SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
August 4, 2008
A special meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Monday , August 4, 2008 at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Chairman Diozzi, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Bellin, and Mr. Desrocher.
J. Michael Ruane Judicial Center – Draft 60% plans comment letter
Ms. Guy provided copies of a draft comment letter that was prepared by Ms. Herbert and edited by Ms. Guy.
The Commission members present reviewed each paragraph in the letter and made edits as agreed.
Ms. Herbert asked if the construction drawings will be 100% completed by the end of 2008 or 60% completed.
Ms. Diozzi believed it is 60%.
Ms. Diozzi stated that she would like to strike “interested parties” because the Commission is writing only for the Commission and not speaking for the whole group.
Ms. Bellin stated that she did not want the letter to state that the Commission agrees that the fritted wall will appear to disappear.
Ms. Guy suggested that it say that it is “intended” to disappear.
Ms. Bellin asked what are divisional lines.
Ms. Herbert stated that she is worried it will look like a scotch tape advertisement. She stated it is an inset of bricks, designed to look like stone blocks. She suggested adding that “the Commission looks forward to further review of this design”.
Ms. Diozzi stated that it is required that every courtroom have natural light.
Ms. Bellin stated that she felt the swoop is odd, particularly with the church on an angle. She suggested adding something about the angle of the church.
Ms. Herbert agreed, noting she forgot to add that in the letter.
Ms. Diozzi noted that she has done a total 180 on the angle.
Ms. Herbert agreed and stated that she has done some on-line research and believed that it was kind of a nod to the new building. She stated glass courthouses on line often angle the different new buildings to make the old buildings appear at a different angle in the reflection. She believed they are trying not to have it all four square.
Mr. Desrocher stated that they are not trying to have the old building become part of the new and to differentiate.
Ms. Diozzi stated that it should read “this is Salem”.
Ms. Herbert stated, historically, if the lot had been the correct size, the church would have been straight, but it acquired a very weird lot, so they centered it on the lot, which was angled. She suggested saying that the angle of the church is currently schedule to remain per 60% plan, however there remains mixed opinion on the commission. She noted that Mr. Hart prefers it be 4-square.
Ms. Bellin stated that she could go either way.
Mr. Desrocher stated that by it being angled, it might open up more green space between the buildings, which could be more usable.
Ms. Bellin added that from North Street it is more interesting to have it angled.
Ms. Bellin asked the deal with the number of columns.
Ms. Guy believed it was to line up with the divisions in the glass and that if the 7th column was taken out, there may not be anything at the end.
Ms. Herbert asked to insert “The glass screen encompasses the current thinking on modern courthouse design “Transparency, both visual and functional”. She stated that it would emphasize the fact that this is a cooperative effort. She stated that the current building is neither modern, nor old and that this is the point where there can be some freedom with design. She stated that they might even curve the roof in a bit. Our understanding of this whole transparency theme, gives them the license to rework some things and maybe make a much better pavilion. She also suggested adding, “The roofline, which the Commission feels is too thin, will be revised somewhat, along with rethinking on the number of columns and other pavilion details including possibly curving the roof
line in toward the glass screen.” Joan Goody said she is going to think about how much she wants to thicken the roof and that she wants to keep the pavilion looking light and airy, which is why the roof was thin and the original columns were thin. Ms. Herbert noted that now the they have thickened up the columns, the roof line doesn’t look right, but noted Ms. Goody doesn’t want the building to look heavy against the glass screen.
Ms. Bellin noted that the glass screen is now going edge to edge.
Ms. Herbert stated that Ms. Goody is going to consider that. She stated that Ms. Goody’s desire is to extend it all the way to the end, to have this floating glass screen, but the cost of the glass is higher than solid materials, and there is an energy factor – the more glass the more a/c, etc.
Ms. Diozzi stated that Ms. Goody stated that she put it the side panels in consideration of the energy concerns.
Ms. Herbert stated that she had requested two landscape plans, one with a summer view and one with a winter view, because six months of the view of the courthouse is going to be a winter view. She suggested adding to the letter “…therefore we request the inclusion of evergreen tries (i.e. Weeping Blue Atlas Cedar and other interesting and other interesting planting materials that we will provide under separate cover) within the landscape plans”, noting the Weeping Blue Atlas Cedar is gorgeous against brick and easy to maintain. She noted that Weeping Sourwoods produce beautiful delicate little white flowers and in the winter it is dramatic oranges, yellows and reds. She recommended them for the big planters. Ms. Guy will add both to the letter.
Ms. Diozzi suggested leaving out comments on the statuary.
Ms. Herbert suggested it just say “statuary or water feature” without further specifics. She added that because there will be no irrigation, she was concerned if the courthouse staff would maintain all this lovely landscaping. She suggested getting in touch with the Salem horticultural group to adopt.
Ms. Bellin asked if the Commission will review the plans when the 60% drawings are done.
Ms. Diozzi stated that Ms. Goody stated that the construction drawings will not differ from what we have see here.
Ms. Herbert stated that the construction drawings will say the dimensions of the mullions and columns and say things like “louver panels will be painted…”. etc. She noted that behind the glass screen will be all concourses, no offices butted up to it and to add “It is our understanding is that the full view glass areas will be corridors only.”
Ms. Bellin asked when the 90% be done.
Ms. Herbert suggested adding that in here, too.
Ms. Guy suggested not rushing the 90%, because the Commission wants something in between, so if we push the 90%, we may not get the interim stuff.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the comment letter as edited and instruct Ms. Guy to finalize and mail the letter. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy stated that she will make the edits and send Ms. Diozzi and Ms. Herbert the final version in the morning. She will prepare it for signature by both.
Ms. Herbert showed the light fixtures and benches that had been distributed at the DCAM meeting. She was not sure where they were going to be.
Ms. Guy stated that the Planning Department will be sending DCAM a copy of the city standard light fixture and bench.
Other Business
Ms. Guy stated that the Woman’s Friend Society at 12-14 Hawthorne Blvd. has been voted eligible by the State Review Board.
Minutes
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of November 7, 2007. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of January 16, 2008. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
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
| 
