City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Board or Committee: Redevelopment Authority, Regular Meeting
Date and Time: Tuesday November 27, 2012 at 6:00pm
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Chairperson Robert Mitnik, Conrad Baldini, Robert Curran, Matthew Veno
Members Absent: Russell Vickers
Others Present: Executive Director and City Planner Lynn Duncan
Economic Development Manger Tom Daniel
Recorder: Jennifer Pennell
Chairperson Robert Mitnik calls the meeting to order. Roll call was taken.
Annual Meeting
- Annual Report and Financial Report
Lynn Duncan presented the Annual Report and Financial Report. The report is for fiscal year 2012, which includes work and activity completed by the end of June 2012.
Among the highlights from fiscal year 2012 accomplishments are the urban renewal plan which was approved by the state on January 11, 2011. The SRA worked with the Cecil Group on the plan update which consolidated the Heritage Plaza East and Heritage Plaza West urban renewal plans. The Salem Downtown Renewal Plan will be in place for the next 30 years.
Duncan then noted Gordon College’s successful role at managing Old Town Hall. The SRA recommended Gordon College to the City Council to manage the facility, and the City entered into a five-year lease. The Salem Museum has had a huge increase in the number of visitors this year.
The next highlighted project was the parking management study which the SRA had contributed funding towards. Implementation began in 2012. The report also contains a list of all private development projects (sign, façade, store front projects) approved by the SRA and DRB.
Another significant project is the work on the Essex Street Pedestrian Mall. The SRA will be voting on phase 2 of this project later this evening.
Duncan then noted the work on public art. The City received a grant from the National Endowment of the Arts to develop a master plan for public art which will focus on the pedestrian mall.
Duncan noted that the financial report shows a balance of $5,799.54, and that 2012 marks the 50th year anniversary of the SRA. It was created in 1962.
Baldini: Motion to approve the current officers for a second term:
Nomination for Chairman, Robert Mitnik
Nomination for Vice Chairman, Russell Vickers
Nomination for Treasurer, Matthew Veno
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
- Approval of 2013 Meeting Schedule
Baldini: Motion to approve the 2013 meeting schedule.
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
Baldini: Motion to adjourn.
Seconded by Veno. Passes 4-0.
Regular Meeting
Executive Director’s Report
Duncan had no additional report.
Old/New Business
- East India Square (Peabody Essex Museum): Discussion and vote on proposed emergency generator.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes plans and photos of the proposed emergency generator.
Daniel noted that the new emergency generator would be located in the parking lot to the east of the museum. Daniel commented that the DRB recommended a darker painted finish for the proposed stack in place of the previously specified metal finish. The museum has agreed to these conditions.
Veno: Motion to approve DRB’s recommendation.
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
- Essex Street Pedestrian Mall: Discussion and vote on proposed improvements to Essex Street pedestrian mall.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes a PowerPoint presentation, plans, and photos of the proposed improvements to the Essex Street Pedestrian Mall. Meera Deean and Charlotte Barrows and were present on behalf of Utile and Landworks Studio.
Daniel noted that the design team was able to incorporate some of the comments from the previous SRA discussion into the updated design. The DRB recommended approval of the design with two conditions:
- Light fixtures should be shielded on the building side and aligned correctly. (This was recommended as a design requirement for the city as a whole.)
- Examine the fountain base to see if it creates a tripping hazard.
Barrows noted that the intent of tonight’s presentation is to familiarize the SRA with the project and to address details revised since the last SRA presentation. Barrows reminded the Board that the purpose of the work is to address the uneven ground plane, eliminate blocked site lines, and create clear pedestrian paths of travel.
Barrows stated that the removals project completed in September eliminated three large planters. The next scope of work will remove and reset cobblestones in specified areas, refurbish the fountain located closest to Washington Street, and shift two light posts.
Barrows noted that the revised design concept replaces seven diseased trees. Prior to this meeting, eight trees were going to be replaced; however, one tree is healthy and can remain. Barrows commented that the wooden kiosk and mailboxes will be relocated next to Cabot Money Management to provide a more efficient pedestrian path of travel. Two additional planters located near Pamplemousse will be removed. Barrows noted that any planters that are removed will be filled in with brick to match existing conditions. Five bollards will be added for pedestrian protection.
Barrows commented that in addition to these removals, phase two will include resetting the cobblestones and replacing the cobble parking “tabs” with bricks. The areas in front of Rockafellas and Bernard’s are in the worst condition and will be prioritized.
The last element involves refurbishing the fountain at Washington Street. Since the last presentation, the design of the fountain base has expanded and been further detailed based on comments received from the public and through archival research. Andrew Carr’s image on savesalem.com helped inform the extent of the specified splash pad in order to capture the entire arc of the fountain. The existing basin will be removed entirely. River rock will be located above the grate, which covers the existing pump. The copper and concrete relief of the structure will be restored. Lighting will be added and repaired. The precast base of the fountain will be at least 6” above finish grade to minimize tripping hazards.
