The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/18/2017 - Landmark Preservation Commission - Agenda - Regular MeetingMeg Dunn, Chair City Council Chambers Per Hogestad, Vice Chair City Hall West Doug Ernest 300 Laporte Avenue Bud Frick Fort Collins, Colorado Kristin Gensmer Dave Lingle Mollie Simpson Alexandra Wallace Belinda Zink Fort Collins is a Certified Local Government (CLG) authorized by the National Park Service and History Colorado based on its compliance with federal and state historic preservation standards. CLG standing requires Fort Collins to maintain a Landmark Preservation Commission composed of members of which a minimum of 40% meet federal standards for professional experience from preservation-related disciplines, including, but not limited to, historic architecture, architectural history, archaeology, and urban planning. For more information, see Article III, Division 19 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Video of the meeting will be broadcast at 1:30 p.m. the following day through the Comcast cable system on Channel 14 or 881 (HD). Please visit http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/ for the daily cable schedule. The video will also be available for later viewing on demand here: http://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php. Regular Meeting October 18, 2017 5:30 PM • CALL TO ORDER • ROLL CALL • AGENDA REVIEW • STAFF REPORTS • PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA • DISCUSSION AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 REGULAR MEETING. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the September 20, 2017 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. Landmark Preservation Commission 2. 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for conceptual design review of The Harden House at 227 Wood Street, designated as a Fort Collins landmark in 1999. The proposed work includes demolition of an existing rear porch (undated, historic), rear addition that steps in six inches on both sides, addition of a skylight, and addition of a deck. The applicants have been before the LPC on August 16, 2017 and September 20, 2017. This a revised option based on feedback received from the Commission at those meetings. APPLICANT: Gordon Winner, property owner Heidi Shuff, architect • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Roll Call & Voting Record Landmark Preservation Commission Date: 10/18/17 Roll Call Ernest Frick Gensmer Hogestad Lingle Simpson Wallace Zink Dunn Vote          N/A 1 – Minutes of September 20, 2017 Gensmer Hogestad Lingle Simpson Wallace Zink Ernest Frick Dunn Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 9:0 Log of Packet Additions Landmark Preservation Commission Meeting Date: 10/18/17 Materials added or updated in the agenda packet between the 10/11/17 work session & the hearing: Item # Item Name Description of addition/change 2 227 Wood Street – Conceptual Design Review Updated Staff Report to include additional information Materials submitted at, or just prior to, the hearing: (These items will be added to the final post-hearing packet, and hard copy meeting record.) Item & Exhibit # Item Name Description of addition/change Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 18, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission STAFF Gretchen Schiager, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 REGULAR MEETING. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the September 20, 2017 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 3 DRAFT City of Fort Collins Page 1 September 20, 2017 Meg Dunn, Chair City Council Chambers Per Hogestad, Vice Chair City Hall West Doug Ernest 300 Laporte Avenue Bud Frick Fort Collins, Colorado Kristin Gensmer Dave Lingle Mollie Simpson Alexandra Wallace Belinda Zink Regular Meeting September 20, 2017 Minutes • CALL TO ORDER Chair Dunn called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Dunn, Zink, Hogestad, Ernest, Simpson ABSENT: Gensmer, Lingle, Wallace, Frick STAFF: Bzdek, Bumgarner, Yatabe, Schiager • AGENDA REVIEW No changes to posted agenda. • STAFF REPORTS None. • PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. • CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 16, 2017 REGULAR MEETING. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the August 16, 2017 regular meeting of the Landmark Preservation Commission. Landmark Preservation Commission 1.a Packet Pg. 4 Attachment: LPC September 20, 2017 Minutes - DRAFT (6014 : MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2017) DRAFT City of Fort Collins Page 2 September 20, 2017 2. 1016 W MOUNTAIN AVENUE - FINAL DEMOLITION/ALTERATION REVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a proposal to add a 2-story addition to an existing residence and connect the existing garage to the residence. The property was determined to be individually eligible for designation as a Fort Collins Landmark. APPLICANT: Darryl Austin, Owner Mr. Ernest moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission accept the Consent Agenda as presented at the regular meeting of September 20, 2017. Ms. Simpson seconded. The motion passed 5-0. • DISCUSSION AGENDA 3. 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for conceptual design review of The Harden House at 227 Wood Street, designated as a Fort Collins landmark in 1999. The proposed work includes demolition of an existing rear porch (undated, historic), addition on the northwest corner of the residence that spans the rear elevation, addition of a skylight, and addition of a deck. The applicants previously presented two design options for conceptual review at the August 16, 2017 LPC meeting. This a revised option based on feedback received from the Commission at that meeting. APPLICANT: Gordon Winner, property owner Heidi Shuff, architect Staff Report Ms. Bumgarner presented the staff report. She reviewed the role of the Commission, noting that the project was not yet ready for final design review. Ms. Bumgarner reviewed the relevant Code sections and Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. She provided some basic information about the property and proposed work, including current and historic photos, and updated the Commission on the new information added to the packet since the work session. Applicant Presentation Mr. Winner said he had spoken to the Assistant City Forester about the tree, which is a male green ash. The Forester said it was a hearty species, and would be likely to survive the effects of the construction. He said their desire is to move forward with the project maintaining the tree in its location. Ms. Shuff quickly reviewed the existing conditions of the property. She discussed the engineer’s report regarding basement excavation, and pointed out the limited usable space that would be created with that option. Ms. Shuff discussed the two basement excavations that had been provided by the Commission as examples, and while she felt they were appropriate for their specific properties, she noted that this property is not as wide and would not provide sufficient usable space. She also pointed out that the concrete foundation of the Oak Street home was more stable and easier to work with than the 114 year old sandstone foundation of this home. Ms. Shuff also noted that the other examples already had more finished basement space with existing stair access. She explained that the excavation of the home on Whedbee was limited to opening up one side to let in more natural light, as opposed to excavating an entire basement. The Oak Street basement excavation was done in sections, which is not a viable option with a load-bearing masonry wall, making the excavation much more difficult. Ms. Shuff concluded that excavating to accommodate the programmatic needs is not feasible, and argued that an addition should be an acceptable alternative. Ms. Shuff discussed the adjustments that were made based on feedback from the Commission at the last meeting. She said the addition was shifted to the west, so that all of the addition is behind the existing house. She stated that efforts would be made to maintain the tree and allow for future growth with a properly sized opening in the deck. She pointed out they had stepped both sides of the east/west primary running walls and gabled roof of the addition six feet in from both the north and south walls of the original house, removed the stairs going to the attic, and eliminated the new north gable roof. The large casement window on the west was replaced with an attic vent similar to that on the east side. Ms. Shuff noted that the basement would be storage at this point, but another bedroom with an egress window would be added later. A stoop and steps for the 1.a Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: LPC September 20, 2017 Minutes - DRAFT (6014 : MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2017) DRAFT City of Fort Collins Page 3 September 20, 2017 laundry/mud room entry had also been added to the drawings. She also confirmed that the new window head heights will match the existing windows, maintaining the existing fascia height around the building. The addition to the north has been lowered to reduce the scale of the addition on the side of the home. They also replaced the long windows with square, punched windows, based on Commission feedback. Finally, Ms. Shuff showed the additional drawings that were requested by the Commission. Public Input None Commission Questions and Discussion Chair Dunn disclosed that the Oak Street house being discussed in relation to the basement excavation belongs to her, but said she didn’t believe that affects her ability to comment on this house. Chair Dunn explained that the Commission had a discussion at the work session about the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) comments regarding additions the Commission had approved in the past. Based on the SHPO feedback, Chair Dunn said the Commission is rethinking how they evaluate additions, and that will have some impact on tonight’s discussion. Mr. Ernest pointed out that the SHPO had provided comments on this proposed addition, which are included on page 101 of the packet. He asked for clarification as to whether the options reviewed by the SHPO were the most current options, and Ms. Bzdek confirmed they were. Ms. Shuff expressed concerns about the predictability of the process. She compared the process of making changes to the Building Code, which includes a lot of public outreach, to these changes in the Standards just now being discussed which appear to raise questions about whether additions would even be allowed. She said she had started working on this project with her client back in March, and the design has already undergone three revisions based on the Standards at that time and what had been approved in the past. She said changing the rules this far into the process puts everyone in a difficult position, and seems very unfair. She also inquired as to the plans for informing the public about the new Standards. Chair Dunn clarified that the Standards had not change, but the Guidelines had been updated. Ms. Shuff said there is a shift in the interpretation of the Standards, which makes things difficult for her client. Chair Dunn emphasized that there have not been any Code changes or changes in the Standards, but that some of these concerns may come up in the discussion. Mr. Ernest referenced page 102 of the packet where the SHPO had stated that installing a skylight is not consistent with the Standards. He asked which skylight that was referencing, to which Ms. Shuff responded it was the kitchen skylight Chair Dunn suggested reviewing the letter from the SHPO in the packet. She said the first step is to determine the character of the house. She then noted the question as to whether the owners had made a convincing argument to allow demolition of the historic rear porch, which the Commission hadn’t even addressed. Mr. Winner explained how the porch is constructed and described its current condition. He stated it is pulling away from the house, and is probably unsafe. Ms. Shuff mentioned that the rear porch was constructed of scrap materials, but in the landmark designation application, the owner stated that he intended to remove it. Chair Dunn asked whether any materials from the porch could be reused. Mr. Winner said there were some usable pieces for blocking and infill-type framing. Chair Dunn pointed out that the 30% rule mentioned by the SHPO was new to them, but this proposal appeared to comply with that. There was some discussion about whether the 30% rule applied to the footprint or finished square footage, and whether the basement counted. Ms. Bzdek said they would clarify that with the State. Chair Dunn mentioned the SHPO’s concern about the projecting addition on the north side altering the rectangular plan, which had been identified as a character-defining feature. Chair Dunn reviewed the SHPO’s comments about the doors and windows. Ms. Shuff inquired as to whether the north side window needed to be a tall, double-hung window, pointing out that she had matched the head height. Chair Dunn said it should match one of the window types on the north side. Ms. Shuff asked whether they need to replicate the historic windows. Mr. Hogestad said while the head alignment makes sense, the addition should not replicate the building. Ms. Zink said the proportion of the window seemed a little jarring, compared to the rectangular shape of the others. 1.a Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: LPC September 20, 2017 Minutes - DRAFT (6014 : MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2017) DRAFT City of Fort Collins Page 4 September 20, 2017 Ms. Zink questioned the way the addition was attached to the rest of the house. Mr. Hogestad said there should be a distinct separation of the new and old, possibly with a reveal. He added that the north elevation is a primary elevation of the building, and it portrays the building as simple. He said the whole addition should be in the back, maybe almost free-standing so as not to remove historic material. He suggested a connector piece to preserve the north elevation. Chair Dunn said the Guidelines call the connector piece a “hyphen”. Ms. Shuff said one of the main objectives of the program is to create a connection between the kitchen and family room and the outdoors. Mr. Hogestad said it was important to preserve the historic material on the back side of the house. Chair Dunn showed an example of a hyphen from packet page 206. Ms. Shuff requested clarification about a connector piece versus a step-in. Ms. Simpson said the hyphen accomplishes two things: limiting the amount of material lost on that elevation, and creating a separation between the old and the new. Ms. Zink said that would also maintain the volume of the original house. Mr. Hogestad suggested that the bulk of the addition be moved to the back and to the west to allow for a connector piece. Ms. Shuff said they would lose the tree and the connection between outdoor space and family room. Mr. Winner questioned how the hyphen would work, since there is a door and window in back, and expressed concern about losing the connection from the kitchen to the outdoors. Mr. Winner asked if they are at an impasse, if they can’t alter the rectangular shape. Mr. Hogestad suggested the west side is less important than the north side. Ms. Simpson asked about keeping the more of the brick historic material intact. Mr. Hogestad said the Secretary of Interior would like to see no changes to the original material so that if the addition were removed, it would expose the historic fabric. However, he acknowledged that may not be realistic in the context of modern day space planning. He suggested exploring the connector piece or hyphen, and finding a new location for the laundry/mud room. Chair Dunn suggested a glass connector piece, which would bring in a lot of light. Ms. Shuff recalled that at the last meeting, the concerns discussed were maintaining the tree, exploring whether a basement could be excavated, and pushing the north addition to the west. She said they’ve addressed some of those, but now she’s hearing something totally different with regard to the hyphen, and not having any part of the addition on the north. She asked how they can get all of the input and requirements in a timely fashion in order to minimize the number of revisions and the design time and cost to her client. Chair Dunn suggested reviewing the Guidelines again. Mr. Hogestad suggested that Beaumont sketches, rather than detailed drawings, might be a good option in the conceptual stage. Chair Dunn pointed out that the information about placing functions for a new use in secondary or non-character defining interior spaces was in the old Guidelines (page 90), as was the information about hyphens and setbacks. Ms. Shuff said the Guidelines are subjective, and said that in the past, the hyphen has been interpreted as a step-back. Mr. Winner asked whether the width of the addition can exceed the width of the original house. Mr. Hogestad noted the six inch setback on south side. Ms. Shuff asked whether the Commission was saying that the addition has to be completely to the west. Chair Dunn said that ideally, all of the Guidelines would be met, and that the Applicant needs to make strong argument for not following the Guidelines, as they have done in ruling out the basement option. Mr. Winner asked whether saving the tree would be a strong argument, but Chair Dunn said since the tree is not historic, it could be removed. Ms. Simpson argued the tree was a character-defining feature of the back yard. Mr. Ernest read a portion of page 137 of the revised Guidelines about landscaping, and questioned whether the tree was historic or not. Ms. Simpson asked whether the City Forester had looked at the tree, and Mr. Winner replied that he had seen photos. Ms. Dunn said the tree was not identified in the designation as a defining historic characteristic. Mr. Hogestad said he didn’t think the tree has any character-defining significance. Mr. Winner argued the merits of the tree, but conceded it did not have character-defining significance. Ms. Shuff asked for a determination on whether they can extend further to the north in order to preserve the tree, or whether they must put all of the addition on the west, which would require removing the tree. Ms. Zink said the tree may be useful, but it is not historic. She said an addition on the north should be avoided, and added that the northwest corner of the house should be especially clear. Mr. Ernest doesn’t see a way to save the tree and also avoid a north addition. He will go along with the majority, but personally, he would save the tree based on page 137 of the Guidelines. Chair Dunn pointed out that the tree wasn’t mentioned in the designation. She went on to explain her view that a landscape feature would have 1.a Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: LPC September 20, 2017 Minutes - DRAFT (6014 : MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2017) DRAFT City of Fort Collins Page 5 September 20, 2017 to be a specific part of what defines the character of the property, and if that were the case, it would be mentioned in the designation. There was a discussion about what makes a tree a character-defining feature. Ms. Simpson mentioned Land Use Code Section 3.4.7 with regard to mature landscape. Mr. Hogestad said it must have some basis in preservation, not just personal preference. He referred to Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code which defines a major alteration as one that causes a loss of two or more aspects of integrity. He argued that the design is injured by the addition, and the setting are feeling are also impacted. He urged the Applicant to find a way to make the program work, but not on a primary elevation. Ms. Shuff confirmed that Mr. Hogestad feels the addition must be inset on both sides of the building. Mr. Ernest said that making sure the addition is compatible with the Standards is more important than preserving the tree. He also expressed his belief that the basement is off the table, acknowledging that they have made a case that it is not feasible. Ms. Simpson would like to hear the opinion of the City Forester about the health of the tree. She said it is important to distinguish between the original and the new, while keeping as much historic material as possible. She said it was okay to remove the tree, if the Applicant feels it’s necessary, but stated they also have a compelling argument for keeping the tree. Ms. Zink said that Land Use Code 3.4.7 applies to new development, and is not relevant to this discussion. She said it was unlikely that the Commission can tell the Applicant definitively what they should do, but whatever they decide, they need a very clear preservation argument to support it, based on the Standards and Guidelines. Chair Dunn said, while it would be great to save the tree, the best way to follow the Guidelines is to locate the addition on the west instead of the north. She would also like to see a hyphen and setbacks, as described in the Guidelines. Chair Dunn brought up the SHPO’s concerns about the skylight. She said it is pretty far back on the house, is flush with the roof, and increases energy efficiency. Mr. Hogestad thinks this skylight is minor. Ms. Zink added that if it fit between existing rafters, it would be reversible. Mr. Ernest and Ms. Simpson agreed that the skylight isn’t an issue. Chair Dunn addressed the fish scale shingles in back, saying they should probably pick a different style or pattern to differentiate them from the original. Mr. Hogestad added that the addition doesn’t have to mimic the house, which allows for some design freedom. Mr. Winner commented about the increase in design costs due to the revisions and lack of clarity, and expressed concerns about the process and how to move forward. He suggested having some training with the professionals who are on the list for the design assistance program. Mr. Hogestad again suggested Beaumont drawings. • OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Hogestad asked Staff to think about where there might be some trees that would be considered historically important or character-defining. Ms. Simpson pointed out that they should consider formal versus informal trees, as well as planted versus non-planted. Ms. Bzdek noted that what is included in the designations has evolved over time, and that they are now including more contributing features. She also mentioned that Forestry has information on historic trees. Ms. Zink suggested having a work session presentation from Forestry about trees. Mr. Ernest mentioned that someone had compiled a list of champion trees. Chair Dunn suggested they also consider how the period of significance relates to the trees or landscaping. Chair Dunn also asked for more information about skylights and sun tunnels. Ms. Bzdek said Staff would follow up on that. • ADJOURNMENT Chair Dunn adjourned the meeting at 7:41 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by Gretchen Schiager. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on __________. __________________________ Meg Dunn, Chair 1.a Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: LPC September 20, 2017 Minutes - DRAFT (6014 : MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2017) Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 1 STAFF REPORT October 18, 2017 Landmark Preservation Commission PROJECT NAME 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW STAFF Cassandra Bumgarner, Historic Preservation Planner PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for conceptual design review of The Harden House at 227 Wood Street, designated as a Fort Collins landmark in 1999. The proposed work includes demolition of an existing rear porch (undated, historic), rear addition that steps in six inches on both sides, addition of a skylight, and addition of a deck. The applicants have been before the LPC on August 16, 2017 and September 20, 2017. This a revised option based on feedback received from the Commission at those meetings. APPLICANT: Gordon Winner, property owner Heidi Shuff, architect OWNER: Gordon and Jody Winner RECOMMENDATION: N/A. The applicant is still in the conceptual design review phase and has not yet finalized plans and applied for a building permit. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND: The house located at 227 Wood Street, known as the Harden House, was constructed in 1904 and designated as an individual Fort Collins Landmark in 1999. In 2000, the previous owners received a landmark rehabilitation grant for $2,500 to restore the front porch back to the historic 1904 photo, replace non-original panes of glass in the lower sashes of windows with historic glass, stabilize windows with epoxy patching where needed, and repoint brick façade. This work was approved under the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, specifically under standards 2, 5, and 6. This is a continuation of the conceptual design review that began with the discussion at the August 16, 2017 LPC meeting. The applicant seeks feedback on the newly revised option based on Commission comments provided at previous LPC meetings. They have not yet fulfilled the requirements for final review, which include finalized sketches and plans and a plan of protection. The applicants will return at a later date for final design review to request a report of acceptability from the Commission. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY: The Harden House at 227 Wood Street is a Fort Collins example of early twentieth century vernacular residential architecture. This hipped box residence with a front gable, open porch is one of a row of three pressed brick houses, likely constructed by Dixon and Murphin Builders in 1903- 1904. The home includes character defining features such as the restored wooden front porch, sandstone foundation and sills, and decorative shingles in the front gable end. Known alterations of the property to date include: 2 Packet Pg. 9 Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 2  Possible addition of rear, covered porch/mudroom, undated, historic  Restoration of porch, windows, and repoint of brick façade in 2000 More detailed architectural and historical information can be found in the attached landmark nomination form. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK: The applicant is seeking design review feedback for the attached design. In this design, the rear, 1-story addition does not protrude on either side of the historic building. The rear addition has been set back from the historic corners of the original residence on each side. To the north, the design shows a setback of 1 foot 6 inches and on the south a 1 foot setback. The proposed addition is 16 feet long and 21 feet 6 inches wide. This design retains part of the historic back wall of the residence. Staff cannot determine the exact length of the preserved brick back wall from the design. On the rear façade, the applicant has shown that the ridge height of the rear gable will not be taller than the existing ridge height. They have indicated that the rear elevation will have a vent in the gable end and a different window configuration than shown; however, Staff is unsure of what the different window configuration will look like. This proposed design plan does not address the previously proposed skylight or rear deck. Staff is unclear if those options are still proposed. The applicants have provided a newly revised conceptual design for the LPC to review. The owner, Gordon Winner, has provided explanatory information about the design, which has been attached. REVIEW CRITERIA: Proposed changes to Fort Collins Landmarks are reviewed by the Landmark Preservation Commission under Chapter 14 of the Municipal Code. Section 14-48, “Report of Acceptability” states, “In determining the decision to be made concerning the issuance of a report of acceptability, the Commission shall consider the following criteria: (1) The effect of the proposed work upon the general historical and/or architectural character of the landmark or landmark district; (2) The architectural style, arrangement, texture and materials of existing and proposed improvements, and their relation to the sites, structures and objects in the district; (3) The effects of the proposed work in creating, changing or destroying the exterior characteristics of the site, structure or object upon which such work is to be done; (4) The effect of the proposed work upon the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of the landmark or landmark district; and (5) The extent to which the proposed work meets the standards of the city and the United States Secretary of the Interior then in effect for the preservation, reconstruction, restoration or rehabilitation of historic resources. The National Park Service defines rehabilitation as "the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural values." As stated in the definition, the treatment "rehabilitation" assumes that at least some repair or alteration of the historic building will be needed in order to provide for an efficient contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy materials, features or finishes that are important in defining the building's historic character. The proposed work would fall under the Secretary of the Interior’s Standard’s for Rehabilitation: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation: 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires 2 Packet Pg. 10 Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 3 replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Exterior Integrity Exterior integrity is the composite of seven (7) aspects or qualities, which convey a property’s identity for which it is significant. These seven aspects are: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure, and style of a property. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and open space. Materials are the physical elements that form a historic property. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans’ labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, or site. Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period or time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property’s historic character. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property’s historic character. EVALUATION: The Harden House is a designated Fort Collins landmark, and thus careful scrutiny is required for any proposed exterior changes that would affect the property’s ability to continue to convey its character and significance through its physical integrity. Additionally, recent feedback from the staff of History Colorado, our State Historic Preservation Office, indicates that our recent trends regarding treatment of additions to historic properties in Fort Collins is not in full compliance with their interpretation of the federal guidelines. Staff is currently consulting with them to provide more information to the Commission and the public that clarifies their expectations and that will ensure our protection and stewardship of designated properties is consistent with other communities in Colorado. In this regard, staff provided recent feedback from History Colorado for discussion at the September 13, 2017 LPC work session. Staff recommends that the Commission consider this feedback when providing comments to the applicant for the proposed work on The Harden House. As with all design reviews for designated landmarks, evaluation of the proposed work should be based on the revised “Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, & Reconstructing Historic Buildings,” published in 2017 by the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service’s Technical Preservation Services for guidance on interpreting the Standards for Rehabilitation. As the guidelines indicate, additions and alterations to historic properties should only be done when needed to retain functional use of a property to ensure continued use. The guiding document explains that “the Rehabilitation guidelines emphasize that new additions should be considered only after it is determined that meeting specific new needs cannot be achieved by altering non-character-defining interior spaces. If the use cannot be accommodated in this way, then an attached exterior addition may be considered.” Based on this guidance, applicants who wish to construct an addition to a designated landmark should provide the Landmark Preservation Commission with a detailed explanation of how the project is essential to the continued preservation and use of the property as well as information on why the program needs cannot be met through interior changes within the existing footprint. After this is established, the guidelines assert that “New additions should be designed and constructed so that the 2 Packet Pg. 11 Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 Page 4 character-defining features of the historic building, its site, and setting are not negatively impacted. Generally, a new addition should be subordinate to the historic building. A new addition should be compatible, but differentiated enough so that it is not confused as historic or original to the building. The same guidance applies to new construction so that it does not negatively impact the historic character of the building or its site.” The chapter on Rehabilitation has been attached to this staff report for reference. COMMISSION REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (OCTOBER 11 WORK SESSION): FOR THE APPLICANT: 1. Which direction are the stairs going in the addition? In the latest stair configuration, the top of the stairs is at the southeast, closest to the existing house as to allow support below for the original foundation wall in this area. The lower half of the stairs would then be to the west. 2. Can you confirm that the roof height of the rear addition? The roof height will actually be lower than the one shown on page 59 due to the increase in the setback from the original walls. We intend to keep the roof pitch parallel to the original roof, but the new section will be set in from the original hips with a valley on each side. Please note that since the setbacks are not identical on either side, the new ridge will be slightly offset to the north from center (as has been shown in several iterations of this addition concept). 3. In your submission, you discussed a different window configuration for your new design. What are your ideas for that window configuration? On the north elevation, the only window we propose adding will be in the stair well. We would like to maximize the natural light that passes through this area and into the basement. We intend to use a vertically oriented window that would maintain the same proportions as the other two larger windows on the north side of the house. We would like for this window to sit a little lower as it will be above the landing of the stairs. The original windows on the north side of the house are 2' 6" x 5' 6". Perhaps a larger window with the same proportions would allow the head heights to remain even across the north elevation. We are planning to only have one new window in the bathroom on the west wall. Since this will be in a shower, it will have a sill height that is higher than any of our other windows. It was suggested in a previous meeting that a square window, or possibly 2 square windows may offer the best configuration in this case. The small window that is in the original bathroom is separated from the claw foot tub and water from the shower by a curtain. The added bathroom will not have a tub, only a walk in shower. Our main concern here is that this window is able to sustain regular contact with water from the shower. We are open to suggestion on the configuration that will look most consistent with the design and the style of the house. At this time, staff has not received this additional information. The applicant will discuss the answers to these in their presentation to the LPC. ATTACHMENTS 1. 1999-06-18 Landmark Designation (PDF) 2. ca 2000 photos (PDF) 3. Additional Photographs (PDF) 4. Existing Plans (PDF) 5. Previous Options 2017-08-16 (PDF) 6. Previous Option 2017-09-20 (PDF) 7. New Design 2017-10-03 (PDF) 8. Memo from homeowner (PDF) 9. Standards for Rehabilitation (PDF) 10. Staff Presentation (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 12 2.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: 1999-06-18 Landmark Designation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 1999-06-18 Landmark Designation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 1999-06-18 Landmark Designation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 1999-06-18 Landmark Designation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 1999-06-18 Landmark Designation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: 1999-06-18 Landmark Designation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 2.b Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: ca 2000 photos (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.b Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: ca 2000 photos (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.c Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Additional Photographs (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL 2.c Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Additional Photographs (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.c Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Additional Photographs (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL 2.c Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Additional Photographs (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 2.c Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Additional Photographs (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL 2.c Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Additional Photographs (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL UP 15' - 0" 15' - 0" SIDE YARD SETBACK REAR YARD SETBACK FRONT YARD SETBACK SIDE YARD SETBACK 150' - 0" 5' - 0" 40' - 0" 5' - 0" 180' - 0" EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING SHED WOOD STREET 50' - 0" 10' - 0" 24' - 1" 15' - 11" 90' - 0" 90' - 0" EXISTING COOP 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado EXISTING CONDITIONS WINNER RESIDENCE 4.10.17 # 5%#.' Á ':+56+0)5+6'2.#0 2.d Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Existing Plans (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REF. DW D W UP LIVING ROOM FRONT PORCH BEDROOM 1 FAMILY ROOM KITCHEN BEDROOM 2 LAUNDRY BATH CLO. CLO. BACK PORCH 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado EXISTING CONDITIONS WINNER RESIDENCE 4.10.17 # 5%#.' Á ':+56+0)(+456(.1142.#0 2.d Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Existing Plans (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN WH UP CRAWL SPACE MECH./ STORAGE 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado EXISTING CONDITIONS WINNER RESIDENCE 4.10.17 # 5%#.' Á ':+56+0)$#5'/'062.#0 2.d Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Existing Plans (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado EXISTING CONDITIONS WINNER RESIDENCE 4.10.17 # 5%#.' Á ':+56+0)5176*'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á ':+56+0)'#56'.'8#6+10 2.d Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Existing Plans (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado EXISTING CONDITIONS WINNER RESIDENCE 4.10.17 # 5%#.' Á ':+56+0)0146*'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á ':+56+0)9'56'.'8#6+10 2.d Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Existing Plans (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REF. DW W UP D 1 A13 LIVING ROOM FRONT PORCH BEDROOM 1 FAMILY ROOM KITCHEN BEDROOM 2 BATH CLO. CLO. DINING ROOM 1' - 0" 23' - 0" 8' - 0" 2' - 1" 4' - 0" 4' - 6" 4' - 11 1/2" 9' - 6" 15' - 0" 40' - 3 1/2" 14' - 4 1/2" 3' - 6" 11' - 8" 1' - 0" 1' - 8" 22' - 0" 24' - 1" PANTRY 4' - 0" 14' - 6" LAUNDRY/ MUD ROOM BATH 31' - 0" 2 A13 10" 4' - 0 1/2" 8' - 3" 1' - 0" 12' - 0" 1' - 0" 13' - 9" 1' - 0" DECK 7' - 5 1/2" PROPOSED SKYLIGHT LOCATION (VERIFY W/ EXST. ROOF JOISTS) ROOF RIDGE ABOVE TV/MEDIA ROOF VALLEY ABOVE 2' - 1" 3' - 10 1/2" 1' - 6" 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&(+456(.1142.#0 1,496 SF (530 SF ADDITION) 2.e Packet Pg. 32 REF. DW UP W/D 1 A14 LIVING ROOM FRONT PORCH BEDROOM 1 FAMILY ROOM KITCHEN BEDROOM 2 BATH CLO. CLO. DINING ROOM 1' - 0" 23' - 0" 6' - 0" 2' - 1" 4' - 0" 4' - 6" 4' - 11 1/2" 9' - 6" 15' - 0" 40' - 3 1/2" 14' - 4 1/2" 3' - 6" 11' - 8" 1' - 0" 2' - 0" 20' - 0" 24' - 1" PANTRY 4' - 0" 14' - 6" 2 A14 10" 4' - 9 1/2" 8' - 3" 1' - 0" 12' - 0" 1' - 0" 13' - 9" 1' - 0" DECK PROPOSED SKYLIGHT LOCATION (VERIFY W/ EXST. ROOF JOISTS) ROOF RIDGE ABOVE TV/MEDIA ROOF VALLEY ABOVE 33' - 3 1/2" BATH MUD ROOM 1' - 9" LAUNDRY EXISTING 22" X 44" DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW TO BE REMOVED 7' - 2" WESTERN 7'-2" OF EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL TO BE COVERED BY NEW ADDITION TO NORTH 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE 8.01.17 # 5%#.' Á 1 A13 FUTURE LOFT ATTIC/ STORAGE EXISTING ATTIC 14' - 4" 2 A13 HATCH INDICATES AREA WITH CEILING HEIGHT OF 6'-8" OR GREATER NEW DOOR TO EXST. ATTIC POSSIBLE LOCATION OF BUILT-IN SHELVES (ABOVE EXST. CEILING JOISTS) POSSIBLE LOCATION OF BUILT-IN DRAWERS (ABOVE EXST. CEILING JOISTS) HIDDEN LINES INDICATE LOCATION OF FUTURE WALLS & DOORS FOR UPSTAIRS LOFT & CLOSET OPEN RAILING 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&5'%10&(.1142.#0 270 SF 2.e Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 1 A14 FUTURE LOFT ATTIC/ STORAGE EXISTING ATTIC 14' - 4" 2 A14 HATCH INDICATES AREA WITH CEILING HEIGHT OF 6'-8" OR GREATER NEW DOOR TO EXST. ATTIC POSSIBLE LOCATION OF BUILT-IN SHELVES (ABOVE EXST. CEILING JOISTS) POSSIBLE LOCATION OF BUILT-IN DRAWERS (ABOVE EXST. CEILING JOISTS) HIDDEN LINES INDICATE LOCATION OF FUTURE WALLS & DOORS FOR UPSTAIRS LOFT & CLOSET OPEN RAILING 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE 8.01.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&5'%10&(.1142.#0 275 SF 2.e Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - WH CRAWL MECH./ SPACE STORAGE 1 A13 STORAGE FRONT PORCH CRAWL SPACE NEW ACCESS TO EXST. BASEMENT CRAWL SPACE 3' - 2" 5' - 10" 15' - 0" 1' - 0" 23' - 0" 8' - 0" 1' - 8" 22' - 0" 2 A13 CRAWL SPACE ACCESS DOOR NEW SUMP PIT, EXACT LOCATION TBD IN FIELD HIDDEN LINES INDICATE LOCATION OF FUTURE WALLS & DOORS FOR BASEMENT BEDROOM & CLOSET CONC. FOUNDATION WALL TO 3'-0" AFF (FIELD VERIFY) W/ 4" CONC. SLAB ABOVE TO EXST. FOUNDATION WALL CONC. FOUNDATION WALL TO 5'-0" AFF (FIELD VERIFY) W/ 4" CONC. SLAB ABOVE TO EXST. FOUNDATION WALL 3' - 3 1/2" 1' - 8" 3' - 2" 4 1/2" 14' - 2 1/2" 3' - 2" 12' - 3 1/2" 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&$#5'/'062.#0 2.e Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - WH CRAWL MECH./ SPACE STORAGE 1 A14 STORAGE FRONT PORCH CRAWL SPACE NEW ACCESS TO EXST. BASEMENT 3' - 2" 5' - 10" 15' - 0" 1' - 0" 23' - 0" 6' - 0" 2' - 0" 20' - 0" 2 A14 CRAWL SPACE ACCESS DOOR NEW SUMP PIT, EXACT LOCATION TBD IN FIELD HIDDEN LINES INDICATE LOCATION OF FUTURE WALLS & DOORS FOR BASEMENT BEDROOM & CLOSET CONC. FOUNDATION WALL TO 3'-0" AFF (FIELD VERIFY) W/ 4" CONC. SLAB ABOVE TO EXST. FOUNDATION WALL CONC. FOUNDATION WALL TO 5'-0" AFF (FIELD VERIFY) W/ 4" CONC. SLAB ABOVE TO EXST. FOUNDATION WALL 3' - 3 1/2" 1' - 8" 3' - 2" 4 1/2" 14' - 2 1/2" 3' - 2" 12' - 3 1/2" CRAWL SPACE 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE 8.01.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&$#5'/'062.#0 345 SF 2.e Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 14' - 0" 1' - 0" 1'-0" ASSUMED PROPERTY LINE 5' - 0" 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&'#56'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&5176*'.'8#6+10 2.e Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 14' - 0" 1' - 0" 1'-0" ASSUMED PROPERTY LINE 5' - 0" NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW WOOD WINDOW- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW WOOD WINDOWS- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW STRUCTURAL WOOD BRACKETS & BEAM- PNT. NEW WOOD DECK- STN. & FIN. EXST. ASPHALT ROOFING REMAIN NEW 2X OVERFRAMING W/ ASPHALT ROOFING ON EXST. ROOF NEW KITCHEN SKYLIGHT IN EXST. ROOF 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE 8.01.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&'#56'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&5176*'.'8#6+10 2.e Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&0146*'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&9'56'.'8#6+10 2.e Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - HATCH INDICATES AREA OF EXISTING NORTH WALL TO BE COVERED BY PROPOSED ADDITION NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW WOOD WINDOWS- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW ROUNDED FISH SCALE SIDING TO MATCH EXST.- PNT. NEW WOOD EXTERIOR DOOR WITH HALF LITE- PNT. NEW 2X OVERFRAMING W/ ASPHALT ROOFING ON EXST. ROOF NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW WOOD WINDOWS- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW ROUNDED FISH SCALE SIDING TO MATCH EXST.- PNT. NEW WOOD FULL LITE FRENCH DOORS- PNT. NEW STRUCTURAL WOOD BRACKETS- PNT. NEW WOOD DECK- STN. & FIN. EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL BEYOND EXISTING ROOF BEYOND NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. 5 1/2" 9 1/2" HATCH INDICATES EXTENTS OF EXISTING MUD ROOM AT WEST ELEVATION TO BE DEMOLISHED 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE # 5%#.' Á 8.01.17 241215'&0146*'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&9'56'.'8#6+10 2.e Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á0146*'#56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á5176*'#56 2.e Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE 8.01.17 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á0146*'#56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á5176*'#56 2.e Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á0146*9'56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á5176*9'56 2.e Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE 8.01.17 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á0146*9'56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á5176*9'56 2.e Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - EL. FINISH FLOOR ELEV. 100' - 0" EL. EXIST. ROOF BRG. 110' - 0" EL. BASEMENT FLOOR ELEV. 92' - 7" EL. PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN 109' - 4 1/4" 5' - 3 3/32" EL. NEW BASEMENT FLOOR ELEV. 90' - 4 1/4" 8' - 5 1/2" 6' - 8" 3' - 6" 8' - 0" 8' - 9" 9' - 0" 11 3/4" 23' - 0" 2 A13 EL. FINISH FLOOR ELEV. 100' - 0" EL. EXIST. BASEMENT 92' - 9" EL. PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN 109' - 4 1/4" 1 A13 6' - 8" 6' - 8" 4' - 0" 4' - 11 3/8" 3' - 0" 2' - 9" 3' - 3" 4' - 5 1/2" 1' - 0" FIELD VERIFY 5' - 0" 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado OPTION D WINNER RESIDENCE 6.09.17 # 5%#.' Á #&&+6+100146*Á5176*$7+.&+0)5'%6+10 # 5%#.' Á #&&+6+10'#56Á9'565'%6+10 2.e Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - EL. FINISH FLOOR ELEV. 100' - 0" EL. EXIST. ROOF BRG. 110' - 0" EL. BASEMENT FLOOR ELEV. 92' - 7" EL. PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN 109' - 4 1/4" 4' - 11 11/32" EL. NEW BASEMENT FLOOR ELEV. 90' - 4 1/4" 8' - 5 1/2" 6' - 8" 3' - 6" 8' - 0" 8' - 9" 9' - 0" 11 3/4" 2 A14 EL. FINISH FLOOR ELEV. 100' - 0" EL. EXIST. BASEMENT 92' - 9" EL. PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN 109' - 4 1/4" 1 A14 6' - 8" 4' - 0" 4' - 11 3/8" 3' - 0" 2' - 9" 3' - 3" 4' - 2 1/2" 1' - 0" FIELD VERIFY 5' - 0" 8' - 0" 3' - 2" 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION WINNER RESIDENCE 8.01.17 # 5%#.' Á #&&+6+100146*Á5176*$7+.&+0)5'%6+10 # 5%#.' Á #&&+6+10'#56Á9'565'%6+10 2.e Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 15' - 0" 15' - 0" SIDE YARD SETBACK REAR YARD SETBACK FRONT YARD SETBACK SIDE YARD SETBACK 150' - 0" 5' - 0" 40' - 0" 5' - 0" 180' - 0" EXISTING HOUSE WOOD STREET 50' - 0" 90' - 0" 90' - 0" PROPOSED ADDITION 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&5+6'2.#0 2.f Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REF. DW D W UP LIVING ROOM FRONT PORCH BEDROOM 1 FAMILY ROOM KITCHEN BEDROOM 2 LAUNDRY BATH CLO. CLO. BACK PORCH EXISTING BACK PORCH FLOOR, WALLS, ROOF & STEPS TO BE DEMOLISHED 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' Á (+456(.114&'/1.+6+102.#0 2.f Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REF. DW W/D LIVING ROOM FRONT PORCH BEDROOM 1 FAMILY ROOM KITCHEN BEDROOM 2 BATH CLO. CLO. DINING ROOM 6" 22' - 0" 10' - 0" 2' - 1" 4' - 0" 4' - 6" 4' - 11 1/2" 9' - 6" 15' - 0" 40' - 3 1/2" 3' - 6" 11' - 4" 24' - 1" PANTRY 3' - 8" 14' - 6" 1' - 0" 12' - 0" 1' - 0" 18' - 0" 1' - 0" DECK PROPOSED SKYLIGHT LOCATION (VERIFY W/ EXST. ROOF JOISTS) ROOF RIDGE ABOVE TV/MEDIA ROOF VALLEY ABOVE 39' - 9 1/2" LAUNDRY/ BATH MUD ROOM 8 ' - 6" 2' - 6" 18' - 0" 5' - 6 1/2" 3' - 5" 3' - 10" 3' - 6" 2' - 0" PROPOSED SKYLIGHT LOCATION 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&(+456(.1142.#0 1,476 SF (510 SF ADDITION) 2.f Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - WH CRAWL MECH./ SPACE STORAGE STORAGE FRONT PORCH CRAWL SPACE NEW ACCESS TO EXST. BASEMENT 15' - 0" 6" 22' - 0" 10' - 0" 2' - 6" 15' - 6" CRAWL SPACE ACCESS DOOR NEW SUMP PIT, EXACT LOCATION TBD IN FIELD HIDDEN LINES INDICATE LOCATION OF FUTURE WALLS & DOORS FOR BASEMENT BEDROOM & CLOSET CONC. FOUNDATION WALL TO 3'-0" AFF (FIELD VERIFY) W/ 4" CONC. SLAB ABOVE TO EXST. FOUNDATION WALL CRAWL SPACE 8' - 6" 12' - 1 1/2" 18' - 0" 10' - 0 1/2" 3' - 10" 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&$#5'/'062.#0 330 375 SF 2.f Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 14' - 0" 1' - 0" 1'-0" ASSUMED PROPERTY LINE 5' - 0" NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW WOOD EXTERIOR DOOR WITH HALF LITE- PNT. NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW WOOD WINDOWS- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW STRUCTURAL WOOD BRACKETS & BEAM- PNT. NEW WOOD DECK- STN. & FIN. EXST. ASPHALT ROOFING REMAIN NEW 2X OVERFRAMING W/ ASPHALT ROOFING ON EXST. ROOF NEW KITCHEN SKYLIGHT IN EXST. ROOF 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&'#56'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&5176*'.'8#6+10 2.f Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW WOOD WINDOWS- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW 2X OVERFRAMING W/ ASPHALT ROOFING ON EXST. ROOF SKYLIGHT IN NEW ROOF OVER STAIRS TO BASEMENT NEW HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING- PNT. NEW WOOD WINDOWS- PNT. NEW ASPHALT ROOFING TO MATCH EXST. NEW C.I.P. CONC. FOUNDATION WALL- PNT. NEW ROUNDED FISH SCALE SIDING TO MATCH EXST.