeMaio rP > David Jaquith, Gleam ..ennedy, Helen Sides MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Blier OTHERS PRESENT: Kirsten Kinzer; C' BG Planner RECORDER: Andrea Bray 5 Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review 1. 139 Washineton Street(Treasures Over Time): Discussion of proposed signage • Aaron Margolis of Gienapp Design states t atthere will be a sunscreen film on every window and logo on every other window e shows the,sign stating that it is 3-feet wide by 3.5-feet tall. He adds that they will replace e exish gvbracket with a new one. The members review the design for the sign, logo, and bracket, and the color chips for the sign. Durand stateshat'ttz sign is very tasteful and unique, and the colors are very nice. He adds that he word`"Trea ures"pushes the boundary and if slightly reduced, readability won cTb enhanced. Jaquith agr�s;,with Duran' 'a out compressing the word "Treasures". Sides states that he sign reads better when represented in black and white and when the color is introduced esi0, looks crowded. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval subject to compressing the word "Treasures" slightly, seconded by Sides. Passes 3-0. 2. 186 Essex Street,#3 (Witch City Ink): Discussion of proposed signage Joe DiRuzza from Saugus Sign-a-Rama displays the material for the sign and the color • chips and states that there will be window lettering on one window and to the left of the DRB June 25,2008 Page 2 of 7 door(white lettering with a black outline). He adds that the sign band is about 18-inches tall and the sign will be 16-inches. Durand asks if there are other signs there. Much discussion ensues about the surrounding businesses and the signage. Jaquith states that he has no problem with the sign,but he wishes to make sure there is adequate clearance on the sign band. Sides states that she would love to see the context for this sign. Kinzer suggests conditioning the approval. Durand and Jaquith favor conditioning the appro 41^ . Durand states that it should be one foot wider to a 1¢¢w m��o�r '. ,ld on the each side of the lettering, and a one-inch white border within the edge ifEtT�e sign board. He expresses concern with the lettering. '!E;!i • DiRuzza shows the original design with all of the text on one . _` dow and the members agree that the original design is preferred. n> , The members agree thatYthe�pl�ci I e number on the window is too large, and something should be on the dodr66o signify entry. Jaquith: Motion totrecoenpxova,with the following conditions: • That t) e sign be or ifdot wider; • That they i height be consistent with signs on the adjacent awnings; • That a 1 inch wide white boarder be added to the sign • That the text of the window decal be consolidated to one window, as shown in the original design; • That the 20% limit on window coverage be waived Seconded by Sides. Passes 3-0. Kennedy and DeMaio arrive. 3. 203 Essex Street (Lizzie Borden Museum): Discussion of proposed signage Durand recuses himself from this item. • DRB June 25,2008 Page 3 of 7 • Keith Linares for Danvers Sign-a-Rama states that the blade sign would be 2-feet by 3- feet and is positioned to avoid a tree. The window graphic will be sized to 20% of the window. DeMaio says that he is in favor of moving the sign toward the comer of the building near the entrance. He states that the height is low in relation to the window and the other signs on that street. He adds that the shape may be inappropriate for the number of words and the type of lettering. Kennedy states that he likes the context of the fonts and the shape. o agrees with moving it toward the corner. As for the height, he states thatfbe,bottom of the sign could be at the middle of the opening. He adds that the bracket�fits tti sign more than the building. tt. Jaquith states that the scrollwork at the bottom could move down slight T}y but he has no problem with the overall design. E Kennedy reviews the recommendations, which are: • Location be off of the window tq and„the corner, closer to the column • • The height of the sign should bOk- e et by, enteggnng the oval on the top of the f5 . storefront windows � • Pending visual inspection of the br ck. by Kennedy Kennedy: Motion to recommend approva-with the following conditions: • That the sign be located wyer the building entrance, positioned to the left of center to avoidthe tree; •. That the height of the blade sign beset by centering the oval with -'f Wop of the windows, to the extent possible while providing 8 feetlbf clearance to the bottom of the sign; • Thrt Kennedy approves the proposed alternative bracket Seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. 4. Banners at Artistst�Row: Discussion of proposed signage Gary LaParl with the Salem Arts Association states that they would like to place banners on the lampposts along the Artists' Row. He adds that the banners would be 2-feet wide and 4-feet tall, and will have an apostrophe after Artists. Sides states that when adding the apostrophe he should keep it on the red ground. • DRB June 25,2008 Page 4 of 7 • The members discuss the height of the banner. They are concerned because the banners will not meet the clearance requirement of 8 feet. Kinzer states that the height violates the SRA regulation for the 8-foot clearance, so they would need to recommend a waiver of this requirement. Durand expresses concerns about accessibility if it is possible to walk into the banners. LaParl states that the brackets would have to be purchased. He adds that there are seven lampposts. Sides states that these banners seem really low and vulner`lile tov?apdalism. DeMaio says that he likes the concept of having the banners but they'duo Id compete with the other signs. He adds that they are too much like the signs that are the 'and perhaps the design could be changed. He states that he would not be opposed to a n ower design with vertical lettering. Sides suggests that they may need to se fewer signs. The members agree with DeMaio's sug f stip fa a narrower banner. DeMaio suggest centering the banner on th post and Durand agrees. LaParl states that they are double sided and that would increase the total expense. Much discussion ensues about possible designs: The mexgbers agree walk the space and continue this item until the next meeting. La arl reJaps the though .i om the board, which include: a � One�zize does not fft= 11 • Banner�s.'should not": end in with the individual blade signs • Clearanes cgti • Perhaps thus"ailrlers should be narrower • Vertical letteir g might be acceptable in this case 5. 155-189 Washington Street (Old Salem News BuildinO: Discussion of proposed temporary fence Matthew Picarsic with RCG states that there was a request to present a design for a temporary fence. He says that the six-foot fence will be constructed of cedar board and • will be erected by the end of July. He adds that the sidewalk is currently blocked off. He DRB June 25,2008 Page 5 of 7 • requests that the approval include flexibility in the fence location because it may shift based on the progress of construction. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval of the temporary fence design with flexibility in location, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5-0. 6. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of proposed phase on site plan Penn Lindsay of New Boston Ventures states that he spoke to the SRA about phasing the project, and they need to present the design for a completed phase one. Dan Ricciarelli presents the plan for the completion of Phase One. DeMaio asks what would happen if Phase Two does"WoNappen. Durand states that the SRA would determinethat and the undeveloped area could become green space. Kennedy states that he would like to see consistency of the,grass across the entire project. • Lindsay assures the board that there will be consistency. I'V Kennedy states that if there,is no development of that space in two years, they should n redesign the green sp4cehvtt"enches or something else. a'W Kennedy: Motion to; DRB June 25, 2008 Page 6 of 7 • Goldberg agrees to stain the fence the color of the DRB's choice, perhaps the same color of the windows (dark beige). The members discuss the possible colors and agree that a color would be best, such as walnut or dark brown. Sides agrees to review the color for the fence. DeMaio: Motion to recommend approval of the feA-,,alkele approval of the color, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5-0. 8. 60 Washington Street : Discussion of proposed sidon change Steven Goldberg states that there is currently a 13-inch step up into the bi4ding and this entry configuration is not handicapped accessible. In order to comply wituA standards, he states that he wishes to reconstruct the sidewalk as a ramp wito a step-down at the edge of the sidewalk. This would result in having an 8-inch step, thereby eliminating the need to have a fence Agamst the high curb. m. Goldberg states that the proposed tenan $ W, al company and requires an ADA • compliant entrance. tona v .. Kinzer states that with the proposed design, i', erson in a wheelchair parking in front of the building would be required to travel in str�` t because they would not be able to access the sidewalk due to the step. Goldberg statri'at there are no handicapped parking spaces in front of the building. He adds thattlus may notbe:the perfect solution, but it is a good way to eliminate the requirement for the fen e. DeMaio expresses concern `;'th setting precedent with this design. Goldberg states at-they are trying to comply with the law and they are working with old stock. 'IV Durand states that this solution is better than the fence option but it does not provide full accessibility for all storefronts. This proposal alters the city for the benefit of one tenant. Much discussion ensues regarding the possible options. Durand suggests a site visit. He requests that the plan show all of the impedances such as . including parking meters, newspaper boxes, light poles and parking spaces. DRB June 25,2008 Page 7 of 7 • The members agree to a site visit on Wednesday, July 2 at 8:00 AM Minutes—May 28, 2008 Meeting DeMain makes a suggestion for an amendment to the minutes. Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5-0. Durand: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Kennedy. Passes' FPS, The meeting is adjourned at 8:30 PM. i • ® Salem Redevelopment UthOtYt 2000 '1410 22 P 3: 23 I iL.E 4 Design Review Board CITY CA-L-F1,K, 'no,LF M, HASS. Meeting Agenda Wednesday, May 28, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 12 and 14 Derby Square (American Marine Model Gallery): Discussion of proposed fagade alteration to reopen entrance 2. 231 Washington Street (The Art Corner): Discussion of proposed window • signage 3. Smokers' Waste Receptacles: Discussion of proposed smokers' waste receptacles downtown 4. 15 Peabody Street Park: Discussion of proposed Final Design plans 5. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of proposed Final.Design plans 6. 118 Washington Street (Sacred Gear): Discussion of proposed planter Other 1. New DRB Member: Information item Minutes Approval of the minutes from the April 23, 2008 meeting. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Salem, Mass. on zhov sa -oo g at J,,.4-e? '3A 23B of M t; arc �,-;; �, re 3 SC CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMain, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review • 1. 12 and 14 Derby Square (American Marine Model Gallery): Discussion of proposed fagade alteration to reopen entrance Michael Wall states that his intention is to restore an entry door to the front of the building. He adds that it is the same door that was removed in 1994. DeMaio: Motion to approve this plan as presented, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 3- 0. Voting members are Durand, DeMaio, and Jaquith. 2. 231 Washington Street (The Art Corner): Discussion of proposed window signage A representative from the Art Corner explains that this is a temporary location and that they have been displaced by a fire. Daniel states that they will open their temporary location on June 14. DeMaio: Motion to approve this as submitted, seconded by,Jaquith. Passes 3-0. Voting members are Durand, DeMaio, and Jaquith. 3. Smokers' Waste Receptacles: Discussion of proposed smokers' waste receptacles downtown • Ellen Talkowsky, on behalf of the Beautification Committee, explains that these waste receptacles are being proposed as part of an anti-litter campaign. She adds that she has DRB May 28, 2008 Page 2 of 4 • two designs and they would like to make these receptacles available to any businesses that would like one. She presents the two designs. Durand asks how many locations will have these receptacles. Ms. Talkowsky states that is would depend on the cost of the approved receptacle. She adds that they are being limited to downtown. DeMaio states that he prefers the second one (the metal one) better because it has more weight. Durand agrees. The members agree that they prefer the black color. Jaquith: Motion to approve the metal receptacle in black, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. Voting members are Durand, DeMaio, and Jaquith. Michael Blier arrives. 4. 15 Peabodv Street Park: Discussion of proposed final design plans Michael Blier recuses himself from this issue. • Daniel confirms that the members that were absent for last month's meeting have received a recording of this hearing. Letitia Tormay reviews the changes that have been made to the design since the last meeting. These changes include: • The crest of the mound has been pushed closer to the walkway to create a large shallow slope for seating and movie viewing. • The shape of the contouring has been changed to appear more irregular. • The design of the wall was changed, allowing the artwork to have a more irregular pattern, and the artwork will be placed enamel panels. • The wall will have a backer board of various colors. • The canopy will be made of standing seam aluminum system in a color that matches one of the colors in the wall. • The size of the green screen has been increased. Tormay reviews the equipment, which will all be red, for the tot lot. She describes the design of the lighting fixtures. She shows the design and location of the water bubbler, which will be placed on the concrete plaza. DeMaio states that he likes that fact that the canopy has a color. • DRB May 28,2008 Page 3 of 4 Jaquith states that this park provides a better entrance to the Harborwalk than Congress Street. Durand states that this design is great and that the park location saves the Harborwalk by being an actual destination. He adds that he likes having the canopy be a color but expresses concern about how well it will weather a nor'easter. He concludes that the design is super. Kennedy expresses approval with the design. DeMaio states that he prefers to see the art on the wall related to children. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval of the final design as presented with the condition that the artwork for the wall will be reviewed, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4- 0. Voting members are Durand, DeMaio, Jaquith, and Kennedy. 5. 50 St. Peter Street(Old Salem Jail): Discussion of proposed final design plans Penn Lindsay states that they have made some changes based on the comments from the last meeting. Dan Ricciarelli reviews these changes. The most significant change is that • the St.Peter Street fagade will have granite and brick. Jaquith asks the height for the drive-through opening. Ricciarelli states that the height is 12.5 feet and will be high enough to allow fire trucks to pass through. DeMaio expresses concern about the conflicting roofline and the way the two roofs and two fa ades stone and brick come together at the corner. � � ) g Much discussion ensues about the roofline. Jaquith expresses concern about the roof, but states that he has no problem with the materials. Durand suggests that these items be reviewed at a later date. Daniel agrees and suggests that they board recommend approval subject to a final construction review. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval of the final design subject to a review of the final construction plans, seconded by Blier. Passes 5-0. • DRB May 28,2008 Page 4 of 4 6. 118 Washington Street (Sacred Gear): Discussion of proposed planter Daniel states that a mother of one of the owners would like to give them a planter as an opening gift. He adds that it will be a fiberglass planter and the color will be sand. Durand states that he is willing to approve it because it is in a park and off of a main street and in a comer and it is not too big. Jaquith states that there should be two planters. Durand suggest approval conditioned upon it being maintained and having live plants. Jaquith recommends suggesting they have a second planter. Blier: Motion to approve the planter given the unique site circumstances with the recommendation that a second planter be added, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0. Other • New DRB Member Daniel states that there is a new DRB member, Helen Sides, and her first meeting will be June 25. Approval of Minutes —April 23, 2008 Meeting Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes as drafted, seconded by Blier. Passes 5-0. The meeting is adjourned. A FHRedox e;Iopmetit ALlthOflty i�u8 ;;FR 1 b P 1= 4b Design Review Board Meeting Agenda �,{7'{ ,_`J''�i, •,1'..L-'rl, MASS. Wednesday, April 23, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 221 Essex Street (Eastern Bank): Discussion of proposed rooftop wireless backhaul dish antenna 2. 15 Peabody Street Park: Discussion of proposed Schematic Design • 3. 190 Essex Street (Witch's Hide): Discussion of proposed signage 4. Artist Row Stall 5 (Theory): Discussion of proposed signage North River Canal Corridor Projects under Review 1. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design Other 1. Flower Boxes and Exterior Container Plantings: Discussion of approach and parameters 2. Approved Railing for South River Harborwalk: Update 3. Joint Land Use Board Meeting: Summary Minutes Approval of the minutes from the March 26, 2008 meeting. Adjournment • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, P Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blier, Ernest DeMain, David Jaquith MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul Durand, Glenn Kennedy OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Jaquith calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review 1. 221 Essex Street (Eastern Bank): Discussion of proposed rooftop wireless backhaul dish antenna Attorney Ann Malone, representing Sprint/Nextel, states that they wish to amend their special • permit to add a wireless backhaul dish, which will provide high-speed internet access, next to existing antennas. She adds that the new equipment would not extend above the existing equipment. Daniel states that the city has added two conditions on the approval, (1) the color should minimize visibility and blend with existing rooftop equipment, and(2) they must install a 150- foot zip-cord line and secure it above the ground. He adds that the SRA has granted approval subject to DRB review. DeMaio states that he doesn't have a problem with the design except for the painting of the antennas. He states that the existing antennas are too pronounced and they should all be painted darker to minimize visibility. Jaquith asks what color would be the least visible. DeMaio states that they should be black or dark grey or brown. DeMaio: Motion to approve this application provided that all existing antennas, and the new equipment are painted dark grey, seconded by Blier. Passes 3-0. 2. 15 Peabody Street Park: Discussion of proposed Schematic Design • Blier recuses himself from this item. DRB April 23,2008 Page 2 of 9 • Daniel states that the SRA waived its procedures to allow this plan to continue on to final design approval at the next DRB meeting. Kirsten Kinzer, with the Planning and Community Development Department, states that two grants will fund this project, and the grants have strict guidelines, one being that the project must be completed by the end of June. She adds that Michael Blier and his firm have been creating the design while simultaneous community meetings have been conducted. David Jaquith volunteered to participate in the community meetings as a liaison to the DRB. Jaquith states that the idea is to speed this procedure along and have final approval at the next meeting. Michael Blier of Landworks explains that the park is located on the south side of the South River and extends from Peabody Street to the South River and includes the Harborwalk. He states that in order to deal with the contamination on site they propose to move earth from one area to another, forming a water recharge area and a green mound, which provides an overlook. He adds that this park is integrated into the Harborwalk. Letitia Tormay of Landworks states that the feedback from the community called for more color in the design and a strong edge at Peabody Street to prevent children from running into the street. • She adds that there will be two concrete plazas, on Peabody Street and on the waterfront, linked by walkways. The other features Tormay describes include a blue and yellow poured rubber floor for a playground and a mosaic mural wall to introduce public art into the park and to screen the electric company. She says the walkway will be made of concrete pavers with colored broken glass, which will be green on the Peabody Street end, blue on the water end, and a mix of both colors in the middle. At the 10-foot mosaic mural wall, Tormay states that the lower 4 feet could support climbing plants and the upper surface could have tiles made by the children in the neighborhood. She explains the a roof structure, extending out from the top of the mosaic wall will provide shelter from the rain, and the two concrete plazas will feature more muted color concrete. Tormay describes the plantings, including honey locust, ash trees along the harborwalk, and remediation species in the depression(poplar trees, understory species such as Indian mustard and sunflower). Additionally, she says the playground will have dwarf bamboo along the edge, and the mound will be planted with a fescue mix which will need mowing only once a year. Along the parking lot, Tormay says tall grasses will be planted. All species will be drought tolerant. For lighting, Tormay states that small light fixtures will be mounted in the tree canopy. For seating, benches along the street will be monolithic poured concrete structures. Blier describes a 3-foot black aluminum fence and bollards, which will provide an edge along the corner at Peabody Street. • DRB April 23,2008 Page 3 of 9 • Susan St. Pierre, of Vine Associates explains a pile-supported walkway will fuse together the Harborwalk and the park, connecting directly to the pile-supported walkway which runs in front of National Grid. Blier explains that he modified the original design from Tufts students while continuing to encourage simultaneous use by multiple groups. Jaquith states that the neighborhood wished to have a gazebo but he thought that it would be used by only one group, and the shelter is a better alternative. He commends the whole design, stating that it is a gateway to the Point neighborhood from the walkway. He says that he likes the protective edge to Peabody Street. DeMaio states that it is wonderful to see such effort committed to this site, and that this well- thought-out design ensures that it will remain an active space over the long haul. He asks about the mound stating that the visibility to the water from Peabody Street might be limited. Blier states that the apex is a point, not a ridge, but the water will reveal itself through the space as you move. DeMain asks if the mound shape is conducive as a space for a large group of people. • Tormay states that the shallower slope in front allows for people to sit on the mound. Blier states that they haven't calculated the number of people that could sit on the green area and stand on the concrete area. DeMaio asks if they would consider the mound flaring asymmetrically. Blier states he will look into that and that the mound should stick out far enough that it is visible. DeMaio asks if the bridge should draw people from the harborwalk into the site or from the site onto the harborwalk. Blier agrees to look into this. DeMaio states that he loves the mosaic wall, and suggests that the wall might not be a uniform rectilinear form, maybe more playful as it nears the water. Tormay states that the bottom line could change, and the edge at the water disintegrates. DeMaio states that the tile grid could change too, and the children could make tile to fit with a theme. He also says he likes the color of the walkway and wishes to see more color at the plaza area. He asks about the lighting. Blier states that Mass Electric has lights,which need to be blocked because they cast a glaring • yellow light. DRB April 23,2008 Page 4 of 9 • DeMaio states that he would like to see lighting as a feature. He asks about seating. Blier states that there will be niches along the adjoining harborwalk with benches, and an integrated bench along the base of the wall, and concrete stoops in the low zone, and informal park benches along the tables and chairs in the plaza near Peobody Street. DeMaio suggests adding benches along the mound. He asks if there will be bike racks. Tormay states that there will be bike racks, a solar powered trash can, and a water bubbler on the Peabody Street side. Daniel asks them to talk next month about the artwork for the wall. He asks about the items in the play area. Tormay states that she is working with two manufacturers now and considering a climbing structure or a swing set. Blier states that there will be a"Peabody Street Park" sign on the Peabody Street end and a kiosk area on the water end. • Kinzer states that the park will be named by the City Councillors. Jaquith states that this will go back to the neighborhood on Monday night and them back to the DRB for final design approval. 3. 190 Essex Street (Witch's Hide): Discussion of proposed signage Keith Linares of Sigh-A-Rama states that the two identical signs will be 2"x3". He provides a color sample. Daniel states that Glenn Kennedy expressed concern with the two different fonts and wished to see some adjustment to the kerning. He adds that Kennedy also wished the sign reflected the product offered by the shop. Linares states that the word"Leathers"is popping in order to illustrate the theme of this business. Daniel states that there's an opportunity for the sign to reflect graphically the shop's products rather than expressing them with words. He adds that Kennedy was concerned that the two signs P g Y o gn where too close together and suggested that the blade sign be placed over the door and the wall sign moved over the window. The shop owner agrees to the new positioning of the signs. DRB April 23,2008 Page 5 of 9 • DeMaio states that he is not happy with the varying height of the blade signs along the street. Linares states that the neighboring blade signs are almost too high for pedestrians. DeMaio states that this blade sign, which is lower, might be less visible from down the street. There is much discussion about the height of the neighboring signs. DeMaio asks how he will mount the sign. Linares states that he will paint the lag bolts to match the sign. DeMaio states that he doesn't want to see counter-sunk bolts. He adds that he isn't happy with the fonts. The members agree that it might be better to square-off the bottom edge of the sign. Daniel suggests that they send the new design to Glenn Kennedy for comments. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval subject to final review prior to the SRA meeting, • with the following conditions: ■ The sign bracket shall be at the height of the"Fuel" sign; ■ The bottom edge of the sign shall be squared-off; and ■ The font shall be reviewed. seconded by Blier. Passes 3-0. 4. Artist Row Stall 5 (Theory): Discussion of proposed signage Frank Taormina, who manages the Artist Row stalls, states that Craig Nelson was awarded a vacant space on the row. Nelson states that he will use an oil-based paint, and the sign will be made out of two pieces of MDF with a two-inch wide strip of copper wrapping over the top. He adds that the lettering will be raised and beveled, and it will be hung either from a thick plastic rod or by a long piece of MDF with eye-hooks. He says that the sign will be double-sided. DeMaio states that the sign is small. He says that the lettering might not be readable. He says that the blade signs out there have no lighting. Blier agrees that it is too small. He asks if the haze around the flame was intentionally cropped. Nelson states that it was not intentional. DRB April 23,2008 Page 6 of 9 Blier suggest that the sign be bigger and the circle be moved in. Daniel states that Glenn Kennedy appreciated the work that went into the sign. Taormina states that the signs on Artist Row will be seasonal, from May to November 1, and once approved, the signs can be reinstalled each year. DeMaio: Motion to recommend approval with the following conditions: • The sign shall be sized to be consistent with the Lobster Shanty's sign; and ■ The frame shall be black with the copper banding. seconded by Blier. Passes 3-0. North River Canal Corridor Proiects under Review 5. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design • Daniel states that the Planning Board is asking the DRB to consider, among other things, massing and consistency with the master plan. Attorney Scott Grover, representing Riverview Place, states that this is primarily a residential property, consisting of 130 units. He describes the approval process to date for this project. Architect Steven Livermore states that the buildings will be landscaped, and that 126 of the 309 parking spaces will be under the building. DeMaio clarifies that the 309 spaces is 49 more than required by zoning. Livermore states that the landscaping will be similar to that of the park on the other side of the North River Canal. He states that they will vary the materials on the elevation, and that the building will be set back from the canal so the landscaping in front can tie into the park across the canal. Daniel cites Glenn Kennedy's comments, stating that he is concerned that the style doesn't fit into the context and wishes to have a more factory—inspired style and he sees a great opportunity for an industrial style design. Jaquith agrees that he would like to have a more industrial loft building. He adds that it is rigidly plopped on the site, and perhaps can have a more industrial look with bigger windows. He states . that now it just looks like a design of"run of the mill, suburban apartments." DRB April 23,2008 Page 7 of 9 Daniel states that the Planning Board is looking for more comments on the massing. Jaquith states that the massing currently has an implied centerline and maybe it should not be that centered and lowering as it goes toward Flint Street. Blier states that this currently appears to be designed to sit on a flat site and Flint Street has beautiful homes on the slope. He says that he would like to see more variation in the rooflines. He adds that there seems to be a lot of impervious material. He says that it needs to factor into the surrounding neighborhood. He asks about the stormwater plan. Livermore states that Jim McDowell has a plan for it, and it has been presented to the Planning Board. Grover statesh t at Chris Huntress is the landscape architect and 1 wtll be at the next meeting, and he wishes to develop the walkway and connect it up to Mason Street. Livermore adds that the Planning Board also wishes to have a stronger pedestrian walkway up to Mason Street. DeMaio states that it is important to think about the types of projects that the NRCC is seeking • and consider that Commercial Street should be assumed to extend to Flint Street. He reads some of the requirements from the NRCC master plan,which include having a design that will enhance the waterfront pathway along the canal,redefine the north edge of the park, create public parkways, and complement and harmonize with existing neighborhoods. DeMaio states that the site has different personalities on Mason Street, Flint Street and the canal, and as a design approach, they need to pick up cues from each face of the site. The current proposal fails to do this as it has the same architectural treatment throughout. He says that the project should have active edges that relate to and promote the park. He agrees with Blier about varying the rooflines. DeMaio believes the materials and massing have a long way to go. The site plan reads as two buildings with a sea of parking, and the buildings read as a large mass that is impenetrable. He asks where one would go to sit and read outside? DeMaio suggests looking at how people pass through the site. Blier suggests making the pathway to Mason a central connection and organizing principal rather put on the edge of the site. DeMaio says that there should be more emphasis to what happens at the ground level where people will walk. He states that it is difficult to comment on the specific architecture because there are problems with the massing. He suggests they review the NRCC document and gain . inspiration from it. He says the parking lot on the canal should be replaced with green space. DRB April 23,2008 Page 8 of 9 • The members discuss flipping the buildings in order to pull more massing toward the canal. DeMaio expresses concern about the large expanses of paving. Jaquith: Motion to continue this until the next meeting, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. Other 6. Flower Boxes and Exterior Container Plantings: Discussion of approach and parameters Daniel states that several years ago the SRA had approved two window box designs as part of a Main Streets project. He presents the two window box designs used by the Main Streets project and asks the member if they will reaffirm the designs or would like to modify them. Blier states that pine will rot and look bad over time. He suggests using cedar or mahogany. Jaquith suggests looking to Newburyport for their designs for window boxes, and that they be painted "Essex Green" (Benjamin Moore). Daniel says that some businesses wish to place urns of flowers outside their stores. He asks if • the board would like to set criteria so he can manage this. Jaquith states that they could have 4-5 acceptable options for urns. DeMaio states that this would create a sameness that might limit opportunities to improve the design. Jaquith states that the board can review anything that is outside of the standard. Daniel states that he wishes to streamline the program so that if someone wishes to spend money to improve the look of their business, he would be able make it as easy as possible for them. Blier states that the window boxes should specify that there be drains at the bottom of the boxes. The Board reaffirms the previously approved designs. 7. Approved Railing for South River Harborwalk: Update Daniel states that the SRA has approved the design with the railing that was presented, but they are looking into alternatives. He shows a sample of the railing by AVCON that they had considered and says that staff has some reservations about it. • The members discuss the sample and agree to look into alternative designs from the AVCON Company. DRB April 23,2008 Page 9 of 9 8. Joint Land Use Board Meeting: Summary Daniel states that he has provided a summary of the Joint Land Use Board Meeting for the members to review. The members discuss the meeting. Approval of Minutes: March 26, 2008 Meeting Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Blier. Passes 3-0. Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Blier. Passes 3-0. The meeting is adjourned at 9:00 PM. ® w Salem Redevelopment Authority ZHUS 20 P 5: 25 Design Review Board t_r_ Meeting Agenda CITY CLE-Hit, ^,LE1, Wednesday, March 26, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand n cx Minutes CU im ZFa' Approval of the minutes from the February 27, 2008 meeting. Projects under Review r� '.5 1. South River Harborwalk: Discussion of Final Design Plans for the propoSpyd`' harborwalk • 2. 118 Washington Street (Sacred Gear): Discussion of proposed signage exterior lighting i E F,) 3. 272 Essex Street (Bella Hair Studio): Discussion of proposed signage exterior lighting , C'7 0 �w 4. 275-281 Essex Street (Cabin Fever): Discussion of proposed signage an exterior lighting v �r1 5. 304 Essex Street: Discussion of proposed fagade restoration ca 6. 125 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed fagade restoration N=" ^ccc s'F f—U s. 7. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project, Central House renovation component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment 8. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project, new construction component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment Adjournment • • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3'd Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Approval of Minutes — February 27, 2008 Meeting Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0. Projects Under Review 1. South River Harborwalk: Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed harborwalk Susan St. Pierre of Vine Associates, representing the City, presents the final design of the harborwalk, and states that she is looking for final approval from the DRB and then the SRA and they plan to bid the project this spring. She states that it begins with a public plaza meeting the existing grade at Derby Street and moving above grade as it approaches Mass Electric. She adds that it will cantilever in front of Mass Electric and then ramp up to the Congress Street Bridge. David O'Connor of The Cecil Group describes the design with all of the elements including the sculpture of the ship half-hull, the fence, the lighting, the plantings, and the interpretive signage. Harbor Coordinator Frank Taormina states that the interpretive signage is still in the developmental stages. Regarding these signs, Daniel states that the board need approve only the • location of the panels. DRB March 26,2008 Page 2 of 7 • Durand expresses concern about not having the signage ready for the opening of the walkway. Taormina says that Jim McAlister will have them ready but they will be funded through a different source. Blier asks about the stockade fence. O'Connor states that it isn't exactly a stockade fence, but a board fence with a cap on top. Blier says that the fence might produce a dark alley on the other side of the fence. O'Connor states that the vegetation might create enough screen once it has matured. Blier says that the fence might be a safety concern. Taormina suggests using a wooden guardrail instead of the fence. He adds that • a vegetation strip could be placed in front of it. Much discussion ensues about this and the members agree that the guardrail is preferred. Jaquith asks how many solar-powered trash compactors will be placed on the walkway. St. Pierre says there will be four dispersed along the area. DeMaio states that the proper lighting will lend a state of security. He states that if the American flag is up at night, it must be lit. He asks if there will be banners or flags around the light poles along the walkway. O'Connor states that they currently have no plans to add banners to the light poles, but this might be possible in the future. DeMaio says that the Congress Street end is being treated as a "back-door". He emphasizes the importance of this end of the walkway, stating that it will attract people coming from the harbor and Pickering Wharf. He adds that establishing a visual connection to this end of the walkway will inspire walkers to travel toward it from the Derby Street end. • DRB March 26, 2008 Page 3 of 7 • St. Pierre says the she isn't sure what can be physically accommodated at the end because of the limited space and the budget. DeMaio asks if any bike racks will be placed at the walkway. O'Connor expresses concern about the racks taking up too much space, but he agrees to look into it. DeMaio states that the guardrail along the harborwalk is a critical part of the scheme and it is too plain. He adds that if the next piece of walkway is built it will either have the same guardrail or it will contrast with this one. Regarding the guardrail and other design elements of this project, Taormina states that any subsequent walkways must meet the same standards as this one. He states that the budget for this project is above $1.5 M, and states that he welcomes suggestions from the board for a more interesting yet economical railing. DeMaio states that the rail has the feel of a fire-stair rail. There is much discussion about the possible alternatives to the current rail • design. Blier asks about the size of the trees. O'Connor state that they will be 3.5 inches in caliper. Blier says that he would prefer they use 4-4.5 inch trees. O'Connor agrees to look into it. Daniel suggests that the board approve the design with conditions. The members review the conditions, which are: • An alternative railing design will be examined; • The flagpole will be lit; • The trees will be 4 —4.5 inches in caliper; and • A wooden guardrail, not a fence, will be placed at the parking lot to the tire store. Jaquith: Motion to approve the design with the above conditions, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0. • DRB March 26, 2008 Page 4 of 7 • 2. 118 Washington Street (Sacred Gear): Discussion of proposed signage and exterior lighting David Lynch with Retro Sign Company describes the sign and shows sample materials. He states that the background will be black and the letters will have an aluminum overlay and the border will be aluminum. Jaquith says that the length of the sign is off, and the letter placement looks tight. Kennedy says that this will be a very clear-reading sign so he could reduce the letters by .5 inch without losing any legibility, and Lynch agrees to this and states that he would also like to lengthen the sign. Durand states that they should extend the sign beyond the door opening. Souchitta Chanthompalit of Sacred Gear says that she has already maximized the height and the width. Jaquith: Motion to approve the sign with the condition that the sign extend an additional 6 inches on each end, second by Kennedy. Passes 5-0. • 3. 272 Essex Street (Bella hair Studio): Discussion of proposed signage and exterior lighting Beca Paulino presents the design and shows sample materials. Jaquith states that the two words "Hair' and "Studio' need to be closer together. Kennedy says that the font is inappropriate and suggests a different script. He agrees that the word "Hair" should be lowered at least 1 inch. DeMaio says that this sign should not hang lower than the "Feed Your Head" sign. Durand agrees and states that the ordinance states that all signs must have a 10-foot clearance. Kennedy: Motion to approve the sign provided the sign allow for a 10-foot clearance and the word "Hair' be at least 1 inch lower, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0. 4. 275-281 Essex Street (Cabin Fever): Discussion of proposed signage and exterior lighting • DRB March 26,2008 Page 5 of 7 • Aaron Margolis of Gienapp Design Associates describes the sign and the color scheme. He states that the landlord has installed new lighting which is inconsistent with this design, so they may need to add more lighting. DeMaio expresses disapproval of the lighting that the landlord installed on that signband. Daniel states that he will look into that because he doesn't know if it was reviewed. Durand states that he likes the lighting in this proposal and would like to see this installed, rather than the lighting installed by the landlord. Kennedy states that the horizontal red band should run to the end of the Crombie Street side of the store. Dale Gienapp says there is a limited budget and that may not be possible. Much discussion ensues about the band. They agree that the red should extend to the end (if possible) and the green verticals should be removed, and the lettering on the Essex Street side should get moved toward the corner. Jaquith: Motion to approve the sign design provided the red band extend the length of the Crombie Street side of the store (if possible), the green verticals be removed, and the lettering on the Essex Street side move toward the corner, with the lighting design as presented, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0. 5. 304 Essex Street: Discussion of proposed fagade restoration Ry Hawkins states that the neighbor had an issue with some crumbling lintel and they would like to go beyond making emergency repairs and use cast concrete and re-point the entire elevation. DeMaio states that the pointing of the existing building is not white and they need to select the right mortar color to match the existing building. He confirms that the new lintels will resemble that of the second floor. DeMaio: Motion to approve as submitted provided the mortar color conforms to the initial color, seconded by Blier. Passes 5-0. 6. 125 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed fagade restoration David Hark states that they received a letter from the building inspector stating • that some concrete was falling and they need to make emergency repairs. DRB March 26,2008 Page 6 of 7 Contractor Tom Jacobs says that he and his mason inspected the site, and he wishes to use a concrete that matches the existing concrete. He adds that some prior repairs that had been executed incorrectly will also be repaired. He states that he meant no disrecpect to the board when he began working on this project prior to seeing the DRB. Durand says that he has no objections and understands the necessity for the emergency repairs. He assures Jacobs that the members of the board didn't see his actions as disrespectful. Jaquith: Motion to approve as submitted, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5- 0. 7. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project, Central House renovation component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment Matthew Picarsic explains that the windows on the second floor have been widened. He says that the flashing will be the same color as the trim color above the third floor windows. He shows a window sample stating that it is wood and • has greater depth than the window that was originally proposed. He says that the shiplap board will be used for the screen. On the rear elevation, he proposes to use shiplap for siding. He states that the trim over the second floor windows will match in color the trim over the third floor window. DeMaio states that the board appreciates all of the effort that went into this design. Kennedy agrees stating that the design has improve greatly since the first presentation. Kennedy: Motion to approve provided the trim over the second floor windows match in color the trim on over the third floor window, and the color of the new canopy will be reviewed, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. 8. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project, New Construction Component Matthew Picarsic reviews the changes based on comments from the last meeting. He says that there is now a new fence detail. Kennedy states that the two fences work much better together. • DRB March 26, 2008 Page 7 of 7 Jaquith confirms that this is a black metal picket fence. Picarsic says that the curb was re-graded at the corner so there will be no tripping there. At the sidewalk level, Ron Lamarre says that an aluminun piece that matches the curtain wall will be encased into the sidewalk, then brick will be above that. He proposes 'Practical Beige" as the top story color, and bronze for the windows, and on the storefront they will use anodized aluminum for the mullions, and standstone color siding, and "Lee Ivory" for the mechanical screen. There is discussion about the color of the storefront mullions. Dark-colored mullions will tend to disappear and light-colored mullions will tend to pop. It is determined that the mullions will be either sandstone or beige. DeMaio suggest a champagne color instead of the aluminum mullions. DeMaio states that the two elevations have inconsistencies with the window dimensions. Jaquith suggests approving subject to seeing the windows and detail at the first • floor cornice at the rounded corner. DeMaio: Motion to approve the final design subject to further review of the window dimensions and the detail at the first floor cornice at the rounded corner, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 3-0. Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. The meeting is adjourned at 9:05 PM. • Salem RERedevelopment Authority Design Review Board Meeting AgendaCD v — 7= Wednesday, February 27, 2008 27, 2008 – 6:00 pm U 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room T ' v = Roll Call CD Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects under Review 1. 93 Washington Street (City Hall): Review and approval of construction plans 2. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of proposed schematic • design modifications 3. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project, Central House renovation component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment 4. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project, new construction component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment 5. 211 Washington Street (Hawthorne Building): Discussion of proposed alteration to approved awning scheme 6. 90 Lafayette Street: Discussion of proposed lighting scheme 7. 247 Essex Street (a/k/a 118 Washington Street; Gulu-Gulu Cafe): Discussion of proposed window decal sign 8. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building): Update on sign band Minutes Approval of the minutes from the December 19, 2007, January 23, 2008, and January 24, 2008 meetin his notice posted on "Officird apt o sty, Hall �III slern, klass. on dU�� Adjournment att�yy �(g�qq gglsa ,.rdd`,a�� E.,.:,r ° �a ;"?3, Seo, a3A z Ay1T,S ofe • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Projects Under Review 1. 93 Washington Street (City Hall): Review and approval of construction plans • Architect John Seger states that they wish to eliminate the handicapped ramp and replace it with a ground level entrance into a vestibule with an elevator. Other changes he mentions include the door swing, an additional vestibule door, and an entrance mat. He adds that there will be no heating elements blocking the view through the windows. He points out the handicapped sign design and says there will be a sign on the front of the building advising of the handicapped access in the back. Other issues Seger discusses include the new louver on the upper wall and the relocation of the existing louver to the rear wall. He adds that a temporary ramp entrance will be used during the construction, and later can be converted to a window or brick-filled. He points out the fire escape on the roof plan and states that it will be on the alley-side. He says there will be a storm water drain for the roof that will drain down a corner behind the rear entrance. Regarding the color, Seger says he prefers the anodized aluminum, which is flatter than the metallic finishes. Durand states that Seger has addressed most of the board's concerns. He says he likes the window in back instead of the brick infill. Blier asks if the window would be of the vocabulary of the old windows, and Seger states that it will. DRB January2 ,, 2008 Page 2 of 9 • DeMaio says that overall this is very nice. He says that he prefers that the louvers be painted a darker color, and that the ceiling mounted unit should be flush to the ceiling. He says that the egress door area would need protection with bollards. He states that he likes the color of the aluminum but would prefer something warmer, perhaps champagne. Blier asks about ownership of the area behind the bank. Kirsten Kinzer of the Planning Department states that it is public property and some of the land is owned by Salem Five. She adds that they could place a bollard there. Durand states that a bollard would not be necessary because there is a lack of travel and because the door swing has been adjusted. He agrees with DeMaio's comment about the color of the louvers. Jaquith: Motion to approve the construction plans with the following conditions: • the louvers shall be painted a darker color; • the ceiling unit shall be flush; • the exit sign shall be clear; and • a window shall replace the temporary ramp egress and will correspond to the historic windows, • seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5-0. 2. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of proposed schematic design modifications Daniel states that the SRA sent this to the DRB for recommendations. Penn Lindsay explains that the market conditions have changed their plans. He says they had a two-prong approach, (1) the applied for federal and state historic tax credits for the original buildings, so they would rent the units in them for 5 years and then convert them to condos, and the duplex units in the jail would now be flats, and (2) they expanded the new building (Alexander building) to add 5 units, so the entire development went from 29 units to 36 units. With these new modifications, Lindsay claims they were able to make the numbers work. Architect Dan Ricciarelli states that they will use all of the same materials but the Alexander building will have an elevator and a new "L"with parking available under the "L". He says that they lost some parking spaces in this area of the site and added other spaces elsewhere on the site. He displays the elevations and explains each. He states that there will be parking on the ground level of the "L" and flats on levels 2 and 3. To beautify the parking area in the "L", Ricciarelli states that there will be glass windows along the fagade. DI}pRB Jaffar}*23, 2008 Page 3 of 9 • Jaquith states that the window line on either side of the access way looks weak and Ricciarelli agrees to look at this. Ricciarelli states that the services will use the Bridge Street access. Blier states that the way this has evolved has made it a better project. DeMaio says he thinks that this is an improvement but he objects to the exterior materials with the granite on the courtyard side and the brick on the street side. He requests that Ricciarelli consider how these elements come together. Jaquith states that the stairway in the junction in the back of the"L"presents an interesting challenge. Durand states that DeMaio has made a good point. He adds that he likes the current design. Daniel states that SRA/HSI has expressed support for the concept. Jaquith: Motion to approve the schematic design, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5- 0. • 3. 155-189 Washington Street(Salem News Project, Central House renovation component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment Durand and Blier recuse themselves from this item and leave the meeting. Daniel states that there was a request to see historic photos and they are included in the members' packets, as well as a letter from Historic Salem. Matthew Picarsic states that the Salem News building will be reviewed in two parts, (1) the renovation of the existing building, and (2) the construction of the new building. He states that he wishes to provide some more detail of the design features such as the corner detail and the rear elevation. Kennedy states that the canopy on the back, over the doorway, will help make it look like an entranceway. The doors would be improved with the addition of four-lite windows. DeMaio objects to the treatment of the windows on the second floor on the Washington Street fagade stating that they do not relate to the third floor, so the second and third floor seem totally disconnected. He says that the windows on the second floor do not resemble the historic photos. • DRB Jawaary23, 2008 Page 4 of 9 • Jaquith and Kennedy agree with DeMaio. Kennedy adds that adding detail above the second floor windows, similar to that above the third floor windows, could help a lot. Other options were to put two smaller windows in that aligned to those on the third floor, or stretching the second floor windows to align with those of the third. Picarsic states that he will look into how this will affect the floor plan and the costs of reframing. He adds that building is in bad shape with some leaning walls and it might need to be reshaped, so the reframing might be necessary anyway. Jaquith agrees with Kennedy about dressing up the service doors in the back. He expresses concern with the fence stating that the openings should be treated with some elements that will define them as openings. DeMaio agrees and states that the vertical slotted screening is not in keeping with the building and looks cheap. Jaquith agrees with DeMaio and says that it could have a cap and be painted a soft grey. He suggests using tongue and groove. • DeMaio would like to see greater detail on the rooftop screening perhaps including trim and a cap. Jason Plais, with Opechee Construction, says that the living space on the second floor demands big windows. The members agree that the color scheme is acceptable. Picarsic shows a sample of a window. Jaquith objects to the muntins being on the inside. He recommends using "Trimline" windows stating that they might be less expensive. Kennedy suggests that he also check into "Eagle" windows. Emily Udy from Historic Salem asks about the material on the corner boards. Picarsic states that they are wood. Walter Power of the Planning Board states that the main foot traffic will come through the market stalls. He expresses concern about the appearance of the back elevation. • Pj7 .;)A-, DRB JantWy 23,2008 Page 5 of 9 • Jaquith states that it is difficult to get some organization to the structure back there. Kennedy says that they will address the service doors in back to make them look more like entryways, and the detailing and landscaping around the parking lot will also be addressed. He adds that when it is cleaned up it will look much better. Picarsic says that the detail of the fence will improve the pedestrian experience. He summarizes the items discussed including the detailing of the fence, the dressing-up of the service doors with windows and a canopy, the detailing of the vertical screen, and on the front elevation they will examine other options for the size, type and pediment of the second floor windows. Additional detail on the roof screening is also needed. He commented that the Board seemed to feel the corner treatment and color were fine. Kennedy states that they could look into the lighting around the service doors in the back. He adds that the detail around the second floor windows would be his first priority, followed by a different brand of window, followed by a different window size. Picarsic states that they work on these items and return next month. DeMaio: Motion to continue this item until the next meeting, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 3-0. • 4. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project new construction component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment Durand and Blier had recused themselves from this item and were not present. Picarsic mentions the items of detail that will be presented tonight including,potential treatments at the corner, screening or fencing along Artist Row and brick samples. Daniel states that there is a letter from Emily Udy of Historic Salem Inc. Jaquith reads that letter into the record. Udy clarifies that she would like the cornice line at the top of the third floor to continue around the corner. Jaquith agrees with the comments from Historic Salem regarding the cornice line. DeMaio states that he had originally liked option 3. He adds that the plane of the fourth floor is set back from the plane of the third floor. He says that if the planes were contiguous it would help the comer. He says that in scheme 2 the third-floor windows are not as wide as the fourth-floor windows. .> DRB k wmr A,2008 Page 6 of 9 • Jaquith agrees with DeMaio. Kennedy draws a design and shows it to Picarsic and much discussion ensues regarding the cornice. Jaquith states that, after hearing DeMaio's comments, he agrees with him about not carrying the cornice line around the corner. Jaquith asks if the glass is coming down to the floor at the storefront. Picarsic states that the design intent was to pull the outside inside. DeMaio states that the grade change presents a problem with bringing the glass all the way down. He suggests using a material that ties into the storefront as the base, and it will vary with the grade change. Kennedy objects to the green color for the storefront, suggesting black, brown, gray, silver, bronze or several other colors instead of the green. DeMaio refers to the suggestion from Historic Salem to add lintels or columns to the brick fagade. He points out the inconsistencies between the hand drawn design and the computer drawn design. In the hand drawn design, the windows appear larger than the brick space between them. This is preferred. Smaller windows would need detailing • around them. Jaquith objects to the garage doors stating that there is another line that will show up in that design. DeMaio asks about the color of the fourth floor, the bays. Jason shows the color samples stating that it will be white. DeMaio expresses concern about using too much white on the building. He suggests using a warmer neutral color. Jaquith and Kennedy agree. Emily Udy states that she would prefer a neutral color. Picarsic agrees to bring color samples to the next meeting. DeMaio asks about the step at the corner. Jaquith suggests carrying the granite around. • r�•�'�'rDtzB Jy�3,2008 Page 7 of 9 • DeMaio says that it would be better without any step there at all. DeMaio states that the top of the roof screening should be as high as the top of the roof equipment no equipment should show. He adds that the galvanized roofing at the bay windows should be painted the same color as the trim work to make it look neat. Picarsic says that scheme 3 with the window height from 4 seems to be preferred. Kennedy says that comments of the SRA lean in the direction of getting more glazing on that comer, so number 3 fits best with the comments. Picarsic states that the 3-5-3 pattern of windows at the corner seems to be preferred. Additional detail work is needed for the windows, the storefront windows relationship to the ground, the step, and the color. DeMaio suggests they examine the window colors carefully. The members review the site plan. The lamp selection is supported by the Board. Picarsic asks for suggestions of the wrought iron fence. • Udy says that straight lines would be preferred. Kennedy suggests looking at the design of the property on Essex Street, across the street from"The Old Spot' as a good example for the combination of wrought iron and wood fencing. DeMaio says that the fence should have some base,perhaps brick. Jaquith: Motion to continue this item until the next meeting, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. 5. 211 Washington Street (Hawthorne Building): Discussion of proposed alteration to approved awning scheme Durand and Blier had recused themselves from this item and were not present. Picarsic states that Starbucks would like to place lettering on their awning. The members review the design. Jaquith states that he has no problem with the lettering. • Daniel states that the original approval states that there will be no text on the awnings. IDRB J 3,2008 Page 8 of 9 • DeMaio states that the lettering should appear only on the hard-framed valance of the awning, not on the sloped portion. The members express concern about setting precedent with this approval for lettering on the awning. Kennedy says that the lettering should be a maximum of 5 inches tall. DeMaio: Motion to approve the lettering (name only, no contact information) on the hard-framed valance portion of the awning. The letters will be a maximum of 5 inches tall. The motion is seconded by Jaquith. Passes 3-0. 6. 90 Lafavette Street: Discussion of proposed lighting scheme Durand and Blier had recused themselves from this item and were not present. Picarsic shows an example of the goose-neck light and states that the lights only come in white, black, green, or silver. The members agree that their first choice would be silver and their second choice would • be black. DeMaio states that one light should be centered over the left door and the others evenly along the front. DeMaio: Motion to approve the lighting with the above suggestions, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 3-0. 7. 247 Essex Street (a/k/a 118 Washington Street; Gulu-Gulu Cafe): Discussion of proposed window decal sign Owner Steve Feldmann states that the tree line hides the sign on the Washington Street side. He states that he wishes to solve this challenge with a decal on one of the windows which would be in black and white. Kennedy states that the decal seems a little too big. He says that the image fits. Durand states that the bigness is the thing. DeMaio states that the Gulu-Gulu is trying to deal with a problem that was created by the developer which is the location of the stairs. He states that a better solution would be to brighten up the window up a bit and add a display box. • PRB � 3a3, 008 Page 9 of 9 • Durand states that the stair is a mistake but it is there and the decal would distract from the stairs. DeMaio says that he has no problem with the sign but it might not be completely effective. Blier states that the text is redundant and the dog is great. Durand adds that the text is more like a border. Kennedy suggests using the yellow sign color for the lettering on the decal, and the others agree. Kennedy: Motion to approve this sign design provided it will be 90% of the originally proposed size, and have yellow lettering, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0. 8. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building): Update on sign band Daniel states that this issue came up at the last meeting. He calls attention to the photos of the sign band, and the members review the photos. They agree that the sign band is acceptable. • Daniel states that no action is necessary. 9. _Approval of Minutes—December 19, 2007, January 23, 2008, and January 24, 2008 Meetings Voting members present for these approvals are Durand, DeMaio, and Blier. DeMaio: Motion to approve the amended minutes for the December 19, 2007 meeting, seconded by Durand. Passes 2-0. Blier abstains because he as not present. DeMaio: Motion to approve the minutes for the January 23, 2008 meeting, seconded by Blier. Passes 3-0. DeMaio approves the minutes for the January 24, 2008 meeting. Durand and Blier abstain because they were not present. Voting members present for the adjournment are Jaquith, DeMaio, and Kennedy. Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. • The meeting is adjourned at 9:15 PM. ?'t� y10FFICE ,ILL Salern Redevelopment A 3 I Design Review Board Meeting Agenda Thursday, January 24, 2008 — 6:15 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Project under Review 1. 90 Lafayette Street: Discussion of proposed alteration to approved fagade plan • 2. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Project, Central House renovation component): Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment Adjournment notice posted on "official BuNetin Board" CRY !Hall ��:��, Mass. on JAN 1 8100 at ,q 3 .Irl ;- a- zrs r �t . • 3A & 23B Of M-G-L" • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Special Meeting DATE: Thursday, January 24, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy OTHERS PRESENT: Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner Jaquith calls the meeting to order. Projects Under Review 1. 90 Lafayette Street: Discussion of alteration to approved design . Matt Picarsic of RCG describes the problem encountered with the approved design once demolition of the existing fagade began. The band of brick assumed to be straight across the face of the building in fact varies by 3 inches from one side of the building to the other. If the sign band is installed as proposed, a gap will be visible under one corner of the sign band. He proposes to drop the sign band and lengthen the marquee above the entrance to address this problem. DeMaio asks how tall the proposed sign band is. Picarsic states that it was approved to be 3'-6"tall and will now be 5' tall and the line will be maintained horizontally. Kennedy comments that this work is ongoing and the mortar now being used on the building does not match the existing mortar at all. He states that it is up to %"thicker than the original mortar lines. Alex Schnip of RCG states that the color will match the original mortar once the building is cleaned at the end of construction. DeMaio notes that in the prior approval, light fixtures and signage design was not approved. He states that when these items are before the DRB, they will be particular in what will be approved including no exposed conduit, no lighting sources glowing when • you are walking down the street. DRB January 24,2008 Page 2 of 6 • Picarsic states that this building is actually very easy to work with for electrical wiring. He asks if the DRB has a preferred fixture. DeMaio states that there is not preferred fixture; the DRB just does not like lights shining in peoples faces. Jaquith reiterates that the DRB does not have a preferred light fixture. DeMaio asks about the headers above the second floor windows and if RCG will change what is existing. Picarsic states that he is not anticipating changing the headers. Jaquith comments that the sign band hangs over on one side of the storefront window and not the other. He states that the band should overhang equally on each side of the windows. Kennedy: Motion to recommend approve with the following conditions: • The sign band shall overhang equally on each side of the storefront windows • Signage and lighting design shall be reviewed by the DRB at a later date • The motion is seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. 2. 155-189 Washington Street, Central House renovation (Salem News redevelopment): Discussion of Final Design Plans Picarsic describes the proposed design which includes only the renovation of the existing Central House and does not include the new building on the Salem News site. DeMaio asks if this is considered one or two projects and if tonight's review would be a final approval of this project. Picarsic states that RCG is seeking approval of the work on the Central House only at this meeting. DeMaio states that he has a problem conceptually with breaking one project into two pieces. Jaquith states that he is not concerned with this as the renovation to this building follows the design of the old building. Kennedy agrees commenting that this building is not going to change so in a sense this is really two projects. The question is how the new building will respond to the old . building. DRB January 24,2008 Page 3 of 6 • Lynn Duncan remarks from the audience that if the developer is willing to meet the requirements of the DRB it is in the City's interest to move development forward that is ready to go forward. Walter Powers comments from the audience that relative to the fagade of the old building, he saw a historic photo from the 1800's. He asks if RCG looked at this photo. He also states that this building will be very different from the new building, making for a nice street. Picarsic states that they do have historic photos of the building which were submitted to the Historical Commission. Powers remarks that the back of this building rises above the Marketplace stalls and should look like a front. Discussion ensues regarding the corner of the new building at Derby Street and the consideration of bay windows and the curved corner. Jaquith states that the curved corner was settled on by the DRB as the superior solution and the DRB has asked RCG to extend the bay windows as far out from the building face as allowed by the building code. • Powers recommends that RCG take a closer look at old drawings of the Central House. He also comments that he is not happy with the treatment of the rear of the existing building where the chimneys are simply enclosed with siding making this fagade look like the rear of a bakery. Jaquith asks what material is proposed for the siding. Picarsic states that 8 '/4 inch Dutch lap pine siding is proposed. DeMaio inquires about what will happen with the siding at the corner of the building. Jason Downing of RCG answers that there will be a corner board at the corners. DeMaio says that looking at the elevation, one side looks like the siding turns the corner and the other side looks like it has a thin corners board. He wonders what the siding looked like originally. Jaquith asks RCG to go through the colors and where they are going on the elevation. Picarsic states that the corbels will be Avon green, the window trim will be green and the window casing is brown, although it looks red on the elevation. • DeMaio comments that what Picarsic has described as green is shown as brown on the elevation. The DRB needs clarification on the color scheme. DRB January 24,2008 Page 4 of 6 Kennedy asks what color the detail above the window will be. Picarsic does not know the answer to this question. Jaquith states that in this period of architecture, the building would have been more decorated. He continues that in general he does not have a problem with the street faces as they look like what is there. Kennedy asks if the windows are paned or two over two and says that on the elevation it looks as if the second floor windows may be completely different from what is there now. Picarsic answers that it is his intention that all the windows will be the same as what is there now. DeMaio inquires if this means two over two on sidelight windows at the front of the building. Downing answers affirmatively. Kennedy comments that he likes the color scheme, asks if the yellow is the color that is • there now and states that the red should be a little brighter. He further comments that he agrees with the need for a corner board and asks for more information on the screening or fence. Picarsic responds that the fence is six feet tall and he does not know specifically what it is made of. DeMaio states that everything on the ground is deferred to a further meeting. Kennedy notes that the rear of the building has the feeling of the back of a building but on Front Street you will not actually feel like you are facing the back of a building. As you walk past the parking lot you will see this face of the building and there needs to be some better way of handling the windows and entries. Picarsic says that the windows are all there already and are all staying. Kennedy asks if there is any way to handle them differently. Picarsic responds that the units are matched to the existing windows. Kennedy asks if the rear siding will match the front. Picarsic responds affirmatively. Jaquith notes that the floor plan does not show the little windows seen on the elevation. DRB January 24,2008 Page 5 of 6 • DeMaio mentions the need for information on rooftop screening of HVAC units including material, color and height. Jaquith adds that this must be shown on the elevations and will be seen on the front elevation. DeMaio says that the screening must be integrated with the architecture and should not just be white vinyl. The members discuss the Pella window sample. Emily Udy, HSI, comments from the audience that HSI supports cladding the building in wood siding and requests wood frames for the replacement windows. Downing states that the existing windows above the Edgewater Cafe are aluminum. Picarsic adds that RCG's goal is to have windows that will last without maintenance. The members discuss the windows used by the Goldbergs on Front Street. • DeMaio comments that to be approved, the submittal needs to include working drawings with an accurate representation of what is there and what is proposed and an elevation with accurate colors. The DRB will also need to see details on the HVAC screening and the chimneys on the rear of the building to make sure the horizontal lines represent the width of the siding, cap at the top of the vents, and corner detailing. Roof top equipment and two over two windows on the second floor must be shown on the elevations. Kennedy encourages RCG to consider the windows used by the Goldbergs. He comments on the screening and states that 6 feet may not be tall enough. Picarsic says that he believes this height is limited by the building code. Kennedy responds that he believes the limitation is 6 feet for a wall and 7 1/2 feet for screening. DeMaio states that there is a lot of activity on Front Street and he does not want the rear of the building to feel like an alley. i Kennedy suggests adding detail to the doors on the rear elevation to make them feel like entry doors. DeMaio agrees, commenting that these doors should not just look like service doors. . Kennedy reminds RCG that they will have residents parking on this side of the building. DRB January 24,2008 Page 6 of 6 DeMaio states that these entrances will be how residents get home and you don't want them to feel like they're in a back alley. Kennedy suggests awnings or detailing over the entry doors. Kennedy: Motion to continue the review of the Central House The motion is seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. DeMaio: Motion to adjourn. The motion is seconded by Kennedy. Passes 3-0. Meeting is adjourned at 7:35 pm. • • '#Lt SalemC� ; S OFFICE • Authority I il. a A 3 31 Design Review Board Meeting Agenda Wednesday, January 23, 2008 — 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects under Review 1. 246 Essex Street (Hex): Discussion of proposed signage and exterior painting • 2. 181 Essex Street (Signatures): Discussion of proposed signage and exterior painting 3. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building): Update on approved alternation to fagade design and update on rooftop equipment Minutes Approval of the minutes from the December 19, 2007 meeting Adjournment This notice posted on "dfslolel Bu"etin Board" City Hall Salem, Mass. on JAN 18 2006 at ill srdaariwith Chap. 39 Sez, • 23A & X238 of M.G.L. CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3 d Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Proiects Under Review • 1. 246 Essex Street (Hex): Discussion of proposed signage and exterior painting Christian Day presents his design for the sign and states that the bracket width will be 44 inches. He adds that it will be connected to the concrete and not the brick. Durand states that a gusset be added at the base of the bracket to give it more rigidity, and Day agrees to this. Day states that he would like the window trim and door surround to be red and not blue. Kennedy states the neighbor's trim color is the wrong red. Durand agrees and says that he would like a red with more blue in it. Day states that the condo association controls the fagade and will only allow a specific color of red. Durand suggests viewing the color personally before deciding on the exact shade of red. He adds that the board can approve the sign now. DeMaio states that he has a problem with the star in the bracket. He adds that he would prefer to have it mounted in the lower band. He says that the galvanized bolts should be painted the same color as the bracket. He says that the "Hex"typeface size is too large, • and he would like it to be scaled down. He says that extruding the red would be appropriate. DRB January 23,2008 Page 2 of 4 Day states that he doesn't want to shrink the letters because they are already small. Kennedy says that it could shrink a small amount, to about 95% of the original size. Durand agrees stating that shrinking the letters would add a bit more field to the sign, thereby making it easier to read. Kennedy suggests lowering the top curve of the rise on the wood to add more space between the top of the sign and the bracket. Kennedy: Motion to recommend approve with the following conditions: • The letter size will be reduced to 95% of the original size • There will be a slight extrusion of the letters • The top of the arch will be shortened by 1/2 inch • The bolts in the bracket will be painted black • There will be a gusset under the bar of the bracket • The paint color approval is subject to on-site review by the board. The motion is seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0. • 2. 