SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
JULY 6, 2011
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, July 6, 2011 at 7:30 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Ms. Herbert, Ms. Diozzi, Mr. Hart, Ms. Harper, Ms. Keenan, Ms. McCrea and Ms. Bellin.
51 Summer Street/28 High Street
Wayne and Nadine Hanscom submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors. The first choice is for the body to be Chelsea Gray with trim and fence in White Dove and black doors. The second choice is for the body to be Chelsea Gray with trim and fence to be Monterey White and Newburyport Blue doors.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Paint chips
There was no public comment.
Ms. Diozzi made motion to approve the application as submitted with the option of either combination or colors. Ms. Bellin 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.
Ms. Guy noted that Ms. Keenan cannot vote on the chimney cap item due to having missed two meetings where this was discussed.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Installation Instructions for high efficiency condensing gas furnaces
- Regency P42 Gas Fireplace Owners & Installation Manual
- Letter from Mr. Legon with specifications for a metal chimney cap
- McNichols Expanded Metal catalog cut
Mr. Legon’s letter stated that the proposed chimney cap sides and top will be mesh, which will appear darker and more solid from the street. The dimensions of the cap are 34” x 28” x 16”H. The lip will be 3” wide around the perimeter of the cap. It will be steel, painted either deep gray or brick red.
Mr. Legon stated that a couple weeks ago he provided some additional information. He stated that there were a few questions that came back to him through Ms. Guy from Ms. Harper and he answered those.
Mr. Hart stated that he felt it should be stainless steel.
Mr. Legon stated that since it is going to be painted a dark color, they could save money by just going with steel, rather than stainless steel.
Mr. Hart stated that it won’t hold up as well.
Mr. Legon stated that Essex County Craftsman states that since it is painted, it will hold up just as long. He agreed if it were not being painted, stainless would be the choice.
Mr. Hart stated that stainless steel will be easier maintenance-wise since going forward for the condo association.
Ms. Herbert asked if they could get it in galvanized.
Mr. Legon replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Hart stated that galvanized is better than plain steel.
Mr. Legon stated that he was willing to do that.
Ms. Bellin stated that it will fall to someone else to maintain and the Commission wants to encourage that it be manufactured now in a relatively long lasting material.
Mr. Legon stated that according to the McNichols catalog cut, the proposal is for 16 gauge, ¼” mesh for sides, and ¾” mesh for the top. He suggested it be grey to match the side roofs.
Ms. Herbert stated that it should be a litter deeper grey, with a matt finish.
There was no public comment.
Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the proposal for the two chimney caps in galvanized metal, charcoal grey, matt finish, 16 gauge, ¼” mesh sides, ¾” mesh top. Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Keenan abstained from voting.
Ms. Guy stated that she received an email request from a resident at 70 Essex Street, Unit 2, to reconsider his objections to the present state of the fence and to have the fence end at least one foot from the sidewalk/end of the driveway.
Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission had approved Mr. Hart and Ms. Keenan as delegates to do a review of the fence. She stated that Mr. Hart did a lot of research on the step down sections with lattice, for which he sent us an email with some examples. They sent a photo of what they approved based on the authorization they were given to make field adjustments. She suggested the Commission formalize it in a motion to approve what is existing.
Ms. Diozzi made a motion to ratify the approval of the fence as it does exist now. Ms. Keenan seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. McCrea abstained from voting.
Ms. Diozzi made a motion to reconsider, as requested by the resident at 70 Essex Street, Unit 2, in hopes it does not prevail. Ms. Harper seconded the motion. Ms. McCrea and Ms. Harper voted in favor. Ms. Herbert, Ms. Diozzi, Mr. Hart, Ms. Keenan and Ms. Bellin voted in opposition. The motion did not carry.
All properties in historic districts
The City of Salem submitted an application for a Certificate of Hardship for the installation of water meter interface units (MIU’s) – 4.4 by 6.2 by 2.2 inches. The units need to be placed on the exterior of the property due to accuracy of signal strength, typically in the same location of the existing touch pad. Present was City Engineer David Knowlton.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photograph of 358 Essex Street
- Catalog cut of R450 Meter Interface Unit
Ms. Guy noted that this came to the Commission’s attention following a complaint by the owner of 358 Essex Street that the units were installed on the front of his property. She suggested that the Commission develop parameters for general installation (location, height, color, etc.) and alternatives if those parameters cannot be met.
Mr. Knowlton stated that they are typically installed in the same location as where the existing touch pad is located.
Ms. Bellin asked if they have to be placed on the front of the house, if the touch pad is there.
