Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Approved Minutes 5/28/2014
City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes


Board or Committee:             Design Review Board, Regular Meeting
Date and Time:                  Wednesday May 28, 2014 at 6:00pm
Meeting Location:                       Third Floor Conference Room, 120 Washington Street
Members Present:        Paul Durand, Ernest DeMaio, Helen Sides
Glenn Kennedy, David Jaquith, J. Michael Sullivan
Members Absent:         
Others Present:                         Andrew Shapiro
Recorder:                               Jennifer Pennell

Paul Durand calls the meeting to order.

Urban Renewal Area Projects Under Review
~
  • 227-231 Essex Street (Rockafellas): Discussion of proposed awnings and signage.
The submission under review before the DRB included a proposal, cut sheets, and photos. Kevin Marchino was present on behalf of Rockafellas.

Marchino noted that the proposal is for a new awnings to be installed along Essex and Washington Street entrances to the restaurant’s upstairs “Colonial Hall” facility. The awnings would be black dome structures protruding 4’ from the building’s face and have the Colonial Hall logo and text along the bottoms of the awnings.  

Also being proposed was to add white “Rockafellas” logo typeface to the rim of the three existing awnings on Washington Street.

DeMaio questioned if any signage would be located on the sides of the awnings.

Marchino responded indicating that there would not and that the awnings would be similar, if not the same, style as what is currently seen on the Lafayette Street side of Derby Lofts.

DeMaio asked how the awnings would be mounted.

Marchino noted that the structure would be a steel frame covered by black fabric.  The frame would be affixed to the wall but would not be seen.

Shapiro noted that white text located at the bottom of the existing 3 awnings along Washington Street would be placed on top of a black background.

Sullivan commented that the proposed awnings would take away from the existing masonry detail of the facade. Sullivan questioned if the same kind of awning is appropriate at this location and if they should all be identical.  Sullivan also expressed concern about the projection of 4’.

Both Durand and Sides noted that they were fine with the proposal as submitted

DeMaio noted his concern for no frame or fasteners to be exposed.
        
Jaquith: Motion to approve as submitted with the lettering on the existing awnings.
Seconded by: Sides, Passes 6-0.

  • 155 Washington Street (Adriatic Restaurant and Bar): Discussion of proposed folding doors/windows and outdoor seating furniture and fence.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, photos, drawings, and cut sheets.  Vini Kurti was present on behalf of Adriatic.

Kurti noted that the proposal is for 13’ wide folding windows, 8’-0” tall sliding doors that will replace existing fixed windows, the addition of a black aluminum fence that will replace existing planters, three (3) post lights, seven (7) lights with sconces that will replace current lighting fixtures on the building and which will match the style of the post lights being proposed, and a lighting fixture that will light the primary sign.

Durand questioned where the lights would be located.

Kurti noted that there would be one light per column, replacing the lights that are currently on the building, but that the new lighting fixtures would be lower than the existing ones, by about one (1) feet.

Durand asked how the lights would be powered and whether there would be any exposed conduit wiring.

Kurti confirmed that wiring would have to run down to meet the fixtures.

Durand noted that he would prefer not to see the exposed conduit.

Durand noted that he likes the chairs, heaters, and fence. Durand again noted his concern regarding the metal pipe coming down the side of the wall. Durand questioned if there was any way to run the conduits from the interior.

Kurti explained that they would be running along structural columns, therefore they could not be run from inside.

Jaquith questioned if the light could be moved up to the existing fixtures location.

Kurti responded by noting that they plan to install an awning at a later point, and having the lights higher would cover them completely.

Sides questioned if the conduit could relate to the horizontal bands of the column and be painted a color to match the existing facade. The lower light provides a more intimate relationship for pedestrians and seating level.

Kurti noted that they have done similar things in the past to disguise exposed conduit wiring.

Sullivan questioned if a junction box would be located above.

Kurti noted that the existing junction box would be closed off and conduits would be switched to a new one.

Kennedy commented that a second junction box would be a concern. Conduits need to extend and the box should be minimal in size.

Kurti noted that a dead junction box above the new proposed lighting fixtures would be covered by an eventual awning, and that the new junction box would be behind the new fixtures.
        
