CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: Wednesday, November 19, 2008
LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, Ernest DeMaio, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy, Helen Sides
MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager
RECORDER: Andrea Bray
Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order.
Approval of Meeting Schedule
Blier: Motion to approve the meeting schedule, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0.
Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review
1. 155-189 Washington Street (Tavern in the Square): Discussion of proposed exterior façade, signage, and lighting
Architect Stephen Sousa describes the design for the color scheme, signage, and lighting.
Sousa discusses the photos of the other locations. He says they will introduce the “practical beige” color on the recessed portion of the sign band as requested by the Board. He presents samples of the brick, window trim, and building colors.
Sousa says the building sign will be a dimensional letter that is halo-lit by LED. He describes the way in which the sign is constructed. He states that the blade sign will have a multi-colored background with dimensional letters, lit with a small blade-sign light.
Sousa states that they will use bronze gooseneck lights above the awnings. He shows a photo of the wall sconces.
Sides expresses concern about the beige band interrupting the color scheme for the storefront. She states that she prefers the uniform brown that was originally presented.
Sousa states that there will be a polished absolute granite base.
Durand agrees that he doesn’t like the beige stripe and would prefer the original proposal.
Jaquith states that the trees enhance the base and provide richness to the look.
DeMaio agrees with Sides and Durand in preferring the original color scheme. He expresses concern about the relationship of the awnings to the sign, because the red awnings are much taller on the other locations, and perhaps the awnings are too small in this case. He states likes the all dark scheme when there is horizontal trim on the pilasters, and he prefers having a silver band on the sign instead of the black band on the tavern sign. DeMaio says that he thinks the blade sign is oversized, as it extends about 5 feet over the sidewalk with the bracket. He requests clarification for the location of the blade signs.
Sousa indicates the location of each blade sign on the plan.
DeMaio states that the blade signs’ locations are consistent with that shown in the elevation.
Kennedy agrees that the band should be darker, and that the blade sign is long and wide he and would prefer it be shorter, maybe 6 inches shorter.
Kennedy states that there is a disconnect with the front sign. He states that the “in the square” in aligned wrong, and he doesn’t understand why “Salem” is necessary on the sign, and he prefers the look of the front sign of the Central Square location. He states that the silver band should be lined up with the top of the awning.
Durand steps out. Jaquith take the Chair.
Owner Joey Arcari agrees to make the front sign identical to the one at Central Square.
Kennedy states that he prefers fewer gooseneck lights across the front. He states that he doesn’t have any issue with the sconce, and he prefers the lighting on the Central Square location.
Jaquith agrees that the decorative wall sconces that are on the Central Square location might look better.
Daniel clarifies that the members are in agreement that the original wall sconces are preferred with the urns and the trees.
Kennedy asks about the height of the letters on the wall sign, and Arcari says that the “T” is 30-inches and it is the biggest letter.
Kennedy expresses concern about the letters being too big.
Sides states that the letter sign looks okay to her because of the proportion of it and the building.
Much discussion ensues about the lighting and the letters.
Kennedy states that he would like to have the silver sign band moved down to the top of the awning and have the letter height within the brown color so it won’t move into the second story. He suggests using the “T” to establish the middle of the top brown band and the other letters will be lower.
Sousa agrees and states that the silver sign band will be in brushed aluminum.
Daniel reviews the recommendations:
- Return to the whole brown base scheme
- Use horizontal trim on all of the pilasters
- Location of the blade signs as in the elevations
- Blade sign will be about 6 inches shorter (less wide)
- The awnings will be extended up
- Gooseneck lighting will move to the top band, and there will be fewer lights than shown in the Central Square photos
- Tavern sign will be moved slightly down so the silver band aligns with the top of the canopy, and the top of the “T” marks the middle of the top brown band
- The horizontal line in the sign (below Tavern) will be in brushed aluminum
- The wall sconces will be those originally proposed
- Salem will not be included in the sign
- Urns will be those shown in the photos and planted year-round
- The awnings will fill the sign band as in Central Square
DeMaio adds that the presence of the urns should not reduce the width of the sidewalk so as to impede pedestrian traffic.
DeMaio: Motion to approve the design with the above recommendations, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Jaquith, Kennedy, Sides.
Jaquith steps out. DeMaio takes the Chair.
2. South River Harborwalk: Discussion of design revision
Susan St. Pierre of Vine Associates states that they have been looking into ways to alter the design to reduce the costs. She describes the various items that she looked into. She says that the ship lofting diagram idea for the plaza was difficult for the contractors to understand and added that it is fragile and is public art.
