SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
July 16, 2008
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, July 16, 2008 at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Diozzi, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Harper and Mr. Hart. Present in the audience was Michael Reiter, who has been appointed by the Mayor to the Commission and is awaiting confirmation from the City Council.
Washington Square - Salem Common Tot Lot
In continuation of a prior meeting, Sarah Wheeler-Gaddipati, on behalf of Parents United’s Tot Lot Committee, presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for replacement of the 25 year old tot lot structures.
Ms. Guy read an e-mail from Ms. Gaddipati requesting a continuation to the meeting of August 6, 2008.
Ms. Harper made a motion to continue the application. Ms. Herbert seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
1 Chestnut Street
Janice and Richard LeBel submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to add lattice work to the top of an existing fence in the back yard between 1 Chestnut and 34 Summer Street.
Ms. LeBel provided a plot plan and photos showing where the fences at 34 Summer, 1 Chestnut and 4 Chestnut meet. She would like to replicate the 5 Chestnut lattice. It is visible from Summer Street.
Ms. Herbert asked the color proposed.
Ms. LeBel stated that it will match the existing fence color and will mirror the height of the 5 Chestnut Street fence.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the application as submitted, with the lattice to be painted to match the existing off-white. Ms. Harper seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
4 Federal Court
Michael Digris and Michele Washburn presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace a leaking 3-tab roof with black architectural shingles. They provided photographs of other houses in the district with architectural shingles. The color proposed is Ebony Wood from the Certainteed Woodscape Series with a 30 year guarantee. Samples of the material was provided.
Ms. Washburn stated that architectural shingles were approved for 6 North Pine Street on June 21, 2006, so that there is precedent for it.
Mr. Hart asked if they were amenable to 3-tab if they were able to get the same life.
Ms. Washburn stated that their contractor has indicated that the value and weight is better with architectural. She noted the cost is more, but the lifetime is longer.
Mr. Hart stated that the Commission’s guidelines strongly encourage 3-tab and that he has done some research recently. He noted that GAF Marquis Weathermax is a 3-tab with a 30 year warrantee.
Mr. Digris that his roofer, who he places a good deal of trust with, strongly recommends architectural.
Mr. Hart stated that all roofers say they recommend architectural and that everyone is using it. He stated that he did not know exactly why.
Ms. Washburn stated that there is also a house on Federal Street, across from Federal Court, with architectural shingles on Federal Street, but she has not found an approval for it yet.
Mr. Hart stated that he preferred 3-tab.
Mr. Digris read an excerpt from This Old House website, noting that the architectural is about twice as thick as a normal shingle and in some colors they resemble slate and others they resemble wood shakes, with a modest upgrade in cost, representing an excellent value.
Ms. Herbert stated that suggested continuing the application to give the Commission members an opportunity to do more research.
Ms. Washburn noted that the roof is leaking.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Washburn stated that the none of the neighbors they talked to had a problem with architectural.
Ms. Herbert stated that the dilemma is making sure the Commission is consistent, but noted it really depends on the house. One approval they gave for architectural shingles was because the house had no redeeming architectural qualities, so it is on a case by case basis.
Mr. Hart stated that with architectural shingles, the eye will go to the roof, rather than the historic house itself. He did not want to set a precedent for approving a sea of architectural shingles. He preferred not to approve them for any house. He provided the applicant with a list of manufacturers of 3-tab shingles.
Ms. Herbert asked if both 3-tab and architectural can be purchased with a 30 year warrantee, did the applicant prefer architectural because of the look.
Mr. Digris stated that he liked the look, but preferred the architectural mostly because he trusts the roofer, who is a close friend and who has been in the business for 25 years and does work in Cambridge. He stated that the way water runs off the roof is superior with architectural shingles. He stated that This Old House website supports architectural.
Ms. Herbert suggested getting pictures of the exact installation they are proposing elsewhere in the proposed color.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue. Ms. Harper seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
17 North Street
Through architect David Jaquith, the Elks Association of BPOE submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to renovate the existing 2 story front of the building and add a new rear addition on the existing footprint in order to convert the building to condominiums. Present with Mr. Jaquith were Attorney Scott Grover and their client William Wharff. Drawings were provided.
Mr. Jaquith stated that he met with Historic Salem, Inc. and interested neighbors following their Zoning Board of Appeals meeting and then had two formal meetings afterward with neighbors. As a result, the design proposed with rebuild 90% of the main body of the house as it was in 1910. He noted that this is the date of the earliest photograph they have. He believes it had a hip roof. He stated that in discussions with HSI, they were asked to replicate as much as possible on the face of the building.
Ms. Herbert asked if it will have the bow fronts on the face.
Mr. Jaquith replied in the affirmative and stated that they will go all the way up. There will be a curved roof line, but it may not be as much of an overhang. They will put the dormers in. He stated that essentially the main block will be restored except for the third floor door. He noted that Eaton Place is not a public way. The windows will be double hung. He noted that the house has less of a foundation currently than is shown in the historic picture. He added that they will be asking the ZBA for a 7th unit. The majority of the siding will be tongue and groove.
Ms. Herbert asked if they will replicate the corbels.
Mr. Jaquith replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Diozzi asked if there is parking for seven.
