DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
November 28, 2007
A 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, November 28, 2007 at 6:00 pm.
Chairperson Paul Durand, Members Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, and 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. 316 New Derby Street (Radiance Aveda) – discussion of proposed signage
Kinzer introduces Trish Grzela and states Radiance Aveda has opened.
Grzela states that the sign colors are black and white, exactly as shown in the handouts.
DeMaio states that his first reaction is that the sign is bland and not too creative.
Grzela explains that it is her logo and that she has stayed basic.
DeMaio asks if she could have some depth to the letters and Grzela agrees.
Kennedy echos DeMaio’s comments. He states that although it included a flat blade sign, Rouge’s sign package was different and well-considered. He recommends some break-up and cadence to the horizontal line in the middle of the sign and Grzela agrees to this.
Durand agrees that he wants signs that are slightly inventive.
Jaquith states that he would like her to use flat black paint.
The members agree that this would be better with the letters in ¼ inch relief.
Durand states that glossy black would work.
Kennedy states that the line could be broken up with a circle in the middle.
Jaquith: Motion to approve the sign with the following conditions:
· The lettering shall be incised if the thickness of the sign board can accommodate incised letters.
· If the lettering can not be incised, the line dividing the sign shall be broken into multiple lines.
· The background color shall be glossy black.
The motion is seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0.
Grzela states that she would like to install window decals as well.
Kinzer states that window decals are considered signage and that she will need to submit the decals for review by the DRB.
2. 2 East India Square, Suite 119 (Rita’s Water Ice) – discussion of proposed signage
Kinzer introduces Cynthia Weaver and project manager Kevin Campbell, and states that the sign colors and font are corporate and cannot be altered.
Weaver states that text in the windows is decals, not neon signs.
Kennedy expresses concern with the green sign boarder clashing with the green awning, and Durand agrees. Kennedy states that the sign needs no boarder or the boarder could be smaller and brought inside with white at the edge of the sign.
Durand states that there could be more white on the left and right of the lettering.
Campbell asks if there could be red and white stripes on the left and right of the lettering.
Kennedy states that a red stripe could be placed close to each side edge.
DeMaio states that the signs and decals do not have consistency which is less than ideal for branding.
Kennedy suggests that the decal on the door could echoe the design of the sign on the awning. He cites the decal in a Rita’s promotional brochure.
Jaquith expresses concern with the product decals along the bottom of the storefront windows.
The members discuss possible locations for the product images and agree that it would be preferable to show the product from within the store, rather than on the window.
Kinzer clarifies the definition of temporary signage, stating that temporary signs must refer to specials or sales of limited duration and must be removed after the sale or special ends.
Campbell requests arriving at some sort of compromise on the of showing images of Rita’s product. He states that in a new market, it is crucial that passersby see the product to understand what it is. He suggests a low wall inside the window with the products signs on it.
The members do not react positively to this idea and Campbell then suggests placing their offer image as a smaller decal in repeat patterns across the bottom of windows.
Kennedy states that he likes the idea of having the offer repeated across the bottom of the window, each about 10 inches high. The other members agree to this.
Durand suggests continuing this issue so the members can see the final design.
Weaver agrees to contact Kinzer as soon as the new design is finished.
Jaquith: Motion to continue this issue, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0.
3. 207 Washington Street (Living Well) – discussion of proposed signage
Kinzer introduces Frank Corcoran and Beth Wheeler, owners of Living Well. She states that the internally-lit sign that was up in the previous business was never approved and therefore is not grandfather claused. The internal illumination needs to be specifically approved. She adds that the other businesses in that building all have internally illuminated signs. She states that the approved awning will be dark red and shows a swatch of the fabric.
Corcoran explains that he did not realize that window decals are also part of the sign review process and he therefore did not include the decals in his initial submission. He shows the DRB the decals he has had fabricated and states that his goal is to have the decals visible between the awning and the height of a parked SUV. Corcoran states that there is some tinting at the top of his windows and there are shades on part of the windows to create privacy and a calm setting.
Durand agrees that the decal be put high on the window and the members discuss the height of the window decals at great length.
Kennedy suggests taping copies of the decals to the windows for the board to review and approve.
Durand confirms that the because the other signs in the building have internally illuminated signs, the DRB recommends allowing internal illumination at the Living Well sign. The DRB agrees that without internal illumination, this sign will look standout from the rest of the building signs and look strange. Durand further states that the sign design is acceptable, and the decals will be placed as high as possible.
Kinzer asks Corcoran to contact her when the decal copies are up.
DeMaio: Motion to recommend approval of the sign design and the use internally illuminated sign, subject to the board’s review of the decal placement, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0.
Minutes – October 30, 2007, December 20, 2006, October 25, 2006 meetings
The members review the minutes for the October 30, 2007 meeting and make suggestions for changes.
Jaquith: Motion to approve the amended minutes for the October 30 meeting, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0.
The members agree that these minutes are sketchy and should remain as a permanent draft.
Jaquith: Motion to keep the minutes for the December 20, 2006 meeting as a permanent draft, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0.
The members agree that, to their best recollection, these minutes are accurate.
Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes for the October 30, 2006 meeting, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0. Durand abstained because he was not present.
2008 Meeting Schedule
Durand suggests that the board take off the month of August unless any pressing issues present themselves at the time.
Kinzer requests that the members hold this date open but agrees that the date should not be listed as tentative on the meeting schedule distributed to the public.
Kennedy: Motion to approve this schedule, with no meeting in August unless otherwise scheduled, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0.
…
Jaquith: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0.
The meeting is adjourned at 7:55 PM.
| 
