CITY OF SALEM MASSACHUSETTS
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: Wednesday, June 24, 2009
LOCATION: 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Paul Durand, Michael Blier, David Jaquith, Ernest DeMaio, Helen Sides
MEMBERS ABSENT: Glenn Kennedy
OTHERS PRESENT: Economic Development Manager Tom Daniel
RECORDER: Andrea Bray
Chairperson Durand calls the meeting to order.
Urban Renewal Area Projects under Review
1. 141 Washington Street: Discussion of proposed window boxes and watering system
Daniel states that they wish to add window boxes on the second floor balcony and to install a watering system.
Ruth Wall states that she has spoken with the business downstairs who is not concerned with the water coming down. She shows the porous hose that she has considered and states she planned to pour the water in the hose from the third floor window. However, she is reconsidering watering through the second floor open window because of the expense of the system. She adds that she wishes to know that these boxes will be watered regularly over a long period of time.
Daniel asks her to clarify the system that she wishes to use.
Wall says that she is open to suggestions.
Daniel clarifies that the DRB approved standards for window boxes last year, and this window box design conforms to the standards, so, if not for the watering system, this item would not be on the agenda tonight.
Blier states that the watering system might not work because there is not enough head. He suggests using a combination of annuals and drought tolerant succulents in the boxes.
Jaquith suggests having the condo association purchase a nice watering can for each condo owner to water the boxes.
Durand agrees that keeping it simple is the proper way to go and Wall agrees.
Daniel states that no action is required since she has chosen not to go with the watering system.
2. 189 Washington Street (Tavern in the Square): Discussion of proposed outdoor café permit
Stephen Sousa presents and describes the design in plan, elevation and detail. He states that the patio area has moved and reduced in size to preserve trees, and they are removing only three trees in the seating area. He adds that there will be a retaining curb wrapping around the patio.
Daniel clarifies that the three trees proposed to be removed are two crabapple trees and an oak tree, and there is a separate process for the removal approval. The Tree Warden will hold a public hearing.
Jaquith expresses concern about setting precedent, stating that the DRB went through this before with the Goldbergs.
Durand says that he is fine with the seating area being a patio as revised, and that he and Blier met during the week to see the space, and they determined that consolidating the seating area would be the better solution for the restaurant and the City. He adds that they are trading off the trees for the constructed amenity. He says that he regrets that the crabapple tree by the granite circle will be removed because it will break up the symmetry.
Blier asks about the precast curb and if any granite curbing would be removed.
Sousa states that precast curb will be in the new areas, and they will not pull up any granite curbing.
Blier states that the ornamental trees are less precious and the oak is small enough that it could be moved to the adjacent green space. He adds that it is a greatly improved scheme and with all of the shrubbery around the corner it helps make up for the removal of the trees.
Sousa states that the lamppost will stay. He says that the paving material will have exposed aggregate, and the darker area in the plan defines the accessible path of travel.
Sides asks about the planters.
Sousa states that they will be recessed portable planters, about 3-feet high and will be located along the straight edge nearest to the restaurant.
DeMaio states that this is an improved plan over the original scheme, but he also regrets losing the tree mentioned by Durand. He says that the hedge border is a nice addition and emphasizes the importance of maintaining the correct height of the hedge. He states that he has always been concerned about the visibility of that building from the street because it sits lower than the corner and with the addition of the heat lamps, umbrellas and hedge border, the building’s visibility could be further obscured. He suggests maintaining the hedge height to just above the table tops so it will not look like a wall.
Joey Arcari states that there are now three trees that completely obscure the building, and with them taken down it will open the view of the building.
DeMaio states that the building sits down from the street anyway so the hedge height must be watched.
Durand opens the meeting to the public.
Ward 6 City Councilor and Council President Paul Prevey states that he is against taking down any trees at all. He cites the City’s plan to improve the greenspace of the City, stating that the residents were told that they can’t take down trees at all unless there are extenuating circumstances. He states that he doesn’t see a hardship here.
City Councilor Stephen Pinto states that he doesn’t want to see the trees removed. He says there will be 22 tables and one entryway in and out with a public sidewalk. He expresses concern about setting precedent with the other restaurants. He states that he doesn’t want to see the oak tree removed. He speaks in opposition to the plan.
Blier states that there is an impact on the root system of the trees and over time these trees would be damaged. He says they consolidated the seating area down to minimize damage to the trees. He agrees that this was a tough decision for the Board. He says that the oak is about a 3” caliper tree and it could probably be moved.
Durand agrees with Blier and states that those trees obscure the building and the greenspace is not maintained and it doesn’t look good. He says that by taking these trees down and preserving the space next to it we end up with some greenery that can be maintained, and in place of those trees there is shrubbery. He explains that this is one of the most powerful corners in Salem, it is an active corner, and this is the largest restaurant in Salem on the busiest corner. He acknowledges that the Board is concerned about precedent but still considers this to be good, and after examining this and weighing all of the merits he feels that this proposal is a better way. He adds that the tree removal issue will be reviewed by the Tree Warden.
Arcari states that he would be willing to replant the trees.
Jaquith states that he would like to see three trees planted for the three trees that are removed.
Durand states that the tree retention/replacement issue should be passed on to the Tree Warden.
Sides asks if he found that the amount of grade change would not allow the trees on this the corner to survive.
Sousa states that he did determine that the trees would probably be damaged or would die.
DeMaio says that the trees are only part of the issue of open space vs. seating area and Durand spoke very well to that. He explains that this plan is much smaller than the original plan, and people want to be outside and this is a fairly under-utilized, not well-maintained greenspace.
Councilor Pinto states that once you lose open space you have something taken away and down the road you may be talking about the area near “A Passage to India.”
DeMaio states that he understands that each decision that the Board makes can be precedent setting, but each space is different.
Durand states that this is misplaced greenspace. It is an urban planning failure, and the former building had been underutilized for many years. He says that the Board is not against greenspace and in the appropriate areas it is a plus, but in this area we are fixing some things that are wrong and still maintaining an abutting greenspace.
DeMaio agrees and states that the existing setback is not desirable even though it is existing open space.
Blier states that 90 percent of the tree character of the corner is staying (the horse chestnut trees being the most significant), and there is no effective way to place a terrace on the remaining greenspace (by the bus shelter) without removing the trees. If such a proposal were made, we should fight like heck to protect that area. The ornamental trees are not worth fighting for.
Durand states that they need to move this forward.
Daniel asks about the color of the planters.
Souza states that they will be black to match the urns.
Jaquith: Motion to approve the plan as newly modified and presented this evening, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0.
3. East India Square, Essex Pedestrian Mall: Discussion of proposed seating
Daniel states that the City is proposing to add tables and chairs at East India Square, and they will be the same tables and chairs as at Derby Square. He adds that there will be 4 tables and 12 chairs.
The members agree that this looks great.
Blier states that the tables and chairs at Derby Square look great.
DeMaio states that he would like to see more because the square is large enough to accommodate it.
Daniel states that they hold events and functions on the square and they wish to keep enough space open to accommodate the activities.
Sides: Motion to approve the tables and chairs as presented, seconded by DeMaio. Passes 5-0.
Approval of Minutes – May 27, 2009 Meeting
Voting members are Durand, Blier, Jaquith and Sides.
Blier: Motion to approve the minutes from the April 15 meeting as presented, seconded by Sides. Passes 4-0.
Daniel reminds everyone that the Salem Farmer’s Market will open tomorrow, and will be held every Thursday, 4:00 – 7:00 pm.
Durand: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 5-0.
The meeting is adjourned at 7:00 PM.
| 
