DRAFT
SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
March 19, 2014
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, March 19, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Kathy Harper (Vice Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, and Natalie Lovett. Jane Turiel and Joanne McCrea arrived late.
3 Carpenter Street
Jonathan and Jennifer Firth submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a sunroom at the rear of the house. The sunroom will 9’6” x 13’4”. Jonathan and Jennifer Firth were present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application: 3/3/14
- Photographs: 3/19/14
- Drawings: 9/2/13
Ms. McCrea arrived at this time.
Ms. Herbert asked if all of the architectural details and dentils would be wooden to match the house.
Ms. Firth responded in the affirmative.
Ms. Harper asked for the specifications on the windows.
Ms. Firth responded that the windows will be custom made. They can match them to the SHC requirements.
Ms. Herbert stated because the solarium is minimally visible from the public way, insulated glass would be acceptable. The window spacers should be bronze and the windows should be wood. Given that the house is Victorian, they do not need to have all of the panes on the windows. It was common for Victorian era windows to be 2/2. That may be an option for the solarium. No panes on the windows would also be appropriate.
Mr. Hart agreed with the options provided by Ms. Herbert and added that he also supported the design as presented.
There was no public comment.
MOTION: Mr. Hart made a motion to accept as submitted with the pro viso that if the applicant wishes to make changes to the window panes, they will come back before the Commission for approval. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion.
Mr. Hart stated that he is not clear on the materials for the foundation.
Ms. Firth responded that it will be red brick to match the house.
VOTE: Mr. Hart amended his previous motion to include that the foundation will be red brick. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Ms. Turiel arrived at this time.
110 Derby Street
Anthony Sobin submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the exterior door along Derby Street. The new door would be a solid core door with the dimensions 34”x80”. The applicant proposed three (3) different door styles. Two of the options have glass, one is a solid 6-panel door. Anthony and Theodora Sobin were present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application: 2/24/14
- Photographs:
Ms. McCrea asked the applicant had a style that they favored.
Mr. Sobin responded that they would prefer to have some light, so style 2, with the fan window, is their first choice.
Mr. Hart preferred style 3, with horizontal lights.
Ms. Harper preferred style 1, if there was glass at the top.
Ms. Herbert noted that the applicant could purchase a 6-panel door (style 1) and have a carpenter cut out the top two panels and install glass. The Commission recently granted approval for a similar door at 91-93 Federal Street.
Ms. Lovett left to retrieve the 91-93 Federal Street certificate from the file.
There was no public comment.
VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to accept the application for Style 1 with the proviso that the door may be either solid wood or the top panels replaced with glass. The door will be painted to match the existing door. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
2-4 Gifford Court
Donna Yates submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the front doors along Gifford Court. The new doors will be four panel, solid wood doors. The application also includes paint colors:
- Body: Sherwin Williams Needlepoint Navy (SW 0032) or Downing Slate (SW 2819)
- Trim: Sherwin Williams Renwick Beige (SW 2805)
In addition, the Commission requested that Ms. Yates come to the meeting to discuss an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability for in-kind work to rebuild a side stairway. Donna Yates was present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application:
- Photographs:
Ms. Herbert asked if the existing door could be repaired.
Ms. Yates responded that the door is not repairable; it no longer fits tight to the jam. This is the closest match that the carpenter could find.
Ms. Harper asked if the fir veneer LDL door is acceptable to the Commission.
Ms. Herbert replied that it would be acceptable.
Ms. Herbert asked if they would also be replacing the storm doors.
Ms. Yates responded in the affirmative.
VOTE: Ms. Mccrea made a motion to accept the application as submitted. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
The Commission then discussed the application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability for in-kind repairs and replacement of the side deck and stairs.
Ms. Lovett left to retrieve a picture of the deck from the file.
Ms. Herbert asked if the deck will be rebuilt in kind and if the lower door was being replaced.
Ms. Yates responded that the deck will be rebuilt in kind. They would like to replace the door in the future, but not at this time. She stated that she would also like to reinstall the lattice underneath the stairs.
Ms. Bellin stated that given that the application did not include the lattice, she does not believe that the lattice can be approved for this meeting.
There was no public comment.
Ms. Lovett stated that lattice cannot be on the next agenda. It will need a notice to abutters.
VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the porch rebuild for the existing design with the pro viso that the rail height meets building code, and that the details for the lattice be submitted to the Commission in a future application. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
The Commission then discussed the paint colors.
Ms. Turiel asked if the applicant would consider a burgundy color for the door.
