Historical Commission

August 18, 2021, Page 1 of 8 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES August 18, 2021 A special meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on Wednesday, August 18, 2021, at 6:00 pm. VIRTUAL ZOOM MEETING. Present were; Mark Meche, Reed Cutting, Milo Martinez, Vijay Joyce, Mark Pattison, and Larry Spang. Not present: Rebecca English, Stacey Norkun 18 Chestnut Street- continuation Dorothy Kelleher submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace fence Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 5/3/21 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher stated that the applicant has requested another continuance. This is at least her third continuance, but she is actively pursuing someone to help assemble a sample gate for Commission review. VOTE: Mr. Joyce made a motion to continue to the next regular meeting Sept 1st. Mr. Martinez seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Joyce, Martinez, Pattison, and Spang were in favor and the motion so carried. 2 Oliver Street– continuation 33WSNS LLC submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace rear addition Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 6/10/21 ▪ Photographs ▪ Site and elevation drawings by Pitman & Wardley Peter Pitman of Pitman & Wardley was present to discuss the project. Mr. Pitman stated that based on feedback from the Commission, the site plan has been modified to include the new footprint, they enlarged the Kitchen and preserved the end wall of the summer kitchen by insetting the new addition by two brick lengths. They increased the size of the new kitchen windows to match the windows on the existing front façade and the new kitchen door will not be centered on the addition it will be aligned with the second-floor window above. The front corner of the dining room addition is also recessed by two brick lengths to highlight the differences in material and craftsmanship of the new and existing brick. The fence is no longer included in the application, but the patio proposal remains. The owner felt that a conservatory style addition would be too shallow, would not fit the front façade of the Federal style home, and he doesn’t want to reduce the scale of the dining room entry which he feels is a step down from the grandness of the existing main entry. The door casing of the addition will not match the door of the existing building and the shutters would remain on the front of the addition. They are seeking conditional approval with future detailed drawings to be submitted for review. They will move onto the ZBA and determine if this is a real project before they return with trim details, balustrade, windows, etc. Chair Spang requested brick and mortar samples be included in the next review. Mr. Pitman noted that masonry samples can be a condition of the certificate of approval since they will not have selected a contractor at that time of their next review. Mr. Pattison noted that while the brickwork and setback look good, the shutters and trim on the other doorways don’t make them subordinate to the main structure as shown the entrance resembles the main entrance. Chair Spang noted that the stepping back of the elevation doesn’t come across in the elevation. Mr. Meche stated that there is too much proposed brick in the new addition. He supports the envelope and proposed layout, but the addition appears dominant in the elevation, and he would not support the project compositionally except for the  August 18, 2021, Page 2 of 8 existing building. The two doors need to evolve to differentiate them from the main entrance. As shown, he could not support the current proposed details. Mr. Pitman replied that he will revisit the details, so the addition isn’t too elegant. Chair Spang noted that the amount of proposed glazing contributes to the grandness of each doorway. The kitchen door could be a door without sidelights and transom above. Mr. Meche stated that he would like to see the differentiation persist with the doors and transom rather than with trim details. He would rather see edge to edge glass with less trim within the brick opening and that should be explored. Mr. Pattison agreed. Mr. Joyce agreed with Mr. Meche and Mr. Pattison and added that the secondary entrance has a balustrade and Doric columns details. Mr. Pitman replied that the pilaster are Doric and only extend a couple inches from the façade. They have an option with a more utilitarian roof, and they could reduce the overall glazing since there is a change on the far-left door from a window to a door. Historically there would have been a door for loading firewood, the center door at the dining room will be the only source of natural light due to the rear party wall. The trim could be reduced and use the brick openings only but there has been a substantial reduction already. Public comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Mr. Meche made a motion to provide a provisional approval of a submission for the geometry, plan layout, building forms, elevations, and general configuration, and to revisit the window composition and associated details at the next submission after ZBA approval. Mr. Joyce seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Joyce, Martinez, Pattison, Spang, were in favor and the motion so carried. Chair Spang left the meeting and Acting Chair Joyce led the remainder of the meeting. 