SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
MARCH 7, 2012
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, March 7, 2012 at 7:30 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Ms. Herbert, Ms. Bellin, Ms. Harper, Ms. Keenan, Ms. McCrea and Mr. Hart.
388 Essex Street
Ms. Bellin abstained from the discussion and joined the audience.
In continuation of a prior meeting Steven Sass and Ellen Golub submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to have the option to install an iron railings for the rebuilt rear porch. The applicant was not present.
Documents & Exhibits
It was noted that the owner has proceeded with the railing in wood.
VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to deny the application without prejudice. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Bellin rejoined the Commission at the table.
18 Butler Street
George J. Sands submitted an application to waive the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the house at 18 Butler Street in order to construct a 2 family modular house. Ms. Guy stated that the applicant has requested a continuance to the first April meeting.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the application to the meeting of April 4, 2012. Mr. Hart seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
19 Fowler Street
Charles Bean and Susan Linder Bean submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a photovoltaic system.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application
- Photographs
- Photo-simulations
- Plans completed by Sollular, LLC
- LG Mononx Catalog pages
- Empase.com pages
- Ironridge Installation Manual
Kathleen Long, Chief Operating Officer of Sollular, LLC stated that it will be a 3.2kw photovoltaic system with 13 panels and one array. It will be located on one side of the roof only, in one neat array.
Ms. Herbert asked the profile, how high they will sit.
Ms. Long replied that they will sit 3” off the roof. She stated that it is a dark colored panel and that the idea is, being considerate of the historic preservation of the property, they did not standard traditional inverter technology, which typical sits on the side of the building. They will use micro-converters, which sit up inside the panel. She stated that the electricity flows to a revenue grade meter, a small box that sits up outside the array. There will also be a small box that is a utility disconnect. The units are approximately 4” x 6”. A thin conduit will come down and run into the basement. The panels are installed 48” on center. Their company is professional licensed engineers, professional electricians and licensed general contractors. When they do a site assessment, they do an electrical assessment, as well as a structural assessment and go into the rafters. They did a full out engineering plan and the roof can support the load. She stated that nothing
would be seen on the other side of the home and that there will be nothing visible from rear. She stated that they are very non-intrusive and the only thing you will see from the street when you look up is a 3” overhang on one side of the house. The system’s energy will be used completely by the home, which is called behind the meter solar. This is renewable clean energy that is being used to offset the existing demand.
Ms. Herbert asked if this will take care of all their energy needs or just supplement it.
Ms. Long stated that it will supplement it, therefore reducing their electric bill. She stated that nothing will be put back on the grid.
Ms. Linder-Bean stated that it is supposed to be 95%.
Ms. Bellin asked where the meter and utility disconnect will be. She stated that it is run through the rafters on the inside and indicated on the plans where the meter and disconnect will be.
Ms. Linder-Bean stated that the meter is currently inside.
Ms. Long stated that, in that case, the meter will be on inside of house. The utility disconnect will be visible in the lower corner outside.
Ms. Herbert asked how big the conduit down the side of the building will be.
Ms. Long stated that it is about a half inch.
Ms. McCrea asked if they have other installations in Salem.
Ms. Long replied in the negative, but noted that they have worked all over the Boston area, including residential and commercial. They have 50 projects in the Boston Area. She stated that they are one of Home Depot’s largest installers. They have a master services agreement with TD Bank. They do utility grade solar as well.
Ms. Herbert the length of time for payout on the system, the cost of installation versus the savings on the electric.
Ms. Long stated that the owners are entering into a sun run program She stated that the system is paid for up front and there are two ways to recover the investment. One is the avoided cost, which is the energy that your system is generating during the day and you are no longer being billed for by the utility company. There is a secondary source of income called a Solar Renewal Energy Certificate (SREC). For every 1000 kw hour generated, they earn one certificate. Right now in Massachusetts certificates, which are a commodity, trade at over $500 a piece. The homeowner will earn 3 certificates per year, at the current rate this system will generate $1500 of income, in addition to the avoided cost. At the present moment, the payback runs between 36 and 48 months. She
noted that for own home, her payback was 38 months.
Ms. Bellin asked about a net meter.
Ms. Long stated that it replaces the utility grade meter and looks almost identical, only it is digital. During the day, the meter is going backwards, as the system is producing electricity. At night it moves forward. If the energy is not being used, it is being placed back on the grid through the net meter. The utility company at the end of the month will reconcile your bill. She stated that the warrantee is 20+ years. It is a LG 255 watt panel. She stated that the panels sit on a racking system, which distributes the weight of the panels, so that each panel is not screwed into the roof. She stated that the nice thing about solar panels is they keep a constant warm temperature and melt ice and snow. They encourage their customers to hose off the panels once per year,
usually in Spring with pollen season.
