SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
199.4
MINUTES
i
Ji
. c
January 5, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 5, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, January 5, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem,
MA. Present were Vice Chairman Carr and Messrs . Casey, Cook,
Hedstrom and Kelleher and Ms . Guy. Vice Chairman Carr called the
meeting to order.
Salem Common
In continuation from a previous meeting, New England Telephone
presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness as
directed by a Salem City Council Order to install a public
telephone at the Salem Common. Richard Picone represented New
England Telephone.
Mr. Picone stated that other possible locations for installation
were by the basketball court or on Washington Square East.
Ms . Guy noted that Mr. Slam was going to get an opinion from the
Salem Common Neighborhood Association but that he was not present.
• Mr. Carr stated that Mr. Picone was going to look into the
installations in Boston' s Back Bay and on Newbury Street. Mr.
Picone stated that New England Telephone has no other designs to
offer and that those telephone structures may have been privately
built.
Mr. Cook asked if New England Telephone makes a wooden booth. Mr.
Picone stated that he hasn't seen one in a long time.
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Casey
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Hedstom was concerned about the upgrading completed to date on
the Common versus the need for public safety. Mr. Hedstrom
preferred that New England Telephone look into alternative
locations .
Mr. Cook did not feel installation was totally incompatible but was
concerned about installation facilitating crime/drugs .
Mr. Casey stated that a hardship was not established and therefore
the Commission would have to act on historic appropriateness . Mr.
Casey stated that he had concerns with the proposed design.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he was not opposed to the concept but did
L , not feel the proposed design was appropriate.
r
T
January 9 5 1994 Page 2
•
Mr. Carr stated that he was opposed to the concept of a telephone
installation except for an emergency telephone approved under
Hardship. Mr. Carr noted that residents in the district spoke out
against the current proposal at the last meeting.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. There were no votes in favor. All
votes were in opposition and the motion was denied.
Ms . Guy suggested that Mr. Picone look into an emergency phone that
is directly linked to the Salem Police Station, similar to those on
highways and that they re-apply under Hardship.
Mr. Kelleher suggested Mr. Picone contact the Boston Landmarks
Commission regarding the phones on Newbury Street. .
65 Derby Street
Ms . Guy noted that the applicant withdrew the application.
1-3 North Pine Street
Pottery Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of
• Appropriateness to replace the front doors and 1-3 North Pine
Street and to paint the house the same color after March 1, 1994 .
The application is provided as the solution to the outstanding
violation for entry alteration of which an application was denied
at another previous meeting. Paul Zaido represented Pottery Realty
Trust and submitted a drawing for wooden replacement doors . The
proposed are SD409 as found in the Commission' s guidelines .
Mr. Carr read the previous denial .
Mr. Zaido stated that he never knew he was in an historic district
and that the house was not in the district when he purchased it.
Mr. Zaido noted that a house on Fowler Street has the same
entryway.
Mr. Cook asked if it was possible to buy framework with sidelights .
Mr. Hedstrom stated that he would have to look into it but that it
may not be historically appropriate.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Cook made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Kelleher
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Cook felt a new frame was needed and that the sidelights and
• transom should be re-installed.
Mr. Casey stated that he could not settle for just changing the
v i
January 5, 1994, Page 3
•
door.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he would be willing to accept the doors if
it was understood that the Commission would receive an application
for the sidelights and transom within six months .
Mr. Hedstrom did not feel security was an issue, given the number
of sidelights and transoms around the districts . Mr. Hedstrom felt
the doors had been widened and the sidelight spacing was
compromised.
Mr. Carr felt the sidelights and transom are critical and stated he
was leery about doing the work in piecemeal .
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Hedstrom seconded the motion. There were no voted in favor.
All were opposed and the motion so carried.
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to approve a Certificate of Non-
Applicability for repainting with the certificate to expire in one
year. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
• Mr. Hedstrom made a motion that the homeowner submit a new
application to resolve the outstanding entryway violation with 60
days . Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
37 Warren Street
Don Rose and Nina Simonds presented an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the side porch with a new
porch which adds a sunroom off the master bedroom at their home at
37 Warren Street. Drawings and photographs were presented.
Mr. Casey asked if the applicants would be removing the shutters .
Ms . Simonds replied in the negative.
Mr. Rose stated that the upper portion would be lattice over glass
with a glass skylight. Mr. Rose stated that on the lower portion,
one half of the area would be a mud room and that there may be a
view of an interior door from Dalton Parkway.
Mr. Hedstrom was concerned about loosing site of the cornice on the
brick addition by a wall of lattice. Mr. Hedstrom was also
concerned whether the skylight would be seen from Warren Street.
Mr. Casey asked if the footprint was the same. Mr. Rose replied in
the affirmative.
Mr. Rose stated that the skylight is "hip style" and that they
• January 5, 1994 , Page 4
intend to come back to the Commission with complete and specific
drawings .
Mr. Carr asked if the columns would be reused. Mr. Rose stated
that it was dependent on the amount of rot.
Mr. Kelleher asked if the French door would be operable. Ms .
Simonds replied in the affirmative. Mr. Kelleher suggested that it
swing inward.
Mr. Hedstrom stated that he needed to know the drawing scale, the
negative space of the lattice opening and the skylight footprint.
Mr. Cook asked if the columns would be true columns or applied to
the outside. Ms . Simonds stated that they would be true columns .
Mr. Carr was concerned about the extent of the visibility of the
raised skylight.
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Cook
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
17 North Street
• The Salem Lodge of Elks presented an application for a Certificate
of Non-Applicability for clapboard replacement and repainting at 17
North Street. Steve Quellette, Dan Dailey and John Bettencourt
represented the Salem Lodge of Elks .
Mr. Dailey stated that the clapboards would have the same exposure,
smooth side out and be cedar or redwood.
Mr. Carr suggested flatboard, rather than clapboard, for the
blocked window on the left side facade. Mr. Kelleher stated that
he preferred clapboards . Mr. Casey preferred closed shutters or
clapboards .
Mr. Carr suggested clapboard replace the vertical board on the side
bay and that all of the front facade be clapboard.
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to change the application to an
application for Appropriateness, waive the public hearing and
approve the application as submitted with clapboard to replace the
vertical board on the side bay and all of the front to be
clapboard.
Mr. Carr suggested wider corner boards . Mr. Hedstrom suggested the
addition of a piece of ground stock.
• Mr. Hedstrom amended his motion to include the repainting, the
watertable to be the trim color and to delegate Commissioners Casey
r
• January 5, 1994 , Page 5
and Hedstrom to oversee the treatment of the corner boards .
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion
so carried.
310 Lafayette Street
Joel Green submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the replacement of railings at 310 Lafayette
Street as has already been completed in wood. The applicant was
not present. A photograph of the prior metal railing was
presented.
Mr. Kelleher stated that the railing as constructed was
inappropriate. The remaining Commissioners were in agreement.
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. There were no votes in favor,
all votes were in opposition and the motion was denied.
Vice Chairman Carr stated that the applicant must submit a new
application for a more historically appropriate treatment within
60 days .
• Violations
Mr. Carr requested that the board look at the property at 10 or 12
North Pine Street to see if the aluminum siding is new and to check
the fencing.
Mr. Casey stated that 333 Essex Street can be removed from the
violation list.
Mr. Casey stated that the landscaping at 2 Flint Street is still
not acceptable.
Other Business
Mr. Carr suggested that the Salem Evening News building and the
former Salem High School (auditorium retention) be considered for
preservation awards .
There being no further business, Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to
adjourn. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
Respectfull submitted,
• J A. Gu �
Z r
• January 19 , 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JANUARY 19 , 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, January 19 , 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem,
MA. Present were Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Carr, Casey, Bailey
and Slam and Ms . Guy.
37 Warren Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Don Rose and Nina Simonds
presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness tb
replace the side porch with a new porch which adds a sunroom off
the master bedroom at their home at 37 Warren Street. The
applicants were not present.
Ms . Guy stated that the applicants have requested that the
application be continued until the next meeting.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application until the next
meeting. Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
• 84 Federal Street
John and Mary Wathne presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the addition of a skylight to illuminate and
ventilate the third floor of their home at 84 Federal Street.
Mr. Wathne stated that there is currently a skylight on the West
which cannot be seen from the public way. Mr. Wathne stated that
the proposed skylight will only be visible from Bridge Street
through the Webb Company property.
Mr. Carr made a motion to find that: a) the house is a many gabled
facade, b) the regulations provide that there be only one skylight
per gable, as close to the ridge pole as possible and that such
skylight not read as a window but rather as a method of
ventilation, and c) only one skylight will be visible when viewing
the rear facade. Mr. Carr also motioned to approve the application
as submitted for a velux skylight not to exceed 24" x 36" , flat,
operable. Mr. Casey seconded the motion and stated that the
proposed skylight reads as though it had been there historically.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
107 Federal Street
• Ms . Sun Cha Kim presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to remove the present store windows and infill the
with wood panelling and double hung wood windows similar to the
• January 19, 1994, Page 2
present second floor windows and 107 Federal Street. The
application states that the existing wood pilasters and cornice
will be retained. The former loading door on the south east end of
the building would be removed to allow the installation of a new
window. The work would allow the first floor to be remodeled as a
rentable apartment. Drawings were presented.
Robert Farley, the architect for the project, stated that there are
two apartment sin the building now. The design proposes to remove
the two large storefront windows and a door on the Federal Street
side. , to add two windows on the Beckford Street side and a window
on the 45 degree corner. Mr. Farley stated that he believed the
building is c1875 and was built as a storefront.
Chairman Oedel read a letter from Joel Caron, 4 Andover Street in
opposition of the application.
Chairman Oedel stated that he believed that a proposal to convert
the store to a residential unit came before the Commission several
years ago. Ms . Guy stated that there are two letters in the file
relating to a proposed conversion and minutes available, but that
there is no application or certificates in the file. Chairman
Oedel remembered that there was a decision to allow the windows to
• be screened from the inside with minor changes to the outside.
Joan Griffin, 105 Federal Street, stated that in 1984, the Board of
Appeals denied the proposed conversion.
David Hart, 104 Federal Street, asked if other interior schemes
where considered so as to keep the commercial facade. Mr. Hart was
concerned that the proposed windows do not line up with the second
floor.
I
Mr. Farley stated that he wanted to retain the pilasters and
entablature and noted that the current windows are not symmetrical .
Mr. Farley stated that he did not look into another interior
solution because they want operable windows .
Councillor at Large William Burns, 22 Beckford Street, stated that
he had no object to the store disappearing. Councillor Burns noted
that the original store was the first First National in the country
but that its days as a store are gone. Councillor Burns felt the
proposal should go before the Board of Appeals first and that he
preferred the building to be an R2 with a combination of two of the
floors as one unit.
Ms . Griffin agreed with Councillor Burns and stated that she would
not want the storefront windows to be retained if a residence and
• that the proposed design addresses that issue. Ms . Griffin stated
that she will object to an R3 zoning at the Board of Appeals .
• January 19 , 1994 , Page 3
Mr. Richard Lindeman, 113 Federal Street, agreed with Councillor
Burns and Ms . Griffin.
Councillor Burns stated that he liked the design of the Beckford
Street side and that it would improve the neighborhood.
Ms . Kim stated that she liked the building and tried to maintain
the store but that there were traffic difficulties from Federal
Street being blocked. Ms . Kim stated that she remodeled the second
and third interiors . Ms . Kim stated that the store has been vacant
since May, that she cannot economically maintain it and that she
had spoken with her bankers and lawyers to decide what to do with
it. Ms . Kim stated that she hired Mr. Farley to design something
that would fit in with the area. Ms. Kim stated that the building
had been a foreclosure and noted that when she took over the
building it had been neglected for a long time. Ms . Kim stated
that there will be enough parking for another apartment.
Chairman Oedel closed the public hearing.
Mr. Carr stated that he favored deferring action until the Board of
Appeal outcome. Mr. Carr suggested that the Commission not review
design details since the design may change based on the Board of
• Appeal decision. Mr. Carr stated that he preferred to keep the
pilaster and entablature details and plate glass . Mr. Carr
preferred that there be an interior solution. Mr. Carr stated that
he could not see a precedent for the infill center door.
Mr. Slam stated that the normal course of events is for the
Commission to act before the Board of Appeals since there is no fee
for the Commission. Mr. Slam stated that the Commission should
judge the application based on its merits and not by the Board of
Appeal decision. Mr. Slam felt a fake storefront would look
awkward and that he was not bothered by the asymmetry of the
windows . Mr. Slam stated that it was an unusual circumstance that
a storefront be original to the building and felt the building
looked like a residential turned commercial .
Mr. Casey felt the building was originally designed so as to be in
sympathy with the neighborhood. Mr. Casey was concerned with the
(false facade between the storefront windows and preferred to see
them addressed as part of the body of the building. Mr. Casey
suggested the shutters be replaced where missing.
Mr. Bailey stated that with the city' s tax structure it is
difficult to maintain a storefront in Salem. Mr. Bailey stated
that he remembered a time when cars for the store blocked the
street and caused traffic problems . Mr. Bailey felt that the
• proposed design allows for the storefront to be put back in if
financially feasible in the future. Mr. Bailey stated that the
design was well done and does not destroy the storefront.
• January 19, 1994 , Page 4
Mr. Carr asked if the granite slab at the front door will be
removed. Mr. Farley stated that they will build over the granite.
Mr. Casey suggested that the area be clapboarded over.
Chairman Oedel questioned if the Commission can allow such change
in the district. Chairman Oedel felt that the building is viable
for anything but residential in order to have a well maintained
building in that location. Chairman Oedel stated that the center
door should be maintained whether working or not. Chairman Oedel
suggested that final approval be withheld pending the Board of
Appeals decision in case they make changes and that the Commission
send a letter.
Mr. Carr felt the building is relatively pure and that the proposal
is removing original elements and replacing with 20th century
elements . Mr. Carr felt the windows could be retained, but felt
the center door was very important to the building. Mr. Carr
stated that he had no problem with the Beckford Street side.
Mr. Slam felt the design was a good solution and that if the
Commission were to deny it, it would be condemning the property to
further deterioration. Mr. Slam stated that the Board of Appeal
. should not make a difference on the Commission' s decision.
IMr. Bailey questioned if the windows could be maintained with a
residence and stated that he would be concerned about possibility
of shabby curtains being seen through the large storefront windows .
Mr. Casey was in agreement that the center door be maintained. Mr.
Casey stated that it was not practical to retain the storefront and
that the Commission should adapt to allow a residential reuse to
insure the building' s preservation. Mr. Casey stated that the
proposed design is not detracting from the other historic fabric.
Mr. Slam made a motion to accept the application as submitted
proved the recessed, center door be retained, that a replacement
door design be submitted under a new application and that the
approval is subject to Board of Appeal approvals as needed. Mr.
,Bailey seconded the motion.
Councillor Burns suggested that research be done to determine if
the property was indeed the first First National and that a plaque
to installed on the building. Councillor Burns did not believe the
(center door should be retained.
Mr. Hart stated that there have been situations where a developer
would put up a wall behind the storefronts in order to retain them.
• Ms . Kim suggested that the plaque be installed in place of using a
fake door.
• January 19 , 1994 , Page 5
Mr. Casey suggested that the west facade transom be restored over
the door and that the shutters throughout the building be restored.
Mr. Slam so amended his motion. Mr. Bailey seconded the amendment.
Messrs . Oedel, Casey, Bailey and Slam voted in favor. Mr. Carr
voted in opposition. The motion was carried.
Other Business
Ms . Joan Griffin questioned the status of the Commission regulating
the installation of a newspaper dispenser at Beckford and Federal
Street. Ms . Griffin asked that the Salem News be required to come
before the Commission.
Chairman Oedel questioned whether the Commission can take
jurisdiction over the first amendment issues . Mr. Carr stated that
the Commission can regulate design and location.
Ms . Guy stated that the Commission should not single out one box
put should adopt district-wide guidelines with input received from
• the Salem News, North Shore Weeklies, U.S . Post Office, etc. Ms .
Guy stated that the alternative is to request that the City Council
adopt city-wide regulations .
• Mr. Slam made a motion to put the issue on the next agenda. Mr.
Carr seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Violations/Work Status
Mr. Slam stated that the chain has been removed from the North
Shore Weeklies dispenser that was attached to the Common fence.
Mr. Carr asked Chairman Oedel to determine the status of 10 Flint
Street litigation.
Mr. Bailey stated that a small section of fence has been installed
at 1 Cambridge Street but does not appear to be as requested by the
Commission. Mr. Bailey will talk to the owner.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja A. Guy
Cl rk of the Commission
'r-
• February 2 , 1994 , Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 2, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
February 2 , 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA.
Present were Chairman Oedel, Messrs . Carr, Hedstrom, Casey, Cook,
Slam and Ms . Guy.
Violations/Work Status
Mr. Cook stated that Barry Paul, 10 Hamilton St. , recently had a
death in the family. Mr. Cook will contact Mr. Paul concerning the
fence in a couple of weeks .
Mr. Casey stated that 389 Essex Street can be taken off the
violation list.
Mr. Casey stated that the hole at 348 Essex Street has been plugged
in but that the facia has still not been repaired. Ms . Guy was
requested to send a letter.
Chairman Oedel stated that there is no change in the lawsuit status
• for 10 Flint Street and that all the escrow paperwork is ready.
Mr. Carr stated that the owner of 18 River Street has recovered
from his hand injury and suggested, due to the weather, that the
Commission send a letter in the Spring to request completion of the
fence.
Ms . Guy was requested to send a second letter to the Bertram Home
regarding outstanding work.
Ms . Guy was requested to send the City Solicitor a request for
enforcement regarding 86 Federal Street .
Ms . Guy was requested to proceed with the next enforcement step for
398 Essex Street.
Mr. Casey stated that the owners of 188 Derby Street will be
submitting a design for the pillars in the Spring. Mr. Carr
suggested a letter be send to them in April if there is no
application received by then.
Ms . Guy stated that Certificates of Violation were filed for 265
Lafayette Street and 271 Lafayette Street.
Newspaper Vending Boxes - Discussion
• Ms . Guy stated that she contacted the lawyer for the Boston
Landmarks Commission and received copies of briefs relating to
• February 2, 1994, Page 2
their court case. The case has been under advisement with Judge
Keaton of the U.S. District Court since August. Initially, Judge
Keaton ruled against the City. The City then revised their
regulations to address Judge Keaton' s concerns and the Judge is not
reconsidering. One of the concerns related to singling out
newspaper boxes, so the regulations were amended to ban all street
structures with the exception of mailboxes, street lights, etc .
The city' s attorney felt that any ban or regulation will eventually
be upheld in the Supreme Court.
Ms . Guy stated that the City' s attorney felt that discretion was a
key problem and that each box should not be approved on a case by
case basis . He suggested that there be a permit process where the
requirements would have to be met to receive approval and that
discretion by a board would not be part of the process . The
attorney suggested that a design for the boxes be adopted and that
a scheme be designed so as to limit locations . Ms . Guy stated that
for example, the Commission could allow no more than 4 boxes to an
intersection with daily papers having priority over weekly papers
and weekly papers having priority over monthly papers .
Mr. Carr stated that regulation of time, place or manner is
permitted if content neutral .
• Ms . Joan Griffin, 105 Federal Street, stated that a complete city-
wide ban in a residential district has been upheld because the
newspaper companies chose not to fight the ban in the residential
areas . Ms . Griffin stated that content neutral implies that it is
okay to regulate the boxes but not what is in them.
City Councillor Bill Burns felt that the newspaper' s should have to
come before a licensing body.
Mr. Carr gave examples of the arguments sited in cases concerning
newspaper boxes including whether the boxes are or are not
structures and that if a structure, whether they are temporary.
Mr. Carr stated that the Statement of Fact was that they are nearly
permanent. Mr. Carr stated that there are arguments that it is a
structure.
Ms . Guy stated that MHC provided information which stated that it
is a structure because it serves as a shelter ( for coins and
newspapers ) and contains signage (newspaper logo, etc. ) .
Mr. Oedel stated that the Commission may be able to regulate the
design, location and quantity but questioned how the boxes impact
the district and to what extent the Commission would want to
regulate or not regulate.
• Ms . Guy stated that the Commission would have to 1 ) find them
inappropriate; 2 ) find them appropriate and adopt criteria and a
February 2, 1994, Page 3
•
permit process; or 3) wait for the decision for the Boston
Landmark' s Commission case. Ms . Guy did not feel the Salem News
should be asked to apply until the Commission has adopted criteria.
Mr. Carr suggested having one policy for commercial areas and
another for residential . Mr. Carr felt there should be an outright
ban on boxes in the residential area. Mr. Carr stated that the
Commission should take an official position that the boxes are a
structure and are permanent.
Ms . Guy stated that the policy would have to include all street
structures and furniture and have exceptions such as mailboxes .
Mr. Casey added that benches would also be exempt.
Councillor Burns asked if a vote of the City Council would be
required. Mr. Carr replied in the negative and stated that the
Commission' s statute allows for the Commission to adopt
regulations .
Ms . Guy read Section 8 of the Salem Historical Commission
Ordinance. Ms . Guy questioned if the Salem News or other company
could prove that the boxes were in certain locations prior to the
formation of the district, would they be grandfathered.
• Ms . Griffin agreed that residential and commercial areas should be
separated and that there should be a ban in residential .
Abby Burns of 15 Chestnut Street stated that she would go along
with the separation and ban in residential .
Mr. Slam was agreeable to separating residential and commercial .
Messrs Casey, Hedstrom, Cook and Carr were in agreement.
Mr. Carr suggested the separation be defined by zoning. Mr. Carr
stated that everything in the residential area would be banned with
the exception of traffic lights or signs relating to public safety,
fire boxes, mail boxes, and historic markers . Mr. Carr stated that
the Commission could assert jurisdiction over placement and design.
Chairman Oedel stated that issues to be considered are benches,
hitching posts, telephone booths and other street furniture. Mr.
Casey added bollards to the list. Mr. Slam added telephone poles .
Mr. Slam made a motion to appoint a sub-committee to prepare
separate draft guidelines relating to street structures in
residential and commercial areas in the historic districts . The
Sub-Committee will include Commissioners Oedel, Carr, and Casey and
resident Joan Griffin. Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in
• favor and the motion so carried.
• February 2, 1994 , Page 4
Water Meters
Joan Griffin, 105 Federal Street, stated that the City is
installing new water meters throughout the city and questioned the
Commission' s jurisdiction.
Mr. Carr made a motion to draft a letter to the Director or Public
Services requesting that a representative come to an upcoming
meeting. Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
37 Warren Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Don Rose and Nina Simonds
presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to
replace the side porch with a new porch which adds a sunroom off
the master bedroom at their home at 37 Warren Street. The
applicants were not present.
The applicants submitted a letter and new drawings dated 1/13/94 .
The letter states that the skylight base and trim will be in copper
as is the adjacent pitched roof and that the glass in the French
doors (rear view) is intended to be true divided lights .
• Mr. Casey noted that he and Mr. Hedstrom performed a site visit
with the owners since the last meeting.
Mr. Carr questioned if the increase in lattice will look odd on a
two story porch. Mr. Casey stated that there is a similar porch on
Fairfield Street.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion.
Mr. Carr questioned how the Commission could justify the skylight.
Chairman Oedel stated that it was appropriate to the addition. Mr.
Hedstrom noted that it was not velux. Mr. Casey felt the skylight
was not obtrusive.
Chairman Oedel noted that the paint colors are to remain as
existing.
The motion was voted on, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Minutes
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the minutes of 12/1/93 and
• 1/5/94 . Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
February 2 , 1994 , Page 5
Peabody Museum signage
Mr. Casey stated that the new signs that the Commission approved
for the Peabody & Essex Museum properties were awful . Mr. Casey
noted that the museum board is sensitive to public opinion and felt
a letter should be sent. Mr. Casey stated that Historic Salem,
Inc . will be sending a letter indicating their opposition to the
signs .
Mr. Carr agreed that the Commission should not have approved of the
signs and recalled that he reluctantly voted in favor.
Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter to the Peabody & Essex
Museum which states that although the Commission approved of the
signs, the Commission is of the opinion that they look atrocious
and that the Commission urges them to reconsider the signage. Mr.
Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Other Business
Ms . Guy read a letter from Coldwell Banker regarding the Joshua
Ward House at 148 Washington Street being offered for sale.
• Ms . Guy stated that the Commission received the current list of
delinquent tax title accounts for the City.
Mr. Hedstrom stated that he will be officially resigning as of the
end of March. Chairman Oedel stated that Mr. Bailey also intends
to resign.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
J e A. Guy
C erk of th Commission
February 16, 1994, Page 1
• SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, February 16, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. , at One Salem Green,
Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Messrs . Cook, Slam, Casey,
Carr and Kelleher and Ms . Guy.
89 Federal Street
Mr. Hedstrom abstained from discussion and vote on 89 Federal
Street and left the room during such discussion and vote.
Kevin and T. Jane Dwyer presented an application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness to remove a window and install a door, arbor and
fence at 89 Federal Street. Ms . Dwyer provided new drawings to
replace those originally provided with the application. Ms . Dwyer
stated that there is not enough room to put a fan light over the
door. Ms . Dwyer stated that the missing section of fence has been
gone for about 20 years and that they intend to remove the
remaining lattice work fence. Ms . Dwyer provided photographs of
fence options ( indicated as A and B on the photos) . Ms . Dwyer
preferred option A. The new fence will run from the corner of the
• house to the corner of the garage.
Mr. Cook stated that he preferred a more conservative fence but had
no objection to option A.
Mr. Kelleher preferred B but had no problem with A, although he
felt is was quite elaborate.
Mr. Casey stated that he preferred option B.
Mr. Carr stated that part of him would like lattice but that he was
troubled with the design. Mr. Carr stated that he had no problem
with the doors . Mr. Carr suggested approving the concept and
having the applicants come back with a final proposal .
Mr. Cook stated that the Commission could approve the doors now or
wait for the final fence proposal and approve them all at once at
the next meeting.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he had no problem with the doors .
Ms . Dwyer stated that the door style is Morgan M5915 and that the
existing door and second floor windows will remain.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the remove the first floor window
to accommodate the location of 2 doors (Morgan M5915) as per
drawing submitted. Framing to match existing windows and all new
construction to be painted to match existing. The motion also
includes the continuation of the fence portion of the application
until the next meeting. Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in
February 16 , 1994, Page 2
favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Casey suggested a site visit before the next meeting.
54 Turner Street
The House of Seven Gables Settlement presented an application for
a Certificate of Appropriateness for exterior lighting, gutters &
downspouts, exterior colors, new doors to garden and exterior
signage at 54 Turner Street. Brett Donham, architect, represented
the Gables . Construction drawings were provided.
Chairman Oedel stated that there is the potential for the
appearance of a Conflict of Interest by his chairing the meeting,
due to his wife being the Executive Director of the Gables .
Chairman Oedel stated that the State has ruled there is no conflict
and that he has filed the appropriate disclosures with the City
Clerk.
LIGHTING:
Mr: Donham stated that there will be a series of five lights in the
front of the building in the ground, concealed by low plantings .
The front trellis will contain nine small light fixtures and two
• fixtures will be added to the rear trellis . Catalog cuts of the
light fixtures were provided. There will be no pole lights in the
parking lot.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to approve the lighting as proposed.
Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS:
Mr. Donham stated that the gutters will be essentially what is
currently there - two boards in a "V" held in a metal bracket,
painted to match the body color. There will be an aluminum liner.
The downspout will be aluminum encased in a wood box.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the gutters & downspouts as
proposed. Mr. Hedstrom seconded the motion. All were in favor and
the motion so carried.
PAINT:
Mr. Donham stated that the color scheme is essentially the same
color scheme that was previously approved in concept. The new
• building will be the same red as Hawthorne' s Birthplace except for
the recessed areas and entrances which will be Cabot Dune Grey
0167 .
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the colors as proposed. Mr.
February 16 , 1994, Page 3
• Cook seconded the motion.
Mr. Carr stated that he liked the break-up of the two colors but
felt the Dune Grey might be a little too bland. Mr. Carr preferred
it to be a little more yellow.
Mr. Hedstrom stated that he had no strong feelings either way.
Mr. Cook stated that he saw Mr. Carr's point but would not argue
against the proposed scheme.
Mr. Kelleher preferred one solid color.
Mr. David Bystrom of 42 Turner Street stated that he liked the
break up of color.
The motion was voted upon, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
BARN SIDING:
Mr. Donham presented an early photo of the "barn" addition. Mr.
Donham stated that the Commission' s previous approvals required the
removal of the vertical siding and replacement with clapboards .
• Mr. Donham requested that the Commission allow the vertical siding
to remain.
Ms . Guy stated that the vertical siding was original to the
building and would help separate the old from the new.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he preferred the vertical siding to
remain.
Mr. Casey was agreeable to the siding remaining and felt that it
could be considered a hardship.
Mr. Cook and Mr. Hedstrom also preferred the vertical siding.
Mr. Carr stated that he had no problem with the vertical siding.
Mr. Bystrom stated that he preferred the vertical siding.
