Historical Commission

February 5, 2020, Page 1 of 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES February 5, 2020 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, February March 4, 2020 at 7:00 pm at 98 Washington Street. Present were Larry Spang (Chair), Milo Martinez, Mark Pattison, David Hart (Vice Chair), Stacey Norkun, and Erin Schaeffer. Request for Comment - New Headstone Replacement at Howard Street Cemetery Mr. Bill Prince presented his request to put in a new headstone for Captain Henry Prince on behalf of his family. He distributed a photograph showing the condition of the current headstone, which has deteriorated to the point where the inscription is almost illegible. Mr. Prince went on to talk about the history of Henry Prince saying he sailed along with Nathanial Bowditch. He also built the Derby House and the West Indian Good Store. My. Prince then distributed an image of the proposed stone showing dimensions, as well as the death certificate of Henry Prince and experts from the practical navigator where Bowditch and Prince were navigating together. The Prince family will pay for the stone and hopes the City will install it. Their goal is to complete this project in the springtime, hopefully to finish before Salem’s ancestry days. The Prince side of the stone would be exactly the same and the reverse side of the stone would stay as it is now. Mr. Prince isn’t sure which type of stone to use for new headstone but does not want to use marble since it deteriorates. He wants to use a stone that looks like it has been there all along. Mr. Pattison asked if the stone was the same on the back and the front. Mr. Prince replied yes with the names on the front and the names on the back. Ms. Schaeffer expressed her opinion about the importance of knowing the location and being able to read the headstones and she would support this plan. Mr. Spang asked if there could be a supplemental sign made of granite that would not take away from the original antique headstone. He asked if the original stone had an image at the top like an urn. Mr. Price said he does not want to disturb what is already there and wants to retain the historical significance. He added that if the ancient stone was replaced the history would be lost. Therefore, he has thought of a few different scenarios for replacing the inscriptions, like a stone on the ground, or a small marker, etc. He concluded that just repeating the old stone for the new stone would add history because then you have a comparison of the amount of age next to each stone. Mr. Prince stated that the new stone wouldn’t take away from the overall historical appearance of the cemetery to avoid disturbing what is already there. Ms. Kelleher noted that a newer stone in Charter Street Cemetery has an inscription noting when it was installed and who was responsible for installing it. The Commission agreed that including this information on the new Prince stone would be important. Ms. Norkum questioned what type of stone should be used. The old cemetery is mostly slate and marble headstones and a highly polished granite stone would look too new. A granite that's rougher, like a flamed finish, would be more appropriate. Mr. Martinez asked if a letter should be written to the Cemetery Commission to get a better understanding of the types of material that would be better for headstones in the cemetery. Mr. Pattison recommended that the positioning of the new stone should be different from the original stone. Ms. Schaeffer noted that the review of headstones in the cemetery seems out of the Historical Commission’s jurisdiction. Mr. Prince responded that he had spoken with the Cemetery Commission and that they requested the approval of the SHC. Mr. Hart wants to make sure that people would see the installment date notation “2020” and by whom for the new stone. There was no public comment.  February 5, 2020, Page 2 of 6 VOTE: Ms. Norkum made a motion to support the proposal to install a new headstone with a flamed textured, non- polished finish and a commemoration date was erected and by whom. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. 7 members were in favor and 1 member (Pattison) was opposed. The motion so carried. 19 Flint Street - continuation Lenney Trust submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for architectural shingles. Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 11/5/19 ▪ Photographs Mary Pax Lenney was present. Ms. Lenney presented examples of current slates and the new replacement shingles to help see the color. The Commission discussed the color options and their preference for architectural shingles with a straight edge, not angled. Ms. Lenney said then she would use the straight shingles from that company but was not sure about the color. The color examples were passed along the members to help get an understanding of what color and shade would be best. Mr. Spang reported that the Commission had visited the district to view examples of architectural shingles and were now more comfortable knowing which manufacturers had shingle models with straight edges. The shingle proposed by the applicant – GAF Slateline in “English Gray” – met this design standard. There was no Public Comment. Ms. Norkun made a motion to approve the color of the suggested the English Gray color. VOTE: Ms. Norkun makes a motion to approve the use of GAF Slateline architectural roof shingles in “English Gray”. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 18 Chestnut Street - continuation Victoria Kelleher submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors. Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 1/2/20 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher reported that the applicant requested a continuation to the next meeting. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to continue to the next meeting. Ms. Norkun seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 149 Federal Street- continuation Joe and Kathy Archambault submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to renovate rear entry porch and for paint color amendment. Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 11/25/19 ▪ Photographs  February 5, 2020, Page 3 of 6 Joe Archambault was present. Mr. Archambault reported that he had worked with Commissioner Joyce on a new design and he presented revised plans with pictures. Mr. Pattison asked if the porch step was going to be tucked in like in the original plan. Mr. Archambault responded not anymore with revised plans. The Commission agreed that the revised design for the porch was an improvement and was appropriate for the house. There was no public comment. VOTE: Mr. Pattison made a motion to accept the application as revised. Ms. Schaeffer seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Archambault stated that his wife wants to keep the existing white trim instead of the trim color recommended and approved by the Commission. He noted that he would retain the approved blue/gray color for the body but wanted to keep the white trim as is. Mr. Norkun said Benjamin Moore “White Dove” is great for historic houses and goes with every color. VOTE: Ms. Norkun made the motion for the color approval. Ms. Schaeffer second the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 415 Essex Street - continuation The City of Salem submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace Fire Station doors. Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 12/19/19 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher reported that the City has requested a continuation to the next meeting. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Ms. Norkun second the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 19 North Street Andrew and Dimitra Milas submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for building renovations. Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 1/13/20 ▪ Photographs Dimitra Milas was present. Ms. Milas presented their application to replace the front door and side lights, add a screen door to the rear kitchen door, replace several windows and a storm door on the back which wouldn’t be visible. Mr. Spang asked about the door color difference in the front versus the back. The applicant said her husband painted the door black without approval from the Commission. The request would be for the new door to also be  February 5, 2020, Page 4 of 6 black. She stated that they would like to use the Greek Revival style door that has two elongated panels (#435 on the Commission Design Guidelines door examples). The four panels on the side of the side door is what they would use in the side door. Mr. Spang asked why the door is being replaced. Ms. Milas responded that the door is composite not wood and the paint is not adhering. She stated that the presented photo makes the door look better than it actually is, it was likely installed in the 1970s. Mr. Hart noted that the side lights are interesting with the applicant saying they are probably made of glass. Mr. Pattison said that the new side panels for the new door would look great for the house. Ms. Schaeffer agreed. The applicant also asked if the Design Guidelines’ Greek Revival style door would be the only fit or would one of the Victorian options be better? Mr. Hart said the 4 panel Victorian or the 6 panel Victorian. (#417-6 panel) may also be appropriate. The Commission agreed that the panels should be the same size all the way across. Mr. Martinez noted that the Commission does not have jurisdiction over attached light fixtures. The Commission also does not have jurisdiction over house numbers. Ms. Norkun recommended the applicant look for old iron house numbers on Etsy under antique hardware. Mr. Martinez noted that Signature Hardware, House of Antique Hardware and Restoration Hardware have good options too. There was no public comment Mr. Spang noted that the Commission also agreed that door #417 was appropriate. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to approve the replacement of the existing door with either a 2-panel door or Door #417 in the Guidelines with the requirement that the 6 panel door have panels that correspond with the panel below the sidelights and approval of true-divided 4-light sidelights. All to be in black. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. The Commission determined the following are not within the Commission’s jurisdiction: boarding the rear basement window (not visible from a public way); storm door on rear kitchen door; and in-kind repairs to rotten wood trim. 360 Essex Street Emily Stuart submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for side fence. Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 1/21/20 ▪ Photographs ▪ Sketch by Seger Architects Julia Mooradian from Seger Architects was present to represent the applicant Emily Stuart. Ms. Mooradian presented drawings and photographs depicting the request to add new AC condensers that would be screened by a new solid board fence. Julia brought in drawings and pictures of the fence. The existing side fence would be replaced by the solid board fence. They would use the Good Neighbor fence type. The wood post would be shaped, and the solid wood fence would have the post on the top and the bottom with it being all white. The condenser units would be at the end of the building, furthest from the street. Mr. Pattison noted that the fence is visible from the street and down the alley.  