Design Review Subcommittee of the Elgin Heritage Commission

Transcription

1 Design Review Subcommittee of the Elgin Heritage Commission March 25, 2014 The meeting of the Design Review Subcommittee was called to order at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers (Located on the 2 nd floor of City Hall) by Chairman Stroud. MEMBERS PRESENT: John Roberson, Dennis Roxworthy, Scott Savel, Steve Stroud and John Wiedmeyer MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Briska and Pat Segal CITY STAFF PRESENT: Amy Munro, Historic Preservation; Matt Falco, Plan Examiner and Cindy Walden, DRSC Secretary RECOGNIZE OTHER PERSONS PRESENT: PROPERTIES ON AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION: Old Business New Business 931 Douglas Ave. Install windows 318 DuPage St. Install front stairs and hand railings APPROVAL OF MINUTES: No minutes were presented for consideration. ITEMS ON THE TABLED: NEW BUSINESS: 931 Douglas Ave. Install windows Project Background: The property owner has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to replace the wood windows located on the second story level of the house. Eventually, the property owner intends to replace all of the building s remaining windows. The property owner

2 Page 2 of 6 has proposed Andersen Woodwright wood replacement windows to match the existing windows profiles in design and color. Although the existing windows are in good condition, the property owner has identified maintenance and energy efficiency as the primary reasons for their replacement. Specifically, the property owner has expressed concerns related to maintenance, air infiltration and sash operability. The house has wood storm windows that were installed approximately 28 years ago by the property owner. On January 29, 2014, Staff conducted a site visit and confirmed that the windows are in excellent condition. At that time, the property owner expressed a preference for replacing the windows, but was also open to suggestions from the DRSC with regard to repair options that would address energy efficiency concerns. The DRSC discussed the project on February 11, 2014 and upon review of the project, staff s assessment, the property owner s concerns and the potential energy retrofitting options for the windows that would continue to preserve the windows, it was agreed that it would be of benefit for a Commissioner to conduct a site inspection to discuss the project with the property owner. On March 5, 2014, Staff and Commissioner Savel conducted a site inspection of the windows. At that time, Commissioner Savel and staff consulted with the property owner as to the options available to address the property owner s energy efficiency concerns with the windows. The property owner stated his preference to pursue window replacements-in-kind. Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Windows A. Which are original should be preserved in their original location, size, and design and with their original materials and numbers of panes (glass lights). B. Which are not original should not be added to primary facades or to secondary facades where readily visible. C. Should be repaired rather than replaced, but if replacement is necessary, the recommended replacement should be in-kind to match the originals in material and design. Windows clad in aluminum or baked-on aluminum are acceptable as replacement windows for use throughout the structure. Factors to be considered in determining whether the severity of deterioration of windows requires replacement shall include but not be limited to the following factors: damage, excessive weathering, loss of soundness or integrity of the wood, deterioration due to rot or insect attack, and cost to repair. As to the factor of the cost to repair windows, a particular window may be permitted to be replaced rather than repaired if the estimated cost to repair the windows is more than the estimated cost of the purchase and installation of appropriate replacement windows. D. Which are original of steel or aluminum should be repaired with materials to match the original. If repair is not feasible, replacement should be with new windows to match the original as closely as possible in materials and dimensions. Aluminum extruded windows are an acceptable replacement substitute for original steel sash windows, as long as their size, shape and profile match the original windows. E. Vinyl extruded windows are not permitted for use in historic districts.

3 Page 3 of 6 F. Which are new should not have snap-on or flush muntins. True divided muntins are preferred over these types of muntins which do not have the same appearance as historic windows. New muntins which are an integral part of the window sash and installed on both sides of the glass are preferable to snap-on simple grilles. G. screens and/or storms should be wood or baked-on or anodized aluminum and fit within the window frames. H. that are approved for replacement may be fitted with new double-paned Low-E glass that will improve the energy conservation on the interior. Only low-e glass that does not contain a tint should be used. Staff Recommendation: The Subcommittee has authorized staff to provide administrative approval on a case by case basis. With regard to the subject COA request, due to the Significant historic district survey rating, and the excellent condition of the windows as well as the property owner s questions regarding energy efficiency, and the Guidelines emphasis on preservation, Staff would recommend approval as submitted if the following conditions are met: 1. That rehabilitation suggestions to address the property owner s air infiltration and window operation concerns are provided to the property owner for consideration. 2. In the event that energy retrofits for the windows are more costly than replacement, that the window replacements fit the existing window openings and match the existing windows profiles which includes details such as size, design, dimension, and material. 3. Alternatively, should the Subcommittee approve the replacement of the windows, Staff would recommend that the application be approved as submitted: window replacements-in-kind (windows must fit the window opening and match the existing windows profile, design, and dimensions.) ***** Robert Bruskewitz (owner) was present for tonight s COA consideration. Homeowner indicated the existing windows were difficult to clean and storm windows had to be installed using a ladder for the second story. Request to install new windows which would tip in for ease of cleaning. Commission recommended windows to be repaired including: ropes, proper adjustments within the sashes and weather striping. New multi-track storm windows should be considered by homeowner, which could be left in place from season to season. Motion made by Committee Member Wiedmeyer to approve as submitted (replacement of existing windows). The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roxworthy. The motion failed unanimously (0-5). Appeal process was explained to the homeowner by Amy Munro. A letter of denial including the appeal process will be sent to the homeowner.

