Loading...
2017-05-10 SRA MinutesSRA May 10, 2017 Page 1 of 9 City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board or Committee: Redevelopment Authority, Regular Meeting Date and Time: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 6:00 pm Meeting Location: 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Conference Room Members Present: Chairperson Grace Harrington, David Guarino, Christine Madore, Dean Rubin, Russell Vickers Members Absent: None Others Present: Tom Daniel – SRA Executive Director and Director of Planning and Community Development, Andrew Shapiro – Economic Development Planner Recorder: Colleen Anderson Chairperson Grace Harrington calls the meeting to order. Roll call was taken. New / Old Business Executive Directors Report: Executive Director Tom Daniel welcomed new Members David Guarino and Dean Rubin. He noted that there will be an effort to introduce other stakeholder groups from downtown Salem into future SRA meetings. Patti Kelleher, Preservation Planner, is using a survey and planning grant from the state to review downtown historic assets. She and a consultant will join the SRA in July or August to present their findings. May is National Historic Preservation Month, and this is the first time Salem will be celebrating it. A kick-off breakfast was held for elected officials in early May, a workshop took place on the 6th, and a second workshop will be held on the 16th; all are welcome to attend. Daniel stated that the City wide visioning project called “Imagine Salem” ended its engagement process at the end of April. Analysis will be compiled and a draft report will be available in early summer. The report will allow the City to see what existing city-wide visions are shared, which are new, to find opportunities for the City to grow, and new goals to set for 2026. Daniel stated that a designer has been selected for the 289 Derby Street, the “carnival lot” that the City acquired at the end of 2016 - Clare Batchelor of CBA Landscape Architects of Cambridge, MA. Their sub- consultants, architect and urban space designer Claudia Paraschiv of Studio Full, and John Andrews of Creative Salem, will be their local public engagement leads. Public engagement activities are scheduled to take place five Wednesday’s in a row from May 24th to June 21st from 5-8PM on the site to discuss future plans for the site. DRB and SRA members are encouraged to join all public engagements, especially after CBA’s June 14th presentation at the SRA meeting. Daniel stated that the Dodge Street hotel project is still on-going despite rumors that the hotel was pulling out of the project. Some issues still need to be sorted out with respect to the design, but they are eager to get underway. Shapiro added that the hotel design has been approved by the DRB and any changes in the design will come before both the DRB and SRA for final approval. The mixed-use portion has been reviewed and approved by the DRB and SRA. Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review 1. 21 Church Street Salem (National Grid): Discussion and vote on installation of “switchgear’ equipment a. Vote to approve the SRA Chair to execute an easement between the SRA, Parking Board, and National Grid in regards to the installation of the “switchgear” at 21 Church Street. Daniel Cameron of National Grid was present to discuss the proposed new switchgear project. Cameron stated that above ground switching covered by a green box: 5 feet 7 inches wide x 3 feet 8 inches high x 5 feet 1 inch deep, will be placed on the sidewalk and a manhole is proposed within the 27 foot wide handicap parking space next to it. He, several DRB members, and the Parking Commission had a meeting on site on February 16th to address their design concerns. No parking will be affected, other than during the 2-3 days it will take to construct the manhole that will be visible within the parking space. The full switchgear installation complete with wiring will take 2-3 weeks. The switchgear box and space in front of the wall will be screened as the DRB suggested. National Grid, will try to install an ADA compliant ramp at the location of the handicap parking spaces, in addition to the existing ramp at the opposite end of the parking lot. Cameron noted that along with SRA approval, the easement will need to be signed by an appropriate member of the SRA. Shapiro noted that the original design of occupying an entire handicapped parking space has been reduced to adding a manhole to the existing parking space and to keep the landscaped area the same size, and to utilize new plantings as additional screening. The SRA chair would need to sign off on the easement that has been reviewed by the City Solicitor. The Director of Parking and Transportation, Matthew Smith, will work with National Grid on this project. Madore noted that National Grid should be aware of the frequent use