SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JUNE 1, 2011
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, June 1, 2011 at 7:30 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Ms. Diozzi, Ms. Herbert, Ms. Harper, Mr. Hart and Ms. Bellin.
Ms. McCrea and Ms. Keenan arrived later in the meeting.
19 ½ - 21 ½ Broad Street
Laurie LaChapelle, David Leach, James Zissulis, Sarah Weigel and Mike Lefebvre submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at 19 ½ - 21 ½ Broad Street. The body would be Portage, the trim would be Linger, the doors would be Wicked and the shutters would be Zorro. David Leach was present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Paint chips
Ms. Herbert asked if the storm doors would be painted the same as the door color.
Mr. Leach stated that they hadn’t considered it.
Ms. Herbert stated that there is a bonding agent that will allow the paint to adhere.
Mr. Hart agreed it would look nice if the storm door was painted the door color.
Ms. Diozzi was in agreement.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Herbert stated that it is a nice, sophisticated combination.
Ms. Diozzi stated that she liked all four color choices.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the recommendation that the storm doors be painted the same color as the doors. Ms. Diozzi seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. McCrea and Ms. Keenan joined the meeting at this time.
13 River Street
Richard and Cynthia Johnson submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at 13 River Street. The body would be Portsmouth Spice, the trim would be Halo and both doors would be Bold Bolection. Ms. Johnson was present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Paint chips
Carol Carr, 7 River Street stated that it is brave color.
Ann McKnight, 11 River Street, stated that she liked the color. She stated she was not crazy about the blue door, but noted that it was a personal taste.
Ms. Herbert asked if the doors would be flat or semi-gloss.
Ms. Johnson stated that they would be semi-gloss. She stated that she consulted with an architect who helped her choose the colors.
Mr. Hart suggested painting a large patch of the body color to see how it will come out in case it is brighter than they think.
Ms. Diozzi made a motion to close the public hearing. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Harper made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
60-62 Washington Square South
In continuation of a previous meeting Lewis Legon, Hodges Court Real Estate, LLC, submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of 2 vents in chimneys.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Vent sample - Broan NuTone wall ducting kit WVK2A (photo taken)
Ms. Herbert stated that normally for vents at the ground level of up to four feet, the Commission will suggest screening such as lattice or landscaping. She noted that the applicant has used landscaping to mask what it there.
Mr. Legon provided photographs of the landscaping being used to conceal the devices on the back and side of the house including a brass water hookup for fire safety equipment to feed the sprinkler system and a fire horn, also for fire safety, two on-demand hot water heater vents and 5 bathroom vents. He stated that the bathroom vents (Broan NuTone wall ducting kit WVK2A) sit flat and will be painted the body color.
Ms. Herbert noted that on the upper left of the addition, there appears to be a light fixture.
Mr. Legon replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Herbert asked if the meter housing and piping will be painted the body color.
Mr. Legon replied in the affirmative. He stated that they were existing.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the 9 devices (water hook-up, fire horn, two hot water heater vents and 5 bathroom vents) as installed with the bathroom vents covers (Broan NuTone wall ducting kit WVK2A) to be painted the body color. Ms. Diozzi seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Harper stated that the vents for the gas fireplace on the right side of the building were supposed to be tucked in and be barely visible. She noted that the one closest to the corner of the building is highly visible.
Mr. Legon stated that he thought he and the Commission were on the same page as to where they were going to be. They did not want to put it on the front of the building. He stated that there are two on the right side and two on the left.
Mr. Herbert stated that those on the left are kind of in the middle of the building. She stated that once they get painted, they shouldn’t be very obvious. The one on the right side, second floor, is identical to the one on the left side of the building. However, the first floor vent is pushed way out, is hugging the corner board and is very noticeable.
Mr. Legon stated that it was likely due to accommodating LVLs and framing.
Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission could not approve it where it is. She asked that Mr. Legon get the manufacturers specifications in writing to rationalize the location. She wanted to know why it couldn’t have gone higher and been next to the upper one.
Mr. Legon will obtain them and provide them to Ms. Guy.
Ms. Herbert asked if Mr. Legon brought manufacturer’s specifications for the vents in the chimney.