181 Essex Street (Signatures): Discussion of proposed signage and exterior painting Trudy Stavros states that the sign will be 3 inches thick,polyurethane and carved. The members agree that the sign colors are appropriate. Stavros states that all of the window trim will be black and the door will be black. Kennedy asks how deep the carving will be in the letters. Stavros says that it will be about 1 inch. Kennedy states that he likes the colors and the simplicity is good because of the thickness, and the overall quality of the design will be determined by the carving depth. DeMaio suggests painting only the recessed plane of the letter and not the inside of the routing. Kennedy states that the deeper the incision, the more shadow you will see on the brown letters. • DeMaio objects to the 3-inch thickness of the sign. DRB January 23,2008 Page 3 of 4 • Kennedy agrees and suggests that the sign be 2 inches thick with a 3/8 inch recess for the letters. Jaquith suggests shrinking the letters for more field space on each side of the sign. Kennedy agrees and states that the field width could be doubled on each side. The members discuss the height of the sign. Kennedy suggests that the top and bottom edges of the sign match with the horizontal band on the building. DeMain objects to the black window trim stating that he wants to see the store in the context with its neighbors. He states that the black may be too stark a contrast to whatever is around it. Stavros states that all of the windows will be painted and have black trim upstairs to match the storefront. • Durand states that the application requirements should include photos showing the subject property in context. He suggests approving the sign with further review of the trim color. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval with the following conditions: • The sign will be 2 inches wide and the letter will be recessed 3/8 inch • The field width on the sides will be doubled by reducing the letter size • The letter, not the sides, will be painted brown • The bottom and top edge of the sign will match the horizontal banding • The window trim color and door color will be reviewed on site by the board prior to approval. The motion is seconded by Blier. Passes 5-0. 3. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building): Update on approved alternation to fagade design and update on rooftop equipment The members discuss the process by which the final fagade approval occurred. In response to concern from the board, Daniel offers to raise the issue of the sign band with the developer. The members agree that this would be appropriate. • DRB January 23,2008 Page 4 of 4 • Kennedy states that the old columns were not cleaned up before painting and expressed concern about the quality of the caulking work. He says such details detract from the building's appearance. Durand suggests that the members make note of this for the next time. DeMaio states that the masonry work was well done. Durand says that it is because the board was specific about having the masonry be consistent with the original building and subject to board approval. Regarding concerns about the workmanship, Daniel suggests that the board could make a recommendation to the SRA for them to send a letter to the developer. Alternatively, he could raise this point informally. Durand says he prefers such information come from the Planning and Community Development Department rather than the board. It is noted that the project is still under construction and it is premature to make a final assessment. • Daniel states that the tall tan box on the roof is the incorrect equipment and Verizon will correct it. He adds that additional Verizon equipment is placed at a different spot than shown on the original plans and is screened. The HVAC units associated with redevelopment have not been installed and screened. Kennedy: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0. The meeting is adjourned at 7:55 PM. • Salem Redevelopment S Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda Wednesday, December 19, 2007- 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review 1. 316 New Derby Street (Radiance Aveda) - Continued discussion of proposed • signage 2. 304 Essex Street (Libeny Tax Service) - Discussion of proposed signage 3. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita's Water Ice) - Continued discussion of proposed signage 4. 207 Washington Street (Living Well) -Continued discussion of window decals 5. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building- Update on approved alteration to facade design Minutes Approval of the minutes from the November 28,2007 meeting Adjournment • CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3`a Floor Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Earnest DeMain, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Blier OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager, and Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner RECORDER: Andrea Bray Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Projects Under Review • 1. 316 New Derby Street(Radiance Aveda)— Continued discussion of proposed signage Ken McTague of Concept Signs states that the colors will be black and white with the letter shadow and line in dark grey. Kennedy: Motion to approve, seconded by DeMaio. Passed 3-0. Jaquith arrives at 6:35 PM. 2. 304 Essex Street (Liberty Tax Service)—Discussion of proposed signage Daniel states that and the signage will go in existing sign panel areas. Kinzer states that the logo and colors are corporate. Valerie Whittier of Liberty Tax Service states that the aluminum sign must use colors from a specific palette which she displays and the members review. The members express concern with the spacing of the letters. Kennedy states that the first letters need to be smaller and closer to the other letters. He adds that there should be less space between the lines. Kennedy suggests that Whittier • look at the kerning between the letters and tighten it up a bit. He says that the T in tax must be brought in closer. DRB Meeting December 19, 2007 Page 2 of 4 • Whittier states that the three signs would say different things. DeMaio says that the logo and the text size should be the same for the two signs on the corner. Kennedy agrees and states that the door sign will have different dimensions but should have similar keming and logo. Kinzer states that the submission is not clear on the location of the lights. Charles Fallon of Liberty Tax Service states that there will be two over the front door, one over the side door and two over the side window. Kennedy states that they need more specifics about the location and the method of installation, specifically there should be no conduit. DeMaio states that the fixtures should be black, not red. Whittier states that they are opening on January 3, 2008. • Kinzer states that the next meeting will be on the 4`h Wednesday in January and then SRA meets on the 2"a week in February. Kennedy suggests they can get some corrections for review within the next two weeks to facilitate an approval at the January SRA meeting. Kinzer suggests a conditional approval pending Kennedy's review. Durand iterates all of the recommendations as follows: The kerning should be reviewed and tightened up, especially the T in tax, which is spaced too far from the other letters. The lines should be brought closer together and there should be more white space on the left and right edges of the door sign. The logo and text size should be the same for the two corner signs, and the door sign will have similar kerning and logo but different dimensions. Daniel states that they should come back with a lighting plan. Kennedy: Motion to approve the signage design with the above noted recommendations, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. 3. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita's Water lee)—Continued discussion of • proposed signage DRB Meeting December 19,2007 Page 3 of 4 Kinzer states that this is a continuation of the last meeting and the applicant lives in New Jersey and asked that the board review the sign and approve or make suggestions for changes. Kennedy states that in the email stream Durand raised the issue of the position of the decals on the doors. Durand suggests dropping the decal down to the middle of the door for safety purposes. DeMaio states that the decals should be smaller(14") and the others agree. The members determine that the decal should be dropped down 1 foot. DeMaio: Motion to approve the sign with the above recommendations, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 3-0. 4. 207 Washington Street(Living Well)—Continued discussion of window decals Kinzer states that after Kennedy and Durand visited the site they determined that the decals on the right were at the wrong height and needed to be moved up,but they cannot • be moved because of the film on the window. Durand asks if they can go lower and Kinzer states that they can. DeMaio states that he doesn't like the placement of the phone number and the Living Well sign. Kinzer states that the SRA did not accept the recommendation for the internally- illuminated sign. Daniel states that the SRA members looked at the building after their meeting and decided that the internally-illuminated sign would be acceptable. Durand states that the phone number and the Living Well sign needs to move. Kennedy suggests that one of the sections of the decal could be replaced by the phone number. Alternatively, he adds that it would be okay for them to put their hours and phone number on the door. The members agree to have the white of the decals extend to the mullions. Durand suggests that when the awnings are added, the height of the decals should be • adjusted. DRB Meeting December 19,2007 Page 4 of 4 Kennedy: Motion to approve with the above noted recommendations, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. 5. 275-281 Essex Street(CF Tompkins Building)—Update on approved alteration to fagade design Durand states that when the developers removed the fapade from the building they found the original columns and will leave these on the front of the building. He adds that the windows had already been ordered and were not wide enough to fill the space between the columns so the developer will be using brick inlay to fill those spaces between the windows and the columns. He asks if they will submit a design. Kinzer states that the brick infill is already approved. She adds that the plan is to do a brick sill and above the windows it will be whatever was approved. Durand asks Kinzer to get the drawings. The members study the drawings. • DeMaio says that he wants to know what is going above the windows because he doesn't want brick there. Durand confirms that the brick adjacent to the vertical columns is approved. He adds that the original approved plan called for the windows to extend to the sign band above,but there appears to be a space between the top of the window and the sign band and the board does not want brick to be there, so the applicant will need to come before the board for approval of the material to be used. Minutes —November 28, 2007 Meeting Kennedy: Motion to approve the minutes for the November 28, 2007 meeting, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. Kennedy: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. The meeting is adjourned at 7:20 PM. • a Salem � i1 F Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda Wednesday,November 28,2007- 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review 1. 316 New Derby Street (Radiance AveQ- Discussion of proposed signage 2. 2 East India SquareSuite 119 (Rita's Water Ice) - Discussion of proposed signage • 3. 207 Washin tg_on Street Living Well)-Discussion of proposed signage Minutes Approval of the minutes from the October 30, 2007 meeting Approval of the minutes from the December 20, 2006 meeting Approval of the minutes from the October 25, 2006 meeting Adjournment This notice posted on "Official 13U"elin Eoan" City Hall .216 1, Masi. on -44,.. 43 4cr7 at l:a7 All in soo:udatt,re �dU1 CtWp. � SM 23A 330 of M.G.L. 1?0 Washington 5rreet. Salmi 19assachi.isc,.Us 01970 • (978) 619-5685 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES November 28,2007 A meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday,November 28, 2007 at 6:00 pm Chairperson Paul Durand,Members Ernest DeMaio,David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Projects Under Review 1. 316 New Derby Street(Radiance Aveda — discussion of proposed signage Kinzer introduces Trish Grzela and states Radiance Aveda has opened. Grzela states that the sign colors are black and white,exactly as shown in the handouts. • DeMaio states that his first reaction is that the sign is bland and not too creative. Grzela explains that it is her logo and that she has stayed basic. DeMaio asks if she could have some depth to the letters and Grzela agrees. Kennedy echos DeMaio's comments. He states that although it included a flat blade sign, Rouge's sign package was different and well-considered. He recommends some break-up and cadence to the horizontal line in the middle of the sign and Grzela agrees to this. Durand agrees that he wants signs that are slightly inventive. Jaquith states that he would like her to use flat black paint. The members agree that this would be better with the letters in '/ inch relief. Durand states that glossy black would work. Kennedy states that the line could be broken up with a circle in the middle. Jaquith: Motion to approve the sign with the following conditions: • • The lettering shall be incised if the thickness of the sign board can accommodate incised letters. DRB Meeting November 28, 2007 Page 2 of 4 • If the lettering can not be incised,the line dividing the sign shall be broken into multiple lines. • The background color shall be glossy black The motion is seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. Grzela states that she would like to install window decals as well. Kinzer states that window decals are considered signage and that she will need to submit the decals for review by the DRB. 2. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita's Water Ice) - discussion of proposed signage Kinzer introduces Cynthia Weaver and project manager Kevin Campbell, and states that the sign colors and font are corporate and cannot be altered. Weaver states that text in the windows is decals,not neon signs. Kennedy expresses concern with the green sign boarder clashing with the green awning, and Durand agrees. Kennedy states that the sign needs no boarder or the boarder could be • smaller and brought inside with white at the edge of the sign. Durand states that there could be more white on the left and right of the lettering. Campbell asks if there could be red and white stripes on the left and right of the lettering. Kennedy states that a red stripe could be placed close to each side edge. DeMaio states that the signs and decals do not have consistency which is less than ideal for branding. Kennedy suggests that the decal on the door could echoe the design of the sign on the awning. He cites the decal in a Rita's promotional brochure. Jaquith expresses concern with the product decals along the bottom of the storefront windows. The members discuss possible locations for the product images and agree that it would be preferable to show the product from within the store, rather than on the window. Kinzer clarifies the definition of temporary signage,stating that temporary signs must refer to specials or sales of limited duration and must be removed after the sale or special ends. • Campbell requests arriving at some sort of compromise on the of showing images of Rita's product. He states that in a new market, it is crucial that passersby see the product to DRB Meeting November 28,2007 Page 3 of 4 understand what it is. He suggests a low wall inside the window with the products signs on it. The members do not react positively to this idea and Campbell then suggests placing their offer image as a smaller decal in repeat patterns across the bottom of windows. Kennedy states that he likes the idea of having the offer repeated across the bottom of the window,each about 10 inches high. The other members agree to this. Durand suggests continuing this issue so the members can see the final design. Weaver agrees to contact Kinzer as soon as the new design is finished. Jaquith:Motion to continue this issue,seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. 3. 207 Washington Street(Living Well — discussion of proposed signage Kinzer introduces Frank Corcoran and Beth Wheeler,owners of Living Well. She states that the internally-lit sign that was up in the previous business was never approved and therefore is not grandfather claused. The internal illumination needs to be specifically approved. She adds that the other businesses in that building all have internallyilluminated signs. She states that the approved awning will be dark red and shows a swatch of the fabric. Corcoran explains that he did not realize that window decals are also part of the sign review process and he therefore did not include the decals in his initial submission. He shows the DRB the decals he has had fabricated and states that his goal is to have the decals visible between the awning and the height of a parked SUV. Corcoran states that there is some tinting at the top of his windows and there are shades on part of the windows to create privacy and a calm setting. Durand agrees that the decal be put high on the window and the members discuss the height of the window decals at great length. Kennedy suggests taping copies of the decals to the windows for the board to review and approve. Durand confirms that the because the other signs in the building have internally illuminated signs, the DRB recommends allowing internal illumination at the Living Well sign. The DRB agrees that without internal illumination,this sign will look standout from the rest of the building signs and look strange. Durand further states that the sign design is acceptable, and the decals will be placed as high as possible. Kinzer asks Corcoran to contact her when the decal copies are up. • DRB Meeting November 28, 2007 Page 4 of 4 DeMaio: Motion to recommend approval of the sign design and the use internally illuminated sign, subject to the board's review of the decal placement, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. Minutes - October 30,2007, December 20, 2006, October 25, 2006 meetings The members review the minutes for the October 30, 2007 meeting and make suggestions for changes. Jaquith:Motion to approve the amended minutes for the October 30 meeting,seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. The members agree that these minutes are sketchy and should remain as a permanent draft. Jaquith:Motion to keep the minutes for the December 20, 2006 meeting as a permanent draft, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. The members agree that, to their best recollection, these minutes are accurate. Jaquith:Motion to approve the minutes for the October 30, 2006 meeting,seconded by • DeMaio. Passes 3-0. Durand abstained because he was not present. 2008 Meeting Schedule Durand suggests that the board take off the month of August unless any pressing issues present themselves at the time. Kinzer requests that the members hold this date open but agrees that the date should not be listed as tentative on the meeting schedule distributed to the public. Kennedy: Motion to approve this schedule,with no meeting in August unless otherwise scheduled,seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. Jaquith:Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0. The meeting is adjourned at 7:55 PM. • iL L I I`l li ® ® Salem �ii�l_ ',i{ S OFFICE Redevelopment Authority 2B71 C" 2 3 ._A q:_0 b Revised Oct. 23,2007 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda Tuesday, October 30, 2007- 6:00 pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review !� L 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Buildine) - Continued review of final construction drawings 2. 320 Derby Street (Culamamal - Discussion of alteration to approved signage. TZ _D U 3. 112 Washington Park(Lappin Pak - Discussion of park fighting 4. 155-189 Washin tg_on Street (Salem News Buildine) - Continued discussion of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment c_- Minutes - Minutes Approval of the minutes from the September 26,2007 meeting 5 � Approval of the minutes from the March 28,2007 meeting Approval of the minutes from the February 28,2007 meeting Approval of the minutes from the February 6, 2007 meeting 01 ZZ 4 Approval of the minutes from the January 24,2007 meeting Adjournment a9 r= —M�t cg !--U acs PLEASE NOTE: The South River Harborwalk will not be discussed at the October DRB meeting as previously publicized. • 120 Washington Street • Salem Massachusetts 01970 ^ (978) 619-5685• Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Meeting October 30,2007 Page 1 of 7 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES October 30, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Tuesday, October 30 2007 at 6:00 pm. Members Paul Durand,Michael Blier,Ernest DeMaio,David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner was also present. Durand opens the meeting. Projects Under Review Urban Renewal Area Projects 1. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins redevelopment) - Construction drawings Attorney George Atkins presents the roof plan,specifications for fencing to hide the mechanical equipment on the roof and a revised entry plan. . Durand summarizes the changes to the entry design as shown in the submission, including a recessed entry,more glass and the removal of some brick. He also asks if the screening fence is white. Architect Keith Musinski answers yes,the fence is white. Atkins says that this fence is very difficult to see from the sidewalk. Durand notes that it can be seen clearly from the adjoining buildings and asks if the white can be toned down. Musinski states that the vinyl is only available in white. He selected the model with the least visual flow through and there is only one color option. Jaquith states that the problem is that the white stays very white and shiny. Durand notes that it is still better than looking at HVAC units. Musinski states that to have a choice in color, it was necessary to either use a solid fence, which will not work with HVAC units, or a fence with too much view through the pickets. DeMaio says that he would choose white over HVAC units but would prefer a grayer or browner color similar to the building color. • Jaquith says that the fence will be fairly difficult to see. DRB Meeting October 30,2007 Page 2 of 7 • Jaquith: Motion to approve the construction drawings with the alterations to the final design submitted, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 5-0) Kinzer recommends that the meeting minutes be reviewed to allow the Gulu Gulu and Upper Crust cafe owners time to arrive for the discussion of the Lapin Park lighting. DeMaio notes that on the subject of Lapin Park,he is not happy with the appearance of the silver chain installed at Gulu Gulu Cafe. The meeting minutes indicate that the cafe enclosure discussed was a black cable,which is not what was installed. Kinzer states that the cafe was reviewed at two meetings and at the second meeting,the proposal was changed to include to a chain. DeMaio raises the concern that there is now a precedent for something that looks like it was purchased at Home Depot. Durand states that because future cafes will also go through the design review process,he is not concerned that the installation of silver chain at this cafe will lead to similar chains used at other cafes. 2. Approval of Minutes-September 26, March 28, February 28, February 6 and January 24 meetings. Blier. Motion to approve the September 26,2007 meeting minutes, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 5-0) Blier: Motion to approve the March 28,2007 meeting minutes,seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 5-0) Kennedy: Motion to approve the February 28, 2007 meeting minutes, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 5-0) Blier: Motion to approve the February 6,2007 meeting minutes, seconded byDeMaio. (Passes 5-0) DeWo: Motion to approve the January 24,2007 meeting minutes,seconded by Blier. (Passes 5-0) 3. 112 Washington Street(Lapin Park) - Discussion of park lighting • DRB Meeting October 30,2007 Page 3 of 7 Kinzer sunumrizes the concerns raised by Michael Buchalter, owner of Upper Crust Pizza, • and Steve Feldman, owner of Gulu Gulu cafe regarding the lighting of Lapin Park. They feel that the light level is generally too low and after dark,people are hesitant to walk through the park to the cafes along the edge of the park. The cafe owners are open to either more lighting in the park or lighting on the building. Several suggestions have been offered. Glenn Kennedy suggested adding a new head to the existing light poles with multiple light fixtures and Jon Girardi, City Electrician, recommended adding lighted bollards along the path through the park. Girardi has also installed a temporary spot light on the path that cuts diagonally through the park The Mayor is also interested in a recommendation for the best way to increase the light level in the park Feldman and Buchalter had said they would attend tonight's meeting but have not yet arrived. Durand notes that the park is quite dark at night, in part due to the thick canopies on the trees. DeMaio states that the park was not designed for the way it is being used today or for the retail storefronts now along its edges. It was designed for people to pass through but now there are cafes around the edges and over the weekend there was a band playing in the park and people hanging out watching the bands. Jaquith says that there are two issues: the issue of visibility for the storefronts and the issue of safety on the walkway. • Durand asks how much light could be provided by Christmas tree lights in the trees. Blier states that putting bollards in the grass is a possibility. DeMaio raises the concern that this would create competition between what the retailers are trying to do and the park design. Bollards along the path will simply encourage people to walk through the park and increase the visual clutter in the park Blier recommends addressing the problem of lighting today and address the long term question of the park's design in the future. He suggests mounting low-wattage fixtures in the trees that cast light up into the canopies, a pool of light at the base of the tree or both. These fixtures are virtually invisible once installed. Kennedy agrees that this would increase the amount of ambient light in the park Durand states that it is very difficult to make these recommendations without a plan of any sort. It would be best to have a lighting designer create plans for the DRB to respond to. He further states that the building owners will need to provide lights on the building if they are concerned about the light level at the storefronts. DeMaio summarizes the recommendations discussed, including providing ambient light through light fixtures in the trees,providing fixtures that encourage a congregational space rather than a transitional space and that adding more fixtures on the ground will be overkill • and counter productive to use by cafes. He poses the question of how lighting can be used DRB Meeting October 30,2007 Page 4 of 7 to encourage people to walk along the edges of the park rather than pass through the center . on the diagonal path. Kinzer thanked the DRB for their willingness to discuss this topic without a complete proposal. 4. 155-189 Washington Street(Salem News Redevelopment) - Schematic Design Durand and Blier rescue themselves from the discussion of the Salem News redevelopment. Ron Lamarre, architect, Opechee,summarized the changes to the design since the last meeting. These changes include creating a corner building that actually holds the corner by wrapping the building around the corner and a paneling material. They are now employing a more modern square window design with no lintels and no sills but are bringing back the idea of lintels in the windows. The retail entabulature wraps around the entire building and the top of the Central House becomes the cornice of the new buildings. The wood piers at the existing storefront are echoed in the new building and the bay windows are used to accent the retail entry doors. In response to the question of how the building toms the corner,Lamarre continues that his goal is to wrap the building around the corner,rather than create a separate building on New Derby Street and Washington Street. He also referenced a rendering showing how the • building will act as a backdrop to Artists Row and how the corner retail points toward the waterfront. Ed Nilsson,Historic Salem Inc., comments from the audience that the building is now parallel to New Derby Street and if the comer were chamfered, it could create a gateway breaking up the traditional functions of Washington Street and New Derby Street. He also stated that HSI would like to see more detail and ornamentation on the columns and lintels. He concludes that at the Front Street side of the redevelopment, landscaping or a low wall is necessary to define the edge of the parking lot. Jaquith agrees that the intersection of the sidewalk and the parking lot need definition. A brick wall with an obvious entry into the parking would be a better concept,would provide a sense of privacy for the lot and would deal with the bleed from the parking lot to the sidewalk. The area for the parking could be made up somewhere further down. He adds that the curved comer is far superior to the chamfered corner. DeMaio agrees with Jaquiths comments regarding Front Street and asks if the 4 planters shown on the site plan exist now. Lamarre responds affirmatively and states that the design will save the four existing mature trees next to the cobble stone street. His goal is to not change the character of the marketplace. He also states that he understands the need for a physical,architectural separation between the sidewalk and the parking lot that will not disturb the roots of the • trees. DRB Meeting October 30,2007 Page 5 of 7 DeNbio states that this will need to reflect the materials appropriate to Front Street,perhaps • bricks,that a passerby will not be put off by. Kennedy states that he could not agree more strongly with these comments. DeMaio comments that he does not object to the round comer but he does have a problem with the fact that the site plan shows rounded columns at the ground plane but the elevation shows rectangular piers coming down to the ground plane. Lamarre states that the elevations show the most current design,which includes wood piers. DeMain states that he is less comfortable with rectangular piers than he would be with something that where people could more easily flow around. The rectangular piers will create a dark area that will collect trash. How that comer is carried down is very important. Jaquith says that these are stand alone columns, not like the columns on the building, and need a stand alone design. DeMaio states that however this is treated should reinforce the corner rather than acting as if there is no corner. DeMaio raises a concern about the bays,which seem to be just a slight change in depth. The DRB will need to see more detail on the bays including materials and what the underside • looks like. The bays are an opportunity to add three dimensionality and interest to the building but from the elevation it seems that these mayjust be a slight change in elevation not an actual bay. Lamarre explains that the building is on the property line, as required, and the bay can extend a maximum of 12 inches. DeMaio questions how the storefront meets the ground plane. The elevations seem to show metal and lass comingdown to the round giving the storefront a very modem feel. This g g g g rY may have too much of a modem feel to it based on the interest expressed in a more historically based building. There is also less of an opportunity to character at a human scale. Flat aluminon is not particularly inviting,warm or welcoming. The existing storefront next door has a great deal of detail and shadow to make the pedestrian comfortable. In reality,taking glass down to the ground may be difficult when grade changes and sidewalk snow plowing is considered. When taking the design to the next level,the storefront design may need to change,keeping the detail of the adjacent building in mind. Jaquith comments on the hierarchy of posts on the Central House storefront with big, medium and small sized posts and states that this rhythm in a more contemporary manner could help the design. DeNfaio recommends that at some point the upper floor of the Washington Street elevation looks like as you are approaching from Essex Street will need to be considered. If you are on the same side of the street as Duncan Donuts,this area will be very visible. DRB Meeting October 30,2007 Page 6 of 7 Lamarre explains that this is now a firewall and because these are two separate buildings, it • will probably need to remain a firewall. DeMaio says that it is possible to have fenestration without needing to sprinkle the wall. Lamarre explains that although one window might be possible,the limitations on its placement within a firewall mean that this window would be up high inside a unit,rather than at the end of the corridor. Jaquith states that this still might be a good thing. DeMaio stresses that this wall is now drawn as background but depending on where you are on the street it will actually be foreground. Matt Picarsic,RCG,agrees that this is a fair point; this is not a hidden wall. Kennedy says that RCG has done a good job at keeping the contemporary feel of the building with historic references. They have done a nice job wrapping the building around the comer. The larger windows help a lot and yet the building is still tied to the Central House next door. He agrees with DeMaio's earlier comments on the columns and states that in his opinion either a curved or chamfered comer to the building could work. He has no strong preference although he feels a chamfer could actually make a stronger statement but the curve also work well. • Kennedy continues that he differs with DeMain on the storefront design. He states that there many good examples of retail extending to the sidewalk level, but the displays become very retailer dependent.You can do a tremendous job with them but not many people do. This would be something different for Salem and speaks to a very contemporary look but some of the newer retailers,such as J. Mode or Rogue Cosmetics, could do well with a lot of windows. Kennedy says that he does understand the concerns about the materials and maintenance and that the challenge of getting in the right retailer. Kennedy asks what the material is at the top level of the rear of the building. Lamarre responds by showing on the elevation that the material is wood and the line is carred to the stair and picks up the line of the third floor at Artists Row. Jaquith recommends a slight tonal difference between the third floor and how it comes around versus the bays and the brick areas,working within the same color pallet. Kennedy agrees that the bays should extend out further from the building. Jaquith suggests that RCG check the limit on this and states that the bays should feel like they are coming out of the brick background. Kennedy states that at the comer, round columns could help emphasize the curve. • DeWio suggest that possibly a subtle shift,such as a pediment, could also help here. DRB Meeting October 30,2007 Page 7 of 7 Jaquith agrees with DeMaio in regard to the base of the storefronts. DeMaio states that this contemporary design won't work as well with painted aluminum as with a more expensive material such as steel. Jaquith stresses building from the Central House storefronts. DeMaio says that from the members varied opinions,the thing to take away is that how the building meets the ground plane is extremely important. Jaquith states that the members are all in agreement on Front Street. DeMaio: Motion to recommend approval the schematic design with the following conditions: • The design of the retail storefronts shall be developed in much greater detail. The design shall address the intersection of the retail storefronts and the sidewalk and the impact of the storefronts on the pedestrian experience. • An architectural treatment shall be used at the intersection of the parking lot and Front Street sidewalk. • Greater architectural emphasis shall be placed on the curved building entry. • If possible within the Building Code,the depth of the bays located on the upper stories shall be increased. • Motion seconded by Kennedy (Passes 3-0) Jaquith: Motion to adjourn,seconded byDeMaio. (Passes 3-0) The meeting is adjourned at 7:35 p.m. • Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD r, Meeting Agenda r, r �� T Wednesday, September 26, 2007—6:00'pm V-J c s" 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: C v 0 Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review 1. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building) —Review of final construction drawings. • 2. 6 East India Sq.,Museum Place Mall (Rose Medallion) -Discussion of proposed signage. 3. 6 East India Sq.,Museum Place Mall (Yaring) -Discussion of proposed signage. 4. 139 Washington Street(The Pickleoot) —Continued discussion of proposed signage. 5. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Building) —Continued discussion of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment. 6. 90 Lafayette Street—Continued discussion of proposed fa4ade alterations. 7. 191-211 Washington Street (Hawthorne Building) - Discussion of proposed awnings and sign brackets. 8 75-87 Washington Street (Kinsman Block) - Continued discussion of proposed fa4ade alterations. Minutes Approval of the minutes from the May 23,2007 meeting. Approval of the minutes from the June 27,2007 meeting. Approval of the minutes from the July 25,2007 meeting. Approval of the minutes for the August 22, 2007 meeting. • This notice posted on "Officini [Otll n Board" Adjournment City HSii �:i-in, of _<: : SS Pp a , o n 2 1 LaI� �h at ' 't -."�' t';. 23A 1 238 of G.L. .0 v1 a iL rni. N4assuchus(,tts 01976 a (9 i 26I9- Iii) 4',-) 0404 DRB Meeting Febm 07 S,.n )� -2� Page 1 of 8 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES September 26, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room.at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, September 26, 2007 at 6:00 pm. Members Paul Durand,Michael Blier,Earnest DeMaio,David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedywere present. Kosten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Projects Under Review 1. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Buildine)—Review of final construction drawings. Attorney George Atkins who represents the applicant introduced architect Keith Musinski. Musinski reviews the alterations that were made as a result of the comments from a previous DRB meetings. He states that the name of the design will be "Latitude". Durand asks about rooftop screening and DeMaio clarifies the previous discussion about the screening. Musinski states that they have not changed the screening plans. Atkins states that the Planning Board approved the site review on this project. He reads the approval language which applies to the screening. Durand states that he would like to see the design after the City Planner has approved it. Atkins states that the building permit has been issued already and they are working on the building, but the elements which are being discussed tonight have not proceeded. Durand states that he would like them to return next month to see the plans for the screening. Atkins introduces the possibility of having a different design on the entry vestibule on the • Essex Street side of the building. Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26, 2007 Page 2 of 8 • Musinski states that he would like to place the entryway out to avoid having a deep recess that collects leaves and may pose a security issue. He provides the Board with the new plans. Jaquith suggests having storefront material at the entryway instead of brick and Musinski agrees to this. Atkins suggests returning with a new plan for the entry vestibule reflecting the storefront material. Kinzer asks if they have selected a color pallet for the building front. Musinski states that their palate only consists of one color because they are only painting windows and door trim. Kinzer states that in that case the Verizon equipment can remain the color that it was painted following the SRA decision. DeMaio: Motion to continue to the next meeting, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 5-0) 2. 6 East India Square,Museum Place Mall (Rose Medallion)—Discussion of • proposed signage. Sign designer Marshall Tripoli describes the sign design and states that it will be made of oak or PVC. The arrows and `Tea Room' will be recessed and `Rose Medallion' will be raised. Kennedy asks about the color of the gold lettering. Tripoli states that the gold lettering will be Gold 871 paint. Kennedy: Motion to approver, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 5-0) 3. 6 East India Square,Museum Place Mall (Marina)—Discussion of proposed signage. Sign designer Marshall Tripoli states that this is in one of the four new storefronts in the Museum Place Mall. He describes the creation of the art, which was originally painted on cardboard. He states that the sign will be about ''/z inch thick, and will be digitally printed. Kennedy states that this could be really nice or really bad depending on the execution of this design. He adds that a digital print could be put on a canvas to give it a real look. He asks about the frame. • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26,2007 Page 3 of 8 • Tripoli states that it will be a regular metal frame. Kennedy states that he would like some more clarification to the design. Tripoli clarifies that there will be a white frame around the entire sign. He states that he plans to alter the lettering in the `Threads' so it blends in with the entire piece. Jaquith suggests that the lettering be a bit thicker for better readability. He states that the Board should see this design in the elevation. Kennedy: Motion to continue this item until the Board gets a resubmission and a more clarified design, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 5-0) 4. 139 Washington Street(The Picklepot) —Continued discussion of proposed signage. Jaquith: Motion to continue until the next meeting, seconded by Blier. (Passes 5-0) 5. 75-87 Washington Street (Kinsman Block)— Continued discussion of proposed fagade alterations. • Owner Bill Goldberg states that all of his proposals were approved at the last meeting except for items 11 and 12 (the removal of the trees and the exterior door on the second level) Goldberg states that he is willing to compromise by replacing the trees on the far left and right of the building and trimming the others. He states that they took Mr. Jaquith's suggestion about maintaining the double door on the second level, so they will have a door there that does not open. . Blier speaks about the tree issue stating that these are tough trees to prune. Kennedy states that he agrees that these trees are challenging to the building. He adds that a cadence is set down the street with the trees so it might be better to start over. Blier agrees and says that with long term viability many of these trees are in ratty condition. He suggests taking them out and replacing them with another species that is more upright growing and less spreading. He adds that there are many tree species that have a vertical canopy which will not spread. Goldberg says that he likes that idea but is concerned about them spreading out and he would like to get permission to trim them if the do. Blier states that this project could set up a standard to replace the unruly trees with a • more appropriate street tree with a vertical growth. He suggests 4 to 5 inch caliper Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26, 2007 Page 4 of 8 • maples or oaks,but they should all be the same species. He says that this will be more architectural without the merging tree canopies. Goldberg asks if the City will contribute by the removal of the existing trees. Kinzer states that she will look into that. Goldberg states that item 12 deals with the double door on the second floor in the alleyway. He shows the new design for the door. Durand reviews the issues stating that item 11 will be the removal of 6 unhealthy trees and replacing them with 6 trees (5"caliper in a fastigiated variety maple or oak species to be reviewed by the Board) Blier states that during the first year the trees will need to be maintained. Durand reviews item 12, stating that the door panels should not be flush with the wall. Jaquith: Motion to continue until the next meeting, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 5-0) • 6. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Building)— Continued discussion of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment. Paul Durand and Michael Blier recuse themselves from this discussion/decision. Developer Matt Picarsic describes the design stating that they will create a strong cornice line at the first floor and set back the fourth floor and add interest to the corner with some wood treatment. Meg Toohey, Historic Salem Inc., comments on the plans stating that they appreciate the items that they have addressed yet continued to be concerned about the way the site will look from Front Street. She shows photos of the Front Street fagade and asks the Board to consider what the building will look like on that side and what could be possible if they eliminate the parking lot which is planned on Front Street. She expresses concern with the curve in the corner and with materials. She suggests echoing details like the cornice brackets and stepping back the fourth floor. She asks the Board to consider how this storefront will look from the street level. DeMain asks about the material for the projecting bays. Ron Lamarre, Architect, Opechee, states that fiber cement will be used at the projection bays, cornices and the around the windows. • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26, 2007 Page 5 of 8 Jaquith states that the continuity on the first three floors is better but he agrees with Historic Salem Inc's concern about the forth floor. He adds that he has no problem with the curve but he is concerned about the fourth level brick and the balconies chopping in to the cornice lines. DeMaio agrees with Jaquith that he doesn't have a problem with the curve and he doesn't mind the scale of the corner being bigger. He asks what the inspiration was for the reddish brick. Lamarre states that it is all over Washington Street and he wishes to address the issue of making this a prominent building. DeMaio states that the red brick poses a bit of a disconnect with the surrounding buildings. Kennedy states that he under-whelmed by the design of this building at this corner and he is concerned about this being the cornerstone of the Derby Street area. He adds that it is such an important corner for Salem and he is challenged by this design. Jaquith states that they are partway there and it can be the building that should be there, and it should make the transition around the corner. He adds that the other key view is • from Artist's Row and Front Street. DeMaio asks if there is an actual landscaping plan. Picarsic states that there is a plan that they will present to the Board. He adds that they will bring the other elevations to see what is there now and what it will look like. Kennedy asks if he could not make the comparison to what is there now because everyone would agree that anything would be an improvement to what is there now. Jaquith: Motion to continue to the next meeting, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 3-0) 7. 90 Lafayette Street—Continued discussion of proposed fagade alterations. Paul Durand and Michael Blier recuse themselves from this discussion/decision. Developer Picarsic displays the plans. He states that they will provide two additional entrances to the building and clean up the storefront. He says there will be five residences on the second floor as well as some offices. Kennedy asks about the colors used for the storefront. • Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26,2007 Page 6 of 8 Picarsic states the entryways will be recessed and they will be white and the sign band will be silver. He adds that they will replace the windows on the second floor and wash the brick. Kennedy asks about the column in the middle of the storefront window. Picarsic states that it will be silver and the canopy will be white. DeMaio asks about the materials for the sills on the second floor windows. Picarsic says he believes they will be concrete. DeMaio expresses concern with the signage. Kinzer states that the DRB will recommend approval of the overall placement of the signage and individual business owners must come back for specific signage approval. DeMaio expresses concern with silver color signage. He suggests bringing some cast stone down to other parts of the building. He asks if any of the brickwork will be repaired. • Picarsic states that they will repair the part where the arch will be removed. DeMaio states that the mortar used for re-pointing must be approved. Jaquith emphasizes that he use cast stone and not concrete. Kennedy: Motion to recommend approval to the SRA with the following conditions: At their meeting on September 26, 2007 the DRB voted to recommend approval of the proposed fagade alterations at 90 Lafayette Street with the following conditions: • The canopy over the new Lafayette Street entrance shall be silver • The second floor window lintels shall be cast stone • At the storefront windows and column there shall be a cast stone base to make-up the grade change resulting from the street slope • New mortar shall be reviewed and approved by the a member of the DRB • Proposals for signage within the sign band, blade signs and blade sign lighting will require further review by the DRB and SRA The motion is seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 3-0) 8. 191-211 Washington Street (Hawthorne Building) —Discussion of proposed awnings and sign brackets. • Paul Durand recuses himself from this discussion/decision. Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26, 2007 Page 7 of 8 • Picarsic states that they are addressing the challenges of visibility because this building steps back from Washington Street. He provides material samples for the awnings which will have no signage. He describes the blade signs. DeMaio suggests that the awnings be open on the sides and Picarsic agrees with this. Much discussion ensues about the varied awning colors. Jaquith states that he has no problem with the blade sign concept. Kennedy suggests using only the black awnings. Picarsic states they wished to cater to the anchor tenant, Starbucks, who have requested awnings in their signature green. He adds that the brackets will be 28"wide and 14" long. Kennedy then suggest using only blue, red and green awnings and wrapping the awnings around the corners of the building to Derby Street and Dodge Street. DeMaio: Motion to recommend approval with the following conditions: • • The sides of the awnings shall be open At the corner storefronts,the awnings shall be installed on the New Derby Street and Dodge Street facade as well as the Washington Street facade • The awning color scheme shall be as follows: ■ New Derby Street awnings shall be blue ■ The 4 awnings at the left side of the Washington St. fagade shall be blue • The 3 awnings at the center of the Washington St. fagade shall be red ■ The 1 awning at the right of the Washington St. fagade shall be green ■ The awnings on the Dodge St. fagade shall be green • There shall be no text or signage on the awnings • Lighting of the sign brackets will require further review Motion seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) 9. Approval of Minutes—May 23, June 27, July 25, and August 22 meetings Kennedy: Motion to approve the May 23 meeting minutes, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 4-0) DeMaio: Motion to approve the June 27 meeting minutes, seconded by Jaquith. • (Passes 4-0) Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26,2007 Page 8 of 8 • Jaquith: Motion to approve the July 25 meeting minutes, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 4-0) Jaquith: Motion to approve the August 22 meeting minutes seconded by Blier. (Passes 4-0) Kinzer states that they will need a Special Meeting to review the Picklepot sign before the next SRA meeting. She will contact the Board about the schedule. Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 3-0) The meeting is adjourned at 8:30 PM. • rr [.�H'K�S OFFICE Salem Redevelopment Authorily DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda Wednesday,August 22, 2007—6:00 pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review • URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 322 Derby Street(Rouge Cosmetics)—Discussion of amendment to approved signage. 2. 2 East India Square (1Vluseum Place Mall,Suites 113-119) -Discussion of proposed fa4ade alterations. 3. 155-189 Washington Street(Salem News Building) -Discussion of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment. 4. 90 Lafayette Street-Discussion of proposed fagade alterations. 5. 75-87 Washington Street -Discussion of proposed fa4ade alterations. 6. 139 Washington Street Cflte Pickleoot) -Discussion of proposed signage. 7. 33 Church Street(Law Office of Lance L Layne)—Discussion of proposed signage 8. 285 Derby Street(Count Orlok's Nightmare Gallery) —Discussion of proposed signage Minutes Approval of the minutes from the May 23,2007 meeting. Approval of the minutes from the June 27, 2007 meeting. Approval of the minutes for the July 25,2007 meeting. This notice posted on "'O'iSir,.iai BuiiOtin Boat*" Adjournment City hail Salam, Wass urt #vc . 17. 0z"I ='z S'Ani in r 1sz .l r 'idQh c a . Sea 25A & 236 M M.0'.11. DRB Meeting August 22, 2007 Page 1 of 7 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES August 22,2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 at 6:00 pm. Members Michael Blier,David Jaquith,and Glenn Kennedy were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray,Clerk,were also present. Jaquith opens the meeting. Proiects Under Review Urban Renewal Area Projects 1. 322 Derby Street(Rouge Cosmetics)—Discussion of amendment to approved signage • Ann Massey presents the lighting design and explains that the lighting will be installed adjacent to the existing bracket and electrical wiring will be hidden from view. Kennedy: Motion to approve the lighting, seconded by Blier. (Passes 3-0) 2. 2 East India Square (Museum Place Mall, Suites 113-119)—Discussion of proposed fagadc alterations Kinzer introduces Brett Marley and states that this proposal been approved by the SRA subject to DRB approval. Jaquith states that it looks similar to what is now there. Marley states that there will be three new doors identical to the existing doors. Blier asks if there will be a threshold. Marley states that there will be threshold. Jaquith asks if any sidewalk bricks will be cut. Marley states that there are no plans to cut the sidewalk bricks. • DRB Meeting Minutes August 22,2007 Page 2 of 7 • Jaquith states that if it becomes necessary to cut the bricks, the any new or replaced brick must match the existing herringbone pattern. Blier: Motion to approve the fagade alteration with the condition that any new or replacement sidewalk brick must match the existing herringbone pattern, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) 3. 155-189 Washineton Street (Salem News Building)—Discussion of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment Matthew Picarsic, Architect with RCG, states that they received approval for partial demolition from the SRA, and a waiver of demolition delay from the Salem Historical Commission. He displays the contextual rendering and the schematic design and says that there will be 8 residential units per floor(total 24) in the new building and 7 units in the existing building. He describes the parking and entry points for the complex. Kennedy explains that the DRB will examine this design while taking caution to avoid being cornered into accepting future project designs with such things as unacceptable parking accommodations. Kinzer reads the attached letter from Barbara Cleary, President, Historic Salem Inc, dated August 22, 2007 into the record. • Jaquith expresses concern about the breaking up the datum line of the cornice, stating that he would like to see it continue around the whole building. He adds that he isn't sure that the breaking up the areas of brick helps the design. He states that he agrees with the opinion of Historic Salem Inc. that Front Street could have more continuity. Blier asks about the entry door on the east, stating the there appears to be no room for the door there. Ron Lamarre from Opechee, states that the plan is preliminary and they intend to place a door in this general location but it depends on the final layout of the retail space. Blier states that the Front Street lot is an obvious site for future development. He adds that if trees are planted, it might be difficult to gain approval for the removal of the trees for development. He states that the proposed parking is an improvement over the existing parking and that there is an existing alley behind the building. This alley will probably be used for trash and therefore must be screened from the parking lot. Picarsic states that they will clean up this area, which is currently a mess. He adds that the housing will be rental units initially but will be designed for conversion to condominiums. Jaquith predicts that residents will use the parking bays for storage and suggests shifting • the bay location to provide more space for storage. Blier asks about the angle of the northeast side of the building. DRB Meeting Minutes August 22,2007 Page 3 of 7 • Lamarre states that the plan is a preliminary design and can be changed if they prefer. Kennedy states that he approves of the schematic site plan in concept but the design of the building is not strong enough for such an visible corner site. He adds that the building will look old when it is complete but not in an historic way. He states that it needs more character. Picarsic states that he appreciates the feedback from the Board. Kennedy states that this design will influence future development and that it should make a stronger statement. Blier states that the design feels institutional, perhaps due to the darkness of the storefronts. Kennedy states that the massing and site plan concepts meet the concerns of the Marketplace Redevelopment Committee review process and the encourages RCG to challenge the Board. Kennedy: Motion to approve the massing and site plan concepts of the schematic design, subject to further evaluation of the specific design elements, seconded by Blier. 4. 90 Lafayette Street—Discussion of proposed fagade alterations • Picarsic states that this is the"Dracula's Castle"building. He states that there will be 2 retail entrances and an entrance for new residences on the second floor. He adds that they will restore the brick and the cornice line, create a sign band and replace the second floor windows. Picarsic states that they will match the existing brick as closely as possible and create as much glass a possible at the street level. He describes the location of the signage. He states that the appearance of the signage will be similar to Beverly Cooperative Bank, with gold lettering on a black background. Jaquith states that the signage doesn't work well for the Beverly Cooperative Building. He expresses concern with the current design for the signage. He adds that it is not a deal breaker. Architect Michael Rubin arrives and presents a revised design. Picarsic states that they could limit the extent of the lettering. Much discussion ensues about the sign band location and the brick lintel. Rubin suggest returning to the DRB for specific signage approval. He describes the canopy as a contemporary box-like structure. Kinzer states that the sign approval for the child care can be done next month and it will be a separate agenda item. DRB Meeting Minutes August 22,2007 Page 4 of 7 • Jaquith reviews the issues which include the sign band and the awning. The awning design needs to be refined, including lowering the top and employing more interesting materials. He adds that he likes the shape of the blade signs and the number of lights on the band. Jaquith: Motion to continue until the next meeting, seconded by Blier. (Passes 3-0) 5. 75-87 Washington Street—Discussion of proposed fagade alterations Architect Michael Wtrzykowski describes the modifications to the fagade which include: 1. Replace the existing sign board and storefront. 2. Replace the exterior doors to match the existing door at 77 Washington Street. 3. Install new sign bracket mounted light fixture. 4. New lettering on the sign band on black background. 5. Replace existing hanging signs with new hanging signs 6. Replace all of the windows with aluminum clad double hung, two-over-two windows. • 7. Pressure-wash the building. 8. Refurbish and expose the stained glass windows and install energy panels in front of the windows. 9. Illuminate the Washington Street fagade with uplighting. 10. Paint existing windows to match new windows 11. Remove of 6 trees to improve visibility and replace them with brick planters 12. On the alley side, remove the service elevator and add storefront window and light the alleyway at night 13. Paint and clean blocked windows in alley to match existing windows. 14. Paint existing wrought iron in alley black(approved) 15. Locate an outdoor cafe in the rear of the building (Blier states that the pine trees in the back of the building should be removed because it is too dark and dead back there, but if they remove any trees from the front it will set a dangerous precedent) 0 16. Paint existing metal bulkheads. DRB Meeting Minutes August 22,2007 Page 5 of 7 • 17. Remove existing vent grill on rear elevation and replace with glass. (Jaquith has some reservations) 18. Infill the elevator shaft in alley way with brick. Steve Goldberg states that there is a tremendous amount of detailing in this building and they want to present it in the best light. The members raise no concerns about items one, two, three, seven, eight, ten, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, sixteen and eighteen. The members raise no concerns about items four and five but Kinzer states that in both cases, individual tenants must have their signs approved by the SRA and this review process will only establish design parameters for the building signs. a Jaquith states that in regard to item six, the windows must be two over two and must completely fill the existing opening. Kennedy states that building lighting, item nine, and the applicant will need to return with a specific lighting proposal. The members support the general concept of building lighting. Jaquith expresses concern regarding item seventeen, because the vent grill is part of the . building's history. He suggests there may be a way to add glass to the existing grill and allow light inside without replacing the grill. There is a great deal of discussion regarding the removal of street trees. Steve Goldberg states that this is what he believes his tenants will desire because the trees block views of the building signs,block light into the second floor windows and make it difficult to see the beauty of the building. He adds that they are willing to listen to suggestions for alternative plantings in those spaces. Kinzer states that they need to provide a proposal for replacing the trees with landscaping or trees in other locations to start the conversation about how the tree removal will be mitigated. Blier suggests that one option may be to cut down the existing trees and replace them with smaller trees. Jaquith asks if there are any locations downtown that are missing trees in which the applicant could plant replacement trees. Michael Lutrzykowski of HH Morant Architects asks if removing three trees would be acceptable. • Kennedy states that removing three trees would too many but he can understand removing the trees in front of the building entries, which are the first and sixth trees or DRB Meeting Minutes August 22, 2007 Page 6 of 7 • replanting with new trees that are better spaced. He suggests that four trees might be a possibility, framing the center of the building. Blier states that new trees should be at least 4 %2 to 5 inches in caliper. Jaquith: Motion to continue until the next meeting, seconded by Blier. (Passes 3-0) 6. 33 Church Street (Law Office of Lance I. Layne—Discussion of proposed signage Kinzer introduces Lance Layne and she presents the color samples. Layne states that this sign will be unlit. Kennedy suggests shrinking the lettering to create negative space around the outside edge of the sign which will increase the readability. He adds that the sign may be too big for the bracket and recommends that it be located at least 1'-6" away from the Vernon Martin sign. He agrees to make a site visit to determine the exact location of the sign. Kennedy: Motion to conditionally approve the sign design subject to determination of location, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 3-0) 7. 285 Derby Street(Count Orlok'sNi2htmare Gallery)—Discussion of proposed signage e � • James Lurgio presents his new sign design stating that the building has been empty for a long time. He adds that the lighting is already in place and the sign will go in the existing sign band. He states that the design will not appear precisely as submitted and that the monster face shown on the submitted design will not be on the sign. He then shows the members a design for the gallery name to be used for publicity that he likes but can't use in the sign band due to the shape of the design. Kennedy suggests that the sign be redesigned to more closely match this design. He suggests that Lurgio consider using this font and including the green goo spilling from the sign. He also suggests that the there are too many words in the second sign, leaving too little space around the letters. Lurgio states that he knows this but can't shorten the tag line. He also states that he would like to get the sign up by October if possible. Jaquith: Motion to continue until a special meeting, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) 8. 118 Washington Street Rear (Upper Crust Pizza)—Discussion of proposed signage Owner Michael Buchhalter presents his sign design stating that the band will be the same color as the entry wood doors. • The members agree that the sign is well designed and the proposed lighting is tasteful. DRB Meeting Minutes August 22,2007 Page 7 of 7 Kenndey: Motion to approve the sign design, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 3-0) 9. Approval of Minutes—May 23 meeting Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes for the May 23, 2007 meeting, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) The meeting is adjourned at 7:45 p.m. • • • II Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda Wednesday,July 25, 2007—6:00 pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand . Minutes Approval of the minutes from the April 25, 2007 meeting. Approval of the minutes from the May 23, 2007 meeting. Approval of the minutes from the July 10, 2007 meeting. Projects Under Review OTHER PROJECTS 1. 1 Harrison Avenue (Habitat for Humanity redevelopment)—Continued discussion of Final Design Plans URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 2. 118 Washington Street Rear Upner Crust Pizza) - Discussion of proposed outdoor cafe. 3. 1 New Liberty Street (Museum Place Parking Garage) - Discussion of proposed banners. 4. 75 Lafayette Street (West Coast Video) - Discussion of proposed signage. 5. 320 Derby Street (Chulamama) Discussion of proposed signage. • 6. 139 Washington Street (The Picklepotl - Discussion of proposed signage. 7. 322 Derby Street (Rouge Cosmetics) - Discussion of proposed signage. Adjournment DRB Meeting Juty25,2007 Page 1 of 4 16ESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTE S July 25,2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, July 25 2007 at 6:00 pm. Chairperson Paul Durand and members Michael Blier,David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. Durand opens the meeting. 1. Approval of Minutes: April 25, and July 10 Meetings The members review the minutes for the April 25 meeting. Kennedy: Motion to approve the minutes for the April 25 meeting, seconded by Blier. (Passes 3-0) The members review the minutes for the July 10 meeting. • Kennedy: Motion to approve the minutes for the July 10 meeting,seconded by Blier. (Passes 3-0) Projects Under Review Other Projects 2. Harrison Avenue (Habitat for Humanity Redevelopment) - Continued Discussion of Final Design Plans Michael Sullivan reviews the changes to the site plan,elevations, and floor plans which resulted from DeMaio's review. He displays the siding and trim material and a paint chip for the door color. All of the members agree that these changes are an improvement from the original plans. Kennedy. Motion to approve the plans,seconded byBlier. (Passes 3-0) • DRB Meeting Minutes July 25, 2007 Page 2 of 4 • Urban Renewal Area Projects 3. 118 Washington Street Rear(Upper Crust Pizza) - Discussion of Proposed Outdoor Cafe. Cafe Owner Michael Buchhalter presents new tables and chairs design. He states that originally he planned to match the furniture from the Gulu Gulu Cafe, but IKEA has stopped carrying summer outdoor furniture. Buchhalter states that the two establishments will have the same stanchions and chains and the furniture will differ but will look good together. The members agree that these tables are better than the original design. Kinzer states that the SRA was concerned about the pedestrian space, and they requested enough walkway space. Buchhalter states that they will share the middle stanchion with the Gulu Gulu Cafe so they will be completely lined up. The members agree that this plan will allow enough pedestrian space. • Blier. Motion to approve the plans for the outdoor cafe,seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) 4. 1 New Liberty Street(Museum Place Parking Garage) - Discussion of proposed banners Kinzer states that this is a City project with the strong backing of the Mayor, and that the SRA has approved the banners pending the DRB approval of the design. She adds that these banners will be read"Parking", "Shopping", "Cinema",and"Restaurant". Anna Geraghty and Jim Hacker display the design for the banners. Geraghty states that they are orange and blue and will be made of vinyl with wind slits. She adds the other option is to go with a digital mesh and there would be two back-to-back layers. She says that the banners will be 4 X 20 feet. Parking garage manager Jim Hacker states that the City mandated the orange and blue colors for the all garage signs at the time that it was built. Kennedy states that they might be missing an design opportunity and suggests having the letters slightly smaller and closer together to make it easier to read the signs. He adds that this will enhance the look of this building. Durand objects to the orange color. • Kennedy states that he likes the blue and orange colors. He suggests solid color backing with white letters for all four signs. He agrees to consult on the final design. DRB Meeting Minutes July 25,2007 Page 3 of 4 • Blier. Motion to approve the banners with Kennedy's review of the final design, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) 5. 74 Lafayette Street(West Coast Video) - Discussion of Proposed Signage Kinzer introduces Chris Gallagher of Associated Awning and states that this is a design for a new awning replacing an existing awning that was approved by the SRA but has been removed. Gallagher presents the fabric sample. He states that the font is the logo for West Coast Video. He adds that this is for the rear entrance from the parking lot and it will provide signage and shelter. Durand states that the awning must conform to the lowest course of the soldier brick. Kennedy. Motion to approve the design with the condition that the awning conforms with the lowest course of the soldier brick, seconded by Blier. (Passes 3-0) 6. 320 Detby Street(Chulamama) - Discussion of Proposed Signage. Kinzer introduces Heather Roman and states that this is one of two Derby Lofts shops presenting signage proposals tonight. • Roman states that this sign is covered by a tree so it can't be seen. She adds that they also have the window signage. The members agree that this is a good design. Roman states that "Hip Baby Gear" will sublet a portion of the store so there will be two separate sections within the sign and the signage is distinct for each. Kennedy states that he likes the sign's white background. He adds that the window sign should have no background, only the white letters. Blier. Motion to approve the design as submitted provided the brown background on the window sign be removed,seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) 7. 139 Washington Street(The Pickelpot) - Discussion of Proposed Signage. Jeff Bowie states that this is the third time she has come to the DRB for a sign approval. Durand states that the sign is traditional looking and the colors are nice, but he would like the sign to be three dimensional and attract attention. • Much discussion ensues about the design of the sign. Kennedy volunteers to assist Bowie with the sign. DRB Meeting Minutes July 25,2007 Page 4 of 4 Durand agrees to have Kennedy help Bowie with the sign, and suggests having a special meeting to cover this design. Kenndey: Motion to continue this hearing until the special meeting, seconded byBlier. (Passes 3-0) 8. 322 Derby Street(Rouge Cosmetics) - Discussion of Proposed Signage. Kinzer states that this is a shop at Derby Lofts. Durand states that he needs to know the depth of the box and there must be no exposed conduit which means that the power must come through the wall behind it. Kinzer states that the box is opaque and the letters are cut out and there is a light in the back of the box. She adds that this is different from other back-lit signs which have not been approved because it is opaque and not translucent. Kennedy states that this is a great design. Durand states that he wants the applicant to supply a color chip for the project file. • Kennedy states that they can come back with window or door lettering with the name or the hours. Durand reviews the conditions. 1. The electrical wiring shall come through the wall with no exposed conduit. 2. The applicant shall submit a color chip. Kennedy: Motion to approve the design with the above condition,seconded by Blier. (Passes 3-0) Kennedy. Motion to adjourn,seconded byBlier. (Passes 3-0) The meeting is adjourned at 7:35 p.m. • [Salem �' i. Miry ® � ® t -L.�Z[�'S OFFICE Redevelopment Authority r _ 3 P 2: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Special Meeting Tuesday,July 10, 2007—6:00pm Old Town Hall, 32 Derby Square Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMain Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review • 1. 24 New Derbv Street, Stall 4 (Artists Row)- Continued discussion of proposed signage. 2. 93 Washington Street (City Hall) - Continued discussion of amendment to approved Final Design Plans. 3. 1 Harrison Avenue (Habitat for Humanity redevelopment) —Continued discussion of Final Design Plans 4. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building) —Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment. 5. 289 Derby St (Coastal Gas Station Redevelopment) - Discussion of amendment to approved Final Design Plans. 6. 7 Lynde Street (Griffen Theater)—Discussion of temporary facade alteration. Adjournment This crones p®Sted on "OffICLal Bulletin Board" City Nati eater, kilas s. cin Tr_y JLV-7 at -4o J91q in a=rdawa tffiMI ^hal) sec. • 23A a via of M.G.L. 120 Washington Street: . Salem Massachusetts 01970 - (978) 619-5685 ^ Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Special Meeting July 10,2007 Page 1 of 8 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES July 10, 2007 A Special Meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, July 10 2007 at 6:00 pm. Chairperson Paul Durand, Members Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk, were also present. Durand opens the meeting. Proiects Under Review 1. 24 New Derby Street, Stall 4 (Artists' Row)—Continued discussion of proposed signage. • Sara Ashodian and Elise Mankes present three different plans for the temporary sign. Ashodian explains that the plans updated sign design includes three-dimensional lettering for the word"art." The three sections of the sign are connected with different types of metal links and bars. Durand states that he prefers design 42 the best and the other members agree. They then review sign design#2. DeMaio suggests using a similar type of link for the vertical and horizontal connections to the "ART"pendant. Blier questions the need for the connecting bars on the two lower pendants. Durand states that they would prevent the signs from bumping together. He suggests having the bars come across the face of the signs. Glenn Kennedy arrives. Blier asks the size of the links. Ashodian states that they are about 1 inch long. • Kennedy suggests using bars instead of links to connect the signs vertically. DRB Special Meeting Minutes July 10,2007 Page 2 of 8 • Durand states that he prefers the links for the vertical connection. Blier agrees with Durand stating that the links will allow the sign to move more flexibly with the wind. Kennedy suggests moving the words "gallery" and"studio' away from the edges of the sign and the other members agree. Kennedy: Motion to approve design #2 as sumitted, seconded by Blier. (Passes 4-0) David Jaquith arrives. 2. 