Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 Design Review Subcommittee (4) Design Review Subcommittee of the Elgin Heritage Commission September 13, 2011 The meeting of the Design Review Subcommittee was called to order at 6:03 p.m. in the City Council Chambers (Located on the 2nd floor of City Hall) by Chairman Stroud. MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Briska, Betsy Couture, Pat Miller, Bill Ristow, John Roberson, Dennis Roxworthy, Steve Stroud and John Wiedmeyer MEMBERS ABSENT: None CITY STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Fritz-Williams, Historic Preservation Planner; and Cindy Walden, DRS Secretary RECOGNIZE OTHER PERSONS PRESENT: None PROPERTIES ON AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION: Old Business None New Business 266 Douglas Avenue— Replace 2 windows 78 N Liberty Street— Replace four doors 129/131 Tennyson Court— Replace garage overhead door 602 N Spring Street— Install handicap ramp 18 N Chapel Street—Replace garage overhead door 612 N Spring Street— Replace bay window roof and add cresting Additional/Add-On Item for Discussion: 432 S Liberty St—Siding and trim work APPROVAL OF MINUTES: No minutes were presented for consideration. ITEMS TABLED: None Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 • Page 2 of 12 NEW BUSINESS: 266 Douglas Avenue— Replace 2 windows The owner has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace two windows at the rear of the property. No information was submitted regarding the cost to repair the windows or specifications and cost to replace the windows. Staff tried to assess the condition of the widows from the ground. Staff did not observe broken glass, damaged sashes, or any other obvious cause for replacement. Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Windows A. which are original should be preserved in their original location, size, and design and with their original materials and numbers of panes (glass lights). B. which are not original should not be added to primary facades or to secondary facades where readily visible. C. should be repaired rather than replaced, but if replacement is necessary, the recommended replacement should be in-kind to match the originals in material and design. Windows clad in aluminum or baked-on aluminum are acceptable as replacement windows for use throughout the structure. Factors to be considered in determining whether the severity of deterioration of windows requires replacement shall include but not be limited to the following factors: damage, excessive weathering, loss of soundness or integrity of the wood, deterioration due to rot or insect attack, and cost to repair. As to the factor of the cost to repair windows, a particular window may be permitted to be replaced rather than repaired if the estimated cost to repair the windows is more than the estimated cost of the purchase and installation of appropriate replacement windows. D. which are original of steel or aluminum should be repaired with materials to match the original. If repair is not feasible, replacement should be with new windows to match the original as closely as possible in materials and dimensions. Aluminum extruded windows are an acceptable replacement substitute for original steel sash windows, as long as their size, shape and profile match the original windows. E. Vinyl extruded windows are not permitted for use in historic districts. F. which are new should not have snap-on or flush muntins. True divided muntins are preferred over these types of muntins which do not have the same appearance as historic windows. New muntins which are an integral part of the window sash and installed on both sides of the glass are preferable to snap-on simple grilles. G. screens and/or storms should be wood or baked-on or anodized aluminum and fit within the window frames. H. that are approved for replacement may be fitted with new double-paned Low-E glass that will improve the energy conservation on the interior. Only low-e glass that does not contain a tint should be used. A) Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 Page 3 of 12 Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Staff would recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions: 1. Cost estimates to repair the two windows are submitted. 2. Cost estimates to replace the windows are submitted. 3. Specifications on the new windows are submitted for approval. ***** Fritz-Williams: Was unable to determine condition due to height and limited space. Window does show some signs of deterioration. Irma Sifuentes (owner): Tenants have stated wind blows thru the sides of the window. Couture: Are there storm windows available or on these windows? Sifuentes: No. Couture: Storm windows help a lot to keep the wind and elements from coming thru. Stroud: Commission recommends repairing, before replacing of windows. Old window material is better than today's materials. Repairs typically save money and have better results. Motion made by Committee Member Roberson to approve with staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Wiedmeyer. The motion passed unanimously. r 78 N Liberty Street— Replace four doors The owner has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace four doors on the property. The work was completed without a COA. All four doors appear to be different sizes than the original openings as photographed in 2008. All but one door is the correct style though. Door#1 at the rear of the house has one lit over two vertical panels. This door is behind a fence and not visible to any public right of way. Door#2 on the south side has nine lites over two vertical panels. This door is more than 50% back from the front of the house but is visible. This style is not appropriate. Door#3 on the south side has one lite over two vertical panels. This door is more than 50% back from the front of the house but is visible. Door#4 on the front of the house has one lite over two vertical panels. This door is highly visible. Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Doors and Door Features A. should be replaced with new doors appropriate for the style and period of the dwelling. Replacement doors should be similar in design to the original in style, glazing (type of Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 Page 4 of 12 glass and area) and lights (pane configuration). Wood or solid core fiberglass is acceptable materials for use in replacement doors. B. should be constructed of solid wood panels, such as the four-panel Homestead or Italianate design may be used on the front if appropriate to the style of the house. C. should involve glazing in clear etched or beveled glass as appropriate to the style of the house, if applicable. D. should only involve artificial materials such as "lexan" or other acrylic based materials, if applicable. E. should not be removed or altered. The original size of the door opening should not be enlarged, reduced, or shortened in height. F. should not be replaced by doors with new designs, especially those at the front entrance or at side entrances which are readily visible from the street. G. should not be added at locations where they did not originally exist. If needed to meet safety codes or to enhance the use of a property, doors should be added at the rear or sides of dwellings where they would not be readily visible. Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Staff would recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions: 1. The glass lites on door#2 are replaced with one glass lite. 2. The opening on door#4 is returned to its original size. 3. Door#4 is smooth fiberglass or wood. **** Fritz-Williams: All four doors have been altered in size. Caridad Ruiz(wife/owner): We were proud to buy within the historic district. There was no door in place (Door#3) when we bought the house. Attempted to get information for door and porch; obtained a picture from the city. We made door#3. The front door was about 1/2"from the floor. Tried to keep the air out/in by using door plates and blankets,just didn't work. I agree that Door#2 is not appropriate. Fritz-Williams: The trim is narrow. Stroud: Door# 2's nine lite style is inappropriate. Fritz-Williams: The grids are removal. Stroud: Removing the grids will satisfy the one lite requirement for Door#2. Fritz-Williams: Door#4 is the 2nd doorway to the right. Prior door would have three (3) horizontal panels. Framing has been increased. The other doors are less visible. Owner: Kitchen door is Door#4. Stroud: The framing was enlarged to put in a smaller door. Need to put the appropriate size door. Wiedmeyer: The threshold was at the porch floor; and was raised by a board. Owner: Storm door was made. Roxworthy: Was this a pre-hung door? Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 Page 5 of 12 Stroud: Did you install the door? Owner: We hired the tenant to install the door. Tenant stated they would install the same size door. Fritz-Williams: The door is slimmer and shorter. Stroud: To make appropriate size, you would have to order a custom door or buy an older door at one of the salvage stores. This door needs to be replaced. Future exterior work needs to have approval prior to work being completed to ensure appropriateness. Motion made by Committee Member Roxworthy to approve as staff recommends as amended: 1- Door#2 remove muntins/grids; and 2- Door#4 same style (one lite). The motion was seconded by Committee Member Ristow. The motion passed unanimously. 129/131 Tennyson Court— Replace garage overhead door The owner has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the garage doors. The current doors are plywood and are not original to the structure. The owner has suggested CHI Model #2283 in sandstone. Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Garage Doors A. should be maintained to the greatest extent possible, but may be retrofitted with modern hardware and custom garage door openers. If the original doors are missing or too deteriorated to repair, they should be replaced with new doors that fit the original opening and are appropriate to the design and period of construction of the garage. B. should be raised panel designs, with a solid core, if proposed to be in metal designs. Flush design doors (without raised panels) unless retrofitted to look like traditional doors and hollow core metal doors should be avoided when possible. C. should have windows simple in design with clear glass, if windows are necessary. Muntins in a simple design may also be used. The use of ornamental stained glass and openings in decorative shapes such as sunbursts and oval designs are not permitted. D. should have painted metal panel doors to match the house in a color appropriate to the period of the house. Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Staff would recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions: 1. The garage door matches the original opening on the garage. The garage door has clear glass lites, short panel. **** Fritz-Williams: The header has been lowered. Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 • Page 6 of 12 Dane Buczkowski (owner): Lintel is up about one foot. Want to knock out the "header infill" and raise the opening back up to eight feet height. Motion made by Committee Member Ristow to approve with staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roxworthy. The motion passed unanimously. 