Loading...
2004-10-13 SRA MinutesSRA Minutes October 13, 2004 Page 1 of 5 MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING OF THE SALEM REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HELD ON OCTOBER 13, 2004 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 We dnesday, October 13, 2004 at 6:00pm. Chairman Michael Brennan called the meeting to order and on roll call, the following members were present: Michael Brennan, Conrad Baldini, Michael Connelly, Christine Sullivan, and Russell Vickers. Lynn Duncan, Executive Director of the SRA, Tania Hartford, Economic Development Planner, and Valerie Gingrich, Clerk, were also present. Minutes Mr. Connelly motioned to approve the minutes from the meeting held on September 8, 2004. Mr. Baldini seconded the motion. Motion passed (5-0). New Business 1. Executive Directors Report Ms. Duncan stated that her report is on the Old Salem Jail, so she will move to the next item on the agenda. REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PROJECTS 2. Old Salem Jail Ms. Duncan stated that the scope for the market study went to the SRA members and the group of interested citizens. She stated that they are still adding to the list of interested citizens, but it will be comprised of Councilor Sosnowski, Councilor Lovely, Barbara Cleary and Patti Kelleher, both of Historic Salem Inc. Ms. Duncan explained that they will be sending letters from the Mayor to 125 residents regarding the project and they expect two levels of interest. The first will be those who attend one of the two community workshops and the other group will be those who are more active and review the materials. Ms. Duncan walked through each of the seven tasks of the scope. Mr. Brennan asked if the document they got was a draft. Ms. Duncan stated that it is, but they would like to incorporate any comments into the document tonight, so that the RFP can be sent out. Mr. Vickers asked if they are still on schedule. Ms. Duncan stated that they are now looking at a more comprehensive market study, which will more likely take sixty days to complete rather than thirty. She stated that they are shooting for issuing the RFP by the end of the month and the proposals will be due within thirty days. She stated that they will hold interviews after Thanksgiving if necessary and the contract will be awarded following the December 8, 2004 SRA meeting. She SRA Minutes October 13, 2004 Page 2 of 5 explained that the two community workshops will be held in early January, and the market study should be completed in early February. She stated that they are looking to designating a developer in June as opposed to the previously proposed month of May. Mr. Brennan inquired as to whether they would see the RFP before it goes out. Ms. Duncan explained that the scope is the meat of the RFP, but the entire RFP can be emailed to the members. Mr. Brennan asked if they will have minimum qualifications for submitting a proposal. Ms. Duncan explained that they would not set minimums, but they will be asking for qualifications as part of the proposals. Mr. Connelly asked who will be deciding on who gets the contract. Ms. Duncan stated that the SRA will decide. Mr. Vickers commented that the marketing materials supplied by the consultant need to include artwork, photos, etc. and they need to be high quality. Ms. Duncan stated that she will expand the wording. Ms. Sullivan asked if there is room for ideas from companies that have shown interest and stressed that they do not want to preclude any ideas. Ms. Duncan stated that they will be ranking ideas rather than excluding and therefore will stay open to all ideas, but at the same time have a preferred concept. Ms. Sullivan commented that the property could be eligible for historic preservation tax credits asked if the property is in a depressed area and whether it would qualify for new markets tax credits. Barbara Cleary, from Historic Salem, Inc., stated that it is not in a depressed area but it could be eligible for new markets tax credits. Ms. Hartford stated that they will change the wording on tax credits to make it general and therefore encompass all possible tax credits. Mark Meche, of Winter Street Architects, commented that they should include a description of the preferred qualifications of the team (a list of who they want on a team). Ms. Duncan asked Mr. Meche for suggestions. Mr. Meche stated that they should have an architect, marketing specialist and someone with financial expertise. Ms. Cleary commented that they should make the title more general by calling it a “feasibility” study or a “reuse” study instead of a “market” study. She added that they should have a preferred use, but they do not want to be too narrow. Ms. Duncan stated that they will make that idea clear throughout the process. Ms. Cleary commented that the preservation aspect of the scope needs to be clear that the person needs to be a qualified preservation professional and they should add standards for determining the historic aspects. Ms. Duncan suggested that Ms. Cleary email wording to her. Ms. Cleary also commented that the wording for Task 6 should be changed from “companies” to “team”. Ms. Duncan stated that the RFP can establish a budget for the project or they can do a “cannot exceed” amount. SRA Minutes October 13, 2004 Page 3 of 5 Mr. Vickers commented that the end result will be a fixed amount. Ms. Duncan stated that it would. Mr. Vickers suggested having an open amount to be able to mesh the qualifications with the scope. Mr. Meche commented that the price should be established or the