Ms. Yates responded that she is open to suggestions for different door colors.
The Commission discussed the paint options and decided on:
Body: SW Needlepoint Navy
Trim: Classic light buff
Doors: Toile red or black
There was no public comment.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the agreed upon colors with an option of Toile Red or black for the doors. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
1 Beach Ave
John and Maureen Hentosh submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the structure and foundation. The house was extensively damaged by a fire. A letter from the Salem Building Inspector, Tom St. Pierre, is included in the application stating that he believes the home is beyond reasonable repair. The new house would be built on the existing homes footprint. Brendan Larkin and Gerald Casaletto were present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application: 3/12/14
- Photographs: 3/12/14
Mr. Larkin and Mr. Casaletto, builders of the new home, present the application to the Commission on the owners’ behalf. Mr. Casaletto stated that the new house will be built on the same footprint, however the foundation will be replaced. The fire took place in the basement, so there is extensive structural damage. The new house will not have as large of a porch along the water side.
Ms. Herbert encouraged the applicants to salvage as much of the Victorian architectural details as possible to reuse on the new building.
Ms. Herbert summarized that the Commission’s jurisdiction for an application to waive the demolition delay ordinance outside of local historic districts is whether or not the existing building is historically significant and whether or not the structure can be restored. In this case, with extreme fire damage, there is not much historic fabric left to be saved.
Mr. Hart stated that while the building inspector’s letter stated that the house is beyond reasonable repair, technically the house can be saved but it would take a lot of money.
Mr. Casaletto responded that if the house were to be repaired, it would end up looking a lot like the new house because they would have to rebuild nearly everything. Restoration would require the house be lifted, the foundation replaced, and the structure reinforced.
Ms. Herbert opened the application for public comment.
Councilor Sargent spoke in favor of the waiver being granted.
VOTE: Ms. Turiel made a motion to approve the application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Community Preservation Act Projects – Requests for Letter of Support
Ms. McCrea distributed to the Commission a spreadsheet showing the project applications coming before the Community Preservation Committee (CPC). The CPC has approximately $400,000 dollars to distribute. She feels as though it will be a challenge for the Historical Commission to prioritize the projects.
Ms. Herbert stated that a vote for a letter of support does not necessarily mean that the Commission is stating they are priority projects, only that they have looked at the project, and it is a historic resource for the City.
The Commission discussed the different projects and the criteria for the projects being determined eligible.
Nancy Tracy was present and stated that she hoped the commission will support the Library’s application to the CPC.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the letter of support. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Section 106 Review- Lateral Pipeline Project
Ms. Lovett stated that PAL will be conducting the Section 106 Review for the Salem Lateral Pipeline project. They sent the Commission a letter requesting initial comments on the project as well as to establish a line of communication with the SHC.
Mr. Hart stated that he attended the public hearing recently held regarding the project. He would suggest that the Commission structure its letter to defer to the MHC, given that they will be involved in the Section 106 process. It is too early to tell if the pipeline will or will not adversely affect the historic buildings.
Ms. Herbert stated that at the public hearing there was a third option discussed for a sea route. It was eliminated due to cost, but she feels the option should be delineated so that the public can understand why it is prohibitive.
Councilor Sargent stated that from the meeting it seemed they would prefer hydraulic drilling across Collins Cove and then come onto land at Beatty Park.
Mr. Hart suggested that the letter could also recommend that a project conservator to appointed to the project. This person would study the adverse effects of the project on archaeological resources and historic properties and work with the project engineers to ensure that any adverse effects are mitigated.
Other Business
Approval of Minutes
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approval the minutes of 1/15/14 with comments.
Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried. Mr. Hart abstained from the vote.
VOTE: Ms. Hart made a motion to continue approval of the minutes from 2/5/14 with comments. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Correspondence
Ms. Herbert stated that at the next meeting she would like to discuss procedures and conduct for the Commission. Specifically with regards to conflict of interest, sunshine ordinance, and open meeting law. She would like to see if the minutes can be received before the meeting so that Commission members can review the minutes before they are posted to the website.
Ms. McCrea asked if the Commission can review and approve the minutes before they are finalized.
Ms. Lovett stated the draft minutes in whatever form are always public information. Once the draft minutes are prepared, they should be posted to the website.
Ms. Bellin discussed difference between draft and final minutes as viewed by the law.
VOTE: There being no further business, Ms. Bellin made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Turiel seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Natalie BL Lovett
Community Development Planner
| 