262 Lafayette Street Unit 2- continuation Justine Kolsky submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace windows Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 6/23/21 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher stated that the applicant is still seeking an alternative window and has requested a continuance to the next meeting. VOTE: Mr. Meche made a motion to continue to the next regular meeting on September 1,2021. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Joyce, Martinez, Pattison were in favor and the motion so carried. 33 Carlton Street Unit 3- continuation John Osborne submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a HVAC mini-split system Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 7/6/21 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher stated that the applicant is seeking final approval from condominium association and requested a continuation to the next meeting. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to continue to the next regular meeting on September 1, 2021. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Joyce, Martinez, Pattison, were in favor and the motion so carried.  August 18, 2021, Page 3 of 8 1 Forrester Street Joshua and Jennifer MacGregor submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 7/21/21 ▪ Photographs ▪ Paint chips Joshua and Jennifer MacGregor were present to discuss the project. Mr. Martinez recused himself as an abutter. Mr. MacGregor stated that they’ve decided to change the proposed façade colors, “Mulberry” (C2) at the doors, “Soot” (Benjamin Moore) to the trim, and “Days End” (Benjamin Moore) to the siding. Mr. Joyce stated that a black-on-black scheme is Victorian not Georgian. The body color is appropriate but not the deep black trim. Ms. MacGregor replied that the colors aren’t as dark as they appear, and the body color is more blue-ish gray. The “Soot” color appeared navy but dried darker. Mr. MacGregor described it as a cool grey and noted their time crunch since the façade has been prepped and they need final colors to give the painters. Mr. Pattison stated that the color combination looked Victorian, and the Mulberry looked pink. Mr. Joyce replied that most of the base should be red ocher, but more expensive colors could be added to lighten them, and the colors for doors were reserved for higher end shades. Public comment: Mr. Martinez stated that he had same reaction as Mr. Pattison and agreed that the colors are more subdued than the photo suggests. He supports the work done by the applicants so far and the proposed color combination. Paul Burney, abutter, spoke in favor of the proposed color combination and believed it will fit in with the neighborhood and in Salem. No one else in the assembly wished to speak. Chair Spang returned to the meeting at this time. Chair Spang stated that in general he likes to let applicants pick their own colors and while the proposed colors may stretch the bounds, he can support it. Mr. Pattison and Mr. Joyce noted that they were in favor of the proposed color combination. VOTE: Mr. Pattison made a motion to approve the colors as presented. Mr. Joyce seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Joyce, Pattison, Spang in favor and the motion so carried. The applicants thanked Mr. Joyce for his guidance. 393 Essex Street 393 Essex Street Realty, LLC submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new sign Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 7/26/21 ▪ Photographs Ms. Kelleher stated that the applicant is selling the business and has submitted a request to withdraw the application. All signs installed on the building without approval by the Commission have been removed.  August 18, 2021, Page 4 of 8 VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to accept the request to withdrawal without prejudice. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Joyce, Pattison, Spang in favor and the motion so carried. 171 Federal Street Chris and Annie Thompson submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace windows Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 8/2/21 ▪ Photographs Chris Thompson was present to discuss the project. Mr. Thompson stated that they want to replace the second and third floor windows for one of two condominium units in the building, at the upper two floors only. The existing deteriorated windows have chipping lead paint, and they are currently doing a lot of lead abatement work. At the windows visible from Federal Street, they are proposing ten new Marvin Ultimate all wood 6 over 6 windows and will keep the storm windows. There will be three on east façade, five windows on the north, and two windows on west façade. The third-floor windows on west façade are an Anderson replacement and will also be replaced. The windows will have an aluminum clad exterior to match the new windows on the rear. All new windows will be painted white to match. Mr. Meche asked if the nine windows on the front façade were original. Mr. Thompson replied that the four contractors they spoke to were unable to determine that, but they do have sash weights and pullies. Some of them are difficult to operate, have been painted many times, but none of them are fully functional. The contractors also suggested replacement windows. The Commission suggested restoring the windows, so they are operable and to save