scope should be iron clad to avoid conflicts. Ms. Duncan asked if the scope is ironclad enough. Mr. Meche stated that it is not. Ms. Duncan stated that they set a price of $50,000 for the St. Joseph’s study. Ms. Hartford added that the church reuse study is a little more extensive, so the price should be a bit lower, between $30,000 and $40,000. Ms. Duncan stated that they will do some research regarding the price. Ms. Hartford noted that they can look at the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s website for ideas on pricing. Ms. Duncan suggested that the board vote to authorize distribution of the RFP. Mr. Vickers motioned to authorize the Executive Director to complete the RFP with the changes, email it, and proceed to release the document. Mr. Connelly seconded. Motion passed (5-0). DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Project Amendments 3. 143 Washington Street/32 Front Street – Review of the proposed amendment to the approved Final Design Plans. The amendment adds outdoor building lighting to the approved plans. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicant, David Pabich, and explained that he is proposing to add lighting to the Lawrence Place project. Mr. Pabich passed out color photos of the proposed light fixtures and explained that the lighting would be located at the five entrances to the building. He stated that they are trying to mirror the style of lighting that is on Old Town Hall, which is a lantern style cast aluminum black wall mounted fixture. Mr. Baldini motioned to approve the lighting plan. Mr. Vickers seconded. Motion passed (5-0). Project Introduction 4. 284 Essex Street – Review of the proposed Schematic Design Plans for the renovation of the storefronts at the YMCA building on Essex Street. Ms. Hartford stated that the YMCA is proposing to restore their storefront and they are using Winter Street Architects for the project. Ms. Hartford introduced the Executive Director of the YMCA, Debbie Amaral, and stated that the SRA would normally refer the schematic proposal to the Design Review Board for review. Ms. Amaral explained that they are looking to restore their storefront to the early 1900s design. She stated that she is working with the Salem Housing Authority to swap space in the building, which SRA Minutes October 13, 2004 Page 4 of 5 would give the YMCA access to the grand staircase and enable them to restore the staircase. Ms. Amaral introduced Mark Meche and Robin Abraham of Winter Street Architects. Mr. Meche went over the floor plan and explained that the project includes restoring the storefront and capturing some space inside the building for the YMCA to put their ramp. He explained that they would like to restore and showcase the staircase for the YMCA. Ms. Amaral added that they would be replacing the marble. Mr. Brennan asked why they are stalled with the Housing Authority. Ms. Amaral explained that there are some legal issues such as the fact that the Housing Authority would be using federal funds and they need to have a tenant’s meeting. Mr. Meche stated that they would create a uniform front to the building rather than the patchwork details that exist now. Ms. Sullivan asked where the Children’s Museum will be going. Ms. Amaral explained that they will be in the left side of the building on the first floor. Ms. Sullivan commented that even though it is not a retail use, it is a good active use for the first floor. Mr. Meche and Ms. Hartford agreed. Mr. Baldini motioned to refer the schematic proposal to the DRB for review. Mr. Vickers seconded. Motion passed (5-0). Final Approval 5. 24 Front Street (Boon) – Approval of the Design Review Board recommendation for the proposed signage at 24 Front Street. Ms. Hartford introduced the applicant, stated that even though internally illuminated signs are not usually recommended in the Urban Renewal Area, the DRB recommended approval of the sign because they think it is a great sign. She explained that the DRB changed the proposal to allow the sign along Front Street to be internally illuminated but sign along the alley would not be lit. She explained that the DRB thought the sign is appropriate for the contemporary art gallery and the internal illumination is done in a tasteful way. Mr. Brennan commented that he went to Front Street to see what the existing signage is like and there are no internally illuminated signs. He stated that his first thought was that he didn’t like it, but he did not know the use at that time. He commented that it is a contemporary art gallery and the blue light only illuminates the cutouts. Mr. Baldini stated that the sign is well thought out and it fits with a contemporary art gallery. Ms. Sullivan stated that she has been lucky enough to work on a volunteer basis with the two partners at Boon and it is not just an art gallery, but it incorporates art and music. She commented that the sign is terrific and the blue light is subtle. She stated that they are a good addition to the city. Mr. Brennan stated that he did a complete turn around on the sign. Ms. Hartford explained that the conduit will be concealed in the sign bracket. SRA Minutes October 13, 2004 Page 5 of 5 Mr. Connelly motioned to accept the DRB recommendation for approval of the proposed signage for 24 Front Street. Ms. Sullivan seconded. Motion passed (5-0). Adjournment There being no further business, Ms. Sullivan motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Vickers seconded. Motion passed (5-0). Meeting stands adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Valerie Gingrich Clerk