- PNT. NEW WOOD FULL LITE FRENCH DOORS- PNT. NEW STRUCTURAL WOOD BRACKETS- PNT. NEW WOOD DECK- STN. & FIN. EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL BEYOND EXISTING ROOF BEYOND 5" HATCH INDICATES EXTENTS OF EXISTING MUD ROOM AT WEST ELEVATION TO BE DEMOLISHED NEW ATTIC VENT 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE # 5%#.' Á 8.31.17 241215'&0146*'.'8#6+10 # 5%#.' Á 241215'&9'56'.'8#6+10 2.f Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á0146*'#56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á5176*'#56 2.f Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á0146*9'56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á5176*9'56 2.f Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 715 west moutain avenue fort collins, colorado 80521 phone: 970.231.1040 e-mail: heidishuff@gmail.com 227 Wood Street Fort Collins, Colorado REVISED OPTION 2 WINNER RESIDENCE 8.31.17 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á'#56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á0146*'#56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á5176*'#56 # 5%#.' &8+'9Á9'56 2.f Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Previous Option 2017-09-20 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 2.g Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: New Design 2017-10-03 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL NEW 2.g Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: New Design 2017-10-03 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL NEW 2.g Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: New Design 2017-10-03 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL NEW I am considering the rear facing elevation (West) as a non-primary elevation absent of character defining features (other than being the fourth and essential side of our rectangular home) As far as we know, this entire elevation has been covered, with the exception of 6" at either corner, for as long as any of our records indicate; however, we all seem to be in agreement that the shed porch is not significant nor was it intended to be preserved long term. I feel we have met the requests presented in each of the past meetings as well as the standards and the majority of the guidelines. The one that is providing great trouble for us is "hyphenating" this addition. I realize the Department of the Interior proposes this as a method of distinguishing the original from the new, but I would like to determine whether this is the only acceptable means of adding to a small historic home in Fort Collins. As you can see from the amended drawing, it would present some problems on the north side with the stair design. On the south, a "hyphen" would create wasted space in the footprint that we are trying to keep to a minimum. I also feel that it complicates the design of a simple rectangular addition added to a simple rectangular house. Gordon Winner sent this information to Staff on October 3, 2017. 2.h Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Memo from homeowner (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) NEW THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES WITH GUIDELINES FOR PRESERVING, REHABILITATING, RESTORING & RECONSTRUCTING HISTORIC BUILDINGS U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Technical Preservation Services 2.i Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION REHABILITATION STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION & GUIDELINES Rehabilitation FOR REHABILITATING HISTORIC BUILDINGS Rehabilitation is deﬁned as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. 75 2.i Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 76 Standards for Rehabilitation 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of dis- tinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that character- ize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic signiﬁcance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, ﬁnishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be diﬀerentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, fea- tures, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 2.i Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION GUIDELINES FOR REHABILITATING HISTORIC BUILDINGS INTRODUCTION In Rehabilitation, historic building materials and character-deﬁning features are protected and maintained as they are in the treatment Preservation. However, greater latitude is given in the Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings to replace extensively deteriorated, damaged, or miss- ing features using either the same material or compatible substi- tute materials. Of the four treatments, only Rehabilitation allows alterations and the construction of a new addition, if necessary for a continuing or new use for the historic building. Identify, Retain, and Preserve Historic Materials and Features The guidance for the treatment Rehabilitation begins with recom- mendations to identify the form and detailing of those architectural materials and features that are important in deﬁning the building’s historic character and which must be retained to preserve that char- acter. Therefore, guidance on identifying, retaining, and preserving character-deﬁning features is always given ﬁrst. Protect and Maintain Historic Materials and Features After identifying those materials and features that are important and must be retained in the process of Rehabilitation work, then protecting and maintaining them are addressed. Protection generally involves the least degree of intervention and is preparatory to other work. Protection includes the maintenance of historic materials and features as well as ensuring that the property is protected before and during rehabilitation work. A historic building undergoing rehabilita- tion will often require more extensive work. Thus, an overall evalua- tion of its physical condition should always begin at this level. Repair Historic Materials and Features Next, when the physical condition of character-deﬁning materials and features warrants additional work, repairing is recommended. Rehabilitation guidance for the repair of historic materials, such as masonry, again begins with the least degree of intervention possible. In rehabilitation, repairing also includes the limited replacement in kind or with a compatible substitute material of extensively dete- riorated or missing components of features when there are surviv- ing prototypes features that can be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. Although using the same kind of material is always the preferred option, a substitute material may be an accept- able alternative if the form, design, and scale, as well as the substi- tute material itself, can eﬀectively replicate the appearance of the remaining features. Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and Features Following repair in the hierarchy, Rehabilitation guidance is pro- vided for replacing an entire character-deﬁning feature with new material because the level of deterioration or damage of materials precludes repair. If the missing feature is character deﬁning or if it is critical to the survival of the building (e.g., a roof), it should be replaced to match the historic feature based on physical or his- INTRODUCTION 77 2.i Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 78 toric documentation of its form and detailing. As with repair, the preferred option is always replacement of the entire feature in kind (i.e., with the same material, such as wood for wood). However, when this is not feasible, a compatible substitute material that can reproduce the overall appearance of the historic material may be considered. It should be noted that, while the National Park Service guidelines recommend the replacement of an entire character-deﬁning feature that is extensively deteriorated, the guidelines never recommend removal and replacement with new material of a feature that could reasonably be repaired and, thus, preserved. Design for the Replacement of Missing Historic Features When an entire interior or exterior feature is missing, such as a porch, it no longer plays a role in physically deﬁning the historic character of the building unless it can be accurately recovered in form and detailing through the process of carefully documenting the historic appearance. If the feature is not critical to the survival of the building, allowing the building to remain without the feature is one option. But if the missing feature is important to the historic character of the building, its replacement is always recommended in the Rehabilitation guidelines as the ﬁrst, or preferred, course of action. If adequate documentary and physical evidence exists, the feature may be accurately reproduced. A second option in a rehabilitation treatment for replacing a missing feature, particularly when the available information about the feature is inadequate to permit an accurate reconstruction, is to design a new feature that is compatible with the overall historic character of the building. The new design should always take into account the size, scale, and material of the building itself and should be clearly diﬀerentiated from the authentic historic features. For properties that have changed over time, and where those changes have acquired signiﬁcance, reestablishing missing historic features generally should not be undertaken if the missing features did not coexist with the features currently on the building. Juxtaposing historic features that did not exist concurrently will result in a false sense of the building’s history. Alterations Some exterior and interior alterations to a historic building are generally needed as part of a Rehabilitation project to ensure its continued use, but it is most important that such alterations do not radically change, obscure, or destroy character-deﬁning spaces, materials, features, or ﬁnishes. Alterations may include changes to the site or setting, such as the selective removal of buildings or other features of the building site or setting that are intrusive, not character deﬁning, or outside the building’s period of signiﬁcance. Code-Required Work: Accessibility and Life Safety Sensitive solutions to meeting code requirements in a Rehabilitation project are an important part of protecting the historic character of the building. Work that must be done to meet accessibility and life-safety requirements must also be assessed for its potential impact on the historic building, its site, and setting. Resilience to Natural Hazards Resilience to natural hazards should be addressed as part of a Rehabilitation project. A historic building may have existing characteristics or features that help to address or minimize the impacts of natural hazards. These should always be used to best REHABILITATION Sustainability Sustainability should be addressed as part of a Rehabilitation proj- ect. Good preservation practice is often synonymous with sustain- ability. Existing energy-eﬃcient features should be retained and repaired. Only sustainability treatments should be considered that will have the least impact on the historic character of the building. The topic of sustainability is addressed in detail in The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines on Sustainability for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. New Exterior Additions and Related New Construction Rehabilitation is the only treatment that allows expanding a historic building by enlarging it with an addition. However, the Rehabilita- tion guidelines emphasize that new additions should be considered only after it is determined that meeting speciﬁc new needs cannot be achieved by altering non-character-deﬁning interior spaces. If the use cannot be accommodated in this way, then an attached exterior addition may be considered. New additions should be designed and constructed so that the character-deﬁning features of the historic building, its site, and setting are not negatively impacted. Generally, a new addition should be subordinate to the historic building. A new addition should be compatible, but diﬀerentiated enough so that it is not confused as historic or original to the building. The same guidance applies to new construction so that it does not negatively impact the historic character of the building or its site. Rehabilitation as a Treatment. When repair and replacement of deteriorated features are necessary; when alterations or additions to the property are planned for a new or continued use; and when its depiction at a particular time is not appropriate, Rehabilitation may be considered as a treatment. Prior to undertaking work, a documentation plan for Rehabilitation should be developed. INTRODUCTION 79 2.i Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MASONRY: STONE, BRICK, TERRA COTTA, CONCRETE, ADOBE, STUCCO, AND MORTAR RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining and preserving masonry features that are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the build- ing (such as walls, brackets, railings, cornices, window and door surrounds, steps, and columns) and decorative ornament and other details, such as tooling and bonding patterns, coatings, and color. Removing or substantially changing masonry features which are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. Replacing or rebuilding a major portion of exterior masonry walls that could be repaired, thereby destroying the historic integrity of the building. Applying paint or other coatings (such as stucco) to masonry that has been historically unpainted or uncoated to create a new appear- ance. Removing paint from historically-painted masonry. Protecting and maintaining masonry by ensuring that historic drainage features and systems that divert rainwater from masonry surfaces (such as roof overhangs, gutters, and downspouts) are intact and functioning properly. Failing to identify and treat the causes of masonry deterioration, such as leaking roofs and gutters or rising damp. Cleaning masonry only when necessary to halt deterioration or remove heavy soiling. Cleaning masonry surfaces when they are not heavily soiled to create a “like-new” appearance, thereby needlessly introducing chemicals or moisture into historic materials. Carrying out masonry cleaning tests when it has been determined Cleaning masonry surfaces without testing or without sufﬁcient time that cleaning is appropriate. Test areas should be examined for the testing results to be evaluated. to ensure that no damage has resulted and, ideally, monitored over a sufﬁcient period of time to allow long-range effects to be predicted. [1] An alkaline-based product is appropriate to use to clean historic marble because it will not damage the marble, which is acid sensitive. 80 MASONRY 2.i Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION [2] Mid-century modern building technology made possible the form of this parabola- shaped structure and its thin concrete shell construction. Built in 1961 as the lobby of the La Concha Motel in Las Vegas, it was designed by Paul Revere Williams, one of the ﬁrst prominent African-American architects. It was moved to a new location and rehabilitated to serve as the Neon Museum, and is often cited as an example of Googie architecture. Credit: Photographed with permission at The Neon Museum, Las Vegas, Nevada. MASONRY 81 2.i Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MASONRY: STONE, BRICK, TERRA COTTA, CONCRETE, ADOBE, STUCCO, AND MORTAR RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Cleaning soiled masonry surfaces with the gentlest method pos- sible, such as using low-pressure water and detergent and natural bristle or other soft-bristle brushes. Cleaning or removing paint from masonry surfaces using most abrasive methods (including sandblasting, other media blasting, or high-pressure water) which can damage the surface of the masonry and mortar joints. Using a cleaning or paint-removal method that involves water or liquid chemical solutions when there is any possibility of freezing temperatures. Cleaning with chemical products that will damage some types of masonry (such as using acid on limestone or marble), or failing to neutralize or rinse off chemical cleaners from masonry surfaces. [3] Not Recommended: The white ﬁlm on the upper corner of this historic brick row house is the result of using a scrub or slurry coating, rather than traditional repointing by hand, which is the recommended method. [4] Not Recommended: The quoins on the left side of the photo show that high-pressure abrasive blasting used to remove paint can damage even early 20th- century, hard-baked, textured brick and erode the mortar, whereas the same brick on the right, which was not abrasively cleaned, is undamaged. 82 MASONRY 2.i Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MASONRY: STONE, BRICK, TERRA COTTA, CONCRETE, ADOBE, STUCCO, AND MORTAR RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Using biodegradable or environmentally-safe cleaning or paint- removal products. Using paint-removal methods that employ a poultice to which paint adheres, when possible, to neatly and safely remove old lead paint. Using coatings that encapsulate lead paint, when possible, where the paint is not required to be removed to meet environmental regulations. Allowing only trained conservators to use abrasive or laser-clean- ing methods, when necessary, to clean hard-to-reach, highly- carved, or detailed decorative stone features. Removing damaged or deteriorated paint only to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g., hand scraping) prior to repainting. Removing paint that is ﬁrmly adhered to masonry surfaces, unless the building was unpainted historically and the paint can be removed without damaging the surface. Applying compatible paint coating systems to historically-painted masonry following proper surface preparation. Failing to follow manufacturers’ product and application instruc- tions when repainting masonry features. Repainting historically-painted masonry features with colors that are appropriate to the historic character of the building and district. Using paint colors on historically-painted masonry features that are not appropriate to the historic character of the building and district. Protecting adjacent materials when cleaning or removing paint from masonry features. Failing to protect adjacent materials when cleaning or removing paint from masonry features. Evaluating the overall condition of the masonry to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to masonry features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of masonry features. Repairing masonry by patching, splicing, consolidating, or other- wise reinforcing the masonry using recognized preservation meth- ods. Repair may include the limited replacement in kind or with a compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of masonry features when there are surviving prototypes, such as terra-cotta brackets or stone balusters. Removing masonry that could be stabilized, repaired, and con- served, or using untested consolidants and unskilled personnel, potentially causing further damage to historic materials. Replacing an entire masonry feature, such as a cornice or bal- ustrade, when repair of the masonry and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing components are feasible. MASONRY 83 2.i Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MASONRY: STONE, BRICK, TERRA COTTA, CONCRETE, ADOBE, STUCCO, AND MORTAR RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Repairing masonry walls and other masonry features by repoint- Removing non-deteriorated mortar from sound joints and then ing the mortar joints where there is evidence of deterioration, repointing the entire building to achieve a more uniform appear- such as disintegrating mortar, cracks in mortar joints, loose ance. bricks, or damaged plaster on the interior. Removing deteriorated lime mortar carefully by hand raking the joints to avoid damaging the masonry. Using power tools only on horizontal joints on brick masonry in conjunction with hand chiseling to remove hard mortar that is deteriorated or that is a non-historic material which is causing damage to the masonry units. Mechanical tools should be used only by skilled masons in limited circumstances and generally not on short, vertical joints in brick masonry. Allowing unskilled workers to use masonry saws or mechanical tools to remove deteriorated mortar from joints prior to repointing. Duplicating historic mortar joints in strength, composition, color, and texture when repointing is necessary. In some cases, a lime- based mortar may also be considered when repointing Portland cement mortar because it is more ﬂexible. Repointing masonry units with mortar of high Portland cement content (unless it is the content of the historic mortar). Using “surface grouting” or a “scrub” coating technique, such as a “sack rub” or “mortar washing,” to repoint exterior masonry units instead of traditional repointing methods. Repointing masonry units (other than concrete) with a synthetic caulking compound instead of mortar. Duplicating historic mortar joints in width and joint proﬁle when repointing is necessary. Changing the width or joint proﬁle when repointing. Repairing stucco by removing the damaged material and patching with new stucco that duplicates the old in strength, composition, color, and texture. Removing sound stucco or repairing with new stucco that is differ- ent in composition from the historic stucco. Patching stucco or concrete without removing the source of deterio- ration. Replacing deteriorated stucco with synthetic stucco, an exterior ﬁnish and insulation system (EFIS), or other non-traditional materi- als. 84 MASONRY 2.i Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MASONRY: STONE, BRICK, TERRA COTTA, CONCRETE, ADOBE, STUCCO, AND MORTAR RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Using mud plaster or a compatible lime-plaster adobe render, when appropriate, to repair adobe. Applying cement stucco, unless it already exists, to adobe. Sealing joints in concrete with appropriate ﬂexible sealants and backer rods, when necessary. Cutting damaged concrete back to remove the source of deterio- ration, such as corrosion on metal reinforcement bars. The new patch must be applied carefully so that it will bond satisfactorily with and match the historic concrete. Patching damaged concrete without removing the source of deterio- ration. [5] Rebars in the reinforced concrete ceiling have rusted, causing the concrete to spall. The rebars must be cleaned of rust before the concrete can be patched. [6] Some areas of the concrete brise soleil screen on this building constructed in 1967 are badly deteriorated. If the screen cannot be repaired, it may be replaced in kind or with a composite substitute material with the same appearance as the concrete. MASONRY 85 2.i Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 86 [7] (a) J.W. Knapp’s Department Store, built 1937-38, in Lansing, MI, was constructed with a proprietary material named “Maul Macotta” made of enameled steel and cast-in-place concrete panels. Prior to its rehabilitation, a building inspection revealed that, due to a ﬂaw in the original design and construction, the material was deteriorated beyond repair. The architects for the rehabilitation project devised a replacement system (b) consisting of enameled aluminum panels that matched the original colors (c). Photos and drawing (a-b): Quinn Evans Architects; Photo (c): James Haefner Photography. MASONRY 2.i Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MASONRY: STONE, BRICK, TERRA COTTA, CONCRETE, ADOBE, STUCCO, AND MORTAR RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Using a non-corrosive, stainless-steel anchoring system when replacing damaged stone, concrete, or terra-cotta units that have failed. Applying non-historic surface treatments, such as water-repellent coatings, to masonry only after repointing and only if masonry repairs have failed to arrest water penetration problems. Applying waterproof, water-repellent, or non-original historic coat- ings (such as stucco) to masonry as a substitute for repointing and masonry repairs. Applying permeable, anti-grafﬁti coatings to masonry when appropriate. Applying water-repellent or anti-grafﬁti coatings that change the historic appearance of the masonry or that may trap moisture if the coating is not sufﬁciently permeable. Replacing in kind an entire masonry feature that is too deterio- rated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or when the replacement can be based on historic documenta- tion. Examples can include large sections of a wall, a cornice, pier, or parapet. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. Removing a masonry feature that is unrepairable and not replacing it, or replacing it with a new feature that does not match. Using substitute material for the replacement that does not convey the same appearance of the surviving components of the masonry feature. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a replacement masonry feature, such as Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for a step or door pediment, when the historic feature is completely the missing masonry feature is based upon insufﬁcient physical or missing. It may be an accurate restoration based on documentary historic documentation, is not a compatible design, or because the and physical evidence, but only when the historic feature to be feature to be replaced did not coexist with the features currently on replaced coexisted with the features currently on the building. Or, the building. it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. Introducing a new masonry feature that is incompatible in size, scale, material, or color. MASONRY 87 2.i Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WOOD: CLAPBOARD, WEATHERBOARD, SHINGLES, AND OTHER FUNCTIONAL AND DECORATIVE ELEMENTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining and preserving wood features that are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building (such as siding, cornices, brackets, window and door surrounds, and steps) and their paints, ﬁnishes, and colors. Removing or substantially changing wood features which are impor- tant in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. Removing a major portion of the historic wood from a façade instead of repairing or replacing only the deteriorated wood, then reconstructing the façade with new material to achieve a uniform or “improved” appearance. Changing the type of ﬁnish, coating, or historic color of wood fea- tures, thereby diminishing the historic character of the exterior. Failing to renew failing paint or other coatings that are historic ﬁnishes. Stripping historically-painted surfaces to bare wood and applying a clear ﬁnish rather than repainting. Stripping paint or other coatings to reveal bare wood, thereby exposing historically-coated surfaces to the effects of accelerated weathering. Removing wood siding (clapboards) or other covering (such as stucco) from log structures that were covered historically, which changes their historic character and exposes the logs to accelerated deterioration. Protecting and maintaining wood features by ensuring that his- toric drainage features that divert rainwater from wood surfaces (such as roof overhangs, gutters, and downspouts) are intact and functioning properly. Failing to identify and treat the causes of wood deterioration, such as faulty ﬂashing, leaking gutters, cracks and holes in siding, dete- riorated caulking in joints and seams, plant material growing too close to wood surfaces, or insect or fungal infestation. 