DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
September 26, 2007
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, September 26, 2007 at 6:00 pm.
Members Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Earnest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy were present. Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner, and Andrea Bray, Clerk, were also present.
Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order.
Projects Under Review
1. 275-281 Essex Street (CF Tompkins Building) – Review of final construction drawings.
Attorney George Atkins who represents the applicant introduced architect Keith Musinski.
Musinski reviews the alterations that were made as a result of the comments from a previous DRB meetings. He states that the name of the design will be “Latitude”.
Durand asks about rooftop screening and DeMaio clarifies the previous discussion about the screening.
Musinski states that they have not changed the screening plans.
Atkins states that the Planning Board approved the site review on this project. He reads the approval language which applies to the screening.
Durand states that he would like to see the design after the City Planner has approved it.
Atkins states that the building permit has been issued already and they are working on the building, but the elements which are being discussed tonight have not proceeded.
Durand states that he would like them to return next month to see the plans for the screening.
Atkins introduces the possibility of having a different design on the entry vestibule on the Essex Street side of the building.
Musinski states that he would like to place the entryway out to avoid having a deep recess that collects leaves and may pose a security issue. He provides the Board with the new plans.
Jaquith suggests having storefront material at the entryway instead of brick and Musinski agrees to this.
Atkins suggests returning with a new plan for the entry vestibule reflecting the storefront material.
Kinzer asks if they have selected a color pallet for the building front.
Musinski states that their palate only consists of one color because they are only painting windows and door trim.
Kinzer states that in that case the Verizon equipment can remain the color that it was painted following the SRA decision.
DeMaio: Motion to continue to the next meeting, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 5-0)
2. 6 East India Square, Museum Place Mall (Rose Medallion) – Discussion of proposed signage.
Sign designer Marshall Tripoli describes the sign design and states that it will be made of oak or PVC. The arrows and ‘Tea Room’ will be recessed and ‘Rose Medallion’ will be raised.
Kennedy asks about the color of the gold lettering.
Tripoli states that the gold lettering will be Gold 871 paint.
Kennedy: Motion to approver, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 5-0)
3. 6 East India Square, Museum Place Mall (Yarina) – Discussion of proposed signage.
Sign designer Marshall Tripoli states that this is in one of the four new storefronts in the Museum Place Mall. He describes the creation of the art, which was originally painted on cardboard. He states that the sign will be about ½ inch thick, and will be digitally printed.
Kennedy states that this could be really nice or really bad depending on the execution of this design. He adds that a digital print could be put on a canvas to give it a real look. He asks about the frame.
Tripoli states that it will be a regular metal frame.
Kennedy states that he would like some more clarification to the design.
Tripoli clarifies that there will be a white frame around the entire sign. He states that he plans to alter the lettering in the ‘Threads’ so it blends in with the entire piece.
Jaquith suggests that the lettering be a bit thicker for better readability. He states that the Board should see this design in the elevation.
Kennedy: Motion to continue this item until the Board gets a resubmission and a more clarified design, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 5-0)
4. 139 Washington Street (The Picklepot) – Continued discussion of proposed signage.
Jaquith: Motion to continue until the next meeting, seconded by Blier. (Passes 5-0)
5. 75-87 Washington Street (Kinsman Block) – Continued discussion of proposed façade alterations.
Owner Bill Goldberg states that all of his proposals were approved at the last meeting except for items 11 and 12 (the removal of the trees and the exterior door on the second level)
Goldberg states that he is willing to compromise by replacing the trees on the far left and right of the building and trimming the others. He states that they took Mr. Jaquith’s suggestion about maintaining the double door on the second level, so they will have a door there that does not open. .
Blier speaks about the tree issue stating that these are tough trees to prune.
Kennedy states that he agrees that these trees are challenging to the building. He adds that a cadence is set down the street with the trees so it might be better to start over.
Blier agrees and says that with long term viability many of these trees are in ratty condition. He suggests taking them out and replacing them with another species that is more upright growing and less spreading. He adds that there are many tree species that have a vertical canopy which will not spread.
Goldberg says that he likes that idea but is concerned about them spreading out and he would like to get permission to trim them if the do.
Blier states that this project could set up a standard to replace the unruly trees with a more appropriate street tree with a vertical growth. He suggests 4 to 5 inch caliper maples or oaks, but they should all be the same species. He says that this will be more architectural without the merging tree canopies.
Goldberg asks if the City will contribute by the removal of the existing trees.
Kinzer states that she will look into that.
Goldberg states that item 12 deals with the double door on the second floor in the alleyway. He shows the new design for the door.
Durand reviews the issues stating that item 11 will be the removal of 6 unhealthy trees and replacing them with 6 trees (5” caliper in a fastigiated variety maple or oak species to be reviewed by the Board)
Blier states that during the first year the trees will need to be maintained.
Durand reviews item 12, stating that the door panels should not be flush with the wall.
Jaquith: Motion to continue until the next meeting, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 5-0)
6. 155-189 Washington Street (Salem News Building) – Continued discussion of Schematic Design Plans for the proposed redevelopment.
Paul Durand and Michael Blier recuse themselves from this discussion/decision.
Developer Matt Picarsic describes the design stating that they will create a strong cornice line at the first floor and set back the fourth floor and add interest to the corner with some wood treatment.
Meg Toohey, Historic Salem Inc., comments on the plans stating that they appreciate the items that they have addressed yet continued to be concerned about the way the site will look from Front Street. She shows photos of the Front Street façade and asks the Board to consider what the building will look like on that side and what could be possible if they eliminate the parking lot which is planned on Front Street. She expresses concern with the curve in the corner and with materials. She suggests echoing details like the cornice brackets and stepping back the fourth floor. She asks the Board to consider how this storefront will look from the street level.
