The URL can be used to link to this page

HISCOM BUDGET, ANN REP CLG ANNUAL REPORT FY95 HisCom Budget , Ann . Rep . CLG Annual Report —I 01- SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT JULY 1, 1994 - JUNE 30, 1995 Ladies and Gentlemen: I. Certificates Issued During the year July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995, the Salem Historical Commission met regularly 20 times and had two site visits during which a quorum was present. In its capacity as Historic District Commission for 4 local districts, the Commission filed: - 63 Certificates of Appropriateness; - 1 Certificates of Hardship; - 50 Certificates of Non-Applicability; - 3 Waivers of the Demolition Delay Ordinance; and - 17 denials including: - 13 for a Certificate of Appropriateness; - 3 for a Certificate of Non-Applicability; and - I for a Certificate of Hardship. Certificates issued are provided to the owner of the property, the City Clerk, the Building Inspector and are kept on file in the Salem Planning Department according to address. A list of all Certificates issued can be found in the Certified Local Government Annual Report which is on file at the Salem Planning Department and the Massachusetts Historical Commission. Minutes of all meetings are also available at the Salem Planning Department. II. Commission Members As of 6/30/95,there are seven(7) Commission members and two (2) alternates. Appointed members are Helen Sides, Chair; John Carr, Jr., Vice Chair; Richard Oedel; Russell Slam; Walter Cook; John Casey; Douglas Kelleher; and alternates James Bailey and Lance Kasparian. Lance Kasparian was appointed to an alternate position on January 12, 1995. Helen Sides was elected Chairman of the Commission on May 17, 1995. John Can was also re-elected as Vice Chairman at that time. The Clerk of the Commission is Jane Guy. 1 III. Workshops/Seminars ' Ms. Guy attended the Conference on Historic Preservation and Urban Issues sponsored by Historic Massachusetts,Inc, and the Massachusetts Office of Business Development held on l H. J August 23, 1994. Ms. Guy attended the Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund Local Project Coordinators workshop on May 9, 1995. Ms. Guy and Mr. Oedel attended Build Boston in November, 1994. Mr. Cook completed the Historic Homes Program sponsored jointly by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Peabody and Essex Museum. Ms. Sides and Messrs.Kelleher,Oedel,Cook,Casey and Kasparian attended Restoration'95. Mr. Kelleher and Mr. Kasparian attended the National Trust for Historic Preservation Conference held in October, 1994. Mr. Kelleher attended the CLG Leadership and Preservation Planning Workshop held in October, 1994 in Lexington. IV. Grants Through the 1994 Survey and Planning Grant Program, the City has engaged the services of a consultant to produce 155 survey forms for the Derby Street and McIntire Historic Districts. As of this date the project has not been completed. Properties targeted were those that were never surveyed,were surveyed in the 1960's,were for sale, were on the boundaries of the district, are city-owned or were in an area designated by the Salem Historical Commission as active. The,forms should be submitted by the consultant in the next few weeks. i V. Rules, Procedures, Guidelines The Commission reviewed and amended several sections of its guidelines including: - How to use this guide; - Procedures for filing applications; - Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Updated to 1990 revision); - Addressing violations: unapproved work completed; - Architectural trim & siding; - Doors, doorways & porticos; - Fences; - Gutters& downspouts; and - House numbers. The Commission also revised its applications and certificates. ' VI. Preservation Awards On Monday, May 15, 1995, the Salem Historical Commission presented its 1995 Preservation Awards at the Historic Salem, Inc. Annual Meeting held at the National Park Service Visitors' Center. The recipients from local historic districts were: 38 Washington Square South-Brian Wehrung &Lisa Dressler- Excellence in Restoration; 331 Essex Street- Richard& Diane Pabich- Excellence in Restoration and Adaptive Reuse; 389 Essex Street- Steven Sass & Ellen Golub - Special Award for Paint Colors; 6 South Pine Street- Albert & Sherrie Goodhue - Excellence in Restoration; 29 Washington Square North - Bertram Home, Inc. - Outstanding Design Achievement, Utilitarian Encasement; 29-35 Warren Street - Trustees of the Estate of Stephen Phillips - Special Award for Slate Roof Replacement; 400 Essex Street - Edward Sabbagh& Claire Twomey - Excellence in Restoration; 50 Broad Street- Spiros & Patricia Flomp - Excellence in Pergola Design; 180 Federal Street- Edward Crowley - Excellence in Restoration; 80 Washington Square East - Castine Realty Trust - Neighborhood Improvement, Paint Colors; Honorable Mentions: ti r 14 Broad Street- Steven Thomas& Evelyn Blum- Excellence in Fence Design; and 188 Derby Street-Helen, Wanda&Irving Mysliwy-Achievement in Fence&Front Entrance Design. From outside local historic districts, the recipients were: 150 Washington Street- Robert A. Murphy - Outstanding Signage; and 92 Washington Square East - Bromwell Real Estate Trust - Outstanding Achievement in Garden and Porch Design. VII. Other Activities The Commission issued one newsletter (Number 3, February, 1995) to all of the property owners in the 4 historic districts. It included a supplement of five sections of the Salem 1 �. Historical Commission's guidelines. It also included a poll on whether the Commission F should continue to have jurisdiction over paint colors. (Only seven responses were returned, with only one in favor of the Commission reviewing paint colors.) This report was completed by Jane A. Guy on behalf of the Salem Planning Department and the Salem Historical Commission. Respectfully submitted, C� Jane . Guy Cle of the Salem Hist cal Commission ,1 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin,Secretary of the CommonwealthMAY 3'p jyy5 Massachusetts Historical Commission S890fY1 9'Nai1111iDO ILiE1pY'. May 25, 1995 Dear Certified Local Government Coordinator: It's that time of year again! This is a reminder that CLG annual reports will once again be due shortly. The annual report should outline your certified local government's activities for the period of July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1995. Annual reports should be sent to MHC no later than Friday, July 28, 1995. The MHC will use the annual report to help monitor CLGs and to formally evaluate them once every three years. Attached you will find an outline for the CLG annual report. Please remember that submitting the minimum information requested in the CLG annual report outline is entirely acceptable and all that is necessary to comply with the CLG program guidelines. There is no need to submit additional information on your community's historic preservation activity unless you wish to do so! Although the Annual Report is not due at MHC until July 28, 1995, you may wish to review the outline now so that you may begin to collect materials required for the report. If you have any questions or concerns regarding completion of the annual report, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, - Mark Verkennis Director of Local Government Programs Massachusetts Historical Commission enclosure E i A 220 Morrissey Boulevard,Boston, Massachusetts 02125 (617) 727-8470 Fax: (617) 727-5128 TDD: 1-800-392-6090 APPENDIX B ANNUAL REPORT OUTLINE As required under the Guidelines, (Section IV, Part A) each CLG shall submit an annual report to the MHC that documents its activities and adherence to CLG program requirements. The Annual Report shall cover the period of July I-June 30. Annual Reports are due at the MHC office by July 31. The information included in the Annual Report will be used in part to answer the questions listed on APPENDIX C: CLG Evaluation used by MHC in its triennial evaluation of CLG performance. The following outline requests basic information and statistics regarding CLG activities. The CLG should not be discouraged from supplying additional materials, highlighting particular activities., or expressing its concerns about the CLG program from the perspective of the local government. A. Enforcement of Local Legislation 1. Provide a list of the cases reviewed by street address, for each property indicate: 1) type of case (alteration, new construction, demolition) 2) dates of: receipt of application, hearing, issuance of certificate. 3) type of certificate issued. 2. Provide three (3) sample meeting minutes providing discussion pertaining to the cases reviewed above. 3. Provide one (1) sample of the written decision notification received by applicants. B. Adequate and Qualified Local Government Commission 1. Provide updated resumes of Commissioners (provide only if updated), also provide resumes for all new commissioners. 2. Indicate total number of commissioners. 3. Indicate number of commissioners who are professionals in preservation related fields. 4. Indicate number and duration of commission vacancies, and efforts to fill them. 5. Indicate CLG training sessions or workshops attended. C. National Register Program Participation 1. Provide list of properties, by street address, evaluated by the CLG for listing on the National Register. 2. Provide list of properties, by street address, for which nominations to the National Register were prepared and submitted to the MHC. 7 i �I �I .d C i L_._I i a. ANNUAL REPORT CITY OF SALEM CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT JULY 1, 1994 THRU JUNE 30, 1995 C. CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT ANNUAL REPORT CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS JULY 1, 1994-JUNE 30, 1995 PART A - ENFORCEMENT OF LOCAL LEGISLATION 1. Cases Reviewed 2. Sample Minutes 3. Sample Decision PART B-ADEQUATE AND QUALIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION 1. Resumes 2. Membership 3. Professionals 4. Vacancies/Appointments 5. CLG Training Sessions/Workshops PART C-NATIONAL REGISTER PROGRAM PARTICIPATION 1. CLG Evaluations 2. Nominations 3. Public Hearings - 4. Professional Expertise PART D- SURVEY AND INVENTORY OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES 1. Survey Forms 2. Survey Work 3. Inventory Status PART E-PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 1. Commission Meeting Dates 2. Open Meeting Law Compliance Statement 3. Accessibility of Minutes 4. Rules,Procedures, Guidelines 5. Other Participation 6. Copies of amended guidelines,applications and certificates PART F-FUNDING OF CLG ACTIVITIES 1. Local Funding 2. Survey and Planning Grant Funding 3. Other Funding 4. Copy of budget PART G-MISCELLANEOUS 1. Preservation Awards This report was completed by Jane A.Guy on behalf of William Luster,City Planner and Helen Sides, Chairman of the Salem Historical Commission under the administration of Mayor Neil J. Harrington. PAR T A ----------------- ENFORCEMENT OF LOCAL LEGISLATION APPLICATIONS REVIEWED 711194-6130195 New or Type of Work Applic. Cert. Cert. Date Cont'd Address Name Alter./New Const.lDemal.lNon-Any. District Date Applied Issued Issued Comments July 6, 1994 meeting: N 180 FEDERAL ST. CROWLEY X MCINTIRE 616194 APPROP. APPROP. 717194 PAINT COLORS N 80 WASHINGTON SO. CASTINE R.T. X WASH.SD .617194 APPROP APPROP. 717194 PAINT COLORS C 274 LAFAYETTE ST. RONAN X LAFAYETTE 4127194 APPROP. APPROP. 717194 DOORIWINDOW DETAILS N 6 N.PINE ST. GRUNDY X MCINTIRE 6113194 APPROP. DENIAL 717194 VINYL WINDOWS APPROP. 717194 WOOD WINDOWS N 331 ESSEX ST. PABICH X MCINTIRE 6121194 APPROP. APPROP. 717194 PORCH,DOORS CONTINUE RAMP N 120 ESSEX ST. PEABODYIESSEX X WASH.SO. 6114194 APPROP. WITHDRAWN FENCE ALTERATION N 10 CHESTNUT ST. HOWE X MCINTIRE - NIA 717194 REPAIR WINDOWS July 11, 1994,site visit: X 331 ESSEX ST. PABICH X MCINTIRE 6121194 APPROP. APPROP. 7112194 PORCHILIFT August 3,1994 N 14 BROAD ST. THOMASIBLUM X MCINTIRE 711194 APPROP. APPROP. 814194 PAINT COLORS C 274 LAFAYETTE ST. RONAN X LAFAYETTE 4127194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 38 WASHINGTON SO. WEHRUNGIORESSLER X WASH.SO. 7114194 APPROP. APPROP. 814194 PORCH,PAINT N 15 BECKFORD ST. COPELAS X MCINTIRE 7118194 APPROP. APPROP. 814194 SIDING,WINDOWS,METERS,PAINT N 44 BROAD ST. JOS REALTY X MCINTIRE 7118194 APPROP. APPROP. 814194 SIDING,WINDOWS,OVERHANG N 89 FEDERAL ST. DWYER X MCINTIRE 7120194 APPROP. APPROP. 814194 PAINT,ROOF N 145 FEDERAL ST. McEVOYIBENCSIK X MCINTIRE 813194 NIA NIA 814194 BASEMENT WINDOWS August 17, 1994: C 274 LAFAYETTE ST. RONAN X LAFAYETTE 4127194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 6 CAMBRIDGE ST. DONOGHUE X MCINTIRE 7125194 APPROP. APPROP. 8118194 FENCE CONSTRUCTION N 113 FEDERAL ST. LINDEMAN X MCINTIRE 7128194 APPROP. APPROP. 8118194 FENCES,SHED,ARBOR N 86 FEDERAL ST. FELT X MCINTIRE 811194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 15 CAMBRIDGE ST. GUINEE X MCINTIRE 811194 APPROP. DENIAL 8118194 FENCE N 331 ESSEX ST. PABICH X MCINTIRE 811194 APPROP. APPROP. 8118194 SIGN N 14 BROAD ST. THOMASIBLUM X MCINTIRE 8117184 APPROP. APPROP. 8118194 AMEND.PREVIOUS CERT.FOR FENCE,WAIVED P.H. September 7, 1994: N 44&46 CHESTNUT ST. ZAKIN&COX X MCINTIRE 8119194 APPROP. APPROP. 917194 PAINT COLORS C 274 LAFAYETTE ST. RONAN X LAFAYETTE 4127194 APPROP. CONTINUED C 86 FEDERAL ST. FELT X MCINTIRE 811194 APPROP. DENIAL 917194 LANDSCAPING TIMBERS N 136 FEDERAL ST. GLSNHC X MCINTIRE 815194 APPROP. DENIAL 917194 DOOR N 38 WASHINGTON SO. WEHRUNGIORESSLER X WASH.SO. 8110194 APPROP. APPROP. 917194 WINDOWS . N 6 WEBB ST.IFORT AVE BUCHANANICITY X DERBY 8117194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 15 CAMBRIDGE ST. GUINEE X MCINTIRE 8124194 APPROP. APPROP. 917194 FENCE N 6 KOSCIUSKO ST. KROM X DERBY 8122194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 7 BOTTS CT. KEMPTHORNE X MCINTIRE 8124194 APPROP. APPROP. 917194 FENCE September 21, 1994 mig: N 31 BROAD ST. GRASBERGERIVAN DYKE X MCINTIRE 8130194 APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 PAINT COLORS N 29 WASH.SO. BERTRAM HOME X WASH SO. 916194 APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 PAINT COLORS FOR CHILLER C 6 WEBB ST.IFORT AVE. BUCHANONICITY X DERBY 8117194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 400 ESSEX ST. SABBAGH X MCINTIRE 912194 APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 PORCH RENOV.,FENCE&ARBOR CONSTR. N 135137 DERBY DANA X DERBY 916194, APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 REAR DECKS,WATERTABLE C 274 LAFAYETTE ST. RONAN X LAFAYETTE 4127194 APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 CARR.HOUSE DOOR OPENINGS,CONT'D CUPOLA C 6 KOSCIUSKO ST. KROM X DERBY 8122194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 10 HAMILTON ST. PAUL X MCINTIRE 911194 APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 PORCH ROOF REPLACEMENT N 2 BOTTS CT. USOVICZ X MCINTIRE 917194 APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 PAINT COLORS,CONT'D PORCH ALTERATION October 5,1994 mtg: C 6 KOSCIUSKO ST. KROM X DERBY 8122194 APPROP. APPROP. 1016194 WINDOW C 2 BOTTS CT. USOVICZ X MCINTIRE 917194 APPROP. APPROP. 9127194 PORCH N 14 CHESTNUT ST. MURRAY X MCINTIRE 9116194 APPROP. APPROP. 1016194 STONE WALL N 136 FEDERAL ST. G.L.S.N.H. X MCINTIRE 9120194 APPROP. CONTINUED N 17 FLINT ST. CASEYIGODDARD X MCINTIRE 1015194 NIA NIA 1016194 ROOF SHINGLES 84 FEDERAL ST. WATHNE X MCINTIRE 1016194 ISSUED SUPPLEMENTAL CERTIFICATE(PORCH) October 19, 1994 mtg.: C 6 WEBB ST.IFORT AVE. BUCHANAN X DERBY 8117194 APPROP. WITHDRAWN C 136 FEDERAL ST. GLSPNHC X MCINTIRE 9120194 APPROP. CONTINUE N 397 ESSEX ST. Z&M REALTY X MCINTIRE 9122194 APPROP. APPROP. 10120194 FENCE N 22 BECKFORD ST. BURNS X MCINTIRE 1015194 APPROP. WITHDRAWN N 5 BOTTS COURT STINSON X MCINTIRE 10114194 NIA NIA 10120194 REPAIR ROOF N 35 BROAD ST. VICCICAISIDES X MCINTIRE 10119194 NIA NIA 10120194 ROOFIGARAGE DOOR N 38 WARREN ST. FAUL X MCINTIRE 1016194 APPROP. APPROP. 1111194 REMOVE PORCH,WAIVED P.H. NIA 10120194 WINDOW REPLACEMENT November 16, 1994 mtg.: C 136 FEDERAL ST. GLSPNCHC X MCINTIRE 9120194 APPROP. CONTINUE N 35 BROAD ST. VICCICAISIDES X MCINTIRE 10119194 APPROP. APPROP. 11117194 DOOR REPLACEMENT N 155 DERBY ST. BUEHLER X DERBY 10120194 APPROP. APPROP. 11117194 WINDOW REPLACEMENT N 149 DERBY ST. COLANNINO X DERBY 10127194 APPROP. APPROP. 11117194 WINDOW REPLACEMENT N 333 ESSEX ST. 333 ESSEX CONDO X MCINTIRE 1117194 NIA DENIAL 11117194 FENCE N 111 DERBY ST. 1771 ROPES HOUSE X DERBY 1112194 NIA NIA 11117194 STOREFRONT WINDOWS December 7, 1994 mtg.: N 9 LYNN ST. DOGGETT X MCINTIRE 11110194 APPROP APPROP. 1218194 WATERTABLE,CLAPBOARDS N 6 S.PINE ST. GOODHUE X MCINTIRE 11116194 APPROP APPROP. 1218194 PAINT,FENCE ALTERATIONS N 11 CAMBRIDGE ST. BREED X MCINTIRE 11117194 APPINA APPROP. 1218194 FENCE N 331 ESSEX ST. PABICH X MCINTIRE 11122194 HARD CONTINUED COMPRESSORSIAIR VENTS X - NIA NIA 1218194 CHINMEY N 5 CHESTNUT ST. ANDERSON X MCINTIRE 1215194 APPROP APPROP. 12119194 DORMER CONCEPT,WAIVED P.H. December 21, 1994 mtg.: C 136 FEDERAL ST. GLSNHC X MCINTIRE 9120194 APPROP. APPROP. 12122194 DOORS,BOX,RAIL TOPS PT. FINDINGS LETTER-12122194 FENCEIGATE,DECK N 7 SOUTH PINE ST. TARNOWSKI X MCINTIRE 11129194 APPROP. DENIAL 12122194 FENCE - C 54 TURNER ST. 7 GABLES X DERBY ST. 5112194 APPROP. APPROP. 12122194 FLAGPOLE,CURBS,WALKWAYS,LANDSCAPING,WALLS,STEPS,GRANITE EDGING&OTHER HARD SURFACES C 5 CHESTNUT ST. ANDERSON X MCINTIRE 1215194 APPROP. APPROP. 12122194 DORMERS January 4, 1995 m1g.: C 331 ESSEX ST. PABICH X MCINTIRE 11122194 HARD. NIA 115195 COMPRESSORSIVENTS APPROP. 115195 RAILING _ N 333 ESSEX ST. 333 ESSEX CONDO X MCINTIRE 1212194 APPROP. DENIAL 115195 FENCE NIA 115195 FENCE N 1 HAMILTON ST. L'HEUREUX X MCINTIRE 12112194 APPROP. CONTINUE N 50 BROAD ST. FLOMP X X MCINTIRE 12113194 APPROP. APPROP. 115195 ARBORIPORCH ROOF N 393 ESSEX ST. TUITION R.T. X MCINTIRE _ 12120194 APPROP. APPROP. 115195 RAILING February 1, 1995 mfg: C 1 HAMILTON ST. L'HEUREUX X MCINTIRE 12112194 APPROP. DENIAL 212195 PORCHIGARAGE ALTERATIONS N 65 DERBY ST. N.E.P.C.O. X DERBY 1118195 APPROP. CONTINUED N 9 CHESTNUT ST. HAMILTON HALL X MCINTIRE 1118195 APPROP. APPROP. 212195 SIGN March 1, 1995 mtg: C 65 DERBY ST. N.E.P.C.O. x DERBY 1118195 APPROP. DENIAL 313195 DEMOLITION OF BLDG. N 1 HAMILTON ST. L'HEUREUX X MCINTIRE 2114195 APPROP. DENIAL 313195 PORCHIGARAGE ALTERATIONS March 15, 1995 mtg.: N 313 ESSEX ST. L'HEUREUX X MCINTIRE 2127195 APPROP. NIA 3115195 PAINT N 115 FEDERAL ST. MELISIINGRAHAM X MCINTIRE 2127195 APPROP. APPROP. 3115195 DORMER N 7 FRANKLIN ST. ROBICHAUD X NIA 317195 WDDO CONTINUED N 1 CHESTNUT ST. MEKELATOS X MCINTIRE 318195 NIA CONTINUED N 161 SWAMPSCOTT RD. MARBLEHEAD X NIA 318-3114 WOOD CONTINUED April 5, 1995 mtg.: C 7 FRANKLIN ST. ROBICHAUD X NIA 317195 WOOD WDDO 416195 DEMOLITION C 1 CHESTNUT ST. MEKELATOS X MCINTIRE 318195 NIA NIA 416195 SIDING N X 3121195 APPROP. DENIAL 416195 SIDING C 161 SWAMPSCOTT RD. MARBLEHEAD X NIA 3183114 WOOD BUILDING CONDEMNED N 361 ESSEX ST. CLARKE X MCINTIRE 3117195 APPROP. APPROP. 416195 SUMMER HOUSE ROOF 37 WARREN ST. ROSEISIMONDS X MCINTIRE AMEND. NIA 416195 AMEND PORCH CERT, N 104 LINDEN ST. SPRINGERICONNELLY X NIA 414195 WOOD WDDO DEMOLITION April 19, 1995 mtg.: N 132134 DERBY ST. SCHLEICHER X DERBY 3124195 APPROP. APPROP. 4120195 PAINT N 4.6 BOTTS CT. PETERSON X MCINTIRE 3127195 APPROP. NIA 4120195 ROOF VENT N 89 FEDERAL ST. DWYER X MCINTIRE 413195 APPROP. APPROP. 4120195 FENCE May 3, 1995 mtg.: N 10 MONROE ST. HARTFELDER X MCINTIRE 417195 APPROP. APPROP. 514195 PAINT N X NIA NIA 514195 FENCE N 398 ESSEX ST. WHITE X MCINTIRE 4118195 APPROP. APPROP. 514195 PAINT X DENIAL 514195 DOOR N 28 CARLTON ST. TREMBLAY X DERBY ST. 411821195 APPR. APPROP. 514195 GARAGE DOOR,ROOF VENT N 11 EDEN ST. SAVASTAIST.PIERRE X NIA 512195 WDDD WOOD 514195 DEMO.GARAGE N 26 CHESTNUT ST. KAVANAGH X MCINTIRE 512195 NIA NIA 514195 ROOF,GUTTER,PAINT,CHIMNEY,ENTRANCE May 17, 1995 mtg.: N 16 CAMBRIDGE ST. FERRUCI X MCINTIRE 4120195 APPROP. APPROP. 