CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: Wednesday, May 27, 2009
LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, David Jaquith, Glenn Kennedy, Ernest DeMaio, Helen Sides
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ernest DeMaio
OTHERS PRESENT: Economic Development Manager Tom Daniel
RECORDER: Andrea Bray
Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order.
Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review
1. 32 Derby Square (Old Town Hall): Discussion and vote on proposed exterior doors
Natalie Lovett, with the Planning Department, explains that as part of the bathroom renovation project, they intend to replace the basement doors for security and aesthetic reasons. She adds that the basement doors will match the front and back doors. She states that the doors will not open from the outside but will function as emergency exits.
Sides clarifies that there will be no knob on the outside of the doors. She states that this will make sense.
Blier asks if there is any repair being planned for the frame around the door.
Dale Gienapp states that the frame will be painted but no repair is needed.
Daniel states that DeMaio has no comments or objections to this item.
Jaquith: Motion to approve the doors as presented, seconded by Sides. Passes 5-0.
2. 209R Essex Street: Discussion of proposed entry canopy
Paul Durand recuses himself from this issue.
Sarah Nelson explains that she is now using Sign-A-Rama for the awning. She presents the new design and states that the letters are 6-inches tall.
Jaquith suggests that the letters be a maximum of 5½ inches tall and the others agree.
Kennedy states that they need to specify the font type.
Daniel states that DeMaio requested that the sign letter height and the font type be clarified.
Sides: Motion to approve the design provided the letters are a maximum of 5.5 inches tall and the applicant inform the Board of the font type, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 4-0. Durand recuses himself.
3. 2 Lynde Street (Lynde Street Café): Discussion of proposed exterior lighting
Daniel states that this is the new café that the Board has seen and they would like to add two lanterns to the exterior. He adds that the fixtures will be black and at least 7-feet off the ground. He says that the applicant is unable to attend this evening so the Board might wish to continue this hearing to next month.
Sides states that she would like to see the fixtures on the elevation to review the scale.
Durand states that they need to continue this so the applicant can be here for this discussion.
Daniel relates comments from DeMaio in which he indicates the need for additional information from the applicant.
Jaquith: Motion to continue this hearing until next month, seconded by Sides. Passes 5-0.
4. 133 Washington Street (Caffe Graziani): Discussion of proposed outdoor café permit
Paula Graziani states that the plan meets the requirements for clearance and that trash receptacles will not be placed outside.
Daniel adds that DeMaio’s comments have been reflected in the discussion.
Jaquith: Motion to approve the design as presented, seconded by Sides. Passes 5-0.
5. 189 Washington Street (Tavern in the Square): Discussion of proposed outdoor café permit
Daniel introduces Owner Joey Arcari and Architect Stephen Sousa. He states that the SRA approved this concept.
Architect Stephen Souse presents the plan, which includes:
- A new boxwood hedge will be installed around the perimeter.
- The public school foundation sign will be relocated.
- There will be a 3-foot planting bed and 6-foot stretch of grass.
- They plan to keep all of the trees except for one.
- The base will be a scored concrete pavement.
- Patio heaters will be used.
- The existing streetlights will be replaced with smaller scale period fixtures.
- Urn planters will frame the entrance.
- The interior curbing will be precast concrete.
- The grade change is less than 1 foot (11 inches).
- Drainage will be managed with catch basins located on the patio.
Blier asks who owns the property.
Daniel states that it is owned by the City of Salem.
Blier asks what will happen to this area if the patio seating is terminated, once it is developed for one particular use.
Daniel states that this came up in the SRA meeting.
Arcari states that public benches could be placed there through the winter as a small park. He states that they will probably use it six months/year.
Blier expresses concern about eliminating any green space.
Sousa states that they are keeping the 9-foot swath, and keeping the existing trees.
Arcari agrees that the restaurant will maintain this 12 months/year.
Kennedy states that the Passage to India seating plan should be similar to the seating for Tavern in the Square.
Durand states that some differentiation would be preferable. He addresses Blier’s concern stating that maybe part of this could be left to the public.
Arcari states that the sidewalks are wide, providing a lot of room for the public.
Sousa states that there are benches outside the café space on the corner.
Blier suggests making the Washington Street edge thicker because of the bus stop.
Durand agrees. He states that because some green space will be removed it would help if they could enhance some of the public space and it should appear more park-like toward the street-side.
Blier states that the tree roots will not respond well to the grade change. He points out two trees that will be particularly compromised.
Sousa describes in detail his plan for the grade adjustment.
