DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
JUNE 28, 2006
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, June 28, 2006 at 6:00 pm.
Members Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, Paul Durand, David Jaquith, and Glenn Kennedy were present. Tania Hartford, Staff Planner, and Debra Tucker, Clerk, were also present.
MINUTES
The minutes from the May 24, 2006 meeting will be presented for approval at the next meeting.
PROJECTS UNDER REVIEW
1. 17 Central Street (Old Police Station/Residences at Museum Place)
Developer’s representative, William Luster, reported that the doors on the front of the building at 17 Central Street, Residences at Museum Place, had been previously approved, however, the residents were not happy. The current residents do not like the glass and lack of privacy. Originally the intent was to sell the unit as a more public space, such as a gallery.
Mr. Luster said that he was recommending a single door with a wooden sidelight, which would be painted the same color as the trim. He stated that the residents preferred this solution and added that double doors would not meet code. Ms. Hartford added that the SRA had reviewed the matter and referred it to the DRB.
Mr. Durand said that he was fine with the proposal and understood that this required insulation from the public in this urban situation since the door is on the street. Mr. Blier agreed.
Mr. DeMaio asked what color the other doors were painted. Mr. Luster answered that they were green and that the windows were aluminum painted an off white color. Mr. Kennedy noted that the trim around the panel should match.
Mr. DeMaio asked if there had been hardware selected. Mr. Luster said that it had not been chosen but that he would be willing to bring the selection in for approval. Mr. DeMaio said that he would want to see the cut of the hardware and that his concern would be to make sure that it would be compatible. Mr. Luster said that it would be a lever door handle. Ms. Hartford suggested that the board could designate someone to review the hardware and suggested Mr. DeMaio. Ms. Hartford requested that Mr. Luster submit a specification or sample to her.
2. 45 Lafayette Street (Cornerstone Books)
Ms. Hartford reported that the SRA had requested DRB review of signage lighting installed by Cornerstone Books located at 45 Lafayette Street without prior approval. She presented photographs to the board of the lighting over the blade sign.
Mr. Durand commented that the conduit was not well done. The owner stated that it runs through the wood vent and along the front. He said that it was the only external place that he could go without going through the concrete. He noted that the other lighting had been done by RCG. Mr. Durand noted that the RCG lighting had been pre-approved by the DRB and the SRA.
Mr. Jaquith joined the meeting.
Mr. Kennedy commented that New Civilitea had done a nice job with their lighting and had painted the conduit black. The owner said that he could make sure that it matches. Mr. Durand noted that the board was not trying to punish the owner but was worried about setting a bad precedent.
The owner said that it would be expensive to go through the concrete. He said that it was important to have the lighting since his business is open at night and he needs visibility. Mr. DeMaio said that New Civilitea had the same problem. He stated that they selected a different light fixture and they painted the conduit. The owner asked what color he should paint the conduit. Mr. Durand replied that it should be black since the signs are black. Mr. Durand suggested that if the lights were moved higher, that it might be better. The owner offered that he could move the sign closer to the edge. Mr. Durand added that the vent should be painted. The owner said that he would look into a type of paint that could handle the heat from the vent.
Mr. Durand recommended that the conduit be directed out through the wood vent and that this would make the conduit more discreet. He said that the current conduit was poor craftsmanship and that it needed to be tight to the upper corner and over the sign and “T” off vertically at the sign and be painted black. Mr. Durand said that the lights should be raised above the sign.
Mr. DeMaio suggested that the owner use a fixture consistent with the other nearby projects. The owner was given the specification information. Mr. Durand drew out the conduit path on the photographs.
Ms. Hartford informed the owner that the lighting still needed SRA board approval and that the next meeting would be held on July 19th.
3. 45 Lafayette Street (Cornerstone Books)
Ms. Hartford reported that the SRA had not reviewed the proposed outdoor café plans for Cornerstone Books at 45 Lafayette Street; however, in order to expedite the process she is having the DRB review it tonight. She stated that there is currently a café in operation with a total of 8 tables with 2 chairs at each table and that it is similar to the café at New Civilitea.
