City of Salem Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
Board or Committee: Redevelopment Authority, Annual Meeting
Date and Time: Wednesday November 12, 2014 at 6:00pm
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Chairperson Robert Mitnik, Conrad Baldini, Robert Curran, Grace Harrington
Members Absent: Russell Vickers
Others Present: Executive Director and City Planner Lynn Duncan, Andrew Shapiro
Recorder: Jennifer Pennell
Chairperson Robert Mitnik calls the meeting to order. Roll call was taken.
Annual Meeting
- Annual Report and Financial Report: Executive Director
Documents and Exhibitions:
- Draft copy of Fiscal Year 2014 SRA Annual Report
Duncan noted Redevelopment Authority projects and others that occurred within Salem’s downtown Urban Renewal District over the past year:
- The rehabilitation of the Town Pump Fountain is complete. It was the final phase of work to be done to the Essex Street Pedestrian Mall.
The District Court will be transferred to the SRA from the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM) pursuant to legislation that was recently passed through the State legislature and signed by the Governor. The Superior Court will remain in DCAMM’s control.
- The MBTA Station and Parking Garage is substantially complete and now open.
The City has taken back control of Old Town Hall from Gordon College, who’s contract was terminated in July of 2014. Subsequently, a public art planner was hired, who also manages Old Town Hall. The building’s window’s will be restored with help from a $20,000 grant received from the MA Cultural Council and $46,000 from the City’s CPA fund.
RCG’s major mixed-use project at the corner of Washington and Dodge Street is moving forward. After it receives approval from the City’s Planning Board, it will again go before the DRB and SRA for final design approval. The parking garage of this new development will retain 38 spaces for public use. The City received a $2.35 million Massworks grant from the State in order to facilitate the movement of utilities from underneath the site, and to make necessary streetscape and intersection improvements. It is anticipated that the utility movement will occur in 2015 and general construction in 2016.
- Phase 2 of the Old Salem Jail development received approval. The project is now ready to submit construction documents so that a building permit can be obtained. This will require approval from the DRB.
- The P.E.M. expansion has been delayed until 2019.
A Storefront Improvement Program continues to be run by the Economic Development Planner.
Artists’ Row recently received $17,000 in approved funding from the City Council in order to hire the Cecil Group to develop a new vision for the area.
- The SRA did not make any expenditures during FY2014. It maintained a balance of just over $5,800.
- Election of Officers: Discussion and vote.
Chairman: Robert Mitnik
Vice Chairman: Grace Harrington
Treasurer: Robert Curran
Baldini: Motion to approve.
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
- Approval of 2015 Meeting Schedule
Documents and Exhibitions:
- Copy of the proposed 2015 SRA meeting schedule
Curran: Motion to approve.
Seconded by Harrington. Passes 4-0.
Baldini: Motion to adjourn.
Seconded by Harrington. Passes 4-0.
Regular Meeting
Board or Committee: Redevelopment Authority, Regular Meeting
Date and Time: Wednesday November 12, 2014 at 6:15pm
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Chairperson Robert Mitnik, Conrad Baldini, Robert Curran, Grace Harrington
Members Absent: Russell Vickers
Others Present: Executive Director and City Planner Lynn Duncan, Andrew Shapiro
Recorder: Jennifer Pennell
Chairperson Robert Mitnik calls the meeting to order. Roll call was taken.
Mitnik then asked that the agenda items be taken out of order and that the item for 10 Derby Square be heard first.
- 10 Derby Square, 4th Floor (Gregg Martin c/o Mazow | McCullough Attorneys at Law): Discussion and vote on proposed replacement of windows
Documents and Exhibitions:
- Cover letter
- Pain Samples
- Photos of existing conditions
- Architectural drawings of proposed windows
Gregg Martin was present on behalf of the applicant. Andrew Shapiro began by summarizing what had transpired at the Design Review Board meeting with respect to this project. Shapiro explained that the applicant is seeking to replace all of the fourth floor windows; it (the company) occupies the entire floor. The unit it occupies is a condominium; hence the company owns the unit and is responsible for maintenance and upkeep. Shapiro also noted that the existing windows are in very poor condition. Restoration in this case is not an option. This had been verified by a qualified contractor who restores antique windows. Therefore, Mr. Martin has been retained by the applicant to reproduce windows that are as close as possible to the original.
