Loading...
2023.04.24 Staff Report.pdf To: Historical Commission From: Sarah LaValley Re: April 24 2023 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 19 windows. RJ Elm LLC c/o Jessica Brand, 300 Elm Street, Map ID 31A-082 Please note that staff recommendations are based on the paper record. Applicants may present other information that could be persuasive. The Commission should review the Design Standards for each proposed piece of regulated work. Window standards are on page 39. Overview: The application proposes replacement of single pane original windows with Marvin double- paned Fiberglass-clad and Wood-clad windows with simulated exterior divided light. Windows proposed to be replacement are a mix of original and later replacements. Grille pattern of original windows is proposed to be matched. Likely original grille pattern of replacement windows that are now without spacers is proposed by addition of divided light in lower panes that were removed at some point in the past. Other windows in the house were replaced with non-compliant windows at some point prior to creation of the historic district. Recommendation: The Design Standards specify that “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. The Standards also provide guidance for replacement windows for instances where repair is not feasible. The Standards specify that “The complete replacement of all windows in a building in which only a few are in disrepair will not be approved” and that “Divided light options (muntin bars) should be limited to the following: - Authentic divided light or Simulated divided light with spacer bar between insulating glass.” The proposed window replacements are simulated divided light, with exterior spacer bars. A full window assessment was not provided, but the application includes photographs of existing conditions. If the Commission agrees that the windows are not able to be retained and repaired, and that work meets the standards and is appropriate for the character of the District, a Certificate of Appropriateness could be issued. Windows not visible from any public ways are not subject to the Ordinance, and the Commission should clearly identify any exempt windows in the decision. The Commisison should note that fiberglass is not specified in the design standards and an updated section could be considered. `2 If the Commission finds that a project is inappropriate (certificate is disapproved), it shall consider whether a certificate of hardship should be issued. The Ordinance specifies that a hardship can be issued if “owing to conditions especially affecting the building or structures involved, but not affecting the historic district generally, failure to approve an application will involve a substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the applicant and whether such application may be approved without substantial detriment to the public welfare and without substantial derogation from the intent and purposes of the Historic District Ordinance. Review Proposed Exterior Restoration Work, Pursuant to Historic Preservation Restriction Agreement – 20 Hawley Street/Hawley Apartments, former St. John Cantius The City will hold a permanent preservation restriction on the former St. John Cantius Church. Required as a condition of CPA funding for exterior restoration work to the building, it requires that the City review proposed ‘major’ alterations to the Premises to determine that such work will not affect the characteristics which contribute to the architectural, archaeological, or historical integrity of the Premises. Once recorded, the restrictions become part of the property’s chain of title and “run with the land” in perpetuity, thus binding not only the owner who grants the easement but all future owners as well. In Massachusetts, Historic Preservation Restrictions are based on a model document prepared by and signed off on by the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC). This contains a set of Grantor’s Covenants; an agreement by the Grantor to maintain buildings in good condition, prohibit complete demolition, list minor activities for which no review is necessary, and outline the review process for other proposed renovations. The restriction is nearly finalized, just awaiting final approval to sign from MHC, but the property owner is following the process as if it is finalized. The most current draft and plans are available in the public file cabinet. The Restriction specifies that the Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation must be used as a guide for review.