April 2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A. Maintenance The maintenance of any historical structure or site shall in no way involve any direct physical change except for the general cleaning and upkeep of the landmark The Commission shall encourage the proper maintenance of all structure or sites. B. Treatment Treatment shall be defined as any change of surface materials that will not alter the style or original form. Such improvements include re- roofing, glazing, or landscaping lawns and may involve a change that can potentially enhance or detract from the character of he landmark. A treatment change of any surface whether on the landmark or in its environment may require a Certificate of Appropriateness if it significantly alters the appearance of the landmark. Although these kinds of changes may not require a Building Permit, a Certificate of Appropriateness may be necessary. The commission should review the proposed treatment for character and style consistency with the original surfaces. C. Renovation and Additions Renovation is the modification of a structure, which does not alter the general massing while and addition, is a change in mass. A modification, which involves the removal of a part of the landmark, should be considered under demolition (see demolition). Additions to landmarks should not detract from the original form and unity of ht landmark and should not cover singular examples of architectural detail. Additions to landmarks should be added in a manner that does not disrupt the visible unity of overall appearance of the site. The proportions, materials and ratios of the existing structures should be carried through in the additions. Care should be taken not to change or alter the following: 1. Structure — Necessary structural improvements, where safety demands should be accomplished in such a way as to cause minimal visual change to the original style and construction. 2. Material — Additions and improvements involving any new material in the landmark should be of the same material as the original. It should be the same size and texture. An alternative material may be allowed if it duplicates the original. a. wood —all wood trim should conform with existing trim in shape and size. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the replacement doors and the replacement windows as the proposals conform to the Group B Standards for Local Landmarks. The present doors are no longer repairable nor are they reliable in inclement weather. The replacement doors will replicate what is currently in place and provide for better weather tightness and climate control while the historic woodwork elements are to be restored. The proposed replacement wood window sashes and the restoration of the window frames for the Moms Performing Arts Center will mirror what the Commission approved for the window treatment in the Palais Royale. Commissioner Steinhauer recused himself. On a motion by Linda Riley with a second by Lynn Patrick to accept application as submitted. Vote: 5 -0 -1 COA 2011 -0401 was approved as submitted. STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Application Number: 2011 -0404 Property Location: 1414 East Wayne Street Architectural Style/Date /Architect or Builder: Colonial Revival/1925/H.R. Stapp/Whitcomb and Keller Property Owner: Jennifer and Drew Chuppe Landmark or District Designation: East Wayne Street Rating: Contributing DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURE/ SITE: The house is a two storey frame designed in the Colonial Revival style reminiscent of French dwellings in the Mississippi Valley. It has a gable roof with a large shed roof front dormer. The porch extends across the entire front of the house supported by large Doric columns over brick porch floor. The porch wraps around to a side gabled roof patio. The roof is asphalt shingles. The windows are double hung, 8/8 on the first floor and 6/6 on the second floor some are also 6/1. ALTERATIONS: The original wood siding was covered with aluminum siding prior to 1986 along with aluminum storm windows and doors. The 1986 survey card notes that the windows were 6/6 double hung. The roof has been replaced. There are replacement windows in the rear of the house. APPLICATION ITEMS: replace upper/lower sashes of 14 double hung windows and replace with architecturally correct Marvin simulated true divided light aluminum clad windows. 14 windows were already replaced years ago during the kitchen/bathroom /attic renovation. 5 of windows being replaced don't match the rest of the house (lack of muntin bars on one sash). DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT: The homeowners wish to replace 3 first floor 8/8 windows in the front and 2 second floor 6/6 windows; on the East side 2 8/8 windows on the first floor and 2 6/6 second floor; on the west side 18/8 on the first floor and 16/6 on the second floor, on the south 18/8 window on the first floor and 2 6/6 on the second floor. The replacement option is a full window replacement with Marvin Clad Ultimate Double Hung. The installation will be via the exterior of the home by removing the present sashes, peeling away the aluminum siding,