Blier states that the hedge’s corner point might present a problem and Sousa agrees. Blier explains that boxwood is fussy and it needs space.
Durand confirms that the tables, chairs and heaters will be locked down in the evening.
Teasie Reilly Goggin of 9 Wisteria Street expresses concern that this is a private restaurant on public property.
Daniel states that this is similar to Rockafellas and this has been done before and the City sees a benefit to the café seating because it will make the area more vibrant. He explains that they have added tables and chairs in Derby Square for this reason.
Reilly Goggin asks if this has been discussed with the public.
Daniel states that there is a public process for each outdoor dining approval. From a broader policy perspective, he ties it back to Salem’s downtown development plan which includes activating the streetscape.
Reilly Goggin states that she is testing the liability of it.
Daniel states in terms of liability, all of the dining establishments must have liability insurance that includes the outdoor space.
Shirley Walker of Derby Lofts asks if the dirt space near the Edgewater Café is public space. She states that something should be planted there.
Alex Schnip of RCG agrees to discuss this with the tenants.
Kennedy asks about the poured concrete.
Sousa states that you can’t keep brick clean. He states that they will use concrete because it can be kept clean. He says they wanted to use pervious concrete but nobody has done it around here.
Kennedy states that the slab will show up more when the tables are removed. He adds that if it has some texture it will not look as bad.
Blier states that the concrete will raise the ambient air temperature of the corner.
Durand suggests increasing the buffer at the street edge.
Sousa states that the boxwood could come out another 2 feet and Durand says he would like that.
Daniel asks about stanchions at the brick ramp.
Souse states that plantings will create the edge. He adds that the service entrance is less formal.
Durand states that the entrance at the Passage to India space should be wider.
Sousa states that they might plant between the two spaces.
Daniel relates comments from DeMaio:
- No objections to the style of the umbrellas, tables, and chairs.
- The new boxwood hedge that separates the outdoor seating from the surrounding sidewalks should not be taller than the tables behind the hedges. He suggests
recommending a maximum height of hedge of 32" – 36."
- No signage of any kind should be permitted on the outdoor patio, the outdoor tables, the patio heater poles, on or in front of the hedges, or on the umbrella poles or fabric, including phone numbers or the name of the tavern on the umbrellas.
- The umbrella fabric should match the material/texture and burgundy color of the existing awnings.
- No other sidewalk seating—apart from what is shown on the plan—should occur.
- The umbrella poles and the outdoor heater pole colors should be dark in color, preferably to match the dark brown facade color, or black.
- There should be no exposed wires or extension cords along sidewalks or strung above between the patio areas/umbrellas and the building at the sidewalk.
- The applicant should clarify whether or not speakers/piped-in music will be part of the outdoor dining experience. If so, information should be presented so the DRB can understand what they will look like, where they will be located, and how power will be provided.
Sousa states that the umbrella polls will be teak and the heater polls will be brushed aluminum. The applicant confirmed that there would not be any other sidewalk seating, there would be no exposed wires or extension cords, and there would not be any music outdoors.
Kennedy states that his only concern is the concrete. He cites a restaurant in New York that uses a pea-stone.
Sousa states that they could use an exposed aggregate.
Kennedy states that something like that will look like they have activated a more natural space.
Sousa states that there might be maintenance issues over time with this.
Arcari asks if they could color the concrete.
Sousa states that they could use textures in the concrete finish, such as a brushed finish.
Kennedy agrees that he would like to see this addressed.
Durand suggests continuing this to see some responses to the comments from the Board.
Daniel suggests they could review this before the SRA meeting.
Blier asks if a member could review this and make recommendations. He reviews the items in question—the hedge, the concrete, and the entry points.
Durand says he would like a landscape architect to look at this and he would like to have some control over this because he wants this to be done right.
Kennedy suggests that Blier and Durand review the plan prior to the SRA meeting and if the plan is not acceptable the issue should be continued.
Durand states that he would like to have further discussion on this because he is not quite comfortable with the plan as yet.
Blier suggests that they take a good look at the grades out there and the widening of the planting bed will help with the grade change.
Durand suggests approving the concept presented with some items that need further review. He adds that Blier and he will be the liaison for the issues of the concrete, entry to the area for the second restaurant, and the hedge planter width.
Kennedy: Motion to approve this concept with the following conditions:
- The width of the boxwood planting bed shall be increased by at least 24” along the New Derby Street and Washington Street sides of the patio;
- The “northern” entrance for Passage to India shall be widened;
- The concrete finish shall be designed to distinguish the patio from the sidewalk area; and
- Two DRB members shall review and recommend approval of the revised proposal prior to the SRA meeting, or the application will be continued to the next DRB meeting.