of that handicapped space. Cameron replied that they will work with the Parking Commission on the best way to handle the excavation needed to add the new manhole. The work could also be done over the weekend and they will contact the neighboring condominium of the proposed work as well. With 27 feet of handicap parking, 2 of the 3 spaces will be occupiable. Cameron added that any future work with the switchgear will not disturb the parking. Madore and Guarino asked if screening was necessary. Shapiro replied that the DRB requested screening with arborvitaes and that it be reviewed before installation. Madore asked if the switchgear could be painted if the screening is not favorable. Cameron replied they could work with City regarding a design as long as it doesn’t impact its use. Shapiro added that in the past, only City owned traffic control boxes have been painted. Madore: Motion to approve installation of “switchgear” equipment as recommended by the DRB. Seconded by: Guarino. Passes 5-0. Vickers: Motion to authorize the Chair to execute an easement between the SRA, Parking Board, and National Grid in regards to the installation of the “switchgear” at 21 Church Street. Seconded by: Madore. Passes 5-0. 2. Town House Square (Town Pump Fountain): Discussion and vote on staining of fountain base. Andrew Shapiro of the Planning Department was present to discuss the project. Shapiro stated that the accumulation of dirt on the white cast in place concrete fountain base has caused maintenance concerns. Landworks has been contacted regarding having the sub-contractor Durastone stain the existing base and clean the bronze reliefs. Shapiro noted that the DRB members were given multiple brown and grey color options. They selected color CL 9505 and allowed Landworks to select any dilution between 3-1 or 15-1, at their discretion in the field. The stain would be weather resistant and would be installed by the same contractor that installed the concrete base. Is the SRA on board with the DRB’s color selections and have the Contractor select the appropriate color? Guarino asked how often the base is cleaned. Shapiro replied that it gets power-washed once a month at the most but that will occur less after the darker stain is applied. J. Michael Sullivan, DRB board member, added that the darker will also improve the design because white concrete gets dirty so easily when it is that close to where people walk and the grey stain will be more historically appropriate. Guarino asked how often the new stain will need to be stained. Shapiro replied that Landworks predicts the base needing to be stained every 5 years. Madore asked if the bronze reliefs would also be cleaned. Shapiro replied yes, but they will be done separately so the cleaning solutions don’t accidentally mix and cause any further discoloration to the bronze reliefs. The order of the work will need to be coordinated. Rubin: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB. Seconded by: Vickers. Passes 5-0. 3. Corners of Federal Street & Washington Street and Front Street & Washington Street: Discussion and vote on proposed installation of Zagster bike share hubs. Erin Schaeffer of the Planning Department and Matthew Smith, Director of Traffic and Parking have been working on the Zagster bike share project. Erin Schaeffer was present to discuss the project. Daniel stated that two locations are proposed within the Urban Renewal area but many more are proposed. The initial kick-off will be May 16, 2017. Schaeffer stated that Zagster will replace the Salem Spins program. The Traffic and Parking Department and Bicycle Advisory Committee have reviewed and approved all of the proposed locations. The hubs are the size of a parking space and work best when placed near other forms of transportation and destinations. Zagster will also rebalance the bikes once a week. The first location is at the corner of Federal & Washington Streets, near but not at the MBTA garage because the MBTA did not respond to their requests. The hub will be placed on the street and this location will provide safe crossings and travel in any direction once the bicycle lanes are installed in the fall along Washington Street. Schaeffer stated that the Front & Washington Street location was selected due to its proximity to central businesses that serve both tourists and residents. Bikes are unlocked using a cell phone and cell phone usage was tested the various locations. A hub would not have worked within the MBTA garage since it has has poor reception. Possible conflicts with scheduled events around the city, the trolley tours, etc. were also factored in when selecting the two downtown locations. This highly visible location will have the hub placed on a bump out on the sidewalk. The hub and bicycles being removed and reconnected, will not conflict with the sidewalk, crosswalk, or the proposed public art