Loading...
2019-05-22 DRB MinutesCity of Salem Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board or Committee: Design Review Board, Special Meeting Date and Time: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 at 6:00 pm Meeting Location: 98 Washington Street, First Floor Conference Room DRB Members Present: Chair Paul Durand, Glenn Kennedy, Catherine Miller, Helen Sides, J. Michael Sullivan DRB Members Absent: David Jaquith Others Present: Kate Newhall-Smith Recorder: Colleen Brewster Chair Durand calls the meeting to order at 6:00PM. Roll call was taken. Signs 1. 93 Washington Street (City Hall): Discussion and vote on signage. – Continued from March 27, 2019 Mike Lutrzykowski, Public Property Assistant for the City of Salem, was present to discuss the project. Lutrzykowski stated that this is the welcome and hours signage for City Hall. He has altered color and text as the Board suggested and would like to continue to use PVC not wood for the new sign, since the 4-year-old existing wood sign is already deteriorating. The color will match the other City signs and Concept Signs will create it. They also want it to place the sign in the same size, 12” x 19”, and installed in the same location, to reuse the existing anchoring into the granite façade. Chair Durand opens public comment. No one in the assembly wished to speak. Chair Durand closes public comment. Sullivan: Motion to accept as submitted, color to match other City signs and to be a matte finish. Seconded by: Sides. Passes 5-0. 2. 2 East India Square (Witch City Mall): Discussion and vote on signage. Ken McTague of Concept Signs and representative for Marley Properties, was present to discuss the project. Miller asked if the Museum Place sign to be removed and the area be cleaned and/or repaired. McTague replied that his company will remove the sign, the studs at each area to be filled, and he will remove the moss and dirt and will clean the area as much as he can, although the whole wall should be cleaned. Newhall-Smith replied that the garage is City property. McTague added that his company will also remove the tenant signage and the signage from the brick façade, where accumulated dirt will be less visible. Kennedy asked if the new signage lettering will be yellow or gold. McTague replied gold. Miller asked why the lettering colors switch from white to gold on the proposed signs. McTague replied for contrast on the windows so the lettering is the most visible element. McTague noted that Marley Properties didn’t respond to the suggestion of adding a new building directory. Miller asked if signage will be added on all 3 sides of the porticos. McTague replied that Marley Properties hasn’t responded to that suggestion either and new signage is still only proposed on the front face of each portico, although it would be good to have it on all 3 sides along Church and Essex Streets for added visibility. Chair Durand stated that the new Witch City Mall sign is too low and suggested it be moved higher by one row of letters. McTague noted the 25-foot maximum height to underside of signage that the new sign now meets. He added that he will fill all holes left by the removed signage. Chair Durand opens public comment. Rob Fitz, Owner of The Magic Parlor. Stated that he approves of the signs. Chair Durand closes public comment. Newhall-Smith stated that the Mr. McTague has been working on this with Marley Properties and the SRA would like to see the DRB’s recommendation before they will approve of it. Sides: Motion to approve with the suggestion to clean the concrete façade. Seconded by: Sullivan. Passes 5-0. 3. 213 Essex Street (The Magic Parlor): Discussion and vote on signage. Rob Fitz, Owner, was present to discuss the project. Fitz stated that the sign will be 28” in width by 30” in height with ½” raised PVC letters and an airbrushed center image. It will replace an existing broken sign. McTague stated that the new sign will be centered over the entry door. Sides asked if the existing A frame sign was permitted. Fitz replied that he wasn’t aware if it had been. Miller asked whether the airbrushing detail would be visible by pedestrians. Fitz replied that it will be low enough for pedestrians to see. Sullivan asked if it will be lit. McTague replied no. Chair Durand opens public comment. Ken McTague of Concept Signs stated that he approves of the proposed sign. Chair Durand closes public comment. Sides: Motion to approve as submitted and to patch the brick where this existing sign is being removed. Seconded by: Sullivan. Passes 5-0. 4. 