SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
September 20, 2006
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on September 20, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Ms. Diozzi, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Bellin, Ms. Harper, Messrs. Desrocher and Hart and Ms. Guy.
30-32 Beckford Street
30-32 Beckford Street Realty Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to paint the existing gray brick façade to match the white on the rest of the house. Richard Luecke represented his neighbor Rolf Franke Otten.
Ms. Diozzi read a letter from Richard Luecke and Perry McIntosh in favor of the application.
Mr. Hart asked if the owner already has a Certificate of Non-applicability to paint the trim. Mr. Luecke replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Hart stated that he thought the house was gray.
Mr. Luecke stated that it is white except for the brick façade.
Ms. Herbert asked for the color that the trim will be on the entire house.
Mr. Luecke replied that it will be white. Mr. Luecke stated that they will also paint the rakes white and the doors will be Forest Green.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to paint the brick and trim white, the rakes white and the doors Forest Green. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
28 Chestnut Street
In continuation of a previous meeting, Annie Harris and Andy Lippman submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace gutters with heavy duty 6” aluminum on four sides of the main house and downspouts with aluminum or painted galvanized with round profile.
Ms. Guy read an e-mail from Ms. Harris waiving the requirement that the Commission act within 60 days and requesting a continuation until October 18th.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue the Appropriateness application to the October 18th meeting. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
39-41 Washington Square
Nikolaus Sucher and Maria Carles presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove old downspouts and install new copper downspouts.
Mr. Hart asked if the existing downspouts are 3”.
Mr. Sucher stated that he believed so.
Ms. Herbert asked if they are white, galvanized metal currently.
Mr. Sucher replied in the affirmative and stated that they are rotted with missing pieces.
Mr. Hart suggested approving 3” up to 6” or to approve the same diameter as existing at the owners discretion.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve round, red copper gutters as proposed with the option to increase the size up to 5” in diameter. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Herbert commended the owner for their new storm windows.
86 Essex Street
The Salem Housing Authority (SHA) submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to permanently remove a steel snow fence that exists around the entire perimeter of the sloped roof. The application stated the fence makes the roof more vulnerable too roof leaks. Present were Debra Tucker of the SHA and Michael Flaherty of Russo Barr Associates.
Ms. Harper asked if the fence was corroded.
Mr. Flaherty stated that the rails and posts are corroded and pitted. They are ¼” to 3/16” thick and the corrosion extends 1/16 to 1/8” into them. They are not yet weak, but will be.
Ms. Harper asked if there are ice dam problems.
Mr. Flaherty state that there are leaks all over, and that it is hard to say if it is flashing and roof failure.
Ms. Harper asked who initially installed the snow fence.
Mr. Flaherty stated that he did not know if it was installed when the SHA took over the building, or before when it was a school. He stated that he believed the roof was replaced in 1986.
Mr. Hart stated that if it was installed in 1986, it is not coming up to 20 years old and asked their intent.
Mr. Flaherty stated that they will be undertaking complete replacement of the roof and gutters as has already been approved.
Mr. Hart stated that, dependent upon their location, he was concerned with public safety if they are removed.
Ms. Diozzi noted that it overhangs the driveway on one side.
Mr. Flaherty stated that it is 10’ away from the Washington Square sidewalk. He noted that typically this type of fence is not needed for asphalt, which is more slideproof than slate. He noted that snow fence holes every 32 inches may contribute to leaks.
Ms. Harper asked if they will be putting ice shield under the new roof. Mr. Flaherty replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. Ms. Diozzi, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Bellin, and Messrs. Desrocher and Hart were in favor. Ms. Harper voted in opposition. The motion so carried.
178 Federal Street
Paul and Marin Konstadt presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove existing roofing paper from the upper slope of the gambrel roof, remove 3-tab asphalt shingle from the lower slop and replace both with GAF T-30 architectural shingles and to replace rotted and cracked fascia boards in kind.
Ms. Herbert stated that rather than architectural shingles, the Commission typically approves 3-tab, which happens to be less expensive.
Mr. Hart asked if they would consider 3-tab.
Mr. Konstadt replied in the affirmative and stated that he was not aware that 3-tab could be used on a low sloped roof.
Mr. Hart replied that it could be used.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the roof replacement with 3-tab, charcoal asphalt roofing and to replace fascia to replicate existing. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
26 Winter Street
Neil and Martha Chayet presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for 22 items (to be described below as each were reviewed). Various supporting documentation was provided, including drawings and photographs. Also present was Larry Beals, consulting engineer.
Ms. Diozzi read a letter from David Jones, 33 Washington Sq./2 Oliver St., in support of the application.
Addendum #1 - Remove metal awning frame from the front of the house, TV antenna and exposed wires. The frame was not original to the house. The wires and conduit for electrical, telephone, cable TV, etc. area on all sides. Re-connectivity for utilities will be done in the least obtrusive fashion in coordination with the utility companies. Meters for all utilities will be located inside the building. Remote computerized meter reading detectors will be mounted in least visible, but still accessible locations on the Oliver Street side of the house.