money. Mr. Thompson noted that there are also 8 rear windows to replace, all the options they’ve considered are expensive and it will require them to move out for 6-8 weeks. They’ve decided to replace them with new windows. Mr. Pattison requested a site visit to determine if they can be restored. Mr. Thompson noted that they would reinstall the storms on the front façade to match the existing look and the windows would be insulated divided sashes. Mr. Meche noted that the Marvin Ultimate’s would reduce amount of glass by 1-1 ½ inches would be another reason to restore them and urged the applicant to reinstall the storm windows. Public comment: Danielle Hannerhan, 28 Beckford Street, stated that she restored the windows in her previous home to make them operable. Wood windows are dense and durable and it’s possible to restore and delead them and make them environmentally sound and energy efficient. She questioned the warranty and whether installing storm windows over the new windows would negate the guarantee of the seal, depending upon the manufacturer. The suggested that the applicant would be happier with the results if they restore the windows, and it would cost less. No one else in the assembly wished to speak. VOTE: Mr. Meche made a motion to continue to the next regular meeting on September 1, 2021. Mr. Martinez seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Pattison, Martinez, Joyce in favor, and the motion so carried. The Commission agreed to schedule a site visit at a later date. 21 North Street Jacob Rego submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace door hardware. This request was reviewed under minor change category with waiver of public hearing pending abutter notification Documents & Exhibits ▪ Application: 7/27/21  August 18, 2021, Page 5 of 8 ▪ Photographs ▪ Product cut sheets Ms. Kelleher stated that this request was processed under the minor change category and notices were mailed to abutters. Since no comments or objections were received within 10 days, a Certificate of Appropriateness was issued on August 16, 2021. Presentation on Historic Court Buildings Renovation Project Ms. Kelleher introduced the project noting that the project design team will discuss the project plans date in order to seek comments from the Commission. Adam Stein and Adam Giordano of Winn Development, and Steve Prestejohn, architect from Cube3 Architects were present to discuss the project. Mr. Giordano discussed the City’s RFP Goals and their mandate. He stated that the transit-oriented site makes the crescent lot unique, and it serves itself to mixed-use housing. They want to create a sense of identity for the crescent lot and its connection to the waterfront with an exceptional design along this gateway to the downtown. They will apply for state historic tax credits for the redevelopment of the two court buildings. Mr. Giordano added that they are seeking input on all aspects of the projects. Mixed-use is proposed on both sites for a total of 129 mixed income apartments and 25,000 SF of commercial spaces. They wish to forge a connection between the buildings and uses with gathering spaces utilizing sustainable design and construction methods. The courthouses were the driving force behind this project, and they will refurbish the facades in-kind, replace the windows and restore the trim, and upgrade the interior while maintaining the historic character described in the preservation restrictions. They want to bring new long-lasting life to the building. The plaza will include greenspace, public art, and gathering space to bring people back to the downtown area. Mr. Giordano added that they are exploring potential tenants including: the Museum of Justice, Salem State University, East Regiment Beer Company, Hasbro, and the Southern Essex Registry of Deeds. Mr. Prestejohn stated that he’s been working with Brian O’Connor, founding partner from Cube 3. Their design working group has regular meetings with various members of the SRA, DRB, and PB and the design team to discuss overall feel of the building, the height which has been reduced, and the public realm and pedestrian connection to foster a connection between Bridge Street and the lower river level. The crescent lot has a slip lane from Bridge Street leading to North Street and the commuter foot traffic comes from North Salem, either direction on Bridge Street, under the North Street bridge, and downtown Salem. The site has two edges, the lower portion facing the river and the upper level at Bridge and Washington Streets. The building was moved against the street edge and the public space towards the water, creating courtyards and a new pathway along the northern face of the building. A smooth flowing design and shared use path will connect the different levels and concentrate the open spaces to where they would be the most useful, at the rear of the courthouses and across the street at the high point of Bridge Street on the crescent. The building design is a ground level stone masonry treatment with upper levels of fiber cement paneling that extends to grade with large transparent glass. Angled accent walls at the balconies facing North/Bridge Streets help to transition the building from North Salem to the downtown. Dynamic layering is proposed with mill style levels and a carved away upper story of glass, banding, and terracing that could become an outdoor roof deck. The curvature of the design along the north façade connects to the building entrances and rear storefronts, so they can maximize the impact of the public space. Mr. Giordano stated that they are seeking a 1.75 parking ratio and plan to lease approximately 70-80 parking spaces at the MBTA garage as well as at the Universal Steel lot and Museum Place garage for a combined total of 1,725 parking spaces. They will continue to refine the design, particularly at the parking level.  