Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-10-2004 Historic Preservation Commission IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 p.m. A. Call to Order B. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda C. Items for Consideration (vote required) 1. Minutes: a. September 23 b. October 14 D. Discussion: 1. 701 Oakland Avenue 2. Northside Historic Districts 3. 2005 annual planning meeting E. Information 1. Information about windows and painting from Bob Yapp 2. Memo from Karin Franklin to City Council; Historic Preservation: history & authority 3. Forum News; November/December 2004; Vol. XI, NO.2 F. Other G. Adjourn MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 23,2004 -7:00 P.M. EMMA HARVAT HALL - CIVIC CENTER DRAFT MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Amy Smothers, Jann Weismiller, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Jim Ponto, Justine Zimmer STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Rodney Lehnertz, Jean Walker CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Public meetina to consider the nomination of the proposed Melrose Historic District to the National Reaister of Historic Places. McCafferty said this will be an evaluation of the National Register nomination for the Melrose Historic District. She said that, as a Certified Local Government, the City is required by contract to comment on whether the proposed nomination is eligible or not eligible and to take public input regarding the eligibility. McCafferty said this needs to be completed at the present meeting, as the State Nomination Review Committee will review this nomination at their October 8th meeting. She said the neighborhood association held a public informational meeting, and two Commission members attended as did architectural historian Marlys Svendsen. McCafferty stated that about 25 people attended the meeting. Public hearing: Rodnev Lehnertz said that he is the Director of Campus and Facilities Planning for The University of Iowa. He distributed maps that outlined properties owned by the University to Commission members. Lehnertz read a letter that he submitted to the Commission. Jean Walker said she represented the Melrose Neighborhood Association. She stated that the Neighborhood Association hired Marlys Svendsen, who has done a lot of successful work in Iowa City already, to research the area. Walker said Svendsen informed her that she would not have undertaken the project if she did not believe it was successful, and now that she has done all of the research, she is still of the same mind. Walker stated that this is a unique area that came into being in the late 1800s, and then there were various waves of building. She said the last big wave occurred when University Hospitals moved from the east side of the City to the west side. Walker said those structures are very much connected to the University because of the relocation of University Hospitals and because of the athletic facilities on the west side. Walker said there have been other areas on the west side of the City that have been demolished due to University expansion, and this is the last remaining vestige on the west side of the City. She said she feels it is very important to preserve the area and feels the historic district should be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places. Walker said she just received the University's letter. She said she is glad the University is taking an interest in the historic nature of this neighborhood. Walker said she hoped the University's review of this would be as quick as possible and would be available to the public. Smothers asked Walker how many neighborhood meetings were held regarding this potential district. Walker said that three or four meetings were held. She said she initially polled people for whom she had Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 23,2004 Page 2 e-mail addresses, which was 38 of the 70 owners, and only two of the 38 did not want to see this become a historic district. She said there are 85 properties in the district. Walker said the neighborhood then held various meetings, and she sent a preliminary notification to all of the property owners. She said that all through this she wanted it to be a transparent process and wanted everyone to know what was going on. Smothers stated that the neighborhood association did an excellent job for a grass roots program. She said that is where preservation stems from and is where the Commission gets its ideas of how people want preservation to work in Iowa City. Maharry asked Walker if University representatives were invited to the meetings. Walker said the University representatives were invited and attended two meetings at which Svendsen made presentations. Maharry asked Lehnertz if the University is contending that their properties may not fit into the context of the proposed district. Lehnertz responded that the University wants to ensure is there was due diligence in respect to their properties in the preparation of the nomination. He said it is not the intent to say that the University would like its properties to be out of the nomination, but the University wants to study its properties with respect to and in relationship to this document. Lehnertz said the University wants to ensure that what goes forth to the State and federal review is accurate and represents the neighborhood accurately. Smothers said that Svendsen has been working in historic preservation for over 35 years with 25 years in Iowa City alone. Lehnertz said he did not question Svendsen's expertise or the process. He said that as he looked at the document in an early review there were some things that appeared to be inaccurate at first glance, including a statement that ownership of the properties was solely private and a statement that there are no religious institutions or purposes in any of the structures. Lehnertz said the University wanted to get a better chance to review the document for accuracy. He said the University consultants have informed him that to take a look at the University properties from the University's perspective is a course of due diligence that best represents the University's and community's interests in making sure the properties are accurately represented and fit into the context of the study. Smothers said that the document was written for a context. She said that each and every property adds to that context. Smothers stated that cohesiveness is what the Commission looks at in determining whether a district is eligible to go to the State and to the National Register. Lehnertz said he does not question the validity of the report itself. He said the University consultants have suggested that the University take a careful look at its properties as they relate to the overall document and the report itself. McCafferty said that all owners of properties in the district may continue to comment until the district is listed on the National Register. Maharry asked if there is a remedy to correct errors of fact if the Commission should recommend approval of this. McCafferty said that after the review process there will be comments, and there can be changes and edits to the nomination as a result of the process. She said there is still opportunity for verification of facts and changes if necessary. McCafferty said that based on information received from the public, its reading of the document, its understanding of the document, and the National Register criteria, the Commission's purview is to state whether or not it feels this district is eligible for the National Register. She stated that the State Nomination Review Committee will take the recommendation into consideration when making its nomination to the National Park Service. Public hearing closed. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 23,2004 Page 3 McCallum said this district is neighborhood initiated. He said that for that reason, he is impressed with this submission and felt favorably inclined to move it forward. Weitzel said he attended the neighborhood meeting, and it was up to Svendsen's usual high quality. He said the questions were pretty routine, and there was no sense of opposition to the district. Weitzel said the document is solid and consistent within itself. He said he would support this and did not see any reason not to support this as eligible. MOTION: Weitzel moved to recommend to the State Historical Society if Iowa that the Melrose Historic District is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. McCafferty said this item and motion will be on the October 4th City Council meeting agenda, and the mayor will have the authority to either agree or disagree with the eligibility. She said that recommendation will then be forwarded to the State for its October 8 State Nomination Review Committee meeting. Certificate of Appropriateness: 525 Iowa Avenue. McCafferty said this application was withdrawn. MINUTES: September 2. 2004. Maharry had a few minor changes. MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the September 2,2004 Historic Preservation Commission meeting minutes, as amended. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. September 9.2004. Maharry said that on page nine, in the fourth paragraph after the public hearing was closed, the number of properties under design review should be changed to read approximately 1,100 instead of 1,700 to 1,800. Maharry also recommended some nonsubstantive clarifications. MOTION: Smothers moved to approve the September 9,2004 Historic Preservation Commission meeting minutes, as amended. Weitzel seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Maharry said McCafferty included statistics regarding the Commission's past application reviews. Maharry said there is also information regarding a comparison of property values in the Summit Street Historic District and the Kirkwood Neighborhood. Maharry said that the Dubuque City Council recently voted to demolish eleven historic buildings, some of which are listed on the National Register, in downtown Dubuque. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s:/pcd/minutes/hpcl2004/hpc09-23-04.doc (/ Q) - :J .~ :::2: t: o ëi5 (/ 'Ë E o Ü t:"I:t .Qo -0 C\JN è: - Q)C') (/ N Q) L.. L.. Q) Q....c .~ E"I:t 02 Q) -a.CJ .!Q Q) C\J IC/)Q.. == Q .... rIJ rIJ .... S S"O Q . u 8 ~ ==~ Q .... ~ ~ ......yO C'4==O >C'4N ~"O rIJ == ~ ~ ....... ~< .... . Q ...... rIJ .... == ~ ..... -- ..... ..... -.:t ..... -- = ..... ~ I N Þ<: 0 0 Þ<: Þ<: 0 I Þ<: Þ<: 0 -- I Q'\ I Q'\ I -- Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I 0 Þ<: 0 Q'\ I I ~ I I Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I I Þ<: 0 Q'\ I I , I \C I I ~ Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I I Þ<: Þ<: I I 00 I I = I I ..... Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I I Þ<: Þ<: -- I I 00 I I N I ~ Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: 0 , Þ<: 0 I I ~ I Þ<: 0 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: 0 I I -.:t I ..... Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: 0 I Þ<: Þ<: -- I \C I = f::1 I f::1 ..... Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: -- 0 I 0 \C I t'- ð I f::1 N 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: -- I 0 11) I ~ I f::1 ..... Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: ìñ I 0 I N f::1 I f::1 ¡¡.¡ ~ Þ<: 0 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Ô 0 I 0 -.:t I ~ ð I f::1 Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: -.:t I 0 I ..... I I .... Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: I -- I I ~ I I \C f::1 ¡¡.¡ ð I I ~ Þ<: Ô Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: , 0 I I N I I N f::1 f::1 f::1 I I ..... Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: Þ<: I Þ<: I -- 0 0 0 I I N I I 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I ~ I I , I ..... I I '" v-. '" r- v-. '" r- '" '" v-. r- ël 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 -- -- -- -- I ) ~ 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ E-<¡¡.¡ -- -- M M M M M M M M M M '" Ë 8 .. ... GI ~ .E! õ3= Q: ... -= = ct -; ~~ ë .... ~ = -= U S .lj ë Q = ct = 'az IS Š -= ~ u ~ ~ Q ='a¡ ~ Ñ 00 ~ =-- oo~ t<I -< ~ ~ ::Ë ~-; ~ Z ..; ..; ..; "0 I ) .... '" (1) ;::I OJ:) ..... ~ ·13 'š ~ I ) I ) ï:iï:i=~:::E (1) I ) I ) "'" t<I tI) tI) tI'J 0 ~ £~~Z~ II II II II II >. f::1 ~ ~Þ<:OOZ MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 2004 -7:00 P.M. CIVIC CENTER - EMMA HARVAT HALL DRAFT MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Amy Smothers, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe, Jim Ponto, Jann Weissmiller, Justine Zimmer STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Ted Chambers, Phil Launspach, Andrew Ives, Larry Svoboda, W. Max Mons, Mike Haverkamp, Helen Burford, Mike Brennan, Greg Allen CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Public meetina: Jefferson Street Historic District. Regarding notification of owners, McCafferty stated that she reviewed the list of addresses and property owners, and there had only been one change of ownership. She said that letters were mailed out according to the Historic Preservation Ordinance. McCafferty said that the Johnson County Tax Assessor's information was used to obtain mailing addresses. She said the notice was sent to 800 2nd Street, Suite 500E, Coralville. Public hearing. Ted Chambers said that he works for a management company and takes care of three properties in this area: 22 North Gilbert, 24 North Gilbert, and 43 Jefferson Street. He stated that neither he nor the owner of the properties, Dick Morrissey of Denver, Colorado, received notification of any of the meetings. Phil Launspach. 136 Koser, said that he owns the property at 405 East Jefferson and manages the properties that his mother owns at 431 East Jefferson and 425 East Jefferson. He said his family has owned the properties since the late 1950s. Launspach said that all of his neighbors on the south side of the 400 block of Jefferson were opposed to having their properties included and all sent notarized letters to the Commission to let them know of their opposition. Launspach said Cindy Parsons, who is on the board of the Congregationalist Church on the corner of Clinton and Jefferson, also wrote a letter voicing the church's opposition. He said he also met with Andrew Ives at the University, and Ives told him that the University has no interest in the district and would like to be excluded from the district. Launspach said that of the properties on the south side of Jefferson Street, it appears that there is not a single property owner on the south side of Jefferson Street who is interested in being in this district. He said that there are a total of 14 properties there, and he counted 38 properties in the entire district. Launspach said he knew specifically of five properties on the north side who have already written letters regarding the Gilbert-Linn Street Historic District, and they are not in favor as well. Launspach said that what he is hoping for is a division of this district going right down the center of Jefferson Street excluding all of the south side properties. He said this could include the north side, because he knew there were some good neighbors on the north side who want to be included. Andrew Ives. 1310 Tea Drive, said that he is the business manager for The University of Iowa. He respectfully requested that the University be excluded from the proposed Jefferson Street Historic District. Ives said that he was unaware of this hearing, but he had earlier written a letter indicating the University's Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 2 objection to this matter, because the University had not received notice of the hearing. He said he received a letter back from the State saying that it was too late to object. Maharry said that the difference in the notification relates to local district designation versus National Register designation. He said the present hearing concerns local designation. Ives asked if this is applying the local ordinance to the nationally designated district, and Maharry confirmed this. Ives stated that the University still would like to be excluded from the district, although it has no objection to the Commission proceeding with the district. He said the University does not feel that it lends a great deal to the district. Ives said that the University has no specific plans with respect to those properties and has recently invested millions of dollars in three of the four properties but still would like to be excluded from the district. Larrv Svoboda. 