2003-01-07 DRB MinutesDesign Review Board
Minutes of the Meeting
Tuesday, January 7, 2003
A meeting of the Design Review Board was held in the third floor conference room at 120
Washington Street on Tuesday, January 7, 2003 at 5:30 p.m. Those in attendance were: Paul
Durand, David Jaquith and Don Giard.
Beverly Cooperative Bank (73-87 Lafayette Street)
Attorney George Atkins updated the Board on the regulatory and design status of the project.
Members from their design team discussed the design changes that had been made in response to
the comments from the DRB. These changes include: more glazing at the rear of the building,
the inclusion of an all-brick exterior with stone accents, a larger sign and more substantial
community room entrance at the rear of the building, additional shade tree, the use of unit pavers
in place of colored concrete, a new decorative unit paver crosswalk, extension of the
groundcover planting bed near the public parking area, new handicap ramp near the community
room and the installation of two additional free-standing light fixtures near the public parking
area.
Mr. Giard inquired about the walkway connection from the harbor walk to the community room
that was mentioned at the last DRB meeting.
David Payne, landscape architect for the project, stated that the applicant has proposed the
installation of grass pavers in the area between the harbor walk and the community room. He
stated that this area would be able to withstand vehicular and pedestrian activity.
Mr. Giard stated that this meeting had been coordinated to precede tomorrow nights SRA
meeting. He asked the other DRB members if they had any other comments for the applicant.
At this time the DRB members thanked the applicant for their efforts and gave a positive
recommendation for the Schematic Design submission.
Salem Laundry Building (51-71 Lafayette Street)
Paul Durand excused himself from the meeting during the Salem Laundry Building presentation.
Mark Meche of Winter Street Architects made an introductory presentation to the Board. He
stated that the Board of Appeals had unanimously approved a height variance for the project. At
this time, they are looking for Schematic Approval to proceed with the project. The existing
building consists of a brick portion along New Derby Street and a concrete portion at the rear,
which was one of the earliest examples of reinforced concrete in the area. He explained that the
building has significant structural issues and will require approximately $1 million in
remediation. Their proposal includes the removal of the upper levels, restoration of the
remaining portions of the façade (including the ground level storefronts) and the construction of
three new levels. The new construction will include a series of terraces that will step down to the
street. He stated that their approach is to maintain a strong street presence while reducing the
bulk with new construction that steps back from the street. He also stated that their proposal will
include a significant corner element and a series of vertical elements along Derby Street to create
a rhythm along the street.
Mr. Meche stated that they are seeking a positive recommendation from the DRB for their
schematic submission.
Mr. Jaquith inquired about the building materials for the new construction.
Mr. Meche stated that that this has not been determined but they are looking into the use of
stucco or cast stone.
Mr. Jaquith stated that he most concerned with the relationship between the new construction
and the original building. He stated that he is interested in the articulation of the new
construction including the shade and shadow lines and other details. He asked Mr. Meche if
their intention was to recede from the street.
Mr. Meche stated that their approach was to recede from the street and that the surface material
will have a smoother texture than the rest of the building.
Mr. Giard stated that he supported the general concept, including the preservation of the original
storefronts and the massing concept for the new construction. He asked Mr. Meche if they had
considered a more prominent corner treatment for the building, such as a tower feature.
Mr. Meche stated that they had received other requests for a more prominent corner and that that
was something that they were investigating. He stated that this project has the potential to act as
a gateway building for this part of the downtown.
Mr. Jaquith requested a copy of the building floor plans. He explained that this would help him
understand the exterior design decisions and issues.
Mr. Meche stated that they could provide this information at the next meeting. Mr. Meche also
inquired about the schematic design approval process.
Mr. Giard stated that additional information would need to be submitted and reviewed by the
DRB. Additional meetings would be required prior to a recommendation.
Mr. Jaquith and Mr. Giard agreed that the general concept was positive and that the applicant
was heading in the right direction. Mr. Giard suggested that the applicant provide additional
photographs, rough elevations, rough sections, etc. for review. He stated that Schematic Phase
was the time in which the applicant could explore different design solutions without getting
locked into construction plans.
Mr. Jaquith stated that the vertical elements proposed by the applicant were not effective. He
suggested that they explore alternatives. Mr. Meche stated that they had been working on this
feature and that they would investigate this further.
Hess Gas Station (295 Derby Street)
Mr. Giard presented roof shingle samples, tile samples, and brick samples submitted by the
applicant. The Design Review Board members reviewed the samples and selected the following:
Heritage SWB Modular by Redland Brick, Inc.; Heather Blend shingle of Timberline Shingle;
green and tile sample were approved.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.