installation. Madore hopes this will be popular and asked how many bikes fit into a hub, and if an expansion is in the works. Schaeffer replied 8 bikes will fit in each hub, each hub will have 6, and there are no plans to expand yet. The setup can be replicated and expanded easily if the number of bikes outnumbers the hub slots, however; additional funding will be necessary for any expansion. Daniel noted that the bicycles are tracked so any issued can be monitored and handled appropriately. If alternate locations are desired or the hubs need to be moved this project will need to come before the SRA again. Rubin stated that the two locations seem very close together especially for people they hope will ride one to the MBTA station and for tourists, the hubs are not near attractions. Schaeffer replied that Zagster's data is not very specific at this point but the locations will be closely monitored. Other Zagster and Hubway stations can be a block apart, but the locations aren’t permanent and can be relocated. Guarino stated that he is in favor of the idea but was unsure of why Federal Street was a proposed location and if the neighboring residences, businesses, or the church had any concerns with it. Schaeffer replied mainly for visibility and safety of bike traffic crossing the intersection of Bridge and Washington Streets. No neighbors have voiced any concerns with the Federal Street location. Madore asked why there weren’t more locations and how will it be funded. Schaeffer replied that 28 possible locations have been identified based on population, but the issue is funding related. Daniel added that they hope to have 10 by the end of the summer. Madore noted that the Planning Board be mindful of commuter neighborhoods that could benefit from these hubs, especially when traveling to the MBTA station. Schaeffer noted that they have been reaching out for additional sponsorships, in addition to their Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts sponsor. Madore asked how the sponsors will be advertised and if a sponsor could be turned down. Schaeffer replied that the standard advertisement package includes; on the bike, on the hub, and on the bike basket. Daniel added that the sponsors will be evaluated on a case by case basis. Rubin noted that more sites will be needed to properly evaluate how the system is working. Madore stated that a bicyclist turning off Federal Street isn’t very safe and temporary signage could be placed to alert drivers. Schaeffer noted that signage isn’t always helpful, however; striping or a bump-out with plants could be considered to make the site more visible. Rubin: Motion to approve the two sites. Seconded by: Guarino. Passes 5-0. 4. Corner of Washington and Front Street: Discussion and vote on proposed public art installation. J. Michael Sullivan, a member of the Public Art Commission, was present to discuss the project. Sullivan stated that the Commission will fund 3 art projects this year for 6 weeks each during the summer, one being an audio project, one will be a mural over the old Salem train tracks, and the third is a sculpture at the corner of Washington and Front Street, by an artist that has created wood structures all over the country. This piece is made of 2x4’s that are pieced together to provide a 1- 1/2” space between each of the wood members, and it will be placed next to the Zagster hub. Shapiro noted that the SRA is voting on location only and that Sullivan is also on the DRB. Rubin stated that he is concerned with the safety of children that might play on the proposed installation and the possible risk and liability. Sullivan replied that interaction is anticipated and the spacing between the wood members meets code by being less than 4” wide. Madore asked if this installation is meant to encourage interaction is this the best location for that, next to the Zagster station and one of the busiest streets in Salem. Sullivan replied that they want it to be in a prominent area and the hope is that it will draw people to Artists’ Row. Daniel added that sculptures have been placed in this location in the past. Sullivan noted that installation would occur in May. Guarino stated that there is a discrepancy between the original dimensions of the art installation in the letter (12’Lx12’Wx12’H) from what is proposed (17’Lx11’Wx10’H). Shapiro asked if the artist will construct it to fit the field conditions. Sullivan replied yes, it can be a condition, and all clearance requirements will be checked during construction. Shapiro noted that the Building Department wouldn’t allow an installation that doesn’t meet code. Madore asked if there would be signage along with it. Shapiro replied that Public Art Planner Deborah Greel will install signage. Guarino: Motion to approve the art installation. Seconded by: Madore. Passes 5-0. 5. 