16 Cherrv Lane N.E., said he owns property in Iowa City but does not own any property in this particular area. He said that it seems that there are some very nice, older restored properties that certainly qualify for historic designation. Svoboda said, however, there are also some properties on the street that are on the other end of the scale. Svoboda said he is a landlord in Iowa City and knows about owning property, and even the owner may not have full control over it because of things like this. He said that some of the property owners are caught in a straddle position of owning a property that has been dismantled; for instance, in the southeast quadrant of this area are six houses in a row that have vinyl siding. Svoboda said that any kind of architectural feature on the house was dismantled some time ago. He said that on the one hand, the owner cannot really rehab the house because there is not enough income out of it to do what the Commission expects. Svoboda stated that on the other hand, the landlord cannot really sell the house because no one will want to buy an income producing property in this condition in a historic preservation district. He said this will work a financial hardship on certain people. Svoboda asked what kind of control the Commission would have over churches in the area, and if the churches would be prevented from printing the Ten Commandments on the front of the church. He said it seems obvious to him that the Commission is trying to use this as a buffer zone for those houses that are worthy of the designation so that they are protected from encroachment by people who want to move into the neighborhood and perhaps tear these other buildings down and put up a different kind of structure. Svoboda said he believes this is a reactive position to a problem that probably needs to be addressed. He said he sees historic designation in this type of situation as a reaction to some deterioration in the neighborhood. Svoboda suggested that the Commission take a proactive stance by trying to provide some incentive for the other houses in the neighborhood. Svoboda said that there is a tremendous vacancy rate in Iowa City right now, and a lot of it is close in in this type of housing. He said that these people are already caught in a financial pinch, and he believes that the only way it would be supported is if there is some kind of incentive to rehab the properties. Svoboda said that certainly in this kind of designated area, it's not going to happen, because it is too expensive and the owner doesn't get a return on his investment. McCafferty noted that three of the church properties are already listed on the National Register and were listed in 1996 as local historic landmarks. Weitzel added that one of the churches already has religious inscriptions on the side of the building. He said the Commission does not tell people what they can or cannot post on the side of their property. Launspach asked if the churches have voting power, and McCafferty confirmed this. Launspach said that in the 400 block of Jefferson Street, everyone of the properties is some type of commercial property. He said that they are all rental properties. Launspach said that none of the buildings are owner-occupied except for one, which also contains an audio-video store. McCafferty said that this is a transitional zone, allowing both commercial and residential uses. Launspach said this area was originally designated as a buffer zone between downtown and residential and was zoned CB-2 until just recently. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 3 W. Max Mons. 404 East Jefferson, said he represents St. Paul's Chapel. He said that at the last meeting he objected to the designation on behalf of his congregation. Mons said that the building is owned by the Iowa District East of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod Number 126 Congregation Strong, and the chairman of the Board of Directors asked him to again voice objection. Mons asked about the last meeting at which it was stated that if owners of a certain percentage of square footage objected, then a certain course of action would be available to them. McCafferty said that in the National Register process, if 51 % of the owners object to the State, the district is not listed on the National Register. She stated that in this case, with local designation, if owners of more than 20% of the property area within the boundaries of the district object to the City Council, a supermajority vote of City Council, six out of seven votes, would be required for approval. Mike Brennan, 1207 Seymour, said he asked at the last hearing about the technical merits of the Newman Center being included in the district and since then has realized there is a small, older chapel attached to it. He said that nevertheless it is designated as a non-contributing property, and it is on the edge of the district. Brennan asked what the technical merits are of including a non-contributing property, most of which has been built within the last ten years, within a historic district. Brennan said he knew there was a preference for squaring off local districts, but that clearly doesn't apply as a rationale to the North Gilbert District and asked why a non-contributing property on the edge would be included. He stated that federal regulations traditionally exclude religious institutions unless they are an integral part of the district. McCafferty said that Brennan's question was relayed to the consultant. McCafferty said the reason the Newman Center was added to the National Register District was because of the historic structure on the site. She stated that under National Register regulations, a property cannot be split; one-half of a building cannot be registered. McCafferty said this would be considered one building because a non-historic and a historic portion are connected. She said the consultant did not feel it had the merits to be a contributing building, but it did have the significance of the historic structure and the significance complied with the National Register regulations in the federal code. Mike Haverkamp. 109 North Van Buren, thanked those in attendance and said he appreciated the opposition coming out and being part of this process. He said that those in favor of the local district have their work cut out for them. Haverkamp stated that the Congregational Church is already on the National Register and is therefore already bound by all of the regulations that a local district would be bound by. Regarding questions about the south side of Jefferson Street and the fact that those are income properties, Haverkamp said he recently looked at the City website and noted that for the following properties the City allows the following number of units and residents: 403 South Jefferson-five units and 12 occupants; 405 South Jefferson-five units and 11 occupants; 409/411 South Jefferson-six units and 19 occupants; 413 South Jefferson-five units and 11 occupants; 415 South Jefferson-number of residents to be determined; 425 South Jefferson- six units and 14 occupants; 431 South Jefferson-six units and 13 residents. Regarding the discussion about owners being saddled with a property that is not in good shape, Haverkamp said there is no way an owner could demolish one of those properties and build back with that kind of density. He said that it is in the best interests of the owners to maintain those properties, because there isn't enough lot space or enough square footage in those properties now to allow them to have the density that they currently do. Haverkamp said that he has owned and lived in his house for 18 years. He said he considers himself the steward of the house, as he did not build it, nor will he be the last one to live there. Haverkamp said some may say that some of those houses are not in bad shape, but they are not historic. He stated that there are two houses on the south side of Jefferson Street that were designed by O. H. Carpenter, who designed the CSPS Hall, the Shambaugh House, the Arthur Hiller Ford House, and many other houses throughout Iowa City. Haverkamp said that 403 South Jefferson is probably the only house that Carpenter designed as a rental property. He added that the house at 425 South Jefferson is the Sueppel house, which was built for an incredibly prominent Iowa City family, although Launspach owns the property now. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 4 Haverkamp said that the boundaries the Commission has drawn on the historic district make sense. He said the boundaries include historic structures and include a neighborhood that at one time was unified and still is. Haverkamp said he enjoys living in a mixed-use neighborhood and has no problem living next to rental properties. Haverkamp said the Commission has a relatively narrow focus. He said that if the Commission approves this, it will go on to the Planning and Zoning Commission and three hearings at the City Council level. Haverkamp said that is the kind of discussion there should be. He said he believes the Commission should approve this district and realizes there is never a way to make everyone happy. Haverkamp said, however, that this is a historic neighborhood, and the Historic Preservation Commission owes it to Iowa City's future to do what it can to designate it as such. Helen Burford. 604 Ronalds Street, asked the Commission to take into consideration that the City Council has passed an ordinance to establish a cultural district, and as part of that pledge, to preserve the historic neighborhoods of Iowa City. She said those neighborhoods add to the complexity of the Iowa City community, which makes it a cultural epicenter for the State. Mike Brennan asked for a more elaborate explanation as to how a property designated as non- contributing forms an integral part of the district in which it is said to be located. McCafferty said that non-contributing properties are typically historic for local designation; she said that properties that are non-historic are classified as such and have very loose guidelines. She said that non- contributing properties often have sufficient form, mass, rooflines, etc. that there is potential for them to be rehabbed. McCafferty said that rehabilitation and restoration is not forced upon property owners. She said that there is no mandate that once a district is passed that an owner will have to invest in the property to do rehabilitation. McCafferty said the Commission does not regulate things such as paint colors or inscriptions. McCafferty said the Commission does regulate additions, major changes, windows, and demolition of a building or portions of a building. She said a non-contributing property may in fact have the potential to contribute to the district or it may be a property which. due to changes over time, does not quite fit with the general character of a district. McCafferty said that per State Code, there cannot be doughnut holes in historic districts. McCafferty stated that the Commission only regulates projects that require a building permit and change the exterior appearance of the property. She said she compiled a list of all historic reviews conducted since the Commission began doing historic review, and the data shows that a property would require historic review on average once every twenty years. McCafferty said she reviewed Jefferson Street building permits issued since 1992, and since that time, there have been ten building permits issued for this area that would have required historic review. Svoboda discussed the scenario in which a severe hailstorm perforates and cracks the vinyl siding that is on many of these houses, and the vinyl siding has to be replaced. He said the vinyl was installed because the old lap siding underneath was rotting away. Svoboda asked what the homeowner could do to replace that siding. McCafferty said the guidelines are not ordinances and therefore allow for flexibility for the unanticipated. She said there is a current case in which she will propose three possibilities so that in the event there are problems with what is under the siding, there are backups so that the owner can be assured that he won't be forced into something that his insurance won't pay for. Svoboda said the insurance company will pay for replacement of the vinyl siding. He said that if there is damage to only two sides of the house. the insurance policy will have a matching clause that will not allow the insurance to pay for the two undamaged sides of the house. Svoboda said the owner will be stuck with the replacement of the vinyl siding with some other kind of siding if vinyl isn't allowed. He said that when the owner takes off the vinyl, the original siding is now exposed. Svoboda asked how far the owner will have to go to repair the house and also meet the regulations imposed by a historic district. McCafferty said that based on the experience she has had with the two insurance inquiries. because the properties are located within historic districts and the owners simply cannot replace the aluminum siding, Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 5 the insurance companies have allowed the owners to comply with the regulations. She said that if there is a partial replacement, the owner is allowed to repair or replace portions of the siding. Maharry said the Commission cannot get into specifics with a hypothetical case. He said that when the Commission has an application in front of it, and there will be three considered later in the meeting, the Commission decides each application on the merits of the case. Brennan said the proposed revision to the zoning ordinance concerning economic hardship was noted at a previous meeting to not apply to financial conditions but was only upon total deprivation of economic value that the City would grant exemptions from the historic process. McCafferty said the financial hardship clause is found in the federal code of regulations. Brennan asked if the City had those in its ordinance to grant relief under the local ordinance, because the City can have tighter standards than the federal government might. McCafferty responded that the City does not have the specific guidelines codified in the ordinance, so that there can be some flexibility. She said there have been situations in the past in which the Commission has not strictly adhered to the guidelines and the cost of a proposal or recommendation is considered. Public hearing closed. Weitzel said that normally when a district is designated, it should include both sides of the street. He said that is the national criteria. Weitzel said that is not necessarily the case for a local district; however, the Commission has tended to stay with that for previous districts. He said if the Commission excludes properties on the south side, then there will be people on the north side who want to be excluded and then where will it stop. Weitzel said then it crumbles, and the whole thing erodes away. Weitzel asked, if any of the buildings are torn down, if it is true that the owner could rebuild at the same density. McCafferty said the RO zone is intended to be a transitional zone between downtown and residential neighborhoods. She said the RO zone is intended to allow flexibility for commercial use of old buildings but also for the construction of smaller scale commercial buildings. McCafferty said that the dimensional requirements for the RO zone are formatted in a manner similar to other commercial districts, as opposed to residential districts. She said that residential districts typically have yard setbacks, but in this zone, there are no yards required. She stated there is a floor area ratio (FAR). She stated that the FAR is two, which means that new buildings could be constructed to have a floor area that would be twice the size of the lot. McCafferty said the maximum height for a building is 35 feet, and the parking requirements for the use would still have to be met. McCallum said his general impression is that he does not know that this block is at risk for demolition. He stated that between the parking requirements and the current density of units currently, he did not believe that there would be any advantage to tearing things down to redevelop the area. McCallum said he thinks that with its grandfathered status, this is probably at its highest and best use according to the current zone. Maharry raised the possibility of excluding the southeast corner of the district. He said that owners in that area appear unanimous in their opposition to this, and it appears that redevelopment potential is slim. Maharry agreed that there needs to be incentivization for rehabilitation of historic properties. He said that with the passage of the National District here, income properties are allowed tax credits for rehabilitation. He said he has concerns that people may not completely understand the Commission's flexibility and how it bends over backwards to work with people when they come with designs for their properties. Maharry said it is a hard stereotype to overcome and encouraged people to stay after the