5118195 PAINT COLORS N 10 HAMILTON ST. PAULIKELLY X MCINTIRE 4124195 APPROP. APPROP. 5118195 FRONT FENCE N 6 WEBB14 FORT AVE. CITYIBUCHANAN X DERBY 4127195 APPROP. APPROP. 5118195 FENCE N 135&137 DERBY ST. DANA X DERBY 511195 APPROP. APPROP. 5118195 PAINT,WINDOWS N SALEM COMMON CITYIARTSALEM X WASH. 513195 APPROP. APPROP. 5118195 WOODCARVING N 359 ESSEX ST. ERRION X MCINTIRE 5116195 NIA 'NIA 5118195 REPAINT June 7, 1995 mtg. N 145 FEDERALST. 145 FED.ST.CON.TH. X MCINTIRE 5115195 APPROP. APPROP. 618195 PAINT COLORS N 347 ESSEX ST. PERVIERILISKA X MCINTIRE 5112195 APPROP. APPROP. 618195 PAINT COLORS N 10 CHESTNUT ST. FEROCE X MCINTIRE 514195 APPROP. APPROP. 618195 FENCE ALTERATION N 180 DERBY ST. BROOKHOUSE HOME X DERBY 515195 HARD. HARD. 618195 VESTIBULE N 1 HAMILTON ST. SALEM ROPES TRUST X MCINTIRE 5110195 APPROP. APPROP. 618195 PORCH&GARAGE ALT. N 310 LAFAYETTE ST. GREEN X LAFAY. 5115195 APPROP. APPROP. 618195 RAILINGS N 10 HAMILTON ST. PAULIALEXANDER X MCINTIRE 5118195 APPROP. APPROP. 618195 FENCE ALTERATION N 7 RIVER ST. CARR X MCINTIRE 5117195 APPROP. CONTINUED June 21, 1995 mtg. C 274 LAFAYETTE ST. RONAN X LAFAY 4127194 APPROP. CONTINUED CUPOLA C 7 RIVER ST. CARR X MCINTIRE 5117195 APPROP. CONTINUED N 6 FEDERAL CT. PEABODY X MCINTIRE 615195 NIA DENIAL 6122195 SIGNS 5126195 APPROP. DENIAL 6122195 SIGNS 5126195 HARD. DENIAL 6122195 SIGNS NIA 6122195 TEMP.SIGNS N 3 FEDERAL CT. LC TRUST X MCINTIRE 5130195 APPROP. DENIAL 6122195 SIGNS NIA 6122195 TEMP.SIGNS N 7 SOUTH PINE ST. TARNOWSKI X MCINTIRE 615195 APPROP. CONTINUED N 2 BOTTS COURT USOVIC2 X MCINTIRE 615195 APPROP. CONTINUED N 106 DERBY ST. MORENCY X DERBY 6121195 NIA NIA 6122195 CHIMNEY JUNE 28, 1995 SITE VISIT: C 2 BOTTS CT. USOVICZ X MCINTIRE 615195 APPROP. CONT'D WALL APPROP. 7120195 TRASH RECEPT. Non-meeting approvals: N 35 BROAD ST. VICCICAISIDES X MCINTIRE 716194 NIA NIA 716194 REPLACE PORCH ROOF SHINGLES N 319 ESSEX ST. O'HARA X MCINTIRE NIA 813194 OIL HEATER PIPES N 407 ESSEX ST. KANTOROSINSKI X MCINTIRE 8111194 NIA NIA 8111194 REPAINT ` N 38 WASHINGTON SO. WEHRUNGIDRESSLER X WASH.SO. 8110194 NIA NIA 8111194 PORCHICLAPBOARDS N 3032 BECKFORD ST. FRANK OTTEN X MCINTIRE 8129194 NIA NIA 911194 REPLACE GRANITE FENCE FOUNDATION N 7 LYNN ST. MILFORDIATCHISON X MCINTIRE 1013194 NIA NIA 1013194 ROOF REPAIR N 4 PICKERING ST. SMITH X MCINTIRE 1014194 NIA NIA 1014194 GARAGE DOOR,STORM DOOR,REPAINT N 6 CARPENTER ST. CHEFITZIFROST X MCINTIRE 9129194 APPROP. NIA 10112194 DOOR INSTALLATION N 151 FEDERAL ST. HENRY X MCINTIRE 10111194 NIA NIA 10111194 REROOF N 365 ESSEX ST. GUENTHER X MCINTIRE 10111194 NIA NIA 10111194 EXHAUST VENT N 10 BROAD ST. MASTOVICH X MCINTIRE 1017194 NIA NIA 10111194 REPAINT N 110 FEDERAL ST. GODDARD X MCINTIRE 10113194 NIA NIA 10113194 REROOF N 112114 FEDERAL ST. FOLEY X MCINTIRE 12129194 NIA NIA 12129194 GUTTER&DOWNSPOUT N 361 ESSEX ST. CLARKE X MCINTIRE 3117195 NIA NIA 3120195 REPAINTING N 131 FEDERAL ST. GLOVSKY X MCINTIRE 4118195 NIA NIA 4119195 REPAINTIREPAIRS N 6 BROAD ST. NALIPINSKI X MCINTIRE 4126195 NIA NIA 4127195 REPAINTIREPAIRS N 19 FLINT ST. SKERRY X MCINTIRE 4126195 NIA NIA 4127195 GARAGE DOOR N 24 112 WINTER ST. DURANDIMECHE X WASH.SO. 5123195 NIA NIA 5123195 REPAINT GARAGE DOORS N 142 FEDERAL ST. CLIFFORD X MCINTIRE 5125195 NIA NIA 5125195 FENCE REPAIR N 21 WINTER ST. WILEY X WASH.SO. 5126195 NIA NIA 5126195 ROOF REPLACEMENT N 6&8 HAMILTON LATTA RLTY. X MCINTIRE 617195 NIA NIA 617195 REPAIRSIPAINT N 17 CAMBRIDGE ST. MOULISON X MCINTIRE 616195 NIA NIA 616195 REPAINT N 140 FEDERAL MARIO X MCINTIRE 5131195 NIA NIA 615195 FRONT PORCH REPAIR N 19%-21%BROAD ST. 19%-21%CONDO TR. X MCINTIRE 615195 NIA NIA 615195 FENCE REPLACEMENT N 113 FEDERAL ST. LINDEMAN X MCINTIRE 618195 NIA NIA 618195 FENCE REPLACEMENT N 171 FEDERAL ST. ADAMSIMALONE X MCINTIRE 6115195 NIA NIA 6120195 REPAINT N 128130 FEDERAL ST. HEATON X MCINTIRE 6120195 NIA NIA 6120195 SHUTTERSIREPAINT N 126 112 FEDERAL ST. HEATON X MCINTIRE 6120195 NIA NIA 6120195 REPAINT N 12 KOSCIUSKO ST. RYBICKI X DERBY 6127195 NIA NIA 6127195 CLAPBOARD REPAIRIREPAINT N 8 BROAD ST. SHREVE X MCINTIRE 6122195 NIA NIA 6123195 GUTTER REPLACEMENT January 4, 1995, Page 1 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 4, 1995 A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, January 4, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem. MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides. and Messrs. Carr, Kelleher, Casey, Cook and Slam and Ms. Guy. Mr. Bailey entered later in the meeting. Ms. Guy stated that there were no applications received for the January 18, 1995 meeting and that there will be no meeting on that date unless the Commission continues any applications from tonight until that time. 331 Essex Street In continuation from a previous meeting, Richard and Diane Pabich presented an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of two compressors and two vent pipes on the roof of 331 Essex Street, which has already been installed. The applicants also are applying for the installation of a railing at the front steps. Mr. Casey felt that they should be painted the roof color as per the Commission's guidelines. Mr. Carr felt that the application should not be for Hardship but should be changed to Non-Applicability. Mr. Carr stated that the equipment is remotely visible from Chestnut and Cambridge Streets. Mr. Carr asked if there was any internal solution. Mr. Pabich replied in the negative. Ms. Pabich stated that in the summer, it could not be seen. Mr. Slam asked if there were any problem painting it the roof color. Mr. Pabich stated that it would not be a problem. Chairman Oedel felt it was very visible from Cambridge Street and felt that it could be mitigated. John Donaghue, 6 Cambridge Street, asked how visible the equipment was. Ms. Sides replied that one has to back up toward the corner of Cambridge and Chestnut. Joan Bacall, 12 Chestnut Street, asked how long the equipment has been operating. Ms. Pabich stated that it was installed in mid-September and was running at that time. Ms. Bacall stated that they are abutters and were never aware of the equipment and were therefore in favor. Thomas Kovac, residing on the second floor of 331 Essex Street, stated that he had no problem with the equipment, that there was no noise and no inconvenience. Mr. Kovac noted that they share a common wall. Chairman Oedel closed the public hearing. Chairman Oedel asked if there was any desire to require additional screening. Ms. Sides felt additional screening would draw more attention to the equipment. Mr. Carr made a motion to change the application from Hardship to Non-Applicability and to approve January 4, 1995, Page 2 it due to minimal impact, conditional that the equipment be painted to match the roof color by 6/30/95. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Chairman Oedel asked the location of the railing. Ms. Pabich stated that it will be on the left hand side as one goes up the steps. Mr. Pabich stated that it is required for insurance and will be installed on the stairs themselves. There was no public comment. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the railing as proposed, painted black. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Pabich asked the Commission to release the money held in escrow for the violations which have been addressed. Mr. Carr made a motion to find that all conditions secured by the escrow have been satisfied and to return the money held in escrow forthwith. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey joined the meeting at this time. 333 Essex St. 333 Essex Street Condo Assoc. presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace a side yard fence with a fence of the same height, with a cap, 3 backing rails and posts between every section. The lower front post is to be in line with the rest of the fence. Chairman Oedel noted that the fence has been constructed and that the finish side of the fence now faces in. Chairman Oedel stated that the fence cap has not been put on the new fence. Mr. Cook asked if it is required to have the finish side facing out. Mr. Carr stated that he was not sure if the guidelines stated so, but that it has been the Commission's practice to approve the finish side out. Mr. Slam asked why the applicants did not come to the Commission prior to construction. Thomas Kovac, of Unit 2, stated that they thought the fence was essentially the same. Mr. Kovac added that, last year, their rear abutter replaced their fence with the finish side in. Mr. Kovac noted that his condo association contributed to that fence. Mr. Carr asked if the rear fence is visible from the street. Mr. Kovac replied in the affirmative. Mr. Carr stated that the fence should also have been approved by the Commission prior to construction. Chairman Oedel asked when the fence would be painted. Mr. Kovac stated that it would be painted as soon as the cap is put on and the weather permits. Robert Maier, 335 Essex Street, stated that he would like the fence to look as close as possible to what was there, facing out from 333 Essex, with a cap and facia board. Barbara Maier, 335 Essex Street, stated that she was pleased that the fence was being dealt with. January 4, 1995, Page 3 Chairman Oedel asked what the cap will look like. Mr. Kovac stated that it can be whatever the Commission prefers. Chairman Oedel suggested that it replicate the previous existing cap. Mr. Kovac was in agreement. Mr. Kovac noted that he did not have,any objection when the Maiers changed their house color, which was a substantially larger project than the fence. Mr. Casey stated that the Maiers came in and received approval prior to doing the work. Mr. Carr stated that the Commission has to look at the proposal as though it has not been completed and review on its merits. Mr. Slam asked if it were possible to have two finished sides of the fence. Mr. Kovac stated it would be cost prohibitive. Mr. Kelleher asked if the applicant's were willing to turn the fence around. Mr. Kovac stated that he preferred not to. Nick Lang, of Unit 1F, stated that each condo owner has contributed to the fence and each has a different window view. Mr. Lang stated that their neighbor put the finish side and so they did. Richard Pabich, 331 Essex Street, stated that the fence as constructed was nice. Chairman Oedel asked for comments on the proposal. Mr. Kelleher had no comment. Mr. Casey stated that he was concerned about the view from Essex and did not like to see the supports on the long side of the Maier's property which is in full view from Essex. Mr. Casey noted that the fence is closer to 331's property line. Mr. Slam was in agreement. Mr. Bailey asked if the posts were in cement, and if the Commission required that the fence be turned, would they have to be taken out. Mr. Lang stated that they are not in cement but would have to be moved. Mr. Carr was in agreement with Mr. Casey and noted that the Commission's practice is to approve the finish side out. Mr. Carr stated that the fence orientation is a change, side it one time faced out. Mr. Carr stated that the side facing the Maier's is the most visible from the street. Mr. Carr felt the rest of the design was fine, the height was fore and that he would want a fence cap as proposed. Mr. Cook stated some consideration should be given to the persons who incur the cost. Mr. Cook felt there was no law or precedent regarding the finish side. Mr. Slam stated that the Commission has never approved the finish side in. Ms. Sides felt the fence should be as previously existing, with the fmish side out, with a cap and a watertable. Chairman Oedel stated that the guidelines don't specify finish side direction. Chairman Oedel stated that from an appropriateness standpoint, the fmish side should face out. Chairman Oedel added that the January 4, 1995, Page 4 contractor should do the chanee at no cost since he did not get the proper permits prior to construction. Mr. Carr made a motion to deny the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness and to approve a Certificate of Non-Applicability for a fence which replicates that which was previously existing, with same height, cap, etc. and finish side facing 335 Essex Street. Mr. Maier stated that they intend to paint the fence their house trim color on their side. Mr. Carr stated that the fence reads as belonging to 333 Essex and should be painted to match 333 Essex Street. ' Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. 1 Hamilton Street Orille L'Heureux, representing Salem Ropes Trust, presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of porch posts, rails and floor and the replacement of broken garage doors, painted white. The application states that the porch work was completed in kind in 1985 and the garage doors were replaced in 1993. It was also noted that the trim around the garage door and the roof soffit were also replaced. Mr. L'Heureux stated that the bar across the garage doors protects the doors from cars. Mr. Casey asked if Mr. L'Heureux lived at 1 Hamilton Street. Mr. L'Heureux replied in the negative. Mr. Casey stated that he sits on the Mayor's Neighborhood Task Force and the three of Mr. L'Heureux's properties have received neighborhood complaints. Mr. L'Heureux stated that the porch was replaced ten years ago and that it was replaced in kind. Mr. Carr asked what the doors on the garage were before replacement. Mr. L'Heureux stated that they were wooden, double doors. Mr. Casey stated that the Commission would never have allowed the porches to go unpainted. Mr. Carr noted that the garage doors were probably original, closed matchboard between metal braces. Mr. Carr did not recall the porches as being in kind. Mr. Carr asked how long Mr. L'Heureux owned the property. Mr. L'Heureux replied 35 years. Mr. Carr stated that in 35 years, Mr. L'Heureux would have gotten notices and newsletters from the Commission, so that he would have to have been aware that the property was in an historic district. Mr. Carr felt the work was inappropriate. Mr. L'Heureux stated that the Building Department told him to change the doors. Mr. L'Heureux asked if he would be allowed to have overhead doors. Mr. Cook stated that the garage design was not sophisticated and does not demand high style. Mr. Cook was not opposed to changing. Ms. Sides felt there should be more concentration on the porches than the garage. January 4, 1995, Page 5 Mr. Carr asked if the window in the garage had been blocked up. Mr. L'Heureux replied in the affirmative. Chairman Oedel stated that he would have a hard time concentrating on the porch since the change had not been noticed by the Commission in ten years. Chairman Oedel stated that although the design was horrible, an argument could be made that it is not that important if it hadn't been noticed in ten years. Chairman Oedel suggested continuing the application until the February 1 st meeting to allow the ownei to prepare a proposal. Mr. L'Heureux felt Chairman Oedel's suggestion was fair. Mr. Casey was also in agreement. Mr. Carr agreed that the garage was not important but felt that it is an out building that is close to period. if not period. Mr. Slam made a motion to continue the application until February 1 to allow the applicant to present plans for the porch, garage, window on the garage and other general improvements. Mr. Carr seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. Mr. Bailey offered his assistance to Mr. L'Heureux. Mr. Slam suggested that the issues be prioritized at the next meeting. 50 Broad Street Spiros and Patricia Flomp presented an application to construct a decorative arbor across the side of the yard with fence and brick wall and to remove and replace the sun porch roof with 26 gauge light green double lock standing seam roof. The arbor has already been constructed. Mr. Flomp stated that he thought the arbor was considered landscaping. 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. Bailey abstained from voting. 393 Essex Street Dr. James Jervinis, representing Tuition Realty Trust, submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a railing on the front step. Photographs of the proposed railing were submitted. Dr. Jervinis stated that his patients have requested the railing, that it would be installed on the right hand side, painted white and that he wants the style used at 385 Essex Street. Chairman Oedel requested that the railing not be installed into the pilasters. Dr. Jervinis agreed that it would not be installed into the reeding, but on the plain finish. Mr. Carr stated that the railing should be black. Dr. Jervinis stated that he wanted it to be less noticeable. Chairman Oedel agreed that the railing should be black. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the application as submitted conditional that the railing be painted black. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained January 4, 1995, Page 6 from voting. Marvin Window Demonstration Ray LeBay representing A.W. Hastings was present to demonstrate Marvin windows. Mr. LeBay stated that they are available in clad exterior or wood, primed or factory finished paint, double glaze, insulated glass. Ms. Sides stated that her firm uses Marvin windows all the time and that the larger the window, the more of a gap can be seen from the side. Mr. LeBay stated that the standard double hung has a 1/2" gap that won't peer through. Mr. LeBay stated that they also offer a single glaze with a storm. Their Historic Magnum has a narrower muntin. One-half screens are available for historic applications. The windows tilt in but can also be made with the top sash stationary. Minutes Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the minutes of July 11, 1994. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Sides abstained from voting. Other Business Ms. Guy stated that she issued a Non-Applicability certificate for gutter replacement at 114 Federal St. Ms. Guy requested a letter of support from the Commission for the application to the Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund for Old Town Hall. Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter of support, Mr. Casey seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Kelleher abstained from voting. Chairman Oedel stated that he has found a number of contractors that can install air conditioning units, similar to the House of Seven Gables, that can be installed so as not to be visible from the public way. Ms. Guy distributed copies of the Beacon Hill design guidelines that Mr. Kelleher obtained. Ms. Guy will may the Commission members copies of Massachusetts Historical Commission's annual report summary. Guidelines Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the section relating to house numbers. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the section entitled How To Use This Guide as amended. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the section entitled Procedures For Filing Applications. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. January 4, 1995, Page 7 Ms. Guy stated that she would like approval of the general format revision which includes the addition of the section on violations and the removal of references to contractors and prices. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the format. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. Violations Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter to the Building Inspector requesting that he order the owner of 25 Essex Street to secure the roof from the weather. Mr. Slam seconded the motion. all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter to the County requesting that the from porch of the Jailor's House be stabilized. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. It was noted that work has been done at 28-28 1/2 Broad Street which is evident by some non-painted wood. Ms. Guy will send a letter. Stop & Shop Ms. Joan Sweeney was present to provide additional research relating to the site proposed for Stop and Shop. Ms. Sweeney provided a map showing the former location of Captain Trask's house and requested the Commission send a letter to William Luster, City Planner. Chairman Oedel will write a letter as outlined in the minutes of the October 5, 1994 meeting. Mr. Slam motioned for the Commission to send a letter. Mr. Carr seconded the motion. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. Mr. Kelleher suggested copies be sent to Trudy Cox. 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. Mr. Bailey abstained from voting. Respectfully submitted, �GG�' J A. Guy C rk of the Commission February 1, 1995, Page 1 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 1. 1995 A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, February 1, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green. Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Oedel, Ms. Sides, Messrs. Casey, Cook. Kelleher, and Carr, new member Lance Kasparian, and Ms. Guy. Mr. Slam entered later in the meeting. 65 Derbv Street N. Malia Griffin was present representing New England Power Company (NEPCO) on an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish their building at 65 Derby Street. Ms. Griffin stated that the building was purchased in October of 1994 and that NEPCO originally had intentions to renovate it. Ms. Griffin stated that the building is too far gone and that the exterior is a palace compared to the interior. They propose to have their arborist maintain the area as per the landscaping plan provided. Mr. Casey stated that he has been by the property and walked around it. Mr. Casey stated that it has asbestos siding and that he can't even date the building. Mr. Casey did not know if it had any historic fiber left to it and did not believe it had any redeeming architectural features. Mr. Carr asked the age of the building. Chairman Oedel stated that the Building Survey form states c.1825. Mr. Kasparian stated that the molding suggests that it could be 18th century or early 19th century. Mr. Kasparian stated that it has clearly been altered and felt that it may have been moved to this location. Mr. Carr felt that the application should not be under Appropriateness. Mr. Carr felt the area was already eroded when the John Derby House was tom down and added that he did not want another missing tooth. Mr. Carr felt the building could be saved and was opposed to demolition. Ms. Guy noted that, in this case, this building may be the only tooth left. Mr. Kasparian stated that it may have some significance and that he may be able to vouch for its age, but felt, without evidence, it would not be appropriate to demolish. Ms. Sides had no comment on the application. Mr. Casey asked the timeframe. Ms. Griffin stated that the building is a hazard and that they are afraid kids might get into the building, which they are liable for. Mr. Casey stated that he will try to get Historic Salem. Inc. to do house research for the building. Mr. Kelleher stated that he would like to see the interior condition. Ms. Griffin stated that no one can go on the 2nd or 3rd floor. Ms. Guy noted that there is no second February meeting unless any applications are continued to that time. February 1. 1995, Page 2 Mr. Cook asked who recommended that it not be renovated. Ms. Griffin replied that it was their own people. Chairman Oedel stated that it was worthwhile to do a site visit. Chairman Oedel noted that it is the last house in the district. and is a lone house with nothing around it for 4 to 5 house spaces. Chairman Oedel stated that he did have concern on how it might read on the Crombie Street issue. Ms. Guy suggested that the Commission determine if it is National Register eligible. A site visit was scheduled for Saturday, February 4, 1995 at 9:45 a.m. Ms. Griffin gave Chairman Oedel the keys to the building. Ms. Guy noted that no abutters have shown up to speak on this issue. Mr. Carr made a motion to continue the application until March 1, 1995. Mr. Cook seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Cook felt that the Commission was on solid ground with its philosophy on the Crombie Street issue and should not allow that issue to be a threat to the Commission's other decisions since each situation is different. Mr. Slam entered the meeting at this time. 9 Chestnut Street Mr. Carr and Mr. Casey abstained from this discussion and left the room for this application. Historic Salem, Inc. presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to attach a sign to the bottom of the Hamilton Hall sign at 9 Chestnut Street. A drawing was submitted. Colors and lettering will match the existing sign. Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Messrs. Carr and Casey abstained from voting. 1 Hamilton Street In continuation from a previous meeting, Salem Ropes Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of porch posts, rails and floor and the replacement of broken garage doors, painted white. The application states that the porch work was completed in kind in 1985 and the garage doors were replaced in 1993. The applicant was not present. Chairman Oedel read a letter from Commission member James Bailey concerning his meeting with Orille L'Heureux, the applicant. The letter outlined items that were discussed as possible work to be done to the building. Chairman Oedel asked each member to outline three items that they feel would be priorities. Mr. Kelleher felt the railings on the porch were most important, along with the front storm door and fence which were key issues. February 1, 1995, Page 3 Mr. Casey felt the posts, railings and balustrades on the back porch, the garage which is the largest mass item and the porch windows were priorities. Mr. Carr preferred not to prioritize and felt that the garage door would be an embarrassment if the Commission allowed it. Mr. Carr felt the posts should be fine tuned. Ms. Guy noted that the only application before the Commission is for the porch and garage which was brought before the Commission as a result of a violation notice. Ms. Guy stated that the Commission cannot force the homeowner to do anything else on the list noted in Mr. Bailey's letter. Mr. Kasparian asked if the Commission knew what doors were on the garage previously. Mr. Carr replied in the affirmative and stated that they were swinging. Mr. Kasparian stated that the replacement of 2/1 windows on the porch may be unwarranted due to the . date of the addition. Mr. Cook felt the whole porch issue was a priority and asked the date of the garage. Mr. Carr guessed that the garage was built after the house. Ms. Sides noted that it was too small for a carriage house. Mr. Carr suggested checking the permit records. Mr. Cook asked if there was glass on top of the doors. Mr. Carr replied in the negative. Mr. Cook stated that swinging doors won't make a silk purse out of a sows ear. Mr. Slam stated that the porch in total was a priority as well as the front door and garage door. Ms. Sides stated that anything related to the porch was first priority, then the garage. Ms. Sides suggested working with the trim on the house. Ms. Sides would like to see the garage door replaced but did not have a set opinion on how to replace. Ms. Sides was sympathetic to having the doors be useable. Chairman Oedel stated that he could not care less about the garage door and suggested that it be painted. Chairman Oedel felt the ballasters and post on the lower porch and stairs were priority along with the storm door and the trim on the house. Mr. Casey questioned prioritizing. Mr. Carr made a motion to deny the application as inappropriate and to require the applicant to reapply. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Kasparian abstained from voting. Mr. Carr made a motion to send a letter to the applicant stating that the Commission recognizes that the situation is not resolved, that the Commission welcomes the points raised in Mr. Bailey's letter and that the Commission would like detailed plans along with the application for the March 1, 1995 meeting. Mr. Casev seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Kasparian abstained from voting. Chairman Oedel suggested that the applicant bring photographs of his proposal. February 1. 1995, Page 4 Other Business Chairman Oedel welcomed Mr. Kasparian to the Commission. Mr. Kasparian stated that he lives on Arbella Street and works in Lowell as an historic preservation architect. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the minutes of December 21, 1994. Mr. Casey seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Kasparian abstained from votine. Ms. Guy presented copies of revised applications for Appropriateness, Non-Applicability, Hardship and Waiver of Demolition Delay Ordinance. Guidelines Ms. Guy outlined some changes made to sections of the guidelines. Ms. Guy stated, at the request of Mr. Carr, she is able to tighten up some of the timing on violations procedures. Mr. Carr made a motion to approve the section on Addressing Violations as amended. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Kasparian abstained from voting. After making amendments to the section on Architectural Trim and Siding, Mr. Carr made a motion to approve that section as amended. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Kasparian abstained from voting. 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. Mr. Kasparian abstained from voting. Respectfullyitted, JA. Guy Clerk of the Commission March 1, 1995, Page 1 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 1, 1995 A regular meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, March 1, 1995 at 7:30 p.m. at One Salem Green, Salem, MA. Presented were Vice Chairman Carr, Messrs. Casey, Kelleher and Slam and Ms. Guy. Mr. Kasparian joined later in the meeting. It was noted that Edward Carberg wrote a letter providing his opinion of historical facts relating to both public hearings on the agenda. 65 Derbv Street In continuation from a previous meeting, New England Power Company NEPCO submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish 65 Derby Street. The applicant was not present. Mr. Carr stated that there was a site visit of the building and that Chairman Oedel had informed Ms. Griffin of NEPCO that approval to demolish the building would be unlikely based on the condition of the building. Mr. Carr stated that Ms. Griffin would not be present and that she has requested that the application be acted on. Mr. Slam made a motion to approve the application as submitted in hopes that it will fail. Mr. Casey submitted copies of Historic Salem's house report for the property. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion. There were no votes in favor, all were opposed and the application was denied as inappropriate. Mr. Carr suggested that a letter be sent to the Building Inspector which states that the application was denied based on the site visit and the structural soundness of the building and to request that the building be secured. Mr. Kelleher made a motion to send a letter to the Building Inspector stated that the application was denied and that at a site visit made on February 4, 1995, it was observed that the building appears to be structurally sound an that the current status of being secured appears adequate. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Kasparian joined the meeting at this time. 1 Hamilton Street Salem Ropes Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to redo the rails and paint the porch and garage door at I Hamilton St. Mr. Carr read two letters from the applicant to the Commission as part of the application. The applicant, Orille L'Heureux, provided photographs of porch work underway at 89 Congress Street that 1 Hamilton would resemble. The body of porch, skirt and house trim is proposed to be white with the deck and stair treads and garage door to be Essex Green. Mr. L'Heureux also proposed to repair the window frames, molding and house trim. March 1. 1995, Page 2 Mr. Carr asked if the only difference in the before and after photographs for 89 Congress Street is the paint and the caps on the posts. Mr. L'Heureux replied in the affirmative. Mr. Carr asked if the applicant was proposing to put the same posts caps and rail on 1 Hamilton as per the photographs. Mr. L'Heureux replied in the affirmative. Mr. Casey asked if the support columns would change. Mr. L'Heureux replied in the negative and stated that he will change the rails and put in a new post on the first floor. Mr. L'Heureux stated that he wants to keep the bar across the garage door for protection and preferred to leave under the porch as is. Mr. Carr asked if the rail on the first floor will emulate 89 Congress Street. Mr. L'Heureux replied in the affirmative and stated that he would leave the garage door and window and trim around the garage white. Mr. L'Heureux would paint everything on the porch white including the second floor and would paint the rest of the wood on the building as time and money permits. Mr. Kasparian asked if the applicant was willing to consider changing the skirting around the bottom of the porch. Mr. L'Heureux replied in the affirmative and stated that he was also willing to change the colors. Mr. Carr suggested closing the public hearing. Mr. Casey made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Casey felt the garage doors were more suitable for a ranch house and felt the entire porch was in violation of the guidelines. Mr. Casey stated that he could not vote for the support columns to remain and would like more specificity on the porch and stair railings. Mr. Casey stated that he would like more done on the porch skirt and that the garage window should be reopened. Mr. Slam stated that he would rather see turned ballasters, that the skirt should be lattice, that the support posts should be replaced and that the porch windows should be opened up. Mr. Slam stated that the garage door was not appropriate but that he would hold off on his opinion for the moment. Mr. Kelleher stated that the ballasters should be turned and that the skirting should be lattice which could be made openable for storage. Mr. Kelleher stated that the support columns need to be addressed. Mr. Kelleher stated that he could live with the garage door painted out but would want the horizontal removed. Mr. Slam stated that he would also like the horizontal removed. Mr. Kelleher stated that he would prefer the window on the garage be opened up. Mr. L'Heureux stated that it was not a problem. Mr. Kasparian stated that he had no problem with square newel posts and added that it appears to be a mid-20th century utilitarian addition. Mr. Kasparian stated that white paint was appropriate but that the skirt board should be in lattice or vertical boards painted the door color and frame white. W. L'Heureux stated that he did not have a problem with Mr. Kasparian's suggestions. Mr. Kasparian stated that the porch posts should be eased with 1 x's with recessed panel on bottom and detail on top. Mr. L'Heureux stated that he could do that. March 1. 1995, Page 3 Mr. Casey stated that he would want to see details. Mr. Kasparian stated that he had no problem with the horizontal bar on the garage but felt the garage window should be reopened. Mr. Carr stated that the Commission only has jurisdiction over unapproved changes and that the Commission should review the changes as though they had not yet been done. Mr. Carr stated that he does not like the door on the garage, that the Commission would not have approved the boarded up window, that he agrees with vertical or lattice for the skirt and encasing of the columns, that he does not care about whether there are square or turned ballasters, that the paint is okay and that he would need detail on the posts. Mr. Casey made a motion to deny the application as submitted. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Carr summarized the comments made: All support casing the columns, detail needed. Square or turned ballasters are okay, detail needed. Skirt should be lattice or vertical, painted. Newelled posts on bottom of stair, casing and capped. Paint entire first and second floor of porch. Reopen garage window. Mr. L'Heureux stated that he can take off the plywood over the window and just replace the panes. Mr. Casey and Mr. Carr would not approve of the garage door. Messrs. Kelleher, Slam and Kasparian would be willing to allow the garage door to stay. Mr. Kasparian suggested using some discretion with the garage doors and to consider the parking. Mr. Kasparian stated that he would prefer panels with vision lights but did not have a problem with an overhead door in general. Mr. Casey stated that there should be ballasters going down the railing. Mr. Kasparian stated that the risers of the stairs should be painted white. Other Business Mr. Kelleher made a motion to approve the minutes of January 4 and February 1, 1995. Mr. Slam seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Guy presented samples of the survey forms being completed by the City's consultant. Mr. Kelleher suggested that the State listing status be placed under the bibliography. Ms. Guy provided drafts of new Certificates which include and expiration date of one year unless otherwise noted. Mr. Casey noted that This Old House is looking to do a property in Salem. March 1, 1995, Page 4 Ms. Guv stated that the Commission received a letter from Massachusetts Historical Commission finding no effect for the installation of an ATM at 126 North Street. Ms. Guy stated that she received an invitation for a grand opening for 331 Essex Street for March 9, 1995. MS. Guy stated that Mr. Kelleher provided a listing of 158 Queen Anne buildings in Salem. 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, ane A. Guy/ Clerk of the Commission Salem H sroricai Commission -NE -z.�LEd GFEEN.SALEM. MASSACH-ISE?-i� 31970 =i&17»5-9595 E:.:T. _- ' CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS It is herebv certified that the Salem Historical Commission has determined that the proposed ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ® Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Signage ❑ Other work as described below will be appropriate to the preservation of said Historic District. as per the requirements s% forth in the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Ch. 40C) and the Salem Historic Districts Ordinance. District: McIntire Address of Property: 10 Hamilton St /24 Chestnut Sr Name of Record Owner: Barry Paul/Ellen Alexander Description of Work Proposed: Alteration of lot line fence to replicate photo of fence at 3 Hamilton St. with bottom of pickets to extend to the ground, painted white. Dated: 6/8/95 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION Bv: The homeowner has the option not to commence the work (unless it relates to resolving an outstandin violation). All work commenced must be completed within one year from this date unless otherwise indicates THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. Please be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from the Inspector c Buildings (or anv other necessary permits or approvals) prior to commencing work. a cava . Lance Kasparian A .I .A. Historical Architect %r be r .T-h,�H -i-e E..sex-Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 508-745-5975 PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS Massachusetts Number 7073 New York Number 17 ,029 JAN17 1995 NCARB Certificate Number 31 ,851 Salam YlZaltlilly v apt. EDUCATION 1988 Boston University. Boston, Massachusetts. M.A. Preservation Studies. Final Project: Peripheral Zone Management Plan for the Historic House Museum Properties of the Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities. 1979 The Architectural Association School . London, England. Independent research in architectural history. . 1979 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Troy, New York. Bachelor of Architecture- B.S. Building Science. Minor: Transportation Engineering. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE current U.S. Department of Interior , Lowell Historic Preservation Spy ys�_ 76J13 Commission. Lowell , Massachusetts. Lowell Canalway Landscape Rehabilitation and Development. Project Architect. Historic Preservation Grant Program Administrator - 1988-89 Mulliken Architects, Inc. Boston, Massachusetts. Project Architect. 1984-87 DiNisco Kretsch and Associates, Inc. Boston, Massachusetts. Middlesex School Athletic Facility Renovation. j. Concord, Mass. Project Architect. Barresi Heights Highrise Facade Renovation. Fall River , Mass. Project Architect. Old Colony Y Juvenile Detention Facility_ Brockton, Mass. Project Architect. Worcester Academy Athletic Facility Renovation. Worcester , Mass. Project Architect. 1984-87 DiNisco Kretsch and Associates, Inc . Boston, Massachusetts. cont'd. Worcester Academy Dexter Hall Renovations_ Worcester , Mass. Project Architect . Police Station. Quincy Mass. Project Captain- 1981-84 W.Z_M.H. Group Architects, Inc_ Boston, Massachusetts. Marketplace Center . 200 State Street, Boston, Mass. Project Captain. The Marriott Hotel . Burlington, Mass_ Project Captain- 1980-81 Mintz Associates Architects and Planners , Inc. Boston, Massachusetts. Green Street Rapid Transit Station. Boston, Mass- Draftsperson- The ass_Draftsperson_The Bostonian Hotel . Boston, Mass_ Draftsperson_ ARCHITECTURAL RESEARCH 1992 Essex Institute Historical Museum_ Salem, Massachusetts. Essex Institute Research Fellow_ 1991 The Haverhill Historical Commission. Project Coordinator: Historic Preservation Plan_ 1990 Architectural Conservation Trust for Massachusetts. Study Report: Stained Glass at Central Congregational Church, Fall River , Massachusetts. 1990 Society of Architectural Historians Annual Conference. Paper and Tour Notes: Boston Stained Glass. 1988 Essex Institute Historical Museum_ Salem, Massachusetts. Measured Drawings: Crowninshield-Bentley House_ 1988 Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities. Measured Drawings: Udall-Boyd House, Quechee, Vt_ Spencer-Pierce Little House, Newbury, Mass_ AFFILIATIONS American Institute of Architects ' Boston Society of Architects Massachusetts State Association of Architects Historical Commission_ Haverhill , Massachusetts Society of Architectural Historians Association for Preservation Technology Lance Kasparian Page Two 10/1992 Adequate and Qualified Local Government Commission PART B.2 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP There are currently seven (7) Commission members and two (2) alternates. PART B.3 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION PROFESSIONALS Professionals in Name Related Preservation Field Helen Sides - Chairman X - Architect John H. Carr, Jr. - V. Chairman - Attorney Russell Slam - Business broker Richard Oedel - V.P. of a plastics corp. Walter Cook - Realtor John Casey X - Interior design firm owner James Bailey, alternate - Restaurant owner Douglas Kelleher X -National Register Asst. Lance Kasparian, alternate X - Historical Architect PART B.4 VACANCIES/APPOINTMENTS Mayor Harrington appointed Lance Kasparian to an alternate position on January 12, 1995 after Mr. Kasparian submitted a resume indicating his interest in serving as a member of the Commission. Helen Sides was elected Chairman of the Commission on May 17, 1995. PART B.5 CLG TRAINING SESSIONS/WORKSHOPS Ms. Guy attended the Conference on Historic Preservation and Urban Issues sponsored by Historic Massachusetts, Inc, and the Massachusetts Office of Business Development held on August 23, 1994. Ms. Guy attended the Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund Local Project Coordinators workshop on May 9, 1995. Ms. Guy and Mr. Oedel attended Build Boston in November, 1994. Mr. Cook completed the Historic Homes Program sponsored jointly by the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Peabody and Essex Museum. Ms. Sides and Messrs. Kelleher, Oedel, Cook, Casey and Kasparian attended Restoration '95. Mr. Kelleher and Mr. Kasparian attended the National Trust for Historic Preservation Conference held in October, 1994. Mr. Kelleher attended the CLG Leadership and Preservation Planning Workshop held in October, 1994 in Lexington. zxVa National Register Program Participation PART C.1 CLG EVALUATIONS COMPLETED There were no evaluations completed. PART C.2 NOMINATIONS There were no nominations prepared and submitted to the MHC. PART C.3 PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearings held. PART CA PROFESSIONAL EXPERTISE There was no professional expertise engaged concerning National Register nominations. a .sxva Survey and Inventory of Historic Properties PART D.1 D.2 D.3 Through the 1994 Survey and Planning Grant Program, the City has engaged the services of a consultant to produce 155 survey forms for the Derby Street and McIntire Historic Districts. As of this date the project has not been completed. Properties targeted were those that were never surveyed, were surveyed in the 1960's, were for sale, were on the boundaries of the district, are city-owned or were in an area designated by the Salem Historical Commission as active. The forms should be submitted by the consultant in the next few weeks. There is no change in the status of the inventory in terms of its organization, storage, accessibility, etc. a zxva Public Participation PART E.1 COMMISSION MEETING DATES: July 6, 1994 July 11, 1994, Site visit August 3, 1994 August 17, 1994 September 7, 1994 September 21, 1994 October 5, 1994 October 19, 1994 November 16, 1994 December 7, 1994 December 21, 1994 January 4, 1995 February 1, 1995 March 1, 1995 March 15, 1995 April 5, 1995 April 19, 1995 May 3, 1995 May 17, 1995 June 7, 1995 June 21, 1995 June 28, 1995, Site visit OPEN MEETING LAW COMPLIANCE STATEMENT 1. All meetings of the CLGC have been open to the public. 2. A notice of the date, time and place of every meeting of the CLGC has been field with the Clerk of the city or town in which the CLGC acts and a copy of such notice has been posted in the office of the Clerk on the principal bulletin board of each city or own at least 48 hours prior to the time of each meeting, excluding Sundays and legal holidays. 3. A record of every meeting, including executive sessions has been maintained by the CLGC, including the date, time, place, members present and actions taken at each meeting. 4. All executive sessions, if any, have been held in compliance with M.G.L. C. 39, Section 23B. 5. No chance meeting or social meeting has been used to circumvent the spirit or requirements of the Open Meeting Law or to discuss or act upon a matter over which the CLGC has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. Date Chairperson. CLGC Public Participation PART E.3 ACCESSIBILITY OF MINUTES There has been no change in the accessibility of Commission minutes. They are accessible for public view at the Salem Planning Department. PART EA RULES, PROCEDURES, GUIDELINES The Commission reviewed and amended several sections of its guidelines including: - How to use this guide; - Procedures for filing applications; - Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation(Updated to 1990 revision); - Addressing violations: unapproved work completed; - Architectural trim& siding; - Doors, doorways & porticos; - Fences; - Gutters & downspouts; and - House numbers. The Commission also revised its applications and certificates. Copies of all updates are included in this report. PART E.5 OTHER PARTICIPATION The Commission issued one newsletter(Number 3, February, 1995) to all of the property owners in the 4 historic districts. It included a supplement of five sections of the Salem Historical Commission's guidelines. It also included a poll on whether the Commission should continue to have jurisdiction over paint colors. (Only seven responses were returned, with only one in favor of the Commission reviewing paint colors.) SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK HOW TO USE THIS GUIDE Rev. 1/4/95 This notebook serves a dual purpose. First. it is a compilation of the design review guidelines used in the administration of Salem's historic districts and second. it provides property owners throughout Salem with information on the preservation, repair,and restoration of historic properties. The Salem Historical Commission supports a property owner efforts to improve their property and can guide them on historical appropriateness. The guidelines listed on the following pages have been voted upon and approved by members of the Salem Historical Commission. While they establish the context in which changes to buildings in Salem's historic districts will be reviewed, they are meant to be applied on a case by case basis. Since circumstances vary from property to property, the Commission allows for a certain amount of flexibility. The important thing to remember is that property owners should consult the Commission early in their planning and certainly before making any changes to their properties. In the long run, this will make the process smoother both for the applicant and the Commission. The Salem Historical Commission is a volunteer board of Salem residents appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. Desien review by the Salem Historical Commission is mandated under Chapter 40C of the Massachusetts General Laws and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinances which established Salem's historic districts. The Commission is responsible for the review and approval of all proposed exterior alterations to properties located in a local historic district. A local historic district is an area with specific boundaries that has been recognized for its historically and architecturally significant quality. A person commencing or completing work to the exterior of a building in an historic district without the necessary approval of the Commission is subject to fines of up to$500 per day from the date of violation. The Commission is not responsible for an owner's neglect to inquire about necessary City permits and approvals. All records are public and we will confidentially assist you if you are concerned that someone in your neighborhood is in violation. The property owner must receive Commission approval before undertaking work. There a three types of Certificates that constitute approval: ■ A Certificate ofAppropriateness is required for changes visible from a public way. A representative from the commission will determine that which is visible or not visible. Examples of changes include but are not limited to the following: I. Additions, new construction,and alterations. Alterations may include changes in design, material,color or outward appearance of the structure including, but not limited to, doors, walls, fences, entrances, gutters, railings, roofs, chimneys, porches/decks,skylights, windows and exterior staircases. 2. Removal of any features(i.e. shutters, porches, siding, windows, fences, railings, doors, chimneys, etc.). 3. Demolition including structural, walls, fences, exterior staircases,garages, sheds, etc. 4. Paint colors (including windows, doors, porches & storms, etc.), satellite dishes, solar panels. 5. Roof color, materials, vents and pipes. 6. Free standing light posts/fixtures. Signs and sign posts. Note: Signs must also conform to the City of Salem sign ordinance. ■ A Certificate of Hardship is used for the same type of changes as a Certificate of Appropriateness. It can only be issued when a Certificate of Appropriateness would be denied as inappropriate and such denial will involve a substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the applicant. Approval of a Certificate of Hardship must not affect the historic district in general, must be without substantial detriment to the public welfare and must not cause departure from the intent and purposes of the Historic Districts Act. The Commission will not approve a Certificate of Hardship in instances where the hardship was self-created(i.e. financial burden to undo work performed that had not been approved by the Commission). ■ A Certificate of Non-Applicability is a way of ratifying that a Certificate of Appropriateness is not required for the work being performed. This certificate.along with the pictures to be taken,protects the property owner from questions about changes have been made without authorization. A Certificate of Non-Applicability is required for the following: I. Additions, alterations or new construction not visible from a public way, public street or public park. A representative from the Commission will determine that which is visible or not visible. 3 SALEdI HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK _. Temporary structures or signs, subject, however, only to such conditions as to duration or use. location, lighting, removal and similar matters as the Commission may reasonably specify. 3. The reconstruction,substantially similar in exterior design. of a building, structure,or exterior architectural features damaged or destroyed by tire, storm or other disaster, provided such reconstruction is begun within one year thereafter and carried forward with due diligence. 4. Ordinary maintenance,repair or replacement of any exterior architectural feature which is damaged or worn provided the work does not involve a change in design, material, color. or outward appearance of the structure. The Commission has no jurisdiction over the following: I. Terraces.walks,driveway materials,sidewalks and similar structures provided that any structure is substantially at grade level. 2. Storms doors, storm windows, screens,window air conditioners. lighting fixtures attached to the building, antennae and similar appurtenances. (Note that the Commission does have jurisdiction over the paint colors of storm doors and windows. Note that the Commission does have jurisdiction over satellite dishes and solar collectors.) 3. Interior work that does not affect the exterior in material, design or outward appearance. 4. Landscaping. (Note that the Commission does have jurisdiction over retaining walls - eg. railroad ties.) Through these guidelines,the Commission works to preserve and protect the distinctive characteristics of buildings and sites within the historic districts,to maintain and improve the settings of these buildings, and to encourage new design compatible with existing structures. The guidelines are based on the Secretary of Interior's Standards of Rehabilitation which encourage the retention of existing historic materials and architectural features whenever possible. When replacement is necessary,new materials should be historically appropriate. New building elements should be designed with architectural compatibility in mind so that the harmonious exterior relationships of a given building or buildings are preserved. In addition to the Secretary of Interior's Standards, the Commission's guidelines reflect Salem's architectural traditions so as to encourage preservation of those elements that make Salem unique. The Commission makes a clear distinction between changes which would be appropriate for the principal elevations of a building and those acceptable at rear, private, "family-living" sections. Intrusive contemporary features should be avoided on the front facade and where visibility from public ways is high. Since,historically, rear elevations were altered over time to meet changing family needs, modern day alterations - skylights, greenhouse windows, French doors, decks - should be restricted to the less important facades of the house. In this way, the contemporary needs of Salem's property owners can be served without compromising the architectural integrity of Salem's buildings and streetscapes. The notebook's technical information on home repair and restoration is organized by topic. The purpose of this data is not to provide construction specifications or a do-it-yourself guide, but to inform owners of what is historically appropriate(or inappropriate)and what kind of work is involved for a variety of repairs. The property owner can use this information as the basis for further research or when consulting contractors. While contractors may be knowledgeable of their crafts,they may not know exactly what the property owner wants unless they are told. Also, they may not be experienced in working on historic buildings. It is the property owner who should decide what type of work is most appropriate for his house. The Commission urges property owners to use this notebook as a means of becoming more informed and more involved in the repair and restoration process. The Commission supports your efforts to improve your property and can guide you on historical appropriateness. Further information, in the form of articles and pamphlets,City-wide architectural inventories,and photographs,as well as this notebook's bibliography are available at the Historical Commission's office at One Salem Green. This project was made possible by a grant from Yankee Magazine administered through the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Historic Salem, Inc. provided the matching funds necessary to receive the grant. - May 1984 Sections have been periodically amended after first receiving a majority vote from the Salem Historical Commission. 4 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK PROCEDURES FOR FILING APPLICATIONS Rev. 1/4/95 A. Be prepared to apply for approvals well in advance of commencing any exterior work. Before making any changes to the exterior of a property in an historic district,the owner should call or visit the Commission representative at the Salem Planning Department to discuss proposed alterations and to determine the category of the application(Appropriateness, Non-Applicability or Hardship). B. The Commission normally meets on the first and third Wednesdays of each month and notices are posted at City Hall. The meetings are held at One Salem Green,2nd floor, and begin at 7:30 p.m. All meetings are open to the public and any person is entitled to appear and be heard on any matter before the Commission before it reaches a decision. C. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Hardship must be received by 3:00 p.m. on the Monday 16 days before the meeting in order to make the agenda. An application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability may normally be added to the agenda up to the day of the meeting. In some cases, a Certificate of Non-Applicability may be issued by the Clerk, without review by the full Commission, after receiving signatures of approval from an officer and a member of the Commission. There is no fee for any applications. D. All applications for Certificates of Appropriateness or Hardship require a public hearing. Notice of the hearing must be posted with the City Clerk 14 days before the hearing and abutters must be notified in writing. Commission staff will handle these procedures. A public hearing is not required for a Certificate of Non-Applicability. E. Applications must be submitted by the owner of the property. In case of a tenant, a waiver of the owner's appearance may be granted at the discretion of the Commission if it is requested by the owner. F. An application will not be considered complete unless all work items are thoroughly described on scaled drawings and include specifications regarding dimensions,materials,and any other information needed for the Commission to visualize the changes in order to make a determination. Applications for paint colors should include a paint chip or chart. Applications for changes other than paint colors must be accompanied by scale drawings that adequately illustrate all proposed changes. The following items should be included in your drawings as applicable: 1. Site plan showing location of improvements; 2. Elevation drawings of the specific improvements: 3. Details/profiles(i.e. moldings, fence caps, cornices, vents, etc.); 4. Materials(i.e. wood, brick, etc.); 5. Dimensions (i.e. size of trim); and 6. Transformers, heat pump and condenser locations, electrical entries and meters, lamp posts, stove pipes. G. At their convenience, a representative of the Commission will take pictures of the property from the public way for presentation at the meeting. It is not necessary that the applicant be home or be present. H. At the hearing,the Commission will discuss the application with the applicant or his representative,hear the abutters and take a vote. Owners having professional consultants such as architects or contractors are urged to have them be present at the hearing. If the application is approved,a Certificate will be issued,mailed to the applicant and copies will be sent to the City Clerk and Building Inspector. Please note that the application can be continued until the next meeting if the Commission deems necessary(i.e. for reasons of incomplete drawings, to perform a site visit, etc.). In any case, the Commission must make a determination within 60 days from the date the application is received,unless the applicant waives that requirement in writing. - 1. A property owner or a contractor cannot receive a building permit unless a Certificate has been issued or the applicant has a letter from the Commission stating that the change involved is not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. Please be sure to obtain appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings prior to commencing work. J. The City of Salem reserves the right to inspect the project to determine compliance with the conditions set forth in the Certificate issued. 5 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK SECRETARY OF INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service Revised 1990 The .Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing standards Jor all national preservation programs under Departmental authority and far advising Federal agencies on the preservation of historic properties listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The Standards for Rehabilitation, a section of the Secretarv's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects, address the most prevalent preservation treatment today: rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is definedas the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural and cultural uses. The Standards that follow were originally published in 1977 and revised in 1990. They pertain to historic buildings of all materials, construction types, sizes, and occupancy and encompass the exterior and the interior of historic buildings. The Standards also encompass related landscape features and the building's site and environment as well as attached,adjacent or related new construction. The Standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner,taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property should be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development,such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features,finishes and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterizea property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause dmage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archaeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. if such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations,or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterizethe property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with massing, size, scale and architectural features and to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Note: To be eligible for Federal tax incentives, a rehabilitation project must meet all ten Standards. 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK ADDRESSING VIOLATIONS: UNAPPROVED WORK COMPLETED RECEIVE COMPLAINT DETERMINE CATEGORY. OF VIOLATION INSIGNIFICANT- Work that would be approved as is and requiring no building permit(e.g. painting, in kind maintenance or repairs of existing conditions). MINOR- Work that consists of changes to existing conditions but would be approved or work that is an in kind replacement. Work that requires homeowner to submit application, but will likely result in approval as is. MAJOR- (i) Work that has resulted in an inappropriate change to the existing conditions and will require additional work to resolve. (ii) Work approved by the Commission but after(a)time period agreed upon or(b)one year from date of Certificate has lapsed, is in partial state of completion and therefore not as approved. (it) Work approved by the Commission but not completed as approved and requiring changes to make it as approved. EGREGIOUS - (i)A Major violation that has been outstanding for three(3)months after the Commission notified the owner of the violation and the owner has not commenced to address the violation: (ii)A Major violation that has been outstanding for six(6)months after the Commission notified the owner of the violation and the owner has not completed the actions required by the Commission: (iii) Inappropriate changes of important features, demolition, building additions or other new construction, replacement of windows,installation of skylights,installation of exterior stairs,removal of any historic features,siding replacement or any other action which the Commission deems to have a significantly detrimental effect on the architectural features of a building. STEP.' INSIGNIFICANT;: :MINOR VIOLATION MAJOR VIOLATION VIOLATION I. SEND LETTER:'' SEND LETTER. APPLY. ATTEMPT TO SEND.LETTER:TO APPLY (OR REQUIRING ALL:.. TELEPHONE'IF-WORK,STILL UNDERWAY. :COMPLETE;OUTSTANDING::WORK IF FUTURE WORK BE. - -APPLICABLE). HAVE B.I. ISSUE.'.CEASE APPLIED FOR. - & DESIST ORDER. 2- OPTION: COMMISSION MEMBER CONTACTS AFTER 30 DAYS; SEND 2ND LETTER HOMEOWNER. ( REQUIRING APPLICATION IN 15'DAYS; CO CITY'.SOLICITOR. HAVE<B.I.ISSUE '2ND C & Dir. 3: AFTER 30 DAYS;SEND'2ND LETTER TO AFTER 15 DAYS, SEND LETTER::TO APPLY WITHIN:15 DAYS CC:.CITY. SOLICITOR':REQUESTING SOLICITOR. BUILDING INSPECTOR ENFORCEMENT, CC HOMEOWNER NOTIFIED IF APPLICABLE. 9, AFTER 15 DAYS,_SEND:LETTER TO rAFTER 3::MONTHS FROM STEP .1, IF SOLICITOR REEQUESTING ENFORCEMENT, HOMEOWNER HAS NOT COMMENCED CC:HOMEOWNER TO ADDRESS THE;VIOLATION, ., .. COMMENCE PROCEDURES FOR EGREGIOUS VIOLATION. 7 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK EGREGIOUS VIOLATIONS & PROCEDURES FOR USE OF RECORDED CLERK'S CERTIFICATES Clerk's Certificate as to Violation: This Clerks Certificate is to be used when the Commission decides that its order to perform or refrain from activities affecting property in an historic district remains unheeded. This form of Clerk's Certificate is used only for egregious violations. See discussion below on previous page of what constitutes an egregious violation. STEP DESCRIPTION OF ACTION TIMING I. Commission determines that an egregious violation exists:under the definition of these procedures. .Commission votes-to (i) notify owner.of.intentto.proceed with the requirements of;these:procedures for the issuanceand:.recordationofa Clerk's Certificate: as to Violation and (ii) place discussion on upcoming:public meeting agenda'. 2. Commission(i) allows for public comment and (ii) may vote.to proceed with the *At scheduled public meeting requirements;of these procedures for the.issuance•and.recordationof a Clerk's Certificate as to.Violation. 3. Commission notifies owner:of continuing violation and intentionto record Clerk's Within 10 days of Step 2 meeting, Certificate asto::Violation:by a date thirty days>late. -- - 4. Clerk of Commission(i) completes and records:.Clerk's Certificate as to Violation:and (ii) After 30 days of Step 3. -mails a copy ofsame to owner. 5. .Commission:votesthat:violation has ceased. - When outstanding work or work in. violationis addressed.to the satisfaction of the Commission. 6: . Clerk of the Commission(i) collects recording fees for Clerk's Certificate as to Violation •-After Step:5.. and.Coinpletion of Work($20.00) from owner and (ii) records::Clerk's Certificate as to Completion of Work. Clerk's Certificate as to Outstanding Work: This Clerk's Certificate is to be used when(i)the Commission enters into an arrangement with an owner of property in an Historic District under which the Commission agrees to allow a continuing violation for a specified period or (ii) when the Commission has been requested to allow work to be performed under an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Certificate of Hardship and,as a condition of allowing such work to proceed.the Commission has required that the work be done within a specified period. The use of this form of Clerk's Certificate is not to be restricted to egregious violations, but may be used as the Commission deems appropriate. STEP" DESCRIPTION OF ACTION - 'TIMING. I.. Ownerhas come.before::the Commission on a.violation;:egregious or notegregious,or in connection with an application fora Certificate.of Hardship:.or:Certificate of Appropriateness. Commission votes to:(i) agree to (a) allow continuing;violation for a j]specified.period of:time(b)or,as.a condition:.of granting the requested.Certificate.of Hardship.or.Certificate;of Appropriateness, to grant the application provided the�.work be completed withima-specified.period of time;::and(ii) proceed with.the requirements;:of thes procedures=for the:issuance-and.recordation of:a Clerk's Certificate as.to Outstanding Work 2. Clerk of Commission(i) completes and records:Clerk's Certificate as to Outstanding Work, After Step Fmeeting. :(ii) and gives a copy,of.same to owner. 3. Commissionvotes that required.work is complete. When outstanding work of work in violation is addressed to the satisfaction:of the:Comm 4. :Clerk of:Commission(i) collects:.recording fees for Clerk's:Certificateas to Outstanding Atter Step 3. Work and Completion;of Work,($20.00)from owner and (ii)records.Clerk's Certificate as to Completion of Work: Clerk's Certificate as to Completion of Work: This Clerk's Certificate is to be recorded with the land records to reflect that a violation under a Clerk's Certificate as to Violation has ceased or that outstanding work so described in a Clerk's Certificate as to Outstanding Work has been completed. This form of Clerk's Certificate clears the title of the property. 8 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK ARCHITECTURAL TRIM AND SIDING Rev. 2/l/95 Salem Historical Commission Guidelines I. Trim work is an essential part of a building's architectural character. Features such as comices. brackets, window moldings, doorway pediments. comer quoins, and all other decorative elements should be retained. 2. Original siding material should be retained whenever possible. 3. Deteriorated material should be repaired or replaced,where necessary,with new material that duplicates the original as closely as possible. 4. Appropriate,siding materials in Salem's historic districts are brick, clapboards,and flush or rusticated boarding. Pressed board siding is not recommended. 5. Wood shingles are only appropriate for exterior cladding if they were used as an original siding material such as on some Queen Anne buildings. Shaped shingles and shingle patterns of that period should be duplicated where repair and replacement are necessary. 6. Aluminum or synthetic sidings (such as vinyl and asphalt) or materials that were unavailable when a building was constructed are not appropriate for properties in Salem's historic districts and their installation will not be approved. Removal of such sidings is encouraged. 7. If a house is to be reclapboarded,the clapboards should line up to match the window heads and sills. Clapboards should be applied smooth side exposed. 8. The Commission recommends clear cedar or redwood. White pine is generally not recommended unless quarter-sawn. Salem Architectural Traditions Clapboards have been used on Salem's buildings since its earliest settlement by Englishmen and have always been the most popular siding material. As early as the mid-18th century, rusticated boarding could also be found on the front of local houses. Brick was first used as a siding material on some of Salem's finest houses but was not really popular until the Federal period (see section on Masonry). Clapboards on 17th century houses generally varied from 3 1/4" to 4" to the weather. Cedar was commonly used but oak clapboards can also be found. Length was controlled largely by the spacing of the studs. Toward the end of the first period (1625-1725) and into the 18th century, it was not uncommon to find that the clapboards revealed a greater exposure to the weather at the top of the house than at the bottom. This was probably done because the lower portions of the house were more vulnerable to the elements. Another weather tightening measure was the use of skirt boards over a foot tall covering the building's sill. An example of this was found during the restoration of the Hooper-Hathaway house (54 Turner St., c. 1682,etc.,,see photo). Sometimes the frame of the house was covered with wide horizontal pine boards. The earliest known example of such underboarding can be found at the Gedney house(21 High Street, c. 1665) over which clapboards are laid. First period houses, sparseiv ornamented, were not without some decorative ornamentation. For instance, doorways were sometimes chamfered,that is. the posts forming the door frame were cut away at about a 45 degree angle. In the second half of the century it was common to find an overhang created by the projection of the second story over the first. These overhangs were often decorated with pendant drops carved from second story posts. As the Georgian period(c. 1720- c. 1780)progressed,omament became richer and was dominated by bold classical details. In the early Georgian houses, comer boards and coved or boxed cornices begin to appear. Often the doorway was the most ornamental feature whether pedimented and pilastered or crowned by a full entablature. Beaded clapboards(clapboards with rounded edges) may also be found during this period. 9 SALEM HISTORIC4L COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK Later in the century, modillioned cornices. corner quoins, and molded window caps and sills were added as decorative features. In addition to these elements,flush boarding scored to imitate stone was employed on some of the finer houses such as that of Benjamin Pickman once located at the present site of the Peabody Museum's Japanese garden or Bowman's Bakery building at 266 Essex Street(1761). One of the most elaborate late Georgian houses in Salem is the Peirce-Nichols house (c. 1782, 180 1) with its monumental fluted Doric comer pilasters,capped window openings, pedimented portico and turned balusters. While Federal houses preserve the symmetn,of Georgian buildings with central hall plans, five-bay facade arrangements,and the central doorway as the main visual focal point, detail became lighter under the influence of English architectand designer Robert Adam. Ornament was more delicate and attenuated. "often geometric in nature, with free use of curved moldings, surfaces,and arches."' Gone are the bold corner quoins. Sometimes the detail is very spare,with most of the attention paid to doorway details such as elliptical fanlights or semi-circular porticos. Other Federal houses are more elaborate,such as the Cook-Oliver house (142 Federal Street, 1802-03, 1808)with its modillioned cornice,molded window frames,columned and dentiled portico, and carved wooden swaes, bellflowers, and rosettes applied to the surfaces around the doorway, the beltcourse, and ffie panels above the second story windows (see photo). The Greek Revival period(1825-1850) brought a change in orientation from the three-storied,four-square hipped roof houses of the Federal era to 2 1/2 story houses set gable end to the street in imitation of Greek temples. Trim was designed to contribute to the temple effect with massive pilasters used to support triangular pediments formed by the eaves of the gable roofs. These pediments usually surmounted full cornices. While clapboards continued in use, flush boarding scored to imitate stone became increasingly popular. Flush boarding was also used on Italian Revival houses. With the introduction of the jigsaw, architectural trim could be produced in mass quantities and houses built during the Victorian period were the beneficiaries. Architects and builders employed heavy wood brackets under the eaves and above doors and windows to support flat hoods. Segmentally arched window hoods were another popular decorative feature. Mansard roofed houses, generally built in Salem between 1860 and 1880, also displayed brackets(often paired) and sometimes flush or rusticated boarding. Although the Queen Anne style was not common in Salem, the City does have a few examples. These houses display irregular plans, varied gables, and bays, diverse window shapes and sizes,and prominent paneled chimneys. Comer towers are also a popular element. A notable part of the Queen Anne scheme of ornament is the highly textured wall surface featuring a combination of clapboards and various decorative wood shingles. This was the only style in Salem for which wooden shingles were used as an exterior cladding material. With the Colonial Revival,Salem's architects and builders renewed their interest in details such as modillions,narrow corner boards, balustrades,pilastered or columned doorways,and Palladian windows. Clapboards or brick were the common siding materials for these homes. Clapboards are usually made of cedar. A survey of some local lumber yards showed cedar is available in 6", 8", and 10" widths. Clear red cedar means no knots and the grain running vertically. While clapboards are easy to replace if necessary,finding matching trim is another matter. The local lumber yard should be your first source. They may have stock moldings that are close to your original trim or they may be able to do custom millwork to your specifications. If not, the next option is local firms which specialize in millwork. Siding: Wood v. Aluminum or Vinyl While clapboards and trim establish the historic character of a house, aluminum and vinyl siding destroy its architectural integrity by encasing it in an artificial skin. Often important ornamental details are removed because it is easier to install siding on flat surfaces,than to work around brackets,quoins, window casings,and door trim. Thus siding reduces a house's three dimensional appearance as it obscures original textures, materials and colors. The number of nail holes required for installation will damage the clapboards; little care is given to existing surfaces since they will be covered up anyway. An insensitive choice of materials can exaggerate the problem. For instance,siding with an 8" exposure is inappropriate for a house that formerly had 4" clapboards. Also, the attempt to imitate wood by choosing siding with artificial graining makes the contrast between genuine and substitute materials even more obvious. Synthetic sidings cannot hope to capture the 10 SALEM HISTORICAL COALVISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK" richness and varietv of real wood. Siding is usually installed for one of two reasons: to mask existing problems or to reduce the maintenance cost of painting. While siding may cover a problem. it will not rectify it and may even accelerate existing causes of damage. For instance. paint failure and clapboard damage are often caused by faulty gutters and downspouts. If this drainage system is not repaired before installation, runoff water may get trapped behind the siding, causing even more damage. Siding may create its own moisture problems. Wood clapboards breath by allowing moisture created by differences in temperature between the inside and outside of the house to migrate to the exterior before condensation occurs in the walls. Unless an interior vapor barrier is installed,the impenetrable layer created by aluminum or vinyl siding will trap excess water vapor which condenses and dama2eswood. Exterior vents have not proved effective in reducing the moisture content in walls and they can easily be blocked by dust or debris and insects. It is a myth that the installation of synthetic sidings will result in energy savings. A study called"Insulating the Old House." by the Greater Portland Landmarks.Inc.. lists heat loss figures for a two-story house of 900 s.f. per floor with a full basement and 380 s.f. of old, loose windows. If the house has no insulation or storm windows, only 19% of its heat is lost through the walls, the large majority beim t lost through the roof, windows, and basement. Storm windows and attic insulation are much more cost effective from an energy savings perspective than siding which is too thin to have much insulation value. Although the backing on some sidings is marketed as insulation, its original purpose was as a reinforcement to prevent denting. In fact, the Federal Trade Commission filed suit against one manufacturer of aluminum siding for false advertising of energy conservation claims. Another study in Providence, RI determined that for a two story house, 25 s.f., the payback period of 23 storm windows, 2 storm doors and 6" of attic insulation was 4.4 years while the payback for aluminum siding with an R-factor of 2.5 was 29.96 vears.' As one preservation publication explains: ...the application of aluminum and vinyl siding is frequently considered as an alternative to the maintenanceof the original historical material. The implication is that the new material is an economic and long-lasting alternative and that somehow the historic material is fragile,short-lived or problematic. In reality, historic building materials such as wood, brick,and stone usually are not delicate or short-lived. Their existence, frequently in sound condition, after many decades during which they probably suffered periods of neglect,is proof that they are the original economic and long-tasting alternatives. All materials,including the new sidings..., can fall into disrepair if abused or neglected; however the maintenance,repair and retention of'original materials" are always the most architecturally appropriate and usually the most economically sound measures for preserving the unique qualities of historic buildings.' The Salem Historical Commission prohibits use of vinyl or aluminum siding. 