Loading...
2012-09-26 DRB MinutesDRB September 26, 2012 Page 1 of 6 City of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board or Committee: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting Date and Time: Wednesday September 26, 2012 at 6:00pm Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, 120 Washington Street Members Present: Paul Durand, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy, Helen Sides, Michael Blier Members Absent: Ernest DeMaio Others Present: Tom Daniel Recorder: Jennifer Pennell Paul Durand calls the meeting to order. Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review 1. Liberty Street (Witch Trials Memorial): Discussion of proposed signage. The submission under review includes a sign proposal, and photos of the proposed signage. Meg Twohey was present on behalf of Witch Trials Memorials. The issue addressed is the font of the title. The script font matches Salem’s standards, but the other (non-script) is preferred by the volunteer team and their designers. Daniel commented that there are five current signs with Salem’s standard script font. Twohey feels the non-script font is clearer. Kennedy noted that a different treatment would be required where faster movement is occurring. The non-script font is more generic and more legible. Kennedy commented that he visually does prefer the consistency and simplicity of the script font and its relation to the surrounding signage programs. Jaquith commented that the centering of the typeface sign appears visually undesirable in regards to the embellishments. Jaquith additionally noted that the script sign doesn’t need the embellishment, however the font does need to be spread out more. Sides noted her desire for the script font. Durand commented that he could go with either. The typeface proposed signage is more legible; however, he would prefer to have the script because of its consistency with the rest of the program. DRB September 26, 2012 Page 2 of 6 Blier noted that the uniqueness of the sign’s location makes it acceptable to have a departure from the City standard. Sides: Motion to approve the non-script font version with the following condition: • The spacing of the initial large cap letters and adjacent small cap shall be tightened up. Seconded by: Sides, Passes 5-0. 2. 190 Essex Street (Witch’s Hide): Discussion of proposed portable sign. The submission under review includes photos of the proposed signage. Deleila and Natal Bettencourt were present from Witch’s Hide. Kennedy questioned whether the image would be shrunk down to fit in the dimensions on the cut sheet. Bettencourt noted that the picture would cover a portion of the plastic. The current reader’s name will be located at the bottom of each image. Kennedy additionally questioned whether the border dimensions will shrink and if the A-frame sign will be weighted down with sandbags. Bettencourt commented that the border would be scaled to match the provided cut sheet dimensions. Sand will be enclosed within the sign structure. Sides questioned how the letters would be applied to the plastic; will they be raised or flat? Sides noted that the plastic material is meant to have something applied to it; any form of stenciling will appear unfinished. Sides commented that making the letters smaller and moving them down would make the sign more legible. Kennedy noted that having the photo on top and the words below would capture people’s attention better. Jaquith questioned what the vinyl signage should be held on by. Bettencourt explained that Velcro would be used. The reader’s photo and name will be on the vinyl. Daniel asked if the A-frame signage would be used only when readers are working. Bettencourt answered that they would only use the A-frame when they had readings going on. They do not want the A-frame when they don’t have readers because they don’t want to confuse people and have them come in the shop. Daniel asked for clarification about the sign location. Bettencourt explained that the sign would be placed perpendicular to the light pole and bollard (not parallel as shown in the submission). Durand commented that the proposed sign exceeds requirements. Durand questioned whether there is a smaller sign? Bettencourt commented that the second A-frame sign option is too light. DRB September 26, 2012 Page 3 of 6 Kennedy: Motion to approve with the following conditions: • The reader’s image shall be located on top half of sign and the words on bottom half; • The reader’s picture shall be part of the vinyl sign and the vinyl shall be printed to fit the full width of the sign; • The reader’s name shall be printed with the picture and located on the lower portion of the picture; • The words on the bottom half of the sign shall be reduced in scale by about 10%; and • Glenn Kennedy shall review final sign prior to submission to the SRA. Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 5-0. 3. 72 Washington Street and 244 Essex Street and (Re-find and Re-find Men’s): Discussion of proposed portable signs. The submission under review before the DRB includes a letter, drawing, and plans of the proposed signage. John Mathews was present from Re-find and Re-find Men’s. Sides questioned whether the signage should identify the location of the other store. Sides noted that incorporating the address might be a desirable feature. Sides additionally commented that a darker metal chain that ties in with the interior of the store would be more desirable. Kennedy commented that identifying Salem, Massachusetts and the zip code at the same time is not necessary. Kennedy noted that the board would need a layout for the signs. Mathews commented that the type would be recessed in a ¾” pine sign about ½”. Daniel noted that the location of the proposed signage on the plan shows the sign in the path of travel. Daniel commented that the sign should move closer to the street edge and be in line with the trees and adjacent stores signage. Daniel noted that reviewing the ordinance is required before approving whether both business names can be located on the proposed sign. A chalkboard finish could express both businesses on the signage. Jaquith noted that the proportion of the logo on the business card is not the same as the proportion of the A-frame. Matthews explained that he would adjust it on the sign. DRB September 26, 2012 Page 4 of 6 Jaquith: Motion to approve with the following conditions: • A darker metal chain shall be used; • The location of proposed signs shall be located along the street edge and in line with the trees. • Daniel shall confirm whether or not both business names can be located on the same sign. • The proportions of the logo and words on the business card shall be adjusted to fit the A-frame. • Glenn Kennedy shall review the revised sign prior to submission to the SRA. Seconded by: Sides, Passes 5-0. 