Shapiro then referred to the materials before the Board, referencing plans that demonstrate how the windows will be constructed. He noted that the Design Review Board voted to recommend approval of the project, conditional upon all sight lines – i.e. dimensions for top and bottom rails, as well as stiles – being within ¼” of the original dimensions of those features. Shapiro explained that Mr. Martin had indeed field verified the original dimensions of the existing windows, as well as provided the dimensions for the new proposed windows, and that they were within the ¼” tolerance being requested.
Martin then added that his windows would be true divided light, with insulated glass and weather stripping. Sight lines of the seal would not be seen. He also confirmed that the exact same paint would be used on the trim and sash.
Baldini: Motion to approve as recommended by the DRB.
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
- FY15 Community Preservation Plan: Request and vote for comment/input.
Documents and Exhibitions:
- Community Preservation Plan Questionnaire for Boards and Commissions
Duncan reminded the Board that this issue had been discussed at the last SRA meeting and that the Board should tonight provide any input it sees fit to pass on to the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) in regards to the 2015 Community Preservation Plan.
Duncan noted that Preservation Plan must be reviewed every year with a public hearing and input moving forward.
Mitnik offered several comments. He noted that proposed projects to be funded seem to be quite specific. He questioned whether more projects in the future could be visionary proposals or in the form of design competitions. Some funds could be used as studies.
Duncan noted that a lot of planning projects are not eligible for CPA funding. She offered the example of the Planning Department seeking to have an updated Open Space and Recreation Plan funded via CPA. It turns out that it is not eligible because that type of project is considered part of the City’s normal responsibility. Alternatively she noted that feasibility studies or designs – for parks for instance – could be funded under CPA.
Mitnik then questioned whether CPA funds could be used to pay for fundraising campaigns for specific projects. He offered the example of the fundraising campaign to restore the Common Arch. He thought that perhaps the fundraising process would have been accelerated with the help of CPA.
Duncan noted that the grant does not allow for fundraising. That being said, Duncan noted that the CPC is always looking for projects to leverage with outside funding. She offered the example of the Common Fence restoration project, which received a state grant.
Baldini asked how much they received.
Duncan said about $50,000, with another $50,000 coming directly from the City. CPA awarded the project $100,000.
Harrington asked how much it would cost to restore the entire fence. Duncan said that it was estimated to cost about $1 million.
Mitnik then offered that for the secondary criteria, the CPC could consider expanding the quality and variety of projects awarded. There seems to be three specific categories. Having more projects submitted so that the Committee has a larger range of options would be preferable.
He then offered that housing projects that demonstrate a high degree of sustainability and low energy use should be encouraged and/or prioritized. Also projects should address climate change, sea level rise, and stormwater management.
Mitnik suggested that open-space projects should incorporate opportunities for green roofs and other types of green infrastructure. Open space can be increased by the built environment, not just the natural environment.
Duncan cautioned that a green roof may not be funded under open space by the CPA. However, some of the concepts could be captured under the housing category.
Mitnik closed the conversation by noting that the Board needed to come to a consensus on the comments provided, so he requested that a motion be made.
Baldini: Motion to accept comments.
Seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
New/Old Business
- Discussion on Draft RFP for Redevelopment of District Court Property:
Documents and Exhibitions:
- Draft of RFP’s “Redevelopment Goals” and “Evaluation Criteria” sections
Duncan reminded the Board that the redevelopment goals had been discussed at the last SRA meeting, and that the section being circulated this evening is still in draft form. Some sections have been reworded, including the addition of “sustainable building measures” as suggested by Bob Mitnik.
Duncan then elaborated on why the process for developing the RFP was taking a little extra time. She explained that the City has convened a committee to examine the potential relocation of City Hall Annex, and has hired Arrowstreet Architects to advise the group and produce feasibility analyses on certain sites, to determine whether they would be appropriate for these City offices. One of the publicly owned sites that is being considered is the former District Court building. Another site the City is looking at is a crescent shaped parcel that abuts the MBTA station. In either case, the City would expect a mixed-use scenario to be developed. Over the next couple of months, we hope to determine whether the City Hall Annex proposal would become part of any RFP being developed.
Minutes
The minutes from the October 8, 2014 regular meeting were reviewed.
Harrington: Motion to approve,
Seconded by Baldini. Passes 4-0.
Adjournment
Baldini: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Curran. Passes 4-0.
Meeting is adjourned at 6:48 pm.
| 