Anthony O’Donnell, 35 Washington Square, stated that he was in favor of Addendum #1.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve Addendum #1 as submitted. Ms. Herbert seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #2 - Remove vertical wooden vine arbor from the face of the outer pillars on the portico which was not original to the building, so that the Federal columns are no longer obscured.
Mr. Desrocher made a motion to approve Addendum #2 as submitted. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #3 - Rebuild missing chimney per historic photographs. The architect has verified that it is still intact in the attic, but roofed over.
Mr. Hart asked when the two existing chimneys were last repointed.
Mr. Chayet stated that it must have been a long time ago, as they are in very bad shape.
Mr. Chayet stated that he and Mr. Beals restored a home in New Hampshire together and that he wants to do this renovation right for Joseph Story, the original owner.
Mr. Hart made a motion to rebuilding the missing chimney in location per attic evidence and historical photo presented with brick, mortar and design to match existing chimneys. The mason should endeavor to match the aggregate of the existing and to “wash” the completed masonry to expose the aggregate. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #4 - Replace National Register plaque with a new plaque of similar size, but revised text as provided in the application.
Jeff Laaff, 24 Winter Street, asked if the plaque will have the same look.
Mr. Chayet stated that they will use the same traditional materials and will just change the text.
Mr. Laaff stated that he felt the new text was a great improvement.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to replace the bronze plaque with one similar in appearance, but with the new text as proposed. Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #5 - Add Historic Salem wooden house plaque with text as provided in the application.
Ms. Herbert asked where the sign would be located as it may be redundant to have two.
Ms. Chayet suggested putting it on the Oliver Street side.
Mr. Hart stated that typically the brass sign is lower and the HSI sign is set to the right.
Ms. Harper stated that installing it on the Oliver Street side will give information about the house on both streets.
Mr. Desrocher made a motion to add the HSI house plaque on the Oliver Street side of the house. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #6 - Restore 27 pairs of wooden shutters on the front and Winter street façade windows.
Mr. Chayet stated that there will be no shutter on the back or side of the house.
Mr. Hart asked if there was any indication on how the early shutters were attached.
Ms. Chayet stated that there is a pin left on one third floor window, which was drilled into the brick, but none of the pull backs remain.
Mr. Hart stated that the shutters could have been attached to either the brick or the window, but felt since there is evidence of attachment to the brick, that would be the appropriate way to install them.
Mr. Hart made a motion to install 27 pairs of wood shutters on the Winter Street and front facing facades, using hardware attached to brick, based on evidence found on the house. Shutters to be hung by SHC guidelines (i.e. that they be hung so as to be operable and when closed will fill the window completely and shed water away from the building). Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #7 - Replace gutters and downspouts. Currently the building has a variety of styles and materials, including aluminum, deteriorated copper and rotted wood with many sections completely missing. Some downspouts drain into an iron plumbing pipe which directs water to an unknown location (perhaps to an old cistern under the basement floor). Some historic photos of the house show no gutters and some roof edges were not designed to include a wooden gutter. The application proposes heavy grade, reproduction gutters made from Kynar or other treated aluminum in a bronze color to look like aged copper.
Mr. Chayet stated they received pricing for a high grade aluminum gutter, in either white or copper color for $22,000. They also received pricing for copper gutters at $47,000. He stated that he did not have a sample of the proposed gutter.
Ms. Chayet stated that most gutters on the house that are K-line and still intact are aluminum. The contractor suggests white since most of them will follow the trim.
Ms. Herbert stated that if aluminum is approved, she suggests they be white. She noted that the Commission has another applicant to which the Commission suggested salvaging copper from non-visible sides be used on to the front of the house.
Ms. Guy stated that she did not recall bronze colored aluminum being approved in the past. She noted that the Commission is struggling with the first application for aluminum gutters on Chestnut Street, but that aluminum gutters have been approved elsewhere in historic districts. She noted that the Commission could consider it under Hardship.
Mr. Hart stated that white on the verticals will contrast with the brick.
Mr. Chayet stated that bronze might blend better with the building.
Ms. Herbert suggested the applicants get a quote on copper downspouts and getting quotes from additional contractors for copper gutters.
Ms. Chayet asked what the Commission suggested for shape.
Mr. Hart stated that they may not be able to use a uniform treatment (i.e. K-line) on the entire building.
Mr. Chayet stated that he would like to reserve the right to replace aluminum with aluminum.
Ms. Herbert suggested the shape be 3-4” diameter, fluted.
Mr. Laaff stated that he felt a house as historic as this calls out for copper. He added that the sills might have been sandstone and not white.
Mr. Chayet stated that in the oldest photo they have, it appears the lintels were white.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue Addendum #7 to the next meeting. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #8 - Remove pipe hand rail at front door and replace with wrought iron hand rail and install simple black metal handrail, with or without balusters, with a start or other feature at the entrance.
Ms. Herbert asked if any of the historic photographs show a handrail. Ms. Chayet replied in the negative.
