Historic Preservation

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting City Hall - Council Chambers May 14, 2026 6:30 PM Agenda PUBLIC NOTICE In accordance with the Statutes of the State of Illinois and the Ordinances of the City of Highland Park, the next regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Highland Park is scheduled to be held at the hour of 6:30 PM on Thursday, May 14, 2026, at City Hall - Council Chambers, 1707 St Johns Avenue, Highland Park, Illinois, during which meeting it is anticipated that there will be a discussion of the following items. The Historic Preservation Commission has elected to conduct the hearing entirely in- person, and without opportunity for virtual viewing or participation. Please contact the Department of Community Development – Planning Division at (847) 432-0867 for up-to- date information on the conduct of the hearing. Individuals with questions or feedback about an agenda item may email the Staff Liaison Maddy Markle. Comments and emails received prior to the Thursday before the scheduled meeting will be included in the meeting packet. Public comments received by 4:30 PM the day of the meeting will be read under Business from the Public. Any comments received during the meeting will be held until the end of the meeting. Individuals who wish to have their comments read into the public record are limited to 200 words or less. Public comments should be emailed and contain the following information: • In the subject line, identify, “HPC (Date of Meeting)” • Name • Address (optional) • City • Phone (optional) • Organization, agency representing, if applicable • Topic or agenda item number of interest All emails received will be acknowledged. Individuals with no access to email may leave a voice message with Maddy Markle at 847.926.1856. The City, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, requests that persons with disabilities who require certain accommodations to allow them to observe and/or participate in this hearing, or who have questions about the accessibility of the meeting facilities, email the City’s ADA coordinator Emily Taub or call at 847.926.1005. I. Call to Order II. Roll Call Page 1 of 124 III. Approval of Minutes A. 4-15-26 Special Meeting Minutes B. 5-7-26 Special Meeting Minutes IV. Scheduled Business A. Certificate of Appropriateness — 1442 Forest Avenue B. Certificate of Appropriateness —2012 Grange Avenue V. Discussion Items VI. Business from the Public (Individuals wishing to be heard regarding items not listed on this agenda) VII. Other Business A. Next Regular Meeting to Occur June 11, 2026 VIII. Staff Report IX. Adjournment Page 2 of 124  1 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 3 OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK, ILLINOIS 4 5 6 MEETING DATE: Wednesday, April 15, 2026 7 8 MEETING LOCATION: Council Chambers, City Hall, 1707 St. Johns Avenue, Highland Park, IL 9 10 CALL TO ORDER 11 At 6:35 p.m., Chairperson Weeder called the meeting to order. This Commission meeting takes place on-site. 12 Staff was asked to call the roll. 13 14 ROLL CALL 15 Commissioners Present: Chairperson Weeder; Commissioners Ehrlich, Gonka, Greenbaum, Hartinger, Pines, 16 & Portman 17 18 Councilmember Present: Blumberg 19 20 Student Council Absent: Cooper Baum 21 22 Student Council Present: Gabi Goldstein 23 24 Staff declared that a quorum was present. 25 26 Staff Present: Coleman & Markle 27 28 Guests Present: Cal Bernstein, Attorney/Samuels & Bernstein 29 30 Others Present: Gale Cerabona, Recorder 31 32 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 33 Chairperson Weeder stated she received a request to move the Approval of Minutes until later in the 34 meeting and will carry out that request. 35 36 SCHEDULED BUSINESS 37 1. 147 Central Avenue – Review of Written Report to the Plan & Design Commission regarding Planned 38 Development 39 Planner Markle offered a presentation: 40 • Commission Consideration Required 41 • Prior HPC Consideration – January 8, 2026 42 • Recommendation 43 44 Mr. Cal Bernstein, Attorney, thanked the HPC for having a Special Meeting, so this matter can move forward. 45 46 Chairperson Weeder asked if anyone in the audience wishes to speak. There was no one. 47 48 Planner Markle shared information on nearby properties and illustrated a graph of same. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 1 Page 3 of 124  1 2 Some HPC comments are….. 3 • Commissioner Pines: 4 o asked if these are actual or zoning setbacks. Planner Markle said this is existing streetscape 5 information. 6 o expressed, regarding the Cornelius House, a 45’ setback from the lot line to the house. 7 o discussed the massing, scale, and proportionality. 8 o said Lot 2 could potentially be 12’ from the lot line; this could be very negative if something 9 was built. 10 o stated the HPC would like to see this property preserved and not disappear. 11 • Chairperson Weeder: 12 o referenced the house at 175 Central Avenue; a huge difference in side yards (from the 13 proposed property at 147 Central Avenue). Planner Markle verified the table indicates the 14 site plan attachment. 15 o said she would mirror the existing to the lot line. Planner Markle said that would be 68’. 16 • Commissioner Hartinger asked, and Planner Markle noted the restrictions/requirements (for new 17 construction). 18 • Commissioner Greenbaum identified a wraparound porch on the east side. Her concern is, when it 19 was designed, it was intended to see the east view. 20 21 Councilmember Blumberg said, when one engages on what the owners can see, that speaks to the 22 interior. This exceeds the purview of the HPC. He is referring to the distances between the houses. 23 It’s an air and light issue; a Plan & Design issue. 24 25 • Commissioner Ehrlich believes the entire property should be preserved. The HPC’s role should not be 26 to give guidance to the PDC. He cares about people walking past this house and noticing the oldest 27 and most majestic house in Highland Park. Anyone wishing to change that should present to the 28 HPC. The draft written recommendation doesn’t reflect his viewpoint. The property has changed 29 (since the bridge). Perhaps the easement, setbacks have changed. 30 31 Senior Planner Coleman noted the Draft Report recommends denial, etc. 32 33 Commissioner Ehrlich said there could be hypotheticals. 34 35 • Commissioner Portman said he felt all along that the HPC’s recommendation should stand on its own. 36 He would like to see no provisions after the fact. 37 • Commissioner Hartinger said the HPC can’t control what the PDC does. He discussed if the lots 38 become separated. 39 • Commissioner Portman said it was determined that it is still a protected property. Increasing the 40 front setback is important. 41 42 Senior Planner Coleman needs to review COAs. He noted there are 14 standards for construction. 43 The COA standards don’t regulate setbacks. 44 45 • Chairperson Weeder said, if the HPC takes Commissioner Ehrlich’s stand, the HPC is taking the 46 perfect over the practical. She recommends the side yard be increased between 147 & 175 Central 47 Avenue from 12’ to 45-50’, and reminded this is a nonbinding recommendation. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 2 Page 4 of 124  1 • Commissioner Pines asked if the recommendation should be skimmed. 2 3 Councilmember Blumberg suggested keeping the recommendations within the purview of what the 4 PDC is requesting. He expounded. 5 6 • Commissioner Greenbaum reiterated, when it was designed, the view was meant to be there. To 7 make this more practical, and because taxes are outrageous, she feels a setback should be assigned, 8 so this estate could have a lake view. Though the HPC is against separating the lots, she wonders if 9 recommendations should be given. Senior Planner Coleman said this is the HPC’s opportunity. 10 • Commissioner Hartinger asked if there have been situations where if a lot is split, the HPC gave 11 recommendations on what to look for. Senior Planner Coleman stated there haven’t been instances. 12 13 Councilmember Blumberg said, if the lot is subdivided, that requires the Petitioner to come back. 14 The new lot is not automatically de-landmarked. He expounded. 15 16 • Chairperson Weeder asked about de-landmarking. Planner Markle found the HPC did not 17 recommend landmark removal. If split, Lot B would still be landmarked. 