88 WOOD 2.i Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WOOD: CLAPBOARD, WEATHERBOARD, SHINGLES, AND OTHER FUNCTIONAL AND DECORATIVE ELEMENTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Applying chemical preservatives or paint to wood features that are subject to weathering, such as exposed beam ends, outrig- gers, or rafter tails. Using chemical preservatives (such as creosote) which, unless they were used historically, can change the appearance of wood features. Implementing an integrated pest management plan to identify appropriate preventive measures to guard against insect damage, such as installing termite guards, fumigating, and treating with chemicals. Retaining coatings (such as paint) that protect the wood from moisture and ultraviolet light. Paint removal should be consid- ered only when there is paint surface deterioration and as part of an overall maintenance program which involves repainting or applying other appropriate coatings. Stripping paint or other coatings from wood features without recoat- ing. [8] Rotted clapboards have been replaced selectively with new wood siding to match the originals. WOOD 89 2.i Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WOOD: CLAPBOARD, WEATHERBOARD, SHINGLES, AND OTHER FUNCTIONAL AND DECORATIVE ELEMENTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Removing damaged or deteriorated paint to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g., hand scraping and hand sanding) prior to repainting. Using potentially-damaging paint-removal methods on wood sur- faces, such as open-ﬂame torches, orbital sanders, abrasive meth- ods (including sandblasting, other media blasting, or high-pressure water), or caustic paint-removers. Removing paint that is ﬁrmly adhered to wood surfaces. Using chemical strippers primarily to supplement other methods such as hand scraping, hand sanding, and thermal devices. Failing to neutralize the wood thoroughly after using chemical paint removers so that new paint may not adhere. Removing paint from detachable wood features by soaking them in a caustic solution, which may roughen the surface, split the wood, or result in staining from residual acids leaching out of the wood. Using biodegradable or environmentally-safe cleaning or paint- removal products. Using paint-removal methods that employ a poultice to which paint adheres, when possible, to neatly and safely remove old lead paint. Using thermal devices (such as infrared heaters) carefully to remove paint when it is so deteriorated that total removal is nec- essary prior to repainting. Using a thermal device to remove paint from wood features without ﬁrst checking for and removing any ﬂammable debris behind them. Using thermal devices without limiting the amount of time the wood feature is exposed to heat. Using coatings that encapsulate lead paint, when possible, where the paint is not required to be removed to meet environmental regulations. Applying compatible paint coating systems to historically-painted wood following proper surface preparation. Failing to follow manufacturers’ product and application instruc- tions when repainting wood features. Repainting historically-painted wood features with colors that are appropriate to the building and district. Using paint colors on historically-painted wood features that are not appropriate to the building or district. 90 WOOD 2.i Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WOOD: CLAPBOARD, WEATHERBOARD, SHINGLES, AND OTHER FUNCTIONAL AND DECORATIVE ELEMENTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Protecting adjacent materials when working on other wood features. Failing to protect adjacent materials when working on wood fea- tures. Evaluating the overall condition of the wood to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to wood features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of wood features. [9] Smooth-surfaced cementitious siding (left) may be used to replace deteriorated wood siding only on secondary elevations that have minimal visibility. [10] Not Recommended: Cementitious siding with a raised wood-grain texture is not an appropriate material to replace historic wood siding, which has a smooth surface when painted. WOOD 91 2.i Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WOOD: CLAPBOARD, WEATHERBOARD, SHINGLES, AND OTHER FUNCTIONAL AND DECORATIVE ELEMENTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Repairing wood by patching, splicing, consolidating, or otherwise Removing wood that could be stabilized, repaired, and conserved, reinforcing the wood using recognized conservation methods. or using untested consolidants and unskilled personnel, potentially Repair may include the limited replacement in kind or with a causing further damage to historic materials. compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated or missing components of wood features when there are surviving Replacing an entire wood feature, such as a cornice or balustrade, prototypes, such as brackets, molding, or sections of siding. when repair of the wood and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing components is feasible. Replacing in kind an entire wood feature that is too deterio- Removing a wood feature that is unrepairable and not replacing it, rated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) or replacing it with a new feature that does not match. using physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or when the replacement can be based on historic documentation. Using substitute material for the replacement that does not convey Examples of such wood features include a cornice, entablature, the same appearance of the surviving components of the wood or a balustrade. If using wood is not feasible, then a compatible feature. substitute material may be considered. Replacing a deteriorated wood feature or wood siding on a pri- mary or other highly-visible elevation with a new matching wood feature. Replacing a deteriorated wood feature or wood siding on a primary or other highly-visible elevation with a composite substitute mate- rial. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a replacement masonry feature, such as Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for a step or door pediment, when the historic feature is completely the missing masonry feature is based upon insufﬁcient physical or missing. It may be an accurate restoration based on documentary historic documentation, is not a compatible design, or because the and physical evidence, but only when the historic feature to be feature to be replaced did not coexist with the features currently on replaced coexisted with the features currently on the building. Or, the building. it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. Introducing a new wood feature that is incompatible in size, scale, material, or color. 92 WOOD 2.i Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION METALS: WROUGHT AND CAST IRON, STEEL, PRESSED METAL, TERNEPLATE, COPPER, ALUMINUM, AND ZINC RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving metal features that are Removing or substantially changing metal features which are impor- important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building tant in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building so that, (such as columns, capitals, pilasters, spandrel panels, or stair- as a result, the character is diminished. ways) and their paints, ﬁnishes, and colors. The type of metal should be identiﬁed prior to work because each metal has its own Removing a major portion of the historic metal from a façade properties and may require a different treatment. instead of repairing or replacing only the deteriorated metal, then reconstructing the façade with new material to achieve a uniform or “improved” appearance. Protecting and maintaining metals from corrosion by providing proper drainage so that water does not stand on ﬂat, horizontal surfaces or accumulate in curved decorative features. Failing to identify and treat the causes of corrosion, such as mois- ture from leaking roofs or gutters. Placing incompatible metals together without providing an appropri- ate separation material. Such incompatibility can result in galvanic corrosion of the less noble metal (e.g., copper will corrode cast iron, steel, tin, and aluminum). Cleaning metals when necessary to remove corrosion prior to repainting or applying appropriate protective coatings. Leaving metals that must be protected from corrosion uncoated after cleaning. [11] The stainless steel doors at the entrance to this Art Deco apartment building are important in deﬁning its historic character and should be retained in place. METALS 93 2.i Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION METALS: WROUGHT AND CAST IRON, STEEL, PRESSED METAL, TERNEPLATE, COPPER, ALUMINUM, AND ZINC RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying the particular type of metal prior to any cleaning procedure and then testing to ensure that the gentlest cleaning method possible is selected; or, alternatively, determining that cleaning is inappropriate for the particular metal. Using cleaning methods which alter or damage the color, texture, or ﬁnish of the metal, or cleaning when it is inappropriate for the particular metal. Removing the patina from historic metals. The patina may be a protective layer on some metals (such as bronze or copper) as well as a distinctive ﬁnish. Using non-corrosive chemical methods to clean soft metals (such Cleaning soft metals (such as lead, tinplate, terneplate, copper, and as lead, tinplate, terneplate, copper, and zinc) whose ﬁnishes can zinc) with abrasive methods (including sandblasting, other abrasive be easily damaged by abrasive methods. media, or high-pressure water) which will damage the surface of the metal. Using the least abrasive cleaning method for hard metals (such Using high-pressure abrasive techniques (including sandblasting, as cast iron, wrought iron, and steel) to remove paint buildup and other media blasting, or high-pressure water) without ﬁrst trying corrosion. If hand scraping and wire brushing have proven inef- gentler cleaning methods prior to cleaning cast iron, wrought iron, fective, low-pressure abrasive methods may be used as long as or steel. they do not abrade or damage the surface. Applying appropriate paint or other coatings to historically-coated metals after cleaning to protect them from corrosion. Applying paint or other coatings to metals (such as copper, bronze or stainless steel) if they were not coated historically, unless a coat- ing is necessary for maintenance. Repainting historically-painted metal features with colors that are appropriate to the building and district. Using paint colors on historically-painted metal features that are not appropriate to the building or district. Applying an appropriate protective coating (such as lacquer or wax) to a metal feature that was historically unpainted, such as a bronze door, which is subject to heavy use. 94 METALS 2.i Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION METALS: WROUGHT AND CAST IRON, STEEL, PRESSED METAL, TERNEPLATE, COPPER, ALUMINUM, AND ZINC RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Protecting adjacent materials when cleaning or removing paint from metal features. Failing to protect adjacent materials when working on metal fea- tures. Evaluating the overall condition of metals to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to metal features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of metal features. [12] This historic steel window has been cleaned, repaired, and primed in preparation for painting and reglazing. [13] The gold-colored, anodized aluminum geodesic dome of the former Citizen’s State Bank in Oklahoma City, OK, built in 1958 and designed by Robert Roloff, makes this a distinctive mid- 20th century building. METALS 95 2.i Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 96 [14] Interior cast-iron columns have been cleaned and repainted as part of the rehabilitation of this historic market building for continuing use. [15] New enameled-metal panels were replicated to replace the original panels, which were too deteriorated to repair, when the storefront of this early 1950s building was recreated. METALS 2.i Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION METALS: WROUGHT AND CAST IRON, STEEL, PRESSED METAL, TERNEPLATE, COPPER, ALUMINUM, AND ZINC RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Repairing metal by reinforcing the metal using recognized pres- ervation methods. Repair may include the limited replacement in kind or with a compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated or missing components of features when there are surviving prototypes, such as column capitals or bases, store- fronts, railings and steps, or window hoods. Removing metals that could be stabilized, repaired, and conserved, or using improper repair techniques, or unskilled personnel, poten- tially causing further damage to historic materials. Replacing in kind an entire metal feature that is too deteriorated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or when the replacement can be based on historic documentation. Examples of such a feature could include cast-iron porch steps or steel-sash windows. If using the same kind of material is not fea- sible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. Replacing an entire metal feature, such as a column or balustrade, when repair of the metal and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing components are feasible. Removing a metal feature that is unrepairable and not replacing it, or replacing it with a new metal feature that does not match. Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not convey the same appearance of the surviving components of the metal feature or that is physically or chemically incompatible. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a replacement metal feature, such as a Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for the metal cornice or cast-iron column, when the historic feature is missing metal feature is based upon insufﬁcient physical or historic completely missing. It may be an accurate restoration based on documentation, is not a compatible design, or because the feature documentary and physical evidence, but only when the historic to be replaced did not coexist with the features currently on the feature to be replaced coexisted with the features currently on building. the building. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. Introducing a new metal feature that is incompatible in size, scale, material, or color. METALS 97 2.i Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION ROOFS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving roofs and their functional and decorative features that are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building. The form of the roof (gable, hipped, gambrel, ﬂat, or mansard) is signiﬁcant, as are its deco- rative and functional features (such as cupolas, cresting, para- pets, monitors, chimneys, weather vanes, dormers, ridge tiles, and snow guards), rooﬁng material (such as slate, wood, clay tile, metal, roll rooﬁng, or asphalt shingles), and size, color, and patterning. Removing or substantially changing roofs which are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. Removing a major portion of the historic roof or rooﬁng material that is repairable, then rebuilding it with new material to achieve a more uniform or “improved” appearance. Changing the conﬁguration or shape of a roof by adding highly vis- ible new features (such as dormer windows, vents, skylights, or a penthouse). Stripping the roof of sound historic material, such as slate, clay tile, wood, or metal. Protecting and maintaining a roof by cleaning gutters and Failing to clean and maintain gutters and downspouts properly so downspouts and replacing deteriorated ﬂashing. Roof sheathing that water and debris collect and cause damage to roof features, should also be checked for indications of moisture due to leaks or sheathing, and the underlying roof structure. condensation. Providing adequate anchorage for rooﬁng material to guard against wind damage and moisture penetration. Allowing ﬂashing, caps, and exposed fasteners to corrode, which accelerates deterioration of the roof. Protecting a leaking roof with a temporary waterproof membrane with a synthetic underlayment, roll rooﬁng, plywood, or a tarpau- lin until it can be repaired. Leaving a leaking roof unprotected so that accelerated deteriora- tion of historic building materials (such as masonry, wood, plaster, paint, and structural members) occurs. Repainting a rooﬁng material that requires a protective coating and was painted historically (such as a terneplate metal roof or gutters) as part of regularly-scheduled maintenance. Failing to repaint a rooﬁng material that requires a protective coating and was painted historically as part of regularly-scheduled maintenance. Applying compatible paint coating systems to historically-painted rooﬁng materials following proper surface preparation. Applying paint or other coatings to rooﬁng material if they were not coated historically. Protecting a roof covering when working on other roof features. Failing to protect roof coverings when working on other roof features. Evaluating the overall condition of the roof and roof features to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to roof features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of roof features. 98 ROOFS 2.i Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION ROOFS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Repairing a roof by ensuring that the existing historic or compat- Replacing an entire roof feature when repair of the historic roof- ible non-historic roof covering is sound and waterproof. Repair ing materials and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing may include the limited replacement in kind or with a compatible components are feasible. substitute material of missing materials (such as wood shingles, slates, or tiles) on a main roof, as well as those extensively deteriorated or missing components of features when there are surviving prototypes, such as ridge tiles, dormer rooﬁng, or roof monitors. Using corrosion-resistant roof fasteners (e.g., nails and clips) to repair a roof to help extend its longevity. [16] The deteriorated asphalt shingles of this porch roof are being replaced in kind with matching shingles. ROOFS 99 2.i Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION ROOFS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Replacing in kind an entire roof covering or feature that is too Removing a feature of the roof that is unrepairable and not replac- deteriorated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still ing it, or replacing it with a new roof feature that does not match. evident) using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or when the replacement can be based on historic Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not documentation. Examples of such a feature could include a large convey the same appearance of the roof covering or the surviving section of rooﬁng, a dormer, or a chimney. If using the same kind components of the roof feature or that is physically or chemically of material is not feasible, then a compatible substitute material incompatible. may be considered. Replacing only missing or damaged rooﬁng tiles or slates rather than replacing the entire roof covering. Failing to reuse intact slate or tile in good condition when only the rooﬁng substrate or fasteners need replacement. Replacing an incompatible roof covering or any deteriorated non- historic roof covering with historically-accurate rooﬁng material, if known, or another material that is compatible with the historic character of the building. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new roof covering for a missing roof or Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for the a new feature, such as a dormer or a monitor, when the historic missing roof feature is based upon insufﬁcient physical or historic feature is completely missing. It may be an accurate restoration documentation, is not a compatible design, or because the feature based on documentary and physical evidence, but only when to be replaced did not coexist with the features currently on the the historic feature to be replaced coexisted with the features building. currently on the building. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic Introducing a new roof feature that is incompatible in size, scale, building. material, or color. 100 ROOFS 2.i Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION ROOFS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Alterations and Additions for a New Use Installing mechanical and service equipment on the roof (such as heating and air-conditioning units, elevator housing, or solar panels) when required for a new use so that they are inconspicu- ous on the site and from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-deﬁning historic features. Installing roof-top mechanical or service equipment so that it dam- ages or obscures character-deﬁning roof features or is conspicuous on the site or from the public right-of-way. Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or ter- races, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continu- ing use so that they are inconspicuous and minimally visible on the site and from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-deﬁning historic features. Changing a character-deﬁning roof form, or damaging or destroying character-deﬁning rooﬁng material as a result of an incompatible rooftop addition or improperly-installed or highly-visible mechanical equipment. Installing a green roof or other roof landscaping, railings, or furnishings that are not visible on the site or from the public right-of-way and do not damage the roof structure. Installing a green roof or other roof landscaping, railings, or furnish- ings that are visible on the site and from the public right-of-way. [17] New wood elements have been used selectively to replace rotted wood on the underside of the roof in this historic warehouse. ROOFS 101 2.i Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WINDOWS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving windows and their func- Removing or substantially changing windows or window features tional and decorative features that are important to the overall which are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the character of the building. The window material and how the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. window operates (e.g., double hung, casement, awning, or hopper) are signiﬁcant, as are its components (including sash, Changing the appearance of windows that contribute to the historic muntins, ogee lugs, glazing, pane conﬁguration, sills, mullions, character of the building by replacing materials, ﬁnishes, or colors casings, or brick molds) and related features, such as shutters. which noticeably change the sash, depth of the reveal, and muntin conﬁgurations; the reﬂectivity and color of the glazing; or the appearance of the frame. Obscuring historic wood window trim with metal or other material. Replacing windows solely because of peeling paint, broken glass, stuck sash, or high air inﬁltration. These conditions, in themselves, do not indicate that windows are beyond repair. Protecting and maintaining the wood or metal which comprises Failing to protect and maintain window materials on a cyclical basis the window jamb, sash, and trim through appropriate treatments, so that deterioration of the window results. such as cleaning, paint removal, and reapplication of protective coating systems. Protecting windows against vandalism before work begins by covering them and by installing alarm systems that are keyed into local protection agencies. Leaving windows unprotected and subject to vandalism before work begins, thereby also allowing the interior to be damaged if it can be accessed through unprotected windows. Making windows weathertight by recaulking gaps in ﬁxed joints and replacing or installing weatherstripping. Protecting windows from chemical cleaners, paint, or abrasion during work on the exterior of the building. Failing to protect historic windows from chemical cleaners, paint, or abrasion when work is being done on the exterior of the building. Protecting and retaining historic glass when replacing putty or repairing other components of the window. Failing to protect the historic glass when making window repairs. 