Mr. Legon stated that he checked with Essex County Craftsman who stated that the vents in the chimneys do have to be the current height because they serve as intake and outtake.
Ms. Herbert asked that Mr. Legon get manufacturer’s specification for the vents to determine if they can be enclosed in any fashion and what the clearances need to be.
Mr. Legon stated that he checked and found you can put something around it, but you cannot contain it. He stated that there are three approaches. One is to leave as is, painted. The other is to build up the chimney height. The last is to install a shroud, for which he provided a photograph. They are approximately $1000 and are painted, galvanized steel, called Kinar. He noted that he has a copper chimney cap.
Ms. Herbert asked if the vents would be contained within the shroud.
Mr. Legon replied in the affirmative and noted that the top is open, but the two vents would be essentially hidden.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Diozzi stated that she did not have a problem with the shroud.
Mr. Hart stated that he was under the impression that the applicant would look into some kind of a clay or metal chimney pot or round vertical pipe, which may be a simpler solution.
Ms. Herbert stated that the vents are off center and it may draw more attention being off-center in the chimney.
Ms. Bellin thought it was going to be two separate pots or pipes, even if one is fake, to make it symmetrical.
Mr. Hart suggested just a simple cylinder to accommodate the intake and exhaust, one in each chimney.
Mr. Legon stated that a cylinder may be doable.
Ms. Harper stated that she was thinking two in each chimney.
Ms. Herbert stated that there may be a logistical problem to get two in each due to where they are located.
Mr. Hart stated that it could just be a piece of vertical copper cylinder to cover the vent.
Mr. Hart stated that he felt the proposed shroud was bulky.
Ms. Herbert noted that they would be off-center.
Mr. Hart stated that chimney pots are seen off-center when there are a number of flues.
Ms. Harper stated that it was her understanding that you need to find out from the manufacturer for each systems whether it is safe to put any kind of covering around these exhausts. She stated that she would want Mr. Legon to do that.
Ms. Bellin asked if raising the brick above the vent is feasible.
Mr. Legon stated that he would have to check to be sure it would be safe. Mr. Legon stated that with a shroud, the copper cap would stay.
Ms. Bellin felt that more information was needed. She stated that she would probably be okay with the shroud, but would like to see if Mr. Hart’s proposal is feasible and what it would look like.
Ms. Diozzi and Ms. McCrea stated that they would be okay with the shroud.
Ms. Harper stated that she would like to see Mr. Hart’s option for the cylinder, which she felt would fit the house better. She also wondered about building up the chimney as was done in the rear of the house, open vented, with a cap on it.
Ms. Herbert stated that the center of the bluestone cap could be cut out, so that visually it looks like it is capped.
Mr. Legon stated that he would need a crane to get the bluestone cap on there.
Ms. Keenan stated that she preferred the cylinder or building up the brick rather than the shroud.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the application. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Herbert suggested forwarding any information gathered to Mr. Hart and Ms. Bellin.
Mr. Legon asked if this will slow down inspections.
Ms. Herbert replied in the negative. She stated that the fence has been approved and looks good and she did not think there were any other issues.
10 Lynn Street
In continuation of a previous meeting, Joseph and Jean Galvin presented applications for Certificates of Appropriateness and a Non-applicability to change two gutters on the left side of the house from wood to aluminum.
Documents & Exhibits
The applicants were not present.
Ms. Harper made a motion to approve 2 wood gutters on the left side of house with aluminum gutters with an OG profile, in color to match trim, gauge to match existing aluminum gutters on rest of the house. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
361 Essex Street
Alice and Timothy Clarke submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for fence replacement on the right side of the house, a portion of which is visible from the public way. It will be a flatboard fence with the top changed to a cap (2 x 2 cedar). Post and frame to be pressure treated and face boards are white cedar 1 x 6.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Paint chip
Mr. Clarke stated that it is between his house and 365 Essex Street.
There are currently 2 different heights. The closest to the street is 58 ½” high and then further back it goes to 69 ½” high. They will take all the boards off and replace the posts and framing as necessary using pressure treated, which will be stained in 6 months. The boards will be stained before they go up. He stated that they want to change the top cap to a 2 x 2 square cap.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to close public comment. Ms. Diozzi seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Clarke stated that the color will match what is there.