125 Washington Street (Ledger): Discussion and vote on signage. Kelsey McCallan, Ledger General Manager, was present to discuss the project. McCallan stated that the Owner did a rubbing of the existing griffin in the molding of the bank and it will be added to the proposed sign. A sign is proposed for the exterior wall of the building and on the three sides below the clock. Kennedy stated that the sign went from 70” wide down to 60” wide so that it will sit within the brick coursing and not extend to the edge of the brick. Miller noted that the “LEDGER” lettering over the door counts as a sign. Sides stated that she is disappointed in the application in that is difficult to decipher where each of the proposed signs are going on the building. Only Mr. Kennedy knows what sign goes where because he worked directly with the applicant. Miller questioned what will this do the elevation of the building, because the proposed sign still seems large even after being reduced in length by 10”. The proposed sign could be squarer or in two pieces. Sullivan noted that the symmetry of the building is important and the sign is asymmetrical. Sides suggested the sign move down and not line up with the transoms so that it stands on its own. McCallan replied that the proposed installation was towards the middle of the building since their restaurant occupies the entire interior length of the building. Kennedy added that they are trying to be symmetrical and the color change is a different look, but agreed that doesn’t need to line up with anything else. Miller stated that it still feels too crammed. Sides suggested the width be reduced to 50 or 52” to expose another brick coursing on each side, Newhall-Smith stated that the signs do not appear to be larger than what zoning allows, though she wasn’t aware of the other signage over the door to include. The restaurant has a long frontage, so even with the existing and proposed signs the applicant is likely within the parameters of what the sign ordinance. Kennedy agreed that they should add another brick course on each side of the sign because there will still be enough brick left to visually anchor it. Sullivan noted that changing the sign width would also require changing the height, since the sign is horizontal. McCallan replied that they will reduce the size of the sign. Miller requested the applicant return to the DRB for a review of their revised sign. Sides suggested a photo of a dimensioned cardboard mockup be taken and submitted for review for context. Chair Durand opens public comment. No one in the assembly wished to speak. Chair Durand closes public comment. Sides: Motion to continue to the next regular meeting. Seconded by: Kennedy. Passes 5-0. Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review 1. 25 Lynde Street: Discussion and vote on residential redevelopment of existing structure Tom Mayo, Architect from Thomas Mayo Associates, and Mike Becker & Carissa Vettis, Owners of 26 Lynde Street, LLC, were present to discuss the project. Becker stated that he reconfigured the garage to eliminate dead space. Mayo noted that they implemented the DRB’s floorplan suggestions; reduced the size of the garage door, moved the residential door forward toward the front of the building, eliminated vegetation off the top of the trellis but left the frame of the trellis, and added doghouse dormer to the roof of the front addition. The addition is now clapboard to introduce a different material, the planter now extends across the front elevation as well as up to the sidewalk, they’ve added a small planter to the side of the addition, and the other doghouse dormers are now a mixture of double and single dormers. Becker added that the oval window on the addition was swapped with the residential door, the door now has a projecting pediment with a 12” deep planter next to it. They have more living space and less garage but with functional turning radiuses. Becker noted that the front parking spot on the adjacent property has a perpetual easement that belongs to Unit 2 of his building and the 3 parking spaces on the east side of the property belong to people across the street. Sides stated that the revised plans have improved. Chair Durand and Miller agreed. Sides suggested the arbor be the body color and not stand out but it is needed to keep its dimensional quality of added texture to the building. Chair Durand agreed. Miller noted that the trellis does break up the mass of the building and leaving it gives the long wall some texture. Vettis presented the proposed paint colors. Becker noted that they are all part of the Benjamin Moore Historic Colors collection Chair Durand opens public comment. No one in the assembly wished to speak. Chair Durand closes public comment. Sides: Motion to approve as presented with the condition that the trellis be painted the body color. Seconded by: Kennedy. Passes 5-0. 2. 