[MassHistPres] our town hall

[Winwilb at aol.com]

Some thoughts on the many aspects of this issue from my son, a builder who  
specializes in the renovation/restoration- and who believes in preservation, 
but  raises some interesting related issues.
Win Wilbur
 
 
"This sounds like a continuance of our past conversation on this issue. I  
think that Mr Hadley, as a preservationist, has his own ax to grind here.  
Maintaining a base of  "knowledgeable woodworkers and painters as  part of the 
preservation strategy for wood buildings" is certainly important,  and I'm not 
trying to sound like a Republican, but on whose shoulders should  this fall?  The 
taxpayers of MV? Additionally,  I'm no expert on the  foundation issue, but 
have to wonder if this is to efficiently create additional  space at lower 
additional cost or even perhaps to help make the building ADA  compliant? 


It's NOT true that Azek needs to be painted, although it only comes in  
white. (Mr Hadley should check their website _http://www.azek.com_ 
(http://www.azek.com/) ) but it does tend to  take paint better than new-growth wood, it comes 
in longer lengths and thus  requires fewer joints, and can even be welded on 
the joints, so that it needs no  caulk. It does expand and contract, and it 
does so at about the rate that  softwood expands ACROSS THE GRAIN, but in length 
as well. Modern architectural  coatings are made to accommodate this, in 
fact, Sherwin Williams has a product  specifically for cellular PVC.  You can 
certainly go down the "it uses  fossil fuels" line of argument, but so does 
purchasing, shipping and applying  coatings for years to come.


Yes, there are differences between the look of aluminum clad windows and  the 
original single glazed ones. But even most professional builders would be  
hard pressed to tell the difference at 25 ft:  Marvin (and I assume KML,  which 
is owned by Andersen) makes a 5/8" mullion with a putty glaze profile, and  
they make literally dozens of extruded aluminum casing profiles - they'll even  
match what you have in an existing building. In my 20+ years in the  
renovation/restoration building business I've seen exactly one (1) client who  properly 
maintains his wood windows and trim.  He lives on the water in  Cape 
Elizabeth and has his painters inspect, repair, and touch up his house  EVERY spring. 
I've seen hundreds more who have NOT maintained their wood windows  and trim 
and face very expensive repairs.


For me it boils down to a compromise, or at least a trading of values: It  
certainly makes sense to preserve "authentic" historical structures so that we  
may learn from them in the future. Where it becomes less clear is where we 
have  to accept the "real world" as it is:  This project is an excellent example: 
 Is there the public will (in the form of additional tax dollars) to  
preserve and then maintain an historical structure which must still be  functional 
and appropriate for a current public use?  Perhaps if Mr Hadley  wants to be a 
purist it's better to sell the building to a private party who can  and will 
maintain it (require an endowment?!), and then build a new  structure.


>From my perspective it boils down to one fundamental issue:  Is the  civil 
society willing to pony up the additional funds to:
A. Restore the existing structure including windows and exterior  millwork
B. Pay a premium on the construction and finishing cost of an  
authentic-all-wood structure
C. Maintain the restored structure and the new addition, probably needing  
paint every two years given the greater porosity of new growth wood and the  
lower level of protection provided by modern lead-free and Low-VOC compliant  
architectural coatings.  In my experience public buildings are NOT  generally 
maintained properly, and thus suffer deterioration, as this structure  apparently 
has.
D. Pay the additional amount it will cost to heat/cool a building that does  
not have insulated glass? (Or is Mass Hist Pres suggesting wood storms - 
another  maintenance nightmare)?
E. Use the additional resources (i.e. burn the fossil fuel) required to  heat 
AND to scrape, prime, and paint the structure religiously.


Is this the right way for society to spend its finite dollars?  Or  ought we 
be educating kids better, maybe taking them on a field trip to see the  
preserved houses in town so they gain a sense of history and value what HAS been  
saved.


WOW, this has turned into a rant, but it is an issue I think about every  
day. I totally believe in preservation (I grew up in Concord, I was a history  
major, I work on old buildings) but we as a society have to maintain a balance.  
Sort of like Cape Winds or the proposed wind farms on Maine's wilderness  
trails  - which way do we go there?


Food for thought... Michael


Michael Wilbur, Willow Ledge Builders
 
207.846.6944 office
207.671.3792 cell






 









**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music.     
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025
48)