public hearing to see how the process works. Gunn said it seems that there is more opposition than just in the southeast corner. He said he has seen a lot of districts go through. Gunn said that two of them have a substantial number of landlord-owned properties, but they are primarily residential. He said that in all those districts, even though there was considerable opposition particularly to Governor-Lucas, there were still a lot of people who came and argued in favor of the district. Gunn said that despite some landlord opposition, the districts have been carried by the fact that many people living in the district wanted them to be historic districts. He said that those were primarily Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 6 residential areas, and this area is commercial in nature. Gunn said he doesn't see the roomful of people who are supporting the designation as a local historic district. He said that makes the Commission's job of recommending that it become a district a lot harder. Gunn said if the southeast corner is removed, there will be a substantial number of people on the north side who will also want to be excluded. He said he would have to think hard about approving part or all of this district. Gunn said that there are different kinds of opposition. He said that if it is primarily a residential neighborhood and landlords just don't want to go through the hassle of having their applications approved, that is one kind of opposition. Gunn said he understands that argument but doesn't put a lot of weight behind it. Gunn said there is other opposition that deals with USê of the property and income potential. He said that issue is a little more complicated. Gunn said this is a mixed zone district. He said the guidelines say that if synthetic siding is damaged, it can be repaired. Gunn said the issue is more complicated if the siding is substantially damaged and has to be removed. He said the question becomes more difficult when the issue becomes whether something that is not allowed can be reinstalled. Gunn said that most of what the Commission requires is very reasonable. He said that owners are quite pleased when their project is done. Gunn said that Brown Street has become a very nice street, in part because of the local historic district designation. He said that there are now 1,077 properties under design review by the Commission. Gunn said the Commission doesn't impose significant burdens on people who are repairing their homes or making additions. Gunn said most of the districts have gone quite smoothly, but the opposition here is a little different. He said this is more complicated because of the mixed zoning. Gunn said that historic preservation has done a lot of good for a lot of neighborhoods, and there are a great many people who appreciate it very much. He added that at the same time, not every place will become a historic district. McCallum asked if this area is covered by the infill design guidelines. McCafferty said that within the Central Planning District, there are guidelines that have to be complied with to insure that the building fits in with the neighborhood if a developer builds three dwelling units or more. She said that there are also guidelines within the RO zone to ensure that there is a reasonable transition from downtown to the residential neighborhoods. Weitzel said that everyone in a city already has to deal with some level of regulation whether it be a health and safety code or other building codes. He said that an owner of rental property is already under a substantial amount of inspection requirements. Weitzel said that he does not see that the historic preservation issues, where the Commission specifies just a limited amount of things on the exterior of the building, could be an undue additional burden. Weitzel said that people want to do the quick and easy thing, for example putting vinyl siding on a building, but the Commission requires a higher standard. Weitzel said he would have a hard time taking out what he knows are historic buildings from this district and would vote on the side of historic preservation and include the entire area. Svoboda asked if, on a redevelopment of an RO zoned property, the ground floor has to be commercial. McCafferty confirmed that in this zone, dwellings on the ground floor shall be permitted if the building is constructed prior to 1993, but any new construction would require ground floor commercial. Weitzel said there is the issue of if this is self-regulating or if more restrictions have to be imposed to get the outcome the Commission wants. He said there might not be a problem, but once the buildings are torn down, it is too late. McCallum said this is a very pristine area. He said that, as a landlord who owns a historic building, some of the poorer quality rentals out there are vacant at this time, and the better quality properties are not vacant. McCallum said he does not think this area is at risk. He added that the pricing of these properties would make it very impractical for a developer to come in, tear out the whole block, and redevelop it, because these properties are granted parking exemptions and much higher density. McCallum said any Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 7 developer would have to pay the current market value of those properties, which would make it cost prohibitive. He said he did not know that the south block is at risk for teardowns there. McCallum said he probably would not support moving this forward, because it seems that the whole south side of Jefferson Street doesn't want to be included, and he wondered how much of the north side agreed. He said he does not sense that much support for this. Smothers said that mixed use and commercial use are part of historic preservation. Smothers said the consultant gave her professional opinion, and she did a very nice job writing the context, with which Smothers agreed. Smothers said she grew up in Iowa City and would not entertain the idea of lopping off a section of the area. She said she agreed with the consultant's definition of the district and would not vote in favor of excluding property from the work that has already been done here. MOTION: Weitzel moved to recommend to the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of the existing boundaries for the local designation of the Jefferson Street Historic District. Smothers seconded the motion. Weitzel said he always weighs the evidence, but tonight he is not hearing compelling data or evidence. He said the owners don't want more regulation, but that does not convince him. Maharry agreed that those on the south side of Jefferson Street did not have facts and figures, but they were making an economic argument. He said that argument is not groundless but is in part based on experience. Smothers said the burden of proof is placed on those owners. She said that making this a historic district does not place a financial burden on the owners. Smothers said she knows it is a concern and she knows there are insurance issues. She said that people are unaware of what their responsibilities will be. Smothers said she did not want to give the impression that the Commission is asking for higher and greater expectations than what people could financially provide. She said she did not believe the Commission would ever vote that way, and it would be irresponsible of the Commission to ignore the needs of the property owner. Smothers said that just because someone would not like to belong to the district is not evidence enough to dissuade her to vote otherwise. Gunn said that he would vote against the motion. He stated that in the past there has been very strong support for historic districts that have been passed. Gunn said there is very strong support for historic districts that are currently in the process of being nominated and carried forward. He said they are named districts because the residents want them to be districts. Gunn said he does not believe that historic preservation is well served if the majority of people are not interested in being in a district. He stated that historic preservation designation is a benefit, not a burden. Gunn said the only thing that could ever be construed as a burden is not allowing the buildings to be torn down. McCallum said that he owns a multi-family property in a historic district. He said he has had zero vacancy for three years, and the owner before him had zero vacancy for ten years. McCallum said, however, that he likes to see more of the residents support the district. He said it would be good for the neighborhood but does not sense strong support for this. The motion failed on a vote of 2-3. with Smothers and Weitzel votina in favor. MOTION: Gunn moved to recommend to the Planning and Zoning Commission approval of local designation of the Jefferson Street Historic District with amended boundaries, excluding the south side of the 400 block of Jefferson Street. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion failed on a vote of 1-4. with Maharrv votina in favor. Certificates of Appropriateness: 721 North Van Buren Street. McCafferty said that this application is to replace the existing wood stoop with a similar wood stoop. McCafferty said that the proposed balustrade complies with the guidelines, and Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 8 a pipe handrail would be constructed where there is an incline on the sidewalk, although it is not required by code. She stated that the proposal complies with the guidelines and noted that the contractor and owners were present to answer questions. MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness for the proposal for 721 North Van Buren Street. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. 1503 Sheridan Avenue. McCafferty said that this is an application for modifications to a house in order to improve the ventilation in the attic. She said that the owner would replace the soffit with similar material, add a continuous soffit vent, and add a ridge vent to the roof. McCafferty said the owner would also be replacing the attic window with a Pella metal clad wood window. McCafferty said the owner also plans to construct a garage in the future. At this time, the owner would like to install the foundation slab to provide an area to park., She stated that the foundation requires a building permit so that the Commission will want to look at the proposed location for the garage. She said the owner proposes to locate the garage in the southeast corner of the lot and access it off of the alley. McCafferty said the proposal complies with the present guidelines. Weitzel asked if the garage would match the house. McCafferty replied that that is the owner's intent, but the owner will need to request another certificate of appropriateness before construction of the garage. MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness for the proposal for 1503 Sheridan Avenue. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. 522 South Lucas Street. McCafferty said that this application is for an addition to a contributing structure in a conservation district. She said that she drew up some alternatives for the owner's and Commission's consideration. McCafferty said there is a screened porch on the back that is of questionable value and structural quality. She said the Commission must decide if it is historically significant and added that historically significant components and features cannot be removed. McCafferty said the owner, Greg Allen, would like to remove the porch to construct an addition with two more bathrooms and closets for his rental property, She said she felt it will be difficult to convert the screened porch for that use. She stated that the Secretary of the Interior Standards say that rehabilitation does allow for the adaptation of property provided significant historic features are not destroyed. McCafferty said that in her opinion, this is not a significantly historic feature. McCafferty said that if the Commission agrees to approve the demolition of the structure, she has looked at a couple of options for the addition that she feels would comply with the guidelines and also meet the owner's needs. McCafferty said the proposed windows did not comply with the guidelines, particularly with regard to scale and proportion. She also said that the proposed materials do not comply, as Allen has proposed all vinyl for windows and siding. Grea Allen. 2427 Hiahwav 6 N.W.. Tiffin, said that this house is in a conservation district, not a historic district. He said that the opposition to the conservation district was practically non-existent, but the real opposition came for the rezoning of this area several weeks before the conservation district was considered. Allen said that he called at that time and discussed the conservation district with Karin Franklin. He said he asked her if he would be allowed to use vinyl siding. Allen said Franklin informed him that if there are other houses on the street that have vinyl siding, then it would be allowed, because it would be in character with the neighborhood. Allen said he also asked Franklin if additions in the backyard that could not be seen from the street would be affected by this, and he was told that the Commission is mostly concerned with the front façade. He said Franklin told him that stuff that was not seen from the street would not be affected by that. Allen said that the handbook for historic preservation has guidelines for the historic district and then it lists historical, conservation, non-contributing structures, and all structures. He said that basically means that the historic guidelines are across the board the same for properties whether they are in a conservation district, contributing, non-contributing, or whether they're in a historic district. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 9 Allen said he wants to try to comply. He said the bedrooms in these old houses have very small closets. Allen said he can put the windows lined up and placed where McCafferty suggests. He said the hip roof will probably work out better than the one he had proposed, and he does not have a problem with it. Allen showed the addition and said that he does not think it was original with the house. He said that the house has asbestos siding. McCafferty said she thought the porch was probably original but was probably all screened in. Smothers said she did not think it the porch was original to the house. Allen said that he liked the hip roof proposed for the addition. He asked if the regulations require double hung windows. Weitzel said the windows could be single or double hung and should have large single lights. Regarding materials, Allen said that he was told that if the other houses on the street have vinyl then it would be acceptable. He said that the four houses to the right of his have vinyl siding. Allen said that there is wood clapboard on the front porch. Gunn said there are two references in the guidelines to siding: one says the new has to match the existing siding and in another place it says to match the existing wood siding of the house, which in this case is covered up. Weitzel said the Commission has approved wood or fiber cement cornerboards filled in with vinyl. Gunn said that vinyl is only allowed for new construction, and that was the case with the previous approval. He said that an addition is not considered new construction. Gunn said it is not permitted to apply synthetic siding to the whole structure on a contributing property in a conservation district. McCafferty said there are a number of issues that need to be considered with this proposal. She said the first issue is whether the porch is historically significant. Weitzel said he is not convinced that it was built with the building. McCallum agreed. Gunn said he also was not certain that the porch is historically significant. Weitzel said that the porch is in such bad shape that it could be demolished based on its status in terms of preservation. He said it has so many structural issues that it is not feasible to change that. Maharry said that he looked at the porch and did not believe it was condemnable. Smothers said she believed the porch was put up in about 1939. She said it was a fad and trend at that time. Smothers said she considers this an adaptive reuse for this property. She said that if the Commission works within the guidelines, she does not see why the owner could not put up a new addition. Smothers said she has issues with the proposed vinyl and materials but considers this an adaptive reuse of the property. McCafferty said the next issue is the mass of the roofline. Allen said he would like the addition to be wider and the roof to be at a lower pitch than what McCafferty had drawn. Weitzel asked if the Commission needs to consider whether the window to be removed is a historic feature. McCafferty asked if it is a character-defining to the house. Weitzel said the window is not an issue for him. Regarding the siding, Gunn said that for an addition the siding has to match the original siding or the existing siding on the house. He said that gives two options: using asbestos siding or fiber cement board that looks like the original siding. Allen asked if vinyl replacement windows are acceptable in a conservation district. Weitzel said that metal clad wood windows can be used but solid vinyl windows cannot be used. Allen proposed using fiber cement board with windows to meet the guidelines. McCafferty said the another issue is to construct a deck balustrade with a true top and bottom rail as opposed to doing them as drawn in the proposal. McCafferty stated that the only other issue is whether there should be windows on the blank north and south walls. Allen said the windows would be in the middle of a closet. Weitzel said there should be at least one window there. Allen said that if one is used, then he would prefer to have a window on both floors Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 14, 2004 Page 10 Weitzel said the door and window trim should match the original. Allen asked if he could do that in aluminum, because he has aluminum soffit on the front and back. Gunn suggested using hardi-plank. Allen said he could use the hardi-plank around the windows. McCafferty said she would draw another sketch and include it with the certificate of appropriateness. She said she would have the chair approve the final drawing to ensure it incorporates tonight's decisions. MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for Option A as drawn by McCafferty, with a hip roof of a six-twelve pitch, small windows on each floor of the north and south wall, using fiber cement board siding and trim, and wood metal clad double-hung windows McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. MINUTES: September 23 MOTION: Weitzel moved to defer consideration of the September 23, 2004 to the next Historic Preservation Commission meeting. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. OTHER: McCafferty said the Commission would need to hold its annual planning meeting. Maharry scheduled the meeting for November 13th at 9 a.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:56 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s:/pcd/minuteslhpc/2004/hpc1 0-14-04 .doc C/) Q) "5 .£;; ~ c: o ëñ C/) "Ë E o Ü c: o :¡::;"<t roo (:0 ~N Q) . ....."<t e....... U........... .- Q)...... o ..c Q) êií .8 OJ ._ u ro IOe. = o ... rI.2 rI.2 ... S S"CS o · u 8 = Qì o~ ... Qì ~ ""(J= ~== >~N ~"CS rI.2 = Qì Qì ..... ~.... (J< ... . o .... rI.2 ... = ~ ,..; -- ,..; ,..; ...,. ~ I >i¡ , ,..; ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ I ~ I -- Ô => 0 I I ,..; I I ~ I M ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 0 I ~ ~ 0 ë:ì\ I I ~ I ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I 0 ~ 0 Q\ I I M I I ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ 0 -- I I Q\ I I I.C I I t:! ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I I QO I I => I I ,..; ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ -- I I QO I I M I t:! ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 I ~ 0 I l"- I ~ I Þ< 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ 0 I I ...,. I ,..; ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 I ~ ~ \è I I => ~ I ~ ,..; ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ -- I 0 I.C I I"- ~ I ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ 0 I 0 I ~ I ~ ,..; ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ Ìì'i I 0 I M >i¡ I ~ ~ t:! ~ 0 ô ~ ~ ~ ~ I I 0 0 ...,. I ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ...,. I 0 I ,..; I I ,..; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I -- I I ~ I I I.C ~ ~ ~ I I t:! ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I 0 0 0 I I M I I M ~ ~ ~ I I ,..; ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I -- 0 I I M I I QO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I => I I -- I I ,..; I I '" or) \0 r-- or) \0 r-- \0 \0 or) r-- ë .~ 0 0 52 0 0 0 52 52 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- I ) ~ 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 t::1 t::1 N t::1 t::1 t::1 t::1 t::1 t::1 t::1 E-<>i¡ -- M M M M M M M M M M Ë E .... '" ~ ¡" .E! ~ ] ¡" CI.I ~ .c = "'iI .. CI.I .... CI.I = .c = '" N e u .... ë = = "'iI .... '" 'a:¡ e 13 -= ~ ... = CI.I 'ij) ~ ~ = = ~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ Ñ '" < ~ ~ ~ ~ ¡..; z ..; ..; .....; ..; "'C I ) .... '" I ) ;::S 01) '" ~ -l3'š ~ I ) I ) ¡:¡=¡:::~:::E I ) I ) I ) ,.". '" r/J r/J tI) 0 ....... £~~z~ II II II II II ;,:, >i¡~ ~~oôz City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Historic Preservation Commission Shelley McCafferty, PCD November 3, 200 701 Oakland Avenue insurance claim Last spring, the aluminum siding on the house at 701 Oakland Avenue was damaged by hail and the owner is trying to reach a settlement with his insurance company for replacement siding. This house is a noncontributing house in the Longfellow Historic District. The house has been classified noncontributing because a second floor dormer addition greatly detracts from the house and the house was covered in aluminum siding. The house is a Craftsman bungalow likely constructed circa 1920. The aluminum siding and addition were likely added to the house in the 1960s. The owner originally intended to replace the siding with vinyl and aluminum soffits and fascia, however, these materials are disallowed in a historic district. The house was originally stuccoed, but it appears that the stucco was significantly damaged when the aluminum was applied and would require removal regardless of the type of replacement siding used. Until the aluminum is removed, the condition of the stucco, eaves, window trim, soffits, etc cannot be fully evaluated. Thus, contractors have not been able to confidently determine a value for siding replacement and the insurance claim has not yet been settled. The property owner does not want to be in a position in which their insurance settlement will not cover the cost of historically appropriated replacement siding if, once the aluminum is removed, it is determined that the siding repairs will be more costly than originally estimated. Furthermore, there is potential that the insurance company will not cover repair of the eaves and soffits and the owner will be financially unable to repair the soffits per the preservation guidelines. To comply with the historic preservation guidelines, the replacement siding should be wood, stucco or fiber cement board and the trim should be repaired or replaced with wood or fiber cement board as needed. The owner is having the siding bid assuming fiber cement board will be used to replace the siding and other architectural features that cannot be repaired. However, the owner would like some assurance that other less expensive alternatives will be approved in case the insurance settlement is not adequate to cover all repairs or other repairs are required that have not been anticipated. One alternative is to allow the soffits and eaves to be clad in aluminum, but require that the clapboard and other trim be fiber cement or wood. The historic character of this bungalow will not be truly restored until the second floor addition is addressed. I feel that there is potential that in the future, 3 to 5 feet of the east side of the dormer could be removed and a matching, symmetrical dormer could be added on the north side. This would allow the front façade, eaves and soffit features to be more prominent without losing second floor area. Therefore, it may be more appropriate to restore the eaves and soffits in the future when and if the addition is addressed. Prior to applying any aluminum or vinyl, all moisture issues with the eaves and soffits must first be repaired to prevent any additional damage from moisture. The most distinctive features of a Craftsman bungalow are the eaves, soffits, rafter tails and trim. A second alternative is to require the repair or replacement of these features November 4, 2004 Page 2 with wood or fiber cement, but allow vinyl to be used in lieu of clapboard. With the trim in place, if in the future any owner wished to replace the vinyl, this could be easily accomplished. Although vinyl is not allowed, I feel that given the extenuating circumstances that vinyl is a realistic alternative. Although neither of the two alternatives would strictly comply with the guidelines, I feel that it is important that any decision by the Commission consider the limitations of the insurance settlement provided a good faith effort is made to reach a settlement that complies with the guidelines. Moreover, this is a noncontributing property that will require some significant alterations restore its original architectural character. I believe that either of the two alternatives would not prohibit future restoration, damage historic materials or further detract from the architectural character. Because the owner will be out of town next week, approval of a certificate of appropriateness is not required. The owner would like to be present to represent his interests. Given the owner's level of frustration with this issue, I would like to provide him with some direction prior to review of an application ~ " ltJ/ Ò4ß-/tf/ld .'~ ,-....... --~ .~ "......~ '1 ¡ 70/ ()v/-/4/1d ,~ 1 ~~~~tt ~~_.. ' ~: J CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM October 28, 2004 / \. D·~ . O~ To: City Council .-U'~2J1ûßf' From: Karin Franklin, Director, ~~ Re: Historic Preservation: history & authority The City Council has requested some background on the legislative history of historic preservation in Iowa City and the scope of authority of the Historic Preservation Commission and the City Council in this arena. In 1982 the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing a a seven-member Historic Preservation Commission and providing for the designation of historic districts. The local ordinance conformed with the enabling language of the State Code, found now in Section 303.34 of the Code of Iowa. State Code requires that such an ordinance or any amendments to it be submitted to the State for review and recommendation prior to enactment. The decision for local government to be involved in historic preservation is a local decision reflecting local values. However, the mechanics of legislative involvement are prescribed by State law and are subject to oversight by the State. Similarly the State chose to become involved in historic preservation when it established the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 1974 which operates within the structure created by the Federal government in 1966 with enactment of the National Historic Preservation Act. The essence of the Federal act was to identify, evaluate and protect national historic resources. This has resulted in the National Register of Historic Places and certain requirements for the protection of historic resources when federal funds are used for projects. The National Historic Preservation Act was amended in 1980 to establish the Certified Local Government (CLG) program. In 1984, the State of Iowa launched a campaign to enroll local governments in the CLG program. With the CLG program comes funding for surveying historic resources, preparing nominations for the National Register, and other preservation education projects. Iowa City became a CLG in 1985. This put the City in an advisory role to the State on any National District nominations and enabled access to grants under the CLG program. National Historic District nominiations: The nomination of districts or properties to the National Register of Historic Places is set by Federal law and State procedures. These nominations carry no regulatory measures with them so long as federal funds are not used for a project. Local governments have no discretion in how these nominations are done. There is discretion as to whether the local jurisdiction initiates a nomination. However, as in the case of the recent Melrose neighborhood, nominations may come from any individual or group. Because Iowa City is a CLG, review by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Council is expected but not required. Local Historic District desianation: Because the ability to designate and regulate historic properties through local district designation comes to cities through the State within the structure created by the National Preservaton Act, the regulations adopted by cities must be consistent with the intent of the Act and the Secretary of Interiors guidelines. Designation of districts must October 27, 2004 Page 2 be consistent procedurally with State law and the criteria for historic districts set out in the Iowa Code must be met. The Council has some discretion in adopting local guidelines for the review of properties within established districts but the guidelines must be reviewed by the State and must be consistent with the more general guidelines of the Secretary of the Interior. The Council has complete discretion in whether you chose to endorse the designation of historic districts generally. This goes back to the community value of whether you wish to assertively foster historic preservation in Iowa City. Councils in the past have identified historic preservation as a goal of the community by adoption of the ordinance to establish the Commission, adoption of historic and conservation districts, and adoption of the Historic Preservation Plan as part of Iowa City's Comprehensive Plan. To summarize, the Council has the authority to determine how many or how few historic and conservation districts exist in Iowa City. You may set the pace of that designation. You have the authority to initiate or not the nomination of properties to the National Register of Historic Places. You have the authority to modify the guidelines used in the regulatory review of properties in local districts to a point; the guidelines must be consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines. Once you have established the guidelines, those guidelines must be followed in individual cases but can be changed legislatively. You set the policy on historic preservation and the Historic Preservation Commission and staff follow that direction. Presently, the policy direction being used is the 1997 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, including the 1992 Historic Preservation Plan. Cc City Manager City Attorney t.