Loading...
2005-05-17 SRA MinutesSRA Minutes May 17, 2005 Page 1 of 5 MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING OF THE SALEM REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HELD ON MAY 17, 2005 A 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 17, 2005 at 6:00pm. 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. Lynn Duncan, Executive Director, Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Debra Tucker, Clerk, were also present. MINUTES The minutes from the April 20, 2005 meeting will be held until the next meeting in order for Ms. Duncan to make minor modifications to them. NEW BUSINESS 1. Executive Directors Report Lappin Park Ms. Duncan reported that a draft agreement concerning the Bewitched statue will be submitted to board members soon for their review and comment. The agreement will then be forwarded to the City Solicitor. REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PROJECTS 2. Old Salem Jail Steve Cecil of the Cecil Group addressed the board in order to update them on the progress of the Old Salem Jail redevelopment project. He reported that he had received comments and will include them in the final draft. Salem’s revival and vitality will be stressed. The condition of the buildings will be portrayed in an objective and non-judgmental manner and renovations must be to the Secretary of Interiors standards. These issues will be made clear in the RPP. Mr. Cecil feels that the market research material may not need to be included as part of the RFP. This information was for the SRA to use as a benchmark in the evaluation of the proposals. Developers will be doing their own research. Peter Smith has put a package together for marketing. Advertising, including a list of publications, will be addressed. Mr. Cecil feels that it will be important to broadcast information to builders and development communities. Mr. Cecil displayed illustrated renderings of current and potential rehabilitation and proposed site plan drawing. He reported that the RFP is coming along and the major elements are nearly complete. The business terms are broken down into three potential steps: Letter of Intent, Purchase and Sales Agreement, and Land Disposition Agreement (LDA). Mr. Cecil noted that historic preservation is required and the proposal must be specific. There will be a focus on the criteria generally, a rating system, and baseline criteria. Questions and comments will be incorporated. Ms. Duncan said that the draft RFP and developer’s kit will be sent to her and she will submit it to the board for review. SRA Minutes May 17, 2005 Page 2 of 5 Ms. Sullivan said that she wants to see the marketing material before any camera-ready copy is completed. She noted that the City has a new marketing slogan, which should be incorporated. Ms. Duncan said that the Structural Engineer’s report did recommend some shoring up of the Jail and Jailer’s House. There was some water in the basement at the foundation in three areas that may require immediate protection. Mr. Cecil noted that this would prevent further degradation. He said that he would leave a memo concerning this with some names of recommended contractors with experience in this area and the reports contain some technical specifications with materials that should be used. Ms. Duncan said that she would get cost estimates or proposals and bring them back to the SRA. Mr. Cecil stated that the entire report could be included in the RFP. Ms. Duncan noted that she has a few more comments to get to Mr. Cecil, but that that shouldn’t hold up the project. DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Project Approval 3. 7 Crombie Street— Approval of the Design Review Board Recommendation for Final Design Plans for the redevelopment of the Mission at 7 Crombie Street. Ms. Sullivan, who was recently appointed a director of the Beverly Cooperative Ban, recused herself from the matter. She noted that any previous votes that she participated in were made before this appointment and still held. Ms. Hartford stated that the SRA had approved the schematic design and the DRB had reviewed the plan with little comment. The developers were seeking final approval. Mark Meche appeared before the board to present his most recent plans. He said that neighbors requested a more impressive and less gentle renovation. The title of the project is Bluestone Alley. To deal with insufficient light in the unusual loft spaces, he is planning to construct inverted dormers at four spots rather than the previously planned eyebrow dormers. Mr. Vickers asked about the balconies shown on the plans. Mr. Meche responded that they are 8’X6’ balconies. Mr. Baldini asked if that were the only change. Mr. Meche replied that it was. Mr. Baldini moved that the final design plans for the redevelopment of the Mission at 7 Crombie Street be approved as recommended by the Design Review Board. Mr. Connelly seconded the motion, and the motion passed (4-0). Project Amendments 4. 143 Washington Street/32 Front Street (The Distillery Condominium) – Review of the proposed change in use of the first floor spaces from retail to retail and/or commercial uses. Ms. Sullivan recused herself from the matter. Ms. Hartford introduced the project. She stated that the Planning Department had been working to help the Pabichs, the developers, to find suitable retail tenants for the first floor space. The Main Streets Program had also been working with them; however, they were unable to find a match. Therefore, the Pabichs are requesting a change in use for the first floor space from retail uses to commercial and/or retail uses. SRA Minutes May 17, 2005 Page 3 of 5 David Pabich addressed the board and said that he has a high threshold for tenants and hadn’t been able to find appropriate tenants in a year. He has been talking with a local realtor. Mr. Pabich has also been working with David Hark of the Drumlin Co. Ms. Duncan said that a suitable retail tenant may be found in the future and suggested that the SRA could waive the retail requirement for a certain number of years. Mr. Pabich said that this might present a problem with any renewal option for tenants. Mr. Baldini said that he found it hard to distinguish the fine line between commercial and retail. Ms. Duncan explained that in terms of zoning and planning that retail is where one purchases a product, whereas commercial is an office space or personal service space such as a beauty salon. Mr. Baldini said that the developer has put time and effort in and hoped to see the building filled. Mr. Connelly agreed. Mr. Vickers added that he could support the change and said that the City needs a mix of businesses and that this is the fabric of the downtown. He said that there is housing from the second floor up. Mr. Connelly said that they shouldn’t tie the hands of the developer and that they need to reward them and give them a chance rather than leave an empty storefront. Mr. Connelly moved that the proposed change in use of the first floor spaces from retail to retail and/or commercial uses for 143 Washington Street/32 Front Street be approved. Mr. Vickers seconded the motion, and the motion passed (4-0). Mr. Pabich stated that 80% of the housing units have been sold and that the demographics of the buyers are varied. 5. 17 Central Street (Old Police Station) – Review of proposed minor changes to the approved development plans. Ms. Hartford reported that she had not received information from Bill Luster in time for the meeting. They will be proposing a change in the doors, but they do not have specifications yet. There are issues with a transformer and they are working with the Building Inspector. She recommended that the project be referred to the DRB first. Other Projects 6. 10 Federal Street – Review of the proposal to add an entranceway along Federal Street. Ms. Sullivan recused herself from the matter. Developer Spiros Flomp requested to add another door to the building at the southwest corner of the building on Federal Street. This would be a second entrance and is necessary for sec urity reasons. Mr. Flomp presented plans and requested that the SRA approve the door without the matter being referred to the DRB. He said that the door is a close match to the other door already previously approved. The location was a window, housing an air intake for an emergency generator previously. Mr. Vickers stated that the first door had been discussed and approved in the past for a previous potential tenant. He noted that the architect is the same and said that he trusted and deferred to him. Mr. Vickers moved that the proposed door at the entranceway along Federal Street be approved as submitted. Mr. Baldini seconded the motion, and the motion passed (4-0). SRA Minutes May 17, 2005 Page 4 of 5 7. 282 Derby Street (Taste of Cilantro) – Review of proposed outdoor café at Taste of Cilantro. Ms. Hartford stated that the Licensing Board had issued a license for this project. The owner must see the Board of Health. They are finalizing the table and chair design. Mr. Baldini moved that the location of the proposal for the outdoor café for Taste of Cilantro at 282 Derby Street be approved and that the project be referred to the DRB for review. Ms. Sullivan seconded the motion, and the motion passed (5-0). 8. 180 Essex Street (Z Crepe Café) – Review of proposed outdoor café at 180 Essex Street. Tracy Thurdin requested approval for 6- 24” tables of two at 180 Essex Street for the Z Crepe Café. Ms. Thurdin stated that the hours will be from 7:00am to 9:00pm and she has a seasonal license to serve beer and wine inside the café. The interior has a capacity of 45. There is a garden area that limits the outdoor seating. Ms. Sullivan suggested that the plans for the area were 30 years old and suggested that the SRA revisit the area including the garden this summer. Mr. Connelly moved that the proposed outdoor café at 180 Essex Street for the Z Crepe Café be approved and sent to the DRB for review with review of the flow of pedestrian traffic as well. Mr. Vickers seconded the motion, and the motion passed (5-0). SIGN REVIEW Project Approval 9. 284-296 Essex Street & One Sewall Street (YMCA) – Approval of Design Review Board Recommendations for the proposed signage at the YMCA. Ms. Hartford reported that the DRB had recommended approval of the signs and that there were no major changes since the original package was approved. Mr. Vickers moved to approve the Design Review Board recommendations for the proposed signage at the YMCA. Ms. Sullivan seconded the motion. Motion passed (5-0). 1. Executive Directors Report (cont.) SRA Financial Accounts Ms. Duncan reported that Bruce Guy, the City’s Finance Director, and the Mayor’s office have recommended that the SRA’s financial accounts be taken over by and that the accounting be done by the City of Salem. She said that she had been approached a while ago when she took over the position, but that she had wanted to take some time to see how the process worked. Ms. Duncan said that with the Jail redevelopment project there would be more activity and recommended that the SRA use the City as the SRA’s fiscal agent. She stated that there would be no commingling of funds and the accounts would be interest bearing. Ms. Duncan added that the City does this for the community block grants. This would be the same process and that she would sign invoices but that there would be the City’s warrant process. She thought it seemed like a good idea. Mr. Vickers questioned the current process. He said that he had been unable to obtain a clear financial picture of the SRA when he requested it from the prior department head. Ms. Duncan explained the current financial process. She said that the City system would provide a way to track the accounts and that they could receive any reports that they may want. SRA Minutes May 17, 2005 Page 5 of 5 After board discussion Mr. Vickers stated that he would like the SRA to take some time to understand the current process and the implications of the change. He stated that he felt that they had a fiduciary responsibility and owed it to themselves to look into the matter. Ms. Duncan said that she would put together information for the board and added that a change may necessitate a change to the bylaws. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mr. Connelly motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Baldini seconded the motion, and the motion passed (5-0). Meeting stands adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Debra Tucker Clerk