The board indicated that they approved the plan, as submitted, and Ms. Hartford informed the owner that the plan now needed SRA approval. She recommended that he contact the Board of Health and the Licensing department for any necessary permits before the next SRA meeting.
4. 17-21 Front Street
Ms. Hartford reported that the SRA referred the proposed exterior storefront improvements at 17-21 Front Street to the DRB for review. She noted Ms. Sullivan’s comments that she would not approve vinyl shutters for the building and would prefer either wooden shutters or none at all. The SRA requested review of the shutters, railings, windows, and lighting for signage.
Mr. Lutrzykowski said that the owner would like to remove the shutters and return to the original look of the building as well as avoid the cost of wooden shutters and the related maintenance costs. He said that the owners do not have a lighting or signage plan yet and that these would depend on the tenants. The proposal calls for adding two dormers in the rear of the building like the two existing dormers with true divided lights in the windows. They are proposing exterior storm windows due to heat loss and want to erect a wooden side railing.
Mr. Durand commented that storm windows in a historic setting are not preferred. The owner said that it is a code issue. Mr. Durand recommended changing the windows or installing interior storm windows. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that the existing windows are not adaptable and that replacing the windows is a cost issue. He noted that the inside of the building is being gutted and that the Building Inspector wants the building brought up to code. He said that the storm window that they are proposing is a white Harvey two channel window.
Mr. Durand said that he would like to see a photograph of the proposed storm window installed somewhere. Mr. Jaquith added that a sample window should be brought in for the DRB to review. Mr. Blier asked what the code requirement was. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that he would get the information. The owner said that most of the windows are on the second and third floors and not the first. They intend to re-glaze and repaint the windows.
Mr. Kennedy said that there was a building on Derby Street in the historic district that had storm windows. The owner said that energy costs are skyrocketing and that there has to be a compromise. Mr. Durand replied that cost does not always come into play and that the board tries to do what is best for the City. The owner replied that he is trying to rehab the building.
Mr. Jaquith said that the windows would change the look of the building. Mr. Durand added that there would be many unhappy people if the storm windows were allowed. Mr. DeMaio commented that in trying to bring the building back to the look of the 18th century, the windows are important. The owner said that they would either replace the shutters with vinyl or have no shutters. He said that there were no shutters before. Mr. DeMaio said that if the shutters were removed, it would change the look dramatically if storm windows were added. He noted that shadow depth would be important.
The owner said that he was trying to take older buildings and bring them up to date and that it was not easy. He added that future tenants would not want to see small hardware store screens inside. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that they would look into storm window ideas. The owner said no. Mr. Durand said that they were trying to do the best for the City and that this would be precedent setting. He added that the board tries to be uniform. Mr. Durand noted that removing the shutters would be acceptable.
Regarding the front door the owner said that he would match the existing wooden door, which was changed in 2001 and may not have been approved. They would add a door on the left side. There are no signs requested at this time.
Mr. DeMaio asked what was proposed for the new entrance at the existing stone columns. He asked if the owner was intending to match the existing right side return, which is a 6” return at the vestibule with a stone jamb. Mr. Lutrzykowski replied that that was their intent.
Mr. Jaquith asked about the entry. The owner said that there are currently two entrances with about 3,000 square feet on the first floor and would either be for one tenant or two (at 1,800 square feet and 1,300 square feet). This may require a second entrance on the first floor.
Mr. Jaquith asked if something had happened to the existing door. He noted a bronze aluminum match would be acceptable but asked what was there for doors. Mr. Kennedy asked if all doors would be the same and match. The owner replied that they would.
Mr. Jaquith said that the board needed to see elevation drawings for the building and that they are preferred to perspectives. Mr. Durand said that there would be a lot of attention paid to this and the other buildings on Front Street, which has a lot of character. He added that the board was not trying to be punitive. Mr. Durand said that the buildings are simple and the brick and windows are important to the building.