Kennedy: Motion to approve conditional upon the following:
  • The current junction box will be reduced to a small connector and allow for a “T” connection to be made to connect the lower hanging light fixture – there will not be two junction boxes.
  • Conduit will be painted to match the wall.
Seconded by: Sides, Passes 6-0.
        
  • 24 New Derby Street (Artists’ Row #4 Marrow): Discussion of proposed signage.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal with design and rendering.  Alikya Wingate was present on behalf of Marrow.

Kennedy questioned if the existing signage base would be used.

Wingate noted that it would.  They plan to paint over their old sign.
        
DeMaio questioned how the edge of the signage would be treated.

Wingate noted it would have a clear coat, sealed, with no trim.

Jaquith and Durand both noted liking the simplicity of the sign.        

Kennedy questioned if it was intentional that the period is sticking out on the end of the sign. He noted that he thought the period could be moved in a bit, as a suggestion.

Wingate responded noting that the period’s placement was intentional.

Sides: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 6-0.

  • 24 New Derby Street (Artists’ Row #5 Double Exposure): Discussion of proposed signage.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal with a design and rendering.  Present on behalf of Double Exposure was Pamela Goldberg.
        
Sides questioned whether the sign would be painted.

Goldberg noted it would, and that the same image would be located on both sides of the sign and that the edge would also be painted.

Sides noted that the proportion is a bit different in the rendering versus the drawing.

Shapiro commented that the rendering is not to scale.

Kennedy questioned if the letters are hand painted.

Goldberg noted that they are and would be a bit taller.

Kennedy commented that the taller you make the letter height the more the word will appear as individual letters.
                
Sides commented that the sign should be ¾” thick and the color should wrap around the edges.
        
Jaquith: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: Durand, Passes 6-0.

  • 24 New Derby Street (Artists’ Row): Discussion of new proposed paint colors for Artists’ Row stalls.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, presentation, drawings, and renderings.  Ellen Hardy was present on behalf Artists’ Row.

The representative noted that the proposal is to paint existing exterior building walls on Artists’ Row stalls to match the trim color for windows on Old Town Hall, which is a “Pittsfield or Powell Buff” color, which appears beige. The trim would not be painted this year – it will remain a raspberry color.

Jaquith: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: Sides, Passes 6-0.

  • 24 New Derby Street (Artists’ Row): Discussion of proposed A-frame signs.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal and picture of proposed signs to be used.  Laura Potter was present on behalf of Artists’ Row.

Potter noted that the proposal is for new A-Frame signs to be located on both ends of Artists’ Row. They would be chalkboard signs with no branding.

Sullivan asked whether events would be advertised on the signs.

Potter responded by noting that they would, in fact, be advertising events, sales, specials for the various artist groups being represented.

Kennedy commented that the location of the A-Frame signs should not be too far out and close to the street. Signage should be tucked near the red line located on the sidewalk.

Sides: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 6-0.

  • 217 Essex Street (Verizon Wireless): Discussion of proposed installation of wireless telecommunications equipment.
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, drawings, plans and cut sheets. Carol Holahan was present on behalf of Verizon Wireless.

Holahan noted that the proposal is for a rooftop installation of antennas and other equipment. She noted that six antennas would be added to the rooftop.  A 6’-0”x6’-0”x15” faux chimney constructed of fiberglass would cover 4 of the 6 antennas. The idea would be to have the chimney appear to be brick, and blend in with the materials of the building.  The two additional antennas would have 2 panels located side by side (72”x12”x6” thick) and be mounted to the existing brick penthouse and painted to match.

Sides noted that she is not in favor of adding the faux chimney to the rooftop.  She then questioned whether the other antennas currently on the roof were property of Verizon.

Holahan responded by saying that they are not, which is leading to a gap in coverage, which is why they would like to add their antennas.

Sides noted that she is fine with the proposed antennas to be affixed to the wall, which will be painted red.  She questioned whether the rest could just be uncovered and painted black.  She then questioned how they would be mounted in such a case.

Holahan referred to an engineer that was present on behalf of the applicant.  He noted that they would have to be mounted on the face of the building.

Sides noted that this would be unacceptable.

Jaquith commented that the faux chimney is larger than most and is located at a funny angle. The structure should be squarer, matching the building to look appropriate. Jaquith questioned if the proposed chimney has to reside at the specified height.

Sullivan echoed Jaquith’s comments by wondering if the chimney had to be as high as it is proposed, and angled in the fashion that it is being proposed.