Mr. Carr made a motion to allow the applicant the option to leave
the vertical siding as is or to change to clapboard. Mr. Casey
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
GARDEN DOORS:
Mr. Donham stated that double doors were proposed because the
• single door was not adequate for the tourist traffic. Mr. Donham
stated that they will retain the original window but remove the
replacement bay window. The doors will be M114 , with true divided
lights with one light insulation panel and be painted the same
color as the building.
February 16, 1994, Page 4
• Mr. Carr stated that the little "arcade" is a charming period piece
and preferred not to substitute a double for a single, although he
understood the need.
Mr. Hedstrom stated that he preferred single glazing.
Messrs . Cook, Kelleher and Casey had no problem with the doors .
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to approve the two M114 doors, painted
to match the body color, to replace the single door, the removal of
the bay window. Mr. Cook seconded the motion. Messrs . Oedel,
Cook, Kelleher, Hedstrom and Casey voted in favor. Mr. Carr voted
in opposition.
SIGNAGE/RAILINGS:
Mr. Donham requested a continuation on the signage.
Marie Oedel asked if the railings had been approved. Mr. Donham
indicated the railings on the construction drawings and stated that
they are galvanized iron painted black. The railings will run on
both sides of the ramp and down the stairs under the canopy. Mr.
Donham stated that there will be substantial planting between the
curb and the ramp.
• Mr. Carr stated that to the extent the railings are underground, he
would have no problem. Mr. Carr added that when introducing a new
material, the Commission should scrutinize the proposal more.
Mr. Cook had no problem with the railings . Mr. Casey and Mr.
Kelleher were willing to approve the railings at this meeting.
Chairman Oedel did not feel the material was appropriate.
Mr. Donham noted that there can be a narrower profile in iron than
in wood.
Ms . Guy felt that the iron will read out and noted that handicap
ramps are a contemporary item.
Mr. Hedstrom agreed that iron can be more easily disguised.
Mr. Cook made a motion to continue the signage portion of the
application and to approve the railings as proposed, painted black.
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. Messrs . Carr, Cook, Hedstrom,
Kelleher and Casey voted in favor. Chairman Oedel voted in
opposition. The motion was so carried.
19 North Street
• Mr. Gary Sackrider presented an application for a Certificate of
Non-Applicability to remove the gutter on the south side of 19
North Street and repair the damaged area underneath to match
existing. The gutter is currently off the building due to ice
February 16 , 1994 , Page 5
accumulation.
Ms . Guy stated that the applicant originally wanted to replace the
gutter, but then decided to submit an application for permanent
removal of the gutter. Ms . Guy stated that the Commission could
change the application to appropriateness and waive the public
hearing or treat the removal of the gutter as demolition by neglect
and approve the Non-applicability application for the repair of the
remaining surface.
Chairman Oedel stated that the applicant should replace the gutter
under Non-applicability or file an application for Appropriateness
for permanent removal .
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve a Certificate of Non-
applicability to replace the gutter and make necessary repairs and
do notify the owner to submit an application for Appropriateness if
he desires permanent removal of the gutter. Mr. Kelleher seconded
the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
98 Federal Street
Ms . Guy stated that a 1981 decision of the Board of Appeals gave
the Commission jurisdiction over site and facade alterations at 98
• Essex Street as long as it remains a tourist home. The current
owner has requested a letter for a real estate closing from the
Commission stating that no changes have occurred. Ms. Guy provided
photographs of the property in 1986 and its present condition and
stated that a building permit indicated that the roof was replaced.
The photographs also showed the replacement of a picket fence with
a solid board fence and some added features to the sign and fence.
Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter stating that the Commission
accepts the roof, that the Commission accepts the fence provided
that the planter, literature holder, and signage are removed and
the areas be repaired and that the Commission will accept one
(vacancy/no vacancy) of the three rectangular signs below the main
sign. The letter should also encourage the owner to apply for the
replacement of the solid board fence with a picket fence. Mr. Cook
seconded the motion. Messrs . Carr, Cook, Hedstrom, Kelleher and
Casey voted in favor. Chairman Oedel voted in opposition. The
motion so carried.
Correspondence
In reply to the Commission' s letter, Charles Quigley, Director of
Public Services, wrote that the project director for the
replacement of the water meters is Christopher Kent of LEU
Associates . Each meter is fitted with a remote, externally
• installed, reading device of approximately 3"x3"xl/2" of black
plastic which may be installed up to 50 feet from the meter in any
accessible, convenient and inconspicuous location. Completion is
expected by December, 1994 . Mr. Carr made a motion to request Mr.
Kent appear at the next meeting. Mr. Cook seconded the motion.
February 16 , 1994 , Page 6
• All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Violations/Work Status
Mr. Casey requested that the Commission' s August, 1993 letter to
the owners of 376 Essex Street concerning the ballastrade and
widows walk which was removed be sent to Tori Stevens at Carlson
Real Estate in order for her to alert any potential buyer.
Ms . Guy stated that a representative of the owner of 2 Oliver
Street called on 2/11/94 and stated that they will be sending an
application for temporary removal and repairs .
Ms . Guy stated that the owner of 86 Federal Street contacted Bob
Ledoux and stated that they will remove the retaining wall in the
warm weather. Ms . Guy requested that Mr. Ledoux have the owners
reply in writing.
Mr. Cook stated that the owners of 10 Hamilton Street will be
applying for a new fence design within two weeks .
Mr. Carr stated that 51 Summer Street can be removed from the
violations list.
• Ms . Guy asked Mr. Hedstrom the status 135 Derby Street. Mr.
Hedstrom stated that Mrs . Gina' s have even decorated the trees .
Mr. Hedstrom stated that he does not have a problem when Eng' s
Floral Hut puts up temporary Valentine' s decorations but Mrs .
Gina ' s looks like Coney Island. Mr. Hedstrom also questioned the
installation of a AAA sign at the Grand Turk Tavern. Chairman
Oedel instructed Ms . Guy to send letters to 135 Derby Street and
110 Derby Street.
There being no further business, Mr. Cook made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
J e A. G
C erk of the Commission
•
• March 16 , 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
MARCH 16, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, March 16 , 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem,
MA. Present were Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Casey, Slam, Carr and
Hedstrom and Ms . Guy.
13 Chestnut Street
Joan Mason submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-
Applicability to install a door, platform and two steps with a
handrail at the rear of 13 Chestnut Street. The contractor
proposes to cut opening and install a 218" x 618" door unit, wood
solid core with no glass . The outside casing is to be flat stock,
1x4 pine. The platform will be 30" x 36" with two 10" steps with
handrail . A plot plan were submitted.
Ms . Guy stated that the pictures reveal a window noted on the plot
plan. Chairman Oedel stated that the proposed stair appears to be
along the site line between the edge of the house and the window.
Ms . Guy stated that the plot plan may not show the window in the
• correct position and felt that the rail to the proposed stair would
be minimally visible at best.
Mr. Carr stated that the Commission should not make the assumption
that it will not be visible.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
There was no second.
Mr. Carr felt that if the rail may be visible, the Commission
should not approve it until the railing design is reviewed.
Mr. Slam withdrew his motion.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application pending a site
visit. Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
5 Chestnut St.
Blake & Nina Anderson presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to renovate third floor dormers to appropriate
period style per plans submitted.
Mr. Carr noted for the record that he has a potential business
• relationship with the applicant but has no financial interest in
the application. He offered to withdrawn but the Commission felt
there was no conflict.
• March 16 , 1994, Page 2
Mr. Anderson stated that the existing dormers are inappropriate as
they vary in size and are of clapboard while the front of the house
is matchboard. Mr. Anderson noted that the proposal will sacrifice
some light and space inside.
Mr. Slam stated that he had no problem with the concept and agreed
that the proposal was an improvement over the existing.
Mr. Hedstrom felt it was a positive change noting that the proposed
windows aligned vertically.
Mr. Carr stated that the Commission would not have approved of the
shed dormers . Mr. Carr stated that he liked how the fenestration
lined up, the recessing of the filler space and the matching
bargeboard. Mr. Carr was concerned that the house reads as a
coherent unity and felt that the appendage is unbalancing. Mr.
Carr was concerned that adding a pediment to the dormers will draw
attention.
Mr. Casey noted that Chestnut Street has very eccentric dormers and
that the proposed is not too eccentric due to the dormers lining up
properly with the windows .
• Barrome Dube, 4 Chestnut Street and Mrs . Busteed, 6 Chestnut
Street, spoke in favor of the application.
Mr. Carr stated that the existing reads as someone 's mistake and
wondered if the proposed would emphasize the imbalance.
Mr. Casey stated that the building doesn't read as a coherent unity
due to the elliptical window at V . Mr. Casey stated that the
Commission cannot freeze buildings in time but must determine if
there is a plus or minus to each application. Mr. Casey stated
that the Commission must adapt old buildings to modern uses .
Mr. Slam stated that he would like to see another elevation which
shows the area between the peaks .
Mr. Hedstrom stated that more of the roof shingles which will frame
the windows will be seen.
Chairman Oedel questioned if 1 1/2 ' setback is enough.
Chairman Oedel stated that a detailed elevation drawing was needed.
Mr. Hedstrom recommended a detail drawing of one gable end. Mr.
Slam felt the drawing should emphasize the area between the
ormers . Mr. Hedstrom suggested putting the paint colors to the
drawings .
Mr. Hedstrom made a motion to approve the concept and to continue
the application until the next meeting. Mr. Slam seconded the
r
t
March 16 , 1994, Page 3
motion. Chairman Oedel and Messrs. Slam, Hedstrom and Casey voted
in favor. Mr. Carr voted in opposition.
Mr. Carr presented a letter from Commissioner Cook which stated
that he was in favor of the application and made a motion to amend
the minutes to record Mr. Cook' s letter. Mr. Slam stated that a
Commissioner cannot vote when absent. Ms . Guy stated that she can
put the letter in the record but not include Mr. Cook' s vote. Mr.
Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
54 Turner Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, the House of Seven Gables
Settlement presented an Application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for signage at 54 Turner Street. Marie Oedel and
David Goss represented the Gables . A drawing of the proposed sign
was presented.
Chairman Oedel stated for the record that there is the potential
for the appearance of a Conflict of Interest by his chairing the
meeting, due to his wife being the Executive Director of the
Gables . Chairman Oedel stated that the State has ruled there is no
conflict and that he has filed the appropriate disclosures with the
City Clerk.
Mr. Goss stated that the existing sign has 3-3 1/2" letters which
do not get attention. The proposed is 4" high by 7" wide. The
left post is to be where the current sign post is . The sign will
be white with black letters with no extra lighting. Mr. Goss
stated that there will be a 2 1/2 ' space between the landscaping
and the bottom of the sign.
Mr. Casey stated that the sign appears huge.
Chairman Oedel noted that the height is approximately the same as
the Sweet Scoops sign. Chairman Oedel asked if a tree will be
removed. Mr. Goss stated that one of the 4 Yew trees will be
removed along the fence.
Mr. Slam stated that he had problems with the size. Mr. Hedstrom
stated that he had the same reservations and suggested it but
scaled down to 3 ' x 5" with scrolls on top.
Mr. Carr also had a problem with the size and felt that it would
read like a billboard. Mr. Carr stated that he liked the color,
but felt it should be scaled down somewhat.
Mr. Hedstrom stated that he liked the top of the sign.
Ms . Oedel stated that the Gables could do a mock up. Ms. Oedel
Y
March 16, 1994, Page 4
•
also noted that they will be reusing the menu sign that is
existing.
Ms . Oedel withdrew the sign portion of the application and stated
that they will reapply.
Ms . Oedel requested the Commission's input on the removal of the
trash area to a section over by the Phippen building and bricking
in the existing trash area, removing the fence and adding an
awning. The area will be used for eating, particularly during
inclement weather.
Mr. Slam stated that he did not have any initial concerns but
preferred to have a site visit.
Mr. Hedstrom felt a eating/sitting area would be key for overflow
and he would like to see it on the site.
Mr. Carr felt it was critical to have a site visit due the fragile
environment of the gables . Mr. Carr was concerned to the extent of
loosing the wall to the parking lot that separates the 17th century
from the 20th century.
• Ms . Oedel stated that she does not want the awning attached to the
building and that they may want to be able to move it to other
areas temporarily for events . Ms. Oedel stated that the color of
the awning will probably be forest green or eggplant maroon.
Mr. Hedstrom abstained from the following discussion and left the
room.
Ms . Oedel stated that since the Gables is unable to put the gift
shop in the new space, they will be applying for a Certificate of
Hardship to add a new door to the Retire Becket House.
Mr. Goss presented historic photographs of the Retire Becket House.
Mr. Goss stated that the maple tree root system prevents the
construction of a walkway to the existing rear door. The new door
will be on the 1933 addition in replacement of a window. The
windows to the house are not original and they may also want to
close off the existing rear door.
Mr. Slam stated that he had no problem with the concept but would
like to visit the site. Mr. Slam preferred to approve the
application under appropriateness rather than hardship.
Mr. Carr stated that he had no particular problem, agreed that the
application should be for appropriateness and also wanted to visit
• the site.
Mr. Casey had no concerns with the concept.
• March 16, 1994, Page 5
Mr. Hedstrom returned to the meeting.
Water Meters
Chris Kent of LEU Associates, Inc. was present to discuss the
replacement of water meter reading equipment through the city and
historic districts . Also present were Tom Otto and Don Kuback of
Schlumberger Industries, the contractor for the project.
Mr. Otto provided a sample of the outside reading receptacle and
stated that they will try to install them near existing electric
meters . Mr. Otto noted that they worked with the Beacon Hill
Commission when the receptacles were installed in the historic
district.
Mr. Casey asked if some homes will have two receptacles . Mr.
Kuback replied that some may have a separate receptacle for lawn
watering, if the Council so approves it.
Mr. Otto stated that they would try not to stick any on the front
of a house.
Chairman Oedel stated that anything done to the exterior of a
• property in a district must be approved by the Commission and noted
that the Commission has pushed Massachusetts Electric to keep most
electric meters in the basement.
Mr. Carr noted that virtually all gas meters are in the basement.
Mr. Otto stated that they usually put the receptacle on the gable
end unless the homeowner requests otherwise.
Mr. Slam suggested a survey of each area to be worked on to
determine if there are any homes that are impossible to avoid the
front facade.
Mr. Kent stated that there is no limit to the length of wire from
the basement meter to the receptacle.
Mr. Carr asked if multiple apartments will still have one meter.
Mr. Kent replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Carr stated that the Commission has allowed electric meters to
be moved from the basement to the outside if they are located in a
minimally visible location and reasonably screened.
Mr. Kent stated that the receptacles can be painted.
• Mr. Carr stated that the Commission may not want to locate the
receptacle with the existing electric meters if the existing are
visible.
• March 16, 1994 , Page 6
Mr. Hedstrom preferred they be located on the siding than on the
watertable since most watertables are of a lighter color.
Mr. Slam felt location on the watertable was less visible due to
being lower.
Mr. Carr asked if Beacon Hill had any quidelines in writing. Mr.
Otto stated that he would check and provide a copy if they were
available. Ms . Guy stated that she and Chairman Oedel could
prepare guidelines for Salem from Beacon Hill ' s and provide it to
Mr. Kent. Ms . Guy stated that she would provide Mr. Kent with an
address listing of properties in the district.
Mr. Casey requested that the Commission be provided with a schedule
of when work will be undertaken in historic districts .
89 Federal Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Kevin & T. Jane Dwyer
submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for
fence replacement. The applicants were not present.
Ms . Guy noted that the Commission needed to approve or deny tonight
• in order to act within the required 60 days .
Mr. Carr made a motion to deny the application without prejudice.
Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried. Mr. Hedstrom abstained.
Other Business
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the minutes of 1/19/94 , 2/2/94
and 2/16/94 . Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and
the motion so carried.
Ms . Guy provided pictures of 135 Derby Street which showed a
framework of tarot cards attached to the window as signage, the
public tree strung with lights and other decorations, and trash and
glass in the gutter. Ms . Guy will send a letter to the tenants and
have the appropriate City departments assert their jurisdiction.
Mr. Carr and Mr. Casey requested that a letter be sent to the
Council on Aging to remove the wishing well .
Ms . Guy stated that the Durand Commission and Senator Berry' s
office is hosting a public hearing on how preservation is good for
the economy on April 8 . Several members will be contacted to
testify.
• Ms . Guy stated that a letter from MHC to Eastern Bank regarding
Hawthorne Square Shopping Plaza indicated it is unlikely that the
• March 16 , 1994, Page 7
relocation of a banking facility will affect any resources.
Ms . Guy read a letter from the City Solicitor stating that the
owner of 86 Federal Street has informed him that they will remove
the wooden retaining wall in the Spring.
Ms . Guy read a letter from the Peabody Essex Museum which was sent
in reply to the Commission' s letter regarding the museum signage.
Ms . Guy stated that Mr. Jones has indicated that the planter on the
fence at 98 Essex Street is frozen and will be removed by the new
owner. The signage on the fence and one of the three rectangular
signs below the main sign has been removed. A second rectangular
sign and the literature holder on the fence will be removed by the
new owner.
Mr. Casey stated that John Goff completed a survey for 94 Essex
Street and suggested that the Commission push the City Council to
enact a local landmark ordinance.
Mr. Carr suggested that the Commission write to George Ahmed to
congratulate him on his election, point out George Nowak's
contributions to preservation and update Mr. Ahmed on the local
• district expansion.
Mr. Casey stated that he received approval from the Commission to
add shutters and replace fencing at his property at 17 Flint Street
in September 1990 . Mr. Casey indicated that he will finish
replacing the shutters and one side of fencing this year.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
JWey
C rk of the Commission
•
4�
c
• April 6 , 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
APRIL 6 , 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, April 6 , 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem,
MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Messrs . Kelleher, Casey, Bailey,
Slam and Cook and Ms . Guy. Mr. Carr arrived later in the meeting.
5 Chestnut Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Blake and Nina Anderson
submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for
the renovation of third floor dormers at 5 Chestnut Street.
Chairman Oedel stated that the applicants would not be attending
and requested a continuance.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Bailey
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
13 Chestnut Street
In' continuation from a previous meeting, Joan Mason submitted an
• application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
installation of a door, platform and two steps to the rear of her
property at 13 Chestnut Street. Ms . Guy stated that because the
steps will be only 26" , the Building Department informed the
applicant that a rail is not needed by code. Ms . Guy stated that
the applicant has dropped the railing from the application. Ms .
Guy noted that the rail was the only portion that may have been
visible from the public way.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the application as amended. Mr.
Bailey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Mr. Carr joined the meeting at this time.
121 Federal Street
John Paul Lenney and Mary Pax-Lenney submitted an application for
a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at 121 Federal
Street. The application states that the trim will be white, the
house will be Pewter 28GV-P, Pratt & Lambert and that they will
repair/replace any rotten clapboards prior to painting.
Ms . Guy noted that the applicants did not submit the application in
time for public notice of this meeting. Ms . Guy stated that the
• applicants verbally indicated that the paint chips selected are as
close to the existing as they could find. Ms . Guy stated that she
drove by the house and felt the house appeared more grey, although
1
• April 6, 1994, Page 2
she did not have the paint chips with her.
Chairman Oedel stated that the Commission could waive the public
hearing and Iapprove under Appropriateness, approve Non-
Applicability or not act until next meeting.
Mr. Slam stated that he did not want to waive the public hearing.
The Commission decided to take no action and have the application
placed on the next agenda after the regular public notice process .
Paint Colors Discussion
Chairman Oedel suggested that the Commission consider requesting
the City Council drop paint colors from the Commission' s
jurisdiction.
Mr. Slam was in favor of dropping paint colors .
Mr. Bailey suggested approving several paint colors and that
homeowners would only have to apply if they were to deviate from
the list. Mr. Kelleher stated noted that each house is different
in style and age and that it would be problematic to approve colors
• as appropriate for all houses . Mr. Carr did not want Salem's homes
to all be the same in color schemes .
Ms . Guy stated that Salem is one of the few communities in the
Commonwealth with paint colors under their jurisdiction.
Mr. Carr stated that paint color jurisdiction should be consistent
from district to district. Mr. Carr was not in favor of dropping
paint colors . Mr. Carr did not feel paint color was a temporary
condition.
Mr. Bailey felt that while paint was important, the Commission must
consider time, cost and administrative efforts required for the
review of paint colors .
Mr. Kelleher stated that he has never been in favor of reviewing
paint colors . Mr. Kelleher stated that dropping paint colors is a
way of winning over those that are opposed to designation.
Mr. Casey stated that there are a large number of absentee
landlords in Salem and that 389 Essex Street is a prime example of
a property that the Commission guided on paint colors . Mr. Casey
felt the Commission could set up a system so that residents would
not have to come through the full board, but through the Clerk, as
is done with most Non-Applicability applications .
• Chairman Oedel stated that the Commission should consider the time
that the homeowner has to sacrifice to have paint colors reviewed.
• April 6, 1994, Page 3
Mr. Cook felt it is a minor encumbrance on the homeowner and that
the protection was worth the risk.
54 Turner Street
Chairman Oedel stated for the record that there is the potential
for the appearance of a Conflict of Interest by his chairing the
meeting, due to his wife being the Executive Director of the
Gables . Chairman Oedel stated that the State has ruled there is no
conflict and that he has filed the appropriate disclosures with the
City Clerk.
The House of Seven Gables presented an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a new sign
at the Derby Street entrance to the parking area, for the
installation of an awning outside of the kitchen on the Turner
Street side of the House of Seven Gables and for the installation
of a door at the rear of the Retire-Beckett House.
Marie Oedel, Executive Director of the Gables, stated that there
was a mock-up 4 ' x 7 ' sign at a recent site visit.
Mr. Slam asked if the menu and scrolled sign will be coming down.
• Ms . Oedel replied in the affirmative and stated that the menu sign
closer to the building entrance will be put back up closer to the
house.
Mr. Carr and Mr. Bailey stated that they were in favor of the sign.
Mr. Casey stated that what seemed large in this room disappears in
scale at the site.
Chairman Oedel asked the colors of the sign. Ms . Oedel replied
that there will be black or brown lettering on white.
David Bystrom of 42 Turner Street stated that he was in favor of
the sign.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the sign portion of the
application as submitted. Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were
in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms . Oedel stated that the scope of the project to install an awning
and have an outside eating area was larger than anticipated. Ms .
Oedel asked that the issue be continued until the next agenda.
Ms . Oedel provided a new drawing of the proposed door which will
replace a window on the Retire Becket House. The door will have 12
• true divided panes similar to the windows on the rear. The panels
will not be raised so that the bottom of the door is identical to
the other doors . Ms . Oedel stated that they will be checking the
• April 6, 1994, Page 4
handicap codes to make sure that the door is accessible - making
the Retire Becket House the only historic site on the property that
is handicap accessible.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the door portion of the
application as amended with door framing, muntins and paint color
to match framing of other door on same facade, door to be wood with
true-divided lights . Lower half of door to match lower half of
adjacent door to left. Size to be per handicap accessibility
codes . The motion is also to continue the awning portion of the
application. Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and
the motion so carried.
Minutes
Mr. Carr requested that the minutes of March 16, 1994 be amended as
follows :
That the word "potential" be added before the word "business"
in the last paragraph of Page 1 . That the following sentence
be added to the last paragraph of Page 1 : "He offered to
withdraw, but the Commission felt there was no conflict. "
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Mr.
Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Violations
Mr. Casey stated that 313 Essex Street is being sold and that he
will check if there is still an outstanding violation.
Mr. Casey made a motion for the Clerk to take the next steps in the
Commission's violation procedures for the violations at 1-3 N. Pine
Street and 2 Flint Street. Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were
in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms . Guy stated that the tarot card signage at 135 Derby Street has
been removed from the window sill . Ms . Guy noted that Fire
Prevention has requested that they remove the lights from the tree.
Mr. Casey stated that the wishing well has been removed from the
Council on Aging.
Mr. Oedel stated that 348 Essex Street can be removed from the
violations list.
It was noted that the fence at 10 Hamilton Street will become an
• egregious violation on May 28, 1994 . Mr. Cook will talk to the
owners .
• April 6, 1994, Page 5
Chairman Oedel requested that the Clerk send a letter to the owner
of 310 Lafayette Street.
Mr. Carr requested that a letter be sent to the owner of 302
Lafayette Street concerning the porch railings .
Mr. Casey stated that clapboards have been repaired and not
painted, second floor railings have been altered and shutters are
falling down at 44 Warren Street. Ms . Guy stated that the
Commission cannot prevent demolition by neglect and cannot force a
homeowner to make repairs to the shutters . Ms . Guy will send a
letter.
Mr. Casey stated that there has been a fence installed at 7 South
Pine Street. Ms . Guy will send a letter.
Chairman Oedel was asked to contact the owner of 2 Botts Court
concerning meters and an oval window on the gable end facing
Hamilton St.
Mr. Bailey was advised to apply for signage installed at 110 Derby
Street.
• 180 Federal Street
Edward Crowley submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to install a fence across the streetscape from the
house to the fence post (of 178 Federal) , 6 feet in height as per
photograph submitted with the fence boards to be butted together
with no gaps . The applicant will re-apply for paint color for the
fence.
Mr. Crowley stated that he has permission from the neighbors to
increase the height of the fence post in order to attach the
proposed fence. The fence will be in two 8 ' sections with no gate.
Mr. Carr stated that the fence should read as a sidewalk fence in
height and had a concern about the height at the streetscape. Mr.
Carr asked if the fence is for privacy. Mr. Crowley replied in the
affirmative.
Mr. Crowley stated that there is a problem with trash finding its
way in his yard. Mr. Crowley also stated that children climbed on
the previous fence and knocked it over.
Mr. Slam stated that he had reservations on the height at the
streetscape but could go along with it.
• Mr. Cook stated that a 6 ' fence in not historically acceptable on
the front streetscape.
April 6 , 1994 , Page 6
•
Mr. Carr stated he was troubled by the height. Mr. Carr stated he
would consider a picket fence on the sidewalk and a 6 ' privacy
fence further back.
Mr. Bailey stated that there may be some 6 ' fences in the district
but that they were likely grandfathered in when the district was
formed. Mr. Bailey suggested the height be brought down to 5 ' .
Mr. Kelleher stated he was not opposed to the design and felt the
solid fence will solve the trash problems . Mr. Kelleher did not
feel a 6 ' fence will solve the trash problem any better than a 5 '
fence.
Mr. Casey stated that he did not have a problem with a 6 ' fence but
suggested the applicant amend the application to 5 ' so that it
won't fail .
Chairman Oedel was concerned with setting a precedent by approving
a 6 ' fence at the streetscape.
Mr. Carr suggested the applicant look at the fence design at the
Narbonne House which is approximately 4 1/2-5" .
• Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted with
the end post to be raised to the fence height. Mr. Slam noted that
the design is meant to be for privacy and does not hinder the
features of the facade. Mr. Slam noted that the fence will hide
the electrical meters . Mr. Casey seconded the motion. Chairman
Oedel and Messrs . Slam and Casey voted in favor. Messrs . Carr,
Cook, Kelleher and Bailey voted in opposition. The motion did not
carry.
Chairman Oedel did not believe that a 5 ' fence would cover the
electrical meters . Mr. Kelleher did not feel the electrical meters
was the issue.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with
the amendment that the fence not exceed 5 ' in height and the end
post to be raised to the fence height. Mr. Kelleher seconded the
motion. Messrs . Carr, Kelleher, Bailey and Cook voted in favor.
Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Casey and Slam voted in opposition. The
motion so carried.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted with
the amendment that the fence not exceed 5 1/2 ' in height and the
end post to be raised to the fence height. Mr. Casey seconded the
motion. Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Slam, and Casey voted in favor.
Messrs . Cook, Carr, Bailey and Kelleher voted in opposition. The
• motion did not carry.
April A 1994,
• p 6, Page 7
29 Washington Sq. N.
The John Bertram House Trust submitted two applications for
Certificate of Hardship for 29 Washington Sq. North.
The first is to increase the height of the existing chiller
enclosure from 7 ' 0" to 10 ' 0" and increase its size in the north-
south direction by approximately 6" to 12 ' 0" . The application is
also to increase the height of the fence from 4 ' 0" to 6"0" . This
would be done to diminish the noise produced by the chiller. The
chiller enclosure would be constructed of tongue and groove beaded
siding, lined with acoustical materials, and would have an
interior, lower roof not visible from the exterior. A fence cap
would finish the top of the enclosure. The 6 ' 0" fence would match
the present flush board fence along Mall Street, and would extend
only to the westerly change in direction of the fence.
The second application is to relocate the chiller to the Mall
Street side of the property, and enclose it with an acoustically
lined enclosure to diminish noise generated by the chiller. The
enclosure would be constructed of tongue and groove beaded siding,
capped with a fence cap. It would have an interior lower roof not
visible from the exterior. Size would be 14 ' 0" x 1010" x 10110"
• high. This would be done to remove the source of noise from the
eastern side of the property and comply with a ruling of the Salem
Building Inspector that the previously approved chiller does not
conform with the Salem Zoning Ordinance.
