City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Board or Committee: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting
Date and Time: Wednesday May 22, 2013 at 6:00pm
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Ernest DeMaio, Paul Durand, David Jaquith
Helen Sides, Glenn Kennedy
Members Absent:
Others Present: Andrew Shapiro and Natalie Lovett
Recorder: Jennifer Pennell
Paul Durand calls the meeting to order.
Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review
~
- 76 Lafayette Street (Orange Leaf Frozen Yogurt): Discussion of proposed outdoor seating.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, cut sheets, and photos.
Sides questioned if there was a sidewalk present and commented that a 38” clearance would be required to meet code.
Dave Pierre commented that the current sidewalk faces the adjacent parking lot located at the rear of the building.
Jaquith commented that smaller tables should be used.
Durand commented that the tables appear fine to him. The proposed seating area is not located along a street edge; the parking lot does not have high pedestrian traffic.
Kennedy commented that the tables and seats would appear more playful if a plasticity and shiny finish was used, similar to the business’ interior design. The orange creatively identifies the business.
Sides: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: Durand, Passes 4-0.
- 300 Derby Street (Murphy’s Restaurant): Discussion of proposed addition of a trellis structure within the outdoor seating area.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, cut sheets, and photos.
Lidia Szydlowska of PionArch Design and Construction, on behalf of Murphy’s Restaurant, noted that the proposed 29’ x 28’ 10” trellis structure would be installed in the front of the building with planters located at its base.
Trellis structure in front of the building.
Sides –questioned whether anything would be growing on the structure and if the ground will remain gravel. Sides questioned whether canvas has been considered to shade guests.
Szydlowska noted that the ground will remain gravel and no additional plants shall be growing on the trellis aside from the ones located with-in the planters. The design intent is to provide a sense of enclosure, there will be no canvas and the current umbrellas will be removed.
DeMaio questioned whether the structure would provide any lights, signage, or banners.
Szydlowska noted that one of the poles would be used to bring lighting up onto the top of the structure. Signage is already attached to the building and no additional special event signage is needed.
Kennedy questioned whether red cedar wood would be used and if planters are to be built into the structure to conceal the removal of existing posts.
Szydlowska noted that existing posts will be removed and planters will conceal 2 of them. The current concrete pad will remain and the handle braces will consist of the same red cedar wood finish.
Jaquith questioned whether a standard catalog product would be used.
Szydlowska noted that the structure would be custom built and have a height of 10’, which sits below the existing signage above.
Kennedy: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: DeMaio, Passes 5-0.
- 24 Artist’s Row (Social Palates Studio): Discussion of proposed signage.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, cut sheets, and photos.
Kennedy commented that the bottom sign draws you away from the sign above because of the darker background. Kennedy noted that when the signage is in scale it might not be an underlying issue. Proportionally the text fits nicely and the sign should not be any larger. Kennedy commented that the font and black on white background is very clear.
Durand noted that the 1” font on the bottom sign is making it appear a bit small and crowded. Durand questioned whether the text could be spread out from left to right.
Kennedy: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 5-0.
- 43 Church Street (Turner’s Seafood): Discussion of proposed signage and façade improvements.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, cut sheets, and photos. Jim Turner was present on behalf of Turner’s Seafood.
Turner noted that the proposed window trim will be painted black and signage will replace the existing blade sign with a new logo sign. The Turner Seafood sign will have black lettering and be pinned to the building. Turner commented that additional small stencil Turner decals would be located on the windows. A red and white striped awning consisting of the same fabric used in their Melrose restaurant will be used. Turner noted that black planters would be located in front of each window. 6 existing flagpoles will have nautical or historical flags hung from them.
Kennedy noted that samples are needed for the color and material. The color on the rendering is too strong. Kennedy commented that the building was limited to 2 flags before because the actual logo was on them. The multiple flags would provide a rhythm and definition of presence. Nautical flags tie into the business better. Kennedy questioned whether the position of type on the building is compliant, because it is located under the second floor windows. If this makes sense on the specific building then it would be ok for the DRB to approve. The signage should be kept closer to brick layering and away from windows so it doesn’t intrude the window space. Size of type is ok for the size of the building. Kennedy commented that he applauds the smaller window decals. Kennedy noted that the awnings and
flower boxes out front appear to take some of the sidewalk space. Kennedy questioned whether they could be a bit shallower.
Durand questioned whether the flower boxes and awnings 8’ clearance over the sidewalk meets compliance. Window boxes in place of the flower boxes would both have the same aesthetic appearance and take up less space. A 5’ or 6’ clearance for sidewalk travel should be maintained. Durand questioned whether the mechanical louvers below the flower boxes are active.
Turner noted that flower boxes and awnings meet the 8’ clearance.
Jaquith commented that the flower boxes should be 6” smaller and could recess into the windows. Jaquith questioned whether the flower boxes would remain dark.
