SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
July 1, 2009
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, July 1, 2009 at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Present were Ms. Diozzi, Mr. Hart, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Bellin and Mr. Desrocher.
25 Washington Square
Gary & Jennifer Santo presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change the previously approved garage edging (apron) to match existing first floor and trim, change windows from diamonds (x’s) over 1 to match windows on main house, alter flashing from approved copper and remove 2 windows from plan.
Lorraine Santo, Gary Santo Sr., Jennifer Santo were present.
Ms. Lorraine Santo stated that for the garage, they would like to match the trim on house, rather than the skirt originally proposed.
Mr. Santo stated that the approved apron does not really mimic house. They want to use dentil molding with trim to match the rest of house.
Ms. Herbert stated that the change will really marry the garage to the house.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to change the approved garage edging (apron) to match the trim of the house as depicted in photographs.
Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Lorraine Santo stated that for the front center window on garage, they want to match the diamond pattern that is under the front Palladian window of the house, as per the drawing, rather than using 6 over 1’s. The windows will be wood, true divided light.
Ms. Herbert stated that she thought it will blend really well.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to change the approved window sash to match diamond pattern that is under the front Palladian window of the house.
Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Santo stated that there is currently no copper on the roof, that the downspouts are copper, and that there are no valleys, just a gable roof. He stated that there will be just drip edge on the front and rear of the garage gable peaks. He noted that it is a slate roof with not much exposure.
Ms. Herbert stated that she felt the aluminum will blend in.
Mr. Hart asked about the eave.
Mr. Santo stated that it will be obscured by the gutters.
Mr. Hart agreed that the gutters are hidden
Ms. Herbert asked if there will be drip edge under the rakes.
Mr. Hart stated that it is unorthodox to flash under the rake.
Mr. Santo stated that they are using Aspen Roofers and going with their experience.
Mr. Hart stated that the life expectancy of copper and slate is 100 years and suggested using copper to match the life expectancy. He was concerned that aluminum will deteriorate in 20-25 years and they will have to pull up the slate. He noted that the price of copper has dropped.
Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the option for aluminum or copper drip edge and flashing. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Lorraine Santo stated that the original plan was for the upper part to have 3 windows on one side. They are proposing for there to now be 2. The other side that was to have 2 will now have one. She stated that this is needed because there isn’t enough wall space.
Mr. Hart made a motion for the removal of 2 windows from approved plan as noted on drawing A2.2.
Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
396 Essex Street
Ms. Bellin recused herself from voting and moved to the audience.
Laurie Weisman Bellin and Jeff Bellin, Julie & Stuart Brown, Sue Benedict and Daniel Leavitt presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install roof vents. A catalog cut of the proposed vent was provided.
Ms. Guy noted that the owners already got a Certificate of Non-applicability for the vents that will be non-visible.
Mr. Bellin stated that there are going to be 3 total vents. He showed a sketch of the proposed locations - one on the dormer visible from north pine, one on the front on the side of the dormer and one in the rear, near the skylight.
Mr. Hart stated that the vents should be a dark color similar to the roof.
Mr. Hart noted that the satellite dish was not approved.
Ms. Herbert suggested a ridge vent on the front dormer instead. She noted that it is a really small dormer to have the proposed vent.
Mr. Bellin stated that he was not sure if it is even visible from street. He stated that the occupant is getting too much heat in the summer and it is too cold in winter, so they need to add insulation to address cold, vents to address hot and have flow for the moisture currently getting trapped inside the house.
Ms. Diozzi asked when they plan to start.
Mr. Bellin stated that they are trying for as soon as possible, possibly next week.
Mr. Desrocher stated that he did not think there would be much of a difference in cost between the proposed vents and ridge vents.
Ms. Herbert stated that it may be more efficient to have ridge vents.
Mr. Hart stated that they could also put a vent in the pediment.