93 Washington Street (City Hall) —continued discussion of amendment to approved Final Design Plans. Architect John Seger displays the plans for the back entry for City Hall stating that this new design will eliminate the need for a ramp through a half-stop elevator entered at ground level. He states that a tree will be eliminated and a park bench will be relocated. He states that the base will be tinted concrete with a precast stone cap over it and aluminum clad windows in a neutral pewter color. He adds that the fenestration will be horizontal and the elevator shaft elevation will be brick veneer. • DeMaio states that there needs to be a bollard to protect the door from cars. Jaquith asks if there should be some flashing of the roof into the brick. Seger states that there will be flashing and he will add a bollard to the site. Kinzer asks where the bollard will be located in terms of the property line. Seger states that the bollard can not be located on the City Hall property. The members discuss the location of the bollard and Kinzer states that the bollard could be placed on the adjacent property because it is also owned by the City. The members conclude that a bollard should not be required. Durand suggests reversing the door swing and Seger agrees to this. Durand asks about the height of the finished concrete base. Seger states that the interior floor is higher so the concrete base is about 4 inches higher than the original base of the building. DeMaio asks about the lighting. • Seger states that the interior lighting will be recessed cans and no lighting on the exterior. DRB Special Meeting Minutes July 10,2007 Page 3 of 8 • Durand asks about the heating. Seger states that there will be an electric heating unit mounted in the brick wall which will blow hot air. Durand states that he does not want to see the back of the radiator unit through the glass. He adds that similarly, he does not want to see the back of an exit sign from the exterior of the building. He states that the exit sign should be a pendant hung from the ceiling. Durand asks about the handicapped signage. Kinzer states that the sign must have brail. Durand states that he wants to see an architecture that accommodates the required signage. He states that it could be screened onto the glass entry door. DeMaio asks about the fascia and asks if it abuts the existing building or projects beyond the building line. Seger says states that the fascia abuts the building and is drawn incorrectly in the elevation submitted. DeMaio states that it must be clarified on the plan. He expresses concern with the white . aluminum around windows stating that it is too stark. Durand agrees. The members discuss the color scheme. Durand states that the store front could be silver and the fascia, sofit, roof cap, gravel stop and flashing could be champagne or pewter. He states that he wishes the mullions to be 6 inches wide. Kinzer suggests that the color scheme be reviewed with the final construction drawings. The Board reviews the recommendations which are: 1. Final construction drawings shall be reviewed by the DRB. 2. The final color selection shall be reviewed by the DRB. 3. Accessible entrance and emergency exit signage design and location shall be reviewed by the DRB. 4. The direction of the exterior door swing shall be reversed. 5. The back of the proposed heating element shall not be visible from the exterior of the addition. 6. The fascia shall stop at the edge of the existing building line. • DRB Special Meeting Minutes July 10,2007 Page 4 of 8 . Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval by the SRA with the above recommendations, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 5-0) 3. 1 Harrison Avenue (Habitat for Humanity redevelopment)—Continued discussion of Final Design Plans. Kinzer explains that DeMaio met with the architect Michael Sullivan and reviewed the plans. She adds that the plans have not yet been revised to reflect DeMaio's suggestions. Warren Sawyer explains that he is representing the Habitat for Humanity project because Michael Sullivan is unable to attend, but he is not an architect and has very limited knowledge design. DeMaio recaps his findings from his meeting with Sullivan which include: ■ The site plan includes several small planting areas in the back, a paved parking area, and area of brick paving for sidewalks adjacent to the parking in the back and a dedicated trash area enclosed by a fence. The trash is screened with a pressure-treated wood fence. ■ On the west elevation an 8 foot high pressure-treated wood fence will be on the roof, and there will be a double-hung penthouse window. • On the north elevation another window will be added, and a there will be a • horizontal band of trim made of 12" wide AZEK that will not project further than the window casing. The AZEK will have a wood grain texture. • On the south elevation the penthouse is drawn in the wrong location and the windows on both floors don't agree with any floor plan. This elevation will be reworked. ■ Floor plans show no basement windows and Sullivan will research the code requirements for basement windows. ■ The 2°d floor plan shows no roof fence and the wall trim is not properly represented. ■ DeMaio recommends muttons on the windows are possible. • The open railings on the roof will be painted wood or AZEK. • The mailbox locations must be determined. ■ There will be surface mounted incandescent fixtures adjacent to the entrance doors and a ceiling mounted fixture under the overhang. DeMaio states that the revised drawings should be completed for the meeting on the 25d'. Durand expresses concern with the locations of the windows on the elevations. Jaquith expresses objection to the location of the horizontal band. Durand asks about the location of the mechanical units. • Sawyer states that he doesn't know where the mechanical units will be placed. DRB Special Meeting Minutes July 10,2007 Page 5 of 8 • Durrand suggests continuing this public hearing. Kinzer states that the architectural design is pro-bono and suggests that the members make any additional suggestions now so that this issue could be closed with just one more hearing. Jaquith states that he has a concern about the horizontal band and the windows. He adds that he is not concerned with the pro-bono status of this project. Durand states that the members could approve this at the next meeting if the new plans reflect all of the issues and suggestions from DeMaio and the other members tonight. Jaquith: Motion to continue this hearing until the next meeting, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 5-0) 4. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building)_Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment. Attorney Jacob Segal states he is representing the developer because his partner, George Atkins, is unable to attend. He adds that the purpose of this meeting is to get an approval subject of the Final Design Plans. • Architect Keith Musinski displays the floor plans. Durand suggests reorienting the door at the entry on Essex Street by reversing the location of the section angled at 45 degrees, switching the hinges and including glass storefront where the door is now located. Musinski agrees to do this. DeMaio suggests recessing the hallway entry door. Jaquith questions the location of the call buttons and door releases for each unit. Musinski says that they will be at the Essex Street entry. DeMaio expresses concern with the mixed-use elevator. Durand states that the elevator could be key-restricted for the residential units. Musinski displays the elevations and explains that the Cromby Street fagade will be restored back to the 1900's design. DeMaio expresses concern with the slivers of masonry between the retail windows. . Jaquith agrees with DeMaio and suggests a taller fascia between the first and second floor to hold signage. DRB Special Meeting Minutes July 10,2007 Page 6 of 8 • Durand confirms that the members favor the expanded glass storefront with a built-out fascia that more closely reflects the original sign band. Jaquith suggests a continuous datum of horizontal exterior lighting as a design feature. Blier states that this design has greatly improved from the original. Kinzer states that a sign with vertical lettering will need specific approval. Musinski displays the upper floor plan and describes the window placement. DeMaio clarifies that the existing brick should be reused as much as possible. Durand suggests the members review any new brick on site prior to use. The members discuss the parameters for the signage. Kennedy suggests not using the copperplate font for the signage. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval by the SRA with the following conditions: ■ Final construction drawings shall be reviewed by the DRB. • ■ If new brick is required, the selected brick shall be reviewed by the DRB. ■ A horizontal sign band shall be added to the building elevation in the expression of the original design, to better divide the retail and residential portions of the building. • Pending review of the horizontal sign band in the final construction drawings, retail signage shall be located in the sign band. ■ Only approval of the second floor location and vertical orientation of the residential project name signage is recommended. The final design of this signage shall be reviewed by the DRB. ■ The retail entry shall be revised. The motion is seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 5-0) Jaquith leaves. 5. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station Redevelopment) —_Discussion of amendment to approved Final Design Plans. Joseph Walsh states that the design was approved by the SRA in 2004 but the Chapter 91 permitting through DEP cause the project to miss the residential market. The design has been changed to limit the construction cost. He describes the main changes which include projecting balconies, the elimination of the sloped metal roof, the redesign of the • cornices, the replacement of the blue canvas awnings with lead-coated copper awnings, and use of precast sills and lintels. DRB Special Meeting Minutes July 10,2007 Page 7 of 8 • Durand states that the retail floor is now a better design but the top floor seems too tall. Walsh states that it was made tall to screen mechanicals. Durand suggests that it might be just a tone issue. Kennedy expresses concern with the external balconies. Durand states that each unit owner will customize his own balcony which will result in it looking too random. He suggests having the condo association regulate what is stored on the balconies. Kennedy objects to the look of those balconies on that building in that location. He states that he has no objection to having balconies on the water side of the building. Blier states that he doesn't object to the balconies on the Derby Street side. Much discussion ensues regarding the balconies. Kinzer asks Walsh if he has checked with DEP about the projection of the balconies on the water side. • Walsh states that they haven't checked with the DEP yet but they will once they complete the DRB approval process. Walsh states that there will be exterior lighting under the awnings and the flat face of the awnings will be used for signage. Durand expresses concern with the low height of the awnings which is only 8 feet from the ground. He suggests a minimum clearance of 9 feet. Durand reviews the Board's concerns: • The projecting balconies. • The awning height is too low. Durand suggests blade signs instead of the signage on the flat side of the awnings. He adds that they might be able to totally remove the awning. He states that the balconies should be more delicate, P P Y a perhaps only 2' rojection. P J Kennedy: Motion to continue this hearing to the next meeting, seconded by Blier. (Passes 5-0) . 6. 7 Lynde Street (Griffen Theater)—Discussion of temporary fagade alteration. DRB Special Meeting Minutes July 10,2007 Page 8 of 8 • Theater director Erik Rodenhiser distributes the design plans for the temporary fagade which will be in place from mid-June through October. Durand asks how this design integrates with the theater production. Rodenhiser states that he wishes to show what Salem looked like in the mid 1600's prior to the witchcraft trials. Durand expresses concern that this design is precedent-setting and all witchcraft sites would want to have this type of design. Much discussion ensues regarding the use of this type of fagade. The main concerns voiced are the precedent that this project would set, the fact that the proposal sidesteps the Sign Ordinance while it is actually a giant sign and that as it is attached to the building fagade, it alters our perception of downtown architecture. Rodenhiser asks what is needed if he wishes to use a removable design which is the same as this, but can be taken down daily. Kinzer states that he would need to return in two weeks with the new design. Rodenhiser states that the only difference in the proposal is that a clause would state that • this would be taken down daily. The members continue to discuss this design and all members express concern about the precedent-setting nature of an approval of this plan. After much discussion the members encourage Rodenhiser to seek another idea for attracting customers to the site. DeMaio: Motion to deny approval of this application, seconded by Blier. (Passes 4- 0) Kennedy: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 4-0) The meeting is adjourned at 9:50 p.m. • Salem Redevelopment Authority Revised June 26,2007 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday,June 27, 2007—6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand • Minutes Approval of the minutes from the April 25, 2007 meeting. Projects Under Review 1. 157 Washington Street (Passage to India —Discussion of proposed building alterations. 2. 157 Washington Street (Passage to India —Discussion of proposed outdoor cafe. 3. 1 Harrison Avenue (Habitat for Humanity redevelopments —Final Design Plans 4. Downtown Salem - Discussion of proposed bike racks. 5. 24 New Derby Street, Stall 1 (Artists Row) - Discussion of proposed signage. 6. 24 New Derby Street, Stall 4 (Artists Row) - Discussion of proposed signage. 7. 24 New Derby Street, Stall 5 (Artists Row - Discussion of proposed signage. • 8. 178 Essex Street (Salem Oriental Gallery) — Discussion of proposed signage. 9. 180 Essex Street (Bewitched in Salem) — Discussion of proposed signage. 10. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building) — Discussion of Final Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment. 11. 289 Derby St. (Coastal Gas Station Redevelopment - Discussion of amendment to approved Final Design Plans. 12. 93 Washington Street (City Hall) - Discussion of amendment to approved Final Design Plans. 13. 217-221 Essex Street (The Gathering and Digital Ima&g Inca—Discussion of proposed rear egress door. 14. 118 Washington Street Rear (Peabody Block Building)—Discussion of proposed egress door. 15. 7 Linde Street (Griffen Theater)—Discussion of temporary facade alteration. Adjournment • • DRB Meeting June 27,2007 Page 1 of 6 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES June 27,2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 at 6:00 pm. Members Ernest DeMaio and David Jaquith were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk, were also present. Due to a lack of quorum the meeting has been limited to review of small projects. DeMaio opens the meeting. Projects Under Review 1. 157 Washington Street(Passage to India) - Discussion of proposed building alterations Owner Hugh Kerr describes the plans for expanding Passage to India into the adjacent • storefront. He proposes a third entry door to the restaurant,stating that this doorway will be made exactly the same as the other two doorways.Kerr shows paint samples, matching the paint colors on the existing building. DeMaio and Jaquith recommend approval by the SRA provided that the third door is exactly the same as the two existing entry doors. 2. 157 Washington Street(Passage to India) - Discussion of proposed outdoor cafe Kinzer explains that this area in front of the restaurant will be cleared and cleaned to build an outdoor cafe and the SRA has approved the removal of one large tree provided that two or more trees be added to the adjacent traffic island. DeMaio states that visibility of the restaurant may be obscured by the addition of trees. Kerr states that the tree which is being removed is obscuring the view of the building and the new trees will be set further away from the building and it will be about 9 feet tall to not obscure the building. Kerr shows the proposed tables and planter boxes. DeMaio expresses concern about whether the trees will thrive on that site and whether the • trees will obscure the view of the building. DRB Meeting June 27,2007 Page 2 of 6 • DeMaio and Jaquith agree to recommend approval by the SRA with the recommendation that the SRA ensure the trees will thrive on that site and they will not obscure the view of the building. The members recommend the trees with a tall canopy or to be small trees or shrubs. 3. Downtown Salem— Discussion of proposed bike racks Frank Taromina explains that the Bike Committee has selected locations in downtown Salem for three different styles of bike racks. He states that the racks will be painted black and will have a decal which identifies them as bicycle parking. DeMaio states that it would be nice if the decal has some sort of logo on it that represents Salem. He adds that some of the selected locations will have little clearance when bikes are locked to the racks and the sidewalk area might get very tight. . He suggests finding a space not directly in front of the Red's Cafe door. He says that in front of Sovereign Bank he doesn't know if there is any alternate space there. David Peletier suggests that the racks be located on the Harrison side of Essex Street because the sidewalk is wide and DeMain agrees. DeMaio suggests that the Church Street racks be placed closer to the Movie Cinema. He suggests placing two racks on the thai restaurant side. He states that the area near • Pamplemousse is too cluttered for large racks. DeMaio suggests having two or three vintage racks near the Old Police Station in lieu of placing any near Pamplemousse. Jaquith asks Taromina to come back to the DRB with a design for a decal. DeMaio states that any bike racks placed at the MBTA station should have the same design as those in the downtown area and that two vintage racks should be installed at location IS on the Inventory of Bike Racks to be Purchased and Installed map. Jaquith and DeMain agree to recommend approval by the SRA with the above noted recommendations and the removal of racks at following proposed locations shown on the Inventory of Bike Racks to be Purchased and Installed map: location 3,2, 17 and 27 and 43. 4. 24 New Derby Street, Stall 1(Artists'Row) — Discussion of proposed signage Kosten states that this location is called"SASSO (Salem Arts in Salem State College) and the signs on Artists'row will go up for the season and then come down. Frank Taromina who manages the Artists'Row shops requests that the approved signs be Lowed to reappear the following year without a new approval PP g Ye rova PP Process. Pamela Perkins displays the sign. Jaquith states that he has no problem with this sign and he understands the nature of a • temporary display. Jaquith and DeMain agree to recommend approval by the SRA. DRB Meeting June 27,2007 Page 3 of 6 • 5. 24 New Derby Street, Stall 4(Artists'Row) - Discussion of proposed signage Kinzer states that the text of the sign runs vertically which is in contradiction to the sign code for the SRA. Sara Ashodian states that it will not be read by people driving cars because it is in a pedestrian area. Jaquith states that vertical signs are hard to read unless the words are short. He says that the word "ART" could be read easily if vertical,but he objects to the placement of the word "EXPERIMENTAL" as a vertical sign. DeMaio states that this is very straight forward and does not reflect an experimental nature for this experimental are gallery. He encourages Ashodian to be more creative with this design. Jaquith agrees with DeMaio suggesting that the sign have more depth. He states that he has no problem with one word "ART" being vertical but he sees a problem with the potential for kids to try to hang on this sign. DeMaio agrees with Jaquith and suggest making the sign something more than two- dimensional. • Jaquith and DeMaio agree to see another design on July 10. 6. 24 New Derry Street, Stall 5 (Artists' Row) - Discussion of proposed signage Taromina states that he has no examples of the text but that front and back of the signs will be identical, and the text is black with an orange outline. Jaquith states that he likes the sign. DeMaio questions the size of the text but states that from a distance the skateboard clearly shows what is for sale in the stall. Jaquith and DeMaio agree to recommend approval by the SRA. 7. 178 Essex Street(Salem Oriental Gallery) - Discussion of proposed signage Marshal Tripoli displays a sample of the sign and states that it would be made of three- quarter oak and he will bolt it to the building and a painted plug will cover the bolt. The • lettering will be routed and painted gold on a black background enclosed by routed gold bonier. DRB Meeting June 27,2007 Page 4 of 6 • Jaquith and DeMaio agree to recommend approval to the SRA. 8. 180 Essex Street(Bewitched in Salem). - Discussion of proposed signage Tripoli shows a sample of the sign and explains that it is black with raised letters which are painted with flat white paint. Jaquith and DeMain agree to recommend approval to the SRA. 9. 93 Washington Street(City Hall - Discussion of amendment to approved final design plans Kinzer explains that the lift on the main City Hall stairs is about to fail and that the City is moving forward with the elevator addition approved by the SRA in 2004. The amended design for a vestibule will eliminate the need for a ramp by placing a half-stop elevator at ground level. She adds that after the SRA approves a design it will go to the Massachusetts Historical Commission for approval. She states that this is an amendment to an approved design. Architect John Seger explains the plans. He states that including glass storefront windows will be safer than the prior proposal for brick addition. • Kinzer states that she would like to send the application to MHC and the plan might need to return to DRB if MHC requests changes to the design. DeMaio asks if the park bench near the vestibule will be moved. Seger states that he could shift it back away from the vestibule. DeMaio suggests a bollard or two to protect the structure from cars. He expresses concem with composite wood and suggests using aluminum instead. Jaquith states that he would like to see the elevations. DeMaio states that the spirit of this addition is very good. He suggests recommending approval provided they see the final plans. Jaquith states that he is not ready to approve this until he sees the elevations but an approval of schematic design would be fine. He asks about the ceiling. Segar states that they would use gyp board with recessed lights. He adds that the floor will be quarry tile. Jaquith and DeMaio agree that they wish to see the project again at the on July 10 Special • Meeting. DRB Meeting June 27,2007 Page 5 of 6 • 10. 217-221 Essex Street(The Gathering and Digital Imagine Inc - Discussion of proposed rear egress door Archetict John Seger states that the new design addresses a compliance issue. The members studythe plans. DeMain states that he must use the brick which is removed for the infill and if they need more brick it must match the existing brick. He adds that the mortar must match as well. Seger asks if he must show the DRB the brick before the construction. DeMaio says that he would like to see it. Kinzer asks if another meeting would be necessary or if one member could look at the brick. DeMaio says that a member could look at the brick on-site. Jaquith states that they could put a white piece on either side of the top of the door. DeMaio and Jaquith recommend approval with the condition that new brick be reviewed by a DRB member. • 11. 118 Washington Street Rear(Peabody Block Building) - Discussion of proposed egress door Kinzer states that this is off of Lapin Park She adds that because it is a minor change but is required for a new tenant to move forward,the SRA has approved this plan pending DRB approval. Dana Weeder of Winter Street Architects describes the plan. Jaquith states that this egress may not be necessary and Weeder should check on this before beginning construction. DeMain states that he would prefer to have the door color close to the brick color. Jaquith and DeMaio agree to recommend approval. 12. 7 Lynde Street(Griffin Theater) - Discussion of Temporary Fagade Alteration DeMaio explains that the Board is not prepared to discuss this subject tonight because they lack a quorum. Eric Rodenhiser presents an alternate roof design. • DRB Meeting June 27,2007 Page 6 of 6 Jaquith states that he is reluctant to approve this design because it is "hoke}?'. He suggests having this structure stand apart from the building so the public would need to walk through this structure to get to the building. Rodenhiser states that it would still be in front of the building and altering the fagade. Kinzer states that it would be helpful if they bring samples of the material. Jaquith and DeMaio agree to review this design on July 10. Other Business DeMaio asks if a current meeting schedule could be posted to the web site. Kinzer agrees to do this. DeMain asks if some of the missing minutes could be approved. Kinzer states that she will get the drafts of those minutes that have not been review by Hartford to the Board. DeMaio adjourns the meeting at 9:30 PM. • • ® � ® Salem EERedevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD o Regular Meeting r; Wednesday, May 23, 2007—6:00pm co 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room y o T Roll Call: m Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review • OTHER PROJECTS 1. 1 Harrison Avenue (Habitat for Humanity redevelopment) — Schematic design URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 2. 55 Washington Street (Edgewater Cafe) —Proposed revision to outdoor cafe 3. 118 Washington Street (Fresh Taste of Asia) —Proposed revision to outdoor cafe 4. 32 Church Street (Salem Wine Imports) — Proposed signage 5. 178 Essex Street (Salem Oriental GalleU) — Proposed signage 6. 180 Essex Street Bewitched in Salem)— Proposed signage `M;s �at1C"q POW of City sala'rie. (20 WgS'r r ,r ton sheets Salem Massacl usetts 01910 978) 619-5685 Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Meeting May 23, 2007 Page 1 of 7 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES May 23,2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, May 23 2007 at 6:00 pm Members Michael Blier,Ernest DeMaio,David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. DeMaio opens the meeting. Other Projects 1. 1 Harrison Avenue (Habitat for Humanity redevelopment) — Schematic design Kinzer explains that this project is a Habitat for Humanity project and is not in the Salem Redevelopment Authority Area but DRB approval for the design is a condition of their funding by the Department of Planning and Community Development. • Architect Michael Sullivan of Beacon Architectural Associates describes the design of the building which will be a two-family building on the comer of Palmer Street and Harrison Avenue. He explains that the building is currently abandoned and there were plans to make it a community center but those plans have changed. Sullivan states that he will reconfigure the building's 'T", byremoving 10-15 of that building,to provide additional parking to accommodate 2 units. He describes the siding as Hardy Plank,which will simulate clapboard siding and trim He adds that the windows will be double hung aluminum clad, and there will be two penthouses that provide access a roof garden on a flat roof. He states that the front door will be painted with an accent color such as a soft gray. Blier asks about the parking surface. Sullivan says that it will not be a hot top and he is open to suggestions. He says that he wants a porous surface. Blier suggests eco-stone because it would allow grass to grow but costs $16 per square foot installed. Sullivan says that he hopes to have the material donated. Jaquith arrives at 6:11 p.m. Kennedy asks how wide the side trim boards will be. • Sullivan says that they will be 6" to 8"wide. DRB Meeting May 23,2007 Page 2 of 7 Kennedy says that an 8" sideboard would give character to that building. • DeMaio asks about the railing on the roof deck. Sullivan states that it will be something that will not penetrate the roof,perhaps a bracket system of pressure treated wood or plastic. DeMaio asks if there will be any screening at the roof to prohibit the view from the street. Sullivan states that he has not planned to screen that. DeMaio expresses concern about the visible low roof, especially if people put a clothesline or old furniture on the roof. He suggests putting up some type of low screening as a visual cut-off. Blier asks if these are rentals. Warren Sawyer states that habitat does nothing but ownership units. DeMaio suggests a little more detail on the elevations would be helpful. He adds that they seem a bit bare. • Sullivan states that he had considered using simulated shingle hardy planks instead of the clapboards. Jaquith states that the problem is that the hardy plank shingles don't really look like shingles, but the hardy plank clapboards look like clapboards. He adds that the money needs to go into the details in the trim around the windows and corners. He questions why they even have the penthouses going to the roof. Sullivan states that it is because the site has no outside space so the roof deck will allow the homeowner some exterior space. Jaquith states that the design starts to fall with the roof deck. He suggests making the roof top work better,stating that the capping element should be a 2 story eave and to play-up the trim around the window. Blier asks about the base of the building with the foundation exposed. Sullivan states that the granite foundation will be exposed on all four sides. He adds that the siding will sit about 1.5" out from the granite foundation. Kennedy asks if a trim piece will run along the bottom of the siding. Sullivan says that is correct, a frieze board will run at the bottom. • Kinzer reviews the main points of this discussion which are: DRB Meeting May 23,2007 Page 3 of 7 • 1. Install low screening at the roof deck to block the view of activity on the roof from the street. 2. Include more detailing on the elevation,providing a stronger expression of the multiple stories 3. Design the penthouses to place less emphasis on the cap 4. Provide more detailed trim at the windows. 5. Provide trim at the base of the siding. Jaquith suggests a meeting in 2 weeks. Kinzer asks for a volunteer to look at the design. Sullivan states that he is confident that he will come back in June and have all of these issues settled,so they don't need to meet again until the next meeting. Kennedy. Motion to approve the schematic design with the above noted recommendations,seconded byBlier. (Passes 4-0) Urban Renewal Area Projects 2. 155 Washington Street(Edgewater Cafe) - Proposed revision to outdoor cafe Kinzer introduces Dennis Moustakis who wishes to replace the existing the chains and • planters with larger planter boxes fully surrounding the outdoor dining area. Moustakis states that he currently has small planters with white chains and he would like to upgrade the look by having planter boxes totally surround the dining area. He shows a model of the proposed planter boxes. Kennedy asks what type of plantings will be in these boxes. Moustakis states that there will be annuals in them. Jaquith asks about the colors the planters will be painted. Moustakis says they will be a cream with a dark teal green. Jaquith suggests that the top trim be wider. DeMaio stresses the importance of getting the right height for these boxes, stating that you don't want to cut people's view off from the sidewalk. He clarifies that there should be no signage of any kind on these planters. Kennedy suggests that Moustakis make one box with the green trim and take a look at it to see if it appears too busy. He states that he might want to have the entire box as cream. • Kennedy volunteers to review one planter after it is painted cream and green. DRB Meeting May 23,2007 Page 4 of 7 • Jaquith says that he should push the planter boxes up against the building in the winter. He suggests filling them with evergreens and small lights in the winter. Kinzer review the recommendations which include: 1. Maintain a 5 foot sidewalk width on all sides of the outdoor cafe 2. Use a wider trim at the top of the planter 3. Push the planters against the building in the winter 4. Following the painting of one planter, a DRB member will review the trim color. The remainder of the planters shall be painted to match the DRB member's recommendation. Jaquith:Motion to approve the plan with the above noted recommendations,seconded by Kennedy. All members vote in favor. (Passes 4-0) 3. 118 Washington Street(Fresh Taste of Asia) - Proposed revision to outdoor cafe. Kinzer introduces Frandy Xu and distributes plans. She states that the outdoor cafe was approved one year ago and tonight Xu is here to get approval for the furniture,cafe enclosure and amended seating plan. Xu shows the photos and drawings and describes the furniture arrangement and the stanchions and the chains. • Kinzer explains that in this new plan,which was not previously discussed with Tanya Hartford,the table configuration has flipped so the tables are now pushed out from the building. Xu states that even though he was approved for 28 outside seats,he currently has between 22 and 26 seats there. DeMaio states that they should approve for the same number of seats as was previously approved. Jaquith expresses concern with the chain which seems to close off the diagonal walkway. DeMaio agrees and says that we should keep the seating out of that diagonal walkway. Jaquith suggests that they visit the site at the end of the meeting to look at an alternative plan. DeMain mentions that the candles on the table are not the jurisdiction of the DRB. He also makes note of the comment on the drawing which states that umbrellas may be installed in the future. He states that because of the wide deep awning there may not be room for the umbrellas. He clarifies that the DRB approval will be exclusive of the candles and the • umbrellas. DRB Meeting May 23, 2007 Page 5 of 7 • The Members decide to continue the discuss of the outdoor cafe configuration on-site at the end of the meeting. [see below for continuation of discussion] 4. 32 Church Street(Salem Wine Imports) - Proposed signage Kinzer introduces Eric Olson and states that he is opening a new business in Salem. Olson describes the sign as colonial in style with a gold leaf on dark blue. Kennedy states that this color(Moby Dick- C2) will look blue or black or green depending on how the light hits it. Blier expresses concern about the sign's size being too big. Olson says that it is smaller than the Vernon Martin sign next door. Kennedy suggests bringing the size down 6" in the height and width to 3'6" by 3'-6". Jaquith asks about outdoor lighting. Olson states that there is no lighting proposed. Kennedy suggests putting beveling the edge of the oval in the upper central portion of the • sign. DeMaio asks about the color of the scrolling graphic on the surface. He states that you won't be able to see it if it is black He suggests lightening the scroll. Olson states that he can do that or change the base color. Blier asks about the mounting bracket. Olson states that it is like the Vernon Martin bracket. Jaquith suggests considering outdoor lighting. Kinzer asks about the wire on the bracket. Jaquith states that it should be a rod. Kinzer reviews the recommendation which include: 1. The sign dimensions shall be 3.6' by 3.6' 2. If the base color changes,the DRB must see it first. • Kennedy: Motion to approve the signage with the above noted suggestions,seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 4-0) DRB Meeting May 23,2007 Page 6 of 7 • 5. 178 Essex Street(Salem Oriental Galle!yl -Proposed signage and 6. 180 Essex Street(Bewitched in Salem) — Proposed signage Kinzer introduces Marshall Tripoli and states that the proposed signs are located on the metal awnings on the Museum Place Mall building, facing the Essex Street pedestrian mall. Tripoli distributes material samples. DeMaio asks if the signage inside the mall needs to be approved by the SRA. Kinzer states that she will check on that. Tripoli states that he already put up a sign inside for"Bewitched in Salem". DeMaio states that the graphic design of the two signs are nice sign but the problem he has is that both are flat vinyl sign. He suggests having the sign be more three-dimensional. Tripoli states that he other three-dimensional signs on the mall's awnings are breaking because the wood behind the awning will not support a heavy sign. He states that he would • love to make a routered sign but is not sure if his client will be open to this idea. Kennedy agrees with DeMaio stating that applied vinyl looks too temporary. Blier states that he agrees with the others that it should be three-dimensional. DeMaio asks if they have considered any colors other than the black and white for the "Bewitched in Salem" sign. Tripoli states that they want to use black and white because their best selling items are black and white,so now all of their marketing pieces are black and white. Kennedy states that silver could be used and it wouldn't change the tone too much. He agrees that adding dimension would be nice in that area. Tripoli agrees to consider silver. He adds that the owner of the Oriental Gallery is in Asia for the next 6 weeks. He suggests that he could just make the sign and have it done when the owner gets back Kinzer summarizes the recommendations which include: 1. Both signs should be more three-dimensional,either positive or negative. • 2. The `Bewitched in Salem" sign could use a color other than white,possibly silver. DRB Meeting May 23,2007 _ Page 7 of 7 • Kennedy: Motion to continue this hearing until the next meeting, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 4-0) 3 (continued from above) 118 Washington Street(Fresh Taste of Asia) - Proposed revision to outdoor cafe. The DRB continued the meeting at the 118 Washington Street outdoor cafe (See item#3 above). During the site visit,the members agree on an alternate layout for the seating area and instruct Xu to place the first stanchion 9' out from the post near the side door so that the chain will run diagonally from the comer of the building to the first stanchion.Kinzer updates the site plan to reflect this amendment to the cafe design. Kinzer summarizes the recommendations: 1. In order to permit adequate space on the diagonal Lappin Park walkway,the configuration of the cafe enclosure will match the attached site plan dated May 23, 2007 2. The approval is exclusive of umbrellas and of candles on the tables. 3. The approval is for a maximum of 28 outside seats. • Jaquith:Motion to approve the outdoor cafe with the above noted suggestions,seconded by Kennedy. All members vote in favor. (Passes 4-0) Jaquith:Motion to adjourn, seconded by Blier. (Passes 4-0) The meeting is adjourned at 7:55 p.m. ® � ® Salem Redevelopment Authority Revised April 20, 2007 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday, April 25, 2007—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review • URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 118 Washington Street Gulu Gulu Cafe) —Proposed outdoor cafe abutting Lappin Park. 2. 118 Washington Street (Gulu Gulu Cafe) —Proposed signage, lighting and exterior improvements. 3. 125 Washington Street (Eastern BanW — Proposed signage. 4. 10 Front Street (Beadworks) — Proposed signage. 5. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building) —Review of wireless facilities installed on the building. 6. 50 St Peter-Street (Old Salem Jail) —Review and approve construction plans,. .. Other Business • Approval of Minutes This notice Pu,`%nd On "vr�s, ; !' 8wisttn Bic 7 Clay Hall AV& Sf.a� rn �� ' f}, rz C 4 c rjn� is e u2.rx+LPz.y � 23A & 23B Of 120 Washington ;trz;ct - `!alln1 Massacblt ..crt€ t! IS 70 6) 619-5685 - Fax (978) 740._0404. DRB Meeting April 25,2007 Page 1 of 5 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, April 25 2007 at 6:00 pm. Chairperson Paul Durand,Members Michael Blier,David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Kosten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. Durand opens the meeting. Projects Under Review Urban Renewal Area Projects 1. 118 Washington Street(Gulu Gulu Cafe) - Proposed outdoor cafe abutting Lappin Park. and • 2. 118 Washington Street(Gulu Gulu Cafe) - Proposed signage, lighting and exterior improvements. Kinzer introduces Steve Feldman and Marie Feldmannova. Feldman presents the revisions to the cafe proposal including stanchions,seating,walkway and bench locations. Feldmannova describes the stanchion design and the main entry flanked by planters. The members review the plans and photos for all of these installation items as well as stanchions, chains,planters,and benches. Feldman discusses problems with snaking the lighting wiring through the inside of the building due to the stairway location. He proposes running a black pipe along the exterior of the building to enclose the wiring. Durand states that this is a decent solution. Feldman states that the sign over the sidewalk is much smaller than the proposed sign reviewed at the prior meeting. The sign on Washington Street is the same size. Jaquith states that it helps to have a good drawing. Blier agrees. Durand states that the gauge of the chain should be at least 3/8" thick. DRB Meeting April 25,2007 Page 2 of 5 • Blier agrees. Durand states that the gauge of the chain should be at least 3/8" thick. Feldman states that the Essex Street sign will be mounted on an existing bracket on the facade that will be relocated. Blier: Motion to recommend approval of the outdoor cafe and of the signage, lighting, and exterior improvements with the condition that the gauge of the chain enclosing the outdoor cafe be at least 3/8", seconded by Jaquith. All members vote in favor. (Passes 3- 0) 3. 125 Washington Street(Eastern Bank)—Proposed signage. Kinzer introduces Richard Batten of Batten Brothers Signs and states that this application is to replace 3 existing signs. She adds that the sign over the main entry was approved by the SRA in 1994. Batten states that the reason for the change of these signs is because Eastern Bank is changing their logo from 3 lines to 2 or 1 line. He adds that they are proposing to replace the signs with new signs of the same materials. • Batten says that the sign above the doorway will be the same size and materials as the existing sign and the two new plaques by the doorway will be slightly shorter and wider than those now on the building, due to the change in layout. Durand states that the new smaller signs should be positioned to cover as many holes left by the prior sign as possible and the applicant should repair any visible damage from the previous sign. He suggests that they restore the damaged brick that is exposed as a result of the replacement of the sign. It will be better to cover more holes with the new signs and have fewer patches. Blier: Motion to recommend approval of the proposed signage with the condition that visible damage under existing signs will be repaired in a manner consistent with the historic nature of the building, such that no previous installations holes in the fagade are noticeable, seconded by Jaquith. All members vote in favor. (Passes 3-0) 4. 10 Front Street (Beadworks)—Proposed signage Kinzer introduces Allison Schmidt and Rachael Tatro-Evans. She states that Beadworks is a new store in Salem open in the storefront now occupied by Seed Stitch on Front Street. Schmidt distributes paint and wood samples. • Kinzer inquires if Beadworks will be reusing the existing sign bracket. DRB Meeting April 25,2007 Page 3 of 5 • Schmidt states that she is not sure if Seed Stitch is taking the bracket to their new location. If not, Beadworks will use this bracket or will install a similar bracket. Jaquith states that he has no problem with the design but he thinks that the sign might be too small. Durand states that this sign can be upscaled a bit and the members discuss the possibilities for enlargement of the letters. Jaquith: Motion to recommend approval of the proposed signage as submitted based on new dimensions provided to the Chair, with the following conditions: Reuse the existing bracket or replace with a similar bracket, increase the letter size to 4 or 5 inches in height and adjust the dimensions of the sign to incorporate larger lettering, seconded by Blier. All members vote in favor. (Passes 3-0) 5. 275—281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building)—Review of wireless facilities installed on the building. Durand recuses himself from this issue because he is an abutter. He asks Jaquith to act as the Chair in his absence. Durand leaves the room. • Jaquith states that without a quorum the DRB can not come to a final vote. Hartford responds that she talked to the applicant and asked him if he still wants to be heard with two members. The DRB has heard items in the past without a quorum. The applicant is willing to have the item move forward with two members but if at any point he wants to continue it until May, we can do that. Hartford provides a background on this issue stating that these wireless facilities have already been installed on the CF Tomkins building. She adds that they were put up prior to approval and are coming before the DRB and SRA now for approval. Carl Gehring introduces himself as a representative of Verizon and introduces Chuck Webberly of Verizon Wireless Real Estate. He then an rovides explanation for the P confusion over the application to the SRA and the prior actions by Verizon. Gehring shows photo simulations of by-right installations of various wireless facility designs and other installations within the Redevelopment Authority area. He states that Verizon does P Y not want to be treated unfairly in comparison to other approved installations. Hartford states that the photos shown may not have been reviewed by the DRB or SRA. Blier states that none of the images shown include an antenna on the fagade. All are located on the roof where this type of thing is more expected and acceptable. In this case, • the antennas are located on the main fagade. He expresses disappointment that the installation took place without approval and has resulted in a blemish on the building. DRB Meeting April 25,2007 Page 4 of 5 • Gehring states that the fayade mount is very common throughout the metro Boston area. Jaquith reads a letter from David Hart regarding the applicant's submission of the antenna installation design to the Salem Historical Commission into the record. The letter states that the images provided to the Historical Commission showed the installation as flush to the building and requests that the antenna be placed flush against the building as. Jaquith then asks Gehring if this is possible. Gehring states that they could put the antenna closer to the building but not flush against it because the antennas must be angled to be functional. He offers to paint the jumper cable to match the cornice of the building. Stanley Smith, a Salem resident, asks if these antennas can be removed when the technology changes and how the damage to the building will be repaired when the antennas are removed. Gehring states that Verizon has a contractual obligation in their lease with the building owner to remove the antennas when they are no longer in use. The damage can be repaired at this point. He underscores that the antennas are just a temporary trade fixture that can be removed at any point, not a permanent alteration to the building. He agrees that Verizon can look at pulling the antennas as far back to the building as • technologically feasible. Smith states that this installation is relatively unobtrusive and could have been far worse than this. The members clarify the recommendations, which include: • The six panel antennas located on the building's Essex Street fagade should be pulled as close to the building as possible while maintaining the tilt required for antenna functionality. • The jumper cable located on the Essex Street fascia should be painted to match the color of the fascia. This color will be selected through the review of the CF Tompkins building redevelopment by the DRB and SRA. • The paint on all portions of the wireless facility visible from the street should be maintained by Verizon Wireless to prevent peeling or flaking paint. The paint color shall match the existing brick as closely as possible. 6. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem.Tail) —Review and approve construction plans. Hartford introduces this item stating that the SRA approval requires DRB review and approve the final construction drawings. . The members review the plans. DRB Meeting April 25,2007 Page 5 of 5 Durand asks them to walk the Board through the issues that have changed. Cindi Giugliano of Finegold Alexander+Associates provides an overview of the plan updates resulting from the comments and suggestions of the DRB. She states that the buildings have been named as follows: the Jail is the Bryant, the Jail Keepers House is the McIntire, the Carriage House is the Carriage House and the new building is the Alexander. The project name is 50 St. Peter. Giugliano continues that at the Bryant, the most notable change is that the light cuts have been designed to be larger in scale. The granite and the brick will be chemically cleaned. David Hart has examined the amount of repointing necessary and the amount of slate that must be repaired, and they looked at the amount of work that must be done of the copulas for restoration. In the 1884 portion of the building the chimneys will remain and be capped with copper, in the 1813 portion the chimneys will need to be removed and rebuilt. One chimney on the north wing will not be kept above the roof but will be kept on the interior as a structural column. The egress door was originally shown as a cell door but this is not feasible. The chamfered surround at the jail entry will be lowered and granite will be placed at the top to make up the height difference. All new lintels and infill will be salvaged material. The bars will be kept at the juliet balconies. The monitor that was the original exhaust system for the building is being used in the attic for the condenser air intake. • The McIntire has not changed since the prior review. One door has been added to the Carriage House for access to the domestic water tank. The Alexander has been modified most in response to DRB comments. The units are now true townhouses with a firewall between the units. There is now more verticality on the rear elevation. The only change to the site plan is that a garden terrace has been added off of the Carnage House. Hartford inquires if the applicant plans to return to DRB with site signage. Dan Ricciarelli confirms that site signage will be submitted in the future. Durand thanks the applicant for the good work and the dedication to quality and states that the DRB will do periodic review on site. Giugliano states that wall sections will be constructed on site which the DRB can review. Jaquith: Motion to approve the amended plans, seconded by Blier. All members vote in favor. (Passes 3-0) Blier: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Jaquith. Meeting is adjourned. • Salem • Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday, March 28, 2007—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review • URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 285 Derby Street—Proposed plans for storefront improvements. 2. 118 Washington Street (Gulu Gulu Cafe —Proposed outdoor cafe abutting Lappin Park. 3. 118 Washington Street (Gulu Gulu Cafe)—Proposed signage, lighting and exterior improvements. Other Business • Approval of Minutes 120 Washington Street Salem Massachusetts 01970 • 978 619-5685 • Fax 978 740-0404 DRB Meeting March 28,2007 Pagel of 5 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD • MEETING MINUTE S Match 28, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, March 28, 2007 at 6:00 pm. Members Ernest DeMaio,Paul Durand,David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford,Economic Development Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. Durand opens the meeting. 1. 285 Derby Street—Proposed plans for storefront improvements Hartford introduces Richard Griffin, Architect, and Tim Clark, owner of the property. Griffin displays the plans and explains that they wish to upgrade the existing storefront windows to match the adjacent Salem Access Television storefront. He adds that no tenants for the retail space have signed on as yet. To enhance the accessibility of the space, Griffin states that they wish to borrow sidewalk space from the City and place a sloped walk against the building and along with some steps entering from straight on. • The slope of the planned walk is less than 1/20 which means that it will not be considered a ramp and will not need a railing. Griffin says that this sloped walk was found to be acceptable to the Public Works Department and the SRA. Hartford says that it was suggested at the SRA meeting that the ramp go between the two commercial units, but this might be difficult with the other tenant in the space. DeMaio asks if there will be clear glass above the doors without any awnings on the unit. Griffin agrees that the material above the doors will be clear glass and there will not be awnings on the storefront. Jaquith asks about the planters. Griffin states that they will replicate the existing planter at the corner of the building. DeMaio states that the planters should be big enough for plants; if they are not, they will only be used by the public as trash bins. Durand expresses his approval with having transparent glass above the mullions. DeMaio: Motion to approve this site plan with the requirement that the glass above • the mullions be transparent, seconded by Jaquith. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 3-0. DRB Meeting March 28,2007 Page 2 of 5 • 2. 118 Washington Street (Gulu Gulu Caf6)—Proposed outdoor cafe abutting Lappin Park Hartford introduces Steve Feldman, owner of the caf6, who states that it is a European- style caf6 by day, and eclectic beer and wine bar at night. Feldman adds that he currently owns another Gulu Gulu Caf6 in Lynn. Durand asks Feldman if he will continue to occupy the location in Lynn. Feldman states that yes, he will continue to operate the caf6 in Lynn, as well as Salem. Kennedy arrives at 6:15 p.m. Hartford states that in addition to needing DBA and SRA approval, Mr. Feldman is seeking approval from the licensing board. She adds that the Board of Health has already approved this caf6, and the SRA has approved the location. Hartford says that the design for the outside tables and chairs at "A Fresh Taste of Asia"was approved but the owner couldn't afford the furniture last year and will not be able to afford it this year. She adds that the owner of"A Fresh Taste of Asia"will purchase the same thing that is approved for the Gulu Gulu Caf6. Feldman states that the stanchions and the 1/4"thick steel cable which connects to the • stanchions will be painted black. Durand asks for a specific description of the device which will attach the steel cable to the stanchions. Feldman states that it will be attached with a hook and clamps. Durand states that it is important to have a good, professional looking connection because if it is not done well the DRB will reject it. He asks about the location of the lights, and whether there is a plan showing the location of the stanchions and cable. Hartford points out the location of the plan. The members look over the plan. Durand asks how far out from the table the stanchions will be. He wants to see the area that will be enclosed by the stanchions before the DRB can approve it. Jaquith states that he wishes to see the light pole on the plan of the tables and the stanchions. Kennedy asks about the entry point for the outdoor cafe area, and the distance from the • sidewalk and curb on Essex Street. DRB Meeting March 28,2007 Page 3 of 5 • Durand states that at least 6 feet of space will be needed between the tables. He asks about the height of the stanchions. Feldman states that the stanchions will be 4 feet tall. Hartford asks about the planters. Durand states that he needs to see where the planters will be placed on the plan. He adds that they should be movable and they cannot be blocking a public way or access. Feldman states that he is not sure how much room he is allowed to have for placing the stanchions outside of the tables. Durand states that 8 feet would be enough to allow the servers room to move around the seated diners. He adds that the key is not to take too much space away from the public sidewalk and to not confine the tables too much. DeMaio points out that the public area is not confined to the chain but to where the base of the stanchions will extend to. Durand states that he wants to see a sturdy base because he does not want to see these stanchions blowing over in the wind. • Hartford asks if the Cafe will serve outside or if the patrons will take their food out themselves. Feldman states that they will serve outside. Hartford asks if the Board would like to walk outside at the beginning of the next meeting to look at the site. Durand says that he thinks that would be helpful and they should plan on a short visit to the site at the beginning of the next meeting. Hartford recaps all of the items that the Board wants from Feldman: 1. A plan showing the stanchions, tables, planters, benches, and light pole with the dimensions of each. 2. A better depiction of the stanchions and the base. 3. A better depiction of the device used to connect the cable to the stanchion. 4. The site plan must show the width of the sidewalk and extend from the street to the caf6. Hartford asks the members if they are satisfied with the tables and the chairs and the type • of cable that is being proposed. DRB Meeting March 28,2007 Page 4 of 5 • The members agree that these items are appropriate for the site. Feldman asks if the cable should be thicker. Durand states that the current width of the cable is fine. 3. 118 Washington Street (Gula Gulu Cafe)—Proposed signage lighting and exterior improvements Hartford explains that the hanging sign will be on Essex Street and the wall sign will be facing the park. Durand states that he likes the bracket, and he suggests that the members consider the size of the sign during the site visit next month. He asks where the entry is. Feldman states that the main door will be on Essex Street. Durand states that there is something about the location of the blade sign that isn't right. He looks at the wall sign and asks if it will be lit. Feldman states that two stainless steel lights will be above the wall sign. • Durand questions the type of light and he suggests using a different kind of light. He states that he may need more of an arm on the light over the sign and that two lights may not be enough for the whole sign. Jaquith states that the wall sign could be lowered and the light over the sign could also act to light the cafe. He adds that the light fixtures along the park side could be bigger. He says that the lights become a rhythm in themselves down the whole wall and he suggests using two different kinds of lighting on the sign and the rest of the building. Much discussion ensues about the lights. Durand suggests he get some professional help to make this lighting design work. Jaquith states that the electrical feed must get to these lights. Durand states the he doesn't want to see conduit up and down the brick wall but it could be part of the sign and concealed. He suggests alight beam on the top of the sign which would not really be seen. DeMaio states that the 34 by 52 inch sign is too big and the edge of the tree pit to the building is probably narrower than the sign. He adds that he wishes to see something that shows the location of the sign. He expresses his concern about the current location of the • blade sign stating that it should be closer to the park so that it can draw people in. He DRB Meeting March 28,2007 Page 5 of 5 states that it is quite a task to draw people all the way around to the other door. He suggests shielding the bulbs or frosting the glass to make the bulbs invisible so they won't be distracting. He agrees with Durand that he does not like exposed conduit all over the building. Durand states that he can trust black will be black but he would like to see a sample of the gold. Feldman states that two benches will go on the Essex Street side of the building. Durand states that Feldman must put the benches in the site plan. Durand asks if the planters pictured are the actual planters. Feldman: Yes. Durand asks if there is enough room on the sidewalk for the benches. Kennedy asks if the benches would be in front of the window. Feldman: Yes. Kennedy suggests showing the recess in front of the window on the site plan. • Durand acknowledges that the cafe is a great place and he is in favor of seeing this caf6 here in Salem, but he needs as much information as possible before an approval. He suggests hiring an architect to draw the site plan. Hartford recaps: 1. Represent a lighting plan for sign lighting and site lighting on both sides of the building. 2. Show an elevation of the park-facing wall showing the signage and lighting design. 3. Look again into the dimensions of the blade sign. 4. Provide a color chip for the gold. 5. The benches must be in the site plan with the dimensions of the sidewalk and the window recess. 6. Resubmit the other part of the lighting plan. 7. The planters must be in the site plan. Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. The meeting is adjourned at 7:10 p.m. • ® � ® SalemALEM 11A CLERIC'S OFFICE • Redevelopment Authority 0111 FEB 20 P 3:'"04 REVISED 2-26-07 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday, February 28, 2007-G:OOpm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review • URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building)—Review of the Schematic Design Plans for thero osed redevelopment. P P P 2. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building)—Review of wireless facilities installed on the building. CONTINUED Other Business • Approval of Minutes Thin notice W-48d on "Official BuNetin BOGM City Wolf Ave,, `a?lam, Fuss. on F?'13 4� dao7 51t j; of. ..ul' °IM'I Cs . v39 �Q' r 23A i 3 Of r Pdt.� L. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 ^ (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday, February 28, 2007—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Thud Floor Conference Room C-1 Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy N Paul Durand n Projects Under Review u' m N D N URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS • 1. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building)—Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment. 2. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building) —Review of cell towers installed on the building. Other Business • Approval of Minutes This "truce ISP ad on "Offlr I&I nuilsor BoaW city Hall Ave � , ,_ �;� , � t°r .�r�,� 3C'4� �aty� �g I�{{^�� i1! Wr t�.e:3� Ye'1F'I/ 233 & 232 �� 1.43. • .-- 1l'0 Washington .Strew. < Sa!em, Vlassadwsetts 019'10 • '978) '/745)-9595, Ext 311 ^ Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Meeting February 28, 2007 Page 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD • MEETING MINUTE S February 28,2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, February 28, 2007 at 6:00 pm. Members Michael Blier,Ernest DeMaio,Paul Durand David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. Hartford begins the meeting. 1. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building): Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment Hartford says that Verizon will be coming in to get approval for the equipment on the roof of the building. She reminds the members that tonight the discussion will be on the renovation of the building. She also states that the SRA wishes to see renovation on the street level. • George Atkins, attorney for the applicant, says that Verizon received a building permit before installing the equipment and they plan to come in to get approval from the SRA. He introduces the other attendees including Steve Tompkins, the current owner of the building, Ted Richard, real estate agent for Tompkins, Jeff Holleran, the buyer and developer for the building, and Keith Musinski, and Dan Skolski, the architects and the design team for the renovation. Atkins states his client has looked into a renovation for the first floor exterior but a design has not been finalized. He adds that it is a financial issue. Musinski and Skolski show the drawings of the new design while Musinski explains that the three upper floors will each have 6 units, four 2-bedroom units and two 1-bedroom units. He adds that the first floor will have 3 retail units and 2 residential units. Musinski says that the building has 2 elevator shafts, one of which was taken over by Verizon, and one still exists. He describes the work to be done to the Cromby Street side noting that they will remove the staircase on that side and regularize the fenestration to give the fagade a more uniform look and provide light to the residences. There will be repointing and reconstruction of some of the brick work, and commercial grade aluminum windows will be installed. On the cornice some painting and restoration work will be done. Durand says that the reconstruction brick work must match the existing brick so that it doesn't look patched-in. He adds that taking care to do this will make it look like it was never adjusted and it is not easy to do. He states that the developer must find the exact • brick or reuse some of the existing bricks which are removed. DRB Meeting February 28,2007 Page 2 of 3 DeMaio agrees and states that repointing must also be consistent all over the building. • Durand states he might like to see windows on the alley wall, even if it is only on the comer of the building. Musinski states that it is difficult to stage that. Durand says that it could be done. He adds that the retail entrance on Essex Street doesn't work because of the intermediary vestibule, making it "Class C" space. DeMaio asks where the main entrance for the residences is. Kennedy arrives at 6:15 p.m. Musinski states that the entrance for the residences will be on the Cromby Street side, and points to the entrance on the plan. Durand states that by changing the entrance to the retail space it will have greater value. He adds that in the future it would be great if there could be one large retail space. Atkins asks if Durand is suggesting separate entrances for each retail unit. Durand says that he is, in fact, suggesting that because the common entrance degrades the • retail units. DeMaio asks about the smaller retail space on Cromby Street. He states that the facade does not draw attention to the retail space because the windows are the same there as on the residences. He also agrees with Durand in stating that it would be nice if the whole floor space becomes one big retail space. Durand agrees with the recommendation from the SRA to restore the retail space fagade back to the post-fire design. Jaquith arrives at 6:25 p.m. Durand states that the fagade needs to be more elegant at the retail level in order to satisfy the concern from the SRA. Blier asks if there has been any exploratory work behind the plywood. Musinski says that the building hasn't been sold yet, so they have not had the opportunity to do that. DeMaio asks about plans for the penthouse. • Musinski states that they were not going to do anything with it. DRB Meeting February 28,2007 Page 3 of 3 DeMaio asks if there will be more rooftop units. Musinski states that there may be after the building is finished. Jaquith states that they should forfeit the mushroom windows. DeMaio states that it looks like there is a continuous piece of steel around the window. Durand states that the original look of the windows is better but is more expensive. Kennedy asks what the retail level is doing on the side alley. Musinski states that there is no retail on the side alley. DeMaio asks about parking plans. Musinski states that the residents will use municipal parking. Durand asks if there is anything else. Kennedy asks if the plan is correct, showing access to one room is through the bathroom. Musinski states that it is correct. • Durand says that this project meets the criteria for schematic design approval, and requests a motion for a recommendation to the SRA. Jaquith: Motion to make a recommendation to the SRA to obtain a schematic design with the following conditions: 1. Storefronts should be restored or opened up; 2. Bricks should be reused on the Crombie Street facade,where possible, and the reconstruction of the brick must match the existing building exactly, 3. Idistorical preservation specification for repointing,must be included; 4. Entry point for the retail unit(s) and egress for the residential units should be reconfigured; 5. Storefront on the Crombie Street facade should be looked at and redesigned; 6. Roof plans must be submitted; and 7. Residential entry point along Crombie Street should be more prominent. The motion is seconded by DeMaio. All members are in favor. The motion passes 5-0. Adjourn Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Kennedy. All members are in favor. The • motion passes 5-0. The meeting is adjourned at 6:40 p.m. MA IAL Salem CLERK S OFFICE MERedevelopment Authority 1001 JAN 22 P- 2: 29 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday,January 24, 2007—6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 265 Essex Street (Salem Chamber of Commerce) —Review of proposed signage. 2. 272 Essex Street(Feed your Head Books) —Review of proposed signage. 3. 17 Front Street (I. Mode) —Review of proposed signage. NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR (NRCC) PROJECTS 2. 28 Goodhue Street—Review of the proposed development plans for anew four- story mixed-use structure at 28 Goodhue Street. Other Business • Approval of Minutes .,.s, ..- ,°,' _ 317 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (9 78) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Meeting January 24,2007 Page I of 8 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD • MEETING MINUTE S January 24,2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street on Wednesday, an � y,J uary 24, 2007 at 6:00 pm. Members Ernie DeMaio,Michael Blier,David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedywere present. Tania Hartford,Economic Development Director, and Andrea Bray, Clerk,were also present. Projects Under Review Urban Renewal Area Projects 1. 265 Essex Street(Salem Chamber of Commence) - Review of Proposed Signage Rinus Oosthoek of the Salem Chamber of Commerce speaks about the design of the sign. Hartford explains that the Chamber's existing sign is not legal so this new sign has been designed to replace the existing one. • The members discuss the new sign and ask for clarification on some of the design components. Oosthoek describes the sign and explains that one sign will be in the window and another will be next to the door. The existing sign will be removed. The sign bracket will be replaced. The sign will be hung just below the second floor window sill. It will be a carved blue sign with gold leaf. DeMaio: Motion to approve the sign design,seconded by Kennedy. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. 2._ 272 Essex Street(Feed you Head Books) - Review of Proposed Signage Harford explains that this shop is across the street from the Chamber of Commerce. Shop owner Randie Farmelant explains her plans for this sign. DeMaio asks Hartford for some information about the sign. Hartford explains that this sign is slightly larger than what is allowed by the Board. Kennedy asks for clarification about the color. • Fannelant says that the sign will be orange,not red, or red-orange. DRB Meeting January 24,2007 Page 2 of 8 • Kennedy states that he likes the design but the sign seems big for the space. Blier agrees with Kennedy saying that he is concerned about the size of the sign. DeMaio asks about the bracket. Jose Neto,who designed the sign and the bracket,shows a picture of the bracket and explains that he wishes to keep the bracket simple. Blier states that the bracket design seems consistent with that building and that the area could absorb the design. Hartford states that there is a bracket on the other side of the building which is more ornate. Jaquith suggests reducing the size of the sign and cautions that the width will be challenged if the height is brought down to 3 feet,unless the sign is squatter. He suggests bringing the width down to 2'- 6". Hartford suggests that the Board also approve the vinyl graphics which are currently in the window. Jose Neto states that the vinyl graphics will be taken down,so it will not be necessary for • the Board to approve them DeMaio: Motion to approve the design of the sign with a width of 2'- 6",seconded by Jaquith. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. 3. 17 Front Street(J.Mode) - Review of Proposed Signage Hartford states that SRA does note allow for vertical lettering, but she recommends that the DRB go ahead with this review so the applicant can follow-up later with the SRA. Janet Barsanti, owner, explains the design as a cut-through sign. She shows a sample of the bracket and picture of other signs on the street. Jaquith states that he likes the sign and he has no problem with the vertical lettering if the word is short, as it is with the proposed sign. Kennedy states that the bracket seems a little too weighty for the sign, and that it needs to be more delicate. He suggests using the same type of bracket as with the "Feed your Head Books" store. Blier asks Barsanti for the dimensions of the sculptural dress form. He expresses concern about the possibility of collecting snow which will add weight. • DeMaio states that this is the type of sign that the Board is always hoping for because it is very creative and differs from a two-dimensional sign. DRB Meeting January 24,2007 Page 3 of 8 • Blier asks what determines the location of the wall sign. Barsanti explains that the sign is centered above the two stores windows. DeMaio asks if the mounting bolts will be visible. Barsanti says that the mounting bolts will be concealed. Kennedy says that he is not in favor of the proposed location of the wall sign. Jaquith agrees with Kennedy and states that he would prefer to see the sign lower than and to the right of the proposed location. Blier says that the proposed location of the sign would not precisely identify the location of the shop. DeMaio suggests aligning the top of the sign with the bottom of the stone lentil on the window. Hartford states that it would be too low to conform to the sign ordinance. Kennedy asks if the bottom of the sign could be aligned with the bottom of the stone lentil. • He then suggests that the sign be slightly smaller to fit the space better. DeMaio asks Hartford if the Board will need to see the wall sign again. Hartford says that it would not be necessary if the Board assign a representative to follow-up on the design and location of the wall sign. The members agree that Kennedy will represent the Board and follow-up on the correct size and location of the wall sign. DeMaio recaps the Board's recommendation to approve the design of the hanging sign including the vertical lettering,and approve the wall sign with the changes discussed,with the condition that the attachments for the wall sign are concealed. Jaquith requests that Hartford advise the SRA that the DRB strongly suggests accepting the vertical lettering on this sign. Hartford agrees to pass that recommendation on to the SRA. Kennedy. Motion to approve the signs with the conditions that the bracket of the hanging sign be modified to be lighter than what was proposed; the wall sign be moved to the area closer to the building edge and aligned so that the bottom of the sign aligns with the bottom of the stone lentil of the windows; and the mounting bolts for the wall mounted sign • be concealed,seconded by Blier. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. DRB Meeting January 24,2007 Page 4 of 8 North River Canal CorridorNRCC) Projects • 4. 