The URL can be used to link to this page

HISCOM 2014 MINUTES January 15, 2014,Page 1 of 12 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION r MINUTES January 15, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Natalie Lovett. Kathy Harper (Vice Chair) arrived late. 92 Derby Street David O'Sullivan submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a wrought iron gate in the alley separating 92 and 94 Derby Street. The gate will be 5 feet high on each end and rise to 6 feet in the middle of the gate. David O'Sullivan and Lisa Ainsworth were present. Documents &Exhibits 1. Application: 12/12/13 2. Photographs: 12/12/13 3. Drawing: 12/12/13 Ms. Ainsworth submitted a picture of a decorative finial for the top of the gate. She states that the door will open in the middle with a knob. Ms. Herbert asked if they considered installing a wooden gate,which would be more typical for the time period of the house. She stated that the proposed gate is more of Victorian treatment. Ms. Ainsworth responded that they did not consider wood. They are concerned with durability and keeping people out of their backyard. They also like that the metal will still show a view of the backyard garden. Ms. Harper arrived at this time. Ms. Herbert asked if they had a dimension on the spacing between the pickets. Mr. O'Sullivan responded in the negative. The fabricator did not provide that information. Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission would need to know the dimension of the individual pickets and the spacing between the pickets. They would also like to know the distance from the ground and how they gates will meet in the middle. Mr. Hart stated that he would also like to see what the setback of the fence is from the street. Ms. Herbert asked if the gate would be attached to both buildings. Mr. O'Sullivan responded that the gate to be held up by two posts, and would not be attached to either house. January 15, 2014,Page 2 of 12 Mr. Hart stated that an elevation of the gates would be helpful in addition to how may finials would be used. Ms. Bellin stated that she would like the applicant to bring additional information on the closing mechanism for the gate. Mr. Hart stated that a lift latch is typical. He added that the applicant should check with the building inspector to see if there is a height requirement for the gate. The public commenting period was opened. Jane Arlander, 93 Federal Street, suggested that the applicants walk around town to see other examples of wrought iron fences and how they close. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 30-32 Beckford Street Rolf Franke-Otten submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a carriage house and fence, per plans previously submitted and approved in 8/7/95 and 8/18/95. The carriage house will house three (3) cars and will also house boats by lift in the loft area. The fence will be constructed out of 1"xl" steel rods with granite block posts. Rolf Franke-Otten was present. Documents &Exhibits 1. Application: 12/30/13 2. Drawings: 8/18/95 Mr. Franke-Otten stated that 20 years ago he got approval for the carriage house. The construction was delayed due to environmental contamination from a neighboring property. With the environmental cleanup now complete,he would like to construct his carriage house. He recently discovered however, that his original design would require a height variance. As a result,he has changed the design to conform to the zoning requirements. He presented the Commission with these revised drawings. Ms. Herbert inquired about an extra door on the drawings. Mr. Franke-Otten responded that the door is an exit/emergency door to meet building code. Mr. Hart asked if there was any information on the materials for the carriage house. Mr. Franke-Otten responded that the siding is clapboards and the doors are barn doors. The roofing would be 3-tab black asphalt shingle to match the main house. The paint color scheme would be the same at the main house. January 15, 2014,Page 3 of 12 Ms. Herbert asked if the siding would be 4 %" cedar clapboard and of what material the doors would be made . Mr. Franke-Often responded that the clapboards would be 4 %" cedar. The door would be made of solid (tongue-in-groove) eastern white pine. The hinges will be cast-iron. Ms. Herbert asked if there will be any windows in the new design. Mr. Franke-Oten responded in the negative. The public commenting period was opened. Dick Luecke, 2 River Street, stated that he is an abutter to Mr. Franke-Oten and has the most sightline to this new building. He likes the new plans and is support of the application. Ms. Herbert read into the record a letter of support from Larissa Lucas, 15 River Street. Ann Whittier, 10 River Street, stated that she is in support the application. David Hallows, 15 River St, stated that he is in support of the application. A resident from 13 River Street, stated that she is in support of the application. Mr. Franke-Oten stated that he may need to add some fill to the land around the carriage house due to a swamp creeping in on the property. Ms. Herbert stated that would be considered landscaping and outside of the Commission's jurisdiction. Steve Whittier, 10 River St, stated that he is in support of the application and can vouch for the high level of Mr. Franke-Otten's craftsmanship. The public commenting period was closed. Ms. Herbert stated that given the topography of the lot, this garage will be much lower than the houses. Ms. Bellin asked the applicant for the door color. Mr. Franke-Oten responded that the doors would be Black Forest to match the door on the main house. Ms. Herbert asked if there will be a corner board. Mr. Franke-Oten responded in the affirmative. The corner board will be at least 6", there will also be a water table. The foundation will likely be a granite veneer rather than just granite however he does need to get approval from the Building Inspector. January 15, 2014, Page 4 of 12 Ms. Herbert asked for the height of the doors. Mr. Franke-Otten responded that they will be approximately 9'high. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the revised proposal with the details as discussed. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Hart recused himself from the vote. 47 Summer Street Phil Marchand submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the side bay window with one (1) triple double hung unit. The window will be all wood and will match the existing windows in size and style. Phil Marchand was present. Documents &Exhibits 1. Application: 12/30/13 Photographs: 1/14/14 Ms. Harper asked when the addition added to the building. Mr. Marchand responded that the house was built in the 1804s and the addition was added in the 1980's.. Ms. Herbert asked if the windows would be insulated windows. Mr. Marchand presented the commission with specifications for the Jeld-wen windows they would like to install. Mr. Hart stated that the specifications show that the window will be argon glass, which is not the same as the existing windows which are single pane with storms. Ms. Herbert stated that it would be very obvious that the windows are not all the same. She stated that the Commission has allowed insulated glass windows, however in this case where the new windows will be adjacent to existing windows, the Commission would prefer a wood window with a storm. BROSCO makes a window of that kind. There was no public comment. Mr. Hart stated that the application also includes replacing the Masonite siding with cedar. Ms. Herbert asked if any Commission members had a comment about the appropriateness of the triple window. Mr. Hart stated that because the window is being installed on an addition, which currently has a bay window, he feels it would be appropriate. January 15, 2014, Page 5 of 12 VOTE: Ms. Harper made a motion to approve the proposed Jeld-wen window. Ms. Kennan seconded the motion. Ms. Keenan was in favor, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Harper, Ms. Bellin, Mr. Hart, and Ms. McCrea were opposed. The motion so failed. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve a true divided light wood window. Ms.Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Herbert stated that the sashes and storms should match the existing. The windows should align with the existing as noted in the application. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the replacement of the Masonite siding with clapboards to match the existing clapboards. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 24 Fort Ave Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish all remaining structures and equipment not previously permitted for demolition. The structures subject to demolition delay include the Unit 1, 2, & 3 Fan House, Boiler Building, Turbine Room and Screen House. The structures will be replaced with a new modern power facility. Atty. Joseph Correnti, George Wilson, Lou Erich were present. Documents &Exhibits 1. Application: 12/16/13 2. Photograph 3. Site Plan Atty. Correnti stated that in May they were before the Commission for Phase 1 of the demolition. They are now before the Commission to request a demolition waiver for the remainder of the site that is over 50 years old, which encompasses most of the main structures including the stacks. Mr. Erich stated that Unit 1 and 2 were the original buildings,built in 1951 and 1952. In 1958, Unit 3 was added as an expansion of those buildings. Unit 4 was added later and is less than 50 years old. The drawings provided with the application shows the demolition plan. Everything not intended for reuse will be taken down. Mr. Hart asked what will remain standing. Mr. Erich responded that they will be leaving the electrical switchyard,which is located adjacent to the fan house. On the demolition plan, the electrical switchyard is shown near the number 43A in the diagram. Ms. Harper asked if the final permitting is in place for the new plant. Atty. Correnti responded that all permits are in hand, however several are under appeal. They are waiting for resolution of several appeals. The plant is closing May 31, 2014. There is currently January 15, 2014,Page 6 of 12 pre-demolition activity going on now. The goal is to be ready to go 100%with construction on June 1st Ms. Harper stated that there were some presentations that included the preservation of the turbine building. She asked if this preservation was still planned. Mr. Erich responded that preservation of the turbine room is still under consideration. It is part of the discussion with the siting board. Atty. Correnti stated that they are before the Commission for approval to demolition all of the buildings. The turbine house is more of a turbine hall and is part of the other buildings. Mr. Wilson stated that they would save the turbine hall because there are overhead cranes. If there were to be a tenant in that space that could use the cranes, it could remain. Only the structural steel would remain. Ms. Herbert stated that retention of the turbine room seems to be more of commercial significance than historic significance. The public commenting period was opened. Meg Twohey, 122 Federal Street, stated that she understands that the turbine hall is a unique structure and represents one of the last un-demolished pieces of the industrial history in Salem. She would ask the Commission to not vote on that building at this time and to request a site visit. There are examples of other City's where such a structure has been saved and have become landmark buildings. William Legault, City Councilor, asks the Commission to not put any future or potential impediment in place for the applicant especially, given the project's importance to Salem. Emily Udy, HSI, asked if the location of the turbine hall could be clarified. She stated that composition of the building with the windows is something to consider maintaining if the interior structure would be used. She asked that the Commission request a site visit. Ms. Herbert asked what the feasibility of a site visit would be. Mr. Correnti responded that it is feasible to view the site, however viewing the inside of the building is more difficult because it is a working power plant. He would need to check with the plant security. Ms. Herbert asked Ms. Udy when the idea of preserving the turbine room surfaced. Ms. Udy responded from HIS's perspective, they have no concerns with the site and environmental issues, however they do have an interest in the demolition of buildings over 50 years old. She stated that she cannot make an official statement on behalf of Historic Salem, Inc at this time because she is still gathering information. However, she does not see a continuance as creating a hardship for the applicant. There is still time before the June lst construction date. . January 15, 2014,Page 7 of 12 Ms. Twohey stated that she understands that the building does hold some promise for Footprint. Additionally, if there is an opportunity here it seems well worth it to investigate the demolition waiver further. She clarified that she is at this meeting representing herself and other residents that were unable to attend, not HSI. Atty. Correnti states that they are not presenting a demolition option that will leave the turbine hall. They are saying that they may reuse some of the structural steel inside the building, not the building itself. They agree that photographic documentation of the site is important and have already been taking steps to do so. Mr. Erich stated that they have found over 300 black and white photos that were taken during initial construction of the site. The owners understand the importance of documenting the site and are committed to compiling photographic and probably also videographic documentation of the power plant. Ms. Herbert stated that she would like to treat the turbine house as a separate application and take some extra time to evaluate the turbine room. It seems that if Footprint is truly considering a tenant retaining the structure would be more feasible than building a new one. She is not looking to hold up the application but would like to take a few more weeks to gather more information about the interior of the building to make sure they are moving in the right direction. Then the Commission can decide whether a site visit is warranted. Atty. Correnti stated that they can come to the next meeting with photographic information about the interior of the building. Larry Spang, 125 Columbus Ave, asked how long Footprint has been considering the idea of preserving the turbine building. Mr. Wilson responded that the idea is relatively new. Atty. Correnti stated that he believes the Planning Board site plan approval does not include the turbine room. Additionally, every approval for the permitting has shown the turbine hall, within the building, as being gone. There would be some serious repercussions if they were not able to demolish the building. The application before the Commission is to demolish the turbine room along with the other buildings. While Footprint thinks the building could have value commercially and economically, they are looking for approval to demolish the building. They are willing to provide the commission with additional information and pictures . Ms. Herbert stated that it would be helpful to have information on the dimensions of these other buildings to compare with the turbine room along with the architect opinion that it would not be feasible to save this building. Mr. Spang stated that he would be concerned with the retention of the steel structure being retained given the great redevelopment plan for the site. He would not want to see a 24 hour ship building business being on the site. Atty. Correnti stated that the Manhattan architectural firm presented examples to the Planning Board of reuse of industrial buildings. The firm determined that reuse was not feasible for this January 15, 2014, Page 8 of 12 building,which is why they drew up the existing plans. For the next meeting, they will pull together parts of that presentation for the next meeting. Mr. Hart stated that he understands that during demolition there will be as-built photographs taken. Those would be helpful for the Commission to have. Ms. McCrea asked if this is the same application that went before the Planning Board. If the turbine room is separated from the application,what would the repercussions be. Atty. Correnti responded that they would wait the 6 months delay period. If they decide to preserve the turbine room, they would need to amend a number of permits. The approved plans do not show a turbine hall on them. They are talking about an interior hall with structural steel that may be commercially beneficial. They are not stating that exterior structure has any historical significance. Ms. McCrea stated that she has a concern with the legal ramifications of separating the Turbine Room from the remainder of the application. She wonders if the Commission should check with the City Solicitor before proceeding. Ms. Herbert responded that the Commission is able to break out the buildings as it wishes. The Commission is just asking for additional information,which they would typically asked for from applicants anyways. The Commission would like to have this documentation, and HSI has expressed concerns, so they should take that into consideration. Atty. Correnti clarified that the architect's presentation was related to the reuse of the entire plant, not just the turbine room. It shows some of the magnificent structures that were built and repurposed in the early 1900s. Mr. Wilson stated that the point of the presentation was to show that architects need to be involved in the design of power plants. The existing plant was designed by an engineer and does not have the architectural integrity of past plants. VOTE: Ms. Harper made a motion to a rove the Demolition Delay Waiver for the boiler buildin screen room and fign room. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. Ms. Herbert Ms. Har er Ms. Bellin Mr. Hart and Ms. Keenan were in favor, Ms. McCrea was opposed, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue discussion of demolition of the Turbine Room to the February 19th meetiniz. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 129 Columbus Ave Lawrence and Deborah Callahan submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the existing building. The foundation would be left intact. The applicant states that the existing building is structurally unsound and unstable. The framing does not comply to existing building code requirements, the mechanical and electrical systems, kitchen January 15, 2014, Page 9 of 12 and baths, and the interior finishes, all require replacement. The cost of replacement will be less than the cost of the required rehabilitation, and replacement will prodce a better quality dwelling. The new building will be of a similar scale and proportion as the existing building and will be architecturally compatible with the existing neighborhood. Richard Griffin, Lawrence and Deborah Callahan were present. Documents &Exhibits 1. Application: l/6/14 2. Inspectors Report: 10/30/13 3. Photographs: l/3/14 4. Drawings: l/3/14 Mr. Griffin submitted to the Commission a summary from Peter Stout stating that he would conclude that the structure should be demolished. Ms. Herbert asked if the,applicants currently own the building. Ms. Callahan responded in the affirmative. Mr. Griffin stated that the building was originally built as a summer cottage. The layout is not ideal and the framing is light: 2x6 spanning 8 feet. The walls are bowing. The structure was originally constructed in 1895,but the original bungalow features of the house is no longer present. Ms. Herbert stated that this building is listed on the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing building in the Willows District. Looking at the building, it has been so altered that she personally feels it is no longer significant. Mr. Hart stated that MACRIS shows that the house was listed as a contributing building for the Willow District in 1994. MHC says that it is significant. He would not feel comfortable approving the demolition of the building. Ms. Herbert stated that there have been so many changes at the Willows, this could seem to set a precedent for demolishing other structures in the area. She asked Mr. Griffin about the cost to replace vs. restore the house. Mr. Griffin said he made this statement based on personal experience along with the information received from Peter Strout, Tom St. Pierre (City Building Inspector) and the engineering firm he works with. There is a fair amount of insect damage. The new house replicates the bungalow features typical of Willows properties. They have received a variance to build the house, and the abutters were in support. There is a lot more flexibility by building up from the foundation rather than restoring the existing building. He stated that the existing house would not be as livable as the new house. They are replicating the Willows architecture even though it is outside of a local historic district. Ms. Harper asked if they would be using the existing foundation January 15, 2014, Page 10 of 12 Mr. Griffin responded that they expect to use the existing foundation however, will not know for sure until the existing structure is demolished. Ms. Bellin asked if the applicants planned to demolish the building when they bought it. Mr. Callahan responded that they planned to remodel the house, however they soon found that this would be difficult. Mr. Hart asked when the house was last occupied. Mr. Callahan responded that the house was occupied as recently as several months ago by two nieces of the family. He was shocked to find that someone had been living there. The ceiling is coming down, and there are water leaks. Mr. Griffin stated that at first glance the house seems OK, but when you look down the side of the house you can see the buckling walls. Larry Spang, 125 Columbus Ave, stated that he has lived in the house next door for 15 years. The previous owner was elderly and mostly housebound. The family had hoped they could do something with the house. Some of the family kids took free rein over the house. There are substantial leaks that were not address. Typically, he supports restoration or preservation of Willows cottages. There is not substantial historic exterior remaining on this house,however. The exterior of the house was completely redone in the 1970s and he does not see what is worth preserving on this property. To recreate the house without any photographs of what was there originally would be fiction anyways. Mr. Hart stated that he is still hesitant to set a precedent of demolish buildings because they have not been maintained properly. The new design looks appropriate, but he is still concerned. Ms. Bellin stated that she agrees with Mr. Hart. Ms. Harper stated that the design keeps the shape and design of the house and streetscape. There does not seem like there is much to save on this house. She would be sympathetic to the demolition waiver. Ms. McCrea agrees with the comments from Mr. Spang and Ms. Harper. Ms. Bellin points out to the Commission that the new design appears to be a story taller than the existing. Mr. Griffin responds that she is correct that the new house will be taller than what is there now, however the house will still be shorter than everything around it. It is also 7' shorter than allowed by zoning. VOTE: Ms. Har er made a motion to approve the application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. Ms. Herbert, Ms. Harper, Ms. McCcrea, and Ms. Keenan were in favor, Ms. Bellin and Mr. Hart were opposed, and the motion so carried. January 15, 2014,Page 11 of 12 Ms. Herbert stated that the Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance is always considered on a case by case basis. With this case, one concern is that it was structured as a summer cottage with minimal framing and would have to sister up everything on the inside. In addition, there is no documentation of how the house originally looked. This decision does not mean that the Commission is changing its view of demolishing historic structures. 3 Webster Street Renewal Ventures, LLC submitted a request for a Letter of Support for their MA Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits application. Constructed in 1887 by the Lynn &Boston Electric Railroad Company, the Car Barn is a unique example of the industrial architecture built in Salem during the late 19th century. The project will involve converting the Car Barn into six residential units. Historically appropriate and energy efficient windows will be installed and repairs will be made to the masonry. The large wood doors will be reintroduced to the original trolley car bays. Ms. Lovett handed around a draft letter of support for the Commission members to review. Ms. Herbert stated that if the applicant is applying for tax credits they will have to meet the Secretary of the Interior's guidelines. Mr. Hart stated that Dan Ricarelli and John Seger are the architects for the project. He has viewed the plans, and it looks like they will be doing a nice job. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion toa&prove the Letter of Support. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Preservation Master Plan Update The Department of Planning and Community Development submitted a request for a Letter of Support for their application for Survey and Planning Grant funds to undertake an update to the City of Salem's Preservation Master Plan. The goal of the Preservation Master Plan update would be to better integrate current historic preservation activities with broader planning, environmental, social, economic, and sustainability goals and procedures. Ms. Lovett handed around a draft letter of support for the Commission members to review. Ms. Bellin asked is the plan update will also be funded with Community Preservation Act funds Ms. Lovett responded that she was unsure whether or not the project qualifies for CPA funds, or whether the grant match will utilize a different source of city funds. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the Letter of Support. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Approval of Minutes w ' January 15, 2014, Page 12 of 12 VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approved the minutes ofNovember 20, 2013 with revisions. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. McCcrea made a motion to approved the minutes of December 4, 2013 with revisions. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Correspondence Ms. Lovett stated that DCAM is holding a meeting for the Family and Probate Court renovation project. She will resend the meeting information to the Commission by email. VOTE: There being no further business, Mr. Hart made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Bellin_ seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner February 19, 2014, Page 1 of 9 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES February 19, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, February 19,2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem,MA. Present were Jessica Herbert(Chair), Kathy Harper(Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, Chad Garner, and David Hart. Joanne McCrea and Larry Spang arrived late. 6 Monroe Street Roger Tyler submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a 10 foot long x 5 foot tall fence along the north side of the house. The fence will be composed of 1"x4" vertical cedar boards with 5"x5" cedar posts with pyramidal caps. The design includes a 32" opening with a short 20" section to the left of the opening. The fence will be stained white. The new fence will replace the existing I V long weave design fence, and will be set back approximately 14" from the existing. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: l/6/14 ■ Photographs: 1/16/14 ■ Site plan Ms. Herbert stated that Mr. Tyler has requested that the application be continued to the next meeting. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the a lication to March 5 2014, Mr. Garner seconded the motion. All were in, avor, and the motion so carried. 16 Summer Street Richard Pabich submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for exterior paint colors. The proposed paint colors are: Body color-Bleeker Beige (Benjamin Moore HC-80) flat finish Trim color- White Dove (Benjamin Moore PM-19) satin finish Window/doors-Black(Benjamin Moore PM-9) satin finish Mr. Richard Pabich was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 1/20/14 ■ Photographs: 1/20/14 ■ Paint chips Mr. Pabich stated that the house is currently brown and white. They are looking for colors to make the house brighter. There was no public comment. February 19, 2014, Page 2 of 9 VOTE: Mr. Garner made a motion to approve the qRplication as submitted. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 92 Derby Street As a continuation of the meeting on January 15, 2014, David O'Sullivan submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a wrought iron gate in the alley separating 92 and 94 Derby Street. The gate will be 5 feet high on each end and rise to 6 feet in the middle of the gate. David O'Sullivan and Lisa Ainsworth were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 12/12/13 ■ Photographs: 12/12/13 ■ Drawing: 2/19/14 ■ Picture of latch Ms. Ainsworth submitted a revised drawing for their gate along with examples from neighbors' gates and a picture of the proposed latch. Ms. Herbert asked if they were still considering finials. Ms. Ainsworth responded that they are going to install the gate without finials. Should they decide to have finials, they will reapply at a later time. Ms. Bellin stated that the graduated bars should continue to the center, so that the middle bar is the highest. Mr. Hart drew the change on the picture submitted by the applicant. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the application with the design change to the center picket. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 24 Fort Ave As a continuation of the meeting on January 15, 2014, Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish all remaining structures and equipment not previously permitted for demolition. The structures subject to demolition delay include the Unit 1, 2, & 3 Fan House, Boiler Building, Turbine Room and Screen House. The structures will be replaced with a new modern power facility. On January 15, 2014, the applicant received a vote in support of the demolition delay waiver for Unit 1, 2, & 3 Fan Houses, the Boiler Building, and Screen House. Discussion of demolition for the Turbine Room was continued to the next meeting in order to review additional information regarding the building. Scott Silverstein, Joseph Correnti, and Lou Erich were present. Documents &Exhibits February 19, 2014, Page 3 of 9 1. Application: 12/16/13 2. Photographs 3. Site Plan 4. Presentation: 2/19/14 Ms. McCrea and Mr. Spang arrived at this time. Lou Arak gave a presentation to the Commission showing the turbine room, structural steel, and historical photographs of the site. Ms. Bellin and Ms. Harper asked for clarification on what part of the building may remain if the turbine hall is reused and specifically which structures would be retained. Mr. Silverstein responded that the entire exterior of the building would be demolished and they would construct a new shell to cover the structural steel. Mr. Arak added that if the steel structure is retained, the floor, turbine deck and mezzanine level would also remain. Mr. Hart suggested that the original architectural drawings could be submitted to the Historic American Engineering Record or the Historic American Buildings Survey. Ms. Herbert asked for public comment. Linda Haley, spoke in favor of retaining the building. She added that the steel structures and tile walls are beautiful. She asked if the walls, with the tiles,would be demolished. Mr. Silverstein responded that the tile on the walls would be demolished, however the tile on the floor would likely remain. Ms. Herbert asked about the details of the tiles. Mr. Silverstein responded that the tiles are gray/cream subway-type tiles. Tim Clark, Salem resident, spoke in favor of the building being reused. He suggested that the Commission tour the building. Ms. Herbert asked Mr. Silverstein for clarification on why they would be removing the skin of the building. Mr. Silverstein responded that they would remove the exterior for two reasons: to capitalize on the view of the harbor and because the exterior brick is planned to be used as fill on the site. There is quite a bit of architectural and historical value to the internal structure, if they are able to find the right tenant. He added that the Planning Board and Siting Board approvals include the demolition of any structures that will not be reused. Emily Udy, Historic Salem Inc., spoke in favor of a community site visit. She added that it would be nice to retain the three vertical windows in the new structure and is pleased to hear that February 19, 2014,Page 4 of 9 much of the masonry will be reused on the site as it will keep trucks from going in and out of the site and through the neighborhood. Mr. Silverstein responded that they would be happy to conduct a site visit for the Commission and Historic Salem, Inc., however they would need to limited the group size. Ms. Haley asked if this project needed to go through the Section 106 permitting review process. Mr. Silverstein responded that there are no federal funds being used for this project. There was historical review during the MEPA review process. Atty. Correnti added that there was a FAA permit required, however the project was found to not trigger Section 106 review. Ms. Udy asked when they would know if the steel structure would be reused. Mr. Silverstein responded that they would make the decision in the next 4 months. Ms. McCrea asked how the steel structure would be affected once the buildings are taken down. Mr. Arak responded that they are completing a study on that subject. It appears as though the steel structure will be able to stand on its own, although it may need some reinforcement The Commission members discuss with the applicant their concern with what will replace the existing brick. Ms. Spang could not envision that the new siding would be brick or anything that looks more finished than corrugated metal, given the plausible uses for the building. Ms. Bellin stated that it would be useful to preserve the existing brick until a use for the structure has been determined and asked for clarification on why the walls cannot remain. Ms. Harper asked if the walls could remain if a prospective tenant desired to retain them. Mr. Silverstein responded that he did not envision the building having metal walls,but is relying on his architect to make the decision. They are hopeful that they will not make the turbine building look worse than when they started. They are hoping to open up a big piece of the site to other uses and would like to see revitalization of the waterfront. An unattractive building would not serve their purpose. If they found a tenant that would like the walls, they would accommodate and support that. Peter Furniss, clarified that once the boiler buildings are demolished, there would be no walls on the northern and western sides. The southern wall would remain intact. One quarter of the eastern wall would remain, however everything below the administrative building is cement block and was not designed to be seen. The walls would require significant structural improvements. Ms. Herbert asked if there will be no demolition before this June, is issuing approval for the waiver moot, as the Demo Delay runs out on June 19, 2014. February 19, 2014,Page 5 of 9 Mr. Silverstein responded that a part of the finance package for a large infrastructure project includes having all of the permits final and in place. It is a matter of finality and having a complete package. Mr. Garner stated that he is satisfied with what the applicant has provided to the Commission and spoke in favor of granting the waiver. Mr. Hart stated that he would like documentation showing that the Section 106 Review was not required in the Commissions files. He feels the applicant is very generous in offering the scanned pictures and blueprints. Finally, he would request that the Commission be given the opportunity to take additional photographs at a site visit prior to demolition of the building. Ms. Herbert stated that in the past when requests for VWDDO have come before the Commission, and the Commission has made a decision to not grant the waiver, it has been a situation where they are hoping that the applicant will perform due diligence in finding a reuse. In this case, she feels as though the applicant is doing that and investigating the options. Ms. Bellin added that this is the only time for the Commission to have a say in the project and is an opportunity for the Commission to convey what they would like to see so that the applicant can take that into account while considering the reuse of the property. Mr. Silverstein responded that he appreciates that comment. They prefer to work through the project as a result of discussions rather than through orders. They will take the concerns of the Commission into consideration. Councilor Legault spoke in support of the waiver. He sees no historic integrity in the building. Ms. Herbert summarized the discussion for the Councilors that had recently arrived. Councilor Turiel spoke in support of the waiver. He concurred with the comments of Councilor Legault. Councilor Eppley spoke in support of the waiver. Councilor Sargent spoke in support of the waiver. He disclosed that he is an employee of the existing plant. An argument could be made that by demolishing the building it would be restoring the historic views that once existed. MOTION: Mr. Garner made a motion to approve the application for a waiver of the Demolition Delav Ordinance for the turbine hall structure. Mr. Sang seconded the motion. Mr. Hart proposed an amendment to the motion, that the applicant furnace a list of documentation that is available. The requested information includes: 1. List of construction drawings and documents that are available 2. List of historical photographs that are available 3. List of current photographs that would be available 4. Documentation that the Section 106 process was followed. February 19, 2014,Page 6 of 9 5. Further requests for a few photographs of contemporary conditions would be allowed as part of a future site visit Ms. Herbert asked the Commission members if they felt as though a tour of the building should be included in the approval. Mr. Garner responded that he did not feel the Commission should make the approval contingent on the tour. Ms. Bellin stated that she would like the approval to include that the applicant provide an annotated version of the presentation. VOTE:Mr. Garner made a motion to apBrove the a lication for a waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance with amendment o the in in re uest listed b Mr. Hart. Mr. S an seconded the motion. Five were in favor Ms. Herbert Ms. Bellin Mr. Garner Ms. McCrea and Mr. S an and one was o osed Ms. Harper and the motion so carried. 94 Federal Street Jamie Gaull submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to make several repairs and restorations to his property: l. Re-hang the black wooden shutters that previously hung on the front of the house and are now being stored in the basement. The Shutters will be repaired and repainted(black) according to their individual condition. 2. Install white aluminum downspout elbows to the bottom of each of the two front downspouts, to redirect rain water away from the foundation of the hosue. The elbows will be made of aluminum(matching the downspouts) and will be 11.5" long. 3. Replace the rotted front threshold and window sill with the same material(wood), same dimensions, and painted the same colors as existing (black threshold and white window sill) Mr. Gaull was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 1/30/14 ■ Photographs: February 2014 Mr. Gaull stated that he recently moved into this house. The house has been neglected and needs a lot of work. This is the first phase of repair and restoration work. Ms. Herbert stated that she applauds the restoration of the shutters and is happy to see them reinstalled. Mr. Hart asked what date of the picture included in the application, which shows the house with shutters, is from. Mr. Gaull responded that he is unsure of the date of the picture. February 19, 2014, Page 7 of 9 Mr. Hart showed the applicant a picture of the property taken 10 years prior. The picture shows the house without shutters and with a greenish paint color. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Garner made a motion to approve the shutter reinstallation and installation o downspouts. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to apl2rove the Certi cate o Non-A licabilitE for in-kind repairs included in the application. Mr. Garner seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 303 Lafayette Street Boston Solar submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a 17.82 (66 panel) rooftop solar array on a flat roof. Mr. Justin Hubbard was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 1/30/14 ■ Photographs: 1/30/14 ■ Specifications: 1/21/14 Ms. Herbert stated that the only other solar array that has come before the Commission was a house on Fowler Street. That application included a site visit. The Salem Historical Commission Guidelines state that solar panel installations can not be prevented,however the Commission can give input into the placement and aesthetics of the panels. Mr. Spang asked if the panels are going to be on the flat roof would this application be approved through a Certificate of Non-Applicability. Mr. Hart stated that he had the same question. What portion of the solar panel installation will be visible from the public way. Mr. Hubbard stated that the parapet is taller than the solar panels. There will be a pipe coming down the back of the building and a utility cut off along the side of the building for 18x 10" for fire electricity shut off. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Garner made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 320 Lafayette Street=Section 106 Review Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, EBI Consulting, Inc, provided the Commission with a notice of a proposed telecommunications facility installation. Verizon February 19, 2014, Page 8 of 9 Wireless is proposing to locate antennas behind screen walls at 53 feet and 60.1 feet on a 75 foot building. EBI Consulting is seeking comments related to the proposed project's potential effect to historic properties. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: ■ Photographs: Ms. Herbert stated that the question with the telecommunications applications is always where the wires and equipment will be located. This property already has a lot of telecommunications facilities on it. Ms. Harper stated that she would like to see a simulated photograph as they have submitted before. Ms. Bellin stated that she would also like to know where the new facilities will be installed in comparison to the existing. Mr. Hart stated that he would suggest that the Commission comment to the Massachusetts Historical Commission that the documentation submitted is not sufficient to comment whether or not this application would impact historic structures. Ms. Herbert felt that the Commission should additionally comment on the proliferation of facilities on this building. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to submit a letter with the discussed comments. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. Ms. Herbert clarified that they should also ask for photographs of the current installation and how the new would be incorporated. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Salem Lateral Project Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and as part of the National Environmental Protection Act Environmental Assessment process, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC)provided the Commission with a Notice of Public Scoping Meeting for the Salem Lateral Project involving the construction and operation of facilities by Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC. FERC is looking to gather input from the public and interested agencies on the project. This input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EA. In addition, the notice is being used to solicit opinions on the project's potential effects on historic properties. The EA will document FERCs findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status of consultations under section 106. February 19, 2014,Page 9 of 9 The project involves the construction and operation of 1.2 miles of new 16inch diameter lateral pipeline and a new metering and regulation station in Salem, MA in order to supply 115, 000 dekatherms per day of natural gas to the Salem Harbor Station facility for power generation. Ms. Lovett stated that the Commission was CC'd on the letter from MHC to FERC. In that letter, MHC requested additional project information including scaled existing and proposed conditions plans and the proposed research design and methodology for the archaeological reconnaissance survey. Ms. Lovett stated that there is a significant maritime area located along the shore of the power plant property, however it is unclear whether or not the proposed pipeline will run into that area. Mr. Hart stated that on page 4 they discuss consultation with MHC and other governmental agencies as part of the Section 106. Ms. Herbert stated that there could be up to 2 acres of land involved in construction for staging, etc. Emily Udy asked if the SHC will still be able to comment after the March 6th meeting. Ms. Herbert responded in the affirmative. Mr. Spang stated that Route A seems to only impact few historic structures. Route B may impact more. They should get information on how the construction will impact any of the foundations of the historic homes. Mr. Hart stated that they should advise the MHC that the Commission would like additional information on the project as it moves forward. VOTE: Mr. Garner made a motion to submit letter requesting additional information on the project. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Ms. McCrea gave the Commission a summary of the last Community Preservation Committee and the preliminary applications for funding. She stated that the Commission members should give some thought to how they would prioritize the projects. VOTE: There being no further business, Mr. Garner made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner March 5, 2014, Page 1 of 5 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES March 5, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, March 5, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper (Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, Chad Garner, and David Hart. Ms. Keenan arrived late. 6 Monroe Street Roger Tyler submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a 10 foot long x 5 foot tall fence along the north side of the house. The fence will be composed of 1"x4" vertical cedar boards with 5"x5"cedar posts with pyramidal caps. The design includes a 32" opening with a short 20" section to the left of the opening. The fence will be stained white. The new fence will replace the existing I V long basket weave design fence, and will be set back approximately 14" from the existing. Roger Tyler was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: l/6/14 ■ Photographs: 1/16/14 ■ Site plan Mr. Hart asked if there was going to be a gate. Mr. Tyler responded that he would apply for a gate at a future meeting. Ms. Herbert stated that in order to incorporate a gate, he may want to widen the opening from 32"to 36." There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to a rove the application with the Provision that the opening may be 32" or 36"wide. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 19 Fowler Street Charles Bean submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the front door and threshold. The threshold will be composed of oak wood. The door will be a 4 panel wood door. The application also includes the restoration of the side lights. The side lights will be composed of pine wood and will have 5 lights. The entryway at 20-22 Fowler Street is being used as a guide for this repair/restoration work. Charles Bean and Susan Linder-Bean were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 2/11/14 ■ Photographs: 2/11/14 ■ Door Specification ■ Entryway dimensions March 5, 2014,Page 2 of 5 Ms. Linder-Bean stated that sidelights are currently just plywood. They are looking to restore the sidelights. Ms. Herbert asked why the door would be replaced verses restored. Mr. Bean replied that the door is leaking, and they think the door may have been taken from a different house. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Garner seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 70-92 % Boston Street DHM Realty Trust submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay ordinance to demolish the structures associated with the vacant Flynntan site. The demolition is associated with a comprehensive redevelopment of the site. A portion of the concrete block and brick(circa 1900)building along Boston Street will be incorporated into the proposed site redevelopment. The remainder of the structures will be razed. Bob Griffin was present. Mr. Gamer stated that he would be recusing himself as an abutter and moved to the audience. Ms. Keenan arrived at this time. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 2/20/14 ■ Photographs: 2/11/14 ■ Drawings: 1/29/14 ■ Renderings Ms. Herbert read into the record a letter of support for the waiver of demolition delay from Historic Salem, Inc. Mr. Griffin presented the application to the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated that the Pediatric Associates of Greater Salem would like to redevelop the site. They looked into reusing the buildings, however they have found that will not be possible as the buildings were originally designed for an industrial use. They plan to reuse only the foundation of the brick and concrete building located along Boston Street. He stated that the architect for the redevelopment is Perkins+Will (Boston, MA). Mr. Hart asked if there are plans and elevations of the existing buildings. Mr. Griffin responded that they do not have architectural drawings of the interior but they have existing conditions plans and pictures. The public commenting period was opened. March 5, 2014,Page 3 of 5 Chad Garner, 69 Boston Street, spoke as an abutter in favor of the redevelopment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the application with the proviso that the applicant will submit forthe historical record: 1. color digital photograph of both buildings, 2. color photographs of the interior, and 3. drawings of the existing conditions. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Garner returned to the table. MBTA Repair/Rehabilitation of the Beverly Draw Bridge The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority(MBTA), in cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration, is proposing to repair/rehabilitate the Beverly draw Bridge. As part of the review of the project, PAL conducted an historic and archaeological resource assessment. The MBTA would like to Commission's concurrence that the project will have no adverse effect on any historic resources. Holly Palmgren, MBTA, and Adie Kim, consultant, were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Request for Letter of Concurrence ■ PAL Assessment Mr. Hart stated that he was a principal of the architecture firm McGinley Hart in 1980s,which had contracts with the MBTA for bridge evaluations, but was not involved in this evaluation. Ms. Palmgren summarized that the project is FTA funded and they are responsible for complying with the Section 106 Process. The project is partially in Salem and partially in Beverly. In the 1980s the bridge was surveyed and determined not eligible for listing on the National Register. The survey recently completed by PAL still found the bridge to not be eligible for the National Register. There was one potentially eligible historic resource within the APE, but it is not within the construction area. The MBTA is looking for a concurrence from the local historic commission on PAL's findings that 1)the bridge is still not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and 2) that there is no negative impact from the project on the potentially eligible historic resource located within the APE. They will then send this information to MHC as part of the Section 106 Review process. Ms. Harper asked if the bridge was going to be the same design,just with new materials. Ms. Kim responded in the affirmative. She clarified that only the approach trestle is located in Salem and the swing span and pivot pier is in Beverly. In 1985, there was a fire and the wooden trestles were rebuilt with concrete. Most of the work involves the substructures that are in contact with the sea water: rip rap replacement, piers, and pile repairs. Of the 179 piles approximately 109 piles are being repaired. Some of those piles are located in Salem. There was no public comment. March 5, 2014,Page 4 of 5 VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to vrovide a letter concurrin with the determination o PAL. Mr. Garner seconded the motion. All were in avor and the motion so carried. Salem Probate and Family Court Renovation/Addition In accordance with Stipulation 6 of the Memorandum of Agreement(MOA)between DCAM and MHC, DCAM submitted a 60% design drawing package to the Commission, as an interested party under the MOA. The package includes site plans, exterior elevations and a site plan details. Thee elevations are the same as were presented to members of the Commission at a previous meeting. Documents &Exhibits ■ 60% Design Drawings ■ Renderings Mr. Hart stated that the applicant showed some aerial renderings and it would be helpful to see street view renderings of the aerial on page A2-04 of the drawings. Ms. Herbert stated that at the 1/28/14 DCAM meeting she attended they said they proposed moving some of the decorative woodwork from the 2nd floor to the new areas, and she felt that the original antique woodwork should stay in place and be replicated for the new areas rather than reinstalled in those new areas. Additionally, six trees were planned to be installed in the front of the building, and because of their proximity to the adjacent parking spaces she hoped that the trees would not be damaged and fail. Lastly, they are doing work to screen the mechanicals on the roof. That was an issue of concern with the new court house. A comment to DCAM may be that they would like to see the mechanicals as screened as possible. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to a rove the dra t letter with comments. Mr. Garner seconded the motion. All were in avor and the motion so carried. Salem Common Fence The City of Salem requested a letter of support from the Commission for their grant application to the Massachusetts Historical Commission to complete a second phase of restoration to the cast iron fence. Ms. Lovett submitted a draft letter to the Commission members to review. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to a rove the letter o su ort. Mr. Garner seconded the motion. All were in avor and the motion so carried. Other Business Correspondence March 5, 2014,Page 5 of 5 Ms. Lovett reminded the Commission of the joint FERC and EFSB public hearing for the Salem Lateral Pipeline project. The pipeline will run through a portion of the Derby Street Local Historic District. She encouraged one or more of the members to attend the meeting. Ms. Herbert spoke with the Commission members about general meeting policies and procedures, and opened discussion for Commission members to discuss any issues or concerns they might have. Ms. Harper gave a report on an upcoming application to the Commission to remove, restore, and reinstall the eagle on top of the Hamilton Hall roof. Ms. Bellin asked if there was still an opportunity for a site visit to the Turbine Hall at the Powerplant site. Ms. Herbert asked that Ms. Lovett coordinate the site visit. VOTE: There beiniz no further business Ms. Keenan made a motion to ad iourn. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in avor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner March 19, 2014, Page 1 of 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES March 19, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, March 19, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper (Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin,David Hart, and Natalie Lovett. Jane Turiel and Joanne McCrea arrived late. 3 Carpenter Street Jonathan and Jennifer Firth submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a sunroom at the rear of the house. The sunroom will 9'6"x 13'4". Jonathan and Jennifer Firth were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/3/14 ■ Photographs: 3/19/14 ■ Drawings: 9/2/13 Ms. McCrea arrived at this time. Ms. Herbert asked if all of the architectural details and dentils would be wooden to match the house. Ms. Firth responded in the affirmative. Ms. Harper asked for the specifications on the windows. Ms. Firth responded that the windows will be custom made. They can match them to the SHC requirements. Ms. Herbert stated because the solarium is minimally visible from the public way, insulated glass would be acceptable. The window spacers should be bronze and the windows should be wood. Given that the house is Victorian, they do not need to have all of the panes on the windows. It was common for Victorian era windows to be 2/2. That may be an option for the solarium. No panes on the windows would also be appropriate. Mr. Hart agreed with the options provided by Ms. Herbert and added that he also supported the design as presented. There was no public comment. MOTION: Mr. Hart made a motion to accept as submitted with the pro viso that if the applicant wishes to make changes to the window panes, then will come back before the Commission for approval. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. Mr. Hart stated that he is not clear on the materials for the foundation. Ms. Firth responded that it will be red brick to match the house. March 19, 2014, Page 2 of 6 VOTE: Mr. Hart amended his previous motion to include that the foundation will be red brick. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Turiel arrived at this time. 110 Derby Street Anthony Sobin submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the exterior door along Derby Street. The new door would be a solid core door with the dimensions 34"x80". The applicant proposed three (3) different door styles. Two of the options have glass, one is a solid 6-panel door. Anthony and Theodora Sobin were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 2/24/14 ■ Photographs: Ms. McCrea asked the applicant had a style that they favored. Mr. Sobin responded that they would prefer to have some light, so style 2,with the fan window, is their first choice. Mr. Hart preferred style 3, with horizontal lights. Ms. Harper preferred style 1, if there was glass at the top. Ms. Herbert noted that the applicant could purchase a 6-panel door(style 1) and have a carpenter cut out the top two panels and install glass. The Commission recently granted approval for a similar door at 91-93 Federal Street. Ms. Lovett left to retrieve the 91-93 Federal Street certificate from the file. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to acce t the application for S le I with the proviso that the door may be either solid wood or the top panels replaced with klass. The door will be i2ainted to match the existing door. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 2-4 Gifford Court Donna Yates submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the front doors along Gifford Court. The new doors will be four panel, solid wood doors. The application also includes paint colors: - Body: Sherwin Williams Needlepoint Navy(SW 0032) or Downing Slate(SW 2819) - Trim: Sherwin Williams Renwick Beige (SW 2805) March 19, 2014, Page 3 of 6 In addition, the Commission requested that Ms. Yates come to the meeting to discuss an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability for in-kind work to rebuild a side stairway. Donna Yates was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: ■ Photographs: Ms. Herbert asked if the existing door could be repaired. Ms. Yates responded that the door is not repairable; it no longer fits tight to the jam. This is the closest match that the carpenter could find. Ms. Harper asked if the fir veneer LDL door is acceptable to the Commission. Ms. Herbert replied that it would be acceptable. Ms. Herbert asked if they would also be replacing the storm doors. Ms. Yates responded in the affirmative. VOTE: Ms. Mccrea made a motion to acce t the application as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. The Commission then discussed the application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability for in-kind repairs and replacement of the side deck and stairs. Ms. Lovett left to retrieve a picture of the deck from the file. Ms. Herbert asked if the deck will be rebuilt in kind and if the lower door was being replaced. Ms. Yates responded that the deck will be rebuilt in kind. They would like to replace the door in the future,but not at this time. She stated that she would also like to reinstall the lattice underneath the stairs. Ms. Bellin stated that given that the application did not include the lattice, she does not believe that the lattice can be approved for this meeting. There was no public comment. Ms. Lovett stated that lattice cannot be on the next agenda. It will need a notice to abutters. VOTE:Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the porch rebuild for the existing design with the pro viso that the rail height meets building code, and that the details for the lattice be submitted to the Commission in a future application. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. The Commission then discussed the paint colors. March 19, 2014, Page 4 of 6 Ms. Turiel asked if the applicant would consider a burgundy color for the door. Ms. Yates responded that she is open to suggestions for different door colors. The Commission discussed the paint options and decided on: Body: SW Needlepoint Navy Trim: Classic light buff Doors: Toile red or black There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the agreed upon colors with an option of Toile Red or black for the doors. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 1 Beach Ave John and Maureen Hentosh submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the structure and foundation. The house was extensively damaged by a fire. A letter from the Salem Building Inspector, Tom St. Pierre, is included in the application stating that he believes the home is beyond reasonable repair. The new house would be built on the existing homes footprint. Brendan Larkin and Gerald Casaletto were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/12/14 ■ Photographs: 3/12/14 Mr. Larkin and Mr. Casaletto, builders of the new home, present the application to the Commission on the owners' behalf. Mr. Casaletto stated that the new house will be built on the same footprint,however the foundation will be replaced. The fire took place in the basement, so there is extensive structural damage. The new house will not have as large of a porch along the water side. Ms.Herbert encouraged the applicants to salvage as much of the Victorian architectural details as possible to reuse on the new building. Ms. Herbert summarized that the Commission's jurisdiction for an application to waive the demolition delay ordinance outside of local historic districts is whether or not the existing building is historically significant and whether or not the structure can be restored. In this case, with extreme fire damage, there is not much historic fabric left to be saved. Mr.Hart stated that while the building inspector's letter stated that the house is beyond reasonable repair, technically the house can be saved but it would take a lot of money. March 19, 2014,Page 5 of 6 Mr. Casaletto responded that if the house were to be repaired, it would end up looking a lot like the new house because they would have to rebuild nearly everything. Restoration would require the house be lifted, the foundation replaced, and the structure reinforced. Ms. Herbert opened the application for public comment. Councilor Sargent spoke in favor of the waiver being granted. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the golication for a Waiver of the Demolition Delav Ordinance. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Community Preservation Act Projects—Requests for Letter of Support Ms. McCrea distributed to the Commission a spreadsheet showing the project applications coming before the Community Preservation Committee (CPC). The CPC has approximately $400,000 dollars to distribute. She feels as though it will be a challenge for the Historical Commission to prioritize the projects. Ms.Herbert stated that a vote for a letter of support does not necessarily mean that the Commission is stating they are priority projects, only that they have looked at the project, and it is a historic resource for the City. The Commission discussed the different projects and the criteria for the projects being determined eligible. Nancy Tracy was present and stated that she hoped the commission will support the Library's application to the CPC. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to a rove the letter ofsupport. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Section 106 Review- Lateral Pipeline Project Ms. Lovett stated that PAL will be conducting the Section 106 Review for the Salem Lateral Pipeline project. They sent the Commission a letter requesting initial comments on the project as well as to establish a line of communication with the SHC. Mr.Hart stated that he attended the public hearing recently held regarding the project. He would suggest that the Commission structure its letter to defer to the MHC, given that they will be involved in the Section 106 process. It is too early to tell if the pipeline will or will not adversely affect the historic buildings. Ms. Herbert stated that at the public hearing there was a third option discussed for a sea route. It was eliminated due to cost,but she feels the option should be delineated so that the public can understand why it is prohibitive. March 19, 2014,Page 6 of 6 Councilor Sargent stated that from the meeting it seemed they would prefer hydraulic drilling across Collins Cove and then come onto land at Beatty Park. Mr. Hart suggested that the letter could also recommend that a project conservator to appointed to the project. This person would study the adverse effects of the project on archaeological resources and historic properties and work with the project engineers to ensure that any adverse effects are mitigated. Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approval the minutes of 1115114 with comments. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Hart abstained from the vote. VOTE: Ms. Hart made a motion to continue a roval o the minutes from 215114 with comments. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Correspondence Ms. Herbert stated that at the next meeting she would like to discuss procedures and conduct for the Commission. Specifically with regards to conflict of interest, sunshine ordinance, and open meeting law. She would like to see if the minutes can be received before the meeting so that Commission members can review the minutes before they are posted to the website. Ms. McCrea asked if the Commission can review and approve the minutes before they are finalized. Ms. Lovett stated the draft minutes in whatever form are always public information. Once the draft minutes are prepared, they should be posted to the website. Ms. Bellin discussed difference between draft and final minutes as viewed by the law. VOTE: There being no further business Ms. Bellin made a motion to ad'ourn. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner April 2, 2014,Page 1 of 7 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES April 2, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper (Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, and Joanne McCrea. Councilor Elaine Milo was present. Tom Gable, SATC,was present video recording the meeting. 27 Hardy Street The House of Seven Gables Settlement Association submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to replace 20 windows on the Nathaniel Hawthorne Birthplace. The Commission requested that the applicant come to a regularly scheduled meeting in order to discuss the scope of work and its impact on the historic fabric of the house. Kevin White was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/25/14 ■ Photographs: 3/25/14 ■ Historic photographs: 4/2/14 ■ Conditions summary Mr. White showed historic pictures of the house with different window configurations. The house was moved in 1958 from Union Street to its current location. Before the house was moved, the house had 9/6 pane window in the top attic sash and 2/2 in the lower windows. In 1959, the house had the currently window configuration. There was a substantial amount of work completed on the building at that time. The current window sash has a substantial amount of material removed from the bottom rail of the top sash in order to make them fit the opening. They would like to have windows custom made in order to fit the window opening. Ms. Herbert asked whether they would like to go back to an 18th century version of the window configuration. Mr. White responded that the house is interpreted as an 1800 house because that is when Nathaniel Hawthorne was born in the house. He stated that the window profile and muntin were designed to mimic the windows at the House of Seven Gables. The windows will have a 7/8" muntin. They will be replicating what is there now. There was no public comment. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to close the public hearing. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the Certi icate ofNon-Applicability to re lace the windows in-kind. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Hart abstained from the vote. April 2, 2014,Page 2 of 7 25 Hardy Street The House of Seven Gables Settlement Association submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to replace the soffit, fascia, and crown molding on the Phippen House. The Commission requested that the applicant come to a regularly scheduled meeting in order to discuss the scope of work and its impact on the historic fabric of the house. Kevin White was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/25/14 ■ Photographs: 3/25/14 Mr. White stated that this work is part of a multi-year restoration. The first phase is the soffit and fascia board repair. There is some original material in the building. The soffit and fascia are in serious disrepair. If there is anything that can be retained, it will be. There was no public comment. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to close the public hearin . Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in lavor and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the Certificate of Non-Alicabilit�. Ms. Mccrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 17 1/2 River Street Frederick Biebesheimer submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to: 1. Repaint the exterior in colors previously approved by the Commission 2. Iri-kind repair and/or replace of damaged corner boards, soffit and fascia boards 3. Install gutters on the East and West roofline. The applicant requested that the approval include two options for the gutter. One would be to install a half-round single bead 5" copper gutter and plain round downspout. The second option is to install an aluminum"L Section" gutter selected to match the gutters at 17 River Street and painted to match the trim. Frederick Biebesheimer and Lisa Spence were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/7/14 ■ Photographs: 3/7/14 ■ Copper gutter detail Ms. Herbert asked if they were leaning towards one material option. Mr. Biebesheimer responded that he would prefer the copper,but just in case would like the option for aluminum gutters. There was no public comment. Apri12, 2014, Page 3 of 7 VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to close the public hearing, Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to apj2rove the previousl approved paint colors. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in avor, were opposed, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the gutters with an option for copper or aluminum. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the in-kind re air work. Ms. Mccrea seconded the motion. All were in iravor, and the motion so carried. 16 River Street Melissa Hankens submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to: 1. Install house numbers on the front right corner trim. 2. Remove plywood inserts on the side of the rear porch. Wood clapboards will be installed to match the clapboards on the remainder of the house. The clapboards will be painted to match the existing house color. Melissa Hankens was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/17/14 ■ Photographs: 3/17/14 ■ Numbers specifications Ms. Hankens stated that the numbers would be an oil rubbed bronze finish and have the same placement as the house at 7 River Street. Ms. Herbert asked if the porch was being winterized. Ms. Hankens responded that the windows are currently insert screens. They are replacing them with permanent windows. It will be partially weatherized but it will still remain very much a porch. The room will remain unheated. Ms. Herbert asked for public comment. Mr. Biebesheimer spoke in favor of the application VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to close the public hearing. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were infavor, and the motion so carried. 86 Bay View Ave April 2, 2014, Page 4 of 7 Robert King submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the house and foundation located on the property. The application states that the existing structure was built, and subsequently altered over the years without providing a proper footing for stability. The entire back half of the house was built without any type of foundation and the lumber used for floor joists has rotted beyond repair. The floors above this section sag approximately 4"in the center of the structure. The electrical is antiquated. The methods used at the time of construction are too far from code to justify renovation. The existing structure will be replaced with a similar home. Robert King and Christine King were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 4/2/14 ■ Photographs: 4/2/14 ■ Drawings Mr. Herbert asked if the new house will also be a two family. Mr. King responded in the affirmative. They have received an approval for the demolition from the ZBA. They also have approval and an order of conditions from the Conservation Commission. When you look at the back of the house, they built the second story over a cement patio and then later dug under the second story to place the boiler. There is no foundation and the back of the house is subsequently sinking. The doorways and floors are off by several inches and many of the walls are bowed. They have removed the details from the front porch of the house and would like to reuse them. They will also be keeping the newel post from the bottom of the stairs on the first floor. There is not much more material worth saving. Ms. Herbert stated that the city records show the date of the house as 1920, however the state database (MACRIS) shows the date as 1885. Ms. Harper asked when they bought the property. Mr. King responded that they bought the house in December. Ms. Herbert asked for public comment. Emily Udy, Historic Salem Inc, stated that while she is not opposed to this waiver, she would like to point out that this is the 3rd waiver in 3 months in the Willows. She stated that it seems this house was purchased for demolition and hopes that future demolition waiver applications will be considered on their own merit. Ms. Herbert affirmed that the Commission takes every application for WDDO individually. Mr. King stated that the house is in such disrepair that anyone who bought the house would have needed to rebuild. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to close the public hearing. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. April 2, 2014,Page 5 of 7 Mr. Hart stated that the new design is in keeping with the Victorian era, however he has concern with the fact that the property was allowed to go to ruin and now cannot be repaired. He stated that he does not feel confident approving the demolition waiver without a report from a professional detailing why the house cannot be restored. Ms. Herbert asked the Commission members is they felt they needed a site visit. Ms. Mccrea, Ms. Keenan, Ms. Harper and Ms. Herbert did not feel the need for a site visit. Ms. Bellin and Mr. Hart were in favor of a site visit. Ms. Herbert asked which materials would be salvageable if the house were restored. Mr. King responded that not much would remain. All of the windows would be replaced, the aluminum siding would be removed, and the roof would be replaced. Ms. Herbert summarized that in order to restore the house you would need to take the building down to the skeleton. As a restoration project, so much of the house would be gone that there would be hardly anything left. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion for a site visit. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. Mr. Hart was in favor, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Harper, Ms. Bellin, Ms. Keenan, Ms. McCrea were opposed, and the motion failed. VOTE:Ms. Keenan made a motion to approve the Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance. Ms. Mccrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Hart abstained from the vote. Historic Salem Inc. Preservation Awards Historic Salem, Inc. released a call for nominations for their annual preservation awards. Preservation effects on properties throughout the city,not just in the historic districts, and completed within the last five years are eligible for nomination. The Commission discussed whether they had any projects to nominate. Ms. Herbert asked if any of the Commission members had suggestions. She suggested to Emily Udy that the Committee look at 1 Harrington Court. The restoration is not strictly historic but it is very good. 184 Lafayette Street-Request for Determination of Significance As required for their application for Community Preservation Act funds, Northeast Are has requested a determination of significance for the stucco wall located at 184 Lafayette Street. The Commission is asked to vote on whether they find the wall to be of historic, cultural, or architectural significance. The house on the property was built in 1922 and was the first stucco home and stucco wall built in the City of Salem. Northeast Arc is proposing to restore the wall by rebuilding it. Susan Brady was present. Ms. Keenan stated that she would love to see the wall repaired. April 2, 2014,Page 6 of 7 There was no public comment. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to close the public hearing. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. MOTION:Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the re uest for si ni caance. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. Ms. Mccrea asked if they should clarify the type of significance of the wall. Mr. Hart disclosed that he has a contract with Northeast Arc in Peabody,but has no financial interest in this project. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to determine that the wall is of historical signif cance. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor; and the motion so carried. City of Salem-Request for Determination of Significance As required for their application for Community Preservation Act funds, the City of Salem has requested a determination of significance for three resources: 1. Choate Memorial 2. Roger Conant Statue 3. Common Fence The Commission is asked to vote on whether they find the statues and fence to be of historic, cultural, or architectural significance. Natalie Lovett, Department of Community Development and Planning, was present to discuss the projects. There was no public comment. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to close the public hearing. Ms. _Harper seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. ^ VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to determine that the Roger Conant statue is of historical si2nificance. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in avor and the motion so carried. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to determine that the Choate Memorial is of historical significance. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. VOTE:Ms. Bellin made a motion to determine that the Common Fence is of historical significance. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Other Business Correspondence Ms. Lovett announced to the Commission that the City received a MHC Survey&Planning Grant for the City of Salem Preservation Master Plan Update. Work on that project will begin in the summer. April 2, 2014,Page 7 of 7 Approval of Minutes Ms. Herbert asked that Ms. Lovett simplify the minutes from the 2/19/14 meeting, as has been practice for the more recent minutes. The minutes should capture the important details of the applications and the pertinent discussions concerning each application. Emily Udy, Historic Salem Inc, stated that she does look back through the SHC minutes from time to time and it is helpful to have some indication of the discussion. Linda Healey, spoke in favor of meeting details being included. For projects that are unique or controversial it would be helpful to have more information. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of 315114 with comments. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Procedures Ms. Herbert asked the Commission members if they had any specific questions regarding the Sunshine Ordinance or Conflict of Interest law. Ms. Bellin asked when the Commission members could review the minutes. Ms. Lovett clarified that the Sunshine Ordinance states that the minutes must be made publicly available on the website at the same time as the draft minutes are sent to the Commission or no later than 21 days after the meeting. Ms. Bellin added a clarification on the Conflict of Interest law; when you abstain, you abstain from the entire discussion, though you are able to comment as a member of the public during the public commenting period. Ms. Herbert added that if there is a financial interest in a project, the member may be best leaving the room. Discussion ensued regarding the Conflict of Interest law. Linda Healey, asked if there was any information available yet regarding the Section 106 process for the power plant. She felt as though the Commission was bullied into the WDDO decision. Ms. Herbert stated that they are in the process of obtaining that information and scheduling the tour of the building. VOTE: There being no further business Ms. McCrea made a motion to ad ourn. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Nat lie BL Lovett Community Development Planner April 16, 2014, Page 1 of 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, April 16, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, and Joanne McCrea. 13 Washington Square/132 Essex Street The Peabody Essex Museum submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace and repair missing and deteriorated brownstone on the Phillips Library. Where possible the existing brownstone will be restored. In areas where the brownstone is missing or severely damaged, the applicant is proposing to use cast stone, colored to match brownstone. Robert Monk was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/20/14 ■ Photographs: 3/20/14 ■ Drawings: 2/3/14 Mr. Hart disclosed that he has a contract with Peabody Essex Museum, but it does not impact this work. Mr. Monk showed the Commission members a sample of the cast stone. There is currently some cast stone on the building, installed in the 1990s. Ms. Herbert asked if they would be repairing brownstone that is delaminating. Mr. Monk responded in the affirmative. They would use glue or Dutchmen where possible. They estimate that approximately 30% of the brownstone will be replaced. They will remove a good sample of brownstone and create a mold from it. The removed pieces of brownstone will be archived. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the a lication as submitted. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 242 Lafayette Street Lucien LaBonte submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing 3-tab roof with architectural shingles. The manufacturer for the shingles is Timberline. Lucien LaBonte was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/3/14 ■ Photographs: 3/3/14 April 16, 2014,Page 2 of 6 Ms. Herbert read a letter of support from Councilor Josh Turiel, 238 Lafayette Street. Mr. LaBonte stated that he included in his application a list of properties located within the historic districts that have architectural shingles. He would like to use shingles similar to that at 88 Federal Street. Ms. Herbert stated that the majority of properties on the list were not approved for architectural shingles and are therefore in violation. She noted that for this property the gable end faces the street, so there is only one portion of the roof that is very visible. Mr. Hart stated that architectural shingles are limited in the guidelines to unusual circumstances. The reason he does not like the architectural shingles is that the roof jumps out at you visually. Slateline is a good option for 3-tab shingles. Ms. Herbert recalled that 24 Warren Street was approved for architectural shingles. Ms. Lovett left the room to pull the file for 24 Warren Street. Ms. Herbert stated that 24 Warren Street was a mansard roof and therefore the Commission had found that the shingles could be appropriate. She asked the Commission members there opinion on the architectural shingles. Ms. Keenan and Ms. McCrea stated that they would not want to set a precedent for architectural shingles for this style of house. The public commenting period was opened. Ken Leisey asked how much of the roof detail you would be able to see from the public way. The public commenting period was closed. Ms. Bellin stated that there are some types of architectural shingles that have more of a 3- dimensional look. Some types of architectural shingles have been approved for some types of houses. Ms. Herbert stated that they could approve a 3-tab shingle now and then continue discussion of the architectural shingles to the next meeting in order to allow time to do more research. She stressed that the Commission needs to be careful in approving a new type of roof than they have approved in the past. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve a 3-tab shingle roof in dark ra . Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to continue discussion of the architectural shingles to the next meeting. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 28 Beckford Street April 16, 2014, Page 3 of 6 Richard and Jane Stauffer submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to relocate a downspout to the front of the house. The downspout currently runs along the side. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/31/14 ■ Photographs: 3/31/14 The applicants for 28 Beckford Street were not present at the meeting. The application will be continued to the next meeting. McIntire Arch Restoration Mark Meche, Winter Street Architects,presented an update of the McIntire Arch restoration to the Commission on behalf of the Salem Common Neighborhood Association. Peter LaChappelle was also present. The SCNA is approximately 3/4 through their fundraising effort. They have removed the carvings and are currently storing them. They are now determining whether or not it is preferable to restore and reinstall the carvings or cast them and archive the originals. He discussed the current conditions of the various carvings: Portrait of Washington: mixed condition Alunette panel: severe deterioration but can be restored Festoons: good condition Scrolls: one is missing, one is OK condition Mr. Meche also discussed the different iterations of the arch details (original full size arch, 1976, and current). He asked the Commission their thoughts about which version should be replicated. The general consensus was that they should replicate the 1976 version in order to be true to the artist that created the replica. He stated that they will be submitting an application to the Commission covering this next phase of repair and restoration work. 92-96 Lafayette Street-Request for Letter of Support Strega Realty Trust submitted a request for a letter of support for their Massachusetts Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit application. Documents &Exhibits ■ Request for letter of support VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion toqpprove the letter o support. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried Grove Street improvement Project—Project Notification Form The City of Salem requested comments on a Project Notification Form being submitted to the Massachusetts Historical Commission for the Grove Street Improvements Project. The purpose April 16, 2014,Page 4 of 6 of the project is to produce a `complete streets' circulation environment through the Grove Street corridor between Goodhue Street and Harmony Grove Road. Documents &Exhibits ■ Cover letter: 4/3/14 ■ Project Notification Form Mr. Hart pointed out that the application asked if there are any historic properties within the Area of Potential Effect (APE),however the response states that there are not historic resources within the "project area."He questioned whether there is a difference between the APE and project area. Ms. Herbert agreed with Mr. Hart. She pointed out that while there are not historic resources along the roadway, there are several adjacent houses that could be impacted by vibrations. Generally, it is a very industrial area. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to submit a letter includinz the comments previously stated. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 217 Essex Street—Proposed Telecommunications Facility In accordance to the Section 106 review process, EBI Consulting requested comments from the Commission on whether a proposed telecommunications facility at 217 Essex Street will have a potential effect to historic properties. Documents &Exhibits ■ Cover letter: 4/1/14 ■ Project plans: 1/29/14 Mr. Hart asked if the antennae would be visible from the street. Ms. Herbert stated that it doesn't appear to be any taller than what is existing. She suggested that the Commission's letter state that if the new installation does not exceed the height of the existing installations, they find no impact on historic resources. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the letter with comments. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Salem Lateral Project—Pre-filing Draft Resource R orts Spectra Energy Partners submitted to the Commission for review and comment a copy of the draft Resource Report being submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC)as part of the pre-filing review process. The Salem Lateral Project will deliver natural gas supply to the Footprint Power site. Documents &Exhibits ■ Cover letter: 4/7/14 ■ Draft Resource Report: April 2014 April 16, 2014, Page 5 of 6 Ms. Bellin recused herself from the discussion and vote, due to her employment with the MA Department of Public Utilities, and moved to the audience. Ms. Herbert pointed out the response to comments section of the materials. The Commission had previously asked for the reasons that the sea route was not plausible. From the report, it seems as though the route was eliminated primarily due to the effect of marine habitats. Mr. Hart stated that the Commission has expressed its concern regarding adverse effects that could occur from vibrations several times, he sees no need to restate that concern. Ms. Herbert stated that their letter could include that the affected historic structures are to be determined by MHC. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to submit a letter with the discussed comments. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor. and the motion so carried. Salem Lateral Project—Pre-filing Cultural Resource Documentation Public Archaeology Laboratory(PAL) submitted to the Commission, for review and comment, a copy of the Cultural Resource Documentation,which is a section of the draft Resource Report, being submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC) as part of the pre-filing review process. The Salem Lateral Project will deliver natural gas supply to the Footprint Power site. Documents & Exhibits ■ Cover letter 3/28/14 ■ Photographs: Cultural Resource Report: 3/28/14 The Commission reviewed this agenda item in conjunction with the previous Salem Lateral project discussion. Marblehead Pipeline Replacement Project—Marine Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey The South Essex Sewerage District submitted for review a copy of the draft Marine Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey report for the Marblehead Pipeline Replacement Project. The pipeline runs through Salem Harbor and will be replaced with a new pipeline. The report, prepared by David S. Robinson&Associates, Inc. (DSRA), presents the results of the initial phase of a marine archaeological reconnaissance survey of the submerged portion of proposed pipeline. Documents &Exhibits ■ Cover letter: 4/4/14 ■ Draft report: April 2014 Mr. Hart stated that the majority of this report discusses underwater archaeology. He would defer to Massachusetts Historical Commission. April 16, 2014,Page 6 of 6 The Commission agreed that they did not find the need to submit a comment letter. Ms. Bellin returned to the table. Greenlawn Cemetery—Draft National Reidster Nomination Jane Guy, Department of Planning and Community Development, requested comments regarding the draft National Register nomination, completed by Lisa Mausolf, for Greenlawn Cemetery(57 Orne Street). Mr. Hart stated that he thought the nomination was well done and very comprehensive. The other Commission members agreed. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to submit a letter with the comments discussed. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to gproval the minutes of 211912014 with comments. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to apj2roval the minutes of 3119114 with comments. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Correspondence There was no correspondence. Community preservation Committee Update Ms. McCrea passed out a handout she compiled which detailed the Community Preservation Committee's decisions on the FY14 applications. She discussed the funded projects with the Commission. VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner May 7, 2014, Page 1 of 10 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES May 7, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, May 7, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper (Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Jane Turiel. 242 Lafayette Street In continuation of a previous meeting, Lucien LaBonte submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to reroof with architectural shingles. The proposed shingle is a GAF Timberline. The existing roof is a 3-tab roof. At the previous meeting, the Commission approved a 3-tab shingle option and continued the architectural shingle discussion in order to do more research regarding whether architectural shingles would be appropriate. Lucien LaBonte was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/3/14 ■ Photographs: 3/3/14 ■ Shingle specifications Ms. Turiel recused herself as an abutter and moved to the audience. Mr. LaBonte stated that he understood from the last meeting that he had approval to use either Slateline or 3-tab shingles. Ms. Lovett notified him that the Certificate had only been issued for 3-tab. He stated that he would like to propose a Certainteed Hateras shingle instead. The Hateras is a 4-tab shingle. He submitted a photograph of a bank in Beverly that he believed had installed the Hateras shingles. Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission is now aware that there are a number of properties that have installed architectural shingles without approval. For a number of these cases, a 3-tab shingle was approved but the owner ultimately installed architectural shingles. The Commission has approved the Hateras shingle in the past, for the property at 84-86 Derby Street. Ultimately, the owner decided to install 3-tab. The concern with the architectural shingles is that the roof of a historic building should stick out as little as possible. Ms. Bellin asked for clarification on what Mr. Hart had proposed as an option for the roof. The minutes from the last meeting state Timberline Slateline. Did he intend for his motion to include Slateline or only 3-tab? Mr. Hart stated that he intended for his motion to be only for the 3-tab shingle. Ms. Herbert noted that the Commission has not seen the Hatteras installed on a building. Mr. LaBonte stated that he would like the option to use either Hatteras or Slateline,but would most likely use the Hatteras. May 7, 2014, Page 2 of 10 Ms. Herbert stated that the picture Mr. LaBonte submitted does not appear to be Hateras. The shingle is more rectangular,while the Hateras in the brochure appears to be more of a square shape. Mr. LaBonte stated that he had better pictures at home. He left to retrieve the pictures. The Commission proceeded with the other applications and returned to the application at the end of the meeting. Ms. Turiel returned to the table. 28 Beckford Street Richard and Jane Stauffer submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to relocate a downspout from the side of the house to the front of the house. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/31/14 ■ Photographs: 3/31/14 Mr. Hart recused himself, as an abutter,from the discussion and vote. The applicants were not present at the meeting. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the a lication to the next meetin . Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 60 & 64 Grove Street and 1, 3, & 5 Harmony Grove Road MRM Project Management, LLC submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance in order to demolish all existing structures on the site, with the exception of the existing office building located on the 60 Grove Street parcel. This building is planned to be renovated. The waiver is specifically for five buildings, one vehicle bridge, three pedestrian bridges, and one free standing brick chimney. The properties are being redeveloped into a mixed-use development. Bob Griffin was present, on behalf of MRM Project Management, LLC. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 4/10/14 ■ Photographs: February 2014 ■ Existing Conditions plan: 3/25/14 ■ Renderings Mr. Griffin gave a presentation to the Commission and pointed out the structures that they would be demolishing. He stated that they are still working on their environmental permits, but they want to apply for the WDDO so that once the other permitting is in place, they will be ready to proceed with demolition and construction. May 7, 2014, Page 3 of 10 Mr. Hart recommended that the Commission have on file additional photographs of the building that will be demolished. The current photographs do not sufficiently depict the buildings. A site plan should also be submitted by the applicant. There was no public comment. Ms. Herbert listed the standard items that the Commission requests WDDO applicants to submit prior to a demolition permit being issued: 1. color digital photos of exterior of all buildings on CD with 3/4 views from all corners 2. color digital photos of interior of all buildings on CD 3. taped elevations of all buildings Ms. Lovett stated that there was a question regarding whether the approval of the WDDO would interfere with the Section 106 process,which still needs to be undertaken. She contacted the Massachusetts Historical Commission, and has not yet heard back. Mr. Hart stated that the motion should include that any necessary state and federal permits will be achieved prior to demolition. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance with the items discussed. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 17 Cambridge Street Lillian Hsu submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a trellis along the front corner of the house. The application also includes a request for approval of a granite step that was previously installed. Lillian Hsu was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 3/27/14 ■ Photographs: 3/27/14 ■ Drawing Ms. Hsu stated that her initial understanding was that because the step was almost at grade, she did not need to get approval. The step was already under construction when Ms. Lovett notified her that she would need a Certificate of Appropriateness. The granite step was installed,because the previous rise of the step was not to code. The distance between the bricks at grade level and the doorway was approximately 10." Discussion then ensued regarding the trellis details. Ms. Hsu stated that there will be a slight space between the house and the trellis. She will be building the trellis herself. It will be 4' out from the corner, 7' to the top, set off the ground. There will be 9 verticals, starting at 3.5' high. She will be using 1/4"x 1.5" antique yellow pine wood. She submitted a drawing of the trellis. Ms. Herbert pointed out that once the clematis is on the trellis, you will not see much of it. May 7, 2014,Page 4 of 10 Ms. Herbert opened the application for comments from the public. Ken Wallis, 172 Federal Street, asked for clarification on how the trellis would be attached to the house. Ms. Hsu responded that it will be secured to the house with stainless steel screws. Mr. Hart stated that he is not sure the Commission has ever seen plantings that are placed directly on the fagade of the house. Ms. Herbert responded that there is a house on Monroe Street that has a trellis. It is not a departure from the Guidelines. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the trellis as designed. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the sty as presented. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 370 Essex Street The Trustees of the Salem Public Library submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the existing timber retaining walls and install granite curbing. The existing curbing is located along the right and left sides of the Library's ground level entrance. The granite will be laid out in three foot lengths and will be 6"wide. The proposed granite is Caladonia. Nancy Tracy, Director of the Salem Public Library, was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 3/27/14 ■ Photographs: 3/27/14 Commission members stated that the granite will look very nice. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 174 Federal Street Amy Corvelyn and Coby Carlucci submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to reroof with architectural shingles. The proposed shingle is a GAF Timberline in a charcoal grey color. Amy Corvelyn and Joe Rogers were present. May 7, 2014, Page 5 of 10 Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 4/16/14 ■ Photographs: 4/16/14 ■ Shingle Sample Mr. Rogers stated that their roofer recommended they install architectural shingles,because there have been issues with the quality of the 3-tab shingles. He also has two brothers that are roofers and they agreed that the architectural shingles are better because they last longer. Ms. Herbert responded that the Commission's concern with architectural shingles is that they make the roof look busy and you do not need the same skill for installation as you do for the 3- tab shingles. The architectural shingles are more expensive. Additionally, the claim of longevity is still unknown because the architectural shingles have not been around that long. Mr. Rogers stated that the application cost ends up being the same as the 3-tab shingles because the architectural shingles are quicker to install. Ms. Corvelyn stated that she owns the other half of the house. She originally submitted the application proposing GAF Timberline,but they would like to amend their application to propose IKO Cambridge AR lifetime shingle. Mr. Hart noted that the roof on this house is not very visible. Ms. Corvelyn stated that she understands that the Commission has approved architectural shingles in the past for houses. Ms. Herbert invited the public to comment. Joyce Wallis, 172 Federal St, spoke in support of the application. William Legault, City Councilor, stated that he would be inclined to make an exception because the roof is minimally visible and the color is appropriate. MOTION: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve this particular application for the use of IKO Cambrid e AR black shingles because the particular location of the house is such that the roo surfaces are minimalh visible from the street and the color is such that it recedes from the site line. This approval is an exception to the guidelines. Ms. Bellin stated that she feels this approval sets a bad precedent and the shingle is too similar to the GAF Timberline. It is inappropriate for this style of house in this neighborhood and will be visible to pedestrians. MOTION: Mr. Hart amended his motion to include the approval of 3-tab shin les in similar color. VOTE: Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. Ms. Herbert, Ms. Harper, Mr. Hart, Ms. Keenan, Ms. McCrea, and Ms. Turiel were in favor. Ms. Bellin was opposed. The motion so carried. May 7, 2014, Page 6 of 10 354 Essex Street Herbert& Leanne Schild submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace an existing chain link fence with a wood fence. The proposed fence is 6' high, flat board fence. It will be constructed using white cedar and will have a clear finish. Herbert and Leanne Schild were present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 4/17/14 ■ Photographs: 4/17/14 Ms. Herbert read into the record an email from Mary Whitney, 356 Essex Street, stating that they are also replacing their chain link fence with a wood fence. The letter requests that the Commission approve a fence that will enable air flow, as they have had issues with mold and mildew on their clapboards and bulkhead. Mr. Schild stated that this application is for the right side of the property, adjacent to a parking lot and the apartment building. The fence through the middle of the backyard is owned by 356 Essex Street. He added that the bulkhead at 356 Essex Street was moldy before the 6' fence was put up. Ms. Schild stated that they would like to remove the stockade fence and chain link. She presented a picture of the proposed fence design. Ms. Herbert stated that the sample fence shows a curved top to the boards. A cap rail would be more appropriate. Ms. Harper stated that it would be nice for the fences on the property to be coordinated. Mr. Schild responded that they are unsure when 356 Essex Street will be moving forward with their fence replacement. They would like to install their fence immediately. Ms. Herbert clarified that the fence would be a cedar 6' high, flat board fence with a top rail. The gate will look like the fence. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the removal of the exisdLng fence and re lace with a 6' at board ca ed fence, let to a e natura11 . Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor; and the motion so carried. 100 Derby Street Martine Shea submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a building sign and blade sign. The wall sign will say"Crotchet Box Country Store" and will be 12' long. The blade sign will hang over the front door and will measure 2'x2'. May 7, 2014, Page 7 of 10 Martine Shea and Phillip Shea were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 4/17/14 ■ Photographs: 4/17/14 ■ Sign dimensions ■ Bracket specifications ■ Drawing Ms. Lovett stated that Andrew Shapiro, Economic Development Planner, reviewed the sign application and it meets the dimensions requirements of the sign ordinance. Ms. Shea stated that she would like the blade sign to be centered over the door. The"Crotchet Box"sign is existing and the new half of the sign, "County Store,"will be butted up against it. Ms. Herbert suggested that the butted ends be sawed off so that they appear to be one sign. Ms. Shea stated that the blade sign will be a painting of the house and say"Crotchet Box Country Store" across the middle, like the building. Ms. Herbert suggested that the blade sign be along the corner so that it doesn't detract from the architecture of the pediment and the building sign. The blade sign should be set over the division line above the house marker. An open flag could be placed to the left of the door. Ms. Harper added that the blade sign should be affixed to the corner board rather than along the clapboards. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the building sign on the front of the building using the existing "Crotchet Box"sign moved over and the addition of the "Country Store"sign to match: the butting ends perfectly matched so then appear to be one sign: the blade sign, dimensions as submitted,painted on both sides to look like the front of the house including the building sign,- and the bracket option o Na oli or Florence s les to be positioned on the ri ht side of the house above the historic plaque, set 10'high along the corner board. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 242 Lafayette Street The Commission then continued the architectural shingle discussion from earlier in the meeting. Ms. Turiel recused herself as an abutter and moved to the audience. Mr. LaBonte presented to the Commission the installation specifications of the Slateline and the Hateras as well as additional pictures of the Beverly bank roof. He stated that the exposure of the Hateras is 8" and the Slateline is 7." May 7, 2014,Page 8 of 10 Ms. Herbert stated that the picture of the bank's overhang still appears to show a more elongated shingle than the Hateras. Mr. Hart showed the Commission a picture of a house with wood shingles which shows that they weather square which would look closer to the Hateras. He then showed a picture of a slate roof, which has a more rectangular look, similar to the Slateline. Ms. Bellin stated that she would support the antique slate color for the Slateline or colonial slate color for the Hateras. Ms. Herbert stated that the house is dramatically changed from its original Greek Revival architecture (porch balustrade and brick front). All that remains original is the roofline, front door, and the chimneys. Ms. Bellin stated that while the two options have different shapes, they are not as distracting as some of the other architectural shingle options. Mr. Hart stated that he would note that approval of these shingles is a semi- experiment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to apj2rove the Slateline in antique slate or Hateras in colonial slate. This approval is an exception to the guidelines and sets no precedent. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in['avor, and the motion so carried. 320 Lafayette Street- Section 106 Review In continuation of a previous meeting, the Commission received an invitation to continent on a proposed telecommunications facility at 320 Lafayette Street. The Commission requested additional information from the EBI Consulting regarding the visual effects of the facilities. EBI Consulting submitted the requested information to the Commission on April 10, 2014. Documents &Exhibits ■ Letter: 4/10/14 ■ Renderings Ms. Lovett stated that MHC has found the project to have no adverse effect on historic resources, however EBI Consulting would still like to have an opinion from the Commission to include in their file. Mr. Hart stated that given that MHC has found no adverse effect, the Commission should accept that decision. The Commission members discussed that regardless of the findings of MHC, the installation is in close proximity to a historic district (Lafayette Street),which is also an entrance corridor into the City. They agreed that continual installation of telecommunications equipment detracts from the nature of the neighborhood and the community. This property in particular, has an extraordinary number of telecommunications facilities on the roof. May 7, 2014, Page 9 of 10 VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to drat a letter including the discussed comments. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 36 Federal Street—MHC Americans with Disabilities Act Consultation The accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Department of Capital Assets Management submitted to the Commission an ADA Consultation Process form requesting a letter of support for a variance from altering the front granite steps at the Probate and Family Court building. The existing steps do not comply with accessibility requirements due to differing rises. In order to correct this issue, the steps would need to be reset or replaced,which would alter the iconic fagade. While the front steps will not comply, they will be installing two new compliant ramps along both sides of the steps. Documents &Exhibits ■ ADA Consultation Process Form The Commission members spoke in favor of the variance and agreed that the front stairs should be left unaltered. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to draft a letter ofsupport, or the variance. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the vote on the minutes to the next meeting. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Correspondence Ms. Bellin asked if Mr. Spang would circulate the pictures he took during the tour of the Footprint Turbine Hall. Commission members also asked if it would be possible to have another tour of the building. Ms. Lovett stated that the Commission was included on the copy of a letter from MHC to the House of Seven Gables Settlement Association. MHC reviewed project plans for various buildings on the House of Seven Gables Settlement property. They have given approval of this work pending approval from the Commission. Ms. Lovett updated the Commission on the Preservation Master Plan update project. MHC will be holding a kick off meeting soon. She will continue to keep the Commission up to date on the project. The Commission discussed the thoroughness of applications and whether the application form should be revised to make the process clearer. VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. McCrea made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in avor, and the motion so carried. May 7, 2014, Page 10 of 10 Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner May 21, 2014, Page 1 of 7 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES May 21, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, May 21, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper (Vice Chair), David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Jane Turiel. 44 Derby Street John Crawford submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to paint the exterior of the house with a medium gray with light gray trim and a white or light gray founding. The application also includes a proposal to construct a fence at the back of the house. John Crawford was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 4/30/14 ■ Photographs: 4/30/14 ■ Paint chips Ms. Harper recused herself, as an abutter to an abutter, and moved to the audience. Mr. Crawford submitted to the Commission paint chip samples for the exterior house colors. He stated that the doors are going to remain the existing color for the time being. The existing fence is the neighbor's fence. They will be removing the fence and replacing it with a standard 6' fence. Ms. Herbert stated that they have not submitted details on the type of fence they are proposing. The stockade fence was probably installed prior to Derby Street becoming a historic district and would not be approved now. The fence on the other side of the property(flat board with a rail on the top) is one that could possibly be approved. The height of 6' would be OK. The posts should be on the house side so that the good side is along the street. She added that fences with integral posts are not typically approved. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the replacement of the existing fence with a 6' flat board cW). edfence in cedar; exterior paint colors body: Bold Backdrop G-1) and trim: Little's Landmark(F-1), as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Harper returned to the table. 330 Essex Street Melanie Griffin submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for in-kind repairs to and replacement of the wooden gutters and crown molding. The application also include May 21, 2014, Page 2 of 7 alterations to the downspouts. The aluminum drainpipe along the west side of the hosue will be replaced with a new gutter that extends to the ground. The copper downspouts on the east side of the house will be replaced with a new aluminum downspout. Melanie Griffin was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 4/30/14 ■ Photographs: 4/30/14 Ms. Griffin stated that on the western side of the house the crown molding is rotting and pulling away. They will be replacing what is deteriorated beyond repair. The copper downspout is on the eastern side of the house and runs down along the white trim. There also a downspout along the western side of the house that empties out on the roofline. They are proposing to extend this downspout to the ground. The downspouts on the eastern edge will be painted to match the trim. The downspout on the western side runs down the body of the house. She asked what color this downspout should be. Ms. Herbert responded that typically the downspouts are approved to match the house colors that they are against. The downspout along the body, should be painted to match the body color. Mr. Hart asked for clarification on a piece of the scope of work that mentions a PVC downspout. Ms. Griffin stated that there will not be PVC. All of the downspouts will be aluminum. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to a rove the replacement in-kind of the aluminum gutters and crown moldin . The downspout on the west side will be painted to match the house color. The downspout on the east side will be painted to match the trim. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 310 Lafayette Street Ken and Monica Leisey submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to: 1. Add two direct vents under the stairs for a new hot water tank and the basement HVAC unit.The vents will be white and located behind existing landscaping so they are not viewable from Lafayette Street. 2. Replace the current air conditioning condenser unit with two condenser units sitting side by side. These units will be located behind the current shrubs on the side of the house. Additional landscaping will be added to ensure concealment. 3. Removal of the rear chimney. 4. Install a direct vent for the attic HVAC unit through the roof at the current location of the rear chimney. The exhaust pipe and pipe flashing will be painted flat black. The exhaust stack will not be visible from Lafayette Street. 5. Repair decorative railing above the front bay window to match the ori9ginal railing and spindles. The railing will be painted white to match the house. May 21, 2014, Page 3 of 7 Ken Leisey, Monica Leisey, and Leland Hussey, their contractor, were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/5/14 ■ Photographs: May 2014 ■ Drawings: May 2014 Mr. Hart stated that that the rear chimney is barely visible from the street. While ordinarily he would not vote in support of the removal of important architectural features, in this case he would be OK. Ms. Harper agreed. While it is a pretty chimney, it is barely visible from the street. Mr. Spang asked if the railing is an original detail. Ms. Leisey responded in the affirmative. You do not notice the railing now, because most of it is missing. There are earlier pictures that show the railing intact. Ms. Herbert stated that this is a Queen Anne style house. The railing could be original or there may have been a railing with a different style. Ms. Turiel stated that it would be nice for the Commission to have on file a picture of the full front of the house. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to a rove the application, as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 180a Federal Street Alexa Ogno submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a chimney cap on the front chimney, remove the rear chimney, install three (3) skylights, replace the side door, replace the basement windows,paint the front door, and install a kick plate. Alexa Ogno and Leland Hussey, her contractor, were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/5/14 ■ Photographs: 5/5/14 ■ Skylight specifications Ms. Herbert asked for clarification on whether the basement window facing the street would be vinyl and whether it would be blocked by shrubbery. May 21, 2014, Page 4 of 7 Mr. Hussey stated that they are proposing vinyl for all of the basement windows. The frames will remain intact and the vinyl windows will be made to fit within. They will be hopper windows. Ms. Herbert stated that the chimney is not very visible from the public way. She asked for the reason why they are proposing removal. Ms. Ogno stated that the chimney does not service anything and runs through the middle of a room that would otherwise be much more usable. Mr. Hussey discussed the front door condition. The door is currently warped. They are planning to straighten the door and then add a kick plate. Ms. Ogno discussed the front chimney work. She would like to install a metal cap on the front chimney similar to the one included in the application. The cap goes is only up when in use. Mr. Spang asked for clarification on how visible will the skylights will be and details on the profile Mr. Hussey responded that Velux is making very low profile skylights. The flashing that will be seen from the street will be bronze aluminum. The skylight will be set off the roof by approximately 4 1/2". Ms. Ogno stated that she would like the skylights to be operable. Mr. Hart stated that that side of the roof is mostly blocked from view by a tree. Mr. Hussey discussed the side door replacement. The proposed door is a fiberglass door with an arched top window. The door frame will be removed and the trim will be reinstalled to match the existing. Ms. Ogno added that the door will be painted to match the front door. The back door will also be painted to match the other doors. Ms. Harper returned to the basement window discussion. She stated that the Commission always prefers wood along the front of the house. If there is vinyl, she would want to see an evergreen blocking it from view. Mr. Hussey stated that the window trim will be painted in kind prior to the storm window being installed. Ms. Herbert asked for public comment. Ken and Joyce Wallis, 172 Federal Street, spoke in favor of the application. May 21, 2014, Page 5 of 7 MOTION: Mr. Spang made a motion to yAprove A. the chimney eqp on kont chimney, capto match the photo, low profile paint black; B. Remove hardly visible rear chimney; C. Install three operable skylights with dark bronze reveal about 4 %-5" high,- D. Replace side door to match photo, door to be painted to match the existing front door color; E Replace the basement window sashes only, frames to remain. The front basement window will be wood and the remainder of the windows vinyl; F. Paint the front door strapping black and added kick plate painted to match the existing door. Mr. Hussey specified that the side door will be a Velux model number 2234. VOTE: Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 42 Chestnut Street Ken Harris submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace an existing fence that runs along the left side of the property. The existing fence is wooden and approximately 4' tall. The new fence would also be wooden and 4' tall. A picture of the proposed fence design shows a flat board fence with spacing between the pickets, top rail, and pyramidal caps. Ken Harris was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 5/5/14 ■ Photographs: 5/5/14 ■ Picture of the proposed fence design Mr. Harris presented to the Commission paint chip samples for the fence stain. The neighbors would like the fence to be stained a dark blue/gray. They would prefer the Glidden Soaring Eagle color (1 OD/15/154). The fence runs along the property line. The posts would be capped with pyramidal caps. The house to the right recently had a fence put in, the pyramidal caps would match theirs. Mr. Spang stated that the spacing of the boards does not feel consistent with other fencing approved in the historic districts. Typically,the spacing would be 3/4"to L" Ms. Herbert stated that they could approve the design based on the fence at 31 Chestnut St. Ms. Lovett left the room to retrieve the file for 31 Chestnut St. Ms. Herbert stated that the fence at 31 Chestnut Street is 3 %2"pickets with 3/4" spacing. She asked for clarification that the fence would be 4' high Mr. Harris responded in the affirmative. He asked if the Commission would consider 1" spacing. They will be growing plants along the fence and the extra space will allow the plants to breath. May 21, 2014, Page 6 of 7 Mr. Spang stated that the house is a blue-ish color. The fence color is usually either a contrasting color or a color similar to the house color. If they want the fence to be blue,the color of the house may be preferable. He added that the fence could also be stained to match the existing neighbors fence. Ken Harris responded that that would be acceptable. VOTE: Ms. Har er made a motion to approve a 4'hi h fence with 3 Y2" wide pickets with 314" to 1" spacing flat board capped with pyramidal post caps. Painted to match the neighbors existing fence. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 40 Highland Ave As part of the Section 106 Review process, EBI Consulting submitted plans for a new telecommunications facility. EBI Consulting asked that the Commission comment on whether the proposed project would have a potential effect on historic properties. Documents & Exhibits ■ Cover letter: 5/12/14 ■ Drawings: 2/3/14 Mr. Spang stated that according the drawings, most of the antennae and equipment is existing. They are proposing to add two new antennae. Ms. McCrea stated that the Commission could request that any obsolete apparatus could be removed. Ms. Herbert added that they should consolidate and eliminate where possible. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to submit a letter with the discussed comments. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Discussion and Review of Application Process Ms. Herbert discussed with the Commission her thoughts on having applicants submit photographs of their completed work in order to ensure compliance with their certificate. This stems from the Lafayette Street application, whether the Commission became aware of a number of properties that were approved for 3-tab and then installed architectural shingles. The Commission discussed the application process and details regarding a checklist to include with the application. Correspondence The Commission received a letter from the Massachusetts Historical Commission to the City of Salem requesting additional information regarding the Grove Street project. May 21, 2014, Page 7 of 7 VOTE: There bein no further business Ms. McCrea made a motion to ad'ourn. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner June 4, 2014, Page 1 of 7 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES June 4, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, June 4, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present Kathy Harper(Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, and Joanne McCrea. 92 Federal Street Vincent Capozzi submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for side entrance railings that were previously installed. The two identical railings are set back from the street. A Certificate of Vote, taken in 1995, is on file with the Clerk for unsatisfactory alterations to the railings. Mr. Capozzi was not the owner of the property at that time. Vincent Capozzi was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/7/14 ■ Photographs: 5/7/14 Mr. Capozzi stated that the railings were installed by the previous owner, Richard Quirk. Richard Quirk was his father-in-law, and he acquired the property through the trust. They just found the violation on the property while preparing to sell the house to a new owner. The railings meet the code requirements of the 1970s which only required a 36"high railing. Were the railing to be rebuild to today's standards, the railing will need to be a minimum of 42"high. He is asking that the Commission allow the railing to remain as is, specifically given that the railings are set back from the street and have been there for 20 years. Ms. Harper summarized the violation history for the railings and passed around a copy of the Clerk's Certificate. Ms. Bellin stated that given that there is not much information,the Commission should review the application for its appropriateness today. However, she is not sure whether or not there is enough information to make a determination. Mr. Hart stated that he does not feel comfortable approving the railing without hearing from the Building Inspector whether or not the railing complies to the code. Mr. Capozzi stated that the Building Inspector signed off on the permit in the 1990s. The railing met code at that time. Ms. Harper stated that the Commission needs to check with the Building Inspector and get a closer look at the railing. MOTION: Mr. Hart made a motion to continue the qRplication to the next meeting: Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. June 4, 2014, Page 2 of 7 Ms. Bellin stated that even if the Building Commissioner says that the railing meets code, the Commission will need additional details on the railings in order to review and approve the design. VOTE: All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Lovett stated that she will speak with Tom St. Pierre about the railing. 2 Gifford Court Donna Yates submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install vertical screening underneath the side entrance stairs. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/8/14 ■ Photographs: 5/8/14 MOTION: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the screenin as submitted. Ms. Mccrea seconded the motion. Mr. Hart asked if there were specified paint colors. VOTE: Ms. Bellin amended her motion to include that the boards will match the house bo color. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 7 Cambridge Street(Hamilton Hall Adelaide Vander Salm submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the three-dimensional painted eagle on the Chestnut Street fagade of Hamilton Hall, which was carved by Samuel McIntire. It has been in the same location on the building since 1805. In order to ensure the eagle's long term preservation, the Trustees of Hamilton Hall have determined that the eagle should be removed and replaced with an exact replica. The original eagle will be conserved and exhibited inside the building. An application was also submitted to make repairs to the exterior fire escapes. The fire escapes will be removed and reinstalled with new anchors. The roof at the 2rd floor, accessing the 3rd floor supper room, will be reduced in size. The exit door along this same escape, on the second floor, will be bricked in if funding allows. An alternative is to replace the door. Joseph Pyfrin and Kathy Harper were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/19/14 ■ Photographs: 5/19/14 ■ Drawings: 5/2/14 ■ Project Manual: 5/5/14 Ms. Harper recused herself, as one of the applicants. June 4, 2014, Page 3 of 7 The Commission discussed the removal of the eagle and replacement with a replica. Ms. Harper stated that they will have a consultant determine the original colors of the eagle. The replica eagle will be created from a caste of the original. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to gp2rove as submitted. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. The Commission then discussed the fire escape repair project. Ms. McCrea asked for clarification on what will happen if there are not funds available to complete the entire project. Mr. Pyfrin responded that the replacement of the door as well as the anchor points, required for stabilization, is the base project. Depending on cost they will reduce the scope of the masonry repairs. Ms. Harper presented to the Commission the selected replacement door. It is the closest match they could find. The door is barely visible from the public way. Mr. Hart asked for clarification on the roof that will be altered along with the door that may be bricked in. Ms. Harper responded that the second floor door with the overhang is also the door proposed to be bricked in. If funds are available,the door will be bricked in. The overhang has a jag that will be removed to aesthetic reasons. Mr. Pyfrin added that if the door is bricked in,the brick will be historic brick and the mortar to match the existing, unless the Commission recommends otherwise. Mr. Hart stated that the Commission will want the overall appearance, binder, and composition of the mortar to be matched. Ms. McCrea suggested that this could be a project eligible for Community Preservation Act funds. They should consider submitting an application. Mr. Hart asked if the date of the door is known. Mr. Pyfrin responded that they do not know the exact date, however the door was installed after the building was built. The fire escape has a plaque on it with the name S. Patton and Sons, which was in business from 1884-1921. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the yp plication as submitted with the ollowin stipulations that if the door is replaced that the brick and mortar match the existiW brick and June 4, 2014, Page 4 of 7 mortar of that,faCade in terms of'ap�)earance color, and texture. Lthe exit door is replaced, it is a Brosco pine M-7989 and it will be painted to match the existing door color. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in fiavor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a subsequent motion that the mason surrounding the anchor points match the existin brick and mortar. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Harper returned to the table. 188 Federal Street Leslie Levesque submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to: • Remove two modern casement windows and install a new double-hung wood window with true divided lights, exterior storm sash, and wood trim to match existing. • Remove the existing stove vent and replace with new metal vent of similar design in a new location. • Construct a new, uncovered back porch and stairway. Ken Levesque, Leslie Levesque, and Wendy Frontiero, the applicants' architect, were present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 5/19/14 ■ Photographs: 5/8/14 ■ Product specifications Ms. Levesque pointed out to the Commission the location of the rear casement windows which are single pane windows. They believed they were added in the 1980s. Ms. Frontiero stated that the kitchen addition is set approximately 30 feet back from the street. It is not very visible from the public way, due to the distance and there is a modern garage on a adjacent property that blocks a portion of the visibility. The casement windows will be replaced with a true divided light window. The clapboards will be patched in to match the existing and painted. A new door will go in at the location of the existing window at the back of the house. There will be steps going down into the back yards. The deck will stay in line with the line of the house. It will be made of typical construction. Only a small portion of the deck will be visible from within the local historic district. Ms. Harper read a letter of support submitted by Sharon Sullivan, 186 Federal Street. There was no public comment. MOTION: Ms. Keenan made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. Mr. Hart asked for clarification on the door and window color. June 4, 2014, Page 5 of 7 Mr. Levesque responded that they will match the existing. VOTE:All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 287 Lafayette Street Salem Renewal, LLC submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to: • Add clerestory windows in the upper sanctuary • Remove religious exterior wall mounted signage and symbols • Replace aluminum replacement windows, in-kind • Install low slope aluminum frame glazed windows well units over existing basement window wells. John Seger, Seger Architects, and David Pabich, Salem Renewal, LLC, were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/19/14 ■ Photographs: 5/16/14 Mr. Seger summarized the major components of the project. Salem Renewal, LLC is renovating the building, which will eventually be used by Salem State University. All of the wood double- hung and steel casement windows will be replaced with aluminum windows. They will install 15degree glass over the existing parapet for the basement windows in order to prevent water infiltration. They will be buffered with some planting along the perimeter. Mr. Seger continued that in order to accommodate the needs of SSU,they are adding a second floor to the existing 2-story space. Offices will be located on the second floor. They would like to add windows along the 2"floor in order to bring more light into the office space. The windows are in the same rhythm as the existing windows. Mr. Pabich stated that the building was constructed in 1952. Mr. Seger added that the site will be re-graded to accommodate handicap accessibility and the existing aluminum ramps will be removed. Ms. Harper asked.if all the windows in the building are being replaced. Mr. Seger responded in the affirmative. Mr. Hart stated that it would be helpful to have drawings and photographs of the existing designs for the file. Mr. Pabich responded that they have the original blueprints in digital form. Ms. Harper opened the discussion for public comment. June 4, 2014, Page 6 of 7 Susan Cheatham, Board Member of the Temple Shalom, spoke in support of the application. She was pleased that the footprint of the building is remaining the same and added that the Jewish Historical Society has records on file for the building. Adria Leach, Salem State University, spoke in favor of the application. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve application as submitted with the following provisos: 1. Existing ramps be replaced with a sloped sidewalk. 2. The followin drawin s be submitted or archival purposes: original construction drawinjzs, existin drawings existing conditions photographs of the exterior, and the proposed drawin s. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in avor, and the motion so carried. 217 Essex Street In accordance with Section 106 Review,the Commission received from EBI Consulting, Inc. an Initiation to Comment on a proposed telecommunications facility. Verizon is proposing to co- locate antennas on the building. The antennas will be located at a height of 87' on a 90' building. Documents & Exhibits ■ Letter: 5/28/14 ■ Drawings: 4/23/14 Mr. Hart stated that the Commission should defer to the Massachusetts Historical Commission and their review of this project. Ms. Bellin stated that the Commission may submit comments that incorporate MHC's previous comments and also defer to their comments on this project. Ms. McCrea suggested that they copy Representative John Keenan on the letter, as he chairs the telecommunications committee. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the draft letter with the discussed comments and to copy Representative John Keenan. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor. and the motion so carried. Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of 412114 with comments. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of 4116114 with comments. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. June 4, 2014, Page 7 of 7 VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of 517114 with comments. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Correspondence There was no correspondence. VOTE: There bein no further business Ms. McCrea made a motion to ad'ourn. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, A Nata ie BL Lovett Community Development Planner June 18, 2014, Page 1 of 8 0 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES June 18, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, June 4, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert(Chair), Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, Larry Spang, and Jane Turiel. 128-130 Federal Street McIntire Real Estate, LLC submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to repaint the house with existing colors. The application also includes repairing and replacing the wood shutters, and rotted wood along the fascia and soffits. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 6/16/14 ■ Photographs: 6/16/14 VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to a rove the a lication as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 92 Federal Street As a continuation of the previous meeting, Vincent Capozzi submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for side entrance railings that were previously installed. The two identical railings are set back from the street. A Certificate of Vote,taken in 1995, is on file with the Clerk for unsatisfactory alterations to the railings. Mr. Capozzi was not the owner of the property at that time. Victor Capozzi was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/7/14 ■ Photographs: 5/7/14 Mr. Capozzi submitted new pictures of the railing, as had been requested by the Commission at the previous meeting. He stated that the posts are 4x4 and the design was an exact replica of what was there before. Ms. Herbert pointed out that there are different treatments under the stairs. One has lattice and the other has vertical boards. Mr. Capozzi stated that you cannot see the sides of the stairs from the street. He submitted drawings of the existing conditions as well as a design showing how the stairs would look if rebuilt. If he is required to rebuild the stairs, they will look very different from what is there now. June 18, 2014, Page 2 of 8 Ms. Herbert stated that it seems it would be an easy fix to replace the lattice under the stairs in order to make the match. Mr. Capozzi stated that if he touches the screening under the stairs, he is required to replace the entire stairway. He abruptly left the meeting. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Spang abstained from the vote. 182 Federal Street Alexa Ogno submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to repaint the front door. The existing color will be stripped. The painted metal faux strapping, hinges, and knocker will be painted black. If the wood is in a good condition, a clear varnish will be applied to the door. If the wood is in poor condition, a faux wood finish will be applied to the door to match the interior. Alexa Ogno was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 6/2/14 ■ Photographs: 6/2/14 Ms. Herbert asked for clarification that the exterior would be painted to look like oak, similar to the interior. Ms. Ogno responded in the affirmative. Jill Pabich will be doing the work. She added that she scraped a portion of the door today and underneath the paint color is black. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the paint colors for the front door as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 10 Lynn Street Joseph Galvin submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing stockade fence and replace it will a new 6' fence. The design, color, and material will match the adjacent neighbor's fence. The design is flat board capped fence, left natural color. Maggie Smith-Dalton was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 5/14/2014 ■ Photographs: 5/12/14 June 18, 2014, Page 3 of 8 Ms. Smith-Dalton stated that the fence will match the neighbor's fence which was installed last summer. Mr. Spang asked if the fence will be left unfinished. Ms. Smith-Dalton responded that it will be sealed with a clear seal,to protect it. Ms. Herbert asked if the pressure treated posts will be a part of the fence or incorporated. Ms. Smith-Dalton responded that she wasn't sure, but it will be an exact replica of the neighbor's fence. Ms. Herbert asked for the location of the neighbor's fence and whether it is visible from the street. Ms. Smith-Dalton stated that the fence runs along the rear of the property. She doesn't think the fence is visible. Ms. Lovett left the room to obtain the file for 10 Andover Street. Ms. Herbert reviewed the file and stated that it may be a different neighbor's fence, as the file for 10 Andover Street does not have a fence approval. However,because the neighbor's fence is not very visible from the public way, it may be OK if the Commission approves the fence without integral posts. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to qp prove the fence, as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 47 Summer Street Philip Marchand submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a second story addition on the existing single-story addition at the rear of the house. There will be no change to the footprint of the building. Philip Marchand and Steve Livermore, architect for the applicant, were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/22/14 ■ Photographs: 5/22/14 ■ Drawings: 4/17/14 Ms. Herbert asked if the plans include the previously approved change for the bow window. Mr. Marchand responded in the affirmative. He stated that they do not want to change the footprint of the building, they are only looking to add a second floor. The additional space will June 18, 2014, Page 4 of 8 be used as additional family space. The Bed And Breakfast will be reducing it's number of rooms from three to two, as well. Mr. Livermore added that there will be improvements to the Gedney Street foundation as part of this project. The roof pitch will match the existing house. The windows will match what was recently approved for the building: BROSCO single pane true divided light with storms. They are extending the existing chimney at the back. The eve will be eliminated at that level and the chimney will go straight up. Ms. McCrea asked for the age on the rear chimney. Mr. Marchand responded that it is approximately 30 years old. His father built it in the 1980s. Ms. Herbert asked if the skylight is existing, and if there will be new venting. Mr. Livermore responded that the skylight is existing and will remain. They have not determined the exact location of the venting but they could agree to putting the venting on yard side of the house rather than the Gedney Street side. Ms. Herbert asked if the block chimney is remaining. Mr. Livermore responded in the affirmative. That chimney is the one being raised up, but they will be parging it. They are bringing the chimney up two feet above anything over 10 feet. They will only go as high as needed by code. Mr. Spang asked if the details will match and if there will be painting to match. Mr. Marchand responded in the affirmative. There was no public comment. Mr. Spang stated that the long Gedney Street fagade seems a little bit overwhelming. The one- story addition currently breaks up that side of the house. Given how few windows are present on that side of the house, he wondered if there was another house next door prior to the roadway being widened. Ms. Herbert suggested that they could run a corner board down along the addition so that it breaks the fagade up. That would not change the number of windows, however. Mr. Livermore stated that there is not much space to add more windows because there are stairs and a bathroom on that side. That side of the house is the utility side. Mr. Spang stated that given the inability to add more windows, adding a corner board would help. It would also delineate the addition from the main house. Ms. Turiel and Ms. McCrea agreed. VOTE: Mr. S pang made a motion to approve the yRplication as submitted with the addition o continuing the existing corner board on the Gedney Street of the house and there will be new June 18, 2014,Page 5 of 8 siding installed on the Gedney Street side,painted to match the existing siding. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 115 Derby Street/54R Turner Street The House of the Seven Gables Settlement Association submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing asphalt roof on the Hooper-Hathaway House with wood shakes. The intent of the Owner is to interpret the exterior of the house to its appearance in the first half of the 20th century following the 1912 restoration and subsequent minor additions to the rear of the house. The overall appearance and installation details will be similar to the roof installed on the House of the Seven Gables a few years ago. Kevin White and Bill Finch, preservation consultant to the HOSG Settlement Association, were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 5/22/14 ■ Photographs: 5/14/14 ■ Drawings: 5/14/14 Mr. Finch stated that they will be replacing the existing asphalt shingle roof and they will be replacing it with what was installed during the restoration in 1912. There are copper clad shed roofs that they will not know the condition of until they get up there, but they are planning to replace them. The existing shed roofs are flat seam copper, however the contractor would prefer standing seam copper for the replacements. There will also be incidental clapboard replacement, as necessary. The replaced clapboards will match the existing clapboards and painted to match. The gutters and downspouts will be replaced. The downspouts have wood covers on a copper downspout. Those will be replaced. The chimney was repointed a few years ago and the flashing was redone, so those are OK. Ms. Herbert asked the size of the downspouts. Mr. White responded that the wood surround will be 4" square and 3" copper downspout. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Mccrea made a motion to aL).L)rove the application, as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in1avor, and the motion so carried. 1 Harrington Court Jason Dziuba submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a 6' fence along the Bridge Street side of the property. The fence will be a cedar flat board fence with a top rail and a gate. The fence will be painted white. Jason Dziuba and Dierdra Mjaeski were present. Documents &Exhibits June 18, 2014, Page 6 of 8 ■ Application: 5/29/14 ■ Photographs: 5/29/14 Ms. Herbert asked the owners if they were aware that the contractor who has restored their house prior to them owning it had received a preservation award from historic Salem, Inc. The house was in terrible condition before, and while it was not a completely historically accurate restoration, but it was done very well. Part of the award was due to the fence. She stated her concern that if a 6' fence is installed that the air flow will be lost. She asked if they considered installing landscaping. Mr. Dziuba responded that they have considered landscaping and that could be an alternative, however because of the large tree there is mostly shade behind the house. They would like a little more privacy for the backyard, but they do not want to hide the house. They would install a fence similar to the neighbor's fence. The 6' fence would step down near the corner of the property. There was no public comment. Ms. Herbert suggested that if the 6' fence could return to the corner of the house. The gate along Bridge Street could be relocated to the Flint Street side. The gate should be the same style as the existing fence. The 6' fence would end at the rear corner of the house. Ms. Mjaeski asked if they should still transition the fence from the 6' fence to the 3' fence. The transition would be one section of fence. Ms. Spang stated that if there is a return to the house then they would not need a transition section. It is typical in the district to have a higher fence for the backyard. He asked if the fence will curve around the corner similar to the existing fence. Mr. Dziuba responded in the affirmative. They will be using Boston Fence, who also constructed the existing fence. Ms. Herbert stated that the gate hardware should be on the inside. They could stain the fence rather than paint it. Mr. Spang showed the applicants a drawing of the Commission's proposed fence. VOTE: Mr. Spang made a motion to approve the application as modified, 6'high cedar board fence with osts to be hidden on house sid. running alon Brid e Street and returning to the corner of the house; the remainder of the fence to remain as is,- relocate the existing gate to a location along Flint Street to be determined by the applicants: painted or stained white ate hardware located on the inside. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in. avor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Capozzi, applicant for 92 Federal Street, returned to the meeting room. The Commission continued the hearing for his application. 92 Federal Street Continuation June 18, 2014, Page 7 of 8 Mr. Capozzi stated that he spoke with the Tom St. Pierre, the City Building Inspector,who said he would issue a repair permit for the stairs, allowing him to change the privacy boards on the sides. This work will entail replacing the frame,the string of the frame, and the screening. Ms. Herbert suggested that the screening be 3/a"x 2 V2"boards with%" spacing. Mr. Capozzi stated that would be fine. The screening will be pressure treated wood and it can't be painted over for a year, otherwise the paint will blister off. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the stairs with the screening as discussed. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Spang abstained from the vote. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to remove the clerk certificate. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Spank abstained from the vote. 87 Federal Street Raymond Young submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the rear and rear side windows of the building. The application also includes repainting the building with existing colors and in-kind repair of the chimneys. All of the work was previously completed and the applicant is before the Commission in response to a violation letter. Raymond Young was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 5/16/14 ■ Photographs: 5/16/14 Ms. Lovett left of obtain the file on the property. Ms. Young stated that the back of the house is no longer a sunroom. It has been converted into a breakfast nook off of the kitchen and a two room bedroom suite. The windows that were installed were the same as the window that is existing on the side of the house. Only the window along the rear side is visible from the public way. Ms. Herbert asked if the replacements are casement windows. Ms. Young responded in the affirmative. The previous windows were casement windows as well. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Spang made a motion to approve the work as completed. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. June 18, 2014, Page 8 of 8 Other Business Jeff Cohen, Salem Recycling Coordinator and member of the Renewable Energy Task Force, spoke with the Commission about solar panel installations. He is also serving as a solar coach for the Solarize Mass. The discussion focused on the design aspects the Commission will need to take into consideration as more residents from the local historic districts begin proposing solar installations for their roofs. Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approval the minutes of May 21, 2014, with comments. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Correspondence There was no correspondence. VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. McCrea made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Spang seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner July 2, 2014, Page 1 of 5 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES July 2, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, June 4, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Larry Spang. 248 Lafayette Street Brad Aham, Witch City Holdings, LLC, submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the main roof with architectural roof shingles. The proposed shingle is a GAF Slateline. The application also includes the replacement of existing shingles on two dormers with clapboards and in-kind work including repairing fascia, soffets, gutters, and the rubber roof on the front porch. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 7/2/14 ■ Photographs: 6/16/14 VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. Meerea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 2 River Street Richard Luecke and Perry McIntosh submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to add a downspout to the existing back addition. The gutter will match the existing downspouts in material and color. The application also includes a rebuild of the top 2-4 feet of the north chimney stack and installation of a stainless steel chimney cap. Lastly,the application includes reroofing with 3-tab shingles. Richard Luecke was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 6/16/14 ■ Photographs: 6/16/14 Mr. Luecke stated that since the application was submitted,the mason has taken a closer look at the chimney and believes they will need to rebuild it from the roofline. Mr. Spang asked for the existing roofing material type. Mr. Luecke responded that the top of the gambrel is slate and the sides of the roof are 3-tab asphalt. Ms. Bellin noted that if the roofing material will remain the same,they can approve the application through non-applicability. July 2, 2014, Page 2 of 5 VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to arove the non-applicable items on the back o the �. house Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. There was no public comment on the chimney cap. Mr. Spang asked if there was a color picked out for the chimney cap. Mr. Luecke responded that he would have the chimney cap color match the one in the picture submitted. Ms. Herbert recommended that the chimney cap be black or painted flat black. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the chimney cap in the color black. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 42 Chestnut Street Kenelm Harris submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change the paint color for the recently approved perimeter fence. The original proposed color was a gray/green color. The applicant is proposing that the fence be painted white to match the trim of the house. Kenelm Harris was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 6/16/14 ■ Photographs: 6/16/14 Ms. McCrea asked for details on the type of white color they would be using. Mr. Harris responded that they will have the stain matched as closely to the house trim paint as possible. There was no public coment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to gj2prove the color, as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in avor, and the motion so carried. 81 Highland Ave The North Shore Medical Center, Inc. submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the boiler building, including the smoke stack, oil bunders, electrical switchgear, inclusive of equipment pad and bulk oxygen tank farm pad. The buildings has been replaced by a new Central Utility Plant and is no longer useful. The building will be replaced by a new state-of-the-art patient care building. Attn. Joseph Correnti, Mary Jo Gagnon,NSMC, and Shelly Bisegna,NSMC were present. Documents &Exhibits July 2, 2014,Page 3 of 5 ■ Application: 6/25/14 ■ Photographs: 6/25/14 Attn. Correnti stated that the boiler building was built in approximately 1917 and sits along the front of the property. It is being removed in order to make room for a new building. A new utility plant was constructed to serve the Medical Center, and the boiler building no longer serves a useful purpose. Mr. Bisegna stated that the only things remaining in the building are a few high and low pressure boilers and an emergency power generator. There are some utilities that run through the building as well. The stack and the building will be completely removed. Underneath the road are underground fuel tanks,they will not be removed at this time. The boiler building is in the middle of the footprint of the new building. The plant is now decommissioned and they are ready to demolish. Attn. Correnti stated that in 2011 the Commission received a copy of a determination by the Massachusetts Historical Commission that while there are some buildings on the NSMC campus that are historically significant,the boiler building is not one of them. Mr. Hart asked if the applicant has a scaled site plan of the buildings. Mr. Bisegna responded in the affirmative. Attn. Correnti stated that the new building will be going through local permitting in the next few months. There was no public comment VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the a lication as submitted with the following pro viso: the applicant submit a scaled site plan showing the boiler buildin on the site and provide color photos taken •om the corners from all four sides or the record and that vertical dimensions of the buildip-g be included on a plan. Ms. Benin seconded the motion. All were in avor, and the motion so carried. 131 Bridge Street The City of Salem requested comments from the Commission regarding a rehabilitation project being undertaken as part of the City's House Rehabilitation Program. Under the requirements of the HUD Community Development Block Grant funds, because the house is located within a National Register district it is subject to the Commission's review prior to the work being bid. Mr. Hart questioned the purview of the Commission on this project. If the project is using federal funds, and thus is being reviewed under Section 106,then he believes the Commission has purview over the interior work as well. Ms. Lovett stated that she did not believe this project was being reviewed under a full Section 106 review. She was unsure whether the Commission should comment on the interior work, however felt the Commission could submit their comments for the City to review. July 2, 2014, Page 4 of 5 Ms. Herbert questioned status of ownership for the property as it appears the property. She questioned whether the property may be condominiumized, in which case the Commission would press the applicant to invest money into making historically appropriate repairs. Ms. Lovett stated that this program provides no interest loans to applicants and the City places an affordable housing restriction on the property. The applicant is not required to contribute funds. To her best knowledge, there is no plan for the property to be sold. If it is, the loan will need to be repaid. Mr. Spang stated that it feels awkward to have historic fabric being replaced with non-historic materials using City funds. There isn't enough data to know if there is historic fabric on the interior that needs to be protected. The Commission should advocate for retaining any historic fabric. Ms. McCrea stated concerned that there were original interior shutters that may be removed. Ms. Herbert expressed concern with the exterior paint being scraped down to bare wood from 5ft down. The existing paint has crackled and the contrast will look strange. Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission could submit initial comments on a few items and then ask for more information for the interior. Mr. Spang expressed interest in holding off commenting until additional information was obtained. Mr. Hart requested that Ms. Lovett ask Jane Guy for the documentation that the City has an agreement with MHC to review the project. Ms. Herbert added some initial comments from the Commission may include that: - The chimneys be repointed and the parging removed - The deleading work on the outside of the building be completed through encapsulation rather than scraping - The 3rd floor windows be replaced with wood rather than vinyl - The chimneys be blocked off rather than removed She added that the Commission has questions regarding whether there is any special treatment anticipated for the apparent period shutters throughout and if there is any intention to remove the period Georgian trim, and doors, or if there will be any modifications to interior period Georgian stairways. Ms Lovett stated that she would obtain answers to the Commission's questions in advance of the next meeting. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the review to the next meeting. Mr. Span seconded the motion. All were in 1avor, and the motion so carried. July 2, 2014, Page 5 of 5 Buffum Street District Ms. Lovett provided a draft of a Certified Local Government Opinion of Eligibility for the National Register for a Buffum Street Historic District. Michael Marsaille, 60 Buffi rn Street, stated that he requested that the City request a CLG opinion for Buffum Street. They are creating a neighborhood association and are also working to designate the street as a National Register Historic District, and then eventually a local historic district. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to support the gpplication for eligibilifyof the Buffum Street district for the National Register of Historic Places. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Ms. Herbert discussed with the Commission the recent email sent from the City Solicitor regarding the question over whether being a member of HSI is a conflict with being a member of the Historical Commission. Ms. Bellin stated that it would be helpful to have an official decision from the Ethics Commission. Mr. Hart can make the request himself. Ms. Herbert stated that Ms. Bellin and Ms. McCrea's reappointments are up for consideration at the next Council meeting. The Council of the Whole will be meeting on July 17 ', to discuss Ms. Bellin's reappointment. As many Commission members as possible should try to attend. HSI members are also encouraged to attend. Ms. McCrea stated that at the last City Council meeting,the City Council voted in support of all of the CPA projects. Correspondence VOTE: There being no further business. Mr. Hart made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, !PieBL Lovett Community Development Planner August 6, 2014, Page 1 of 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES August 6, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, August 6, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Larry Spang. Ms. Harper arrived late. 310 Lafayette Street Ken and Monica Leisey submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the chiropractor sign located in the front yard, remaining from the previous owner. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 6/17/14 ■ Photographs: 6/17/14 There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Harper arrived at this time. 188 Derby Street James Bailey submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace two front pillars alongside the front door. The pillars have deteriorated and the applicant is proposing to replace them with a synthetic pillar. James Bailey was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 6/30/14 ■ Photographs: 6/30/14 ■ Catalog Mr. Hart asked for clarification on the specifications for the pillars. Mr. Bailey responded that it would be a tapered fiberglass pillar(FRP Tuscan-style tapered round). The wood versions are made up of small pieces of wood. The last wood pillars, installed by a developer around 2000, have been fixed several times already and are still deteriorating. Prior to the pillars, the front porch was being held up with 4x4s. He showed the Commission a sample of the proposed pillar. Ms. Herbert asked if the pillar would be painted. Mr. Bailey responded that it could be painted. August 6, 2014, Page 2 of 6 Ms. Harper asked if the pillar will be the same dimensions as the existing and if the box at the ' bottom of the pillar would be replicated. Mr. Bailey responded that the diameter would be the same (12" at the bottom and 10"at the top). He is unsure whether they will need to add to the bottom and if so if that will be built with wood or composite. Mr. Hart stated that the columns are replacements and not historic to the building. He stated that he had worked on a project that had funding from Massachusetts Historical Commission and asked if they would approve fiberglass pillars; they denied the request. They were able to find a hardwood pillar to use for the project. Mr. Bailey stated that he doesn't feel it makes sense to use a substandard quality material for the pillars. Even the cedar pillars will be finger jointed and susceptible to water infiltration. Ms. Keenan stated that the property is set back from the street, additionally it is susceptible to the ocean air which will accelerate the deterioration. She stated that she is OK with the fiberglass pillar in this case. Mr. Bailey stated that his first choice is the fiberglass, the second option would be the dipped preserved wood to match the existing pillars. Mr. Hart commented that the base of the pillar needs to have ventilation in order to guard against deterioration. Mr. Spang stated that typically he doesn't like the synthetics because the proportions and detail is not quite right. He wonders if they need a drawing that will show how the pedestal will be installed. Ms. Herbert clarified that the column itself needs to be ordered to size to fit the space between the base and the capital. Mr. Hart added that it should be a tuscan-style column. Mr. Spang stated that the style would be similar to the pillar on page 11 of the product manual. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve a Tuscan-style column in 100%wood, sized to Fitt existing conditions with t p ical Tuscan details at the base ca ital and sha t. Painted to match the trim of the house. Ms. Har er seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Mr. San made a motion to a rove a Turncra t FRP Tuscan round tapered pillar. sized correctly to fit fi-omthe stairs to the pediment as shown on page I of the catalog, and painted to match the existing trim. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. Ms. Keenan Ms. McCrea and Mr. Span-e were in favor. Mr. Hart Ms. Harper, and Ms. Herbert were opposed The motion so failed August 6, 2014, Page 3 of 6 29 Chestnut Street Maura McGrane submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to make renovations to the rear ell of the house. The project will involve disassembly and reconstruction of the wood framed addition on north elevation. The reconstructed addition will be on the same footprint as the existing structure and recreate the height and roof pitch. The existing wood frame ell is built of combined stick framing and larger wood framing. The structure rests on a partial rubble foundation faced with granite. The foundation extends only a few inches below grade. The structure is un-insulated and unheated, but is the primary entry into the house from the Warren Street driveway and garage. Electricity is the only utility in the structure. The overhang of the existing ell will not be replicated. The reconstructed wall will continue the line of the wall immediately adjacent to the north brick wall of the house. The arched openings on the west side will be recreated as window and door openings. A second doorway will be added to the west side. The north gable end will have two windows rather than the window and door combination. The position of the windows on the east elevation will be shifted along with the door. The existing slate roof will be reinstalled. The cornice and rake molding will be salvaged for reuse or replicated. The project also includes the removal of aluminum sliding glass doors along the kitchen wing and installation of a window bay and a pair of windows at the location of the sliding glass doors. An application was also submitted to install a cantilever sliding gate along the Warren Street driveway. Maura McGrane, Grace McGrane and Lynn Spencer, the applicant's architect, were present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 7/10/14 ■ Photographs: 7/10/14 ■ Drawings:5/28/14 Mr. Hart stated that he had a business relationship with Ms. Spencer 30 years ago, but has not since then, and does not feel it will affect his vote. Ms. Spencer summarized the project for the Commission. She stated that they research the history of the rear addition, but were unable to find much information. They believe that it used to be a separate building on the property and was at one time moved and attached to the main building. All architectural woodwork will be reused or recreated in-kind. They are proposing simulated divided light window. She showed the Commission a sample of the window glass, one regular glass and one low-e. The paint colors will be Benjamin Moore Cottage Red on the body and Benjamin Moore Marble White for the trim. She discussed the sliding glass doors in the kitchen. They believe that there was a plan for a deck at one time that never came to fruition. They are proposing to install a bay window in its place. This work will involve mortar analysis and matching to historic brick. August 6, 2014, Page 4 of 6 '-' Ms. Herbert asked if the bay window can be seem from the street. Ms. McGrane stated that it is minimally visible. Ms. McGrane spoke to their need for the cantilever gate door. They have had numerous trespassers on their property and need the gate for security. The black post visible in the rendering is the gate mechanism. Mr. Spang asked if it would be better for the innermost arched window to look like the french doors,just fixed in place. Ms. Herbert stated that another option would be to have a fixed window rather than a doorway at the outermost opening. Ms. Spencer stated that the use pattern for the area closest to the main house will be different. The reason for the window is that they are looking to keep the area as warm as possible. Ms. Herbert asked for clarification on the platforms outside the french doors. Ms. Spencer responded that there will be a platform although they are still unsure of the material. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Harper made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 94-96 Derby Street Townsend House Condominiums submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to block off one rear basement window and install a new dryer vent. The work also includes making repairs to the foundation which are the result of erosion and water infiltration. Wendy Walsh was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 7/16/14 ■ Photographs: 7/16/14 Ms. Lovett clarified that the front door repairs have already been approved through a Certificate of Non-Applicability. Ms. Walsh presented to the Commission close-up pictures of the basement window. The inside of the window, behind the metal screen, is at a lower grade than the pavement. As a result, water infiltrates the basement. Ms. Herbert asked if louvered venting could be used instead. August 6, 2014, Page 5 of 6 There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. San made a motion to a rove the removal o the window and its screening, brickin in solid with a gray toned brick to match the granite and a louvered vent rather than the proposed pitched vent. Ms. Mccrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 131 Bridge Street As a continuation of the discussion from the previous meeting,the City of Salem has requested comments from the Commission regarding a rehabilitation project being undertaken as part of the City's Housing Rehabilitation Program. The property is located within a National Register district and, as a result, is subject to the Commission's review. Ms. Herbert stated that a comment could be that the 3`d floor windows should be 6/6 single pane wood windows with storms rather than vinyl. Mr. Spang added that any deleading work on the exterior be done as sympatric to the historic fabric as possible. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to submit a letter stating all of the comments discussed by the. Commission. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the minutes of 6118114 with comments. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Hart gave the Commission a summary of the Point Neighborhood National Register nomination meeting. Correspondence Ms. Lovett stated that the Commission received a letter from MHC regarding the CLG Opinion for the Buffum Street district. MHC wrote that it is unable to concur with the Commissions opinion until an updated area form is completed for the street. The City does not have money to proceed with the area form update at this time. Ms. Lovett stated that the Commission also CC'd on a letter from MHC regarding the telecommunications facility proposal for 217-222 Essex Street. MHC stated that the applicant should provide the Commission with the information it requested in its letter so that the Commission ca further review the project. Ms. Lovett stated that additional archaeological reports have been completed for the Essex County Sewerage Pipeline and the Underground Cable Replacement project. These reports are available in the Commission's files. August 6, 2014, Page 6 of 6 Ms. Herbert stated that she spoke with the consultant for the 310 Lafayette Street telecommunications facilities installation project. In order to have the existing antennae consolidated, the owner would need to request so from the various telecommunication providers. VOTE: There being no further business, Mr. Hart made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Spang seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner August 20, 2014, Page 1 of 7 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES August 20, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, August 20, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert(Chair), Laurie Bellin, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Jane Turiel. 