125 Washington Street (Ledger): Discussion and vote on proposed café permit / outdoor seating area and installation of trash enclosure and ventilation ducts. Brett Danahy from Ledger was present to discuss the proposed signage, seating, trash enclosure, and ventilation ducts. Shapiro stated that the signage, custom logo will be placed on the existing clock, and has been approved by Tom Daniel through streamlined signage process. The rear planter would be demolished and a dumpster and recycling bin enclosure would be added. The dumpster was approved without screening for the time being. The chain-link fence with privacy slats originally submitted has been eliminated and the DBR has approved a 90 day grace period for Ledger to design, fund, and receive DRB approval to install an enclosure around the dumpsters in the back alley and an enclosure around the HVAC units on the rear entry roof. The vents leading from the rear HVAC units up to the roof will be painted matte black. Danahy stated that handicapped accessibility is also a concern at the rear entry so they will look into that as well. Madore asked if the planter and tree removal will engage the Lorax task force. Shapiro replied that it is unknown if there is a rule about removing a tree on your own property. Madore asked if the rear light pole will remain. Danahy replied that the landlord has approved removing it since there is no light fixture attached to it and it will be in the way for trash removal. Daniel asked if the wood storage would be open or within in the trash enclosure. Danahy replied that they hope to designate a space for wood within the enclosure, but for now, it will be in the open. Madore asked for more information on how the rear ventilation units were installed without either DRB or SRA approval. Shapiro replied that the Building Department issued a Building Permit but did not know there were outstanding exterior items that had not yet been approved. When this happens the DRB will conduct a retroactive review and in this instance they have previously reviewed this application and were familiar with the item in question and their only recommendation was to paint it. Guarino asked how the outdoor seating would be changed. Danahy replied that the tables will be custom mahogany tops on steel bases and will have 24” x 30”. The umbrella material and shape has changed and they will be higher and with no signage. Madore asked if there were plans to cover the windows with vinyl decals or privacy screens. Danahy replied there will be curtains at the private dining room windows only. Chair Harrington opens public comment. Councilor Tom Furey, Salem Councilor-At-Large. Councilor Furey stated that he is excited about this new restaurant coming to Salem and thanked Danahy and his team for investing in Salem. Erik Sayce, co-owner of Good Night Fatty. Will also have a storefront in Higginson Square, and are in favor of Ledger’s proposal and activating the alleyway, which will be used by their customers on Friday and Saturday nights. Chair Harrington closes public comment. Rubin stated that it will make more sense to add a light fixture to that existing pole rather than take it down for security reasons, since there will be a business open late in the alleyway now. Madore stated that the public alleyways are a neglected space that should be activated as Opus has done. Danahy noted that they have approached someone about adding some public art to the right side alleyway to help eliminate the loitering. Vickers: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB. Seconded by: Guarino. Passes 5-0. New / Old Business 6. 65 Washington Street (Former Salem District Court Property): Presentation by Diamond Sinacori on status of the project. Merrill Diamond of Diamond Sinacori, and Steve Tice and Julia Sauer of Tice Design Associates, were present to discuss the proposed project. Daniel stated that this project was before the SRA in January and was referred to the DRB. It is before the SRA again because the design has evolved and because this project was discussed before the City Council as part of the Housing Development Incentive Zone approval process. The City Council approved the HDIP Zone on April 16th and it has been submitted to the DHCD for approval, hopefully by the end of May. That zone consisted of 5 properties, however; Tabernacle Church on the corner of Washington and Federal Streets asked to be added to the zone, because they are going through their own visioning process, extending the zone to 6 total properties. The Tax Increment Exemption Agreement, specific to the District Court project, will be submitted to the Council in the future. Shapiro stated that in 2015 the Governor signed legislation allowing for conveyance of the court property to the SRA to allow it to seek redevelopment proposals. The Planning Department and SRA developed an RFP to which there were 3 responses and Diamond Sinacori was selected. The project