SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
July 19, 2006
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on July 19, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Ms. Diozzi, Ms. Herbert, Mr. Desrocher, Mr. Spang and Ms. Harper and Ms. Guy.
78 Derby Street
John and Janel Showalter presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors and door replacement. The Body will be China Aster. The trim will be Linger/Wild Oats and the doors will be Delieata/India Trade.
Ms. Showalter stated that they will use India Trade and Linger.
Ms. Herbert asked if the finish will be flat or eggshell. Ms. Showalter stated that it would be flat.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the colors as presented in flat finish. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Showalter stated that their door is damaged. They propose to go from the lights of glass on top to 2 lights with bullseye glass. A catalog cut of Bullion door was provided.
Mr. Desrocher made a motion to approve the colors as presented in flat finish. Ms. Herbert seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
138 North/2 Dearborn St.
Thomas Pelletier, Cynthia Pelletier and Kellie Overberg submitted an application for exterior alterations to a carriage house including replacement of windows, changing 3 doors to windows, installation of new door and installation of a/c vents and pipes through the Carriage House Ordinance.
Ms. Herbert asked if the main house is a condominium.
Mr. Pelletier stated that they are rental, but the plan is convert the main house and the carriage house to condos.
Ms. Herbert asked if the siding on the carriage house is original.
Mr. Pelletier stated that it is the original flat board. He stated that it is a post and beam structure with no foundation. It is currently on pilings and they propose to lift the structure and dig a full basement. It will house one unit, which has already been approved by the Board of Appeal. He added that he hopes to remove the vinyl siding of the main house. He stated that they are proposing Anderson windows, for which the window sizes are standard. They would be wood, vinyl-clad with permanent grills inside and out, with a spacer. He noted that the Anderson windows have a closer mullions size to what is currently on the house than Pella Windows. They will keep the casings and just replace the sash. He asked for guidance on appropriate doors.
Ms. Harper asked if the existing windows were salvageable.
Mr. Pelletier stated that the bottom windows may be, but the top need to be casement windows in order to get legal egress.
Ms. Herbert asked if they could install skylights for egress instead of altering the original windows. Mr. Pelletier stated that they would not work for legal egress.
Ms. Herbert suggested a moveable interior stair to access the skylights to create a legal egress as has been done previously.
Mr. Spang asked if code will allow them to keep the two small windows since they will be on the property line. Mr. Pelletier stated that he did not know.
Ms. Harper suggested restoring the windows on the first floor and allowing casement on the second floor.
Mr. Pelletier stated that he would have to install storms on the first floor to make the windows air tight. He noted that the building is 30’ off the street and that you would not be able to tell the type of material. Mr. Pelletier stated that it appears the existing door opening may have had a transom.
Ms. Herbert stated that she would like a site visit and to see a sample of the proposed Anderson window.
Mr. Spang stated that the Commission has been grappling with finding an energy efficient, yet appropriate, window. He stated that he was willing to let the owners start digging the foundation. He stated that the applicant should consider window repair. He added that he commended the owners for the level of effort they are going through to preserve the building.
Helen Sides, Broad Street, stated that Boston Sash of Chelsea makes a true divided light window which can be seen at Grand Banks in Gloucester. She also suggested energy panels.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting, pending a site visit on Saturday, July 22nd at 8:00 a.m. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
14 River Street
Stephanie Trainor Madigan and Daniel Madigan presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for replacement of windows that are mostly 2 over 1 with Brosco authentic divided light 6 over 6 windows with optional historic sill nosing/connector and insect screen with flat casing and option for Low E energy panel. One first floor window may not be authentic divided light due to irregular size.
Ms. Diozzi read a letter in support from April Kabbash and Chris Harwell, 15 River Street.
Mr. Madigan stated that the two basement windows have already been replaced and that they eventually will apply to replace shingles with clapboard. They would like to use exterior e-panels and remove the storms. He added that the jalousie window would be changed to a vinyl clad, double glaze window, but he was willing to come back for approval of that change.
Ms. Sides asked if the windows will remain the same size as existing. Mr. Madigan replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Spang asked if they considered moving the jalousie window around the corner. Mr. Madigan replied that it would probably not look right.
Ms. Herbert stated that she felt that the window replacing the jalousie should at least be in line with the door.
