Historical Commission

April 21, 2021, Page 1 of 10 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES April 21, 2021 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 6:00 pm Zoom Virtual Meeting Present were: Reed Cutting, Milo Martinez, Mark Meche, Mark Pattison, Erin Schaeffer, Stacey Norkun and Larry Spang. Not present: Rebecca English, Vijay Joyce Salem Common The City of Salem submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Washington Arch Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 4/7/21 ▪ Photographs Ray Jodoin of City of Salem was present to discuss the project. Mr. Jodoin stated that they want to restore the arched pathway through an existing arch although no products or plantings have been determined although plantings have been recommended. The pathway will be 15-feet wide and approximately 12-feet diameter pathway with a compass in the middle for historic accuracy. The gap at the bottom of the wood arch will remain to stave off deteriorated. Mr. Meche noted that he created a plan for the arch for the Boy scouts and can provide details and imagery. Ms. Kelleher stated that the Commission gave a Certificate of Appropriateness to restore the McIntosh Arch in 2002 but that work wasn’t completed, and that certificate is 6 years old. At grade changes aren’t within the Commission’s purview but guidance and comment is needed. Mr. Meche asked if there is a Preservation Restriction for Salem Common. Ms. Kelleher replied yes and noted that she will send it to MHC for review of the paving, but she is unsure if planting approval is required. Mr. Jodoin noted that they are looking for comments regarding paving materials and will return for materials approval, although their recommendations may change the pricing but will be needed to come to an informed decision financially. Chair Spang noted that the Commissions opinions would be advisory not mandatory. Ms. Norkun noted that S&P brick is the standard used across Salem. Mr. Meche stated that the Department of Public Works and City Solicitor may have standards to follow that many be applied to a landscape project. Mr. Jodoin noted that when prevailing wages are required it triggers requirements such as OSHA compliance, so this will become a publicly bid job. Chair Spang suggested continuing the stone dust rather than adding a new walking surface. Mr. Meche replied that although this isn’t historical it’s a replica and they wanted the color guard to have a solid surface as they marched through the arch to formalize the area and support the muster. Chair Spang asked if they could the path continue in a radial fashion. Mr. Meche replied that it transitions to grass again. Mr. Jodoin agreed that their scope of work will end at the brick. Ms. Schaeffer stated that the crushed stone dust was used at Charter Street Cemetery and the same should be explored for this project but not asphalt. Mr. Jodoin replied that they want to stay true to what existed previously or use porous pavement which will require long-term maintenance. They are also looking into a stone dust with a polymetric, or stamped brick, stamped concrete, as well as brick and concrete.  April 21, 2021, Page 2 of 10 Public Comment: Gabriel Ciociola, 11 Winter Street and VP of the Salem Common Neighborhood Association. The replacement parts at the arch are being planned but they need vendors to provide the decorative enhancements, such as the eagle which is being held by the PEM and could be recreated and a sign. The hardscape would be useful and welcoming for the public and for ceremonial purposes. Erin Murphy, 96 Washington Square East and Salem Common Neighborhood Association. They’ve been working on this proposal for the last year with DPW and the PEM. They have renderings from the Makers Guild, but they are open to changes to make it the most historically appropriate. The Association wants to install brick for historical accuracy and President Dennis Maroney wants the brick to include donor names and to raise funds for the carvings. Mr. Jodoin noted that he will meet with the Association to make sure they share the same goal. Alan Hanscom, SATV. Interested in this project and in favor of the compass rose which will be similar to the compass rose at the bandstand. It would require cleaning to keep gravel off the surface and the PEM has all the four medallions from the original arch that he hopes they could be recreated. Claire Kallelis, GM of Hawthorne Hotel and Peter LaChapelle. Mr. LaChapelle noted his pleasure with seeing the project progress as much as it has. This will also commemorate the National Guard and the arch will be a free attraction for visitors too. He is in favor of installing a brick paving material. No one else in the assembly wished to speak. Mr. Meche stated that informational sign is within their purview. Mr. Jodoin added that they will install an improved sign. Mr. Martinez suggested the sign be