Turner commented that the boxes would stay dark.
Sides question whether there are plans for the rear of the building.
Turner commented that they will be keeping the outdoor seating and windows will be operable.
DeMaio that the scale, frequency, and color of the nautical flags should be revised by the DRB.
Sides: Motion to approve.
- Switching to window boxes as opposed to planters. 18” or less deep.
- Come back for submission of proposed flags.
- Pull height of sign letters down away from windows.
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 5-0.
- 188 Essex Street (Red Line Cafe): Discussion of proposed signage and outdoor seating.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, cut sheets, and photos.
Maria Veres, representing Red Line Café, noted that 12 seats are being proposed outside of the business. The signage will be located in the same location as the previous signage. Window decals will be placed at 3 windowsills stating “Eat Drink Indulge.” One word per decal is the same typeface. The signage would be burgundy red with a green background and white lettering.
Sides questioned what the dimensions are for the width of the sidewalk and how much of this space would proposed seating occupy.
Veres noted that the sidewalk width is 5’.
Sides commented that it is still a designated sidewalk and the current scheme does not meet ADA requirements. Sides noted that 2 chairs per small table and 2 tables total could be used if it meets the 42” min. clearance for pedestrian travel on the sidewalk.
Kennedy noted that a dimensioned drawing is needed for the proposed window decals. Signage color needs approval as well.
Kennedy – motion
Approve sign with submitted color reviewed by Kennedy. Portion is ok.
Resubmission of window decals reviewed by Kennedy.
Second - sides
Kennedy: Motion to approve with the following conditions:
- Minimum of 2 tables maximum of 3 depending on size. Contingent on not blocking the door.
- Round 24” table with black chairs as submitted. Maximum of 2 seats per table.
- 42” clearance for sidewalk pedestrian traffic.
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 5-0.
- 230 Essex Street (Sugar Rush): Discussion of proposed signage and painting of facade.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, cut sheets, and photos. Helen Taka was present on behalf of Sugar Rush.
Taka noted the proposed green and blue color options for the façade.
The blade sign will be located in the same location as the existing one.
Kennedy questioned whether the window decal would just be candy. Can be any height.
Kennedy commented that the signage graphics are working but the type is rushed, the text appears too tight to the outside edges of the sign. Space is needed around the outside edge. Shadows of color are difficult to read. Kennedy noted that font, position, shadow, and color need to be revised. Typeface could be more playful, something that fits the character of the store better.
Jaquith commented that font should be one color because there is so much color in the graphics.
Durand questioned what the shape of the sign is.
Kennedy: Motion to approve with the following conditions:
- Vinyl sign on window
- Lollipop icon on wall
- Work with Glenn Kennedy further on type and blade sign
- Green facade
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 4-0.
- 45 Federal Street (Cornerstone Court): Discussion of proposed window and siding replacement.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, cut sheets, and photos. Alexandra Ingemi was present on behalf of Cornerstone Court.
Ingemi noted that the intent is to replace the mixture of 42 window types on the building so that the appearance is uniform and consistent. Ingemi commented that the aluminum siding would be replaced with vinyl with fluted corners similar to the attorney’s office next door. The siding color will be neutral with a white trim.
Sides questioned what the condition of the wood siding behind the aluminum is like.
Ingemi noted that the condition is not good and requires repair. The intent is to remove the aluminum siding and to replace it with sheathing, Tyvek, insulation board, and vinyl.
Kennedy questioned whether the building has all vinyl existing windows.
Ingemi commented that the building has a mixture of wood and vinyl windows.
Jaquith noted that the original building would probably have 2 over 2 windows. Vinyl windows are not approved across the street in the historical area and vinyl siding is not appropriate for this location. Vinyl clad exterior windows would be more appealing. Jaquith commented that the fluted trim would be more aesthetically pleasing plain. The 2 visible faces should be thought of differently than the whole building. Jaquith commented that a site visit is required before approval by the DRB. Historical photos would be nice.
Sides commented that the building is not located in the historic district but the DRB holds authority for approving it to make the appearance more pleasing. Trim around openings and other details would make it look nicer. Sides questioned whether the building would be kept as 5 apartments.
Ingemi noted that the building would remain as 5 apartment units.
Durand commented that Hardy Board would be a nice siding option. The material is often used in historical districts and requires less maintenance. The product works well with details and should be expressed on the 2 front sides of the building that face the street.
Kennedy: Motion to approve with the following conditions:
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 4-0.
Minutes
Approval of the missed meeting minutes from the April 24, 2013 regular meeting.
Jaquith: Motion to approve
Seconded by: Kennedy, Passes 4-0.
Adjournment
Durand: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Jaquith. Passes 4-0.
Meeting is adjourned at 7:30pm.
| 