The motion is seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0.
Daniel states that he will coordinate a conversation in the next week.
6. 10 Derby Square (LaVoie Group): Discussion of proposed signage
Michael Blier recuses himself from this issue.
Wendy Irwin states that this is the same signage they used in their former space adjacent to the current one.
Daniel states that DeMaio has no comments or objections.
Sides: Motion to approve this design, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0. Blier recuses himself.
7. 300 Derby Street (Murphy’2 Irish Pub): Discussion of proposed signage
Daniel states that the proposal is for one wall sign and to refurbish the kiosk.
Peter Kelly states that it is a metal sign, with halo lighting, at the same place as the current sign.
Sides states that the current sign seems too high.
Kennedy states that the signs looks misplaced because the wall is big. He suggests lowering it.
Durand agrees that it needs to be lower.
Sides asks how far off the wall the sign sits.
Kelly states that it sits about 1 inch off the wall.
Blier states that he doesn’t have a problem with this sign.
Sides asks about the kiosk.
Kelly states that the sign sits on top of the kiosk.
Daniel states that the kiosk is 1 foot deep.
Kelly states that he is not planning to have a blade sign.
Durand states that all power must be concealed and come through the wall.
Daniel summarizes comments from DeMaio who has concerns about the graphic layout of the signs. He is concerned the letters are far too large, the organization and spacing of the letters is poorly considered, and there is little or no detail to show how the sign will be made or how the lighting will be incorporated into the sign. He also objects to the glowing plexiglass box concept.
Kelly states that the box on the kiosk will have daily specials or entertainment events. He presents a second draft of the kiosk design. He explains that the back is blank.
Sides states that the type needs more space between the two lines.
Kennedy states that the sign needs to be about 1 inch taller. He suggests increasing the height by 1 inch on the kiosk sign.
Jaquith steps out.
Kennedy suggests doing the same thing on the big sign.
Sides asks if a mock-up can be produced for review for the wall sign location.
Kennedy offers to follow up on this, look at the wall and make a recommendation.
Shirley Walker of Derby Lofts states that it is very nice to see Murphy’s here. She asks what will happen to the Roosevelt’s sign and the plastic piece, and Kelly states that they will be removed.
Blier confirms that Kelly will need to return to the Board for approval of the canopy.
Daniel reviews the conditions, which include:
- The wall sign shall be located about halfway between the top of the door and the location of the current sign;
- The kiosk design shall be the second version in which the sign does not extend beyond the kiosk base;
- Both signs shall be adjusted to create more space between the top and bottom lines of text;
- The power for the wall sign shall come through the wall and the power cord and source will be concealed; and
- The DRB shall review the revised wall sign location and design prior to a sign permit being issued.
Kennedy agrees to review all of the items listed prior to the SRA meeting.
Kennedy: Motion to approve this design with the above noted conditions, subject to review by a representative from the Board, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0.
8. Artists’ Row: Discussion of proposed exterior painting
Daniel introduces Debra Crosby and Mamadou Diop, delegates for Artists’ Row. He states that since repainting and repairs are needed, they are using this opportunity to change the paint colors.
Crosby presents photos of successful artist colonies around the country including Rocky Neck, and states that these places are usually quite colorful. She shows sample colors for the walls, trim and doors, and says that these colors are complementary to the colors on the banner.
Sides states that she likes the colors.
Kennedy objects to the Cozumel color, stating that this is the one color in the palette that is not transcendent over time. He adds that this aqua color comes and goes out of fashion for about 18 months every 15 years. He states that it clashes with the green.
Daniel relates DeMaio’s comments. His concern is with the "Status Bronze" color proposed for the stall walls which he believes is unnecessarily bold and strays too far from colors typically found in the immediate neighborhood.
Kennedy agrees to substitute the raspberry color for the trim and have one door in the Cozumel color.
Kennedy: Motion to approve with the raspberry trim and one door in the Cozumel color, seconded by Blier. Passes 4-0.
Approval of Minutes – April 15, 2009 Meeting
The members review the minutes and make amendments, and Daniel states that the minutes were changed as suggested by DeMaio.
Blier: Motion to approve the minutes from the April 15 meeting as amended, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0.
Sides: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Blier. Passes 4-0.
The meeting is adjourned at 8:05 PM.
| 