Ms. Bellin asked how close they will sit to the roof line.
Ms. Long stated that they will be 6’’ back from the front.
Ms. Bellin asked home much room is to the peak.
Ms. Herbert asked if it could be moved back.
Ms. Guy asked why they chose that side of the roof and not the other.
Ms. Long stated that it is an orientation issue. They would not be able to capture enough sunlight to create enough energy for the warrantee for the production guarantee. Ms. Long stated that they could not move them back as they have maxed out the roof with the proper setbacks.
Ms. Bellin stated that they are pretty much taking up the entire.
Ms. Long replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Hart stated that it will be visible from the public way, noting that the photo was taking 2 or 3 houses away.
Ms. Herbert asked about the air space with the racking that the panels sit on and whether one will see a black line or light going through.
Ms. Long stated that it is a dark roof and the double row of panels that sit flush together and go to the peak, so it is unlikely that one will see light.
Mr. Hart stated that he would like a site visit. He stated that it has the potential for precedent setting installation. He stated that he understands it is minimal, but that he was not comfortable voting until there is site visit to see the site distances.
Ms. Herbert asked if it is possible to put a panel in place to see at the site visit.
Ms. Long stated that she could ask an engineer to meet on site and go on the roof with a panel.
Ms. Herbert stated that it could be some kind of a mockup.
Ms. Harper suggested a section of panel or something the same size and same height off the roof.
Ms. Herbert stated it could even be black Styrofoam fashioned to look like a panel so we can stand back and see. It would not need to be an actual panel, but would need to be the dimensions of the panel and the same black color. She stated that she could see that a lot of people might be interested. She noted with this particular roof design, it won’t be seen as much, but stated that it would really be obvious if this house were an a-frame. She stated that this system would be a case by case basis depending on the construction of the building.
Paul Marquis, City of Salem Energy Manager, stated that he and the Renewable Energy Task Force had a hand in advising on the Commission’s guidelines. He stated that the Fire Chief has indicated concerns about the setbacks from the roof edges, particularly the front and rear edge of the roof. Fire Marshalls across the state have worked to develop some general guidelines. He advised that there be is due diligence in making sure that the setback guidelines are met. He stated that it may require the sacrifice of one of the modules to meet a safety set back. There is some strong sentiment with Salem’s Fire Chief regarding setbacks.
Ms. Long stated that they leave 6” around the entire array on every side. She noted that they are not covering both sides of the roof and that the utility disconnects at are ground level, so that the Fire Department is able to throw the switch.
Mr. Marquis stated that he is not suggesting that 6” is not enough, but is suggesting that a consultation with the Fire Department is warranted, particularly when dealing with an historic district.
Ms. Herbert stated that it sounds like the proposal probably needs to be run by the Fire Department to get their reading on it. She stated that this is a first in Salem and we need to get this right.
Ms. McCrea asked if the State has developed regulations or are coming up with its own.
Mr. Marquis stated that he could not answer definitively, but noted that there is some consensus among fire safety officials. There is the code and what public safety officials would like to see.
Ms. Guy asked what other permits are needed. She asked if a Fire Department permit was required.
Mr. Marquis replied in the negative. He stated that it requires Building, Electrical and an interconnection agreement with the utility company.
Ms. Bean stated that they have all three.
Mr. Marquis stated that he is a strong proponent of renewable energy, but wants to get it right, since it is a test case for solar in a historic district.
Ms. Herbert asked if there are any installations in Salem outside of historic districts.
Mr. Marquis replied in the affirmative. He stated that he has a document from Chief Cody with preferred setbacks and UL disconnect requirements. He will email it to Ms. Guy to forward.
Mr. Hart suggested a site visit. He stated that he would like to understand what the disconnect looks like and where it is going to be. He stated he thinks solar is great, but wants to be sure what is installed is appropriate for the historic district.
Ms. Long encouraged the city to develop its own ordinance.
Ms. Bellin stated that considering this is first one, it is an ideal model to be the first one because of the unobtrusive roof. She stated that she also wants to know the dimensions.
Mr. Hart noted that you have to stand relatively far back to see it and it is not a heavily traveled public way.
Ms. Herbert stated most drivers will take the right onto North Pine. She noted solar approvals will be on a case by case basis and in this case, it will be minimally visible from a well-traveled public way.
Rick Bingham, Advanced Performance Solar, stated that he lives in salem. He stated that he can answer any questions.
Ms. Herbert closed the public hearing.
VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to continue the application and to schedule a site visit on Saturday 10th or 17th, and, if possible, the proponent provide a mock up of the array for the roof and the utility disconnect. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
16 River Street
Kevin & Melissa Hankens submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a 3’ high picket fence along the top of the retaining wall at the porch end of the upper driveway. Pickets to be 2” in width and the fence will match the picket fence located by their front door. Paint Swiss Coffee to match proposed house trim. Also submitted was an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for removal of aluminum siding and shutters, to repair existing clapboards and trim and for paint colors. House to be Wainscot Green, Trim, windows and fence to be Swiss Coffee and Door and brick wall foundation at the rear of the house to be Brattle Spruce.
