Ben and Carrie Modlin vs. Historic Preservation Commission (COA#2019-1007A)

Home Browse Search

f T Prior to the current owners,the property had a long history of deferred maintenance and vacancy, including a 2009 staff memo in the file noting the siding as"rotting". In 2012, Commission staff met with new owner Ben Modlin to go over the scope of work, including"exterior routine maintenance and repair",although no Certificate of Appropriateness applications are on file. In May 2017,Commission staff mailed a Minimum Maintenance Standards letter to the Modlin's, commending their efforts to maintain and preserve the historic character of the property that included a reminder that any project that affects the exterior of the building, site,outbuildings, grounds, or landscaping will require review, and a completed COA application,with a reference to the Standards. The siding replacement without COA or Building Permit was discovered by Historic Preservation staff during St Joseph County Historic Landmark site visits on 8/27/19 and reported to the Building Department. The Building Department posted a cease and desist on 8/30/19,followed by a Violation letter 9/18/19. The original wood weatherboard shiplap siding, corner boards, and wood,raised head labels at windows are important in defining the overall historic character of the building. As evidenced by the owner's description and supporting photographs,the original siding demonstrates an advanced state of deterioration and has become permeable to water.Furthermore,the discoveries made inside the wall cavities provides reasonable cause for removing the original siding to remediate the materials in the wall cavities. While the original siding may have the ability to be repaired and made impermeable,it likely will not withstand removal to clean the wall cavities and reinstallation. Staff accepts that the original siding is deteriorated beyond repair. Group B Standards discourage the covering or alteration of original materials with additional siding. If the historic material cannot be repaired because of the extent of deterioration or damage,the preferred treatment is replacement in kind with the same material,wood shiplap in this case. Because this approach is not always feasible,provisions are made in Group B Standards to consider the use of a substitute material if it is of the same material as the original, in the same size and texture. The Standard does provide for an alternative material if it duplicates the original, however,the proposed PVC wood simulated siding is not of the same material as the original,is not in the same size (width of the clapboards is scaled up without a shiplap edge)or texture(embossed wood graining, intended to simulate the texture of wood, is not characteristic of real wood siding and is visually inappropriate). The proposed PVC product is not a familiar replacement product; this may in fact be the first application before this Commission. There is precedent for engineered wood products such as HardiePlank and LP SmartSide,as well as traditional vinyl siding, all having a shiplap style option. Applicants have submitted comparison quotes for Celect(application item), cedar siding,vinyl siding, and original siding repair. A summary(by staff) of the costs for the materials and for painting(where applicable)has been redacted from this report. Staff has requested more detail about the plan to repair/replace the trim around the windows and at the roof gable to "closely match the original"—specifically which architectural details and what the material will be. Results of the October 21 Historic Preservation Commission public hearing are: Commissioner Ponder made a motion to continue application#2019-1007A until the November 18th meeting.This continuance is to allow the applicant time to research and provide additional information about restoration of the existing wood siding, including: removing the bottom shiplap to allow for the removal of debris, ascertaining an estimate as to the amount of siding material that could be considered salvageable,estimates as to the cost of the restoration of that salvageable material. This information is requested by Tuesday,November 12th. Seconded by Commissioner Brazinsky. Four in favor,none opposed. Vote: 4—0.Motion to continue COA#2019-1007A until the November 18th meeting is passed. Applicants have submitted two additional proposals, see: Clayton Hoover and Sons for salvaging remaining siding and mill new siding and Mignery& Son Contracting for vinyl siding. The National Park Service Preservation Brief#8 Aluminum and Vinyl Siding on Historic Buildings: The Appropriateness of Substitute Materials for Resurfacing Historic Wood Frame Buildings was consulted for this staff report.