Staley McDermet, representing the Bertram Home, stated that the
chiller operates July 1st to October 1st and that a consultant firm
recommended the changes to the enclosure. Mr. McDermet stated that
the noise level is not below the legal limits, but is 10 decibels
above. The lst application addresses the noise issue and the
Bertram Home would have to go before the Board of Appeal and
request a finding that the chiller and enclosure is not a
'structure' and therefore not subject to zoning setbacks so that it
can remain where it is .
Mr. McDermet stated that the previous Building Inspector ruled it
was not a structure and approved its location. The abutters
questioned the current Building Inspector who has ruled that it is
a structure and is not within the setback limits . Mr. McDermet
stated that since it is a corner lot, the Building Department
states that there are no side yard setbacks but rather two rear
setbacks, which have 30 ' limit. Mr. McDermet provided a drawing
indicating the remaining space on the property to relocate the
chiller to be within the required setbacks .
• Mr. Slam asked when it will go before the Board of Appeal . Mr.
McDermet replied that it is scheduled for April 27 .
• April 6, 1994 , Page 8
Mr. Slam stated that he recalled the chiller was minimally visible,
but that he would want a site visit. Mr. Slam felt the Board of
Appeal should act first.
Mr. Cook stated that he would also like a site visit. Mr. Carr was
in agreement and stated that they should try to keep the chiller in
the current location where it is most minimally visible. Mr. Carr
felt that someone from the Commission should go to the Board of
Appeal meeting.
Mr. Carr asked if the equipment could go underground. Mr. McDermet
stated that he has not looked into it but felt there could be an
access problem.
Mr. McDermet noted that the roof might stop the noise from bouncing
off the wall .
Mr. Casey was concerned with the height and also wanted a site
visit. Mr. Casey questioned if the design could be more in
sympathy.
Mr. Carr asked if the issue was with noise only. Mr. Ted Richards,
35 Pleasant St. , who manages the abutting property, stated that it
• is a noise and site issue.
Mr. Carr suggested landscaping be put on the neighbor' s side at the
expense of the Bertram Home.
Chairman Oedel read a letter from Judith Doering, owner of 2
Oliver/33 Washington Sq. N and 31 Washington Sq. N. in opposition
to the chiller unit and enclosure based on noise, aesthetics and
zoning.
Michael Koffman, Attorney for the Doerings ( 32 Village Brook Ln. ,
Natick, MA 01760) , stated that the needs of the Bertram Home and
the abutters can both be met by moving the chiller.
Chairman Oedel stated that in the Commission' s review for
historical appropriateness, they often have to combine 20th century
items within the historic property.
Mr. Carr believed the chiller was originally approved based on
minimal visibility.
Ms . Guy suggested that the Commission look at the relocation design
in case additional drawings are needed for the next meeting.
Chairman Oedel asked Mr. Carr to define Hardship. Mr. Carr felt
• that to what extent the equipment is required, alternative
solutions and comparative costs should be considered. Ms . Guy
stated that there is a definition in Chapter 40C which, in summary,
l
April 6, 1994, Page 9
states that Hardship is when the denial of a Certificate of
Appropriateness would cause Hardship, financial or otherwise, to
the owner. Ms . Guy felt the language was vague. Chairman Oedel
asked Mr. Carr to define Hardship for the next meeting.
Chairman Oedel asked Mr. Hughes of the Bertram Home to provide a
definition of the necessity of the unit for the next meeting.
Chairman Oedel asked Mr. McDermet to look a different locations for
the equipment including inside the building.
A site visit was set for Saturday, April 9 , 1994 at 9 : 00 a.m.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Cook
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
MA. Guy
k of t e Commission
•
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
• APRIL 9 , 1994
The Salem Historical Commission attended a site visit of the Bertram
Home at 29 Washington Square North on Saturday, April 9, 1994 at 10:00
a.m. Present were Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Carr, Casey and Slam.
Also present were Cliff Hughes, Campbell Seamans and Staley McDermet
representing the Bertram Home, Ted Richards and Attorney Koffman
representing the Doering' s who are abutters of the property.
The Commission reviewed the existing chiller enclosure and the proposal
to alter the existing enclosure and fence as well as the proposal to
relocate the chiller.
Mr. Carr asked if the equipment would fit on the rooftop.
Representatives from the Bertram Home stated that the possibility has
not been explored.
Mr. Richards stated that any approval for the existing site will draw a
lawsuit. Chairman Oedel stated that the Commission' s jurisdiction is
only for historical appropriateness .
Mr. Slam asked if the issue with the Doering' s was appropriateness or
sound. Mr. Richards replied that the issue was with sound.
Mr. Carr stated that sound ( 10 decibels noise rise) is a health
• department issue and that the Zoning Board of Appeal was probably the
correct forum for the discussion.
Mr. McDermet stated that sound can be attenuated by increasing the
distance from the sound and by changing the shape and baffling of the
chiller. This can be topped with architectural details to make it more
appropriate, possibly like a summer house. Since a decision from both
boards will be needed, it was decided to come to the Historical
Commission first .
Chairman Oedel felt the chiller was quite visible from Mall street in
the existing location and that at ten feet tall, the top would have to
mirror the top course of bricks over the lintel of the windows.
Chairman Oedel stated that all alternatives should be explored including
but not limited to water cooled chillers, rooftop mounting and attic
mounting.
Mr. Carr noted that Victorian water towers were once common. Mr. Carr
noted that intersections of buildings are good places for this.
The Commission felt that the proposal presented for relocation was
unlikely to be considered appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard Oedef��,4l
Chairman
April 20, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
APRIL 20, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, April 20, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA.
Present were Messrs . Casey, Slam, Kelleher and Cook. Mr. Bailey entered
later in the meeting. Mr. Casey chaired the meeting.
121 Federal St.
John Paul Lenney and Mary Pax-Lenney presented an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at their home at 121
Federal Street. The body will be Pratt & Lambert Pewter 28 GV-P and the
trim will be white. The application is also to repair/replace any
rotten wood clapboards .
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
26 Beckford St.
Mary Lee Storrs submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for paint colors at her home at 26 Beckford Street. the
• main body of the house will be Caldwell Green HC-124, the shutters on
the front of the house will be Hancock Gray HC-97 , the window sash and
mullions will be Sandy Hook Gray HC-108, and the front and back doors
will be Waterbury Green HC-136 . The applicant was not present.
Mr. Kelleher felt there were too many colors for such a small house.
Mr. Casey had concerns about the proposed shutter color.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application. There was no
second.
Ms . Guy suggested approving an acceptable color scheme and continuing
the application in case the applicant wants to make a case for the
original proposal or another option.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the body, trim and sash to be
Caldwell Green, the doors to be Sandy Hook Gray and the shutters to be
Waterbury Green and to continue the application until the next meeting.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
5 Chestnut Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Blake and Nina Anderson
• submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
renovation of third floor dormers at 5 Chestnut Street. Mr. Cook stated
that the applicants would not be attending. Ms . Guy stated that there
is not enough time left to continue the application.
April 20, 1994 , Page 2
• Mr. Kelleher made a motion to deny the application without prejudice.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
54 Turner Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, the House of Seven Gables
presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
installation of an awning outside of the kitchen on the Turner Street
side of the House of Seven Gables .
Ms . Guy stated that the applicants have requested a continuance.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to continue the application until the next
meeting. Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
29 Washington Square
In continuation from a previous meeting, the John Bertram House Trust
submitted two applications for Certificate of Hardship for 29 Washington
Sq. North.
The first is to increase the height of the existing chiller enclosure
• and the second application is to relocate the chiller to the Mall Street
side of the property, and enclose it with an acoustically lined
enclosure to diminish noise generated by the chiller.
Ms . Guy stated that the applicants have requested a continuance.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application until the next
meeting. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
44 Warren Street
Mike Kantorosinski submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-
Applicability to repair the clapboards, repair broken porches and
repaint the entire house white at 44 Warren Street. The work is to be
completed within 6 months . Ms . Guy noted that the next agenda will
include an application from the owner to change the second floor porch
rails to match the first floor and to replace or remove the shutters .
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Bailey entered the meeting at this time.
8 Gifford Court
Shirley Walker and Robin O'Neil submitted an application for a
Certificate of Non-Applicability to reshingle the roof in the same color
and material and to repair the chimneys .
r -
April 20, 1994 , Page 3
• Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr.
Kelleher seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
15 Beckford Street
Peter Copelas submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-
applicability to remove asphalt siding in the rear of the building in
the area noted on the application and to replace with clapboards .
Ms . Guy stated that the owner is using this non-visible area to test
what is underneath before applying for the visible portions of the
house.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to enthusiastically approve the application
as submitted. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
14 Cambridge Street
James and Phyllis Ballou submitted an application for a Certificate of
Non-applicability to scrape, prime, repaint and repair the house and
shutters .
• Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Correspondence
Edward Mello sent a letter in reply to the Commission' s letter
concerning railings replaced at 302 Lafayette Street. Mr. Mello wrote
that he purchased the house on 1/14/93 and has made not changes since
owning it. Mr. Mello noted that he painted the outside trim and front
piazza. Ms . Guy stated that the Commission has waived violations for
other new owners such as the house missing the ballastrade and widows
walk on Essex Street. Ms . Guy felt it was not good public relations to
go after the new owner, when the Commission did not notify the previous
owner of any violation. Mr. Kelleher was in agreement. Mr. Bailey felt
it did not matter when the house was purchased if the work was done
after the district was formed. Mr. Casey stated that Mr. Mello' s
recourse would be to the former owner. Ms . Guy will send a letter to
Mr. Mello requiring that the violation be addressed.
Ms . Guy read a letter from Dr. Joel Green concerning railings at 310
Lafayette Street. Dr. Green indicated that he needs some idea of what
the Commission would approve. Mr. Slam stated that the current
ballasters are interior and that Dr. Green should selected an exterior
ballaster. Mr. Slam stated that the ballasters should also be spaced
closer together. Mr. Slam stated that he would be willing to do a site
• visit. Ms . Guy will send another letter and ask Dr. Green to come to a
meeting.
Ms . Guy read a letter from Massachusetts Historical Commission to the
owners of the Joshua Ward House which stated that there is a
April 20, 1994, Page 4
• preservation restriction in effect through January, 2000 . The letter
also states that the projected new use as a antique book shop appears to
be compatible for the house.
8 Carpenter Street
Kathleen Karydis submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to reconstruct the shed addition, to eliminate the door
on the side of the shed, and to add doors and windows on the back of the
shed. The applicant was not present and drawings had not been provided.
Mr. Bailey made a motion to continue the application until the next
meeting. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
Preservation Awards
Mr. Cook nominated the yellow Greek Revival/Italianate house on Mason
Street.
Violations
Mr. Casey stated that 2 Flint Street has added railroad ties to the
property.
There being no further business, Mr. Kelleher made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
JaA. Guy
C1 rk of the ommission
l
,
• May 4 , 1994 , Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
MAY 4 , 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, May 4, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green. Present
were Chairman Oedel, Messrs. Kelleher, Casey, Slam and Cook, Ms .
Sides and Ms . Guy. Mr. Carr entered later in the meeting.
Chairman Oedel welcomed Helen Sides who has been appointed an
alternate member to the Commission.
26 Beckford Street
In continuation from a previous meeting Mary Lee Storrs was present
concerning an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for
paint colors for her home at 26 Beckford Street. Ms . Storrs
amended her application to have the body and window sash and
mullions to be Ford Blue, for the shutters to be Bayberry and the
front and back doors to be Herb Garden Green. (Paint by Pratt &
Lambert)
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to accept the amended application as
• presented. Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and
the motion so carried.
400 Essex Street
Claire and Edward Sabbagh presented an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at 400 Essex
Street. The body of the house will be Pratt and Lambert #2073
Albite and the trim will be Benjamin Moore PH-148 Jamestown Blue
with a touch of green mixed into it.
Ms . Sabbagh stated that the shutters will be painted the trim
color.
Mr. Kelleher asked what color the brackets along the eaves would be
painted. Ms . Sabbagh replied that they would be the same as the
body. The door reveal and mullions will be the trim color. The
front door will remain natural . Ms . Sabbagh stated that they will
also be replacing the wood on the front step and will polyurethane
it.
Mr. Slam made a motion to accept the application as submitted. Mr.
Kelleher seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
115 Federal Street
Darleen Melis and Irving Ingraham submitted an application for a
• May 4, 1994, Page 2
Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the gutter across the
main facade of the house with copper gutters and downspouts at each
corner.
Ms . Melis stated that the work is needed due to water damage. The
downspout will run down the clapboards since the fence goes into
the cornerboard.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
54 Turner St.
Chairman Oedel stated for the record that there is the potential
for the appearance of a Conflict of Interest by his chairing the
meeting, due to his wife being the Executive Director of the
Gables . Chairman Oedel stated that the State has ruled there is no
conflict and that he has filed the appropriate disclosures with the
City Clerk.
In continuation from a previous meeting, the House of Seven Gables
presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for
• the installation of an awning outside of the kitchen on the Turner
Street side of the House of Seven Gables .
Chairman Oedel stated that the applicants would not be present to
provide additional information.
Mr. Slam made a motion to deny the application without prejudice
due to the Commission being unable to continue the application
until the next meeting due to the time constraint that the
Commission must act within 60 days of receiving an application.
Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
72 Washington Square East
John and Nancy Sachetti requested a waiver of the public hearing
and submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
for paint colors at 72 Washington Square East. The body will be
Benjamin Moore Georgetown Gray #73 stain. Shutters to be black and
trim to be white as existing. The applicants collected the
abutters signatures .
Mr. Slam made a motion to waive the public hearing. Mr. Kelleher
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
• Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
w
• May 4 , 1994, Page 3
29 Washington Square North
In continuation from a previous meeting, the John Bertram House
Trust submitted two applications for Certificate of Hardship for 29
Washington Sq. North. Cliff Hughes and Staley McDermet represented
the Bertram Home. Due to a business relationship with Mr. Hughes,
Ms . Sides abstained from the discussion and left the room for this
public hearing.
The first is to increase the height of the existing chiller
enclosure and the second application is to relocate the chiller to
the Mall Street side of the property, and enclose it with an
acoustically lined enclosure to diminish noise generated by the
chiller.
Mr. Casey stated that some of the Commission members attending a
site visit at the Bertram Home. Ms . Guy read the minutes
pertaining to the site visit.
Mr. McDermet stated that he is trying to get information on a
water-cooled system. Mr. Hughes stated that they are also looking
into covering the compressor with lead as well as other methods to
reduce the noise.
• Chairman Oedel stated that in order for the Commission to approve
any alteration the applicants will have to show why other methods
are not possible, eg. that water cooled is not economical or a roof
or ceiling unit won't fit or is an economic hardship.
Mr. Hughes stated that he would like to have something from the
Commission concerning the application for relocation to bring to
the Board of Appeal .
Chairman Oedel stated that some potentially acceptable locations
were identified at the site visit. Chairman Oedel stated that
although they may be considered for historical appropriateness,
they may not be acceptable to zoning.
Mr. Slam was opposed to any relocation and noted that the proposed
is highly visible.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application for relocation as
submitted in hopes that it would fail . Mr. Slam made his motion
based on hardship not being proven due to there being other options
which are less visible from the public way, including the existing
location. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. There were no votes
in favor, all were opposed and the motion was denied.
• Mr. Kelleher made a motion to deny the application for alteration
of the existing chiller and enclosure without prejudice due to the
lack of sufficient information in order for the Commission to make
. May 4, 1994 , Page 4
a determination within the 60 day period. Mr. Casey seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
The applicant was advised to refile as soon as more definitive
information was available for the Commission to make an informed
decision.
Ms . Sides rejoined the meeting.
10 Hamilton/24 Chestnut Street
Barry Paul & V. Kelly and Ellen Alexander submitted an application
for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the alteration of the
fence between the two properties which was installed with first
having received approval by the Commission and which was recently
denied approval as existing. The application stated that they
would cut the end and center posts of the existing fence to be
level with the pickets . The post tops would be angled. A bar
would be placed over the pickets .
Ms . Guy stated that the applicants were unable to attend the
meeting and have requested a continuance.
Mr. Casey made a motion to deny the application due to the design
being inappropriate to the house, site and location. Mr. Slam
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Casey has been designated to work with the applicants toward
the selection of a historically appropriate fence treatment.
44 Warren Street
Mike Kantorosinski submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to replace the second floor porch railings to match
the first floor porch railings with no changes in design and for
the option to replace shutters or remove them if replacement
shutters cannot be located.
Ms . Guy noted that the work has already started.
A letter from James and Helen Baldwin was read which approved of
the proposed alterations with the exception of removal of the
shutters .
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the porch portion of the
application as submitted.
Mr. Casey stated that Mr. Carr had indicated that the work appeared
• to be fine.
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion.
• May 4, 1994 , Page 5
Mr. Casey preferred not to act without drawings and was concerned
if the applicant pulled a Building Permit and if the work was being
done to code.
Mr. Slam suggested that the Building Department be flagged or that
the application be continued so that the Commission members could
go by the property.
Chairman Oedel stated that the Commission has a photograph of thee
existing conditions and that the application is clear to match the
first floor porch. Chairman Oedel stated that the work underway
appears to match and felt there was enough documentation to vote.
Chairman Oedel, Mr. Cook and Mr. Kelleher voted in favor. Mr.
Casey and Mr. Slam voted in opposition. The motion was so carried.
Mr. Carr joined the meeting at this time.
Mr. Carr questioned if it could be considered inappropriate to
remove shutters .
It was noted that the property came into the district with
shutters .
• Mr. Cook made a motion to repair or replace the shutters to match
existing. Mr. Casey seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
Mr. Casey made a motion to deny removal of the shutters . Mr. Carr
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
30-32 Beckford Street
Rolf and Cynthia Frank-Otten submitted an application for a
Certificate of Non-Applicability to repoint brick walls and
chimneys, replace clapboard covered door opening with brick,
replace damaged and rotten clapboards ( 6" x 1/2" cedar, 4"
visible) , replace rotten moldings, soffit, facia, eaves and
windowsills, replace rotten gutters with wood gutters and copper
downspouts and replace black fiberglass roof shingles and drip
edge. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was also
submitted with a request to waive the public hearing to replace 1
over 1 sash to 6 over 6 wherever missing, replace a 35 pane window
opening with a 6 over 6 window and replace first floor window sills
to match the second floor.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve a Certificate of Non-
Applicability to repoint brickwalls and chimneys, replace damaged
• and rotten clapboards ( 6" x 1/2" cedar, 4" visible) , replace rotten
moldings, soffit, facia, eaves and windowsills, replace rotten
gutters with wood gutters and copper downspouts and replace black
• May 4 , 1994, Page 6
fiberglass roof shingles and drip edge. Mr. Slam seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Carr made a motion to waive the public hearing. Mr. Kelleher
seconded the motion.
Mr. Slam stated that he was opposed to waiving the public hearing
unless it was imperative.
Mr. Carr stated that the alterations were minimal, that neighbors
he has spoken to are in favor and that the neighbors will get
notice that they have ten days to request a public hearing.
Mr. Cook stated that he was opposed to a waiver if there is no
crisis .
Mr. Kelleher and Mr. Casey stated that they had no problem with a
waiver.
Chairman Oedel stated that he had no problem waiving the public
hearing since the work was primarily on the back sides and was of
minimal impact on appropriateness .
• Mr. Slam stated that public hearings are for neighbors to hear what
is applied for and provide input.
The motion was voted upon. Chairman Oedel, Ms . Sides and Messrs .
Carr, Casey and Kelleher voted in favor. Messrs . Slam and Cook
voted in opposition. The motion was so carried.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness,
subject to abutter notification, to replace the clapboard covered
door opening with brick, to replace 1 over 1 sash to 6 over 6 sash
wherever missing, to replace the first floor window sills to match
the second floor and to replace the 35 pane window with a 6 over 6
window that matches the second floor. Mr. Casey seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
8 Carpenter Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Kathleen Karydis submitted
an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to reconstruct
the shed addition, to eliminate the door on the side of the shed,
and to add doors and windows on the back of the shed. The
applicant was not present and drawings had not been provided.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application until the next
meeting. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
• motion so carried.
• May 4, 1994, Page 7
Minutes
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the minutes of 4/6/94 , 4/9/94
and 4/20/94 . Mr. Carr seconded the motion. All were in favor and
the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms . Guy stated that she would like to revisit the issue of 302
Lafayette Street. Ms . Guy felt it was bad public relations to
enforce a violation on a current homeowner when the violation was
created by the previous homeowner more than 1 year ago. Ms . Guy
stated that the Commission previously set a precedent when it
decided not to enforce the violation at 376 Essex Street.
Chairman Oedel stated felt that the length of time and whether the
violation is a continuing violation that the Commission has been
chasing were issues to consider. Chairman Oedel felt it would be
acceptable to pursue the violation if the current owner purchased
the property last month and the previous owner made the
inappropriate alteration the month before in order to facilitate a
sale.
Mr. Carr stated that he thought the Commission' s policy was not to
saddle the new buyer with the problem but that he preferred the
policy be that the violation runs with the property and the owner
has recourse to the seller. Mr. Carr stated that whatever the
policy, it should be consistent.
Mr. Slam questioned if the violation occurred after the creation of
the district . Mr. Casey will research.
Preservation Awards
Mr. Casey stated that Historic Salem, Inc. ' s annual dinner has been
changed to 6/16/94 .
The following properties were added to the nominations for awards :
84 Federal St.
10 Monroe St. - pergola
144 Federal St. - fence
5 Chestnut St. - fence.
1 Pickering - dormer
152 Bay View Ave.
23 Arbella St.
135 Bridge St.
• Violations
Mr. Carr requested that a letter be sent to 10 Summer Street
May 4 , 1994 , Page 8
concerning a railroad tie wall .
Mr. Carr requested that a letter be sent to the Building Inspector
concerning complaints that auto repairs are being undertaken at 2
Flint St. and requesting that they take appropriate action since
the Commission has no jurisdiction.
Mr. Slam requested a letter be sent to the Building Inspector
concerning a "hot dog" sign at Nicole' s on Essex Street.
Mr. Cook made a motion for the three letters concerning violations
be sent. Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
Correspondence
Ms . Guy stated that the Salem Willows Historic District has been
accepted for listing on the National Register.
Ms . Guy stated that the Commission received a letter from an artist
who draws renderings of architecture.
District Expansion Poll
Ms . Guy stated that the Commission received responses on 196 out of
1017 properties - 2 had no opinion, 60 were in support, 116 were
not in support and 18 needed more information and have not
responded since. Ms . Guy provided a colored map which indicated
which properties were in support or not in support. Ms . Guy felt
that there was no area where there was a strong majority of support
which left herif with the conclusion that more education and
feedback was needed. Chairman Oedel felt that assistance from
neighborhood groups would be needed.
There being no further business, Mr. Cook made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Carr seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jankof
Cle Commission
• May 18, 1994 , Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
MAY 18, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, May 18, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA.
Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms . Sides, Messrs . Kelleher, Carr,
Casey, Bailey and Slam and Ms . Guy.
Chairman Oedel expressed concern over the possibility that the
Museum' s cooperative may proposed to demolish the remaining portion
of the head house of the Armory.
29-35 Warren Street
The Trustees U/Article 8 u/w Stephen Phillips presented an
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace
deteriorated galvanized iron roofing and renew with natural slate
to match existing that is presently on the mansard roof at 31, 33
and 35 Warren Street. j
Mr. Carr made a motion to enthusiastically approve the application
as submitted.
• Kevin Kidney, the contractor for the project, provided samples of
the existing and proposed slate and stated that it was an exact
match. Mr. Kidney noted that the gambrel portion of the roof was
already slate. The current slate is random width and the proposed
will also be installed in random widths .
Mr. Slam seconded Mr. Carr' s motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
8 Carpenter Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Kathleen Karydis submitted
an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to reconstruct
the shed addition, to eliminate the door on the side of the shed,
and to add doors and windows on the back of the shed. The
applicant was not present and drawings had not been provided.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application until the next
meeting. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
72 Washington Square E.
Ms . Guy stated that the public hearing on the application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness from John and Nancy Sachetti for
paint colors was waived at the last meeting.
There was no public comment.
r ,
• May 18, 1994, Page 2
274 Lafayette Street
John H. Ronan presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for total restoration of the carriage house at 274
Lafayette Street. Drawings were provided and Mr. Ronan presented
enlarged photographs of the existing conditions .
Chairman Oedel read a letter in support of the application from
Marie Plamondon at 278 Lafayette Street.
Mr. Ronan stated that the carriage house is not salvageable and
that the framing is too far gone. A fire, sixteen years ago, left
the interior exposed to the weather. The cupola burnt down in 1978
and the structure is listing toward 278 Lafayette Street. Mr.
Ronan stated that the foundation is no good and that by tearing
down the building and essentially rebuilding as is, they will save
$30, 000-50, 000 . Mr. Ronan stated that he proposed to save as much
as possible including cornice, front molding, brackets and oval
windows .
Mr. Ronan proposed some changes to the existing. Changes include
that the door height will be lowered so that more standard sized
garage doors can be used. The doors will have a central post and
the doors will slide up. The size of the doors will facilitate the
• accommodation of two cars . The rear facade will extend to the
length of the rear appendage and will be square off . The slope of
the rear roof will change from 12 over 14 to 12 over 12, while they
will maintain the same pitch on the front roof . One window, facing
278 Lafayette Street on the bottom, will be removed. The cupola
will be added.
Mr. Slam asked the time frame for the project. Mr. Ronan stated
that he would like to start by early summer and complete within two
weeks of starting.
Mr. Slam stated that the project was ambitious and great, but that
he would like a site visit.
Ms . Sides asked what generated the cupola design. Mr. Ronan stated
that he could not locate any old photographs and that he looked at
other cupolas in Salem including one at Ocean and Summit Avenues .
Ms . Sides felt the cupola was proportionately small and not as
grand as the rest of the structure.
Mr. Carr agreed with Ms . Sides and asked if the new structure will
be sited in the same location. Mr. Ronan replied in the
affirmative.
Mr. Ronan stated that a variance from side yard setback will be
• needed because the lot will not be in compliance once the structure
is demolished.
• May 18, 1994 , Page 3
Mr. Ronan noted that the entryway is now 5-6 inches of the ground
and he proposes a concrete apron.
Mr. Carr stated that the center panel doesn't trouble him and asked
if the applicant looked into doors that swing out. Mr. Ronan
replied in the negative and stated that he would like the doors to
be able to open with an electric garage door opener. Mr. Ronan
stated that the doors will be all wood, customized to match the
trim of the existing.
Mr. Casey asked if it were possible, that once the building is
demolished, that the new carriage house won't be built. Mr. Ronan
stated that it was not possible and that the funding has already
been allotted.
Mr. Slam asked if the project is on the Board of Appeal agenda yet.
Mr. Ronan replied in the negative.
Chairman Oedel stated that he did not believe that the windows
specified had intregal muntins and mullions . Mr. Ronan stated that
he would want they to be intregal .
Mr. Carr suggested further investigation into cupolas .
Debra Hilbert, 10 Winter Street, stated that she will likely be
purchasing the property behind the applicant and asked if the roof
height will be the same. Mr. Ronan stated that it will be the same
height with a slightly different pitch. Ms . Hilbert asked if the
structure will be used to garage cars . Mr. Ronan replied in the
affirmative and stated that it will not have heart, water, or
sewerage and that there is no outside door to the loft.
Mary Dorothy Theriault, 278 Lafayette Street stated that she is a
third floor tenant and that she admires and appreciates what the
Ronans have done to their property since purchasing it.
Chairman Oedel closed the public hearing.
Mr. Kelleher was concerned over the design of the cupola but
preferred the proposed doors . Mr. Kelleher stated that he could
approve the concept contingent that more details be supplied on the
cupola and doors .
Mr. Carr stated that his only concerns were with the cupola and
doors and noted that the doors may be out of scale with the rest of
the .building. Mr. Carr asked if the same clapboards will be used.
Mr. Ronan stated that the back will remain clapboards and the front
will remain shiplap.
Mr. Bailey stated that it was a worthy project and agreed that the
doors and cupola approval should be held for further review.
• May 18, 1994, Page 4
Mr. Casey felt the proposed carriage house treatment was in
sympathy.
Ms . Theriault stated that doors opening outward will be difficult
with snow.
Mr. Slam stated that he had no problem with the proposal but would
be more comfortable with a site visit.
Ms . Sides was thrilled with the project but had concerns with the
doors, cupola and windows . Ms . Sides felt the door height should
not be lowered in order to keep the proportions.
Mr. Ronan stated that he had three designs completed and felt the
garage doors would not work if the height was raised. Mr. Ronan
stated that if it were raised, they would have to put in bridge
work.
Mr. Carr asked if the drawings were in scale. Mr. Ronan replied in
the affirmative. Mr. Carr asked if the drawings replicated
existing measurements except for the rear roof line and rear wall .
Mr. Ronan replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Slam made a motion to have a site visit. There was no second.