DeMaio asks about the material for the projecting bays.
Ron Lamarre, Architect, Opechee, states that fiber cement will be used at the projection bays, cornices and the around the windows.
Jaquith states that the continuity on the first three floors is better but he agrees with Historic Salem Inc’s concern about the forth floor. He adds that he has no problem with the curve but he is concerned about the fourth level brick and the balconies chopping in to the cornice lines.
DeMaio agrees with Jaquith that he doesn’t have a problem with the curve and he doesn’t mind the scale of the corner being bigger. He asks what the inspiration was for the reddish brick.
Lamarre states that it is all over Washington Street and he wishes to address the issue of making this a prominent building.
DeMaio states that the red brick poses a bit of a disconnect with the surrounding buildings.
Kennedy states that he under-whelmed by the design of this building at this corner and he is concerned about this being the cornerstone of the Derby Street area. He adds that it is such an important corner for Salem and he is challenged by this design.
Jaquith states that they are partway there and it can be the building that should be there, and it should make the transition around the corner. He adds that the other key view is from Artist’s Row and Front Street.
DeMaio asks if there is an actual landscaping plan.
Picarsic states that there is a plan that they will present to the Board. He adds that they will bring the other elevations to see what is there now and what it will look like.
Kennedy asks if he could not make the comparison to what is there now because everyone would agree that anything would be an improvement to what is there now.
Jaquith: Motion to continue to the next meeting, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 3-0)
7. 90 Lafayette Street – Continued discussion of proposed façade alterations.
Paul Durand and Michael Blier recuse themselves from this discussion/decision.
Developer Picarsic displays the plans. He states that they will provide two additional entrances to the building and clean up the storefront. He says there will be five residences on the second floor as well as some offices.
Kennedy asks about the colors used for the storefront.
Picarsic states the entryways will be recessed and they will be white and the sign band will be silver. He adds that they will replace the windows on the second floor and wash the brick.
Kennedy asks about the column in the middle of the storefront window.
Picarsic states that it will be silver and the canopy will be white.
DeMaio asks about the materials for the sills on the second floor windows.
Picarsic says he believes they will be concrete.
DeMaio expresses concern with the signage.
Kinzer states that the DRB will recommend approval of the overall placement of the signage and individual business owners must come back for specific signage approval.
DeMaio expresses concern with silver color signage. He suggests bringing some cast stone down to other parts of the building. He asks if any of the brickwork will be repaired.
Picarsic states that they will repair the part where the arch will be removed.
DeMaio states that the mortar used for re-pointing must be approved.
Jaquith emphasizes that he use cast stone and not concrete.
Kennedy: Motion to recommend approval to the SRA with the following conditions: At their meeting on September 26, 2007 the DRB voted to recommend approval of the proposed façade alterations at 90 Lafayette Street with the following conditions:
· The canopy over the new Lafayette Street entrance shall be silver
· The second floor window lintels shall be cast stone
· At the storefront windows and column there shall be a cast stone base to make-up the grade change resulting from the street slope
· New mortar shall be reviewed and approved by the a member of the DRB
· Proposals for signage within the sign band, blade signs and blade sign lighting will require further review by the DRB and SRA
The motion is seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 3-0)
8. 191-211 Washington Street (Hawthorne Building) – Discussion of proposed awnings and sign brackets.
Paul Durand recuses himself from this discussion/decision.
Picarsic states that they are addressing the challenges of visibility because this building steps back from Washington Street. He provides material samples for the awnings which will have no signage. He describes the blade signs.
DeMaio suggests that the awnings be open on the sides and Picarsic agrees with this.
Much discussion ensues about the varied awning colors.
Jaquith states that he has no problem with the blade sign concept.
Kennedy suggests using only the black awnings.
Picarsic states they wished to cater to the anchor tenant, Starbucks, who have requested awnings in their signature green. He adds that the brackets will be 28” wide and 14” long.
Kennedy then suggest using only blue, red and green awnings and wrapping the awnings around the corners of the building to Derby Street and Dodge Street.
DeMaio: Motion to recommend approval with the following conditions:
· The sides of the awnings shall be open
· At the corner storefronts, the awnings shall be installed on the New Derby Street and Dodge Street façade as well as the Washington Street façade
· The awning color scheme shall be as follows:
§ New Derby Street awnings shall be blue
§ The 4 awnings at the left side of the Washington St. façade shall be blue
§ The 3 awnings at the center of the Washington St. façade shall be red
§ The 1 awning at the right of the Washington St. façade shall be green
§ The awnings on the Dodge St. façade shall be green
· There shall be no text or signage on the awnings
· Lighting of the sign brackets will require further review
Motion seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 3-0)
9. Approval of Minutes – May 23, June 27, July 25, and August 22 meetings
Kennedy: Motion to approve the May 23 meeting minutes, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 4-0)
DeMaio: Motion to approve the June 27 meeting minutes, seconded by Jaquith. (Passes 4-0)
Jaquith: Motion to approve the July 25 meeting minutes, seconded by Kennedy. (Passes 4-0)
Jaquith: Motion to approve the August 22 meeting minutes seconded by Blier. (Passes 4-0)
Kinzer states that they will need a Special Meeting to review the Picklepot sign before the next SRA meeting. She will contact the Board about the schedule.
Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. (Passes 3-0)
The meeting is adjourned at 8:30 PM.
| 