Mr. Knowlton stated that that is the preference, but they can be put in other locations.
Ms. Bellin asked if they can be put on the inside.
Mr. Knowlton replied of the affirmative, stated that they can as long as the signal strength is okay. He stated that they have been placing as many as they can on the interior in the historic districts since they got the complaint.
Ms. Herbert asked if they will be reinstalling those at 358 Essex inside.
Mr. Knowlton stated that they could. Mr. Knowlton noted that maintenance on the inside is more problematic.
Ms. Guy asked, for the rare instances where it cannot go on the inside, if it can be placed somewhere other than the front of the house.
Mr. Knowlton replied in the affirmative.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Bellin made a motion that when the MIU units cannot be installed inside, that they are installed on side as far from the public way and visibility as possible, or on rear, and as low as possible and that the 358 Essex units be relocated inside or to a less visible place. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
310 Lafayette Street
Dr. Joel Green presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace a wood gutter with aluminum to match the existing gutters.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Sample OG gutter (photo taken)
Ms. Herbert asked if they will be repairing the soffit as well.
Dr. Green replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Harper asked if they already have some aluminum gutters on the building.
Dr. Green stated that the front and side have wood and he believed the other two sides were aluminum.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Bellin made motion to replace the existing wood gutters with OG profile seamless aluminum white gutters to replicate the gutters existing on the house and for in kind repair of soffits as needed. Ms. Diozzi seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
14 Chestnut Street
Tom and Kate Murray submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to build a screened gazebo on the rear right corner of the lot, at least 5’ from the property line. The gazebo will be 10’ octagonal, with 2 x 6 roof rafters with 1 x 6 tongue and groove ceiling. The first style choice is Pagoda and the second is Majestic. The first choice for architectural shingles is Rustic Cedar and the second is Weathered Wood. The finish will be white to match the house trim.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Plot of land
- Catalog excerpts from Amish Country Gazebos
Ms. Harper asked if it will be visible from the street.
Ms. Murray stated that there may be a glimpse in the winter. She stated that they will not have a weathervane.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Harper made a motion the installation of a gazebo in either Pagoda or Majestic style and with shingles to be either Rustic Cedar or Weathered Wood. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
1 Brown Street
The Peabody Essex Museum submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove mineral board siding, aluminum gutters and storm windows and other trim details for the purpose of exposing underlying historic fabric. The work will be done under the direction of Finch & Rose and after surveying the historic fabric, a stabilization plan will be developed in advance of strategic planning for the restoration/preservation of the structure.
Documents & Exhibits
Ms. Guy stated that she received an email request asking for a continuation to the next meeting.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the application. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
4 Andover Street
Joel F. and Judy H. Caron submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace an existing picket fence with a Molly Prichard Picket Fence.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Proposal from J. C. Fence Co.
Ms. Diozzi stated that the application does not show the spacing on the slats.
Mr. Hart made a motion to continue and to ask the applicant to attend the next meeting. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
84-86 Derby Street
Ryan and Amber Macione submitted an application for a Certificate of Non-applicability to install an air cooled condensing unit for the A.C. system to be installed in the rear of the property and non-visible from the public way. The application is also to replace 10 wooden windows with 8 new wooden windows, on the back side and the side facing 92 Derby Street, not visible from Derby or Becket Street and to install 10 brown storm windows to match existing storm windows on the front of the house, on the back side and the side facing 92 Derby Street, not visible from Derby or Becket Street.
Ms. Herbert stated that they need to submit a plot plan.
No action was taken.
Other Business
- 86 Essex Street – Ms. Guy read a letter from the Salem Housing Authority stating that they found an alternative solution for the elevator condensing unit and will not be mounting the equipment on the exterior of the building.
- Approval of minutes
- Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of May 18, 2011. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
- Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of June 1, 2011. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
- Ms. Guy read a letter from AB Carnes Roofing concerning an architectural roof the was installed at the front of 4 Andover Street by Aspen Roofing without having obtained permits. She noted that this came about due to a recent Certificate of Non-applicability that was issued for the rear of the property, which specified 3-tab. AB Carnes is suggesting that Aspen Roofing reimburse the owner to have the architectural shingles replaced. Ms. Guy noted that the house has not been sited as a violation. She stated that it would be up to the homeowner to pursue Aspen, not the Commission, but that the Commission could assist the owner in his pursuit by formally requiring the removal in writing.
Ms. Bellin made a motion to send a letter to Mr. Caron responding to the letter and enclosing a formal violation notice for the roof that Mr. Caron can use to compel Aspen. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
There being no further business, Ms. McCrea 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
| 
