MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING
OF THE SALEM REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HELD ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2007
A regular meeting of the Salem Redevelopment Authority was (SRA) held in the third floor conference room at the City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, on Wednesday, September 12, 2007 at 6:00 p.m
Roll Call
Chairman Michael Brennan called the meeting to order, and on roll call the following members were present: Conrad Baldini, Michael Brennan, Michael Connelly, Robert Mitnik and Russell Vickers. Also present was Kirsten Kinzer, CDBG Planner and Andrea Bray, Clerk.
Chairperson Brennan calls the meeting to order.
Redevelopment Authority Project Review
1. 50 St. Peter Street (Old Salem Jail)
Penn Lindsay addresses the project and provides an update, stating that everything is moving along very well. He make the following points: (1) multiple contractors are on board, (2) they have the final signoff on the construction drawings from the DRB, (3) they have met with all of the historical boards and the Massachusetts Historical Commission has signed off on the project, (4) they have met with the City Engineer and expect him to sign-off the routing slip next week, and (5) they expect to have the routing slip signatures complete within the next two weeks.
Lindsay explains that the reason for the delay in the closing is because the current market is making procuring financing more difficult and it is taking longer than planned.
Brennan asks Kinzer when the final plans will be before the SRA.
Kinzer states that the SRA does not need to give final approval of the construction documents. She states that the DRB has reviewed and approved the final construction plans.
Vickers asks if there is a draft of the deed available for review.
Lindsay states that it is not ready yet but will be provided by Attorney Joe Correnti. He adds that New Boston Ventures hopes to have the draft within the next few weeks.
Mitnik asks who the two contractors are.
Lindsay states that Deuse and Metro Construction are the two contractors.
Connelly asks about the funding.
Lindsay states that Boston Private Bank is the financier.
Brennan states that he has noticed that many developers are being delayed by the financiers because appraisals are now lower than they were a year ago. He adds that the good news is that this project has all of the plans complete and all of the permits are nearly complete.
Vickers agrees with Brennan and states that this current lending crisis is effecting the construction environment.
Brennan asks if the appraisal is done.
Lindsay states that it is complete, and the bank is taking more time to look over every detail but the bank is 100% committed and excited about this project.
Vickers asks what Lindsay would like for an extension.
Lindsay states that they are anxious to get started as soon as possible. but the easiest thing to do would be for the Board to extend it for three months. This will move the closing date to no later than December 14, 2007. The subsequent deadlines would be extended as follows: submittal for building permit by January 17, 2008, commencement of construction by February 16, 2008 and completion of construction by February 19, 2010.
Vickers states that he is confident that this group is committed to this matter and they are vigorously pursuing this closing.
Brennan agrees with Vickers and states that he would like a periodic update on their progress.
Vickers agrees and says that he would like the Board to be advised of the closing date when it is set.
Mitnik: Motion to grant the closing date extension of three months, seconded by Vickers. (Passes 5-0)
Sign Review
2. 33 Church Street (Law Office of Lance I. Layne) – Discussion and vote on DRB recommendation for proposed signage
Kinzer states that Lance worked with the DRB to shrink this sign and reposition it, and the DRB approved it conditionally on these changes to the design.
Baldini: Motion to approve, seconded by Vickers. (Passes 5-0)
3. 285 Derby Street (Count Orlock’s Nightmare Gallery) – Discussion and vote on DRB recommendation for proposed signage
Kinzer provides additional photos to give a better sense of the location of the sign. She states that the DRB worked with the owner to altar the original proposal extensively and held a Special Meeting last week to approve it in time to use it for this season.
Vickers asks if they are putting in the approved access ramp.
Kinzer states that they are not required to install the ramp because the occupancy permit did not involve a change in use.
Baldini: Motion to approve the sign design, seconded by Connelly. (Passes 5-0)
4. 118 Washington Street Rear (Upper Crust Pizza) – Discussion and vote on DRB recommendation for proposed signage
Kinzer states that this sign is the same as the signs at all of the Upper Crust locations, and the DRB approved it as submitted.
Vickers: Motion to approve the design, seconded by Connelly. (Passes 5-0)
5. 322 Derby Street (Rouge Cosmetics) – Discussion and vote on DRB recommendation for amendment to the proposed signage
Kinzer states that this is an amendment to add two lights to the existing blade sign bracket and the DRB approved it.
Connelly: Motion to approve the amended design, seconded by Mitnik. (Passes 5-0)
Other Business
6. Approval of Minutes – January 10, February 14, March 14, April 11, and May 9 meetings
Vickers: Motion to approve all of the minutes, seconded by Mitnik. (Passes 5-0)
Kinzer distributes a new copy of the Downtown Retail Plan.
Kinzer provided an update on the outside display of items sold in stores within the Redevelopment Authority area. She states that the through their business license, all businesses are permitted to display items they sell inside the store on the sidewalk. When a business expands beyond the area they are licensed to utilize, the Licensing Department sends an inspector to talk to the store owner. She adds that the consignment shop on Washington Street is not doing anything outside of what is allowed for their business. She states that the SRA does not have the authority to ask them to remove or change their display items on the sidewalk because they are temporary.
Vickers states that the feedback would be appropriate even if the business owner is not in favor of making any changes.
Mitnik asks about the authorized zone for display materials.
Kinzer states that it is the length of their storefront and she is not sure of the depth. She adds that this issue is whether the display is permanent or temporary.
Baldini asks about the status of the demolition of the Old Salem News Building.
Kinzer states that the project is still on track but she is not sure when the demolition is scheduled to begin.
Vickers: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Baldini. (Passes 5-0)
The meeting is adjourned at 6:30 PM.
| 