4 Page 4 of DuPage St. Install front stairs and hand railings Project Background: The applicant has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to repair the stairs located on the southwest front stoop entrance and to paint the house. The property is in violation of work without COA permits for exterior paint, removal of the front stair hand railing, and front stoop stair repairs. The property owner has filed a COA permit as a corrective action for the violations. Because the porch stairs have more than 3 risers, a hand railing will be required. The 2008 Historic Survey shows that the front stoop had hand railings. A Google photo taken in 2012 shows that the handrails were still installed. Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Porch Columns and railings A. should be preserved and maintained. Where repair is required, use materials to match the original in dimensions and detailing. B. should be rebuilt in historic designs if the original columns and railings have been removed or replaced. C. should have new balusters for the railing, if required. Porch balusters (also called spindles) should be appropriate for the building's style and period. The height of the railing should be in line with the window sill level, if present, and no greater than 30 inches in height. Porch Stairs and Steps A. Should be retained in their original location and configuration, if original to the property. Wood and concrete steps should be repaired with materials to match the original. B. should be replaced with wood rather than brick or concrete, if the porch floor is made of wood. C. should have their tread constructed in either 5/4x12 or 2x12 lumber. The ends of the treads should be bull-nosed and overhang the riser by no less than 1 inch. D. should have newel posts and balusters, treads and risers, to match original porch construction. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends does not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Staff would recommend approval if the following conditions are met: 1. The stair treads shall be constructed in 5/4 x 12 (recommended) or 2x12 lumber and the treads shall be bull-nosed with 1 overhang over the risers on three sides of the stair tread, min. 10 wide. 2. That the handrail installation matches the 2008 survey photo (Exhibit B). 3. That the hand railing is installed no more than 30 above finished floor (AFF). 4. The handrail shall have a 2x4 top rail and bottom rail with chamfered edges, ¾ cove, 2x2 square balusters, with a maximum of 2 on center (spacing suggested as per approved city

5 Page 5 of 6 file drawings of building s other two porches), square corners. That the bottom rail is a 2x4 with chamfered edges, and installed 2 AFF. To ensure that the balusters have straight corners rather than round corners, it is recommended that the balusters be cut from 4x4s. 5. That the newel posts are located on the bottom stair tread. 6. That the newel posts shall be 6x6, with pyramid caps with cove molding. 7. That the base of the newel post is wrapped in 1x and has cove molding. 8. That the newel posts shall not exceed That all stoop details, including the handrails and stairs, are primed and painted. ***** Matthew Schultz (owner) was present for tonight s COA consideration. Owner stated the handrail was missing when he purchased the property, and he had replaced the treads and risers. Willing to complete the work as required. During the discussion, questions regarding Building Code requirements for handrails (height of the top tread from grade level, and riser height: width of the risers must not exceed the width of the stringer). Staff will work with plans examiner and homeowner for determination. Due to the unknown factors of height from grade and riser dimensions, handrail requirement could not be determined. Commission provided two motions as follows: Motion #1 made by Committee Member Savel to approve stair replacement without handrail providing bull nosed treads (overhang not to exceed 1-2 (maximum) over riser) and risers are constructed in compliance with Building Code requirements. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Wiedmeyer. The motion passed unanimously. Motion #2 made by Committee Member Savel to approve as noted in Motion #1 with hand railing per staff s recommendations; with the following amendments: Design to match 2008 survey 2 separation of balusters (approximately 3.5 on center) Top rail constructed of 2x4 to be bevel top (not chamfered) Bottom rail constructed of 2x4 to be chamfered. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roxworthy. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: Elgin Porch Guidelines - Memo from Dan Miller ( ) Information was presented to the commission for guideline consideration. Discussion regarding drainage of stair treads included options such as: split 5/4 x3, 2 x6 or 2 x8 boards; rather than 2 x 12 boards which tend to warp. Propose listing true dimensions of construction materials. This would be done to eliminate confusion of construction requirements and ease of purchasing the building materials for

6 Page 6 of 6 historic districts projects. Example of balusters being cut square, in which two 2 balusters could be cut from a 2x6 with minimal scrap. While cutting a 2x4 does not provide two true 2 balusters. Consideration of composite materials for treads. More products are being available which would meet the character/design needs of the historic district. Newel post constructed of a 4x4 is not appropriate, but could be wrapped with a 1 by; or a 6x6 could be used. Amy Munro indicated the Elgin Heritage Commission would be provided the information present tonight for consideration with other guideline updates. Elgin Historic House Design Review Presentation (Historic Photographs) Steve Stroud presented police photos found during a renovation of the Elgin police department. Several structures in background from various photos were located within the historic district. Additional Staff Comments: Building Code Review/COA Process - Matt Falco, Plans Examiner Matt Falco expressed appreciation of the Design Review Subcommittee member s dedication. Attending tonight s meeting assisted with understanding the process for the COA process. General discussion of building code vs. preservation / Design Guideline Manual which included: unique historical handrail designs, handrail height, accessory structure height and new construction site plans. CORRESPONDENCE: ADJOURNMENT: Motion to adjourn was made by Committee Member Savel. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roxworthy. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting of the Design Review Subcommittee was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cindy A. Walden Design Review Subcommittee Secretary Approved: