CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: Wednesday, July 23, 2008
LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith,
Helen Sides
MEMBERS ABSENT: Glenn Kennedy
OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager
RECORDER: Andrea Bray
Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order.
Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review
1. 27 Charter Street (Salem Housing Authority): Discussion of proposed wireless facility
Daniel introduces Kristen LeDuc of Wellman Associates, and states that this item was approved by the Planning Board with the condition that the facility was painted the same color as the building.
LeDuc explains that the new equipment would be screened within a wall and the back door would be painted grey to match the penthouse. She states that the present penthouse height is 16 feet.
The members review the plan.
Durand states that he sees this as an acceptable design and it provides an amenity, and he has no objection.
DeMaio states he has no problem with this design except that he as seen no detail of the material for the screen wall.
LeDuc states that the material will look like brick.
DeMaio states this would probably be fine but he would like to see the material before approving it.
Blier states that he has no issues with this design because it is high enough so it will not be visible.
Durand suggests approval conditioned upon review of the material.
Jaquith says he has no problem with this. He asks about maintenance.
LeDuc says that the Planning Board has spelled out the maintenance requirements.
Jaquith: Motion to approve conditioned upon review of the material for screening, and provided the site is maintained according to the Planning Board’s specifications, seconded by Sides. Passes 5-0.
Daniel suggests deferring the material review to a member.
DeMaio agrees to review the material.
2. Solar Trash Compactors and Recycling Kiosks: Discussion of proposed installation of additional solar trash compactors and new recycling kiosks
Tom Watkins of the Mayor’s Office states that these compactors are supporting the city’s green policy, and the city plans to add about 20 units to areas throughout the city. He adds that many of the new models will replace the older models downtown. He says that there will be no kiosk at the mall entrance even though the plan indicates that one will be there.
Daniel asks Watkins to describe the recycling kiosk.
Watkins states that it is a Big Belly solar trash compactor with a paper recycler on one side and a bottle/can recycler on the other side.
Sides states that the bus stop near the Elks is a serious trash location as is the library. Watkins agrees to consider this.
Julie Rose with the Engineering Office states that the basic compactors cost $3,900 and the kiosks cost $5,800.
Durand states that he would like to see the locations of these on a map indicating the adjacent site. DeMaio agrees.
Watkins agrees to work on this.
DeMaio asks if all of these units come in the same color.
Watkins states that they will all be black.
Jaquith expresses concern with the appearance of the ads on the sides of these units.
DeMaio says that he wonders if anyone has looked at all of the public infrastructure currently being added around the city, including the ashtrays, the bike racks and now the compactors/kiosks. He recommends that the city appoint someone to examine this issue.
Durand suggests approval conditioned upon allowing the board to review the locations after they are in place and, if the board has an issue with a location, the kiosk/compactor can be relocated.
Blier: Motion to approve the installation of the compactors/kiosks subject to the board’s approval of the locations after installation. If the board determines that a unit has been installed in an inappropriate location, the unit will be relocated to a more appropriate site. The board also recommends that a city official examine the locations of the many pieces of public infrastructure/street furniture being installed throughout the city including ashtrays, bike racks, and compactors/kiosks and develop a plan to avoid congestion and visual clutter. The motion is seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0.
3. Public Tables and Chairs: Discussion of proposed public tables and chairs in Derby Square
Daniel states that he is presenting this item for Kirstin Kinzer, CDBG Planner. He explains that the Mayor and others have been interested in adding tables and chairs to Derby Square. During the Old Town Hall lease discussions with Gordon College, the College agreed to secure the furniture every night with a cable. The current proposal consists of 7 tables and 25 chairs. He describes the chairs as durable and stackable, and the table will have a tilt top for stacking.
The members review a diagram of the potential layout configuration for morning, when the table and chairs are oriented on the left hand side of the square, away from the tables next to Maria’s. The also examine a potential layout for a performance or special activity.
Sides says that she thinks that this is a great idea, but it is a hot spot and is in the sun all day long. She thinks that the tabletop should be mesh because it will not collect the rain and will not get as hot.
Durand states that he understands Sides’ concern about the sun in that plaza, but Salem is not always hot. He agrees with Sides’ idea on using mesh tables. He says that he is in favor of this concept.
Jaquith agrees with the mesh idea.
Blier states that this might be slightly more idealistic than ideal. He expresses concern about the policing of this area for any antisocial people that might spend all day there.
Daniel states that it would be policed like any other public space.
Blier says that he wonders how long the tables and chairs will actually stay there before someone takes them.
DeMaio agrees with Blier and states that after hours in Salem can be a lively place and there are no eyes watching that plaza at 1:00 AM.
Blier says that maybe with the increased life in Old Town Hall this idea could work.
Steve Goldberg asks if permanent chairs would work better there.
DeMaio says that the beauty of the Old Town Hall square is that it is a flexible space and using removable furniture would be ideal.
Clay Colarusso, a condominium owner in the Distillery at 141 Washington Street, expresses concern about the type of activity this amenity might attract.
Lee Wolf, owner of the Lobster Shanty, expresses concern about the hours of operation and the policing need.
Steve Goldberg, owner of 2-26 Front Street, says that they have had break-ins and vandalism and the police have not been able to curb the incidents.
Durand suggests assigning someone to oversee this area so it will remain clean and safe. He says that this idea needs more thought.
Daniel agrees to advise Kirsten Kinzer of the concerns of the board.
Jaquith: Motion to continue this item, seconded by sides. Passes 5-0.
4. 60 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed changes to two entrances
Daniel states that there was a field-visit since the last meeting.
Steve Goldberg states that the existing main entrance will be lowered 5-7 inches and they will add a railing on the outside and an automatic door button. Additionally, he says that on the other door (to Courthouse Deli) there will be two six-inch steps going in. He adds that this space will soon be used by another tenant.
DeMaio suggest placing the rail inside the building.
Goldberg states that an inside rail would ruin the lobby of the building.
Durand states that he doesn’t have a problem with the two steps but he doesn’t think that it meets code. He adds that he can’t make a decision about the railing because there is no drawing, and he wishes to see the design on paper. He agrees that having rails inside would not be aesthetically pleasing.
Sides states that it is contingent on the design of the rail but she prefers the shorter rail, which would be outside.
DeMaio describes the design for the rail on the inside with a 1:20 sloped floor, stating that it would look much better than the proposed outside rail.
Daniel clarifies that a piece of molding will be above the door that is lowered. He asks if the sidelights will also be lowered.
Goldberg states that the sidelights will also be lowered.
Durand states that he would prefer a decorative railing rather than the standard ADA compliant rail.
DeMaio states that he could place the nice brass hand rail inside the building and it would look good, and the outside rail would look bad if it extends out to the sidewalk.
Goldberg expresses his frustration with the board.
Durand states that the board cannot make an aesthetic decision without having the drawings.
Much discussion ensues about this design and the members agree that they need to see a plan with the rail placement and specific information about the material for the rail.
Goldberg asks for approval pending review of the handrail. He expresses his disappointment.
Sides: Motion to continue this item, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0.
Approval of Minutes: June 25, 2008 Meeting
Voting members are Durand, Jaquith, DeMaio and Sides.
Jaquith: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0.
Sides: Motion to adjourn, seconded Blier. Passes 5-0.
The meeting is adjourned at 7:30 PM.
| 