located off the dust path but near the arch. Ms. Kelleher noted that the Disabilities Commission should review the sign placement to ensure that it is accessible. Mr. Jodoin added that they were told that historically it could be on the new path. Chair Spang stated that he wouldn’t consider any hardscape other than brick because of its historic nature or stone dust. Ms. Norkun agreed and suggested stamped concrete for cost savings. Mr. Martinez agreed and noted that the asphalt installed near the basketball court looks out of place. He asked who makes the final decision. Mr. Jodoin replied that it would be a joint decision by Salem Common Neighborhood Association, Director of Engineering, Finance Director and Mayor Driscoll. Chair Spang added that MHC will need to review it as well but they aren’t bound to follow the suggestion of the SHC. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to submit a recommendation letter for the proposed design. Ms. Norkun recommended amendment to include color variations in the red and black hues and for surface to be worn and pitted and to oppose the use of asphalt. Mr. Cutting seconded the amended motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang in favor and the motion so carried. Installation of Interpretive Sign Ms. Kelleher noted that proposal was to use City’s standard sign design with the Neighborhood Association providing the design and text. Chair Spang stated that the sign will be located along the stone dust path to the right of the arch to be reviewed by the Disabilities Association. Mr. Meche suggested they move the sign closer to the arch and off the path. Mr. Jodoin, Mr. Pattison and Mr. Meche agreed. VOTE: Mr. Meche made a motion to locate the sign mid-way between the planting bed and dust path. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang in favor, Martinez abstained, and the motion so carried.  April 21, 2021, Page 3 of 10 132 Derby Street Roger and Helen Falcone submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 3/29/21 ▪ Photographs Eda Matchak of 16 Bentley Street was present to discuss the project. Ms. Matchak stated that they have a small condominium association of 6-units and they want to upgrade 132 Derby Street. The paint is in poor shape, there is some rot to repair as well as other exterior improvements. They are proposing “Van Deusen Blue” for the body paint with white trim and a black door. All paint will be manufactured by Benjamin Moore. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. Ms. Kelleher noted that despite Mr. Joyce’s absence he sent in comments stating that he finds the blue color to be appropriate but that the white was too pure a white for the Georgian era, so he suggested a white from the historic collection. Ms. Norkun agreed. Mr. Pattison suggested that any doors on the South façade be painted a slightly lighter color that won’t draw as much heat as black. Ms. Matchak replied that the three South facing townhouse doors will be painted and they will also have storm doors, but she will make that accommodation. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to approve the body color in “Van Deusen Blue” in a satin semi-gloss, “White Dove” for trim and Black HC-190 in semi-gloss or gloss for doors. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Cutting, Meche, Martinez, Pattison, Norkun, Schaeffer and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. 7 North Pine Street Stephanie Ellis submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for exterior vents Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 4/13/21 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher reported that the applicant was not present and asked Commission to continue the application to the next meeting. VOTE: Mr. Pattison made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting on May 5, 2021. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Cutting, Meche, Martinez, Pattison, Norkun, Schaeffer and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. 310 Lafayette Street- CONTINUATION Kenneth and Monica Leisey submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace windows (after the fact) Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 12/16/20 ▪ Photographs  April 21, 2021, Page 4 of 10 Ms. Kelleher reported that the applicant requested a continuation to allow him to do a mockup of the windows weather-permitting for the Commission to determine if his modifications are appropriate and he will let them know when the work is completed. He requested a motion to continue. VOTE: Mr. Cutting made a motion to continue to the next regular meeting on May 5, 2021. Ms. Norkun seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Cutting, Meche, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. 