28 Goodhue Street— Review of the proposed development plans for a new four- story mixed-use structure at 28 Goodhue Street. Hartford updates the Board on the progress of this project by listing all of the issues brought up at the last meeting. These issues include the fence (it can't be chain link),the landscaping plan,the look of the storefronts,the roofing materials,the finishes,the color palette, and the articulation in the bay windows. She adds that the Board wishes to see the unit layouts. Attomey Joseph Correnti, representing North River Canal LLC, and Tom Galvin, architect, Joseph Riggs Associates, explain the plans. Correnti states that they will not use a chain link fence and because the fence will stretch for 400 feet along the North River,this will be a huge expense. Much discussion ensues regarding the look of the fence. Blier states that he likes the look of the old wall along the canal and would not like to see the fence on top of it. Correnti says that the fence will not go on top of the wall, but on the property side of the wall. • DeMaio asks how this fence will relate to other fences. Hartford states that currently there are no other fences there. DeMaio expresses concern about having a hodgepodge of different fences along the canal. Martin Imm of 174 Federal Street, Co-Chair of the Federal Street Resident's Association, states that there will be a public way along the canal, and the public storage facility will soon be doing work there. DeMaio suggests recommending that the Planning Board consider the fence in the broader context of the entire canal redevelopment plans,and that this developer comply with the Board's decision about the fence. Correnti explains the plantings. Blier explains that the Maples are not necessarily a good street tree and that Cornus Florida (Dogwood) need to be treated every year, making it expensive to maintain. Correnti makes a note of Blier's comments. Correnti describes the new design for the storefront windows,stating that the building's base • has some recessed panels painted the same green color as that on the upper level. He goes DRB Meeting January 24,2007 Page 5 of 8 on to describe the complete color scheme of the exterior. He shows the fiberglass roofing • material known as "shangles" which resembles slate. Jaquith states that he feels that the base of the building has improved since the last meeting, and expresses his desire for the recessed panel divisions to be in line with the windows' muntin lines. Correnti makes a note of Jaquith's suggestion. DeMaio asks if the ground floor commercial space has flexibility to be redesigned based on future tenants'demands. Correnti says that the ground floor space is flexible. DeMain expresses concern with the material used on the base of the building stating that it will not hold up over time. He adds that the materials work well from a distance, but are challenged up close. Correnti makes another note. Jaquith asks about the type of ownership for the building. Correnti states that there will be a combination of resident condominium space and • commercial rentals. Blier states that he feels that the new design is much improved. Jaquith asks about the lighting. Correnti shows the Board the exterior lighting plan. He comments on the bay articulation, stating that there will be balconies on the back and left. Jaquith asks about the four units on the right and suggests adding balconies to those units as well. DeMaio asks about services for the residential units. Correnti states that the owners are obliged to take out their own trash. Jaquith reminds Correnti and Galvin to think about recycling. Much discussion ensues about the size and location of the dumpster area. Blier asks about the viability of the original brick structure. Correnti states that it will go away because it serves no function to the development. • Blier reminds Correnti that the structure was previously described as an amenity. DRB Meeting January 24,2007 Page 6 of 8 • Galvin says that there are currently no plans for the brick structure,but that it will probably stay there, and maybe it could be an enclosed garden. Martin Imm, of 174 Federal Street, comments on the plans. He says that the fagade on Goodhue Street is monolithic and wishes that there was more variation in the planes. He expresses his displeasure with the chain link fence across the canal on Bridge Street. He encourages the Board's efforts to see that the design be fust rate and to really say"Salem", stating that is will be a keynote building in the area. Darrow Lebovici, of 122 Federal Street,echoes Imm's statement and says that he is looking forward to other development projects. He compliments the Board on the work that was done on the Gateway Center. Lebovici expresses disappointment with this building,stating that it doesn't say"Salem" and that it doesn't say anything to him He asks that the Board to find ways to reflect and honor the industrial buildings in the area. Jaquith disagrees with Lebovici's statement that this is not a Salem-type building, and acknowledges that it is not and industrial building. He adds that the trim will break-up the monolithic look somewhat,and the exterior lighting design will make the building look like retail space. He suggests adding two more bays on the front elevation. Imm sites a Cambridge building that has more variety in the facade which enhances the streetscape. • DeMaio states that his issue is what is at the street level,specifically the very bold color, which he describes as not pedestrian-friendly. Jaquith reminds the group about some conditions that have not yet been addressed. Of note are the end panels which need some work. He agrees with DeMain about the base color being too strong. Galvin asks if there is a color pallet that the Board would suggest. DeMaio suggests breaking up the base color, or playing with different shades of the same color. Kennedy states that the other color is so strong that it takes the base color down a bit. Galvin asks if the Board is recommending working with different shades of this color. DeMaio suggests more than one color to take a bit of the curse off the mass of the building. Imm asks when the perspective drawings will be updated. Correnti states that they will be ready next week for the Planning Board meeting. • Galvin asks if the DRB will recommend to the Planning Board that the DRB maintain jurisdiction over the design. DRB Meeting January 24, 2007 Page 7 of 8 Hartford states that it is possible to do this, and the Planning Board can approve the application pending DRB approval. Galvin expresses his concern for attaining a timely approval. Hartford suggests having a special meeting before February 15. Jaquith agrees that another meeting is in order and says that it is better if the Board spends the effort now because this is the first project in this area. Darrow Lebovici suggests making the entryway more prominent. Blier states that that will be possible with landscaping and understory plantings rather than architecture. He mentions that the developers will need to make a stronger case for the shangles. DeMaio suggests bringing the colors that are above down to the ground. Kennedy suggests adding a bay to the end unit on the south elevation, or possibly another element in the Second Empire style. Blier asks about the location of the heating and cooling systems. • Correnti explains that they will be on the roof and concealed behind a parapet wall. He adds that the hidden roof will have a base of rubber. Hartford recaps the desire for a special meeting and asks if the Board wants them to reconsider the materials. DeMaio states that he has a problem bringing those materials down to the ground. Jaquith states that he wishes to see articulation in the elevation Hartfort recaps some of the Board's decisions, including amending the landscaping at the entryway and clearing up the planting schedule. She adds that the Board will continue the discussion on the fence. DeMaio states that he wishes to put the fence issue to the Planning Board. Hartford asks about the detail on the edge of the parking lot. Correnti states that there is precast concrete curbing at the edge of the parking lot. Jaquith asks for further information about the trash. There is a discussion about the possible dates for the special meeting. DRB Meeting January 24,2007 Page 8 of 8 The parties agree to meet on Tuesday,February 6, 1007,at 6:00 p.m isBlier. Motion to continue, seconded by Jaquith. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. Other Business 5. Approval of minutes Hartford agrees to defer the approval of the previous meetings'minutes until the next meeting. Adjourn Kennedy: Motion to adjourn,seconded by Jaquith. All members vote in favor. The motion passes 4-0. The meeting is adjourned at 8:20 p.m • • Salem ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday,December 20,2006 - 6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 10 Federal Street- Review of Schematic Design Plans for the addition of one story to the proposed on-site parking garage. • NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR(NRCQ PROJECTS 2. 28 Goodhue Street- Review of the proposed development plans for anew four- story mixed-use structure at 28 Goodhue Street. Other Business • Approval of Minutes • Approval of 2007 Meeting Schedule • 120 Washington Street • Salem Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 619-5685 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRAFT-DRB Meeting December 20, 2006 Page I of 2 • DRAFT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 20,2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday,December 20,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Paul Durand,Michael Blier,David Jaquith and Glenn Kennedywere present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner,was also present. Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order. Proiects Under Review 1. 10 Federal Street Attorney George Atkins and architect Peter Gerhart present schematic design plans for • the addition of one story to the proposed on-site parking garage. The DRB discusses the proposal with Atkins and Gerhart. Kennedy moves to recommended approval of the Schematic Design Plans for the construction of a two-level garage at 10 Federal Street with the following conditions: 1. Elevations of all sides of the building that include the architectural features; 2. A lighting plan; 3. A landscaping plan that takes into account where the current trees are and any new trees that will be planted; and 4. Attention given to the relationship of the structure to the neighboring historic building. Jaquith seconds the motion. (Passes 4-0) 2. 28 Goodhue Street Attorney Joseph Correnti, representing North River Canal LLC,provided an overview of the project. He explained that his client removed all the buildings on the site, aside from a small brick building. He stated that they are proposing to construct a 4-story mixed-use building in the NRCC district. The project did receive the necessary variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) to allow for 44 units,they are filing with the • Conservation Commission, and are currently before the Planning Board for site plan review. Design Review Board Meeting Minutes September 26, 2007 Page 2 of 2 • The DRB recommended that the item be continued to their January 24,2007 meeting. The Board asked that the following items be included in the revised drawings of the project: 1. Fence design 2. Landscaping plan including placement of landscaping on island 3. Alignment of first floor 4. Roof and other finish material samples 5. Color palate 6. Varied building articulation 7. Unit layout The discussion is continued to the January 24, 2007 DRB meeting. Jaquith: Motion to adjourn,seconded by-Kennedy. (Passes 4-0) • • C'. SalemIiL � . • Redevelopment J' 0 OR Authority � z DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Special Meeting Wednesday, December 6, 2006—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 85 Lafayette Street (New Dimensions in TechnoloU) —Continued review of proposed lighting. • 2. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Tail) —Continued review of Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail. Other Business This nottcs poeted on "Official ouf{st€n Board" 0`4 Hail A- NOV 3 0 [UOS 2 '3 t 'fi t of i kSeQ t1_10 WaShincuto[l Street • Saltm, tYlasSadlUse,its 01970 • (97(3) "145-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes December 6,2006 Page 1 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 6, 2006 A re meeting of the Salem Des' Review Board RB was held in the third floor conference regular g Design (DRB) room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday,December 6,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Michael Blier, Paul Durand, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner,was also present. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. 50 St. Peter Street(Old Salem 190 Ms. Hartford introduced Penn Lindsey of New Boston Ventures,LLC and their architects,Dan Ricciarelli and Cindy Giugliano of Finegold,Alexander+ Associates, Inc. Ms. Giugliano went through the list of outstanding issues the Board had with the project. Ms. Giugliano presented the plans for the trash receptacles at the Jail. Mr. DeMain asked the color they would be painted. Ms. Giughano said that it was to be determined but most likely grey and they would be built into the building. Mr. DeMaio asked why they were attached to the building. Ms. Giugliano replied that it was to • avoid articles from getting stuck behind them. Mr.Jaquith asked if the receptacles would be use for only trash or if they would also include recycling bins. Mr. Ricciarelli replied that they typically have the residents recycle in their units and take their bins to the curb each week. Mr. Durand asked the number of units in the Jail that these trash receptacles would be servicing. Mr. Ricciarelli stated there were 17. Mr.Jaquith asked who would pick up the trash. Mr.Lindsay replied that it would be a private company picking up the trash. Mr. Blier asked if they were water tight. Ms. Giugliano replied that they were not Mr. Blier stated that it was a good reason to keep the recycling indoors. Mr. Durand asked how the barrels would be assigned and whether one could be used for recycling. Mr.Jaquith stated that one would not likely be enough. Mr. Ricciarelli stated that the intent was for the receptacles to all be used for trash and each individual unit be responsible for recycling. Mr. Durand stated that it was an operational issue and adding an additional pick-up would take care of any issues. The Board agreed that they had no issues with the receptacles. Mr. Ricciarelli said that they would 40 address the recycling issue later when they figure out a trash program for the building. DRB Minutes December 6,2006 Page 2 • Ms. Giugliano stated that the next item for review was the sample of the window for the Jail Keeper's House with 5/8`s inch muttons. Mr.Jaquith asked who was making the window. Ms. Giugliano stated that Eagle was making the windows and they would have a bronze spacer bar. The Board agreed that the window was fine. Ms. Giugliano noted that she found another sample of material for the new building that had the aggregate that the Board liked and was a better match than the material the Board originally agreed on. She presented the material. Mr. DeMaio stated that the problem was really the aggregate and this sample looks good,although he was not as sure about the color. Ms. Giugliano stated that the color was a better match. Mr. Durand asked if the size presented was the size that the blocks would be. Ms. Giugliano replied that it was not. The size the blocks that will be installed are 16 x 24 but it was too large for a sample. The Board agreed to the sample change for the new building. Ms. Giugliano presented the next item,which was the requirement to show the proposed lights on the rendered drawings. She presented the rendering to the Board. • Mr.DeMain asked if there would be lighting on the cupolas. Mr. Ricciarelli said that they looked at it but did not think it would work because its actual living space. Mr. Durand asked if there would be internal lights in the cupolas. Mr. Lindsay said that there would. Mr. DeMaio asked if they had any other discussions on lighting with the other Boards. Mr. Ricciarelli said that they had met with the Planning Board and they were okay with the lighting choices presented. Mr. Durand said that with the lights happening in the building it was most likely enough. He said that they did not want to light the building like a monument. Ms. Giugliano noted some building lighting,which accentuated the granite. Mr. Ricciarelli also noted that they would have path lights on the site. The Board agreed that they were okay with the lighting plan. Ms. Giugliano presented the final design plans for the Barn. She said that they looked at making the Barn more traditional and tried to look at older photos to determine where the windows existed. She also noted that the new design has two bi-parting doors as opposed to one sliding door. Mr. Ricciarel i added that David Hark,their preservation consultant,was doing a paint analysis to . determine the original color. The Board agreed that they were okay with the Bam redesign. DRB Minutes December 6,2006 Page 3 • Ms. Giughano stated that the Jail Historic Review team asked that the second portico on the Jail Keeper's House be more suspended so that it did not compete with the main entrance portico. She showed the rendering with the suspended portico. Mr.Jaquith said that it looked good. The Board agreed that they were all okay with the redesign of the second portico. Ms. Giugliano said that the last item they were to look at was to add some verticality to the rear elevation of the new building. She presented the plans. She said that she is trying to make it have more of a townhouse feel but they are still working on it. Mr. Ricciarel i said that it was better but not quite there yet. Stanley Smith,member of the public, asked if adding drain pipes or playing with the masonry might help with the problem. Mr. Durand stated that a change in plane is what they need. Mr. DeMaio offered that they could even make a change in the brick bond. Mr. Smith stated that they could add a narrow tall window above the second floor doorways. Mr. Durand replied that he thought it would clutter the doorway too much. He offered that a higher • doorway might be nice. He said that a slight change in plane is really all they need;something subtle. Mr. DeMaio noted that a bond of brick that accentuates the vertical would work well and be subtle. Mr. Durand stated that they do not want to over decorate it too much. Mr. Durand stated that they needed a recommendation. He emphasized that the design team understands the design intent of the Board and should incorporate that into the construction drawings,which they will review. Ms. Hartford read through the recommendation: recommendation of approval of the Final Design Plans for the construction of a mixed-use development at 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail) taking into consideration the design intent discussed with the DRB on the final modifications to Building D and with the following conditions: The final site construction plans must be reviewed and approved by the DRB prior to a building permit being issued. They must conform to the plans submitted and approved by the DRB;and the signage plan must be submitted to the DRB for review prior to installation. Mr.Kennedy moved to recommend approval with the conditions mentioned. Mr.Jaquith seconded the motion. Motion passed (5-0). 2. 85 Lafayette Street (New Dimensions in Technology) • Ms. Hartford provided the Board with an overview of the project. She stated that at the last meeting,the Board asked the owner to reduce the number of lights at the project from five to three. DRB Minutes December 6,2006 Page 4 She said that the owner reviewed the Board's suggestion with his electrician and sign company and both agreed that three lights would be too few. Ms. Hartford stated that she looked at other signs that were the same size or smaller in the downtown and many have more than three lights, such as the Dunkin Donuts on Washington Street,which has four lights on a smaller sign. She said the Board also asked for more true renderings and scaled drawings/specifications of what would be installed. She explained that Mr. DeMaio reviewed the submittal and thought it was a better rendering and was satisfied with what was submitted. Mr. DeMaio stated that this business would not be open all the time like Dunkin Donuts and would not require the same degree of lighting. Mr. Durand stated that he thinks four lights are okay. He said he does not feel he needs it but is willing to compromise. Mr.Jaquith said that he thinks that with three lights there would be some spots on the sign that would not be lighted. Mr.Jaquith moved to recommend approval of the revised lighting package to reflect four (4) gooseneck lights being installed, as opposed to five. Mr. DeMaio seconded the motion. Motion passed (5-0). OTHER BUSINESS • Mr. Kennedy stated that the windows at 17-21 Front Street look great. He extended his "kudos" to the Board for making this project better than what was presented. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board, Mr. Kennedy moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Jaquith seconded the motion. Motion passed (5-0). ,e Salem CITY cd. sO,ErI, MA CL�ERK'S,O,ff•ILE • Redevelopment ® Authority 1006 NOV q-.P . Ia 38 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday, November 15, 2006 —6:00pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Projects Under Review URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 85 Lafayette Street (New Dimensions in Technology —Review of proposed signage and lighting. • 2. 10 Derby Square ,_avoie Group)—Review of proposed signage. 3. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem jail) — Continued review of Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail. Minutes — Approval of the minutes from the September 27, 2006 DRB Meeting, October 3, 2006, and October 17, 2006 Special DRB Meeting. Other Business This notic-a posto d on "Q;ficiaf Bull 4ln Board" at ��3a!&,r, Mass. o �� 23A & 23B of M-G. " " ' Chw SM 'il ill"toll Strcc! ^ ti;Jcm. (11971) • (97ti) 74 -959 , Fxt 311 • Fax (97S) 740-0404 DRB Minutes November 15,2006 Page 1 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15,2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,November 15,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Paul Durand, Ernest DeMaio and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner was also present. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. 85 Lafayette Street(New Dimensions in Technology) Ms.Hartford introduced the project She noted that the sign changed slightly since it was approved by the Board. The size increased slightly to accommodate the lighting. The proposal includes the installation of 5 gooseneck lights above the sign,as presented in the specifications submitted Mr.Durand stated that he thought the five lights were overkill. Larry Kahn,owner of NDT,replied that they looked at the sign with four lights but thought that five would light the dark street better. Mr.Durand stated that generally you would have some type of cadence with the lighting on the building rather than grouping all the lights at one location on the building. Mr. Kahn replied that his end of the building was different than the other part of the building. He referred to the photos. • Mr.Durand asked the purpose of the lights. Mr. Kahn replied that they were to light the sign and the sidewalk. Mr.DeMaio questioned the scale of the drawings submitted. He said that the drawings did not meet the specification indicated in the packet. He said he would like the owner to pick a specification of light and draw it to scale so that it is drawn the way it will be installed Mr. Kahn asked if the Board was okay with the look of the sign and lighting. Mr.DeMain stated that they did not have objections to the look of the sign with goosenecks. Mr.Durand added that the issue was that all the emphasis is on one bay of this building. Mr.Kahn noted that he was the only tenant in that part of the building. Mr. Kennedy agreed that five lights were too many. He said that when you look at it to scale they actually only need about three lights. The Board agreed that the sign was okay with three lights. They also asked that Mr.DeMain be designated as the DRB representative to review the scale of the revised drawings to ensure it is drawn the way it will be installed. Mr. Kennedy moved to recommend approval of the signage and lighting with the condition that the number of lights be reduced to three and the scale is reviewed by Mr.DeMaio prior to going to the SRA. Mr. DeMaio seconded the motion. Motion passed(3-0). • DRB Minutes November 15,2006 Page 2 • 2. 10 Derby Square (Lavoie GroQ) Donna Lavoie,owner of the Lavoie Group,presented her sign proposal. Mr. Kennedy asked if the signs would be centered in the windows. Ms.Lavoie said it would be. Mr. Kennedy moved to recommend approval of the signage as submitted. Mr.DeMaio seconded the motion. Motion passed(3-0). 3. 50 St. Peter Street(Old Salem jail) Ms.Hartford introduced Penn Lindsey of New Boston Ventures,LLC and their architects,Dan Ricciarelli Cindy Giugliano of Finegold,Alexander+Associates,Inc. The revised final design plans were presented to the Board. Mr. Kennedy asked about the finish of the materials for the new building. Ms. Giugliano replied ground face. She said they are trying to find a larger sample size to show the Board. She said they are going with a 16"x 24"monumental size blocks for the building. Mr. Kennedy asked for the pattern. Ms. Giugliano replied they were shown on the elevations. She also noted that at the historic review committee meeting,it was requested that some granite be incorporated into the building and she said they are looking at doing that at the entranceway. Mr. Kennedy said that he is interested in seeing what becomes of the main entranceway at the Jail and the enclosure for the trash is important. • Mr. Kennedy had questions about the back terraces at the Jail Keeper's House. Mr.Ricciarelli clarified. Ms. Giugliano went through the other changes. She said that they changed the materials of the decks on the new building from pressure treated wood to steeL She said that the other modification was that they took out the horizontal rails initially proposed. She also noted that they looked at the window screens and are proposing half screens;she noted the phantom screens were too expensive. She said they are going with a thinner mutton on the Jail Keeper's House and would have a sample of that sash by the next meeting. She presented the updated site plan and lighting plan. She said they would come back to the Board with a signage plan later. Mr.DeMaio asked if they could take the lighting specifications and put them into the elevation of where they are going to be placed. Mr.Lindsay asked if the Board liked the direction of where they were going with the lights. Mr. Durand stated that they did like the lights. Ms. Giughano presented details of the revised light monitors. The Board was okay with the changes. Larry Spang,member of the public,asked about trash removaL Mr.Ricciarelli said that they did have a meeting with the Board of Health and they will be removing it from the site. Ms.Giugliano stated that when they met with the historic review team they were talking about replacing the second portico on the Jail Keeper's House with a canopy with brackets. She said she was looking into that redesign. Mr.DeMain stated that when he saw the cleaning sample of the Jail Keeper's House the mortar looked really white. He said that when the developer goes back to clean the entire building,it will really change the face of • that building and the team should consider that in the final scheme. DRB Minutes November 15,2006 Page 3 Ms. Hartford went through the outstanding items: 1. Enclosure on the trash both at the jail and the Jail Keepers House. 2. Sample of window detail at the Jail Keepers House. 3. Larger sample of the material being used on the new building. 4. Rendering of the proposed lights in the elevation. 5. Final design of the Barn. 6. Redesign of the second portico on the jail Keepers House as suggested by the historic team. 7. Renderings of the rear elevation on the new building taking into account the suggestions by the historic team and reiterated by the DRB. The DRB agreed to meet again on December 6,2006 at 6:OOpm to continue the discussion on the Jail- MINUTES Ms.Hartford told the Board that the minutes for the previous meetings were not complete. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board,Mr.Kennedy moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr.DeMaio seconded the motion. Motion passed(3-0). • Salem CJ-1Y OF ALEM, MA 7 ® Redevelopment CLERK'S OFFICE Authority 100b OCT 19 p 2: 413 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD" Regular Meeting Wednesday, October 25, 2006—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Christoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Projects Under Review URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 85 Lafayette Street (New Dimensions in Technology) —Review of proposed signage and lighting. 2. 157 Washington Street (Passage to India) —Review of proposed signage and lighting. 3. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Tail) —Continued review of Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail. Minutes— Approval of the minutes from the September 27, 2006 DRB Meeting and October 3, 2006 Special DRB Meeting. Other Business This notice portfd o, "C A :i a4 Bulletin Board" City Hall Ave., 511Vr. r'„ f WSS. or, OcT. 15, 'A00'(- at .) : 4 a nrn in ai=rdarw With ChV. 36 ftro 23A & 23B Of M.C.L. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Meeting October 25,2006 Page 1 of 7 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES October 25 2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, October 25,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Ernie DeMaio,David Jaquith and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner and Melissa Pagliaro, Clerk were also present. Projects Under Review 1. New Dimensions in Technology, 85 Lafayette Street Hartford started with the Kahn first on the agenda to review signage and lighting. Kahn says he does not have light specs ready yet but he is proposing to erect sign close to • what Kelleher Williams has. Hartford states the sign is 52" from t eh top of the window to the roofline. Kennedy states his is to see more character in the typography DeMaio asks if the letters were flat. Kahn says that they were bold and slightly raised. He says he wants to be consistent with his neighbor. The sign will be a bit classier if it is consistent with neighbor. Kennedy states that the other sign had a bit more character. DeMaio says that the letters look like the others. Kahn says that he is not looking for flat. He says that the sign company has been instructed to follow the style of the Kelleher Williams sign. Jaquith says he would rather see more black on each end of sign because of all the lettering but without expanding lettering. He thinks the sign needs a little more depth. Kennedy agrees with Jaquith. Jaquith asks about the lighting. DRB Meeting Minutes September 26,2007 Page 2 of 7 Hartford says that he is considering goose neck lighting but is not sure how to deal with the conduits. Kahn says he is working with the electrician to put 5 goose neck lights above the sign. Hartford asks the Board to offer any suggestions. Jaquith suggests that it may not be bad to float signs a little bit. Kahn says that area is dark. He says they are thinking of black fixtures. Hartford says he will come back to the DRB with specifications. Jaquith says he would like it to come out and to talk it over with electrician to see what he can do about the conduit. Kahn says his goal tonight was to approval for the sign and then come back with his specs for the sign and lights. DeMaio moves to recommend approval of the sign proposal with the conditions that the sign width run from window to window, that the increased area be filled with additional • black background and that the lettering be at least %"to 1/4"bigger. Kennedy seconds the motion (Passes 3-0) 2. Passage to India, 157 Washington Street Hartford says that Hugh Kerr proposes to install a blade sign at Passage to India because he has problems with visibility. Kerr states that when you are coming down Washington Street you cannot see anything because the original lighting was done incorrectly. He thinks that gooseneck lights should be on top of sign. He says there is a panel box behind the sign so that no wires will be seen. It does not matter to him what color the lights are. Jaquith suggested adjusting the stem. Kerr states that he is just looking for visibility. Kennedy says Ken is headed in the right direction regarding visibility but is not sure if the lighting is in the right place. DeMaio says that he is concerned that the lighting might be a distraction to pedestrians walking on the sidewalk and maybe light should be shielded. He says that the light • should be focused on the sign not the sidewalk. DRB Meering Minutes September 26,2007 Page 3 of 7 • Jaquith says that maybe just a simple fixture under the eave might do. He agrees with Kennedy on recommending approval of the sign. Hartford says she will get the lighting specification from Kerr and give it to Jaquith to review. Jaquith moves to recommend approval. Motion seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0) 3. Old Salem Jail(50 St. Peter Street) Hartford states that the site visit had been cancelled. It may take place tomorrow morning. She says this project will be back in front of the DRB on November 15`h. She says the visit should be done before then. Dan Ricciarelli, architect, Finegold Alexander+Associates, says that they are looking for masonry to use on the building. They are looking for substitutions,possibly Duke or York. • Cindi Giugliano, Architect, Finegold Alexander+ Associates, says the concrete block was ground face and non reflective. Kennedyasked if when it was cleaned if it came back a a tone or yellow. gray Ricciarelli says he was not sure. DeMaio asked for a new spec of the fagade. Jaquith asked if everything is still up in the air. Penn Lindsay,New Boston Ventures, says that they really want to get on the site. Giugliano says it is not an easy match Jaquith says that this should be looked at in field. DeMaio says he wants to see much bigger samples before anything is approved. Giugliano says once the choices are narrowed down she will send larger samples. • DeMaio says that it is important that the entire project is the same material. DRB Meeting Minutes September 26,2007 Page 4 of 7 • Jaquith suggested says that they should try to do a very tight joint in this. Ricciarelli says he would like to see mortar samples when they do the walk through. DeMaio asked if new fill would be in existing building. Giugliano says a lot of existing brick will be reused. Ricciarelli says that the material for the proposed roof is two colors: graphite or silver. He says they are still looking at pricing. DeMaio asked if you will able to see any running of the material over time. Ricciarelli says he did not think so. Giugliano raises the issue of the rail details at Building D and states that the screens are salvaged cell doors. The deck is mahogany with a channel wrapping around the edge. The railing will imitate cell doors with 7/8"metal round bars. • DeMaio asked how the salvaged cell doors were finished. Giugliano says Juliet balconies will have the same wood deck. DeMaio asked if the wood structures will be pressure treated. Giugliano says it is always a problem when a deck is against a veneer. Ricciarelli says that the bars and doors are larger than the bars at windows. He says he is taking the bars off of the windows and putting mahogany bars in. He says that most of the windows in the jail are from the 1970's. He says the brick mold around the windows is interesting. He says he would like to replicate that using all wood windows. He says there will be jamb detail with concrete back up. DeMaio asked to see the elevation. Giugliano says molding will go around the double hung windows. DeMaio asked if screens will be visible on all of these windows. Giugliano says yes. • DeMaio asked if they have thought about any non-double hung windows. DRB Meeting Minutes September 26,2007 Page 5 of 7 • Ricciarelli says they are still working on windows. Jaquith asks if they will be whole screens or half screens and which brand windows are being used. Giugliano says they are using Eagle Windows. Ricciarelli says the Bridge Street side will be same molding and double hung windows. He says that the window shave been a struggle. DeMaio asked if they have thought of clad windows. Giugliano says on the Jail Keepers House she is keeping the same windows but different molding, it will be ''/o round. Jaquith asked if shutters are going back on the building. Giugliano says no. From the audience Barbara Cleary, Historic Salem Inc.asks if the plan is to use the same • windows as the new owns. She says the muttons on the jail are 5/8. She says thinner mutton bars for jail keepers house. Giugliano says Jail Keepers House has 3 different size masonry openings and they will try to work off these sizes. . Hartford asks the applicant to submit these new plans so that the Board can take a better look at plans before the next meeting. DeMaio says that he thinks the screens are much more important on the Jail Building. He thinks it will look odd to have big windows with enormous screens. Ricciarelli says there are products that have retractable screens. Kennedy mentions a"phantom screen". He says they are very nice with brushed aluminum and very small trim. DeMaio says that is one thing people do not think about. It is enough trouble to choose window and then there is no thought to the screens. Ricciarelli agreed with DeMaio about the windows. • Kennedy says to be careful with phantom screens because they snap back. DRB Meeting Minutes September 26, 2007 Page 6 of 7 • Ricciarelli says he wanted to give an update on the proposed site lighting. Giugliano says they have plans for fixtures to accent the tree path but the restaurant lighting may be different. She also says that St. Peter Street egress cuts off shield light. Jaquith asked to be shown where existing lighting is. Ricciarelli says he does not know what is proposed on Bridge Street bypass road yet. Jaquith says that maybe it will be better to to go with the old look. He also asked how the material will tie in with the zinc. Ricciarelli says he wants frame to match roof. DeMaio asks how big the window monitors would be. Giugliano says they are about 5 `/z X 5 %. DeMaio says his concern is that these windows are so big. • Giugliano shows a sample of the doors for 8 doors at back of building. They are aluminum doors. Bulk of doors will be from Eagle. The French and swing doors will have same moldings as windows. The doors for the new building are Simpson mahogany. Kennedy says that we do not see a lot of doors like that around here and wondered how they will hold up. Ricciarelli says that they are very good doors and will hold up very well. Hartford says that she will need copies of all the new drawings. From the audience Cleary asks if there is a plan to re-use some sets of doors that exist. Ricciarelli says they will try to salvage the brick. Kennedy says he would like to see a photographer document the building before the work is done. Cleary asks if there will be details provided for the windows. Jaquith says that the applicant will come back to the DRB with everything presented • tonight. DRB Meeting Minutes September 26, 2007 Page 7 of 7 Cleary asks when the applicant wants to talk with the Massachusetts Historical Society. Hartford says that should be done before the next meeting on November 15`h Y g Hartford also reviews what needs to be done. • Detail drawings • Provide copies of specifications Deck details • Options for screens on jail • Detail on mullets for keepers building • Site plan showing lighting • Details on monitors DeMain says his last comment on the new building is that he thinks there are lots of different styles on windows. He would like to see you take an overall look of the window treatment of the new building. He says he is not sure they all work well together. Jaquith moves to adjourn. • DeMaio seconds the motion(Passes 3-0). • o SalemC; ,�Et1, CLEkWS OFFIC% Redevelopment Authority JOB OCT 12- P l.: Ol DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Special Meeting Tuesday, October 17, 2006—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Chnstoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMato Glenn Kennedy Projects Under Review NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR PROJECTS 1. 401 Bridge Street (Gateway Center)—Continued review of plans for the construction • of a new building. Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the July 26,2006 DRB Meeting,August 3, 2006 Special DRB Meeting, and August 22,2006 DRB Meeting. This notice POE(Nd rn n 0 fiat W 2 �x City mall A:0:,., S >M mss r ate � 1 .. 120 Washington Street • Salem. Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 ^ Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes October 17,2006 Page 1 of 1 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 17,2006 A special meeting of the Design Review Board (DRB)was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on October 17,2006 at 6:00 p.m. Members Paul Durand,David Jaquith and Ernest DeMaio were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner,and Melissa Pagliaro, Clerk,were also present. NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR (NRCC) PROJECTS 401 Bridge Street(Gateway Center) The architect for the project,Harry Gundersen, provided an overview of the changes made to the plans since the last DRB meeting. He stated that they did met with the Board of Health and as a result moved the dumpster to the church side of the property. He added that they have made the changes that Mr.Blier suggested at the last meeting in regards to the trees. Mr. Durand asked if the dumpsters were screened. Mr. Gundersen said they were. • Mr. Gundersen stated that they are continuing with slight modifications to the building. He noted that he brought the building father down the road from a design standpoint. Since the last meeting,he has been working on a new approach. He presented the revised plans. Mr.Jaquith stated that he was not sure about the curved building and bay. He thinks there could be a problem with the windows being different sizes. He also noted that he has a concern whether or not something is picking up the brick line and the panels. Mr. Gundersen said that on the larger windows the sills would be lower. Mr. DeMaio said that fust of all a great deal of effort has been put into landscaping the backside and not so much on the west side where the comer property abuts. He did not think there was a lot of thought about how this site would de into the future development of the abutting parcel. Mr. Gundersen replied that there is a visibility issue on that corner due to the way the street curves. He said that ultimately there would be all new sidewalks and plantings but due to the visibility issue they are limited on what they can do there. Mr. Durand asked if there would be a connection between the sites. Mr. Gundersen said that ultimately there would be but not where the traffic comes in. Mr. DeMaio apologized for missing the last meeting. He did read the minutes and understands the concerns of the Board. He thinks the newer version of the building adds more materials and is more interesting to look at. He said it is a little restrained where • improvements were made. He would not mind seeing a bit more. He is a little bit uncomfortable with the massing of building and thinks that maybe some columns could be DRB Minutes October 17,2006 Page 2 of 2 • added to calm it down a bit. He stated that there is a definite improvement. He thinks maybe some low landscape treatments may work to alert people to the entry on the west side of the property. Mr. Durand suggested possibly a curb or a low wall, to separate parking from sidewalk would work on the west side of the property. Mr. DeMain said that maybe some signage or lighting might mark the corners. Mr. Durand stated that he thinks site signage might be nice. Mr. Gundersen said that one issue with signage and the site is that you drive parallel to it. Mr. Durand said that most of his comments have been addressed. He thinks Mr. Gundersen understands what he meant. He also agrees with Mr. DeMaio's comments that the break and rhythm were good. Mr. DeMain said he also noticed that the masonry has changed from the last version. Mr. Gundersen said that he thought it seemed nice with pre cast. Mr.DeMaio suggested that with the Church in the background maybe the two buildings could relate better to each other,perhaps the colors could play off each other. Mr. Durand asked if the issues with the power poles had been addressed. Mr. Gundersen • said the engineer has contacted the power company and they basically said they could do whatever needed. Mr. Durand said they have to be removed for a clean look. Mr. Gundersen agreed but said that cost would be a factor. Mr. Durand said that hopefully between the City,the developer and the Power Company it could be accomplished. Mr. Gundersen said that the Power Company said that it would help if it were of some financial benefit to them. He is not sure if that will actually be the case because of where the power stops. He also noted that if they remove the poles they have to replace the street lighting. Mr. Durand stated it would be great to see something reflect off of the Church. Mr.Jaquith stated the most important changes should be to the top plane of the building. Ms. Hartford went through the conditions of the recommendation: 1. The applicant will submit final construction plans and material samples for review and approval by the DRB prior to obtaining a building permit. 2. The metal entry points should be modified to show a break in the vertical plane at the roofline by at least one-foot. 3. The electrical poles should be removed and the lines should be buried. The streetlights should be removed or replaced with a more aesthetically pleasing light. 4. The masonry chosen for the details on the building should relate to the masonry on the church. • 5. The relocated dumpster must be screened. DRB Minutes October 17,2006 Page 3 of 3 . 6. The corners of the site should be modified to include some additional site features such as low-level plantings, signage or lighting. Mr. DeMain moved to approve the recommendation. Mr.Jaquith seconded the motion. Motion passed (3-0). Martin Imm,member of the public residing at 72 Federal Street, stated he is the co-chair of the Federal Street Neighborhood Association and was active in the crafting of the NRCC Master Plan. He stated that he is in 100%in support of this project. He commended the DRB,noting that the comments have been very constructive. He stated he is pleased that the DRB is moving this project forward. Mr. Durand thanked him on behalf of the Board. He noted that the Board has provided a vital function to make sure that all developers are doing the right thing. He stated that he hopes this Board sends a message to future developers that if your coming to Salem,aim for high standards because this City is a great place. Approval of Minutes Ms. Hartford stated that the Board needed to approve the minutes from the July 26,2006 DRB Meeting,August 3, 2006 Special DRB Meeting,and August 22,2006 DRB Meeting. Mr.Jaquith moved to approve all of the minutes as submitted. Mr. DeMain seconded the • motion. Motion approved (3-0). Adjourn The Board moved to adjourn the meeting. All were in favor. Meeting stands adjourned. • CiT`;` U ,, L J1, MA ® � ® Salem CLERKS OFFICE Redevelopment • Authority 200h .SEP 28,. P,.4 30 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Special Meeting/Site Visit Tuesday, October 3, 2006—8:15am 71 Washington Street, Salem Five Bank Branch (outside) Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Christoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Projects Under Review URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 1. 71 Washington Street (Salem Five Bank) —Continued review of proposed exterior • painting and site visit. This notice post,"i 09' 11 '10al Bulletin Board" City Hall Ave., ;y, "; s.� x 4,. ,O r' SYF, .,18_ �Co(c at q, 3 0 F� irk at til 'M O �. 23A # 235 Of M.G.L. 120 Washington Street • Salem; Massachusetts 01970 ^ (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 ^ Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes October 3,2" Page 1 of 1 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2006 A special meeting of the Design Review Board (DRB)was held on site at 71 Washington Street, outside the Salem Five Branch,on Tuesday,October 3,2006 at 8:30am. Members Michael Blier and Paul Durand were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner,was also present. 1. 71 Washington Street (Salem Five Bank The DRB members reviewed the paint colors shown on a window at 71 Washington Street. There were two shades painted on the window,with one slightly darker than the other. Mr. Durand stated that he was okay with the darker color but would prefer it even darker,to make the windows"pop"more. Mr. Blier agreed that a dark color would be preferred. Mr. Durand asked the applicant to use one to two shades darker on the base color. Mr. Blier agreed. The members also reviewed the proposed doors. They agreed that the doors proposed were in keeping with other storefront doors on the block and recommended approval. • Adjournment There being no further business,the meeting was adjoined. • Page I of 1 Salem • Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday, September 27,2006-6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: C-1 Michael Blier Paul Durand C-'- r-� Christos Christoudias David Jaquith ,�', M c Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy c) r' N q Projects Under Review 9 n z w c-. ®o OTHER PROJECTS "> Y i4t:1 S> ca Fa d,� 1. 50 Palmer Street-Review of amendments to the approved Final Design Plans. Q�C%2 a URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS M 2. 71 Washington Street(Salem Five Bank)-Review of proposed exterior painting. s o 3. 143 Washington Street/32 Front Street(The Distillery)-Review of proposed ca U3 addition of window boxes at the fust floor level. � 4. 120 Washington Street-Review of plans for minor exterior renovations to the c a building facing Barton Square. 5. 50 St. Peter Street (Oldld Salm 1a�Al4-Review of Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail. CONTINUED p : .- 0.> 4 NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR PROJECTS p wix�.1 6. 75 North Street (Creations Architectural Woodwork& Salem Kitchen and Bath) - C-M J44 Continued review of plans for an addition and renovation of property. u r 4C teed 7. 401 Bridge (Gateway Center)-Review of plans for the construction of a new building. Minutes- Approval of the minutes from the July 26,2006 DRB Meeting,August 3,2006 Special DRB Meeting, and August 22,2006 DRB Meeting. • Other Business 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 1 of 1 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 27,2006 A regular meeting of the Design Review Board (DRB)was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday September 27,2006 at 6:00 p.m. Members Michael Blier, Christos Christoudias,Paul Durand,David Jaquith and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford,Economic Development Planner,and Melissa Pagharo,Clerk,were also present. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. 50 Palmer Street Ms. Hartford stated that the City required the applicant to come to the DRB for the project as part of their funding agreement. Mike Whelen, Executive Director, Salem Harbor CDC,and Joe Luna, architect,presented the project Mr.Luna stated that based on the construction quotes received;they were coming in 25% • over budget. He noted that some simplistic structural system changes had to be made in order to make the project work;however,the architecture of the building will remain the same and no significant changes to the exterior of the building will be made. This included some exterior changes to the original design, such as removing the balconies and eliminating the efface at corner of the building and using trim board. In addition, the condensing unit was taken out and the units will have self-contained heating units and no central air conditioning. Also,they are changing the manufacturer of the windows. He also stated that the landscaping budget was reduced by 50%. Mr. Kennedy asked about the air conditioner sleeves and questioned if the color matched the color of the windows. Mr.Luna responded that they would match. He stated that they would prefer not to have individual air conditioning units but they could not make it work with the funding. They went with sleeves so that they could reduce the wear that would occur if the occupants put air conditioner units in the windows. Mr. Blier asked if each unit gets a sleeve for the air conditioner. Mr.Luna responded that each unit would have two, one in the front and one in the back. Mr. Durand stated he was a little bit disappointed that they would not have central air conditioning and asked if there would be ceiling fans to circulate air. Mr. Luna answered that there would not be any ceiling fans.Mr. Durand asked if they could retrofit the 14VAC in the future.Mr.Luna answered that it was possible but would depend on the cost. He said that cutting this piece out was not a huge savings but small cuts all over had to be made. 49 DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 2 of 2 • Mr. Durand asked if the color would stay the same on the comer of the building. Mr. Luna answered that it would. Mr.Jaquith stated that all in all he is okay with the presentation and the changes. Mr. Durand agreed that it has not changed much. He said that he wished the project did not have to change at all but has no issues with the changes. Mr.Jaquith questioned if the windows were the same. Mr. Luna responded that the windows are the same. He also stated that the plan still works the same. He noted that he wished that there could be balconies but they have done the best they can and wants to see the project built. Jim Treadwell,member of the public,asked if this location was in an area for the National Historic Register. Ms. Hartford stated that the project did not need approval from the Historic Commission. He asked if there were required to file a Section 106 review due to the federal funding going into the project Ms. Hartford stated that this was outside the jurisdiction of the DRB and he could check with Jane Guy in the Department and Planning and Community Development for answers to these questions. Walter Power, a member of the public and Chairman of the Planning Board, stated that he was a bit disappointed with the changes. He thinks that Congress Street needs to set the tone for the Point Neighborhood and this project does not set a high standard. He said that • that initially he felt this project was approved too fast and now there are all of these changes that do not enhance the project Mr. Blier stated that he feels as though the modifications have not made a reduction in the project He said that the designers have struggled to maintain as close to the original as possible. Mr. Durand stated that he felt as though they could have ignored the air conditioning issues but did not. He said that they insisted that the issue was addressed now rather than having problems with deterioration later and, for the most part, the bulk of sleeves would be kept toward back of building. Nina Cohen, staff of the Salem Harbor CDC, said that the Salem Harbor CDC wants high standards as well. She stated that she is very confident that this project is high standard and even though there will be no balconies it is a beautiful design. Mr.Durand stated that the design is not one that has an appearance of affordable housing. Mr. Durand agreed with Mr. Power but felt as though the bay window with roof is nice. He stated that sometimes to stay within the budget,changes have to be made. He stated that he was surprised the design stayed so close to the original. • Mr.Jaquith made a motion to approve the changes to the Final Design Plans. Mr.Blier seconded the motion. Motion passed (5-0) DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 3 of 3 • Mr. Luna thanked the Board and stated that they hope to break ground within a year. URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS 2. 71 Washington Street Ms. Hartford introduced Joe Longo from Salem Five Bank to present the project. Mr. Longo stated that they would like to change the paint color of the exterior windows on 71 Washington Street from the existing teal blue color to a brown, darker than the existing facade color. Mr.Jaquith suggested that the brown could be a hint darker than the chip presented. Mr. Longo stated that they have put up a sample of the color on one of the windows. Mr. Durand suggested the Board go and take a look at the sample colors on the building before making a recommendation to the SRA. The Board did ask that they provide a sample slightly darker than what was presented. Ms. Hartford asked if the detail on the building would remain. Mr. Longo responded that all the detail would remain the same and be touched up. He stated that the only thing that will change is the blue color. Mr. Longo stated that they also would like to change the front doors to one that is more . consistent with the others on the block. Mr.Jaquith stated that the doors should be looked at on-site as well. The Board agreed to meet at Salem Five Bank at 71 Washington Street on Friday morning, September 29,2006 at 8:15 am. 3. 120 Washington Street Mr. Durand recused himself and left the meeting. Ms. Hartford introduced the project and the applicant,Dave Steinberg,and his architect, Dana Weeder. Mr. Steinberg stated that the plan is to construct five residential units in part of the space formally occupied by the Phoenix School. He noted that two of the units will have entrances off of Essex Street and three of will have entrances off of Barton Square. Mr.Weeder explained that the Essex Street facade will not be touched. He says that the Barton Square side will consist of 1 townhouse and 2 flats,which will be entered off new proposed walkway. He noted that the new design elements are the trellis and the walkway. The walkway will be of a Brazilian cherry wood and the trellis will be white. There will be some landscaping building up on existing pads. The plan is to move the dumpster to its • intended location on the other side of the parking lot. DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 4 of 4 • The other exterior additions will be the lighting along the walkway. There will be no changes to the building other than three windows that will become doors. All other existing windows will remain. Mr.Blier asked the reason for the trellis structure. Mr.Weeder responded that it is mainly aesthetics. Mr. Blier questioned the old storefront and asked if this will now be residential. Mr. Weeder responded that it would. Mr. Blier asked how they intend to control the issue of how the glass is shaded from inside for privacy. Mr.Weeder stated that they had not given much thought to that but will consider ideas. Mr. Blier noted that he feels that maybe there is not a problem now but that it could become one. Mr. Weeder suggested maybe installing shutters on the bottom half of the large windows. Mr. Kennedy asked if there is any covering on top of the trellis. Mr.Weeder answered no. Mr. Blier asked the material of the wall. Mr.Weeder answered stucco. Mr. Kennedy highly recommended something to cover the windows. Mr. Bliet asked how trash removal would be handled. Mr. Weeder stated that the residents • will use the existing dumpster that will be moved behind transformer across the parking lot. Mr. Christoudias asked if they thought about lighting options. Mr.Weeder replied that the lights where the doors were more of a security issue. Mr.Jaquith suggested lighting at the trellis. Mr.Weeder replied that they could do that. Mr. Christoudias stated that he has concerns about there not being enough light while walking to building. Mr. Blier asks if the parking spaces were already striped. Mr.Weeder responded yes. Mt.Jaquith stated that the area is more or less quiet. He liked the idea of adding residential units in the location. He asked Ms. Hartford what approval they needed to take tonight. Ms. Hartford responded that the Board could make a recommendation tonight on the project. She noted that this project does not require a two-step review of Schematic and Final Design Review so if they recommended approval it would be the last time they saw the project Mr. Blier asked if there would be interior shutters incorporated on the Essex Street units as well. Mr.Weeder stated that most likely there would not be because there are no residential units on ground floor. Mr. Blier stated that he thought the upper floor windows would warrant some type of half shutter as well seeing as the opening is so large. • Ms. Hartford recapped what the Board discussed: recommendation of approval with the condition that the applicant come up with revised drawings showing some screening of the DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 5 of 5 large windows at both Barton Square and the second floor of Essex Street and present • additional lighting at the trellis. A member of the public,David Hart,asked if the project would be subject to a Section 106 review. Ms. Hartford stated that she would check with Jane Guy. A member of the public,Walter Power,suggested using a Salem standard light for Barton Street side of building. Mr.Jaquith stated that he asked to see something in regards to lighting but will leave the type of lighting up to them. Mr. Kennedy commented that the alignment of the trellis seems to fall in an odd area and questioned if it can be raised a bit. Mr.Weeder stated that he would revise the drawings to reflect that change. Ms. Hartford asked for a representative of the Board to review the changes prior to submittal to the SRA. Mr. Blier volunteered to review the project. Mr.Jaquith asked for a motion made to approve. Mr. Kennedy moved to approve the recommendation with the conditions stated. Mr. Christoudias seconded the motion. Motion passed (40) Mr. Durand returned to meeting. • 4. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jaid Ms. Hartford stated that the Old Salem Jail project team asked to continue the DRB review until the next regular DRB meeting in October. NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR PROJECTS 5. 75 North Street(Creations Architectural& Salem Kitchen And Bathl The architect for the applicant,Richard Griffin,presented the changes made to the design since the last meeting with the DRB. He said that they incorporated all the changes suggested by the Board but the applicant would like to keep the awning over the Kitchen and Bath storefront because it was a fairly new expense. Mr. Durand stated that the applicant gave the Board everything that was asked for except the awning and his feeling is that the awning would be okay to stay on the building. Mr.Jaquith stated that noting the location of the building;he thinks it could be a lot better. He stated that,in his opinion,the shutters should go inside the trim. He thought the south elevation is the nicest He suggested that the dormers are large and should have more glass. He also suggested that the signage have a different background. Mt.Jaquith apologized for missing the last meeting where this was discussed. • Mr. Griffin responded that the owner was very eager to have a 1-t/2 story addition and their desire for square footage is what drove the width of the dormers. DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 6 of 6 • Mr.Durand asked if other windows had shutters if that would address Mr.Jaquith concerns. Mr.Jaquith responded that it might. Mr. Griffin stated that there would be no residential use in the building. He said that the owner would use the space for his wood working shop and storage. He further stated that there might be a possibility in the future of leasing part of the space for commercial use. Mr. Kennedy stated that he felt as though the previous comments from the board were addressed very well and does not have any other issues. Mr.Jaquith pointed out that the gables and eves do not show on elevations. He stated that shutters or a wider trim with minimum clapboards might be better. He also noted that he does not have a big issue with the awning. Mt. Durand stated that he respects Mr.Jaquith's comments. He questioned if the Board required HVAC plans. Mr. Griffin stated that the HVAC would not be visible from the street. Mr. Kennedy recommended that shutters be added on the south elevation because that side is very visible coming over the bridge. Mr.Jaquith asked if the door to the wood working shop could be bought back a bit. Mr. • Griffin stated that it could. A member of the public stated that the chimney seemed out of place with the design and asked the reasoning. Mr. Griffin answered that the chimney is actually housing the elevator shaft,which will be a standard sized shaft Mr. Durand asked for a motion to approve with the conditions stated. Ms. Hartford clarified the conditions of the recommendation,which are as follows: 1. The first and second floor windows on the South Elevation have shutters that match the Front Elevation. 2. The windows in the roof peak of the South and North Elevations contain pediments and headers similar to the lower windows on the South Elevation. 3. The entry under the"Creations" sign should be recessed by l-/2 feet. 4. The gable ends on the dormers should stick out by 8 inches or more and the trim should measure 5 1/4 x 8. 5. The DRB prefers that the awning at the Kitchen and Bath store be removed but understands that the owner is not under an obligation to do so. Ms. Hartford informed the Board that if they recommend approval, this will go straight to • the Planting Board and would not come back to this Board for further approvals. DRB Minutes Sept bu 27,2006 Page 7 of 7 A member of the public,Walter Power, asked if there currently was an elevator at the • building. Mr. Griffin said there was not. The Board moved to approve the recommendation with the stated conditions. Motion passed (5-0). 6. 401 Bridge Street (Gateway Center) Ms. Hartford introduced the representative for the developer,Mr. Gundersen, Gundersen Associates. He stated that the project has been in the planning stages for a long time. He explained that the parcel is very large and currently,the only building on site is a blue metal building. He stated that the property will be subdivided and this site will be 3 t/2 acres. The developer will come back to the city in the future regarding development of the 1 3/4 acres comer portion of the site. Mr. Gundersen stated that the project falls into to new NRCC zoning requirements. He stated that the development team is trying to keep the plan as close to the NRCC requirements as possible. He described the development proposal. There will be a 50-foot landscaped buffer zone between the residential zone and the development. He explained that the zoning also suggests that the building be placed on one of the streets of the zone and the proposed building will be placed on the property line on Bridge Street. Four or five curb cuts will need to be cut into entire parceL Mr. Gundersen stated that the Bridge Street side of the • building will have a colonnade for pedestrian traffic. There will be 233 parking spaces and the building will have 3 floors consisting of a total of 78,000 square feet. The use of the building will be mixed,with mostly office and a small portion of retail that will be approximately 10,000 square feet. There will be a dumpster at the rear of the parking lot which will be enclosed. Recycling will be considered. A neighbor has suggested bike storage. Mr. Gundersen stated that there has been a lot of discussion in the neighborhood about the landscaping plan. He stated that they agreed to put up a 6 or 8-foot wood fence all the way around the property. A 12-foot retaining wall will have a fence around that as well He further added that they would be planting 12-foot high arborvitae and hemlock trees. Decorative honey locust trees will go in parking lot and pear trees will be planted along the sidewalk. There will be more natural landscape under the canopy. Mr. Gundersen stated that the building will be steel flamed. The interior space has not been configured. He stated that most likely it will be medical offices,with the close location to the hospital,and the current designs are for high ceiling to floor space. Mr. Gundersen stated that the building material would be basic. The building will have brick veneer with a punched opening. Above and below the windows and roof will be cast stone, a 7 or 8-inch hardy plank. The roof will be metal,galvanized roof with curved zinc. The windows will be painted aluminum. All mechanical instruments on the roof will be • enclosed. DRB Mnutes - Septembec 27,2006 Page 8 of 8 • Mr. Gundersen added that this is a very dense property and there will be no shadow to the residential properties. Mr. Durand opened it up to public comment and no one responded. He then opened it up for discussion among the board. Mr.Jaquith stated that the landscaping on the site plans appear to be unfinished on both ends. Mr. Gundersen responded that this was done intentionally because this is only Phase 1 of the project. Mr.Jaquith stated that he admires the plan and the concern for neighbors. He stated that he lives on Flint Street and thinks the idea for usage is good. He stated that he wonders about the ideas for windows and thought the cap on the roof needed more detail. He also noted that he has a bit of concern about the entry,but other than that he likes it. Mr.Blier asked if the driveways would be two-way. Mr. Gundersen responded that they will be two-way. Mr.Jaquith noted that there are driveway restrictions imposed by the Fire Department. Mr. Christoudias stated that he agreed with most of Mr.Jaquiths thoughts. He did question what would go on the borders. Mr. Gundersen stated that the intention is to build another, similar building for mixed-use. He noted that one possible tenant is a bank He stated that they would like to see a nice large building on that comer. Looking at a building in the • 25,000 to 35,000 square foot range. Mr. Christoudias asked what would be in between the two buildings. Mr. Gundersen said they want it to look continuous. As if there is no break in the property. It will look as though it is a single site. Mr. Kennedy asked about signage on the building. Mr. Gundersen stated that there would be fairlydiscreet signage. That issue is about a year away and is hard to discuss not �g Y Y knowing whom exactly will occupy the building. There will be external lit signs. Ms. Hartford pointed out that signage must go before the DRB,whether it is during the project review or in the future. Mr. Durand thought that it was good to start thinking of that ahead of time. Mr. Blier said that as a side note,he feels the Bradford pear trees might be hard to get in there. Making the sidewalks a tight place for pedestrians to walk. He suggests looking at another type. He likes the building being close to the street but he thinks those type trees will make it tight. Mr. Durand thought maybe if the building was not so close there could be a compromise. He also asked if there was a storm water drainage plan. Mr. Gundersen said that the plan was included in the package. He also spoke about the rooftop stating that with the residential elevation it will be hard for neighbors to see the . roof. Most homes do not stand that high in the neighborhood. It is also in the proposal that the islands in the parking lot will have granite curbs with cobblestone. DRB Minutes Septembx 27,2006 Page 9 of 9 Mr.Blier asked about site lighting. Mr. Gundersen answered that there is a lighting plan in the packet He suggested possibly Salem standard lighting. Mr.Blier commented that they might want to think about a tree other than Hemlocks. Mr. Durand asked about the building lighting. Mr. Gundersen says that there will be lighting underneath the colonnade and some lighting will shine up the facade on either end. Mr. Durand asked if power poles are going to go underground. Mr. Gundersen states that is a City problem and everything will be underground on their site. Mr. Durand stated that it is the developer's problem and not the City's problem The poles take away everything this project has accomplished. He stated that his opinion is that the poles need to go. He understands there are costs but they are worthwhile. Mr. Durand also stated that he is not really inspired by the building. He does not think that this project says a lot about Salem. He is disappointed that this is the project for an entrance corridor and wishes it were something better to represent our City. He stated that he would Eke to see this building lead Salem and the NRCC's next designs. He noted that in his opinion,he finds it lacking. Walter Power,member of the public, stated that he would like to see a building with a tower. He would like to see something more fitting for Salem as well. He has concerns about what will be put there during the next phase. He would like to see this building closer to Church • and suggested ribbon glass be used to make it more interesting. Mr. Durand stated that in his opinion every high rise had that office module. This building does not have a lot of thought put in to it about what Salem means. He was hoping for something better and is wondering how this design can be better addressed in terms of Salem. Mr.Jaquith suggested that the module become fairly rigid. He also stated that lighting and rhythm become important. He noted that the future building is more important. Rita Markunes,member of the public, stated that the neighborhood likes the design very much. The neighbors like the industrial look. Lots of neighbors want something that"fits" into the neighborhood. It reminds them of what used to be there. Councilor Mike Sosnowski joined in saying that neighbors did not want the Trophy building design. He stated that Mr. Gundersen has been through many,many different designs for this project. This is what the neighbors have asked for. It is what they want. Mr. Durand stated he does not agree. He thinks that the neighborhood opinion is based on nostalgia. It is not bad,just ordinary. He feels that it is what the neighbors want so there is no competition or no threat to the neighborhood. He has tried over many years to make Salem better. He said that he has a vision and brings it to the various boards he serves on as well as in his career. DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 10 of 10 Mr. Durand stated that for an entrance corridor,it is too ordinary. He reiterates that this is just his opinion,which he feels strongly about but acknowledges that there is more than just himself on the Board. Concilor Sosnowski asked if it was about the shape. Mr. Durand stated it is much more than just the shape. Mr. Kennedy stated that he doesn't disagree with the sentiment and also thinks it is ordinary. David Hart,member of the public, stated that he himself is an architect and liked the fact that it is not a real flashy building. He thinks it just kind of sits and "hums". Mr. Durand said he would like it to do more than "hum" and he thinks it is setting a precedent. Mr. Hart responded by saying the board should be giving direction to Mr. Gundersen on the entrance or some other point not on the meaning of the building. Mr. Durand said that he board can criticize but should not design. That has come to from the architect. David Hart states that the neighbors want a signature comer.The neighborhood is happy with this. Mr. Blier noted that he thought that the criticism is in the process. He said it is not so much the building. We don't know what is going to happen with the other building. We don't • know what out limitations will be when the next project comes around. Mr. Durand stated that the applicant has this issue before us now and the board has to decide on it. Mr. Christoudias stated that though he is not from Salem,he owns the Daniel Lowe Building. He pointed out other projects in other cities where you see a lot of old and new buildings mixed. He thinks the Church in the background compliments the new building. He expects a lot from the comer property but likes the design for this budding. Mr. Durand questioned if the board should approve the design or ask for more renditions. Ms. Hartford stated that this will be the only time the DRB sees this project,as there is not a two-step review process for NRCC projects. She advised the Board that Planning meets on October 19,2006 and they are looking for a recommendation before that meeting. She noted that they can hold a special meeting if they would like to see another rendition of the Plans. Mr. Durand stated that if the rest of the board is okay with this design"just humming" than it should be approved. Mr. Kennedy suggested a few ideas such as single pane windows,more glaze and maybe • more color. Mr. Durand agreed and says he would like to see a building with a little more thought. DRB Minutes September 27,2006 Page 11 of 11 • Mr.Jaquith states he does not mind the building"just humming"but does agree that some things could be notched up a bit. Mr. Durand says he is not being offensive but he thinks it needs some more tweaking. Mr. Gundersen says he would like to have the recommendations before October 19. The DRB agreed to hold a special meeting on October 17 at 6:00pm. A member of the public asked for clarification as to what the board wants Mr. Gundersen to do exactly. Mr. Durand says that he does not need to do anything drastic. They would like to see bit of improvement. Ms. Hartford confirmed that some of the specific things that Mr. Gundersen is to consider are the church end of the building,the sidewalk along Bridge Street and the electric poles. URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS cont. 7. 143 Washington Street • Ms. Hartford stated that the applicant is looking to install window boxes at the building similar to the boxes at Fiddlehead. She noted that they would be a removable stand in front of the windows. The applicant is debating rutting them under every other window or in between the windows, the same length as the columns. The Board agreed that the boxes looked good every other window,except at the Washington Street facade,where the boxes should be placed at all the windows at the ReMax facade and between the windows at the Pickle Pot facade,the same length as the columns. The Board recommended approval with the condition that the boxes be placed at every other window,except at the Washington Street facade,where the boxes should be placed at all the windows at the ReMax facade and between the windows at the Pickle Pot facade, the same length e as the columns. Motion passed 5-0 . � P � ) The Board agreed to approve the minutes at the next meeting. Meeting adjourned. • Salem Redevelopment Authority — �cn ul o D -„ r 3 r n:K DESIGN REVIEW BOARDo' o D N Regular Meeting Tuesday,August 22,2006—6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Christoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Projects Under Review URBAN RENEWAL AREA PROJECTS • 1. South River Harborwalk—Continued review of Schematic Design Plans for the construction of the South River Harborwalk. 2. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail,)—Review of Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail. NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR PROJECTS 3. 75 North Street (Creations Architectural Woodwork& Salem Kitchen and Bathl — Review of plans for an addition and renovation of property. Minutes — Approval of the minutes from the July 26, 2006 DRB Meeting and August 3, 2006 Special DRB Meeting. Other Business ThIS WAGO Paiad on "Cfficifil 6tk@tT5 " City Hall Ave., Salem, Mass. on 1111115 at in aocOrd&rM With Chap. 32 i 23A & 238 of bA.G.L. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes August 22,2006 Page 1 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 22, 2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Tuesday,August 22,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Michael Blier, Paul Durand, David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner,and Debra Tucker,Clerk,were also present. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. Museum Place Mall Suite 101 (Cool Jewels) Ms. Hartford introduced the proposed signage for Museum Place Mall Suite 101 by the owner of Cool Jewels. The owner indicated that he wanted to install a sign with orange painted wood letters,which would stand out. Various color combinations for the base of the sign were discussed. Mr. Kennedy recommended that the letters be three dimensional with shadowing. He also noted that the owner might be able to order brushed or cast aluminum letters. The board members agreed that the letters will be twelve inch upper and lower case in the `Bolt" font and the sign will be 123"long. The Board also asked that the letters be in silver as opposed to orange. Mr. Kennedy offered to review the silver color with the owner. • 2. South River Harborwalk The schematic design plans for the South River Harborwalk were presented for review. Susan St. Pierre of Vine Associates and David O'Connell have worked with Frank Taormino of the Planning Department to revise the plans based on the Harbor Committee comments and comments from the DRB. Ms. St. Pierre explained the schematic design plans to the audience. There will be a 1,100 linear foot walkway from Congress Street to Lafayette Street along the south side of the South River. The hope is for development of the north side by private developers at a later date. At this point,the current Hess gas station and former Dave and Jack's gas station are slated to construct a portion of the harbor walk, abutting their properties. There will be linear extensions at the Congress Street Bridge for access. There will be four benches, trash receptacles,and City standard lighting along the walkway. The City parcel of land off of Peabody Street will be a park with access to the walkway. At the Mass Electric property, the walkway will be cantilevered on pilings over the seawall. The existing concrete wall and chain link fencing at that property must remain. Mr. O'Connell described plans for the gateway at the Derby Street access and their hope to tie the design into Salem heritage. The walkway will be poured in place concrete and will be 18-20 feet wide. A ship's mast design with horizontal elements is planned using technical drawings from the Peabody Essex Museum with lofting diagrams and showing ship's ribs. Scoring patterns will be made into the pavement with shadow line or stainless steel with poured concrete. There will be granite benches installed. The plan will preserve the trees planted by the Beverly Cooperative Bank and add a few more. Granite curbing will be added to mark the plaza to a ten foot wide point. An interpretive sign incorporating Salem's shipbuilding and maritime heritage will also be included. Ms. St. Pierre added that there would be three • interpretive signs similar to those installed at Salem Willows Park. Local historian Jim McAllister is assisting. There will be some City of Salem signage as well that will match the existing citywide signage program DRB Minutes August 22,2006 Page 2 • signage. The plan requires approval by the City of Salem boards as well as the state through Chapter 91. Permitting by applicable agencies will be done over the next few months. Shirley Wall asked about the 18-20 foot plaza at the edge of the bank property. Mr. O'Connell explained that it will be a stone dust walkway and that the landscaping will be preserved as much as possible. Barbara Warren asked about river flooding and whether the materials being used would survive. She also asked if the plan called for the grade to be raised. Ms. St.Pierre said that there would be no re-grading of the property. The walkway is twelve inches in depth on top of the wall. There will be a 12-14 inch grade change along the walkway. There will be a level landscape area. Storm water will channel into the South River with some natural filtering. The walkway will be concrete with a flat steel pole railing along the water edge. The railing will be four feet high and will probably be black in color. Marlene Faust asked if the seawalls would be shored up and Ms. St. Pierre replied that they would be and the plan called for re-setting the granite by chinking stones in to the gaps. City Councilor Lucy Corchado asked about the permitting process. Ms. St.Pierre answered that there would be Chapter 91 licensing in addition to review by the Salem Conservation Commission and Final Design Review by the Salem Redevelopment Authority. The construction could be done in phases. Eric Easley asked if Mass Electric was receptive to making their property better. Ms. St. Pierre answered that they were not. Doug Haley asked what the timeframe was. Ms. St.Pierre said that the previous redevelopment of the Hess property already required Chapter 91 and City licenses. The former Coastal Oil property will have the same stipulation. Doug Haley asked if there were dinghy docks planned. Ms. St. Pierre said that there would be no floats allowed because they would sit at the bottom at low tide and that is not • allowed. The area pitches into the river now and has storm drains and runoff pitched that way. David Jaquith joined the meeting in progress. Tim Smith of the Beverly Cooperative Bank asked about the Mass Electric lease of the property as well as the access from Peabody Street in relation to his bank. Ms. St.Pierre answered that the City parcel will be a park in the future and that there will probably be common access points. Mr. Smith said that there would need to be contract negotiations with Mass Electric. Mr. Durand said that this was only the schematic design approval phase and that there was room to discuss that item. Frank Taormina said that the City is sensitive to the Beverly Cooperative Bank property and the Chapter 91 license. He noted that this would be discussed in another foram. Mr. Smith said that to keep vehicles off the walkway bollards should be installed. Mr. Kennedy stated that the mast and boat design needed a plaque. Mr. O'Connell said that an interpretive sign could be placed there. Jim Treadwell of the Northfields Neighborhood Association asked about the expired status of the Salem Harbor Plan. Mr.Taormina replied that even though the date had expired the plan is still in effect. He added that the City is working with the state Coastal Zone Management(CZM) to update the plan and that the public will be notified of the process. An implementation committee is being re-formed by the Mayor. Ms. St.Pierre said that the Harbor Committee had previously reviewed the plan and that some changes-were made as a result. Mr.Treadwell said that the Mass Electric structure was the only structure to survive the 1914 fire. The plan called for three vest pocket parks and includes the Pickering Wharf lot as well. Mr. • Durand said that that was outside the scope of the project. DRB Minutes August 22,2006 Page 3 • Members of the public asked about the durability and lifespan of the walkway as well as any effect by global warming. Mr. O'Connell said that since the walkway will be concrete in a maritime setting,which it would last indefinitely. He did not think that global warming would come into play and it was not taken into consideration during planning. Mr.Taormina said that the Chapter 91 license gives a right to maintain the public way and that the City would maintain it. A member of the public asked about the existing oak tree at the entrance. Mr.Durand said that the plan calls for preserving it. Mr.Blier said that the site visit was helpful. He asked that the designers look at the detail of the way that the gateway meets the sidewalk. Mr. O'Connell answered that they could extend it out to the sidewalk. Mr. Durand said that he agreed that bringing it out to the sidewalk would be better. Mr.Blier asked that the condition of the plantings at the edge be reviewed and referred to spatial bleed. He asked if trees were planned. Mr.Taormina said that due to high voltage on the Mass Electric property,no trees would be allowed to be planted due to problems with root systems. Mr. O'Connell said that he would review the utility drawings. Mr. Kennedy said that the signage should be extended down the walkway. Mr. O'Connell said that it would be good opportunity to put a lot of information on the site. Mr.Blier asked if one bench were enough. Mr. O'Connell replied that it was a small space and that they were concerned about cluttering the area. He said that they would review the plan. There will be four City standard benches along the walkway and that the Beverly Cooperative Bank has three benches. Mr. Durand asked if there could be something other than a bollard installed. A member of the public spoke out about the tire shop and the cars that park over the bushes currently and push snow there. Eric Easley said that Shetland Park employees could use the space at lunchtime. Mr. • Durand asked about the entrance off the bridge. Mr.Taormina said that there was a Ci sign g ry Sn Planned near the new hotel. Mr. Haley said that he thought that the new benches would be ruined as the ones near the Peabody Essex Museum had been. Ms.Hartford stated that those benches were to be replaced with the new City standard benches. A member of the public recommended a one to one scale of the cross section of the Friendship. Mr. Durand moved that the schematic design for the South River Harbor Walk plan be approved as presented with the following items to be reviewed and addressed for final design approval submission: scale,preservation of the tree,birm at the Goodyear Tire property, additional interpretive signage, use of the scale of the Friendship,and additional benches. Mr.Jaquith seconded the motion,and it was approved (4-0). 3. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail Ms. Hartford introduced Penn Lindsey of New Boston Ventures,LLC and their architects,Dan Riccarelli Cindy Giuliano and Jim Alexander of Finegold,Alexander +Associates,Inc. Final design plans of the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail were presented for approval. Mr. Lindsey introduced the plan and said that they had kept the design very close to the original property of the Federal-style building and introduced a more modern interpretation for the Jail and new building. He said that the comments from previous reviews were taken and incorporated into the design. Finegold,Alexander +Associates,Inc. has taken care with the historic nature and the layout of the residential units and not to • upset the historic exterior facade. Jim Alexander said that they were in the pricing phase and were DRB Minutes August 22,2006 Page 4 • considering some alternate materials. They will present the details when the pricing was received and analyzed. The design team presented the changes to the site plans and drawings. Mr.Alexander said that the goal was to minimize the changes to the facades. He stated that the Mass Historic Commission and the Salem historic community were reviewing the plans. Mr. Durand said that the designers had done a very good job incorporating the changes. It opened the meeting to public comment. A member of the public asked if the project would have central air conditioning. Mr. Riccarelli replied that they would be enclosing a chiller plant near the current loading dock. There would be minimal penetrations and nothing installed on the roofs. It would be visually screened from the cemetery with privet hedge. Mr. Alexander added that the units would have their own mechanical rooms. Mr. Treadwell asked that the DRB look at the Mass Highway access road and the pedestrian cuts, the burial ground wall,and public open space. Mr.Treadwell said that the burial wall was very important. Ms. Hartford stated that the only change made to the public open space abutting the Jail was to add the access roadway that would otherwise be cut-off with the Bridge Street Bypass Road project. She stated that it was approved by Mass Highway and was not under the jurisdiction of this Board. A member of the public asked about parking. Ms. Guiliano replied that there would be 37 spaces. Barbara Cleary of Historic Salem Inc. expressed her thoughts on the project. She indicated that she approved • of the window opening cuts and requested that the developer look at the window detail at each building carefully. She indicated that she and Larry Spang had created two sets of comments. Ms. Cleary added that the window detail might be a little fussy with the transom,panes,and trim. She thought that the secondary doorway appeared"squished" and appeared to be missing a second post. Mr.Riccarelli responded that they were looking into that. Ms. Cleary said that there were many examples of carriage houses in Salem. She thought that the rear wood veneer treatment seemed a little odd. She liked the new building's brick and granite facade treatment. Mr.Alexander stated that they needed the comments as soon as possible. Mr. Riccarelli said that they were looking at gray terracotta pre-cast concrete as an option. Mr.Alexander said that the roofing costs were sky high. Mr. Riccardelli added that they were still pricing all materials. Morris Shop asked about the pedestrian crossing. He noted that if the pedestrian walk skirted the wall there would be a very substantial green space. Mr. Riccarelli said that there were grade change problems at the site. Mr.Alexander said that it was an interesting idea. Mr. Durand agreed that it was a great idea but said that it was not really within this review as Mass Highway is building the walkway. Ms. Hartford added that the urban renewal area only extends to the property line of the jail and does not include the Mass Highway project. Mr.Jaquith said that he liked the window monitors and the use of granite and brick but felt that the windows were off a bit. He also liked the trellises. He felt that the barn design needed work but liked the sliding barn door window idea. Mr. Blier said that he thought it was a smart plan for the site. He commented that the courtyard to St. Peter's Street was narrow. He asked about servicing the trash. Mr.Alexander said that there would be no dumpsters • on location. Mr. Blier asked about the evergreen screening. Mr. Riccarelli said that there was always a low privet hedge and it would continue. DRB Minutes August 22,2006 Page 5 • Mr. Durand said that he was pleased with the design. His concern was the materials and asked that future submissions show colors as well as window manufacturer. Mr. Durand said that there were many new DRB board members and recommended a site visit before the next meeting. Mr.Alexander said that they would present materials at the next meeting. He requested a vote of approval on the general design. Ms. Hartford noted that the DRB makes recommendations to the SRA and that they are requesting more detail. Mr.Durand said that he was set with the design but would like more information on the materials, finishes,and details. Mr. Kennedy asked that the developer think about signage locations. Mn Lindsey said that they hoped to begin construction during the fust quarter of next year. Ms. Hartford stated that the Planning Board would be meeting the third Thursday of September and that the next DRB meeting would be held on the fourth Wednesday of September. NORTH RIVER CANAL CORRIDOR PROJECTS 4. 75 North Street (Creations Architectural Woodwork& Salem Kitchen and Bath) Ms.Hartford introduced the fust North River Canal Corridor Project for DRB review. Architect Richard Griffin and Creations Architectural Woodwork and Salem Kitchen and Bath owner David Jalbert addressed the board concerning proposed changes to 75 North Street. • The proposal for the one level building was to add one and a half stories to the building,clapboard the fa4ade,and add classical dormers and an arched window over the workshop. Mr.Jalbert would showcase his woodworking talent and add paneled shutters on the double hung second floor windows. The color scheme is Spanish moss (green)with a lighter trim color and burgundy shutters. The elevator shaft would be sheathed in brick veneer. Vinyl double hung windows with two over two mullions between the panes. Cementitious clapboards with Azak trim and molding would be used. The existing signage would remain with a frame added around the proposed workshop sign,which would use four inch engraved capital letters in a Book Antiqua font. Jim Treadwell of the Northfields Neighborhood Association and the North River Canal Corridor Working Group said that he remembered the building growing up. He said that he was anxious to see this fust review process. He noted that there was a Revolutionary War monument on the overpass,which had been relocated to Winter Island. Historic Salem Inc. recommended that the monument be relocated back to the overpass. Mr.Treadwell recommended that they read the site plan review requirements. Mr. Griffin said that the abutters to the property were O'Rourke Memorials,Triumph Motorcycles,Valvoline Oil Change,and the Salvation Army. Mr. Durand said that he liked the color scheme and thought that it was strong and bold. He added that the owner was improving a substandard building. Mr. Durand said that the additions were substantial and that the building could house offices in the future. Mr. Griffin said that the second floor was going to be used for storage of materials. Three are three parking spaces across the street with two hour parking. Mr.Jalbert added that there is parking on Commercial Street with no limitations. • Ms. Hartford noted that the owner had already obtained a variance from the Zoning Board. She asked if the parking was acceptable to that board. Mr. Griffin said that there was no parking variance required. He DRB Minutes August 22,2006 Page 6 . displayed a white window sample by Euroweld. The arched window will be from the same manufacturer. The door will be a Thermatru. Mr. Durand said that he felt that the window looked too plastic. Mr. Kennedy added that it would look so especially next to panel carved wood shutters. Mr.Jalbert said that he was trying to keep the windows maintenance free. Mr. Kennedy recommended the Anderson 200 series windows as an inexpensive alternative,which has a nice screen. Mr.Durand said that the project is a huge improvement. He wanted to see a more compatible window that looked a little more historic. He added that he thought that the ground floor looked a little light with shutters on the second floor. Mr. Griffin said that the workshop was on the first floor. Mr.Durand asked about increasing the size of the first floor windows. Mr. Griffin said that they are using the interior wall space. Mr. Durand asked about the roof shingles. Mr. Griffin said that they would be Certainteed asphalt shingles in a charcoal colored slate look. Mr. Durand said that he would like to see a sample and asked that it be submitted. Ms. Hartford directed the owner to submit a window sample and shingle sample at the next meeting. Mr. Kennedy asked about the door entrance. He said that the owner should check with the other manufacturer regarding the arched window as well. With regard to the sign he asked that if the name were not to be displayed that the owner consider an architectural illustration to create interest. Mr.Durand asked about the HVAC equipment. The owner indicated that the equipment would be roof mounted in the rear. Mr. Griffin added that a parapet masks the roof and that there is a towing business behind the budding. • Mr. Durand asked about the cuts on the light fixtures. Mr. Griffin proposed black or green caged lights. Mr. Durand asked about the old sign and red awning on the Salem Kitchen and Bath section of the building. Mr. Griffin said that when they are ready to replace the sign, they would consider changing,but that the sign is only five years old. Mr. Durand requested that they consider changes and the removal of the awning now since they are residing anyway. Mr. Kennedy asked how much the street address pipe lettering of"75"helped. Mr.Jalbert said that the location was a tough area that people don't really know about. Mr. Kennedy recommended removing the awnings and putting the"75"on a pediment. Mr.Blier suggested that they be wary of roof units and visibility. The architect stated that there will be a new roof over the loading bay. Mr. Blier noted the scale of the windows and that they are low to the ground. Mr. Griffin said that the interior of the first floor goes below grade and that they needed the light. Ms. Hartford noted that the owner must come before the DRB again with the window, shutter,and shingle samples as well as a plans without the storefront awning and the HVAC plans on the drawings. David Jaquith left the meeting. MINUTES The minutes of the July 26,2006 regular meeting and the August 3,2006 special meeting were presented for approval. Board members asked that the approval be held until the next meeting so that they could review them. • URB Minutes August 22,2006 Page 7 • ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board, Mr. Blier moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion,and the vote was (3-0). • • ILL Salem . tj 111 Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD d Special Meeting s`n Thursday,August 3,2006—10:00am ' y 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room ;�y v� Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Chtistoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Projects Under Review • 1. 17-21 Front Street—Continued review of exterior improvements. Other Business This notice posted on "Official Su Boer" City Hall A Salem, Mass. on a1,3.�/ /yl in a 1 "Jtr. 231A i► 230 of M.G.L. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes June 26,2006 Pagc 1. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD • MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 3,2006 A special meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Thursday,August 3,2006 at 10:00 am. Members Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, Paul Durand, David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford,Economic Development Planner,was also present. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. 17-21 Front Street—Proposed Exterior Improvements The applicants,Steven and Bill Goldberg,were present along with their architect Michael Lutrzykowski. They presented the option of replacing all the windows on the building,aside from the storefront windows with a Trim Line window similar to the windows at The Distillery Building across the street from their building. They said the windows would be wood with an aluminum-clad exterior. The applicants'window sales representative presented a specification of the window and provided more information on the window type. The proposed windows are Trim Line Ultrafit with the slender frame. They are wood with a white aluminum clad exterior. Mr.Durand stated that he would be okay with the window presented with the condition that they have a 5/8th mutton and spacer in between the glass. The other members agreed. • Mr. DeMaio requested that the applicant submit detail of how the window will fit into the jamb. Mr. Durand questioned whether the 8 over 8 windows would be replaced with 8 over 8 windows and the 6 over 6 windows be replaced with the same type. The applicant stated that they would match the existing windows. Mr. Kennedy made the motion that the DRB recommend approval with the changes reflected in the packet submitted by HH Morant on August 3,2006 with the condition that the new windows have 5/8th permanent muttons with the spacer, full screen and the panes match the existing windows (6/6 and 8/8). In addition, the applicant must submit a drawing of the window jamb detail for their approval. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board, Mr. DeMaio moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion. Motion passed(5-0). 40 CI i v 1.,.'i' r fiL1:14I. �f h1 ® � ® Salem CLERIC'S. OFFICE • Redevelopment Authority 1006,JUL 2 I-,:q .1o= 42 REVISED (7-20-06) DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday,July 26, 2006—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Chnstoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Minutes • • Approval of Minutes from June 28,2006 Meeting Projects Under Review 1. 13 Washington Street (f'he Washington Square Studio)—Review of proposed signage. 2. 24 Front Street (FiddleheadD—Review of proposed signage. 3. 17-21 Front Street—Continued review of exterior improvements. Other Business This notice posted on °Official B ®4i Board" r C on f:i1 Hall Ave., ,..S.r.lar�;, Prta�,s. _ accb at � U t} Ilap 30 law c3A 233 of M.G.L. 1.(i "d✓ =� Ir;gtori Sti at ° ` ilr,m_, tvt�i�;.ch sct._ 01970 (978) 7.5-959j, Ext 311 . Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes June 26,2006 Page 1 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD • MEETING MINUTES JULY 26, 2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday,June 26,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Ernest Michael BliDeMaio, a e est Paul Durand Davida uith and Glenn Kennedy were J 9 y resent.P Tania Hartford,Economic Development Planner,and Debra Tucker,Clerk,were also present. OTHER BUSINESS Ms. Hartford reported that there would be an Open Meeting Law training held on Monday,July 31, 2006. She asked that anyone interested in attending reply to Dan Merhalski, Staff Planner, in the Department of Planning and Community Development. New Civilitea is holding a Grand Opening on July 27th between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. and board members are invited. Crunchy Granola Baby will also be holding a Grand Opening on August 4e at 11:30 a.m. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. 13 Washington Square (The Washington Square Studio) • Ms. Hartford introduced the proposed signage for 13 Washington Square for The Washington Square Studio. The board discussed various possible locations and configurations for the signage due to the location of the front door,an unused second story door, a protruding granite lintel, and a high brick wall in front of the property. Mr. Durand offered to sketch out a suggestion for the petitioner and send it to Ms.Hartford. Mr. DeMaio recommended an ornamental bracket,which would protrude off the building so that the sign would"float" rather than fit into the architecture. Ms. Hartford reminded the owner that should she want to add exterior lighting, she would have to submit a plan for approval. It was decided that the owner's sign maker,Keith Linares,would submit a sketch to Mr. Durand to review. Mr.Jaquith moved to approve that an amended signage plan with a bracket,which is not visible,be submitted for review by Mr. Durand. Mr. DeMaio seconded the motion, and it was approved (5-0). 2. 24 Front Street (Fiddlehead) Jackie Albanese of Fiddlehead at 24 Front Street presented her plan for proposed signage. The sign will be a hanging sign similar to other signs in the area and will have a green patina copper"F". Mr. Kennedy moved that the signage plan presented for Fiddlehead at 24 Front Street be approved as presented. Mr.Jaquith seconded the motion, and it was approved (5-0). • Y DRB Minutes June 26,2006 Page 2 3. 17-21 Front Street • The review of the proposed exterior renovations at 17-21 Front Street was continued. Architect Michael Litkowski reported that he had addressed the concerns raised by the board at the last meeting. He addressed the nine items with the board: 1. The dormer sketch requested was submitted. A painted Broscoe window with true divided light window was proposed. 2. Glass doors are proposed for the front entries. The 21 Front St. door will be changed out to a narrow style. The sidelights will be left. There will be a similar new door added at 17 Front St. to provide access to a second floor tenant. Two sidelights will be full panel lights in recessed doorways. 3. A door will be added on the"Marketplace" side. A 36"high wrought iron rail will be added and will match the railing used at the Residences at Museum Place. 4. The shutters will be removed. 5. Knox box will be added to the front,per the building code. 6. Three new oval signs measuring 29"x 22"are proposed,which would use the bracket previously approved for The New England Soup Factory. The proposed signage will be made of PVC and each tenant will be responsible for getting a permit. The signs will not be lighted. The middle sign will be the street address. 8. Narrow mullion bronze storefronts. Three doors on the rear would match Front Street. 9. A 44"x 44"brick masonry platform will be constructed on the side with the intention of outdoor seating. 7. The Goldbergs hope to obtain approval for storm windows. They indicated that they are necessary to help prevent heat loss and believe that they are needed for their tenants. They gave examples of nearby storm windows at the Residences at Museum Place,another Front St. building's second floor, • Cafe Graziani, and 15 Front St. There was extensive discussion concerning the windows. Mr. Durand asked if insulation would be added to the walls. Steve Goldberg stated that they would be just installing sheetrock. Bill Goldberg said that there would be some insulation added and some of the brick would be left exposed. Steve Goldberg said that the second and third floor levels have sheetrock and he was not sure if there was insulation behind it. Mr. Durand said that he understood their dilemma and was sympathetic to it. Bill Goldberg stated that 25 years ago there was a bad renovation done to the building and that they were trying to step up the renovation to make it better. Mr.Durand said that there were better storm windows. Bill Goldberg replied that they were trying to work together. He referred to their recent renovation of the storefront at 24 Front St. and said that they left it vacant for 3 months in order to rent it to Fiddleheads. Mr.Jaquith said that he liked all but the storm windows,with which he had an issue. Mr. Kennedy agreed. He said that he had seen storm windows done well. Mr. DeMaio said that the board needed to decide whether the building had historical character and how to allow the developer to bring it into the 2150 century. He added that every decision that the board makes sets a precedent. Mr.DeMaio thought that the board should be sensitive that similar projects will come before the board. Bill Goldberg stated that the board has to balance pure preservation. Mr.Durand said that the board has an historic preservation doctrine. Mr. Lutrzykowski asked if there could be a compromise and suggested no storm windows be installed on the Front Street elevation. Mr. Durand said that this might be alright. He did note that storm windows are not that effective in the prevention of heat loss in comparison with double pane windows. He added that the • board was not trying to hurt the developer and noted that precedent setting was very powerful. Bill Goldberg said that they need to be able to compete economically. He commented on energy prices. Mr. Durand DRB Minutes June 26,2006 Page 3 responded that the board worked for the SRA and was working to help make projects successful. He noted • that there has been many mistakes made all over the City with redevelopment but noted that those projects were not before this board and out of their control. Mr. Bher asked the developer about windows that meet energy code. He noted that there are other ways to meet the energy code without storm windows and added that there are interior storm windows available. Bill Goldberg said that they would explore all options,but that they are trying to get the project moving. Mr.Jaquith asked if there were any historic tax credits available. Ms. Hartford answered that there may be a grant matching program available and recommended that the developers contact her. She indicated that she would speak with Lynn Duncan,Director of Planning and Community Development,to see whether this project would qualify. Mr.Jaquith asked the reason for the dormers. Bill Goldberg answered that the third floor was dark and needed natural light. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that the dormer windows would have energy panels. Possible ideas for compromise were discussed. Mr.Durand indicated that they wanted to be practical but were struggling with preservation. He noted that he could approve storm windows as long as any new windows replaced in the future would be historically accurate thermopane. Mr. Blier agreed that he was leaning in that direction. Mr. Kennedy concurred that he was leaning that way with reluctance. Mr. DeMaio noted that the building has certain facades that have historic significance and thought that Front Street should remain authentic. He added that this was an historic public-fronting building. Steve Goldberg said that 140 and 160 Washington St. have replacement windows. He said that different • buildings downtown have been updated over different periods. Mr. DeMaio noted that this is the reason that boards such as the DRB exist to hold onto the past. Years of bad redevelopment have led to the creation of these boards. Bill Goldberg commented that empty pretty buildings don't accomplish much. Mr. DeMain said that there was an ebb and flow to the economy with good times and bad. Ms. Hartford indicated that the possibility of any grant would have to be reviewed. She suggested that if the board was in agreement with the rest of the project,they could approve all but the storm window proposal. Bill Goldberg answered Mr.Durand that tax credit applications were not worth the gyrations necessary to apply. Bill Goldberg said that he would agree to either no storm windows required on the front of the building or none on the whole first floor. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that he would prefer the elimination of the storms proposed on the fust floor. Bill Goldberg said that every window had to be either replaced or have storm windows installed. Ms. Hartford recommended further study of the issue. She said that a cost estimate would be necessary and that she would speak with Lynn Duncan. Mr.DeMain said that if City funding were available that the money should be put into the two most visible elevations. Ms. Hartford recommended that the developers obtain estimates for the replacement of all windows,just the Front Street elevation,and storm windows on all. She said that a per window cost should be submitted. Ms. Hartford directed the developers to inform all tenants moving in that lighting was not proposed nor • approved for the signage. DRB Minutes June 26,2006 Page 4 The board agreed that eight of the nine items were approved. The only exception was the window issue. The • brick platform was approved on the condition that it would be done only if the City approved outdoor seating. The Board agreed to reconvene the following week during the day to discuss the solution on the windows. VIOLATIONS Ms. Hartford reported on the status of violations. Fresh Taste of Asia will be notified that the umbrellas with liquor advertisements and the flag garland were inappropriate. She said that the owner has already been instructed to remove the neon window signage. The outdoor patio fencing is not as specified. Ms. Hartford reported that after researching the signage approval,it appears that the Salem Five Bank is in compliance. The door paint,however,is a violation and Ms. Hartford will speak with them. The sign installed at Hair Express on Front Street is not as approved by the board and Ms.Hartford will speak to the owners. Mr.Jaquith excused himself from the meeting and left. MINUTES The minutes of the June 28,2006 meeting were presented for approval. • Mr. DeMaio moved that the minutes of the June 28, 2006 meeting be approved as presented. Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion,and it passed (5-0). OTHER BUSINESS Mr. DeMain reported that he had not received the hardware information from the developer of Residences at Museum Place. Ms. Hartford replied that the SRA board was aware. Ms. Hartford reported that she had placed a call to Mr. Christoudias regarding the violation of the addition of the side porch at Rockafella's restaurant. Ms. Hartford informed the board that there would be a few North River Corridor projects before the board at either the August or September meeting. Mr. DeMaio stated that the board would be setting precedents with their decisions. He thought that it would behoove the board to know the Planning Board studies inside and out. He added that the board might be challenged in big ways and any decisions would have a ripple effect. Ms. Hartford said that familiarity with the urban design standards was important too. She added that if the board felt that it would be helpful, site visits could be scheduled. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board, Mr. DeMain moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion, and the vote was (4-0). • a a Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday,June 28, 2006—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Christoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Minutes • Approval of Minutes from May 24, 2006 Meeting Projects Under Review 1. 17 Central Street (Old Police Station/Residences at Museum Place)—Review of proposed doors on the front of the building. 2. 45 Lafayette Street (Cornerstone Books)—Review of signage lighting. 3. 45 Lafayette Street (Cornerstone Books)—Review of proposed outdoor cafe. 4. 17-21 Front Street—Review of proposed exterior improvements. 5. 24 New Derby Street Crafters Boutique)—Review of proposed signage. 6. 24 New Derby Street (Row Gallery�—Review of proposed signage. Other Business • Reschedule August Meeting • DRB Review of projects located in the NRCC Zoning District 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 '• URB Minutes June 28,2006 Page t of t • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES JUNE 28, 2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,June 28,2006 at 6:00 pen. Members Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, Paul Durand, David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford,Staff Planner,and Debra Tucker,Clerk,were also present. MINUTES The minutes from the May 24,2006 meeting will be presented for approval at the next meeting. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. 17 Central Street (Old Police Station/Residences at Museum Place) Developer's representative,William Luster,reported that the doors on the front of the building at 17 Central Street,Residences at Museum Place,had been previously approved,however, the residents were not happy. The current residents do not like the glass and lack of privacy. Originally the intent was to sell the unit as a more public space, such as a gallery. Mr. Luster said that he was recommending a single door with a wooden sidelight,which would be painted the same color as the trim. He stated that the residents preferred this solution and added that double doors • would not meet code. Ms. Hartford added that the SRA had reviewed the matter and referred it to the DRB. Mr. Durand said that he was fine with the proposal and understood that this required insulation from the public in this urban situation since the door is on the street. Mr. Blier agreed. Mr. DeMaio asked what color the other doors were painted. Mr.Luster answered that they were green and that the windows were aluminum painted an off white color. Mr. Kennedy noted that the trim around the panel should match. Mr. DeMaio asked if there had been hardware selected. Mr. Luster said that it had not been chosen but that he would be willing to bring the selection in for approval. Mr. DeMaio said that he would want to see the cut of the bardware and that his concern would be to make sure that it would be compatible. IVR.Luster said that it would be a lever door handle. Ms. Hartford suggested that the board could designate someone to review the hardware and suggested Mr. DeMaio. Ms. Hartford requested that Mr. Luster submit a specification or sample to her. 2. 45 Lafayette Street (Comerstone Books Ms. Hartford reported that the SRA had requested DRB review of signage lighting installed by Cornerstone Books located at 45 Lafayette Street without prior approval. She presented photographs to the board of the lighting over the blade sign. Mr. Durand commented that the conduit was not well done. The owner stated that it runs through the wood vent and along the front. He said that it was the only external place that he could go without going through • the concrete. He noted that the other lighting had been done by RCC. Mr. Durand noted that the RCG lighting had been pre-approved by the DRB and the SRA. DRAFT DRB Minutes June 28,2006 Page 2 of 2 • Mr.Jaquith joined the meeting. Mr. Kennedy commented that New Civilitea had done a nice job with their lighting and had painted the conduit black. The owner said that he could make sure that it matches. Mt. Durand noted that the board was not trying to punish the owner but was worried about setting a bad precedent. The owner said that it would be expensive to go through the concrete. He said that it was important to have the lighting since his business is open at night and he needs visibility. Mr. DeMaio said that New Civilitea had the same problem. He stated that they selected a different light fixture and they painted the conduit. The owner asked what color he should paint the conduit. Mr. Durand replied that it should be black since the signs are black. Mr. Durand suggested that if the lights were moved higher, that it might be better. The owner offered that he could move the sign closer to the edge. Mr. Durand added that the vent should be painted. The owner said that he would look into a type of paint that could handle the heat from the vent. Mr. Durand recommended that the conduit be directed out through the wood vent and that this would make the conduit more discreet. He said that the current conduit was poor craftsmanship and that it needed to be tight to the upper comer and over the sign and"T"off vertically at the sign and be painted black. Mr. Durand said that the lights should be raised above the sign. Mr. DeMaio suggested that the owner use a fixture consistent with the other nearby projects. The owner was given the specification information. Mr. Durand drew out the conduit path on the photographs. Ms. Hartford informed the owner that the lighting still needed SRA board approval and that the next meeting would be held on July 19th. • 3. 45 Lafayette Street (Cornerstone Books Ms. Hartford reported that the SRA had not reviewed the proposed outdoor cafe plans for Cornerstone Books at 45 Lafayette Street;however,in order to expedite the process she is having the DRB review it tonight. She stated that there is currently a cafe in operation with a total of 8 tables with 2 chairs at each table and that it is similar to the cafe at New Civilitea. The board indicated that they approved the plan,as submitted,and Ms.Hartford informed the owner that the plan now needed SRA approval. She recommended that he contact the Board of Health and the Licensing department for any necessary permits before the next SRA meeting. 4. 17-21 Front Street Ms. Hartford reported that the SRA referred the proposed exterior storefront improvements at 17-21 Front Street to the DRB for review. She noted Ms. Sullivan's an s comments that she would nota approve e vinyl shutters for the buildingand would refer either woup wooden shutters or none at all. The SRA requested review of the shutters,railings,windows, and lighting for signage. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that the owner would like to remove the shutters and return to the original look of the building as well as avoid the cost of wooden shutters and the related maintenance costs. He said that the owners do not have a lighting or signage plan yet and that these would depend on the tenants. The proposal calls for adding two dormers in the rear of the building like the two existing dormers with true divided lights in the windows. They are proposing exterior storm windows due to heat loss and want to erect a wooden side railing. • DRAFT DRB Minutes June 28,2006 Page 3 of 3 Mr. Durand commented that storm windows in a historic setting are not preferred. The owner said that it is • a code issue. Mr. Durand recommended changing the windows or installing interior storm windows. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that the existing windows are not adaptable and that replacing the windows is a cost issue. He noted that the inside of the building is being gutted and that the Building Inspector wants the budding brought up to code. He said that the storm window that they are proposing is a white Harvey two channel window. Mr.Durand said that he would like to see a photograph of the proposed storm window installed somewhere. Mr.Jaquith added that a sample window should be brought in for the DRB to review. Mr. Bher asked what the code requirement was. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that he would get the information. The owner said that most of the windows are on the second and thud floors and not the fust. They intend to re-glaze and repaint the windows. Mr. Kennedy said that there was a budding on Derby Street in the historic district that had storm windows. The owner said that energy costs are skyrocketing and that there has to be a compromise. Mr. Durand replied that cost does not always come into play and that the board tries to do what is best for the City. The owner replied that he is trying to rehab the building. Mr.Jaquith said that the windows would change the look of the building. Mr. Durand added that there would be many unhappy people if the storm windows were allowed. Mr. DeMaio commented that in trying to bring the building back to the look of the 18th century, the windows are important. The owner said that they would either replace the shutters with vinyl or have no shutters. He said that there were no shutters before. Mr. DeMaio said that if the shutters were removed,it would change the look dramatically if storm windows were added. He noted that shadow depth would be important. The owner said that he was trying to take older buildings and bring them up to date and that it was not easy. • He added that future tenants would not want to see small hardware store screens inside. Mr.Lutrzykowski said that they would look into storm window ideas. The owner said no. Mr. Durand said that they were trying to do the best for the City and that this would be precedent setting. He added that the board tries to be uniform. Mr.Durand noted that removing the shutters would be acceptable. Regarding the front door the owner said that he would match the existing wooden door,which was changed in 2001 and may not have been approved. They would add a door on the left side. There are no signs requested at this time. Mr. DeMaio asked what was proposed for the new entrance at the existing stone columns. He asked if the owner was intendingto match the existing right side return which is a 6"return at the vestibule with a stone g , jamb. Mr.Lutrzykowski replied that that was their intent. Mr.Jaquith asked about the entry. The owner said that there are currently two entrances with about 3,000 square feet on the first floor and would either be for one tenant or two (at 1,800 square feet and 1,300 square feet). This may require a second entrance on the fust floor. Mr.Jaquith asked if something had happened to the existing door. He noted a bronze aluminum match would be acceptable but asked what was there for doors. Mr. Kennedy asked if all doors would be the same and match. The owner replied that they would. Mr.Jaquith said that the board needed to see elevation drawings for the building and that they are preferred to perspectives. Mr. Durand said that there would be a lot of attention paid to this and the other buildings on Front Street,which has a lot of character. He added that the board was not trying to be punitive. Mr. • Durand said that the buildings are simple and the brick and windows are important to the building. DRAFT URB Minutes June 28,2006 Page 4 of 4 Mr. Lutrzykowski said that he would speak to the owner and try to go in another direction and put together a proposal. Mr.Durand said that it would be important to re-point correctly so that the budding does not look scarred. The owner replied that the budding needs a total rehab. The shutters will be removed and the dormers will be replicated exactly. Ms. Hartford said that a measured drawing is required for the July SRA meeting and that an actual window must be submitted or another solution. Mr. Lutrzykowski asked if the new door locations were acceptable. The board indicated that they were. Mr. DeMaio requested that the vestibules be designed to be identical to the rest and that all three entrances look the same. Mr. Lutrzykowski replied that he would do a sketch. Mr.Jaquith informed him that drawings for that building do exist. Mr. Kennedy recommended that they design a signage plan including conduit placement and color and submit it for approval. Mr. Beer asked about the porch off the side of the building. He noted that it does not look right in an urban setting and referenced the one at Rockafella's restaurant. He thought that it was more suburban and out of context. Mr.Jaquith recommended that the owner look at the step and handrail. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that they prefer wrought iron or wood. Mr.Jaquith said that it would be better in the long run to use wrought iron. Mr. Durand agreed and said that wrought iron is preferred. Ms. Hartford directed the owner to present a revised plan with drawings (dormer,window, doors) and an actual photograph of the proposed storm window as well as a specification of the wrought iron railing, and the step involved. The doors will be approved as simple bronze aluminum door fronts as submitted. • 5. 24 New Derby Street (Crafters Boutique) The owner of Crafters Boutique appeared for review of proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street. They proposed replacement of the former Craftisian's sign and will be the same shape and will be made of26"X 32"MDO board. Frank Taormino of the Planning Department added that the sign for The Shanty is an identical oval. Mr. DeMaio asked about the zoning requirement regarding the height of the sign. Ms. Hartford answered that there are conflicting guidelines of 8 feet and 10 feet but that 8 feet has been allowed where it works. Mr. Taormino added that the existing signs for Mamidou and The Shanty are at 8 feet. Ms. Hartford noted that the perspective in the submission was off and that that photo was not to scale. Mr.Taormino said that the signage and poles are the same dimensions. The owner indicated that he would be in business until November. Mr. Kennedy made the following suggestions to the owner: the shape and lettering were nice but a better font is needed and the background color tone should be 10%-15%lighter to the background color to have contrast. Mr.Durand asked Mr. Kennedy if he would help the owner. Ms. Hartford requested that the owner re-submit the revised proposal to her for the July 19th SRA meeting. 6. 24 New Derby Street (Row Gallety) The owner of Row Gallery of 24 New Derby Street appeared for review of proposed signage. Mr.Jaquith asked if the proposed size of the sign was 30"x34". The owner said that she was planning on using MDF and • hoped to open July 9th. Mr. Kennedy suggested changes to the color in order to balance it and make it dimensional. Ms. Hartford asked the owner to re-submit the revised proposal for the July 19th SRA meeting. DRAFT DRB Minutes June 28,2006 Page 5 of 5 • OTHER BUSINESS The August Meeting will be scheduled for August 22,2006. 7. North River Canal Corridor Project Review Ms. Hartford informed the board that the DRB would now be reviewing any proposed projects to be located in the NRCC Zoning District and making recommendations to the Planning Board. She distributed copies of the `Neighborhood Master Plan for the North River Canal Corridor". The DRB uses the "Heritage Plaza West Urban Renewal Plan"criteria for review. Signage will be part of the site plan review by the DRB. Ms. Hartford noted that the first project for review, for the kitchen and cabinet business on Commercial Street,would be presented at the July meeting. Mr. Durand stated that the DRB would help the Planning Board with aesthetic issues. Ms. Hartford said that she would obtain a scaled map of the surveyed plan for the area for members. Ms. Duncan may attend the July meeting in order to explain the zoning. 8. Violations Ms. Hartford noted that she will be pursuing violations by the Salem Five Bank at the Washington Street location (sign), Hair Express (sign),Daniel Lowe (porch),and Fresh Taste of Asia (signs). • ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board, Mr. Durand moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Jaquith seconded the motion, and the vote was (5-0). • DRAFT a Salem • Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting Wednesday, May 24, 2006—6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier Paul Durand Christos Christoudias David Jaquith Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Minutes • Approval of Minutes from April 26, 2006 Meeting • Projects Under Review 1. 318 Derby Street (New Civilitea)— Continued review of proposed lighting. 2. 318 Derby Street (New Civilitea)—Review of proposed outdoor cafe. 3. 144 Washington Street (Gangi Printing)—Continued review of proposed hanging sign. 4. 72 Washington Street (Crunch)Granola Baby) —Review of proposed signage and window boxes. 5. 168 Essex Street (Asahi)—Review of proposed signage. 6. 118 Washington Street (Fresh Taste of Asia) —Continued review of outdoor cafe. Other Business • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 I DRB Minutes Mav 24,2006 Page t of 1 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MAY 24, 2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,May 24,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, Paul Durand, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford, Staff Planner,and Debra Tucker, Clerk,were also present. PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW 1. 318 Derby Street (New Civilitea)—Continued review of proposed lighting. Mr. Durand recused himself from this matter since his firm has worked with this applicant and he left the room. Lynn Potoff of Civilitea appeared to present additional information on and to request approval for lighting at 318 Derby Street. The light will be a black covered light fixture and the conduit from the window to the blade sign will be painted before it is installed. Michael Blier,Ernest DeMaio, and Glenn Kennedy recommended approval of the lighting plan for Civiltea • of 318 Derby Street to the SRA. 2. 318 Derby Street (New Civilitea) Lynn Potoff of Civilitea appeared to present plans for an outdoor cafe at 318 Derby Street. Her plan includes four-28" tables and eight chairs,which will be taken in at night. The items will be metal. The owner planned upon black tables and chairs but had encountered problems with the manufacturer on availability of the chairs in black and requested approval for silver. Ms. Potoff stated that there was sufficient clearance along the sidewalk and that the nearby tree was not a problem. After discussion, the board recommended that the owner investigate obtaining black chairs from another manufacturer. Tania Hartford suggested that the she call the Edgewater Cafe as to where they had purchased their furniture. Michael Blier,Ernest DeMaio, and Glenn Kennedy recommended approval of the outdoor seating plan for Civiltea of 318 Derby Street with the following conditions: the furniture be black; the final furniture selection be reviewed and approved by Mr. Bher; and the DRB members would go to the site within two months to ensure that the configuration works,and that the owner would be willing to change the plan if it is found not to work. Mr. Durand returned to the meeting. 3. 144 Washington Street (Gangi Printing) • Steve Gangi of Gangi Printing at 144 Washington Street appeared to request sign approval. The signage had previously been approved by the DRB;however, the SRA rejected the plan due to the color selection. -- Mr. Durand stated that he liked the new colors. Mr. Beer commented that the colors matched the building better. .eA 1 DRB Mtn.t" May 24,2006 Page 2 of 2 • Mr. DeMain moved that the revised signage for Gangi Printing at 144 Washington Street be approved as presented. Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion,and it was approved(4-0). 4. 72 Washington Street (Crunchy Granola Baby) The owners of Crunchy Granola Baby of 72 Washington Street presented plans for signage. Their hanging sign will be in the same location as the nearby Career Center and Salem Cycle and will use the same type of bracket. The owners requested approval of window boxes as well,which they said were similar to the Main Street standard. After discussion, the DRB members recommended approval of the proposal as follows: the hanging sign was approved, the door sign will be green lettering on a light background and will be reduced in size and centered with at least three inches on each side, the window boxes will be painted brown and w ll not have a fm edge. 5. 168 Essex Street (A ani) Ms. Hartford reported that the owners of the Asahi restaurant were requesting a sign on Church Street near the vestibule entrance to help customers find them, since they are located on the Essex Street mall. She reported that this prompted discussion and that Executive Director Lynn Duncan has requested that the matter of storefronts and the mall be studied further. She thought that a sign with a directory of businesses might be more appropriate. The Planning department will set up a meeting with the mall owners in order to discuss the matter. • Ms. Hartford reported that there is a banner hanging on the Essex St. side that was not approved and was an eyesore. The owners were proposing a sign that was larger than allowed. They are allowed 48 square feet of signage and already have 38 feet of signage with two awnings. They would be allowed another 12 square feet of signage. The owners stated that they had already had a new metal sign made up. They complained that they have no visibility on Essex Street. Ms. Hartford suggested that they could remove some of their other signage or could remove the lettering off of the awnings. She noted that the window lettering was not counted in their signage, although it should have been. Mr. Durand noted that the new proposed sign would have to be half of the sign. Ms. Hartford said that they could ask the mall owners if they could install their new sign inside the vestibule on Church Street. She noted that the Planning Department was offering to meet with the store and mall owners to discuss a directory sign. She noted that they could not allow a sign for Asahi on the exterior of the mall on Church Street as all of the other owners would then request the same. The proposed metal sign was discussed in detail and members made various suggestions to the owners to reduce the size in order to meet the signage limits. The owners stated that they would have to see if the signs had been made already. Ms. Hartford informed them that they should not have ordered the signs before the plan was approved. She added that the Planning department has a signage program for businesses and that the department tries to help businesses as well. Ms. Hartford informed the owners of Asahi that if they wished to have an outdoor cafe, the plan would have to be pre-approved by the SRA.Any alcohol or food served would need the appropriate licenses. URB Minutes May 24,2006 Page 3 of 3 6. 118 Washington Street (Fresh Taste of Asia This matter was withdrawn by the owner and may be presented at a later date. MINUTES The minutes from the April 26,2006 meeting were presented for approval. Mr. DeMaio moved that the minutes for the April 26,2006 meeting be approved as presented. Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion,and the motion passed (4-0). OTHER BUSINESS Ms. Hartford reported that she would contact the Salem Five Bank concerning the former Heritage Cooperative Bank building on Washington Street. They had painted the doors without approval and the other work that had been approved had not yet been done. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board, the meeting was adjourned. • SKA Minutes May 10 2006 Page 1 of I • MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING OF THE SALEM REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HELD ON MAY 10,2006 A Regular Meeting of the Salem Redevelopment Authority(SRA) Board was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Tuesday,May 10,2006 at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call Chairman Michael Brennan called the meeting to order,and on roll call the following members were present: Conrad Baldini,Michael Brennan,Michael Connelly,Christine Sullivan, and Russell Vickers. Also present were Lynn Duncan,Executive Director,Tania Hartford,Staff Planner,and Debra Tucker, Clerk. Minutes Mr. Baldini moved to approve the minutes of the minutes for the meeting held on April 10,2006. Mr. Connelly seconded the motion,and the motion passed (5-0). New Business Executive Director's Report: a. Marketplace Redevelopment • Ms. Duncan reported on a committee meeting held. The RCG plan will be reviewed by Michael Blier of Landworks, Inc., and award-winning landscaping architectural firm. There will be a public meeting held on May 22^d from 7 p.m.-9 p.m. and Ms. Duncan encouraged SRA members, that are able, to attend. Ms. Sullivan noted that Mt. Blier,who is on the Design Review Board, has a good reputation and said that she was looking for creativity. b. Old Police Station There are outstanding punch list items on the redevelopment of the Old Police Station project. Ms. Duncan proposed that she send a letter to Charring Cross re-iterating the outstanding work and invite officials to the June SRA meeting. She will also let the owners know as well. The department is holding the final Certificate of Occupancy for one unit and the final project. There are Planning Board issues with the project as well. Ms. Sullivan stated that the Planning Board issues were legitimate concerns. She noted exterior lighting and fencing issues. Mr. Vickers added security and locks and said that there was a whole litany of items. Ms. Sullivan said that this was not acceptable. Chairman Brennan recommended that a letter be sent from both the SRA and the Planning boards. c. Access to the Old Salem Jail from the Bypass Road Ms. Duncan reported that the Planning Department is still working with the developer as well as Mass Highway concerning the curb cut on Bridge Street,which is necessary for access to the rear driveway for the proposed restaurant. The bypass road is currently under construction. Ms. Duncan said that she thought • that the proposed 18-foot driveway with turnaround would work and that the City Engineer had no problem with it as well. There will probably be a field change order by Mass Highway. SRA Minutes May 10 2006 Page 2 of 2 • The engineering firm HW Moore Associates is currently working on the project. Ms. Hartford is coordinating the project with Kathy Winn. Ms.Duncan said that it is not clear who pays for the plan and that Mass Highway may be looking to the developer. The landscaping plan for the green space is being revised. Ms. Hartford said that the City of Salem would prepare the plan and give it to Mass Highway. Chairman Brennan asked if the residual land would be turned over to the City. Ms. Hartford replied that it would be eventually. Ms. Sullivan asked who owns the driveway and the land. Ms. Duncan said that the right of way is retained by the City of Salem and that the existing road is still owned by the City. Ms. Duncan indicated that it would be incumbent upon New Boston Ventures to coordinate with Mass Highway. She will also draft a letter from the Mayor supporting the plan with hopes of moving the project forward. It has been decided that there will be no parking in the green space area. REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PROJECTS Downtown Market SD& Ms. Duncan reported that Ms. Hartford had a conversation with local realtors and the Chamber of Commerce in an effort to identify concerns or pitfalls. Ms. Hartford said that she had spoken with Juliana Tache,who offered to sit with realtors regarding the pulse of the market. She indicated that since she knows the market that she would not be interested in donating towards a study but would speak with the City. • Ms. Hartford stated that when she spoke to Rinus Oosthoek of the Salem Chamber of Commerce,he said that he needed updated demographic information from the census,including population,income,what is being spent,who shops,what is being bought,and what is missing, the size of space available, and information on the cost for space. She further stated that Mr. Oosthoek thought that this would be helpful and that he would support it. Ms. Sullivan agreed and referenced the growth of Vinnin Square. She noted that Salem State College students frequent Vinnin Square rather than downtown Salem. Ms. Sullivan said that it is not enough to have the facts but that they need a plan to identify the types and sizes of stores. She said that they needed an action plan. Ms. Sullivan added that there are 6,000-day students and 1,400 residential students at the College. Ms. Sullivan asked how many Salems there were. She said that there is Vinnin Square, downtown,and Highland Ave. Ms. Sullivan said that residents of the Highland Ave. area might relate to Highland Ave. stores and the Northshore Mall. She suggested linking the Salem State debit card to use downtown. Ms. Duncan said that she would form the scope,have discussions, and frame it as a very specific action plan. Ms. Sullivan said that Newburyport attracted the restaurant Not Your Average Joes to replace the Firehouse. She said that she wanted action. Ms. Hartford said that there would be no funding from the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Vickers stated that they would be able to find the funding if the study had value. Chairman Brennan noted that the SRA has money. Mr. Vickers said that he thought that the SRA should fund half and others should fund the other half. • Mr. Baldini commented that the developers do their own research and know what is needed in an area. Ms. Duncan added that small businesses and landlords might not have sophisticated outreach. i SRA Minutes May 10 2006 Page 3 of 3 • Ms. Sullivan said that she had seen some of the prior studies and did not like studies that don't go anywhere. Mr.Vickers commented that he had directed local realtors to the Planning department and said that if they were not interested then maybe the landlords would be and suggested reaching out to them. Ms. Hartford said that the most current census information was from 2000 and that the demographics of the City had changed since then. Ms. Sullivan added that there has been a change in downtown and that they do not know what they have. Ms.Duncan said that the information should be updated and kept current. She said that if it were updated P P P every two to three years, then future studies would not be as expensive. Chairman Brennan asked when the last plan was done. Ms. Hartford said that it was 2001 or 2002 and that there had been changes since then. Ms. Sullivan said that Salem has no marketing tools and no brochure. She noted that Haverhill does. Chairman Brennan asked why the Chamber of Commerce did not provide this,since it is their business. Ms. Sullivan said that they just don't think that way. She suggested a general Gve/work campaign. SMALL PROJECT REVIEW City Hall Ms. Hartford reported that the Collector's office has had numerous requests for a collection drop-off box outside of City Hall where people could drop off their payments, since City Hall hours are not always • convenient. The suggested box will be black and will be placed to the right of City Hall. Mr. Connelly asked how secure it was. Ms. Hartford said that it was secure and will be visible in front of City Hall with easy access and will serve senior citizens well. Mr. Vickers moved to approve the proposed collection box in front of City Hall as presented. Mr. Connelly seconded the motion, and the motion passed (5-0). 304 Essex Street(Holloran Development) Attorney George Atkins and developer Jeff Holloran of Holloran Development appeared before the board concerning 304 Essex Street. Ms. Hartford stated that all exterior renovations to the building need SRA approval and this developer had not sought this. Attorney Atkins said that his client has experience converting over 100 units of multifamily buildings into condominiums. He apologized on behalf of his client,who did not know that he needed the SRA approval. The building at 304 Essex Street was a former rooming house and is being converted into seven condominiums. There were changes made to the windows on North Street. Transoms formerly covered with plywood were changed to glass. The storefronts were painted a bronze color on North Street and white on Essex Street. Attorney Atkins said that there were older photos of the budding showing that these were the colors. He was requesting approval for two lighting fixtures on the inside entryways to the residential units and one at the back entry through the church parking lot. • Mr. Baldini commented that the work was a great improvement on North Street. Ms. Sullivan questioned the window on Essex St. with doors built in. Mr. Holloran explained that this was for display cabinets accessed from the common hall inside the building. Attorney Atkins stated that there is nothing there now and the ' , SRA\linutes May 10 2006 Page 4 of 4 • storefront will look differently once occupied. Mr. Baldini said that he thought there was no sense in holding up the project. Attorney Atkins said that they could change it if necessary or even hang a curtain in the window. Mr.Baldini stated that it should be left as it is. Ms. Sullivan moved to send the matter to the Design Review Board. There was no second. Attorney Atkins asked if this were within the jurisdiction of the SRA if the issue is inside the building. Ms. Hartford answered that the SRA can review the issue if one can see it from the outside and if it is a change. Ms. Sullivan said that the developers did a great job and that this was in no way a reflection on that. Mr. Vickers moved to accept the plan for redevelopment of 304 Essex Street as presented. Mr. Baldini seconded the motion. Mr. Baldini,Mr. Connelly,and Mr.Vickers voted in favor and Chairman Brennan and Ms. Sullivan voted against. The motion passed (3-2). OUTDOOR CAFE PERMITS 318 Derby Street(New Civilitea) Lynn Potoff of New Civilitea appeared to request approval for an outdoor cafe at 318 Derby Street. She explained that the cafe would have four tables with a maximum size of 28 inches and eight chairs. These would be black wrought iron and located two on each side of the doors in front of the windows. They will be taken in each night. Ms.Potoff said that they fit nicely and leave an eight-foot passageway for pedestrians. Ms. Sullivan moved to send the application for an outdoor cafe for Civilitea at 318 Derby Street to the DRB . for review. Mr. Vickers seconded the motion. The motion passed (5-0). PROJECT APPROVAL 318 Derby Street(New Civilitea) Ms. Hartford reported that the DRB had reviewed the proposed signage for New Civilitea of 318 Derby Street and had loved it. They had recommended approval for the hanging sign and the vinyl window graphics. The board requested further information on the exterior lighting. Mr. Connelly moved to approve the proposed hanging sign and the vinyl window graphics as presented and approved by the DRB. Mr. Baldini seconded the motion. The motion passed (5-0). SIGN REVIEW 265 Essex Street(Chamber of Commerce) Ms. Hartford reported that this matter would be continued as the petitioner pulled their waiver request. PROJECT APPROVAL 265 Essex Street Salem Chamber of Commerce Ms. Sullivan moved to approve the vinyl window signs for the Chamber of Commerce as presented and • approved by the DRB. Mr. Connelly seconded the motion. The motion passed(5-0). l l SL1 btinutes May 10 2006 Page 5 of 5 • 144 Washington Street (Gangi Printing) The proposed signage plan for Gangi Painting at 144 Washington Street was presented for approval. Ms. Hartford reported that the plan was similar to that of the other businesses on the block. The DRB had modified the sign and approved it. Ms. Duncan asked if there had been any discussion on the color of the storefront in relation to the sign. Chairman Brennan commented that he did not like the color. Ms. Sullivan agreed. Ms. Hartford said that the color was actually bluer. Mr. Vickers said that he did not like it. Ms. Sullivan said that the City should have some harmony without losing character. Mr. Connelly added that he thought that it did not blend in. Ms. Duncan asked if the design guidelines discussed color. Ms. Hartford replied that color was arbitrary. Ms. Hartford asked the board what their thoughts were on the temporary window banners. Chairman Brennan suggested that the DRB be asked to reconsider the color. Ms. Sullivan wanted the DRB to be asked what their reasoning for approval was. Ms. Hartford replied that this was their logo. Mr. Baldini suggested that the sign be brought in for the board members to see it. Ms. Hartford said that she would. Mr. Baldini moved to approve the upper hanging sign and to send the matter of the other signage for Gangi Printing of 144 Washington Street back to the DRB for reconsideration. Mr.Vickers seconded the motion. The motion passed (5-0). 34 Front Street(Hair Express) Ms. Hartford presented proposed signage for Hair Express of 34 Front Street for approval. She stated that it • is the same as that for Remax and would be attached with a bracket into the brick masonry flat against the budding at the landlord's request. The hanging sign is wood with gold leaf. Mr. Baldini moved to approve the proposed signage for Hair Express of 34 Front Street. Mr. Connelly seconded the motion. The motion passed (5-0). Other Business Ms. Sullivan asked how the Old Salem Jail project was progressing. Ms. Duncan replied that it is in design review now. Ms. Hartford added that it seemed to be on schedule and that the developers are on site frequently. Ms. Duncan said that the developer had to wait for all permits,which should be issued by the end of the summer. Mr. Baldini asked about the progress of Taste of Asia. Ms. Hartford reported that the owner hoped to hold a soft opening the next weekend. Mr. Connelly asked for the progress of Habitat for Humanity. Ms. Hartford said that she hasn't been able to get to the site yet. Adjournment There being no further business,Mr. Baldini moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Sullivan seconded the motion, and the motion passed (5-0). Meeting stands adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Debra Tucker Clerk r , Salem C ui �ALEM, ;-1a ® CLERK'S OFFICE Redevelopment Authority • 1006 61AP -3 A 10: 4 i DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Special Meeting Tuesday, Match 7, 2006—9:00am 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Christos Chtistoudias Fred Johnson Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Agenda • 1. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem�aill —Continued review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail Complex. a. This notice posted on `Officla{ Buil ate" city v Salem, Mass. on ' �3A /7.� �3B of M.G.L.arxorda valift . 30 Sac,. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes March 7,2006 Page 1 of 2 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MARCH 7,2006 A special meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Tuesday,March 7,2006 at 9:00 a.m. Members in attendance were Michael Blier, Christos Christoudias, Paul Durand, David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford,Staff Planner,was also present. PROJECT REVIEW 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem jail) —Continued review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail Complex continued. The developer said that they had reviewed the comments from the DRB meeting held February 23,2005 meeting taken them into account for their schematic redesign. Dan Riccarelli,project architect,reviewed the changes with the Board. He explained that the light monitors were slimmed down,the width of the doors on the North Elevation was scaled down,and additional architectural elements were added on the South Elevation. The roof was kept the same because a traditional roof did not work with the building. Stanley Smith,member of the public,asked about the light monitors. He noticed that there were horizontal muntins on the rear and vertical on the front. He thought that it was important to keep the dimensional proportion of some aspect of the monitors be consistent with the similar dimensional proportion of other aspects of the building so that it reads in a unity rather than being separate with no relationship to anything • else. He further commented that if they were to turn the monitors 30 degrees so they clearly look different to be a modern statement,if might create a nice element He compared them to a restaurant in Faneuil Hall. He thought it would create a little interest so that they would be achieving an objective of proportionality by making certain that the glass size would correspond to the glass size in other parts of the building. The developers liked the idea and noted that Mr.DeMain had brought up the idea of having the monitors different sizes and perhaps even different designs. Mr. Riccarelh said that when they tried that in the drawings,the building seemed to"busy"and did not work well with the site. Cindy Giugliano,project archietct,noted that the vertical elements are symmetrical. Mr. Kennedy thought that the drawing looked a whole lot better. Mr.Jaquith agreed. Mr.Jaquith asked about the asymmetrical gable. The developers said that the actual shape was addressed making it symmetrical would increase the elevation of the lines and didn't look right. Mr.Durand thought that whether it was asymmetrical or not he thought it makes it unique and communicates correctly. That fa4ade,he thought was a little mannered and the small window on the gable was not strong enough. Mr.Durand asked about the scale of the window on the brick fayade. He liked the composition but didn't want it to get too thin and lack detail. He said that he appreciated the modem composition and thought that the proportions were good. He thought that it needed some detail and articulation. Mr.Durand thought that if along the side if it were recessed it might look like more of a thick brick wall with windows set into that. It would help with the energy code. He thought that the cornice needed to be stronger. Mr.Durand did not know if the top header aligned with the vertical window and fenestration. • DRB Minutes Much 7,2006 Page 2 of 2 Mr.Durand recommended that a window dormer would make it an architectural feature. He thought there • needed to be a stronger statement. He thought that the roof was doing a different thing and was calling attention to it. It needed proper weight The materials were reviewed including granite,metal pickets and posts,metal trellises,lead coated copper. The trellises may be taken from the cell doors as a nice way to break up the mass. Mr.Durand thought that the materials were nicer than anticipated. There may be some glass in the garage doors. Mr.Durand thought that the garage doors were important and added that the light monitors looked a little thin. Mr.Durand stated that the developer needed a little more attention to the back of the building with maybe a little more prominence. The Juliet balconies may be made of the jail bars as well and it would tie into the iron fencing. Mr. Kennedy said that with the reduction of the size of the windows, the light monitors got smaller. He thought that they look a little small now. He said that the outside comers would look nice with the granite front. He had been interested in seeing the window size reduced and the corner becoming more prominent. Mr.Durand thought that this was a final design issue. Mr.Durand reviewed the turnaround plans on the site plan. He thought that it would work itself out. He said that if it was hard to use then it won't be used much and if it is available when you need it to use it,it was fine. Mr.Durand thought that it was a condominium control issue. Mr. Kennedy said that he was in France and there was something similar and the biggest issue was the size of the cars that were in there. Mr.Durand said that Salem was a very pedestrian oriented City and this was a pedestrian oriented design. The developer reminded the board that no one will be parking in the spot for more than 30 minutes or so. Mr.Durand said that it was a nice garden spot. • Mr.Durand moved that the DRB recommended schematic approval of the design plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail as presented to the SRA. For final design plans the DRB recommended that the developer look at and work on the light monitors,the roofline,and more detail on the fenestration and other details, such as the railing design. All members were in favor. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board,the meeting was adjourned. Salem • Redevelopment ® Authority r� me NCD DESIGN REVIEW BOARD qrn „:K � w . RESCHEDULED 2/22/06 MEETING M:J Meeting Agenda Wednesday, Match 1, 2006—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Michael Blier David Jaquith Christos Christoudias Fred Johnson Ernest DeMaio Glenn Kennedy Paul Durand Project Review • 1. 71 Washingtton Street (Salem Five Bank)—Review of the proposed signage at the new Salem Five Bank location at 71 Washington Street. 2. 6 Central Street (Wicked Goodzl —Review of the proposed signage. 3. 103 Washington Street (Modem Millie)—Review of the proposed signage. 4. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem laill —Continued review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail Complex. 5. 90 Lafayette Street—Continued review of Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of 90 Lafayette Street into a mixed-use development. Minutes • Review and approval of the minutes from the February 7, 2006 DRB meeting. Other Business Adjournment This notice postsd on #,of`icial Bulletin Board• City Hall Ave., a:� , on FEB 2 at �/rl s t�u . Je a Ya Ll�a . . 23A & 2Bofl. � i 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 r Salem c� �MLL! 1. 1 Redevelopment P CLERK'SCLERK'S OFFICE � Authority _(Q6 FEB I I A 11: 00 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 22,2006—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Christos Christoudias Paul Durand David Jaquith Fred Johnson Project Review • 1. 71 Washington Street (Salem Five Bank) —Review of the proposed signage at the new Salem Five Bank location at 71 Washington Street. 2. 6 Central Street O icked QooLz) —Review of the proposed signage. 3. 103 Washington Street (Modern Millie) —Review of the proposed signage. 4. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jaid l —Continued review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail Complex. 5. 90 Lafayette Street—Continued review of Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of 90 Lafayette Street into a mixed-use development. Minutes • Review and approval of the minutes from the February 7, 2006 DRB meeting. Other Business Adjournment This notice po€ted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall ,Ave., Mass. on Fea. 17, acz (, at ) I oo lvty� its acoordanco with Chap. 39 • 23A & 23B of €Yf.G.f,• -_.., 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes Much 1,2006 Page 1 of 7 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MARCH 1, 2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,Match 1,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Michael Blier, Christos Christoudias, Ernest DeMain, Paul Durand, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford,Staff Planner,and Debra Tucker,Clerk,were also present. David Jaquith joined the meeting in progress. Ms.Hartford introduced the three new board members Michael Blier,Ernest DeMaio,and Glenn Kennedy. PROJECT REVIEW 1. 71 Washington Street (Salem Five Bank) Jeffrey Sara presented plans for new signage for the new Salem Five Bank located at 71 Washington Street. Mr.Sara stated that the Salem Five had recently acquired the Heritage Cooperative Bank,which has been located downtown for 150 years. As a result the bank will be renamed and requires new signage. The projecting sign at the corner will be moved for better visibility. Michael Blier asked if any of the signage or the existing clock would be lighted. Mr.Sara replied that they both are,but that the existing clock is not internally illuminated. Ernest DeMaio asked how they would be lit. Mr. Sara answered that there would be both up lighting and down lighting but that the lighting source would • not be seen. Mr.Kennedy stated that he thought that the sign lettering appeared too crowded in the space and out of proportion and thought that it could be brought forward. Mr. Sara explained that the proposed sign is 24"by 30". Mr.Durand thought that it protruded into the arch too far and was ill fitted. Mr. Christoudias asked if Mr.Sara was sure of the proportions. Mr. Sara replied that the window was 11 feet at the widest point. The current sign is 134". He stated that he could not distort the logo. He suggested that if he reduced the height to 18"he could lengthen the lettering within the blue space. Mr.Kennedy commented that this might give balance to the sign. Mr. Christoudias asked if there were plans to paint the sills below. Ms.Hartford noted that any color change would have to be brought to the Planning Board. Bank officials stated that they had not determined the color scheme. Mr.DeMaio asked if the electrical feeds would be concealed. Mr.Sara replied that they would be and fed through support tubing. Ms.Hanford recapped that the wall sign lettering would be shrunk and made more proportional. She requested that the revised plan be provided to her quickly for inclusion on the SRA agenda. Mr.Sara said that the three cast bronze plaques along the side of the building will be changed to Salem Five. Mr.Durand recommended keeping the masonry line rather than overlapping the sign. He thought that it would look better. Mr.Sara agreed. Mr. Durand asked that the elevations and dimensions be provided and • added that photos are not accurate. II DRB Minutes March 1,2006 Page 2 of 7 The board unanimously approved these plans with the proposed changes. • 2. 6 Central Street (Wicked Goodz) Keith Linneras presented proposed signage for Wicked Goodz of 6 Central Street. Mr.Linneras said that the sign is similar to two other signs on the building and would be consistent by having the same shape. All signs are at the ten-foot height. A new bracket that matches the others will be installed. Mr.Durand noted that the colors proposed were striking. Mr.Linneras stated that they are the colors of the shop. He added that it is a dark street without a lot of light Owner Betty Bouchard said that the colors are those of her logo,store walls,and bags. She said that her store is geared towards a younger and trendier crowd. Ms.Bouchard said that she could tone the colors down some. She stated that she has two other shops already selling souvenir items and fun gifts for teens and young adults and that is why she chose fairly trendy colors. Mr.Blier stated that the colors were similar in intensity and were hard to read. Mr. Christoudias added that it was almost over designed and does not stand out. He suggested maybe adding some negative space somewhere. Mr.Durand proposed a border of color and said that the intricate lettering with bold color was competing with the message and the wording was floating off Mr.Kennedy added that a border would pick up the architecture of the windows and there would be more visual draw and pick up on the framework Mr.Durand stated that in the past a similar sign had been recommended for approval to the SRA and that it was the only time one of the DRB's recommendations had been overturned He added that the SRA has the ultimate authority. • Mr.Jaquith joined the meeting. Mr.Durand thought that they should balance the amount of strong color,but that it was a design issue. He thought that the shape was fine. Mr.Blier said that the sign had a flat two-dimensional feeling and that maybe there should be a shift in the intensity level. Mt. Durand added that it needed to be balanced. Ms. Hartford instructed the owner and Mr.Linneras to redesign the sign. Mr.Durand stated that they might want to submit a few designs. Mr.Linneras said that he would email the changes. 3. 103 Washington Street (Modern Millie) Ms.Hartford presented proposed signage submitted by Modem Millie of 103 Washington Street. The sign is a hanging sign that will be located in the same space as the former store. The same bracket will be used. Mr. Kennedy noted the white background. Mr.Durand felt that the sign lettering was too tight to the edge. He suggested shrinking the lettering to 90% size. Mr.Kennedy suggested that the black color on the oval sign be reduced to a more gray tone at about 70%. The board unanimously approved these plans with the proposed changes. 4. 50 St Peter Street Old Salem jail) Jim Alexander of Finegold Alexander presented the revised schematic design plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail complex. • DRB Minutes Match 1,2006 Page 3 of 7 • Project Manager Penn Lindsey of New Boston Ventures presented the conceptual plans for the overall site and the new building. He reported that they had met with Mass Historic,Historic Salem Inc.,and the Salem Historic Commission in order to get feedback on their plans. Mr.Alexander described the plan to re-establish the fore court,wall,and fencing as well as the steel arch at the entrance. The developers are planning a conservative approach for the Jail Keeper's building,a federal budding. Mr.Alexander reviewed the plans of the current site for the benefit of the new board members. He noted that the pattern of granite on the Jail is simple and beautifully proportioned. The plans for parking and access to the courtyard were reviewed. The main access will be from St.Peter Street There will be parking under the new building. A public path will have circulation through the site to the museum and restaurant. There will be a small exhibit of the former Jail as the museum. Dennis Gray,landscape architect,addressed the board. He reviewed the plans for parking,courtyard,and lower terrace. There will be minimal landscaping without a lot of planting added. Mr. Gray envisioned shade trees such as honey locust located between the church parking lot and the site. His plan calls for putting back a privet hedge along the cemetery in order to provide a green edge rather than a fence. Brick paving and granite are planned for the inner courtyard and car turnaround/drop off area. These will be a simple wall at the corner of St.Peter Street and Bridge Street Terraces are planned from the walk as the grade drops off. Evergreens and boxwood will be used. There will be shade trees at the restaurant area. Ms.Hartford reminded those in attendance that the presentation was for discussion of the schematic plan. The developer will keep talking about the access from Bridge Street;however,many parties including the • State are involved in that item. Mr.Alexander stated that they were looking at a more contemporary approach with the new building. Plans for a masonry facade with light monitors,asymmetrical gables,and granite and brick was presented. The new building will not just replicate a federal house. The buildings will frame the courtyard. Cindy Giugliano discussed the preliminary floor plans. The new building will house eight units in a 44'by 80' box. Parking will be at the rear of the building. The front facade will have terraces off the toaster bedrooms. There will be two main entrances to the eight units at the front and back of the buildings. There are raised decks over the garages and four Juliet balconies as well. Dan Riccardelli noted that the eave line follows the Jail eve line and the plan is to match it to the height of the Jail. The windows will be similar to the Jail's with Juliet balconies and spandrels. He added that the light monitors take their cues from the chimneys and cupolas of the Jail and mimic the coursing. Granite will wrap around the base. The roof will be asymmetrical. A scale model was presented for DRB viewing. Mr.Christoudias commented that the new building looked more contemporary and more elements are being incorporated rather than replicated. Mr.DeMaio asked if there would be passage through the site,what the courtyard would become. Mr.Alexander answered that the courtyard would be accommodating a lot of activity. Cars would enter for drop off. The public will be encouraged to wally through. Mr.Alexander noted that the area was not totally solved yet,especially landscaping. Mr.Gray said that there is a question of how many people would be coming through the space. Mr.Alexander stated that the museum would not be a large one. Mr.Kennedy said that the assumption appears to be that there will be access from Bridge Street He asked • about the parking. Mr.Alexander said that there would be valet parking. DRB Minutes March 1,2006 Page 4 of 7 • Ward Two Councilor Mike Sosnowski stated that access from Bridge Street was becoming a hot topic and that Howard Street residents are concerned about traffic if the valets go up St.Peter Street to the garage and down Howard Street back to the site. Ms.Hartford stated that the project is not at that point The Planning Department would be the place to discuss that matter. Mr.Alexander added that a traffic consultant will be brought in on the matter and noted that the valet service can be instructed as to what streets to use. Mr.Blier asked about the courtyard turnaround. Ms. Giugliano answered that there is 80 feet between the buildings. Mr.Alexander said that the turnaround is intended as a resident turnaround and drop off. Mr. Durand asked if they anticipated any problem with mixing cars with pedestrians. Mr. Gray answered that they did not Mr. Christoudias noted that that mix does not work on the Essex Street mall,but does work at Harris Place in Chelsea. Mr.Durand stated that the condominium documents should cover who owns the courtyard and how it works as well as how long cars are allowed to stop there. He noted that it would be prone to abuse. Mr.Blier stated that the use of materials would be important so that when there are no cars on the spot,it has a pedestrian feel. Trees would help and the developer should make it inconvenient for a car to stay parked there. Mr.Durand asked about the front granite wall and the fence and whether it would be retained. Mr. Alexander said that there the iron fence at the front of the property would be replicated around the site. Mr.Kennedy commented that he thought that the new building feels out of place in that the windows and light monitors feel big. He suggested a bigger corner and smaller windows. Mr.DeMaio noted that they are picking up cues from all of the surrounding area. He thought that the plan was done very well and liked the playfulness. One area that he thought should be looked at was the side • elevation of the new building,which he felt looked like it had a"hat"on it. Mr.DeMaio referred to the roofline bands as well. Mr.Alexander said that they might have tried too hard to get away from the traditional form. Mr.Jaquith said that he liked the transition from granite to brick and the window. He noted that there might be a way to use a true gable. He mentioned the north elevation entryway widths and asked the developers to take a look at them. Mr.Jaquith stated that the south side windows at the ends seem too close to the edges. He also asked that they take another look at that the railings at the balconies. Mr. Kennedy asked about the front courtyard and its perspective. Mr.Alexander answered that there is a slight rise in elevation. Mr.Durand asked if it would be possible to screen the back of the building and the parking garage area. He thought that there was a carport feel to it with the garages lined up. Mr.Alexander thought that the edge could be landscaped. He said that it is a tough spot The intent is for nice-looking garage doors and added that they could take a look at a more solid and interesting railing. Mr.Blier said that it is an important elevation since there is no real back of the building. He added that it should receive great light Mr.Blier asked about the service and location of dumpsters. Mr. Gray answered that the plan was for them to be located near the restaurant for access and service. Ms.Hartford asked for public comment There was none. Ms.Hartford stated that her notes on the board's comments on the project included requests to look again at the light monitors,a larger comer and smaller or less windows,review of the side elevations and the gable end of the roof and the roof cap. Other comments include reviewing the entryways at the north elevation and the parking lot landscaping plan as well as service for the building. The south side windows were thought • to look institutional DRB Minutes Much 1,2006 Page S of 7 r Mr.Durand said that the DRB should review the project again before it goes before the SRA. He asked if the • landscaping was sprinklered. Mr. Gray said that it was. Ms. Hartford suggested a special meeting for March 7t� at 9:00 a.m. The next DRB meeting will be held on March 22nd and the SRA meeting will be April 12th. Barbara Cleary,member of the public,asked what the roof color would be. The developer answered that it would be a lead coated copper color. Mr. Christoudias commented that the developers'attempt to blend the historical with contemporary was pretty impressive. 5. 90 Lafayette Street Mr.Durand recused himself from the matter. Mark Meche of Winter Street Architects presented the revised schematic design plans for the redevelopment of 90 Lafayette Street into a mixed-use development for review. He reviewed the plan in detail for the newer board members. The proposed plan consists of rebuilding the structure to house 30 condominium units with retail space on the first floor. There will be 6 units per floor, five 2 bedroom units and one 1 bedroom unit,constructed in the five story building with 31 parking spaces located inside the building and at the rear of the property. Mr.Meche presented drawings. He noted that his client liked the industrial look of the recent Derby Lofts project. The plan calls for a tower in the corner and the first floor will house retail storefronts and a canopy with lettering. Materials discussed were glass for the tower and windows,and brick and a stucco product such as simstone. Mr.Meche noted that they would avoid yellow colors as recommended at the last DRB • meeting. He said that since he is at the schematic phase,actual materials would not be presented until the next meeting. Mr. Meche stated that a tertiary material such as simstone,a relatively new product,would be a good durable product suitable for a high-rise building. The materials must be affordable. Mr.Meche said that he is using some of the simstone on his Crombie Street project. He stated that he is trying to make the building a fairly green building in order to meet the energy star requirements,although it will not be LEED. There will be mullion relief to give some depth at the brick. The windows will be either fiberglass or aluminum. Mr.Jaquith noted that it would depend upon the scale. Ms.Hartford said that materials and windows would be determined at a later date. Mr.Blier asked about the surface parking behind the building. Mr. Meche said that the area would be paved. Mr.Blier asked about deeded roof rights as well as the storm water collection. Mr.Meche replied that roof decks could be built over the rubber roof. Water will be collected and sent to the storm drains. The board discussed possible development of the neighboring buildings. Mr.Kennedy noted that the drawings have come a long way,that the windows are nicer,and that the building looks a lot better. He said that he was not sure about establishing such a strong corner as the tower and said that it did not feel right and seemed arbitrary. Mr.Jaquith agreed and thought it seemed arbitrary as well. Mr. Blier stated that he appreciated the boldness and was alright with it. He thought that it could be the threshold in the Point area. Mr. Christoudias added that he thought the plan was very distinct,but didn't seem to fit He did like the tower though. • DRB Minutes March 1,2006 Page 6 of 7 Barbara Cleary,member of the public,cautioned the board that they might be setting a precedent. She said • that there is a scale there and that other owners will want to do something similar. She noted that the buildings on either side are historic. Ms. Cleary said that this would be a very big building. Mr.Jaquith said that Mr.Meche was looking at the relationship to other buildings done by his firm Winter Street Architects and he worried that they should be looking at it from a more residential point of view. Mr. Meche stated that he would be going before the Board of Appeals for variance in order to take down the existing building. He noted that the zoning is B5 and calls for a five-foot setback. There will be one parking space per unit A member of the public questioned the"window real estate"with respect to the adjacent Strega building. He stated that the building is very large for a very small site. Mr. Meche said that he could build up to the side and windows and that the plan qualifies with respect to air and light. The member of the public said that this should be disclosed in the condominium documents and represents a huge risk to the developer. He thought that the building was one story too tall and said that he thought that the developer could fix the existing building. Mr. Meche referred to Derby Lofts and the fact that the developer was willing to take a risk concerning closing a wall off with no windows. The member of the public then said that a 10-foot alley was not much and that there was really not a front and a back to the site. Mr. DeMaio stated that it was inappropriate at this point to now comment on the size and that he would refrain from commenting. He said that if the project goes forward,there is going to be a large building. Mr.DeMaio said that large structures in a neighborhood are usually courthouses,steeples,etc. He said that • the building looked like it could be anywhere such as Lynn or Malden and wondered what it had to do with Lafayette Street,an important street in Salem. Mr.Meche said that he was not looking too deeply for reference. He was hoping for a bit of departure and statement and said that this was the design that he wanted to put forward. Ms. Hartford said that they were now ready to go to the SRA with changes as recommended. Mr. Christoudias said that this project was handed down to the DRB for review. He wondered if this building shouldn't go there,what should? Mr.Jaquith stated that the Zoning Board dictates that and that the developer is meeting that envelope. The rest,he said,was a design issue. Mr.Meche said that it is not an industrial building and he hopes to add more sparkle. He noted that the Strega building is uncharacteristic for that whole street Mr. Meche said that he thought his plan was a pretty good design. Mr.Jaquith added that the neighborhood is a mixed bag with Wendy's,Winer Brothers,Strega,and the two hotel buildings. Mr.Meche noted that the building changes grade. Mr. Christoudias added that the building is that last at the very edge of the SRA district. Ms.Hartford asked if the DRB was recommending the project as designed to the SRA for approval. Mr. DeMaio said that in fairness and since this had already been a process,the developer had done what was asked of him. Mr. Kennedy and Mr.Blier agreed. The other members agreed to recommend the project for approval at the Schematic Design Review at the next SRA meeting. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS • Mr.Durand returned to the meeting. DRB Minutes March 1,2006 Page 7 of 7 Ms. Hartford distributed contact information forms for new members. She stated that her primary contact with the members would be through email communication. Ms.Hartford requested more formalization for the board and recommended electing a Chair and Vice Chair. She suggested that formal votes be taken on matters and encouraged the new members to share their opinions and to express dissension when necessary. Board members Mr.Blier,Mr. Christoudias,Mr.DeMaio,and Mr.Kennedy decided that Mr.Durand should serve as Chair and Mr.Jaquith should serve as Vice Chair. Mr.Jaquith welcomed the new board members. Mr.Durand added that they and their expertise were needed. Ms.Hartford announced that there would be a press conference by RCG at 3:00 p.m. on March 2nd concerning development plans for the Salem News building block,the Marketplace,the Delande Lighting building,and the municipal parking lot at the corner of Lafayette,and Front Streets. Ms.Hartford reported that the walkway plans along the South River were still underway. MINUTES Minutes from the February 7,2006 meeting were presented and accepted. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board,the meeting was adjourned. • • M SSS+nJ m+ny�tS Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda January 25, 2006 —6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Christos Christoudias Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the January 4, 2006 meeting. New Business 1. 140 Washington Street (Ristorante Gioia)—Review of proposed signage. 2. 118 Washington Street (Fresh&Taste)—Review of proposed hood system. 3. 118 Washington Street (Fresh &Taste)—Review of proposed signage. 4. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jain —Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail Complex. 5. 90 Lafayette Street—Review of Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of 90 Lafayette Street into a mixed-use development. • 120 Washington Street • Salem Massachusetts 01970 978 745-9595, Ext 311 Fax 978 740-0404 Salem ERRedevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda January 4, 2006 —6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Christos Christoudias Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson • Minutes Approval of the minutes from the November 16, 2005 meeting. New Business 1. 55 Lafayette Street (DiFiUo Antiques) —Review of proposed signage. 2. 324 Derby Street (Basics Furniture/1oelArt —Review of proposed signage. 3. 40 Front Street aM Trading Company/Salem Harbor Outfitters) —Review of proposed signage. 4. 217 Essex Street (The Gatherings—Review of proposed signage. 5. 50 Palmer Street (Salem Harbor CDCs—Review of Final Design of proposed 15 unit residential project on the corner of Palmer and Congress Streets. • DRB Minutes January 4,2006 Page 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES • JANUARY 4,2006 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,January 4,2006 at 6:00 pm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Debra Tucker,Clerk,were also present. NEW BUSINESS 1. 55 Lafayette Street(DiFifto Antiques) Proposed signage for DiFillipo Antiques at 55 Lafayette Street was presented for review. The signage proposed is the standard approved signage. Mr. Durand commented that he did not think that the mail slot would be allowed by the Post Office and that he might have to get a Post Office box. Mr. Jaquith said that he thought that the mailbox mounted outside looked residential. The petitioner replied that he had been in contact with the Post Office and they had approved the mail slot. The signage was approved as submitted. 2. 324 Derby Street(Basics Furniture/JoelArt) Plans for two proposed hanging signs were presented for Basic Furniture and JoelArt of 324 Lafayette Street. • There is one sign proposed on Derby Street for Basic Furniture and one on Central Street for JoelArt. Both would use the approved bracket. The lettering and the signs were approved as submitted. 3. 40 Front Street QM Trading Company/Salem Harbor Outfitters) Plans for two signs were presented for approval for JM Trading Company and Salem Harbor Outfitters of 40 Front Street. The petitioner was informed that two hanging signs are not allowed on the same street side. He complained that there is a fire escape balcony in front of the building,which does not leave enough room for a hanging sign. He requested one sign over the retail front entrance and one sign for the wholesale division. Mr. Durand recommended hanging one sign inside the glass window. Mr. Durand stated that the bracket, sign,and design were recommended. 4. 217 Essex Street(The Gathering) The applicant appeared to request sign approval for their storefront at the old Eastem Bank on Washington Street. One sign was presented, as their other two signs were not ready yet. Those will be presented at the meeting on February 22, 2006. A matte black sign is proposed for the 13" substrate area. The size and location were discussed. • The applicant stated that another of their signs would need to be changeable in order to post service times. Mr. Durand recommended a few seasonal signs that could be changed out seasonally. He also requested of sign maker that any future sign presentations be specific with dimensions. DRB Minutes January 4,2006 Page 2 of 3 The applicant asked if right angle signs on the building were acceptable since there will be an outreach • training center housed as well. Mr.Jaquith noted that the petitioner was not yet at his limit. Ms. Hartford answered that since the building is located on two streets, then one sign would be allowed for each of Washington and Essex Streets. She recommended that the petitioner look at other existing approved signs downtown for ideas. The one sign was approved as presented and will be submitted at the January 11, 2006 Redevelopment Authority meeting for approval. 5. 50 Palmer Street (Salem Harbor CDC) Madeleine Nash and the architect from Luna Design Group appeared before the Board on behalf of Salem Harbor CDC to present plans for 50 Palmer Street Ms. Hartford noted that the group had received a grant from the City of Salem and therefore the project review was under the jurisdiction of the Redevelopment Authority. The architect stated that the bids for construction were due on January 5, 2006. The project is for development of 15 units. The boards have seen the project at the schematic phase and they are now at the final phase. Due to soil analysis results,there will be crawlspaces instead of full basements. There will be no window air conditioners and there will be 9 to 15 air systems located on the roof. Harvey windows will be used. Two basic Benjamin Moore color schemes from their historic collection were presented. Mr. Durand stated that he preferred the gold color scheme and thought that it was more uplifting. Mr. Jaquith preferred the green color scheme. The architect noted that a standard 4" Hardy plank siding and trim system would be used with a factory • applied Churchill color coating. . A Certainteed asphalt shingle will be used. There will be brick pavers on the comes and concrete pavers in place of landscaping. Trex decking will be used. The architect stated that the Planning Board had approved the landscaping plan. A 2 over 2 Harvey vinyl window with sandwiched mullions will be installed. Azac trim will be applied and there will be no wood on the exterior. The project must remain affordable for 50 years. Mr. Durand stated that he thought that the plans looked good. He asked what the square footage was. Ms. Nash replied that the lot is 15,500 square feet and the comer units will be 1,065 square feet and the townhouses will be 1,400. The architect noted that nine interested contractors had obtained plans, seven were still interested, and they were hoping for five bids. Mr. Durand stated that either paint scheme would be good. Ms. Hartford commented that the blue doors were throwing her. The architect said that the gold color scheme would stand out more in the neighborhood. Ms. Hartford asked that the developers notify her of the color decision and when the plans are finalized to copy the information to her. The architect said that they were hoping to break ground in the spring and complete the project in a year. 6. Other Business Ms. Hartford stated that the North River Corridor Zoning had passed and that the Design Review Board would be advising the Planning Board on the design of projects in this district. . Mr.Jaquith stated that the applications for signs have been getting worse. He recommended copying a good proposal such as the New England Soup Factory and giving it out as a sample to business owners. Ms. Hartford stated that she would work with the applicants on putting together better applications. DRB Minutes January 4,2006 Page 3 of 3 MINUTES • Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on November 16,2005 were presented. Mr. Durand moved to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting held on November 16,2005. Mr.Jaquith seconded the motion,and the motion passed. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board,the meeting was adjourned. o Salem Redevelopment LU Authority CANCELLED DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda December 21,2005—6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Christos Christoudias Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson • Minutes Approval of the minutes from the November 16,2005 meeting. New Business 1. 55 Lafayette Street (DiFi W Antiques)—Review of proposed signage. 2. 324 Derby Street(Basics Furniture/JoelArt —Review of proposed signage. 3. 40 Front Street QM Trading Company/Salem Harbor Outfitters)—Review of proposed signage. 4. 50 Palmer Street (Salem Harbor CDC —Review of Final Design of proposed 15 unit residential project on the comer of Palmer and Congress Streets. • v Salem S Redevelopment Authority REVISED DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda November 16,2005—6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Christos Christoudias Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith . Fred Johnson Minutes Approval of the minutes from the October 26, 2005 meeting. New Business 1. 45 Lafayette Street (Cornerstone Books) —Review of proposed signage. 2. Lappin Park Benches—Review of proposed benches at Lappin Park. 3. 2006 Meeting Schedule—Approval of the 2006 DRB Meeting Schedule. • DRB Minutes November 16,2005 Page 1 of 2 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 16, 2005 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, November 16, 2005 at 6:00 pm. Members Paul Durand, David Jaquith, and Christos Christoudias were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Debra Tucker, Clerk, were also present. NEW BUSINESS 1. Lappin Park Benches The proposed benches for Lappin Park were presented for board approval by Kate Sullivan of the Mayor's Office and Ellen Talkowsky, who appeared before the board in order to discuss the bench design, lighting, and safety at Lappin Park. Due to concern about teens hanging around the park and people sleeping on the benches, the Police Department had requested consideration of a new bench design and lighting changes rather than the downtown standard, in order to discourage unwanted loitering and activity coming back into the • park. Lt. Prosnewski of the Police Department had approached the Mayor's office with these matters. After discussion the DuMor bench #120 with center rail in black with the City seal was selected and approved. Ellen Talkowsky reported that the Police Department was testing some security surveillance cameras at Lappin Park. They are waiting to get video feed up and into the Police Station. If it works, they will be back for approval from the board. Mr. Durand responded that whatever is good for the Police Department would be the most important thing. Kate Sullivan said that TV Land is picking up the tab for the benches. 2. 45 Lafayette Street (Cornerstone Books Proposed signage for Cornerstone Books at 45 Lafayette Street was presented for review. Ms. Hartford reported that the website would be removed from the sign. Mr.Jaquith stated that he had no problem with the signage. Discussion was held concerning the specifics of the color, material, and dimensions. The sign was approved with the condition that the dimensions for the sign band be verified. Ms. Hartford said she would work with the developer of the project and business owner to see if they can find those measurements. DRB Minutes Nowoabec 16,2005 Page 2 of 2 • 3. 2006 Meeting Schedule The 2006 Design Review Board meeting schedule was presented. Ms. Hartford will change the December meeting due to the holiday. Therefore, the November and December DRB meetings will be held on the third Wednesday of each month. MINUTES Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on October 26, 2005 were presented and approved. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board, the meeting was adjourned. • • o Salem • Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda October 26, 2005— 6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes Approval of the minutes from the August 24,2005 meeting. • New Business 1. 2 East India Square (Phoenix Rising)—Continued review of proposed signage. 2. 142 Washington Street (Tobie's Jewehy)—Review of proposed signage. 3. TENTATIVE - Lappin Park Benches — Review of proposed bench change for Lappin Park. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes October 26,2005 Page 1 of 2 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 26, 2005 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,October 26,2005 at 6:00 pm Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Staff Planner, and Debra Tucker, Clerk,were also present. NEW BUSINESS 1. 2 East India Square (Phoenix Rising-Revised ptoposal Based on the comments from the board, the owner made modifications to the sign for Phoenix Rising of 2 East India Square. The new proposal shows a 12" X 120" green aluminum sign with red, black, and white vinyl graphics and the lettering in Calligrapher font. The logo is shown on both sides of the lettering as opposed to the original location in the middle of the sign. It should be noted that the sign has been installed. The proposal includes the installation of a white aluminum wall sign measuring l' x 10' along the fountain side of the mall. The sign will be white aluminum with red and black vinyl graphics mounted with screws directly on the canopy. • The owner Scott Tarbox stated that he is not working with the former sign maker anymore. He said that he has put up a temporary sign for his grand opening. Mr. Durand noted that he thought the new proposal was better and that the color was good. Mr.Jaquith added that he thought that the typeface was interesting. Mr. Tarbox noted that he would like a larger sign. Ms. Hartford answered that he could have a wider sign but that he should come back to the department with any changes. Mr. Durand and Mr.Jaquith said that they though that the height was fine and that he should keep it the same in order to retain the border. Mr. Tarbox asked about his temporary paper signs. Ms. Hartford informed him that he is allowed to have vinyl lettered signs in his window to advertise merchandise. She cited Rockafella's and the Z Crepe Cafe as good examples of this. Mr.Tarbox asked about outdoor sandwich boards and noted that others in the area use them. Ms. Hartford told him that they are not allowed and that the Building Inspector enforces that rule. Mr. Durand said that they are a safety hazard for pedestrians and traffic. Mr. Tarbox asked about an outdoor pushcart for merchandise. Ms. Hartford instructed him to contact the Licensing Department. She informed him that the Design Review Board will make the approval recommendation to the Redevelopment Authority, who will meet on November 14th. They will have final approval. Ms.Hartford told him that he did not need to attend. 2. 142 Washington Street(Tobie's Jewelry) • DRB Minutes October 26,2005 Page 2 of 2 • The owner of Tobie's Jewelry presented her sign plans for approval. She stated that the sign will have black facing with gold tracing around the 1" plastic lettering that is 16.9". She will be using the same font as the two restaurants in that budding,which have already received approval. The sign was recommended for approval, Ms. Hartford informed the owner that the recommendation would be taken up at the Redevelopment Authority's November 14th meeting. 3. Lappin Park Benches Kate Sullivan of the Mayor's Office,Ellen and Lt.. Conrad Prosnewski of the Police Department appeared before the board in order to discuss the bench design, lighting, and safety at Lappin Park. There have been complaints by businesses and residents concerning teens hanging around the park and people sleeping on the benches. The Police Department has responded to the area. Lt Prosnewski stated that the Police Department approached the Mayor's office with these matters. Ms. Sullivan had requested that the board consider other bench designs rather than the downtown standard, in order to discourage unwanted loitering and activity coming back into the park. She submitted a catalog with suggestion for consideration. Lt Prosnewski suggested reducing the number of benches by eliminating two in the back of the park, adding lighting, and consideration of a different style bench to discourage loitering and skateboarders. The benches were provided by TV Land and that they may be able to work with the supplier to exchange them. Ms. Sullivan said that she has spoken with other City department and they may be able to use the benches that were originally ordered She added that she will obtain cost estimates • Lt. Prosnewski said that the Police Department is considering surveillance at trouble spots downtown. They are looking into obtaining funding for this. Improved lighting would help the situation. He suggested strategic directional lighting in order to provide the ability to see deep into the shaded areas of the park. Paul Durand agreed that this would be a good idea. He noted that placement often affects behavior. David Jaquith agreed with the plan to reduce the number of benches to 3 along the outside edge of the park. Ms. Hartford reported that Chris Greene had agreed with the lighting suggestions. He would obtain some ideas on the bench. Paul Durand thought this was a good idea. Ms. Hartford said that she would get the information from Mr. Greene. Mr.Jaquith thought that it would be a good idea to find a bench that would work throughout the downtown. Ms. Sullivan noted that the contractor who is installing the benches was anxious to finish the work. He had done a lot of extra work for the City. She noted that there is a light pole in the center of the park that could provide more lighting. MINUTES Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on August 25,2005 were presented. Paul Durand moved to approve the minutes of the August 25, 2005 meeting as presented. David Jaquith seconded the motion,and the motion passed. ADJOURNMENT • There being no further business before the board,the meeting was adjourned. CITY OF SALEM, MA aSalem CLERK'S OFFICE • ® Redevelopment Authority INS SEP 21 AM: 21 NOTICE OF MEETING CANCELLATION DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting September 28,2005— 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room The September 28, 2005 regularly scheduled meeting of the Design Review Board has been cancelled. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be held on October 26, 2005 at 6:00pm in the third floor conference room at 120 Washington Street. • This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Wail Ave., Salem, Miss. on SFp � aao5 at //' aq Af.� in accordas wt Chaps ' an 23A & 238 of M.G.L. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 o Salem • Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda August 24, 2005 —6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes Approval of the minutes from the July 27, 2005 meeting. • New Business 1. 282 Derby Street (Taste of Cilantro) — Review of proposed umbrella at the outdoor cafe at Taste of Cilantro. 2. 2 East India Square (Phoenix Rising)—Review of proposed signage. 3. 17 Central Street (Residences at Museum Place/Old Police Station) — Review of amendment to Final Design Plans regarding the removal of proposed lighting at the Central Street facade. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes August 25,2005 Page 1 of 2 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 25,2005 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,August 25,2005 at 6:00pm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Staff Planner, and Debra Tucker, Clerk,were also present MINUTES Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on July 27,2005 were presented. NEW BUSINESS 1. 17 Central Street(Residences at Museum Place/Old Police Station) Ms. Hartford presented the plans for the exterior lighting for the 17 Central Street project The lighting plan was to restore the original exterior lights where possible and new lights were proposed. The original lighting was able to be restored and the developers do not want to proceed with the additional approved extra lighting. Mr.Durand reviewed the plans and approved them. He stated that he preferred the original lighting as well • 2. 282 Derby Street(Taste of Cilantro The owner of Taste of Cilantro appeared to propose one large umbrella for her outdoor cafe located at 282 Derby Street. The$5,000 umbrella will be a heavy one and is 20'in diameter and green in color (the same as Dunkin'Donuts). There is a large plate to be set on the ground. This will cover all 7 tables and chairs. She stated that the area is dark and she will add some Christmas lights underneath the umbrella. She said that she has the proper insurance. She hopes to keep the tables up through January 15th,the end date for her seasonal liquor license,and will use heaters. The board discussed the possibility of anchoring the umbrella for safety reasons in case of strong wind Ms. Hartford noted that this might not be possible since the location is a City sidewalk. She will check into the matter. Mr. Durand suggested bolting the umbrella down. The owner said that her installer told her that it is possible to bolt the umbrella down. This would require the temporary removal of 2 bricks,which could be reinstalled Mr. Durand recommended approval as submitted with safe installation. Ms. Hartford indicated that the plan now needs SRA approval and that the next meeting will be held on September 12,2005. David Jaquith joined the meeting in progress. 3. 2 East India Square (Phoenix Rising) Keith Linares,who represented Phoenix Rising of 2 East India Square, appeared to present a sign proposal. The storefront is a gift shop and faces the fountain. The sign was reviewed Other area signs for Asahi, and • Z Crepe were compared The type font,colors, and position of the symbol were discussed. Mr.Linares said that the storeowner might already have other materials printed with this same design. Mr. Durand said that DRB Minutes August 25,2005 Page 2 of 2 the DRB reviews the exterior signage. Ms. Hartford stated that the business may need a temporary banner until the signage is approved. She noted that any graphics need approval as well. Ms. Hartford recommended that he attend the next meeting and informed Mr. Linares that there is a grant program available for signs. After discussion the plan was rejected and members Mr.Durand and Mr.Jaquith recommended that the sign be redesigned and resubmitted. Other Business The board noted that the Hollywood Wax Museum sign was erected without approval and that the non- compliant Elite Physical Therapy sign had been removed. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board,the meeting was adjourned. • • Salem • Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda July 27, 2005—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes Approval of the minutes from the May 25,2005 meeting. 1 New Business • 1. 24 New Derby Street (Artists Row) — Review of proposed signage for three entrances into Artists Row. 2. 24 New Derby Street (Boabab Space)—Review of proposed signage. 3. 24 New Derby Street (Share An Umbrella)—Review of proposed signage. 4. 24 New Derby Street (Craftisans)—Review of proposed signage. 5. 73 Lafayette Street (Beverly Cooperative Bank)—Review of proposed signage. 6. 70 Washington Street (North Shore Career Center) — Review of proposed signage. 7. 51 Lafayette Street (Derby Lofts) — Review of proposed sign package for building. 8. 155 Washington Street (Edgewater Cafe)—Review of proposed parking lot. Old Business • 9. 266 Essex Street (Barking Cat) — Review of modification of approved sign bracket. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes July 27,2005 Page 1 of 3 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES JULY 27, 2005 A re meeting of the Salem Des' Review Board RB was held in the third floor conference regular g tgtl (DRB) room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,July 27,2005 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner,and Debra Tucker, Clerk,were also present. NEW BUSINESS L 24 New Derby Street(Artists Row) Frank Taormina presented 3 designs for the brick wall at Artists Row for consideration. Mr. Durand stated that they were simple and understated. Frank Taormina added that they were stenciled and the lettering color blends with the brick and contrasts with the white. The submission was approved. 2. 24 New Derby Street(Boabab) Mamadou Diop, owner of Boabab, presented sign design for his Artists Row space. The City will add the sign poles at all of the artists' booths. Mr. Durand said that a better sample of the yellow color proposed was needed. He added that the letter sizing appeared proportional. The submission was approved as submitted upon receipt of the new yellow color sample. 3. 24 New Derby Street(Craftir," Lisa Murphy of Craftisans submitted 2 sign samples. The arrow sign was chosen and approved. 4. 24 New Derby Street(Shared Umbrella) Frank Taormina submitted samples of brick color on green. These were approved as submitted. 5. 73 Lafayette Street(Beverly Cooperative Bank) Keith Linares representing the Beverly Cooperative Bank appeared before the board concerning additional proposed signage. Mr. Durand recommended that he should consider a more visible sign. Mr.Jaquith agreed and said that they would be adding more signs but not getting the desired effect. He thought that the building looked like an office building due to the dark glass. He also recommended changing the spacing between the words. Mr. Linares stated that the bank preferred to use this sign. The signs were approved as presented with the spacing increased between the _ words. DRB M nut s July 27,2005 Page 2 of 3 • 6. 70 Washington Street(North Shore Career Center) Keith Linares presented a sign for the North Shore Career Center. The sign is a corporate logo. The colors of the sign were discussed. Mr. Durand suggested that the sign should not be so white and referred to the other signs in the area and the way that they blend. Mr. Linares said that he could add a black border. He said that the alley area is dark and has a lot of trees. The sign was approved as presented with a change of the white to a more off white color and the addition of a solid black border at the edge. 7. 155 Washington Street(Edgewater Cgke This matter was held over since the owner was not present and the samples of Lyn Pac were not submitted. Ms. Hartford stated that Chris Greene wants to see landscaping in the area. The DRB members asked that the owner submit the following prior to hearing the item: a drawings of the improvements that is definitive and shows the actual layout of the parking lot and any improvements being made to the lot;a sample of the curbing being used to contain the materials;a landscape plan;and photographs of the existing site. 8. 266 Essex Street(Barking Cat) • Ms. Hartford presented the item. The owner from the Barking Cat had to make some minor adjustments to the bracket when installing the sign, which resulted in a box being attached to the building, and then the bracket being installed to the box. To remediate the problem, the owner painted the box the color of the building. Mr. Durand stated that the changes submitted were fine and that it blends in. Mr. Jaquith agreed. Ms. Hartford said that she would speak with the sign maker to ensure that he measures properly in the future to avoid these types of mistakes. 9. 51 Lafayette Street(Derby Lofts) Mr. Durand recused himself. Ms. Hartford presented the plan for signs and brackets. The sign will be standard and the tenants will personalize them with approval from the SRA. Mr.Jaquith recommended that the letter spacing be tighter vertically. The signs will be cast bronze. Mr.Jaquith approved the signs as presented with the spacing changes as recommended. The signs will be raised from the street level or made shorter. Mr.Durand returned to the meeting. MINUTES Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on May 25, 2005 were presented and approved. • ADJOURNMENT DRB Minutes July 27,2005 Page 3 of 3 SThere being no further business before the board, the meeting was adjourned. • • re Salem ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda May 23, 2005 - 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes Approval of the minutes from the April 27, 2005 meeting. • New Business 1. 180 Essex Street (Z Crepe Cafe, - Review of proposed signage at Z Crepe Cafe. 2. 180 Essex Street (Z Crepe Cafe - Review of proposed outdoor cafe at 180 Essex Street. 3. 282R Derby Street Craste of Cilantro) - Review of proposed outdoor cafe at 282R Derby Street. 4. 51-71 Lafayette Street (Derby Lofts) - Review of proposed awnings at the Derby Lofts development. 5. 290 Essex Street (YMCA Renovation) - Review of proposed changes to the storefront improvements at 290 Essex Street. 6. TENTATIVE 17 Central Street (Old Police Station) - Review of proposed minor modifications to the Final Design Plans for the Old Police Station. 7. 289 Derby Street- Comments on the final construction plans. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes May 25,2005 Page 1 of 2 . DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MAY 25,2005 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,May 25,2005 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Staff Planner, and Debra Tucker,Clerk,were also present. MINUTES Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on April 27,2005 were presented. NEW BUSINESS L 180 Essex Street(Crepe Cafe) The proposed signage plan for Z Crepe Cafe was reviewed. There will be an 8-foot by 8" sign with 5"letters with the letter"Z"one foot in diameter. There will also be 2 one-foot logo stickers on 2 of the front windows. Mr.Durand recommended better spacing for the letters of the sign. Mr.Jaquith agreed. A sample of • the shade of green to be used was submitted. The owners will submit the revisions to Ms. Hartford with detailed window sticker location information. The owners hope to open within 2 weeks. 2. 180 Essex Street(Z Crepe Cafe) The plans for a proposed outdoor cafe for the Z Crepe Cafe were reviewed. The proposal calls for 6 24-inch tables with chairs. The area is approximately 7 feet and 6 inches from the wall. Ms. Hartford stated that the SRA had approved the location but recommended DRB review of the pedestrian traffic flow. Mr.Jaquith and Mr.Durand approved the plan. Ms. Hartford stated that the owners would appear at the June 81h meeting for final approval. 3. 51-71 Lafayette Street Pel y Lofts) Mr.Durand recused himself from the matter. The plans for the proposed awnings and clock for the Derby Loft Apartments were reviewed. Mark Meche submitted a sample of the proposed striped awning and said that it will be similar to the awning to be used at the YMCA. The clock location has been raised one floor due to the nearby location of a sign and a pedestrian light. He presented a drawing of the dock and said that it will have hands that glow and will be built into the side of the building. Mr.Jaquith approved the plans. 4. 290 Essex Street(YMCA Renovation) Mr.Durand recused himself. The proposed changes to the plans for storefront improvements by the YMCA for 290 Essex Street were reviewed. Ms.Hartford reviewed the proposed changes and Mr.Jaquith approved them. DRB Minutes May 25,2005 Page 2 of 2 • Mr.Durand returned to the meeting. 5. 282R Derby Street(Taste of Cilantro) The plans for a proposed outdoor cafe for Taste of Cilantro at 282R Derby Street were reviewed. Ms. Hartford reported that the SRA approved the location. Six 30-inch tables and chairs are proposed for an area outside of the restaurant. The owner has a liquor license and must cordon off the area. She has proposed fabric panels rather than a chain and had submitted pictures of a sample. The panels would be solid color with a small cilantro leaf. Mr.Durand and Mr.Jaquith approved the plan. 6. 17 Central Street(Old Police Stationl Ms. Hartford reported that this item would be postponed since information had not been submitted for the meeting. 7. 289 Derby Street The final construction plans for 289 Derby Street had been reviewed by Mr.Jaquith and Mr.Durand, who had no comments. The plans were approved. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the board,the meeting was adjourned. • eSalem • ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda April 27, 2005 - 6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the March 23, 2005 meeting. New Business 1. 112 Washington Street & 237-245 Essex Street (Lappin Park) - Continued review of proposed TV Land project at Lappin Park 2. 284-296 Essex Street & One Sewall Street (YMCA) - Continued review of proposed signage at 284-296 Essex Street&One Sewall Street. 3. Salem Harborwalk - Continued review of proposed Schematic Design Plans for the South River Harborwalk. 4. 7 Crombie Street (Crombie Street Mission) - Review of Final Design Plans for the Redevelopment of 7 Crombie Street. 5. 289 Derby Street - Review of the final construction plans. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes April 27,2005 Page 1 of 5 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD • MEETING MINUTES APRIL 27, 2005 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,on Wednesday,April 27,2005 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner,and Debra Tucker,Clerk,were also present. Minutes Minutes for the Regular Meeting held on March 23,2005 were presented and approved. 112 Washington Street&237-245 Essex Street (TV Land): Review of Plans TV Land Vice President Rob Pellizzi addressed the board concerning the proposed Bewitched statue for Lappin Park. He displayed pictures other portrait work done by Studio EIS. Michael Blier showed his site plan drawings of the park. He stated that his changes will connect the inside and outside of the park. There will be granite curbing 8 inches wide by 6 inches high replacing the brick wall to define the park. The planted areas have been increased. There will be a clearer walkway with more of a relationship to the street. The grade changes will only be at the statue and are estimated to be 3.5% with a 1.5% pitch to the catch basins. Stone aggregate concrete will be • placed in the center where the statue will go. The statue has been moved back from the street approximately 4 feet or so and will be nestled in the trees. The existing park plaque will be placed on a granite pillar. Mr.Jaquith commented that these plans were a big improvement. Mr. Durand agreed and said that the wall had kept people out. He thought that it would work and that pulling the statue back from the comer will help. Mr.Jaquith asked if there would be new benches and that he would want to see the proposed benches. Mr. Blier said that there would be new benches. He stated that there would be a decorative triad pebble product with exposed aggregate used that will recede into the landscape. The path will be reset with brick. The sidewalk,which is in bad shape,will be concrete to match the existing. He is in the process of designing the lighting and envisions ADA compliant recessed ground lights as well as a pole-mounted light in the grass or directed light from the existing park light. The lights will be timer controlled and will be used to highlight or enhance the statue. Ms. Hartford stated that they had received the design as changed with details on the bench and lighting to be submitted at a later date. Mr.Jaquith and Mr.Durand approved the concept. The next step will be to take the proposal back to the SRA at their meeting on May 17,2005. The SRA has the authority to approve the project and use the DRB recommendation to guide their decision. Mr.Pellizzi asked about the timing since they were aiming for a mid-June dedication and there is a lot of work to be done. Ms. Hartford told Mr. Pellizzi that he could request a special meeting from Lynn Duncan,Executive Director of the SRA. • DRB Minutes April 27,2005 Page 2 of 5 John Carr stated that the decision had been made without public comment and added that it was an • insult to those who had come out on the matter and felt that the process was flawed. Mr. Durand replied that the appropriate venue to make comments is to appear before the SRA, who makes the actual approval on the project. Ms. Hartford asked if any members of the public had comments on the design of the park. Meg Twohey said that the City does not light other statues in the City and asked why this one would be. She said that the DRB had not asked what the statue looked like. Mr. Durand and Mr.Jaquith stated that they had seen the clay mold rendering of the statue,which will be 9 feet tall. A member of the public asked why a statue of Elizabeth Montgomery,who only had been in Salem for 2 weeks and had no relation to Salem, was being put up. Mr. Pellizzi said that the statue association was to a magical witch that celebrates fun. Another member of the public,a trolley driver,said that the statue is to be located in a serious part of town and that it was off base. Ms.Hartford replied that the SRA had approved the statue siting and the next step for them is to approve the changes to the park. John Carr said that the problem is not in the micro details but in the macro and faulted the procedure. He said that the SRA approved the statue subject to the DRB approval. Mr. Carr said that it is not the way to go. He referred to the new ad campaign being launched for Salem to get away from the schlock side. Mr. Carr commented that the DRB is privileged and elitist to be the only ones to see the plans for the statue. Ms. Hartford said that the DRB was making a recommendation the design of the park and that the SRA approved the site. The DRB is to make comments on the park plan and make a final • recommendation tonight to the SRA. A member of the public said that he was disappointed and saddened. He said that the plan was a dramatic change to the park because it has been an eyesore. He said that Salem is a great city and that the design is impeccable. Walter Power said that he would like to see the pedestal moved northwest towards the intersection to connect the walkway from the building to the center in bring it line. He did not think it was integrated to the park. Mr. Blier spoke of a double row of trees causing problems due to spacing and the root system He did not want to damage or remove any trees. A member of the public stated that there was probably a more appropriate statue to go there such as Alexander Graham Bell,who made the famous telephone call from Salem Mr. Durand said that the DRB was reviewing the statue plan as presented. He felt that there is lightness to urban living and this TV pop culture would pull people across the street. This, he felt, would be a great economic vehicle. The weight of tourism is across the street. The location is excellent from an urban planning perspective. He felt that it was celebrating Salem Mr.Pellizzi said that the first thing that TV Land did was to send someone to Salem to meet with the City and scout the location. They took the lead from Salem and looked for an appropriate site. He said that they were sensitive to the history and added that they had been embraced in every other city • where they had donated statues. They were under the impression that his was an appropriate location. DRB Minutes Aprit27,2005 Page 3 of 5 • A member of the public asked if they would consider re-siting the statue. Mr. Pellizzi said that they had looked to the City for the site. Ms. Hanford added that it was not within the purview of the DRB. Paul Durand recused himself from the next two items. 7 Crombie Street — Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 7 Crombie Street Mark Meche of Winter Street Architects addressed the DRB concerning the project at 7 Crombie Street. He reported that the SRA accepted the conceptual plan presented. He reviewed the plans for Bluestone Alley,the working title for the project. The floor plan has been tweaked, eyebrow dormers will be added, as will period lighting,and a metal gate. The slate roof will be repaired and brick and copper added. Existing windows will be repaired and painted. A mezzanine will be added to the 3rd floor instead of skylights and will bring it up to a barrel dormer with a sill height of 6 feet 6 inches. Mr.Jaquith asked if there was an egress problem. Mr.Meche replied that the windows will be carved out and an ornamental balcony will be added. Mr.Jaquith recommended a change of course at the balconies and brick. Mr.Meche said that he would look at that. The storage area for garbage will be behind wood paneled doors of plywood with trim and look like a bam door. Mr.Jaquith instructed him to make them good and heavy to stand up to heavy use. • Ms.Hartford added that Mr. Greene had reviewed the plans and had sent her his comments that he was fine with the changes as presented. Mr.Jaquith recommended that the final approval be sent to the SRA. 284-296 Essex Street& One Sewall Street(YMCA) —Review of proposed signage The revised plans for the YMCA remodel were presented to the DRB a few months ago. The signage recommendations by Mr. Greene had been incorporated and presented. Mr.Jaquith said that he liked them as well but suggested that the lettering be tightened up a bid to lessen the white space. The plans were approved with the condition that the white space on the signs be tightened up. Mr.Durand returned to the meeting. Salem Harbor Walk - Continued Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the Salem Harbor Walk Rebecca Longley presented the proposed schematic design plans for the South River Harborwalk. Design issues will be ironed out with Mass Electric, who abuts the land. There were comments submitted from the last committee meeting. David Vine of Vine Associates said that there would be approximately 1,100 feet along the entire length of the walk. It will be handicapped accessible. The walkway will be 10 feet wide and made of • DRB Minutes April 27,2005 Page 4 of 5 concrete with a 10-foot buffer zone to transition the existing grade. There will be lights and benches • along the way. Minor repairs must be made to the old seawall. There will be a 4-foot high metal rail. Part of the walkway will be supported on piles and will span out over the water to avoid the Mass Electric property. There are some security issues to that site and a 6-foot high black chain link fence with barbed wire will be installed. There will be a stairway onto the bridge. The project will be similar to one done in Fall River. The city standard will be used for the features. A brick archway with stamped brick features on the ground was planned. Ms. Longley stated that Mr. Greene previously gave his comments and was disappointed with the archway. He wants to see some historical aspects of the South River incorporated. Mr.Durand agreed that the arch was not what he had in mind and was not inviting and he wanted to see something more playful and fun. He agreed with the plan for fencing due to Mass Electric's high voltage equipment on the nearby property. Steve Cecil said that in combination with the railing the fencing keeps thing s simple and they will work with Mass Electric. Mr.Durand said that a stairway up to the bridge was a good idea. Steve Cecil said that they were thinking of taking the archway out. There was the suggestion of a flagpole shaped like a ship's mast with the opportunity for pennants. Mr. Durand said that he thought that that would be playful and entertaining. Mr.Jaquith said that the site should be lit at night and that the rhythm of the light pole placement should be carefully planned out. Mr. Cecil thought that the effect of a string of pearls would be good. Mr.Jaquith referenced the Beverly Common lighting. • Mr.Durand said that he did not love the brick in the walkway. Mr.Cecil suggested finishing the edge with a texture in concrete with a curved edge and the landscape coming up against it. Mr. Durand suggested a subtle 2"-3" rise. Mr.Cecil added that there would be hardy low coastal plantings such as rola mgosa that can survive with minimal maintenance planned for the hot and dry landscaping area. This would reduce the maintenance costs. Mr. Durand asked about trash receptacles. Mr. Vine said that they would be placed along the benches and light poles. Ms. Longley eSsaid that some of the public comments on the project were more signage at Congress and Derby and wood chips instead of grass. The Beverly Cooperative Bank landscaping featuring granite benches was referenced. Mr.Jaquith and Mr. Durand felt that granite benches are not that comfortable. Mr.Cecil said that the benches would be staggered in response to Mr.Jaquith's request that the walkway not be so symmetrical. Mr.Durand suggested intermittent historical references. Mr. Jaquith stated that the plan was a good start. Ms. Longley said that she would take the suggestions and do a re-design. Mass Electric will review the plan. Then all will be brought back to the public probably at the end of May or beginning of June. Ms. Hartford said that the DRB will see the plans after they have been revised. Mr. Durand stated that the most intensive areas are the entrance and edging. • DRB Minutes April 27,2005 Page 5 of 5 Doug Haley asked that the archway celebrate marine history. He is part of SAFE and the • Implementation Committee and asked that no pesticides be used near the water. He referred to the granite benches at the National Park Service and said that they would not be subject to vandalism or people sleeping on them Hans Weedon added that he hoped marine barrels and not iron be used. Dave Fix suggested that the outside border or berm might be cobblestone. Mr. Durand said that those could be thrown in the water. Mr. Cecil stated that granite might be too expensive for the project. Mr.Durand suggested the use at the entryway. Ms.Hartford stated that the project has direction. 289 Derby Street — Review of final construction plans for 289 Derby Street. Ms. Hartford said that the project manager dropped off the plans that were included with the member's packets. She asked if any members had questions or comments on the plans. Mr.Jaquith and Mr. Durand asked if they could have more time to review them Ms. Hanford asked that they call her should they have any questions or concerns on the submitted plans. Adjournment There being no further business before the board,the meeting was adjourned. • Salem • ® Redevelopment Authority 9 p� 7 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 9. Special Meeting Agenda O April 13,2005—5:30pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson • New Business 1. 112 Washington Street & 237-245 Essex Street (Lappin Park)—Review of proposed TV Land project at Lappin Park. This notice posted on "Official Bulls-tin Bo&rd" City Hall eAva., u _ <' ,:s, :s. anP at // ��] ekil�c21bEi9 y11. C1. 23A t23Qeof .G.�.. w 120 Washington.Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404-—' DRB Minuo April 13,2005 Page 1 of 5 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES APRIL 13, 2005 A special meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand, Chris Greene, and David Jaquith were present. Valerie Gingrich, Staff Planner,and Debra Tucker, Clerk,were also present. New Business 112 Washington Street&237-245 Essex Street f'TV Land): Review of Plans Valerie Gingrich reported that the Redevelopment Authority approved the proposed bronze "Bewitched" statue for Lappin Park as presented at their April 6h meeting and referred the matter to the Design Review Board for their input Chris Sabin and Mike Blier appeared before the DRB to present the revised plans for the proposed TV Land sponsored statue of Bewitched planned for Lappin Park. • Mr. Blier, a landscape architect from Landworks Studio in Salem,presented his revised plans for site changes proposed for Lappin Park. The plans included removing the brick wall, and installing granite curbing wrapping the park. He compared the plan to that of the nearby Essex Institute and Armory Park. A low fence would line the park and reinforce the urban edge. The paving pattern is still under study and a circular paving pattern is being considered. The fence will protect the park's grass. Mr. Greene asked about the grading plan. Mr. Blier answered that there is a 13" slope towards the street with a 9" grade change and a 4% pitch from the circle to the path. Footing would have to be built and would be regarded when the brick is removed. There is no real change to the grading. Mr. Greene asked about park seating. Mr. Blier stated that there are benches planned for the pathway and none on the edges. He felt that this would center people in the park and keep the traffic flow around the comer and keep people from the traffic. Mr. Greene said that the path is not wide enough to have benches and foot traffic. Mr. Blier added that the path is 10 feet wide. Mr. Greene said that he felt that the path was still not wide enough. Mr.Jaquith and Mr. Durand said that they felt 10 feet was wide enough. Mr. Blier said that the current recessed notched areas attract detritus and that the outside sidewalk would be wider. Mr.Jaquith said that the grade is a problem and asked whether the circular base should be • level. Mr. Blier answered that it is 9 inches over approximately 15 feet and is not dramatically steep of more than the path currently. DRB Minute Apa 13,2005 Page 2 of 5 • Mr. Greene stated that he felt that the presentation was incomplete and said that he could not judge whether the grading problem had been solved. He said that it was a conceptual design. Mr. Blier stated that an actual sample of paving is being designed and he would be happy to share it with the board. Mr. Greene asked if the entire sidewalk was being rebuilt. Mr. Blier said that part of it at the comer was being rebuilt and was in bad shape now, as it was concrete poured without expansion consideration and is badly cracked. Mr. Greene said that the back end of the park is not being upgraded and that he is concerned. Mr. Durand commented that the original design of the park was with an idea for a possible cafe area. There is a school in the area currently,but that may not be so always. Mr. Greene said that from a design point of view, these improvements should enhance the City's park. He said that he is waiting to see how the statue will enhance the park. Mr. Durand asked Mr. Sabin to address the board. Mr. Sabin said that the intention was to bring the statue to Salem. When looking around they did agree that the wall has to come down. He asked what the board would need from them to move the project along. He asked if the board was looking for a whole new park. Mr. Durand stated that he thought that the park was a great location for TV Land and that the City would like to make the park more useable. Mr. Durand said that he would like to • see the whole thing work. Mr. Sabin asked the board for any recommendations for the back end of the park. Mr. Greene answered that that was not the board's role. He added that the board's role is to review proposals. He also said that the transformation of this public park has a high degree of responsibility to the public. Mr. Greene added that he is not their designer. Mr. Sabin asked what the concern is now. Mr. Greene stated that he thought that the granite curbing and fence were fine. He asked about benches and lighting. Mr. Greene said that he did not see enough for him to make a decision. He wants to make sure that the project is good for Salem and that he felt that they haven't reached that point yet. The changes were relatively modest,although they are heading in the right direction. Mr. Blier asked if it were a criterion that the whole park be redesigned. Mr. Durand stated that the building edge around the park has a hard-edged surface area. He added that he is not against that. From an urban planning point of view they want to give the park energy and to draw people in. He added that the board speaks to design issues and makes recommendations to the SRA in an advisory capacity. Mr. Durand said that it is not up to the Design Review Board as to whether the statue should be put in the park or not. Mr. Durand reminded the public in attendance that the DRB was performing design review. The SRA makes the decision as to whether the statue is approved. Mr. Durand opened the meeting to public comment. Ms. Gingrich asked that the public keep their comments to the . issue of design only. DRB Minutes April 13,2005 Page 3 of 5 • Shawn Poirier said that the park is a rest stop for vagrants and skateboarders. Laura Lane added that she has a business across the street from the park and that she is constantly complaining to the City about this type of activity. Mr. Blier commented that the removal of the wall would displace the skateboarders and some of the vagrant problems. Mr. Poirier felt that anything would be better than the current situation and that the statue would bring paying customers in and get rid of the vagrants. Mr. Greene said that the public comments should be weighed by the SRA before a decision is made. He told the public that the Design Review Board is composed of professional designers charged with reviewing design issues and making recommendations back to the SRA. John Carr of 7 River St., formerly of the Historic Commission, stated that he felt that the issue was incredibly important. He acknowledged that the park as it exists now is not everything that it could be. He said that from a design standpoint the Design Review Board couldn't divorce itself from the statue. He applauded Mr. Blier's work. He added that he hoped that the tail was not wagging the dog. He said that he location is at a crossroads at Essex and Washington Streets. He recommended another location for the statue be found. Ms. Gingrich stated that the SRA had approved the project at its last meeting and referred the design review to the DRB. • Mr. Carr commented that he thought that the statue was in horribly bad taste. He compared it with erecting a statue of Colonel Klink at Auschwitz. He added that if the statue has already been approved then it should be made as invisible by moving it to the back of the park. Mr.Jaquith said that some of Salem's other sculptures are in poor places. Chris Sabin said that Studio Ice is a national company who has done great work. Mr. Durand said that he had received many email on all sides of the issue. He said that the statue is of TV pop culture and that he felt that it was a great way to uplift the park. The other statues done for TV Land were well liked. Valerie Gingrich reminded the public that the DRB was reviewing design only. Jean Harrison of 1 Ome Square stated that the newspaper stated once this is passed by the DRB then the project would go ahead. If witches are for the statue then it becomes a religious symboL She felt it was deplorable to put it in the center of Salem in the park. Meg Twohy of 122 Federal St. concurred with Mr. Carr and Ms. Harrison and added that the DRB may want to see the statue and whether it is a bad rendering. She added that if it is a draw and people take pictures,and then she suggested moving it to the back of the park. Mr. Durand said that the statue is an artist's work and that he felt uneasy telling a designer how to design. Mr. Greene said that based on content and form the statue is schlock and poorly done. Chris Sabin said that the statue will be 9 feet tall and bronze with a 50" base and will weigh over 1,500 pounds. DRB Minutes April 13,2005 Page 4 of 5 • Mr. Greene said that as far as he knew the DRB had not approved the design of the statue. Ms. Gingrich He said that what he had seen at the last meeting looked like schlock. Michael Blatty, said that he had mixed feelings about the statue. Generally he liked the statue and thinks there is a place in Salem for it. The issues are important. The quality of the statue is important, as there is a fair amount of schlock in Salem. He was surprised at the location of the statue and added that he thought there was a bit of danger with the location and pedestrians crossing the street. He liked the idea of the statue being sited further back in the park. He asked about the rights of the City if they wanted to move the statue or give it back and asked how long it would be there. Chris Sabin said that the TV Land statue in Chicago had been moved from Michigan Ave. to Navy Piet. He said that TV Land owns the statue and is making a gift to Salem. TV Land will maintain the statue and clean it 3 or 4 times a year. Mr. Durand said that the quality of the statue is fine and that it will be top quality and made of bronze. He said that it is not Roger Conant and that it is a whimsical image and not an eyesore. He is not against it being popular. It will move people to that part of the City. Mr. Greene said that it is a small park and there are pros and cons to putting it all the way in the back. He added that the tourist season coincides with the school year. Mr. Durand said that it is a City park and not the nearby school's. • Mr. Greene commented on TV Iand still being the owner with long-term interest. Chris Sabin said that TV Land would maintain the statue. He told Mr. Greene that the statue in Raleigh is in a park setting. Mr. Greene said that it is hard for him to imagine it being more likely than not being successful. Terry Colgren of Winter Island Road and the Director of Witches Education said that the statue is not a symbol of witchcraft and that it does not depict witchcraft She said that basically it comes down to whimsy. She said that it is not a part of religion. Jean Harrison said that just because the statue is bronze does not make it art. Mr. Durand said that he trusts that it will be quality based on having seen the pictures of the past work. Mr. Greene asked to see pictures of other images. Chris Sabin said that there was apprehension in showing the pictures in order to keep the excitement They do not want pictures to get out and ruin the"magical excitement". Mr. Cox of 1 Webster Road said that he was deeply opposed to the project and that more of an effort should have been made to inform the public. He said that it is controversial and asked if the statue would say TV Land on it. There will be a separate plaque in the sidewalk approximately 24"by 36". • DRB Minutes Apel 13,2005 Page 5 of 5 • Betsy Bums of 22 Beckford St. asked what the context for having the statue in Salem was. Chris Sabin said that Salem is a magical City that has excitement. It is a chance to remember a time gone by. There were episodes filmed here. David Pelletier said that the Choate statue redesign is an embarrassment This site is based on a modem medium. He asked what the budget is. Chris Sabin said that is in the thousands of dollars. Mr. Pelletier said that the site is a park and not the school playground. He said that there could be better placement in the park. He said that Mary Tyler Moore is probably the most photographed thing in Minneapolis. Mr. Pelletier said that Salem is not going to get away from the witch connection. He felt it would be ok if done properly but said that it could be dangerous if people take pictures and gave the example of the Conant statue and the Witch House. He cited the McIntire statue in the Common as an example of a long history of people wanting to give the City things. Ms. Gingrich reviewed the items to be considered as moving the statue back, drainage in the park, and photos or a visual of what the statue would look like. The SRA included the review as part of the approval. Mr. Durand added the hardscaping at the buildings to be considered as well. Mr. Greene spoke of the transfomnation of a portion of the park. He said that you couldn't divorce the front part of the park from the rest, as it is an integrated space. Mr. Durand added that if the statue were pushed back that it might help. Michael Blier said that no one sets out to design half of a park • Ms. Gingrich asked about the existing lights. Michael Blier said that there had been some discussion of flush mounted ground lights and maybe a down-facing light on the statue. Mr. Durand asked that they consider the glare. Mr. Greene mentioned seating. Ms. Gingrich asked what the time schedule for TV Land was and said that the next regular meeting will be in two weeks. Chris Sabin said that he would touch base with the department Michael Blier added that he would need two weeks to do his work. Adjournment There being no further business before the board, the meeting was adjourned. • a Salem • ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda Match 23, 2005 —6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes . Approval of the minutes from the February 23, 2005 meeting. New Business 1. 