HomeMy WebLinkAbout8. 510 S St Joseph_COA 2018-0911A_PACKETSTAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Date: September 11, 2018 Application Number: 2018-0911A Property Location: 510 S Carroll Architectural Style/Date/Architect or Builder: American Foursquare / 1894 Property Owner: The Entrust Group FBO Lisa H McKnight Landmark or District Designation: Taylor’s Field, Ordinance #8952-98 Rating: Contributing DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURE/ SITE: Large irregular two story (plus attic) Free Classic with American Foursquare stylistic cues on a stone block foundation. Wood shingle siding is found throughout. The roof is hipped with asphalt shingles and hip dormers on the north and south sides. A small porch exists on the second story with wood balustrade, wood columns supporting the hip roof with a large overhang, purlins, and a plain freeze. The entry porch is partially enclosed and has similar details to the second story porch. Windows have aluminum storms and wood surrounds. An exposed second story stair well is on the south side, and an enclosed
two-story concrete-block entrance is at the north east corner. ALTERATIONS: Extensive modifications have occurred throughout the structure’s history, including additions in
1939 (one story addition to the rear), 1943 (11’ x 14’ rear porch), and in 1949(?) with the addition of the 7’ x 12’ cinder block construction at the north east corner. COA #1999-0308 allowed for the “rebuilding south side stairs and repair clapboard and rotted trim with like materials.” COA #2003-0806 allowed for the reconstruction of the
exterior stair with treated lumber, and explicitly retained the supporting stone and brick structure beneath this stair. COA #2013-0615 allowed for the tear-off and re-roof of the main structure. COA #2013-0625 allowed for the repair of the internal gutter system on the front façade and the installation of K-style gutter system on the rest of the house. COA #2013-0509A allowed for the re-installation of the front stair guide rail and the repair of the railing to upper apartment #4. APPLICATION ITEMS: “1.) Side staircase replacement. 2). Replacement of fallen down fence in backyard. 3) Replacement 7 windows – removal of old wooden windows and old storm windows with vinyl windows. 4) Replacement of damaged on 2nd floor right side and back with vinyl siding. See attached sheet for details.” DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT: Applicant seeks a Certificate of Appropriateness for improvements on the structure, including: 1. Retroactive reconstruction of south stairwell with treated lumber,
2. Retroactive removal of stone and brick structure at base of south stairwell. This structure concealed/protected the exterior basement access stairwell. 3. Retroactive replacement of fallen fence at rear of property using existing posts (eligible for Routine
Maintenance Exclusion by staff), 4. Replacement of seven (7) windows on the North face of the structure. Three on the upper floor, four on the ground floor.
a. Per inspector Szaday’s report, existing windows are either: i. “structurally beyond repair” on the lower level ii. “painted and nailed in place” on the upper level. b. Proposed replacement: Jeld-Wen Best Series Model JW1438 vinyl windows, 5. Replace existing mastic/asphalt siding on rear top floor dormer with vinyl siding. PRESERVATION SPECIALIST REPORT: September 5, 2018 On August 10, 2018 I stopped at the property located at 510 S St Joseph. This property is within the Taylor’s Field Locally Designated Historic District. I noticed work being performed and piles of both new and
removed materials on site. I met Charles who is the owner’s representative. He informed me that the crew that was on site was kicked off the job for sub-par work and that they had not pulled the necessary permits.
I saw a new wooden staircase on the south side of the house where the previous wooden one was. I noticed the sculpted block knee wall that was at the bottom of the previous staircase was removed. I also saw new wooden fence panels both in place and stacked on the ground. I returned to the property on September 4, 2018 to meet with Charles and discuss the COA application items up for Commission review. Fence: Most of the posts were original with some new ones replacing old. The panels are similar to those
that were there according to the 2013 digital file photos. The footprint does not appear to have been altered based upon those 2013 photographs. Exterior Side Staircase: the new staircase is sturdy and composed of wood as the previous staircase was. I requested that the contractor confer with the building department to make sure the baluster spacing meet code requirements. The remaining block and concrete landing and steps are failing. The steps have sunken to the south and there is a washout spot on the southeast base of the structure has left a deep void underneath. The removal of
the knee wall has left the underground staircase to the cellar exposed and should be addressed. Windows: The owner has proposed the replacement of 7 original wood double-hung windows. I was unable to inspect the windows in the second floor as the apartment is occupied and the renter was not home. The four on the first level all have lower sashes that are broken and each have metal angle brackets holding the sashes together. These sashes are missing ropes and are not rotted, but rather are structurally damaged beyond repair. The metal
storm windows are missing screens but have kept the original sashes and sills safely out of the elements. The upper sashes are painted and nailed in place. Front Steps: The front steps are failing. I believe they are past the point of merely “capping”, and should be removed and replaced entirely. The porch may be tall enough that the building department may require a handrail added. I defer to local ordinance. Siding: The siding on the dormers have both mastic/asphalt siding and asphalt shingles. The 2013 file