• Mr. Carr felt most of the work could be approved tonight and that
details could be resolved at a site visit.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the demolition and reconstruction
of the carriage house as per plans submitted with the exception of
the cupola, doors and windows of which are to be continued to the
meeting of June 15, 1994 . Approval is conditional that no
demolition begin until variances are obtained and the work is ready
to commence. Approval is subject to the applicant using as much of
the original materials and details as possible and that the
building be located at the same site. The motion also includes
that the Commission send a letter to the Board of Appeal endorsing
the application for a variance. Mr. Casey seconded the motion.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
19 North Street
Gary Sackrider presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the permanent removal of the gutter on the
south side of 19 North Street.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Bailey seconded the motion.
• Mr. Slam asked if the gutter was aluminum. Mr. Sackrider replied
in the affirmative.
. May 18, 1994 , Page 5
Mr. Carr asked what will be revealed. Mr. Sackrider stated that
the gutter ripped of the molding and that he will put the molding
back to match existing.
Mr. Carr amended his motion that the facia is to duplicate that
which is on the return that is parallel with North Street. Mr.
Bailey seconded the amendment.
Mr. Kelleher asked if the asphalt shingles will be repaired. Mr.
Sackrider replied in the affirmative.
The motion was voted upon, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
30-32 Beckford Street
Ms . Guy stated that the public hearing on the application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness from Rolf & Cynthia Frank-Otten was
waived at the last meeting.
There was no public comment.
54 Turner Street
• Chairman Oedel stated for the record that there is the potential
for the appearance of a Conflict of Interest by his chairing the
meeting, due to his wife being the Executive Director of the
Gables . Chairman Oedel stated that the State has ruled there is no
conflict and that he has filed the appropriate disclosures with the
City Clerk.
The House of Seven Gables Settlement requested a waiver of public
hearing and presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for a roof enclosure for the kitchen exhaust fan
and to lower the parking lot elevation plan which would eliminate
the handicapped ramp and entrance stairs in front of the new
education center.
Marie Oedel, representing the Gables, stated that they are
requesting a waiver due to time constraints and that the machinery
is on site.
Mr. Carr felt that parameters for considering a waiver of the
public hearing is when time constraints are not the fault of the
applicant and that the work is not controversial . Mr. Carr felt a
site visit was needed.
Mr. Slam stated that several members have made individual site
visits .
Mr. Casey asked the timeframe. Ms . Oedel stated that every day the
project is delayed, delays the manufacture of materials and their
• May 18, 1994, Page 6
installation. Ms . Oedel stated that too much delay will result in
having to stay with the originally approved plan due to financial
and time constraints .
Mr. Casey stated that there wasn't any controversy on the ramp and
stairs when originally reviewed.
Mr. Bailey suggested that the Commission vote at a site visit.
Mr. Slam asked if the roof enclosure was also critical . Mr. Oedel
replied in the affirmative and stated that if they can' t have the
roof enclosure, they can't have a kitchen. Ms . Oedel stated that
they received conflicting opinions from two different fire
inspectors .
Ms . Oedel stated that the opening is 20" x 20" and will vent
through the roof, through a wooden louvered enclosure stained dark
brown. It will be placed over to the left as far as possible so as
not to obstruct the Bystrom' s view of the ocean.
David Bystrom stated that he was comfortable with the vent.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he had no problem with the vent.
Mr. Carr felt it should be brick and read like a chimney. Mr.
Bailey stated that there was no foundation for a chimney. Mr.
Casey stated that it has to be louvered for the air to get in.
Mr. Bailey agreed that the proposed may not look right and asked if
it will be on the peak. Ms . Oedel stated that it will be just off
the peak. Mr. Bailey stated that he had reservations with the
design.
Ms . Oedel stated that she was told that it has to be louvered. Ms .
Oedel stated that a chimney won' t accomplish this function and the
building has no support for a chimney.
Mr. Casey questioned that if air is needed, should this be a case
of hardship.
Chairman Oedel stated that the Commission approved a similar vent
in the new buildings behind Phillips School and at the condo
complex at the Willows that the Commission had design review over.
Mr. Kelleher asked if the louvers will pop out when the fan kicks
in. Mr. Seamans, also representing the Gables, replied in the
negative.
Chairman Oedel read a letter from the Gables ' contractor stating
• that he could not get a permit from the fire inspector to discharge
from the side wall .
• May 18, 1994, Page 7
Ms . Oedel stated that she needed direction on the kitchen vent or
they will have to cancel the kitchen.
Mr. Casey stated that the Commission should separate the two
portions of the application.
Mr. Slam was in agreement and suggested a poll around the table.
Mr. Slam felt there should be another solution but would accept as
a hardship if no other solution is found.
Ms . Sides was in agreement and accepted the need, but felt there
may be another solution. Ms . Sides preferred a site visit on the
parking lot issue. Ms . Sides also suggested that the Fire
Inspector be checked with again.
Chairman Oedel stated that there were three issues - location,
concept and materials . Chairman Oedel felt that there appeared to
be no problem with the location and that the concept does not
appear to be an issue. Chairman Oedel felt that materials appear
to be the sole problem.
Mr. Carr felt the concept and the materials are the same issue and
that they were problematic . Mr. Carr suggested a site visit on
Saturday to get a consensus and to ratify a decision at the next
• meeting.
Mr. Slam made a motion to poll the Commission members . There was
no second.
Mr. Slam preferred to see another solution, but, if none, would be
willing to approve under Hardship.
Mr. Casey felt it was a hardship situation and did not feel the
Gables could get a waiver from the fire inspector. Mr. Casey
stated there was nothing appropriate about the design.
Ms . Sides agreed with hardship. Ms . Sides preferred to see another
idea and suggested making it look more like a cupola than a
chimney.
Mr. Bailey felt that the proposed design or cupola will look like
a black chimney after time from the exhaust. Mr. Bailey did not
feel it was a good solution in the long term. Mr. Bailey had a
problem with hardship since the project was changed from a
residential to a commercial kitchen.
Mr. Carr did not feel it was legally a hardship. Mr. Carr felt the
situation was self-created. Mr. Carr preferred a different
solution and did not want to vote for approval tonight. Mr. Carr
• felt he could give guidance after a site visit and felt that the
issue was not non-controversial . Mr. Carr wanted to consider
cupola, stucco, chimney and other design solutions .
• May 18, 1994 , Page 8
Mr. Kelleher felt the issue was hardship and had not problem with
the location. Mr. Kelleher stated that the abutter who has been
most concerned with the project has no objection. Mr. Kelleher
felt the concept was acceptable and that the design was acceptable
because venting is needed. Mr. Kelleher felt a cupola would look
odd on the side.
Chairman Oedel had no problem with the location or concept.
Chairman Oedel had some problem with the materials, but felt they
could be covered after installation if they did not look right.
Mr. Casey made a motion to waive the public hearing on the vent.
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion.
Mr. Carr felt the public hearing should not be waived.
Mr. Slam stated that his previous stance has been to vote against
waivers, but that he would approve the proposal if waived.
Chairman Oedel stated that, in general, he does not like to waive
public hearings in respect to the abutters . Chairman Oedel noted
that the only abutter who has been concerned is present and that
there is a need based on a ruling from the fire inspector.
• Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Casey, Kelleher and Bailey and Ms . Sides
voted in favor. Mr. Carr and Mr. Slam voted in opposition. The
motion was so carried.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve a Certificate of Hardship for
the vent in the location presented with the material to be wooden,
louvered and painted black due to the code requirements and
conflicting opinions from the fire inspector' s office. Mr. Slam
seconded the motion.
Mr. Carr felt that the Commission should get verification that the
proposed is the only solution. Mr. Carr felt that the proposal was
being voted for in haste and stated that he was against the
proposal and the procedure.
Ms . Sides asked if the venting equipment was the same no matter
what showed on the outside. Mr. Seamans replied in the
affirmative. Ms . Sides concluded that the sleeve could be almost
anything. Ms . Sides asked if it were crucial that the interior
equipment portion be installed immediately. Ms . Oedel replied in
the affirmative. Ms . Sides stated that if the Commission approved
the concept and location, there could still be further discussion
on the exterior materials .
Mr. Slam suggested amending the motion so that if the Commission or
• the applicant cannot locate another solution, to allow the
applicant to install the proposed and to reserve the final decision
on sleeve design until the June 1 meeting.
• May 18, 1994, Page 9
Mr. Casey amended his motion to approve the application for
Hardship for a vent in the proposed location with the exterior
cladding of the vent to be continued until the next meeting in
order for the applicant to come back with an exterior design
scheme. If no other scheme is acceptable, the proposed design is
approved. Mr. Slam seconded the amendment. Chairman Oedel and
Messrs . Kelleher, Casey, Bailey and Slam and Ms . Sides voted in
favor. Mr. Carr voted in opposition. The motion so carried.
Ms . Oedel stated that there are liability and maintenance issues
with the ramp and stairs due to the facade facing North. The
proposal is to eliminate the ramp and stair, shorten the canopy,
regrade the parking lot and change the parking so that the bus
parking does not obscure the view of the buildings .
Mr. Seamans noted that the change will get the handicap parking
closer to the building.
Mr. Carr stated that he would like a site visit and was concerned
that the complex will look like it is in a bowl . Mr. Carr stated
that the proposal could either exacerbate the site or improve the
site by taking away the ramp and stairs .
Mr. Bailey stated that contours look better than ramps .
• A site visit was scheduled for Saturday, May 21, 1994 at 9 : 30 a.m.
Mr. Bystrom stated that he would like to see more details including
drainage.
There was no motion to waive the public hearing.
15 Beckford St.
Peter Copelas was present to informally present a sample of a
window proposed for the rear of 15 Beckford Street. Although the
window will not be visible from the public way, if acceptable, it
would be used when the remaining facades of the house are restored.
Mr. Copelas is hoping to order all of the windows for the house
now, and install only the rear windows at this time. Mr. Copelas
would submit a formal application for the rest of the house.
The proposed window is made by J.B. Sash and is vinyl-clad wood,
double glaze. Mr. Carr believed it had been approved for 28
Beckford Street.
Mr. Al Bellesisle, the contractor for the project, stated that the
muntins and mullions are not removable.
• Mr. Copelas stated that the manufacturer will not guarantee the
wood without the vinyl cladding unless it is painted - not stained.
Mr. Copelas stated that he will not use paint because it does not
• May 18, 1994 , Page 10
maintain.
Chairman Oedel stated that he does not believe that the Commission
approved the window with the profile per the sample.
Ms . Sides suggested a single glaze with an energy panel with
screens .
Mr. Kelleher asked if the windows were currently 2 over 2 and if he
would be installing 6 over 6 . Mr. Copelas replied in the
affirmative. Mr. Kelleher felt the proposed would be okay if it
were all wood.
Mr. Carr stated that he does not want snap-ins, which would
undermine the sense of shadow. Mr. Carr stated that the Commission
has not approved vinyl clad. Mr. Slam was in agreement with Mr.
Carr.
Mr. Bailey stated that he could vote in favor of wood only.
Mr. Copelas stated that he cannot go with all wood because the
manufacturer will not guarantee the integrity of the seal without
paint. Mr. Copelas stated that he will not paint, only stain.
• Ms . Sides suggested buying a shop primed window which will have a
guaranteed finish for a specific time period.
Mr. Casey stated that he had no problem with the configuration, but
had a problem with the vinyl .
Ms . Sides stated that vinyl is not acceptable.
Chairman Oedel stated that vinyl clad is not acceptable. Chairman
Oedel stated that he would consider the double glaze in wood but
would prefer a higher profile.
Preservation Awards
The Commission decided on the following properties for preservation
awards :
IN DISTRICT:
111 FEDERAL ST. - PAUL & LESLIE TUTTLE - EXCELLENCE IN RESTORATION
91 FEDERAL ST. - LANCE, JEAN & CONSTANCE ARLANDER - SPECIAL AWARD
FOR GUTTER REPLACEMENT
84 FEDERAL ST. - JOHN & MARY WATHNE - EXCELLENCE IN RESTORATION
5 MONROE ST. - RICHARD & VICTORIA STEVENS - OUTSTANDING DESIGN
ACHIEVEMENT (PERGOLA)
• 144 FEDERAL ST. - ESTHER HENRY - EXCELLENCE IN FENCE DESIGN
5 CHESTNUT ST. - BLAKE & NINA ANDERSON - EXCELLENCE IN FENCE DESIGN
1 PICKERING - JOHN & LINDA LOCKE - SYMPATHETIC ADDITION
• May 18, 1994, Page 11
OUTSIDE DISTRICT:
155 WASHINGTON ST. - SALEM EVENING NEWS - OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT
IN STOREFRONT RESTORATION
21 OCEAN AVE . - MICHAEL & KAREN ANDREAS - SPECIAL AWARD FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT (PAINT COLOR)
18-20 MASON ST. - JOSEPH & JOAN ROGERS - HONORABLE MENTION FOR
PAINT COLORS/MAINTENANCE
23 & 27 ARBELLA ST. - GEORGE & KAREN TANCH & MICHAEL & STACIA KRAFT
- CO-AWARD FOR NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT (REMOVAL OF SIDING)
152 BAY VIEW AVE - SCOTT & LAURA CLARK - SYMPATHETIC CONSTRUCTION
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Carr seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Je A. Guk of t e Commission
•
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
MAY 21, 1994
The Salem Historical Commission conducted a site visit at the House of
Seven Gables on Saturday, May 21, 1994 , at 9 : 30 a.m. In attendance were
Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Carr, Casey, Slam and Kelleher. Representing
the Gables were Marie Oedel, Campbell Seamens, Bruce Goddard and their
engineer Scott Patrovitz . Interested residents in attendance included
David and Debbie Bystrom, Mrs . Sawicki?, and some of the condominium
owners from 125 Derby Street.
The parking lot re-grading proposal was divided into several areas .
In Area 1, located on the left' side of the visitor' s center, the Gables
proposes to close one Turner Street exit, widen the second exit, drop
the grade 24" and eliminate the "moat" at the side of the building.
Neighbors did not appear to have any desire to widen the curb-cut. They
appeared to be in support for dropping the grade, eliminating the "moat"
and closing one exit. The Commission appeared to be in favor of
lowering the grade and closing one curb-cut.
In Area 2, located between Area 1 and 42 Turner Street and extending
from Turner Street to the left corner of the main entrance to the
visitor center, the proposal is to drop the grade 18" at the fence line
with a rock wall installed similar to existing by Hardy Street. There
will be a gradual slope toward the building. The canopy for the
• entrance will be cut back from 18 feet to 10-12 feet. Neighbors
appeared to like the stone wall but were not certain about the grade.
Neighbors appeared to generally feel the proposal would be better than
the existing but had difficulty visualizing. Neighbors preferred to see
plans . Commission members generally appeared to have no problem with
the new proposal . There was some question about landscaping and a
desire to have the canopy disappear entirely. The Commission preferred
better sketches .
In Area 3, located between the northwest corner of 42 Turner Street and
the Phippen house (approximately 50-100 feet from the visitor center) ,
the proposal is to gradually slope into the building to meet the grade
in Area 2 . It will slope up toward the Phippen House and then back
toward the water. Neighbors appeared to be in favor, but need drawings
and elevations . The neighbors appeared to be in favor of busses no
longer parking in front of 42 Turner Street. Mr. Carr was concerned
that it would look like a bowl and wanted to see elevations . Remaining
Commission members did not appear to have a problem with the proposal
but wanted elevation and preliminary landscaping plans .
The Gables will provide plans and elevations for the next meeting.
Respectfully submitted.
Richard Oedel C/ /
t;
.r
N
i`l P ♦ i.
June 15, 1994 , Page 1
• SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JUNE 15, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, June 15, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem,
MA. Present were Vice Chairman Car, Ms . Sides, Messrs . Kelleher,
Slam and Bailey and Ms . Guy. Mr. Cook entered later in the
meeting.
354 & 356 Essex Street
John and Nancy Shirley and Lenny and Lana Owens presented an
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors
at 354 and 356 Essex Street. The. body will be PH-86, the trim
Flagstaff and the doors Hemlock.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Bailey seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
274 Lafayette Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, door, cupola and window
details under an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
• for the restoration of the carriage house at 274 Lafayette Street
were scheduled for review. Vice Chairman Carr read a letter from
the applicant waiving the requirement that the Commission act
within 60 days so that the application can be continued until the
next meeting.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Kelleher
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
19 Flint Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Jon & Kim Skerry presented
a photograph illustrating the sash design of the leaded glass
window requested under an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the first floor, rear jog facing Essex Street.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the design details as submitted.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
86 Federal St.
Suzanne and Jonathan Felt submitted an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness and requested a waiver of public
hearing to replace asphalt roof shingles in Sable Black. The
applicants submitted signatures from abutters waiving the public
hearing. Pictures submitted indicated that the work has begun.
Ms . Guy stated that Ms . Felt had indicated that the existing roof
is mottled with different colors .
June 15, 1994, Page 2
• Mr. Cook made a motion to waive the public hearing. Mr. Bailey
seconded the motion.
Mr. Slam stated that the need to expedite the application was
obviously self created.
The motion was voted on. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion
so carried.
Mr. Carr suggested that future roof replacement applications should
show the shape of the tiles or include a sample or photo of the
roof tiles .
Mr. Carr stated that the owners of this property are still in
violation for not having removed a wall erected without approval .
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to send the owners a letter. Mr. Cook
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
10 Hamilton St.
Barry Paul submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-
Applicability to repaint the exterior of his home at 10 Hamilton
Street in existing color scheme.
Mr. Carr noted that the colors and their location must be exactly
the same.
Mr. Slam noted that the applicant is still in violation for the
fence and stated that the Commission may want to explore the
possibility of withholding approval of applications for homeowners
not in compliance.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application. Ms . Sides
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Minutes
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the minutes of May 18, 1994 .
Ms . Sides seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
120 Essex Street
The Peabody Essex Museum submitted an application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness and requested a waiver of public hearing to
remove a chain link fence and relocate a wooden fence at 120 Essex
• Street. John Grimes and Will Phippen represented the Museum and
submitted signatures from abutters waiving the public hearing and
a drawing.
Ms . Guy stated that the applicants have indicated that the
June 15, 1994, Page 3
• landscaping would not be removed when the wooden fence is removed
for relocation.
Mr. Carr is concerned about what will be visible when the wooden
fence is removed.
Mr. Slam stated that since it is perpendicular to the street, it
may not be that visible.
Mr. Grimes stated that they will move the fence near the meeting
house to Brown Street. Since there will not be enough fencing,
they will fill in the missing portions to match the fence. It is
also intended to add an 8 ' fence by the Bray House.
Mr. Slam asked why the fence is being removed from the garden. Mr.
Phippen stated that they want to unify the garden space and have an
open view which will attract people from the visitor' s center. It
will also add programming space for events .
Ms . Sides asked about the parking currently there. Mr. Phippen
stated that the parking will be eliminated. Mr. Phippen stated
that their asset of garden is underutilized.
Mr. Carr felt the application should be broader so that the
Commission could see how this portion fits into the overall plans .
• Mr. Carr questioned why the headhouse portion of the Armory has not
been completed and why the Museum is not complying with the portion
of the joint venture.
Mr. Grimes stated that the Museum is trying to put on its best face
for the opening of the Visitor' s Center and is trying to make the
space inviting by replacing an unattractive fence on Brown Street.
Mr. Phippen noted that the back door of the Visitor' s Center goes
into the garden.
Mr. Carr felt there would be no problem with erecting a 4 ' fence in
substitution of a chain link fence. Mr. Carr also felt that a
fence installed by the Bray House would not be controversial . Mr.
Carr did not feel the Commission should act on the application at
this meeting.
Mr. Phippen stated that they want to get the fence in place by the
week of the 24th.
Mr. Carr felt that there should be a site plan. Ms . Sides
suggested a site visit.
Mr. Bailey felt that the Parking Commission should be aware of the
loss of parking.
• Mr. Carr stated that if the Museum is concerned about appearance,
they should be working on the headhouse. Mr. Phippen stated that
it was a complicated issue and was beyond just this or any other
board and the State. Mr. Carr was in disagreement and stated that
there is a written agreement.
t.
R
June 15, 1994, Page 4
• Mr. Phippen stated that the proposal is for a small improvement to
enhance the initial summer.
Mr. Bailey stated that if the application were just for removal of
the chain link and replacement with a wooden fence, he would have
no problem.
There was no motion to waive the public hearing.
Mr. Carr suggested a larger site plan.
Mr. Carr stated that when the Gardner-Pingree house was renovated,
the Commission listened to the Museum' s consultant explain why the
"open campus" design should be eliminated. Mr. Carr stated that if
there is a different dynamic driving the Museum, the Commission
should know about it.
A site visit was scheduled for Monday, June 20th at 7 : 00 p.m.
Ms . Sides excused herself from the meeting.
29 Washington Square North
The John Bertram House Trust presented an application for a
Certificate of Hardship to relocate the chiller to the Mall Street
• side of the property and enclose it with an acoustically lined
enclosure to diminish noise. The request is made in order to
remove a source of noise from the eastern side of the property and
to comply with a ruling of the Salem Building Inspector that the
previously approved chiller does not conform with the Salem Zoning
Ordinance.
Attorney John Serafini, representing the Bertram Home, stated that
the unit provides air conditioning for the residents of the Bertram
Home. Atty. Serafini stated that the previous building inspector
had reviewed the architectural plans and had concluded that the pad
and unit did not constitute a structure. The plans were approved
and the unit and enclosure was built up to the lot line of the
Doerings at 31 Washington Square North. It has been determined
that the noise level generated by the unit is in violation of the
emissions level set by the State. The current building inspector
has ruled the unit is a structure and is therefore in violation of
the zoning ordinance. The Bertram Home tried to quiet the unit,
but it is apparently too noisy and too close to the Doerings .
Atty. Serafini stated that Mr. Doering would not tolerate a
variance from zoning and wants the unit moved.
Atty. Serafini stated that the Bertram Home engaged an air
conditioning firm who came up with a new system and Bertram Home ' s
architect, Staley McDermet, has determined a location that will
• comply with zoning.
Atty. Serafini stated that the Hardship request is due to the
Bertram Home being unable to maintain what is existing legally,
that it is in violation for noise and that there is no other
June 15, 1994 , Page 5
• location adjacent to the Doerings that would comply with zoning.
Mr. McDermet provided a plan which identified the proposed
location.
Mr. Cook asked if the Doerings were satisfied with the new
location. Atty. Serafini replied in the affirmative
Ms . Guy noted that all abutters would have gotten notice of the
Board of Appeal hearing and that none attended.
Atty. Serafini stated that they have agreed that by 7/31/94 they
will remove the existing unit and will operate the existing from 8
a.m. to 6 : 30 p.m. until that time. Atty. Serafini stated that they
need approval for the location.
Mr. McDermet stated that the enclosure is square and that the roof
is composed of vertical 2 x 6 ' s on edge. The roof is not solid in
order to get air in and out and to soften noise. The 2 x 6 ' s will
be painted black or dark grey similar to roof shingling and would
give the shape of a hipped roof .
Mr. Carr asked the height of the structure. Mr. McDermet stated
that it is 12 ' 8" to the peak of the roof . It will approximately
match the pitch of the addition roof .
• Mr. Slam asked the paint color. Mr. McDermet did not know.
Mr. Carr asked if it will read like an out-building. Mr. McDermet
showed the perspective on the plan.
Mr. Carr asked the distance to the sidewalk. Mr. McDermet stated
that it is 48 ' from Mall Street.
Mr. Cook asked the position of the abutters . Atty. Serafini stated
that there have been no telephone calls received and none were in
attendance at meetings, although all were notified.
Mr. Kelleher asked the height to the cornice. Mr. McDermet stated
that it is 8 ' to the top of the keystone.
Mr. Slam asked if the arch was on 2 sides . Mr. McDermet replied in
the affirmative.
Mr. McDermet stated that the doors face front and back with and a
window faces Mall St. and the remaining side. Mr. McDermet stated
that a window is a door with blinds permanently closed.
Mr. Cook stated that he had no comments or questions .
Mr. Bailey felt it was well thought out and was in favor as long as
it was in agreement with the neighbors .
Mr. Kelleher felt it was a good solution. Mr. Slam was in
agreement.
1
1
June 15, 1994 , Page 6
• Mr. Carr asked if there was any interest by Commission members to
disguise the enclosure with tall shrubbery. There were no comments
by the other members in this regard.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted with
paint colors to be submitted at a later date. Mr. Cook seconded
the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion
so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
i
J e A. Guy
C erk of th Commission
•
•
1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JULY 11, 1994
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Monday, July
11, 1994 at 7 : 00 p.m. at 331 Essex Street to conduct a site visit as
part of the continuation of a public hearing on the application of
Richard and Diane Pabich to install a handicap ramp. Present were
Chairman Oedel and Messrs . Casey, Carr and Bailey and Ms . Guy. Also
present were Robert and Barbara Maier, 335 Essex St.
Mr. Pabich stated that they originally proposed a ramp but have since
found out that it is not required for under 12 units . 331 Essex Street
has 11 units . Mr. Pabich stated that they still want to accommodate
those with disabilities by altering the application to install a
wheelchair lift and porch instead of the ramp.
Ms . Pabich stated that there used to be a porch in back and that it will
go straight across the rear of the ell . The stairs will be on the
driveway site with the lift installed at the opposite end facing the
yard.
Dee Cote, the contractor for the project, stated that the deck will be
level with the water table and will come out approximately 5 ' from the
wall .
Ms . Pabich stated that there will be a bricked in patio in front of the
• porch with extensive landscaping.
Mr. Carr noted that the porch should have the same ballastrade as the
rest of the house.
Mr. Carr made a motion to amend the application and approve the
installation of a porch and wheelchair lift as proposed with the lift to
be located under the lst floor window as close to the wall as possible
(as noted on plan) . The porch is to replicate the original porch as
close as possible, not to exceed 6 ' from the rear wall and the deck and
stairs not to protrude past the edge of the house into the driveway,
with height approximately 67" . The railings are to match the existing
railing on the house. Heavy duty trellis is to be placed underneath.
Mr. Casey seconded the motion.
Ms . Maier stated that she was delighted to see the porch set back.
The motion was voted upon, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
There being no further business, Mr. Carr made a motion to adjourn. Mr.
Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
-• JaA. Guy
C1 rk of th Commission
f
i
� . June 1, 1994, Page 1
• SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JUNE 1, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, June 1, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA.
Present were Messrs . Kelleher, Carr, Slam, Casey and Cook and Ms .
Sides . Chairman Oedel entered later in the meeting.
Vice-Chairman Carr called the meeting to order.
335 Essex Street
Barbara & Robert Maier presented an application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness for paint colors for their home at 335 Essex
Street . Paint chips were presented showing the body color change.
The shutter and trim colors will remain the same.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
6 Broad Street
• Michael Nalipinski presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to install a copper chimney cap which would be
approximately 34" per side and approximately 12" high. A photo
illustrating a cap of similar dimensions was provided.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
26 Beckford Street
Mr. Oedel joined the meeting at this time.
Mary Lee Storrs presented an application for a Certificate of Non-
Applicability to replace clapboards on the front and sides of her
home at 26 Beckford Street. All joints to be scarfed.
Jim Harrison, the contractor for the applicant, stated that the
current clapboards are eastern white pine and will be replaced in
kind.
Mr. Carr felt that the existing was a combination of pine and
either cedar or redwood due to repairs over the years . Mr. Carr
• stated that the Commission has not approved pine in past due to the
curling that occurs .
Mr. Harrison stated that cedar was not used when the house was
June 1, 1994 , Page 2
• originally built and that pine is more historically appropriate.
Mr. Harrison stated that the pine will not curl due to the method
of application that he will used and due to how the wood is sawed.
Mr. Harrison presented an article concerning the method of sawing.
Mr. Slam asked if all the clapboards on three sides will be
replaced. Mr. Harrison replied in the affirmative and stated that
the previous owner replaced the rear clapboards with butt joints .
They will not be replacing the rear.
Mr. Slam asked if any clapboards are original to the house. Mr.
Harrison did not know. Mr. Harrison stated that there are
approximately 1/2 dozen splices with red cedar and fir and that
there is nothing left to save.
Ms . Storrs stated that she is starting to suffer water damage.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried. Mr. Oedel abstained from voting.
Mr. Carr turned the Chair over to Mr. Oedel .
19 Flint Street
• Jon & Kim Skerry requested a waiver of public hearing and presented
an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a
window on the first floor, rear jog facing Essex Street. The trim
specifications and color to match existing trims . Size of window
to be approximately the same as the window above. The applicants
provided signatures from 11 of the 17 abutters waiving the public
hearing. Mr. Skerry stated that Ms . Meadowcroft gave a verbal
okay.
Mr. Skerry stated that the window will be slightly narrower than
the window above.
Ms . Skerry stated that the window will be clear leaded glass and
noted that the kitchen was ripped out yesterday.
Mr. Casey stated that the rest of the house is balanced window over
window and it is likely that a window could have been placed in the
proposed location.