5 Orne Square- CONTINUATION Amy Sinatra submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for new fence and porch alterations Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 3/18/21 ▪ Photographs Amy Sinatra was present to discuss the project. Ms. Kelleher reported that a site visit was conducted, and revised plans were submitted. Ms. Sinatra stated that changes were made based on the Commission comments. The standard for run of fencing was 6-8-feet in length, and they proposed solid fencing and submitted a sketch based on a fence on Summer Street. The proposed fence would be 6-feet-high and painted Orne Square Green. Chair Spang noted that a cap should be installed on top of the fence run and that the pressure treated posts should be boxed and not left exposed. Ms. Sinatra noted that she will mimic the fence that exists. Mr. Pattison noted that the street line fence is decorative, and the posts aren’t visible from the public way. Ms. Sinatra replied that she has no preference on whether the posts are visible but would like decorative posts at either side of the gate. Chair Spang requested an end post, so the fence end isn’t attached to the house. Mr. Pattison suggested a half post, given the minimal space and to keep boards on the outside and posts on the inside. Public Comment: Jeff Kabriel, 3 Orne Square. Agrees with what is proposed. His property is next to the 23-foot-long section of fence. He suggested the four-foot gate area be extended to 5-feet to include a planting bed and soften the edge without using a half post. It would also keep the fence edge away from the edge of the concrete sidewalk which is not is good shape and away from the walkways that are pitched towards the house. Mr. Pattison replied that no more than 1-foot maximum should be added or another post would be required to make up for the gate. Ms. Sinatra noted her preference for standard 6-inch x 6-inch posts, not larger decorative posts. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to approve intermediary posts to be behind the board cedar fence, the new fence to be 6-feet high with posts below the top rail. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Cutting, Meche, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. Rear Porch Ms. Sinatra stated that the railing height at the rear porch would need to meet the building code requirements. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to approve changes to rear porch as not visible from a public way with requirement that applicant provide drawings if fence design is changed. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Cutting, Meche, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried.  April 21, 2021, Page 5 of 10 2 North Pine Street- CONTINUATION Theodor and Diana Cowan submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for building renovations Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 3/22/21 ▪ Photographs Theodore Cowan was present to discuss the project. Mr. Cowan stated that this is a request to remove three windows and add three new windows. Two will be relocated so they would be in-line with the windows above and the windows to match the size of the existing openings. Ms. Schaeffer noted that the plan addresses all of the Commission’s previous concerns regarding uniformity. Mr. Cowan stated that the new skylight will be installed in the same approximate location and will be a Velux VS C042004 that will be operable for ventilation purposes. Chair Spang asked how high the new skylight will stick up off the roof. Mr. Cowan replied 5-inches. Ms. Kelleher noted that this skylight has been approved by the Commission at a house on Orne Square. Mr. Cowan stated that he is proposing a Marvin Ultimate wood window with simulated divided lite in a 2 over 2 configuration. The current window sashes are white. Mr. Martinez asked about the current state of the windows. Mr. Cowan replied that they are due for replacement but could be kept and salvaged later. Mr. Martinez encouraged the applicant to retain the removed windows on site. Mr. Pattison stated that he is not in favor of removing the existing windows and replacing them with a modern window with a shadow bar. Ms. Norkun noted that the proposed window is wood not aluminum clad. Ms. Kelleher noted that this window has been approved by the Commission in the past with the exterior applied muntin. Mr. Martinez noted that the rear of the building faces a tight driveway which will limit visibility. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Ms. Norkun made a motion to approve the application for 3 Ultimate Marvin wood window, with a 2 over2 SDL with the option of ADL, and 1 Velux top hinge skylight VS C042004. Mr. Martinez seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun were in favor (Chair Spang abstained as not being present at the last meeting) and the motion so carried. 