102 WINDOWS 2.i Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WINDOWS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Sustaining the historic operability of windows by lubricating friction points and replacing broken components of the operat- ing system (such as hinges, latches, sash chains or cords) and replacing deteriorated gaskets or insulating units. Failing to maintain windows and window components so that win- dows are inoperable, or sealing operable sash permanently. Failing to repair and reuse window hardware such as sash lifts, latches, and locks. Adding storm windows with a matching or a one-over-one pane conﬁguration that will not obscure the characteristics of the his- toric windows. Storm windows improve energy efﬁciency and are especially beneﬁcial when installed over wood windows because they also protect them from accelerated deterioration. Adding interior storm windows as an alternative to exterior storm windows when appropriate. [18] The historic metal storm windows in this 1920s ofﬁce building were retained and repaired during the rehabilitation project. [19] Installing a mockup of a proposed replacement window can be helpful to evaluate how well the new windows will match the historic windows that are missing or too deteriorated to repair. WINDOWS 103 2.i Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 104 [20 a-d] The original steel windows in this industrial building were successfully repaired as part of the rehabilitation project (left). WINDOWS 2.i Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WINDOWS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Installing sash locks, window guards, removable storm windows, and other reversible treatments to meet safety, security, or energy conservation requirements. Evaluating the overall condition of the windows to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to windows and window features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of window features. Repairing window frames and sash by patching, splicing, consoli- Removing window features that could be stabilized, repaired, or dating, or otherwise reinforcing them using recognized preserva- conserved using untested consolidants, improper repair techniques, tion methods. Repair may include the limited replacement in or unskilled personnel, potentially causing further damage to the kind or with a compatible substitute material of those extensively historic materials. deteriorated, broken, or missing components of features when there are surviving prototypes, such as sash, sills, hardware, or Replacing an entire window when repair of the window and limited shutters. replacement of deteriorated or missing components are feasible. Removing glazing putty that has failed and applying new putty; or, if glass is broken, carefully removing all putty, replacing the glass, and reputtying. Installing new glass to replace broken glass which has the same visual characteristics as the historic glass. Replacing in kind an entire window that is too deteriorated to Removing a character-deﬁning window that is unrepairable or is not repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) using needed for the new use and blocking up the opening, or replacing it the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or with a new window that does not match. when the replacement can be based on historic documentation. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a compat- Using substitute material for the replacement that does not convey ible substitute material may be considered. the same appearance of the surviving components of the window or that is physically incompatible. WINDOWS 105 2.i Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WINDOWS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED [21] The windows on the lower ﬂoor, which were too deteriorated to repair, were replaced with new steel windows matching the upper-ﬂoor historic windows that were retained. Modifying a historic single-glazed sash to accommodate insulated glass when it will not jeopardize the soundness of the sash or signiﬁcantly alter its appearance. Modifying a historic single-glazed sash to accommodate insulated glass when it will jeopardize the soundness of the sash or signiﬁ- cantly alter its appearance. Using low-e glass with the least visible tint in new or replacement windows. Using low-e glass with a dark tint in new or replacement windows, thereby negatively impacting the historic character of the building. Using window grids rather than true divided lights on windows on Using window grids rather than true divided lights on windows in the upper ﬂoors of high-rise buildings if they will not be notice- low-rise buildings or on lower ﬂoors of high-rise buildings where able. they will be noticeable, resulting in a change to the historic charac- ter of the building. Ensuring that spacer bars in between double panes of glass are the same color as the window sash. Using spacer bars in between double panes of glass that are not the same color as the window sash. Replacing all of the components in a glazing system if they have failed because of faulty design or materials that have deteriorated with new material that will improve the window performance without noticeably changing the historic appearance. Replacing all of the components in a glazing system with new mate- rial that will noticeably change the historic appearance. Replacing incompatible, non-historic windows with new windows that are compatible with the historic character of the building; or reinstating windows in openings that have been ﬁlled in. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new window or its components, such Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for the as frames, sash, and glazing, when the historic feature is com- missing window is based upon insufﬁcient physical or historic docu- pletely missing. It may be an accurate restoration based on mentation, is not a compatible design, or because the feature to be documentary and physical evidence, but only when the historic replaced did not coexist with the features currently on the building. feature to be replaced coexisted with the features currently on the building. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with Installing replacement windows made from other materials that are the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. not the same as the material of the original windows if they would have a noticeably different appearance from the remaining historic windows. 106 WINDOWS 2.i Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION (a) (b) (c) [22] Not Recommended: (a-b) The original wood windows in this late-19th-century building, which were highly decorative, could likely have been repaired and retained. (c) Instead, they were replaced with new windows that do not match the detailing of the historic windows and, therefore, do not meet the Standards (above). (b) WINDOWS 107 2.i Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 108 [23] (a)This deteriorated historic wood window was repaired and retained (b) in this rehabilitation project. WINDOWS 2.i Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION WINDOWS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Alterations and Additions for a New Use Adding new window openings on rear or other secondary, less- visible elevations, if required by a new use. The new openings and the windows in them should be compatible with the overall design of the building but, in most cases, not duplicate the historic fenestration. Changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows on primary or highly-visible elevations which will alter the historic character of the building. Cutting new openings on character-deﬁning elevations or cutting new openings that damage or destroy signiﬁcant features. Adding balconies at existing window openings or new window open- ings on primary or other highly-visible elevations where balconies never existed and, therefore, would be incompatible with the his- toric character of the building. Replacing windows that are too deteriorated to repair using the Replacing a window that contributes to the historic character of same sash and pane conﬁguration, but with new windows that the building with a new window that is different in design (such as operate differently, if necessary, to accommodate a new use. glass divisions or muntin proﬁles), dimensions, materials (wood, Any change must have minimal visual impact. Examples could metal, or glass), ﬁnish or color, or location that will have a notice- include replacing hopper or awning windows with casement ably different appearance from the historic windows, which may windows, or adding a realigned and enlarged operable portion of negatively impact the character of the building. industrial steel windows to meet life-safety codes. Installing impact-resistant glazing, when necessary for security, so that it is compatible with the historic windows and does not damage them or negatively impact their character. Installing impact-resistant glazing, when necessary for security, that is incompatible with the historic windows and that damages them or negatively impacts their character. Using compatible window treatments (such as frosted glass, Removing a character-deﬁning window to conceal mechanical appropriate shades or blinds, or shutters) to retain the historic equipment or to provide privacy for a new use of the building by character of the building when it is necessary to conceal mechan- blocking up the opening. ical equipment, for example, that the new use requires be placed in a location behind a window or windows on a primary or highly- visible elevation. WINDOWS 109 2.i Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION ENTRANCES AND PORCHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED [24] Rotted boards in the beaded-board porch ceiling are being replaced with new matching beaded board. Identifying, retaining, and preserving entrances and porches and their functional and decorative features that are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building. The materi- als themselves (including masonry, wood, and metal) are signiﬁ- cant, as are their features, such as doors, transoms, pilasters, columns, balustrades, stairs, roofs, and projecting canopies. Removing or substantially changing entrances and porches which are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the build- ing so that, as a result, the character is diminished. Cutting new entrances on a primary façade. Altering utilitarian or service entrances so they compete visually with the historic primary entrance; increasing their size so that they appear signiﬁcantly more important; or adding decorative details that cannot be documented to the building or are incompatible with the building’s historic character. Retaining a historic entrance or porch even though it will no longer be used because of a change in the building’s function. Removing a historic entrance or porch that will no longer be required for the building’s new use. Protecting and maintaining the masonry, wood, and metals which comprise entrances and porches through appropriate surface treatments, such as cleaning, paint removal, and reapplication of protective coating systems. Failing to protect and maintain entrance and porch materials on a cyclical basis so that deterioration of entrances and porches results. Protecting entrances and porches against arson and vandalism before work begins by covering them and by installing alarm systems keyed into local protection agencies. Leaving entrances and porches unprotected and subject to vandal- ism before work begins, thereby also allowing the interior to be damaged if it can be accessed through unprotected entrances. Protecting entrance and porch features when working on other features of the building. Failing to protect materials and features when working on other features of the building. Evaluating the overall condition of entrances and porches to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to entrance and porch features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of entrance and porch features. Repairing entrances and porches by patching, splicing, consoli- Removing entrances and porches that could be stabilized, repaired, dating, and otherwise reinforcing them using recognized preser- and conserved, or using untested consolidants, improper repair vation methods. Repair may include the limited replacement in techniques, or unskilled personnel, potentially causing further kind or with a compatible substitute material of those extensively damage to historic materials. deteriorated features or missing components of features when there are surviving prototypes, such as balustrades, columns, and Replacing an entire entrance or porch feature when repair of the stairs. feature and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing compo- nents are feasible. 110 ENTRANCES AND PORCHES 2.i Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION ENTRANCES AND PORCHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Replacing in kind an entire entrance or porch that is too deterio- Removing an entrance or porch that is unrepairable and not replac- rated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) ing it, or replacing it with a new entrance or porch that does not using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature match. or when the replacement can be based on historic documenta- tion. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not compatible substitute material may be considered. convey the same appearance of the surviving components of entrance or porch features or that is physically incompatible. [25] The new inﬁll designs for the garage door openings in this commercial building (a) converted for restaurant use and in this mill building (b) rehabilitated for residential use are compatible with the historic character of the buildings. ENTRANCES AND PORCHES 111 2.i Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION ENTRANCES AND PORCHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new entrance or porch when the Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for historic feature is completely missing or has previously been the missing entrance or porch is based upon insufﬁcient physical or replaced by one that is incompatible. It may be an accurate res- historic documentation, is not a compatible design, or because the toration based on documentary and physical evidence, but only feature to be replaced did not coexist with the features currently on when the historic entrance or porch to be replaced coexisted with the building. the features currently on the building. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. Alterations and Additions for a New Use Enclosing historic porches on secondary elevations only, when Enclosing porches in a manner that results in a diminution or loss required by a new use, in a manner that preserves the historic of historic character by using solid materials rather than clear glaz- character of the building (e.g., using large sheets of glass and ing, or by placing the enclosure in front of, rather than behind, the recessing the enclosure wall behind existing posts and balus- historic features. trades). Designing and constructing additional entrances or porches on secondary elevations when required for the new use in a manner that preserves the historic character of the building (i.e., ensuring that the new entrance or porch is clearly subordinate to historic primary entrances or porches). Constructing secondary or service entrances and porches that are incompatible in size and scale or detailing with the historic building or that obscure, damage, or destroy character-deﬁning features. [26] Not Recommended: Installing a screened enclosure is never recommended on a front or otherwise prominent historic porch. In limited instances, it may be possible to add screening on a porch at the rear or on a secondary façade; however, the enclosure should match the color of the porch and be placed behind columns and railings so that it does not obscure these features. 112 ENTRANCES AND PORCHES 2.i Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STOREFRONTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving storefronts and their func- Removing or substantially changing storefronts and their features tional and decorative features that are important in deﬁning the which are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the overall historic character of the building. The storefront materials building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. (including wood, masonry, metals, ceramic tile, clear glass, and pigmented structural glass) and the conﬁguration of the store- Changing the storefront so that it has a residential rather than com- front are signiﬁcant, as are features, such as display windows, mercial appearance. base panels, bulkheads, signs, doors, transoms, kick plates, corner posts, piers, and entablatures. The removal of inappropri- Introducing features from an earlier period that are not compatible ate, non-historic cladding, false mansard roofs, and other later, with the historic character of the storefront. non-signiﬁcant alterations can help reveal the historic character of the storefront. Changing the location of the storefront’s historic main entrance. Replacing or covering a glass transom with solid material or inap- propriate signage, or installing an incompatible awning over it. Retaining later, non-original features that have acquired signiﬁ- cance over time. Removing later features that may have acquired signiﬁcance. [28] This new storefront, which replaced one that was missing, is compatible with the historic character of the building. STOREFRONTS 113 2.i Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STOREFRONTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Protecting and maintaining masonry, wood, glass, ceramic tile, and metals which comprise storefronts through appropriate treatments, such as cleaning, paint removal, and reapplication of protective coating systems. Failing to protect and maintain storefront materials on a cyclical basis so that deterioration of storefront features results. Protecting storefronts against arson and vandalism before work begins by covering windows and doors and by installing alarm systems keyed into local protection agencies. Leaving the storefront unprotected and subject to vandalism before work begins, thereby also allowing the interior to be damaged if it can be accessed through unprotected entrances. Protecting the storefront when working on other features of the building. Failing to protect the storefront when working on other features of the building. Evaluating the overall condition of the storefront to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to storefront features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of storefront features. [27] This original c. 1940s storefront, with its character- deﬁning angled and curved glass display window and recessed entrance with a decorative terrazzo paving, is in good condition and should be retained in a rehabilitation project. 114 STOREFRONTS 2.i Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STOREFRONTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Repairing storefronts by patching, splicing, consolidating, or Removing storefronts that could be stabilized, repaired, and con- otherwise reinforcing them using recognized preservation meth- served, or using untested consolidants, improper repair techniques, ods. Repair may include the limited replacement in kind or with or unskilled personnel, potentially causing further damage to a compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated historic materials. or missing components of storefronts when there are surviving prototypes, such as transoms, base panels, kick plates, piers, or signs. Replacing in kind an entire storefront that is too deteriorated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or when the replacement can be based on historic documentation. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a compat- ible substitute material may be considered. Replacing a storefront feature when repair of the feature and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing components are feasible. Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not convey the same appearance of the surviving components of the storefront or that is physically incompatible. Removing a storefront that is unrepairable and not replacing it or replacing it with a new storefront that does not match. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new storefront when the historic Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for storefront is completely missing or has previously been replaced the missing storefront is based upon insufﬁcient physical or historic by one that is incompatible. It may be an accurate restoration documentation, is not a compatible design, or because the feature based on documentary and physical evidence, but only when to be replaced did not coexist with the features currently on the the historic storefront to be replaced coexisted with the features building. currently on the building. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic Using new, over-scaled, or internally-lit signs unless there is a his- building. toric precedent for them or using other types of signs that obscure, damage, or destroy character-deﬁning features of the storefront and the building. STOREFRONTS 115 2.i Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STOREFRONTS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Replacing missing awnings or canopies that can be historically Adding vinyl awnings, or other awnings that are inappropriately documented to the building, or adding new signage, awnings, or sized or shaped, which are incompatible with the historic character canopies that are compatible with the historic character of the of the building; awnings that do not extend over the entire length of building. the storefront; or large canopies supported by posts that project out over the sidewalk, unless their existence can be historically docu- mented. Alterations and Additions for a New Use Retaining the glazing and the transparency (i.e., which allows the Replacing storefront glazing with solid material for occupants’ pri- openness of the interior to be experienced from the exterior) that vacy when the building is being converted for residential use. is so important in deﬁning the character of a historic storefront when the building is being converted for residential use. Window Installing window treatments in storefront windows that have a resi- treatments (necessary for occupants’ privacy) should be installed dential appearance, which are incompatible with the commercial that are uniform and compatible with the commercial appearance character of the building. of the building, such as screens or wood blinds. When display cases still exist behind the storefront, the screening should be set Installing window treatments that are not uniform in a series of at the back of the display case. repetitive storefront windows. [29] The rehabilitation of the 1910 M-a’alaea General Store (a), which served the workers’ camp at the Wailuku Sugar Company on the Hawaiian island of Maui, included the reconstruction of the original parapet (b). 116 STOREFRONTS 2.i Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CURTAIN WALLS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving curtain wall systems and Removing or substantially changing curtain wall components which their components (metal framing members and glass or opaque are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the build- panels) that are important in deﬁning the overall historic charac- ing so that, as a result, the character is diminished. ter of the building. The design of the curtain wall is signiﬁcant, as are its component materials (metal stick framing and panel Replacing historic curtain wall features instead of repairing or materials, such as clear or spandrel glass, stone, terra cotta, replacing only the deteriorated components. metal, and ﬁber-reinforced plastic), appearance (e.g., glazing color or tint, transparency, and reﬂectivity), and whether the glaz- ing is ﬁxed, operable or louvered glass panels. How a curtain wall is engineered and fabricated, and the fact that it expands and contracts at a different rate from the building’s structural system, are important to understand when undertaking the rehabilitation of a curtain wall system. Protecting and maintaining curtain walls and their components Failing to protect and maintain curtain wall components on a cycli- through appropriate surface treatments, such as cleaning, paint cal basis so that deterioration of curtain walls results. removal, and reapplication of protective coating systems; and by making them watertight and ensuring that sealants and gaskets Failing to identify, evaluate, and treat various causes of curtain wall are in good condition. failure, such as open gaps between components where sealants have deteriorated or are missing. Protecting ground-level curtain walls from vandalism before work begins by covering them, while ensuring adequate ventilation, and by installing alarm systems keyed into local protection agencies. Leaving ground-level curtain walls unprotected and subject to van- dalism before work begins, thereby also allowing the interior to be damaged if it can be accessed through unprotected glazing. Protecting curtain walls when working on other features of the building. Failing to protect curtain walls when working on other features of the building. Cleaning curtain wall systems only when necessary to halt dete- rioration or to remove heavy soiling. Cleaning curtain wall systems when they are not heavily soiled, thereby needlessly introducing chemicals or moisture into historic materials. CURTAIN WALLS 117 2.i Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CURTAIN WALLS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Carrying out cleaning tests, when it has been determined that cleaning is appropriate, using only cleaning materials that will not damage components of the system, including factory-applied ﬁnishes. Test areas should be examined to ensure that no damage has resulted. Cleaning curtain wall systems without testing or using cleaning materials that may damage components of the system. Evaluating the overall condition of curtain walls to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repair of curtain wall components, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to protect curtain wall components. Repairing curtain walls by ensuring that they are watertight by Removing curtain wall components that could be repaired or using augmenting existing components or replacing deteriorated or improper repair techniques. missing sealants or gaskets, where necessary, to seal any gaps between system components. Repair may include the limited Replacing an entire curtain wall system when repair of materials replacement of those extensively deteriorated or missing compo- and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing components are nents of curtain walls when there are surviving prototypes. feasible. Applying sealants carefully so that they are not readily visible. Replacing in kind a component or components of a curtain wall Removing a curtain wall component or the entire system, if neces- system that are too deteriorated to repair (if the overall form and sary, that is unrepairable and not replacing it or replacing it with a detailing are still evident) using the physical evidence as a model new component or system that does not convey the same appear- to reproduce the feature. If using the same kind of material is not ance. feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be consid- ered as long as it has the same ﬁnish and appearance. Replacing masonry, metal, glass, or other components of a Using substitute material for the replacement that does not convey curtain wall system (or the entire system, if necessary) which the same appearance of the surviving components of the curtain have failed because of faulty design with substitutes that match wall or that is physically incompatible. the original as closely as possible and which will reestablish the viability and performance of the system. 