Mr. Slam stated that he was against waiving public hearings unless
it is an emergency.
Mr. Carr stated that he generally endorses Mr. Slams opinion on
waivers unless the neighbors are not in opposition as is in this
• case or if it is not a significant change. Mr. Carr did not feel
the change proposed was controversial and had no problem waiving
the public hearing.
June 1, 1994, Page 3
• Mr. Kelleher had not problem waiving the public hearing since
signatures were obtained. Mr. Cook had not problem waiving the
public hearing due to the minimal impact. Messrs . Casey and Oedel
and Ms . Sides also had no problem waiving the public hearing.
Mr. Casey made a motion to waive the public hearing. Mr. Carr
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion.
Chairman Oedel stated that a window design has not been presented
and that there is no detail on the leaded glass .
Mr. Carr suggested that the Commission only approve the opening and
withdrew his motion. Mr. Cook withdrew his second.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve an opening for a window pending
abutter notification with final design to be continued until the
next meeting. Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and
the motion so carried.
8 Carpenter St.
In continuation from a previous meeting, Kathleen Karydis submitted
• an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to reconstruct
the shed addition, to eliminate the door on the side of the shed,
and to add doors and windows on the back of the shed.
Ms . Karydis stated that she will be completing the reconstruction
of the shed per the plan submitted in 1988 but is proposing some
slight changes . Ms . Karydis stated that there will be French doors
on the back instead of a plain wall .
Mr. Carr stated that he could not recall the shed being visible.
Mr. Slam made a motion to change the application to non-
applicability subject to the finding that the shed is minimally
visible and to approve the application. Mr. Carr seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
10 Summer Street
Hilary Realty Trust, represented by Ted Richard, presented an
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness and an application
for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to replace the rotting
timbers on the retaining wall at 10 Summer Street. The work has
been completed.
Mr. Richard stated that the replacement was in kind.
• Mr. Carr asked what the time was between the removal of the old
wall and the replacement of the new wall . Mr. Richard replied that
it was no longer than one day. Mr. Carr asked if the height is the
same. Mr. Richard stated that the wall is essentially the same as
June 1, 1994 , Page 4
• the previous .
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application for Non-
Applicability due to being an in kind replacement. Mr. Carr
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Richard withdrew the application for appropriateness .
54 Turner Street
Chairman Oedel stated for the record that there is the potential
for the appearance of a Conflict of Interest by his chairing the
meeting, due to his wife being the Executive Director of the
Gables . Chairman Oedel stated that the State has ruled there is no
conflict and that he has filed the appropriate disclosures with the
City Clerk.
The House of Seven Gables Settlement presented an application for
a Certificate of Appropriateness to lower the parking lot elevation
plan which would eliminate the handicapped ramp and entrance stairs
in front of the new education center.
Scott Patrowicz of Patrowicz Land Development Engineering, the
engineer for the project, provided a regrading plan and stated that
the grade of the new building had been designed to match the garden
• grade. Mr. Patrowicz noted that the front lot is higher in grade
and that the initial design was to put in ditches on the sides of
the building and handicap ramps . Mr. Patrowicz stated that the
alternative is to regrade to match the entrances, to close one
entrance and modify the bus area. Mr. Patrowicz stated that the
work was essentially a master plan and would not all be done
immediately. The drainage will be by pipes and 3 new catch basins .
The grade will be subtle and there will be a dry stone wall next to
the Bystrom' s house. The hedge wall will be retained. The
steepest grade will be 4% . The canopy has been reduced to 101 .
Mr. Patrowicz stated that walkway next to the building will expand.
Marie Oedel, Executive Director of the Gables, stated that the
narrowest portion of the walkway is now 51 . Mr. Carr asked the
grade of the walkway. Mr. Patrowicz stated that it is
approximately 5% . Mr. Carr noted that it is steeper than any grade
proposed.
Chairman Oedel read the minutes from the site visit held on May 21,
1994 .
Mr. Slam stated that he had no problem with the proposal .
Mr. Carr asked if the wall will match the wall along the Phippen
house. Mr. Patrowicz stated that the wall along the Phippen house
has large stones mortared together and has a foundation. The
• proposed wall will have large stones laid, will run approximately
2 . 5 ' to 18" high and will not have a foundation. Mr. Patrowicz
stated that they will look about the same above the foundation.
Ms . Oedel stated that they will be using natural field stone which
June 1, 1994 , Page 5
• is not as flat a stone.
Mr. Carr asked if any bushes or shrubs will be removed. Mr.
Patrowicz replied in the negative and stated that some stems may be
removed. There will be significant additional planting. Ms . Oedel
stated that not all the landscaping will be in place in the first
year and that they will continue to add landscaping.
Mr. Patrowicz stated that they haven't established whether the curb
will be granite.
Mr. Carr asked Mr. Patrowicz what his preference was of the two
options . Mr. Patrowicz felt that the previously approved proposal
would look funny to have the building recessed.
Mr. Kelleher asked if the parking spaces were parallel and if the
service entrance would be relocated. Mr. Patrowicz stated that the
parking was reduced from 11 to 7 and angled to ease movement. Ms .
Oedel stated that the service entrance is in the same location.
Mr. Patrowicz stated that there will be a wall transition to 0" at
the end.
Ms . Oedel stated that the pedestrian walkway through the parking
lot will be safer.
• Ms . Oedel stated that the Heritage Trail redline runs past the door
of the Visitor' s Center. Campbell Seamens, also representing the
Gables, stated that they will be replacing the turnstile.
Chairman Oedel asked the material of the sidewalk. Mr. Patrowicz
stated that it has not been decided and that he has proposed
concrete.
David Bystrom of 42 Turner Street stated that he generally approved
of the proposal and that his only concern is with the treatment of
the Turner Street exit and how it will look from Turner. Mr.
Bystrom was in approval of the wall, elevation, walkway and bus
drop-off .
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted with
the requirement that further details on the walkway, curbs and
landscaping plans be submitted along with a timetable for the
landscaping completion.
Mr. Carr suggested that the plantings not be typical of "K-Mart" .
Mr. Slam so amended his motion. Mr. Carr also felt the motion
should be under Hardship. Mr. Slam so amended his motion. Mr.
Carr seconded the motion.
• Mr. Slam stated that he preferred to see a timeframe of
approximately 2-3 years . Chairman Oedel felt the Commission could
not ask for a date to complete the landscaping without a
landscaping plan.
June 1, 1994, Page 6
• Ms . Guy asked when the Commission would want the remaining details
submitted by. Mr. Slam amended his motion that the details be
submitted within 60 days or before the work is done if before 60
days . Mr. Carr seconded the amendment.
The motion was voted on. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
In continuation of a previous meeting regarding the installation of
a kitchen vent, Mr. Seamens proposed that there be a wooden
enclosure around the duct work with clapboards, not louvers,
stained to match the building. Mr. Seamens stated that an opening
is needed for drainage on the bottom. The vent will be located at
the end of the building behind the Oak tree as per the neighbors '
request.
Mr. Slam had no problem with the proposal .
Mr. Carr felt that it should look like a chimney and that since it
cannot be disguised as one, he could not vote in favor with the
proposed being seen against the mansion.
Mr. Seamens stated that the vent does not need to take in air.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he would rather see brick or z-brick
• rather than clapboard. Mr. Cook was in agreement that he would
rather have Brickmaster.
Mr. Casey did not feel clapboard was used on roofs and also
preferred a brick-like material .
Mr. Seamens felt a painted material would disappear more easily.
Mr. Casey stated that the rear vents of 82 Derby Street were
disguised to look like a chimney.
Ms . Sides preferred clapboard to fake brick, especially with there
being an opening on the bottom.
Mr. Carr suggested using double flashing.
Mr. Slam felt a chimney would be unnoticeable.
Mr. Slam stated that he could go along with either.
Mr. Carr stated that he would want lathe or fake brick.
Messrs . Kelleher, Cook and Casey preferred fake brick.
Ms . Sides stated that if brick, she would want to see the flashing
• detail .
Mr. Slam made a motion to accept the use of fake brick for the
exterior cladding so as to read like a chimney and flashing to be
used that would obscure the opening on the bottom. Mr. Cook
. . . . - . . .. . .. .
June 1, 1994, Page 7
• seconded the motion.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he had no opinion on the material and that
the location and size were acceptable.
Chairman Oedel stated that he had a problem with approving
Brickmaster and doubted that the brick color could be successfully
matched to other brick on the site. Chairman Oedel felt that
painting out could be done more successfully.
Ms . Sides felt that using clapboards will read out better.
Mr. Seamens suggested stucco painted out.
Mr. Carr stated that he would want a Brickmaster sample.
Mr. Kelleher suggested that the brick be painted the color of the
body.
Ms . Oedel stated that she would be willing to paint a box as a mock
up to see how it looks . Ms . Oedel stated that she did not want
Brickmaster.
The motion was voted upon. Messrs . Carr, Cook, Casey, Slam and
Kelleher voted in favor. Chairman Oedel and Ms . Sides voted in
• opposition. The motion was so carried.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Carr
seconded the motion.
Mr. Seamens questioned the Commission acting on a treatment that
was not proposed.
Mr. Carr withdrew his second. Mr. Slam withdrew his motion.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve clapboard cladding in hopes that
it fails . Mr. Cook seconded the motion. Chairman Oedel , Ms . Sides
and Messrs . Slam and Casey voted in favor. Messrs . Carr, Kelleher
and Cook voted in opposition. The motion was so carried.
397 Essex Street
Z & M Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of
Non-Applicability to repaint 397 Essex Street in the same color.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
1-3 N. Pine Street
• Pottery Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of
Non-Applicability to repaint 1-3 North Pine Street in the same
color.
June 1, 1994 , Page 8
. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
15 Beckford Street
Peter Copelas submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-
applicability to install a window on the rear of 15 Beckford Street
which is not visible from the public way.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Waivers
Mr. Slam stated that he felt that the process to have homeowners
get signatures from abutters was prejudicial . Mr. Slam felt that
19 Flint Street was a significant change and was self imposed. Mr.
Slam felt that the Commission should not have waivers of public
hearings .
Chairman Oedel stated that M.G.L. Chapter 40C allows waivers, but
that the Commission had a policy years ago not to have waivers .
• Mr. Carr agreed with Mr. Slam but felt that there should be some
exceptions .
Mr. Slam felt that exceptions should be rare circumstances and only
for emergencies .
Mr. Casey stated that the Commission has a lousy reputation and is
not user friendly. Mr. Casey felt the Commission should allow
waivers to remain.
Ms . Guy stated that 40C allows two ways to waive a public hearing
and one of which is to collect signatures . Since the City Council
has adopted 40C, signatures should be accepted. Ms . Guy suggested
that the waiver be denied if not all the signatures are received.
Mr. Carr stated that waivers should be the exception but not ruled
out.
Salem Armory
Chairman Oedel read a letter from Stanley Smith to the Salem
Redevelopment Authority concerning the possibility of the headhouse
skeleton of the Armory being demolished.
Mr. Carr stated that there is a fear that the headhouse walls will
be demolished by being declared a public safety hazard. Mr. Carr
• stated that the Memorandum of Agreement, issued pursuant to the
Section 106 Review and signed by the Museum' s Collaborative, the
SRA and the Commission, specifies that the design and financing of
the project had to be in place before the rest of the building was
June 1, 1994 , Page 9
• demolished. Mr. Carr felt that no one wants to oppose the museum' s
and hold them to the agreement. Mr. Carr stated that there are
rumors flowing about that say there will be a midnight demolition
order.
Mr. Slam suggested that the Commission send a letter to the SRA
agreeing with Mr. Smith' s letter.
Chairman Oedel stated that the museum wants to tear the walls down,
particularly Ned Johnson, the principal funder, and Dan Monroe.
Chairman Oedel stated that the museum's current architect has not
included the headhouse walls in its design. Chairman Oedel stated
that he spoke with Mayor Harrington and William Luster today who
both state that the building will not be condemned and torn down.
Chairman Oedel noted that the Visitor' s Center will be opening on
June 25 and that Senator Kennedy is doing the presentations .
Chairman Oedel stated that if there is controversy, Kennedy' s
office usually drops out from attending the event giving the
preservation of the walls the most leverage between now and June
25 .
Mr. Carr suggested that there be a meeting between all the
signatories and interested parties in order to get a status and
review requirements of the project. Mr. Slam suggested Chairman
• Oedel send a letter. Chairman Oedel did not think a meeting would
happen before June 25th.
Mr. Slam made a motion to send a letter requesting a meeting. Mr.
Carr suggested a copy be sent to the Advisory Council . Mr. Carr
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Kelleher suggested the letter request the meeting at the
earliest possible convenience.
Minutes
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the minutes of May 4 , 1994 . Mr.
Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Violations
Mr. Carr stated that 136 Federal Street has installed a metal
Georgian raised panel door, has not built the fence as required for
the ramp and has put in some sort of roof deck. Ms . Guy will send
a letter.
Ms . Guy read a letter from the Building Inspector stating that the
"hot dog" sign at 406 Essex Street has been removed and that no
signs of on-going automobile repairs could be found at 2 Flint
• Street. Mr. Cook noted that the auto repairs at 2 Flint Street is
usually weekend activity. Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter
to the Board of Appeal pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40A with copies
going to the Mayor' s Neighborhood Improvement Plan Committee and
June 1, 1994, Page 10
• the ward Councillor. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in
favor and the motion so carried.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Respectfully submitted,
J e A. Guy
C erk of the Commission
•
` y
July 6, 1994 , Page 1
• SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JULY 6, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on
Wednesday, July 6, 1994 at 7 : 30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA.
Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms . Sides, Messrs . Carr, Bailey and Cook
and Ms . Guy.
180 Federal Street
Edward Crowley submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for paint colors at 180 Federal St. The body will be
Hancock Grey and the trim will be Yorkshire Tan.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Crowley stated that he would like the option to paint the house the
same color scheme as 7 River Street, Mr. Carr' s home. Mr. Carr stated
that he copied the color scheme from the Sanderson' s on the corner of
Federal and Lynn Streets .
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve as an option to paint 180 Federal
Street in the same color scheme of 7 River Street. Mr. Cook seconded
0 the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
80 Washington Sq.
Castine Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for paint colors at 80 Washington Sq. The paint scheme
will be the same as the Hawkes House (Concord Ivory HC12 ) .
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
6 No. Pine Street
Richard Grundy presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the replacement of windows at 6 N. Pine Street with
double hung vinyl replacement windows, white in color.
Mr. Carr stated that pursuant to the Commission' s longstanding
guidelines consistently enforced, the Commission does not approve vinyl
clad windows . Mr. Carr stated that changing windows is acceptable but
the guidelines require wood, typically 6 over 6 with intregal muntins
and mullions .
Mr. Grundy stated that he was concerned with purchasing wood windows due
to the lack of energy efficiency and possible fire hazard. Mr. Grundy
• stated that wood windows need storm windows which are not historically
appropriate. Mr. Grundy stated that vinyl, with certain specifications
placed on it, would look more appropriate than a storm over a wood
window.
` July 6, 1994 , Page 2
• Chairman Oedel asked if the frames are to be replaced or just the sash.
Mr. Grundy replied that just the sash would be replaced.
Chairman Oedel stated that vinyl windows have never been approved in the
twelve years he's been on the Commission.
Mr. Carr stated that the Commission has studied the visibility of wood
vs . vinyl and has examined the cost as well . Mr. Carr stated that not
approving vinyl is consistent with guidelines from other historic
commissions in other cities .
Mr. Cook stated that the issue with the Commission is historical
integrity.
Ms . Sides felt that there are alternatives in wood that are energy
efficient such as replacing the liner, ropes and weights to remove
pockets .
Chairman Oedel noted that the Commission stopped approving glued on
mullions for a few years until the adhesive industry progressed.
Mr. Carr made a motion, in hopes that it would fail, to approve the
application as submitted. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion. There were
no votes in favor, all were opposed. The application was denied as
inappropriate.
• Mr. Bailey suggested that Mr. Grundy look at the windows at 28 Beckford
Street. Ms . Guy will provide Mr. Grundy with names of window companies .
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve 6 over 6, single glaze, wood
replacement sash with intregal muntins and mullions . Mr. Cook seconded
the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
331 Essex Street
Dick and Diane Pabich submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to rebuild porches, install a handicap access ramp, and
alter the side and rear doors at 331 Essex Street. Drawings were
provided.
Dee Cote, the contractor for the project, stated that they will be
adding trim and moldings to the palladian window and that the porches
will have a square ballastrade. The front porch will be rebuilt as it
was with the stairs being redone. The lattice work will be continued
onto the wheelchair ramp.
Mr, Pabich stated that they will landscape around the ramp and that it
is likely that it will not be seen. Mr. Pabich stated that the ramp has
to be 67 ' long. Mr. Pabich stated that there will be a courtyard
sitting area.
• Mr. Carr felt there should be a site visit.
Ms . Guy noted that there is no meeting on July 20, 1994 unless we
continue this application.
July 6, 1994 , Page 3
• A site visit was scheduled for Monday, July 11, 1994 at 7 : 00 p.m. at 331
Essex Street.
Mr. Cote stated that the rail detail hasn't been finalized but will be
more appropriate than on the plan. Chairman Oedel stated that they will
need a detail or sample for the site visit. Chairman Oedel noted that
the plan was missing the door detail .
Mr. Cote stated that the door is existing and that the trim shown is
proposed. Mr. Cote stated that the second door in the rear will be a 6
panel door with a transom to match the other door. Mr. Cote noted that
the lattice will be tight, not 2" as shown.
Barbara Maier, 335 Essex Street, asked how far out the ramp would
extend. Mr. Cote stated that it would be 40 ' out from the building,
almost to where the spiral is . Ms . Pabich stated that it will stop just
before the big tree. Mr. Cote stated that Ms . Pabich will see a porch
with a nice ballastrade from her property.
Ms . Maier asked if the grass will remain. Mr. Pabich stated that he did
not know, that there may be parking due to constraints of zoning, but
that it would not be asphalt.
Mr. Cote stated that they will also rebuild the front fence as is .
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the
exception of the handicap ramp and to continue the ramp until the site
visit, Monday, July 11, 1994 at 7 : 00 p.m. Mr. Bailey seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
274 Lafayette Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, John Ronan was present for
discussion on door, cupola and window details under an application for
a Certificate of Appropriateness for the restoration of the carriage
house at 274 Lafayette Street.
Mr. Ronan stated that he did not have cupola details ready for this
meeting. Mr. Ronan stated that he is proposing a wood door with
mullions . Mr. Ronan stated that Overhead Door Co. can almost customize
a door by installing a wood flush door and laminating what is wanted on
top of it.
Ms . Sides stated that the proportion and size of the opening is
important and that the cornice line on top of the door must be
maintained. Ms . Sides noted that the first drawing submitted showed a
cornice line lowered to a standard garage door height.
Mr. Ronan proved a sketch of another option (#2) for the entry which had
not been shown at the previous meeting. Mr. Carr and Ms . Sides
• preferred the Option 2 .
Ms . Sides asked if Option 2 would interfere with the floor plate. Mr.
Ronan replied in the affirmative.
July 6, 1994, Page 4
• Mr. Ronan suggested widening the trim over the door so that the trim
would match the trim on the gable.
Ms . Sides stated that an intermediate piece with panels and no glass may
be needed. Ms . Sides stated that it would be on the same idea as Option
2 but with a new material . Ms . Sides stated that a drawing would be
needed for the contractor to understand what to do.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve a door which replicates the existing
door as close as possible, to approve wood windows with 2 over 2 sash,
with intregal muntins & mullions in either single or double pane and to
continue the doorway opening and cupola to the August 3rd meeting. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
10 Chestnut Street
Alan Howe was present to request that the Commission vote to issue a
Certificate as to Completion of Work for the fence at 10 Chestnut
Street. Photographs were presented.
Chairman Oedel stated that the fence has been reconstructed and painted
and that Mr. Howe would like the title cleared of the violation
certificate. Chairman Oedel felt the worked was completed sufficiently.
Mr. Cook stated that he also felt the work was completed satisfactorily.
• Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the fence work as completed, to vote
that a violation no longer exists and to instruct the Clerk to issue a
Clerk' s Certificate as to Completion of Work. Mr. Cook seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Chairman Oedel asked what window work was being undertaken as shown in
the photographs . Mr. Howe stated that it was repair work.
Mr. Carr made a motion to issue a Certificate of Non-Applicability to
repair the set of 4 first floor windows on the Cambridge Street side
with no changes in color, material, design or outward appearance. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
86 Federal Street
Ms . Guy stated for the record that the application of Suzanne and
Jonathan Felt for a Certificate of Appropriateness for roof replacement
was approved at the last meeting under a waiver of public hearing.
120 Essex Street
Ms . Guy read a letter to the Commission which states that the Peabody
Essex Museum is withdrawing their application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the removal of a chain link fence and the relocation
• of a wooden fence without prejudice.
Mr. Carr noted that a planter sign and a canvas sign at the Andrew
Safford House have been installed.
July 6, 1994 , Page 5
Chairman Oedel stated that the museum has put up temporary planter signs
for various events over the years .
Mr. Carr stated that he was not saying the signs would not be approved,
but that the law requires them to apply.
Chairman Oedel stated that the signs have not been up past 14 days .
Mr. Carr made a motion that the Commission send a nice letter to the
museum concerning the signs at the Andrew Safford and the lawn at the
Crowninshield Bentley and requesting the appropriate applications be
filed. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion.
Chairman Oedel stated that there have always been signs over the front
entrance and that he will vote against the motion unless the letter will
be sent after the 14 day timeframe. Mr. Carr withdrew his motion.
Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter one week after the 14th day from
the day before the opening of the Visitor' s Center. Mr. Bailey seconded
the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Chairman Oedel read a letter dated June 29, 1994 to the Commission from
the Museum concerning the Salem Armory.
Mr. Carr stated that in order to demolish the 2 walls of the headhouse,
• the Museums had to have finished drawings and secured financing and,
according to Bill Luster, had to start construction after 18 months .
Chairman Oedel stated that there is a strong group of people in support
of the facade preservation.
Mr. Carr will draft a nice reply letter.
Chairman Oedel will tell Mayor Harrington of the letter, give Dan Monroe
a personal call and give him the reply letter over lunch.
Mr. Carr made a motion that the Commission send a reply letter which
will be drafted by Mr. Carr who will work with Chairman Oedel to
finalize. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
No. Pine Guard Rail
Ms . Guy stated that a metal guard rail has been installed at the corner
of No. Pine and Fowler Streets and that she has received a request from
Susan Bean for the Commission to send a letter to the City Council to
have a more appropriate guard rail be installed.
Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter to the City Council which states
that the guard rail installed doesn' t fit in the historic district and
• that the Commission sympathizes with the need and is willing to work
with the Council to find a more appropriate design. Mr. Cook seconded
the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
July 6, 1994 , Page 6
• Other Business
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the minutes of June 1, 1994 . Ms .
Sides seconded the motion, all were in favor and. the motion so carried.
Ms . Guy read a letter from the owners of 2 Gifford Court stating that
the door and lattice work will be completed in 3 to 4 months .
Ms . Guy stated that the City Council approved a budget for the
Commission which included mailing costs for three newsletters and $500
for a new brochure.
Ms . Guy presented the updated list of delinquent real estate taxes .
Ms . Guy stated that she is not going to renew thee membership to Bay
State Historical League.
Mr. Carr stated that the pine trees that are required as part of the
ramp screening at 136 Federal Street are dying. Ms . Guy stated that a
letter is being sent concerning all the outstanding work and violations
for that property.
There being no further business, Mr. Bailey made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
• carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jan A. Guy
Cle k of the mmission
August 3, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
AUGUST 3, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, August 3, 1994 at 7:30
p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem,MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs. Carr, Casey and
Slam and Ms. Guy. Mr. Kelleher entered later in the meeting.
38 Washington Square South
Brian Wehrung and Lisa Dressler presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
demolition of the remainder of an existing 6' x 9'porch and the erection of a replacement 9' x 12' porch and
for paint colors for their home at 38 Washington Square South. Drawings and paint chips were submitted.
Mr. Wehrung stated that the size of the existing porch is unusable and the proposed will be set back more
from the sidewalk with the 12' running along the length of the house. Ms. Dressler stated that there are
currently lilacs to help screen the porch and that they will be adding peonies.
Mr. Wehrung asked if the Commission would prefer diamond or vertical lattice under the porch. Mr. Carr
stated that either is appropriate provided that it is thick and not flimsy.
Chairman Oedel asked if the porch meets the side set-back requirement for zoning. Mr. Wehrung stated that
• zoning is his next step. Mr. Wehrung stated that the porch would be painted the trim color.
Mr. Carr stated that if the posts are capped with balls, he would not want the stem showing. Mr. Slam
preferred the balls have beveled tops.
Mr. Casey preferred that the posts be flat with no balls. Chairman Oedel and Ms. Sides were in agreement.
Mr. Carr stated that he did not care either way.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the posts not to have balls, with
ballasters to be 1" square with a profiled rail, with the option for either diamond or vertical heavy quality
lattice underneath, subject to any zoning approval required. Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in
favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Kelleher joined the meeting at this time.
Paint colors proposed are Terra Umber body, Early American Cream trim and Black shutters. Ms. Dressler
stated that they will be using the Benjamin Moore equivalent of the paint chips submitted.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the paint colors proposed in Benjamin Moore to be as close as possible
to the paint chips submitted. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
14 Broad Street
Stephen Thomas and Evy Blum presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to repaint the
exterior of the building and the front fence which will be installed as previously approved. Paint samples
l f
August 3, 1994, Page 2
were submitted.
• Mr. Casey asked when the fence would be installed. Mr. Thomas stated that it was on order and would be
installed by the end of August or September.
The body of the house is proposed to be Lambswool, trim White, shutters and fence Green.
Ms. Sides preferred one of the lighter colors for the fence.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application for paint colors with both fences painted the trim color
and if the applicant proposes to alter the colors that Mr. Casey be delegated for approval. The motion further
stated that the fence be installed by 9/30/94 with no further continuances and that the painting be completed
by 5/31/95. Ms. Sides seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
89 Federal Street
T. Jane and Kevin Dwyer presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing
roof in charcoal grey and for paint colors at 89 Federal St. Paint chips were submitted which include
Mesquite for the body, green shutters,cream trim and a dark maroon for the doors. The garage will match
the house colors. Trim to include doors,windows, sash and cornerboards. Doors to include two front facing
doors, and 1 French door on the South side.
• Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Carr seconded the motion. All were
in favor and the motion so carried.
15 Beckford Street
Peter Copelas presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove siding and replace
with wood clapboards, replace window frames in kind, remove window sashes and replace as per sample,
relocate the electric service from near the front door to the left side of the house near the electric pole and
for paint colors at 15 Beckford Street.
Mr. Copelas presented a window sample from J.B. Sash and noted that he found an acrylic stain that acts
like a paint and that the manufacturer of the window will guarantee the window with this stain. Mr. Copelas
stated that the exterior mullions are vinyl and that the rest of the sash and inside mullions are wood.
Mr. Copelas stated that corner boards will be restored/added,that the trim will be white and the body will
be Federal Blue. Mr. Copelas stated that he will try to get the electric service around the corner so that it
will not be seen. Mr. Carr stated that he would help the applicant try to get approval for relocation to the
basement.
Ms. Sides stated that the window is not top quality but is good for the average price range.
• Mr. Casey nominated Mr. Carr to monitor the cornerboards, etc.
Richard Lindeman of 113 Federal Street was in favor of the proposal.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the following conditions: that the
e
August 3, 1994, Page 3
clapboards be smooth side out, 3 1/2"-4" to weather, that the window casings replicate what is currently
. there, that the windows be 6 over 6 as per sample, that the electric service be located to the rear of the
property or in the basement so as not to be seen from the public way,that comerboards, watertable and trim
be repaired/replaced/installed with such detail approval to be delegated to Mr. Carr and that all work, if
started,be completed within one year. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
145 Federal St.
James McEvoy and JoAnn Bencsik presented an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to replace
three rotted basement awning windows with Anderson Perma-Shield AN-351 on the Flint Street side of the
property. The application states that the windows are 28 above ground behind 55 tall landscaping bushes.
Ms. Guy noted that the windows can be seen through the landscaping,but it would be doubtful if one could
tell that they were not wood.
Mr. Carr made a motion to find that the windows are minimally visible and to approve the application as
submitted. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
44 Broad Street
JDS Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for window alterations,
• replacement of siding and replacement of overhang roof at 44 Broad Street. Atty. Stephen Lovely
represented the applicant. Drawings were presented.
Atty. Lovely stated that the applicant would be removing the slate siding and replacing with stained cedar
clapboards, the overhang would be replaced with copper and shutters would be added.
Chairman Oedel stated the specifications would be needed for the windows and shutters.