The engineer noted that it would because of the density of population and the form of surrounding buildings – positioning it in the way that is being proposed would allow for better cell reception.

DeMaio asked if there would be flexibility with respect to the location of the antennas.

The engineer noted that there is no flexibility, unless the antennas are mounted to the face of the building.

Antennas should be left exposed, painted black, and not mounted to the face.

Durand noted that Sheet A-2 acknowledges a generator and gas lines running up the building façade facing Old Town Hall. Durand questioned if the generator would be visible from a public way.

Holahan noted that the lines would be painted to match the brick and that the generator is tucked in between an existing ac unit surrounded by a parapet.

DeMaio noted that the gas line would run up the side of the building that faces Old Town Hall, and that there would be a concern of how that appears.

The Board expressed a unanimous desire to see alternatives to the faux chimney and to see more information presented about other fixtures that would be mounted to the building.

Jaquith: Motion to continue
Seconded by: Sides, Passes 6-0.

        At this point Helen Sides recused herself and left the meeting.

  • 9-11 Dodge Street, 217-219 Washington Street, and 231-251 Washington Street (Dodge Area LLC c/o RCG LLC): Continuation of discussion of proposed development project - Schematic Design Review
The submission under review before the DRB includes a proposal, presentation, drawings, plans and renderings.  Matthew Picarsic was present on behalf of RCG and began the presentation.

Picarsic began by covering the history of different versions of the project that had been presented in the past, and where the current design stands.  He noted that they plan on going to the Planning Board after receiving final approvals for schematic design review from the Design Review Board and Salem Redevelopment Authority.  Sometime after receiving approvals from the Planning Board, they will return to the Design Review Board and Salem Redevelopment Authority for final design review.

Picarsic continued by noting that they currently require some degree of flexibility in the exact breakdown of intended programming for the building, which is currently broken out as follows:

  • 70‐100 Residential Units
  • Includes some live‐work spaces in South Building
  • Final unit count and type subject to market demand
  • 20,000 +/- square feet of commercial space
  • Could increase if demand for office space suggests adding office space and could decrease if demand suggests more live‐work space
  • 85-115-room limited service hotel
  • Subject to franchisor license agreement and market demand
  • 265 +/‐ parking spaces
  • Parking sufficient to meet demands of all permutations of potential uses
  • Includes 38 re‐located publicly available spaces, to be regulated and managed by owner
  • Final count will vary as drawings become more detailed
Picarsic emphasized that they are seeking schematic design approval from the Design Review Board this evening.  

Picarsic continued by covering the evolution of the building’s design, which he noted, began with a u-shaped building.  He commented that he believes the current design responds well to the Board’s previous comments throughout the design review process, that it engages the street, and that it provides many pedestrian amenities.

Picarsic then turned the presentation over to Jai Singh Khalsa, the project architect, and Michael Blier, the project landscape architect to cover details about the development’s current design.

Khalsa began by showing the site context; where the site sits in relation to other areas of the city.  He noted that the original proposal for the development envisioned one u-shaped building.  He continued by explaining that the current scheme still represents one building, but now has the appearance of three distinct buildings.  There is a hotel building, an open-air connector piece that connects to the West Building – a mixed-use building - on Washington Street, and the Mill Hill building, which is mostly residential.

Khalsa began to explain specific design features by starting with the hotel corner lobby entrance.  He toggled between the last proposed design for the building and the current proposed design.  

He noted the following changes to Hotel and Hotel Lobby Corner:
  • Top floor has a more clean and simple detail.
  • The top floor will now be all hotel rooms and no residences as previously proposed.
  • Integrated mechanical system within window frames.
  • Mullion number has been reduced to provide a more civic sense of scale.
  • Reinforced way-finding and retail signage at the pedestrian scale.
  • Design engages the sidewalk more, creating a landing spot for hotel arrival.
  • Window structures have been revised.
Khalsa moved on to discuss what has been described as the “cube” feature at the corner of Washington and Dodge Street at the hotel building.

DeMaio asked whether the plane at the crosswalk coming from Starbucks changes.  

Blier noted that it would be a raised crosswalk.

