620 West LaSalle Avenue_AA 2020-1016B AMENDED

Home Browse Search

4 ‐Sarah On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 3:48 PM Adam Toering <atoering@southbendin.gov> wrote: I’d love to hear what other evidence he’s got for it being from the 80’s. It is not out of the question to envision a previous owner stripping the wood elements down to bare wood at some point in the house’s history. Just going off of my own house as an example, there are sections where previous owners stripped siding and painted anew as evidenced by the various paint jobs (in my case, it’s very evident based upon what colors are visible: white, blue, burgundy and tan). There are also areas on my house where siding was replaced, as well. So I accept that it is a possibility that the columns are ‘new.’ If it’s original wood, even in it’s degraded state, it’ll still outlive whatever new wood you buy (unless you are getting something exotic, which will increase the price). If the existing columns are replacements from the early ‘80s, they are still marginally ‘hardier’ than what you’d buy off the shelf today. We accelerate the growth of much wood that is sold today, and it shows in the hardiness. Failure of the bases of any age is not uncommon, as water flows down. Pillars should also be vented, in some way. The proposed replacement pillars are, by the manufacturer’s own description, “a soft wood,” in this case, Pine. Pine, when properly cared for, should still last in exterior applications. Were you to use the wood replacement column, would you be coupling it with the as‐advertised polyurethane bases? I believe that’ll be a material change, and I’d punt to @Elicia for whether we’d be able to approve it or not. Will you be coating the interior of the columns with a “nonfibrous asphaltum type roof coating” per the installation instructions? There are other considerations in that document that I’d ask you to look at. The pillars are warrantied for a year, contingent upon installation following the instructions. I believe you are planning to ‘flip’ this house, and I get that you need to make the numbers work. I’m the preservation specialist, so I’m always going to advocate for preserving existing materials. “Broken Record Adam” kicking in: removing rotting material and stabilizing/rebuilding with a wood epoxy will be cheaper than purchasing 7 columns and 7 bases (~$1,643 versus $135 for 5 quarts!). It’s cheaper than purchasing one pillar and base. Has your worker ever worked with wood epoxy / reconstruction of wood before? “When all you have is a hammer, all you see are nails.” Our office is charged with advocating for the long term preservation of the structure, and my concern is that changes today may lead to further problems tomorrow. I should say, it’ll be good to see this kind of pillar on the side porch. I’m luke‐warm on the polyurethane base. I’m using salvaged wood for much of the repairs and reconstructions of original elements on my house (and Ross would concur on projects he’s worked on), as you just can’t get the hardiness out of new wood. That’s one of the reasons why elements like the bases are now often made out of alternative materials. There’s an ongoing debate in the preservation community regarding the appropriateness of these alternative materials. Woodworkers jump at the opportunity to grab original wood that is removed from historic buildings specifically for this reason. Were you to remove those pillars and put them out on the street, I guarantee that someone will take them, because I am