18 • Commissioner Ehrlich: 19 o asked if a COA was granted without a plan. He stated it is not the HPC’s place to give 20 guidance. It could be given when a COA is presented to the HPC. Planner Markle reminded 21 the PDC wants the HPC’s guidance and direction. 22 o said, if a COA is to be given, a plan must be submitted. He doesn’t want to mislead anyone 23 by suggesting various numbers of feet. 24 25 Councilmember Blumberg said the HPC is not being asked to say anything about a COA. He 26 reminded the HPC is being asked to give a recommendation with any restrictions, suggestions. 27 Councilmember Blumberg said, if this property is not subdivided, someone could present a plan on 28 the un-subdivided area. Limitations could be placed on the lot. 29 30 • Chairperson Weeder mentioned the crux of the issue is noted at the end of the Staff Report. She 31 expounded on parameters. 32 • Commissioner Pines concurred. 33 34 Commissioner Gonka arrived at 7:41 p.m. 35 36 • Commissioner Ehrlich would like the HPC to review the 14 criteria and noted, this matter could be 37 continued. 38 • Commissioner Pines said the restrictions are not as grave as Commissioner Ehrlich is making them 39 out to be. 40 • Commissioner Hartinger said the Staff Report covers 98% of the HPC’s view. Setback issues could be 41 added. 42 • Commissioner Portman concurred with the exception of the specification from the HPC. It was 43 stated Staff intended to include the second 3-page nonbinding recommendation. 44 • Chairperson Weeder named the specific areas to address and suggested moving the discussion 45 toward that. It’s about the experience of the public viewing this. 46 47 Chairperson Weeder asked if anyone in the audience wishes to speak. There was no one. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 3 Page 5 of 124  1 2 Senior Planner Coleman summarized the additional 50’ is a new point to add. 3 4 More HPC comments are….. 5 • Commissioner Gonka asked: 6 o about the process. Planner Markle explained same. 7 o what the HPC is actually saying regarding 50’ in addition to 12’. Planner Markle explained 8 same. 9 • Commissioner Pines said Lot 2 is approximately 90,000 sq. ft.; over 2 acres. The amount that’s 10 buildable is likely 25,000-30,000 sq. ft.; a robust footprint. The site plan has to be handled artfully. 11 12 Councilmember Blumberg suggested the two other agenda items be given attention at this time, as the 13 public may wish to speak on those. 14 15 2. 670 De Tamble Avenue – Final Consideration of Landmark Nomination 16 Planner Markle offered a presentation: 17 • Summary 18 • Arthur Vetter House 19 • Tudor style 20 • Built in 1928 21 • Landmark Designation Process 22 • Previous Consideration 23 • Findings of Fact 24 • Landmark Criteria 25 • Recommendation 26 27 Commissioner Greenbaum moved that this meets Criteria 1, 3, 4, & 6; has sufficient integrity of design; and 28 recommends City Council adopt a Landmark Designation Ordinance. Commissioner Gonka seconded the 29 motion. 30 31 On a roll call vote 32 Voting Yea Chairperson Weeder; Commissioners Ehrlich, Gonka, Greenbaum, Hartinger, Pines, 33 & Portman 34 Voting Nay: None 35 36 Staff declared that the motion passed unanimously. 37 38 3. 273 Sheridan Road – Final Consideration of Landmark Nomination 39 Planner Markle offered a presentation: 40 • Previous Consideration 41 • Marshall Johnson House 42 • Significant rating in the 2003 Braeside survey 43 • French Eclectic style 44 • Built in 1935 45 • Findings of Fact 46 • Landmark Criteria 47 • Additional Information Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 4 Page 6 of 124  1 o architect is William Betts who designed 18 homes in Highland Park 2 o elevations of those homes were shown 3 • Recommendation 4 5 Commissioner Greenbaum moved that Criteria 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7 are met. This house has sufficient integrity of 6 design. The HPC wishes to adopt a Landmark Designation recommendation and the drafted Findings of Fact 7 and Planning Report with new information about Marshall Johnson & William Betts added. Commissioner 8 Gonka seconded the motion. 9 10 On a roll call vote 11 Voting Yea Chairperson Weeder; Commissioners Ehrlich, Gonka, Greenbaum, Hartinger, Pines, 12 & Portman 13 Voting Nay: None 14 15 Staff declared that the motion passed unanimously. 