118 CURTAIN WALLS 2.i Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION [30] Rather than replace the original curtain wall system of the 1954 Simms Building in Albuquerque, NM, with a different color tinted glass or coat it with a non- historic reﬂective ﬁlm, the HVAC system was updated to improve energy efﬁciency. Photo: Harvey M. Kaplan. [31 a-c:] (a) The rehabilitation of the First Federal Savings and Loan Association building in Birmingham, AL, constructed in 1961, required replacing the deteriorated historic curtain wall system because the framing and the fasteners holding the spandrel glass and the windows had failed. (b) Comparative drawings show that the differences between the replacement system, which incorporated new insulated glass to meet wind-load requirements, and the original system are minimal. (c) The replacement system, shown after completion of the project, has not altered the historic character of the building. CURTAIN WALLS 119 2.i Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CURTAIN WALLS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new curtain wall or its components Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for when the historic feature is completely missing. It may be an the missing curtain wall component is based upon insufﬁcient accurate restoration based on documentary and physical evi- physical or historic documentation, is not a compatible design, or dence, but only when the historic feature to be replaced coex- because the feature did not coexist with the features currently on isted with the features currently on the building. Or, it may be a the building. new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. Introducing a new curtain wall component that is incompatible in size, scale, material, color, and ﬁnish. Alterations and Additions for a New Use Installing new glazing or an entire new curtain wall system, when necessary to meet safety-code requirements, with dimensions, detailing, materials, colors, and ﬁnish as close as possible to the historic curtain wall components. Installing new glazing or an entire new curtain wall system, when necessary to meet safety-code requirements, with dimensions and detailing that is signiﬁcantly different from the historic curtain wall components. Installing impact-resistant glazing, when necessary for security, so that it is compatible with the historic windows and does not damage them or negatively impact their character. Installing impact-resistant glazing in a curtain wall system, when necessary for security, that is incompatible with the historic curtain walls and damages them or negatively impacts their character. 120 CURTAIN WALLS 2.i Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving structural systems and vis- ible features of systems that are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building. This includes the materials that comprise the structural system (i.e., wood, metal and masonry), the type of system, and its features, such as posts and beams, trusses, summer beams, vigas, cast-iron or masonry columns, above-grade stone foundation walls, or load-bearing masonry walls. Removing or substantially changing visible features of historic structural systems which are important in deﬁning the overall his- toric character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. Overloading the existing structural system, or installing equipment or mechanical systems which could damage the structure. Replacing a load-bearing masonry wall that could be augmented and retained. Leaving known structural problems untreated, such as deﬂected beams, cracked and bowed walls, or racked structural members. Protecting and maintaining the structural system by keeping Failing to protect and maintain the structural system on a cyclical gutters and downspouts clear and rooﬁng in good repair; and basis so that deterioration of the structural system results. by ensuring that wood structural members are free from insect infestation. Using treatments or products that may retain moisture, which accelerates deterioration of structural members. [33] Retaining as much as possible of the historic wood sill plate and replacing only the termite-damaged wood is always the preferred and recommended treatment. STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS 121 2.i Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Evaluating the overall condition of the structural system to deter- mine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to structural features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of structural systems. Repairing the structural system by augmenting individual com- ponents, using recognized preservation methods. For example, weakened structural members (such as ﬂoor framing) can be paired or sistered with a new member, braced, or otherwise supplemented and reinforced. Upgrading the building structurally in a manner that diminishes the historic character of the exterior or that damages interior features or spaces. Replacing a historic structural feature in its entirety or in part when it could be repaired or augmented and retained. [32] (a-b) The rehabilitation of the 1892 Carson Block Building in Eureka, CA, for its owner, the Northern California Indian Development Council, included recreating the missing corner turret and sensitively introducing seismic reinforcement (c) shown here (opposite page) in a secondary upper ﬂoor ofﬁce space. Photos: Page & Turnbull. 122 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS 2.i Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Installing seismic or structural reinforcement, when necessary, in a manner that minimizes its impact on the historic fabric and character of the building. Replacing in kind or with a compatible substitute material large portions or entire features of the structural system that are either extensively damaged or deteriorated or that are missing when there are surviving prototypes, such as cast-iron columns, trusses, or masonry walls. Substitute material must be structurally suf- ﬁcient, physically compatible with the rest of the system, and, where visible, must have the same form, design, and appearance as the historic feature. Using substitute material that does not equal the load-bearing capabilities of the historic material; does not convey the same appearance of the historic material, if it is visible; or is physically incompatible. Installing a visible or exposed structural replacement feature that does not match. Replacing to match any interior features or ﬁnishes that may have to be removed to gain access to make structural repairs, and reusing salvageable material. STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS 123 2.i Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Alterations and Additions for a New Use Limiting any new excavations next to historic foundations to avoid undermining the structural stability of the building or adjacent historic buildings. The area next to the building foundation should be investigated ﬁrst to ascertain potential damage to site features or archeological resources. Carrying out excavations or regrading land adjacent to a historic building which could cause the historic foundation to settle, shift, or fail, or which could destroy signiﬁcant archeological resources. Correcting structural deﬁciencies needed to accommodate a new use in a manner that preserves the structural system and indi- vidual character-deﬁning features. Making substantial changes to signiﬁcant interior spaces or damag- ing or destroying features or ﬁnishes that are character deﬁning to correct structural deﬁciencies. Designing and installing new mechanical or electrical equipment, when necessary, in a manner that minimizes the number and size of cuts or holes in structural members. Installing new mechanical or electrical equipment in a manner which reduces the load-bearing capacity of historic structural mem- bers. Inserting a new ﬂoor when required for the new use if it does not Inserting a new ﬂoor that damages or destroys the structural system negatively impact the historic character of the interior space; and or abuts window glazing and is visible from the exterior of the build- if it does not damage the structural system, does not abut window ing and, thus, negatively impacts its historic character. glazing, and is not visible from the exterior of the building. Creating an atrium, light court, or lightwell to provide natural Removing structural features to create an atrium, light court, or light when required for a new use only when it can be done in lightwell if it negatively impacts the historic character of the build- a manner that preserves the structural system and the historic ing. character of the building. 124 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS 2.i Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MECHANICAL SYSTEMS: HEATING, AIR CONDITIONING, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving visible features of early mechanical systems that are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building, such as radiators, vents, fans, grilles, and plumbing and lighting ﬁxtures. Removing or substantially changing visible features of mechanical systems that are important in deﬁning the overall historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. Protecting and maintaining mechanical, plumbing, and electrical systems and their features through cyclical maintenance. Failing to protect and maintain a functioning mechanical system, plumbing, and electrical systems and their visible features on a cyclical basis so that their deterioration results. Improving the energy efﬁciency of existing mechanical systems to help reduce the need for a new system by installing storm windows, insulating attics and crawl spaces, or adding awnings, if appropriate. Evaluating the overall condition of mechanical systems to deter- mine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to mechanical system components, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of mechanical system components. Repairing mechanical systems by augmenting or upgrading system components (such as installing new pipes and ducts), rewiring, or adding new compressors or boilers. Replacing a mechanical system when its components could be upgraded and retained. Replacing in kind or with a compatible substitute material those Installing a visible replacement feature of a mechanical system, if it extensively deteriorated or missing visible features of mechanical is important in deﬁning the historic character of the building, that systems when there are surviving prototypes, such as ceiling fans, does not convey the same appearance. radiators, grilles, or plumbing ﬁxtures. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS 125 2.i Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MECHANICAL SYSTEMS: HEATING, AIR CONDITIONING, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Alterations and Additions for a New Use Installing a new mechanical system, if required, so that it results in the least alteration possible to the historic building and its character-deﬁning features. Installing a new mechanical system so that character-deﬁning structural or interior features are radically changed, damaged, or destroyed. Providing adequate structural support for the new mechanical equipment. Failing to consider the weight and design of new mechanical equip- ment so that, as a result, historic structural members or ﬁnished surfaces are weakened or cracked. Installing new mechanical and electrical systems and ducts, pipes, and cables in closets, service areas, and wall cavities to preserve the historic character of the interior space. Installing systems and ducts, pipes, and cables in walls or ceilings in a manner that results in extensive loss or damage or otherwise obscures historic building materials and character-deﬁning features. Concealing HVAC ductwork in ﬁnished interior spaces, when pos- sible, by installing it in secondary spaces (such as closets, attics, basements, or crawl spaces) or in appropriately-located, furred- down sofﬁts. Leaving HVAC ductwork exposed in most ﬁnished spaces or install- ing sofﬁts in a location that will negatively impact the historic character of the interior or exterior of the building. Installing exposed ductwork in a ﬁnished space when necessary Installing exposed ductwork in a ﬁnished space when necessary to to protect and preserve decorative or other features (such as protect and preserve decorative or other features that is not painted, column capitals, pressed-metal or ornamental plaster ceilings, or is located where it will negatively impact the historic character of coffers, or beams) that is painted, and appropriately located so the space. that it will have minimal impact on the historic character of the space. Lowering ceilings, installing a dropped ceiling, or constructing Lowering ceilings, installing a dropped ceiling, or constructing sof- sofﬁts to conceal ductwork in a ﬁnished space when this will not ﬁts to conceal ductwork in a ﬁnished space in a manner that results result in extensive loss or damage to historic materials or decora- in extensive loss or damage to historic materials or decorative and tive and other features, and will not change the overall character other features, and will change the overall character of the space or of the space or the exterior appearance of the building (i.e., the exterior appearance of the building. lowered ceilings or sofﬁts visible through window glazing). 126 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS 2.i Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION MECHANICAL SYSTEMS: HEATING, AIR CONDITIONING, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Installing appropriately located, exposed ductwork in historically- unﬁnished interior spaces in industrial or utilitarian buildings. Installing a split system mechanical unit in a manner that will have minimal impact on the historic character of the interior and result in minimal loss of historic building material. Installing a split system mechanical unit without considering its impact on the historic character of the interior or the potential loss of historic building material. Installing heating or air conditioning window units only when the installation of any other system would result in signiﬁcant damage or loss of historic materials or features. Installing mechanical equipment on the roof, when necessary, so that it is minimally visible to preserve the building’s historic character and setting. Installing mechanical equipment on the roof that is overly large or highly visible and negatively impacts the historic character of the building or setting. Placing air conditioning compressors in a location on a secondary elevation of the historic building that is not highly visible. Placing air conditioning compressors where they are highly visible and negatively impact the historic character of the building or setting. [34] The new ceiling ducts installed during the conversion of this historic ofﬁce building into apartments are minimal in design and discretely placed above the windows. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS 127 2.i Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving a ﬂoor plan or interior Altering a ﬂoor plan, or interior spaces (including individual rooms), spaces, features, and ﬁnishes that are important in deﬁning features, and ﬁnishes, which are important in deﬁning the overall the overall historic character of the building. Signiﬁcant spatial historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character characteristics include the size, conﬁguration, proportion, and is diminished. relationship of rooms and corridors; the relationship of features to spaces; and the spaces themselves, such as lobbies, lodge halls, Altering the ﬂoor plan by demolishing principal walls and partitions entrance halls, parlors, theaters, auditoriums, gymnasiums, and for a new use. industrial and commercial interiors. Color, texture, and pattern are important characteristics of features and ﬁnishes, which can Altering or destroying signiﬁcant interior spaces by inserting addi- include such elements as columns, plaster walls and ceilings, tional ﬂoors or lofts; cutting through ﬂoors to create lightwells, light ﬂooring, trim, ﬁreplaces and mantels, paneling, light ﬁxtures, courts, or atriums; lowering ceilings; or adding new walls or remov- hardware, decorative radiators, ornamental grilles and registers, ing historic walls. windows, doors, and transoms; plaster, paint, wallpaper and wall coverings, and special ﬁnishes, such as marbleizing and graining; Relocating an interior feature, such as a staircase, so that the cir- and utilitarian (painted or unpainted) features, including wood, culation pattern and the historic relationship between features and metal, or concrete exposed columns, beams, and trusses and spaces are altered. exposed load-bearing brick, concrete, and wood walls. Installing new material that obscures or damages character-deﬁning interior features or ﬁnishes. Removing paint, plaster, or other ﬁnishes from historically-ﬁnished interior surfaces to create a new appearance (e.g., removing plaster to expose brick walls or a brick chimney breast, stripping paint from wood to stain or varnish it, or removing a plaster ceiling to expose unﬁnished beams). Applying paint, plaster, or other coatings to surfaces that have been unﬁnished historically, thereby changing their character. Changing the type of ﬁnish or its color, such as painting a histori- cally-varnished wood feature, or removing paint from a historically- painted feature. 128 INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 2.i Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Retaining decorative or other character-deﬁning features or ﬁnishes that typify the showroom or interior of a historic store, such as a pressed-metal ceiling, a beaded-board ceiling, or wainscoting. Removing decorative or other character-deﬁning features or ﬁnishes that typify the showroom or interior of a historic store, such as a pressed-metal ceiling, a beaded-board ceiling, or wainscoting. Protecting and maintaining historic materials (including plas- ter, masonry, wood, and metals) which comprise interior spaces through appropriate surface treatments, such as cleaning, paint removal, and reapplication of protective coating systems. Failing to protect and maintain interior materials and ﬁnishes on a cyclical basis so that deterioration of interior features results. Protecting interior features and ﬁnishes against arson and vandal- Leaving the building unprotected and subject to vandalism before ism before project work begins by erecting temporary fencing or work begins, thereby allowing the interior to be damaged if it can be by covering broken windows and open doorways, while ensuring accessed through unprotected entrances. adequate ventilation, and by installing alarm systems keyed into local protection agencies. Protecting interior features (such as a staircase, mantel, ﬂooring, or decorative ﬁnishes) from damage during project work by cover- ing them with plywood, heavy canvas, or plastic sheeting. Failing to protect interior features and ﬁnishes when working on the interior. [35] (a) Although deteriorated, the historic school corridor, shown on the left, with its character-deﬁning features, including doors and transoms, was retained and repaired as part of the rehabilitation project (b). INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 129 2.i Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 130 [36] The elaborate features and ﬁnishes of this historic banking hall in the Union Trust Company Building, in Cleveland, OH, were retained and repaired as part of its conversion into a food market. INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 2.i Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Removing damaged or deteriorated paint and ﬁnishes only to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible prior to repainting or reﬁnishing using compatible paint or other coating systems. Using potentially damaging methods, such as open-ﬂame torches or abrasive techniques, to remove paint or other coatings. Removing paint that is ﬁrmly adhered to interior surfaces. Using abrasive cleaning methods only on the interior of industrial Using abrasive methods anywhere but utilitarian and industrial or warehouse buildings with utilitarian, unplastered masonry interior spaces or when there are other methods that are less likely walls and where wood features are not ﬁnished, molded, beaded, to damage the surface of the material. or worked by hand. Low-pressure abrasive cleaning (e.g., sand- blasting or other media blasting) should only be considered if test patches show no surface damage and after gentler methods have proven ineffective. Evaluating the overall condition of the interior materials, features, Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of and ﬁnishes to determine whether more than protection and interior materials, features, and ﬁnishes. maintenance, such as repairs to features and ﬁnishes, will be necessary. Repairing interior features and ﬁnishes by patching, splicing, Removing materials that could be repaired or using improper repair consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the materials using rec- techniques. ognized preservation methods. Repairs may include the limited replacement in kind or with a compatible substitute material of Replacing an entire interior feature (such as a staircase, mantel, or those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of interior features door surround) or a ﬁnish (such as a plaster) when repair of materi- when there are surviving prototypes, such as stairs, balustrades, als and limited replacement of deteriorated or missing components wood paneling, columns, decorative wall ﬁnishes, and ornamental are feasible. pressed-metal or plaster ceilings. Repairs should be physically and visually compatible. INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 131 2.i Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 132 [38] The rehabilitation project retained the industrial character of this historic factory building, which included installation of a ﬁre-rated, clear glass enclosure that allows the stairway, an important interior feature, to remain visible. [37] Exposed and painted ducts were appropriately installed here in a retail space in Denver’s historic Union Station after considering other options that would have impacted the ceiling height, or damaged or obscured the ornamental plaster crown molding. Photo: Heritage Consulting Group. [39] Leaving the ceiling structure exposed and installing exposed ductwork where it does not impact the windows, are appropriate treatments when rehabilitating an industrial building for another use. INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 2.i Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Replacing in kind an entire interior feature that is too deterio- rated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. Examples could include wainscoting, window and door surrounds, or stairs. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered. Removing a character-deﬁning interior feature that is unrepairable and not replacing it, or replacing it with a new feature or ﬁnish that does not match the historic feature. Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not convey the same appearance of the interior feature or that is physi- cally incompatible. Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not convey the same appearance of the interior feature or that is physi- cally incompatible. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new interior feature or ﬁnish when Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for the historic feature or ﬁnish is completely missing. This could the missing feature is based upon insufﬁcient physical or historic include missing walls, stairs, mantels, wood trim, and plaster, or documentation; is not a compatible design; or because the feature even entire rooms if the historic spaces, features, and ﬁnishes did not coexist with the feature currently on the building. are missing or have been destroyed by inappropriate alterations. The design may be an accurate restoration based on documentary Introducing a new interior feature or ﬁnish that is incompatible in and physical evidence, but only when the feature or ﬁnish to be size, scale, material, color, and ﬁnish. replaced coexisted with the features currently in the building. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building. Alterations and Additions for a New Use Installing new or additional systems required for a new use for the building, such as bathrooms and mechanical equipment, in secondary spaces to preserve the historic character of the most signiﬁcant interior spaces. Subdividing primary spaces, lowering ceilings, or damaging or obscuring character-deﬁning features (such as ﬁreplaces, windows, or stairways) to accommodate a new use for the building. INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 133 2.i Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Installing new mechanical and electrical systems and ducts, Installing ducts, pipes, and cables where they will obscure charac- pipes, and cables in closets, service areas, and wall cavities to ter-deﬁning features or negatively impact the historic character of preserve the historic character of interior spaces, features, and the interior. ﬁnishes. Creating open work areas, when required by the new use, by selectively removing walls only in secondary spaces, less sig- niﬁcant upper ﬂoors, or other less-visible locations to preserve primary public spaces and circulation systems. Retaining the conﬁguration of corridors, particularly in build- Making extensive changes to the character of signiﬁcant historic ings with multiple ﬂoors with repetitive plans (such as ofﬁce corridors by narrowing or radically shortening them, or removing and apartment buildings or hotels), where not only the ﬂoor plan their character-deﬁning features. is character deﬁning, but also the width and the length of the corridor, doorways, transoms, trim, and other features, such as wainscoting and glazing. Reusing decorative material or features that had to be removed as Discarding historic material when it can be reused to replace miss- part of the rehabilitation work (including baseboards, door casing, ing or damaged features elsewhere in the building, or reusing mate- paneled doors, and wainscoting) and reusing them in areas where rial in a manner that may convey a false sense of history. these features are missing or are too deteriorated to repair. Installing permanent partitions in secondary, rather than pri- mary, spaces whenever feasible. Removable partitions or partial- height walls that do not destroy the sense of space often may be installed in large character-deﬁning spaces when required by a new use. Installing partitions that abut windows and glazing or that damage or obscure character-deﬁning spaces, features, or ﬁnishes. Enclosing a character-deﬁning interior stairway, when required by code, with ﬁre-rated glass walls or large, hold-open doors so that the stairway remains visible and its historic character is retained. Enclosing a character-deﬁning interior stairway for safety or func- tional reasons in a manner that conceals it or destroys its character. Locating new, code-required stairways or elevators in secondary and service areas of the historic building. Making incompatible changes or damaging or destroying character- deﬁning spaces, features, or ﬁnishes when adding new code- required stairways and elevators. 134 INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 2.i Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION [40] Not Recommended: Removing a ﬁnished ceiling and leaving the structure exposed in a historic retail space does not meet the Standards for Rehabilitation. [41] Not Recommended: Leaving fragments of deteriorated or “sculpted” plaster is not a compatible treatment for either ﬁnished or unﬁnished interior spaces. INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 135 2.i Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Creating an atrium, light court, or lightwell to provide natural Destroying or damaging character-deﬁning interior spaces, features, light when required for a new use only when it can be done in a or ﬁnishes, or damaging the structural system to create an atrium, manner that preserves signiﬁcant interior spaces, features, and light court, or lightwell. ﬁnishes or important exterior elevations. Inserting a new ﬂoor, mezzanine, or loft when required for a new Inserting a new ﬂoor, mezzanine, or loft that damages or destroys use if it does not damage or destroy signiﬁcant interior features signiﬁcant interior features or abuts window glazing and is visible and ﬁnishes and is not visible from the exterior of the building. from the exterior of the building, and, thus, negatively impacts its historic character. Inserting a new ﬂoor, when necessary for a new use, only in large Inserting a new ﬂoor in signiﬁcant, large assembly spaces with assembly spaces that are secondary to another assembly space distinctive features and ﬁnishes, which negatively impacts their in the building; in a space that has been greatly altered; or where historic character. character-deﬁning features have been lost or are too deteriorated to repair. Installing exposed ductwork in a ﬁnished space when necessary Installing exposed ductwork in a ﬁnished space when necessary to to protect and preserve decorative or other features (such as protect and preserve decorative or other features that is not painted, column capitals, ornamental plaster or pressed-metal ceilings, or is located where it will negatively impact the historic character of coffers, or beams) that is designed, painted, and appropriately the space. located so that it will have minimal impact on the historic char- acter of the space. Lowering ceilings, installing a dropped ceiling, or constructing Lowering ceilings, installing a dropped ceiling, or constructing sof- sofﬁts to conceal ductwork in a ﬁnished space when they will not ﬁts to conceal ductwork in a ﬁnished space in a manner that results result in extensive loss or damage to historic materials or decora- in extensive loss or damage to historic materials or decorative and tive and other features, and will not change the overall character other features, and will change the overall character of the space or of the space or the exterior appearance of the building (i.e., the exterior appearance of the building. lowered ceilings or sofﬁts visible through window glazing). Installing a split system mechanical unit in a manner that will have minimal impact on the historic character of the interior and will result in minimal loss of historic building material. Installing a split system mechanical unit without considering its impact on the historic character of the interior or the potential loss of historic building material. 136 INTERIOR SPACES, FEATURES, AND FINISHES 2.i Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION BUILDING SITE RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving features of the building site Removing or substantially changing buildings and their features that are important in deﬁning its overall historic character. Site or site features which are important in deﬁning the overall historic features may include walls, fences, or steps; circulation systems, character of the property so that, as a result, the character is dimin- such as walks, paths or roads; vegetation, such as trees, shrubs, ished. grass, orchards, hedges, windbreaks, or gardens; landforms, such as hills, terracing, or berms; furnishings and ﬁxtures, such as light posts or benches; decorative elements, such as sculpture, statuary, or monuments; water features, including fountains, streams, pools, lakes, or irrigation ditches; and subsurface arche- ological resources, other cultural or religious features, or burial grounds which are also important to the site. [42] This garden is an important character- deﬁning landscape feature on this college campus. BUILDING SITE 137 2.i Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION BUILDING SITE RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Retaining the historic relationship between buildings and the landscape. Removing or relocating buildings or landscape features, thereby destroying the historic relationship between buildings and the land- scape. Removing or relocating buildings on a site or in a complex of related historic structures (such as a mill complex or farm), thereby dimin- ishing the historic character of the site or complex. Moving buildings onto the site, thereby creating an inaccurate his- toric appearance. Changing the grade level of the site if it diminishes its historic character. For example, lowering the grade adjacent to a building to maximize use of a basement, which would change the historic appearance of the building and its relation to the site. Protecting and maintaining buildings and site features by provid- ing proper drainage to ensure that water does not erode founda- tion walls, drain toward the building, or damage or erode the landscape. Failing to ensure that site drainage is adequate so that buildings and site features are damaged or destroyed; or, alternatively, chang- ing the site grading so that water does not drain properly. Correcting any existing irrigation that may be wetting the build- ing excessively. Neglecting to correct any existing irrigation that may be wetting the building excessively. Minimizing disturbance of the terrain around buildings or else- Using heavy machinery or equipment in areas where it may disturb where on the site, thereby reducing the possibility of destroy- or damage important landscape features, archeological resources, ing or damaging important landscape features, archeological other cultural or religious features, or burial grounds. resources, other cultural or religious features, or burial grounds. Surveying and documenting areas where the terrain will be Failing to survey the building site prior to beginning work, which altered to determine the potential impact to important landscape may result in damage or loss of important landscape features, features, archeological resources, other cultural or religious fea- archeological resources, other cultural or religious features, or burial tures, or burial grounds. grounds. 138 BUILDING SITE 2.i Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION BUILDING SITE RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Protecting (e.g., preserving in place) important site features, archeological resources, other cultural or religious features, or burial grounds. Leaving known site features or archeological material unprotected so that it is damaged during rehabilitation work. Planning and carrying out any necessary investigation before rehabilitation begins, using professional archeologists and meth- ods, when preservation in place is not feasible. Allowing unqualiﬁed personnel to perform data recovery on archeo- logical resources, which can result in damage or loss of important archeological material Preserving important landscape features through regularly-sched- uled maintenance of historic plant material. Allowing important landscape features or archeological resources to be lost, damaged, or to deteriorate due to inadequate protection or lack of maintenance Protecting the building site and landscape features against arson Leaving the property unprotected and subject to vandalism before and vandalism before rehabilitation work begins by erecting tem- work begins so that the building site and landscape features, porary fencing and by installing alarm systems keyed into local archeological resources, other cultural or religious features, or burial protection agencies. grounds can be damaged or destroyed. Removing or destroying features from the site, such as fencing, paths or walkways, masonry balustrades, or plant material. Installing protective fencing, bollards, and stanchions on a build- Installing protective fencing, bollards, and stanchions on a building ing site, when necessary for security, that are as unobtrusive as site, when necessary for security, without taking into consideration possible. their location and visibility so that they negatively impact the his- toric character of the site. Providing continued protection and maintenance of buildings and landscape features on the site through appropriate grounds and landscape management. Failing to protect and maintain materials and features from the restoration period on a cyclical basis so that deterioration of the site results. Protecting buildings and landscape features when working on the site. Failing to protect building and landscape features during work on the site or failing to repair damaged or deteriorated site features. BUILDING SITE 139 2.i Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION BUILDING SITE RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Evaluating the overall condition of materials and features to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to site features, will be necessary. Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of the site. Repairing historic site features which have been damaged, are deteriorated, or have missing components order reestablish the whole feature and to ensure retention of the integrity of the historic materials. Repairs may include limited replacement in kind or with a compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of site features when there are surviving prototypes, such as paving, railings, or individual plants within a group (e.g., a hedge). Repairs should be physically and visually compatible. Removing materials and features that could be repaired or using improper repair techniques. Replacing an entire feature of the site (such as a fence, walkway, or drive) when repair of materials and limited replacement of deterio- rated or missing components are feasible. [43] The industrial character of the site was retained when this brewery complex was rehabilitated for residential use. [44] Not Recommended: (a-b) The historic character of this plantation house (marked in blue on plan on opposite page) and its site was diminished and adversely impacted when multiple new buildings like this (#3 on plan) were constructed on the property (c). 140 BUILDING SITE 2.i Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION BUILDING SITE RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Replacing in kind an entire feature of the site that is too deterio- Removing a character-deﬁning feature of the site that is unrepair- rated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) able and not replacing it, or replacing it with a new feature that does using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature. not match. Examples could include a walkway or a fountain, a land form, or plant material. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not convey then a compatible substitute material may be considered. the same appearance of the surviving site feature or that is physi- cally or ecologically incompatible. Adding conjectural landscape features to the site (such as period reproduction light ﬁxtures, fences, fountains, or vegetation) that are historically inappropriate, thereby creating an inaccurate appearance of the site. BUILDING SITE 141 2.i Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION BUILDING SITE RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED [45] Undertaking a survey to document archeological resources may be considered in some rehabilitation projects when a new exterior addition is planned. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new feature on a site when the his- Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for toric feature is completely missing. This could include missing the missing feature is based upon insufﬁcient physical or historic outbuildings, terraces, drives, foundation plantings, specimen documentation, is not a compatible design, or because the feature trees, and gardens. The design may be an accurate restoration did not coexist with the features currently on the site. based on documentary and physical evidence, but only when the feature to be replaced coexisted with the features currently on Introducing a new feature, including plant material, that is visually the site. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the incompatible with the site or that alters or destroys the historic site historic character of the building and site. patterns or use. Alterations and Additions for a New Use Designing new onsite features (such as parking areas, access Locating parking areas directly adjacent to historic buildings where ramps, or lighting), when required by a new use, so that they vehicles may cause damage to buildings or landscape features or are as unobtrusive as possible, retain the historic relationship when they negatively impact the historic character of the building between the building or buildings and the landscape, and are site if landscape features and plant materials are removed. compatible with the historic character of the property. Designing new exterior additions to historic buildings or adjacent Introducing new construction on the building site which is visu- new construction that are compatible with the historic character ally incompatible in terms of size, scale, design, material, or color, of the site and preserves the historic relationship between the which destroys historic relationships on the site, or which dam- building or buildings and the landscape. ages or destroys important landscape features, such as replacing a lawn with paved parking areas or removing mature trees to widen a driveway. Removing non-signiﬁcant buildings, additions, or site features which detract from the historic character of the site. Removing a historic building in a complex of buildings or removing a building feature or a landscape feature which is important in deﬁn- ing the historic character of the site. Locating an irrigation system needed for a new or continuing use of the site where it will not cause damage to historic buildings. Locating an irrigation system needed for a new or continuing use of the site where it will damage historic buildings. 142 BUILDING SITE 2.i Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Identifying, retaining, and preserving building and landscape Removing or substantially changing those building and landscape features that are important in deﬁning the overall historic features in the setting which are important in deﬁning the historic character of the setting. Such features can include circulation character so that, as a result, the character is diminished. systems, such as roads and streets; furnishings and ﬁxtures, such as light posts or benches; vegetation, gardens and yards; adjacent open space, such as ﬁelds, parks, commons, or wood- lands; and important views or visual relationships. [46] The varied size, shapes, and architectural styles of these historic buildings are unique to this street in Christiansted, St. Croix, USVI, and should be retained in a rehabilitation project. [47] Original paving stones contribute to the character of the historic setting and distinguish this block from other streets in the district. SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) 143 2.i Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) [48] Old police and ﬁre call boxes, which are distinctive features in this historic district, have been retained, and now showcase work by local artists. [49] Low stone walls are character- deﬁning features in this hilly, early-20th-century residential neighborhood. RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Retaining the historic relationship between buildings and Altering the relationship between the buildings and landscape fea- landscape features in the setting. For example, preserving the tures in the setting by widening existing streets, changing landscape relationship between a town common or urban plaza and the materials, or locating new streets or parking areas where they may adjacent houses, municipal buildings, roads, and landscape and negatively impact the historic character of the setting. streetscape features. Removing or relocating buildings or landscape features, thereby destroying the historic relationship between buildings and the land- scape in the setting. 144 SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) 2.i Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Protecting and maintaining historic features in the setting Failing to protect and maintain materials in the setting on a cycli- through regularly-scheduled maintenance and grounds and land- cal basis so that deterioration of buildings and landscape features scape management. results. Stripping or removing historic features from buildings or the setting, such as a porch, fencing, walkways, or plant material. Installing protective fencing, bollards, and stanchions in the Installing protective fencing, bollards, and stanchions in the setting, setting, when necessary for security, that are as unobtrusive as when necessary for security, without taking into consideration their possible. location and visibility so that they negatively impact the historic character of the setting. Protecting buildings and landscape features when undertaking work in the setting. Failing to protect buildings and landscape features during work in the setting. Evaluating the overall condition of materials and features to Failing to undertake adequate measures to ensure the protection of determine whether more than protection and maintenance, materials and features in the setting. such as repairs to materials and features in the setting, will be necessary. Repairing features in the setting by reinforcing the historic materials. Repairs may include the replacement in kind or with a compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of setting features when there are surviving pro- totypes, such as fencing, paving materials, trees, and hedgerows. Repairs should be physically and visually compatible. Failing to repair and reinforce damaged or deteriorated historic materials and features in the setting. Removing material that could be repaired or using improper repair techniques. Replacing an entire feature of the building or landscape in the setting when repair of materials and limited replacement of deterio- rated or missing components are feasible. SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) 145 2.i Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Replacing in kind an entire building or landscape feature in Removing a character-deﬁning feature of the building or landscape the setting that is too deteriorated to repair (if the overall form from the setting that is unrepairable and not replacing it or replac- and detailing are still evident) using the physical evidence as a ing it with a new feature that does not match. model to reproduce the feature. If using the same kind of mate- rial is not feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not convey considered. the same appearance of the surviving building or landscape feature in the setting or that is physically or ecologically incompatible. The following work is highlighted to indicate that it is speciﬁc to Rehabilitation projects and should only be considered after the preservation concerns have been addressed. Designing the Replacement for Missing Historic Features Designing and installing a new feature of the building or land- scape in the setting when the historic feature is completely missing. This could include missing steps, streetlights, terraces, trees, and fences. The design may be an accurate restoration based on documentary and physical evidence, but only when the feature to be replaced coexisted with the features currently in the setting. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the historic character of the setting. Creating an inaccurate appearance because the replacement for the missing feature is based upon insufﬁcient physical or historic documentation; is not a compatible design, or because the feature did not coexist with the features currently in the setting. Introducing a new building or landscape feature that is visually or otherwise incompatible with the setting’s historic character (e.g., replacing low metal fencing with a high wood fence). Alterations and Additions for a New Use Designing new features (such as parking areas, access ramps, or lighting), when required by a new use, so that they are as unobtrusive as possible, retain the historic relationships between buildings and the landscape in the setting, and are compatible with the historic character of the setting. Locating parking areas directly adjacent to historic buildings where vehicles may cause damage to buildings or landscape features or when they negatively impact the historic character of the setting if landscape features and plant materials are removed. Designing new exterior additions to historic buildings or adjacent new construction that are compatible with the historic character of the setting that preserve the historic relationship between the buildings and the landscape. Introducing new construction into historic districts which is visually incompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the set- ting, or which damages or destroys important landscape features. Removing non-signiﬁcant buildings, additions, or landscape fea- tures which detract from the historic character of the setting. Removing a historic building, a building feature, or landscape feature which is important in deﬁning the historic character of the setting. 146 SETTING (DISTRICT / NEIGHBORHOOD) 2.i Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CODE-REQUIRED WORK RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Sensitive solutions to meeting accessibility and life-safety code requirements are an important part of protecting the historic character of the building and site. Thus, work that must be done to meet use-speciﬁc code requirements should be considered early in planning a Rehabilitation of a historic building for a new use. Because code mandates are directly related to occupancy, some uses require less change than others and, thus, may be more appropriate for a historic building. Early coordination with code enforcement authorities can reduce the impact of alterations necessary to comply with current codes. ACCESSIBILITY Identifying the historic building’s character-deﬁning exterior features, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, and features of the site and setting which may be affected by accessibility code- required work. Undertaking accessibility code-required alterations before identify- ing those exterior features, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, and features of the site and setting which are character deﬁning and, therefore, must be preserved. Complying with barrier-free access requirements in such a manner that the historic building’s character-deﬁning exterior fea- tures, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, and features of the site and setting are preserved or impacted as little as possible. Altering, damaging, or destroying character-deﬁning exterior fea- tures, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, or features of the site and setting while making modiﬁcations to a building, its site, or setting to comply with accessibility requirements. [50] This kitchen in a historic apartment complex was rehabilitated to meet accessibility requirements. [51] A new interior access ramp with a simple metal railing is compatible with the character of this mid- century-modern building. CODE-REQUIRED WORK | ACCESSIBILITY 147 2.i Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CODE-REQUIRED WORK RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Working with specialists in accessibility and historic preservation to determine the most sensitive solutions to comply with access requirements in a historic building, its site, or setting. Making changes to historic buildings, their sites, or setting without ﬁrst consulting with specialists in accessibility and historic preser- vation to determine the most appropriate solutions to comply with accessibility requirements. Providing barrier-free access that promotes independence for the user while preserving signiﬁcant historic features. Making modiﬁcations for accessibility that do not provide indepen- dent, safe access while preserving historic features. Finding solutions to meet accessibility requirements that mini- mize the impact of any necessary alteration on the historic build- ing, its site, and setting, such as compatible ramps, paths, and lifts. Making modiﬁcations for accessibility without considering the impact on the historic building, its site, and setting. [52] The access ramp blends in with the stone façade of the First National Bank in Stephenville, TX, and is appropriately located on the side where it is does not impact the historic character of the building. Photo: Nancy McCoy, QuimbyMcCoy Preservation Architecture, LLP. [54] The gently-sloped path in a historic park in Kansas City, MO, which accesses the memorial below, includes a rest area part way up the hill. Photo: STRATA Architecture + Preservation. [53] This entrance ramp (right) is compatible with the historic character of this commercial building. 