SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
December 17, 2008
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, December 17, 2008 at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Diozzi, Ms. Herbert, Ms. McCrea and Ms. Harper and Mr. Hart.
17 North Street
William Wharf, applicant who is under agreement with the Beverly Salem Massachusetts Lodge of the B.P.O.E. to purchase the property, presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to restore the existing building by adding one and one-half stories to recreate the building’s original height, removing recent additions to the property and building a new addition to complement the architecture of the original structure. This re-application to the Commission is necessary because economic conditions have dictated a reduction in the size of the project, and an alteration in the design that was originally approved by the Commission. The body will be painted Sea Salt, the trim will be Parchment and the shutters will be Mediterranean. Present were Mr. Wharff, Attorney Scott Grover and
architect Peter Pittman.
Atty. Grover stated Mr. Wharff has an agreement to purchase 17 North Street from the Elks. He stated that they were before the Commission previously for a similar application. He stated that since that time, as Mr. Wharff developed construction drawings, he discovered that the previously approved design had some elements that rendered it infeasible to build economically. He noted that the prior design was a recreation of the old Victorian building that was on the front part of the site that was built in the late 1800s and a newer, more contemporary structure in the back. The problems that they ran into during the construction design phase related to melding those two together.
Mr. Wharff stated that the contemporary building was a 4 story flat roofed building and that the front building was a 3 ½ story hipped roof building. As they tried to blend the roof lines, it was not coming out attractively and he recalled that some Commission members wanted the roof lines as close as possible. He noted that they were not as close as possible, because they were not following the existing floor pattern all the way across, so they were staggering up. He stated that the result was the contemporary building being quite a bit higher and not being feasible and not looking very good either. The new design is a down-sized version, is one less unit, less gross square footgage, is more symmetric and fits well into the neighborhood. He noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals has
given their approval.
Atty. Grover noted that the parking is still one space per unit.
Mr. Wharff stated that they continued the bays to the third floor, which was not in the old design. He stated that he changed the color scheme slightly, which he felt is more stately and that he felt it was more in tune with the neighborhood and the historic district.
Ms. Herbert asked if the new scheme has a red accent.
Mr. Wharff replied in the negative, but added that they may want to add some dark red somewhere.
Ms. Herbert stated that the worst thing is if it does not work financially and they are not be able to sell.
John Carr, 7 River Street, stated that he has an office at 9 North Street which looks at the southern façade of this building. He stated that the proposed is as good as what was in the last iteration and felt it was even better. It is a cohesive building on all four sides, while the prior was very schizophrenic. He stated that he felt the prior was a great design and the closest thing to an exact reproduction, but the scale was a little intimidating. He stated that the new design is a terrific for a property located on an entrance corridor, which will clean up that entire side. He felt it was terrific for someone to take on this project in this economy and this market. He noted that it passed unanimously at the ZBA.
Doug Cabot, 1 Forrester Street, stated that he was representing Historic Salem, Inc.(HSI) board and that they are unanimously in favor.
Ms. Herbert asked the reason for getting rid of the third floor curve.
Mr. Pittman replied that it was largely economics, and the complications of trying to do curved siding, soffits and gutters.
Ms. Herbert noted that it does not exist in its current state.
Mr. Pittman stated that Juliette balconies are being used.
Ms. Herbert asked if the balconies will have metal balusters.
Mr. Wharff stated that he believed so.
Mr. Hart suggested looking again at the scale of the doors on the south elevation and felt there was no precedent for the style of the proposed doors.
Ms. Herbert suggested a small transom over a solid door for security.
Ms. Guy suggested eliminating the heavy trim on each side, adding one side light and having a solid door.
Ms. Herbert asked the height of the doors.
Mr. Pittman stated that they are 7’.
Ms. Herbert suggested having a small transom over a solid 6’8” door. Ms. Herbert suggested picking up the theme of the front doors, which also has a transom.
Mr. Pittman stated that her suggestion was reasonably and he had no problem with it.
Ms. Herbert asked if everything is the same in terms of materials, windows, roof, etc. previously approved for the prior design will remain the same.
Mr. Wharff replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Herbert noted that there will be no shutters on the west side.
Mr. Hart asked if the gutters and downspouts will be exposed.
Mr. Wharff stated that he did not think they are needed.
Ms. Herbert stated that they may be needed on the south side, but the applicant could apply for them later.
Ms. Herbert asked if the colors changed.
Mr. Wharff stated that they changed very slightly.
Ms. Herbert asked if they would like an option for a red accent.
Mr. Wharff replied in the affirmative, stating that it would be Hot Tamale, i.e. for the doors and possibly some upper details.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the renovation of the existing building and new rear addition per colored rendering dated 11/25/08. Paint colors to be Parchment for the trim, Sea Salt for the body and Mediterranean for the shutters, lattice, sash, and some doors. Option to use Hot Tamale for an accent color, with locations to be submitted to the Commission at a later date. South elevation door to be solid with transom above, mimicking the front entryway.
Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
J. Michael Ruane Judicial Center – 80% Plan Review & Comment
Ms. Herbert provided a summary of the meeting of the interested parties held at DCAM on 12/16/08.
A draft comment letter was circulated.
