Historical Commission

SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES September 17, 2025 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on September 17, 2025 at 6:00PM via Zoom Virtual Meeting. Present were: Chair Vijay Joyce, Robert Peterson, Milo Martinez, Emily Gonzalez, Rebecca English, Brendan Murray (departed early), Vice Chair Kelly Tyler-Lewis, Mark Meche. Staff: Patti Kelleher. Absent: Margarida Raka-Goncalves. Oct. 1 Meeting Date Changed to Oct. 8 Ms. Kelleher noted that the next meeting was scheduled for October 1st, which is a holiday. The Commission agreed to hold its next meeting on October 8th. Request to extend demolition period for Camp Naumkeag, 85 Memorial Drive – continued discussion Ms. Kelleher said that the City was still exploring recommendations from the previous meeting and requested a continuation. VOTE: Mr. Peterson motioned to continue the application. Ms. English seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez, Murray, Meche, Martinez, Joyce were in favor and the motion so carried. 107 Federal Street–continuation Richard Jagolta applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness for building renovations after the fact, rear condenser and fence. Contractor Leo Kraunelis was present. Neighbors delivered comments about the casement windows opening over the sidewalk. Mr. Kraunelis, in discussion with the Building Department, determined that the casement windows did not meet building code and would be replaced with two wooden doors with glass in the middle as originally approved. Kraunelis said that the front door would be completed in accordance with the approved plan; a single door, transom above, etc. Chair Joyce affirmed that all details would match the existing double doors on the tenant side. Mr. Kraunelis shifted discussion to Anderson A Series windows. Chair Joyce showed images of a window at the corner of the property. Ms. Kelleher noted that previous approval was for double-glazed, wood windows, 2 over 2, and to match existing. Mr. Kraunelis said that the Anderson window used has a Fibrex (composite) exterior. Mr. Peterson and Chair Joyce looked at mockups at the property that Mr. Kraunelis had arranged. Mr. Meche lauded Fibrex as a great material, a good alternative to PVC that paints well, efficient as a thermal break. Mr. Meche also noted that Fibrex had been installed elsewhere in the neighborhood. Ms. Kelleher said that the condenser and fencing would be re-advertised for a later meeting. The City Solicitor determined that the description of work to be performed as advertised did not include this description and needed to be re-advertised for the Commission to re-affirm their previous vote.  Historical Commission meeting minutes, September 17, 2025 Page 2 of 7 Mr. Kraunelis identified a discrepancy in the previously approved materials: specifying that the previously approved plan said that a window would be 2 over 2, but a separate drawing said 1 over 1, thus there was ambiguity as to what configuration was approved for installation. Mr. Kraunelis drew attention to a document called page A1.1. The first floor drawing plan identified 2 over 2. Chair Joyce said that the windows under discussion should match the size of the storefront window panes as best as possible. Public comment: John Carr, 7 River St, felt that the project was coming along nicely. Mr. Carr wanted clarification that the front door would match the tenant doors in all respects. Mr. Carr also said that the window on the corner of the property should not be operable because the storefront windows – which they should match – were not operable. Mr. Carr did not express concern about the Anderson windows, granted that they have been approved at other historic properties. Mr. Carr asked the SHC if the side door could or should be recessed, potentially six inches. Mr. Meche expressed doubt that the front door could perfectly match the tenant doors but should still aspire to. Mr. Kraunelis said that the front door would be a single 3’x7’ door, all wood, transom on top, with trim to match that of the tenant doors. Mr. Carr spoke in strong favor of matching the details of the tenant’s door and wanting to resolve any ambiguities in approved drawings and plans. David Sullivan remarked on the work of this property that had been carried out after the fact. Mr. Sullivan expressed hope that windows on the Beckford side would have window trim to match existing. Mr. Kraunelis affirmed that trim would match. Constance Arlander, 91 Federal Street, reiterated a point that was raised during the SHC’s site visit, i.e. the fact that 49 Federal had condensers (at least four altogether) between two buildings that were very close. Ms. Arlander encouraged the SHC to take a look at the installation of condensers at 49 Federal. Mr. Carr asked if a single door could be installed that appeared as though it were two doors. Mr. Meche looked up the IRC code which confirmed that at least one leaf of the doors needs to be at least 32”. Chair Joyce said that forcing two doors into that space would not be possible. Chair Joyce affirmed that the windows would be trimmed out to match existing, and was fine with one window, 