- Application
- Photographs
- Paint colors
Ms. Hankens stated that she talked to the neighbors and held paint chips to the neighboring houses because she wanted something to compliment the neighborhood.
VOTE: Ms. Harper made a motion to remove the siding and shutters, and to repair clapboards and trim. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to approve the paint colors as submitted. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. Hankens stated that there was once a chain link fence, but that it disappeared when they moved in.
There was no public comment.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the fence as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
37 Chestnut Street
Daniel Randal and Phillip Gillespie submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a 3’ x 12’ bay on the West elevation of the existing wood frame extension at the rear of the house. It will have a brick foundation to match existing, wood windows, a copper roof and wood trim details painted white to match existing trim on house. The dentil detail shown on the bay will match the existing on the eave of the main house. The façade is obscured from the public way. The application also includes the replacement of the existing wood frame mudroom/sunroom and covered porch with a wood frame mudroom/conservatory with wood windows, wood trim details painted white to match the existing, and a copper conservatory roof. They propose extending the rear
façade by 2.5 feet toward the south. They also propos to demolish the existing wood stair on the East side of the home, as well as, the wood deck at the rear (South) side of the house. An unused brick chimney on the South side of the clapboard structure will also be removed.
- Application
- Photographs
- Plans completed by Foley Fiore Architecture
- Plot Plan prepared by Edward J. Farrell
Mr. Gillespie stated that he moved up from Pennsylvania a few years ago. He stated that the purpose of the project is for their young daughters, and that they want to provide an informal living space for the children that has an eat-in family area and is close to the outside.
David Foley, architect, stated that they are removing the existing wood frame structure and will construct a conservatory structure. They will add a small bay onto the family room. The house will extend rearward by 2.5 feet. The wooden deck will be removed. Mr. Foley stated that the bay on the side is not terribly visible from street. It is obscure from Warren Street, and is most visible from Chestnut street but from a distance.
Mr. Gillespie stated that they tried to design the façade similar to what is there.
Mr. Foley stated that it looks like the structure has evolved over years. It does not have a foundation.
Mr. Gillespie stated that it is hard to tell what was there originally.
Mr. Foley showed a sample of standing seam copper roof. He stated it will be the same detail whether glass panels or copper.
Ms. Herbert asked if the conservatory will be glass and wood.
Mr. Foley replied in the affirmative and stated it is a wooden base, with glass and wood, and wooden pilasters.
Ms. Herbert asked the material for the lower roof.
Mr. Foley stated it will be standing seam copper and portions would be glass.
Mr. Hart stated that he was not sure if the West elevation is visible from the public way.
Mr. Gillespie stated that it is minimally visible from Warren Street and not visible from Chestnut Street.
Ms. Herbert asked if they are removing the side deck.
Mr. Foley replied in the affirmative.
Ms. Herbert asked if they will add a new deck.
Mr. Gillespie replied in the negative and added that they may have flush brick patio.
Ms. Harper asked about the windows.
Mr. Foley stated that they will be Marvin double hung in the bay, and casement in the conservatory, with simulated divided lights.
Mr. Gillespie stated that they will be all wood.
Ms. Herbert asked the size on the mullions.
Mr. Foley stated that they will match what is on the house.
Mr. Hart stated that it is a very well done application package. He stated that it is a subsidiary portion of the building. He stated that it does not really emulate Federal architecture, but that it is interesting whimsy of design. He noted that it meets the National Park Service guidelines for an addition to be separate and distinct from the building and not pretending to be a Federal building. He noted that the visibility is rather minimal.
Mr. Gillespie stated that he did not believe it will be visible at all in the summer,
Ms. Harper asked if the chimney will be removed.
Ms. Gillespie replied in the affirmative and stated that it was probably a chimney for a subsidiary cooking stove at one point. It is not being used. They will reuse its brick to do bay foundation.
Ms. Keenan stated that she thought the proposal was great.
VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms. Guy stated that she is looking for a vote to submit a letter of support for the city’s application for MPPF funds for the Salem Common Fence Restoration. She provided a draft letter.
VOTE: Ms. McCrea made a motion to submit the letter. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Ms. McCrea stated that Bill Wooley went above and beyond for the Salem Common and wished to thank him for his efforts.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of 1/18/12. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of 2/15/12. Ms. Harper seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the minutes of 2/28/12. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Mr. Hart stated that the MACRIS link on Massachusetts Historical Commission’s webpage has a large number of digitized Form B’s.
VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane A. Guy
Clerk of the Commission
| 