11 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK DOORS, DOORWAYS, PORTICOS Rev. 3/15/95 Salem Historical Commission Guidelines 1. Historically appropriate door openings includine doors,glass,pediments,hoods, moldings, steps,and all hardware should be retained. 2. The enlargement or reduction of historical or original door openings to fit new stock door sizes is not permitted. 3. The stylistic period or periods a building represents should be respected. Original doors and door hardware should not be discarded when they can be repaired and reused in place. If replacement doors are necessary,the replacements should duplicate the material, design, and hardware of the older or original doors. 4. Residential doors should be made of wood. Pine and fir are most commonly used for exterior doors. Metal doors on houses are not acceptable. 5. The arrangement of door panels is a significant architectural feature and varied from period to period. Replacement doors should have the appropriate panel arrangement for the date of the house's construction. 6. Generally,it is not appropriate to introduce a new door opening into the principal or front elevation. The appropriateness of new side or rear doors depends on their design. (See 47). 7. The elaborateness of the entrance is related to the design of the house. Simple houses tend to have relatively plain doorways while more ornate houses have more highly decorated doorways. Therefore,when a replacement doorway is necessary on the principal facade or new doorway is being added on a side or rear facade, it should harmonize with the style of the house as far as the type and extent of detail. Large sheets of glass are not generally in keeping with the character of a historic house. 8. Doorways above ground floor level which provide secondary egress must be individually evaluated. In general,approval will result only when visibility from the street is minimal. The application of exterior staircases to buildings is generally not acceptable. 9. Porticos,porches, steps, railings that are appropriate to the building and its development should be retained. Porticos or additions reflecting later architectural styles are often important to the building's historical integrity. 10. Deteriorated porticos, porches, steps, and railings should be repaired,where necessary,with materials that duplicate the original as closely as possible. 11. Front steps should be made of granite or wood. Brick, flagstone, or concrete steps were not used historically in Salem and are not appropriate. Salem's Architectural Traditions Very few original 17th century doors have survived from the Massachusetts Bay area but those remaining show that early doors were constructed of outer vertical boards an inch or more in thickness which were battened on the reverse with shorter lengths laid horizontally. As architectural historian Abbott Lowell Cummings describes,these layers were fastened together with nails, whose heads formed an exterior diamond pattern. This pattern could be subtly reinforced by lines scored in the surface of the wood, connecting the individual nailheads. The doors,hung with long strap hinges,opened inward. A rabbet was carved into the posts or other frame members to receive the door.' As Salem entered the Georgian period(c. 1720-1780), framed and paneled doors replaced the 17th century battened doors. Early Georgian door trim consisted of flat casings which evolved into simple architraves. Later developments included the use of flat caps, followed by projecting heads, complete entablatures, and finally pediments. 12 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK Entry halls were often lit by a series of top lights forming a transom over the door. After the Revolution. side lights were added to provide greater illumination to the larger halls and more elaborate stairways that were built. The number of panels on Georgian doors vary. Early doors often had between seven and ten panels arranged in various combinations (see photos), but toward the end of the 18th century the six-panel door, with two nearly square upper panels and four identical rectangular panels below, became the most common. Sometimes the two upper panels were replaced with panes of bull's-eye glass. More elaborate features were introduced after the Revolution, for instance,the portico, either open or closed. Semi-circular fanlights were another post-Revolutionary innovation. In his book The Country Builder's Assistant(1798), Asher Benjamin shows doorways in the Doric, Ionic and Corinthian orders with broken pediments,semi-circularfanlights,and six-panel doors similar to those built in Salem. As the Federal Period(c. 1790-c.1830)progressed.the elliptical fanlight supersededthe semi- circular in popularity and can be found on many of Salem's early 19th century houses. The elaborateness of the doorway varied with the lavishness of the house. Some of the Federal mansions also feature semi-circular porticos. The elliptical fanlight disappeared with the advent of the Greek Revival house in the 1830's and 1840's. While Georgian and Federal doorways stood in the middle of the house, Greek Revival dwellings were often built gable-end to the street with side-hall entries,eitherrecessed or flush with the front facade. Sidelights and transoms were popular and doorways were often decorated with full entablatures and Doric pilasters. With respect to the doors, the six-panel door persisted side by side with new arrangements: the four panel door (two long rectangular panels over two short rectangular panels), the two-panel door (two long rectangular panels running the length of the door), or multi-paneled doors. During the Victorian period, paired doors (that is two doors sharing the same entryway) became popular. Common panel arrangements were either a top rectangular panel, a middle thin panel, and a bottom square panel or else a top rectangular panel and a bottom square one. Often the panels on Victorian doors were elaborately carved. Many were varnished to enhance the grain of the wood rather than painted. Colonial Revival doorways mixed pre- and post-Revolutionary elements with contemporary motifs. Elaborate porticos reappear along with sidelights and elliptical fanlights but the scale of the elements and their relationships to each other are often different than those of the periods from which they were derived. The doors themselves vary from copies of earlier six-panel styles to modern innovations where the door is divided by a large rectangular or square pane of glass at the top, a small rectangular panel at the middle, and two rectangular or square panels at the bottom. For most of Salem's older homes, doorways above grade level were usually reached by granite steps. Occasionally wooden steps were constructed. Storm Doors Although the Historical Commission does not have jurisdiction over storm doors, we make the following suggestions. Consider purchasing storm doors of wood. Wood is a more sympathetic material to historic houses. Select a storm door that is appropriate for your entrance. Storm doors are available that consist almost completely of glass which would block very little of the historic door. Doors marketed as "Colonial"with a crossbuck on the bottom half and a scalloped frame around the upper window are not appropriate to historic houses. 13 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK FENCES Rev. 4/5/95 Salem Historical Commission Guidelines I. Fences are significant architectural features. They were sometimes architect designed, as those of Samuel McIntire. Therefore,architecturally important fences should be repaired or replaced.%'here necessary.with new materials that duplicate the old as closely as possible. Other fences may be architecturally unimportant. the result of fence replacement in more recent years. In these cases, property owners would be encouraged to make the design more appropriate rather than duplicate the existing fence. 2. Fences along the street facades of historic houses were meant to serve a decorative purpose. Such fences should not block a house's view,but complement it;they should be in scale to the property. Narrow pickets(approximately 2 1/2" in width) are preferred to wide pickets. Back and side yard fences which serve a screening purpose may be higher. 3. The design of a fence should be sensitive to that of the house. Since Federal architecture stressed delicate proportions,the fence in front of such a house should also be delicate in scale,whereas the fence in front of a more massive Victorian house could be heavier. Also,elaborate fences are suitable for elaborate houses;simple houses should have simple fences. 4. If wood is to be used,picket,capped picket.or spindle fences are recommended for anywhere around the yard. Capped flat board fences are most appropriate for side and back yards. The flat board fence with a lattice top is an excellent privacy option. 5. The Commission encourages the retention of suitable cast and wrought iron fences. Such fences should be repaired and painted as necessary. If sections are missing and it is financially feasible, replacement sections should be obtained. Otherwise it is preferable to consolidate the existing sections of the fence than to remove the fence altogether. 6. Historically,fences were located along the sidewalk and the continuity of such fences is an important asset to the street. The Commission generally discourages fence relocation to accommodate off-street parking. Gates may be required as an alternative to relocation. 7. Chain link, stockade, and wire-type fences are not appropriate in historic districts. Low brick walls and brick planters are also not acceptable. Salem's Architectural Traditions The most common types of wooden fences found in Salem along the street are spindle, capped picket, and capped flat board fences. Nineteenth century photographs and prints also show a preponderance of these types. Flat board fences were also used at the rear of lots along with lattice-work fences and simple post and rail fences. Salem's spindle fences are composed of vertical spindles which pierce horizontal rails that are supported by stout square posts. Capped picket fences are constructed of equally spaced flat-topped pickets which are crowned by a molded fence cap,while flat- board fences are made of capped I"thick boards placed directly against each other. Both capped picket and capped flat-board fences are supported from behind by rails that are secured to posts rooted in the ground. It is difficult to be specific about which fences were used in each period since very often the construction of existing fences is not documented or surviving drawings and bills refer to fences which no longer stand. We know that fences were used from the earliest settlement of the colonies,for instance histories of Cambridge refer to the"Pallysadoe," a stockade composed of stakes, willows,and a trench erected to fortify the town. Through the Colonial Period fences evolved from a means of protection and a way of penning livestock into a decorative architectural feature. Pattern book and carpenter's handbooks document popular styles. Asher Benjamin shows two fences in his Country Builder's Assistant(1798)both with slender angular pickets. One is a capped picket which slopes upward at the ends of each section to meet a square post topped by a ball. The other fence has pickets of alternating height and posts featuring banded balls. Fences of similar designs can be found in Salem. 14 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK Salem's most well-known fences are associated with the work of Samuel McIntire. One of McIntire's early fences,possibly built for Elias Hasket Derby, is similar to a Benjamin design although the posts are much heavier. Since Benjamin's design is slightly later, it may reflect the trend toward more delicate proportions during the Federal period. According to Fiske Kimball,McIntire was influenced by the fence Charles Bulfinch designed for the Derby mansion in 1795 (never built) which shows urns on the posts and a segmental curve to the gate. The fence at the Cook-Oliver House, 142 Federal Street (now altered), is of a similar design although the existing gate is different from the one shown in McIntire's drawing (see illustrations). Although blacksmiths were creating wrought iron fences during the late 18th century,such metal fences apparently were not popular in Salem since even the designs of McIntire and Bulfinch for the finest late Georgian and Federal houses specified wooden fences. By the Victorian period, cast iron fences had been introduced and were popular enough that in 1850 a cast iron fence was chosen to enclose the Salem Common. Many of the Colbnial Revival fences are copies of Salem's earlier gems. For instance,the fence at the Ropes Mansion is a conjectured copy of a McIntire Federal type erected in 1894 from plans by Stone,Carpenter,& Wilson of Providence,Rhode Island. In general, wooden fences were more in keeping with the renewed interest in the colonial than cast iron. Fence Purposes and Designs The purpose of a fence should be considered before making choices as to materials and designs. Fences along the street often serve decorative functions while those at the back of the property are generally installed to maintain privacy. Privacy fences can be merely functional (the flat board fence)or decorative(the flat board fence with a lattice top). Since fences have an architectural impact on a property, they should be thought of as more than just screens. Wooden Fences Although wooden fences can be bought commercially,most of the products available locally are too heavy and rustic looking to suit the character of Salem's historic districts. Fences are a good do-it-yourself project or they can be easily managed by a carpenter. A lumber yard could cut the pickets or boards to order and mill a fence cap to your specifications. Aluminum Pickets With a spindle fence, some property owners have substituted aluminum piping for wooden spindles. This was done at the Ropes Mansion. Once painted, the round aluminum spindles look no different from wooden ones. For more information, contact the Curator of Historic Properties at the Peabody and Essex Museum. Cast and Wrought Iron Fences Cast and wrought iron are often confused with each other. Not only are these two materials handled differently,but they also differ metallurgically. The most basic distinction between the two metals is that cast iron forms are made by pouring molten iron into a mold while wrought iron is heated and hammered into shape. Cast iron contains silicon and 2-4%carbon; it is a more brittle material than wrought iron which only has a 0.1-0.3%carbon content and is relatively elastic. Contemporary wrought iron is actually made from steel. Nineteenth century fences were sometimes made from combinations of wrought and cast iron. For instance,a wrought 'iron fence might have cast decorative elements. Since the metals had different properties,they sometimes suited different forms. The wrought iron process tended to eliminate impurities so that wrought iron could be thinner than cast iron. Cast iron, on the other hand,could be molded into very large objects while wrought iron was limited by the strength of the person working it. In the 19th century when many foundries were operating,it was cheaperto obtain cast iron because it was manufactured using a mass production process whereas wrought iron was an individual craft. Because it was cheaper,cast iron was more readily available to the average homeowner;such fencing reached its height of popularity in the Victorian period. Today, wrought iron is frequently machine produced while casting has become a custom product due to extremely short production runs. 15 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK Iron fences were often composed of vertical pickets that were topped by cast iron ornaments. Crosses and spearheads were particularly popular cresting designs. In addition to pickets, rustic motifs with vines and flowers or scroll motifs were also common. For those homeowners with iron fences, the Commission has some articles on file which describe the repair process and literature form companies that will cast missing pieces or supply historically appropriate metal fences. Some companies stock pieces that may be suitable for replacements. 16 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS Rev. 4/19/95 Salem Historical Commission Guidelines 1. Wooden or copper gutters and downspouts can be an important architectural feature. Therefore, gutters should be properly maintained and only replaced in cases of irreparable deterioration. 2. In older houses and buildings,they were often designed as part of the eave moldings. In these cases, the gutters become a particularly important architectural feature and should be treated as such. This treatment should follow the guidelines set for other important features,that is;repair if at all possible:if repair is impossible,replacement should be with like materials and design. 