112 Washington Street & 237-245 Essex Street La pin Patk)—Review of proposed TV Land project at Lappin Park. 2. 284-296 Essex Street& One Sewall Street (YMCA)—Review of proposed signage at 284-296 Essex Street& One Sewall Street. 3. 7 Crombie Street (Crombie Street Mission) — Review of Schematic Design Plans for the Redevelopment of 7 Crombie Street. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes March 23,2005 Page 1 of 5 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MARCH 23, 2005 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand, Chris Greene, and David Jaquith were present. Valerie Gingrich, Staff Planner, and Debra Tucker, Clerk,were also present. Minutes The minutes from the February 23, 2005 meeting were presented for approval. Mr. Durand moved that the minutes from the Regular Meeting held on February 23, 2005 be approved. Mr. Greene seconded the motion. The motion passed (3-0). New Business 1. 112 Washington Street & 237-245 Essex Street (Lappin Park)—Review of proposed TV Land project at Lappin Park. • Robert Paluzzi, Chris Sabin of TV Land, and Michael Blier of Landworks Studio in Salem, appeared before the Design Review. Board to present the proposed TV Land sponsored statue of Bewitched for Lappin Park. Mr. Paluzzi gave background on other TV Land statues, such as Mary Tyler Moore in Minneapolis, Ralph Kramden in New York, Mayberry RFD in North Carolina, and Bob Newhart in Chicago. This would be their fifth statue. They have proposed a bronze statue of Samantha from the television show "Bewitched" for Lappin Park in Salem. Mr. Paluzzi and Mr. Sabin displayed pictures of the clay statue, which is ready to be cast in bronze. There will be a plaque at the base of the statue embedded in the ground. Mr. Blier, a landscape architect from Landworks Studio in Salem, presented his plans for site changes proposed for Lappin Park. The plans included removing the brick wall, planting trees, and opening the space up visually to draw visitors and pedestrians. The sculpture would be located close to the sidewalk near the corner of Essex and Washington Streets and would be visible from the Essex St. pedestrian mall. Mr. Blier said that it would draw more people across the street and would be a way to connect the underused section of Essex Street between Washington and North St. • Mr. Blier stated that there would be a spiral in the ground leading to the statue. He envisioned a gathering space with the same overall path through the park. There would be DRB Minutes Match 23,2005 Page 2 of 5 • one 12-foot fruit tree that would be moved. The existing site plaque for Lappin Park would be moved from the wall to a vertical stone mounted inside the park. Mr. Paluzzi added that the statue would be a draw for people and a way to connect with their memories. He explained that Studio Ice, a national company, will be creating the statue. Mr. Durand asked what the unveiling would be like. Mr. Paluzzi answered that they are usually really big events and estimated 3,000-5,000 people. He predicted that the street would probably have to be closed and it would be a sizable media event. CNN and the major news stations may broadcast. June 15`"was mentioned as a proposed unveiling date. Mr. Greene commented that it would tie in nicely with the new Bewitched movie. Mr. Durand noted that the siting of the statue does make a great gesture across the street and said that it would be an important development tool. The park has never really been used and the walls serve as a barrier. He has seen very few use the park. He likes the statue and the plan and sees it as a positive for the city. Mr. Greene asked how big the statue would be. Mr. Paluzzi answered that it would be approximately 8 feet. Mr. Greene commented that he thought it was a tacky looking statue with virtually no connection with Salem and is similar to previous attempts to exploit Salem's history, one of the worst things to ever happen in American history where 20 • innocent people were killed by a mob. He said that there is no organic connection to the City and that he is ashamed that Salem is proud of that connection. He noted that just a few episodes of"Bewitched"were shot in Salem. Mr. Greene said that the park has problems but this won't solve them. The original park had people walking all over the grass. The wall was an attempt to save the grass. Taking the wall down and creating a focal point that would create pedestrian traffic on the grass would not allow the grass to survive. He asked what would happen when the grass dies and if the area would then be paved. Mr. Greene stated that installing something that looks like a promotional tie into a Nicole Kidman movie is not in the best interest of the City and the timing seems fishy, although it may be a coincidence. Mr. Greene also noted that there might be some legality involved and referenced the State Constitution, specifically Article 97, concerning public open space that may not be changed without 2/3rds approval by the Legislature. He suggested that they look into it. From a design point of view Mr. Greene said that it is not fine art and is commercial. If it were to be put in Salem, is should not be put on that corner. He said that he would consider another location. Mr. Paluzzi answered that the fust question that TV Land asked was if it were appropriate. • They worked to locate it with the utmost respect. He said that it is the pop culture of witches and not history. DRB Minutes March 23,2005 Page 3 of 5 • Mr. Paluzzi added that the location seemed like an opportunity and they were open to consider others. There is a corporate commercial connection, but they are not working with the studio. They were aware of the timing and thought it would tie in nicely. He stated that the unveiling date could be changed. The statue is being presented by TV Land as a labor of love. He said there is press value, but that the intent is to bring a show to mind and reconnect to childhood memories. True emotional connection was the intent. It was never meant to be disrespectful, crass, or inappropriate. Mr. Jaquith said that he had no problem with the cultural image. He said that his problem was with the corner of the park getting worn away and felt that the carpet of green would be worn away in a few months. He said that it is a summertime cluster point. Mr. Blier used Copley Plaza as a comparison. There was discussion concerning public and private spaces and the care necessary to maintain green spaces. Mr. Jaquith asked that Mr. Blier take the comments and concerns of the board and reconsider the landscape and park design plan. He said that the statue location was ok and asked Mr. Paluzzi what the timeframe for the plans was. Mr. Paluzzi replied that they were looking for June 15`h, if the details could be worked out. He said that they were looking for initial approval from the board. Kate Sullivan of the Mayor's office spoke on behalf of the plan. She said that TV Land had come to the Mayor's office first and asked how the plan would fit into the community. They • gave a presentation and toured the City looking for potential locations. Ms. Sullivan reported that the City suggested the location. She added that they had been wonderful to work with. She added that there are lots of ideas in the City about witch culture. Mr. Greene said that he thought it was an ugly statue and that it would not be an improvement to the City. He noted that there is a lot wrong with the park but that it is not being addressed by this proposal. As a designer, he said that he thought it was a cartoon statue not worthy of the City. He said that it is not connected to Salem and that it seems like an effort to take advantage of the commercialism of witches. Mr. Durand commented that the connection is to popular culture. Mr. Paluzzi added that although TV Land airs shows, they do not own them. He said that classic TV characters are loved and a part of our lives. Mr. Paluzzi acknowledged that although TV Land does not make any money directly from this project,it would be publicity for the station. Mr. Jaquith said that it would make people smile as they walked by and that he had no problem with the pop culture aspect. Mr. Greene said that if the Design Review Board were to recommend that the SRA approve the project, then the whole park should be upgraded. He did not think that it would result in an improvement and as a landscape architect; he said that he could see the park be so much more. • Ms. Gingrich recommended that once the proposal changes were made, they should contact her to get on an agenda. URB Minutes March 23,2005 Page 4 of 5 • The DRB members agreed that a special meeting could be held if necessary. Paul Durand recused himself from the next two matters. 2. 284-296 Essex Street & One Sewall Street (YMCA)—Review of proposed signage at 284-296 Essex Street& One Sewall Street. Mark Meche and Robin Abraham of Winter Street Architects presented plans for signage for the YMCA storefronts that are under renovation. The preschool daycare program and the North Shore Children's Museum would have 2 separate functions with 1 main entrance. Ms. Abraham said that there would be a frosted glass-look to the windows with 6" vinyl lettering applied to the windows. The proposed blade signs will be moved. Ms. Abraham explained thafthe proposal includes the installation of eighteen (18) signs and vinyl window frosting along Essex Street and Sewall Street. The proposal includes the installation of two 12"x 77" wall signs, two 3'5"x 2' hanging signs, seven 12"x 12" "Y" window logos, and four 17"x 41" window signs along Essex Street. The proposal also includes two 12"x 12" "Y"window logos and one 3'5"x T hanging sign along Sewall Street. • The wall signs will be painted MDO with a painted wood trim and black vinyl letters. The hanging signs will be white painted MDO with vinyl graphics and lettering. The "Y" window logos and window signs will be vinyl logos and lettering, which will be applied directly to the glass. The hanging signs will be attached to black aluminum scroll brackets. The wall signs and the hanging signs will be attached to the building with black lag bolts. After discussion Mr. Greene noted that he liked the shape and size of the signage plans with the exception of the font. Mr. Jaquith agreed. Mr. Greene said that he will recommend a font. Mr. Greene stated that the hanging sign at the corner should be moved away from the corner so that attention is not drawn to the door that is not an access point. Mr. Greene and Mr. Jaquith approved the location as amended and size. They asked that they work on the spacing and font and resubmit the sign layout. 3. 7 Crombie Street (Crombie Street Mission) — Review of Schematic Design Plans for the Redevelopment of 7 Crombie Street. Mark Meche of Winter St. Architects along with Troy Scott presented the preliminary plans to the board. Mr. Meche explained that they are planning a gentle renovation of the church building. The building is in good shape structurally. • They reviewed the initial plans to renovate and have estimated that they will build to suit 12- 16 artist live/work units and are hoping to sell them for under $300,000.00 apiece. Mr. URB Minutes March 23,2005 Page 5 of 5 Meche indicated that parking is not an issue as they are in a B5 district and within 1,000 feet of the parking garage. He stated that they have purchased parking passes for each of the units. Mr. Greene suggested that there be a tree at the entrance gate. He commented that there will not be a lot of sun in the alley. Mr. Meche stated that they are hoping that the alley will be a sculpture garden for the artists. Mr.Jaquith and Mr. Greene said that the plan seems to be headed in the right direction and recommended approval of the conceptual plans. Adjournment There being no further business before the board, the meeting was adjourned. • a Salem • ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda February 23, 2005 –6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the December 15, 2004 meeting. New Business 1. 60 Washington Street (Ben &jerr,L) – Review of proposed signage and lighting at 60 Washington Street. 2. 140 Washington Street (New England Soup Kitchen)—Review of proposed signage and lighting at 140 Washington Street. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes FebnLa:y 23,2005 Page 1 of 2 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 23,2005 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, February 23,2005 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Valerie Gingrich, Staff Planner, and Debra Tucker, Clerk,were also present. Ms. Gingrich explained that Mr. Greene is not present, but had notified her that he had comments on the proposed signage. New Business 1. 60 Washington Street (Ben & JeM s) — Review of the proposed signage and lighting at 60 Washington Street Ms. Gingrich presented the proposed plans for Ben &Jerry's wall signs, lighting, and neon signs inside the windows. She stated that the proposal includes a wall sign on Washington St. and a wall sign on Lynde St. • Mr. Durand asked if the signs would be aligned on the facade. Mr.Jaquith suggested that they be aligned with the Boston Hot Dog sign and the Deli sign. The owner, David Saia, replied that they would be. Mr. Durand asked if the sign would be 12 feet in length. Ms. Gingrich and the owners replied that the sign on Washington Street is 10' in length and 14"high, and the sign on Lynde Street will be 8'in length and 14 1/2" high. Ms. Gingrich stated that sign will be made of MDO plywood and sign foam, and lights would be black gooseneck arms with white fixtures. Mr. Durand asked how they would be mounted. The owner replied that the lights would be mounted above the sign. Mr. Durand specified that there should be no exposed conduit or junction boxes allowed. The owner agreed. Mr. Durand asked how the two neon signs shown on the plan will hang on the inside of the windows. The owner stated that they will be hung by wire on the inside of the windows. One will be of an ice cream cone and will be in the Washington St. window. The other will probably be of an ice cream cake sign and will hang in the Lynde St. window. Ms. Gingrich added that this will not exceed the allotted signage for the business. Mr. Durand commented that the signs were fine. Mr. Jaquith asked if the signs were all corporate logos and the owner replied that they were but the architects had changed the • signage to fit the parameters of this location. He added that his business partner is John Serino. DRB Minutes Feba 23,2005 Page 2 of 2 • Mr. Durand asked that there be no exposed fasteners and that everything be concealed and the owner answered that he would make sure of that. The members agreed to recommend the sign as proposed with the condition that there be no exposed fasteners or conduits. Ms. Gingrich asked that the owners submit seven copies by Friday for the SRA to review for final approval. The owner agreed and stated that he will be meeting with the Building Inspector at the beginning of next week. He is hoping to open between April 15 1h and May V. 2. 140 Washington Street (New England Soup Factor-i —Review of the proposed signage and lighting at 140 Washington Street. Michael Lutrzykowski of HH Morant and Milind Divadkar, owner of New England Soup Factory, presented their plans. They explained that the store is a small franchise with other locations in Newton and Brookline. Mr. Lutrzykowski explained that the proposal includes the installation of two signs — one sign consisting of raised lettering to be applied to the existing recessed panel along Washington Street, and one hanging sign along Washington Street. He stated that the raised lettering consists of individual "California" Black raised plastic letters which are 12" x 11" x 3/4" to match adjacent signage at IL BOCCA ITALIANA. He stated that the hanging sign will be a 22" x 29" oval PVC/Wood sign with the company logo and the sign bracket will match the bracket used by IL BOCCA • ITALIANA. Mr. Durand and Mr. Jaquith both stated that the City needs a business like this one. Ms. Gingrich stated that their submission was revised and will be an oval hanging sign in the same colors. Mr. Durand asked if the size of the sign is 22 inches x 29 inches. The owner replied that it is and that it will be hung by a bracket that matches the one for the Italian restaurant next door. The sign will be fiat not raised with the graphics applied onto it Ms. Gingrich added that the wall sign would be lit by two gooseneck lights. The owner said that the lights were approved when the storefront project was approved. Ms. Gingrich confirmed this. The members agreed to recommend the signage as proposed. The owners stated that they are hoping to open before June. Minutes Minutes from the December 15, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Adjournment There being no further business before the board, the meeting was adjourned. • Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda December 15, 2004 - 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the November 17, 2004 meeting. New Business 1. 282 Derby Street (Dunkin Donuts) -Review of proposed signage and awnings at 282 Derby Street. 2. 284 Essex Street (YMCA) - Review of proposed Final Design Plans for the renovation of the storefronts at the YMCA. 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) - Continued review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978).745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes December 15,2004 Page 1 of 4 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 15, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand, Chris Greene and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner and Valerie Gingrich, Clerk were also present. Minutes Minutes from the November 17, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. New Business 1. 282 Derma Street (Dunkin Donuts —Review of the proposed signage and awnings at 282 Derby Street. Ms. Hartford explained that the Dunkin Donuts opened about two years ago and the board reviewed the current signage at that time. She stated that the applicant is proposing to replace the current signage with blade signs and awnings like those on the Dunkin Donuts at • the corner of Washington and Derby. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicant, Bob Jackson, who went over the proposal. The applicant explained that the two awnings over the two doors will have the address on them. Mr. Durand asked if only the awnings over the doors would be dropped. The applicant confirmed. Ms. Hartford explained that the awning material and color will be the same as what is on the Dunkin Donuts on Washington Street, which will match the awnings around the store. She explained that they will have small spotlights for lighting. Mr. Durand asked if the lighting is on the building. The applicant confirmed. Mr. Greene asked the location of the two blade signs and whether both would be lit. The applicant stated that there will be one sign on Derby Street and one on New Liberty Street, and both will be lit in order to draw in pedestrian traffic. Mr. Greene stated that the graphic on the blade sign is too big for the space that it is situated on. He explained that there needs to be a little more black space for the field. Mr. Greene asked if the line between the two names is necessary because graphically,it is not needed. The applicant agreed. • Mr. Greene asked if the cup is part of the logo. The applicant stated that it is. Mr. Greene stated that they should align the right side of "Dunkin Donuts" with the lower trademark DRB Minutes December 15,2004 Page 2 of 4 • and align the left side of"Dunkin Donuts" with the "3" in the lower name. He added that the line between the two names should be removed. All members agreed and Mr.Jaquith stated that it is a big improvement. The members agreed to recommend approval of the signage with the above changes to the Salem Redevelopment Authority. 2. 284 Essex Street () MCA) —Review of the proposed Final Design Plans for the renovation of the storefront at the YMCA. Mr. Durand recused himself. Ms. Hartford explained that the SRA approved the schematic design at their last meeting, and referred the final design plans to the board for review. Ms. Hartford stated that the board had specifically wanted to talk about materials in the final design phase. She introduced the applicants, Mark Meche and Robin Abraham of Winter Street Architects, and asked them to present the final design plans. Mark Meche explained that they found historic photographs of the building and switched gears during the schematic process. He stated that the original storefront had large panes of glass with small mullions. • Mr. Greene stated that he understands the change and agrees that it is the right way to go, but his concern is with the proposed materials. He explained that it is clearly an historic building and it should contain wood trim as opposed to the proposed breakfold metal. Mr. Meche stated that his only concern with wood is that the mullions will have to be thicker and they will have to route in the stops. Mr. Greene stated that the narrower look is fine but the material should be wood. Mr. Jaquith asked what the original material was. Mr. Meche stated that the original was aluminum but it would not meet today's standards. Mr. Greene commented that it is the right layout and transom windows would be wrong. Mr.Jaquith stated that he is fine with the proposal. Mr. Greene asked about signage. Mr. Meche stated that at this point they are only presenting the location and types of signage, not graphics. He went over the signage, which includes retractable awnings, blade signs, and frosting on the windows. Mr. Meche stated that they will present the graphics at a later date. The members agreed to recommend approval of the final design plans with the above changes to the SRA. • DRB Minutes December 15,2004 Ng 3 of 4 • 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) — Continued review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. Ms. Hartford introduced the design team and stated that at the last meeting the board requested the remaining information and materials for the projects. Attorney Scott Grover introduced the applicant, George Belleau and the architect, Craig Douglas of Martins Construction. He commented that they received Planning Board approval since their last DRB meeting. Mr. Belleau stated that he appreciates the board's work and stated that it is a better project because of them. He added that they had their Chapter 91 hearing. Craig Douglas handed out an update of the project with a sample of the awning material to the board members. Mr. Douglas went over the proposed materials. Mr. Durand asked about the window recesses. Mr. Douglas explained that the top floor needs to be slightly recessed so it will not look flat. He stated that they will build the wall back and it will look like the window is sitting in a thicker wall. Mr. Douglas showed the board members the proposed window, which had historic style molding. He explained that the brick will stick out about three inches from the windows. • Mr.Jaquith asked if it will be a running bond. Mr. Douglas confirmed. Mr. Durand stressed that they should not infill the windows. Mr. Greene asked about the building material and motor joints. Mr. Douglas explained that they will use ariscraft, a composite material in 12"x 24" blocks with tight mortar. Mr. Greene stated that they will need to review the brick color and mortar color, so they should set up a sample wall for review during construction. Mr. Greene asked about the sidewalk and whether they could plant additional trees. Mr. Greene suggested that two additional trees be planted in front of the building. Mr. Greene asked about the plaza paver joints. Mr. Douglas stated that there will be no joints, they will be dry set so that water can filter through. Mr. Greene commented that the pavers are not exactly vertical, so they will have a gap and they should put sand in the cracks. Mr.Jaquith asked for the final landscape plan and the plant list. Attorney Grover explained that Coastal Zone Management said that they would provide a list of coastal plants that they could use. He added that it will probably be thirty percent indigenous and seventy percent other. . Ms. Hartford stated that she will make review of the final landscape plan a condition of approval. She stated that when they have their construction drawings, they should submit them for review. DRB Minutes December 15,2004 Page 4 of 4 . Mr. Jaquith stated that the top windows look different from the last meeting. Mr. Douglas explained that the sheets he is looking at are not updated and pointed out the updated drawings. Mr. Jaquith stated that he is disturbed by the brick over the windows because it looks incomplete. Mr. Greene commented that the risk is modern trying to look historic. Mr. Durand commented that the simple opening fits with the ornate window as proposed. The members agreed to recommend approval with the condition that they review the final construction and landscaping plans. Mr. Belleau thanked the board and added that a possible use for the rear space is a day spa. The board agreed that would be a good use for the space. Ms. Hartford stated that the project will go before the SRA at their January 14`h meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned • • aSalem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda November 17, 2004 - 6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the October 27, 2004 meeting. New Business 1. 193 Washington Street (Bank of America) - Continued review of the proposed signage at 193 Washington Street. 2. 284 Essex Street (YMCA) - Continued review of proposed Schematic Design Plans for the renovation of the storefronts at the YMCA. 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) - Continued review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station into a mixed-use building. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 • DRB Mmmes November 17,2004 Page 1 of 1 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, November 17, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner and Valerie Gingrich, Clerk were also present. Minutes Minutes from the October 27, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. New Business 1. 193 Washington Street (Bank of America.) — Continued review of the proposed signage at 193 Washington Street. Ms. Hartford explained that the sign maker, Rick Berk, is present to explain the proposal and answer questions. She stated that at the last meeting, the board recommended that the • applicant look at the old Bank Boston sign for guidance for the new sign. Ms. Hartford stated that the proposed sign color is champagne. Mr. Berk added that he shrunk the lettering proportionally. Mr. Durand asked if the red and blue symbol is the company's logo. Mr. Berk stated that it is. The members agreed to recommend approval of the sign to the Salem Redevelopment Authority. 2. 284 Essex Street (YMCA) — Continued review of the proposed Schematic Design Plans for the renovation of the storefront at the YMCA. Mr. Durand recused himself. Ms. Hartford explained that at the last meeting, the board commented that the proposal was too modern and requested thicker mullions, a site plan and conceptual signage. She introduced Mark Meche and Robin Abraham of Winter Street Architects. Mr. Meche explained the changes to the conceptual plans. He explained that historically, the building had large glass pieces with tiny mullions. Mr. Meche stated that they are pushing . back in that direction. He explained that the proposed awning is reminiscent of the one in an old photograph. He stated that they would like to do signage on the sign band, awnings, windows and blade signs. • DRB Minutes i November 17,2004 Page 2 of 2 • Mr. Jaquith commented that the awning should be tilted more. He stated that they need to have blade signs. Mr. Meche stated that they are looking at slight frosting on the windows for privacy. He explained that they are looking at a product called Lumisty. Mr.Jaquith stated that the proposal looks fine. Ms. Hartford stated that Chris Greene is looking at the plans and she will let them know if he has any comments. Mr. Meche stated that Mr. Greene can call him if he has any questions. Ms. Hartford stated that she will send a letter regarding what is required for the final design approval. 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) — Continued review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. Ms. Hartford introduced the design team and stated that they will be presenting some new • materials at the meeting. Attorney Scott Grover introduced the applicant, George Belleau and the architect, Craig Douglas of Martins Construction. He commented that they have been productive and will show their progress. Craig Douglas reviewed the changes to the site,which included thinning out the landscaping, adding hanging plants to the garage ramp and changing the shape of the plaza to an "L" shape. Mr. Douglas explained that they are proposing Arriscraft for the base of the building. He presented a sample to the board. He stated that they would like to use a precast oversized brick paver for the plaza. Mr. Douglas stated that they added awnings to the first floor windows. He stated that the upper windows will be double hung aluminum-clad wood window. He explained that they do not know which manufacturer they will use at this point. Mr. Durand asked when they will know the exact window that they will be using. Mr. Douglas stated that they will decide at the pricing stage. He added that they are looking at using Eagle windows and presented a sample. Mr. Durand stated that they will need to know which window they will be using before they recommend approval of the project. He added that they want to know the exact window. Mr. Douglas stated that he will have a sample at the next meeting. Mr. Durand stated that they will need to review all of the details, mullions, etc. • Mr. Douglas stated that they will not be using mullions in the windows and added that they are proposing mallard green as the color. DRB Minutes November 17,2004 Page 3 of 3 • Mr. Durand asked what the material will be for the top of the building. Mr. Douglas stated that they are proposing stucco to match the Ariscraft on the bottom. He explained that the middle of the building will be brick and he presented a sample. Mr.Jaquith stated that they will need to review a detail of the window arch on the top of the building. Mr. Belleu stated that all of the parking is now under the building on both levels. Mr. Douglas stated that the wall against the ramp will have a high seat back so that no one falls. Mr. Durand asked about the material of the sills. Mr. Douglas stated that they are brick. Mr. Durand asked if the roof is proposed as metal. Mr. Douglas stated that it is and they would like the color to be hemlock green, which is a grey-green. Mr. Durand asked if the arched window is fixed. Mr. Douglas stated that it is. Mr. Durand asked if the windows are in the residential units. Mr. Douglas stated that they are. Mr. Jaquith asked if the windows will open. Mr. Douglas stated that they will be sliding doors on the other side of the building. • Mr.Jaquith commented that the residents may want to open the windows. Mr. Durand commented that the top need articulation, more detail. He questioned whether the look is too Spanish/Floridian. Mr. Douglas stated that the intent was a 1920s look (more of a classic look). The members agreed that that is the look they should go for. Mr. Durand asked if it will be an aluminum storefront. Mr. Douglas stated that it would and added that they will proposed blue awnings. Mr. Durand commented that they need to look at signage for the retail spaces and provide space for it. Mr.Jaquith added that they should think about what type of signage they want to do. Mr. Durand asked why they eliminated parking spaces for the ground floor parking level. Mr. Douglas explained that they were able to rearrange the parking layout on the subsurface level and move the spaces down to create a better view. Mr. Durand asked if they will provide a railing at the parking garage ramp. Mr. Douglas stated that it will be forty-two inches off the height of the seat. Mr. Durand suggested that they angle the top of the wall to discourage sitting and walking on it. • Mr. Douglas explained that they are proposing black or dark green aluminum railings on the balconies. Mr.Jaquith commented that they should look at both options. Mr. Durand stated that black goes with anything. • DRS Minutes November 17,2004 Page 4 of 4 • Mr. Durand asked about the cornice. Mr. Douglas stated that it will be efface. Mr. Durand asked if they have a name for the building. Mr. Belleau stated that they will call it Harbor view place. Mr. Durand stated that they need to look at signage, lighting, window details, cornice details, colors and materials. He stated that he liked the materials shown at the meeting. He added that they should look at the upper windows and consider movable planters for the plaza. Mr. Durand stated that if they will be doing banners, they should include those in the submittal. He also asked for a section of the railing and planter at the ramp wall. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned • • MOOT Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda October 27, 2004 - 6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes Approval of the minutes from the September 22, 2004 meeting. New Business 1. 193 Washington Street (Bank of America) - Review of the proposed signage at 193 Washington Street. 2. 284 Essex Street (YMCA) - Review of proposed Schematic Design Plans for the renovation of the storefronts at the YMCA. 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) - Continued review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes Oaober 27,2004 Page 1 of 5 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 27, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 at 6:00pm. Members Paul Durand, Chris Greene and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk were also present. Minutes Minutes from the September 22, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. New Business 1. 193 Washington Street (Bank of America) - Review of the proposed signage at 193 Washington Street. Ms. Hartford explained that the proposal includes the installation of three internally illuminated wall signs in place of the current Fleet Bank signs. • Mr. Greene commented that the internally .illuminated band should have a darker background color. Mr. Durand stated that the existing Fleet sign has a darker background with lighter letters and this sign should have the same. Mr. Durand and Mr. Greene agreed that the white background is unacceptable and the lettering should be smaller. They suggested that the applicant look at the Fleet or Bank Boston signs for guidance and resubmit. 2. 284 Essex Street "CA) - Review of the proposed Schematic Design Plans for the renovation of the storefront at the YMCA. Mr.Durand recused himself. Ms. Hartford explained that the YMCA would like to renovate their storefront on Essex Street. She stated that the applicant will have a complete sign package when they come back for final design approval. Ms. Hartford introduced Deb Amaral, Executive Director of the YMCA,Mark Meche and Robin Abraham of Winter Street Architects. Mr. Meche explained that the goals of the project are to improve the storefront, locate the • Children's Museum in the first floor retail space of the building, and regain control of the central entrance by negotiating with the Salem Housing Authority. He stated that if the YMCA is able to swap space with the Housing Authority, they will remove the exterior DRB Minutes October 27,2004 Page 2 of 5 • entrance ramp,internalize it, and patch the storefront. He explained that if there is no swap, the ramp will stay and they will patch the storefront as much as possible. Mr.Meche stated that they would like to get rid of all of the little niches and create a uniform sidewalk treatment along Essex Street. He added that the project will not be a complete restoration of all of the windows because the YMCA has a limited budget. Mr. Greene stated that his initial response is that the proposal looks too much like a modem storefront and it does not go with the style of the building. He stated that the all glass doors do not give a period appearance. He added that the second level of divided lights should have thicker mullions and spandrels, more like the upper windows. Mr. Meche explained that the original windows have large single pieces of glass and the proposal was derived from the original. Mr. Jaquith commented that the proposal is very continuous. He suggested that the applicant look at the transom light. Mr. Greene asked about the material for the double rows of lights. Mr. Meche stated that it may be and FCO finely finished aluminum, but that has not been determined. Mr. Greene commented that the inlets are most likely the original concept and he suggested that they recess the storefront slightly to create more shadow. He stated that the members are too thin and he would like to see wood and wooden doors. • Mr. Greene commented that the uses of a museum and daycare do not necessitate big sheets of glass. Mr. Meche commented that it is better to seem as retail/active as possible for the streetscape. Mr. Greene stated that the most important thing is that the project be consistent with the building and in order to restore the integrity of the facade. Mr. Meche stated that they are trying to figure out the side of the building as well and they are looking at an eight over one window. Mr. Greene commented that he would like to see a site plan showing the trees, curb and sidewalk. Ms. Hartford asked the members if they want to recommend approval with the changes mentioned. Mr. Greene stated that he would like to see the revised proposal prior to recommending it to the SRA. He added that the applicant should also submit the concept for the railings of the ramp, should it remain. 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) - Continued review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a • mixed-use building. DRB Minutes October 27,2004 Page 3 of 5 • Ms. Hartford introduced the design team and stated that they will be focusing on the site at this meeting. Attorney Scott Grover introduced the applicant, George Belleau and the architect, Craig Douglas of Martins Construction. He commented that the final building design is still in progress and they will be reviewing the site/tonight. Craig Douglas reviewed the changes to the site, which included rectilinear planters. He stated that the design intent was to bring out the garden feel of the plaza. He commented that they added a lattice fence along the side property line and created a garden folly finish to the end of the harborwalk. Mr. Douglas stated that they added a trellis to buffer the underground parking structure from view of the plaza. He added that he has a letter from the project's structural engineer,which states that he reviewed the underground garage plans and is comfortable that everything will fit, such as irrigation, planters, etc. Mr. Douglas stated that they have moved away from concrete planters to brick with over-scaled tiles for the floor. He added that he will supply the plaza materials when the building materials are reviewed. Mr. Greene asked how much higher the elevations are with the changes. Mr. Douglas stated that the elevations are the same and they have to be because the harborwalk continues from the Hess Gas Station. Mr. Douglas reviewed the elevations. • Mr. Greene commented that the seat walls of the planters are too high to sit on. Mr. Douglas explained that they need the depth for the plantings. Mr.Jaquith commented that it should be fine because there will be other furniture in the plaza. Mr. Greene commented that the planter in the back corner of the building is too deep and it needs to be more transparent. He added that the planter along the harborwalk is only two feet wide and it needs to be wider for the plantings. Mr. Greene stated that the passageway effect to the different spaces is good, but all the spaces are the same size. He stated that one of the spaces should be primary and the others secondary. He added that the size and design should be directly related to how the spaces will be used. Ms.Hartford asked the applicant about the timeframe for the final design plans for the building. Mr. Grover stated that they will have the full design for the December meeting and they can skip the November meeting and come back in December with the final design. Ms. Hartford stated that the DRB will need the fully engineered site plan prior to recommending approval in order to review drainage, grading, etc. Mr. Greene commented that they need to make sure that the handrails are ADA compliant and suggested that they there make the stairs more of a feature. He commented that h r e can be more plantings and less access to create more attractive views from the condos above. • Mr. Bellau asked the board about the plaza furniture stating that Chapter 91 does not want a lot of furniture. Mr. Greene commented that benches will work well and should be fine with Chapter 91 regulations. DRB Minutes October 27,2004 Page 4 of 5 • Mr.Jaquith asked about the edges of the building adjacent to the plaza. Mr. Douglas stated that they will keep those areas open for potential access to the building. Mr. Greene stated that they want the plaza spaces and the building access from the plaza to relate to the use of the interior space. He suggested widening the access to the back space. Mr. Durand commented that if they open the access,they will have a more primary space. Mr. Belleau stated that they are limited as to what the use of the interior space will be, but it will be public. He stated that not knowing the use does not allow them to place the doorways from the plaza. He stated that they would like to have two doors, one to each plaza space,with only one use. Mr. Belleau commented that one concept that they are considering is a bed&breakfast. Mr. Greene suggested that the entryway be on the comer of the building. The members discussed possible locations of the access between the interior public space to the exterior plaza. Mr. Greene suggested that the planter at the corner of the building be removed and the planter opposite the corner be enlarged to create all possible access options. The members agreed. • Mr. Greene commented that the lattice fence is the wrong aesthetic. Mr.Jaquith stated that the fence is too residential. Mr. Greene added that the building is more urban and modern and the fence does not fit. Mr. Greene stated that it should be a semitransparent fence, but the lattice is not the right look. He suggested something with vertical slats. Mr. Greene stated that plants will not be able to span the mass of the trellis over the ramp. Mr. Belleau stated that there would not be any plants,just trellis. Mr. Durand asked if it would be possible that someone might try to climb on the trellis and stated a concern for safety and liability. Mr. Douglas stated that they would have planters buffering the trellis. Mr. Greene stated that the planters would be transparent and asked if there would be a wall. Mr. Douglas stated that the lattice would serve as a wall and all safety concerns cannot be solved architecturally. Mr.Jaquith replied that it is possible to design some of the safety concerns out of it. Mr. Durand stated that the lattice would be easily accessible and someone could fall through it. He commented that they do not want to cover the ramp with something that can't . support. Mr. Durand explained that a seemingly playful thing that is accessible will draw attention. Mr. Durand stated that they do want to handle it architecturally. DRB Minutes Oaober 27,2004 Page 5 of 5 Mr. Belleau asked if the members would rather the lattice be removed. Mr. Durand stated that it is hard to judge because the concept has not been fully developed. He stated that an integrated fence and screen may be more attractive than seeing the concrete, but if there are vegetated buffers and screening with vegetation,it is ok to take the lattice out. Mr. Greene commented that it is hard to solve the screening with the lattice. He explained that it would be better to have trees overhanging the ramp with vines to buffer the ramp with green. Mr. Durand agreed that vines over the walls would help with the view and not cause a safety concern. Mr. Greene stated that they should use the largest trees possible to create a canopy over the ramp. The members agreed that the trellis is not the right concept to solve the views due to safety, maintenance, etc. They suggested doing a roof over the surface parking spaces that would connect to the building. Mr. Douglas stated that he is not sure that they could do a roof there. • Mr. Belleau stated that the people at Chapter 91 liked the trellis idea. Mr. Durand stated that if they want to do the trellis,they have to supply more detail. Mr. Durand suggested that the applicant come back in November with the site changes and then in December with the details, samples, specifications, and fully engineered site plan. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned • ,e Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda September 22, 2004 - 6:00pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the August 25, 2004 meeting. New Business 1. 24 Front Street (Boon) - Review of the proposed signage at 24 Front Street. 2. 139 Washington Street (Pickle Pot) - Review of the proposed signage at 139 Washington Street. 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) - Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. 4. 331 Lafayette Street - Review of proposed Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of 331 Lafayette Street from a one-story retail space into a residential/commercial mixed-use building. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 1 of 8 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand, Chris Greene and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner was also present. Minutes Minutes from the August 25, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Old Business Ms.Hartford explained that the owner of Edgewater Cafe, Dennis Moustakis,is present to discuss the ductwork in the rear of his restaurant. Ms. Hartford explained that the applicant appeared before the board some time ago and was told to match the siding to the existing aluminum siding. She stated that he is ready to start the work and would like to use vinyl siding. She explained that the applicant brought samples for the board to review and he is • willing to paint the aluminum siding to match the vinyl. Mr. Durand commented that they really want the colors to match. Mr.Moustakis stated that he would match the aluminum by painting the vinyl. Ms. Hartford questioned whether vinyl could be painted. Mr. Durand stated that with the right primer is could be possible, but it will probably look like patchwork. Mr. Greene asked about the location of the wall. Ms. Hartford stated that it faces the alley or parking lot. Mr.Moustakis stated that he understands that the materials will have to match. Mr. Moustakis commented that they don't even make aluminum siding anymore. Mr. Greene stated that the other option would be to make it a very different color. Mr. Durand suggested making it look like a chimney. The members suggested using a different material. They stated that they would look at it and give suggestions. Ms. Hartford stated that the change would probably have to go before the SRA. She told the applicant that she would be in touch. • DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 2 of 8 • New Business 1. 24 Front Street (Boon) - Review of the proposed signage at 24 Front Street. Ms. Hartford explained that the proposal includes the installation of two signs. One sign would be installed along Front Street and would be 24" x 24" attached at a right angle to the building with a blue internal light to show the through the die cut. The other sign would be located along the alley and would be 12" x 14" attached flat against the wall. Both signs would be a dark metal background with die cut diamonds. Ms. Hartford stated that the only color light allowed in the guidelines is white, except for entertainment, recreation and eating and drinking establishments. She commented that she did not know what category a gallery fits into. Mr. Durand commented that the blue light would be good. Ms. Hartford commented that if the members want to recommend the blue light,they can take it to the SRA and make a case that it is an entertainment establishment. Mr. Greene supported the idea and suggested approval of the blue light for the hanging sign. Mr. Greene stated that there is a light shown for the wall sign. He commented that the wall sign should not have a light. • The members discussed the location of the conduit. Mr. Greene commented that both top and bottom of the conduit have to be covered. Mr. Greene suggested approval of the hanging sign with the blue illumination and the wall sign with no illumination. The members agreed that the wall sign should be one inch off the wallwith no light. They agreed that the applicant can add color to the wall sign because there will be no light. The members stated that they will need to approve the location of the conduit and the attachment detail. They stressed that there should be no exposed conduit. They stated that the entire sign needs to be enclosed, but small ventilation holes would be allowed. 2. 139 Washington Street (Pickle Pot) - Review of the proposed signage at 139 Washington Street. Ms. Hartford introduced the owner of the gallery at 138 Washington Street,Jennifer Bowie, and explained that the proposal includes the installation of a hanging sign and a wall sign. Ms. Bowie stated that she had to compromise with the landlord to get to this point because the building does not lend itself to signage. She stated that her frontage is 32 feet along Washington Street. The applicant stated that the hanging sign would be 18" x 36" mounted on a scroll bracket with medium green vinyl graphics on 1/z" PVC with a white background. The wall sign would be 24" x 96" with medium green vinyl letters on 1/2" PVC with a white background. Ms. Bowie stated that the compromise was to attach the signs to the brick of the fagade instead of mounting them to the granite sign bar. DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 3 of 8 • Mr. Greene suggested using two brackets mounted to the brick and hanging the sign above the door at the granite level. He commented that the applicant is correct about the granite being the sign band. Mr. Durand stated that the brackets would not work with the proposed PVC sign. Mr. Greene commented that the sign would have to be thicker. Ms. Bowie stated that she likes the idea but she does not have any say in the decision. She commented that the Pabichs probably should have come to the meeting in order to make decisions. Ms. Bowie explained that they are having a hard time trying to find a place for the blade sign because of the shutters. Mr. Durand asked why the signs have to be up so high. Ms. Bowie explained that she does not have enoughclearance from the sidewalk and then the bracket hits the shutters if it is higher. Mr.Jaquith commented that the blade sign does not need a big bracket. Ms. Bowie stated that she would like it if the sign was just the pickle cut out entirely. Mr. Durand asked if the applicant needs the blade sign. Ms. Bowie explained that because of the trees, her store is completely hidden from people going down Washington Street and the • hope is that a blade sign would attract pedestrians. Mr. Greene stated that the location is a walk-by location. Mr. Greene stated that he does not see why the sign cannot be attached further down towards Front Street. Ms. Bowie explained that the pickle hanging sign is to attract people from Essex Street. Mr. Durand asked the members what they thought of the white background and suggested that it be darker. The other members of the board agreed and suggested that the color be creme. Ms. Bowie explained that she hates the PVC, but she cannot paint, and would like something that will last. Mr. Greene stated that the background color needs to be changed to creme and the signs need more space around the letters and graphics. Ms. Bowie passed out color renderings of the pickle sign. Mr. Durand stated that the colors on the picture are better and that she should paint the sign. Ms. Bowie clarified that the board wants the wall sign to hang and asked if the sign would hit the building. Mr. Greene stated that the sign would be rigid and there could be a welded rod keeping the sign in place. Mr. Greene stated that the sign should be exterior plywood (MDF) and hang out from the building about three inches. Ms. Bowie asked if since they are going with the MDF, can she carve the signs and do gold • letters with dark green background. The members stated that that would be great. Ms. Bowie suggested that the pickle be silver and the members agreed that it would be great. DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 4 of 8 • Ms.Hartford summarized that the board would like to see an MDF sign above the door and the dimensions will have to be worked out. Mr. Greene stated that the board should see a submission before approving the signs and brackets. Ms. Bowie stated that the submission will be a hanging sign with a silver pickle and the wall sign with gold letters and rigid mounting above the door. She stated that both would have dark green backgrounds. Ms. Bowie stated that she does not have jurisdiction on where the signs can be hung. Mr. Durand stated that this is the first sign on the building and there needs to be a precedence where the signs work around the building. He added that the owners should be presenting the signs. Ms. Bowie stated that how her signs work will not work on the other side of the building. Mr. Durand commented that the owners of the building said that they would present a sign package for the building to the board. The members asked Ms. Hartford to check whether they were supposed to come back with a comprehensive sign package. Mr.Jaquith asked that Ms.Hartford check the drawings for the shutters. The applicant asked that the rods be decorative. The members suggested that she propose • something but to keep it simple. Ms. Hartford asked the applicant to submit revised materials by noon on Monday, September 27`h. She stated that she needs dimensions,locations, colors and layouts. 3. 289 Derby Street (former Coastal Gas Station) - Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed- use building. Ms. Hartford introduced the design team and stated that they will be presenting their final design plans. She explained that the project is currently being reviewed by the Planning Board and Conservation Commission. Ms. Hartford explained that the project has also started the process of Chapter 91 review. She stated that the DRB will have a series of meetings to review the project before recommending the project to the SRA. Ms. Hanford explained that they will be looking at site issues tonight and introduced Scott Grover, the attorney for the project. Attorney Grover introduced the project team and stated that they have been working on site design. He explained that they are hoping to get site plan approval from the Planning Board at the next meeting and they expect approval from the Conservation Commission tomorrow ,night, September 23, 2004. Attorney Grover explained that the site plan has been revised through a series of meetings • with the Department of Planning&Community Development and the Planning Board. He stated that the topic tonight is the site plan. He commented that they are looking to have the final design of the buildings in part by the October meeting and the finalized plans in DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 5 of 8 • November. Attorney Grover stated that they appreciate the comments and input from the schematic level and look forward to working with the board during the final phase. Brigitte Fortin, the architect for the project, went over the site plans and the changes from the Chapter 91 process thus far. She stated that the parking spaces within 100 feet of the river are now open to the public and the area around the harborwalk has been opened up. She explained that they are looking at brick for the surface of the site and poured concrete for the planters. Ms. Fortin explained that they do not know what the harborwalk materials will be yet, so they will add that information when it is provided by the city. Ms. Hartford explained that the harborwalk is currently being designed and the specifications will be provided to Hess, Beverly Cooperative Bank and this project for construction of the walkway. Mr. Durand asked what the material will be for the harborwalk. Ms.Hartford stated that she believes that it will be concrete. Mr. Greene stated that he found it hard to comment on the site plan because the details of how the design would be constructed are missing. He stated that the cross sections do not show what the roof of the garage is and it is hard to comment on whether there is enough soil or too much soil without knowing what the structure will be. • Ms. Fortin explained the dimensions of the garage and the planters. She stated that the planters will be 28" and will require smaller trees. Mr. Greene commented that designing a garden on a rooftop is complicated and irrigation, weights, structural supports, etc. need to be worked out. He explained that his comments on the design are qualified by the fact that they are limited because there is not enough technical information. He commented that the roof may need to be thicker to hold the proposed planters and shade trees would be an excellent idea for this site. Ms. Fortin asked if there are examples of roof gardens with shade trees. Mr. Greene suggested looking at examples such as Post Office Square Park or University Park Hotel in Cambridge. He commented that the planters in the second instance had to be mounted because they could not go down,which would probably apply to this site. Mr. Greene commented that the board will need to see the particular patterns of the brick on the site. Mr. Greene commented that the proposed semi circular pattern of bricks would necessitate saw cutting them and they probably do not want to do that. Ms. Fortin agreed. Mr. Greene commented that there is a risk that the poured concrete planters will be a focal point and may not be as elegant as appears. Mr. Greene suggested carrying the wall around so that people will not be able to see into the garage from the garden. Mr. Durand commented that the stairs look too bare and may be too wide. • Mr. Greene commented that the stairs will need to have handrails and the risk is skateboarders. He stated that the design should think about that and railings will break the DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 6 of 8 • steps up. Mr. Greene commented that his firm designed Spaulding Rehab Hospital Park with seatwalls all around the park and installed bronze objects where the concrete is smooth. Mr. Greene commented that they should make sure the proposed ramp is twelve percent. Mr. Greene commented that the waterproofing structure for the garage needs to be at least preliminarily designed in order to look at the roof. Mr. Greene also asked about the ten foot access to the harborwalk. Ms. Hartford explained that they will be combining their access with the Hess Gas Station to make a ten foot walkway. Mr. Greene asked about the other side of the parcel where there is a five foot setback and asked if there will be access on that side as well. Ms. Fortin stated that it is a setback and there will not be access. Mr. Greene asked questioned what will stop people from walking in that space. He added that the five feet should be thought out and there should be plantings in the five foot setback. Mr. Greene asked about the rest of the harborwalk. Ms. Hartford explained the location of the harborwalk. Mr. Greene commented that at this site, the harborwalk is a dead end. Ms. Hartford stated that at this point, it is a dead end. Mr. Greene stated that the dead end of the harborwalk, the lack of access on the side should be worked out. Ms. Hanford stated that she would check on what they can do in the setback. Mr. Greene commented that they should be allowed to do a planter in the setback. Mr. Greene added that all of these issues go together in refining the design. • Mr. Jaquith commented that the circular planters where they touch the building will create awkward spaces that stuff will get stuck in. Mr. Belleau asked if they are suggesting square planters instead of round. Mr. Greene commented that because their building is straight and the harbor line is straight, they may want to have straight planters. Mr.Jaquith added that round planters would work on the comers. Mr. Greene stated that if they use rectilinear planters, they may be able to use other materials than poured concrete,which would work better. Mr. Greene stated that the balance of plantings to paving is fine. He asked about the windows on the public facility. Ms. Fortin explained the windows. Mr. Greene stated that they should think about the egress and design it even though they don't know exactly what the use will be. He added that they should consider adding planters in front of the windows. Mr. Belleau commented that the feedback is very helpful. Mr. Greene commented that the lighting of the space should be included in the design. Ms. Hartford explained that the harborwalk will have specs for lighting fixtures. Attorney Grover stated that they will use that in the design. Mr. Greene commented that the seating area should have a sense of enclosure with a smaller entry. Mr. Belleau explained that because they do not know what the use will be, so the • design is trying to be flexible. DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 7 of S • Mr. Greene suggested that they consolidate some of the planting beds so that they have more usable space. Attorney Grover stated that their feedback is very helpful and stated that they will come back to the next meeting with some of the building design and the changes from the comments regarding the site. Mr. Belleau added that they will get more details on the structural design of the garage. Al Martin suggested that they design the structure but work on the details at a later time. Mr. Greene stated that they need to know the dimensions and whether it will work. Mr. Durand stressed that if the structural design does not work,the site will not work. Ms. Hartford asked the applicant about their process with Coastal Zone Management and whether their comments are incorporated into the design. Attorney Grover stated that the comments are incorporated. Mr. Greene asked about coverage at the down ramp and suggested building a freestanding wall along the ramp opening. Mr. Greene added that because it is North facing, it will be a great place to grow plants. 4. 331 Lafayette Street - Review of proposed Schematic Design Plans for the • redevelopment of 331 Lafayette Street from a one-story retail space into a residential/commercial mixed-use building. Ms.Hartford stated that this project is a little different because it is outside of the Urban Renewal Areas. She explained that the applicant had some trouble with the Zoning Board of Appeals and asked if they could come before the DRB and get comments about the project design to aid in the ZBA process. She explained that Lynn Goonin Duncan, Executive Director of the SRA and Director of DPCD,thought it would be a good experiment for using the Design Review Board outside of the Urban Renewal Areas. Mr. Durand commented that the board could be used as a scapegoat in the Zoning Board process. He asked if there were any specific issues that were raised from that process. The applicant explained that there were no issues but there was a lack of communication with the neighbors. Ms. Hartford stated that from her understanding the neighbors wanted some changes to the design, or the project would not be approved. Attorney Scott Grover explained that he was not at the meeting and he is filling in for Attorney Bill Quinn, but the neighbors had some problems with the design of the building. Mr. Greene commented that he feels that the board should not discuss the project. He explained that they do not know what the parameters are,who they are advising, and what the implications will be. He stated that there could be situations where parameters are • established for review outside the SRA, but that is not the case at this time. He explained that such parameters should be in place before the board acts outside of their jurisdiction. DRB Minutes September 22,2004 Page 8 of 8 • Mr. Durand commented that they did review other projects outside of the Urban Renewal Areas. Ms.Hartford stated that the board reviewed the project at 50 Palmer Street because the city required the review as part of the funding agreement with the Salem Harbor CDC. Mr. Greene commented that the board reports to the SRA with recommendations for the downtown,which is a different situation. He questioned the legality of reviewing the project and stated that it is not their function to review projects. d oo hor nei hbects. g Mr.Jaquith commented that it would even be difficult to review if in their jurisdiction prior to the Board of Appeals. Mr.Jaquith stated that the ZBA has different criteria for reviewing and approving projects. Mr. Durand commented that expanding design review is a good idea, but he is concerned about what Mr. Greene is saying. Mr. Greene commented that they do not know who they are advising or what the basis is to review the project. He added that design review should be added to other parts of Salem through mechanisms, but those are not in place. He stated that the Planning Department should work out those mechanisms before having the DRB review projects. Mr. Durand stated that there should be more design review, but agreed that a mechanism must be in place. • Attorney Grover explained that some of the neighbors stated that without professional help, they did not know whether the project would be integrated into the neighborhood properly. Mr.Durand stated that they should hire their own consultant to determine that;the DRB is not that mechanism. Mr. Durand commented that they may be pulled into something that they don't want to be pulled into. He added that he appreciates that they would come voluntarily,but they cannot help. Mr. Greene stated that in order for them to be a design review mechanism,there has to be a permitting requirement. He stated that it is not an accident that they only look at the Urban Renewal Area. He stated that if the city wants to create areas where design review is a part of review,it has to be legislated. Attorney Grover thanked the board. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned e Salem ` ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda August 25, 2004- 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Approval of the minutes from the July 21, 2004 meeting. Old Business 1. 266 Essex Street (Barking Cat) -Review of changes to the sign bracket. New Business 2. One Salem Green (Salem Five Savings Bank) - Review of proposed signage. 3. 17 Central Street (Old Police Station) - Review of the amendment to the approved Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Police Station. 4. 247 Essex Street (Elite Physical Therapy -Review of proposed signage. 5. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) - Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. This iton wiff be com=wd amtd the next mcetmg. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes August 25,2004 Page 1 of 3 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 25,2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Stteet, on Wednesday,August 25, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members Chris Greene and Paul Durand were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner was also present Minutes Minutes from the July 21,2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Old Business 1. 266 Essex Street (Barking Cat)—Review of changes to the sign bracket. Ms. Hartford explained that the owner installed the approved sign,but during installation, there were some problems with the bracket The sign company put a large metal box on the building to attach the bracket. • Mr. Durand commented that the connection to the building should be decorative. Mr. Greene questioned why the box was constructed. Ms. Hartford stated that the box was a field change by the sign maker and was not approved. She explained that the architect for the building,Mike Lutrzykowski,suggested changing it to wood to match the building. Mr. Durand commented that it should look like an extension of the bracket rather than an extension of the building. Mr. Durand suggested that it could be a plate and should not be so heavy. The members agreed. Ms. Hartford stated that she would talk to the owner and the sign maker and get some options to fix the bracket Mr. Greene suggested that a new bracket be made,which would adapt to the molding. He suggested that the applicant go through the facade improvement program. Ms. Hartford stated that the applicant is already using the program and she will have the applicant submit options for the board's review. New Business 2. One Salem Green (Salem Five Cents Savings Bank]—Review of proposed signage. • Mr. Durand recused himself. i + DRB Mmtrt August 25,2004 Page 2 of 3 • Ms. Hartford explained that the proposed signs are not allowed by the SRA Sign Manual,but the SRA approved a waiver to allow the signs. Ms. Hartford stated that Robin Abraham and Amy Powers were present from Winter Street Architects were present and Ms. Abraham will go through the proposal. Ms.Abraham explained that the proposal includes three identical signs below the second story windows. The signs ate proposed to be located along Cervoni Way,Church Street and One Salem Green. Mr. Greene questioned whether the drawings show the same size signs and stated that the drawing showing the smaller sign is preferable. Ms.Abraham commented that the intent is that the signs are the same size. Mr. Greene stated that the signs are great,but they are a little too big. Mr. Greene asked the dimensions of the sign. Ms.Abraham stated that they are 2.5 feet high and 8.5 feet long. Mr. Greene suggested that the signs be 2 feet and three inches high with the length proportionally reduced. Mr. Greene asked the type of letters that will be used. Ms. Abraham stated that they will be one inch thick metal letters one inch off the building. Mr. Greene suggested that the letters be 1/2" thick located 1/2"off the building. Mr. Greene recommended approval with the changes. 3. 17 Central Street(Old Police Station)—Review of the amendment to the approved Final • Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Old Police Station. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicants,Bill Luster and Jack Finch. Ms. Hartford explained that the developers had to demolish one of the wings of the Old Police Station because of the oil they found. She explained that the SRA told the developers that they had to build the new wing according to what was there before,however the developers ate proposing two changes to the plans. Mr. French explained the changes to the Charter Street elevations with the addition of windows and changes to the tower. Mr.Luster explained the histo of the project and explained that the oil ge xP history P 1 xP cleanup costs were substantial and they are now facing a loss of$200,000 to$300,000. He explained that the Peabody Essex Museum is not being reasonable at this point. Mr. French explained that they would like to substitute semititious clapboards for the brick on the back elevation of the reconstructed wing. Mr. Greene stated that he is concerned about what happens at the comer of the building where clapboards meet brick,but the clapboard elevation is nice. Mr. French explained how they would treat the comers. Mr. French stated that he will submit the material samples and color samples to Ms. Hartford. Mr. Greene asked about the roof of the passageway. Mr. French stated that it will be water resistant drywall. Mr. Greene stated that it was at one time a barrel ceiling with a light hang ng down. Mr. • French stated that they could install crown molding and raise the ceiling to install a pendant light. DRB Minutes August 25,2004 Page 3 of 3 • Mr. Greene asked why the tower is shorter. Mr. French explained that the first floor is now shorter. The members agreed to recommend approval of the amendments with the changes. 4. 247 Essex Street (Elite Physical Therapy)—Review of proposed signage. Ms. Hartford explained that the SRA wanted the DRB to look at Mr. Harding's sign again. Ms. Hartford explained that the SRA was mostly concerned with the colors. Ms. Hartford explained the context of the sign. Mr.Harding presented several options for color changes and stated that the SRA was fine with the design. Mr. Greene stated that the letters should be slightly smaller. He suggested that Mr.Harding submit the dimensions of the existing letters and then the members can recommend a size. Mr. Durand suggested 4.5 inches for the letters. Mr. Harding proposed a dark color for the background of the sign. Mr. Durand suggested more of a pastel color. The members suggested that the applicant submit a full size mock up of the sign for approval- Mr. Greene stated that all caps letters are fine when there is enough space around the letters. Ms. Hartford stated that the mock a should be submitted b the end of the week. P Y • 5. 289 Derby Street(Coastal Gas Stations—Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street(Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. Ms. Hartford explained that the applicant requested to be continued to the next meeting. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned eSalem ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda July 28,2004 - 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Project list 1. 85 Lafayette Street (Keller Williams ReaftyJ -Review of proposed signage. 2. 266 Essex Street (Barking Cat) - Review of the proposed bench. 3. 266 Essex Street (Bowman's Bakery) - Review of proposed modifications to approved Final Design Plans. 4. 247 Essex Street (Elite Physical Therapy) -Review of proposed signage. 5. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) - Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. This wnwdl be contmuez'ta d dx-next n ig. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes Jur 28,2004 Page 1 of 3 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES JULY 28, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, July 28, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members David Jaquith and Paul Durand were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk,were also present. Minutes Minutes from the June 23, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Project list 85 Lafayette Street (Keller Williams Realty)—Review of proposed signage. Ms.Hartford explained that the applicant is a tenant in the new Beverly Cooperative Bank building. She introduced Keith Linear,the sign maker,who went over the proposal to install a 16" x 210" black aluminum sign with plastic letters covered in gold leaf. • Mr. Durand asked if the proposed font is the company's logo. Mr. Linear stated that it is. Mr. Durand commented that the sign looks too heavy. He asked if the black background is part of the company's logo. Mr. Linear stated that it is not but the bricks are too busy to not have a background. Mr.Jaquith commented that it should work fine. Mr. Linear stated that the letters are the same height as Beverly Cooperative Bank's letters. Mr.Jaquith suggested that the applicant add more space on the ends of the sign. Mr.Durand agreed and commented that it might help the heavy look. Mr.Jaquith suggested adding six inches to each end of the sign. Mr.Durand suggested that the sign board be 18" high with the 10" letters. The members agreed on recommending the sign with the revisions of adding 6" to each end and the sign board being 18" high. 24 New Derby Street (Lobster Shanty)—Review of proposed change to cafe permit. • Ms. Hartford stated that the manager from the Lobster Shanty is present and is requesting to change the planter/posts around their cafe. DRB Minutes July 28,2004 Page 2 of 3 The manager explained that they would like to replace the old planters with new soft plastic pots that look like clay pots. He stated that they will be planting flowers in the pots around the cafe posts. Ms.Hartford stated that they will be using the same rope as they are currently using. Mr. Durand asked about the posts. The manager stated that they are wood posts. Mr. Durand suggested that he paint the posts black. The manager agreed to paint the posts. Mr. Durand asked how the rope connects to the post. The manager explained that he will attach them with galvanized eye hooks. The members agreed to recommend approval of the change. 