August 18, 2021, Page 6 of 8 Schedule Mr. Giordano stated that they began meeting with the community in mid-July and have met with various city boards, neighborhood groups, and they will continue to do so to refine the design. They project a final closing in 2023, commencement of construction in 2024, and state and federal approvals throughout 2024 and into the first quarter of 2025. Mr. Joyce noted his interest in the proposal for the historic courthouses as well as materiality. Mr. Meche asked if grade changes were proposed for Bridge Street to allow for plaza access. Mr. Prestejohn replied no, and they’d won’t adjust the lawn, stone wall or sidewalk at the courthouses either. Mr. Meche noted that the large arched windows in the County Commissioner are bricked up and that MHC will likely comment on proposal to alter this feature. Mr. Stein replied that the proposed plans haven’t been presented to MHC yet. Mr. Prestejohn added that they will restore the window openings if they are permitted. Mr. Meche requested the proposed mix of housing and commercial for the court buildings. Mr. Stein replied that the mix is distributed in various location, with approximately 20 residential units total, more in the courthouse than the County Commissioners building. The crescent lot is mixed use with commercial space and public programming at bridge and 110 residential units above. Mr. Prestejohn noted that they are working on new renderings for the upcoming DRB meeting and will include materiality and large blowups of areas of the building, with physical material samples to be shown at some point. Mr. Giordano noted that photos will be provided of precedents to see the look and feel they are trying to achieve. Mr. Meche suggested they not overbuild on parking. Mr. Stein replied that they need to design options that allow for fewer cars, particularly since they are next to a parking garage. Mr. Prestejohn added that parking at this level and the potential for flooding are also concerns that they are working on. Ms. Kelleher requested the proposed materials. Mr. Prestejohn replied that the base would be a stone-like panel, but they are looking at other options, the middle would be a Nicheha panel, and the top would be similar to the base but with a textured horizontal fiber cement composite panel. Ms. Kelleher stated that this end of Salem is surrounded by masonry, and she raised concerns with how the proposed materials will relate to the neighboring buildings. The team stated that this site is at the perimeter of the downtown, but they are open to options. Mr. Meche stated that he is in favor of not using brick, which can be hard to source as a high-performance product. Mr. Pattison asked Mr. Meche for his thoughts on the use of brick at the Halstead at Salem Station project. Mr. Meche replied that brick is labor intensive and new buildings shouldn’t be faked to look old by using brick. He noted that the proposed design is similar to the Hampton Inn on Washington Street. Ms. Kelleher noted that this will be the first building visible at the entrance to the downtown from North Salem Mr. Prestejohn stated that this building will be high performance, with a rain screen, and allows for flexibility in the design and details, will have reveals and reglets to articulate the wall. More information on details can be included in future presentations. Mr. Joyce requested future presentation include a wall section and a shadow plan to help the public understand the building since there will be many views from various angles. The court buildings have a lot of details, but this new building should show the depths of the façade with highly rendered images. Mr. Martinez stated that he is excited about the utilization of this space and the restoration of the empty court buildings. Regarding the crescent lot building, the materials will be very important. The façade facing North Salem doesn’t read as Salem and isn’t very characteristic of Salem’s architecture and it feels disconnected from the downtown. Design cues should be taken from the court buildings, noting that the south side of the courthouse is very classical design. The proposed is very modern and lacks historical flavor and adding small nods to historic architecture would be good for those who might push back on the design. He agreed with Mr. Meche that being next to a parking garage, the numbers of spaces proposed should be more than enough. Public Comment: No one in the assembly wished to speak. Mr. Joyce agreed with the need for detail and materiality. Many modern buildings have details that end up looking flat and sterile and fitting a new structure in a historic structure will be a constant battle. Mr. Meche noted that the Superior Court has strong forms with subtle details that create shadow and textures that liven up the façade. Mr. Giordano replied that they will add detail and refined renderings using cues from the surrounding buildings. Ms. Kelleher recommended they show the view from Bridge Street as it relates to the historic and new courthouses. Mr. Prestejohn replied that they will provide multiple views.  