Changes to the Hotel Cube Feature were described as follows:
  • Extension of program out into public round.
  • Very active corner to create a connection similar to the other end.
  • Ground plane materials come forward as you approach the building.
  • Dining area is separated by a low planter and seed grasses.
  • Raised crosswalks so that traffic is slowed along the Dodge Street edge.
  • Bike racks have been relocated.
  • Monumental scale treatment at corner.
  • Windows are recessed in to have a shadow line.
  • 2-window pattern with integral grilles with the same color scheme.
  • Panel system and signage located on the buildings.
  • Grade drop of roughly 18”.
  • Planter is flush at one end creating containment to the outdoor seating, framing the space and indicating a pedestrian walkway. Planter has a height of 24”.
  • Trees frame the pedestrian corridor.
  • Simplified and enlarged window system along base floor.
  • White brick with a panel system.
DeMaio questioned if the panel system would remain the same at the outer and recessed surfaces.

Khalsa commented that it would. The proposal is for an aluminum panel or cementitious system, painted in a body shop to provide more of a variation and texture similar to what is currently at Patriot Place in Foxborough.  The panels would have concealed fastners.

DeMaio asked whether the panel system being described is a Nichiha system.  

Khalsa confirmed that it is.

Connector Between Hotel and Commercial Buildings:   
  • Too many opportunity’s for anti-social, unsafe spaces.
  • Garden theme with a straight shot path of travel that creates a clear view.
  • Removed planters with raised trees, which made it appear darker.
  • Screen plantings to grow up the building.
  • Ground plane would be planted.
  • Entry planting grades up so there is no visual wall at stair.
  • Will be a high traffic area because of parking and intermediate level, which is a garage exit.
Washington Street Mixed Use Building (West Building):
  • Urban shopping zone, parking along street edge.
  • Retail identification.
  • Planted beds and trees along street edge.
  • Window-shopping, planting cuts in the pavement to get window visualization. Don’t want to create lips or ledges in the pavement so there are punctures in the ground.
  • Darker brick colors create a unique pattern
  • Each panel becomes an area for public art.
  • Masonry with 24” coursing on lower level of the building. Colors slightly alternate, textures have a stronger variation.
  • Solid canopy signage over retail space with a brise-soleil.
  • Upper level signage relates to office or retail space.
  • Glass railings acknowledge where residences starts.
  • Larger and smaller masonry coursing as you move up the building.
  • Slate blue color scheme.
West Building Connector:
  • Mill Hill Building and West Building balconies and masonry, wraps around the corner.
  • Metal panel systems have same structure but different colors.
  • Dormers give recognition that it is an area in transition.
  • Ground floor is main entrance.
  • Collision of styles with the bays.
  • Different scales of signage.
  • Grade changes roughly 3’ between buildings.
  • Stairs down to lower landing with bike racks that are visually present.
  • Walkway beyond into lobby entrance.
Top of Mill Hill Building:
  • Cast stone heads and sills on the building.
  • Red brick has variation in color pattern.
  • Retail area wraps around corner on the lower level.
  • Parking directory worked into corner of building.
  • Blade signs and stoops identify live/work areas.
  • Balconies above are created where the brick line ends and metal panel system continues up.
  • Brick walls and plantings work with the stoops.
  • Grade change to layer the landscape creating a domestic scale.
  • Knee-walls create a separation between public and private.
Inner Court of the Buildings:
  • Series of balconies, softened landscape.
  • Retail area along West Building beyond.
  • Ground floor has double doors for live workspaces.
  • Typical 5’ wide sidewalk.
  • Balconies are 4’ wide.
  • Garden space
Durand noted that he applauds the active and engaged streetscape with a mixed-use environment.

Andrew Shapiro read into the record a letter from Nina Cohen of, which noted that the overall design is a more successful one that provides welcome to density and a range of residential and commercial uses in this critical downtown corridor. Coen commented that crosswalks should encompass a 90-degree angle rather than the proposed acute angles. This would be more desirable from an ADA standpoint. New signage located on Washington Street would improve the intersection and support businesses with new access from the west. The signage would alert drivers about the new crosswalk bisecting this section of the road. Coen noted that bike parking space is currently not represented in the design and should be addressed. Additional bike parking should be located at parking meters. Cohen’s letter commented that an open atrium to the upper garage level would accommodate the tree island on the lower level. This would strengthen the tree’s survival while providing additional light and air to the lower level. The Letter finally noted that the size, scale, and massing of the building is appropriate at this location, relating well to the residential buildings on Mill Street.

