[MassHistPres] HDC guidelines for siding/windows within a district

Tue Sep 25 22:44:39 EDT 2007

In Springfield, we have taken the approach of being permissive to window 
replacement coupled with high expectations coupled with very clear 
guidelines describing what is appropriate. Since doing that, we have 
really seen the quality of our applications improve, and have had far 
fewer contentious encounters with homeowners. You can see our new 
(passed in February) window replacement guidelines here:

http://www.springfieldcityhall.com/planning/fileadmin/Planning_files/Window_replacement_guidelines-final1.pdf

It is important for the commission to really know the difference between 
appropriateness and hardship, and to educate the public on this when 
they take out an application form. Prior to us doing this, the public 
felt that hardship was "because I don't feel like spending any extra 
money or effort to do or even research the appropriate thing". With our 
guidelines, we have now given homeowners some knowledge to replace 
windows in a way that does not visually detract from the district. We're 
very specific about what we're looking for because homeowners don't 
often share our critical eye (we do this more than they do).

We allow windows to be replaced as long as:

1) The replacement is substantially similar in design to the original, 
with simulated divided lights exactly replicating the original light 
design (which allows for double-pane glass -- the thing the public 
desires the most).

2) The exterior, if not wood or other material designed to be painted, 
must usually be a dark color, because that is the original color of most 
windows on houses in Springfield from the era of our districts. Again, 
the public is looking for "maintenance free", so this meets their needs.

3) This is the important one: the lower sash of the window must sit upon 
the sill, just like the original window. This disqualifies the windows 
that look like storm windows, which includes every vinyl window 
currently made. It took us a long time to figure out why vinyl windows 
looked so different from original windows, and this was the key.

Although we'd prefer that homeowners restore their original wooden 
windows, we were fighting a losing battle, so we decided to go by "look 
of the window" rather than our previous "no replacements ever" policy, 
particularly because we decided that the law allows someone to replace a 
wooden window with an exact replica under non-applicability (since that 
would fall under "ordinary maintenance, repair or replacement of any 
exterior architectural feature within an historic district which does 
not involve a change in design, material, color or the outward 
appearance thereof", which MGL 40C says it does not prevent).

The other key thing to realize is that even if your commission does not 
control paint color, it DOES control material color (spelled out in MGL 
40C Section 5). We have construed that to also mean materials with a 
permanent baked-on powder-coated finish, something that the manufacturer 
does not intend the consumer to ever paint. The bright white colors so 
prevalent at the big box retailers just don't' work on 19th century 
houses, so applying that rule has made things look a lot better.

We've seen some good visual improvements, particularly because the 
people that have replaced their windows within our guidelines have 
removed their brushed aluminum triple-track storm windows. We have had 
some homeowners go for wood exterior windows, others go for 
aluminum-clad exterior windows. Contrary to conventional window, there 
are also lower-end wooden windows, particularly those made by Jeld-Wen.

Now if a homeowner can't meet appropriateness, they are welcome to apply 
under hardship. However, there is in essence a two-part test for 
hardship. From MGL 40C, Section 10:

"the commission shall determine whether, owing to conditions especially 
affecting the building or structure 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 this chapter."

So the first part of the test is "is there a condition especially 
affecting the building but not affecting the historic district generally"?

The simple desire for a replacement window or vinyl siding is not such a 
condition, nor is the alleged lack of energy efficiency of older 
windows, nor is normal required maintenance of windows or siding (such 
as needing to be painted). As our former chair said, "this is a request 
for certificate of hardship, not a certificate of inconvenience".

Let's assume that someone's windows pass the first part of this test. 
(We've seen some pretty rotted windows, for example, beyond normal 
repair.) At that point you need to find the middle ground between the 
hardship to the applicant and derogation from the intent of historic 
preservation. It's a balancing act, and it's done on a case-by-case 
basis. We take into account a lot of factors, including:

* Condition of each existing window proposed for replacement.
* Number of original windows that require immediate replacement.
* Urgency to replace windows – the hardship if some or all are not 
immediately replaced.
* Exploration of measures taken to fix the problem.
* Prominence of property within the district.
* Prominence of windows that are being replaced (front vs. side vs. rear).
* Economic viability of structure.
* Financial situation of petitioner.
* If financial hardship is claimed, the financials of the proposal, 
including comparisons of the cost of more appropriate alternatives.

We have allowed brown vinyl windows recently on properties that were 
seriously deteriorated -- in other words, properties that were on the 
fringe of being economically unviable. The windows had exterior grids 
applied by the manufacturer. Is that the most ideal situation? Obviously 
no, but it sure beats what we were seeing before, which was people 
putting in butt-ugly white vinyl windows with grids between the glass.

Once you have appropriateness and hardship down, the discussion becomes 
very easy. If you're talking about appropriateness, you don't get into 
the "why" about window replacement. The discussion centers on whether 
the new window looks just like the old one. And for hardship, the "why" 
must be a very specific reason affecting your property but not the 
district in general. That's a pretty high standard to overcome, and once 
you read the law to the homeowner, they understand very quickly why 
you're telling them "no".

We did this because we had to try and plug a dam that was about to 
burst. I think our next direction should be better education as to why 
original windows are superior to even appropriate replacements, and to 
also provide homeowners with information about contractors who will 
refurbish old windows at a reasonable cost.

Springfield has had districts for 30 years, so we don't have to convince 
people the same way you do. I think that the best way you can convince 
the residents of your town to accept a rule that prevents them from 
putting in the cheapest building materials on their 19th century houses 
would be to go to a community that has older houses but no historic 
districts and take a lot of photos. Then go to a town that has intact 
properties and show the differences. The color is the biggest feature on 
windows, bright white just looks ridiculous on older homes. Do the same 
thing for siding. The key to that discussion is that vinyl siding is 
most common (and cheapest) in just a handful of colors, so most 
neighborhood with siding have houses that are all white, beige, and 
yellow. Highlight how bad that looks when you have 20 houses on a street 
compared to houses that are painted in many different varieties of colors.

Ralph Slate
Springfield Historical Commission

lancasterhistorian wrote:
> The Lancaster Historic District Study Committee is preparing for a special
> town meeting to bring forward a proposed historic district bylaw. We have
> received from MHC the recommendation to proceed.
>
> Does any presently established Historic District Commission(s) have a list
> of recommended house sidings and windows including manufacturers?  .  The
> recurring questions and concerns at all our public meetings and the hearing
> are about financial hardship for the property owners pertaining to siding
> and replacement window choices.  Since the guidelines are established by the
> appointed commission once the bylaw is past some citizens are hesitant to
> support the bylaw.  
>
>  
>
> Any suggestions are appreciated.
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Joan Richards, Office Coordinator
>
> Lancaster Historical Commission
>
> P.O. Box 351
>
> Lancaster, MA 01523
>
> 978-368-1162
>
> (office open Tuesdays only)
>
>  
>
> ******************************
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE WHOLE LIST.  
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> ********************************
>   