My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
60649 Hickory_COA 2019-1007A_PACKET continued
sbend
>
Public
>
Historic Preservation
>
2019
>
Agendas & Packets
>
November 18, 2019
>
60649 Hickory_COA 2019-1007A_PACKET continued
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/19/2021 2:54:28 PM
Creation date
11/14/2019 4:44:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
South Bend HPC
HPC Street Address
60649 Hickory Street
HPC Document Type
Certification
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Prior to the current owners, the property had a long history of deferred maintenance and vacancy, including a 2009 <br />staff memo in the file noting the siding as “rotting”. In 2012, Commission staff met with new owner Ben Modlin to <br />go over the scope of work, including “exterior routine maintenance and repair”, although no Certificate of <br />Appropriateness applications are on file. In May 2017, Commission staff mailed a Minimum Maintenance Standards <br />letter to the Modlin’s, commending their efforts to maintain and preserve the historic character of the property that <br />included a reminder that any project that affects the exterior of the building, site, outbuildings, grounds, or <br />landscaping will require review, and a completed COA application, with a reference to the Standards. <br /> <br />The siding replacement without COA or Building Permit was discovered by Historic Preservation staff during St <br />Joseph County Historic Landmark site visits on 8/27/19 and reported to the Building Department. The Building <br />Department posted a cease and desist on 8/30/19, followed by a Violation letter 9/18/19. <br /> <br />The original wood weatherboard shiplap siding, corner boards, and wood, raised head labels at windows are <br />important in defining the overall historic character of the building. As evidenced by the owner’s description and <br />supporting photographs, the original siding demonstrates an advanced state of deterioration and has become <br />permeable to water. Furthermore, the discoveries made inside the wall cavities provides reasonable cause for <br />removing the original siding to remediate the materials in the wall cavities. While the original siding may have the <br />ability to be repaired and made impermeable, it likely will not withstand removal to clean the wall cavities and <br />reinstallation. Staff accepts that the original siding is deteriorated beyond repair. <br /> <br />Group B Standards discourage the covering or alteration of original materials with additional siding. If the historic <br />material cannot be repaired because of the extent of deterioration or damage, the preferred treatment is replacement <br />in kind with the same material, wood shiplap in this case. Because this approach is not always feasible, provisions <br />are made in Group B Standards to consider the use of a substitute material if it is of the same material as the original, <br />in the same size and texture. The Standard does provide for an alternative material if it duplicates the original, <br />however, the proposed PVC wood simulated siding is not of the same material as the original, is not in the same size <br />(width of the clapboards is scaled up without a shiplap edge) or texture (embossed wood graining, intended to <br />simulate the texture of wood, is not characteristic of real wood siding and is visually inappropriate). The proposed <br />PVC product is not a familiar replacement product; this may in fact be the first application before this Commission. <br />There is precedent for engineered wood products such as HardiePlank and LP SmartSide, as well as traditional vinyl <br />siding, all having a shiplap style option. <br /> <br />Applicants have submitted comparison quotes for Celect (application item), cedar siding, vinyl siding, and original <br />siding repair. A summary (by staff) of the costs for the materials and for painting (where applicable) has been <br />redacted from this report. <br /> <br />Staff has requested more detail about the plan to repair/replace the trim around the windows and at the roof gable to <br />“closely match the original” – specifically which architectural details and what the material will be. <br /> <br />Results of the October 21 Historic Preservation Commission public hearing are: <br />Commissioner Ponder made a motion to continue application #2019-1007A until the November 18th meeting. This <br />continuance is to allow the applicant time to research and provide additional information about restoration of the <br />existing wood siding, including: removing the bottom shiplap to allow for the removal of debris, ascertaining an <br />estimate as to the amount of siding material that could be considered salvageable, estimates as to the cost of the <br />restoration of that salvageable material. This information is requested by Tuesday, November 12th. Seconded by <br />Commissioner Brazinsky. <br /> <br />Four in favor, none opposed. <br />Vote: 4 – 0. Motion to continue COA #2019-1007A until the November 18th meeting is passed. <br /> <br />Applicants have submitted two additional proposals, see: Clayton Hoover and Sons for salvaging remaining siding <br />and mill new siding and Mignery & Son Contracting for vinyl siding. <br /> <br />The National Park Service Preservation Brief #8 Aluminum and Vinyl Siding on Historic Buildings: The <br />Appropriateness of Substitute Materials for Resurfacing Historic Wood Frame Buildings was consulted for this staff <br />report.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.