Mr. Spang stated that the energy panel should be clear glass, not low e.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the window replacement with 6 over 6 true divided light, single glaze, wood windows with clear glass, with the thicker sills, with the option of a clear glass energy panel. The motion does not include replacement of the jalousie window. Mr. Spang seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
377 Essex Street
Maureen McCarthy presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish the existing porch and construct a new porch. Present was Ms. McCarthy’s husband, Frank Simmons, and architect Helen Sides who provided drawings of the proposed new porch and examples of similar porches in the district.
Ms. Sides noted that portions of the porch are visible, but that there is no straight view.
Ms. Guy noted that the Commission has approved similar railings as is proposed for the first floor of the porch in order to meet building code height.
Mr. Spang stated that he preferred only one horizontal rail on the top with longer balusters.
Mr. Spang made a motion to approve the application as submitted, but with the second floor porch railing design to be similar to the first floor railing, but with longer verticals. Ms. Herbert seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
142-148 Derby Street
Reardon Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors and an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability for the installation of an awning. Paint colors will include Fez , Diva, Tempura and Grand Canyon. The awning has already been installed and painting has begun. Present were Jennifer Reardon and Brian Casey.
Mr. Casey provided a sketch of the color scheme and summarized the history of the colors previously on the building. He stated that his scheme is to bring the colors of the more Victorian era and point out the Italianate features on the main building.
Ms. Herbert stated that Fez looks very fluorescent orange.
Mr. Casey stated that they have not finished all the coats, but noted that it is brighter in the sunshine.
Ms. Diozzi stated that Tempura doesn’t look the same on the building as on the chip.
Mr. Casey stated that he check the chip to the color painted and that it is a match.
Mr. Spang stated that he drove by and felt it looks very bright and modern.
Ms. Reardon stated that the front only has one coat, not the proposed three coats.
Ms. Herbert stated that she felt the modern window trim of the storefronts should be darker.
Ms. Reardon stated that there will be window boxes in front.
Mr. Casey stated that they are natural mahogany.
Ms. Herbert stated that she felt the body color should be toned down to blend more with the awning and felt that the awning looked fine.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the awnings as installed. Mr. Spang seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Reardon stated that they are using a higher quality paint, so it won’t fade as soon as the last painting, but noted that with the amount of sun and the location near the water, it will still fade.
Ms. Diozzi stated that instead of Diva, she suggested County Redwood.
Mr. Spang stated that he liked the strategy of separating the house portion from the commercial portion, but was not sure that Diva accomplished it.
Ms. Herbert suggested that instead of Diva, using Georgian Brick and instead of Grand Canyon, usng Audobon Russet.
Ms. Reardon suggested a site visit.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue the application to a site visit on Saturday, July 22nd and then to the meeting of August 2nd. Mr. Spang seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
65 Jefferson Avenue
The Olive Realty Trust submitted an application to waive the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish 65 Jefferson Avenue. Owner Robert Dunham and architect Dennis Gray were present.
Mr. Dunham stated that the building is on wood piles. He hopes to develop the property in 1-2 years.
Ms. Guy noted that there is no survey form on file, but that the Assessor’s records show the date of construction as 1890.
Ms. Herbert asked when the building was purchased.
Mr. Dunham stated that he purchased it 3 to 4 weeks ago and that it is a liability. The sprinkler is partially taken apart and there are people and animals entering the building.
Mr. Spang asked the zoning. Mr. Dunham replied that it is industrially zoned.
Mr. Desrocher asked if there are any architectural details on the interior. Mr. Gray stated that it is mill type framing and that they could sell the salvage.
Ms. Herbert suggested demolishing the newer sections and securing the rest.
Mr. Gray stated the older sections are the most deteriorated and that the wood piles are rottd.
Ms. Harper made a motion to waive the Demolition Delay Ordianance. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
92 Derby Street
John Paskowski submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of an addition at 92 Derby Street.
Michael Lutrzykowski, architect representing the applicant, requested a continuance.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the minutes of June 21, 2006 with the following change:
· Page 2, Paragraph 3, Sentence 1 - Add “of the foundation” to the end of the sentence.
Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Harper made a motion to approve the minutes of July 5, 2006 with the amendment that Mr. Desrocher made the motion to adjourn, rather than Mr. Spang. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
There being no further business, Mr. Desrocher made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Herbert seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
| 