August 18, 2021, Page 7 of 8 Other Business: a. Violations; Ms. Kelleher stated that since the agenda is lightening up she will have more opportunity to review the violations. Other Demolition Delay Ordinance Revisions: Ms. Kelleher stated that the proposed revisions to the City’s Demolition Delay Ordinance was passed by the City Council and the Major has signed it. The ordinance includes an updated definition of demolition, and the Commission will likely review more applications under this change. The new ordinance went into effect as of August 6, 2021, with a 12-month delay on buildings between 50 and 100-years-old and an 18-month delay on buildings over 100-years old. This will allow a significant amount of time to work with applicants who are seeking to demolish a significant portion of their buildings. Mr. Meche asked about emergency demolition that would be authorized by the Building Inspector. Ms. Kelleher replied that the Building Inspector felt it was important to have that oversight. 9 Buffum Street: Ms. Kelleher stated that this application is on the ZBA agenda with a request for a special permit but was continued to the following meeting. It will come before the Commission. The applicant wants to take off a gable roof and install a mansard, which is a change to a historic building and the streetscape. It will remain a 2- family, but they are seeking more living space, and she suggested that adding small dormers would be a more historically appropriate alternative for additional living space. Salem Willows Pier: Ms. Kelleher stated that MHC sent a letter to the Commission regarding the Salem Pier which has had significant damage from storms and needs to be replace. MHC believes it doesn’t contribute to the Salem Willows Park, but the Commission may believe it is a significant feature. She asked if the members would want someone to present the pier replacement proposal to the Commission. Mr. Meche asked about MHC’s opinion in relation to the current details of the pier. Ms. Kelleher replied that the current pier was built in 1975 and MHC believes it doesn’t relate to the history of the park. She’s unsure if their findings are based on the MACRIS report, but she believes it is a significant part of the visual character of The Willows. Salem State University – South Campus: Ms. Kelleher stated that MHC found an adverse effect by DCAMM proposal to surplus the SSU south campus, which includes the historic Sainte Chretienne buildings. MHC is requesting a preservation restriction be placed on those buildings and that DCAMM reach out to the Commission and HSI for comment. She’s unsure of the timing of that project. Mr. Joyce replied that this is a former convent on their campus and a significant structure. Keeping History Above Water Salem: Mr. Joyce stated that a symposium on Keeping History Above Water will be held on September 13th and 14th. On September 14th he will be giving a walking tour and discussing seal level rise at the Point Neighborhood and his colleague David Moffit will be giving a walking tour on Collins Cove. Ms. Kelleher added that there will be multiple speakers, and it will be hybrid event with all events having both in- person and virtual options. They will look at storm impacts and a Salem State University professor will be looking at the House of Seven Gables. Design Guidelines Update: Mr. Meche asked how the revisions are progressing. Ms. Kelleher replied that a public meeting will be held the second meeting in October with a draft document provided in advance. 7 Hamilton Street: Ms. Kelleher stated that the homeowner’s slate roof has had multiple repairs and with each repair their insurance premium rises. They are trying to balance the cost of insurance vs. saving the slate roof. The slate roof is a key feature of the building so any opportunity to preserve it is important.  August 18, 2021, Page 8 of 8 110 Federal Street: Ms. Kelleher stated that she received no comments from the Commission to considering the removal of a chain-link fence. If an abutter objects to its removal it will be adding to the agenda of the next meeting. If an abutter does not object it will be issued without a public hearing. 23 Chestnut Street: Ms. Kelleher stated that Mr. Meche and Mr. Martinez made a site visit. The architect agreed to keep the design as approved, since painting the nano wall doors black would be a significant change. She asked if there were still concerns about only doing work at the rear which has minimal visibility rather than the entire project. Mr. Pattison and Mr. Martinez agreed that the work was minor if it was not black. Ms. Kelleher noted that the owners are requesting to extend the certificate for another year. VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to extend the certificate for one additional year. Mr. Pattison seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Pattison, Martinez, Joyce in favor, and the motion so carried. Adjournment VOTE: Mr. Martinez made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Meche seconded the motion. Roll Call: Meche, Martinez, Pattison, Joyce in favor and the motion so passed. The meeting adjourned at 8:45PM Respectfully submitted, Patti Kelleher Preservation Planner