Barrows noted the updated design incorporates concrete bands from the existing ground plane to finish the proposed paving pattern. The fountain will be offset from the ground plane pattern, enhancing the design. Construction will start in the Spring of 2013.
Mitnik asked if there was any public comment.
John Carr, 7 River Street - Carr stated that he is in favor of the design. He likes the emphasis on how the fountain can serve as a bench. Carr wondered how important the original vertical shape protruding out of the horizontal fountain basin was to the sculptor. He is pleased to see concern taken in regards to restoring the concrete banding. Carr wondered if the footprint was enough and if there had been any attempt to locate the sculptor and find out the degree to which the fountain’s basin serves the whole. Carr noted that the specified bollards appear thin and weak, as opposed to bollards located at the Common which appear state of the art and much larger.
Claudia Chuber, 190 Bridge Street - Chuber commented that the current cobblestones are hard to walk on. Chuber asked if the cobblestones will be reset with a different kind of material. She showed concern for resetting them because they limit pedestrian circulation.
Barrows noted that original cobblestones were not reinstalled properly after some construction was done. The current stones will be removed and reset. Barrows commented that the finish will always have a rustic top and will never meet perfectly (in contrast to brick). The pedestrian travel path will be brick and is intended to span a larger area than the current conditions. The vehicular zones will have cobblestones maintaining the historic character as well as providing a defined path of travel.
Andrew Carr, 7 River Street - Carr commented that the proposed fountain ground plane expresses seven consistently proportioned squares surrounding the base. Carr commented that if the fountain base were moved further forward and less offset, the remaining squares would become more symmetrical. The ground plane would then preserve the essence of the basin a little more while fitting into the pattern of the pedestrian walkway. Carr noted that the basin is important to the idea of the fountain. Consistency and similarity in size is important.
Mitnik noted that the fountain base is raised around and not similar to the ground plane square pattern. The base becomes an object in itself surrounded by the squares.
Barrows noted that the grade surrounding the fountain base slopes slightly to one side. The surrounding edge will be 6” above grade on one side and 18” above grade on the adjacent end. Barrows commented that the fountain and base are really one object but the squares around it are a two dimensional pattern and different. Barrows noted that the square pattern is not currently symmetrical. The object is located in the center surrounded by the squares.
Carol Carr, 7 River Street – Carr asked whether the two concrete steps surrounding the fountain remain in the new scheme and if the base will become one piece and more rectangular. A photoshopped image was recommended for a clearer visual understanding of the detailed space. Carr asked what the reason was for specifying the proposed bollards as tall and thin.
Barrows noted that the bollards are the same height and similar to the existing ones but thinner taking up less space while accentuating a more pedestrian environment.
John Carr commented that the fountain footprint provides a proportion between the base and the vertical of the step, which is almost like a plinth. A secondary proportion between the flat footprint and the verticality of the fountain itself can also be identified. Carr noted that if the step is removed the current edge will become shrunk and perpendicular. Carr commented that the original designer had a reason for the footprint, which celebrated the fountain.
Duncan commented that the work needs to be accomplished by early spring to remain on schedule. Businesses and property owners have been informed about the specified time frame. Construction drawings are still required which can be a time constraint. Duncan commented that the DRB thought that enough information was provided and decided to vote to recommend approval.
Veno asked whether there was a purpose for the relocation of the old utilities located within the kiosk. Veno asked what the reason was for providing electrical wiring in the kiosk.
Barrows noted that the electrical box located in the kiosk needs to be above grade and easily accessed. Currently the kiosk is much larger than required.
Daniel commented that the kiosk is a large utility box cover housing several electrical panels, a pump switch, and pedestrian/bollard lights. Relocating the existing kiosk will expand the pedestrian zone and improve site lines.
Mitnik commented that he approves of the proposed fountain scheme and its asymmetry, which accentuates the connection between fountain and pool. Mitnik agrees with the DRB’s recommendations.
John Carr noted that the original SRA plan was an east west pedestrian mall with a north south pedestrian mall running down from the Universalist Church to Front Street. Carr asked if the kiosk could be located across the specified location out of the principal axis.
Daniel commented that the specified location is between a wall and a landscaping bed. Daniel noted that the specified location is not a pedestrian space, currently a solar trash compactor is located in front of the existing landscape bed.
Veno suggested an electric box covered with public art. Veno noted that the function of the kiosk is to mask the utilities box. He agrees with the kiosk’s relocation but commented that its exterior treatment should recognize its function as a shield. Veno commented that proposed bollards appear ordinary and utilitarian and asked whether they should be consistent with existing bollards.
Duncan noted that bollards were originally proposed to be public art forms. The current budget will not accommodate this concept so the intention is to keep the bollards consistent while providing more visual space. The existing bollards have a large form and cap. Duncan commented that over time the bollards could be replaced.
Baldini: Motion to approve the DRB’s recommendation,
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
Sign, Awning, and Lighting and Façade Review
- 6 Front Street: Discussion and vote on proposed windows.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes plans and photos of the proposed windows. Bill Goldberg was present on behalf of Goldberg Properties.
Daniel noted that the intent is to replace the existing windows from multi pane to single pane glass. Daniel commented that the 6 Front Street photograph shows the existing conditions of the building. The next photo shows windows across the street at J Mode and seedstich. The last photo is a photoshopped image showing the proposed design scheme.
Daniel additionally noted that based on the Salem Downtown Renewal Plan, because the building is over 50 years old, the basis for review are the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and the Salem Historical Commission’s Guidelines Notebook, both of which should be considered as guidelines rather than standards.
Goldberg commented that the intent is to increase the quality of retail space by providing visibility and a comfortable and appropriate retail environment while properly accentuating the historic attributes. Goldenberg noted that not all the glass would be replaced. Goldberg would like to accommodate all types of retail.
Baldini commented that he agrees with the proposal.
Mitnik noted that it is important to restore the historic character of the proposed windows. The storefronts are an important piece of history for the city of Salem.
Goldberg noted that the effect of retail use has a different need than residential design. Goldberg believes that this should be considered.
Duncan commented that the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and the Salem Historical Commission’s Guidelines should be considered however there are also commercial design guidelines, which elaborates further about original storefront window mullion, lintel sizes, and proportions.
Goldberg commented that multiple pane windows provide a positive effect for retail stores like J Mode, which requires flexibility. Goldberg commented that higher quality stores require proper tools and visibility to be successful in providing economic growth to the city. Goldberg noted that thermal pane glass will be used to provide energy efficiency.
Mitnik commented that the DRB should provide a professional opinion to this issue.
Veno commented that the DRB should provide some feedback to this issue. A balance between historic character and the vibrant retail use should be addressed. Veno noted that the current retail plate glass windows on Front Street businesses are well represented. Veno commented that the blend of historic structure with modern glass is compelling.
Duncan commented that the SRA could send the topic to the DRB for additional input and a broader discussion of issue. This is the traditional process and will not require any additional time.
Curran commented that he does not agree with the need to go present this issue to the DRB.
Jay Goldberg commented that he doesn’t mind presenting the topic to the DRB, however fewer complications would be more ideal. Jay noted his desire to add to the retail cluster.
Veno: Motion to refer the application to the DRB to get the Board’s thoughts on how to balance historic design with the needs of retail uses we want to promote as well as the Board’s comment on the details of the proposal.
Seconded by Mitnik. Passes 2-0 with abstentions by Baldini and Curran.
- 270 Essex Street (Game Zone): Discussion and vote on window decal signage.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes plans and photos of the proposed window decal signage.
Daniel noted that the SRA would be approving the window decal signs previously installed. Daniel commented that the DRB recommended approval.
Baldini: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB,
Seconded by Veno. Passes 4-0.
- 223 Washington Street (Vintage Wood): Discussion and vote on proposed signage.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes plans and photos of the proposed signage.
Daniel commented that the window decal signage would state “Vintage Wood” and the decal located on the door would provide the business phone number. Daniel noted that the DRB recommended approval.
Baldini: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB,
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
- 99, 103 Washington Street and 230 Essex Street (Town House Square Condominium): Discussion and vote on proposed exterior paint color.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes photos and samples.
Daniel noted that the current green trim color will change to Sail Cloth while dark green and white paint will remain. Daniel noted that the DRB recommended approval.
Curran: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB,
Seconded by Baldini. Passes 4-0.
- 25 Lynde Street: Discussion and vote on exterior siding and paint color.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes photos and a letter for exterior siding and paint color.
Daniel commented that the façade’s wood clapboards have already been painted and replaced to match because the contractor was not aware of the need to get SRA approval. Daniel noted that the DRB recommended approval.
Veno: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB,
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
- 7 Church Street (i Taco): Discussion and vote on proposed signage.
The Board reviewed a submission that includes a letter, photos, and plans for the proposed signage.
Daniel commented that the submission includes two components—a wall sign in the specified awning area and a window image of Don Quixote on top of an opaque white translucent screen located in front of the kitchen prep space.
Daniel noted that the DRB recommended approval with the two conditions that have been addressed.
Mitnik questioned whether the screen material would read white.
Daniel commented that the material would be a 75% opaque white translucent screen.
Baldini: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB,
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
Minutes
The minutes from the October 10, 2012 regular meeting were reviewed.
Veno: Motion to approve
Seconded by Baldini. Passes 4-0.
Adjournment
Baldini: Motion to adjourn,
Seconded by Veno. Passes 4-0.
Meeting is adjourned at 7:30 pm.
| 