Arty. Lovely stated that the paint colors would be similar to Old Salem Grey with cream trim as is on 10
Winter Street.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with paint colors to match 10 Winter Street,
with black shutters to be wood, full size, hung so as to be workable and to shed water when closed. The
motion is also for the windows to be wood, 6 over 6,with intregal muntins and mullions and to delegate Ms.
Side to monitor the selection of windows and shutters. Mr. Slam seconded the motion,all were in favor and
the motion so carried.
274 Lafayette Street
In continuation from a previous meeting,was an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness from John
Ronan on door, cupola and window details for the restoration of the carriage house at 274 Lafayette Street.
• The applicant was not present.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and
the motion so carried.
August 3, 1994, Page 4
Minutes
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the minutes of 5/21/94 and 6/15/94. Mr. Slam seconded the motion.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Certificates of Non-Applicability Issued
Ms. Guy stated that the following Certificates of Non-Applicability were issued during the period of 3/17/94
to 6/20/94:
12 Chestnut St. - gutters
98 Essex St. - repainting
87 Federal St. -paint, fence
2 Oliver St. - shutters
115 Federal St. -paint
72 Washington Sq. -repaint
8 Winthrop St. -rebuild chimney
40 Flint St. - roof replacement
300 Lafayette St. -repaint
331 Essex St. - repaint, reroof
348 Essex St. - repaint
35 Broad St. - reroof rear porch
• Correspondence Review
Ms. Guy read from a letter dated 7/5/94 from Massachusetts Historical Commission(MHC)to the Peabody
Essex Museum requesting financing and status information regarding the Salem Armory headhouse.
Ms. Guy stated that the Commission received a copy of a letter from the Board of Health to the owners of
397 Essex Street concerning electric sanding/paint removal.
Violations/Work Status
Ms. Guy stated that she received copies of three letters sent by the City Solicitor to the owner of 2 Flint
Street. Ms. Guy will provide notice to the owner that the item will be placed on the Commission's agenda
for possible vote.
35 Washington Square - Mr. Casey and Mr. Carr stated that there are violations concerning the front facia,
2 chimneys facing Winter Street and a trellis. Ms. Guy will send a letter.
31 Washington Square-Mr. Casey stated that there are violations concerning the iron fence and columns.
Ms. Guy will send a letter with a copy to Ted Richards, the property realtor.
• 92 Federal Street-Ms. Guy will inform the City Solicitor that the Commission is not satisfied with the work
completed.
313 Essex Street-Mr. Casey stated that the "Rooms for Rent" sign is still there and noted that Carlson was
the realtor. Ms. Guy will send a letter.
August 3, 1994, Page 5
Chairman Oedel stated that the items in violation have been removed from 135 Derby Street.
• Mr. Carr stated that the gap between the post and fence at the Bertram Home is still there and that he will
check the other outstanding issues.
Mr. Carr asked Ms. Guy to check the expiration date on the Certificate for the Brookhouse Home vestibule.
Ms. Sides stated that work is underway at 31 Broad Street and that they do not have a Certificate. Ms. Guy
will send a letter.
Other Business
Ms. Guy asked to visit the issue of violations that are inherited by new owners and are not discovered until
a year or more after the property is sold, particularly with 302 Lafayette St.
Mr. Carr felt that the Commission should consistently enforce all violations and that the new owner has
recourse to the seller.
Chairman Oedel felt that each violation should be looked at on a case by case basis, considering the length
of time and the extent of the violation.
Ms. Guy suggested there be some sort of time limit that the Commission has to act on a violation.
Mr. Slam agreed with a case by case philosophy but did not feel it should be a written policy.
Mr. Kelleher did not feel that the Commission should make a policy and felt that the Commission should
not hold the new homeowner responsible for what the previous owner had done.
Mr. Casey suggested that the Commission notify realtors of violations on for-sale properties.
Ms. Sides agreed that the Commission should not hold new owners responsible and stated that it was a
negative way to start out with a new owner.
Ms. Guy will remove 302 Lafayette Street from the violation list.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Carr seconded the motion. All
were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submi ,
Jane Afee
Clerk mmission
t
August 17, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, August
17, 1994 at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman
Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs. Slam, Cook and Casey and Ms. Guy.
6 Cambridge Street
John Donoghue presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
installation of a fence at 6 Cambridge Street. The fence has already been installed
on the side lot line facing 10 Chestnut Street. The streetscape portion is also
proposed. The fence is 30' along the side lot line and 4 feet high, 2 1/2" wide
flatboards butted with a cap on top. The applicant will use existing posts on the
street side and the streetscape side of the fence will be painted the trim color of the
house.
Mr. Donoghue stated that it was necessary to install the fence due to the dogs at 10
Chestnut and other harassments by the dogs' owner. Mr. Donoghue presented
pictures of his view to the 10 Chestnut Street yard and stated that he has not been
able to open the windows on that side of the house since 1988.
Chairman Oedel read letters from Alan Howe and Joseph Feroce of 10 Chestnut Street
dated 8/8/94 and 8/9/94. Mr. Donoghue presented a copy of his deed and plot plan
and a letter stating that he would move the side lot fence onto his property line.
• Chairman Oedel stated that a condition of Mr. Howe's approval for a fence was that
it tie into the fence at 6 Cambridge. It was noted that the fence post at 10 Chestnut
does not end at the property line, and that Mr. Donoghue does not have
authorization to attach the proposed fence to Mr. Howe's post which will leave a small
gap at the streetscape between the proposed 6 Cambridge post and the 10 Chestnut
Street post.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Casey felt the only issue was the treatment of the streetscape fence.
Mr. Donoghue stated that the same 4' fence will be used across the streetscape. Mr.
Donoghue noted that it is 28" across. Mr. Donoghue stated that he did not want to
increase the height of the fence due to it decreasing visibility in case someone should
try to break into the house from that side. Mr. Donoghue stated that the fence will
be left to weather.
Mr. Slam stated that he ordinarily would not have a problem with a 4' fence but was
concerned with the 4' meeting the 6'. Mr. Slam suggested a compromise of 5'.
Ms. Sides suggested that the fence on the other side of 6 Cambridge, on the
streetscape, be continued.
Mr. Slam stated that he had no problem with the fence installed on the side lot line.
The other Commission members were in agreement.
• Chairman Oedel asked if a 4' fence at the streetscape was acceptable. Mr. Casey
replied in the affirmative. Mr. Cook stated that he could go along with it. Mr. Slam
preferred a higher fence but stated he would accept a 41.
Ms. Sides stated that she had no problem with the height but had a problem with the
r August 17, 1994, Page 2
design. Mr. Cook was in agreement. Mr. Casey agreed that the other fence should
• be repeated. Mr. Donoghue stated that it would be difficult to do and that it may
look incongruous. Mr. Slam agreed that it would be incongruous.
Mr. Casey stated that he had problems with the "up & down" and the missing piece.
Mr. Donoghue stated that the only other option is to remove the 30' fence and leave
the front open.
Ms. Sides felt the proposed was inserting a whole different element.
Mr. Donoghue stated that he would not put up a 6' fence.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the side lot fence as constructed and to approve
a 5' fence on the streetscape. The fence must match the newly constructed fence in
design and not be a 4' fence with a splashboard added on the bottom to increase the
height. There was no second.
Mr. Cook noted that it 10 Chestnut Street did not have a fence, Mr. Donoghue would
not have to comply.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the side lot fence as constructed and to approve
a 5' fence on the streetscape. The fence must match the newly constructed fence in
design and not be a 4' fence with a 1' splashboard added on the bottom to increase
the height. Streetscape fence to be 27" wide with round posts on the inside.
Fencing to be weathered grey, white cedar.
• Mr. Casey asked if a 4' or 6' fence was preferred. Ms. Sides stated that if the
proposed design is to be accepted, it should be kept at 41.
Mr. Cook amended his motion for the streetscape fence to be 4'. Mr. Slam seconded
the motion.
Chairman Oedel noted that the application states that the streetside of the fence will
be painted the trim color.
Mr. Cook amended his motion to include the streetscape side of the fence to be
painted the trim color. Mr. Slam seconded the amendment. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
113 Federal Street
Richard Lindeman presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for
the following:
- Stabilize shed and install concrete footings, pour concrete floor, remove
existing roof, repair and replace with cedar shingle roof and paint white with
gray trim.
- Remove exiting fence between 113 & 115 Federal, install new chatham picket
fence (same as current style except using rounded balusters) and gate across
driveway and paint white.
- Install arbor at rear of brick patio as entrance to garden and paint white.
- Install new chatham picket fence and gate across walkway leading to side door
• at 113A Federal St. with fence and gate to be at line separating walkway from
Federal Street sidewalk and paint white.
Drawings were presented.
Mr. Lindeman stated that he will bring the fence up to the line between the driveway
and the patio and will utilize the same posts.
August 17, 1994, Page 3
Mr. Slam asked if the applicant was changing the shape of the balusters. Mr.
• Lindeman replied in the affirmative and stated that they are going from square to
round.
Mr. Casey asked if there will be insizing around the top. Mr. Lindeman replied in
the affirmative and stated that Roger Hedstrom will be doing the work.
Mr. Casey stated that the proposed will be like the fence approved on Federal Court.
Mr. Casey stated that the arbor should have keystone and asked the paint colors.
Mr. Lindeman stated that the fence will be white and there will be grey trim on the
shed.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. Sides
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
331 Essex Street
Richard and Diane Pabich submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for sign installation as per drawing submitted.
Ms. Pabich asked to amend the application tol put the sign on the house so as not to
crowd the garden space. Mr. Pabich stated'that the sign will be perpendicular to
the house and will be the same size and scale as the sign on the Salem Inn.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as amended. Mr. Casey seconded
the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
• 15 Cambridge St.
Kevin & Deborah Guinee submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
to install a fence and gate with a total width of 82". The gate will be 36" and will be
constructed from the same fence section. Fence to have four posts with gate
hardware on the inside. A drawing was submitted showing the placement of the
fence and a catalog cut of the fence was submitted. Fence to be painted the trim
color of the house. The applicants were not present.
Chairman Oedel read a letter from Kathryn Moulison, 17 Cambridge Street.
Mr. Casey stated that the fence design was inappropriate. Mr. Slam was in
agreement.
Mr. Slam felt it was unfair to the public that attends the public hearing to have to
return for a continued meeting due to the applicants not showing up.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted in the hopes that it
fails. Ms. Sides seconded the motion.
Mr. Cook preferred to continue the application.
i
Mr. Casey stated that the applicants did not give the courtesy of a telephone call to
say they would not attend.
• Mr. Cook voted in favor of the application. Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides and Messrs.
Slam and Casey voted in opposition. The motion was denied as inappropriate.
274 Lafayette Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, was an application for a Certificate of
August 17, 1994, Page 4
Appropriateness from John Ronan on door, cupola and window details for the
• restoration of the carriage house at 274 Lafayette Street. The applicant was not
present.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Casey seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
86 Federal St.
Suzanne and Jonathan Felt submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the installation of landscaping timbers to hold soil at the front
of their house at 86 Federal St. The timbers have already been installed.
Ms. Guy stated that the applicants have requested that the application be continued
until 9/7/94.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application. Ms. Sides seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
14 Broad St.
Stephen Thomas submitted a request to amend an existing Certificate of
Appropriateness for his front fence at 14 Broad St. Instead of a 1 x 2 spindle with
a cap, Pro Fence will use a 2 x 2 spindle with a pyramid top and no cap is requested.
Spacing will be the same. A drawing was submitted.
Chairman Oedel stated that he saw two homes in Marblehead where Pro Fence
completed work and the quality was fine.
Mr. Slam preferred the original submission.
Mr. Cook made a motion to waive the public hearing and approve an amended
Certificate of Appropriateness. Ms. Sides seconded the motion. All were in favor
and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the minutes of 8/3/94. Mr. Slam seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy stated that she issued Certificates of Non-Applicability to 319 Essex Street
(oil heater pipes) , 38 Washington Sq. (repainting) and 407 Essex Street (porch &
clapboards) .
Ms. Sides stated that a fence has been installed at the Breed's on Cambridge Street.
Ms. Guy will send a letter:
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Sides
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
• Respectfully su itted,
Ja4 A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
September 7, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 7, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, September 7, 1994
at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs.
Carr, Slam, Kelleher, Casey and Cook and Ms. Guy.
274 Lafayette Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, was an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
from John Ronan on door, cupola and window details for the restoration of the carriage house at
274 Lafayette Street. The applicant was not present.
Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were in
favor and the motion so carried.
86 Federal St.
Jonathan and Suzanne Felt presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
installation of landscaping timbers to hold soil in front of the house at 86 Federal St. The timbers
have already been installed.
Chairman Oedel read a letter from Roy & Florence Gelin, 88 1/2-90 Federal Street, who were in
favor of the application.
•Ms. Felt presented a before photo and stated that cement was used to fill in the area between the
granite and the foundation. In order to have a garden, the timbers are needed to keep the soil
from running over the granite. Ms. Felt stated that the timbers were not attached to anything.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Carr asked if the concrete could be removed. Ms. Felt stated that the concrete was there
when the purchased the house and believed it is there due to foundation problems. Mr. Carr
suggested a trench by lifting the granite.
Mr. Carr stated that the Commission needs to judge the application on the appropriateness of a
wooden retaining wall on top of granite.
Mr. Casey felt that timbers have been used throughout the district, with some on top of granite.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted in hopes that it fails.
Mr. Slam asked if Mr. Kelleher had ever heard of an approval for something like this.
Mr. Kelleher stated that it is not historically appropriate but felt that it was not big enough to
require removal.
Chairman Oedel asked if Mr. Kelleher would support the filing of a Clerk's Certificate of Vote
rather than further enforcing the removal of the timbers. Mr. Kelleher replied in the affirmative.
•Mr. Carr and Mr. Cook stated that the timbers were inappropriate.
Mr. Casey felt the timbers did not alter the structure, that it is a small bit of landscaping and not
a big deal. Mr. Casey stated that it was not appropriate, but that he did not want to penalize the
applicant.
September 7, 1994, Page 2
Ms. Sides agreed with Mr. Casey and asked why the applicant did pot come to the Commission
rbefore doing the work. Ms. Felt stated that she did not believe (landscaping timbers would
equire approval.
Mr. Carr stated that he told the applicant in person, when the work was underway that it
required approval and that to proceed was at their own risk. Ms. Felt stated that Mr. Carr
approached them on Mother's Day when the garden was nearly finished and that the garden was
a Mother's Day gift from her husband and children.
Chairman Oedel did not feel it was appropriate, but stated that he would be willing not to pursue
enforcement if a Clerk's Certificate of Vote was filed. Chairman Oedel stated that this would
arantee that the timbers would be removed if the Felt's were to sell the house. Mr. Slam was
in agreement with Chairman Oedel.
Mr. Cook seconded Mr. Carr's motion. Messrs. Casey and Slam and Ms. Sides voted in favor.
C�}airman Oedel and Messrs. Carr, Kelleher and Cook voted in opposition. The motion to approve
th¢ application as submitted was denied as inappropriate.
Chairman Oedel suggested that a Clerk's Certificate of Vote be filed and that no further
enforcement be pursued.
Mzl. Casey made a motion that the Commission is not to pursue further enforcement, that the
homeowners do not further embellish the garden, that the homeowners may remove the timbers
at any time prior to selling the house and that the Commission file a Clerk's Certificate as to
Violation with the Essex South Registry of Deeds. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. Chairman
Oedel, Ms. Sides and Messrs. Slam, Casey and Kelleher voted in favor. Messrs. Carr and Cook
voted in opposition. The motion was so carried.
•136 Federal Street
Greater Lynn Special Needs Housing Corp. submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to replace a louvered glass door at 136 Federal Street. The applicant has already
replaced the previously existing wooden door with a metal door.
Paul Tempesta, representing the applicant, stated that they realize the door installed is not
ap, ropriate and that they are willing to replace the door with a wooden, raised panel door.
M Carr made a motion to deny the door as installed and to require the applicant to submit an
a lication for a new, appropriate door by September 19, 1994.
Mr. Tempesta asked if the Brosco M-100 would be acceptable. Mr. Carr preferred not to see a
stock door. Mr. Casey stated that he would like to see what was there before.
Mr. Carr amended his motion to find that the existing metal door is inappropriate and to appoint
a member of the Commission to work with the applicant to select a new door and to file an
application for such door in time for the October 5th meeting. Mr. Casey seconded the motion.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Carr volunteered to go to the Essex Institute to look for old photographs.
Mr. Casey made a motion to delegate Mr. Carr to work with the applicant. Mr. Slam seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
•Chairman Oedel asked about the fire alarm box installed on the building. James Chalmers, also
representing the applicant, stated that it was installed by the Fire Department. Chairman Oedel
stated that the property owner does not have to accept the location chosen by the Fire Department
and can look into other solutions.
i
September 7, 1994, Page 3
Mr. Carr suggested creating a laundry list of outstanding issues. Chairman Oedel read a letter
•dated July 7, 1993 which identified some outstanding issues including fence, trees and a second
floor landing.
Mr. Tempesta stated that the fence installation was scheduled two weeks ago but that Lundy fence
has delayed it.
Mr. Casey asked when the ramp would be stained or painted. Mr. Chalmers stated that it was
treated. Mr. Casey felt that it was supposed to be the trim color.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Carr made a motion that all unapproved work be removed or that applications for approval be
submitted by September 19, 1994. Mr. Casey seconded the motion, all were in favor and the
motion so carried.
38 Washington Square
Brian Wehrung & Lisa Dressler submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to
remove 3 small Victorian windows on the side (rear) of the house with the area to be re-
cl pboarded and to re-open original Federal window currently boarded up (with frame still
visible) on the front (side facing Hawthorne Hotel) , second floor ell. Window to be 6 over 6, wood
wi h intregal muntins and mullions.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as submitted.
Chairman Oedel asked the paint color. Ms. Dressler replied that it will be consistent with the rest
Wf the house.
Mr. Carr seconded the motion.
Mr. Casey felt that the 3 windows being removed could not be seen from the public way and that
the work proposed was appropriate.
There was no public comment.
The motion was voted on. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
6 Webb Street - adjacent City-owned land
Ruth Buchanan submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a 6'
capped, flatboard fence around the property that she has been given license to by the City of
Salem. A drawing was submitted showing the proposed fence for the Webb Street and driveway
sides. The park side would be 3" boards, butted with cap and post the same as the other sides.
A gate would be at the driveway, with hardware on the inside.
Ms. Buchanon stated that the fence around the driveway will be 4', the Webb Street side will be
pine and the park side will be spruce boards, all left natural.
Chairman Oedel stated that the license does not indicate that there is permission to build on the
land. Ms. Buchanon stated that she was told it would be allowed by the City Solicitor, Mayor and
David Shea.
*r. Carr stated that a motion could be made subject to such authorization. Ms. Sides stated that
the approval should be in writing.
Paul Boisvert, with an interest in 8 Webb Street, stated that if the fence is allowed, it will make
it difficult to get into his property and that the fence should be lower so as not to block the view.
September 7, 1994, Page 4
Mr. Boisvert complained of the upkeep of 6 Webb Street. Mr. Boisvert also stated that there is
�aright of way through the property to the park.
John Green, 8 Webb Street, sated that a 6' fence would block the view when coming out of his
driveway.
Mr. Slam felt that a site inspection is necessary and requested verification from the City that a
fence would be allowed.
Mr. Carr made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in
favor and the motion so carried.
A site visit was set for Saturday, September 10, 1994 at 9:00 a.m.
Chairman Oedel stated that it should be checked if the applicant has exclusive use and not just
use.
Ms. Buchanon stated that the license requires her to insure the property and that if she must pay
for insurance, she wants it fenced in.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. All were
in favor and the motion so carried.
15 Cambridge Street
Kevin & Deborah Guinee submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install
a fence with gate in the location shown on a sketch presented. The fence will be 82" with a 36"
*color
and four posts. Gate hardware will be on the inside and the fence will be painted the trim
color of the house.
Ms. Guinee stated that she proposes the fence design on Page 7 of the fence section of the
Historical Commission's guidelines with the posts from Page 8, bottom.
Mr. Casey asked why the fence was needed. Ms. Guinee stated that they want to close the patio
off for the children. Ms. Guinee stated that the fence and gate will be 6' high.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted. There was no second.
Kate Moulison, 17 Cambridge Street, stated that she would like to be able to complete the work
needed to stop water leaking into her foundation before the fence is installed. Ms. Guinee stated
that she would allow Ms. Moulison access to her property to do the work prior to the fence
installation.
Mr. Carr stated that he did not oppose a fence in the proposed location but that he did not have
enough information to visualize the fence. Mr. Carr questioned how much space would be taken
up by the posts.
Mr. Casey stated that an 82" fence with a 36" gate and four, 4" posts would leave only 15" of
fence. Mr. Casey stated that something less substantial was needed. Mr. Casey felt that posts
were not necessary. Ms. Guinee stated that she would be willing to eliminate the posts.
Mr. Cook suggested the fence be supported from the back. Mr. Kelleher was in agreement and
•felt that no posts should be seen from the street.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve a fence to span the entire width in the location proposed, with
supports not visible from the street.
Mr. Carr felt the application should be continued and the applicant return with a drawing.
September 7, 1994, Page 5
Mr. Slam seconded Mr. Cook's motion. Chairman Oedel, Messrs. Cook, Slam, Kelleher and Casey
•and Ms. Sides voted in favor. Mr. Carr voted in opposition. The motion so carried.
6 Kosciusko Street
Richard & Margaret Krom submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install
a wood window in the kitchen area at 6 Kosciusko Street. A drawing was submitted. The window
will be a slider with two operating sash. It will be 2'11" wide by 217 5/8" tall.
Mr. Krom stated that there are no windows downstairs that can open and therefore no air
circulation. Mr. Krom stated that the windows will slide side to side. Ms. Krom stated that they
cannot install a casement window because the porch is too narrow. The window will be over the
counter top.
Mr. Slam suggested a site visit which was scheduled for Saturday, September 10, 1994 at 9:30
a.m.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. All were
in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Krom stated that they have a cardboard cut out of the proposed window size. Chairman Oedel
suggested they also make a cut out of a window that matches the size of the upstairs windows.
7 Botts Court
•Peter & Jeanne Kempthorne submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to
replace a fence between 7 & 5 Botts Court. The fence will be essentially the same with a change
from round posts without caps to square posts with caps and from stockade type picket (closed)
to open picket.
Chairman Oedel asked the color of the proposed fence. Mr. Kempthorne stated that it will be the
trim color of the house.
Mr. Kempthorne stated that the current fence has a front and a back and that the proposed will
have a matching panel so that both sides look finished. The fence will have a double rail with
single pickets.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the fence to be painted the
trim color of the house. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
44 & 46 Chestnut Street
Richard & Meg Zakin and Tony & Susie Cox submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness repaint 44 and 46 Chestnut Street and the surrounding fence of both residences.
Paint chips were provided indicating the body as taupe, shutters black and trim cream. The color
scheme is similar to 12 Chestnut Street.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Cook seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
*Other Business
Ms. Guy requested that the Commission send a letter of support for funding of a multi-purpose
trail system. Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter of support. Mr. Slam seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
September 7, 1994, Page 6
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the minutes of July 6, 1994. Mr. Carr seconded the motion,
•all were in favor and the motion so carried.
M
Ms. Guy stated that a Certificate of Non-Applicability was issued to 30-32 Beckford Street for the
replacement of the granite fence foundation.
A letter dated 8/11/94 from the National Park Service to Massachusetts Historical Commission
(MHC) was read finding that the installation of new exhibits in the Bonded Warehouse at the Salem
Maritime National Historic Site will have no effect.
A letter dated 8/12/94 from MHC to the Planning Department was read which stated that work
proposed for Splaine Park will unlikely affect significant historic resources.
Mr. Casey stated that the Durand Commission will present its findings from the public hearings
in Lowell on Friday morning at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman Oedel stated that he met with MHC and members of the Peabody Essex Museum
concerning the Armory. The back side of the drill shed is not being used. There will be some
minor external changes that Chairman Oedel did not feel would be a problem. MHC will be sending
a letter of no effect and a second letter concerning tying in the work to the front section.
Chairman Oedel stated that the museum does not want to do the original plan for the front section,
but does not have a new proposal as yet.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Kelleher seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
•Respectfully submitted,
Ja ' A. Guy
Cl rk of the ommission
bN. •.
A
September 21, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 21, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday,
September 21, 1994 at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Present were
Chairman Oedel, Messrs. Kelleher, Cook, Bailey and Carr and Ms. Guy. Mr. Slam
entered later in the meeting.
31 Broad Street
Stephen Grasberger and Katherine Van Dyke submitted an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at 31 Broad Street. The body will be
Crosby Grey, trim Lancaster White and shutters Essex Green.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Cook seconded
the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
29 Washington Square
The John Bertram House Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for paint colors for the new chiller exposure. The roof will be flat
black. All trim, including cornice, corner boards, water table, door and window
casings, sill and siding below blinds and round top doors will be #957. The
clapboards will be #1301 and the blinds will be Chrome Green #41 (same as the house
blinds) . All paint is Moore's High Gloss House Paint, except for the roof, which is
• flat black. Staley McDermet represented the applicant.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Cook seconded
the motion. There was no public comment. All were in favor and the motion so
carried.
Mr. McDermet stated that a child of a resident who died has donated a memorial and
the Bertram Home would like it to be a bench on a flush concrete pad. Mr. Carr
stated that it was not a structure and would not require Commission approval.
6 Webb Street/adjacent City-owned land
In continuation from a previous meeting, Ruth Buchanon presented an application
for a Certificate of Appropriateness to erect a fence around the property that she
has been given license to by the City of Salem.
Chairman Oedel stated that he was given a copy of a letter from the City Solicitor
which stated that Ms. Buchanon has been given license to the property which is
revokable at any time and gives permission to erect a fence. Chairman Oedel noted
that he left the copy at home. Mr. Carr noted that the right to erect a fence is given
subject to Commission design approval.
Chairman Oedel stated that a petition with over 44 names has been submitted in
opposition to the fence. Ms. Buchanon noted that some of the signatures are from
people who do not live in that area. Chairman Oedel noted that any Salem resident
has a right to express opinion whether in favor or opposed.
• Mr. Carr stated that he attended a site visit with Mr. Slam of which the applicant and
her contractor were present along with Karl Kouse and Mr. Boisvert who are in
attendance at tonight's meeting. Mr. Carr stated that there appears to be a path
and a break in the split rail fence leading to the park.
September 21, 1994, Page 2
Karl Kouse, 2 Cousins Street, presented additional photos of the area and stated
• that his concern is with regard to cars turning from Derby onto Webb. Mr. Kouse
stated that as it exists, cars can visually police the park and that, at night,
headlights shine into the park to Fort Avenue, providing additional security. Mr.
Kouse stated that he has additional names for the petition, including the residents
directly next door, which he will submit. Mr. Kouse stated that the license states
strictly that there shall be no structure on the property and that the Building
Inspector defines a fence as a structure according to Mass. law. Mr. Kouse
requested additional time to present his case and stated that the neighbors are
loosing a right of way. Mr. Kouse noted that during snow removal, people park
their cars on the property. Mr. Kouse submitted copies of a letter from the Mayor
to the City Council dated 8/4/94 and the City Council Order dated 8/4/94.
Mr. Slam joined the meeting at this time.
Mr. Slam provided a copy of a letter referred to by Chairman Oedel earlier from the
City Solicitor dated 9/9/94.
Mr. Kouse stated that 40 plus people sent him to the meeting to speak on their
behalf. Mr. Kouse felt that the property was not licensed in an appropriate manner
and that a right of way would be fenced in. Mr. Kouse suggested a compromise of
fencing in only up to the right of way and requested that the matter be tabled since
he has had little time to prepare. Mr. Kouse stated that he wants to put the issue
to the City Council and that he has not been able to speak with each of the
Councillors yet. Mr. Kouse stated that those he has contacted have not been in
favor of the fence.
• Mr. Carr stated that Mr. Kouse feels headlights shining into the park discourages
undesirables. Mr. Carr asked if the issue is the fence design or fence vs no fence.
Mr. Kouse replied that his first choice would be to have no fence and that his second
choice would be to have a fence that allows illumination into the park. Mr. Kouse
also felt that oil truck noise will reverberate on the fence.
Mr. Bailey asked if the existing fence would be removed. Ms. Buchanon stated that
they would either remove it, or could put up the new fence adjacent to the split rail
fence. Ms. Buchanon stated that the City now owns the fence which N.E. Power
installed. Ms. Buchanon stated that N.E. Power installed no parking signs so that
people would not park on the new grass.
Ms. Buchanon stated that she would be willing to create a new opening further down
such as coming back 60' from the sidewalk and returning license to that portion back
to the City.
Mr. Slam asked Councillor William Burns if the fence was discussed before the City
Council. Councillor Burns stated that it was approved the by City Council but he
did not recall the meeting or any discussion. Councillor Burns felt that Ms.
Buchanon is putting a fortress around the property and that the current view to the
park is aesthetic and beautiful which would be cut off by the fence. Councillor
Burns suggested that the split rail fence be continued around the property and
chicken wire be added to limit dog access.
