Loading...
2004-10-27 DRB MinutesDRB Minutes October 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 (YMCA) – 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 a nd 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 modern 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 façade. 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 make the stairs more of a feature. He commented that there 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 corner 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 October 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