23 Chestnut Street Peter Cohen and Martin Lieberman submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to: 1. Strip the carriage house brick dental work of paint 2. Install blue stone chimney caps to replace the existing concrete caps 3. Reinstall the original front door and sidelight shutters, which are current in storage in the carriage house. 4. Install rooftop HVAC units to service the 2°d and 3rd floors. The HVAC contractor has specified a Goodman GSX160421F unit with the dimensions of 35 1/2"x 35 %2"x 361/4". The units would be located between the parapet and the chimney,toward the back of the house. 5. Install a 6' fence along the Pickering House side of the property. The proposed fence is a stockage fence. The existing fencing along the property is also stockage style. 6. Alter the carriage house door. The application states that the existing door does not appear to be original. There is evident that there were two doors that opened out from the existing hardware on the brick fagade and above the door the brick shows evidence that the opening was.once arched. The proposal is to store the door to this original arch style. Peter Cohen was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 7/21/14 ■ Photographs: 7/21/14 Ms. Herbert asked if the abutting properties' fences are also stockade. Mr. Cohen responded that the adjoining three properties also have stockade fencing. If they were to install a different style, it would stand out. He also explained that the application for the window painting has been amended. They originally proposed to paint the sashes black,however they are now proposing to paint the windows with in-kind colors. Ms. Herbert asked for clarification of the photo of the Phillips House carriage house dentil work. Commission member David Hart took a picture of the carriage house that shows the carriage house with painted dentils. Mr. Cohen stated that he took a picture of the carriage house from Essex Street. It seems as though the dentils are not painted on the entire building. Ms. Herbert stated that there was a carriage house on the Common that stripped the painting from the dentils. It can be either painted or unpainted. August 20, 2014,Page 2 of 7 There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the amended application for painting with in-kind colors. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried Ms. Herbert asked how height the blue stone chimney cap will be. Jeff Whitmore, contractor for the applicant, responded that it will be 12" from the surface of the chimney. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the application, as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Herbert asked if historic hinging, with the pins, would be used with the shutters. Mr. Cohen responded in the affirmative. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the application, as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Bellin asked if the top of the fence post will be rounded or flat. Mr. Cohen stated that the posts used to be more rounded, but they have been worn down by squirrels. They are considering installing the fence at 5', which was a suggestion of the neighbor, as then the fence would match the height of the adjoining fence. There was no public comment. MOTION: Ms. Bellin made a motion to qEprove the Lence, at 6'or a height to match the adjoining fence. Ms. Herbert asked if they also wanted to include details on the color of the fence. VOTE: Ms. Bellin amended her motion to include that aging Ygitzg oil would be used to match the ad jacent fences. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in avor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Herbert asked if the HVAC for the first floor will be located at ground level. Ms. Cohen responded in the affirmative. The rooftop unit will be located between the parapet and the chimney. August 20, 2014, Page 3 of 7 Mr. Whitmore added that the units will be a dark charcoal color, so it won't be as visible. It will not be visible at all from Chestnut Street, and will only be visible from halfway down Hamilton Street, for approximately 10'. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the HVAC units in the charcoal color. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Herbert asked if the carriage house door will be an operable double door. Mr. Cohen responded that they are still exploring that. If it is a single door, it will appear to be a double door. Ms. Herbert asked for the motivation to change the door. Mr.Cohen responded that the change is for aesthetics reasons. Additionally, the existing door is not very operable. Ms. Herbert asked if the age of the carriage house is known. Mr. Cohen responded that they believe it was built around 1814. The brickwork surrounding the existing door gives the appearance that the door used to be arched and was at one time filled in, as the brick is of a different color. The brick surrounding the adjacent single door is also in poor condition and will need to be repaired. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the qRplication, as submitted. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 6 Harrington Court Nikoleta Jaho submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for changes previously made to the exterior of the house. These changes include repaired to the front stairs, the addition of retaining walls and stairs, and the installation of a side deck. Nikoleta Jaho and Anil Jaho were present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 7/28/2014 ■ Photographs: 7/28/2014 Ms. Herbert stated that she is unsure how the deck received a building permit, because it does not seem to comply with the dimensional setback requirements. In addition, it should have come before the Commission because it is located within the historic district. August 20, 2014, Page 4 of 7 Ms. Herbert summarize the changes that have been made to the front entry. The front entry previously had a wrought iron railing along the portico, which was not original to the structure. She asked when the changes were made to the front portico. Mr. Jaho responded that it was fixed approximately 5-6 years ago. They were not aware that the house was located within the local historic district. Ms. Herbert continued to discuss the deck addition. She stated that if the deck had come before the Commission prior to the deck being built, the Commission would have requested a more historic balustrade and also that the deck be painted to match the house. The existing deck has backcut pickets and the deck is painted the color of red wood. Mr. Jaho stated that when the deck was built, there were a number of trees on the property so it wasn't as visible as it is now. Ms. Herbert said that the deck would be more acceptable if it was painted white and the balusters were changed to 2x2s, where the base of the balusters rest along the bottom rail. Only the front side of the balustrade, facing the street, needs to be changed. The side and the rear are not visible from the street and can remain as they are currently designed. Ms. Herbert stated that for the front portico, the Commission would have been very specific on the style and would have wanted something less utilitarian. The railings that were there prior to the Jaho's purchasing the property were of a 40-50s style. There have been many changes to the property over time. Ms. Lovett left to find the assessor's picture of the property. The picture shows the front of the house, approximately 5 years ago,prior to the changes to the portico. Ms. Turiel stated that if the railings were painted white, it would improve the appearance. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to paint the balustrade white and revise the front balustrade desi n. Jessica Herbert will work with the a licants to clari& the design of the balustrade change. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to paint the front railings white. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Herbert stated that with regards to the retaining walls and stairs, she is not sure what the Commission would have requested differently. MOTION: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the retaining wall and repairs to the kont steps. Ms. McCrea stated that she does not feel the retaining walls are appropriate to the house. Ms. Bellin withdrew the previous motion August 20, 2014, Page 5 of 7 VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to, under the circumstances, allow the retaining walls to remain and as well as the repairs to the front steps. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Keenan left the meeting. 148/150 Washington Street Joshua Ward House Salem Renewal, LLC submitted a request for a letter of support from the Commission for their Massachusetts Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit application. The project includes restoration of the house, so that it may operate as a bed and breakfast. The building is being restored by Todd Waller, of ZXE, LLC. John Seger, Dan Riccarelli, and Todd Waller were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ MA Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit Letter Request Form Mr. Waller gave a presentation to the Commission on the proposed rehabilitation of the building. The building will be turned into a boutique hotel with 11 rooms. The 4-square interior layout will remain. Most of the fireplaces will be restored and made operable. The existing closets will be changed into bathrooms. He added that the building, at one time, operated as a hotel (-1910- 1920). Mr. Seger said that they will need to go through the National Parks Service review as part of the MA Rehabilitation Tax Credits process. Mr. Riccarelli stated that the balustrade will be restored in the same style, however the new balustrade will be higher to meet current building code requirements. A balustrade will also be added to the top of the rear addition so that the roof will be usable as a deck. The portico will remain and a new door will be added to the rear of the building to accommodate for handicap access. Ms. Herbert noted that the base of the pillars at the rear portico seem too clunky for the era. VOTE: Ms. Mccrea made a motion to submit a letter of syMort. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in Lavor, and the motion so carried. 3 Webster Street Renewal Ventures, LLC submitted a request for a Letter of Support for their MA Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits application. Constructed in 1887 by the Lynn& Boston Electric Railroad Company, the Car Barn is a unique example of the industrial architecture built in Salem during the late 19t'century. The project will involve converting the Car Barn into six residential units. Historically appropriate and energy efficient windows will be installed and repairs will be made to the masonry. The large wood doors will be reintroduced to the original trolley car bays. Documents &Exhibits ■ MA Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit Letter Request Form August 20, 2014, Page 6 of 7 r" VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to submit a letter of support. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 217 Essex Street As a continuation of a previous meeting, and in accordance with Section 106 Review, the Commission received from EBI Consulting, Inc. an Initiation to Comment on a proposed telecommunications facility. Verizon is proposing to co-locate antennas on the building. The antennas will be located at a height of 87' on a 90' building. In response to the Commission's initial comment letter stating the detrimental visual effect the installation would have on the surrounding historic buidlings, EBI submitted additional information on the details of the proposed project. Documents &Exhibits ■ Submission Packet, FCC Form 621 Ms. Herbert stated that she feels the City Councilors need to involved with the telecommunication installations. Councilor Sargeant is the SHC representative and could be notified of the issue. She said that the comment letter should state that the Commission still finds that the additional antennae installation would have a negative impact on the downtown and because of the proliferation of antennae on the building. The Commission is going to refer the issue to the City Council. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to support the letter to EBI and MHC and send a memo to Councilor Sar eant. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in Lavor, and the motion so carried. 94 Derby Street/33 Carlton Street Wendy Walsh requested, via email,that the completion date for their Certificate of Appropriateness, for the doorway repair work, be extended for two months. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to a rove the two month extension. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in fiavor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Correspondence Ms. Lovett updated the Commission on the North Street Fire Station masonry restoration project. The project has been moving along smoothly and the masonry work is nearing completion. The window restoration will be completed during the fall. August 20, 2014, Page 7 of 7 Ms. Lovett updated the Commission on the Phase 2 restoration of the Salem Common Fence. CBI Consulting is under contract to produce bid documents and oversee the construction. The bids will be available in the fall. Ms. McCrea stated that she is concerned with the mothballing of the superior court and that at a meeting DCAMM had stated that the heating system would be split and they would not be heating the superior court building. VOTE: There bein no further business Ms. Bellin made a motion to ad'ourn. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner September 3, 2014, Page 1 of 2 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES September 3, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, September 3, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper(Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Larry Spang. 8 Gifford Court Robin O'Neil & Shirley Walker submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the asphalt shingle siding and repair and repaint the underlying clapboards. The proposed paint colors are: Body- Sherwin Williams Colonial Revival Stone Trim- Sherwin Williams Pure White Door- Sherwin Williams Rookwood Red Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 8/14/2014 ■ Photograph ■ Paint chips Mr. Hart stated that until the asphalt shingles are removed, it is unknown what the condition of the clapboards is and whether there are corner boards and skirt boards present. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to qp prove the concel2t of color and approve final details after removal of the asphalt shingle that reveals exact wood siding and wood trim. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue discussion o 'details with the a alicant's Presence at the next meeting. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Herbert stated that the applicant should come to the next meeting with details and photographs of the clapboards, skirt boards, corner boards. If the applicant strips the front right corner of the building, that will show the necessary details. Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion toapprove the minutes of 712114 with comments. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, were opposed, and the motion so carried. Review of revised Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness September 3, 2014, Page 2 of 2 The Commission discussed the draft revised application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. Ms. Lovett stated that she would incorporate the Commission's comments and send a revised version to the Commission members. Correspondence There was no correspondence. VOTE: There being n further business Ms. B d1in made a motion to ad'ourn. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner September 17, 2014, Page 1 of 4 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES September 17, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, September 17, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Laurie Bellin, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, Larry Spang, and Jane Turiel. 370 Essex Street The Trustees of the Salem Public Library submitted an application for a Certificate of Non- Applicability to install a temporary project sign, in the dimensions 4'x4'. The sign is a requirement of the Community Preservation Act funding for their roof replacement project. The sign will be located in front of the building, to the left of the main entry door. It will be installed for approximately 3-5 weeks. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 9/12/14 ■ Photographs ■ Sign specifications VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to a . rove the application, as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 8 Gifford Court As a continuation of the previous meeting, Robin O'Neil & Shirley Walker submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the asphalt shingle siding and repair and repaint the underlying clapboards. The application was continued so that the applicant could submit additional information on the existing trim work underneath the siding. Robin O'Neil was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 8/14/14 ■ Photographs: 9/15/14 Ms. O'Neil stated that there is a skirt board on the front and on one side. On the back and the other side where there are porches,the clapboards extend down to the brick. There was a house a few doors down where the corner boards were replaced after removing a synthetic siding. Her contractor would be doing the same thing. Mr. Spang stated that the pictures are difficult to tell if it is clapboards or sheathing underneath the asphalt. Ms. O'Neil responded that along the back of the house she removed a large portion in the back and it is clapboards, which appear to be in good condition. Once the contractor removes the asphalt, he will be better able to determine what repair work needs to be completed. There is a September 17, 2014, Page 2 of 4 gap between the clapboards and the skirt board in the front of the house. The contractor may install a larger skirt board to close the gap. Ms. Herbert stated that the skirt board should be anywhere from 6-8" depending on the house. She suggested that the applicant only have the house stripped and then have the contractor detail the repair work to the clapboards. She added that the reason there is a gap between the skirt board and the clapboards may be that there was at one time a lip detail. Mr. Spang advised the applicant on how the contractor should judge the original width of the corner and skirt board by using the existing clapboards as a guide. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to remove the asphalt and continue the remainder of the application to the next meetiag. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the Non-applicable in-kind repair work to the clapboards. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, were opposed, and the motion so carried. 117 Federal Street Stephen Duguay and Kathleen Riley submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install double-glazed,true divided light windows along the front fagade of the building. The window will be a Pella Architect Series. This type of window has already been installed along the rear addition and on the side windows. Stephen Duguay was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 8/25/14 ■ Photographs: 8/25/14 Ms. Herbert asked if the windows in the back were also replaced with the Pella double glazed windows. Mr. Duguay responded in the affirmative. Ms. Herbert asked if the glass divider for the existing windows is silver or bronze. Mr. Duguay responded that the divider is silver. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Mccrea made a motion to approve the application as submitted Ms Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 342 Essex Street September 17, 2014, Page 3 of 4 David and Sharon Williams submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to -`- replace the fence at the rear of their property. The existing fence is deteriorated. The replacement fence will match the existing fence that runs along the side of the property. It will be a flat board fence with a top cap and integrated posts. David and Sharon Williams were present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 9/2/14 ■ Photographs: 9/2/14 Mr. Williams stated that Richard Griffin recently installed the adjacent neighbor's fence. They were planning to match the fence from Beckett Street to the corner of the property. The new fence will be drilled into the neighbor's existing post. The fence will be left to age naturally. The fence is difficult to see from the public way because there are plantings in front of it. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the application, as submitted. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Marblehead Pipeline Replacement Project In accordance with the Section 106 review process, an archaeological reconnaissance survey prepared by David S. Robinson& Associates was completed for the Marblehead Pipeline Replacement Project. The conclusion of the three phases of the marine archaeological reconnaissance survey is that there is no evidence of the presence of cultural materials within the Area of Potential Effect. Ms. Lovett read an email from Rachel Burckardt, Parson Brinckerhoff, requesting concurrence of the reviewing agencies and The Tribes that the project be constructed in accordance with the plans and profiles as submitted and that the Federal Permit be issued to allow construction to commence as soon as possible. VOTE: Ms. Keenan made a motion to defer to the Massachusetts Historical Commission or the project. Ms. Mccrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Salem Lateral Project Ms. Lovett read an email from Gregory Dubell, Public Archaeology Laboratory (PAL), inquiring about whether the Commission has any additional comments regarding the cultural resources reports and acoustic studies related to the Salem Lateral Project. The Commission is a commenting party on the project as part of the Section 106 review. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to respond to PAL that the Commission has no further comment. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. September 17, 2014, Page 4 of 4 Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approval the minutes o '8/6/14 with comments. Mr. S an seconded the motion. All were in avor and the motion so carried. Correspondence Ms. Lovett notified the Commission that the Point Neighborhood National Registration nomination was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Massachusetts Historical Commission. VOTE: There being no further business Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner October 1, 2014, Page 1 of 4 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES October 1, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, October 1, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper, Susan Keenan, David Hart, Joanne McCrea, and Jane Turiel. 8 Gifford Court As a continuation of the previous meeting, Robin O'Neil & Shirley Walker submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the asphalt shingle siding and repair and repaint the underlying clapboards. The application was continued in order to allow the contractor time to remove the asphalt siding and evaluate the extent of the repairs necessary to the underlying clapboards as well as to better determine which trim details will need to be reproduced. Robin O'Neil was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 8/14/14 ■ Photographs: 9/15/14 Ms. O'Neil stated that there is a 3" gap between the corner and the clapboards. There was undoubtedly a 3" corner boards there. For the skirt board, there will be a 3" strip of wood installed with a 45 degree slant. Ms. Herbert stated that the skirt board, typically, is approximately 6"wide. Ms. O'Neil responded that the skirt board is there, but there is a gap between the skirt board and clapboards. There are no other repairs necessary to the clapboards. Mr. Hart asked what material would be used for the corner boards. Ms. O'Neil stated that it would be wood, likely pine. She asked if the paint color for the siding should be semi gloss or flat. Mr. Hart responded that it should not be flat, the paint should have some gloss. He stated that the clapboards should be carefully power washed because the water can get under the clapboards, resulting in damage. Ms. Harper stated that her house had asphalt siding when she bought it, which they removed. They did not have the clapboards power washed and their paint has held up. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the a ? lication as submitted and discussed. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. October 1, 2014, Page 2 of 4 330 Essex Street Hugh& Diane Pyle and Melanie Griffin& Benjamin Larrabee submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing slate roof with asphalt shingles. A majority of the existing slate tiles on both roof lines need to be replaced as they are showing significant flaking and powdering and have led to internal water damage and external rotting of the crown molding. The rear lower extension roofline has already been replaced with asphalt shingles. The proposed asphalt shingle would be a GAF Slateline in Antique Slate. Diane Pyle was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 9/15/14 ■ Photographs. 9/15/14 ■ Preserve Services Estimate ■ JB Kidney Estimate ■ Osgood Companies Estimate Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission prefers for slate roofs to be retained, whenever possible, rather than replaced with asphalt. Mr. Hart added that slate, depending on where it is from, can last for up to 100 years. He did not feel the email from JB Kidney fully addressed whether the roof could be salvaged. He recommended that the applicant get additional opinions. He is hesitant to approve the removal of a slate roof without additional information on the state of the roof and the extent of the damage. Ms. Herbert read the email from JB Kidney stating that the condition of the roof. Ms. Herbert read into the record a letter in opposition from Morris Schopf, 1 Cambridge Street. Ms. Pyle stated that the cost to replace the roof would be $100,000, which is cost prohibitive. Replacement with the reuse of the existing slate, as quoted by Preserve Services, would be $43,000. Ms. Pyle called Hugh Pyle to confirm the cost estimates for the slate repair, replacement, and installation of the asphalt shingles. Ms. Herbert opened the discussion to public comment. David Williams 342 Essex Street, spoke in opposition to removing the slate roof due to that it will remove part of the architectural history of Salem and may result in more slate roofs being removed. Mr. Pyle, via phone, stated that they do have interior water damage due to water infiltration indicating that there are some major issues with sections of the roof. October 1, 2014, Page 3 of 4 Ms. Turiel stated that she feels that given the disparity of the roof repair estimates, she would also like to see additional estimates for the restoration and/or replacement. Mr. Pyle,via phone, JB Kidney would not even get up on the roof to review the condition, because he felt it was in such poor condition. Given that there is interior water damage, they are hoping to replace the roof as soon as possible. He stated that the western roofline is in significantly worse condition than the rest of the roof. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor. and the motion so carried. 23 Congress Street Salem Waterfront Hotel & Suites, LLC submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the entire structure in order to allow for a new 5-story building with restaurant and function space to be built at the location. Tony Sasso, attorney for the property owner, was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 9/17/14 ■ Photographs: 9/17/14 Atty. Sasso stated that they are currently applying for a Chapter 91 license. The new building will come right up to the Congress Street sidewalk. The Ch. 91 license will require a glass viewing area as well as the lengthening and widening of the Harborwalk along the property. Mr. Hart stated that the demolition does demand recordation of the building. He would request, in addition to the information already provided, the vertical dimensions of the building. The dimensions can be submitted to the Historical Commission. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the application, as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Community Preservation Plan The Community Preservation Committee requested comments on the annual Community Preservation Plan update. The Commission is requested to submit comments by November 20. Mr. Hart stated that he skimmed through the Plan and there does not appear to be any holes in the Plan, however there are a lot of details to review. The Commission members agreed to review the Plan and fill out the survey form with their comments for the next meeting. October 1, 2014, Page 4 of 4 Other Business Review of application form for Certificates of Appropriateness Ms. Lovett presented the Commission members with a revised draft of the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. The new draft incorporates the Commission members' comments and feedback. Ms. Lovett stated that she will email the draft to the remainder of the Commission members so that they have a chance to see the final draft prior to the Commission voting to approve it. Correspondence Ms. Herbert stated that she is concerned with the number of telecommunications installations going up around the City. She noted that the applicants for the telecommunications projects are the telecommunications companies, rather than the owners. She believes the owner should be involved in the review of the Section 106 application. The Commission needs to find out more information about other design options for the antennae. VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. McCrea made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner October 15, 2014, Page 1 of 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES October 15, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, October 15, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Kathy Harper(Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Jane Turiel. Larry Spang arrived late. 330 Essex Street As a continuation of a previous meeting, Hugh & Diane Pyle and Melanie Griffin & Benjamin Larrabee submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing slate roof with asphalt shingles. A majority of the existing slate tiles on both roof lines need to be replaced as they are showing significant flaking and powdering and have led to internal water damage and external rotting of crown molding. The rear lower extension roofline has already been replaced with asphalt shingles. The proposed asphalt shingle would be a GAF Slateline in Antique Slate. At the previous meeting, the Commission requested that the applicants have additional contractors review the condition of the roof and give their opinion on whether or not the roof can be repaired rather than replaced. Melanie Griffin and Bill Shay, Shay Roofing,was present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 9/15/14 ■ Photographs: 9/15/14 ■ Preserve Services Estimate ■ JB Kidney Estimate ■ Osgood Companies Estimate Ms. Griffin stated that she was not present at the last meeting. The applicants would like to propose a change to the initial application. They would repair the slate along the eastern roofline of the front of the building as well as the back and rear roofs. The western side roof is completely deteriorated and unrepairable. They have had 6-7 companies look at that roof and all have said that it is unrepairable. That portion of the roofline is not very visible from the public way. Mr. Shay stated that any salvageable shingles on the western roof side would be reused for the remainder of the slate repair sections. Ms. Harper asked if they have had additional estimates for the roof repair. Ms. Griffin responded that they have. The estimates have had a huge range. Mr. Hart asked how they would handle the ridge. Mr. Shay responded that he will need to see how the ridge is laid out now. He believes it is a metal cap. If so he would build a metal cap in dark bronze for the ridge. October 15, 2014, Page 2 of 6 Mr. Hart stated that he agrees that the west side of the roof is not very visible from the public way. The eastern facade is very visible. If the Slateline was used, the average person would not notice. Ms. Griffin stated that they would prefer to install a Slateline asphalt roof. Ms. Bellin stated that she is concerned with approving any slate replacement. The photos only seem to show deterioration along the edge of the roofline. She asked how much of the slate on the western roof is salvageable. Mr. Shay responded that approximately 40% of the slate is unusable and deteriorated. The roof has been improperly repaired over the years. There was no public comment. Larry Spang arrived at this time. Ms. Bellin asked what color the asphalt shingle would be. Mr. Shay stated that it would be Antique Slate or English Gray to match the existing slate. MOTION: Mr. Hart made a motion to a rove the revised a lication to repair all slate sur aces of the roof with the exception of the western roofline which would be replaced with a Slateline 3-tab shingle in the color Anti ue Slate or English Gray and the work to include the metal peak cap. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: Ms. Bellin stated that she feels the Commission needs to clarify that this is an unusual situation that does not set a precedent to replace slate roofs. MOTION: Mr. Hart amended his-previous motion to include that considering the fact that the elevation in question, that would be replace with asphalt shingles, is minimally visible rom the street and this is not precedent setting, it is germane to this application onl . VOTE: Ms Harper, Mr. Hart, Ms. Keenan, Ms. McCrea. and Ms. Turiel were in favor. Ms. Bellin was opposed. The motion so carried. Mr. Spang abstained. 125 Derby Street The Derby Street Condo Association submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace a rear wood gutter with an aluminum gutter. The gutter is limitedly visible from Derby Street. It is located on the back of the home and wraps around the right corner. Charlotte Gallagher and Cristian Hazelton were present. October 15, 2014, Page 3 of 6 Documents &Exhibits - ■ Application: 9/18/14 ■ Photographs: 9/16/14 Ms. Gallagher stated that the house is located at the corner of Hardy and Derby Streets. The rotted gutter is located along the side of the building. The gutter is only visible from the corner of Derby Street. The remaining wood gutters are in good shape. This gutter has been an issue in the past. Ms. Bellin asked if there is an issue connecting existing wood gutters to an aluminum gutter. Ms. Gallagher responded that she is unsure. Ms. Harper asked if they have found a gutter with a profile that matches the existing. Ms. Gallagher responded that they have not identified an exact product. They have found a fiberglass gutter that can be custom made, but it is very expensive. Mr. Hart suggested that the applicant pick an aluminum or fiberglass product and come back to the next meeting. There was no public comment. MOTION: Mr. Hart made a motion to continue the a lication to the next meeting at which time the applicant will present the selected gutter product. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: Mr. Spang also asked that the applicant bring with them details on the connection. VOTE:All were in Lavor, and the motion so carried. 125 Derby Street Christian Haselgrove submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing fence along Hardy Street with a new fence. The proposed fence is a scallop- style flat board fence. The fence will be 42"high and there will be 1 1/2" spacing between the cedar boards. The posts will be topped with a flat top cap and the entire fence will have a top rail. Charlotte Gallagher and Cristian Hazelton were present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 9/25/14 ■ Photographs: 9/25/14 ■ Fence estimate ■ Photograph of proposed fence style Ms. Harper asked if the height will be the same as the existing fence. October 15, 2014, Page 4 of 6 _ Ms. Gallagher stated that it is approximately the same height. Mr. Hazelton added that the new fence color and the gate location will match the existing fence. The caps will be slightly smaller than the existing. The existing fence is completely rotted, which is why it is being replaced. Ms. Bellin asked for the height of the existing fence. Mr. Hazelton stated that he is unsure of the height of the existing fence. It is only a few inches lower than the proposed. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to a rove the yRplication as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. Ms. Harper, Mr. Hart Ms. Bellin Ms. Keenan. Ms. McCrea, and Ms. Turiel. Mr. Spang was o osed. The motion so carried. 47-49 Washinglon Square North Ralph& Jeannette Cantie and Barbara Swartz submitted an application for a Certificate of Hardship to remove a chimney. The applicants received a Certificate of Non-Applicability to rebuild the chimney, in-kind. Once the rebuild work began, the mason found that the chimney damage continued 5-6 feet into the building. The chimney was crumbling and there is not a sufficient base to reconstruct the chimney. In order to repair the interior chimney damage,the interior walls and ceiling will be need to be removed. The chimney is currently roofed over. The Hardship is due to the disruption and risk to the elderly neighbors' health and well-being, along with the cost. The applicant proposes a rebuild of the chimney should the other unit change owners in the future. Barbara Swartz, David Benson(contractor), Patricia and Robert Bade (relatives of the other unit owners)were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: l0/9/14 ■ Photographs: May-June 2014 Ms. Bellin asked when the chimney was taken down. Ms. Swartz responded May, beginning of June. Mr. Spang asked if the other chimneys are original, and whether they serve fireplaces. Ms. Swartz responded that the other 3 chimneys have been rebuilt at one time. There are two operable fireplaces on the interior of the units that the chimneys service. Ms. Harper read into the record a letter from Richard Wise, 51 Washington Square North, in support of the application. October 15, 2014, Page 5 of 6 Ms. Bade stated that her sister is homebound and her husband was recently diagnosed with Alzheimer's. It would be a hardship for them to undergo the interior work at this time. Ms. Bellin asked about the Commission's ability to enforce the rebuild. Ms. Lovett stated that the Commission has limited ability to require the chimney be rebuilt in the future, unless it issues a violation. Mr. Hart stated that the missing chimney does not initially jump out as there being a gap. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to gRprove. under hardship, the removal of the chimney with the understanding that one of the current applicants would like the abili to eventually replace it and with a chimney to match the other existing chimneys, and that the Commission would also eventually like to see the chimney replaced. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to recojZnize that the chimney is an integral part of the existiti a ade and that the Commission su orts the eventual replacement o such element. Ms. Kennan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Community Preservation Plan As a continuation of a previous meeting,the Historical Commission was asked to review the existing Community Preservation Plan and to submit any comments for the annual plan update. The deadline for comments is November 20. Ms. McCrea stated that they received additional information at the CPC meeting last night. She will work with Ms. Lovett to scan and email the updated documentation to the Commission members. Other Business Review of application form for Certificates of Appropriateness Ms. Lovett presented the Commission members with a revised draft of the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. The new draft incorporates the Commission member's comments and feedback. Ms. Lovett stated that she will also made the edits to the Non-Applicability and bring it in for approval at the next meeting. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to a rove the revised qp lication form. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Approval of Minutes October 15, 2014, Page 6 of 6 VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to a )rove the minutes of 61412014 with comments. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to a rove the minutes of 8/6/14 with comments. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to a,pprove the minutes of 8120114 with comments. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Mccrea made a motion to approve the minutes of 9/3/14 with comments. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in lavor, and the motion so carried. Correspondence Ms. Lovett stated that the Greenlawn Cemetery, 57 Orne Street, will be considered by the Massachusetts Historical Commission for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. The Commission is invited to attend the meeting of the MHC at which this property will be considered. The Commission will meet at 1:OOPM on December 10, 2014 at the Massachusetts State Archives. Ms. Lovett stated on October 7 the Massachusetts Historical Commission sent the National Register nomination for the Point Neighborhood Historic District to the National Park Service for approval. VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner November 19, 2014, Page 1 of 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES November 19, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday,November 19, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Kathy Harper(Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Larry Spang, and Jane Turiel. 125 Derby Street As a continuation of the previous meeting, the Derby Street Condo Association submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace a rear wood gutter with an aluminum gutter. The gutter is limitedly visible from Derby Street. It is located on the back of the home and wraps around the right corner. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 9/18/14 ■ Photographs: 9/16/14 Ms. Lovett stated that the applicant would like to continue their application to the next meeting. They have waived their right to a decision within 60 days. VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the yplication to the 1213114 meeting. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 2 Botts Court Mary and Stan Usovicz submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a bike shed. The shed would mimic the design of the existing shed, without the wood storage section. It would be painted to match the existing shed. Mary Usovicz was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: l0/6/14 ■ Photographs: l0/6/14 Ms. Usovicz stated that a contractor would be completing the work. The shed will be exactly the same as the other shed, without the wood shed section. Mr. Hart asked for clarification on where the shed will be placed. Ms. Usovicz stated that the shed will be on the back left side of the house. It will block the view of the neighbor's fence. The shed will fit two bikes. Mr. Spang asked for clarification on the paint color. Ms. Usovicz responded that the shed will be painted forest green to match the house trim. November 19, 2014, Page 3 of 6 ■ Application: 10/27/14 ■ Photographs: 10/27/14 Ms. Harper stated that the applicant was unable to attend the meeting and requested a continuance. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Bellin abstained from the vote as an abutter. 33 Chestnut Street Thomas J. Vander Salm submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install two new roof vents. The attic was recently insulated and the building code requires that vents be installed. There will be two (2)black,mushroom-shaped vents. The diameter will be 18" and the height 6". The vents will be on the back of the house facing Warren Street as indicated in the picture submitted with the application. John Seger, a neighbor of the applicant, was present on behalf of the applicants. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 10/28/14 ■ Photographs: 10/28/14 Mr. Seger stated that the owner's attic was recently insulated through Mass Save. The top gable needs to be vented. The Mass Save contractor recommended an 18"diameter roof vent. The owners are the middle unit of 33 Chestnut Street. The vents will only be visible from Warren Street, and a garage limits the majority of the visibility. Mr. Spang asked if the roof was asphalt or slate. Mr. Seger responded that it is asphalt. They also need to install a vent for the bathroom,but he is unsure whether that was included on this application. Ms. Bellin noted that the application only states that it is for two vents. Mr. Spang asked if they knew the width of the pipe coming out of the roof. Mr. Seger responded that he is unsure. There was no public comment. Mr. Spang stated that he feels that an 18" vent feel large. He wonders if a different vent would be more appropriate. Mr. Hart stated that the applicant should submit a catalog cut for the vent. Mr. Spang added that the size of the vent pipe should be dictated by the building code. November 19, 2014, Page 5 of 6 Ilse J. Peirce submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install snow guard brackets along the roofline. The contractor, JB Kidney& Co., found that there are marked positions showing that there were previously snow guards and brackets on the roof. The new snow guard brackets will be custom fabricated to match the slate tile that it will replace. The snow fence will be custom fabricated from galvanized piping. The brackets and piping will be painted with an epoxy based paint prior to assembly. Only copper fastener nails and screws will be utilized. Ilse Pierce and Bruce McDonald were present. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: ll/3/14 ■ Photographs: ll/3/14 Ms. Harper asked if entire house has a hip roof. Mr. McDonald responded in the affirmative. Ms. Harper asked for the height of the brackets off the roof. Mr. McDonald responded that the bracket would be approximately 6"high. He stated that the reason for the snow guards is that Ms. Pierce has been hit by snow and ice falling off of the roof. The color of the snow guards will be painted to match the color of the slate. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Span made a motion to a rove the a lication as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 18 Washington Square West As a continuation of the previous meeting,the Hawthorne Hotel submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to modify the hotel's main entrance for universal accessibility. The changes include the installation of a new ramped entrance to replace the existing temporary ramp, a lowered sidewalk, curb cut, and new handrails and planters along the ramp. At the previous meeting, the Commission approved the installation of the planters and removal of the associated step. The Commission found that they did not have jurisdiction over the ramp, curb cut, or sidewalk. Discussion of the handrail design was continued. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 10/20/14 ■ Photographs: ■ Drawings ■ Rendering The applicant was not present. December 3, 2014, Page 1 of 7 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES December 3, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, December 3,2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, Larry Spang, and Jane Turiel. 33 Chestnut Street Thomas J. Vander Salm submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install two new roof vents. The attic was recently insulated and the building code requires that vents be installed. There will be two (2)black, mushroom-shaped vents. The diameter will be 18" and the height 6". The vents will be on the back of the house facing Warren Street as indicated in the picture submitted with the application. Thomas Vander Salm was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 10/28/14 ■ Photographs: 10/28/14 Mr. Vander Salm presented the Commission with a picture showing two options for the vent style. He also presented a letter from the Mass Save contractor discussing the venting requirements for the roof. Mr. Vander Salm explained to the Commission that the attic is divided into two sections. One mushroom vent is necessary for each side of the attic. The square vents have only 40%of the free air flow of the mushroom vent. As a result, four of the square vents would be necessary. Ms. Turiel asked for the height of the vents. Mr. Vander Salm responded that the vent is approximately 8"high and the square is approximately 5". There was no public comment. Mr. Hart summarized that the Commission has an option between two mushroom or four square vents. Also, the vents will only be visible from Warren Street and set back from that street. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to accept the application as submitted with the pro viso that the installation will include two mushroom vents to be mounted on the elevation of the roo facine Warren Street and that the vents will not be visible from Chestnut Street. They will be mounted egualltiyspaced and as close to the ridge as possible without being visible from Chestnut Street. Mr. Spang seconded the motion. Ms. Bellin, Mr. Hart, Mr. Spang, and Ms. Turiel were in favor. Ms. Herbert and Ms. Keenan abstained Lrom the vote. The motion so carried. Ms. Bellin left the meeting at this time. December 3,2014, Page 3 of 7 Mr. Spang questioned whether the twist in the rail met the MAAB requirement or whether the railing needed to continue out further. Mr. Goff stated that the Building Inspector was not concerned with the railing design. He added that there are several other reviews and approvals necessary for the application: Design Review Board/Salem Redevelopment Authority, City Engineer, and Department of Public Works. He stated that they may need four newel posts in order to stabilize the railing, which would slightly defeat the purpose of a newel post. Ms. Herbert suggested that the railing could have two newel posts and the center posts could be small versions or more simple. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to continue the application to the Januaa 7`h meetin . Mr. Spang seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 125 Derby Street As a continuation of the previous meeting, the Derby Street Condo Association submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace a rear wood gutter with an aluminum gutter. The gutter is limitedly visible from Derby Street. It is located on the back of the home and wraps around the right corner. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 9/18/14 ■ Photographs: 9/16/14 Ms. Herbert stated that the applicant has withdrawn the application. 47 Summer Street Philip Marchand submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the front facing chimney. The chimney has been deemed unsafe by the Building Department and a potential hazard. The letter from the Building Department required that he either remove or rebuild the chimney. Philip Marchand was present. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: ll/7/14 ■ Photographs: ll/7/14 Mr. Marchand stated that this chimney is not in use. Harry Wagg, from the Building Department, has deemed the chimney unsafe. Ms. Herbert asked if the rear chimney is shorter or whether the chimneys are a pair. December 3, 2014, Page 5 of 7 The roof has a number of valleys that complicate the repairs. He has repaired the roof throughout the years, however it now needs more significant repairs. Ms. Herbert stated that the original front railings, which have now been removed, could be reinstalled. She suggested that the applicant speak with the Building Inspector. She added that for the second floor balustrade, she suggested that a parapet be installed so that the original railing could be reinstalled as well. Mr. Hart returned to the roof discussion. He stated that the house is an excellent example of Queen Anne architecture. He added that he is hesitant to approve the removal of a slate roof. Ms. Herbert asked if the condition of the roof in the front of the building is salvageable. She also asked about the roof condition for the carriage house. Mr. Willwerth responded that the roof on the carriage house is stable at this time. On the main house,the valleys at the top of the dormer and the area around the chimney are leaking. He questioned whether a patchwork roof would look appropriate. Deb Hilbert, 23 Linden Street, stated that she has a concern with removing the slate roof. She asked if there are any new composite materials that better replicate slate. Ms. Herbert stated that typically the Commission approves 3-tab shingles. There are some architectural shingles that the Commission has approved. Mr. Willwerth presented a sample of the proposed roofing. Mr. Hart stated that he had the valleys torn out on his own house, double layer copper installed, and the slate reinstalled. He stressed that if you fix a slate roof, it will last a long time. Mr. Willwerth agreed but he stated that he cannot afford to replace the roof at this time. Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission is not supposed to take into account cost. VOTE: Mr. Spang made a motion to approve the replacement of the existing decking on the orch on the south elevation in order to re air the deck and re lace the roof to be re laced in- kind materials and conCguration. The motion also includes reinstallation o the original front railings, sub ect to approval by the Building Inspector. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Ms. Herbert stated that she would like to see an evaluation from a qualified roofer discussing the slate roof issues and what it would take to correct the damage. The most desirable option would be to repair the roof. The second option could be to maintain the slate along the front and side elevation and replacing the remainder of the roof with asphalt. Because this is an important building,the Commission needs to have a solid basis to approve removal of the roof. VOTE: _Mr. Hart made a motion to continue the discussion of the slate roof replacement and railings along the south elevation. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. December 3,2014, Page 7 of 7 Ongoing demolition in the Willows, which is currently unprotected - Increasing the educational and advocacy role of the Commission - Technology changes for windows,roofing, siding products as well as the increased installation of cell towers and solar panels Streamlining of the regulatory review process The need for increased integration between the various City boards and commission Ms. Lovett stated that there will be additional opportunities for the Commission and the public to provide input into the development of the Plan over the next few months. VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. Keenan made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner December 17, 2014, Page 1 of 2 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES December 17, 2014 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, December 17, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Larry Spang. 396 Essex Street#3 Sue Benedict submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install vents for a new high efficiency combination heat and hot water system. The intake and exhaust pipes penetrate the skirt board of the house. The pipes are 3"PVC, one pipe has an elbow facing down and the other pipe has a T. The terminating pipes will be painted to match the color of the house. A small sign will also be installed, as required by MA building code. Joe Addario, the applicant's plumbing contractor, was present on behalf of the applicant. Documents & Exhibits ■ Application: 10/27/14 ■ Photographs: 10/27/14 Mr. Spang asked why some heating vents are of a different style. Mr. Addario responded that it depends on the manufacturer. Ms. McCrea asked what type of paint would be used. Mr. Addario a special paint that bonds to plastic. There was no public present. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to qpj2rove the application as submitted. Ms. Harper seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. 278 Lafayette Street Robert Willwerth submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the existing slate roof and replace it will architectural shingles. The application also proposes to remove all existing railings and modify them to meet the current building code. At the previous meeting, the Commission voted to have the applicant reinstall the original front balusters. Discussion of the redesign of the south fagade 2°a floor deck was continued. Documents &Exhibits ■ Application: 11/12/14 ■ Photographs: 11/12/14 December 17, 2014, Page 2 of 2 Ms. Herbert stated that the applicant has requested to be continued to the next meeting in order to allow additional time to gather the request materials. VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to continue the gMlication to the next meeting Mr. Spang seconded the motion. All were in .avor, and the motion so carried. Other Business Approval of Minutes VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the minutes o,[9117114 with comments. Mr. Spang seconded the motion. Ms. Herbert, Ms. Keenan, Ms. McCrea, and Mr. Spang were in ,favor. Ms. Harper abstained. The motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. Harper made a motion to approve the minutes of'1011114 with comments Ms McCrea seconded the motion. Ms. Herbert, Ms. Harper, Ms. Keenan, and Ms. McCrea were in avor. Mr. Spank abstained. The motion so carried.. Correspondence Ms. Lovett read a letter to the Commission announcing that the Greenlawn Cemetery was accepted into the National Register of Historic Places. Ms. Lovett stated that the Massachusetts Historical Commission is accepting nominations for the annual Preservation Awards. The Commission discussed some initial ideas for nominations. VOTE: There beiLig no further business, Ms. McCrea made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Spang seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Natalie BL Lovett Community Development Planner