• Mr. Carr asked what Councillor Burns sensed would happen if the subject went back
to the Council. Councillor Burns stated that there would be a more lively
discussion.
Mr. Kouse stated that if the matter returned to the Council, neighbors would speak
on the issue. Mr. Kouse stated that the neighbors did not know about the proposal
September 21, 1994, Page 3
when it first went before the Council.
• Audrey Hahn, 12 Webb Street, stated that she was the daughter of Ms. Buchanon
and that she has never seen into the park when she has taken the corner. Mr. Kahn
suggested that lights be installed in the park. Mr. Kahn stated that her mother has
taken care of the property even before it was licensed to her and that the persons
soliciting signatures misrepresented the issues when asked for the signatures.
Ms. Buchanon stated that she would like to put up some kind of wire fence to allow
visibility.
Mr. Slam asked why the fence needed to be so tall. Ms. Buchanon stated that it
could be reduced. Mr. Slam asked if 4' would be sufficient. Ms. Buchanon replied
in the affirmative.
Mr. Slam stated that his main objection was height, and that he would have less
objection if it were lower.
Mr. Cook stated that it appears there is potential controversy which is sufficient to
warrant a continuation of the application to allow the proponents and opponents to
work out the issue with the City Council.
Mr. Slam asked why it should be tabled since the neighbors have had more than two
weeks to petition the City Council.
Mr. Kouse stated that he has only had since last Saturday's site visit to prepare and
• that he will be bringing the issue to the City Council. Mr. Kouse stated that he
wants the Council to speak to the question of whether the fence issue was considered
when the license was approved.
Mr. Carr asked what would be reasonable time. Mr. Kouse replied 30 days.
Chairman Oedel stated that there is not enough time left on the application. Mr.
Carr stated that the Commission will have to deny the application or ask the applicant
to waive the right to a decision within 60 days of filing the application.
Mr. Cook made a motion to continue the application until the meeting of October 19,
1994. Mr. Slam seconded the motion and suggested that the applicant waive the 60
day requirement so that a fence does not get built and then the City Council revokes
the license.
Chairman Oedel stated that there also seems to be questions of fence type and
visibility, height, and right-of-way. Chairman Oedel stated that right-of-way
should be considered since rights-of-way do have historic nature in Salem.
Chairman Oedel noted that the Mayor's letter says that no structure is to be built on
the property, but that the license does not represent the same. Mr. Carr noted that
the Commission's question as to authority to erect a fence was answered by the City
Solicitor and not the Mayor or City Council. Mr. Slam stated that the license was
ambiguous.
Mr. Carr felt that reviewing the design would prejudice the issue before the City
Council.
• Mr. Slam made a motion to move the questions. Mr. Carr seconded the motion.
Ms. Buchanon stated that Councillor George Ahmed is going to set up a meeting with
those concerned.
Mr. Slam asked if Ms. Buchanon would waive the 60 day requirement. Ms. Buchanon
September 21, 1994, Page 4
agreed and so signed the application.
• Ms. Guy suggested that someone from the Commission be delegated to attend the
meeting of interested parties. Mr. Carr and Mr. Slam were so delegated.
The motion to move the question was voted upon. All were in favor and the motion
so carried.
The motion to continue was voted upon. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
400 Essex Street
Edward and Clair Sabbagh presented an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for exterior renovations to the back porch and rear bulkhead,
construction of a new fence, 2 gates and 1 arbor, and repair of side porch with
addition of stairs similar to new back porch. Scale drawings and photographs were
submitted.
Ms. Sabbagh stated that they have received an okay from their neighbor to have the
finished side face in on Essex Street. They hope to receive an okay from the N. Pine
Street neighbor to have the finish side face in as well.
Mr. Carr stated that the rear porch will not be seen due to the fence. Mr. Carr felt
the application was terrific except for the finish side of the fence should point out.
Mr. Carr stated that if the supports were placed between the horizontals, the fence
would look the same on both sides.
• Mr. Slam stated that he had no problem with the fence.
Mr. Kelleher felt the proposal was great and that it was a well-prepared application.
Mr. Cook noted that the interior of the house is great, too.
Mr. Bailey felt that since the fence can't be seen between the buildings, where the
finish side goes is insignificant.
There was no public comment.
Chairman Oedel asked paint color. Ms. Sabbagh stated that it will be painted the
house body color.
Ms. Guy asked what they would do if the N. Pine Street neighbor does not want the
unfinished side facing his property. Mr. Sabbagh stated they will have both sides
face out.
Chairman Oedel stated that small wood ballasters on 6" centers is unusual. Mr. Carr
stated that it will be behind the fence. Mr. Slam stated that the applicants should
check the legal code.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Cook
seconded the motion. Chairman Oedel and Messrs. Slam, Kelleher, Cook and Bailey
voted in favor. Mr. Carr voted in opposition. The motion was so carried. Mr. Carr
• noted that his vote in opposition was only due to the finish side of the fence facing
inward.
135-137 Derby Street
Robert Dana presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the
September 21, 1994, Page 5
demolition and reconstruction of decks on back of both buildings. The only change
• will be to replace the railing cross members with square edge balusters. The
application is also to install freeze boards.
Chairman Oedel noted that there is some signage that has not been approved for the
tenant, Mrs. Gina, that must be removed. Mr. Dana stated that his eventual intent
is not to have a business there.
Mr. Dana supplied photographs and a drawing of the proposed decks and stated that
the square edge ballasters will be constructed slightly different with the baluster
sandwiched in between.
Mr. Carr asked the timetable. Mr. Dana stated that there are life safety issues and
he would like to start on Monday.
Mr. Carr stated that the decks are an intregal portion of these 3-deckers and that
it was problematic that there is no plan.
Mr. Dana stated that it will be ballastrade throughout and down the stairs. They
will be vertical, square edge enclosed ballasters with two 2 x 41s.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application subject to:
1. the dimensions and locations of the porches and stairs remain as existing;
2. the ballasters be constructed as per diagram with application; and
3. the railing to match 149 Derby Street except for stair rails which shall also be
vertical.
• Mr. Slam seconded the motion.
Chairman Oedel asked the paint colors. Mr. Dana stated that he would apply for
paint at a later date.
Mr. Carr amended his motion that the applicant apply for paint colors by 6/30/95.
Mr. Slam seconded the amendment. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the water table and for the paint color also to be
applied for by 6/30/95. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
motion so carried.
274 Lafayette Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, was an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness from John Ronan on door, cupola and window details for the
restoration of the carriage house at 274 Lafayette Street.
Mr. Ronan stated that in researching cupola's, more appropriate designs were
expensive and he would prefer to wait for approval.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the cupola portion of the application to on or
before 6/30/95. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
• Mr. Ronan stated that his original proposal for the doors was to lower the opening
and submitted Scheme C which does not lower the doors.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve Scheme C subject to the conditions of the
Certificates dated 5/19/94 and 7/7/94. Mr. Carr seconded the motion. All were in
favor and the motion so carried.
September 21, 1994, Page 6
Mr. Ronan stated that he plans to paint the carriage house the same as the house.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve paint colors to match the house provided the trim
locations be the same as the original carriage house scheme. Mr. Cook seconded the
motion.
Mr. Ronan stated that he is not sure how he wants to paint the door. Mr. Carr
included in his motion that Chairman Oedel be delegated to represent the Commission
on door colors. Mr. Cook seconded the amendment. All were in favor and the motion
so carried.
6 Kosciusko Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Richard and Margaret Krom submitted an
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a window in the kitchen
area. Mr. Carr stated that the applicants would not be available to attend this
meeting.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application. Mr. Slam seconded the motion.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
10 Hamilton Street
Barry Paul submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace
the sheet metal roofing on the front porch with rolled asphalt that will match the
charcoal color roof of the main roof.
• Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Carr seconded
the motion.
Chairman Oedel noted that there is an outstanding violation for this property for the
fence.
Mr. Carr stated that he did not want to hold up improvements.
The motion was voted on. Messrs. Carr, Bailey, Slam and Cook voted in favor.
Chairman Oedel and Mr. Kelleher voted in opposition. The motion was so carried.
2 Botts Court
Stan and Mary Usovicz submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
for paint colors and to alter the side porch at 2 Botts Court.
Ms. Guy stated that the applicant's have requested a continuation for the porch
alteration.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the paint colors and to continue the porch portion
of the application. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion
so carried.
Other Business
. Ms. Guy stated that Massachusetts Historical Commission replied to a resident
inquiry concerning the discovery of an infant's gravestone from 1894 at 2 Albion
Street.
Ms. Guy stated that there is a workshop for historic commissions on Saturday,
October 1, 1994 sponsored by Historic Massachusetts and that Commission members
September 21, 1994, Page 7
should be attending educational workshops such as this in order to comply with
Certified Local Government requirements.
•
Ms. Guy stated that the National Preservation Conference is October 26-30, 1994 in
Boston.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Kelleher
seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully sub 'tted,
eof
ci�JaClCommission
October 5, 1994, 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
OCTOBER 5, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, October 5, 1994
at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs,
Carr, Kelleher and Casey and Ms. Guy.
Chairman Oedel noted that 6 Webb Street, which was continued to the meeting of October, 19,
1994, has been withdrawn.
6 Kosciusko Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Mr. Richard Krom was present on the continuation of an
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a window at 6 Kosciusko
Street.
Mr. Krom stated that, at the recent site visit, he made a cardboard frames for two window options.
One is for a preferred window which slides and the second is for a window similar to the ones on
the second floor. Mr. Krom noted that the current windows are not uniform.
Mr. Carr stated that the house was a warehouse that had been moved from Derby Wharf. Mr. Carr
• stated that Option 1 would allow the homeowner to have a counter. Mr. Carr felt that the two 6
over 6 windows on the second floor may be original. Mr. Carr stated that the rest of the windows
are haphazard.
Mr. Kelleher asked if the sliding window had true divided lights. Mr. Krom stated that it would be
two single panes with inserts. Mr. Krom stated that they would be removable, like the newer
windows on the second floor.
Mr. Carr stated that a casement window will not work due to the front door. Mr. Carr stated that
the owner wants a horizontal window in order to accommodate a counter and to have ventilation.
Mr. Carr felt that the Kroms were nice, accommodating people who care about and maintain their
property. Mr. Carr had concerns about the proposal and wondered if the already non-uniform
windows will make the house look too busy. Mr. Carr preferred Option 2. Mr. Carr stated that
he has considered that fact that it was once a warehouse which has less need for symmetry.
Mr. Casey stated that although he would like to accommodate the applicant, the proposed is not
historically appropriate.
Ms. Sides the condition of the windows on the rest of the house and if there were any plans to
replace them. Mr. Krom stated that it was a possibility.
Ms. Sides stated that it is the inserts that bother her most and suggested installing a true divided
• light window. Ms. Sides stated that the remaining windows on the house could be matched to the
new window later.
Mr. Carr stated that Option 2 will match the two on the second floor. Mr. Carr stated that Option
1 appears tiny.
October 5, 1994, 2
Ms. Sides asked if the applicant would consider a shorter true-divided light double window. Mr.
• Krom replied in the affirmative. Ms. Sides noted that security is better with a double hung window.
Mr. Kelleher stated that he wouldn't mind, and would even prefer, if the slider had true divided
lights. Mr. Kelleher felt the double hung will look too large and out of place.
Chairman Oedel felt it was an odd place for a window and that the building was odd in terms of
openings and fenestration. Chairman Oedel noted that it all hangs together. Chairman Oedel
stated that he would be agreeable to a true divided light slider and agreed that a double hung may
be a little too tall.
Ms. Sides stated that it may be easier to get a double hung in that size than a slider.
Mr. Carr was concerned with the size of the individual panes. Mr. Kelleher stated that the drawing
shows the panes fairly close in size.
Mr. Casey felt there was an opportunity to unify the windows.
Chairman Oedel did not feel a vertical window in that location was appropriate.
Mr. Casey felt that a vertical window is appropriate for any building this age.
• Mr. Kelleher stated that it has to be taken into consideration that this was a warehouse.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the application as submitted conditional that the window
have 4 over 4 true divided lights to match the drawing. There was no second
Ms. Sides asked if the glass proposed is single glaze or insulated. Mr. Krom replied that he is
proposing insulated.
Mr. Kelleher amended his motion that the mullions must match the rest of the house. There was
no second.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve a 36" by 36" double hung, true divided light window to
match the two 6 over 6 windows on the second floor. There was no second.
Chairman Oedel stated that the Commission must approve or deny.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted in hopes that it fails. There was
no second.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application. There was no second.
Ms. Sides made a motion to approve a double hung, true divided light window, single glaze, 6
. over 6, approximately 36" x 36". Mr. Casey seconded the motion. Chairman Oedel and Messrs.
Kelleher and Casey and Ms. Sides voted in favor. Mr. Carr voted in opposition. The motion was
so carried.
October 5, 1994, 3
2 Botts Court
• In continuation from a previous meeting, Stan and Mary Usovicz submitted an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness to revise the design of the side porch at 2 Botts Court. Ms. Usovicz
presented new drawings showing the porch to have turned ballasters, standard lattice and no roof.
The porch will be 10' wide in fir.
Ms. Usovicz stated that they will remove the existing temporary porch and that the new porch will
end at the end of the house where the existing post is. The porch will be painted the trim color.
Ms. Sides felt that the angling in the proposed design in Option 1 may be treacherous and was
setting up a dangerous descent position. Ms. Sides felt that since the railings are on the sides, it
will encourage people to use the narrower portions of the steps.
Mr. Carr suggested a site visit.
Ms. Sides suggested that the steps for Option 2 pinch in a little and have 6' stairs.
Ms. Usovicz stated that Option 2 looks like a runway, but that she did not want to decrease the
width of the stairs because they want an inviting stair to sit on.
Ms. Usovicz amended Option 2 to cut angles on the two exterior corners.
• Mr. Carr asked if the porch will be the same height as the existing top stair. Ms. Usovicz replied
in the affirmative.
Mr. Kelleher preferred 90 degree angles. Mr. Carr stated that he also had a problem with the
angles.
Option 3 was reviewed.
Ms. Sides felt the stairs should be a straight run and felt that 8' wide stairs would be like bleachers.
Ms. Sides preferred 6' wide stairs.
Chairman Oedel stated that if the porch had square corners, returns, and 6' wide stairs, it would
probably be approved.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve Option 2 with square corners, stairs to be centered and not
wider than 6'. The motion is also to delegate Mr. Casey to approve details (facial, width of lattice,
ballasters, etc.). Flooring to be fir, 6 1/2" post caps, 5"+/- boxed posts, 1 1/4 balusters. Paint to
be trim color. Ms. Sides seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy is to draft a letter to Massachusetts Electric Company concerning the electric meters at 2
Botts Court.
• 14 Chestnut Street
Katherine &Thomas Murray submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove
the landscape timbers and replace with a stone wall of the same dimensions and location.
October 5, 1994, 4
Ms. Kate stated that the stones could be flat or incorporate stones from the site.
• Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Casey seconded the motion.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
136 Federal Street
Greater Lynn Special Needs Housing Corp. (GLSNH) submitted an application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness to change the steel entry door on Carpenter Street, the basement door off of
Carpenter Street and the bedroom access door all to M-100, to relocate the knox box and to paint
the tops of the railings on the rear porch in the trim color.
Mr. Paul Tempesta, representing GLSNH stated that the Executive Director's position is that
relocating the knox box may slow down the Fire Department in getting into the building and that
he does not want to move it unless the Fire Department selects an alternative location which does
not require firefighters to have prior knowledge of in order to locate. Mr. Carr questioned if the
existing location was the only location that was reasonably visible. Mr. Carr stated that he will set
up a meeting with the Fire Inspector.
Peter Copelas, 17 Beckford Street, stated that the Fire Department gives the impression that a knox
box is mandated and that it is not. Mr. Copelas stated that he was ordered to install one and
refused due to security reasons. Mr. Copelas stated that it is not a code requirement but a
• recommendation.
Mr. Carr stated that he researched the property at the Essex Institute library and looked at houses
of approximately the same period in order to facilitate door selection. Mr. Carr described the doors
for a property on Liberty Street and a brick double house that is two houses over from St. Peter's
Church. Ms. Sides stated that those types of doors may be difficult to get.
Chairman Oedel stated that the Brosco M-100 is not appropriate on the Carpenter Street door.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue application. Mr. Casey seconded the motion, all were in favor
and the motion so carried. Mr. Carr and Mr. Tempesta will meet concerning the doors.
Mr. Tempesta stated that the Executive Director wants to keep the second floor platform as is for
safety reasons. In case of fire, they want the back area to be a corralling area for the residents.
Mr. Carr stated that the structure built was not approved.
17 Flint Street
John Casey and Bruce Goddard submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to
replace the roof shingles in 1/4 of the area with in kind shingles, same color, same dimension and
keeping same coursing.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Kelleher seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Casey abstained from voting.
October 5, 1994, 5
Survey of Derby Street & McIntire Districts
• Ms. Guy stated that 155 survey forms will be updated this year with Survey and Planning Grant
funds. All of the approximately 95 forms in the Derby Street district will be updated. The
consultant completing the work will look at the properties in the McIntire District that have not
been surveyed since 1967, particularly those around the perimeter of the district. The consultant
will be at the next meeting to request input from the Commission on any properties that may be
slated for development of which a new survey form would be beneficial.
84 Federal Street
John Wathne was present to request a new delegate from the Commission to continue the review
of details for his home at 84 Federal Street. The new delegate would take over for Roger Hedstrom
who is no longer on the Commission, but was delegated for Mr. Wathne's renovation project.
Mr. Wathne presented sketches of proposed changes to the front porch. Mr. Wathne stated that
they found markings from the former shingles. Mr. Wathne proposes to pump out the pilasters and
extend them to the ground, and install new molding. Mr. Wathne stated that there is presently
solid shingle and he will install vertical lattice that is not stock quality. Mr. Wathne stated that he
also wants to install granite steps.
Mr. Casey was delegate for the review of the project.
• Mr. Carr made a motion to amend the Certificate of Appropriateness for 84 Federal St. to include
the approval the drawing of the porch as submitted and to delegate Mr. Casey to approve the
granite details. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Window Discussion
Mr. Peter Copelas, 17 Beckford Street, stated that he is not 100% happy with the J.B. Sash windows
that he installed. Mr. Copelas stated that he broke the mullions on the first two windows he tried
to open.
Mr. Copelas presented a double glaze window sample from Architectural Components which is
wood with individual lights. There is no vinyl inside or out. Mr. Copelas stated that they also
make a window with glass imperfections so as to look old, if desired. References from the
company were also provided.
Mr. Copelas stated that the J.B. Sash windows were $200. plus installation and that the
Architectural Components window is $500 plus installation.
Ms. Guy will try to get a window sample from Marvin Windows. Ms. Sides suggested contacting
Dodge, Adams and Roy in Portsmith to get leads. Ms. Sides stated that Kolbe and Kolbe makes an
interior energy panel that is available at Gove Lumber in Beverly.
• Stop & Shop
Ms. Joan Sweeney, 22 Silver Street, provided old maps and pictures from 1989 to the present to
illustrate the effect that Stop & Shop will have on the proposed area. A map was shown indicating
• October 5, 1994, 6
what space would be taken up if the project is built and Ms. Sweeney stated that, if built, a piece
• of history would be lost. Ms. Sweeney stated that the State is not sure of the boundaries of the
cemetery and that she was concerned about erosion. Mr. Sweeney stated that all the house on
Beaver Street abutting the property were built in the 1850's.
Mary Casey of Grove Street stated that on May 3, 1994 a Notice of Intent/Environmental Impact
Statement was provided to the City of Peabody which stated that there are no historical or
architectural resources impacted. Ms. Casey stated that this information is being used and
misrepresented to various boards.
Also present with Ms. Sweeney and Ms. Casey was Maureen Kiley of 15 Bow Street.
Mr. Kelleher stated that Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) comments under the Section
106 Review requested a reconnaissance survey.
Ms. Casey asked for the Commission to ask MHC to push Stop and Shop for the studies that were
requested. Ms. Guy stated that Stop & Shop can submit the information requested by MHC at any
time, but the work cannot proceed until the information is received and the Section 106 review
process is completed. Ms. Guy stated that the Commission can comment on the information
submitted.
Mr. Carr suggested a letter be sent to all interested parties concerning the Notice of Intent that wa
• submitted.
Chairman Oedel suggested a letter be sent to Stop & Shop representatives with copies to the
Peabody Boards concerning the Notice of Intent claim that there are not historical or architectural
resources, that MHC says there is an impact and that the Commission concurs and for Stop & Shop
to adjust the Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Notification Statement according.
Copies to be sent to Ms. Sweeney, Ms. Casey and Ms. Kiley. Chairman Oedel will draft the letter.
Minutes
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the minutes of September 7, 1994. Mr. Carr seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms. Guy stated that a copy of a letter from MHC to the Peabody Essex Museum dated 9/19/94 was
received concerning the collections storage facility and the finding that it is consistent with the
terms of the Memorandum of Agreement.
Ms. Guy stated that Certificate of Non-Applicability were issued to 4 Pickering Street and 7 Lynn
Street.
• Mr. Casey stated that he has left several telephone messages and has knocked on the door of 10
Hamilton Street and has not been able to meet with the owner concerning the fence. Mr. Carr
made a motion to take the next step in the enforcement process. Ms. Sides seconded the motion.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
October 5, 1994, 7
Ms. Guy will send letters to Dr. Mike Kantorosinski concerning the shutters on 44 Warren Street
Sand to the owners of the property on the corner of Broad St. and Orne Sq. concerning shutters.
Ms. Guy asked if the Commission wants to renege on its approval of the J.B. Sash window. Mr.
Kelleher stated that J.B. Sash is announcing that the Commission has approved these windows. Mr.
Carr made a motion to renege on the approval of the J.B. Sash window. There was no second.
Chairman Oedel suggested a letter be sent to the company. Mr. Kelleher suggested that the letter
state that approval will be on a case by case basis and that the company should not advertise that
it is an approved window.
There being no further business, Mr. Kelleher made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Carr seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
•
•
October 19, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
OCTOBER 19, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, October 19, 1994.
Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs. Slam, Cook and Carr and Ms. Guy.
6 Webb St.
In continuation from a previous meeting, Ruth Buchanon presented an application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness to erect a fence around the property that she has been given license to by the
City of Salem.
Chairman Oedel read a letter from the owners withdrawing their application without prejudice.
136 Federal Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Greater Lynn Special Needs Housing Corp. (GLSNH)
submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change the steel entry door on
Carpenter Street, the basement door off of Carpenter Street and the bedroom access door all to M-
100, to relocate the knox box and to paint the tops of the railings on the rear porch in the trim
color. Mr. Carr stated that he has a meeting with the applicants on 10/20/94 at the site at 10:00
• a.m.
Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application until the next scheduled meeting. Mr. Slam
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
397 Essex Street
Z & M Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the
driveway fence as per drawing submitted.
Mr. Slam noted that the fence is visible from S. Pine Street.
Vincent McGrath, representing the trust, stated that the fence is falling down, the gate is gone and
dogs are getting in. Mr. McGrath proposes to install a new fence in the same location, to match
the picket fence of the neighbor's which is at a right angle to his fence. Mr. McGrath stated that
they could install a solid board fence if preferred.
Mr. Carr stated that the photographs of the neighbor's fence shows a wider space between the
pickets than the drawing provided. Mr. Carr stated that the new fence should match the spacing
of the neighbor's.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the picket spacing to match
• the neighbor's. Mr. Carr seconded the motion.
Chairman Oedel asked the color of the fence. Mr. McGrath replied that it would be painted white.
Mr. Carr suggested a friendly amendment to paint the fence white. Mr. Slam so amended his
October 19, 1994, Page 2
motion. Mr. Carr seconded the amendment. The motion was voted upon, all were in favor and
• the motion so carried.
Mr. Carr asked the status of the entryway replacement for 1-3 N. Pine St. Mr. McGrath stated that
the plans are ready but they have not had the finances. Mr. Carr suggested that the Commission
give the owner 90 days to apply.
6 Carpenter Street
M. Chefitz and R. Frost submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for door
installation at 6 Carpenter Street. Ms. Guy noted that the proposed was not visible from the public
way and had been changed to an application for Non-Applicability which has since been signed
off by two Commission members.
22 Beckford Street
William & Elizabeth Burns presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change
the size of a window on the first floor as per drawing submitted.
Ms. Burns stated that the casing, top height, glass size and shutter would be the same, but the
height and width would be smaller.
• Mr. Slam asked if the window would still be double hung. Ms. Burns stated that she did not know,
that she just wants a smaller window to accommodate the counter. Ms. Burns stated that the
window is rotted and needs replacement anyway.
Mr. Carr noted that it is a period window.
Ms. Burns stated that she would consider a stained glass window or something decorative/
Mr. Carr suggested a site visit.
Ms. Burns stated that the window is located on the shed part of the house, which is not as
important to have the same size windows.
Mr. Carr noted that it has a big, thick period sill.
Mr. Cook suggested having the counter go over across the window. Ms. Burns stated that the
existing counter goes partially across it now.
Mr. Carr felt that a smaller window would exacerbate the unfortunate octagonal window on the
second floor.
Mr. Slam stated that he had a problem with the proposal and felt that it would diminish the
• property to alter an appropriate window. Mr. Carr was in agreement and suggested the owner put
in a half curtain.
Ms. Burns stated that the living room is opened up to the kitchen so that the window is very
visible.
October 19, 1994, Page 3
Mr. Cook stated that he had a similar problem in one of his houses but felt the inconvenience
• inside was worth not messing up the outside.
Ms. Sides stated that to truly judge the proposal, she would want to have a site visit. Ms. Sides
stated that in viewing the drawing, she would agree that the window should not be changed. Ms.
Sides stated that a new sash in the existing window will eliminate any current problems of opening
the window. Ms. Sides suggested an inside shutter painted out.
Chairman Oedel felt the window was pretty visible and agreed with Ms. Sides that the Commission
should either have a site visit or the homeowner look into installing a shutter.
Ms. Burns asked about installing a decorative window. Ms. Sides stated that the light loss in the
kitchen would be dramatic. Ms. Sides stated that light would also be lost with a smaller window.
Ms. Burns withdrew their application and stated that she would try a shutter.
Ms. Burns submitted brochures to the Commission regarding the Historic Salem, Inc. Christmas
house tour.
5 Botts Court
Willis and Ashley Stinson submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to repair
• the rear roof which is currently asphalt and gravel with a rubber membrane roof. The application
noted that the roof is in the rear of the house, is flat and is not visible from any street.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Slam seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
35 Broad Street
Paul Viccica and Helen Sides presented an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to
repair the slate roof including reflashing (skylights, vents, chimney), ridge replacement and slate
replacement to match existing and to replace the garage doors to match existing.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Slam seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Sides abstained from voting.
38 Warren Street
Ms. Guy stated that there is only one application for the November 2 meeting and that if the
Commission wants to waive the public hearing and approve the application for 38 Warren Street,
the Commission won't have another meeting until November 16, 1994.
David & Susan Faul submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the rear
• porch, replace the window and door on the porch wall with a 5' x 8' bay window and landscape
the back garden.
Ms. Guy stated that the wall where the window and door will be replaced is non-visible, but the
porch is partially visible from Warren Street.
October 19, 1994, Page 4
Mr. Carr made a motion to delegate the bay window to a Commission member who, if agrees that
it is non visible, may approve a Certificate of Non-Applicability. There was no second.
Ms. Guy stated that the porch roof is visible.
Chairman Oedel stated that the Commission could waive the public hearing and approve a
Certificate of Appropriateness for the porch and issue a conditional Certificate of Non-Applicability
for the bay window.
Mr. Carr made a motion to waive the public hearing and approve the removal of the porch due to
its minimal impact on the historic district. The motion is also to issue a Certificate of Non-
Applicability for the bay window conditional that it not be visible from the public way. Ms. Sides
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Survey and Planning Grant
Dianne Siergiej was present to request comment from the Commission concerning the 160
architectural survey forms that will be updated in the Derby Street and McIntire Districts. Ms. Guy
stated that all of the approximately 90 forms will be updated from Derby Street with the exception
of properties not over 50 years and the properties of the National Park Service.
Ms. Siergiej asked if there was anything critical in the McIntire District.
• Mr. Slam felt that the Commission seems to get the most applications from Federal Street.
Chairman Oedel was in agreement, particularly from Boston to Flint Street.
Mr. Carr asked how the date of the homes are determined. Ms. Siergiej stated that they are dated
mostly through maps, appearance and previous research.
Mr. Slam suggested Carpenter Street be included. Chairman Oedel suggested Gifford Court.
Minutes
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the minutes of 8/17/94 and 9/21/94. Mr. Slam seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Corresoondence
Ms. Guy stated that the Commission received a copy of a letter to 15 River Street from the Building
Inspector concerning the possibility of the property being used by more than one household.
Ms. Guy stated that the Commission received a public notice concerning the construction of a
temporary detour for the Beverly/Salem bridge project.