photographs show a better view of what was in place then. There are places where siding has been replaced with plywood and left unfinished. The remainder of the house is covered with wood clap board with a 4” reveal. Steve Szaday Preservation Inspector STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Taylor’s Field Local Historic District Guidelines I. THE ENVIRNOMENT A. THE DISTRICT ENVIRONMENT […] B. BUILDING SITE, LANDSCAPING AND ACCESSORIES Individual properties in the district are characterized by a house located near the front of each lot with a small to medium lawn in front and little to no lawn at the rear of the property. Often the back yard is used as a parking lot for tenants. About half of the properties include a garage which is either located at the rear of the property and accessed from unpaved alleys running behind the property or located directly next to the structure and accessed by small drives. Nearly all of the garage structure and accessed by small drives. Nearly all of the garage structures are out of date, single-stall frame buildings. One larger carriage house still stands in the district. Most properties have trees, shrubbery and/or hedges. Most houses conform to the uniform set-back within each block. Required Plants, trees, fencing, walkways, private yard lights, signs (house numbers) and benches which reflect the property’s history and development shall be retained. Recommended New site work should be based upon actual knowledge of past appearance of the property found in photographs, drawings, and newspapers. New site work should be appropriate to existing surrounding site elements in scale, type, and appearance. Accessory structures such as decks, gazebos, fountains and/or small outbuildings should be appropriate to surrounding site elements in scale, type, and appearance. Plant materials and trees in close proximity to the building and causing deterioration to the building’s historic fabric should be removed and replaced by suitable flora as approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Prohibited No changes may be made to the appearance of the site by removing trees, fencing, walkways, outbuildings or other site elements before evaluating their importance to the property’s history and development. Front yard areas shall not be transformed into parking lots nor paved nor blacktopped. Front yard areas shall not be fenced or fences shall not extend forward beyond the setback line of the house. The installation of unsightly devices such as television satellite dishes, solar panels and skylights shall not be premised in areas where they can be viewed from the public thoroughfare. II. EXISTING STRUCTURES A. BUILDING MATERIALS
Original exterior wall materials in the district include limestone, flagstone, stucco, clapboard, wood shingles, sandstone and masonry block. In some instances, vinyl or aluminum siding has been applied over the original material. Required Original exterior building materials shall be retained. Deterioration of wood materials shall be prevented through repair, cleaning and painting. The existing or original architectural detail windows, porches, doors, and eaves should be retained or replaced by replicas of the same design and materials when deteriorated beyond repair. Masonry including brick, limestone, flagstone, sandstone, and stucco shall be cleaned only when necessary to halt deterioration or to remove stains, and shall be done with a method acceptable for the preservation of the surface: i.e. low pressure water and soft natural bristle bushes. No chemicals, sand blasting or other invasive methods may be used to clean historic buildings. When repairing stucco, stucco mixture compatible in composition, color, and texture shall be used. Recommended Whenever possible, the original building materials should be restored. Metal or vinyl siding may be used when it is the only alternative to maintaining or replacing the original surface material. When used over wood surfaces, this siding should be the same size and style as the original wood. Every effort should be made to retain the original trim around the windows, doors, cornices, gables, eaves, and other architectural features. Ample ventilation must be afforded the structure when metal or vinyl siding has been installed in order to prevent increased deterioration of the structure from moisture and/or insects. Mortar joints should be repointed only when there is evidence of moisture problems or when sufficient mortar is missing to allow water to stand in the mortar joint. Existing mortar shall be duplicated in composition, color, texture, joint size, method of application and joint profile. It is emphasized that, prior to initiating any restoration or rehabilitation effort, the property owner contact the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County at 125 Lafayette, South Bend. The Commission is an invaluable source of information about all facets of rehabilitation and restoration. Prohibited Wood siding shall not be resurfaced with new material which is inappropriate or was unavailable when the building was constructed, such as artificial stone, brick veneer, asbestos or asphalt shingles. Sandblasting or the use of harsh detergents shall not be used on masonry including brick, stucco, limestone, flagstone, and sandstone. This method of cleaning erodes the surface material and accelerates deterioration. Brick surfaces shall not be painted unless they had been painted originally. Not Recommended Waterproof or water repellant coatings or surface consolidation treatments should not be used on masonry surfaces unless required to solve a specific problem that has been studied and identified. Coatings are frequently unnecessary and expensive, and can accelerate deterioration of the masonry. Mortar joints which do not need repointing should not be repointed. Repointing shall not be done with a mortar of high Portland cement content which can often create a bond that is stronger than the building material. This can cause deterioration as a result of the differing coefficient of expansion and the differing porosity of the material and the mortar which can result in serious damage to adjacent brick. Paint shall not be removed from masonry surfaces indiscriminately B. ROOFS AND ROOFING […] C. WINDOWS AND DOORS Window and door frames are in most cases wood. Brick