266 Essex Street (Barking Cat)—Review of proposed bench. Ms.Hartford introduced the applicant,Jeff McKee, who explained the proposal to install a wood 48" x 32" bench with green accents in front of the store. Mr.Jaquith commented that he wouldn't have chosen that bench. Mr.Durand asked about the bench materials. Mr.McKee stated that it is wood that will age to a grey color with cast iron legs. Mr. Durand stated that he is fine with the bench and asked how it will be placed. Mr.McKee explained that he would center it in the window. Mr. Durand suggested that he center it on the mullion instead of the window. Mr.McKee agreed. • Ms.Hartford asked how he will secure the bench. Mr.McKee explained that he will use an eyebolt and chain it to the wall. He stated that he will take the bench inside in the winter. The members recommended approval of the bench. 266 Essex Street (Bowman's Bakery—Review of proposed modifications to approved Final Design Plans. Ms.Hartford explained that the SRA wanted the DRB to review the changes and give a recommendation. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicant,Mike Lutryzkowski from H.H.Morant,who explained that there were some modifications to the building during construction. Mr.Lutrzykowski stated that the right elevation was permitted as brick, but the brick was not structurally sound and they had to keep the stucco on the brick. He explained that they want to keep the stucco and paint it to match the building body color. The members agreed that the change was fine. Mr.Lutrzykowski explained that they had to make several changes to the rear elevation. He explained that the window at the stairway had to be removed due to a building code issue. He stated that they also brought the cornice line around the building and a small section above that is not brick like it should be. He explained that the contractor stamped the stucco to make a brick appearance, but they • are proposing to cover the section with clapboards or stucco like the right elevation. The members agreed that they should stucco the section. DRB Mmu es J„ly.28,2004 Page 3 of 3 Mr. Lutrzykowski explained that they wrapped the cornice around the side of the building, did not add the detail to the transition point from brick to wood on the rear elevation, and kept the existing brick on the left elevation. The members agreed that the changes are fine The members recommended approval of the changes to the Final Design Plans,with the exception of the faux brick that will need to be covered over with stucco and painted. 247 Essex Street (Elite Physical Therapy)—Review of proposed signage. Ms.Hartford stated that the applicant, Ed Harding,put up the sign without approval, because he was not aware that the needed approval. The SRA requested that the sign be reviewed. Mr.Harding explained the proposal,which includes the installation of a 24" x 59" hanging sign that replaces the former Salem Physical Therapy sign. Mr.Jaquith commented that the sign is better than the former sign. Mr.Harding commented that he matched the wood, cedar plank,to the old sign and made the sign himself. He stated that the SRA had asked that the sign be taken down prior to getting approvals, but he had difficulty and could not take it down. Mr. Durand asked about the bracket. Mr.Harding stated that it is the same bracket that held the previous sign. • Mr. Durand commented that a different font would have been better and the blue is very bright. The members agreed to recommend approval of the sign as proposed. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station—Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. Ms. Hartford explained that the applicant requested to be continued to the next meeting. She explained that they will be coming before the board at the next meeting. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned • i Salem LLI Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda June 23, 2004—6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Project list • 1. 24 New Derby Street(Jennifer Admire Designs)—Review of proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street (Artists Row). 2. 24 New Derby Street (Gem & I Originals)—Review of the proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street (Artists Row). 3. 24 New Derby Street(Craftisans)—Review of the proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street (Artists Row). 4. 18 Crombie Street — Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment and restoration of 18 Crombie Street for use as a single-family affordable home. 5. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station)—Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. This item will be continued until the next meeting. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes June 23,2004 Page 1 of 4 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD • MEETING MINUTES JUNE 23, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, June 23, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members David Jaquith, Chris Greene and Paul Durand were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk,were also present. Minutes Minutes from the May 26, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Old Business Ms.Hartford stated that there are three items of old business before the board. First, the light specification for The Barking Cat will be exactly like that of Elixir. She passed out a picture of the light. The members agreed that the lights are good. Ms. Hartford stated that the sign maker for Sacred &Folk will be emading Mr. Durand to • double check the sign supports prior to hanging the sign. Lastly,Ms.Hartford stated that the hanging sign for E Bocca Italiana is very small and is not the same size as the other signs on the street. She explained that the owner will be aided by the storefront improvement program to be able to get a larger sign. She stated that the sign was permitted as it hangs, but the sign should be larger and it was our mistake that it is not. Mr. Durand commented that the sign is too small and that the board probably assumed that a proposal for a smaller sign is not bad, but in this case it does not look appropriate. Ms. Hartford stated that they will use the same design, but make it the size of the YMCA sign (2' x 3') u the street from Il Bocca Italiana. The members agreed greed with the proposal. Ms. Hartford stated that she will put the proposal on the next SRA agenda. Project list 24 New Derby Street (Craftisans)—Review of proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street (Artists Row). Ms. Hartford explained the Artists Row program,which allows artists to use the Market Place stalls for the summer in exchange for community workshops. She stated that the Craftisians is a cooperative of about 20 artists. Ms.Hartford introduced the applicant, Lisa Murphy,who described the proposal,which includes the installation of two 18" x 22"wall signs,with one on the wall of the building facing the throughway at • Artists Row and one facing New Derby Street. The sign would be painted on wood and attached to the brick on the building. ' c DRB Minutes June 23,2004 Page 2 of 4 • Mr. Durand asked if there is a standard for signage in the program, or if the different groups are allowed to propose whatever they wish. Ms. Hartford stated that the different groups can have different proposals. Ms.Murphy explained that the sign will be unstained wood in the shape of a pallet. Mr. Greene asked the dimensions of the sign. Ms.Murphy stated that the sign will be 18" x 22" but it is cut in the pallet shape, so it is actually less than that. Mr. Greene asked the dimension across the brick portion of where she is proposing hanging the sign. Ms.Murphy replied that she does not know the dimension exactly, but the sign does fit in proposed location with space on each side. Mr. Greene commented that the wall space is limited and may be a tight fit. Mr.Jaquith stated that the eves on the buildings are low and that is why they had signposts. Ms.Hartford explained that signage is limited in this area because last year the sign posts were cut down by mistake. Due to the short season of the program,it is unclear if the sign posts will be replaced. The members agreed that the sign should be installed on the brick section of the building. Mr.Jaquith questioned the style of the sign because it looks temporary and asked if the sign has been made. Ms.Murphy stated that the sign has been made and she will go get the sign and bring it in for the board to look at because the sign looks better than on the drawing. Mr. Greene stated that they need to look at what the sign will really look like. Ms.Murphy left to get • the sign. 18 Crombie Street—Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment and restoration of 18 Crombie Street for use as a single-family affordable home. Ms.Hartford introduced the applicants,Mr.Warren Sawyer, and his architect,Mr.John Goff. Mr. Goff explained the proposal,which includes the redevelopment and restoration of the home at 18 Crombie Street with exterior changes that include the addition of windows,window replacement, removal of existing shingles and replacement with clapboards, and landscaping in the adjacent yard. Mr.Jaquith asked the differences from the schematic proposal. Mr. Goff explained that there are no changes, but they now have paint colors. Mr. Greene asked if there are any additional details on the site work. Mr. Goff stated that the site will basically be a lawn. He added that the porch that was chosen was the smaller minimal porch. Mr.Jaquith stated that he has no problem with the design but he does not like the color. Mr. Goff explained that they are proposing a blue-grey with cream trim, similar to other buildings in the surrounding area. Mr. Durand commented that the white may be too cream. Mr. Goff explained that they used it on the Bowditch House and it turned out great. • All members agreed that the paint should be glossy. They agreed that the fence color should be the same as the house trim. _ DRB Minutes June 23,2004 Page 3 of 4 • Mr. Goff explained that the wood shingles will be removed to expose the clapboards underneath. They will then see the condition of the clapboards to determine if they can just seal them. He stated that they plan to replace them as necessary and scrape and paint them. Mr.Jaquith asked if the window shown is a dummy window. Mr. Goff stated that it is a real window with black plywood behind it. Mr. Green asked about the colors of the fence and porch. Mr. Goff stated that the fence will match the house trim and the porch will be a grey color. Mr. Goff showed the board members the plaque layout. Ms. Hartford asked if that is the final design of the plaque. Mr. Goff stated that it is a draft layout. The board members discussed the history of the brook located in the area. Mr. Greene stated that he does not want to approve the marker because the layout is too wordy, and therefore the applicant will have to come back for approval of the plaque. Mr.Jaquith asked about the fascia and the bulkhead. Mr. Goff stated that the fascia will be copper and the bulkhead will have to be rebuilt. All members agreed that the plans look good and recommended approval of the Final Design Plans • except that the applicant must return for approval of the marker. 24 New Derby Street (Craftisans)—Continued. Mr. Greene commented that the lettering looks amateur,which he stated is probably not what they want to portray. Mr. Greene asked what type of art was sold at the shop. Ms.Murphy stated that they have sculpture, pottery,painting,watercolors,jewelry,blown glass, and other types of work. Mr. Greene stated that he doesn't oppose handwriting where appropriate. Mr.Jaquith asked if the signs will be permanently mounted on the building. Ms.Murphy stated that there are existing nails in the brick,on which the signs will be hung. Mr.Jaquith stated that he is willing to let it go. Mr. Greene stated that the lettering is not spaced in the best way and the lettering is not easily read, but he is willing to let it go, as well. Mr.Jaquith asked how long the signs will be up. Ms.Hartford stated that the program ends in November. In the winter, a Call for Artists will be released for next year's season. Mr.Jaquith stated that if the group applies again,the sign must be changed. The sign should be clearer next time, especially because "craftisians" is not a word. • The members recommended approval of the sign as a temporary sign until November. DRB Minutes June 23,2004 Page 4 of 4 i24 New Derby Street (Jennifer Admire Designs)—Review of proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street (Artists Row). Ms. Hartford stated that the applicant,Jennifer Admire,is not here but the proposal includes the installation of a 3'x 3'wall sign on the wall of the building facing Front Street. The sign would be wood with a white background and black letters. Mr. Greene stated that the lettering is too small and there is too much space between the lines. He suggested that "Jennifer" be moved down a '/a of an inch, "Design" move up '/4 of an inch and the letters can stay the same size. Mr. Greene stated that the sign is a vertical layout, so it should be on a 2'x 3'sign. Ms.Hartford asked if the sign should have a border. The members stated that it should not. The members recommended approval of the sign with the revisions. 24 New Derby Street (Gem & I On —Review of proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street (Artists Row). Ms.Hartford stated that the applicant, Keri Gleason,is not here but the proposal includes the installation of a 3'x 3'wall sing on the wall of the building facing the throughway at Artists Row. The sign would be wood with a white background and black letters. • Mr. Greene stated that you cannot tell that the "I" was an I, so he rearranged the letters so that "Gem &I" are on one line and "originals" was on the line directly below. The members agreed that the sign should be 2'x 3'like Jennifer Admire's sign. They also requested that the lettering for the word"by" should be a lower case "b". 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station)—Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) into a mixed-use building. Ms.Hanford explained that the applicant requested to be continued to the next meeting. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned • a Salem . LU Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda May 26, 2004—6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Project list • 1. 266 Essex Street(Barking Cat.)—Review of proposed signage at the new storefront at 266 Essex Street (former Bowman's Building). 2. 177 Essex Street (Samantha'O—Review of the proposed signage at 177 Essex Street. 3. 103 Washington Street (Sacred &Folk) —Review of the proposed additional signage at 103 Washington Street. 4. 51-71 Lafayette Street — Review of the proposed exterior changes to the SRA Approved Final Design Plans for the project at 51-71 Lafayette Street (Derby Lofts). 5. 209 Essex Street—Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the facade at 209 Essex Street (Newmark Building). 6. 50 Palmer Street—Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Keefe's lot at 50 Palmer Street into 12 units of affordable housing. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 s DRB Minutes May 26,2004 Page 1 of 5 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MAY 26,2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, May 26, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members David Jaquith and Paul Durand were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk,were also present. Minutes Minutes from the May 5,2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Project list 266 Essex Street (Barking CatLReview of proposed signage at the new storefront at 266 Essex Street(former Bowman's Building). Ms. Hartford introduced the applicant,Jeff McKee,who described the proposal,which includes the installation of a 42" x 42" sign constructed of carved wood relief graphics,painted and hung on a decorative wrought iron bracket. The sign will be lit with white spotlights on the building aimed • directly at the sign. In addition, the owner is proposing attaching vinyl letters to the windows with the telephone number,logo and website for the business. Mr. Durand asked if the store would be doing grooming. Mr.McKee explained that there would be no grooming and instead he would be selling pet food, supplies and gifts. Mr. Durand stated that the hanging sign should be curved. Mr. McKee stated that it would be curved. Mr. McKee explained that he will be using a wrought iron bracket,but he does not have the spec at this time. He stated that it would be similar to Elixir s bracket and it would be moderately heavy to hold the carved sign. He added that he may need to add another bracket to keep the sign from swinging. Mr. McKee stated that the logo application on the door will be vinyl and the letters at the bottom of the window will be six-inch letters. Mr. Durand stated that the logo could be improved by making the backing clear and thus making it more minimal. Mr.McKee agreed to make the backing dear. Mr.Durand stated that the text looks better when it is closer together. Mr. Durand stated that the board will need to review the spec for the halogen spotlights prior to recommending approval. Mr. Durand asked about the size of the lettering on the window. Mr.McKee stated that the letters are six-inch letters. Mr.Durand asked for the size of the"Store Hours" signage to be placed on the door, because the picture was not proportional. • DRB Afmute May 26,2004 Page 2 of 5 • Mr.Jaquith stated that the space between lines of text should be half the size of the text. The members agreed that the applicant should apply 1 '/2 inch letters for the days and hours with '/4" space between;"Store Hours" and the address should be two inch letters. Ms. Hartford asked for the logo size. Mr. McKee stated that it will be 12"x 12". Mr.Jaquith asked the size of the text of the phone number. Mr. McKee stated that it is proposed as six-inch letters. Mr. McKee stated that the text on the window has not been finalized as far as content. Mr.Jaquith stated that the board will need to review the text when it is finalized. Mr. Durand stated that the text of the phone number should be smaller,perhaps three-inch letters.. Mr. McKee asked if the logo font is ok. Mr. Durand stated that the font is good and it is good that the logo font is different from the other text. Ms. Hartford stated that she will need a spec for the bracket, scroll, and lights. Mr. McKee inquired about putting a bench and trash can on the sidewalk in front of his store. Ms. Hartford stated that she would give him more information about the bench and trashcan when they talk next. Mr. McKee asked what would happen if he does not close on the property by the SRA meeting on June 9d. Ms. Hartford stated that in that case,they will need a letter from the building owner • regarding the proposed project. 177 Essex Street(Samantha's'Ic=Review of proposed signage at 177 Essex Street. Ms. Hartford stated that the proposed wall sign is currently up and that Mike Lutrzykowski,a friend of the owner,is here on her behalf. Ms. Hartford explained that the sign is a black 12'x 1'2"wall sign with plastic letters painted gold. The lettering is 10" on the upper case letter and 7" on the lower case letter. The members agreed that the sign is fine and recommended approval as submitted. 103 Was on Street(Sacred&Folks—Review of the proposed additional signage at 103 Washington Street. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicant,Stephanie Hobart,who described her proposal to erect a hanging sign. The proposal includes the installation of a 20"x 20"wood sign,painted dark green (matching the existing wall sign),with gold leaf lettering. The sign will be hung on a hand-carved, wood horse that is 36"L x 20"H x 3"D and weighs approximately 15 pounds. The sign will be hung in the same location as the previous owners sign and it will be anchored and stabilized. Mr. Durand asked if the bracket would be through bolted. Ms Hobart stated that it would and that she had talked to the building owner regarding the process. She stated that there will be two angle • pieces attached to the horse bracket to add stability. DRB Minutes May 26,2004 Page 3 of 5 Mr. Durand stated that the side attachments should be very thin black wrought iron rods with a small • screw eye into the horse. Mr. Durand suggested that the sign maker,Ken McTague, submit a detail of the rods and bracket for his review. Ms. Hobart asked if the rods should be green. Mr.Jaquith stated that the rods should be black. Ms. Hartford informed that applicant of the submission deadline and requirements for the SRA meeting and stated that the sign maker should provide a detail for Mr. Durand. Ms. Hobart stated that she wants to do lighting as well,but it will have to be under a different submission. Mr.Jaquith suggested using the same lights as Elixir. 51-71 Lafayette Street—Review of the proposed exterior changes to the SRA Approved Final Design Plans for the project at 51-71 Lafayette Street (Derby Lofts). Mr. Durand recused himself. Ms. Hartford stated that Chris Greene could not make it to the meeting,but he may be submitting comments. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicants,Mr. Mark Meche and Mr. Kelly Foster,both of Winter Street Architects. Mr.Meche explained the proposed changes of the exterior materials from hardipanel and petrarch to a • full stucco system. Mr.Jaquith asked if the metal lathe would be protected. Mr. Meche stated that it will be galvanized. He also stated that the windows are Pella Architectural series windows. Mr.Jaquith stated that the windows look fine. Mr.Jaquith asked about the locations of the different colors. Mr. Foster explained that the darker color is on the upper portion of the building and the lighter color is on the lower portion. Mr.Jaquith commented that it is good that the brick is broken up. Mr. Meche stated that the brick match is pretty good. Mr.Jaquith asked the name of the color. Mr. Foster stated that it is called"Eldetidge Gray." Mr.Jaquith stated that the proposal looks great and recommended approval as submitted. Mr.Jaquith asked about the awnings shown on the plans. Mr. Meche stated that they will be coming back to the board when they have determined who the tenants will be and know what exactly the awning and signage will be. 209 Essex Street—Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the facade at 209 Essex Street (Newmark Building). Ms. Hartford stated that Mr. Greene will provide comments if applicable. Ms Hartford • stated that the proposal includes the renovation of the Essex Street front of the building, primarily at the storefront level The upper floors will require some brick and stonework DRB Minutes May 26,2W4 Page 4 of 5 and the windows will be replaced with arched-top double-hung windows to match historical photos. The project will also include window replacement on the remaining parts of the building. Mr.Meche stated that he and Mr. Durand have renovated every other piece of their building and this is the last one. He stated that they will be providing approximately 3,000 square feet of retail in the front of the building. Mr. Meche explained that historically there has been a band of glass along the upper storefront and they would like to go back to that. Mr. Meche stated that this is the schematic design for renovating the very tall storefront and introduced Mr. Foster to go over the proposal. Mr. Foster explained the proposal,which includes the glass band on the top of the storefront,which would be flush. He explained that the columns of the building were carried down to the storefront and they are looking to have one or two tenants in the space. Mr.Jaquith asked about the material at the elevator location. Mr. Foster stated that they pushed the facade out at the elevator to make it flush and hide the elevator. Mr. Foster stated that they do not know what the material will be at this stage. Mr.Jaquith stated that the schematic design looks great and recommended approval as submitted. • 50 Palmer Street—Review of the Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Keefe's lot at 50 Palmer Street into 12 units of affordable housing. Ms. Hartford explained that the project is not in the Urban Renewal Area,but the project did receive funding from the City's Community Development Block Grant. Ms. Hartford explained that as part of the funding agreement,the applicant was required to go through the design review process. She stated that the project is currently at the schematic design level and introduced the design team representing the Salem Harbor Community Development Corporation (CDC). Mr.Jim Haskell,Executive Director of the CDC, stated that the site is where the former Keefe's Restaurant was. He explained that the vision for development is for affordable housing. Mr. Haskell explained that they started with a proposal with eight owner/rental units and now they have a proposal osal with only six owner rental units with three condos in the middle. He explained that the owner will live on the second and third floors and the first floor will be a two-bedroom rental unit for the owner. Ms. Nash commented that they have been working with the community on the design of the project and there is a definite need for it. Mr. Luna went over the details of the design. He stated that that one of the goals of the design is to reinforce the street along Congress and Palmer. He stated that another design feature that is found in the surrounding neighborhood is a strong cornice line. • DRB Minutes May 26,2004 Page 5 of 5 Mr. Luna stated that through the six-month process, the community indicated that having two bedroom rental units is more important that having more yard space, so they design decks on the second floor for the owners. Mr. Luna stated that the construction will be wood frame with a hardipanel fagade. He stated that the details will be worked out prior to the final design stage. Mr.Jaquith asked if the center bay windows will be one window or two. Mr. Luna stated that it will be two,but he would like to do one if he can. Mr.Jaquith stated that he is fine with the hardipanel. Mr. Luna stated that it will be a four color scheme with two body colors,a trim color and an accent color. He added that there will be some brick (the stairs). Mr. Durand stated that the color scheme is good. Mr. Luna stated that they will be going to the Zoning Board of Appeals for variances for the number of parking spaces and the parking space size. Mr.Jaquith stated that it is a good project. Mr. Durand stated that it looks like a lot of glass in proportion to solid wall. Mr. Durand suggested moving the vestibule out to make the back of the building less tunnel-like. Mr. Luna stated that they made one change to the plan since they submitted it for review. Mr. Luna explained that they added one parking space to the site. Ms. Hartford asked the applicants to submit the revised plan. Mr.Luna added that there will be full basements in each unit for the owner to access. The members agreed that the schematic design is good and approved the schematic design as submitted. Mr. Haskell stated that it may be a while before they ate back with the final design due to funding approvals that are needed. He stated that they will be before the ZBA on July 21s` to get the variances that are needed for the project. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned • DRB Minutes May 5,2004 Page 1 of 3 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MAY 5,2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the thud floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, May 5, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Member David Jaquith was present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner was also present Members Chris Greene and Paul Durand provided comments on the agenda items prior to the meeting. Minutes Minutes from the March 24,2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Project list 282–Rear Derby Street(Taste of Cilantro)—Review of proposed signage in second store location at 282-Rear Derby Street and minor storefront improvements. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicant and stated that the proposal is to install a 20"x 60"wood hanging sign with a white background,red lettering with green accents;a green canvas awning with the • Cilantro logo in white lettering,and a new door exactly the same as the Cilantro door on Derby Street Mr.Jaquith asked the height requirement for band ng signs. Ms. Hartford stated that it is 10 feet from the ground to the bottom of the sign. Mr.Jaquith commented that the signs look fine and gave a positive recommendation for approval. The other members also approved of the signs as submitted. 8 Central Street(Salem Historical Touts—Review of proposed signage at 8 Central Street. Ms. Hartford stated that the proposal includes the installation of a 34" x 40" MDO hanging sign with a white background and gold leaf letters and plum trim. Mr.Jaquith commented that the sign has a lot of lettering on it,but it is fine with him. He asked that the sign be hung higher and that it have an arched top like the adjacent sign. Mr.Jaquith asked if the logo on the sign is used on all of their materials. The applicant stated that it is. Mr.Jaquith stated that the 2"x2"decals on the door are fine. The other members also approved the signs as submitted. 140 Washington Street—$eview of storefront improvements to the property at 140 Washington Street Ms. Hartford introduced Mike Lutrzykowski,who represented the owner,Goldberg Properties. Mr. Lutrzykowski, from H.H.Morant presented the proposal,which includes repainting,the installation of • gooseneck lights,and adding trim to the existing storefronts along Washington Street He explained that the proposal also included reconfiguring the entranceway to the second floor office spaces. Mr. s: DRB Minutes May 5,2004 Page 2 of 3 • Lutrzykowski presented two improvement scenarios for reconfiguring the entranceway to the second floor as options for the board. Mr. Lutrzykowski commented that in his opinion,having the doors all on one plane is the nicer way to go. Mr.Jaquith commented that the first design is fine and the only comment he has regarding the second design is that the proportions of the arches are slightly off and it looks jammed in. He stated that everything else looks fine. Mr.Jaquith commented that the lighting behind the glass should be substantial. He also asked about the signage along the building. The applicant stated that American Nails'lease will be expiring and they will negotiate the removal of the awnings at that time. He stated that the tenants will be responsible for having their signage approved and they will not require exactly the same type of signage along the building,but they will dictate the location. Ms. Hartford stated that the applicant will have to submit the final choice by the end of the week and she will get the DRB members to comment and approval on the design. She also suggested that the owner talk to a representative from the Salem Main Streets Program for assistance in getting new signs for the storefront owners. 70 Washington Street—Review of storefront improvements to the property at 70 Washington Street (Masonic Temple Building). • Ms. Hartford stated that the proposal includes repainting windows, door trim and panels to the storefronts and the upper windows. Mr.Jaquith stated that the proposal looks great. The other members also approved the improvements as submitted. 73-87 Lafayette Street(Beverly Coolerative Bank)---Review of proposed signage. Ms. Hartford stated that the board has seen the signs before when the applicant was permitting the project and the current proposal is pretty much the same. Ms. Hartford introduced Mr. Bill Howard, President of Beverly Cooperative Bank and the architect from Bay State Design, who presented the proposal, which includes eight (8) titanium wall signs. All of the signs are twelve (12) inches high and the background will be green to match the trim and the letters will be gold. Mr.Jaquith suggested that they make the text on the drive-thm sign larger. He stated that otherwise the signs look fine. 10 Federal Street—Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the office building at 10 Federal Street. Ms. Hartford introduced the architect,Peter Gearhart,who presented the final design plans • to add three floors to the existing two story building at 10 Federal Street. DRB Minutes May 5,2004 Page 3 of 3 Ms. Hartford stated that Chris Greene could not make it to the meeting, but he had several comments, which she provided in writing to the applicant (see attached). Ms. Hartford stated that Mr. Greene recommended approval if the application with the condition that the final landscaping plan must be approved by the DRB. Mr.Jaquith asked about the parking deck and Mr. Gearhart explained the subsurface parking deck and the screening that was required by the Planning Board. Mr.Jaquith stated that he has no problem with the proposal. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned • • ,e Salem Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda April 28, 2004 - 6:OOpm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Project list • 1. 282-Rear Derby Street (Taste of Cilantro) - Review of proposed signage in second store location at 282-Rear Derby Street and minor storefront improvements. 2. 8 Central Street(Salem Historical Tours) - Review of the proposed signage at 8 Central Street. 3. 140 Washington Street-Review of the storefront improvements to the property at 140 Washington Street. 4. 70 Washington Street- Review of the storefront improvements to the property at 70 Washington Street (Masonic Temple Building). 5. 10 Federal Street-Review of the Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the office building at 10 Federal Street. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 Salem ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda March 24, 2004 - 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Project list • 1. 185 Essex Street (Pamplemousse) - Review of proposed signage in new location. 2. 190 Essex Street (Spellbound Museum) - Continuation of the review of proposed signage. 3. 128 Washington Street (Cafe Kuscho) - Continuation of the review of proposed signage and storefront improvements. 4. 103 Washington Street (Sacred& Folk Int'l) - Review of proposed signage. r • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 ' w DRB Minutes March 24,2X4 Page 1 of 2 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES MARCH 24,2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday,March 24, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk,were also present. Minutes Minutes from the February 25, 2004 meeting and from the special meeting held on March 8, 2004 were reviewed and approved. Project list 190 Essex Street (Spellbound Museum)—Continuation of the review of proposed signage. Ms.Hartford introduced the applicant and new business owner,Molly Stewart, and stated that the applicant was asked to make a few changes to the proposed sign and those changes have been made. • Mr.Jaquith commented that the sign is now readable and it looks good. Mr.Durand commented that he appreciates the photograph of the surrounding signs and stated that the signs look fine. The members agreed to give a positive recommendation to the SRA for approval. 128 Washington Street (Cafe Kuscho)—Continuation of the review of proposed signage and storefront improvements. Ms.Hartford introduced the applicant,Mark Stafford, and stated that the applicant looked at the entire storefront and is proposing to paint the exterior green, exactly like the Taste of Thyme Restaurant. Ms.Hartford further explained that the owners plan to add gooseneck lights to the Washington Street facade to match the adjacent storefronts. She stated that the proposed sign is black with gold lettering. Mr. Stafford stated that he would like to paint the storefront with cream and green,matching Taste of Thyme. Mr. Durand asked if the applicant would be alright with not matching Taste of Thyme exactly. Mr. Stafford stated that he would be fine with that and he asked the members for a suggestion. Mr.Jaquith inquired as to the proposed color of the letters on the sign. Mr. Stafford replied that the letters will be gold. • Mr.Jaquith and Mr. Durand agreed that "Olivine" green would be the best color for the facade. The members agreed that the wall signs and the window signs are fine. They offered a positive recommendation on the proposed improvements as revised. !e DRB Minutes March 24,2004 Page 2 of 2 • 103 Washington Street (Sacred& Folk Int'l)—Review of proposed signage. Ms.Hartford introduced Stephanie Hobart,the applicant and new business owner. Ms.Hobart presented the proposed surface sign with eight-inch letters,which would be placed above the window. Mr. Durand asked the applicant to explain the business name. Ms. Hobart explained that they will show and sell sacred and folk art. Ms.Hobart stated that the proposed sign is 12" x 8', and she would also like to do a hanging sign with a unique bracket. Ms.Hobart presented the bracket,in the shape of a horse,to the members and stated that they do not have all of the details for the hanging sign at this time. She stated that they are looking into how they would attach the bracket to the building. Mr. Durand stated that the bracket is very unique and would be very attractive with a hanging sign. Mr.Durand and Mr.Jaquith agreed that the surface sign is great and would offer a positive recommendation to the SRA for approval. Ms. Hartford asked Ms. Hobart to supply the measurements of the bracket and how she intends to hang it from the building. Ms. Hobart stated that she will get all the necessary information for the next meeting. 101 Washington Street (Nostalgia)—Review of signage in new location. • Ms.Hartford introduced Ms. Kim Raines,the applicant, and explained that Ms.Raines is moving her business down one door to the former Pamplemousse site. Ms.Hartford explained that the sign will be the same, but it will be moved one door down. The members agreed that the placement of the sign is fine, and recommended approval. 185 Essex Street (Pamplemousse)- Review of proposed signage in new location. Ms.Hartford stated that the applicant is not present, but the proposal is to hanging the previously approved Pamplemousse sign to the building at 135 Essex Street. She stated that the sign is currently above the entrance to the store. The members agreed that the sign placement is fine, and recommended approval. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned • Salem • ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda March 8, 2004 - 8:00pm 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Project list • 1. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) - Continuation of the Schematic Design Review for the proposed mixed use development. 2. 266 Essex Street (Bowmans) • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 i DRB Minutes March 8,2004 Page 1 of 3 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES MARCH 8, 2004 A special meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Monday,March 8, 2004 at 8:OOAM. Members Paul Durand and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hanford, Economic Development Planner, and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk,were also present. Project list 289 Derbytreet (Coastal Gas Station) -Continuation of the Schematic Design Review for the proposed mixed use development. Ms.Hartford introduced the project and the development team. Attorney Scott Grover thanked the board members for agreeing to hold a special meeting and introduced Ms. Brigitte Fortin. Ms. Fortin outlined the changes to the plan,which included changing the roof design, and adding some architectural features to the building. Mr. Durand commented that he does not love the roof however he stated that he will not • object because it could change in the final design. He suggested that that cornice line should be heavier but the proposed cornice is acceptable. Mr.Jaquith commented that the side elevation is better than the front elevation. He commented that the development team has made considerable improvements, but everything should be flexible until final design approval. He commented that the building still looks like a 1970s apartment house and there is certainly room for improvement. Mr. Durand stated that additional improvements could come in the choice of materials. Mr. Jaquith suggested that when the condo spaces are configured the design team could make the spaces different and add more details. Mr. Durand inquired as to whether part of the building is shown as recessed. Ms. Fortin replied that it is proposed as recessed approximately ten inches. Mr.Jaquith commented that if the material is brick, it will most likely be eight or twelve inches. Mr. Durand asked about the depth of the balconies. Ms. Fortin stated that they will be five feet deep. Mr.Jaquith stated that the project could be better and the better the project is,the more money Mr. Bellows makes. Mr. Durand agreed and stated that they are looking for a quality building and the applicant should not budget on the minimum side. • Mr.Jaquith commented that they do not need as much deck space on the roof. He asked how many units are on the top floor. Ms. Fortin stated that there are six on the top floor DRB Minutes March 8,2004 Page 2 of 3 • and there are eight on the other floors. Mr.Jaquith suggested making the top units special. Attorney Grover commented that the change in the roofline could allow more flexibility in making the top units special. Ms.Hartford asked the board members what their recommendations for final design would be. Mr.Jaquith stated that they will look for fine detail and materials in the final, as well as signage and lighting concepts. Mr.Jaquith reminded the applicants that the retail space should not be treated as a secondary concern. Mr. Durand agreed and stated that they are fine with the schematic design and they will look at details and materials in the final design, and they will expect minor improvements in form. Ms. Hartford stated that the next stage, following schematic design approval by the SRA, will be to present to the SRA for final design approval. Mr.Durand stated that the applicant should feel free to submit progress prints as the projects progresses. 266 Essex Street (Bowman's) - Review of proposed changes to redevelopment at 266 Essex Street. Mr.Michael Lutrzykowski informed the board that the cornice of the building had been torn off by the contractor. He explained that although the contractor had good intentions, he did • not receive permission from the owner to take the existing cornice off. Mr. Durand asked if the contractor is replacing the cornice. Mr. Lutrzykowski stated that the contractor started replacing the cornice, but it is not the same as what previously existed. Mr. Lutrzykowski stated that they stopped the work when they found out and worked on a proposal to replace the cornice that was taken down and disposed of. Mr. Durand asked who the contractor is. Mr. Lutrzykowski replied that D.L. Cote is the contractor working on the job and he is the second contractor working on the project. Mr. Jaquith asked who the first contractor was. Mr. Lutrzykowski stated that Mr. Steve Rice was the first contractor. Mr. Lutrzykowski stated that the owner understands the problem with removing the cornice when permitted plans show the cornice remaining as it was, and the owner is frustrated with what happened. Mr. Lutrzykowski presented the proposed changes to the project, which include rebuilding the cornice to match the previous cornice as closely as possible. Mr. Jaquith commented that he has no problem with the proposed changes, but he did notice other minor changes. He stated that the board had been deceived about the elevator override,which is a big box on the building, but was not shown on the plans. • The members agreed that the molding changes are fine. Mr. Durand commented that they should match the dental work as closely as possible to the previous materials. DRB Minutes March 8,2004 Page 3 of 3 • Mr. Durand inquired as to what is going in on the first floor. Mr. Lutrzykowski stated that one of the spaces has been taken by a pet bakery and the other is still available. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned • aSalem ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BoARD Meeting Agenda February 25, 2004 - 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Greene David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes • Review of minutes from the January 28, 2004 meeting. Project list 1. Il Boca Italiana (140 Washington Street) -Review of proposed signage. 2. Spellbound Museum (190 Essex Street) -Review of proposed signage. 3. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) - Continuation of the Schematic Design Review for the proposed mixed use development. 4. 18 Crombie Street-Review of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment of home. 5. 10 Federal Street -Review of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed 3-story addition and roof to existing 2-story building. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Minutes February 25,2004 Page 1 of 7 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 25, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, February 25, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand, Chris Greene and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk,were also present. Minutes Minutes from the January 28, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved. Project list Il Boca Italiana (140 Washington Street) - Review of proposed signage. Ms. Hartford introduced the project and new business owner, Ms. Patrice DeSa. Ms. Hartford noted that the landlord, Goldberg, will be submitting a proposal to the SRA in March to paint the facade, so keep this in mind as far as color schemes. • Ms. DeSa described the proposal, which includes the installation of three signs; two wall signs, along Washington and Barton, and one hanging sign, along Washington Street. The wall signs would be black plastic letters attached directly to the existing fagade. The hanging sign will be a 2'x 1.5' green sign with white lettering. Mr. Durand asked if the logo on the hanging sign is a white flying pig on a green background. Ms. DeSa stated that it is such. Mr. Durand commented that the hanging sign is hard to see and that the black letters of the wall sign are very elegant. He inquired as to what the bracket for the hanging sign would look like. Ms.Hartford stated that the applicant would use the existing sign bracket from Triosi's Restaurant. Mr. Durand asked if the sign would be in the same location as the previous sign and stated that perhaps the sign should have a border. The applicant stated that the sign location would be the same. Mr. Greene commented that a border does not seem appropriate because the sign is very plain and it isn't classical. Mr. Greene asked the applicant to supply a larger picture of the hanging sign. The applicant apologized and agreed to drop them off the next day. Mr.Durand inquired as to the material of the hanging sign. The applicant stated that it is plastic. Mr. Greene commented that the lettering on the side street wall sign is too big, and the lettering should be the same as that on the Washington Street wall sign. Mr. Greene also requested a larger photo of the hanging sign. • The applicant stated that she will submit the requested item the next day. DRB Minutes February 25,2004 Page 2 of 7 • Spellbound Museum (190 Essex Street) - Review of proposed signage. Ms. Hartford introduced the project and Mr. Keith Linear. Ms. Hartford informed the board members that the site is that of the former "Practical Magic" site on the Essex Street pedestrian mall and the proposal includes the installation of two signs, one wall sign and one window sign, along Essex Street. The wall sign will be a 22" x 55" sign with a black background and white lettering. The window sign will be 2.5'x 57"with gold lettering attached directly to the window. The material of the signs will be painted MDO. Mr. Durand asked for a photograph of the adjacent signs in order to see the context of the proposed sign. Ms.Hartford stated that they do not have a photograph, but the adjacent signs are window signs that are similar to the one proposed. Mr. Greene commented that he did not like the design because the border is too busy and the lettering is too big,which doesn't allow for enough empty space on the sign. He stated that he liked the window sign. Mr.Jaquith agreed that the window sign is good. Mr. Greene stated that the sign should be one line across instead of two,like the sign next door. Mr. Linear commented that the sign next door is not very visible. Mr. Greene replied that the sign is not visible due to the font type,not because it is one line across. Mr. Greene stated that the sign is too big for the space. Mr. Linear stated that they were trying to use the existing holes in the granite for the sign and that the owner requested that specific font because it is the font she uses for her business. Mr. Greene commented that not all fonts are • appropriate for signs, as is the case with this one. Mr.Jaquith agreed that the font is hard to read. Mr. Durand agreed that the sign would look better linear with only one line. Mr. Linear stated that the proposal is such because of budget constraints. Mr. Greene replied that the sign doesn't necessarily have to bigger, but a different shape and the border is too ornamental. Mr. Durand stated that they will need photographs that show the context of the sign. Mr. Greene stated that perhaps if the font was bolder and smaller, but the font is too curly to be readable. Mr. Linear inquired if he could use a more modest border. All members agreed that a more modest border would be better. Ms.Hartford stated that she would contact the owner,relay the comments from the board and have the applicant resubmit the proposal. Ms. Hartford stated that the owner can hang a temporary banner in the window until the permanent sign is permitted. 289 Derby Street (Coastal Gas Station) - Continuation of the Schematic Design Review for the proposed mixed use development. Ms.Hartford introduced the project and the development team. Ms. Hartford stated that • the project should be given schematic approval with recommendations for the final design. DRB Minutes February 25,2004 Page 3 of 7 • Attorney Scott Grover introduced George Bellows,the owner, Brigette Fortin,the designer, and Al Martin of Martin Construction. Attorney Grover stated that the design team took the comments from the last meeting and made some positive changes in the design. He stated that the details will become even more specific when they return for final approval. Ms. Fortin reviewed the plans with the board members. She pointed out the change that was requested b theboard q y to step the building back between the second and third floors and continue the facade around the side of the building. Ms. Fortin reviewed the underground parking layout. Mr. Bellows commented that the engineering firm for Hess responded in a positive way at the possibility of combining access to the waterfront. Attorney Grover stated that the designs will correspond and Hess has not started construction of the walkway. Mr. Greene inquired as to who would be responsible for building the walkway to the waterfront, because they do not want two halves of a walkway. Mr. Bellows stated that they will coordinate the construction in order to have one walkway. Attorney Grover pointed out the additional glazing that had been added along the proposed location of the walkway to the waterfront. He stated that all of the suggestions made by the board were incorporated into the plans well. Attorney Grover added that the number of units decreased from 42 to 38 units from when the SRA saw the project first. Mr. Bellows stated that the suggestion to step the building back at the second story makes the building look smaller. • Mr.Jaquith commented that one of the things that was mentioned at the last meeting was not addressed,the mansard roof. Mr.Jaquith commented that the mansard roof is not good and he stated that aluminum will probably be used and if so, brick would be better even if it makes the building look bigger. Mr. Durand agreed that googg g at the mansard roof is not good. Attorney Grover stated that they would look at the material later in the process. Mr. Durand stated that it is not only the material that is not good,the form of a mansard roof is not desirable. Mr. Durand suggested that there be more glass at the top of the building. Mr. Greene stated that a mansard roof is not the only way to try to make the building smaller. Mr. Durand stated that there should be more stepping back and the building should be more delicate on the streetscape. Mr.Jaquith suggested using bay windows or something similar, but he stated that he understands the reason for the density. Mr. Durand stated that if they are going to have that density,they want some quality for the density. Mr. Greene suggested carrying the cornice to the back of the building and changing the mansard roof. He suggested a stronger cornice and reducing the size of the terrace. Mr. Durand commented that the building is boring, monotonous and if the density is going to work,there need to be some architectural quality to the building. Attorney Grover stated that Ms. Fortin's goal was to give the impression of a number of separate brownstones. Mr. Durand stated that the design should be even more like that and the sections of the building . should not all be the same, but have more character. Mr. Durand agreed that it was good that the facade was continued around the corner and that the building was stepped back at the second floor, but he stated that the mansard roof is not good. He suggested that they DRB Minutes February 25,2004 Page 4 of 7 • celebrate the top floor by adding more glass and create better views. Mr. Bellows asked if Mr. Durand was suggesting a flat roof. Mr.Durand replied that a flat roof would be fine if the top floor is celebrated. Mr. Durand also suggested that the windows on the street vary. Mr. Greene stated that he had no problem with celebrating the top floor as a penthouse. Mr.Martin commented that mansard roofs are all over Salem and that he likes mansard roofs, it is just a difference in opinion. Mr. Greene stated that the DRB is concerned with matters of design,which are subjective. Attorney Grover stated that they would like to get back to the SRA with any suggested changes. Mr. Durand stated that there are still big concerns about the design and they are not ready to give schematic approval. He continued stating that it is the DR-B's job to judge the design and they have stated that the mansard roof is not acceptable. Mr. Durand stated that they need to be more comfortable to give approval and they are not there yet. Mr. Bellows commented that they are finding the problem with the process is that they try to provide changes by guessing at what the board will like. Mr.Jaquith stated that they have provided plenty of comments for direction. Mr. Durand stated that the board made comments at the last meeting,which were not incorporated in the design. Attorney Grover commented that he thinks of schematic or conceptual design as pertaining • to the layout and more general things than what the concerns are. Mr. Greene stated that the board asked that the building be smaller or look smaller, and even though there have been good changes that has not happened. Mr. Bellows commented that they tried to incorporate the changes except for the mansard roof. The board members agreed that they are not trying to make the building smaller, but they are requiring that the building have architectural features to make up for the massiveness of the building. Mr.Jaquith added that they do not like the mansard roof, as stated in the last meeting. Ms.Hartford suggested that the board recommend the project to the SRA with specific comments and recommendations. Mr. Durand asked why they should go to the next step when they are not comfortable, and he stated that the problem is that when the SRA sees the visual,they will think that a mansard roof has been approved when it has not. Mr. Durand stated that he does not want anything to get lost in translation and he does not want to put the board in a corner in the future. Ms. Hartford suggested that they could hold another meeting before the SRA meeting on March 10 if the DRB members are willing. Mr.Jaquith stressed that the massing is not a problem with him, but how the mass is handled is an issue. Attorney Grover commented that he believes that this is where • schematic ends and final design begins,therefore if the board is comfortable with the mass, the details can be worked out. DRB Minutes Febntaty 25,2004 Page 5 of 7 • Mr. Greene stated that once the schematic design is approved,there will be no going back to change it. Ms.Hartford asked the group if they would be willing to meet prior to the next SRA meeting on March 10. Ms. Fortin and Mr.Martin stated that they would need at least two weeks to prepare for the meeting. Ms. Hartford reiterated that the SRA meets in two weeks on March 10. Mr.John Goff asked to be recognized from the audience and suggested that they drop the cornice line of the building like the YMCA building. Ms.Hartford suggested that they meet on Monday,March 8 or Tuesday,March 9. The board members and applicants stated that they would check their schedules and Ms. Hartford stated that she would coordinate with both parties to set up a meeting. 18 Crombie Street -Review of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment of home. Ms.Hartford introduced the proposal and the architect,Mr.John Goff. Ms. Hartford stated that the house at 18 Crombie was recently acquired by the SRA and through the RFP process, Habitat for Humanity was chosen as the designated developer to historically restore the house to be sold as an affordable home. Mr. Durand commented that the rehabilitation of 18 Crombie Street is an outstanding • project. Mr. Durand stated that he reviewed the project and he has very little criticism. Mr. Jaquith commented that the "L" shaped rear of the building does not look right. Mr. Goff stated that they will be removing the "L" shaped portion, which was added on in the 1900s. Mr. Greene inquired as to the date of the main structure. Mr. Goff stated that it is pre 1830s. Mr. Goff went on to explain the proposed restoration work,which includes replacing the asphalt roof with cedar shingles,restoring the clapboards, and replacing windows. Mr. Greene asked if the windows would have double glazing. Mr. Goff replied that single glazing with a storm window system is preferred, but it will depend on the budget. Mr. Greene stated that he did not have any architectural questions, but he did have a question about the site boundary and layout. Mr. Goff described the proposed landscaping and pointed out the property lines,which follow the newly erected fence around the property. Mr. Greene asked if the main entrance would be in the rear. Mr. Goff stated that the main entrance would remain at the front of the building. Mr. Goff stated that the back end of the building is difficult and they will be removing the odd windows and adding a porch. Mr. Goff stated that they would like to remove the existing asphalt in the backyard and recreate a lawn and garden, like the other houses in the area. Mr. Goff stated that they are also considering building a tool shed in the backyard in the future. • DRB Minutes February 25,2004 Page 6 of 7 • Mr. Greene stated that he would recommend the project with the caveat that the site improvements are not included in the approval. All members agreed and Ms. Hartford stated that the applicant will now go back to the SRA for schematic approval. 10 Federal Street—Review of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed three-story addition and roof to existing two-story building. Ms. Hartford introduced the proposal and Attorney George Atkins. Attorney Atkins introduced the architect for the project,Mr. Peter Gehring. Attorney Atkins stated that the goal of the project is to create new,modern office space and bid for the RFP fro the State to house the District Attorney's office. Attorney Atkins stated that the DA will require approximately 25,000 square feet of office space,therefore,the proposal is to construct three additional stories on top of the existing two-story structure. Mr. Durand inquired as to whether the project depends whether they get the DA's office. Attorney Atkins stated that the project does not rely entirely on that outcome, but it does affect it. Mr. Durand stated that he is currently representing another property owner in bidding for the DA's contract, so he would feel more comfortable if he recused himself. Mr. Durand took a seat in the audience. Mr. Gehring explained the proposal, which includes two additional stories of brick with windows matching the existing, cast stone window sills, and a third floor of an external • finish system. Mr. Gehring explained that they are looking at a hydraulic elevator system, which would decrease the size of the elevator back on the roof. Mr. Gehring stated that the roof will be metal, probably a green color like that of the Museum Place Mall and the trim will match the limestone below it. Mr. Greene asked if they will be approximating the brick to match the existing. Mr. Gehring stated that they would and that they have the beltcourse to break it up. Mr. Gehring stated that the height to the top of the main roof is sixty-five feet. Mr.Jaquith asked if the windows are double hung windows. Mr. Gehring stated that they would be. Mr. Greene inquired as to the proposed site improvements and landscaping. Mr. Gehring stated that there is some existing landscaping and they do not have a specific landscape plan at this time, but there is a yard that wraps around two sides of the building. Mr. Greene stated that the building, being in an urban context, is an isolated mass with little landscaping opportunities to bring the building down to the pedestrian level, therefore, he recommended larger trees to bring the scale down. Mr. Greene inquired as to the proposed parking layout and suggested that if they construct a deck of parking under the existing parking, they could do more landscaping. Mr. Greene . commented that the accessibility to the site is tremendous. DRB Minutes Febuary 25,2004 Page 7 of 7 The board members agreed to recommend the schematic design with the caveat that site improvements, including a parking plan, is not included and with the comments that the metal roof may not be the best material and that substantial landscaping is suggested. Mr. Greene commented that the location is a good edge of the commercial district and the City of Salem should use its resources to create a plan for the area. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned • • 'e� ,, Salem ® Redevelopment Authority DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Meeting Agenda January 28, 2004 - 6:00pm 120 Washington Street,Third Floor Conference Room Roll Call: Paul Durand Chris Green David Jaquith Fred Johnson Minutes Review of minutes from the November 19, 2003 meeting. • Project list 1. Cafe Kushco (128 Washington Street) - Review of proposed signage. 2. Coastal Gas Station Redevelopment (289 Derby Street) -Review of Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the current Coastal Gas Station. 3. Salem Five Bank (One Salem Green) -Review of Final Design Plans for the proposed pedestrian bridge linking buildings at One Salem Green and Essex Street. • 120 Washington Street • Salem, Massachusetts 01970 • (978) 745-9595, Ext 311 • Fax (978) 740-0404 DRB Mms January 28,2004 Page 1 of 6 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD •' MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 28, 2004 A regular meeting of the Salem Design Review Board (DRB) was held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday,January 28, 2004 at 6:OOpm. Members Paul Durand, Chris Greene and David Jaquith were present. Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Valerie Gingrich,Clerk,were also present. Minutes Minutes from the November 19, 2003 meeting were reviewed and approved. Project list Cafe Kushco (128 Washington Street) -Review of proposed signage. The applicant, Mr. Mark Stafford, described the signage proposal, which includes the installation of two signs along Washington Street that would cover the entire signboard. The proposed signs will have white lettering on a red background. The materials will be the same as what was there before. • Mr. Durand commented that the sign does not work well with the blue facade. Mr. Stafford stated that he went with the red sign because the previous signs in this location have been red. Mr. Greene commented that other facades on the street are both muted colors and the blue does not fit in with the rest of the building. Mr.Durand inquired as to the colors of the interior of the cafe. Mr. Stafford stated that they changed the colors to white and a dull yellow. Mr. Greene stated that the lettering is fine and it has a nice European flare to it, but the bright white and bright as a warmer red and a duller white. The � red do not fit as nicely bright colors would look too much like a flag. Mr. Greene asked if the sign would be painted. Mr. Stafford stated that the sign is plastic with white adhesive letters. Mr. Greene asked if there were other colors of plastic he would be willing to use. Mr. Stafford replied that he was just trying to keep the sign the same as what was there previously. He stated that he doesn't necessarily like the colors and he would be willing to do something different. Mr. Stafford stated that he liked the black and gold sign nem door. Mr. Greene asked Mr. Stafford if he already has the sign. Mr. Stafford responded that the sign has been ordered. He stated that he was going with the same type of sign that was there before just to be safe, but he likes the sign nem door. • DRB Minutes January 28,2004 Page 2 of 6 • The members of the DRB agreed that a black sign with gold lettering would work better and it is a standard Salem sign. Mr. Durand stated that a black sign would make the blue facade better, but if possible,the blue fagade should be changed as well. Mr. Greene stated that if the applicant wanted to paint the blue a different color,they would consider that. Mr. Stafford inquired about the timing of approval because they are scheduled to open next week. He stated that he is willing to what the DRB recommends, but he already has the sign made. Mr. Stafford stated that he wanted to do something different like paint the sign onto the building,but he went with what was approved before. Mr. Durand stated that he wants the sign and facade to be attractive so that it is successful. Ms. Hartford stated that the Main Streets Program has a matching grant program for storefront improvements, which provides a 1 to 1 match for improvements up to $2,500. She further stated that she would have the Downtown Program Manager, Deborah Greel, stop in to talk with Mr. Stafford tomorrow or Friday. Mr. Greene suggested using the sign as a temporary sign until the final sign can be designed and approved. Ms. Hartford stated that a temporary sign is a sign hung in the window for 15 days and it does not required approval. The board members agreed that the sign can be hung in the window as a temporary sign and they will look forward to a proposal for a permanent sign and storefront improvements next month. • Coastal Gas Station Redevelopment(289 Derby Street)—Review of Schematic Design Plans for the redevelopment of the current Coastal Gas Station. Ms. Hartford introduced the project and explained that they had been to the SRA in October. Ms. Hartford explained that the DRB can recommend the project back to the SRA tonight for schematic approval, or they can continue their review of the project until the next meeting. Mr. Durand inquired as to the definition of "schematic." Ms. Hartford explained that schematic design review is focused on the preliminary design, layout, rough sketches, and use, rather than the final building materials and construction plans. She noted that she did not want the Board to get too focused on the details of the project but rather focus on the overall design and layout. Attorney Scott Grover introduced the applicant, Mr. George Bellows, and the designer, Brigitte Fortin of Martin Construction. Attorney Grover stated that they had been referred to the DRB by the SRA in October. He stated that since the SRA meeting, they have been working with the Planning Department to respond to concerns about massing and scale. Attorney Grover gave an overview of the proposal, which includes a mixed-use residential and retail structure with parking onsite. He explained that Chapter 91 requirements pose a • lot of limitations of what can be done on the site,but Ms. Fortin will say more on that later. r DRB Minutes January 28,2004 Page 3 of 6 • The project will have retail on the first floor along with the Harbor walk and open space, and residential condominium amts on the upper. floors. Attorney Grover stated that the project has been designed in accordance with local zoning and will not require any variances. Attorney Grover explained that in addition to the SRA, the project would be subject to site plan review by the Planning Board, Harbor Plan compliance, and approval by the Conservation Commission. Ms. Fortin presented the site plan and elevations to the board. She explained the changes that came out of meeting with the Planning Department, which include keeping the first floor on the street, but pushing the upper mass of the building back from the street. Ms. Fortin presented a view of the different building elevations along Derby Street for a perspective of the heights of surrounding buildings. Mr. Greene inquired as to how many of the adjacent buildings have second stories. Ms. Fortin and members of the board agreed that the adjacent buildings have false fronts with just one story. Attorney Grover stated that the concern of creating a wall along the street was the reason that they stepped the building back on the upper floors. Mr. Greene inquired as to whether the setback of the property line is the same for the entire width of the property. Ms. Fortin stated that the building is now aligning with the neighbor. Mr. Greene asked what the width of the sidewalk is in front of the building. Ms. Fortin stated that she did not know exactly. Mr. Greene asked if the site plan is to scale. Ms. Fortin replied that it is. Mr. Greene stated that the sidewalk is about ten or twelve feet wide. • Ms. Fortin described the proposed access to the Harbor Walk,which would be shared with the neighboring Hess Gas Station. Mr. Durand asked if Hess has constructed the Harbor Walk yet. Ms. Fortin responded that they have not. Mr. Durand stated that they should include the approved Hess portion of the access way to make the two portions work together. Mr. Greene asked if the retail space would extend all the way back to the rear of the building. Ms. Fortin stated that the rear of the first floor would be a community space for residents, such as an exercise room. Mr. Greene asked Ms. Fortin to describe the access to the basement. Ms. Fortin explained that parking would be located in a loop under the building. Mr. Greene asked how much soil would be placed on top of the roof of the garage. Ms. Fortin stated that the landscaping will be a raised bed of approximately ten feet of soil, but the garage has not been fully designed at this time, so the details are not known. Mr. Durand asked if they have a parking layout at this time. Ms. Fortin responded that they do not. Mr. Greene asked if the balconies are accessible. Ms. Fortin responded that they are. Mr. Greene asked if the first floor is proposed as an arcade. Ms. Fortin stated that the building comes out to the street. • DRB Mmmu January zs,2004 Page 4 of 6 • Mr. Greene stated that the main issue is the way the building meets the street and the Planning Department was right to discuss that further with you. The changes made are in the right direction, but are not quite enough. He stated that it is important to try to create a unified streetscape, and the line that carries across the existing adjacent buildings (one-story with a false front) should be carried across to this site. The mass of the building should be stepped back further. Mr. Greene suggested having one story of residential units above the first floor retail and then moving the rest of the building back. Mr. Durand agreed with Mr. Greene on the issue of massing and stepping the building back further. Mr. Durand stated that the building is very boxy, the mansard roof has never been successful, and the sixty-foot height is questionable due to the requirements of the first floor retail space. Mr. Durand stated that he would expect that they would be pushing closer to seventy feet rather than sixty. Mr. Durand commented that when he looked at the perspective from the street, the vanishing points do not add up. Mr. Durand commented that the building is pushing seventy feet and it is massive. He further stated that the streetscape needs to be dealt with. Mr. Durand stated that he has many issues with the proposal. It reminds him of "The Essex" on the Essex Street pedestrian mall because the retail spaces are not very transparent and in the case of The Essex, they struggle. Mr. Durand stated that the retail aspect needs more attention and cannot be an after thought. Mr. Durand commented that from his experience with Chapter 91, they might not be able to do as much private courtyard as shown in the proposal. • Mr. Greene stated that they might want to have the private courtyard space off of the community room. Attorney Grover stated that the main struggle is the density that they must achieve due to the cost of the land. He stated that the property is operating very well as a gas station and therefore,the purchase price reflects that. Mr.Jaquith explained that the problem is not with the number of units. He continued that the mansard tops have never been successful and the density and the massing are a concern. Mr. a uith J q commented that they should be careful with public space because it is rarely used. He stated that signage must be thought out very early in the process and the retail should be the first priority rather than an afterthought. Mr. Greene suggested that they bring the stepped back design of the street level around the building with the high part of the building away from the street in the center. Mr. Durand inquired as to the material proposed for the street level. Ms.Fortin stated that it would probably be some kind of precast concrete. Mr. Durand asked about the roofing material. Ms. Fortin stated that they are not sure what the material will be. Mr. Durand asked for floor plans and scaled drawings. Mr. Greene explained the benefit of coming to the DRB early in the design process, being • that the applicant gets direction from the board prior to final design. f DRB Minutes Jmuzy zs,zooa Page 5 of 6 • Mr. Durand commented that the facade needs to be worked with so that the building does not appear so massive. He explained that he does not want the building to be the backstop to the South River. Mr. Durand stated that the goal should be to create more views to the South River rather than taking them away. Mr. Durand stated that Derby Street is becoming a great street with all of the development going on and this project should add to that. Mr. Durand asked if the retail units would be condos. Attorney Grover stated that they would. Attorney Grover explained that the site is difficult because Chapter 91 requires a certain distance from the water and therefore the building has to sit on a limited amount of space. Mr. Durand agreed that the site is challenging, but he added that it does not allow for the streetscape to be destroyed. Mr. Durand stated that it takes a lot of work to balance the streetscape with the scale and massing, but it can be done. He stated that a skilled architect could take the site and create a solution. Mr.Jaquith inquired as to the developer's schedule. Attorney Grover stated that they will make changes and return to the board next month. Mr.Jaquith stated that they will need to come back with a solution to the massing and an alternative to the mansard roof. Ms. Fortin explained that the use of mansard roofs in other locations in the City is not reflective of what the proposed roof will look like. The board members agreed that mansard roofs are rarely used successfully. Mr. Greene stated that he understands the density issue, but he never expected to see such a • large building on this site. The size of the building and the streetscape are concerns. Attorney Grover stated that the only way this site will be developed is if it is according to the proposed density. He stated that if a building of this scale doesn't get developed here,it will never be developed, and that is just the economic reality of the situation. Attorney Grover stated that they will take the comments and suggestions, but he doesn't want to give anyone the wrong impression that it will change dramatically. Mr. Greene stated that the SRA balances economics with design, but the role of the DRB is purely design recommendations, and according to that,the proposed building is too big. He stated that if the proposal is not changed to at least look smaller, if not be smaller, he will have serious concerns about the project. Mr. Greene stated that if it remains a gas station this time around, then there will be other opportunities to develop it at another time, but once the building is built it will remain there. Mr. Greene complimented the vision of the project, but stated that the vision is not entirely appropriate for this site. Attorney Grover stated that they will take a look at the suggestions and return to the board next month. Salem Five Bank (One Salem Green)—Review of Final Design Plans for the proposed pedestrian bridge linking buildings at One Salem Green and Essex Street. • Mr. Durand excused himself from the discussion due to a conflict of interest. DRB Minn Jct uary28,2004 Page 6 of 6 • Attorney George Atkins gave a review of the process thus far and stated that they are pending Planning Board approval. They will return to the SRA for final approval after receiving approval from the DRB. Mr. Mark Meche reviewed the proposal to construct a bridge between the two buildings. Mr.Meche stated that the bridge would connect the second and third floors of the buildings. A set of columns will spring out of the existing hole. The bridge will have a pitch because the two buildings are not level. The bridge will hand off of the One Salem Green frame. Mr. Meche stated that the lighting would be a soft glow,which will improve the security of the parking lot. The bridge is a curtain wall system and will have a metal roof. The height of the bridge is 12 feet and 8 'h inches. Mr. Greene asked Mr, Meche to explain the details of the column extensions. Mr. Meche clarified the details of the materials and design. Mr. Meche stated that they will be installing snow stops on the roofs to stop snow from falling below. Mr.Jaquith asked that width of the bridge. Ms.Amy Powers stated that it is eleven feet. Mr. Greene asked if the bridge has gutters. Mr. Meche explained the drainage system of downspouts and drainage pipes to the existing catch basin. Mr. Greene inquired as to whether there is any landscaping involved in the proposal. Mr. Meche replied that the trees shown are existing trees. The DRB recommended the approval of the project, as submitted,to the SRA. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned •