Laserfiche WebLink
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 /> 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 /> 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 /> 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 /> Applicants have submitted comparison quotes for Celect, cedar siding,vinyl siding,original siding repair, and <br /> another for new wood. Below is a summary of the costs for the materials and for painting(where applicable). <br /> Celect PVC siding cedar siding vinyl siding—Big C repair original siding tongue&groove <br /> -Kimmel siding-Mastercraft <br /> $11,230 $60,970 $2,796.55 $23,000 $16,170 <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 /> 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. <br /> SITE VISIT REPORT: N/A <br /> STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Group B <br /> The Commission has the authority to determine the architectural merits and the extent of any proposed <br /> treatment,renovation,or addition to a historic landmark. The commission will require drawings,plans, <br /> specifications, and/or samples where appropriate. <br /> A. Maintenance <br /> The maintenance of any historical structure or site shall in no way involve any direct physical change except <br /> for the general cleaning and upkeep of the landmark. The Commission shall encourage the proper <br /> maintenance of all structure or sites. <br />