3. In the case of hung/afterthought gutters,more discretion may be shown in what is acceptable. The architectural value of the gutters must still play a major role in the decision making process, but the cost differential between and the enviromnent's effect on different materials may also be taken into account. 4. New gutters and downspouts should be placed in an architecturally sensitive manner and painted the color of the surface on which they are installed; i.e, if a downspout runs down a white corner board, it should be painted white. Painting of copper gutters and downspouts will be evaluated on a case by case basis. 5. Removing trim pieces from the roof line in order to more easily attach gutters is generally not permissible. General Information Importance of Gutter Maintenance Gutters today are generally made of either copper,wood,vinyl or aluminum. Wooden gutters may have) liners. Liner materials include: copper,tin,rubber,galvanized or teme metal. Since water is one of the major causes of building deterioration,gutters and downspouts are a key element in keeping water off your house. Therefore,gutters should be inspected regularly and kept free of debris. Clogged gutters can cause water to overflow or ice to build up. Also any acidic elements in the debris can eat away at the metal of the gutter itself or its liner. Gutterjoints should be inspected and either soldered or patched if leaks are found. This work may have to be done by a metalsmith. Wooden gutters must be painted every four or five years and any gutter liners made of tin or galvanized or terve metal must also be kept painted. Placement of Gutters and Downspouts Gutters and downspouts should be placed with great sensitivity to the architectural appearance of the house. In some cases,where due to the original style of the building or the richness of cornice or comer detail,gutters or downspouts would not be appropriate. Some wooden gutters are built into the roof and are, therefore, invisible from the street, while others are part of the cornice decoration. Hung gutters should be as unobtrusive as possible. Downspouts should not obstruct the view of quoins. Sensitive painting can do much to hide gutters and downspouts. For instance,gutters lying over trim should be painted trim color while downspouts running down the body of the house should be painted body color. Care should be taken that the new hung gutters detract as little as possible from the house's appearance. Choosine Amone Gutter Materials Choosing a gutter material is like making a lot of other purchases-you get what you pay for. Cheaper gutters may cost less but they will also deteriorate faster. Since installation is the largest percentage of the cost, it may be more worthwhile to invest in copper rather than settle for aluminum. 17 SALEM HISTORICAL COM.tIISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK Copper v. Aluminum Whether copper or aluminum, good installation is the key to getting the most out of the material. Since copper requires more attention to detail, it takes more time and care to install. There are advantages to copper that may make it worth the money. Copper handles better than aluminum and can be repaired more easily. The life of an aluminum gutter depends on its coating. Once that coating is broken, the gutter will start to corrode. Copper is less sensitive to salt air than aluminum. Also, copper is a better conductor of heat from the sun. Aluminum gutters are often made of a light material and do not absorb heat as well. Copper gutters are encouraged by the Salem Historical Commission because they are more durable and retain their shape. Regular grade aluminum gutters do not hold up well in Winter. Ice and snow tend to cause warpage and sagging. Aluminum gutters may be allowed in some circumstances,conditional that they are of a heavy grade and do not destroy the integrity of the eaves. Wooden °utters Wooden gutters are generally an aesthetic choice. These gutters are either hung or built into the structure of the roof or cornice (see drawings). Because of their close proximity to the comice, any leaks in wooden gutters will cause water to drip into the cornice itself and possibly into the main structure of the house. Thus gutters built into box cornices require careful maintenance to make sure that all seams are watertight and that metal liners are painted as necessary. Properly maintained wooden gutters (linseed oil applied twice a year)can last as long as 50 years. Because built-in wooden gutter can be an integral part of a house's architectural design, they should be maintained if possible. Sources of Wooden Gutters The first source for obtaining wooden gutters should be your local lumber yard. The Old House Journal Catalog available at the Commission office, also has listings of suppliers. Most wooden gutters are made of Douglas fir; western red cedar is a preferable material if it can be obtained. Prices The price for installing gutters depends on the job. Since seamless aluminum gutters are cut to size,houses with more angles (for instance those with bay windows),require more cuts and,therefore,the cost will be greater. 18 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION GUIDELINES NOTEBOOK HOUSE NUMBERS Rev. 5/3/95 It is important that your house be clearly numbered should police or fire personnel need to find it. If your house is not clearly numbered, it could also result in fines. Here are the guidelines for house numbers in historic districts: Salem Historical Commission Guidelines I. The minimum height of the numbers shall be 3'h" high and no more than 6" high and they must be of wood or metal(no plastic). 2. While meetine the visibility requirements from the street, house numbers shall be appropriate in size, style and location to the house. 3. The numbers shall be of a contrasting color from the surface it is affixed to but shall be limited to black or a color already used on the house(eg.shutter color). The homeowner may also use unpainted metal numbers. 4. Stick on house numbers are not permissible. 19 T LJ�Ii i.rY� _......lU ii%at /ir ria ✓:v.1:t.i+idClj J^Ay lli APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Pursuant to the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinance, application is hereby made for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Sign ❑ Other as described below. District: Building Construction Date, if known: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Work Proposed: (Please attach required scale drawings, paint chips andlor samples of work and material proposed, where applicable.) Signature of Owner: Tel. #: Mailine address: City: State: Zip: PROCEDURES FOR FILING APPLICATIONS 1. Be prepared to apply for approvals well in advance of commencing any exterior work. Before making any changes to the exterior of a property in an historic district.the owner should call or visit the Commission representative at the Salem Planning Department to discuss proposed alterations and to determine the category of the application t Appropriateness. Nan-Applicability or Hardship). 3. The Commission normally meets on the first and third Wednesdays of each month and notices are posted at City Hall. The meetings are held at One Salem Green. 2nd floor, and begin at 7:30 p.m. All meetings are open to the public and any person is entitled to appear and be heard on any matter before the Commission before it reaches a decision. C. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Hardship must be received by 3:00 p.m. on the Monday 16 days before the meeting in order to make the agenda. An application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability may normally be added to the agenda up to the day of the meeting. In some cases,a Certificate of Non-Applicability maybe issued by the Clerk,without review by the full Commission.after receiving signatures of approval from an officer and a member of the Commission. There is no fee for any applications. D. All applications for Certificates of Appropriateness or Hardship require a public hearing. Notice of the hearing must be posted with the City Clerk 14 days before the hearing and abutters must be notified in writing. Commission staff will handle these procedures. A public hearing is not required for a Certificate of Non-Applicability. E. Applications must be submitted by the owner of the property. In case of a tenant, a waiver of the owner's appearance may be granted at the discretion of the Commission if it is requested by the owner. F. An application will not be considered complete unless all work items are thoroughly described on scaled drawings and include specifications regarding dimensions. materials. and any other information needed for the Commission to visualize the changes in order to make a determination. Applications for paint colors should include a paint chip or chart. Applications for changes other than paint colors must be accompanied by scale drawings that adequately illustrate all proposed changes. The following items should be included in your drawings as applicable: 1. Site plan showing location of improvements; 2. Elevation drawings of the specific improvements: 3. Detailsiprofiles(i.e. moldings, fence caps, comites, vents.etc.); 4. Materials(i.e. wood, brick, etc.); 5. Dimensions(i.e. size of trim); and 6. Transformers, heat pump and condenser locations, electrical entries and meters, lamp posts, stove pipes. G. At their convenience, a representative of the Commission will take pictures of the property from the public way for presentation at the meeting. It is not necessary that the applicant be home or be present. H. At the hearing, the Commission will discuss the application with the applicant or his representative, hear the abutters and take a vote. Owners having professional consultants such as architects or contractors are urged to have them be present at the hearing. If the application is approved.a Certificate will be issued,mailed to the applicant and copies will be sent to the City Clerk and Building Inspector. Please note that the application can be continued until the next meeting if the Commission deems necessary (i.e. for reasons of incomplete drawings, to perform a site visit, etc.). In any case, the Commission must make a determination within 60 days from the date the application is received, unless the applicant waives that requirement in writing. 1. A property owner or a contractor cannot receive a building permit unless a Certificate has been issued or the applicant has a letter from the Commission stating that the change involved is not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. Please be sure to obtain appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings prior to commencing work. I. The City of Salem reserves the right to inspect the project to determine compliance with the conditions set forth in the Certificate issued. Violations A person commencing or completing work to the exterior of a building in an historic district without the necessary approval of the Commission is subject to fines of up to 5500 per day from the date of violation. The Commission is not responsible for an owner's neglect to inquire about necessary City permits and approvals. All records are public and we will confidentially assist you if you are concerned that someone in your neighborhood is in violation. Assistance The Commission's guidelines are available for viewing at the Salem Planning Department and the Salem Public Library. The guidelines provide examples of what is historically appropriate(or inappropriate)for Salem's neighborhoods including trim,siding,doors,fences,gutters,masonry,paint colors,parking solutions.porches.roofing,satellite dishes,secondary egress,skylights,utilities,windows,etc. These guidelines help you understand what changes are likely or unlikely to be approved. The Commission supports your efforts to improve your property and can guide you on historical appropriateness. Further information.in the form of books,articles and pamphlets.City-wide architectural inventories.and photographs,are available at the Historical Commission's office at One Salem Green. For more information.contact the Clerk of the Commission.Jane Guy, at the Salem Planning Department One Salem Green, Salem. MA 01970. 508 745-9595. Ext. 311. Saile 21 -,)�-iisror1CaI ,,,:'o mission ':E SALEM GREEN.SALEM. MASSACHUSE7 S 01970 ,5081 745-9595 EXT.311 APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF HARDSHIP Pursuant to the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinance, application is hereby made for issuance of a Certificate of Hardship for: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Sign ❑ Other as described below. District: Building Construction Date, if known: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Work Proposed: (Please attach required scale drawings, paint chips and/or samples of work and material proposed, where applicable.) Signature of Owner: Tel. #: Mailing address: City: State: Zip: PROCEDURES FOR FILING APPLICATIONS \. Be prepared to apply for approvals aeii in advance of commencing any exterior work. Before making any changes to the exterior of a Property in an historic district.the owner should call or visit the Commission representative at the Salem Planning Department to discuss proposed alterations and to determine the category of the application (Appropriateness. Non-Applicability or Hardship). B. The Commission normally meets on the first and third Wednesdays of each month and notices are posted at City Hall. The meetings are held at One Salem Green.2nd floor,and begin at 7:30 p.m. All meetings are open to the public and any person is entitled to appear and be heard on any matter before the Commission before it reaches a decision. C. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Hardship must be received by 3:00 p.m. on the Monday 16 days before the meeting in order to make the agenda. An application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability may normally be added to the agenda up to the day of the meeting. In some cases,a Certificate of Non-Applicability may be issued by the Clerk,without review by the full Commission,after receiving signatures of approval from an officer and a member of the Commission. There is no fee for any applications. D. All applications for Certificates of Appropriateness or Hardship require a public hearing. Notice of the hearing must be posted with the City Clerk 14 days before the hearing and abutters must be notified in writing. Commission staff will handle these procedures. A public hearing is not required for a Certificate of Non-Applicability. E. .Applications must be submitted by the owner of the property. In case of a tenant,a waiver of the owner's appearance may be granted at the discretion of the Commission if it is requested by the owner. F. An application will not be considered complete unless all work items are thoroughly described on scaled drawings and include specifications regarding dimensions, materials, and any other information needed for the Commission to visualize the changes in order to make a determination. Applications for paint colors should include a paint chip or chart. Applications for changes other than paint colors must be accompanied by scale drawings that adequately illustrate all proposed changes. The following items should be included in your drawings as applicable: 1. Site plan showing location of improvements; 2. Elevation drawings of the specific improvements: 3. Details/profiles(i.e. moldings, fence caps, comites, vents, etc.); 4. Materials(i.e. wood, brick, etc.); 5. Dimensions(i.e. size of trim); and 6. Transformers, heat pump and condenser locations, electrical entries and meters, lamp posts, stove pipes. G. At their convenience, a representative of the Commission will take pictures of the property from the public way for presentation at the meeting. It is not necessary that the applicant be home or be present. H. At the hearing, the Commission will discuss the application with the applicant or his representative. hear the abutters and take a vote. Owners having professional consultants such as architects or contractors are urged to have them be present at the hearing. If the application is approved. a Certificate will be issued,mailed to the applicant and copies will be sent to the City Clerk and Building Inspector. Please note that the application can be continued until the next meeting if the Commission deems necessary(i.e. for reasons of incomplete drawings, to perform a site visit, etc.). In any case, the Commission must make a determination within 60 days from the date the application is received, unless the applicant waives that requirement in writing. 1. A property owner or a contractor cannot receive a building permit unless a Certificate has been issued or the applicant has a letter from the Commission stating that the change involved is not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. Please be sure to obtain appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings prior to commencing work. I. The City of Salem reserves the right to inspect the project to determine compliance with the conditions set forth in the Certificate issued. Violations A person commencing or completing work to the exterior of a building in an historic district without the necessary approval of the Commission i subiect to tines of up to $500 per day from the date of violation. The Commission is not responsible for an owner's neglect to inquire about necessary City permits and approvals. All records are public and we will confidentially assist you if you are concerned that someone in you neighborhood is in violation. Assistance The Commission's guidelines are available for viewing at the Salem Planning Department and the Salem Public Library. The guidelines provid examples of what is historically appropriate(or inappropriate)for Salem's neighborhoods including trim,siding,doors,fences,gutters,masonry,pain colors,parking solutions.porches,roofing,satellite dishes.secondary egress,skylights,utilities.windows,etc. These guidelines help you understan what changes are likely or unlikely to be approved. The Commission supports your efforts to improve your property and can guide you on histories appropriateness. Further information,in the form of books.articles and pamphlets,City-wide architectural inventories,and photographs,are availabl at the Historical Commission's office at One Salem Green. For more information, contact the Clerk of the Commission.Jane Guy, at the Sale Planning Department. One Salem Green, Salem. MA 01970. 508 745-9595, Ext. 311. 'NE SALEM GREE34. S.�LEA. MASSACHUSE' 01970 :SCS)7-'5-9595 EXT. --11 APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF NON-APPLICABILITY Pursuant to the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinance, application is hereby made for issuance of a Certificate of Non-Applicability for: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Sign ❑ Other as described below. District: Building Construction Date, if known: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Work Proposed: Signature of Owner: Tel. #: Mailing address: City: State: Zip: PROCEDURES FOR FILING APPLICATIONS A. Be prepared to apply for approvals well in advance of commencing any exterior work. Before makine any chanaes to the exterior of a property in an historic district,the owner should call or visit the Commission representative at the Salem Planning Department to discuss proposed alterations and to determine the category of the application (Appropriateness. Non-Applicability or Hardship). The Commission normally meets on the first and third Wednesdays of each month and notices are posted at City Hall. The meetings are held at One Salem Green.2nd floor.and begin at 7:30 p.m. All meetings are open to the public and any person is entitled to appear and be heard on anv matter before the Commission before it reaches a decision. C. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Hardship must be received by 3:00 p.m. on the Monday 16 days before the meeting in order to make the agenda. An application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability may normally be added to the agenda up to the day of the meeting. In some cases,a Certificate of Non-Applicability may be issued by the Clerk,without review by the full Commission,after receiving signatures of approval from an officer and a member of the Commission. There is no fee for any applications. D. All applications for Certificates of Appropriateness or Hardship require a public hearing. Notice of the hearing must be posted with the City Clerk 14 days before the hearing and abutters must be notified in writing. Commission staff will handle these procedures. A public hearing is not required for a Certificate of Non-Applicability. E. Applications must be submitted by the owner of the property. In case of a tenant, a waiver of the owners appearance may be granted at the discretion of the Commission if it is requested by the owner. F. .An application will not be considered complete unlessall work items are thoroughly described on scaled drawings and include specifications regarding dimensions, materials, and any other information needed for the Commission to visualize the changes in order to make a determination. Applications for paint colors should include a paint chip or chart. Applications for changes other than paint colors must be accompanied by scale drawings that adequately illustrate all proposed changes. The following items should be included in your drawings as applicable: 1. Site plan showing location of improvements; 2. Elevation drawings of the specific improvements: 3. Details/profiles(i.e. moldings, fence caps, cornices, vents, etc.); 4. Materials(i.e. wood, brick, etc.); 5. Dimensions(i.e. size of trim); and 6. Transformers, heat pump and condenser locations, electrical entries and meters, lamp posts, stove pipes. G. At their convenience, a representative of the Commission will take pictures of the property from the public way for presentation at the meeting. It is not necessary that the applicant be home or be present. H. At the hearing, the Commission will discuss the application with the applicant or his representative, hear the abutters and take a vote. Owners having professional consultants such as architects or contractors are urged to have them be present at the hearing. If the application is approved. a Certificate will be issued.mailed to the applicant and copies will be sent to the City Clerk and Building Inspector. Please note that the application can be continued until the next meeting if the Commission deems necessary (i.e. for reasons of incomplete drawings, to perform a site visit, etc.). In any case, the Commission must make a determination within 60 days from the date the application is received, unless the applicant waives that requirement in writing. 1. A property owner or a contractor cannot receive a building permit unless a Certificate has been issued or the applicant has a letter from the Commission stating that the change involved is not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. Please be sure to obtain appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings prior to commencing work. I. The City of Salem reserves the right to inspect the project to determine compliance with the conditions set forth in the Certificate issued. .violations person commencing or completing work to the exterior of a building in an historic district without the necessary approval of the Commission is subject to tines of up to 5500 per day from the date of violation. The Commission is not responsible for an owner's neglect to inquire about necessary City permits and approvals. All records are public and we will confidentially assist you if you are concerned that someone in your neighborhood is in violation. Assistance The Commission's guidelines are available for viewing at the Salem Planning Department and the Salem Public Library. The guidelines provide examples of what is historically appropriate(or inappropriate)for Salem's neighborhoods including trim,siding,doors.fences,gutters,masonry,paint colors,parking solutions.porches,rooting,satellite dishes,secondary egress,skylights,utilities,windows,etc. These guidelines help you understand what changes are likely or unlikely to be approved. The Commission supports your efforts to improve your property and can guide you on historical appropriateness. Further information,in the form of books.articles and pamphlets.City-wide architectural inventories.and photographs,are available at the Historical Commission's office at One Salem Green. For more information, contact the Clerk of the Commission.Jane Guy,at the Salem Planning Department, One Salem Green. Salem. MA 01970, 508 745-9595, Ext. 311. l 4tu ;A Salem Historical Commission ONE SALEM GREE`!. SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (508)7-5-9595 EXT. 311 APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF THE DEMOLITION DELAY ORDINANCE Pursuant to the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinance, application is hereby made for issuance of a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance for demolition as described below. District: Building Construction Date, if known: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Demolition Work Proposed: Signature of Owner: Tel. #: Mailing address: City: State: Zip: PROCEDURES FOR FILING APPLICATIONS A. Be prepared to apply for approvals well in advance of commencing any exterior work. Before making any changes to the exterior of a propertv in an historic district.the owner should call or visit the Commission reoresentative at the Salem Planning Department to discuss proposed alterations and to determine the category of the application I Appropriateness. Non-Applicability or Hardship). The Commission normaltv meets on the first and third Wednesdays of each month and notices are posted at City Hall. The meetings are held at One Salem Green.2nd floor.and begin at 7:30 p.m. All meetings are open to the public and any person is entitled to appear and be heard on anv matter before the Commission before it reaches a decision. C. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Hardship must be received by 3:00 p.m. on the Monday 16 days before the meeting in order to make the agenda. An application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability may normally be added to the agenda up to the day of the meeting. In some cases,a Certificate of Non-Applicability may be issued by the Clerk,without review by the full Commission,after receiving signatures of approval from an officer and a member of the Commission. There is no fee for any applications. D. All applications for Certificates of Appropriateness or Hardship require a public hearing. Notice of the hearing must be posted with the City Clerk 14 days before the hearing and abutters must be notified in writing. Commission staff will handle these procedures. A public hearing is not required for a Certificate of Non-Applicability. E. Applications must be submitted by the owner of the property. In case of a tenant, a waiver of the owner's appearance may be granted at the discretion of the Commission if it is requested by the owner. F. An application will not be considered complete unless all work items are thoroughly described on scaled drawings and include specifications regarding dimensions, materials, and any other information needed for the Commission to visualize the changes in order to make a determination. Applications for paint colors should include a paint chip or chart. Applications for changes other than paint colors must be accompanied by scale drawings that adequately illustrate all proposed changes. The following items should be included in your drawings as applicable: 1. Site plan showing location of improvements; 2. Elevation drawings of the specific improvements: 3. DetaiWprofiles(i.e. moldings, fence caps, cornices, vents, etc.); 4. Materials(i.e. woo(, brick, etc.); 5. Dimensions(i.e. size of trim); and 6. Transformers, heat pump and condenser locations, electrical entries and meters, lamp posts, stove pipes. G. At their convenience, a representative of the Commission will take pictures of the property from the public way for presentation at the meeting. It is not necessary that the applicant be home or be present. H. At the hearing, the Commission will discuss the application with the applicant or his representative, hear the abutters and take a vote. Owners having professional consultants such as architects or contractors are urged to have them be present at the hearing. If the application is approved.a Certificate will be issued,mailed to the applicant and copies will be sent to the City Clerk and Building Inspector. Please note that the application can be continued until the next meeting if the Commission deems necessary (i.e. for reasons of incompletd drawings, to perform a site visit, etc.). In any case, the Commission must make a determination within 60 days from the date th application is received, unless the applicant waives that requirement in writing. I. A property owner or a contractor cannot receive a building permit unless a Certificate has been issued or the applicant has a letter from the Commission stating that the change involved is not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. Please be sure to obtain appropriate, permits from the Inspector of Buildings prior to commencing work. J. The City of Salem reserves the right to inspect the project to determine compliance with the conditions set forth in the Certificate issued. Violations A person commencing or completing work to the exterior of a building in an historic district without the necessary approval of the Commission i subject to fines of up to $500 per day from the date of violation. The Commission is not responsible for an owner's neglect to inquire abou necessary City permits and approvals. All records are public and we will confidentially assist you if you are concerned that someone in you neighborhood is in violation. Assistance The Commission's guidelines are available for viewing at the Salem Planning Department and the Salem Public Library. The guidelines provid examples of what is historically appropriate(or inappropriate)for Salem's neighborhoods including trim,siding,doors,fences,gutters,masonry,pain colors,parking solutions,porches,roofing,satellite dishes.secondary egress,skylights,utilities,windows,etc. These guidelines help you understar what changes are likely or unlikely to be approved. The Commission supports your efforts to improve your property and can guide you on histori appropriateness. Further information,in the form of books.articles and pamphlets.City-wide architectural inventories,and photographs,are available at the Historical Commission's office at One Salem Green. For more information. contact the Clerk of the Commission.Jane Guy,at the Salerri Planning Department, One Salem Green. Salem, MA 01970, 508 745-9595, Ext. 311. I Salem 1-1fisrorieal yadllmission ONE SALEM GREEN. SALEM. MASSACHUSE i:S 01970 508)7459595 EXT. 311 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS It is hereby certified that the Salem Historical Commission has determined that the proposed ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Signage ❑ Other work as described below will be appropriate to the preservation of said Historic District, as per the requirements set forth in the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Ch. 40C) and the Salem Historic Districts Ordinance. District: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Work Proposed: Dated: SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: The homeowner has the option not to commence the work (unless it relates to resolving an outstanding violation). All work commenced must be completed within one year from this date unless otherwise indicated. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. Please be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings (or any other necessary permits or approvals) prior to commencing work. ��LOIT � JJf . e Salem -lisroncai Lommission ONE SALEM GREEN, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 5081745-9595 EXT.311 CERTIFICATE OF NON-APPLICABILITY It is hereby certified that the Salem Historical Commission has determined that the proposed: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Signage ❑ Other Work as described below does not involve an exterior architectural feature or involves a feature covered by the exemptions or limitations set forth in the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Ch. 40C) and the Salem Historic Districts Ordinance. District: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Work Proposed: Dated: SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: The homeowner has the option not to commence the work (unless it relates to resolving an outstanding violation). All work commenced must be completed within one year from this date unless otherwise indicated. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. Please be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings (or any other necessary permits or approvals) prior to commencing work. A �� ;a Salem 1cl1sr®rica L bmmission ONE SALEM GREEN. SALEM. SSACHUSET S 01970 5081745-9595 EXT. 311 CERTIFICATE OF HARDSHIP It is hereby certified that the Salem Historical Commission had determined that the proposed: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Signage ❑ Other Work as described below has been approved under a finding of Hardship, as per the requirements set forth in the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Ch. 40C) and the Salem Historic Districts Ordinance. District: Building Construction Date, if known: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Work Proposed: Reason for Issuance of Certificate of Hardship: ❑ The application affects only the building or structure on which work is to be done and not the historic district in general. ❑ The application is approved because it does not cause substantial detriment to the public welfare. ❑ The application is approved because it does not cause departure from the intent and purposes of the amended Historic District Act. Dated: SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: The homeowner has the option not to commence the work (unless it relates to resolving an outstanding violation). All work commenced must be completed within one year from this date unless otherwise indicated. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. Please be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings (or any other necessary permits or approvals) prior to commencing work. � A�Q FF Salem 2-115170ry, i Commd�� i®n ONE SALEM GREEN. SALEM, MASSACHUSET S 01970 508)7-5-9595 EXT. 311 WAIVER OF THE DEMOLITION DELAY ORDINANCE It is hereby certified that the Salem Historical Commission has waived the Demolition Delay Ordinance for the proposed demolition as described below, as per the requirements set forth in the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Ch. 40C) and the Salem Historic Districts Ordinance. District: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Demolition Work Proposed: Dated: SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: All work commenced must be completed within one year from this date unless otherwise indicated. THIS IS NOT A DEMOLITION PERMIT. Please be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings (or any other necessary permits or approvals) prior to commencing work. a zxt�a Funding of CLG Activities PART F.1 LOCAL FUNDING Local funding budget appropriation attached. PART F.2 SURVEY AND PLANNING GRANT FUNDING The City of Salem received $10,000 in MHC Survey and Planning Grant funding. PART F.3 OTHER FUNDING There were no other public or private grant funds received. FORM A CITY OF SALEM - MUNICIPAL BUDGET FOR FY 1996 PROGRAM GROUP: SUBPROGRAM GROUP: ACTIVITY: ENVIRONMENT PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORIC PRESERVE EXPENDITURE ACTUAL ANNUAL ADOPTED ADJUSTED PROPOSED APPROVED VOTED BY CLASSIFICATION EXPENDITURES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BY MAYOR COUNCIL 01 -4 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1996 FY 1996 4129-111 (100) SALARIES-FULL TIME 5.835 6.200 6.200 6r200 6. 200 6. 200 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****PERSONNEL TOTALS 5.835 6.200 6.200 6. 200 6. 200 6.200 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4129-306 ( 200) ADVERTISING 74 80 80 80 80 80 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4129-342 (200) POSTAGE 0 835 835 835 635 835 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4129-421 (400) OFFICE SUPPLIES (GEN 132 650 650 150 150 150 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4129-583 (400) PHOTOGRAPHY SUPPLIES 451 456 456 456 456 456 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4129-710 (700) IN STATE TRAVEL. MEE 62 50 50 50 50 50 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4129-730 (700) DUES AND SUB 95 100 100 100 100 100 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****EXPENSE TOTALS 814 2.171 2. 171 1 .671 1 .671 1 .671 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPT TOTALS 6.649 8. 371 8.371 7.871 7.871 7.871 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTIVITY: 1700 HISTORICAL COMMISS PAGE : FORM 8 CITY OF SALEM - MUNICIPAL BUDGET FY 1996 PERSONNEL EXPENSE SHEET PROGRAM GROUP: SUBPROGRAM GROUP: ACTIVITY: ENVIRONMENT PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORIC PRESERVE EXPENDITURE ACTUAL ADOPTED ADJUSTED PROPOSED APPROVED VOTED BY CLASSIFICATION EXPENDITURES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BY MAYOR COUNCIL FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1996 FY 1996 01 -4-4129-111 NO NO RATE TOTAL , SALARIES 4129-111 - 02362 ' GUY J A 24 MTGS CLERK 1 .200 1. 200 1 . 200 50. 00 1 . 200 1 .200 1 . 200 4129-111 - 77777 52. 2 AIDE 5.000 5.000 5.000 95.79 5.000 5.000 5.000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PERSONNEL TOTALS 61200 6x200 61200 6x200 6x200 61200 DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTIVITY: 1700 HISTORICAL COMMISS �txea� .4R R Miscellaneous PART G.1 PRESERVATION AWARDS On Monday, May 15, 1995, the Salem Historical Commission presented its 1995 Preservation Awards at the Historic Salem, Inc. Annual Meeting held at the National Park Service Visitors' Center. The recipients from local historic districts were: 38 Washington Square South - Brian Wehrung & Lisa Dressler - Excellence in Restoration; 331 Essex Street- Richard & Diane Pabich- Excellence in Restoration and Adaptive Reuse; 389 Essex Street- Steven Sass & Ellen Golub - Special Award for Paint Colors; 6 South Pine Street - Albert & Sherrie Goodhue - Excellence in Restoration; 29 Washington Square North- Bertram Home, Inc. - Outstanding Design Achievement, Utilitarian Encasement; 29-35 Warren Street - Trustees of the Estate of Stephen Phillips - Special Award for Slate Roof Replacement; 400 Essex Street - Edward Sabbagh& Claire Twomey - Excellence in Restoration; 50 Broad Street - Spires & Patricia Flomp - Excellence in Pergola Design; 180 Federal Street - Edward Crowley - Excellence in Restoration; 80 Washington Square East- Castine Realty Trust -Neighborhood Improvement, Paint Colors; Honorable Mentions: 14 Broad Street - Steven Thomas& Evelyn Blum- Excellence in Fence Design; and 188 Derby Street - Helen, Wanda & Irving Mysliwy - Achievement in Fence & Front Entrance Design. From outside local historic districts, the recipients were: 150 Washington Street- Robert A. Murphy- Outstanding Signage; and 92 Washington Square East-Bromwell Real Estate Trust-Outstanding Achievement in Garden and Porch Design.