• Violations/Work Status
Ms. Guy provided a written status of violations/outstanding work and stated that previously
requested letters to violators have been issued.
October 19, 1994, Page 5
Mr. Carr stated that 10 Andover Street removed a portion of the concrete block wall due to a water
main problem. Mr. Carr noted that the owners received a grant from the city a few years ago. Ms.
Guy will send a letter.
Other Business
Chairman Oedel stated that the Gleason House in Billerica, which is currently under demolition
delay, is available free to anyone willing to move it.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Cook seconded the
motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
JVaA.. Guy
the Commission
November 16, 1994, Page 1
r
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
NOVEMBER 16, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, November 16, 1994
at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Present were Vice Chairman Carr, Ms. Sides, Messrs.
Casey, Bailey and Kelleher and Ms. Guy.
149 Derby Street
Dennis Colannino submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace 2 windows
on the Daniels Street side of the building on the first floor closest to Derby Street. The windows
will be J.B. Sash wood tilt replacement windows approximately 32" x 62" and 36" x 62".
Maureen McDonald, representing the applicant, stated that the wood surrounding the first window
will remain and that there will be no changes except for the windows themselves. Ms. McDonald
state that the applicant is proposing to change the two windows from 2 over 2 to 6 over 2.
Mr. Casey suggested a site visit.
Ms. Sides suggested that the windows remain 2 over 2.
Ms. McDonald amended the application to be 2 over 2.
• Mr. Casey stated that he did not want the window size to change.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the application as amended to 2 over 2, painted finish or
equivalent stain to match the existing windows and with the work to be completed within 6 months.
Mr. Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy will take photographs to document current conditions.
136 Federal Street
In continuation from a previous meeting, Greater Lynn Special Needs Housing Corp. (GLSNH)
submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change the steel entry door on
Carpenter Street, the basement door off of Carpenter Street and the bedroom access door all to M-
100, to relocate the knox box and to paint the tops of the railings on the rear porch in the trim color.
Mr. Carr read into the record a letter from Paul Tempesta requesting continuation to 12/21/94 and
waiving the 60 day rule.
Ms. Sides made a motion to continue the application until 12/21/94 or the following scheduled
meeting if there is none scheduled for 12/21/94. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor
and the motion so carried.
• 35 Broad Street
Paul Viccica and Helen Sides presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace
a hollow core flush door at the side entrance with a 6 panel door, Morgan M-100. Ms. Sides
November 16, 1994, Page 2
abstained from discussion as a Commission member in order to present the application.
• Ms. Sides stated that the door was already been replaced in response to the next door neighbor being
robbed, which had been the second robbery in the neighborhood in two weeks. Ms. Sides stated that
the door is painted Essex Green to match the front door.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Cook seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
155 Derby Street
Stephen Buehler submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the window
sash for all windows in units #3 and #4. Windows will be wood, insulated tilt type sash, 2 over 1
with glued on exterior mullions/snap in interior as supplied by J.B. Sash. The applicant was not
present.
Mr. Cook stated that Units #3 and #4 occupy the third and fourth floors.
Pictures viewed could not verify the configuration of the existing windows as being all 2 over 1, 2
over 2 or a combination.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the configuration to be
delegated to Mr. Bailey. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
• 333 Essex Street
333 Essex Condo Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to remove and
reconstruction the side yard fence. The work has already been completed.
Ms. Guy stated that a neighbor contacted her and stated that the fence orientation was changed from
the good side facing out to it now facing in. Ms. Guy provided photographs of the old fence and
the new fence.
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to deny the application due to the work constituting a change from the
existing condition, therefore requiring review under a Certificate of Appropriateness. Mr. Bailey
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
111 Derby Street
The 1771 Ropes House Condominium submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability
to replace rotted windows and panels on the storefront at 111 Derby street. A drawing was submitted
with the application.
Mr. Casey stated that the number of lights in the drawing is not the same as the existing condition.
• Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the application as submitted for wood windows which replicate
the existing in all aspects including number of lights (2 over 4 per section, not 6 over 12 as per
drawing). Windows to be tru divided lights, no vinyl or permashield. Mr. Kelleher seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
November 16, 1994, Page 3
2 Flint Street - Discussion on Violation
This discussion was scheduled in order to provide the homeowner with an opportunity to comment
on the existing violation of an inappropriate deck which has not been adequately screened from the
public way with evergreen plantings in order to render it non-applicable. The applicant was not
present.
Ms. Guy stated that the owner, Peter Hinchey, verbally told her that he had installed some plantings
recently. Ms. Guy provided photographs of the plantings and a note from Mr. Hinchey stated that
he replanted the area with Japanese spreading yews which are 24-30" and will grow to 4'.
Mr. Casey stated that the deck is still visible from the public way.
Mr. Casey made a motion to record a Clerk's Certificate as to Violation as to the policy previously
outlined by the Commission. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion
so carried.
Mr. Casey stated that he would like to look into the railroad ties in the front of the building and
determine when they were installed and if they were approved.
Mr. Casey made a motion to send a letter to the homeowner to either remove the landscaping timbers
or to provide documentation that they were installed prior to the creation of the district. Ms. Sides
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
• Violations/Work Status
Mr. Carr requested that a letter be sent to Spiros Flomp for a pergola at 2 Dalton Parkway that was
installed without prior Commission approval.
Mr. Casey requested that a letter be sent to the owner of 1 Hamilton Street concerning a rear porch
and alterations to a garage door.
Mr. Casey asked Mr. Cook to check into the status of ownership at 313 Essex Street.
Mr. Kelleher requested that a letter be sent to the owner of 180 Federal Street for the fence installed
which is higher than the approved 5'.
Mr. Casey requested that a letter be sent to the owner of 44 Warren Street for the shutters which are
still not re-installed.
Mr. Casey stated that additional alterations have been made to the fence at 7 South Pine Street and
requested that a second letter be sent to the owner.
Mr. Casey requested that a letter be sent to the owner of 10 Chestnut Street, for alterations to the
• fence including the installation of urns.
Other Business
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the minutes of October 5, 1994. Mr. Cook seconded the
November 16, 1994, Page 4
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy stated that she issued Certificates of Non-Applicability for 10 Broad Street(repainting), 365
Essex St. (bathroom vents which are non-visible), 151 Federal Street (reroofing), 6 Carpenter Street
(door which is non-visible) and 110 Federal Street (reroofing).
Ms. Guy distributed drafts of the Commission's annual report and requested that amendments be
called in to her prior to November 23, 1994.
Mr. Carr requested that Ms. Guy obtain regulations pertaining to house numbers from Fire Prevention
in order assist the Commission in establishing its own parameters.
Ms. Guy stated that a letter was received from Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC)
concerning the installation of an ATM facility at Salem State College, indicating that it is unlikely
to affect significant resources.
Ms. Guy stated that a letter was received from the National Park Service to MHC stating that the
construction of a temporary brick pad will have no effect on the Salem Maritime National Historic
Site.
Ms. Guy stated that the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation is requesting public comments on
proposed regulatory changes for the Section 106 review. Mr. Carr was provided a copy of the
proposed revisions and Ms. Guy will send a copy to Chairman Oedel.
There being no further business, Mr. Cook made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Sides seconded the
motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
JA. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
December 7, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
• MINUTES
DECEMBER 7, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, December 7, 1994 at
7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs. Cook,
Casey, Slam and Carr and Ms. Guy.
Ms. Guy asked that Commission members to remember to inform her when they cannot attend a regular
scheduled meeting.
9 Lynn Street
Timothy and Margaret Doggett presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace
the sills along the front and left side of their home at 9 Lynn Street and to leave the watertable exposed.
Mr. Doggett stated that the sills have already been replaced, but the shingles have not been re-installed.
The applicants feel it would look better with a watertable. Mr. Doggett added that there are clapboards
under the shingles and that this is not the first time that sills have been replaced.
Mr. Doggett requested a recommendation from the Commission for a better sidewalk to be installed in
front of his house.
• Mr. Doggett stated that he also plans to remove all the shingles and either repair or replace the
clapboards underneath over a four year period. The new clapboards would be cedar rather than pine.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the option to either re-shingle the
exposed area or remove the shingles on a surface by surface basis over four years, with the front wall
being completed within the first year. Clapboards underneath to be repaired or replaced with cedar. Mr.
Carr stated that the motion requires that as one wall is removed, it must be reclapboarded. The motion
also includes a strong recommendation to pursue sidewalk replacement in brick. There was no second.
Mr. Slam asked the watertable specifications. Mr. Doggett replied that it is 2 x 10 and matches the one
on the right side of the house.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted. There was no second.
Mr. Carr stated that the Commission can amend the existing application, but it the Commission approves
only the watertable, there is no application to amend.
Mr. Casey seconded Mr. Carr's motion. Mr. Carr reinstated his motion, seconded by Mr. Casey.
Mr. Cook stated that he is opposed to mandating how a homeowner can undertake a project.
The motion was voted on. Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides and Messrs. Slam, Casey and Carr voted in favor.
Mr. Cook voted in opposition. The motion was so carried.
Mr. Slam asked about paint colors. Mr. Doggett stated that they did not know at this time, but that the
clapboards underneath the shingles are yellow. Mr. Doggett stated that they are considering grey or red.
Y.
December 7, 1994, Page 2
Mr. Doggett did not believe trim was different from the body color in that period.
• 6 South Pine Street
Albert Goodhue III presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change the color of
the house, replace the side lot line (rear of house) fence with the same fence, only 6' high and painted
the body color and to cap the picket fence. A picture of a Brosco 8276 fence cap was submitted. The
applicant proposes to paint the house with the same colors as 7 River Street. The application states that
the back side fence will be identical to what was there with 6" wide boards with supporting posts inside
with fence cap #8276. The height would be 6'.
Mr. Goodhue stated that the rear fence had blown down.
Mr. Slam asked why they want to cap the picket fence. Mrs. Goodhue felt it would look nicer.
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all
were in favor and the motion so carried.
Chairman Oedel asked the timeframe for the posts on the granite. Mr. Goodhue stated that it would be
completed in the Spring.
331 Essex Street
• Richard and Diane Pabich submitted an application for a Certificate of Hardship to install two
compressors and two vent pipes on the roof. The work has already been completed.
Ms. Guy stated that the photographs taken did not develop well.
Mr. Pabich stated that the two vent stacks are for the twelve bathrooms and that in the Winter the
compressors and vents can be seen from Cambridge Street and between two houses on Chestnut Street.
Mr. Pabich stated that they cannot be seen in the summer.
Ms. Pabich stated that they were installed in the summer when they did not realize that they would be
visible.
Chairman Oedel read a letter from John,Donoghue, 6 Cambridge Street, stating that he is in opposition
if the compressors and vents can be seen or heard from his property.
Mr. Slam made a motion to have a site inspection and continue the application until the next meeting.
Mr. Carr seconded the motion.
Mr. Carr felt the application should be under Non-Applicability rather than Hardship.
Mr. Pabich noted that the units were installed in July and ran July, August and September.
• There was no public comment.
Ms. Pabich stated that their insurance company requests a railing down the front stairs and presented a
drawing of a proposed wrought iron railing. Ms. Pabich also requested the $3000 held in escrow.
J I
Y
December 7, 1994, Page 3
Mr. Casey stated that bathroom vents are required by law and that the plumbing inspector should be
• notified to hold off on issuing a permit until the Commission has approved the location. Ms. Guy will
talk to the Building Department.
Mr. Casey suggested painting out the units.
Ms. Guy stated that the business might suffer a hardship if disapproved, since air conditioning and
venting would be necessary.
A site visit was scheduled for Saturday, December 10 at 10:00 a.m.
Mr. Pabich stated that they cannot attend the meeting of December 21, 1994. The application will be
continued until the following meeting.
The motion was voted upon, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
The applicants also presented an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability to reconstruct the brick
chimney. Ms. Pabich stated that it was done the exact same height and way it was previously.
Mr. Cook asked if it was the chimney that is now stucco.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted with reconstruction to be exactly as the
chimney was immediately preceding the rebuilding. Ms. Sides seconded the motion, all were in favor
• and the motion so carried.
11 Cambridee Street
Allen Breed submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness and/or Certificate of Non-
Applicability to construct a removable and temporary fence across the driveway, 25 feet from the street.
The fence has already been constructed, is 13'11" wide in three sections that can be lifted and removed.
The fence is not attached to either 11 or 13 Cambridge Street, is made of white pine and reinforced by
galvanized pipes that are capped. The top cap of the fence is identical to the existing fence in the back
yard. A picture presented shows that 11 Cambridge Street had a fence across the driveway at the
streetscape in 1891.
Mr. Casey made a motion to approve the application as submitted and to give the applicants the option
to remove the fence as desired. Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so
carried.
5 Chestnut Street
Blake and Nina Anderson requested a waiver of the public hearing and presented an application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for the alteration of dormers as per the application reviewed and attached
plans of the March 16, 1994 meeting.
• Dan Pierce, the architect representing the applicants, stated that plans were submitted last Spring which
were approved in concept by the Commission. Mr. Pierce stated that in the last month, the applicants
have had leakage in their home and need to make repairs before the Winter. Mr. Pierce stated that they
may opt to repair in kind or undertake the basic repairs and pursue the form of the proposed while
Y
December 7, 1994, Page 4
coming back to the Commission with detail specification. Mr. Pierce stated that there are flashing, roof
• and gutter problems at the edge of the dormer and that they don't want to proceed on repairs that would
be undone and redone in the Spring.
Mr. Carr asked if it were possible to secure the roof until the meeting of December 21, 1994. Mr. Pierce
stated that major demolition is needed to make the repairs.
Ms. Guy stated that since the applicants have not obtained abutters signatures waiving the public hearing,
a Certificate could not be issued until ten days have elapsed from the time abutters are given notice of
the waiver. This would result in a gain of only 4 days.
Mr. Anderson stated that he wants to be able to line up the contractors, put up staging and be ready to
go on the 22nd.
Mr. Carr asked if there was any opposition to the proposal last Spring. Mr. Anderson stated that
neighbors spoke in favor of the proposal.
Mr. Carr made a motion to waive the public hearing. Ms. Sides seconded the motion.
Mr. Casey stated that since there was no abutter opposition when the application was previously before
the Commission, he would vote in favor of waiving the public hearing.
Mr. Slam stated that he is only willing to vote to waive the public hearing since it was previously before
• the Commission with no opposition from abutters.
The motion was voted upon, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the alteration of dormers in concept and to continue the application
until December 21, 1994. No demolition may occur until final designs are approved. Ms. Sides
seconded the motion.
Mr. Pierce stated that he is looking for dimensional concept approval so that he can proceed with the
preparation of specifications.
I
Mr. Slam preferred a real dormer to a faux dormer. Mr. Slam stated that he would like examples on a
Federal house. Mr. Pierce stated that there are some in Boston, not in Salem.
Mr. Carr stated that a shed dormer reads as a mistake and that a faux dormer would a mistake that is not
clearly apparent, leaving the unwanted possible impression that it is appropriate. Mr. Carr preferred that
the dormers be symmetrical with 7 Chestnut Street.
The motion was voted on. Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Mr. Cook and Mr. Casey voted in favor. Mr.
Carr and Mr. Slam voted in opposition. The motion was so carried.
Mr. Pierce stated that the materials will match the existing including vertical siding, wide flushboard,
• shiplap type. The moldings will be of the same scale and the profile will be shown in the detail plans.
Mr. Pierce stated that there is presently a green roof over the front of the entire building and the rear
of 5 Chestnut is black. Mr. Pierce asked the policy regarding changing the roof color on one-half of a
double house. Mr. Can stated that the policy is to go toward future conformity in the most appropriate
1
December 7, 1994, Page 5
color.
• Chairman Oedel preferred to see the roof black.
Mr. Pierce stated that there is no parry wall and that they will have to tooth it in.
Mr. Casey asked about the windows. Mr. Anderson stated that they will be wood framed, divided light
with storms. Mr. Anderson stated that they are considering replacing the windows on the northeast side
of the house and that the octagonal window may be removed.
Ms. Sides left the meeting at this time.
House of Seven Gables
Chairman Oedel stated for the record that he no longer has the appearance of a conflict of interest
regarding the House of Seven Gables since his wife is no longer the Executive Director.
David Goff and Cliff Hughes, representing the House of Seven Gables, were present requesting an
amendment to their Certificate of Appropriateness to include the flagpole which has been erected on the
site. Mr. Goff stated that the Building Inspector has indicated that the flagpole needs a building permit
since it is a structure and was not noted on the plans for the permit issued for the Visitor's Center. Mr.
Goff showed a drawing of where the flagpole had originally be planned and a rendering that the
Commission reviewed which actually showed two flagpoles. Mr. Goff stated that only one flagpole was
• erected and that it was put in a different location where it was less likely to be hit by the busses.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the alternative location. Mr. Carr asked if there has been any
opposition to the flagpole installation.
Mr. Goff stated that the Bystrom's have contact them and stated that in its position, the flagpole blocks
their views to the waterfront.
Mr. Carr withdrew his motion.
Mr. Carr made a motion to send notice to abutters and place the flagpole, curb, walkway plans and
landscaping plans on the next agenda as a continuation of the existing application which still remains
open. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Window Demonstration
Ms. Guy presented window samples from Brosco, which included a single glaze with and without an
exterior storm.
There were no concerns with the single glaze windows.
Mr. Slam stated that the problem with the exterior storm is that homeowners would not remove them.
• Chairman Oedel noted that it is available in tilt windows.
Mr. Cook stated that without the storm, the window molding is disproportionate. Mr. Carr agreed that
k
December 7, 1994, Page 6
it was not appropriate.
• Mr. Carr suggested that the Clerk find out what the Beacon Hill Commission approves for windows.
Other Business
Mr. Cook made a motion to approve the minutes of October 19, 1994. Mr. Slam seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy read a letter from Dr. Kantorosinski requested an extension on the requirement to install
shutters at 44 Warren Street until June 1, 1995. Mr. Carr made a motion to grant the extension. Mr.
Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy read a letter from Gale Couture of 10 Andover Street stating that the wall caved in and the
rubble was removed. Mr. Carr stated that he would rather have the whole wall removed than leave one-
half of a wall. Chairman Oedel requested that it be put on the next agenda.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Casey seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
J e A. Guy
erk of the Commission
•
j December 21, 1994, Page 1
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 21, 1994
A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, December 21, 1994 at
7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs. Slam,
Casey and Kelleher and Ms. Guy. Mr. Carr entered later in the meeting.
54 Turner Street
In continuation of an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness from a previous meeting, the House
of Seven Gables was present to discuss the remaining unapproved items at 54 Turner Street which
include the flagpole, curbing, walkways and landscaping.
David Goff presented an as-built plan of the project which included the location of the flagpole. Robin
Kanter stated that the plan includes walls and changes in curb cuts that were agreed to.
Chairman Oedel asked about the meter box. Mr. Goff replied that it was subsurface.
Ms. Kanter presented the proposed landscaping plan.
Mr. Carr joined the meeting at this time.
Ms. Kanter stated that they will preserve what is worth preserving and will work a planting bed around
the flagpole. Ms. Kanter stated that the flagpole was relocated when the ramp was eliminated.
Mr. Goff stated that the rest of the parking lot not in the plan will remain as is.
Mr. Slam asked the timeframe to complete the landscaping. Mr. Campbell Seamans stated that they
would like to get the work done in the Spring if the budget so allows.
Mr. Carr asked what would be a reasonable time frame and suggested one year. Mr. Seamans felt that
one year was acceptable.
David Bystrom, 42 Turner Street stated that he had no problem with anything except with the new tree
on Turner Street side because of the height blocking the water view. Ms. Kanter stated that it was
proposed in order to provide screening for the neighbors on Turner Street.
Mr. Slam asked when it would get to 30' high. Ms. Kanter replied that it would be 20 years.
Mr. Bystrom stated that he has an agreement with the Gables not to put in any landscaping that would
obstruct his water views. Mr. Bystrom felt that the flagpole was acceptable but stated that he was not
notified prior and that the Gables did not return his telephone calls.
Ms. Sides asked if Mr. Bystrom opposed the location of the flagpole. Mr. Bystrom replied that he would
not want to have them take it out but would have preferred it moved a few fit.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the as-built plan dated 11/29/94 with respect to hard surfaces which
include the location of curbs, walkways, flagpole, walls and grading. The motion does not include any
December 21, 1994, Page 2
organics. Ms. Sides seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
• Mr. Carr felt that the area in front of the kitchen area needs more and that it looks like the end of an
alley. Mr. Carr stated that it needs more of a green buffer and suggested some intermediate color.
Mr. Slam made a motion to accept the landscaping plan as presented with all work to be completed by
December 31, 1995. Mr. Casey seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Chairman Oedel asked if the Gables was applying for the granite steps and change in granite landing to
the Phippen House. Mr. Goff replied in the affirmative. Chairman Oedel circled the hard surface items
not yet approved in red on the landscaping plan.
Mr. Carr made a motion to accept the circled areas on the plan and approve the hard surfaces not
previously approved including wall, steps, landing and granite edging. Mr. Casey seconded the motion.
All were in favor and the motion so carried.
5 Chestnut Street
In continuation of a previous meeting, Blake and Nina Anderson presented an Application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness for dormer alteration at 5 Chestnut Street.
Mr. Anderson provided pictures of a similar treatment in Chestnut Hill but noted that his dormers would
• have more setback between. Mr. Anderson presented updated drawings and stated that he felt the best
way to de-emphasize the setback is to use slate material. Mr. Anderson stated that he felt that the
proposed Eternit Slates would be more subtle. The color would match the roof.
Mr. Casey preferred matchboard. Messrs. Carr and Kelleher were in agreement.
Ms. Sides preferred the slate and felt that it would disappear. Mr. Sides stated that flushboard will read
like a billboard. Mr. Slam was in agreement.
Ms. Sides made a motion to approve the application as submitted with Eternit Slates or equal to be used.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion. Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides and Messrs. Kelleher, and Casey, Slam
voted in favor. Mr. Carr voted in opposition. The motion so carried.
136 Federal St.
In continuation from a previous meeting, Greater Lynn Special Needs Housing Corp. (GLSNHC)
submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change the steel entry door on Carpenter
Street, the basement door off of Carpenter Street and the bedroom access door all to M-100, to relocate
the knox box and to paint the tops of the railings on the rear porch in the trim color.
Paul Tempesta, representing the GLSNHC, stated that the steel door on Carpenter Street will be to a M-
1053 and that the knox box and mailbox will move to the left of the door where the rest of the utility-
type items are located. Mr. Tempesta stated that the alarm box will be painted white and that the shed
that was erected without approval has been removed.
Mr. Casey asked about the deck on the second floor. Mr. Tempesta stated that the Commission should
refer to the letter from the Executive Director, Albert Bleau, dated 9/28/94. Mr. Carr felt there was a
solution that could make the deck non-visible and that the Commission should write to Mr. Bleau.
December 21, 1994, Page 3
Mr. Carr stated that the fence built at Carpenter Street is not all right angles as approved.
Mr. Casey suggested that the colors of the doors be black. Mr. Tempesta replied that black was okay.
Ms. Sides stated that the casing of the Carpenter Street door should be more like window casing and that
they should apply flat casing painted the trim color.
Mr. Carr suggested that Ms. Sides also be delegated to okay details on site when the carpenters are ready.
Ms. Sides felt it was more dangerous to specify molding than to state flat molding.
Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the replacement of the entry door on Carpenter Street with a Brosco
M-1052 with flat trim molding. Mr. Slam seconded the motion.
Mr. Tempesta asked the minimum size acceptable on the molding. Ms. Sides stated that the minimum
would be 1 x 4 but that she did not want it sticking over the transom.
Mr. Carr amended his motion that the flat molding be in scale to the door. There was no second.
Ms. Sides made a motion to approve the M-1053 door with the minimum flat trim molding needed to
cover the distance between the door and under the transom, that it be flat on top, not mitered, with 2
vertical pieces.
• Mr. Tempesta suggested an acceptable reveal of 1/" under the transom.
Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Tempesta withdrew replacement of the basement door.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve replacement of the bedroom access door with a Brosco M-100. Mr.
Kelleher seconded the motion. Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides and Messrs. Slam, Casey and Kelleher voted
in favor. Mr. Carr voted in opposition. The motion so carried.
Mr. Carr stated that he has not been provided with any evidence that the knox box is required by law.
Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the relocation of the knox box. Ms. Sides seconded the motion.
Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides and Messrs. Slam, Casey and Kelleher voted in favor. Mr. Carr voted in
opposition. The motion so carried.
Mr. Carr stated that he was bothered by the jog in the fence. Mr. Casey stated that he was bothered by
the hump in the gate more than the jog. Mr. Slam was not bothered by the fence.
Mr. Casey made a motion for the owners to paint the fence and the railing tops of the porch, as
previously stipulated, by 8/31/95. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion
so carried.
• Mr. Carr made a motion to find that the jog in the fence and the size of and hump in the gate are not
as approved and to require that the fence be put at right angles and the gate be made to be as approved.
The fence is to be at right angle to the street and the gate is to be flat on top and match the rest of the
fence. Mr. Casey seconded the motion. Ms. Sides and Messrs. Casey, Carr and Kelleher voted in favor.
December 21, 1994, Page 4
Chairman Oedel and Mr. Slam voted in opposition. The motion so carried.
• Mr. Carr made a motion to find that the roof deck continues to be in violation and that it has been
determined that there is a solution that is not detrimental to the health and safety of the occupants
(decrease the size of the deck so that it is non-visible from the street). The motion includes that the deck
be fixed forthwith. Mr. Casey seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Tempesta suggested the Commission send a letter explaining the position of the Commission
concerning the deck.
7 S. Pine Street
Joseph Tarnowski submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a 6' stockade fence
to be built over the existing fence in the back of the yard, color to be natural. The applicant was not
present.
Mr. Casey stated that he is an abutter to the applicant and that he would abstain from discussion on this
application. Mr. Casey left the table for this application.
Ms. Guy stated that she had spoken with the applicant and advised them that a stockade fence was not
likely to get approved and suggested that they provide a proposal, including photo's and/or drawings,
of a capped fence. At that time, Mr. Tarnowski asked that the application be changed to a capped fence.
• Ms. Guy noted that after their conversation, she received photo's meant to illustrate the proposal of a
stockade fence.
Mr. Carr made a motion to deny the application as historically inappropriate.
Mr. Bruce Goddard, the rear abutter at 17 Flint Street, stated that he wants to be sure that any proposed
fence is one foot in from the property line so that the owners can maintain it. Mr. Goddard noted that
his fence is one foot in from the property line.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy noted that this application was submitted after the Commission sent a letter of violation
concerning fence installation/alteration.
Mr. Goddard stated that the owners had put up a temporary snow fence (1" slat with wire) and added
colored ornamental balls to a fence.
Mr. Carr made a motion to require that the snow fence and colored ornamentation balls be removed.
Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Kelleher recommended that the applicant be told that the Commission would consider a flat board
fence and that Ms. Guy convey that message.
• Mr. Goddard suggested that the owners look at the fence at 21 Flint Street.
Mr. Casey rejoined the meeting.
December 21, 1994, Page 5
Approval of minutes
Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the minutes of November 16 and December 7, 1994. Ms. Sides
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Newsletter
Ms. Guy asked if there were any changes to the draft newsletter that was sent to each member. There
were no amendments.
House Number Guidelines
Mr. Carr suggested that, in order for the Commission to keep its hand in, that the guidelines require that
the location and style be appropriate to the building and location. Chairman Oedel did not feel it was
necessary to state so.
10 Andover Street
Ms. Guy re-read the letter from the owner of 10 Andover Street in response to the Commission's letter
concerning the partial removal of a wall.
Mr. Carr stated that the wall did not cave in as suggested in the owner's letter.
Mr. Carr made a motion to find that a change occurred and to instruct the owner to apply to ratify the
change, demolish the remainder of the wall and/or propose a new wall or fence treatment. Mr. Slam
seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms. Guy read a letter from Alan Howe, 10 Chestnut Street, stating that the fencing on his property was
vandalized and will be rebuilt in the early Spring of 1995.
Ms. Guy read a letter from the Building Department to the owners of 331 Essex Street concerning the
lack of a Building Permit for the HVAC unit.
Mr. Carr requested that vent work at 31 Washington Square be added to the violations list.
Mr. Carr stated that roof vents have been installed at 110 Federal Street. Mr. Casey stated that they were
likely installed for the blown in insulation program of Boston Gas Energy Savings Plan. Mr. Casey
suggested a letter be sent to the homeowner and to Boston Gas.
There being no further business, Mr. Slam made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Carr seconded the motion,
all were in favor and the motion so carried.
• Respectfully sub i ed,
Jan A. uy
Cl
e of the mmission
i
w
e
universal
STOCK NO. COLOR
C2-20571 Black
C2-20572 Light Blue
C2-20573 Dark Blue
C2-20578 Rust Red
C2-20579 Rd Executive
t
F } GENUINE PRESSBOARD
t
i
�i
r-
' i