June 2007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Sporleder: I was also going to ask if you knew the original function of the furnace itself was and if this particular chimney fed anything else, but Todd has asked that question. I suspect that it was in fact a coal burning furnace there to begin with, which would explain why the chimney is as high as it is. Coal burning furnaces usually emitted certain amounts of burning debris on occasion and it had to clear the roof therefore they usually required either by Code or convention to have at least two feet above the highest ridge line, so.. just for that information. Now, I would like to go into a little speech ifI may. I toured the area, investigating almost all of the houses in your particular Chapin Park area, and there are quite a few gabled houses. I would estimate that about 1/3 of them have no chimneys visible at all, about 113 of them have very functional looking chimneys such as yours which were meant to do what it was meant to do which is carry the flue and the gases out, and there were several other chimneys that were ornamented in some architectural way, usually with corbelling. It was my opinion as the architectural historian on this board that the chimney is now disposable, since it serves no function and it has no particular architectural merit. As an architectural feature of the house it was there functionally to carry the flue, fumes out of the furnace and that was its primary function. It wasn't put therefor any ornamental function, nor was it ornamented in any particularly architectural way such as with corbelling or limestone caps as several other chimneys have been done in that area. I would recommend allowing you to remove it to make the roof better. Now, if i could go on, the roof itself however has some architectural merit. The interlocking roof shingles on it creating a diagonal pattern and I would urge you to see if you could have that replicated when you go in to finding a new roof because it's important for a roof that has as much visibilityfrom the street that it not look crude in any particular way. This kind of particular South Bend feature of roofing has with the diagonals. Klusczinski: Thank you Joann. Professor, in your opinion is the chimney damaged or deteriorated beyond repair? Rosenberg: Beyond repair? Um, I can't offer any opinion on that, I'm sorry. I don't have any expertise in that area I couldn't say. Klusczinski: Are the bricks crumbling? Anything like that? Rosenberg: It looks to me like the mortar is... Klusczinski: But not the bricks...? Rosenberg: I haven't ever been upon the chimney, I'm sorry. I cannot say, I wouldn't offer an opinion. It would be to my advantage to offer one, but I can't. Klusczinski: Any other questions for the petitioner? I'll entertain Commission discussion on the topic. Zeiger: I just wanted to note that because the chimney has been abandoned with regard to the gasses and whatnot that it will deteriorate pretty rapidly. Those, the moisture that would go up through the chimney actually helped keep them in tact. And, over time without those flue gasses going up with your comment about everything being direct vent is pretty common in older houses. You'll see that chimney deteriorate fairly quickly without the moisture coming up through there, and that was the reason for my question about the current condition as well as long term. I guess I just share Joann's thought that it's not an essential or definingfeature of the home. Klusczinski: Of this particular home? Zeiger: Of this particular home, yes. Klusczinski: Any other comments, anyone? I'll open the public hearing portion is there any member of the public wishing to speak in support of this C of A? Hearing none. Is there any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Also hearing none, I close public hearing. I'll entertain a motion one way or the other. Zeiger: I'll move for approval of Certificate 2007-0426 as presented. Sporleder: I'll second it. Klusczinski: All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries unanimously. Moved: Zeiger To approve C of A 2007-0426 Second: Sporleder Approved: Unanimously 3