Jaquith noted that the lip on the top of the building at the hotel entry needs adjustment. Jaquith commented that he is not sold on the blue panels color selection yet.

Sullivan commented that the proposed overhang that creates a sheltered drop off area creates tension from the large mass, which currently sits on top. It becomes a very uncomfortable condition. Sullivan commented that the proposed massing is shy a couple feet behind the canopy edge. Sullivan noted that the proposed addition to the landscape has helped a great deal.

In regards to the Hotel Cube Corner:

Jaquith noted that he applauds the 2 windows instead of the 3.

Durand commented that the window revision provides importance and monumentality to the building. It is really strong and works well with the cube.

Kennedy commented that the color slate blue is a bit too bright. A grey blue or gunmetal color would be more appealing. Between the 2nd and 3rd floor, and the 4th and 5th floor a sensation of verticalness by coloring in at the spandrels would be a nice addition to the design. Kennedy commented that there should be reference to the other buildings on both sides.

DeMaio noted that he applauds the 2 story window pieces. The horizontal and vertical spandrels in the window planes should be a shade darker or should match the window color. Windows should read more as a 2-story piece. DeMaio commented that the proposed panel treatment should not be the same as the rest of the building. DeMaio noted that he is not a fan of the bright blue color; a slate blue grey or gunmetal grey would be more appealing. Any panel reveals should have a finish to them. The aluminum color would have a dramatic effect on the building.

In regards to the Open Stair Connection:

Durand noted that the design is prominent and inviting. Landscaping looks inviting. It is the most improved aspect of this presentation.

Jaquith noted that there could be more green plantings running vertically creating more of a connection.

Kennedy noted that lighting fixtures integrated into the ground plane located on the floor level, as the pedestrian walks up the stairs would be a nice feature to have.

DeMaio noted that the stair resolution is excellent. DeMaio on commented that the stair located closest to Washington Street could flare wider at the base than at the top landing. This would create a more welcoming and less rigid sensation.

In regards to the Washington Street (West Building):

Durand noted that the design is very successful. The building identifies a lot of retail locations with signage to help the interior courtyard gain visitors.

DeMaio commented that the signage acknowledges both businesses along the front of the building as well as the rear. There are a lot of messages being received at one time, which has the potential to become confusing.

Kennedy noted that he is not a fan of the 2nd level signage. It should dictate exactly what client can go there. Public art spaces only on the specified panels could be valuable to retail if handled properly.

In regards to the West Building Connector:

DeMaio noted that the proposed planting located in front of the bicycle racks drops down from the corner leading towards the Mill Building entry about 3 or 4 feet. The planting makes walkway space leading to entry very concealed. Lighting should be addressed at this location.

In regards to the Residential Building:

Kennedy commented that the directory sign acknowledging the proposed offices located in the parking court feels very out of place.

DeMaio noted that the proposed retail window is one of the most important elements in the design. The retail will activate the streetscape; a directory sign located at this moment will ruin this feature.

Sullivan commented that the transparent retail corner enlivens the streetscape.

In regards to the Interior Parking Court:

Kennedy questioned the color of the planters and noted that additional ground lighting would be a nice feature to add.

Blier noted that the planters would have a copper finish.

DeMaio commented that the proposed curb lines could shift over a few inches. There will be a lot of pedestrian foot traffic at this location. The sidewalk should be as wide as one can make it.

A brief discussion took place as to the conditions that could be applied to any potential decision the DRB would vote upon, as well as thoughts on other periods of time when materials could be reviewed as the design develops further.

Picarsic acknowledged that they could return to review lighting and other design developments before final design review.       

Jaquith: Motion to approve schematic design conditional upon the applicant returning to the DRB for review of 100% Design Development documents and 50% Construction Documents as needed to encapsulate project updates with respect to site lighting, landscaping, materials, etc.  Final Design approval will be considered upon review of 100% Construction Documents.

Seconded by: Kennedy, Passes 5-0.

Minutes

Approval of the minutes from the April 23, 2014 regular meeting.

Kennedy: Motion to approve.
Seconded by: Jaquith, Passes 5-0.

Adjournment

Durand:  Motion to adjourn, seconded by Kennedy. Passes 5-0.
Meeting is adjourned at 9:00 pm.