16 17 Back to….. 18 19 1. 147 Central Avenue – Review of Written Report to the Plan & Design Commission regarding Planned 20 Development 21 Chairperson Weeder reminded the HPC was discussing setbacks and reducing bulk. 22 23 Commissioner Ehrlich asked, and Planner Markle said the site plan was the only thing submitted. They 24 stated the PDC is waiting for the HPC. 25 26 Mr. Bernstein said, as far as he knows, nothing’s been designed for this property. He noted the potential 27 buyer for Lot B has retained James Fraerman, Principal at Fraerman Associates Architecture, who is well 28 versed on the HPC’s view and the 14 standards. Fraerman has served on HPC in the past. 29 30 Final HPC comments….. 31 • Commissioner Pines summarized that setback and height information be added to the Staff Report. 32 • Commissioner Gonka maintained that 80’ is not enough and said whatever is built shouldn’t be taller 33 than the existing house; side setback should be 100’ from the proposed lot line. 34 • Commissioner Greenbaum maintains that a more restrictive front yard setback would maintain the 35 Lot 1’s view. 36 • Commissioner Ehrlich maintains that the HPC should not include conditions of approval in written 37 report. 38 • Commissioner Pines believes that is excessive; 80’ would meet the same objective. 39 40 Commissioner Pines moved to approve the written report presented by Staff with the changes: 41 • to increase the west side-yard setback to 80’ for Lot 2 42 • require that the height of a new structure not exceed that of the Cornelius Field home 43 44 Commissioner Portman seconded the motion. 45 46 On a roll call vote 47 Voting Yea Chairperson Weeder; Commissioners Hartinger, Pines, & Portman Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 5 Page 7 of 124  1 Voting Nay: Commissioners Ehrlich, Gonka, & Greenbaum 2 3 Planner Markle declared that the motion passed 4-3. Planner Markle advised they will attend the PDC 4 meeting. 5 6 Mr. Bernstein reminded HPC Commissioners cannot discuss this at the PDC meeting due to the Open 7 Meetings Act. 8 9 Councilmember Blumberg said speaking separately is contrary to what the HPC, as a whole, has put forth. 10 11 Back to….. 12 13 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 14 Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission – March 12, 2026 15 16 Commissioner Gonka expressed that the HPC did an incredible job on the motions at the last meeting. 17 Chairperson Weeder thanked Gale Cerabona, Recorder; Planner Markle, and Senior Planner Coleman for the 18 incredible job they’ve been doing. 19 20 Commissioner Gonka moved to approve the regular meeting minutes of March 12, 2026. Commissioner 21 Greenbaum seconded the motion. 22 23 On a voice vote 24 Voting Yea Chairperson Weeder; Commissioners Ehrlich, Gonka, Greenbaum, Hartinger, Pines, 25 & Portman 26 Voting Nay: None 27 28 Staff declared that the motion passed unanimously. 29 30 DISCUSSION ITEMS 31 1. 2026 Preservation Awards 32 Planner Markle reminded the event for the Preservation Awards is at the Willits House on May 7, 2026, at 33 6:30 p.m. They noted sparkling water is being provided. Snacks are welcome. Nominations are posted. 34 Judges made a decision on the winners. Chairperson Weeder offered to bring snacks. 35 36 BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC 37 There was no Business from the Public. 38 39 OTHER BUSINESS 40 1. Next Regular Meeting is Scheduled for May 14, 2026 41 It was noted the next regular HPC Meeting is scheduled for May 14, 2026. 42 43 STAFF REPORT 44 There was no Staff Report. 45 46 ADJOURNMENT 47 Commissioner Greenbaum moved to adjourn at 8:34 p.m. Commissioner Portman seconded the motion. 48 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 6 Page 8 of 124  1 On a voice vote 2 Voting Yea Chairperson Weeder; Commissioners Ehrlich, Gonka, Greenbaum, Hartinger, Pines, 3 & Portman 4 Voting Nay: None 5 6 Staff declared that the motion passed unanimously. 7 8 Respectfully Submitted, 9 10 11 Gale Cerabona 12 Recorder 13 14 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING ON MARCH 12, 2026, WERE APPROVED WITHOUT CORRECTIONS. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 7 Page 9 of 124  1 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 3 OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK, ILLINOIS 4 5 6 MEETING DATE: Thursday, May 7, 2026 7 8 MEETING LOCATION: Ward Willits House, 1445 Sheridan Road, Highland Park IL 9 10 CALL TO ORDER 11 The meeting began at 6:30 pm. This Commission meeting takes place off-site at 1445 Sheridan Road. 12 13 ROLL CALL 14 Commissioners Present: Chairperson Weeder; Commissioners Ehrlich, Gonka, Hartinger, Pines, & Portman 15 16 Councilmember Present: Blumberg, Ross, Mayor Rotering 17 18 Student Council Absent: Cooper Baum & Gabi Goldstein 19 20 Student Council Present: None 21 22 Staff declared that a quorum was present. 23 24 Staff Present: Planner Markle, Senior Planner Coleman, and City Manager Neukirch 25 26 Guests Present: Thomas Hiller, Peijian Sun, Cedar Roofing Company, Northshore School District 27 112, and Mary Seyfarth. 28 29 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 30 There was no approval of minutes. 31 32 SCHEDULED BUSINESS 33 Staff presented the winners of the 2026 Historic Preservation Awards. 34 35 Winners Thomas Hiller and representatives of North Shore School District 112 spoke about their 36 preservation projects. 37 38 Resident Mary Seyfarth spoke about the Rocky the Raccoon Weathervane and the relocation of “The Flight 39 of Time” clock. 40 41 DISCUSSION ITEMS 42 There were no discussion items. 43 44 BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC 45 There was no Business from the Public. 46 47 OTHER BUSINESS 48 There was no Other Business Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 1 Page 10 of 124  1 2 STAFF REPORT 3 There was no Staff Report. 4 5 ADJOURNMENT 6 Meeting adjourned at 8:30 pm. 7 8 Respectfully Submitted, 9 10 Maddy Markle 11 Commission Secretary Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 15, 2026 - Page 2 Page 11 of 124  To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Maddy Markle, Planner I Date: May 14, 2026 Subject: Certificate of Appropriateness – 1442 Forest Avenue Location: 1442 Forest Avenue Historical Name: Stewart House Historical Status: Local Landmark (1993) Structure: Style: Colonial Revival Architect: Robert Seyfarth Built: 1913 Petitioner: Andrew Venamore (contractor) on behalf of Michael Goldner (owner) 602 Academy Dr Northbrook, IL 60062 Project Architect: Heartland Garage Builders 602 Academy Drive, Northbrook, Illinois 60062 SUMMARY OF THE PETITION Contractor Andrew Venamore, on behalf of property owner Michael Goldner, has submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of a detached garage and construction of a new detached garage at the property located at 1442 Forest Avenue. The application was submitted April 10, 2026. The historic “Stewart House” designed by Robert Seyfarth in 1913, is the primary residential structure on the property. Figure 1. Current Historic Garage Figure 2. Location Prior Commission Consideration. This property was designated a Local Landmark in 1993 (see Attachment A). The residential structure on the site was designated a Local Landmark for its associations with architect Robert Seyfarth, its Colonial Revival Style, and its embodiment of significant design details (Landmark Criteria 4, 5, and 6). See the 1993 Landmark Nomination materials in Attachment B. In 2023 the Historic Preservation Commission (“HPC”) granted Certificates of Appropriateness (“COA”) to the current owners to remodel the home and modify window openings (see Attachment C). The HPC found these changes appropriate. Furthermore, the Commission granted the remodel a 2025 Historic Preservation Award (see Attachment D). Page 1 of 5 Page 12 of 124 Garage History. A 1924 Sanborn Map shows that a large dog kennel used to exist on the back of the property. Figure 3. 1924 Sanborn Map In 1932 the City reviewed a permit application (Attachment F) to demolish a portion of the kennel and move the remnants farther east. The building permit application states “present building 40x20 to be split in half. East half to be made into garage. West half to be torn down.” Staff concludes that the current garage is the east half of the 1920s dog kennel that was moved and repurposed into a garage in 1932. Figure 4. 