Historic Code Help - Contractor Talk - Professional Construction and Remodeling Forum

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 04:02 AM

Ha! not what you thought, I am offering, rather than seeking. I have been poking around here for a short while, but some of the things I have read are surprising, and certainly as is evident in the excavating threads where the willful destruction of historic assets was treated in a laughing demeanor. I think that most people who get to work on Historic properties do have a reverence for the structures, and other who may be interested in doing so are put off by, again, what the excavation thread calls "the hysterical preservation people" mentality.
I am Chair of my County Landmarks Comm, wrote the code with two others for the preservation of near to 600 historic properties and have been doing pres work for nearly 30 years.
If it is the pleasure of this forum, bring forth the questions.....especially the ones about how much it costs to do historic stuff.....

tinner666 · 12-16-2008, 10:07 AM

This could be a good thread. I always have trouble expressing myself to clients about the costs of restoration and on the other side, why my 100 year+ roof will ADD historic value to their 40-80 year old house.

We all know that paying now will save later and actually create value. But, how to express that is my question.

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 12:39 PM

There are many publications by the Sec. Int. re: the cost of , and the benefits of doing historic right. they are found on the Nat. Parks Service website, and can phrase the "argument" well for contractors. I often put it this way to clients
" you have had one roof ( windows set, siding etc)on this house since it was built. it has lasted 50 yrs longer than modern materials last now. wouldn't you like to get that kind of value out of the work you are proposing to do now? " Pocketbook savings over the life of the house often sways the decision.
And obviously that is a truncated version of the "conversation" Check out the preservation briefs and the other info at the NPS, the national trust for historic preservation and your local State Historic Preservation Office.

Tscarborough · 12-16-2008, 01:22 PM

I do a little preservation work, mainly consulting on materials, and consider myself a preservationist. However, age alone does not give value to a structure. There are plenty of reasons to remove structures considered historical and many good reasons for intelligent choices in the restoration of old buildings that use modern materials and techniques rather than slavishly duplicating original construction.

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 01:40 PM

No question. It is often better , as a landmarks commissioner to work with a HO in the material than let the structure die on the vine due to cost prohibitive replication of elements. We have approved smooth hardie in a few cases. And yes, just because it is old does not mean it isn't a POS. Being a commissioner who weighs all of these factors is one thing I pride my time on commission on.

MALCO.New.York · 12-16-2008, 02:18 PM

^^^^Good Peoples is DD!^^^^ (Thus far)

tinner666 · 12-16-2008, 02:24 PM

Derek, when you get your site up, let me know. I might want to trade links with you if you're agreeable.
( The one in your sig is dead).

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinner666

Derek, when you get your site up, let me know. I might want to trade links with you if you're agreeable.
( The one in your sig is dead).

we got "hacked" by trying to switch our hosting to the (as I found out too late) outsourced idiots at qwest. we are within days of having our site back up. and yes, I would be agreeable, without question. As contractors, it is a strength in numbers mentality with me.

neolitic · 12-16-2008, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadhead Derek

There are many publications by the Sec. Int. re: the cost of , and the benefits of doing historic right. they are found on the Nat. Parks Service website, and can phrase the "argument" well for contractors. I often put it this way to clients
" you have had one roof ( windows set, siding etc)on this house since it was built. it has lasted 50 yrs longer than modern materials last now. wouldn't you like to get that kind of value out of the work you are proposing to do now? " Pocketbook savings over the life of the house often sways the decision.
And obviously that is a truncated version of the "conversation" Check out the preservation briefs and the other info at the NPS, the national trust for historic preservation and your local State Historic Preservation Office.

Thanks for reminding me where
that was located.
Been trying to remember since the
untimely demise of my hard drive.

Besides everything else that site is
chock full of great links.

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 05:21 PM

what can I say, I'm a giver....

MALCO.New.York · 12-16-2008, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadhead Derek

what can I say, I'm a giver....

Had you been a taker, I would have given you EVERY reason, cause, excuse and need to NEVER post here again.

I just DO NOT like takers.

Thanks for being you!!!

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 05:56 PM

you NYers...such tough guys....scary too...

MALCO.New.York · 12-16-2008, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadhead Derek

you NYers...such tough guys....scary too...

Jason W · 12-16-2008, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadhead Derek

No question. It is often better , as a landmarks commissioner to work with a HO in the material than let the structure die on the vine due to cost prohibitive replication of elements. We have approved smooth hardie in a few cases. And yes, just because it is old does not mean it isn't a POS. Being a commissioner who weighs all of these factors is one thing I pride my time on commission on.

I hope you didn't do that on a registered historic building w/grant money!

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason W

I hope you didn't do that on a registered historic building w/grant money!

no, no grant money involved, though it was the will of the majority of the commission to allow the use based on the future restoration plans. The idea is that the siding was a stop gap until cedar was to be installed. I seem to remember pointing out that double labor and the waste of the hardie material cost made very little sense, but one voice on a commission of 9...

Jason W · 12-16-2008, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadhead Derek

no, no grant money involved, though it was the will of the majority of the commission to allow the use based on the future restoration plans. The idea is that the siding was a stop gap until cedar was to be installed. I seem to remember pointing out that double labor and the waste of the hardie material cost made very little sense, but one voice on a commission of 9...

What happened to replacing "like with like"? Isn't that the golden rule? I take it this is not a Historical district?

All this would do is compromise the Historic design of the community and put your district at risk of loosing it's Historic identity.

Deadhead Derek · 12-16-2008, 09:39 PM

Based on hist. photos, the structure had bevel siding in the past. T1-11 at the time of application. the applicant was moving forward with a restoration plan, windows trim and siding, was doing the right thing in re: the windows and trim, and saw the siding as any easier change out later. The burden of proof for the appropriateness of the request is on the applicant, and the majority of the commission felt that the restoration plan was approvable as presented. will they ever change the siding? I don't know. did we get rid of alum sliders, t1-11 ans brickmold trim? yes. Is the house going in the right direction rather than down a path of total loss of the historic fabric? yes. was it perfect? no. Do we, as a commission need weigh in what can be and can't be done at any one time to maintain the integrity of our Nat Reg. Dist.? of course. To look at the decision as that balance of give and take that all who apply the rules for historic preservation must, as well as the suggestion deliniated in the Sec/ Int Standards and how they will be interpreted by the local agencies is the trickiest part.

Jason W · 12-16-2008, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadhead Derek

Based on hist. photos, the structure had bevel siding in the past. T1-11 at the time of application. the applicant was moving forward with a restoration plan, windows trim and siding, was doing the right thing in re: the windows and trim, and saw the siding as any easier change out later. The burden of proof for the appropriateness of the request is on the applicant, and the majority of the commission felt that the restoration plan was approvable as presented. will they ever change the siding? I don't know. did we get rid of alum sliders, t1-11 ans brickmold trim? yes. Is the house going in the right direction rather than down a path of total loss of the historic fabric? yes. was it perfect? no. Do we, as a commission need weigh in what can be and can't be done at any one time to maintain the integrity of our Nat Reg. Dist.? of course. To look at the decision as that balance of give and take that all who apply the rules for historic preservation must, as well as the suggestion deliniated in the Sec/ Int Standards and how they will be interpreted by the local agencies is the trickiest part.

If it's a Historic District in the making, you're on the right path. You'll need to firm up your rules as you go.

Jason W · 12-16-2008, 10:19 PM

OK, re-read. You say it's already a National Historic District.

You say you know about the Dept. of the Interior rules and regs.

So why do you not follow them?

Jason W · 12-16-2008, 10:20 PM

It either IS or ISN'T by the rules. Hardie IS NOT.