148 CODE-REQUIRED WORK | ACCESSIBILITY 2.i Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CODE-REQUIRED WORK RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Using relevant sections of existing codes regarding accessibil- ity for historic buildings that provide alternative means of code compliance when code-required work would otherwise negatively impact the historic character of the property. Minimizing the impact of accessibility ramps by installing them on secondary elevations when it does not compromise accessibil- ity or by screening them with plantings. Installing elevators, lifts, or incompatible ramps at a primary entrance, or relocating primary entrances to secondary locations to provide access without investigating other options or locations. Adding a gradual slope or grade to the sidewalk, if appropriate, to access the entrance rather than installing a ramp that would be more intrusive to the historic character of the building and the district. Adding an exterior stair or elevator tower that is compatible with the historic character of the building in a minimally-visible location only when it is not possible to accommodate it on the interior without resulting in the loss of signiﬁcant historic spaces, features, or ﬁnishes. Installing a lift as inconspicuously as possible when it is neces- sary to locate it on a primary elevation of the historic building. Installing lifts or elevators on the interior in secondary or less signiﬁcant spaces where feasible. Installing lifts or elevators on the interior in primary spaces which will negatively impact the historic character of the space. [55] The lift is compatible with the industrial character of this former warehouse. CODE-REQUIRED WORK | ACCESSIBILITY 149 2.i Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CODE-REQUIRED WORK RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED LIFE SAFETY Identifying the historic building’s character-deﬁning exterior Undertaking life-safety code-required alterations before identifying features, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, and features of those exterior features, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, and the site and setting which may be affected by life-safety code- features of the site and setting which are character deﬁning and, required work. therefore, must be preserved. Complying with life-safety codes (including requirements for Altering, damaging, or destroying character-deﬁning exterior fea- impact-resistant glazing, security, and seismic retroﬁt) in such a tures, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, or features of the site manner that the historic building’s character-deﬁning exterior fea- and setting while making modiﬁcations to a building, its site, or tures, interior spaces, features, and ﬁnishes, and features of the setting to comply with life-safety code requirements. site and setting are preserved or impacted as little as possible. Removing building materials only after testing has been con- ducted to identify hazardous materials, and using only the least damaging abatement methods. Removing building materials without testing ﬁrst to identify the hazardous materials, or using potentially damaging methods of abatement. Providing workers with appropriate personal equipment for pro- tection from hazards on the worksite. Removing hazardous or toxic materials without regard for work- ers’ health and safety or environmentally-sensitive disposal of the materials. Working with code ofﬁcials and historic preservation specialists Making life-safety code-required changes to the building without to investigate systems, methods, or devices to make the build- consulting code ofﬁcials and historic preservation specialists, with ing compliant with life-safety codes to ensure that necessary the result that alterations negatively impact the historic character of alterations will be compatible with the historic character of the the building. building. Using relevant sections of existing codes regarding life safety for historic buildings that provide alternative means of code compli- ance when code-required work would otherwise negatively impact the historic character of the building. [56 a-b] In order to continue in its historic use, the door openings of this 1916 Colonial Revival-style ﬁre station had to be widened to accommodate the larger size of modern ﬁre trucks. Although this resulted in some change to the arched door surrounds, it is minimal and does not negatively impact the historic character of the building. (a) Above, before; Photo: Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department (FEMS), Washington, D.C.; below, after. 150 CODE-REQUIRED WORK | LIFE SAFETY 2.i Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION [57] Workers wear protective clothing while removing lead paint from metal features. [59] (a-b) The decorative concrete balcony railings on this 1960s building did not meet life-safety code requirements. They were replaced with new glass railings with a fritted glass pattern matching the original design—a creative solution that satisﬁes codes, while preserving the historic appearance of the building when viewed from the street (c-d). Photos: (a, b, d) ERA Architects, Inc.; (c) Nathan Cyprys, photographer. CODE-REQUIRED WORK | LIFE SAFETY 151 2.i Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION CODE-REQUIRED WORK RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Upgrading historic stairways and elevators to meet life-safety codes so that they are not damaged or otherwise negatively impacted. Damaging or making inappropriate alterations to historic stairways and elevators or to adjacent features, spaces, or ﬁnishes in the process of doing work to meet code requirements. Installing sensitively-designed ﬁre-suppression systems, such as sprinklers, so that historic features and ﬁnishes are preserved. Covering character-deﬁning wood features with ﬁre-retardant sheathing, which results in altering their appearance. Applying ﬁre-retardant coatings when appropriate, such as intu- mescent paint, to protect steel structural systems. Using ﬁre-retardant coatings if they will damage or obscure charac- ter-deﬁning features. Adding a new stairway or elevator to meet life-safety code requirements in a manner that preserves adjacent character- deﬁning features and spaces. Altering, damaging, or destroying character-deﬁning spaces, features, or ﬁnishes when adding a new code-required stairway or elevator. Using existing openings on secondary or less-visible elevations or, if necessary, creating new openings on secondary or less-visible elevations to accommodate second egress requirements. Using a primary or other highly-visible elevation to accommodate second egress requirements without investigating other options or locations. Placing a code-required stairway or elevator that cannot be accommodated within the historic building in a new exterior addi- tion located on a secondary or minimally-visible elevation. Constructing a new addition to accommodate code-required stairs or an elevator on character-deﬁning elevations or where it will obscure, damage, or destroy character-deﬁning features of the building, its site, or setting. Designing a new exterior stairway or elevator tower addition that is compatible with the historic character of the building. [58] Fire doors that retract into the walls have been installed here (not visible in photo) preserve the historic character of this corridor. 152 CODE-REQUIRED WORK | LIFE SAFETY 2.i Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION RESILIENCE TO NATURAL HAZARDS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Resilience to natural hazards should be addressed as part of the treatment Rehabilitation. A historic building may have existing characteristics or features that help address or minimize the impacts of natural hazards. These should be used to best advantage and should be taken into consideration early in the planning stages of a rehabilitation project before proposing any new treatments. When new adaptive treatments are needed they should be carried out in a manner that will have the least impact on the historic character of the building, its site, and setting. . Identifying the vulnerabilities of the historic property to the Failing to identify and periodically reevaluate the potential vulner- impacts of natural hazards (such as wildﬁres, hurricanes, or ability of the building, its site, and setting to the impacts of natural tornadoes) using the most current climate information and data hazards. available. Assessing the potential impacts of known vulnerabilities on character-deﬁning features of the building, its site, and setting; and reevaluating and reassessing potential impacts on a regular basis. Documenting the property and character-deﬁning features as a record and guide for future repair work, should it be necessary, and storing the documentation in a weatherproof location. Failing to document the historic property and its character-deﬁning features with the result that such information is not available in the future to guide repair or reconstruction work, should it be necessary. Ensuring that historic resources inventories and maps are accu- rate, up to date, and accessible in times of emergency. Maintaining the building, its site, and setting in good repair, and regularly monitoring character-deﬁning features. Failing to regularly monitor and maintain the property and the building systems in good repair. Using and maintaining existing characteristics and features of the Allowing loss, damage, or destruction to occur to the historic build- historic building, its site, setting, and larger environment (such ing, its site, or setting by failing to evaluate potential future impacts as shutters for storm protection or a site wall that keeps out ﬂood of natural hazards or to plan and implement adaptive measures, if waters) that may help to avoid or minimize the impacts of natural necessary to address possible threats. hazards Undertaking work to prevent or minimize the loss, damage, or Carrying out adaptive measures intended to address the impacts destruction of the historic property while retaining and preserving of natural hazards that are unnecessarily invasive or will otherwise signiﬁcant features and the overall historic character of the build- adversely impact the historic character of the building, its site, or ing, its site, and setting. setting. RESILIENCE TO NATURAL HAZARDS 153 2.i Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION 154 [60] In some instances, it may be necessary to elevate a historic building located in a ﬂoodplain to protect it. But this treatment is appropriate only if elevating the building will retain its historic character, including its relationship to the site, and its new height will be compatible with surrounding buildings if in a historic district. The house on the right, which has been raised only slightly, has retained its historic character. The house on the left has been raised several feet higher, resulting in a greater impact on the historic character of the house and the district. RESILIENCE TO NATURAL HAZARDS 2.i Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION RESILIENCE TO NATURAL HAZARDS RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Ensuring that, when planning work to adapt for natural hazards, all feasible alternatives are considered, and that the options requiring the least alteration are considered ﬁrst. Implementing local and regional traditions (such as elevating residential buildings at risk of ﬂooding or reducing ﬂammable vegetation around structures in ﬁre-prone areas) for adapting buildings and sites in response to speciﬁc natural hazards, when appropriate. Such traditional methods may be appropriate if they are compatible with the historic character of the building, its site, and setting. Implementing a treatment traditionally used in another region or one typically used for a different property type or architectural style which is not compatible with the historic character of the property. Using special exemptions and variances when adaptive treat- ments to protect buildings from known hazards would otherwise negatively impact the historic character of the building, its site, and setting. Considering adaptive options, whenever possible, that would protect multiple historic resources, if the treatment can be imple- mented without negatively impacting the historic character of the district, or archeological resources, other cultural or religious features, or burial grounds. Sustainability Sustainability is usually a very important and integral part of the treatment Rehabilitation. Existing energy-eﬃcient features should be taken into consideration early in the planning stages of a rehabili- tation project before proposing any energy improvements. There are numerous treatments that may be used to upgrade a historic build- ing to help it operate more eﬃciently while retaining its character. The topic of sustainability is addressed in detail in The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guide- lines on Sustainability for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. RESILIENCE TO NATURAL HAZARDS 155 2.i Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED New Additions Placing functions and services required for a new use (including elevators and stairways) in secondary or non-character-deﬁning interior spaces of the historic building rather than constructing a new addition. Expanding the size of the historic building by constructing a new addition when requirements for the new use could be met by alter- ing non-character-deﬁning interior spaces. Constructing a new addition on a secondary or non-character- deﬁning elevation and limiting its size and scale in relationship to the historic building. Constructing a new addition on or adjacent to a primary elevation of the building which negatively impacts the building’s historic character. Constructing a new addition that results in the least possible loss of historic materials so that character-deﬁning features are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed. Attaching a new addition in a manner that obscures, damages, or destroys character-deﬁning features of the historic building. Designing a new addition that is compatible with the historic building. Designing a new addition that is signiﬁcantly different and, thus, incompatible with the historic building. Ensuring that the addition is subordinate and secondary to the historic building and is compatible in massing, scale, materials, relationship of solids to voids, and color. Constructing a new addition that is as large as or larger than the historic building, which visually overwhelms it (i.e., results in the diminution or loss of its historic character). 156 NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 2.i Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Using the same forms, materials, and color range of the historic building in a manner that does not duplicate it, but distinguishes the addition from the original building. Duplicating the exact form, material, style, and detailing of the historic building in a new addition so that the new work appears to be historic. Basing the alignment, rhythm, and size of the window and door openings of the new addition on those of the historic building. Incorporating a simple, recessed, small-scale hyphen, or con- nection, to physically and visually separate the addition from the historic building. Distinguishing the addition from the original building by setting it back from the wall plane of the historic building. [61 a-b] The materials, design, and location at the back of the historic house are important factors in making this a compatible new addition. Photos: © Maxwell MacKenzie. NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 157 2.i Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Ensuring that the addition is stylistically appropriate for the his- toric building type (e.g., whether it is residential or institutional). Considering the design for a new addition in terms of its rela- tionship to the historic building as well as the historic district, neighborhood, and setting. [62] The stair tower at the rear of this commercial building is a compatible new addition. 158 NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 2.i Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Rooftop Additions Designing a compatible rooftop addition for a multi-story build- ing, when required for a new use, that is set back at least one full bay from the primary and other highly-visible elevations and that is inconspicuous when viewed from surrounding streets. Constructing a rooftop addition that is highly visible, which nega- tively impacts the character of the historic building, its site, setting, or district. [ 63] (a) A mockup should be erected to demonstrate the visibility of a proposed rooftop addition and its potential impact on the historic building. Based on review of this mockup (orange marker), it was determined that the rooftop addition would meet the Standards (b). The addition is unobtrusive and blends in with the building behind it. New addition NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 159 2.i Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Limiting a rooftop addition to one story in height to minimize its visibility and its impact on the historic character of the building. Constructing a highly-visible, multi-story rooftop addition that alters the building’s historic character. Constructing a rooftop addition on low-rise, one- to three-story his- toric buildings that is highly visible, overwhelms the building, and negatively impacts the historic district. Constructing a rooftop addition with amenities (such as a raised pool deck with plantings, HVAC equipment, or screening) that is highly visible and negatively impacts the historic character of the building. [64] Not Recommended: It is generally not appropriate to construct a rooftop addition on a low-rise, two- to three-story building such as this, because it negatively affects its historic character. 160 NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 2.i Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED [65] (a) This (far left) Related New Construction Adding a new building to a historic site or property only if the requirements for a new or continuing use cannot be accommo- dated within the existing structure or structures. Adding a new building to a historic site or property when the project requirements could be accommodated within the existing structure or structures. Locating new construction far enough away from the historic building, when possible, where it will be minimally visible and will not negatively affect the building’s character, the site, or setting. Placing new construction too close to the historic building so that it negatively impacts the building’s character, the site, or setting. is a compatible new outbuilding constructed on the site of a historic plantation house (b). Although traditional in design, it is built of wood to differentiate it from the historic house (which is scored stucco) located at the back of the site so as not to impact the historic house, and minimally visible from the public right-of-way (c). new addition NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 161 2.i Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - REHABILITATION NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED Designing new construction on a historic site or in a historic setting that it is compatible but differentiated from the historic building or buildings. Replicating the features of the historic building when designing a new building, with the result that it may be confused as historic or original to the site or setting. Considering the design for related new construction in terms of its relationship to the historic building as well as the historic district and setting. Ensuring that new construction is secondary to the historic build- ing and does not detract from its signiﬁcance. Adding new construction that results in the diminution or loss of the historic character of the building, including its design, materi- als, location, or setting. Constructing a new building on a historic property or on an adjacent site that is much larger than the historic building. Designing new buildings or groups of buildings to meet a new use that are not compatible in scale or design with the character of the historic building and the site, such as apartments on a historic school property that are too residential in appearance. Using site features or land formations, such as trees or sloping terrain, to help minimize the new construction and its impact on the historic building and property. Designing an addition to a historic building in a densely-built location (such as a downtown commercial district) to appear as a separate building or inﬁll, rather than as an addition. In such a setting, the addition or the inﬁll structure must be compatible with the size and scale of the historic building and surrounding buildings—usually the front elevation of the new building should be in the same plane (i.e., not set back from the historic build- ing). This approach may also provide the opportunity for a larger addition or inﬁll when the façade can be broken up into smaller elements that are consistent with the scale of the historic build- ing and surrounding buildings. 162 NEW EXTERIOR ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION 2.i Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 10/5/2017 1 1 Design Review – 227 Wood Street The Harden House Cassandra Bumgarner, Historic Preservation Planner Landmark Preservation Commission, October 18, 2017 Role of the LPC • Evaluate the revised option presented for Conceptual Review in accordance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Chapter 14 of Municipal Code • Not ready for Final Design Review 2 2.j Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Staff Presentation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 10/5/2017 2 Section 14-48, “Approval of Proposed Work” (1) The effect of the proposed work upon the general historical and/or architectural character of the landmark or landmark district; (2) The architectural style, arrangement, texture and materials of existing and proposed improvements, and their relation to the sites, structures and objects in the district; (3) The effects of the proposed work in creating, changing or destroying the exterior characteristics of the site, structure or object upon which such work is to be done; (4) The effect of the proposed work upon the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of the landmark or landmark district; and (5) The extent to which the proposed work meets the standards of the city and the United States Secretary of the Interior then in effect for the preservation, reconstruction, restoration or rehabilitation of historic resources. The proposed work would fall under the Secretary of the Interior’s Standard’s for Rehabilitation. 3 Sect of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 4 2.j Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Staff Presentation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 10/5/2017 3 Sect of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 5 227 Wood Street – The Harden House • Owners: Gordon and Jody Winner • Hipped box vernacular with Victorian details– constructed 1904; Designated in 1999 Proposed Work: • demolition of rear enclosed mudroom/porch • addition on north and rear elevations, approximately 350 square feet • addition of skylight • addition of rear deck 6 2.j Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Staff Presentation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 10/5/2017 4 227 Wood Street – The Harden House 7 227 Wood Street – The Harden House 8 2.j Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Staff Presentation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) 10/5/2017 5 9 Design Review – 227 Wood Street The Harden House Cassandra Bumgarner, Historic Preservation Planner Landmark Preservation Commission October 18, 2017 2.j Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Staff Presentation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW) advantage when considering new adaptive treatments so as to have the least impact on the historic character of the building, its site, and setting. INTRODUCTION 2.i Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Standards for Rehabilitation (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - 241215'&(+456(.1142.#0 1,439 SF (473 SF ADDITION) 2.e Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) - Attachment: Previous Options 2017-08-16 (6002 : 227 WOOD STREET (THE HARDEN HOUSE) -