Historical Commission

May 20, 2020, Page 1 of 3 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES May 20, 2020 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 7:00 pm via Zoom Virtual Meeting. Present were; Reed Cutting, Rebecca English, David Hart, Vijay Joyce, Milo Martinez, Stacey Norkun, Mark Pattison, Larry Spang (Chair). 7 Carpenter Street – continuation – CONTINUED TO JUNE 3, 2020 7 Carpenter Street Condominium Trust submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install new downspout Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 4/27/20 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher reported that the applicant requested a continuation to the next meeting. VOTE: Mr. Joyce made a motion to continue to the next regular meeting on June 3, 2020. Ms. Norkun seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 111 Federal Street Amanda Ray submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness to install new fence Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 5/6/20 ▪ Photographs VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to continue to the next regular meeting on June 3, 2020. Ms. English seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. Other Business 32 Church Street – Request for Comment Peter Pitman of Pitman & Wardley Architects was present to discuss the project. Ms. Kelleher stated that they did a preliminary review at the last meeting for DRB and the comments were forwarded to the architect. This review is for comment only. Mr. Pitman stated that the submission was revised after the SRA’s review and comment. The previous courthouse at 65 Washington Street stopped at the soffit line of their building. The construction of the Brix building will cover their 3rd floor two double-hung windows and gable, so they are seeking to construct a dormer for their office space. The original plan proposed Nantucket style dormers with a shed dormer and picture window between them. The SRA suggested eliminating the end dormers and install three windows in a single dormer. With a simple shed roof, they can’t align the windows due to a large truss and an existing bathroom. A front dormer would not be acceptable, the rear elevation is limited due to a cathedral shape and an existing vent, the West elevation faces the new building, and that leaves the  May 20, 2020, Page 2 of 3 alley / East elevation. It will be minimally visible from the sidewalk, approximately 3’-0” behind the edge of the existing chimney and would be a painted dark grey with light grey trim to blend in with the roof. The dormer size has been reduced by 3’-0” and the windows will compensate for what they lost in light and ventilation. The stairs are currently their only means of egress so the new dormer windows will provide egress. The new constraints are making this necessary and the proposed will have minimal impact. Chair Spang appreciated the alternatives. Mr. Joyce agreed with their revision and asked if the siding will be clapboard. Mr. Pitman replied yes, a Hardie or Boral product. Mr. Joyce asked if the new window- panes sizes to match the existing as much as possible by removing the middle mullion and adjusting the horizontal mullions. Mr. Pitman replied yes, they can make them vertical rather than square. Ms. Norkun agreed with Mr. Joyce’s suggestions and the revisions made by the applicant. Mr. Pattison suggested installing half size bottom sashes. Mr. Pitman replied that the windows are casement for egress and although they aren’t required for a commercial building, they want to go beyond what’s compliant. Chair Spang noted that the windows are tall and thin and new are square and Federal style. He suggested installing four windows, adjusting the spacing between the windows, with thinner proportions to match the existing windows. Mr. Pitman replied that he would prefer Mr. Joyce’s recommendation despite the different proportions. He can elongate the mullions windows but is okay with the dormer windows being different than the structure below. Mr. Cutting noted the proposed dormer would be minimally visible in the tight space of the alley. Both options are good, and the chimney will help conceal it. Chair Spang added that a shed dormer looked better and a change in proportions could make it fit better. Ms. English agrees with all comments and the window suggestions. Mr. Hart agreed and noted that the oblique view of the dormer above will always make it appear unbalanced. Mr. Pattison stated that he liked the dormer as presented. Mr. Pitman added that they will replace some over the boarded windows with new painted T&G boards. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Mr. Pattison made a motion to issue support for the application as presented. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Mr. Joyce made an amendment to include giving the applicant the option to elongate the window. Mr. Pattison accepted Mr. Joyce’s amendment. Mr. Cutting seconded the amendment. Ms. Norkun asked if the proposed Anderson 400 series windows were vinyl. Mr. Pitman replied that the existing windows will be reinstalled at the new dormer, with vinyl cladding and wood interior. Chair Spang requested the window color. Mr. Pitman replied dark gray. The building has existing burgundy windows, but it may call too much attention at the roof when they want to make them disappear. Ms. Norkun suggested black or dark bronze windows. VOTE: Ms. Norkun motioned for a second amendment to allow dark grey or dark bronze windows. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Cutting, Pattison, English, Hart, Joyce, Norkun & Chair Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. 350-352 Essex Street: Ms. Kelleher stated that the applicant, Blue Sky Properties, will be at the next meeting with new colors suggested by the Historic Commission. At the time of his previous application the Commission wasn’t in favor of the vivid yellow color. The proposal is for 2 colors with a 3rd color for  May 20, 2020, Page 3 of 3 the door, or he could do a single color too. Mr. Joyce and Ms. Norkun will work with the applicant and send him some color scheme options in time for the next meeting. The rear two-story carriage house will also be painted. Mr. Joyce noted that the structure was a double house built by two brothers for their families. Ms. Martinez suggested moving the meeting time up to 6PM while the meetings are virtual. Allen Hanscom of SATV noted that Google street view has a feature to show the past 10-years of street views Meeting Minutes No minutes to review. Violation Notices No violations to review. Correspondence No correspondence to review. VOTE: Mr. Hart made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Cutting, Pattison, Hart, English, Joyce, Norkun, Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 PM. Respectfully submitted, Patti Kelleher Community Development Planner