is similar to the original proposed project; parking on site, retail/restaurant space, 60+ condominium units, but there have been some minor changes as would be anticipated of any project going through a design development process. The Planning Department and DCAMM have been in regular contact with each other on a monthly basis regarding the project. The project came before the SRA in January seeking approval to begin the Design Development process. The City Council recently approved the HDIP, so the project is before the SRA now to explain the evolution of the project, and it will be before the DRB later the month. Daniel noted that no vote is needed this evening and that the presentation is only informational. Diamond stated that the plans and some details have been refined to ensure that the building looks as if it belongs in Salem by drawing on neighboring elements. The concerns of the SRA and DRB have been addressed and some changes have been made, however; there is more work to be done. The first floor retail now has awnings and iron fretwork grid at the transom level to reflect more of what is seen at neighboring storefronts. As a result of City Council parking concerns, the parking is now 1 to 1 and self-operated vehicle lifts for units with two vehicles, which could give the building a parking capacity of closer to 1.5 to 1 or higher ratio. The unit mix is now 2/3 – 2 bedrooms and 1/3 – 1 bedroom, with 5-3 bedroom units. Tise stated that they are trying to keep the project financially feasible and reusing the existing lower level and parking area is a major contributing factor. Access to the 1st floor must be maintained since the first floor is 2’ above grade. The parking space total is now 61 and the revisions include an additional 6 tandem parking spaces and vehicle lifts because of the proposed vertical clearance. Some spaces are full size, others are for EV (electric vehicles), and the remaining for compact vehicles, which the Planning Board will review. Tise noted that the structure is 6 stories, with a base, the intermediate floors are a mix of wood paneling and brick, and the top penthouse units have much more glass with small balconies. On both Washington and Church Streets the glazing is set back approximately 5 feet to allow for two 24’ long exterior ramps to reach the first floor level. The main entry off of Washington Street is now a two story entry Lobby. The entrance to the two level parking is off of Federal Street with an interior ramp that leads up to the first floor 2’ above grade. Some of the interior space at the Basement level will need to be used for an interior Elevator Lobby. Bike storage has also been added within the Garage. A display window is placed next to the base of the Church Street ramp to continue the retail treatment and the remaining first floor is approximately 2,800 SF of retail that could be divided into two units. The second floor will consist of community spaces; roof terrace, library with fireplace, exercise room, and a unisex toilet. The bays on the intermediate floors become balconies at the penthouse units and will be somewhat solid for privacy, or possibly perforated laser cut metal panels to match the panels/artwork proposed at the first floor Garage façade along Federal Street. A deep cornice with up-lighting and recessed granite block with a brass nautical star have been placed as a proposed detail in the façade. Rubin asked what concerns the DRB had with the ramps. Tise replied that they preferred that all of the storefront glass be at the street line, but ramps are needed to maintain the existing first floor level. Chair Harrington asked if there was a view of the Federal Street façade seen from the MTBA garage. Tise replied no but it will be similar to the Church Street façade; the glass at the penthouse level returns approximately 30 feet along Federal Street and metal panels are proposed at the exterior recesses of the first floor Garage level. Diamond added that images of that façade will be presented at the next DRB meeting and that revised material can also be sent to the SRA. Tise noted that the material change was to conceal the parking, which was the greater necessity than continuing the commercial spaces. Madore urged them to take a closer look at the design of the first floor and the prominent view from the MBTA train station down Washington Street. Making that corner/façade interesting shouldn’t rely on public art. Guarino agrees. Diamond replied that both the base plane and Federal Street façade are areas still being studied. Daniel noted that Deborah Greel, Public Art Planner, will work with them regarding having the metal panels on the façade as the proposed artwork. Daniel asked if the façade that is not brick will be wood panels. Diamond replied that the paneling is a product called longboard, a horizontal aluminum panel with the simulated look of