140 Derby Street- CONTINUATION Patrick Shea submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for building renovations Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 3/10/21 ▪ Photographs Mr. Shea and Mr. Malinowski (Contractor) were present to discuss the project. Mr. Malinowski stated that the proposed changes at the front façade are due to the interior commercial space being brought up to meet ADA code. It requires an ADA compliant opening with a ramp and 36-inch-wide door. The windows on either side of the door will be tempered glass cut to size of openings and exterior trim and no mullions or muntins are proposed.  April 21, 2021, Page 6 of 10 Mr. Meche noted that the floor level is not visible, and he is concerned with the pitch and landing at the door and suggested it be reviewed by the Building Inspector. Mr. Malinowski replied that the floor level is 5-inches higher than the street. Mr. Shea added that they have been working with Tom St. Pierre on ADA concerns. Mr. Malinowski stated that proposed paint colors are by Benjamin Moore, Monterey White for the trim, Downpour Blue for siding and Vermillion for the entry door. Ms. Norkun stated that the door doesn’t align with upper-level windows and is shifted to the right while the surrounding storefronts are centered between windows. Mr. Malinowski replied that a sixty-one-inch-wide staircase to second floor is on the left which is why the entrance is shifted. They also need 18-inches for someone to grab the door handle which is an ADA requirement. Mr. Pattison suggested aligning the bottom left window with the window above and adjusting the right side. Mr. Meche noted that while it may look better, storefronts did not always align with traditional layouts. Ms. Norkun suggested keep the upper and lower alignment separate and adding flat boards and paneling at the wall below so create a series of storefronts. Mr. Malinowski replied that they wanted to eliminate creating a large flat panel on the far left. Mr. Meche agreed. Mr. Pattison suggested a panel be created that doesn’t project out as far. Ms. Schaeffer suggested adding bead moulding to hold the windows in place. Mr. Malinowski noted that quarter round moulding is proposed around the window. Mr. Pattison suggested that this will still create a chaotic look and a hollowed-out version of the window above while the clapboard change could make the front façade feel more balance and separate the two floors. He suggested adding a raised panel to the left. Mr. Meche noted that a flat board would help give that floor a commercial feel. Ms. Kelleher suggested that signage for the storefront could be placed on the blank left side since there isn’t enough of a sign band above the storefront. Mr. Meche suggested raising the height of the cornice two or three clapboard to create a higher sign band. Ms. Norkun and Ms. Schaeffer agreed. Mr. Malinowski suggested painting the panel Monterey White. Mr. Pattison requested a revised drawing be submitted based on the Commissions comments. Ms. Norkun and Mr. Meche agreed to work with the applicant on the proposed design. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to approve the renovation plans dated 4/21/21 with Commissioners Meche and Norkun to approve final design details. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Cutting, Martinez, Meche, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Martinez stated that he is in favor of the Monterey White but the other colors are too bright and saturated. Ms. Norkun agreed and noted that the proposed color combination at a storefront isn’t typical. Mr. Malinowski agreed to return for a review of proposed paint colors. Mr. Martinez suggested adding a fourth color to provide depth. VOTE: Ms. Norkun made a motion to continue the review of paint colors to the next scheduled meeting on May 5, 2021. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Cutting, Martinez, Meche, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. 23 River Street Paschal Corrigan submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for building renovations Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 4/8/21 ▪ Photographs  April 21, 2021, Page 7 of 10 Mr. Corrigan stated that he wants to restore this home, remove aluminum siding to expose the flat siding and the flat casing. There are missing windows and ones that remain are not operable are broken or are covered in plexi- glass. He proposed a Harvey Majesty 2/2 replacement window to be installed in existing openings. Mr. Meche and Mr. Pattison suggested a site visit. Mr. Meche noted that it is not clear where all the replacement windows will be placed. Chair Spang asked if the enclosed front porch was concealing an open porch. Mr. Corrigan believed it was added but will determine what exists when the aluminum siding is removed. He wants the porch design to be consistent with the period of the house. He intends to keep the stairs in place but make them more traditional. The building will remain a 2-family home. The Commission agreed that the application is incomplete, lacks