-fffstoric Preservation Commission Shelley McCafferty Bob Miklo Jeff Davidson . ~ = HISTORIC 1[111 ~~N OF .I~ WHY SHOULDN'T I REPLACE MY WINDOWS? Many people say they want new windows because they fear lead paint, want better soundproofing, energy efficiency and easy cleaning. Then the answer is to restore original windows, not replace them. Restoration will cost less and the windows will be lead :tree, soundproof, energy efficient and easily cleaned. I have trained many small contractors and homeowners how to perform this task efficiently, cost effectively and for those who insist they want tilt-ins for easier cleaning this system can give them an easy cleaning solution as well. All of this and a new combination wood storm/screen cost less than a wood tilt-in with vinyl jamb liners and no storm. This system keeps the sash weights, cuts nothing off the window sash and removes all old paint and glazing. My friend John Seekircher, a steel casement window restoration expert, always says, "The reason they call them replacement windows is that you have to replace them over and over again," EP A & HUD lead paint regulations are out of control! The facts however fly in the face of this anti-preservation intrusion into our lives. Lead poisoning in children has been depicted by HUD and the EP A as an epidemic. This is total nonsense. Children today have less lead poisoning than ever before in history and it has nothing to do with lead paint regulations. Taking lead out of gasoline and better factory emissions are responsible for this. In essence we should be teaching the uneducated, educated, poor and well-off families how to effectively dust their houses. Lead dust is the main culprit in lead poisoning. Common sense education is all that's needed with lead paint. Lead paint is only a hazard if it's unstable. Removing lead paint :trom window jambs and sashes is a safe, quick and easy process if the homeowner or contractor knows how to do it. We must start immediately training small contractors & homeowners how to do this. Right now the contractors that are getting lead certified are gouging homeowners pocketbooks because they can. The reason homeowner's think they need to replace their windows is that the window industry spends tens of millions of dollars a year to convince homeowners to buy their inferior products. It will take a consumer about 30 years to get any payback from replacement windows with insulated glass and considering the following statements in the window industries trade magazine, Glass Magazine, the industry makes the case for restoration. July 2001 Glass Magazine, By Editor, Charles Cumpstom, "The consumer's perception of glass is significantly different :trom the industry's. While some in the industry think a 15-year life is adequate, it is the rare homeowner who envisions replacing all his windows in 15 years." Another article in 1995 in Glass Magazine by Ted Hart states, "Remember our industry, with rare exception, has chosen to hide the fact that insulating glass does have a life expectancy. It is a crime that with full knowledge and total capability to build a superior unit, most of the industry chooses to manufacture an inferior single-seal unit." NOTE: Single seal units are still the norm with an average seal life of 2 to 6 years. As a side note to this, I am not a general contractor. I believe it is a conflict to teach people how to do these things out of one side of my mouth and then try to get their business out of the other side of my mouth. I do, however, buy endangered, historic properties and rehab them both in my job as a Community Preservation Specialist with Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana and as a private citizen. This keeps me in the :tray with the least conflict of interest possible. As a practical preservation advocate, there can be only one client----the consumer, their homes and. neighborhoods they live in. Bob Yapp, Community Preservation Specialist, 574-232-4534 RESTORE & MAINTAIN WINDOWS ***** DON'T REPLACE THEM · Replacement wood windows are made with neW growth lumber that's not as strong or rot resistant as the old growth lumber used in windows made before the 1950s. · Insulated glass-seals tend to fail in 2 to 6 years allowing condensation between the panes. · Most insulated glass panels cannot be replaced once they fail. The entire window must be replaced. · Primary window sashes were never intended to take a direct hit from the weather. In early years they had shutters then stonns to protect them. · Air infiltration is the biggest energy issue with windows. Vinyl windows, by their nature, have weep holes in their bottom rail to let the moisture seep out which allows massive air infiltration. · PVC or vinyl is the most toxic substance manufactured today. It can't be recycled; off-gasses toxic fumes and has excessive contraction and expansion issues. It fades, cracks and has a maximum lifespan of 16 to 18 years. · Metal clad windows are designed to allow water to seep behind the cladding. This causes early rot of the often finger jointed, new growth lumber underneath. · The vinyl jamb liners that are needed for tilt-in windows have cheap spring balances and cheesy foam backing that have a lifespan of about 6 to 10 years. · Double hung windows were invented in the 1400s as an air conditioning system. Lower the top sash and raise the lower sash. This lets the hot air and humidity out the top and brings the breezes in through the bottom. Most replacement units don't have a full screen to allow for this process. · Aluminum, self-storing stonn windows are not even a good windbreak. Metal conducts heat and cold while wood insulated against heat and cold. · Sash weight pockets are only a problem if a house has not been caulked and painted properly. · !j,¡ ", laminated glass has better UV protection than all the low-e coatings. It also approaches similar thennal capabilities as insulated glass, is more soundproof, is safer and cost less than insulated glass. If retrofitting energy efficient glass into an old sash is something you feel must be done, install laminated glass. · Original window sashes are a part of the footprint of your old house or building. Replacements often have different dimensions and sometimes the window contractor wants to reduce the size of your openings. This has a negative effect on the overall texture and look of the original footprint of your building. · If you don't want to lift a finger to maintain or renovate your home then hire a contractor to restore your windows. Your restored windows will cost less, have a better payback, be easily cleaned, have a nice track system, and stop air infiltration which means great energy efficiency. · Restored wood windows have another 100-year economic life before total restoration is needed again. Replacement windows can never be restored effectively. · All materials and labor used in window restoration is generally local which means all of the money stays in the community. This is not the case with replacement windows. Creating Windows of Energy-Saving Opportunity by Andrew M. Shapiro and Brad James Andrew M Shapiro is an energy engineer with the Vermont Energy Investment Corporation in Burlington, Vermont. Brad James is a master's degree candidate at the University o/Vermont. s. Flanders o/the Us. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory assisted with project oversight. Windows are where we often look to improve the energy performance in old homes. But don't rip out those old sashes yet. A field study in Vermont suggests that "remove and replace" is not necessarily the way to go when it comes to old . windows. Renovating historic homes is a tricky and sometimes onerous task. The desire to retain the historic character of the building, and in some cases the actual historic material, competes with the desire to improve energy performance. One particularly difficult question that renovators of historic buildings often confront is what to do about windows. From their handmade glazings to their crafted muntins, old windows add much to the character and charm of historic homes. But just looking at their loose jambs and leaky sashes can make an energy auditor shudder. Although the tendency among some contractors has been to replace the windows in older homes, until recently, there has been very little data available to guide renovators in choosing the most energy-efficient window rehab option (See "Energy-Efficient Window Retrofits," HE Jan/Feb '97, p. 35). To help fill this data gap and supply additional guidance to renovators, we evaluated the thermal efficiency of more than 150 windows in 29 old New England homes and one municipal building. We determined the energy savings and costs associated with different renovation strategies, from simply weatherstripping to replacing the entire sash. The study was funded by the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training and the Vermont Division of Historic Preservation. Comparing Original and Renovated Windows We were not able to test most of the windows before and after renovation. Instead, we tested 64 "original" windows and 87 windows that had been renovated by contractors, and compared the results. The windows varied widely in age and condition; a few were at least 100 years old. Many of the original windows had storm windows installed. Some renovated windows still had the original sash, while others had been retrofitted with a new sash. For the retained sashes, the contractors used a variety of weatherization and renovation methods; these are described below. The retrofitted windows had received either a new sash in the old jamb or a new vinyl or wood window insert (also known as a secondary frame) with a new sash. On some homes, the contractors had installed new storm windows. -= E "".'::I"' =. Figure 1. On the left, typical air leakage sites with Sash Leakage, S, and Extraneous Leakage, E. On the right, a cutaway showing the parts of a typical single-hung window. Although the windows we tested varied in size and shape, we were able to make comparisons across sizes by normalizing the data to a typical window 36 inches wide by 60 inches high. Measuring Infiltration and Thermal Losses Window heat loss may be considered as a combination of thermal and infiltration ( or leakage) losses. Thermal loss occurs when energy passes directly through the materials of the window. It includes radiation and convection to the interior surfaces of the window from the room; conduction through the materials of the window; and convection and radiation from the exterior surfaces of the windows to the outdoors. Infiltration losses are driven by wind and by differences between indoor and outdoor temperatures. They occur primarily through cracks in the sash, gaps between the sash and jamb, and gaps between the frame and rough opening (see Figure 1). We calculated thermal losses using WINDOW 4.1, a computer model developed by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's Building Technologies Program. We based our infiltration test method on ASTM E783-93, performing two air leakage tests on each window. We constructed a simple measurement device around the windows by taping a plastic sheet onto the interior trim and attaching an air hose, blower, and pressure tap. First, to test total leakage, we drew air through the window using the blower and measured the flow rate, in fe per minute (CFM), at various pressure differentials across the plastic sheet. Then, to test extraneous leakage, we attached a second plastic sheet to the exterior trim of the window and repeated the test. By subtracting the value obtained in the second test from that obtained in the first, we were able to estimate sash leakage. Some building designers think of window infiltration only in terms of sash leakage. But significant leakage can also occur between the window frame and the rough opening. (Note that window manufacturers report only sash leakage in product data.) To estimate how much rough opening leakage contributes to total window infiltration, we measured the temperature of the indoor air, the outdoor air, and the air being drawn through the window during 33 of the extraneous leakage tests. We found that, on average, the air drawn through the windows in the study was approximately 30% cooler than the indoor air. Based on this difference, we assumed that approximately 30% of the extraneous leakage was outdoor air coming through the rough opening. We thus estimated total infiltration as sash leakage plus 30% of extraneous leakage. While this method was not very precise, it did allow us to estimate the relative contribution of rough opening leakage to heating load. Tightening Up with the Original Sash For those houses where the sash was retained rather than replaced, we found that contractors used a variety of methods and materials to tighten the sashes. These methods and materials are summarized in Table 2. J $3. f ~$2S c;, .s ¡ $21 1::: I i ~ $S ;; c ..i $0 c~* . ~miM ,It., wllId_C;aNPJ' ! --"I~ ¡ ~~ } ~" iHIt ~'~'~~;¡"¡¡;f~;;¡¡'__WÍ lI"¡ ,~ ~ qQI '>tf 1ft,.tI "'Nt iii i IG; Wi ~~ ~.... I 23 . S , 1 . t ''''^,,'''''''''--'''''''''''''''-='"''#<*'''~'''''''~'~'''''''''''''''''''''''''" Figure 2. First year heating cost per window, pre- and post-treatment. Comparing Costs and Savings Having determined the ELAs, we then analyzed the impacts of the renovations and retrofits on energy savings. Figure 2 compares the infiltration and thermal loss heating costs of the baseline, renovated sash, and retrofitted windows. As expected, the results confirm that the largest energy savings came from tightening the loosest windows. However, the chart also shows that, except in the case of low- E glass window inserts, the difference in heating costs for the renovated sash and retrofitted windows was not great. Compared to the loose baseline, savings for the renovated windows ranged from $14 to $20 annually per window (3%-20% rate of return), while compared to the typical baseline, savings ranged from $1 to $7 annually (less than 1%-4% rate of return). Note that these annual returns actually reflect the flrst-year savings. Lead Abatement The problem oflead paint often arises when dealing with old windows. As shown in Table 3, lead abatement can add significantly to renovation costs (see "Getting the Lead Out"). For example, weatherizing a loose baseline window with weatherstripping, sealing the top sash, and rehabbing an existing storm costs $75 iflead abatement is not needed. At the annual savings rate of$15, this represents an annual rate of return of20%. But when lead abatement is needed, the cost jumps to $200, which approaches the cost of replacing the sash. Note: Costs for inserts varied with the material, which ranged from medium-cost vinyl to high-quality wood. Full-sash lead abatement adds $125 to other rehab costs. Savings were based on 7,744 degree-days and oil heat at 90¢/gallon with 75% overall heating season efficiency. Note that the samples of most windows tested were very small. Cost estimates for window upgrades were based on interviews with housing developers and/or builders. Estimates were normalized to a $20- per-hour labor rate, and included contractor markup. $4 .Sd~ D ~ __ I!!imIøw $8 $4 $2 so ~ Figure 3. First year heating costs, infiltration only, renovations retaining sash. Storm Windows Table 3 also shows the costs and savings associated with adding storm windows. A new exterior storm window added to a loose baseline window has a first-year savings of $16 at a cost of $1 00 (excluding lead abatement), or a 16% annual rate of return. Adding a low-e interior storm to a loose window saves $19 at a cost of$155, a 12% annual rate of return. Figure 3 shows first-year heating costs due to air leakage only. The variation in the cost of air leakage in the first four columns suggests variability in workmanship in installing the jamb liners. Also, windows where the jamb was out of square had the poorest seal. Sites C and D both incorporated weatherstripping at the meeting rail but the much lower leakage rates should not be attributed to that difference alone. Jamb liners require that the sash be fitted precisely to the liner and to the jamb to prevent leakage between the jamb and the jamb liner and between the liner and the sash. The strategy used at site E resulted in quite low sash leakage. However, the total leakage was approximately the same as that at sites C and D, due to high leakage through the rough opening. Similarly, even though site G had a very low sash leakage, performance was undermined by the rough-opening leakage. Is a New Sash Worth It? Figure 4 compares the associated heating costs for infiltration and thermal losses for windows that retained the original sash. The chart shows that, compared to the thermal losses, infiltration accounted for a small part of the total heating cost, regardless of the strategy used. Table 4 lists the heating costs for windows with new sashes or window inserts. With the exception of the low-e sash and the poorly fitted sash, the total heating costs were very similar, ranging from $12 to $14. 1m $1' .. I. $14 J 51! I Sit .. SI i~ $<4 ] $] ä . ¡¡ ..þ . .~- D ..~.- Figure 4. Total first year heating cost, renovations retaining sash. Table 4. Annual Heating Cost for Upgrades that Include Replacing the Original Sash Upgrade Description Non-Infiltration Heating Cost Infiltration Heating Cost Total Heating Cost Vinyl window insert $12 $0.37 $12 Wood window insert 12 0.70 13 Sash & storm 12 1.68 14 Sash & storm (poor fit) 12 4.83 17 Insulated glass sash 12 0.60 13 Insulated low-e sash 8 0.60 9 Note: Savings were based on 7,744 degree-days and oil heat at 90¢/ gal with 75% overall heating season efficiency. We did not observe the use of low-e glass in the field and calculated the thermal loss for the low-e retrofit. We estimated the added savings of low-e glass over other sash replacement strategies at $3.40 per year. Preservationists Take Heart Our study of old windows showed that the energy savings are similar for a variety of retrofit and replacement strategies. Rates of return on investment for energy improvements are quite low when starting with typical or tight windows with storms in place, but are significantly higher when renovating loose windows with no storm. The difference in annual energy savings between renovating an old sash and replacing it with a new one was very small--retrofits saved only a few dollars. For preservations, the good news is that with a proper choice of renovation strategy and good workmanship, historic sashes can be almost as energy-efficient as replacements. Window renovators and homeowners can give more weight to comfort, maintenance, lead abatement, egress requirements, durability, ease of operation--and historical value-- without sacrificing energy savings. For those of us who work with old windows, this is very good news indeed. Sources American Society for Testing and Materials. "ASTM E783-93, Test Method for Field Measurement of Air Leakage through Installed Exterior Windows, Curtain Walls, and Doors under Specified Pressure Differences across the Specimen," in Annual Book rifASTM Standards, Vol. 04.07, 1994. Grimsrud, D.T., M.H. Sherman, R.c. Sonderegger: Calculating Infiltration: Implicationsfor a Construction Quality Standard, Proceedings, ASHRAEIDOE Conference on Thermal Performance of Exterior Envelopes of Buildings II. 1982. James, B., et al. Testing the Energy Performance of Wood Windows in Cold Climates, National Center for Preservation Technology and Training, 1996. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Windows and Daylighting Group, Berkeley, California. WINDOW 4.1: A PC Program for Ana!njng the Thermal Peiformance rifFenestration Products (1994). A COST BREAKDOWN FOR WINDOW RESTORATION Y.S. WINDOW REPLACEMENT The following is a break down of the costs to completely restore original wood sash. It is important to note that often, total paint removal, epoxy repairs, new glass, new interior stop-moldings, etc don't have to be done or replaced. Window sash and jambs that are completely restored have a life of another 100 years with painting every 12 to 20 years depending on conditions. In one example, replacement of each, two-sash unit (with four true divided lights in each sash) would have cost $800 to $1,200 per unit installed, without storms. This is a conservative estimate. MATERIAL & LABOR TO RESTORE A DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW UNIT 33" X 67" OPENING WITH A 4 LIGHT TOP SASH & ONE LIGHT BOTTOM SASH - TRADITIONAL WOOD STORM Materials What Storm Window Description Factory primed traditional wood storm 33" x 67" Glazing Putty Linseed oil based glazing compound Weather Stripping Rigid metal with EPDM rubber for storm Weather Stripping Dorbin Strip Metal double hung weatherizing system with shipping Glass Double strength glass, 4 lights per upper sash & 1 light on lower @ $2.55 per square foot Storm Hardware Traditional storm hangers and 2 hook & eyes Sandpaper 100 grit 5" sanding disc- 2 pieces Epoxy Architectural epoxy wood filler-liquid & putty Tack Cloths F or cleaning bare wood surface Glazing Points F or setting glass Caulk Acrylic Latex caulk with silicone for bedding glass Sash Cord Nylon sash cord Moldings New interior finish stop & parting stop Primer Alkyd oil based primer with linseed oil-sash & storm Paint Acrylic latex semi-gloss top coat-sash & storm Total Material Costs with Storm/Screen Wood Combination Labor (â2 $25 Per Hour Task Sash removal What Remove sash from jamb, take off all hardware Time .25 hrs Paint & Glazing Removal Wet scrape paint fromjamb. Wet scrape paint & glazing from sash 1. 00 hrs Repair Sash Re-pin or repair with wood or epoxy .25 hrs Clean & Prime all Tack-off or clean with TSP & oil prime .75 hrs Glaze Set glass in caulk with points & glaze .50 hrs Paint Sash, Storm & Jamb Two coats of top coat 1. 00 hrs Hardware Buff or wire wheel & lacquer or spray paint. Cut sash slots & install weather-stripping-sash & storm .25 hrs Weather-Stripping 1.00 hrs Hang Storm & Sash Re-hang two sash & one storm with hardware Total Labor Costs with Traditional Storm Total Material Costs with Traditional Storm Total Window Restoration Cost 1.50 hrs 6.50 hrs NOTE: This is absolute worst-case/total restoration scenario, with all work hired done. Cost $130.00 $.65 $12.40 $14.15 $20.40 $2.22 $.30 $3.50 $.29 $.20 $1.00 $1.50 $8.50 $1.25 $2.50 $218.86 Cost $6.25 $25.00 $6.25 $18.75 $12.50 $25.00 $6.25 $25.00 $37.50 $162.50 +$188.86 $351.36 MATERIAL & LABOR TO RESTORE A DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW UNIT 33" X 67" OPENING WITH 4 LIGHTS ON TOP SASH & ONE LIGHT ON BOTTOM SASH - STORM/SCREEN WOOD COMBO Materials What Storm Window Description Factory primed traditional wood storm 33" x 67" Glazing Putty Linseed oil based glazing compound Weather Stripping Rigid metal with EPDM rubber for storm Weather Stripping Dorbin Strip Metal double hung weatherizing system with shipping Glass Double strength glass, 4 lights per upper sash & 1 light on lower @ $2.55 per square foot Storm Hardware Traditional storm hangers and 2 hook & eyes Sandpaper 100 grit 5" sanding disc- 2 pieces Epoxy Architectural epoxy wood filler-liquid & putty Tack Cloths For cleaning bare wood surface Glazing Points F or setting glass Caulk Acrylic Latex caulk with silicone for bedding glass Sash Cord Nylon sash cord Moldings New interior finish stop & parting stop Primer Alkyd oil based primer with linseed oil-sash & storm Paint Acrylic latex semi-gloss top coat-sash & storm Total Material Costs with Storm/Screen Wood Combination Labor ({i), $25 Per Hour Task Sash removal What Remove sash from jamb, take off all hardware Time .25 hrs Paint & Glazing Removal Wet scrape paint from jamb. Wet scrape paint & glazing from sash 1. 00 hrs Repair Sash Re-pin or repair with wood or epoxy .25 hrs Clean & Prime all Tack-off or clean with TSP & oil prime Set glass in caulk with points & glaze .5 0 hrs .75 hrs Glaze Paint Sash, Storm & Jamb 1.00 hrs Two coats of top coat Hardware Buff or wire wheel & lacquer or spray paint. .25 hrs Weather-Stripping Cut sash slots & install weather-stripping-sash & storm 1.00 hrs Hang Storm & Sash Re-hang two sash & one storm with hardware Total Labor Costs with Traditional Storm Total Material Costs with Traditional Storm Total Window Restoration Cost 1.50 hrs 6.50 hrs Cost $160.00 $.65 $12.40 $14.15 $20.40 $2.22 $.30 $3.50 $.29 $.20 $1.00 $1.50 $8.50 $1.25 $2.50 $219.86 Cost $6.25 $25.00 $6.25 $18.75 $12.50 $25.00 $6.25 $25.00 $37.50 $162.50 +$219.86 $381.36 NOTE: This is absolute worst-case/total restoration scenario, with all work hired done. MATERIAL & LABOR TO RESTORE A PAIR OF WOOD CASEMENT WINDOWS IN A 33" X 67" OPENING WITH 4 LIGHTS PER SASH OR 8 LIGHTS TOTAL - TRADITIONAL STORM Materials What Storm Window Description Factory primed traditional wood storm 33" x 67" Glazing Putty Linseed oil based glazing compound Weather Stripping Rigid metal with EPDM rubber Glass Double strength glass, 4 lights per sash x 2 sashes = 8- l2"x l2"panes @ $2.55 per square foot Storm Hardware Traditional storm hangers and 2 hook & eyes Sandpaper 100 grit 5" sanding disc- 2 pieces Epoxy Architectural epoxy wood filler Tack Cloths For cleaning bare wood surface Glazing Points For setting glass Caulk Acrylic Latex caulk with silicone for bedding glass Primer Alkyd oil based primer with linseed oil Paint Acrylic latex semi-gloss top coat Paint Matte black spray paint for metal hardware Total Material Costs with Traditional Storm Labor (iV, $25 Per Hour Task Sash removal What Remove sash fromjamb, take off all hardware Paint & Glazing Removal Wet scrape paint fromjamb. Wet scrape paint & glazing from sash Repair Sash Re-pin or repair wood with wood or epoxy Clean & Prime Tack-off or clean with TSP & oil prime Glaze Set glass in caulk with points & glaze Paint Sash & Jamb Hardware Two coats of top coat Buff or wire wheel hinges & other hardware & spray paint. Weather-Stripping Install weather-stripping Hang Storm & Sash Re-hang two sash and one storm Total Labor Costs with Traditional Storm Total Material Costs with Traditional Storm Total Window Restoration Cost Cost $130.00 $.65 $22.80 $20.40 $2.80 $.30 $3.50 $.29 $.20 $1.00 $1.25 $2.50 $2.00 $187.69 Time Cost .25 hrs $6.25 1.00 hrs $25.00 .25 hrs $6.25 .75 hrs $18.75 .50 hrs $12.50 1.00 hrs $25.00 .50 hrs $12.50 .50 hrs $12.50 1.50 hrs $37.50 6.25 hrs $156.25 +$187.69 $343.94 MATERIAL & LABOR TO RESTORE A PAIR OF WOOD CASEMENT WINDOWS IN A 33" X 67" OPENING WITH 4 LIGHTS PER SASH OR 8LIGHTS TOTAL- STORM/SCREEN COMBO Materials What Storm/Screen Description Factory primed combo, wood storm & screen with removable glass inserts from inside the house Glazing Putty Linseed oil based glazing compound Weather Stripping Rigid metal with EPDM rubber Glass Double strength glass, 4 lights per sash x 2 sashes = 8- 12"x 12"panes @ $2.55 per square foot Storm Hardware Traditional storm hangers and 2 hook & eyes Sandpaper 100 grit 5" sanding disc- 2 pieces Epoxy Architectural epoxy wood filler Tack Cloths F or cleaning bare wood surface Glazing Points For setting glass Caulk Acrylic Latex caulk with silicone for bedding glass Primer Alkyd oil based primer with linseed oil Paint Acrylic latex semi-gloss top coat Paint Matte black spray paint for metal hardware Total Material Costs with Traditional Storm Labor (à) $25 Per Hour Task Sash removal What Remove sash fromjamb, take off all hardware Paint & Glazing Removal Wet scrape paint from jamb. Wet scrape paint & glazing from sash Repair Sash Re-pin or repair wood with wood or epoxy Clean & Prime Tack-off or clean with TSP & oil prime Glaze Set glass in caulk with points & glaze Paint Sash & Jamb Two top coats Hardware Buff or wire wheel hinges & other hardware & spray paint. Weather-Stripping Install weather-stripping Hang Storm & Sash Re-hang two sash and one storm Total Labor Costs with Traditional Storm Total Material Costs with Traditional Storm Total Window Restoration Cost Cost $160.00 $.65 $22.80 $20.40 $2.80 $.30 $3.50 $.29 $.20 $1.00 $1.25 $2.50 $2.00 $217.69 Time Cost .25 hrs $6.25 1.00 hrs $25.00 .25 hrs $6.25 .75 hrs $18.75 .50 hrs $12.50 1. 00 hrs $25.00 .50 hrs $12.50 .50 hrs $12.50 1.50 hrs $37.50 6.25 hrs $156.25 +$217.69 $373.94 PAINTING SIDING TO ACHIEVE A 12 to 15 YEAR PAINT JOB vs VINYL REPLACEMENT SIDING Product $ Materials $ Remove Siding $Backer Board $ Install Labor $ Total High Grade Vinyl Siding 1.95 p/s.f.. .21 p/s.f. .77 p/s.f. .86 p/s.f. 3.79 p/s.f. Strip Off Clean & Rinse Acrylic Latex Oil Primer + 2 All Paint Siding Siliconized Caulk Coats Latex $ Total 12 To 15 Year Paint Job .49 p/s.f. . .17 p/s.f. .15 p/s.f. 1.25 p/s.f. 2.06 p/s.f. Difference $1.73 p/s.f. Total Price of Vinyl Siding Is $1.73 More p/s.f. Than Stripping With The Paint Shaver, (800-932-5872) & Re-Painting Existing Wood Siding. Vinyl Siding Has an Expected Maximum Life Span of 20 Years And Then Must Be Replaced. A House Can Be Painted Twice In 24 to 30 Years For Close To The Price Of20 Year Vinyl Siding. Wood Siding, If Maintained, Has A Life Expectancy Of Well Over 100 Years. VINYL REPLACEMENT SIDING vs FACTORY PAINTED CEDAR CLAPBOARD Product $ Materials $ Remove Siding Backer Board $ Install Labor $ Total High Grade Vinyl Siding 1.95 p/s.f. .21 p/s.f. .77 p/s.f. .86 p/s.f. 3.79 p/s.f. Factory Painted Cedar Clapboard 1.88 p/s.f. .21 p/s.f. None 1.03 p/s.f. 3.12 p/s.f. Difference .67 p/s.f. Total Price of Vinyl Siding is .67 cents more p/s.f. than Factory Painted Cedar Clapboard. Vinyl Siding Has an Expected Life Span of 20 Years And Then Must Be Replaced. Factory painted Cedar Clapboard Comes With A 15 Year Warrantee On The Solid Color Stain. Wood Siding, If Maintained, Has A Life Expectancy Of Well Over 100 Years. NOTE: Cedar Prices Vary From Month To Month And Both Cedar & Vinyl Have Increased In Price Since 1999 By About 15%. All numbers are based on actual material prices and labor according to manufacturers and the following national bidding books: 1999 National Renovation & Insurance Repair Estimator, By Albert Paxton, Published by Craftsman Book Company. 1999 Repair & Remodeling Cost Data, Published by RS Means Company, Inc. All information compiled by Preservation Resources, Inc. South Bend, Indiana VINYL SIDING: THE REAL ISSUES A PRESERVA TION GUIDE for Historic Property Owners Historic District Commissions Historic Property Commissions Jan Cunningham Historic Preservation Consultant Sponsors: Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation Connecticut Historical Commission October 2001 Partial funding for this publication was provided by grants from the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the National Center for Preservation Training and Technology of the National Park Service, US. Department of the Interior. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the author and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the US. Government or the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the US. Government or the National Trust. Printed by Kramer Printing Company, Inc., West Haven, CT 2002 CONTENTS Introduction......................... ........ .................................................. ........... 5 Why Is Vinyl Siding So Popular? .............................................................. 6 Connecticut Heritage................................................................................ 6 The Great Debate...................................................................................... 7 The Preservation Alternative................................................................... 10 Painting Your House............................................................................... 11 Conclusion.. ................................................................................. .......... 13 Appendix A. The Courts Decide....... .................... .......... ...... .................. 14 Appendix B. Recommended Reading..................................................... 17 INTRODUCTION Vinyl siding is a major preservation issue in Connecticut. Throughout the state, more and more historic houses are being covered with vinyl. This trend has affected the historic character of whole neighborhoods in cities and has spread throughout the countryside. Responding to aggressive marketing by the industry, an increasing number of historic house owners are choosing vinyl as a replacement siding, with little understanding of the possible consequences. Historic property owners are pressuring local historic district and property commissions to allow vinyl siding; some commissions have faced lawsuits. The response of the preservation community to this issue is long overdue. It is time to take a stand, to reach out to historic property owners and commissioners and give them the facts they need to make informed decisions. In this guide we will explore all the issues, pro and con, and hear from preservationists as well as the vinyl industry. We will look at vinyl from many perspectives, assess economic benefits, discuss structural and maintenance concerns, and identify preservation alternatives. Vinyl siding is such a hot button issue in local historic districts that we include an appendix with an analysis of the latest court decision on this subject. Many of the technical issues summarized in these pages are covered in greater detail both in print and online. For your convenience, a complete list of sources can be found at the back of the guide under "Recommended Reading," along with the current version of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. WHY IS VINYL SIDING SO POPULAR? American consumers have always had a love affair with technology. We buy the latest advertised product, every new, new thing that comes on the market. We do not have the patience for tried and true methods; we look for the quick fix, the latest gadget. "New and improved" is the siren song that sells everything from cars to cornflakes. We buy into the idea of "lifetime guarantee" even as we look in vain for the fine print disclaimers. Now that vinyl siding is no longer a new product, it is time to take a closer look. What is vinyl anyway? Technically, vinyl is a generic term that applies to a broad group of chemical polymers. It has been around for 40 years. Vinyl is just one of many kinds of plastics we use every day for packaging, shipping, construction, and for a range of home and health-care products. Plastics are a major part of recycling programs in every Connecticut community. In short, plastics are part of modern life. Remember the magic word "plastics" whispered in Dustin Hoffmans's ear in The Graduate? A funny moment in this 1967 film. Little did we know then the impact that plastics would have on our lives or, more importantly, their impact on Connecticut's built environment. CONNECTICUT HERITAGE Connecticut has a rich and diverse heritage, a shared legacy that all can cherish and enjoy. Historic buildings, the visible part of this legacy, tell the stories of countless men and women who made our state. These structures come in all shapes and sizes. Many were built of wood, and even brick and stone buildings have wooden trim and windows. Historic buildings range from architectural landmarks associated with famous people and major historical events to modest workers' cottages. The institutional life of the past is embodied in our historic churches, town halls, and schools. Just as our agrarian past is reflected in rural farmhouses and barns, the Yankee spirit of enterprise is found in mills and factories, historic urban commercial blocks, and country stores. The National Register of Historic Places recognizes the importance of many of these historic buildings. In Connecticut, nearly 45,000 historic structures have this designation. National Register listings include 964 individually significant sites and 368 historic districts. Town-based architectural surveys sponsored throughout the state