Mr. Santo stated that if they go with a ridge vent and ceiling fan, the occupant will see tremendous difference.
Mr. Desrocher stated that the proposed box vent will look large on a small dormer.
Ms. Herbert stated that when the owners look into a ridge vent for front dormer, they may want to look into them for other dormers too, which may be more efficient.
Mr. Desrocher made a motion to approve a ridge vent on the front dormer.
Ms. Herbert seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Desrocher made a motion to approve the option for installation of ridge vents in two rear dormers or Duraflo roof vents, per specification provided – 17.5” x 19.5” x 4/3”H polypropylene in grey) in two rear locations.
Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to continue the application in case it is determined that they can’t do a ridge vent on the front.
Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Bellin stated that they may need to repair roof shingles.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the repair or replacement of asphalt shingles to match existing in 3 tab.
Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Bellin rejoined the Commission at this time.
Salem Common (playground) at Washington Square
Parents United on behalf of the City of Salem submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a sign displayed with a picture of the new proposed playground structure and donation information. Jennifer Santo represented Parents United.
Ms. Santo stated that they have enough funding to do a partial build – about $30,000. They have approval from the Park and Recreation Commission to do a partial build. They are waiting to find out how much the City will give. She stated that she still did not think they will have enough to do the entire build before October 1st. She noted that they are constantly running into new families who have no idea that a new playground is proposed for the Common. They would like to install a sign with information on how to donate. The design will be similar to one on Derby Wharf, is approximately 16 x 24 with plexi-glass on the top to slide information in and out. She noted that the Salem Common Neighborhood Association(SCNA) is in support and that the Park and Recreation
Commission has approved it. She added that after the playground is done, the SCNA would like to use the sign for other things. She stated that the location can be determined by the Historical Commission and that they have no preference.
Ms. Herbert stated that they may want to go bigger so it is not hard to read.
Mr. Desrocher preferred it be a temporary structure.
Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the installation of display sign in same design as informational sign for Central Wharf on Derby Street. Sign not to exceed 30” x 40”. Sign is considered temporary and must be removed within 36 months.
Ms. Herbert suggested having two signs - one near where parents sit and one near path.
Mr. Desrocher stated that one closer to path is better than in between the playground and walk path.
Mr. Bellin stated that he was not in favor of permanent advertisement. He stated that he felt it should be distanced enough from path for biker safety.
Mr. Hart amend his motion for the location of sign to be between walking path and swingset, so as not to interfere with playground use or persons using footpath.
Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms. Guy stated that she received a letter from Thomas Henry, 151 Federal Street, requesting to extend his Certificate of Non-applicability dated 7/24/07 for repairs to clapboards, trim, windows, etc. for one year. Ms. Herbert made a motion to approve the extension. Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Guy read a letter from Massachusetts Highway Department dated June 24, 2009 regarding the installation of hand railings or asphalt wheelchair ramps at four locations where the multi-use path intersects with the ends of local streets. Ms. Guy asked if the Commission had comments to put in writing.
Ms. Herbert made a motion to suggest, rather than painting the handrail posts black and the railings green, that the posts and rails be consistent and both be painted a subtle green to blend in with the landscape. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Hart made a motion to suggest, instead of the installation of railings, that MHD investigate if the straight paths at Saunders and Lemons Streets can be regraded to create sloped sidewalks that are MAAB compliant. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. Mr. Hart, Mr. Desrocher, Ms. Herbert and Ms. Bellin voted in favor. Ms. Diozzi voted in opposition, noting her concern for extra cost. The motion so carried.
Mr. Bellin stated that he preferred winding to keep the grade down, which may be better looking option.
Ms. Guy stated that she received a letter from Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) to The First Church in Salem informing them of a $45,000 Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund grant.
Ms. Guy stated that she received a letter from MHC to EBI Consulting regarding 181 North Street, requesting additional information regarding the proposed telecommunications installation.
There being no further business, Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
| 