602 N Spring Street— Install handicap ramp The architect has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a handicap ramp. The proposed location is the front of the house. The architect has stated that the side enclosed porch is part of the kitchen and does not have the maneuverability to accommodate a wheelchair. Staff has investigated the site and found that there is only 11 feet from the house to the north lot line. Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Handicap Ramps A. should be added in such a way that original historic materials are not removed and that the ramp construction should be reversible. B. should be located at the rear or sides of dwellings. If a handicapped ramp must be placed on the front of a residential dwelling it should be of wood construction rather than of brick, concrete, or metal. C. should be of wood construction and simple traditional design and configuration or designed to match the original porch railing in materials, dimensions, and detailing. Brick, concrete, and metal ramps are more acceptable at rear and sides of dwellings. Ramps should be painted to match the color of the porch railing or to match the overall paint color of the building. D. should have pipe railing painted in darker colors to reduce the impact of the railing on the structure. E. should be screened with landscaping, if readily visible. Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Staff would recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions: 1. The ramp is located on the south side of the house, running down towards the west, in front of the bay window. 2. The ramp is screened with evergreen shrubs to obscure the view. 3. The ramp is removed when it is no longer necessary. ***** Margarita Dineda and Espiridion Cantor(owners)were present for tonight's meeting. Fritz-Williams: Very difficult site. Need a minimum of 36" for ramp. North side actually only Al) Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 Page 7 of 12 eleven feet wide from house to property line; spacing is insufficient on north side. (House is rob. incorrectly noted on Plat of Survey—shown appx. 10' south of structure location). On the west elevation, the door to on the bump-out leads to the basement, not the house. On the south elevation,that doorway has an interior step up into the kitchen. Zoning and historic guidelines do not support parking in front of the house. Since writing the staff report, two additional items has been found for consideration. 1-A lift could be installed adjacent to the driveway. Minimal landscaping would be needed to "soften" the visual impact of the lift. 2-Starting at the south porch doorway; install a new landing south of the existing porch, near the south porch doorway; extend ramp easterly along existing porch, then north parallel with existing porch. Install a new service walk from end of ramp to the northern driveway. Keep ramp as close to existing porch as possible, landscape to soften the visual appearance. At this point, a total of five options have been presented for committee consideration: 1-Lift installed adjacent to driveway (possible grant for assistance?) 2-Ramp installed extending west towards original driveway/garage, in front of the bay window 3-Ramp installed along eastern elevation, in front of existing porch 4-Ramp installed from south porch doorway, extended south, then east,then north to new service walk to northern driveway 5-Driveway expansion in front of the house Couture: Could the lift be used in the winter? Fritz-Williams: Yes, it would be commercial grade. elk Stroud: Installing the lift would illuminate the ramp and a lot of landscaping. Amy Hutchinson (contractor): The lift grant would be income qualifying. Can we have an alternative in case they do not income qualify? Roberson: Ramp to the new sidewalk would be doable. The ramp to the west should not be considered. It's probably more than 80'from porch house to driveway. Wiedmeyer: Need to include a statement to have the lift/ramp removed when the property is sold; unless new owners need an ADA compliant lift/ramp. Motion made by Committee Member Couture to approve in the following order: 1- Lift unit adjacent to driveway; 2- ramp installed starting near south porch doorway, then easterly, turning north to complete ADA distance requirements. With either option, landscaping must be installed to minimize the visual impact from the street. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roxworthy. The motion passed 7-0. Yeas: Briska, Couture, Miller, Ristow, Roxworthy, Stroud, Wiedmeyer Abstain: Roberson 18 N Chapel Street— Replace garage overhead door The owner has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the garage door. The current door is 16 feet wide and is manually opened. The new door will be 12 feet. This will allow the owner to install a service door. The owner presented several styles to staff but did not include them with the COA. All options shown to staff were appropriate. Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 • Page 8 of 12 Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Garage Doors A. should be maintained to the greatest extent possible, but may be retrofitted with modern hardware and custom garage door openers. If the original doors are missing or too deteriorated to repair, they should be replaced with new doors that fit the original opening and are appropriate to the design and period of construction of the garage. B. should be raised panel designs, with a solid core, if proposed to be in metal designs. Flush design doors (without raised panels) unless retrofitted to look like traditional doors and hollow core metal doors should be avoided when possible. C. should have windows simple in design with clear glass, if windows are necessary. Muntins in a simple design may also be used. The use of ornamental stained glass and openings in decorative shapes such as sunbursts and oval designs are not permitted. D. should have painted metal panel doors to match the house in a color appropriate to the period of the house. Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Staff would recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions: 1. The garage door style is approved by the subcommittee. 2. The service door is steel or smooth fiberglass with four vertical panels. ***** Mark Preradovic (owner): Existing door is deteriorated. Not enough room for 2 eight foot wide doors. Proposing overhead door is Model MR5S with an electric opener. Also, requesting the service door on the same elevation. Miller: Style of the service door? Owner: Solid door; okay with staff recommendations. Couture: Brackets and handles to be installed on the overhead door? Fritz-Williams: No brackets. Proposed handles would be okay. Wiedmeyer: Width of service door? Owner: 36". Wiedmeyer: Make the spacing for the service door equal between the overhead door opening and the side of the garage; might only have enough room to install the trim. Miller: Trim style? Owner: 1 x 4 to match the overhead door. Motion made by Committee Member Couture to with staff recommendations as amended: 1-Overhead door style MR5S without lites and handles; 2-service door to be 36" width centered between overhead opening and side of garage. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Ristow. The motion passed unanimously. 411) , Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 Page 9 of 12 612 N Spring Street— Replace bay window roof and add cresting The owner has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to re-roof the bay window and install cresting. The owner wants the bay window to have a metal roof, copper colored. No specifications on what type of metal was submitted. No specifications on the cresting was submitted either. Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications: Roof A. should be retained in their original shape and pitch, with original features (such as cresting, chimneys, finials, cupolas, etc.), and, if possible, with original roof materials. B. should be re-roofed with substitute materials such as asphalt or fiberglass shingles if the original materials are no longer present or if the retention of the original roof material is not economically feasible. C. should be in appropriate colors such as dark grey, black, brown or shades of dark red; red or green may also be appropriate for Craftsman/Bungalow period dwellings for new asphalt or fiberglass shingled roofs. D. should have sawn cedar shingles added only after a complete tear-off of the existing roof materials is completed. This is necessary to provide adequate ventilation and proper drying of the roof during wet conditions. E. should have soldered metal panels added as the surface material, if the roof is flat. If not readily visible, rolled composition or EPDM (rolled rubber) roofing materials are acceptable. F. should have proper water-tight flashing at junctions between roofs and walls, around chimneys, skylights, vent pipes, and in valleys and hips where two planes of a roof meet. Metal flashing should be used instead of the application of caulking material or bituminous coating, which can deteriorate due to weathering and allow moisture damage. G. should not have new dormers, roof decks, balconies or other additions introduced on fronts of dwellings. These types of additions may be added on the rear or sides of dwellings where not readily visible. H. should not have split cedar shakes, in most cases. Architectural Details and Features A. should be repaired rather than replaced. B. should not be removed or altered if original to the building. C. should not be covered or concealed with vinyl, aluminum or other substitute material. D. should not be added unless there is physical, pictorial, or historical evidence that such features were original to the house or consistent with the style which would allow them to be added to the house. These features should match the original in materials, scale, location, proportions,form, and detailing. Staff Recommendation: Staff does not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted. Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 • Page 10 of 12 • Staff would recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions: 1. The bay roof has flat seams. 2. The bay roof metal specifications are submitted for staff review. 