2 over 2 to match existing glass size, on the side of the house. Chair Joyce said that all windows to be brush painted. VOTE: Mr. Peterson motioned to approve windows as constructed using the Anderson A Series with Fibrex, to be brush painted in the field, 2 over 2 window on the corner, single window on Beckford Street, with muntins to appear as had been discussed. Mr. Meche seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez, Murray, Meche, Martinez, Joyce, Tyler-Lewis (abstained) were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Kelleher noted that the entrance door and side door on Beckford Street were to be constructed as previously approved; the contractor needs to remove and install what had been previously approved. Single entrance door (to front) as drawn/specified/detailed with dimensions. Ms. Kelleher said that no additional vote needed to be taken on that previously approved item. Ms. Kelleher said that no continuation was needed to continue discussion of the condenser and fencing.  Historical Commission meeting minutes, September 17, 2025 Page 3 of 7 1 Pickering Street–continuation Ellen and Matthew Marshall applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness to modify previous approval for perimeter wall. Chair Joyce recused from discussion. Ms. Tyler-Lewis served as Chair. Ms. Kelleher said that Ms. Marshall had resubmitted new drawings. Ms. Marshall showed a photograph of the property at present which was missing a large portion of brick wall. Pickering and Warren Street perimeter walls were indicated on a birdseye view. Front fence elevation plans were shown: existing granite posts on all 4 corners of property would remain; original brick columns on either side of front walk would remain, as would the wood fence; the taper detail from front fence would be replicated at all corners; and existing brick wall to the left of the driveway would remain and be repointed / repaired. Ms. Marshall’s slides were very detailed in labeling the dimensions of each fence component: columns would be 52” with 48” fence / posts (currently 63”); post would be 12” wide; pickets 1.5” wide with 2” in between every picket; top rail would be 4” wide (“sandwich construction”); bottom rail would be 6” wide, to sit on top of existing granite (used to be under brick wall); and so forth. Drawings of fence replicas were shown: cedar fence painted BM Simply White (OC-117); custom fence built by Boston Hill Fence Company; the indentations in the column that exist now would be removed; top rail would be moved up and started four inches from the top of the fence (currently 6”); the bottom rail would be 6” wide (currently 4”). Fence inspirations from Essex and Chestnut Streets were shown. Distance between posts was 8’, Ms. Marshall said in response to Mr. Meche’s question. Chair Tyler-Lewis questioned if there was room for a taper from the brick columns in the center down to the pickets in order to mimic the taper design on the corners. Ms. Marshall affirmed that this could be done. Ms. Marshall said that rebuilding the entire brick wall would double the cost of the project and be cost-prohibitive. Chair Tyler-Lewis asked if a more substantial base along bottom rail could be used to mimic grandeur of the brick, from 6” to potentially 8”, giving the appearance of a baseboard at the bottom. Ms. Marshall said that the bottom would be laid on top of existing granite, which would be retained. Ms. Kelleher said that no drawings of approval existed because the previous owner never reached that stage. Mr. Martinez wanted to see at least some brick in the new design, even four or five rows of brick underneath the fence would help tie it into the rest of the property. Mr. Martinez recommended exploring this option and shortening the wooden fence as a result, which would be more historically appropriate. Ms. Marshall was open to Mr. Martinez’s recommendations. Chair Tyler-Lewis named 33 Warren as a potential reference for fencing, which Mr. Martinez noted had uninterrupted runs. Public comment: Helen Sides, 35 Broad Street, applauded the Marshalls for their work and fully supported modifications undertaken. David Sullivan recommended having a placard to demarcate the fact that a variety of historic influences were flagged for visitors walking by. Danielle Hanrahan, 28 Beckford Street, said that the plans looked fabulous and wanted to know what sort of treatment would exist around the large oak trees. Ms. Marshall said that the oak trees would remain.  Historical Commission meeting minutes, September 17, 2025 Page 4 of 7 Chair Tyler-Lewis asked if the Tree Commission had provided guidance. Ms. Marshall said that at least one tree would have to be taken down which was overrun with carpenter ants. Ms. Marshall said that the oak trees were in good shape. Ms. Marshall sought permission to take down the rest of the remaining brick wall. Mr. Meche said that the wall would come down eventually due to its deterioration. Mr. Murray said that the wall should come down. Mr. Murray agreed with Mr. Martinez about the cadence of the fence posts (i.e. to spread out more). Mr. Martinez said that the fence paint color should match the trim of the house. VOTE: Mr. Murray motioned to approve the applicant’s request to remove the brick wall in the area under discussion and continue the fence discussion. Mr. Martinez seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, Meche, Murray, English, Gonzalez, Martinez, Tyler-Lewis, Joyce (recused) were in favor and the motion so carried. 142 Federal Street–continuation Ashley Flynn and Eric Romeo applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness to modify the fence. Helen Sides and Ashley Romeo were present. Ms. Sides said that the chimney (which was not functional) would be planned for removal and that a separate application would be submitted for this. Chair Joyce complimented the applicant’s submission of a fence drawing by McIntire. Members were fine with the fence being made level, as well as the removal of posts at the mouth of the driveway. Chair Joyce pointed out which post would be removed (i.e. the lower one that levels out after the taper). Ms. English clarified that the vote was to remove side panel and level outside runs as submitted in the application, with one post to remain or not remain. Mr. Martinez recommended that the center post also be removed, perpendicular to the street, as an amendment to Ms. English’s planned motion. VOTE: Ms. English motioned to approve the application as submitted. Ms. Gonzalez seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez, Murray, Meche, Martinez, Tyler-Lewis, Joyce were in favor and the motion so carried. 1 Forrester Street Jennifer and Joshua MacGregor applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness for fencing, gutters and window replacement. Mr. Martinez abstained from discussion as an abutter. Images of a metal fence from a neighbor’s property were shown. Ms. MacGregor noted that the neighbor was giving away the fence and she is asking to use it on her property. Ms. MacGregor cited water issues as reason for desire to have new gutters. Ms. Kelleher proposed scheduling a site visit to observe the planned fence material, as well as to gain more details on windows (the ones on the rear ell portion of the property). Ms. Kelleher said that the gutters would be on the back of the ell and may be non-applicable. Mr. Meche questioned if the house  Historical Commission meeting minutes, September 17, 2025 Page 5 of 7 across the street was in a district, which Ms. MacGregor said “no.” Ms. MacGregor said that 150 feet worth of fencing would be available. Chair Joyce said that a site visit would be appropriate. Public comment: Adam Schoenhardt, 2 Forrester, identified as the neighbor who would be donating the fence to the applicants. Milo Martinez lauded the fence panels, fully molded, fleur de lis, and suggested they would not set precedent, given they were made of “unobtainium” (a portmanteau of “unobtainable” and the suffix “- ium”). Vice Chair Tyler-Lewis cautioned the applicants to measure out how much fencing was needed and available, given its finiteness. VOTE: Ms. English motioned to continue the application to conduct a site visit. Mr. Peterson seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, Gonzalez (absent for vote), English, Murray, Meche, Tyler-Lewis, Martinez (recused), Joyce were in favor and the motion so carried. 8 Gifford Court Michael Scott applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors and AC minisplit, after the fact. Mr. Scott noted that he was trying to get the house painted. AC minisplits had been installed four years ago and were installed when he purchased the house. Chair Joyce surmised that the minisplits had been installed in 2016, prior to Mr. Scott’s ownership. Mr. Scott did not have paint color names available but referenced neighboring properties’ paint colors, e.g. 123 Federal. The trim was Navajo White, according to Ms. Kelleher, and appeared to be Old Salem Grey (HC-94) was the body, according to Ms. English. Chair Joyce called these colors historically appropriate. Chair Joyce said that the unpainted line sets should get painted the body color. Mr. Martinez proposed that any new work to be undertaken on heating and cooling systems at this property would be flagged for SHC attention. No public comment. VOTE: Tyler-Lewis motioned to approve paint colors as Navajo White for trim and with body color to match color of 123 Federal Street with line sets to be painted color of body. Mr. Meche seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez (not present), Murray (not present), Meche, Martinez, Tyler-Lewis, Joyce were in favor and the motion so carried. 30 Leavitt Street The City of Salem applied for a Waiver of the Demolition Delay to demolish more than 50% of roof and wall of building older than 50 years. Bill Peterson and Mike Crounse were present on behalf of the City. An image of the building was shown. The original building was built around 1913 and the left side addition about 2013. The building was  Historical Commission meeting minutes, September 17, 2025 Page 6 of 7 located on edge of Palmer Cove Park. Mr. Crounse said the building would be converted to Salem Public Schools Welcome Center, to be used to accommodate the population that utilizes services provided onsite. Project started 2022-23, schematic design undertaken by architectural firm. In May 2024 an RFQ was put out and Derby Square Architects was hired in fall 2024 to take the project to construction documents. Mr. Peterson took over the presentation and showed the design development set. Portion of brick on the right was called the “original piece” dating back to 1913. During design process, the project team learned that the building was in a flood plain. A so-called “facade-ectomy” was undertaken to preserve the facade, demo / renovate interior, and then build out as needed. Interior plans were discussed such as enhancing accessibility. Chair Joyce asked if the brick structure was being raised. Mr. Peterson said that they were building around the brick. Chair Joyce noted the property was documented on an inventory form in MACRIS. Mr. Meche questioned how much more expensive this project would be through trying to save portions of the building rather than completely tearing it down and starting fresh. Chair Joyce surmised that the footprint was being kept to preserve existing non-conforming status. No public comment. VOTE: Ms. English motioned to find the property historically significant. Mr. Martinez seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez, Meche, Martinez, Tyler-Lewis, Joyce were in favor and the motion so carried. VOTE: Ms. English motioned to find the building not preferably preserved. Mr. Martinez seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez, Meche, Martinez, Tyler-Lewis, Joyce were in favor and the motion so carried. 25 Highland Street Bogdan and Lilla Jucewicz applied for a waiver of the Demolition Delay to demolish more than 50% of roof and front wall of building older than 50 years. The applicants were present. Ms. Jucewicz said the house has a barn that is about to collapse. The house was built in 1890, but the barn construction date was unknown. The applicants wanted to preserve what could be preserved but otherwise rebuild to make it more safe for storage. Chair Joyce proposed a site visit. Ms. Kelleher thought that the barn was likely built by 1897. Mr. Jucewicz said that the structure was currently being used for storage. The applicants said that the structure was built with cement blocks. Chair Joyce affirmed that the property was not documented on an inventory form. Vice Chair Tyler- Lewis said it was difficult to judge how much of an original structure remained, given apparent alterations. Chair Joyce doubted that the structure was timber-framed and said that the amount of vines on the building was not conducive to its longevity. Mr. Meche favored a site visit. No public comment. VOTE: Ms. English motioned to find the building not historically significant. Mr. Peterson seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez, Meche, Martinez (no), Tyler-Lewis, Joyce (no) were in favor and the motion so carried.  Historical Commission meeting minutes, September 17, 2025 Page 7 of 7 Ms. Kelleher requested that the applicants take and provide photographs of the interior of the structure before undertaking any demolition. Request for letter of support SSU South Campus requested a letter of support for an Historic Tax Credit application. Steve Senna (VP and Project Development Manager at Winn Companies) and Eryn Boyce (PAL) were present. Slideshow presentation was given covering the existing site; recent history & proposed site plan; adaptive reuse of properties (Loring Villa / Sainte Chretienne Chapel / Sainte Chretienne Convent [aka Alumni House]); Sainte Chretienne Academy - elementary school (aka the Academic Bldg); Sainte Chretienne Academy High School (aka the Harrington Building); Draft 40R Design Standards (Adaptive Reuse); and Historic Tax Credit Process. Site context was also presented. A proposed site plan was shown. An aerial view of historic property and buildings were also shown. Ms. Boyce provided an overview of historic alterations to the property in the 20th century. Ms. Boyce said that MHC and National Park Service had already undertaken a review of the property and provided support. Mr. Senna spoke to the necessity of tax credits in undertaking the type of work being planned. Mr. Meche questioned plans for the gym. Mr. Senna said that the cafeteria would see minor renovations undertaken. Mr. Senna said that the gym would see a combination of keeping the stage and gymnasium floor to create a multi-function space. VOTE: Mr. Meche motioned to draft a letter of support. Ms. English seconded the motion. Roll Call: Peterson, English, Gonzalez, Meche, Martinez, Tyler-Lewis, Joyce were in favor and motion so carried. Request for comment on the FY26 CPA Plan Ms. Kelleher requested that discussion be continued to the next agenda. Other Business 392 Essex Street Mr. Meche asked if a Certificate of Non-Applicability was issued for 392 Essex given that work was being undertaken to repair significant rot of siding. Mr. Meche wanted to ensure that proper in-kind siding materials were being used. Adjournment VOTE: Ms. English motioned to adjourn. Ms. Tyler-Lewis seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:22PM. Respectfully submitted, Dan Graham, Historic Commission Clerk