Mr. Hart stated asked if the finished side currently faces the applicant.
Mr. Clarke replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Bellin asked if they are keeping the changes in height.
Mr. Clarke replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Diozzi made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
8 ½ Chestnut Street
Chestnut Street Associates submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the fence along the rear of the property, currently two different styles, with a new fence of one style. The new fence is to be cedar board, 4’ high. Representing the applicant was Richard Jagolta.
Documents & Exhibits
Mr. Jagolta stated that this property is the park on Chestnut Street. There are 9 sections on the rear of the park and 3 sections on the side. It will be cedar plank with pressure treated posts, not scalloped as in the picture, but straight. It is similar to one of the existing fence portions.
Ms. Harper asked if it will be painted.
Mr. Jagolta stated that the preference is for it to weather gray.
Mr. Hart stated that the finish side should face the neighbors.
Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the application as submitted, and for the fence to remain natural with finish side facing neighbors. Ms. Diozzi seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
14 Beckford Street
Richard and Cynthia Griffin submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for an extension and winterization of a rear screen porch. Work will include insulation and extension of the existing floor and replacement of the screen area with full height doors and windows. Color and detailing shall remain as is and duplicate existing.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Drawings A1, A2 and A4 dated 5/5/11 and drawing A3 dated 2/24/11 by Richard Griffin, Architect
Mr. Griffin stated that it is a sideways facing, saltbox house. A 2-story porch was added to the back of the house around 1900. The porch is only 7 ½ feet deep and they would like to Winterize it, as well as provide more security. They would like to maintain the openness to a 11’ x 16’ room. They would like to have as few mullions as possible. The visible portion will be obscured by the trellis and the tree. Mr. Griffin stated that the lattice will be on the same plane and the windows will be behind the trellis about 4”. There will be a standing seem hipped copper roof or a zinc roof. A glimpse of the roof may be seen on a Winter’s day. The upper part of the porch will remain as is.
Ms. Diozzi asked the year of the house.
Mr. Griffin stated that it was started some time around 1700.
Mr. Hart stated that the steps are probably not going to be visible. He stated that he felt either copper or zinc roof is appropriate.
Ms. Diozzi made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the option of either copper or zinc roof. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
31 Washington Sq. North
Michael Shea submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a roof deck with railings, approximately 15’ x 15’ on the rear first floor roof. Ted Richard was present representing the applicant. The potential buyers, Elisabeth LeBrun and Jim Harrison were also present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Parcel map
Mr. Richard stated that the site line from Washington square and Oliver is not visible. The only spot visible is from the corner of the Bertram Home property on Mall Street, which is about 100 yards away.
Mr. Richard stated that Mike Shea’s unit is about 40’ away in the carriage house. He stated that due to the trees, six months out of the year the deck will be invisible. One of the windows will be changed to a door (as noted on drawing). The door will closely resemble the window, such as a French glass door.
Ms. Herbert suggested a fir, 15 lite door.
Mr. Richard stated that they propose to use the same balustrade as existing on the first floor.
Ms. Herbert asked if there will be sleepers on the roof to support the flooring.
Mr. Richard replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Herbert asked if the base at the floor of the deck will be a skirtboard.
Mr. Richard stated that it will be simple, painted white.
Ms. Herbert asked what the room below will be.
Mr. Richard stated that it goes over a hallway.
Ms. Bellin stated that it will be fairly non-visible with the balustrade.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the application as submitted with wood balustrade matching the first floor, with railing height to code, corner to be square 4 x 4 pressure treated wrapped in 1 x 6 pine and capped in pyramid wood cap, door to be 15 lite true divided wood door, and with a minimum amount of skirtboard. Baluster rail and door to be painted trim color. Ms. Diozzi seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
48 Chestnut Street
John Connelly and Denice Brait submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for fence installation to conceal gas furnace pipes.
Ms. Guy stated that the applicants have withdrawn due to finding a solution that is non-visible from the public way.
Other Business
- Approval of minutes – 5/4/11
Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of May 4, 2011. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
B. Ms. Harper stated that she got a call from Bertram Home and took a look at the fence. Portions of the fence have been repaired. They will be coming in for some addition work.
There being no further business, Ms. Harper made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
| 