by the Connecticut Historical Commission have identified thousands more that are potentially eligible for this largely honorary listing. Since the federal designation does not restrict any private property owner's rights, changes to National Register buildings, such as vinyl siding, are unregulated. Some of these historic resources, but not all, are protected under state mandate. In Connecticut, historic district commissions administer 111 local historic districts in 66 towns. A few district commissions also have oversight of individual properties; in other communities, historic property commissions are appointed for this purpose. Altogether, these commissions are responsible for 7500 buildings and sites. An impressive number to be sure, but it is clear that only a relatively small percentage of Connecticut's heritage has the protection of design review. Indeed, the preservation of the vast majority of historic properties must depend upon the informed stewardship of their owners. People buy historic houses for a variety of reasons: to restore and preserve them for future generations; to make a good investment; or simply to have a well built home. In any event, buying a house is a major purchase, probably the largest single outlay most people make in their lifetimes. As numerous studies have shown, historic houses are a sound investment. Often undervalued at time of purchase, they appreciate faster than new construction over time. Prudent homeowners recognize that they must preserve the value of their investment by proper maintenance. Sooner or later every historic homeowner faces a basic maintenance problem: a new paint job. Your house is looking a little shabby, what with all that dirt, mildew, and peeling and cracking paint. The temptation is just to cover it up with artificial siding. The vinyl industry tells you its product will last a lifetime, so why not? You may have heard that the preservation community has some reservations about vinyl siding, but you do not really know why. There is much more substance to this debate, as the following section will show. The real issue is which method, paint or vinyl, is better for your historic house in the long term. Only you can decide. THE GREAT DEBATE The Vinyl Industry Position: Vinyl manufacturers believe that vinyl siding is superior to paint. The industry's claims for vinyl siding can be summarized in five ways: Vinyl is cost-effective. Vinyl improves appearance. Vinyl is weatherproof. Vinyl conserves energy. Vinyl is maintenance-free. The Preservation View: Is Vinyl Cost-Effective? Any cost-benefit analysis looks first at the bottom line. Is vinyl a better buy? It looks like a bargain, but over 20 years, the usual guarantee period,1 the cost of installing vinyl siding is more or less equal to the cost of two quality paint jobs. For preservationists, value, not cost, is the real economic issue. Is there a genuine long-term benefit to vinyl siding? Will it improve the appearance of your house, save energy, or reduce maintenance costs as the industry claims? Does Vinyl Improve Appearance? For preservationists, appearance is the major value issue in this debate. While we have no quarrel with the use of vinyl siding in new construction, we have always contended that the character of a historic house is substantially altered and diminished by artificial siding of any type. Seasoned real estate appraisers tend to agree with this view. Many will tell you that there is an automatic markdown for artificial siding on historic buildings. Vinyl is just the latest in a long list of artificial sidings that goes back to the asphalt and asbestos siding of the 1930s. These older substitutes for wood did little damage to historic fabric and have been removed with some success. Aluminum siding that came on the market after World War II was another story. After extensive testing, it was found that aluminum siding posed a potential threat to wood-framed historic buildings and, like vinyl, it had a decided impact on appearance and historic character. The subtle and often decorative textures of historic wood sidings are lost when vinyl siding is applied, turning once individually distinctive houses into bland, anonymous boxes. Despite industry claims, vinyl does not look like wood. Attempts to give vinyl siding a fake woodgrain appearance are particularly ineffective. Keep in mind that the installation process itself is potentially destructive. Historic character is lost when decorative trim is removed or cut down to install vinyl siding. Standard installation requires removal of the historic corner boards that frame your house; the vinyl replacement is always much too narrow. Ends of sills and cornices are cut off, leaving doors and windows looking bare and unfinished. Even when a homeowner pays more to have siding fitted around existing trim, decorative details and profiles are diminished or obscured by the thickness of the surrounding vinyl. Furring strips and any rigid insulation board under the siding must be nailed or screwed, leaving the walls peppered with holes. Is Vinyl Weatherproof? There is no question that vinyl siding, properly installed, is a weatherproof material. It does a good job of keeping water away from building exteriors. For preservationists, the real issue is that vinyl also keeps water inside a 1 Longer guarantee periods are usually prorated after 20 years. building. When you wrap your house in plastic, moisture can build up in wall cavities, a problem for older houses. Unlike wood, vinyl does not breathe. Water vapor trying to pass to the outside is trapped in the wall, where it reaches its dew point temperature and condenses. The water then puddles at the base of the wall, leading to rot in sills and other structural components, along with unpleasant problems like mold and insect damage. On a painted house, many excess moisture conditions become quite obvious; in fact, peeling paint can help homeowners pinpoint problem areas so that repairs can be made. If you already have a condensation problem, installing vinyl siding is a major mistake. Hiding pre-existing moisture conditions of any kind will not make them go away. They will only get worse over time, and structural repairs down the road are even more expensive. The construction industry is well aware of the condensation problem. Modern houses are engineered to exhaust moisture-laden air and are provided with internal vapor barriers. New products used for underlayment on the outside are designed to breathe. Vinyl manufacturers now recommend installation of continuous wall vents under the eaves to improve air circulation in wall cavities and have added weep holes to their product. The manufacturers point out that the connector channels used in vinyl siding are another path for water vapor. All these measures are steps in the right direction for new construction, but they do not really solve the problem for older buildings. Does Vinyl Siding Conserve Energy? The insulation value of vinyl siding is minimal. Even when siding is backed with a thin layer of insulating foam, or applied over rigid board insulation, the thermal envelope created has about the same UR" value as two to four inches of airspace. Tests have shown that up to 75 percent of heat loss is through the roof. Insulating the attic is a more cost-effective way of reducing your heating bill, followed by the installation of storm windows and weather stripping but forget about insulating walls. There is really no effective way to insulate the walls in a historic house. Standard batt insulation with vapor barriers cannot be installed in walls without destroying plaster, woodwork, and other original historic fabric. The types of insulation that can be introduced into wall cavities from the outside have their own problems; for example, blown-in insulation often settles to the base of the wall. Chemicals in the foam types can be destructive to wood fibers. Of course, in the absence of vapor barriers, both types can contribute to the condensation problem. The full story of energy conservation in historic buildings is complex and beyond the scope of this guide. For more information, please see Preservation Brief 3: Conserving Energy in Historic Buildings and other articles on this subject cited in "Recommended Reading." Is Vinyl Really Maintenance Free? Certainly vinyl siding lasts a long time, but it is not indestructible. Vinyl is subject to denting, cupping, and warping, and over time, colors fade from exposure to sunlight. Repairing or replacing damaged vinyl siding can be difficult. Just finding a piece to match the old vinyl used on your house will be a problem. Eventually the surface will need to be cleaned and, yes, even painted. Painting vinyl is a risky business. In fact, many manufacturers void their guarantees if vinyl is painted. If you must paint, there are special rules. The type of paint and even the color must be compatible with vinyl's physical properties. Since vinyl expands and contracts with changes in temperature, the paint coating must be equally flexible. Paint darker than the original vinyl will absorb more heat from the sun, which can lead to severe warping and curling of the siding. THE PRESERVATION ALTERNATIVE Painting has always been the preservation alternative to artificial siding. We believe that a program of painting combined with other good maintenance practices is the best way to protect your historic house and preserve its historic character. This approach is fully in accord with a long-standing preservation principle summarized in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards as follows: Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. The original materials used on your historic house have stood the test of time. Brick and stone, of course, are permanent materials; properly maintained and painted, wood also can last indefinitely. Even masonry buildings have wood features that need periodic refinishing. But it is a waste of time and money to paint a wet house. Deal with any moisture problems before you even consider painting Moisture Problems Condensation is a major problem for historic homeowners. Our modern life-style, which puts a premium on comfort, is largely responsible for this condition. Past generations made do without central heating and instead of air conditioning, they just opened windows in summer. As a result, the average air temperature differential between inside and outside was much less than it is today, making condensation of water vapor in walls less likely. In addition, there was a limited amount of moisture in the home, which came mainly from cooking and burning wood in fireplaces or stoves. Today, with the incredible amount of water vapor the average household produces, historic homeowners must install exhaust fans and special vapor barrier paints in bathrooms, laundries, and kitchens. Water penetration is another major problem. A wet basement is a perennial condition in some old houses, and there may also be actual leaks from cracked or missing roof shingles or deteriorated gutters and downspouts, and even household plumbing. In addition to the potential for structural damage if not corrected, long-term leaks can lead to growth of new mold strains that are actually dangerous to your health. So far, these newly discovered mycotoxins seem to be confined to recent construction. They thrive on newer materials such as sheet rock; historic houses with plastered walls seem to be less vulnerable. Rising moisture, from high water tables or poor drainage, is another area of concern, particularly in Colonial-style houses, which have low foundations. But every homeowner should take steps to correct drainage problems by grading the slope away from the foundation or, in some cases, installing a complete perimeter drain system with perforated pipe laid over gravel. For the most recent publication on diagnosing and solving moisture problems, please see Preservation Brief 39: Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings, cited under "Recommended Reading." PAINTING YOUR HOUSE First off, we must admit that painting a historic house is not a quick fix. Painting, and especially the preparation work, is tedious and labor-intensive. Decisions must be made about what paint to use. There have been great strides in paint chemistry since lead was banned in the 1970s. While the new paint coatings are quite durable, they do not last as long as the oldfashioned lead-based paints that were good for 20 years or more. Preparation Paint coats fail for a number of reasons. Inadequate preparation is the primary cause, but mistakes made in the application process can also create problems. New paint bonds better to clean, dry, and dull surfaces. Peeling, the most common form of paint failure, is usually a sign that earlier coatings did not adhere or bond. In that case, surface preparation requires scraping and sanding of the deteriorated areas, and a complete light sanding to dull the rest of the surfaces, followed by a thorough cleaning. Badly deteriorated paint coats, with wholesale cracking and peeling, must be removed down to bare wood. If the surface is "alligatored" with deep cracks, there may be too many layers of old paint. Chemical paint removers can do the job, but heat guns and heat plates, followed by hand scraping, are the recommended methods for complete paint removal. Blowtorches are no longer used because of the potential fire danger. Sandblasting to remove paint is a mistake. Highly destructive, it grinds away softer wood fibers and leaves behind striated, porous suñaces. CAUTIONS: Lead, or other hazardous materials, may be present. Even for minor preparation work, such as sanding, safety precautions are advised, including facemasks and goggles. Complete paint removal is not a project for the homeowner. Only an experienced contractor has the knowledge and equipment to do the job safely and effectively. Cleaning A garden hose, some household detergent, and a soft scrub brush are all you really need to clean a house. This method will remove chalking (powdering of the surface of the old paint film), dirt, and even loose paint. Excessive dirt or mildew requires scrubbing with a solution of household bleach or trisodium phosphate (TSP) in water. Dirt accumulates under eaves, soffits, and edges of clapboards. Look for signs of mildew or fungus on the shady side of the house, especially behind foundation plantings. If shrubs are overgrown and too close to the building, now is the time to prune them back. A thorough rinsing should always follow cleaning. Failure to rinse off all the TSP or other chemicals can cause your new paint job to fail prematurely. Allow the surface to dry completely before you paint. Moisture still in the wood can cause the new paint to bubble. Painting contractors will prefer to power wash your house. It saves them time and achieves the same results. Be sure that they use a low-pressure wash (under 100 p.s.i.). Water under high pressure can be as harmful as sand blasting. It not only damages wall surfaces and makes them more porous, but it can also destroy the beauty of irreplaceable architectural details. Painting Good-quality paint properly applied and maintained will last on average about eight to ten years. The best paint is expensive but well worth the money. Buying cheaper bargain paint will end up costing you more in the long run. At least two coats will be needed, a primer and a finish coat. Spot priming in areas that have been scraped and sanded may be adequate, but all bare wood must be completely primed for good adhesion. The best choice for historic houses is an alkyd-based primer. Have it tinted to a shade just slightly lighter than the topcoat. It will make the application of the finish coat much easier. Follow the manufacturer's recommendation for a compatible finish coat, preferably one with a low luster. Good brushes are a necessity. No other method offers the durability of paint applied with brush. Above all, read the directions on the can about the best temperature range for painting, and what to use to clean up when you are done. Avoid painting in direct sunlight. The outer layer will dry too fast and wrinkle, a condition also caused by not waiting for the primer coat to dry. Other causes of wrinkling include applying paint too thickly, or failing to brush it out well. Spray painting is often the choice of painting contractors, but with this method, paint is often thinned for ease of application or to get a smoother coat. Be aware that too much paint thinner can compromise paint chemistry and shorten the life of the paint coating. Painting looks easy but, given all the possible pitfalls, it may pay to hire a skilled professional, one who has been in business for a long time. Before hiring a painting contractor, check out references. Take a look at projects the company completed