3. The cresting is submitted to the subcommittee for review and approval of the design, material, etc. ***** Bay window roof material: Stroud: Originally when copper roof was installed, it has the "copper" look for about a year before the green patina would occur. Renate Adams (owner): Why not the copper color? Stroud: It would continue to show as a bright copper color. It would stick out, rather than blend in with the house. Couture: A good example of that are the row homes along Kimball Street south of Douglas. Owner: There would only be a 3.5' x 3.5' x 12" color exposed. Copper installation has its own problems attached to wood. How would anyone know when the copper color was installed? Have images of other locations where metal was installed. Miller: Not sure this little edge is straight, concave, or built up over the years. They were typically metal. Hard to tell what shade of orange/copper is proposed. Do you really want an orange color on your house? I don't see how it blends in with the house color scheme. Owner: Intending to paint the house; changing the color scheme. Fritz-Williams: Anodized aluminum should be used. Roxworthy: How about a brown color for the metal area? Stroud: The problem is the area is likely to be concaved. Might be premature in determining a color. Fritz-Williams: Metal will bend to shape. Wiedmeyer: Lapped seams if aluminum; needs to soldered if copper. Roxworthy: A temporary tarp could be put up to cover area when the roof area is exposed to keep water/rain out. Stroud: Rolled roof material could be used as an alternative to keep the water out. Fritz-Williams: The ribs will need to be done. Wiedmeyer: The placement of a liner should be applied between the copper and the wood. Miller: A good roofer will know the proper steps to take to ensure the least amount of problems might be incurred by the roof installation. Wiedmeyer: If metal roofing material is used, a color to compliment the new color scheme should be selected and submitted to staff. Ristow: Roof with copper roof is at 725 N Spring. Owner: Why not seamed metal? Fritz-Williams: Not historically accurate. Stroud: Recommend looking at 602 S Spring; the bay there is very similar to this one. Miller: Think the aluminum material will be disappointing. Seams will be very visible. Might want to have contractor give you addresses to see similar projects they have done. Cooper or lead coated copper should be installed. . Design Review Subcommittee—September 13, 2011 Page 11 of 12 Roxworthy: Aluminum will expand and contract with weather conditions. Miller: Be careful that a large band of flashing is not installed. Cresting: Wiedmeyer: Dimensions indicate 18" —24". Owner: Several photos shown of various styles of cresting in Elgin. Miller: The railroad station on National was replicated from photos. Cresting was made of aluminum and powder coated. Couture: I like the corners being higher. Owner: Corner elements are called snowguards. A lot of homes donated their metal (including decorative cresting) during World War 2. Fritz-Williams: Most designs would work on this project. Stroud: Concept approval of the cresting could be done by the committee, with final design approved by staff. Roof should be concaved with the fewest seams possible. Cooper color would be inappropriate. Cooper roofing first choice. Anodized aluminum would also be okay. Motion made by Committee Member Ristow to approve as amended: 1-Concept only of cresting approved by committee (design to be approved by staff); 2-Bay roof to be flat with to be concaved exposure in copper (1st choice), with option of anodized aluminum consistent with the original design (exact color to be approved and approved by staff); The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roxworthy. The motion passed unanimously. r Additional item for discussion by staff: 432 S Liberty St—Siding and trim work—grant project Fritz-Williams: Staff was reviewing other work in the neighborhood and found several items that were not being installed as approved by the COA issued for a grant project. Need some direction on how to proceed. The following items were discovered: 1-COA approved clear smooth cedar siding with a 2 1/2" reveal; reveal is approximately 4" and numerous knots are exposed; 2-Window sills are missing; 3-Siding of front porch was sided over; 4-Missing water table boards; 5- 1x8 fascia boards installed; 6-Corner boards are not mitered; 7- Gaps in several areas between boards. Miller: Grant money should not be provided to work done inappropriately within the historic district. Briska: A 4" reveal is not uncommon for a bungalow. Wiedmeyer: Corner boards are sticking out sometimes more than the siding; other times not. Asphalt siding actually looked better than what has been installed at this point. Fritz-Williams: Can the owner epoxy the knots? Reduce the reveal height? Miller: Not sure this siding could be reused. Lots of knots, and joined incorrectly. Roxworthy: The siding could be cut down. Briska: Would be willing to have the 4" reveal, but need to have the knots epoxyed, correct the water table boards, install the window sills, mitered boards. I�" Miller: When you try to put the details to the porch, they won't work. Design Review Subcommittee— September 13, 2011 • Page 12 of 12 Couture: Approving the installation of the wrong material which was clearly noted in the COA, is not something the committee should consider. Jose Moreno (owner): All the material was paid for already. About 90% of the work is done. Briska: When it comes down to it, it is the contractor and homeowner's responsibility to ensure the proper material was being used. Stroud: Recommend more research be done, and have a formal submittal to the committee. Fritz-Williams: This project will be provided to the committee with a staff report. Stroud: If the city is paying for the grant,the product should be appropriate. Miller: Other grants proposals were turned down for this project to be done as submitted and approved by COA. CORRESPONDENCE: None ADJOURNMENT: Motion to adjourn was made by Committee Member Roberson. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Ristow. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting of the Design Review Subcommittee was adjourned at 7:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 1 / Cindy A. "den Approved: Design Review Subcommittee Secretary November 8, 2011 I