65 Federal Street: Discussion and vote on residential redevelopment of existing structure Tom Mayo, Architect from Thomas Mayo Associates, and Mike Becker, Owner, were present to discuss the project. Mayo stated that only the rear façade has changed on the site plan, they’ve eliminated the jogs and left a 3-foot clear passage between the structure and the rear property line, and the roof overhang below the second floor. The roof scape has been reduced and they are retaining the 2 existing doghouse dormers. The missing chimney has been added to the drawing, the shed dormer will start behind the chimney and wrap around it, with simpler shed dormers on the other sides. The overhang is new over the 2nd floor with the dormer above that will be supported by heavy brackets. The dormer is set back 2-3-feet from the roof edge with roofing below to separate the two floors. Sides suggested the face of all shed dormers and their cheek walls being a dark grey instead of the proposed blue, so they become part of the roof rather than the wall, to further reduce their scale. Mayo asked if the trim color should remain white to highlight the demarcation at the window. Sides noted that large shed dormers tend to make a roof disappear. Chair Durand and Sullivan agreed that should be no blue above the roofline. Mayo suggested Hardi Board shingle panels. Kennedy agreed and suggested that they start with their corner panels and a full length at the bottom course to create a water barrier at the sill. Sides stated that the windows could remain trimmed in white but with no corner trim on the dormers, like a cedar shake dormer. Miller asked about paving. Becker replied pervious pavers to allow tenants to also use it as a patio. Miller suggested they break up the existing concrete driveway on the left and add pervious paving at this single-car parking area. Miller asked about the existing curb cut. Becker replied that they have a turning radius and an existing curb cut, although there is pavement, they don’t own in front of their right-side parking spaces. Becker suggested addimh a planter to the front face of the building. The Board agreed. Chair Durand opens public comment. No one in the assembly wished to speak. Chair Durand closes public comment. Sides: Motion to approve as submitted with the condition that everything above the roof line be grey to match the roof, with wrapped corners, adding a planter box in the front, add more pervious paving to the left (east) side of the property to match the proposed pervious pavers on the west. Seconded by: Miller. Passes 5-0. 3. 133 Washington Street (Boston Burger Company): Discussion and vote on Café Permit Application No one was present to discuss the project. Kennedy: Motion to continue to the next regular meeting. Seconded by: Sullivan. Passes 5-0. 4. 292 Essex Street (Salem Housing Authority): Discussion and vote on window replacement Debbie Tucker, of Salem Housing Authority, Stuart Gregerman and Keri Mosman of Environmental Restorations, Inc., and Barry Buchinski, Architect from Blackstone Block Architects were present to discuss the project. Buchinski stated that he was awarded the bid to remove the windows but DRB needs to review the project and that hadn’t been done. They are replacing the 1980’s existing windows and hope that the window style and color they’ve already ordered are the acceptable. Tucker stated that the architect did contact the City in 2017 and was told by Mike Lutrzykowski that this project was not subject to SRA and DRB review. This is an ‘after the fact’ review since they attempted to get a permit but found out that a DRB review was, in fact, required. The goal of the project is to improve and extend the life of this building. The window fenestrations will remain, there are no new window openings proposed and no window opening are being enclosed. Sides asked if the curved glass will remain. Bushinski replied yes. Miller asked if the transoms will remain. Mosman replied that they will be replaced in kind and will salvage most of the trim. Newhall-Smith noted that the transoms appear to be wood. Gregerman replied that the new windows will be aluminum. Bushinski added that the grid pattern will also be retained and the curved window will be replaced with a high-performance polycarbonate. The Housing Authority obtained the building in 1982 and it underwent a major renovation. They will keep the curvature but behind it is a standard window for thermal protection. Sides asked if the window will be simulated divided lite or permanently applied grids at the transom. Gregerman replied exterior applied only. Buchinski noted that this project is for the windows on the 2nd and 3rd floors only. Tucker stated that the YMCA owns the 1st floor. Sides asked for clarification that everything within the masonry openings would be replaced. Bushinski replied yes. Chair Durand opens public comment. No one in the assembly wished to speak. Chair Durand closes public comment. Sides: Motion to approve as presented. Seconded by: Kennedy. Passes 5-0. Old/New Business Election of Officers – Chair and Vice Chair Kennedy: Motion to approve Helen Sides as Vice-Chair of the DRB. Seconded by: Miller. Passes 5-0. Kennedy: Motion to approve Paul Durand as Chair of the DRB. Seconded by: Miller. Passes 5-0. Resignation of Member – Christopher Dynia SRA Recommendation of Member – Marc Perras Minutes The minutes of the April 24, 2019 meeting were reviewed. Sides: Motion to approve with Miller’s edits. Seconded by: Miller. Passes 5-0 Adjournment Sides: Motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by: Miller. Passes 5-0. Meeting is adjourned at 7:30PM. Know your rights under the Open Meeting Law M.G.L. c. 30A §18-25 and City Ordinance Sections 2-028 through 2-2033.