detail regarding materials and proposed work. Chair Spang noted his concern with the large expanse of blank wall and the siding that may be concealing openings or detail that the applicant may want to utilize. Ms. Norkun stated that aluminum clad windows have been approved for the second-floor use where it’s less visible, but all wood windows is needed for first-floor windows. Mr. Pattison agreed that all building elevations are visible and the Commission doesn’t want to end up with a mishmash of windows. Public Comment: Lori Hart, 114 Federal Street. Glad the property has been purchased, the building will be restored and agreed that the windows are in terrible shape. John Carr, 7 River Street. Buildings on River street in the 1970s were in this condition and when he was on the Commission, they would reject the notion that deterioration requires any less than what is appropriate. Each preceding application has been clear and detailed, and this application isn’t ripe for consideration pursuant to the regulations to allow the Commission to make a determination. The Commission should not design the renovation for the applicant and therefore the application should be continued. The property also is not zoned for R-2 and should go before the Board of Appeals. 2 over 2 windows are not appropriate and 6 over 6 are consistent with the remainder of the street. He read a letter from Josiah Fisk. Carol Carr, 7 River Street. Since 1973 there have been many good changes in this area. The application is vague with very little intent or details therefore a full application should be submitted. The applicant should also reach out to the neighbors. Barbara McClaughlin, 11 Lynn Street. She has watched over the home since the previous owner left and alerted Ms. Kelleher when animals began to live there. She is confident that the applicant will restore the home but he’s just unfamiliar with the process and it’s good that the Commission is asking as many questions as they are. Ms. Schaeffer suggested Ms. Kelleher provide samples of complete applications to the applicant. Chair Spang noted that the siding needs to be removed. Mr. Meche suggested that an interior demolition of the walls take place to see any additional openings in the clapboards. Ms. Schaeffer requested the applicant temporarily weatherize areas that would be prone to leaking. Mr. Pattison noted that the framing was from the early 19th century not the late 18th century. VOTE: Mr. Cutting made a motion to allow the applicant to remove the aluminum siding. Ms. Schaeffer seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried.  April 21, 2021, Page 8 of 10 VOTE: Mr. Meche made a motion to continue to the review of the application to the meeting on May 19, 2021. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. Review of proposed new Demolition Delay Ordinance Ms. Kelleher stated that revisions are proposed for the City’s Demo Delay ordinance to strengthen the regulation. The proposal would create an ordinance with more clarity, definitions, extension of timelines based on a buildings age. If the Commission approves it, it will go before the City Council. Public Comment: Emily Udy, HSI and 8 Buffum Street. HSI submitted a letter to the Commission, and they have been advocating for this for nearly 2 years. They support the draft but have some suggestions and recommendation, as well as additional comments to be sent to the City Council and the Committee on Ordinances, Licenses and Legal Affairs. Suggestion #1: 12-month delay for any building over 50-years of age and 18-month delay for buildings over 100 years old. Suggestion #2: The definition of demolition should include 50% or more of the building and ensuring that definition will be administrated properly to serve the community and potential developers. Chair Spang noted that there may be some confusion about protecting interior vs. exterior details and what make up the 50%. Ms. Udy suggested prioritizing specific exterior building elements since the City has less oversight on the interior. It needs to be determined how best to interpret that percentage. Barbara Cleary, HSI - Chair of Preservation Committee. Thanked Ms. Kelleher for her work on this ordinance that in the end will provide clarity. HSI expects the draft will go to the City Council and then be sent to subcommittee for further review. She suggested that someone from the Commission go to a Committee meeting to eliminate some of the back-and-forth discussion. No one else in the assembly wished to speak. Chair Spang stated that the Commission could submit a letter of support to accompany the proposed Demo Delay ordinance revisions. Mr. Meche agreed that the 50% demo criteria needs more specificity since the structure means different things to an architect vs. a contractor. He suggested the description read 50% of the building envelope. He mentioned the example of 25 Lynde Street where the ell was