Ms. Herbert stated that the biggest change to the main pavilion is the treatment of the capitals and the light poles. She stated that they did pick up on some of the plantings that the Commission has suggested. The little entryway to the garden area will be interspersed with granite strips into the concrete. Basically, the entire campus main walkway will be concrete, with no brick and no brick edging. The rear wall will have planting pockets with ivy. They will try to use a minimum amount of lighting poles. They are removing the light fixtures from the columns and will be putting in some kind of system with lights shining up and down. The capital design on the columns is still being worked on and Ms. Goody hopes to use cast aluminum to get more texture. The roof line has
gotten much thinner and lighter. The glass screen fritted glass from little white dotted pieces to be thin, grey horizontal stripes, which really looked quite good. They have a 3 color scheme, which is basically a beige that will match the Indiana limestone that will be used on the Pavillion and will try to carry it through to the pre-case, as well as on the metal panels. They will also have a deeper gray and a darker gray. The mullions on the glass screen will have dark gray on the windows that they do not want to emphasize and will have the light beige on the ones that they want to pop out. For the main courthouse building, the windows will generally be recessed around 8”, with the least recess at the bottom of the building and greater as it moves up to create movement, shadowing and interest on the North Street and Bridge Street facades. The treatment of the lintels is going to be minimal. The bricks are called Norman bricks, which
will be 12” long instead of the typical 8” and will be slimmer, about 2 ½” or 2 ¼”. The main color will be a Georgian red brick, with a dark grey brick stripes as an accent. She noted that the deadline for comments is 12/29/08.
Ms. Emily Udy stated that wall along Bridge Street that shields the judges parking will be concrete block with banding that will be 4 to 1 ration. She added that the lights will be on the face of the building, not on columns or poles.
Ms. Herbert stated that they passed a photo of a wood and iron bench. She stated that she was pretty pleased with what was presented and that for some of the things that they would like to change, it is too late.
Ms. Diozzi stated that following the polling of State agencies for the reuse of the two buildings being vacated, only Salem State College expressed interest. She added that the church is being moved on December 22nd.
Ed Neilson stated that one noticeable change on Federal Street is they went back to the design of the front canopy that was in the model, which had a cantilevered extension at a sharp angle, and it points more toward the law library.
Ms. Udy stated that Historic Salem’s comments are going to be few. They are dismayed that there are not more changes to the west (North Street) façade, for which they wanted the mass reduced.
Ms. Herbert stated that she believed the idea is that the gardening, etc. will be the pedestrian’s view, but felt that from across the street it will appear massive.
Mr. Neilson stated that there are pre-cast lintels that project as an eyebrow, but there is no masonry detail other than striping to really add something to the building.
Ms. Udy stated that they will also request greater detail around the windows on all the brick facades and whether the fluting on the columns will be horizontal or vertical. We don’t have a decision on which we prefer, but will be having a discussion.
Ms. Herbert provided a draft comment letter for which the Commission reviewed and edited. Ms. Guy will make the edits and forward a final draft tomorrow.
Ms. Diozzi stated that she was concerned about the magnolia trees leaving petals on walkways due to the likelihood of pedestrians slipping on them.
Mr. Hart questioned if brick paving was a safety issue.
Ms. Diozzi stated that it was to her.
Ms. Guy agreed, noting that she her shoe heels often get stuck in the bricks and she has tripped out of her shoes. She added that she saw a woman get her walker stuck in the brick crosswalks once. She felt that brick is a horrible safety issue. She stated that they only time they work is if they are tight together, as in front of the Hawthorne Hotel. However, it looks too modern, rather than old when it is tight together. She added that perhaps it would look older if the bricks varied in color a little.
Ms. Herbert stated that Ms. Richardson described special treatment with the concrete, such as edging and scoring or some kind of design. She noted that she liked that there is a savings by not using brick that could go into other things. She stated that Ms. Goody noted that the pattern for the walkways is so irregular, that if edged all in brick, would not be a lovely design.
Ms. Herbert was not sure if the light fixtures would be affixed to the building or on some kind of pole system.
Mr. Hart asked if they have a lighting consultant.
Ms. Diozzi stated that they were not introduced to one.
Mr. Neilson stated that they had an electrical engineering drawing that had foot candle dispersion, but did not know if that was by an electrical engineer or lighting designer.
Mr. Hart stated that he felt this project demands a lighting designer.
Ms. Herbert noted that the ramp will, unfortunately, have both cobra and antique lights.
Ms. Harper asked if it was typical to have dividers on the windows in different colors in different areas.
Ms. Herbert stated that she did not if it was typical in modern design. She stated that what they choose to emphasize and de-emphasize is going to be huge. It would be great to see some sort of small model or rendering on how this is going to look.
Mr. Hart suggested encouraging the architect to further explore the possibility of lintils or other defining element at the top of the windows (i.e. cast stone or brick), especially the lower floor floors, rather than continued with a punched look.
Mr. Hart stated that he has received complaints about the vibration and has heard through the grapevine that there will be an additional 245 piles being driven. He will conduct some research on vibration.
Other Business
Mr. Hart stated that the National Trust showed up at the BSA Historic Resources Committee meeting and that he forwarded some information on windows that they provided to commission members by email. He suggested having a presentation to homeowners with Historic Salem, Inc.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the minutes of November 5, 2008 as amended. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the minutes of December 3, 2008 as amended. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy stated that she received the following letter copies:
- 12/11/08 from Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) to US Army Corps of Engineers concerning the Peabody Square Flood Mitigation Area (copies of which she provided to Commission members);
- 12/12/08 from EA Engineering, Science & Technology to US. Coast Guard concerning Bakers Island Soil Remediation Project (copies of which she provided to Commission members);
- From US Coast Guard to MHC concerning Bakers Island Soil Remediation Project (copies of which she provided to Commission members), with a copy of the Public Archaeology Laboratory Report. Mr. Hart will review the report.
There being no further business, Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Harper seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
| 