structures have stone sills and brick lintels. In some cases where additional siding has been applied window trim has been covered. Many structures in the district have aluminum storm windows. Some houses retain wood framed storm windows. Required Original windows and doors shall be retained including sashes, lintels, sills, shutters, decorative glass, pediments, hoods, and hardware. When deteriorated beyond repair, they shall be replaced with units and trim resembling the original. Recommended Wood frame storm windows and doors painted to match the original should be used but should not damage existing frames and should be removable. If new sashes or doors are installed, the existing or original materials, design, and hardware should be used. When metal storm doors and windows are used, they should be painted, anodized or coated to match the existing. When awnings are used they should be of canvas material. Prohibited Original doors, windows, and hardware shall not be discarded when they can be restored and re-used in place. New window and door openings which would alter the scale and proportion of the building shall not be introduced. Inappropriate new window and door features, such as aluminum insulating glass combinations that require the removal of the original windows and doors, shall not be installed. Not Recommended Awnings, hoods, and fake shutters made of metal, vinyl, or fiberglass should not be used if they would detract from the existing character or appearance of the building. D. ENTRANCES, PORCHES, AND STEPS Most houses in the district have either an open or enclosed porch across the front. Most porches have either hip or gabled roofs or are covered by the main roof of the house. Required Existing or original porches, stoops, patios, and steps, including handrails, balusters, columns, brackets, tiles and roof decorations, shall be retained or replaced by replicas of the same design and materials when deteriorated beyond repair. Porches and additions reflecting later architectural styles and which are important to the building’s historical integrity shall be retained. Recommended When enclosing porches for heat conservation or other reasons, it should be done in a manner that does not alter the architectural or historical character of the building. Prohibited Front porches, stoops, patios, and steps that are important to the building’s style and character shall not be altered or removed.
Not Recommended Original porch details should not be replaced with materials representing a different period or style from the original. E. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS […] III. NEW CONSTRUCTION […] IV. SAFETY AND BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS A. BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS Required Building code requirements shall be compiled with in such a manner that the existing character of the building is preserved. Recommended Local code officials should be consulted to investigate alternative life safety measures that will preserve the architectural integrity of the structure. Variances for historic properties should be investigated. Prohibited Construction of new stairways and elevators that would alter important architectural features or existing exits and spaces is prohibited. Not Recommended Fire prevention equipment should not damage the appearance or fabric of the building. B. ACCESS FOR HANDICAPPED OR DISABLED PERSONS V. GENERAL […]
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This property has 1) an extensive history of modification and alteration, 2)
existed as rental property for the majority of its existence (records indicate the structure was subdivided sometime after 1970). As a subdivided structure, multiple ingress/egress openings have been added over the years, requiring consistent (and documented) reconstruction. Regarding the external stairwell: in the period of time from the establishment of the district in 1998 until today, three out of the five Certificates of Appropriateness on file for this property have been received for projects related to the external staircases. As such, precedent has been established and staff recommends approval. Regarding the low stone and brick wall: of the prior projects, COA #2003-0308 explicitly stated that “the
existing stone and brick structure along the south side of the house, enclosing cellar stairs and partly
supporting the existing stair to the second floor, is to be retained and repaired.” Inspector Szaday confirmed that the structure was being ‘washed out.’ The structure has been removed, and its likelihood of reconstruction is low. Staff makes no recommendation.
Regarding the retroactive reconstruction of the fence using the existing fence posts, staff recommends approval. Regarding the removal and replacement of the windows with Jeld-Wen vinyl windows, staff recommends
approval based upon Inspector Szaday’s opinion of the existing window condition.
Regarding the replacement of the exterior mastic siding with vinyl siding on the rear upper story of the structure, staff recommends approval.
Written by Adam Toering
Historic Preservation Specialist Approved by
Elicia Feasel Historic Preservation Administrator
Sanborn Maps / Satellite Photos
Figure 1 - Sanborn imagery (1899, 1917, 1960), and current satellite imagery.
Site Visit – Photos
Figure 2 - 510 S St. Joseph from the street, looking east.
Figure 3 - Close-up of the stairs.
Figure 4 - Rebuilt stairwell, looking east.
Figure 5 - Basement access beneath stairwell.
Figure 6 - Deconstructed stone and brick wall.
Figure 7 - Photo from June of 2013 showing the base of the south stairwell at right.
Figure 8 - Replacement fence.
Figure 9 - Replacement fence.
Figure 10 - North face, upper three windows to be replaced.
Figure 11 - North face, all windows to be replaced.
Figure 12- lower level sill.
Figure 13 - Missing weights / ropes.
Figure 14 - Lower level window sash, nailed shut.
Figure 15 - Jeld-Wen replacement window information (not installed).
Figure 16 - South gable with window (replaced by previous owner without COA), mastic/asphalt siding.
Figure 17 - Close-up of ill-fitting window and mastic siding.