significantly changed. Ms. Schaeffer noted her concern with the language rather than the percentage. Ms. Kelleher stated that the ordinance is based on the MHC model bylaw and has been adopted by many communities although some have added additional language. Ms. Schaeffer noted her appreciation with the time and research that when into this draft which is significant, and she is excited by it. She suggested they also research case studies. Ms. Udy hoped the building inspector would offer suggestions since he deals with the regulations the most and HSI can compile specific wording to include. Ms. Schaeffer suggested someone from HSI also be present at the Committee meetings since they put in the work. Chair Spang noted his concern with the definition of demolition and the “intent of completing the same” phrase and ensuring that a shell isn’t left. The building code mentions “work area” which is also a grey area. Ms. Kelleher noted that the term is consistent with other communities Chair Spang suggested the Commission support it in general and recommend that the Council send it to the sub-committee for review along with additional recommendations. Ms. Schaeffer and Mr. Cutting agreed and were enthusiastically supportive of it. Ms. Cleary asked if the Commission could support the recommendation for 18-month for buildings over 100-years- old. Chair Spang agreed with the suggestion despite the potential opposition and noted that it is a worthwhile ask for a structure that old. Mr. Meche agreed since a complicated permit can go on for 12 to 18-months. This will give the sub-set of buildings outside the district some purview. Ms. Kelleher stated that the Commission can deny  April 21, 2021, Page 9 of 10 people in local historic districts and many of the historic structures are not within the districts. Ms. Norkun and Mr. Cutting agreed. Mr. Martinez added that in addition to supporting 18-month he also supports the tiered approach. Ms. Schaeffer. Ms. Kelleher noted that she met with the developer on Curtis Street that restored rather than demolished the building who provided feedback and didn’t realize there was a demo delay until he went to the ZBA. Advocacy work needs to happen to let people know it exists, that will benefit everyone. Ms. Schaeffer agreed and noted that a standalone piece is good, so developers don’t get too far down the road. Ms. Kelleher agreed to draft a letter for the City Council for their meeting tomorrow noting that the Commission is in line with HSI’s recommendations and suggestions. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to draft a letter of support asking the City Council to submit proposed revisions to subcommittee with the recommendations of HSI and increasing the delay to 18-months for buildings over 100-years old. Mr. Cutting seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. Other Business 53 Charter Street Ms. Kelleher reported that the building owner has asked for a letter of support from the Commission for her Historic tax credit application. The applicant went before the SRA, the early configuration has changed, and the addition has been eliminated so they are working with the existing building. Chair Spang noted that MHC will provide the rigorous review the building needs. Ms. Kelleher noted that it is an income-producing property that is in the Urban Renewal district not a historic district and this request is typically supported by the Commission. Chair Spang suggested they include a statement in their letter of support that the Commission looks forward to seeing more information from the applicant. VOTE: Ms. Norkun made a motion to provide a letter of support. Ms. Schaeffer seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. Design Guidelines Ms. Kelleher stated that a day and time to meet the consultant needs to be determined. The consultant has requested feedback and additional information from Commission prior to receiving public comment on May 5th. The Commission agreed to hold a special meeting on April 28, 2021 at 5PM and to explore options for streamlining some reviews that can be approved administratively. Chair Spang suggested that windows and roof shingles be added to the Design Guidelines. Almy’s Clock Ms. Kelleher reported that the clock will be removed and restored to its original appearance from 1910. Charter Street Cemetery Ms. Kelleher reported that the cemetery is scheduled to reopen on May 15th with a new welcome center in collaboration with the PEM. Meeting Minutes Commission agreed to continue minutes to the next regular meeting.  April 21, 2021, Page 10 of 10 Adjournment VOTE: Mr. Meche made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. Roll Call: Commissioners Meche, Cutting, Martinez, Pattison, Schaeffer, Norkun and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. The meeting adjourned at 10:30PM Respectfully submitted, Patti Kelleher Community Development Planner