SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION
MINUTES
July 2, 2014
A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, June 4, 2014 at 7:00 pm at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Jessica Herbert (Chair), Laurie Bellin, David Hart, Susan Keenan, Joanne McCrea, and Larry Spang.
248 Lafayette Street
Brad Aham, Witch City Holdings, LLC, submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the main roof with architectural roof shingles. The proposed shingle is a GAF Slateline. The application also includes the replacement of existing shingles on two dormers with clapboards and in-kind work including repairing fascia, soffets, gutters, and the rubber roof on the front porch.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application: 7/2/14
- Photographs: 6/16/14
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.
2 River Street
Richard Luecke and Perry McIntosh submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to add a downspout to the existing back addition. The gutter will match the existing downspouts in material and color. The application also includes a rebuild of the top 2-4 feet of the north chimney stack and installation of a stainless steel chimney cap. Lastly, the application includes reroofing with 3-tab shingles.
Richard Luecke was present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application: 6/16/14
- Photographs: 6/16/14
Mr. Luecke stated that since the application was submitted, the mason has taken a closer look at the chimney and believes they will need to rebuild it from the roofline.
Mr. Spang asked for the existing roofing material type.
Mr. Luecke responded that the top of the gambrel is slate and the sides of the roof are 3-tab asphalt.
Ms. Bellin noted that if the roofing material will remain the same, they can approve the application through non-applicability.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the non-applicable items on the back of the house. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
There was no public comment on the chimney cap.
Mr. Spang asked if there was a color picked out for the chimney cap.
Mr. Luecke responded that he would have the chimney cap color match the one in the picture submitted.
Ms. Herbert recommended that the chimney cap be black or painted flat black.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the chimney cap in the color black. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
42 Chestnut Street
Kenelm Harris submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to change the paint color for the recently approved perimeter fence. The original proposed color was a gray/green color. The applicant is proposing that the fence be painted white to match the trim of the house.
Kenelm Harris was present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application: 6/16/14
- Photographs: 6/16/14
Ms. McCrea asked for details on the type of white color they would be using.
Mr. Harris responded that they will have the stain matched as closely to the house trim paint as possible.
There was no public coment.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to approve the color, as submitted. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
81 Highland Ave
The North Shore Medical Center, Inc. submitted an application for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance to demolish the boiler building, including the smoke stack, oil bunders, electrical switchgear, inclusive of equipment pad and bulk oxygen tank farm pad. The buildings has been replaced by a new Central Utility Plant and is no longer useful. The building will be replaced by a new state-of-the-art patient care building.
Attn. Joseph Correnti, Mary Jo Gagnon, NSMC, and Shelly Bisegna, NSMC were present.
Documents & Exhibits
- Application: 6/25/14
- Photographs: 6/25/14
Attn. Correnti stated that the boiler building was built in approximately 1917 and sits along the front of the property. It is being removed in order to make room for a new building. A new utility plant was constructed to serve the Medical Center, and the boiler building no longer serves a useful purpose.
Mr. Bisegna stated that the only things remaining in the building are a few high and low pressure boilers and an emergency power generator. There are some utilities that run through the building as well. The stack and the building will be completely removed. Underneath the road are underground fuel tanks, they will not be removed at this time. The boiler building is in the middle of the footprint of the new building. The plant is now decommissioned and they are ready to demolish.
Attn. Correnti stated that in 2011 the Commission received a copy of a determination by the Massachusetts Historical Commission that while there are some buildings on the NSMC campus that are historically significant, the boiler building is not one of them.
Mr. Hart asked if the applicant has a scaled site plan of the buildings.
Mr. Bisegna responded in the affirmative.
Attn. Correnti stated that the new building will be going through local permitting in the next few months.
There was no public comment
VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the following pro viso: the applicant submit a scaled site plan showing the boiler building on the site, and provide color photos taken from the corners from all four sides, for the record, and that vertical dimensions of the building be included on a plan. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
131 Bridge Street
The City of Salem requested comments from the Commission regarding a rehabilitation project being undertaken as part of the City’s House Rehabilitation Program. Under the requirements of the HUD Community Development Block Grant funds, because the house is located within a National Register district it is subject to the Commission’s review prior to the work being bid.
Mr. Hart questioned the purview of the Commission on this project. If the project is using federal funds, and thus is being reviewed under Section 106, then he believes the Commission has purview over the interior work as well.
Ms. Lovett stated that she did not believe this project was being reviewed under a full Section 106 review. She was unsure whether the Commission should comment on the interior work, however felt the Commission could submit their comments for the City to review.
Ms. Herbert questioned status of ownership for the property as it appears the property. She questioned whether the property may be condominiumized, in which case the Commission would press the applicant to invest money into making historically appropriate repairs.
Ms. Lovett stated that this program provides no interest loans to applicants and the City places an affordable housing restriction on the property. The applicant is not required to contribute funds. To her best knowledge, there is no plan for the property to be sold. If it is, the loan will need to be repaid.
Mr. Spang stated that it feels awkward to have historic fabric being replaced with non-historic materials using City funds. There isn’t enough data to know if there is historic fabric on the interior that needs to be protected. The Commission should advocate for retaining any historic fabric.
Ms. McCrea stated concerned that there were original interior shutters that may be removed.
Ms. Herbert expressed concern with the exterior paint being scraped down to bare wood from 5ft down. The existing paint has crackled and the contrast will look strange.
Ms. Herbert stated that the Commission could submit initial comments on a few items and then ask for more information for the interior.
Mr. Spang expressed interest in holding off commenting until additional information was obtained.
Mr. Hart requested that Ms. Lovett ask Jane Guy for the documentation that the City has an agreement with MHC to review the project.
Ms. Herbert added some initial comments from the Commission may include that:
- The chimneys be repointed and the parging removed
- The deleading work on the outside of the building be completed through encapsulation rather than scraping
- The 3rd floor windows be replaced with wood rather than vinyl
- The chimneys be blocked off rather than removed
She added that the Commission has questions regarding whether there is any special treatment anticipated for the apparent period shutters throughout and if there is any intention to remove the period Georgian trim, and doors, or if there will be any modifications to interior period Georgian stairways.
Ms Lovett stated that she would obtain answers to the Commission’s questions in advance of the next meeting.
VOTE: Ms. Bellin made a motion to continue the review to the next meeting. Mr. Spang seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Buffum Street District
Ms. Lovett provided a draft of a Certified Local Government Opinion of Eligibility for the National Register for a Buffum Street Historic District.
Michael Marsaille, 60 Buffum Street, stated that he requested that the City request a CLG opinion for Buffum Street. They are creating a neighborhood association and are also working to designate the street as a National Register Historic District, and then eventually a local historic district.
VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to support the application for eligibility of the Buffum Street district for the National Register of Historic Places. Ms. McCrea seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Other Business
Ms. Herbert discussed with the Commission the recent email sent from the City Solicitor regarding the question over whether being a member of HSI is a conflict with being a member of the Historical Commission.
Ms. Bellin stated that it would be helpful to have an official decision from the Ethics Commission. Mr. Hart can make the request himself.
Ms. Herbert stated that Ms. Bellin and Ms. McCrea’s reappointments are up for consideration at the next Council meeting. The Council of the Whole will be meeting on July 17th, to discuss Ms. Bellin’s reappointment. As many Commission members as possible should try to attend. HSI members are also encouraged to attend.
Ms. McCrea stated that at the last City Council meeting, the City Council voted in support of all of the CPA projects.
Correspondence
VOTE: There being no further business, Mr. Hart made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Bellin seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion so carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Natalie BL Lovett
Community Development Planner
| 