Mr. Lutrzykowski said that he would speak to the owner and try to go in another direction and put together a proposal. Mr. Durand said that it would be important to re-point correctly so that the building does not look scarred. The owner replied that the building needs a total rehab. The shutters will be removed and the dormers will be replicated exactly.
Ms. Hartford said that a measured drawing is required for the July SRA meeting and that an actual window must be submitted or another solution.
Mr. Lutrzykowski asked if the new door locations were acceptable. The board indicated that they were. Mr. DeMaio requested that the vestibules be designed to be identical to the rest and that all three entrances look the same. Mr. Lutrzykowski replied that he would do a sketch. Mr. Jaquith informed him that drawings for that building do exist.
Mr. Kennedy recommended that they design a signage plan including conduit placement and color and submit it for approval. Mr. Blier asked about the porch off the side of the building. He noted that it does not look right in an urban setting and referenced the one at Rockafella’s restaurant. He thought that it was more suburban and out of context.
Mr. Jaquith recommended that the owner look at the step and handrail. Mr. Lutrzykowski said that they prefer wrought iron or wood. Mr. Jaquith said that it would be better in the long run to use wrought iron. Mr. Durand agreed and said that wrought iron is preferred.
Ms. Hartford directed the owner to present a revised plan with drawings (dormer, window, doors) and an actual photograph of the proposed storm window as well as a specification of the wrought iron railing, and the step involved. The doors will be approved as simple bronze aluminum door fronts as submitted.
5. 24 New Derby Street (Crafters Boutique)
The owner of Crafters Boutique appeared for review of proposed signage at 24 New Derby Street. They proposed replacement of the former Craftisian’s sign and will be the same shape and will be made of26” X 32” MDO board. Frank Taormino of the Planning Department added that the sign for The Shanty is an identical oval.
Mr. DeMaio asked about the zoning requirement regarding the height of the sign. Ms. Hartford answered that there are conflicting guidelines of 8 feet and 10 feet but that 8 feet has been allowed where it works. Mr. Taormino added that the existing signs for Mamidou and The Shanty are at 8 feet. Ms. Hartford noted that the perspective in the submission was off and that that photo was not to scale. Mr. Taormino said that the signage and poles are the same dimensions. The owner indicated that he would be in business until November.
Mr. Kennedy made the following suggestions to the owner: the shape and lettering were nice but a better font is needed and the background color tone should be 10%-15% lighter to the background color to have contrast. Mr. Durand asked Mr. Kennedy if he would help the owner. Ms. Hartford requested that the owner re-submit the revised proposal to her for the July 19th SRA meeting.
6. 24 New Derby Street (Row Gallery)
The owner of Row Gallery of 24 New Derby Street appeared for review of proposed signage. Mr. Jaquith asked if the proposed size of the sign was 30”x34”. The owner said that she was planning on using MDF and hoped to open July 9th. Mr. Kennedy suggested changes to the color in order to balance it and make it dimensional. Ms. Hartford asked the owner to re-submit the revised proposal for the July 19th SRA meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
The August Meeting will be scheduled for August 22, 2006.
7. North River Canal Corridor Project Review
Ms. Hartford informed the board that the DRB would now be reviewing any proposed projects to be located in the NRCC Zoning District and making recommendations to the Planning Board. She distributed copies of the “Neighborhood Master Plan for the North River Canal Corridor”. The DRB uses the “Heritage Plaza West Urban Renewal Plan” criteria for review. Signage will be part of the site plan review by the DRB.
Ms. Hartford noted that the first project for review, for the kitchen and cabinet business on Commercial Street, would be presented at the July meeting.
Mr. Durand stated that the DRB would help the Planning Board with aesthetic issues. Ms. Hartford said that she would obtain a scaled map of the surveyed plan for the area for members. Ms. Duncan may attend the July meeting in order to explain the zoning.
8. Violations
Ms. Hartford noted that she will be pursuing violations by the Salem Five Bank at the Washington Street location (sign), Hair Express (sign), Daniel Lowe (porch), and Fresh Taste of Asia (signs).
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the board, Mr. Durand moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Jaquith seconded the motion, and the vote was (5-0).
| 
