Loading...
2022.01.03 Staff Report To: Historical Commission From: Sarah LaValley Re: January 3 2022 Historical Commission Staff Report 5:30 PM: Public Hearing - Request for a Local Historic District Certificate of Appropriateness pursuant to Section 195 of the Northampton Code for proposed replacement of 30 windows. Perry Cohen/Pella Products, 330 Elm Street, Map ID 31A-002. The application proposes replacement of many windows on a 1920 Colonial Revival. The Review is required as the proposed windows are not a “duplication or rehabilitation of existing windows, provided that the new windows are identical in size to the old windows, have the same style and details and are consistent with the Design Standard” The Commission previously did not find that replacement of all of the building’s windows met the criteria for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. The majority of Elm Street- facing windows are not proposed to be replaced. Replacement of all windows circled in green in the application materials is proposed. Windows are proposed to be wood interior with white aluminum clad exterior to match existing color.Grille patters will match existing or we request to add where appropriate to the home for consistency. Grilles are proposed to be permanently bonded to the glass both interior and exterior using 3M insulation foam tape in order to meet code for u-value parameters. An assessment of existing windows was not provided, but not all windows proposed for replacement appear to be original. The historic inventory form notes that “First story windows have limestone keystone in their straight lintels and 6/6 sash. The 6/6 sash is used at the second story as well. The south ell has a row of arched windows at the first story, which is relatively unconventional for this very traditional house.” These windows are no longer proposed to be replaced. Recommendation: The Design Standards, beginning on page 39, with relevant sections below, provide standards for replacement windows for instances where repair is not feasible. The Commission should review these criteria with the applicant, with special attention to windows that are original to the structure. The Commission may find that the proposed windows may be appropriate to the district and the structure given locations and visibility, condition and material of existing windows, even if all criteria are not strictly met. Original or later windows, trim and features should be retained and repaired except in cases when they are beyond repair. In such cases, replacement must be based on physical, photographic, or documentary evidence. `2 Where the building has been altered to have several types of windows, proposed changes shall be consistent with either the predominant window pattern of the building or the original historic pattern. Historic oriels shall not be removed or replaced. Alterations to oriels on the primary elevation are inappropriate. Exact Duplication. Nothing should be different, including: material of the window (usually wood), window style (usually double-hung), grid pattern (no change in the number of divided lights), grid style (true divided lights will be replaced with true divided lights), grid dimensions, sash widths, lintels, sills, glass, treatment (single-pane), or frame type and opening, shutter hardware, surrounds, and all other details shall be duplicated in the same configuration, dimensions, style and existing materials. Retention of original historic material such as curved, leaded, or stained glass is mandatory. Retrofitting original window sashes with weather-stripping and/or insulated glass is encouraged. Alterations to the design and arrangement of window openings on the historic façade, other than restoration to documented historical conditions, are generally not allowed Glazing should be limited to the following: - Insulating glass - Single glass with removable energy panels Divided light options (muntin bars) should be limited to the following: - Authentic divided light - Simulated divided light with spacer bar between insulating glass. The following are unacceptable options for divided lights: - Simulated divided light (applied to glass) - Grilles between insulating glass - Removable grilles Narrow muntin bars that closely match existing muntin widths. Muntin bars wider than 7/8” are not acceptable Wood clad exteriors are preferred. Aluminum clad exteriors are acceptable, provided the profile reasonably matches existing window muntins. Section 106 Review, Mount Tom Road (Rt 5) Shared Use Path Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires federal agencies to consider the effects of federally funded projects on historic properties (Here, Federal highway funding through MassDOT) by consulting with State Historic Preservation Offices. As part of these reviews, local Commissions can review the work, and provide advisory comment to MassHistoric if it could negatively impact “buildings, structures, archaeological sites, districts, objects, and landscapes that are listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places.” Discuss Local Historic District Design Guidelines Updates As discussed briefly at prior meetings, the Local Historic District Guidelines have not yet been approved by Council, a necessary step to make them part of the LHD Ordinance. That makes now an opportune time to review and make any edits and updates that might be needed. Commissioners should review suggested edits, and review the guidelines to flag anything that could benefit from revisions prior to Council review.