CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Special Meeting
DATE: Thursday, January 24, 2008
LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy
OTHERS PRESENT: Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner
Jaquith calls the meeting to order.
Projects Under Review
1. 90 Lafayette Street: Discussion of alteration to approved design
Matt Picarsic of RCG describes the problem encountered with the approved design once demolition of the existing façade began. The band of brick assumed to be straight across the face of the building in fact varies by 3 inches from one side of the building to the other. If the sign band is installed as proposed, a gap will be visible under one corner of the sign band. He proposes to drop the sign band and lengthen the marquee above the entrance to address this problem.
DeMaio asks how tall the proposed sign band is.
Picarsic states that it was approved to be 3’-6” tall and will now be 5’ tall and the line will be maintained horizontally.
Kennedy comments that this work is ongoing and the mortar now being used on the building does not match the existing mortar at all. He states that it is up to ½” thicker than the original mortar lines.
Alex Schnip of RCG states that the color will match the original mortar once the building is cleaned at the end of construction.
DeMaio notes that in the prior approval, light fixtures and signage design was not approved. He states that when these items are before the DRB, they will be particular in what will be approved including no exposed conduit, no lighting sources glowing when you are walking down the street.
Picarsic states that this building is actually very easy to work with for electrical wiring. He asks if the DRB has a preferred fixture.
DeMaio states that there is not preferred fixture; the DRB just does not like lights shining in peoples faces.
Jaquith reiterates that the DRB does not have a preferred light fixture.
DeMaio asks about the headers above the second floor windows and if RCG will change what is existing.
Picarsic states that he is not anticipating changing the headers.
Jaquith comments that the sign band hangs over on one side of the storefront window and not the other. He states that the band should overhang equally on each side of the windows.
Kennedy: Motion to recommend approve with the following conditions:
· The sign band shall overhang equally on each side of the storefront windows
· Signage and lighting design shall be reviewed by the DRB at a later date
The motion is seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0.
2. 155-189 Washington Street, Central House renovation (Salem News redevelopment): Discussion of Final Design Plans
Picarsic describes the proposed design which includes only the renovation of the existing Central House and does not include the new building on the Salem News site.
DeMaio asks if this is considered one or two projects and if tonight’s review would be a final approval of this project.
Picarsic states that RCG is seeking approval of the work on the Central House only at this meeting.
DeMaio states that he has a problem conceptually with breaking one project into two pieces.
Jaquith states that he is not concerned with this as the renovation to this building follows the design of the old building.
Kennedy agrees commenting that this building is not going to change so in a sense this is really two projects. The question is how the new building will respond to the old building.
Lynn Duncan remarks from the audience that if the developer is willing to meet the requirements of the DRB it is in the City’s interest to move development forward that is ready to go forward.
Walter Powers comments from the audience that relative to the façade of the old building, he saw a historic photo from the 1800’s. He asks if RCG looked at this photo. He also states that this building will be very different from the new building, making for a nice street.
Picarsic states that they do have historic photos of the building which were submitted to the Historical Commission.
Powers remarks that the back of this building rises above the Marketplace stalls and should look like a front.
Discussion ensues regarding the corner of the new building at Derby Street and the consideration of bay windows and the curved corner.
Jaquith states that the curved corner was settled on by the DRB as the superior solution and the DRB has asked RCG to extend the bay windows as far out from the building face as allowed by the building code.
Powers recommends that RCG take a closer look at old drawings of the Central House. He also comments that he is not happy with the treatment of the rear of the existing building where the chimneys are simply enclosed with siding making this façade look like the rear of a bakery.
Jaquith asks what material is proposed for the siding.
Picarsic states that 8 ¾ inch Dutch lap pine siding is proposed.
DeMaio inquires about what will happen with the siding at the corner of the building.
Jason Downing of RCG answers that there will be a corner board at the corners.
DeMaio says that looking at the elevation, one side looks like the siding turns the corner and the other side looks like it has a thin corners board. He wonders what the siding looked like originally.
Jaquith asks RCG to go through the colors and where they are going on the elevation.
Picarsic states that the corbels will be Avon green, the window trim will be green and the window casing is brown, although it looks red on the elevation.
DeMaio comments that what Picarsic has described as green is shown as brown on the elevation. The DRB needs clarification on the color scheme.
Kennedy asks what color the detail above the window will be.
Picarsic does not know the answer to this question.
Jaquith states that in this period of architecture, the building would have been more decorated. He continues that in general he does not have a problem with the street faces as they look like what is there.
Kennedy asks if the windows are paned or two over two and says that on the elevation it looks as if the second floor windows may be completely different from what is there now.
Picarsic answers that it is his intention that all the windows will be the same as what is there now.
DeMaio inquires if this means two over two on sidelight windows at the front of the building.
Downing answers affirmatively.
Kennedy comments that he likes the color scheme, asks if the yellow is the color that is there now and states that the red should be a little brighter. He further comments that he agrees with the need for a corner board and asks for more information on the screening or fence.
Picarsic responds that the fence is six feet tall and he does not know specifically what it is made of.
DeMaio states that everything on the ground is deferred to a further meeting.
Kennedy notes that the rear of the building has the feeling of the back of a building but on Front Street you will not actually feel like you are facing the back of a building. As you walk past the parking lot you will see this face of the building and there needs to be some better way of handling the windows and entries.
Picarsic says that the windows are all there already and are all staying.
Kennedy asks if there is any way to handle them differently.
Picarsic responds that the units are matched to the existing windows.
Kennedy asks if the rear siding will match the front.
Picarsic responds affirmatively.
Jaquith notes that the floor plan does not show the little windows seen on the elevation.
DeMaio mentions the need for information on rooftop screening of HVAC units including material, color and height.
Jaquith adds that this must be shown on the elevations and will be seen on the front elevation.
DeMaio says that the screening must be integrated with the architecture and should not just be white vinyl.
The members discuss the Pella window sample.
Emily Udy, HSI, comments from the audience that HSI supports cladding the building in wood siding and requests wood frames for the replacement windows.
Downing states that the existing windows above the Edgewater Café are aluminum.
Picarsic adds that RCG’s goal is to have windows that will last without maintenance.
The members discuss the windows used by the Goldbergs on Front Street.
DeMaio comments that to be approved, the submittal needs to include working drawings with an accurate representation of what is there and what is proposed and an elevation with accurate colors. The DRB will also need to see details on the HVAC screening and the chimneys on the rear of the building to make sure the horizontal lines represent the width of the siding, cap at the top of the vents, and corner detailing. Roof top equipment and two over two windows on the second floor must be shown on the elevations.
Kennedy encourages RCG to consider the windows used by the Goldbergs. He comments on the screening and states that 6 feet may not be tall enough.
Picarsic says that he believes this height is limited by the building code.
Kennedy responds that he believes the limitation is 6 feet for a wall and 7 ½ feet for screening.
DeMaio states that there is a lot of activity on Front Street and he does not want the rear of the building to feel like an alley.
Kennedy suggests adding detail to the doors on the rear elevation to make them feel like entry doors.
DeMaio agrees, commenting that these doors should not just look like service doors.
Kennedy reminds RCG that they will have residents parking on this side of the building.
DeMaio states that these entrances will be how residents get home and you don’t want them to feel like they’re in a back alley.
Kennedy suggests awnings or detailing over the entry doors.
Kennedy: Motion to continue the review of the Central House
The motion is seconded by DeMaio. Passes 3-0.
DeMaio: Motion to adjourn.
The motion is seconded by Kennedy. Passes 3-0.
Meeting is adjourned at 7:35 pm.
| 