February 5, 2020, Page 5 of 6 The Commission asked for the distance between the posts and the widths of the boards since the dimensions were not clear in the presented photographs. Ms. Norkun stated that she would have a hard time approving the fence since the sizes are not known and the drawings represent a concept rather than the true item being installed. Ms. Mooradian noted that the existing fence does not provide enough privacy since the fence is 4 feet high which looks about 2 feet since the land is raised slightly. Mr. Martinez said the house is very monolithic since it’s a huge block, but the smaller fence is very quintessential compared to the size. The wooden cap is the same height as the iron cap and the same size between the pickings. He would be reluctant to replace a fence that would be a foot taller and solid. Mr. Pattison stated that the fence at the edge of the house should start with 4 feet to shield the condensers more. Mr. Hart said that a solid board fence would not last as long and the owner may want to consider having a small space in between boards. Mr. Pattison said the applicant could do the front part of the fence as it is and then the 4’ tall fence towards the back where it would become a side yard fence. Mr. Pattison and Mr Spang both recommended the use of a hidden front post to make the iron fence remain prominent. Mr. Hart stated that the Commission needed dimensions on the vertical zone and the horizontal pieces. Mr. Martinez asked if there was a plan for the other side of the fence on the adjoining property. Ms. Mooradian replied, no. Mr. Pattison stated his opinion that the spacing for the new fence was too modern. Mr. Spang reiterated Mr. Hart’s comment that the Commission needs drawings with accurate dimensions. There was no public comment. VOTE: Ms. Norkun started the motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Mr. Martinez second the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 8 Botts Court- Request to amend Certificate of Appropriateness for Rear Gutter Ms. Kelleher noted that the owner Amy Miller was unable to attend but had a representative speak on her behalf. The owner wants to replace the wood gutters with copper due to the large capacity of water being shed off the roof. Mr. Lou Sirianni, 6 Botts Court, was the owner’s representative and is the neighbor of Ms. Miller. He stated the owner’s passion for the house and how well she takes care of the historic house. He noted that this is the only house without copper gutters and that all of the houses have copper gutters with two having copper unpainted. He noted that his are older gutters and painted. He noted that the copper gutter and molding would be hardly distinguishable from the wood gutter and the difference would be subtle when painted the same as the trim. Mr. Sirianni put his gutters in about 16 years ago and they are working just fine with the current amount of rainfall. However, the paint on the back is chipping, but he does a rotation where he paints them switching sides every other year when needed. Mr. Hart stated that he attended a conference about why historic New England, Inc. was changing the wood gutters on their historic buildings to metal due to the fact the wooden gutters are undersized and cannot handle the amount of runoff from stormwater. Mr. Hart said that this is especially true due to contemporary circumstances with extreme weather.  February 5, 2020, Page 6 of 6 Ms. Norkum asked if the trim profile is applied on top of the gutter. Mr. Lou said it was below it. The copper gutter would have the same wood trim below it. Mr. Pattison said he likes the copper gutters due to the flow being better than the wood gutter since the capacity is better. Ms. Kelleher noted that new wood gutters do not have the longevity of older wood gutters. Mr. Spang expressed his concern that the profile of the copper gutter would be different than the wood gutter, but not by much. Mr. Hart said that copper gutters last about 100 years making it a good investment. Mr. Pattinson agreed. Tim Jenkins, Broad Street, stated that the Witch House has copper gutters that are beautiful, though they don’t mimic the exact age of the Witch House. Held up by metal brackets, the copper gutters are needed for today’s rain run-off. These profiles are mainly everywhere now, the only issue is the paint, but the gutters are designed to preserve the houses to keep the water out. So, despite the aesthetics, the gutters are useful and needed. Especially due to the climate like increase in storms and climate change.” Mr. Martinez noted that it is important for the gutter’s return to be maintained and to make sure the contractor is on board with the same type of transition. Mr. Siriani said he has consulted the contractor and they plan to do just that. Mr. Spang stated that he wants to make sure the profile is maintained and noted that the plans seem to be pretty close to the profile. VOTE: Mr. Pattison made a motion to accept the application as presented and amend the previous certificate with the requirement that the gutters replicate the existing profile and be painted to match the trim color. Mr. Hart seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 87 Federal Street – Request to amend Certificate of Appropriateness for rear gutters The applicant, Rachel Leeman, asked for a reconsideration of the approval that wood gutters be replaced in-kind. Ms. Leeman passed around photos to show the new section of the house where she wants aluminum gutters. She noted that they will keep most of the gutters in wood but want to do a new aluminum on the newer side of the house. Ms. Norkun asked if the downspout would be the same. Ms. Leeman responded yes. Mr. Hart reported that he visited the property and that the change to an aluminum gutter on the rear ell of the building was not highly visible and he is in favor of an aluminum gutter. There was no public comment. Mr. Martinez asked if the left side of the house, the original side, would have wooden gutters. Ms. Leeman responded yes. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to approve the request to amend the Certificate to allow aluminum gutters on the rear ell with downspouts to remain in existing locations. Gutters to be painted to match trim and downspouts to be painted to match body color. Ms. Schaeffer seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Patti Kelleher Preservation Planner