wood. It is currently a placeholder while other façade options are being considered. Madore noted that as a gateway building the envelope should be pushed a bit more. Diamond agrees. Madore asked if the bicycle access will also be through the Garage and up to the upper parking level. Tise replied bicyclists will have access through the Garage, ramp and elevator. Shapiro agreed that the envelope should continue to be pushed regarding the design and asked if the retail will be leased or condo. Diamond replied that no decision has been made, but condominium space would be preferred. Daniel added that the treatment of the recessed ramps is very important and a possible way to incorporate them within the premises should be considered. Chair Harrington opens public comment. Councilor Tom Furey, Salem Councilor-At-Large, 36 Dunlap Street. Councilor Furey stated that he is in favor of and excited about this project and commend them on their collaborative efforts. Chair Harrington closes public comment. 7. 32-50 Federal Street (Superior Court and County Commissioners Building): Update on status. Daniel stated that a walk-thru of the buildings will be conducted on May 11 at 3PM, where several members of the SRA, Historical Commission, City Councilors, Planning Staff, Salem Partnership Chair, Stantec Engineers, and DCAMM will be present. A meeting was held in March with the Kristen Lepore (Secretary of Administration & Finance), Commissioner Gladstone (Head of DCAMM), First Assistant Secretary of the Commonwealth, General Council from the Secretary of the Commonwealth, John O’Brien (Essex South Registrar of Deeds), Assistant Registrar, Beth Debski (Executive Director of the Salem Partnership), Mayor Driscoll, Dominick Pangallo (Chief of Staff at Office of the Mayor), Senator Lovely, Representative Tucker, Andrew Shapiro and himself. The buildings and legislation were discussed. Everyone acknowledges the significance of saving and actively using these properties, however; Registrar O’Brien continued to not be in support of moving the Registry of Deeds to the Superior Court Building, because the spaces identified in the legislation do not add up to square footage in the legislation and it doesn’t meet their space needs. O’Brien’s assertions were determined to be accurate after the meeting. Under the current legislation the Registry of Deeds must move into these buildings. The buildings are currently connected with a shared elevator and dividing the buildings would require a second elevator be added, along with separating the utilities. The buildings are currently maintained and insured by the State. Daniel stated that Secretary Lepore agreed to fund an update of DCAMM’s out- of-date feasibility study and will take into consideration the relocation of the Registry of Deeds to this new location. Commissioner Gladstone assigned Gail Rosenberg to manage this project. A third market feasibility study of the remaining space as office vs. commercial will be conducted. No dollar amount has been determined for the Commonwealth to pay for the space. Vickers noted that the payment amount is annually at the discretion of the Secretary of State and a more definitive payment would need to be agreed upon. Daniel stated that the use of Historic Tax Credits will be looked into but those are typically for leased spaces not owned. A lease to own agreement could be implemented. DCAMM has worked with the Registry of Deeds to create a space needs program which can be updated. A neighboring parking lot and the MBTA garage, which wasn’t in place when the previous study was done, could be a factor in the analysis. Daniel noted that an updated feasibility study could lead to proceeding with a revised RFP for both buildings or opening up dialog to amend the legislation. Drew Leff of Stantec will conduct the feasibility study, which will take approximately 8 weeks. Shapiro added that 20-24,000 SF is needed for the Registry of Deeds, which leaves very little left over in the rest of the Superior Court property for other uses. Chair Harrington stated that if the Registry needs almost the entire building than it should be a state bonded project because this project’s current path does not benefit the SRA. Daniel stated that the buildings’ heat will remain on, DCAMM will board up the windows, the water infiltration/leaking issues will be addressed, and the property will be fenced off to keep it secure. It could take 2 years or more before a tenant is able to move into the building. Minutes The minutes from the February 8, 2017 regular meeting were reviewed. Chair Harrington: Motion to approve the minutes. Seconded by: Madore. Passes 5-0. Adjournment Madore: Motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by: Harrington. Meeting is adjourned at 9:00PM. Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A §18-25 and City Ordinance Sections 2-028 through 2-2033.