St. Pierre states that they will use a timber pile-supported walk in front of the electric company and timber walk on the slope up to Congress Street. The rest of the walk will be concrete. She adds that the removal of the concrete curbing in the parking lot would save $14,000, and they can use DPW supplies instead.
Kirsten Kinzer states that using a PVC rail will save about $97,000. She states that she has researched the Board’s questions about repairing scratches on the PVC. She explains that if the scratch is not too deep it can be sanded and waxed, and deeper scratches could be fixed with a heat gun, and it is possible to replace sections within the post. She adds that the rail and posts are steel and are coated with PVC.
Blier states that PVC is not the preferred material but it is more stable than it used to be.
DeMaio states that if the two rail types can be scratched but one is easier to fix, the fixable one would be preferred.
Kinzer states that she called manufacturers to get names of buyers for the PVC. She says that the largest number of linear feet for this fence is at Disneyland. The Family Circle Stadium in North Carolina has had this for two years, and they have not needed to have any repairs and it is in full sunlight all day. She adds that if a steel railing is scratched and not repainted it will rust and the rail will need to be replaced in five years. Kinzer states that she feels comfortable with this rail after doing the research.
Daniel confirms that tonight the DRB needs to decide on the rail.
DeMaio expresses concern about having a rail that will be difficult to maintain and therefore will not be maintained. He adds that this project will be precedent-setting for other fencing along the river.
Kinzer states that the City cannot spend $100,000 extra.
DeMaio states that he understands but as a Board they need to make a recommendation for a design that the City can support, and he would prefer that some money be found so they can use a steel rail. He agrees that the steel will scratch just as easily but it can be repaired easily.
Sides asks about the cap on the posts, and Kinzer shows a sketch.
Kennedy states that he would prefer metal but using PVC is better than having no harborwalk.
Blier states that in the perfect world he would like the metal, but there is not enough funding, and it is better to use PVC than to forego the walkway.
Kennedy asks how this material can be recycled 30-years down the road when the fence is replaced.
Kinzer states that it is more difficult to recycle than metal.
DeMaio opens to the public.
Jane Arlander of 93 Federal Street asks about the possibility of children getting their heads caught between the rails. She also asks if PVC is as strong as the metal.
DeMaio states that the PVC fencing will meet the same building and safety standards as the metal fencing would. He suggests that the Board make it clear in the motion that the preference is for metal, but because there is a strict budget, they have a choice between a harborwalk and no harborwalk, so they will accept the PVC fence.
Blier asks if there they could install a temporary fence, possibly black chain link, until there is enough money for the metal rail.
Kinzer states that they don’t know when more funding will be available.
DeMaio suggests that the Board make a recommendation that the City look into alternate ways to raise funds so they can afford to install the metal rail.
Kinzer agrees to look into it and states that if the timing works they could do a change order.
DeMaio makes the following motion: Given the choice between a harborwalk and no harborwalk, the Board would agree to use the PVC. Given the choice between the PVC and the metal the Board would prefer the metal, and they recommend that the City look into ways to afford the metal. This motion is seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Kennedy, Sides.
St. Pierre states that the Board can also decide on the new treatment shifting from concrete to timber pile-supported structures to save $90,000.
Kennedy confirms that there would be a combination of wood and concrete. He states that for the visceral feel of walking around on the water, he prefers wood, so he has no issue with the wood.
Blier states that he doesn’t mind the wood.
Kennedy: Motion to approve the timber pile-supported structure and portions of timber walk, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Kennedy, Sides.
3. 15 Peabody Street Park: Discussion of design revision
Michael Blier recuses himself from this item.
Daniel states that this design is approved and one element will be discussed.
Letitia Tormay from Landworks Studio explains that they need to reduce the costs of construction by about $200,000, and they eliminated the cantilevered walk over the water and pulled it back, and pushed the core area to the center. She describes the low concrete seating wall from Peabody Street to the water, adorned with artwork and tile and notes it will start on the water side and move through the property.
Tormay shows the diagram of the canopy and states that it will still sit in the same corner as originally proposed and have four black steel posts along the back and one that sits at the corner of the green. She explains that the multi colored canopy of red, orange and blue will wrap down the back of the structure at various levels.
Tormay states that the art wall will be turned in about three feet to the east at the waterfront and the tiles will begin at the waterfront.
Tormay explains that stone dust will be used at the Peabody Street entrance, where there is the existing sidewalk, and then a new band of concrete, and the stone dust will be about ¼ inch below the concrete to produce a small grade change to keep the stone dust in.
Tormay says that the metal frame used for the art wall is a flush system and not deep at all.
Blier says that the art wall will worm through the park.