4. 196 Essex Street (Jo’ Freedom): Discussion of proposed signage. The submission under review before the DRB includes photos and plans of the proposed signage. Bobby Kneeland was present from Jo’ Freedom. Jaquith questioned how thick the sign is. Kneeland commented that the thickness is 2” and the border and light colored portions of the sign shall be engraved on both sides. Kennedy questioned whether there is any window signage in or on the windows. Kneeland said not at this time. Kennedy suggested using the same image as the blade sign on decals for the windows— one on the right window and a smaller one on the door with the hours below it. Kennedy commented that these changes would require an additional submission to be reviewed by the DRB. Daniel questioned whether the sign is hung from a chain off the bracket. Kneeland commented that he would use a black chain to hang the sign from the black bracket. Jaquith: Motion to approve. Seconded by: Kennedy, Passes 5-0. 5. 87 Washington Street (Opus): Discussion of proposed signage, alley design and egress. The submission under review before the DRB includes a letter, cut sheet, photos, and plans. Jonathan Poore was present on behalf of Opus. Poore explained the layers of the signage and façade proposal. The blade sign would have an “O” carved out of it as well as the word opus. LED tape would be hidden within the “O”. At night, the “O” would glow. A transparent “O” decal is proposed for the doors along with the word “opus”. Dimensional letters would be added in the sign band to match the letters used on the rest of the façade. A rosette is proposed for between each letter. DRB September 26, 2012 Page 5 of 6 Window treatments include bamboo, hops, and lighting. A side egress door with two planters is proposed. The grade of the concrete alley needs to be adjusted to have a level entry by the door. Jaquith questioned how power would be connected to the sign. Poore noted that a conduit coming through the existing bracket would be used. The bracket needs to be extended a bit but will remain. Durand questioned whether there would be any lighting above the egress door. Poore commented that a canopy of Christmas lights would be strung at the second floor level eventually, but it is not part of the submission tonight. Daniel noted that this would be part of an additional DRB discussion. Durand questioned why the existing concrete walkway is being addressed. Poore commented that the walkway needs to be reset because there is currently a 3” difference between it and the proposed new door. Poore noted that the door is needed to have an enclosed fire-rated second egress from the basement. Poore commented that the door would be located in place of an existing window opening. The brickwork and the lintel shall remain. Kennedy noted that the rosettes with lettering located above the entry are getting a bit fussy. A simple bulb with a little bit of color would be more desirable and relate better to the simplicity of the sign below. Jaquith: Motion to approve. Seconded by: Sides, Passes 5-0. 6. 270 Essex Street (Game Zone): Discussion of proposed signage. The submission under review before the DRB includes photos of the proposed signage. Neal Crockett was present from Game Zone. Daniel explained that the proposal was for the blade sign. The owner did not know that the window decals needed to be approved as well. The owner also did not know that the lit signs (Nintendo, Xbox, etc.) were not allowed. He has removed them. Jaquith asked what the depth of the sign is. Crockett said four inches. Sides questioned how the sign would be mounted. Crockett commented that two guide wires would hang from the sign. DRB September 26, 2012 Page 6 of 6 Blier asked what would stop the sign from swinging. Crockett commented that the sign hangs 4’-0” below the existing bracket. Blier commented that some rigidity is required. Cables should be replaced with rods or the bracket should be relocated closer to street level to meet this requirement. Sides noted that 4’-0” seems enormous in comparison to other signs. Sides questioned whether the sign could be 2’-0” wide. Sides asked whether all the windows should be emptied. Sides asked specifically about the “We remove scratches” sign in the side window. Crockett noted that the green stripe, lettering, and the game zone signage would remain. He would return to the board for approval of the window decals. The “We remove scratches” sign was not necessary. Kennedy commented that the sign should be 42” wide and 20” in height. Kennedy noted that the bracket should be in a similar position above door to where the sign bracket for Bella Hair is located. Durand: Motion to approve with the following conditions: • A new bracket shall be used and installed above the door at a height to align with the Bella Hair Studio bracket; • The sign shall be 42” wide x 20” high; • The window signage package shall be resubmitted; and • Glenn Kennedy shall review the revised sign prior to submission to the SRA. Seconded by: Kennedy, Passes 4-0. Minutes Approval of the minutes from the August 22, 2012 regular meeting. Durand: Motion to approve. Seconded by: Kennedy, Passes 4-0. Adjournment Durand: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. Meeting is adjourned at 8:00 pm.