five or more years ago and see how well they have held up. A final word of advice: Your new paint job will last longer with yearly washing and spot maintenance. CONCLUSION In this guide, we have made the preservationists' case for the best way to maintain your historic property and pointed out ways in which vinyl siding fails to live up to its promise. We have also discussed the problems with vinyl as a replacement siding, especially how it can contribute to water retention in the walls of historic buildings. Despite industry claims, this type of siding has limited value as insulation and, as numerous homeowners have discovered, vinyl eventually needs maintenance and even painting. For many in the preservation community, the overriding issue is simply loss of historic character: by hiding or obscuring important architectural features, vinyl siding can diminish your home's esthetic and economic value. We have demonstrated how proper maintenance and the application of paint remain the preferred approach to preserving and protecting your historic property. We hope this guide has contributed to your understanding of these issues, and for additional information, we invite you to consult published and online sources listed in Appendix B: "Recommended Reading." APPENDIX A THE COURTS DECIDE The 1999 decision by the Connecticut Appeals Court in the case of Church of Christ, Scientist v. Historic District Commission of the Town of Ridgefield (AC 18423) was a great victory for the preservation community. In affirming the commission's right to deny the church's application to install vinyl siding, the court resolved important preservation issues. The decision in this landmark case, however, has much broader implications. The Appeals Court not only validated some long-standing preservation principles, but it also reaffirmed the discretionary authority of local historic commissions and the legitimacy of state historic district and property legislation. There is a certain irony to this case. Nearly four years of litigation were needed to resolve a preservation issue concerning a property that is not a historic building. Although obviously located in a historic district, the Colonial Revival-style church is a wood-framed building sheathed with clapboard, constructed in 1965. In 1995, after its application to reside with vinyl was denied by the commission, the church appealed the case to the Superior Court in Danbury. Since the commission had failed to make an adequate record of its proceedings, the judge ordered a new public hearing, which was held in June 1996. The commission once again voted to deny the application. The church filed suit in Superior Court, where Judge Socrates Mihalakos ruled in favor of the commission on all counts and dismissed the lawsuit. When this decision was upheld by the Appeals Court, the church appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case. As a basis for its decision, the Connecticut Appeals Court adopted the earlier lower-court opinion written by Judge Mihalakos. This well-reasoned opinion should reassure historic district and property commissioners who may have been concerned about the extent of their discretionary authority in vinyl siding cases. The rulings: commissions have the authority to require applications for vinyl siding. commissions can base all decisions on esthetic considerations, not just in vinyl siding cases. It was the plaintiff's contention that vinyl siding is "ordinary maintenance and repair" which does not require a certificate of appropriateness. Judge Mihalakos ruled that "recladding" a church in vinyl does not "fall within the scope of ordinary maintenance and repair," and that use of vinyl instead of paint constituted a change in appearance and materials, both of which are subject to review by district commissions. The judge also noted that both the state historic district legislation and the Ridgefield historic preservation ordinance provide that ordinary maintenance and repair does not involve a change in appearance or design. Judge Mihalakos relied on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for guidance in this matter and made relevant sections a part of the record, perhaps a first in preservation law. He observed that the Standards state that: maintenance generally involves the least amount of work needed to preserve the materials and features of the building; maintenance of a frame building would include caulking and painting or, where paint is excessively cracking and peeling, its removal and the reapplication of a protective paint coating. He further noted that the Standards provide that: deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced wherever possible, and that if replacement is necessary, the new material should match [the original] in composition, design, color, texture, and other qualities.2 The plaintiff also claimed that in denying the application, the commission had exceeded the bounds of "permissible esthetic considerations." The judge ruled that Connecticut case law had already decided this question, citing, among others, a 1976 Connecticut Supreme Court case in Norwich, Figarksy v. Historic District (171 Conn. 198368 A. 2d 163), which upheld the validity of esthetic considerations in land use regulations. It is clear, however, that esthetic judgements must be based on objective facts. For example, in the Ridgefield case, among the changes in appearance noted in the denial of the application were: The proposed vinyl siding did not match the original clapboards in size or exposure. Double seams where vinyl siding overlaps are more pronounced than staggered butt joints used with clapboards. 2 The wording is taken from an earlier version of the Standards. Original projecting trim around windows and doors would be recessed. Molding details would be lost or over simplified by the proposed bent aluminum trim. The decision in the Ridgefield case is also a cautionary tale, one that underscores the importance of a fair hearing process in full compliance with the state's "sunshine law." Commissions should take care to have a recording and/or a transcript of all regularly scheduled meetings and hearings, as well as adjourned hearings held at other locations, such as at the applicant's property, or even at an out-of-town site, which was the case in Ridgefield. Also, as the full transcripts of the case make very clear, commissions cannot have a pre-established policy on vinyl siding. Each application for vinyl siding must be judged on its own merits, and in the case of districts, for the potential impact on the historic district as a whole. A final caution is implicit in the opinion rendered in this case. Time and time again, references were made to conformance with the state statute, as well as local historic preservation ordinances. Presumably town counsels have reviewed all local ordinances for substantial compliance with the state statute, but a review might be in order. Many local ordinances incorporate the exact wording of the statute, perhaps the best approach. That the judge in this case cited Secretary of the Interior's Standards sends a clear signal to historic district and property commissions. Some commissions have already adopted the Standards as policy; others use them as a checklist. In either case, the Standards can provide a practical and philosophical basis for deliberations. Indeed, by using the Standards, commissioners can be sure that their decisions are grounded in time-tested preservation principles, ones that will stand up to legal challenge. Perhaps, more importantly, the even-handed application of recognized objective standards increases public confidence in the fairness of the design review process. APPENDIX B RECOMMENDED READING Belkin, Lisa. "Haunted by Mold." New York Times Magazine, August 12, 2001. "(The) Changing Nature of Wood Products: What Does It Mean for Coatings and Finish Performance." Online: historichomeworks.com/HHW/library/ coatings/chang ing nature. html. Cohen, Joyce. "Historic Properties stay that way, thanks to neighborhood societies." Hartford Courant, May 5, 1996. "Connecticut Court Upholds Local Commission's Denial of Permission to Install Vinyl Siding on Historic Church." Preservation Law Reporter, April- June, 1998. Conrad, Ernest A, P.E. "The Dews and Don'ts of Insulating." Old House Journal, May/June, 1996. Conway, Brian. "The Hazards of Synthetic Siding." Historic Illinois, December 1979. "Finishes for Exterior Wood Surfaces: Options for the Painting Contractor." Historic Homeworks: Joint Coatings/Forest Products Committee. Online: h istorichomeworks. com/H HW / library/coatings/fin ishesforexterior. html. First Church of Christ. Scientist v. Historic District Commission of the Town of Ridgefield (AC 18423). Briefs and court opinions. On file at Connecticut Historical Commission and Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation. Framm, Mark. Well-Preserved. Ontario, Canada: Boston Mills Press, 1992 (revised edition). "Historic Preservation and Property Values in Indiana." Public Investment. American Planning Association, June 1998. Informational Brief: Maintaining Vinyl Siding. Washington, D.C.: Vinyl Siding Institute, 1994. Informational Brief: Vinyl Siding and Historic Restoration. Washington, D.C.: Vinyl Siding Institute, 1994. Online: vinylsid ing .0rgJvsic/historic/index. htm. Kilpatrick, John A "House Price Implications of Historic District Designations." Draft, 1996. Leeke, John. "Vinyl Siding" Historic Homeworks. Online: historichomeworks.com/HHW/library/ coatings/finishesfor exterior. html. Lyons. George. "Considering Vinyl Siding?" Common Bond. Vol. 15/Spring 2000. Online: www.nylandmarks.org. Meyers, John. H., revised by Gary L. Hume. Preservation Brief 8: Aluminum and Vinyl Siding on Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, Government Printing Office, 1984. Park, Sharon C. AlA. Preservation Brief 16: The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, Government Printing Office, 1988. . Preservation Brief 39: Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, Government Printing Office, 1994 (also online: Old House Web, 2001). Pickart, Margaret M. M. and Richard C. Sutter & Associates. Gettysburg Design Guide: A Guide for Maintaining and Rehabilitating Buildings in the Gettysburg Historic District, n.d. Poore, Patricia, ed. The Old House Journal: Guide to Restoration. New York: A. Dutton Books, 1992. "Preservation Property Values." Connecticut Preservation News, May/June, 1998. Schaeffer" Peter V. and Cecily P Ahern. "The Effect of Historic District Designation on Property Values: An Empirical Study." Draft, 1990. Smith, Baird M., AlA. Preservation Brief 3:Conserving Energy in Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, Government Printing Office, 1978. "Vinyl and Aluminum Siding: Myths and Facts." Rhode Island @ Home. Online: arch. rwu.edu/rihp/hhr/lead/altern. html. Values of Residential Properties in Urban Historic Districts: Georgetown, Washington, D.C., and Other Selected Districts. Washington. D.C.: Preservation Press, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1977. "Vinyl Siding -The Debate Continues." Connecticut Preservation News. Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation, November/December, 1996. Weeks, Kay D. and David W. Look, AlA. Preservation Brief 10: Exterior Paint Problems on Historic Woodwork. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, Government Printing Office, 1982. Yapp, Bob and Rich Binsacca. About Your House with Bob Yapp. San Francisco: Bay Books, 1997. "You Can Paint Vinyl Siding, But You Need to Follow the Rules." Hartford Courant (Real Estate Section), September 30, 2001. About the author: Jan Cunningham has been actively involved in historic preservation in Connecticut for more than 20 years. After receiving her master's degree in American Studies from Wesleyan University in 1979, she became director of the Greater Middletown Preservation Trust. A member of the Middle Haddam Historic District Commission, she served as chairman for two years. Since 1984, Cunningham has been a professional historic preservation consultant, specializing in National Register of Historic Places nominations, architectural surveys, and certified historic rehabilitations. Clients have included the National Park Service, the Connecticut Historical Commission, municipal governments and agencies, historical societies and commissions, and private historic property owners and developers. Cunningham has written extensively on historic architecture and community history in Connecticut and her publications received awards from the American Association for State and Local History and the Connecticut League of Historical Societies. The Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation was established in 1975 by a special act of the Connecticut General Assembly. The mission of the Connecticut Trust is to preserve and protect the vitality of Connecticut's historically significant places. Working with local preservation groups and individuals as well as with statewide organizations, it encourages, educates about, and facilitates historic preservation throughout Connecticut. For more information on the Connecticut Trust, please visit its web site at www.cttrust.org or call 203-562-6312. Exterior Wood Painting Procedures Necessary To Obtain A 12 To 15 Year Paint Job Removing Paint Often, there are many coats of paint on the wood exterior of house or building. Too many layers of paint can create paint failure from the incompatibility of these different paints. Generally, if there are three or less complete paint jobs on the wood exterior, you can scrape all of the unstable paint of the house using hand scrapers with carbide blades. If there are three or more complete paint jobs on the structure it is best to remove all the paint. This can be accomplished utilizing a tool called the Paint Shaver. What used to take 4 to 6 workers, 6 to 8 weeks to accomplish this task can now be done with 2 workers in 5 to 7 days. This method usually costs 2% to 7% more than traditional hand scraping and power washing that is common throughout America. The paint shaver takes the paint off to the bare wood, puts the paint into a hose that is attached to a HEP A vacuum. This avoids lead paint issues. When hand scraping it is critical to wear a properly fitted double cartridge respirator rated for lead paint. The ground should always be tarped and cleaned off at the end of every day. Hand Washing All bare wood should be hand washed with TSP and water. Use 1j¡ cup ofTSP for every gallon of water and scrub the siding. This should then be rinsed with a hose without a spray nozzle. Wood Repair Repair any rotted & cracked siding and trim with like material and architectural epoxies. Moisture Before any primer, paint or caulking is applied, the siding and trim you must test the wood to be sure the moisture content does not exceed15%. The only way to determine this is with a moisture meter. All house painters should have one of these meters. Painting wood above 15% moisture can knock 5 to ten years off the life ofthe paint job. Power washing is an automatic prescription for paint failure. The high pressure drives moisture deep into the wood and it can take as long as six months to dry down to 15% moisture. Priming All primer should be oil based alkyd primer. Latex primer does not bite into the wood and condition it properly for caulk and topcoats. This should be applied by brush, not spray. Caulking Use an acrylic/latex caulk with silicon. Imagine your house under Niagara Falls. Caulk all areas the cascading water can penetrate but do not caulk where it cannot. Topcoats Use the highest quality acrylic latex topcoats you can afford. With paint you get what you pay for. Painting contractors have accounts with paint stores and often want to sell you paint for $12 to $15 a gallon. This is no bargain as the paint is always inferior as it has a low solids content. $25 to $40 a gallon is the correct range. Apply two coats with brush only. Spraying puts the paint on 10 times thinner than brushing. Creating the thickest mil coating possible is what adds to longevity of paint surfaces. Check Consumer Reports Magazine for the highest rated paints and use them! Paint Maintenance A paint j ob must be maintained on a yearly basis. Look around your house to see if any paint is failing. Paint failure, on a properly painted house, can be caused by things such as exhaust fans not sealed properly, leaky gutters or roof problems. Correct the moisture problems first, then scrape, prime and paint the failed areas. It's sort oflike skin cancer, if you have a weird spot on your face and you don't get it taken care of it can turn into malignant melanoma cancer and kill you. If you get it checked out and have it removed you'll be ok. It's no different with a paint job.