Kennedy states that he likes the color of the canopy, but he is not in favor of having the back panels with the various heights.
Blier states that the idea is that the view gets progressively better as you get closer to the water.
Kennedy asks if the artwork wall has ever been used.
Blier states that he hasn’t used it before, but he cannot see why it will not work well. He adds that he looked at forming the wall directly into the concrete floor but that would cause a depletion of the art, and they are looking for a way to grow the display as the tiles become available.
Durand steps back in.
Kennedy expresses concern about having too many edges on the art wall.
Blier states that there is a round corner that is not chamfered, and no plywood is showing, and the contours are not as robust as to appear jagged.
DeMaio states that he likes this version of the canopy better than the last one. He clarifies that on the previous design he liked the way the canopy was more of a focal point. Although he understands the desire to open the view closer to the water, DeMaio says that this feature will be one of the few three-dimensional objects in the park that can be seen from far away, and it might be better if a small piece were to wrap down the back at the waterfront corner.
Sides suggests that the roof and the back panel not connect and allow light to come through.
DeMaio suggests having a slight pitch to the roof to make it show up better from a distance. He says that he has no issue with the stone dust detail. He agrees with Kennedy about the art wall’s curvy nature of the previous scheme. He suggests that some of the green space might become more organic with curvy edges. Regarding the art wall detail, DeMaio says that he has a problem with it because it is metal and it turns corners and kids can get hurt. He suggests having a small recess, which can be a feature whether or not there is artwork.
Blier states that there is not a lot of wall that is exposed, and much of the wall is planting area.
Durand confirms that there is no vote necessary tonight because this was already approved and this session was only commentary tonight.
4. 6 Central Street (China Trade House): Discussion of proposed signage
Daniel states that this sign will have a red background, but the owner will go along with blue or black if the Board prefers, and the lettering and image will be gold and hand-carved.
The members agree that the red background would be best.
Durand states that the thickness should be a minimum of ¾ inch.
Kennedy: Motion to approve this sign design with the red background, seconded by Sides. Passes 5-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Kennedy, Sides.
Kennedy steps out.
North River Canal Corridor Projects under Review
5. 72 Flint Street and 67-69 & 71 Mason Street (Riverview Place f/k/a/Salem Suede): Discussion of proposed Schematic Design
Attorney Scott Grover states that they are here to present some of the deign changes and will not look for approval tonight, but they wish to get an understanding of what more the Board would like to see.
Chris Huntress, Landscape Architect, describes the landscape plan, which includes sidewalks, curbing, street trees, plantings, and lighting. He states that they intend to develop a main streetscape that relates to the buildings, featuring a promenade that opens to the river. He describes the various plantings including evergreens and ornamentals to screen and provide variety. He says that the downcast lighting will be minimally invasive. Huntress states that there will be benches and lights along the walkway. He adds that this design has changed since last time because they have added details on the sidewalks.
Stephen Livermore, architect, speaks about the buildings stating that the Board was uncomfortable with the transition on building two between the mill building design and the more residential design. He describes two alternatives at to the uncomfortable transition. He adds that he screened the parked cars under the building by adding carriage type doors at the base of the building.
Livermore states that he has added more detail to the drawings, site elevations coming up the hill from the river from both sides and coming across the street, and provided bigger scale elevations depicting the materials on the façade which include brick, roll-formed aluminum crown molding, diamond-shaped 16-inch aluminum shingles, asphalt shingles, and cement clapboard (hardiplank). He says that the railing will feature a balustrade on the residential buildings, and on the mill buildings it will appear more commercial looking with a metal rail.
Livermore describes the construction for the big buildings using a steel frame and the smaller residential buildings with a wood frame. He explains that the systems on the roof would be screened and he hasn’t designed the screening yet.
Sides states that she is bothered by having no real base to building two. She adds that the garage doors help compared to the last version, but it might look too much like a long ribbon and there isn’t enough relationship to the space above. It appears the residential style “houses” are floating without a base.
DeMaio states that for future presentations they should present new information in advance of the meeting because it is difficult to discuss these issues when it is being presented tonight. He describes the elevations being of details and vignettes but not of what the building looks like from one end of the building to the other. He says that he has no problem with each building having its own personality, but he has a problem with buildings with multiple personalities, turning the corner from one style to another. He asks why the materials on the brick building changes.
Livermore states that it is partially for economy and to keep the piers vertical.