Mr. Hart stated that there are stock metal handrails available that are very appropriate and commonly used.
Ms. Herbert stated that Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) has a website where you can see similar buildings of the period and that the owners might find an exact or similar rail that is appropriate.
Ms. Chayet stated that they were considering one that is similar to 18 Summer Street.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue Addendum #8 in order for the applicants to undertake further research. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #9 - Remove un-matched brick patch above the portico and replace with matching brick. Historic photos show that this area was once enclosed in a box-like extension from the second floor.
Addendum #10 - Rework opening above portico to replace the thin existing doorway with a slightly wider doorway with a window pane styling of wood, flanked by black wooden shutters. The lintel will be splayed as the others on the façade and the threshold will be stone.
Mr. Hart asked if it will be the same width as the window above.
Mr. Chayet replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Hart stated that the proposed looks like it should have been done in the first place.
Ms. Herbert suggested considering a design similar to the Emmerton House on Essex Street, which has a little French door, or else it should be a replication.
Ms. Diozzi stated that she believed the Andrew Safford house has a Palladian window.
Mr. Hart stated that there are a multitude of ways that federal buildings are fashioned.
Ms. Herbert suggested a continuation.
Mr. Hart stated that it is a door. He suggested instead of having a door that looks like a window, to have a door that looks like a door. He stated that he preferred not to see something in principle, but rather an actual proposal.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve repair/replace the un-matched brick patch above the portico, so as to match the rest of the brick and mortar on the house and to continue Addendum #10. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Addendum #11 - remove section of porch to the left of the front door portico and restore the balustrade railing on the side of the portico. They will retain a small landing and steps from the door to the right of the bow window. The application states that the porch is not original to the building. Once removed, balustrades matching the existing portico will need to be added on the left side of the portico to enclose the entry way.
Mr. Chayet stated that the porch is in bad shape and dangerous. They will restore the windows below the porch, which will bring in light to the basement.
Ms. Herbert asked if they had details of the new steps and handrail.
Mr. Chayet stated that the front steps are granite.
Ms. Chayet stated that the new rail will mimic the other rail to be installed.
Ms. Herbert suggested that they may want wooden stairs.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the removal of the porch to the left of the front door portico and to continue the replacement steps and rail from the door to the right of the bow window. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue Addenda #12 through #22. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
281 Essex Street - Discussion
Jim Valeriani of Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless and Mary Stadalnick, architectural historian, were present regarding a submission to MHC to install telecommunications equipment on 281 Essex Street (Tompkins Furniture).
Ms. Guy stated that she initially spoke with Ms. Stadalnick on the phone and that the Commission also received a copy of the MHC submission. Ms. Guy noted that the Commission may comment on the installation as part of the Section 106 Review process. She noted that the initial submission to MHC omitted the Crombie Street and Downtown Salem National Register districts.
Ms. Herbert asked what the proposed use is for the site when Tompkins Furniture vacates.
Mr. Valeriani stated that he believes it will be condos.
Ms. Guy stated that she believes that the Pabich’s have bought the building.
Mr. Valeriani stated that Verizon has a lease interest in the building. He noted that the antennas proposed will be approximately 4’ high.
Mr. Hart noted that the drawings indicate that the screen around the rooftop equipment area will not be seen from the street.
Mr. Valeriani stated that this was correct.
Ms. Herbert stated that there was once a knee wall there as shown in the historical photographs of the building and suggested there be some consideration to replacing it in order to help mask what is happening on the roof. She asked what kind of rental income is involved.
Mr. Valeriani stated that he cannot divulge that information, but that it would be similar to equipment on public buildings, to which the information is public.
Mr. Desrocher asked why the antennas cannot be on the roof rather than on the façade.
Mr. Valeriani stated that the would have to go over the cornice and therefore may be more visible due to their height.
Mr. Desrocher stated that his concern was that it looked nice on paper, but when in place does not look the same and could jump out. He noted that the Hawthorne Hotel “flagpole” did not look as proposed.
Mr. Valeriani stated that only 2 or 3 inches will be protruding from the building.
Mr. Hart asked if they could be spread across the rear and not grouped.
Mr. Valeriani stated that they met with the abutters who requested that the antenna be away from the balconies.
Mr. Hart stated that if done properly, it could look like architectural brick treatment.
Mr. Desrocher asked if there is any similar treatment in Salem.
Mr. Valeriani stated that he would check. He noted that the knee wall is outside of their leased area.
Mr. Have suggested emailing an address or photograph of similar treatment so that the Commission will have evidence that the actual will look like the proposed.
Mr. Hart suggested that the Commission discuss its comment at the next meeting.
Other Business - Violations
Ms. Herbert stated that she went by 266-268 Lafayette and provided photos. She stated that a new deck is currently being built without approval and that it can be seen from Lafayette and Laurel Streets. Ms. Guy stated that she had the Building Inspector stop the work.
Ms. Herbert stated that 135 Derby Street has removed tar paper shingles and added wooden panels. Ms. Guy will check the Certificates.
There being no further business, Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Spang seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
| 