Mr. Jaquith stated that they have eight spaces. The pavement will be concrete brick in a red tone. All the units are two bedroom town houses.
Ms. Herbert asked the square feet of the units.
Mr. Jaquith stated that they are approximately 1200 s.f.
Ms. Herbert stated that she was concerned about the entrance to the old barroom remaining. She asked how the basement will be used.
Mr. Jaquith stated that they will use the space for utilities and for storage for the seven units.
Ms. Herbert stated that she felt more work was needed on the design of that entrance, noting that it looks like a shed. She stated that it shouldn’t be there, but could be made to work.
Mr. Hart stated that a determination on how much is visible from Federal Court should be made.
Ms. Herbert stated that she had no problem with the design proposed for the rear, so visibility would not matter. She asked the depth of the rear decks.
Mr. Jaquith stated that they are 5’ deep.
Mr. Hart stated that he was curious as to the effect of four automobiles on the front elevation.
Mr. Jaquith stated that currently there is one parking space and a handicapped ramp there. He noted that the ramp will be removed.
Mr. Jaquith stated that all the fire escape stuff is coming out.
Mr. Hart stated that the proposed is a vast improvement over what is there now.
Atty. Grover stated that they will be going to the Planning Board for site plan review which will include parking, snow removal, trash storage and plantings.
Ms. Herbert stated that she suggests some sort of Victorian lattice to help hide the parking.
John Carr, 7 River Street, stated that the initial plans started out with an entirely different design and that the current plans are the revised version. He noted that the neighbors and HSI representatives met with the applicants, who agreed to prepare an alternative plan, which was presented to the ABA in June. He stated that the new plan is a step in the right direction. At the meetings, they had discussed not having a flat top and other details, such as lowering the height line of the rear addition. They received the new plan this week and are astounded for all the right reasons. Mr. Carr noted that to fund the project, the applicants need one more unit, which the consensus is that it is a fair trade off. He stated that the project is on tonight’s ZBA agenda and that he is in
enthusiastic support.
Edward Nillson, representing Historic Salem, Inc. (HSI) stated that they formally and strongly endorse anything that restores buildings on North Street, given the recent loss of the three houses.
Gary Cherry, 25 North Street, stated that he highly endorsed the project, noting that it was a good plan. He commended the developer, noting that he was true to his word and focused.
Jane Arlander, 93 Federal Street, asked the total square footage.
Mr. Jaquith stated that they are 1200 s.f., 2 bedroom units and that he did not have the figure for the entire square footage.
Ms. Arlander stated that she preferred large condominiums, so that there is less turnover.
Mr. Jaquith stated that four out of the seven units will have basement space of their own.
Jay Poppe, 19 North Street, stated that the proposed was wonderful and commended the developer for having the courage to do a major real estate endeavor in the current environment.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to close the public hearing.
Ms. Harper seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Herbert asked if there was any other way to treat the board in the front where there used to be granite.
Mr. Jaquith stated that it is original and that they would be repairing, not changing it. He stated that the problem is the building has dropped, including the interior floors.
Mr. Hart felt it was worth exploring. He commended the team and felt there was a need to tweak the right hand entrance. He suggested finding a way to shield the four cars on the side elevation. He asked if the they could pick up on the double arched motif for the arched door on the balcony. He stated that other than those three items, he had no problem with the design.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the project in concept as submitted and continued to the next meeting for further discussion on the details of the windows, roof, colors and shutters and treatment of the basement entrance on the north side, screening of the cars on the south side, front foundation level, arched door, mechanicals, chimneys, gutters, downspouts and vent pipes.
Mr. Jaquith stated that there may be condensing units on the roof or in the back.
Mr. Herbert asked if there will be any fireplaces.
Mr. Jaquith stated that there is one existing original fireplace in the front on the second floor with no chimney.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the renovation of existing building and construction of rear addition in concept, size and massing and to continue the details of the windows, roof, colors and shutters and treatment of the basement entrance on the north side, screening of the cars on the south side, front foundation level, arched door, mechanicals, chimneys, gutters, downspouts and vent pipes. Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms. Guy stated that she received a request from 386 Essex Street Trust (David Clarke) to extend their Certificate of Non-applicability dated 11/30/06 to 11/30/08. Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the request. Ms. Harper seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy stated that the City received a letter from Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) dated 7/1/08 to ICON Architecture, Inc. finding no adverse effect for the proposed structural stabilization for Salem State College Central Campus Building I Interim Library Renovation.
Ms. Guy noted that on 7/9/08 she mailed Commission members a copy of a letter from DCAM to MHC dated 7/1/08 regarding the J. Michael Ruane Judicial Center Project: Feasibility Report Availability and Expression of Interest Polling Schedule.
Mr. Hart stated that DCAM is intending to submit the 60% design plans for the courthouse at any time and that there is a meeting of the interested parties at DCAM on 7/31/08. Mr. Hart questioned when the Commission can review it. Ms. Diozzi believed that comment will be due the following week and the Commission will be meeting on the following week.
Ms. Guy introduced Lizzie Richardson, a geography student from Cambridge University in England. Ms. Richardson interviewed Commission members regarding their perceptions of history.
There being no further business, Mr. Hart 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
| 
