City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Board or Committee: Design Review Board, Regular Meeting
Date and Time: Wednesday December 18, 2013 at 6:00pm
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room #314, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Paul Durand, Helen Sides, Glenn Kennedy,
David Jaquith, Michael Sullivan, Ernest DeMaio
Others Present: Andrew Shapiro
Recorder: Jennifer Pennell
Paul Durand calls the meeting to order.
Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review
- 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail): Discussion of proposed design revisions of phase two/ new building.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, drawings, and renderings. Daniel Ricciarelli was present on behalf of Segar Architects Inc. and Sara Logan was present on behalf of LabHaus. ~Ricciarelli clarified that while Segar was the architect that designed the project’s originally approved proposal a few years ago, that they were now acting in an advisory role with regards to historic preservation. ~
Ricciarelli noted materials would change along the building facade. Landscaping and building massing would remain the same as previously approved by the DRB in 2006. The initial proposal had been approved with 13 units. ~This new proposal now calls for 12 larger units, but they would occupy the same footprint as originally proposed.
All parking would be hidden behind the building. The proposed façade would consist of clad with concrete masonry units (CMU) facing the jail with a copper roof. Ricciarelli commented that as the building turns the corner onto Saint Peter Street the building façade would consist mostly of masonry.
Durand questioned the reason for these revised changes.
Ricciarelli commented that the overall cost was an issue, and that building felt heavy so a lighter material was more desirable.
Logan noted that the intent would be to make it appear as a two-story structure with an attic and basement. The design would keep a very symmetric scheme with the façade. The building mostly contains two and three bedroom units and materiality is staying true to the original concept. Aluminum windows would be used because they keep with the size of the windows located along the jails façade. The goal is to make the residential building feel a bit more civic.
Durand questioned if the roofing material would be similar to what is currently placed on the jail.
Logan noted that the roof would consist of Majestic slate roofing material, which would be the same that is used on the jail. The building would use reclaimed brick construction that expresses real dimensional brick, not veneer. Aluminum flashing and windows would be used along with fiber cement siding in a light grey finish. Logan commented that iron metal rails and balconies would be finished in standard black. Balconies would be made by a manufacturer and delivered to site.
Jaquith questioned what the fascia material along the eaves would consist of. Jaquith noted that the contemporary piece of tower does not tie back in to the older form. The proposed eave could tie them together. Jaquith commented that a bit more brick could be used to make the corner appear anchored. Currently there is cladding along the base of the east elevation. Jaquith noted that the proposed balcony height is to short, it is currently 36” high, but should be 42”.
Logan noted that fascia along the eaves would be hardy soffit panels.
Sides noted that the exposure needs to be bigger to appear correct with the scale of the building, currently the six inches feels too residential. Maybe the exposure could be eight inches. Sides commented that she is not fond of the entrance with the brick located in the center of the facade. It currently feels distracting and takes away from the monumental appearance of the elevation. Could this material become something more similar in color to the rest of the façade? Sides commented that she likes the base band of brick, but there could be more of a height to it along the contemporary towers. The façade currently does not look integrated and appears to float. Maybe the brick should connect to the pediment.
Durand noted that he likes the centered brick façade. Too many materials would become overwhelming. The original presentation had some sort of reference to the other buildings. The brick echoes the McIntire building and the city. The design fits in as a modern piece of architecture that is context sensitive. Durand noted that the brick is important and the proportions have a nice variation and provides a historic appearance. Durand commented that the design should not look like the original jail building.
Sullivan noted that the materials are different than any of the adjacent buildings. The strength is that it is somewhat related but it is still very modern and compelling. The design is trying to be a little like the jail house but also different. It seems like the design can’t make up its mind on what it wants to be. Sullivan noted that he is not convinced that the junction of those two ideas are yet resolved.
DeMaio noted that he liked the original scheme of the building because it was respectful of the context, without mimicking the context. ~The materials proposed at that time were “class A” materials and the project had an overall “class A” feel to it. ~He noted that with respect to the proposal before the Board at present, he struggled a bit with some of the material choices being made. ~The previous design appeared clean and elegant. ~He pointed out that he feels that the new design has a larger palette of materials, and as such, is not yet fully developed. ~He noted that he feels that there is room for refinement in regards to materials. ~Although the variety of materials may add interest, there is something to be said for streamlining the design to make it more holistic.
DeMaio continued by noting that he is less enthusiastic about trying to mimic the look of the jail as others might be. ~He said that he does not feel that it needs to be a monumental or elegant building, even though he respects that that could be one approach. ~The original building was more “people friendly” at the street level, especially when the façade on St. Peter Street was oriented toward the street, as opposed to the courtyard as it is here. ~He expressed the concern that the experience for people is that they will just walk by.
Logan expressed that their goal was to maximize the amount of light coming into the building, but that she understood Mr. DeMaio’s concern.
DeMaio continued by noting that there were contemporary portions of the building that he wished were carried through to more of the building. ~He said that he building has a variety of personalities, but they do not seem integrated. ~He noted that he appreciates the scale of the building, but that the material on the courtyard side is a significant leap from where it was before; it is a significant change.
Kennedy noted that he likes the contemporary nature of the building. It appears hidden and monumental in the rear of the building. Maybe the centered brick becomes more contemporary similar to the sides. Currently it feels a bit disconnected. The façade should appear more monumental and less residential. Heavier and larger windows could enhance this feeling. Currently the dormer and tower connection does not appear correct. Maybe the contemporary design could wrap around the building more?
Sides commented that the traditional soffit line stops abruptly and does not tie in. It crashes with the tower.
DeMaio commented that the building has two different personalities; one in the back one in the front. ~He noted that the eave line under the pediment is one of the things that bothers him about the pediment. ~
Kennedy noted that the building needs to make the statement that it is a bit more contemporary. Needs to stop bouncing from three different personalities and pick one style.
Jaquith noted that he likes the blending of grey’s and neutrals.
Jaquith: Motion to continue.
Seconded by: DeMaio, Passes 6-0.
Shapiro asked the Board whether they would want to make a motion that Paul Durand continue as Chairman in 2014.
Jaquith: Motion to continue with Paul Durand as chairman.
Seconded by: Sides, Passes 6-0.
Minutes
Approval of the meeting minutes from the December 4, 2013 regular meeting.
Page five - Sides noted that the photograph was monographic, meant to say monolithic.
Sides: Motion to approve with noted correction.
Seconded by: Kennedy, Passes 6-0.
Adjournment
DeMaio: ~Motion to adjourn, seconded by Sides. Passes 6-0.
Meeting is adjourned at 7:19pm.
| 