DeMaio states that the challenge becomes real when the project progresses from paper and is constructed. He says that the mixed surfaces present a disconnect within each of the façades. He says that the site and landscaping plans have not gone very far, and he would like to see a more developed landscape plan dealing with speed bumps and other items. He notes that the central pedestrian spine doesn’t carry through well. DeMaio states that he would like to see a plan that shows, short-term and long-term, before Commercial Street cuts through and after Commercial Street cuts through, because this change will be critical, and he currently can’t see how it will work when Commercial Street runs through. He agrees with Sides about the garage doors.
Blier agrees with DeMaio on the connection back to Mason Street, stating that there is inconsistency between the plan and the perspective drawing with the light posts and plantings, and he has the sense that more time needs to be spent exploring the nature of these spaces. He adds that, along the promenade, the plantings need to reinforce that transition moving from the wide walkway to the four-foot walkway, and on Flint Street the street edge could be planted with trees. He describes the plant palette as very good, and he likes the tree species. He suggests that they look at the landscape plan more carefully to achieve the look they are seeking. He asks about the storm water system and how it would engage into the landscaping.
Huntress states that they don’t have the civil engineer here tonight to provide a description of the drainage system.
Durand states that he would like to see the site plan including the adjacent properties to show how it ties into the neighborhood, and to see how this scale fits into the fabric of the neighborhood. He agrees with DeMaio about needing to see plans with a Commercial Street extension. He expresses disappointment that there are not more site amenities, stating that the site needs to be looked at from a human scale. Regarding the construction of the buildings, Durand says that he doesn’t want to see the design go down a path that cannot be delivered, as it relates to the construction. He says that he would like to see some details through the walls. He clarifies that if this is the design the developer wants to do, the Board will be happy to go down that road with him. He asks them to
memorialize the construction details, but he wants it to be real. He explains that he will follow this project through the construction.
Durand explains that having density is fine as long as it comes with quality in design. He will not compromise the design quality.
Emily Udy of 7 Phelps Street, with Historic Salem, agrees that the building with multiple personalities would be better in a single building type. She wonders how this building, which is attractive and trendy looking, will appear in 20 years. She states that the parking garage elevations have no detail. She says that the scale on Mason Street is appropriate but was hoping the decks could look more like porches, and the site plan view from Flint Street has too much parking lot and needs screening. She remarks that the parking count is very high for the number of units, and if the parking could be reduced then the amount of green space on the site could be increased, or the number of parking spaces in the garage could be reduced.
Darrow Lebovici of 122 Federal Street describes the role that the DRB has in the North River context, stating that the DRB needs to certify as a requirement of the special permit that the project proposed meets the requirements and are compatible with the North River Canal Ordinance, and this project doesn’t.
Scott Grover states that the ZBA issued variances to the ordinance.
Lebovici states that the ZBA can grant a variance, which allows the DRB to determine if this is compliant, and the fact is that it is not compliant. He adds that the master plan was designed to encourage an “Urban Village” and this project is not that.
Edward Nilsson whose office is at 262 Essex Street, with Historic Salem, questions the design philosophy in taking a mill building down and then rebuilding it to look like a mill. He recommends having an all residential design or changing the use in the mill buildings to be something other than residential.
Morris Schot of 1 Carey Street states that the diversity of forms is not bad but it is not clearly defined in terms of materials and treatments, and there are too many buildings, too close together, crammed into too big a parking lot, and too much of the site is devoted to parking, and accommodation ought to be made in favor of open space.
Durand states that the comments are the same as what the Board has been alluding to when asking for context and further details. He adds that he would like to see this project be more friendly with the surrounding neighborhood, and he will not view this project as being confined to a site. He says that this is a good project, and it is important.
Jane Arlander of 93 Federal Street asks for illustrations of what the buildings would look like at eye level.
Durand agrees.
Sides states that she doesn’t think that the whole project can go to the residential type because it is too big and the imagery of the mill building is more as a type to adapt and can be quite repetitive in a very simple way. She explains that this reference to a mill building is good and she would like the mill building to come around the corner of building two and the residential units should come all the way to the ground. She says that there are too many balconies.
Livermore explains how this will look when coming up the street across the tracks from Bridge Street and the city and the overpass you are seeing the mill form.
Blier asks what the finished floor elevation is, and Livermore says 10 or 11.
Much discussion ensues about the building types.
Scott Grover clarifies the role of the DRB stating that the ordinance does not require DRB certification for the plan to conform to the master plan.
Durand agrees and states that they can look at it in context of the master plan. He thanks the public for their comments.
DeMaio: Motion to continue this issue, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Sides.
Approval of Minutes – November 22, 2008 Meeting
Blier: Motion to approve the minutes, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Sides.
Blier: Motion to adjourn, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 4-0. Members voting: Blier, DeMaio, Durand, Sides.
The meeting is adjourned at 9:30 PM.
| 