1932 sketch describing proposed alterations to 1920s dog kennel. PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 1932 garage and replace it with a new structure of similar dimensions and with a similar roofline. The new structure will be located west of the current structure. The Page 2 of 5 Page 13 of 124 applicant proposes that the new garage be vinyl. The applicant’s proposed plans can be found in Attachment H. Figure 5. Proposed New Structure. STANDARDS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS The following are the Standards for Certificates of Appropriateness as listed in Section 24.030(C), which are for an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for New Construction. The applicant has provided comments that address each standard in Attachment I. Code excerpts are in BLACK. The applicant’s commentary is in RED. Additional staff comments are in BLUE. (1) Height. The height of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visibly related.  The proposed detached garage will be less than 16 feet to the ridge (based on a 6/12 pitch) and will be located some 85 feet behind the existing SFR. This accessory structure will therefore be compatible with the home and not detract from it.  Staff adds that the proposed garage will be the same height as the historic garage. (2) Proportion of front façade. The relationship of the width to the height of the front elevation of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related.  At 22 feet in width and 16 feet in height, the proposed garage will be of a standard size for parking 2 vehicles. Since it will be located some distance behind the SFR, there will not be an adverse relationship to the house, and the existing hip style roof will be mirrored on the garage. Additionally, the existing trees that will remain on the lot (within the driveway area) will also form an additional visual barrier down the driveway, as will the location for the replacement structure being +/- 30 further into the rear yard. (3) Proportion of openings. The relationship of the width to height of windows and doors of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which the building is visually related  The new garage has been designed to be very proportional with the 22-foot width dispersed with a 16-foot x 7-foot overhead door that is centrally located on that front elevation. (4) Rhythm of solids to voids in front facades. The relationship of solids to voids in the front façade of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. Page 3 of 5 Page 14 of 124   As noted above, the front elevation will have continuity of style, with the overhead door having a glass panel to provide additional interest. (5) Rhythm of spacing and structures on streets. The relationship of the proposed new Structure or object to the open space between it and adjoining structures or objects shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related.  This basic-sized garage (22’x22’), has been located in an area of the rear yard that will provide a reasonable amount of open space, within a quite heavily wooded yard. This location is compatible with the subject property and is standard for many neighborhood homes with detached garages. (6) Rhythm of entrance porches, storefront recesses and other projections. The relationship of entrances and other projections of the proposed new Structure to sidewalks shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related.  The entrance is on the side of the garage which is quite standard for a detached structure.  Staff notes that the garage’s entrance is on the east façade and is consistent with the door placement on the historic garage. (7) Relationship of materials and texture. The relationship of the materials and texture of the façade of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the structures to which it is visually related.  The proposed project will have white vinyl siding and white LP Smartside trim, with the overhead door (with glass in the top panel) colored Evergreen to match the shutter details on the house.  Staff notes that vinyl is not consistent with the main structure’s wood siding and is a modern material. The commission should consider if a modern material like vinyl is compatible with the historic materials of the original garage and the historic Stewart House. (8) Roof shapes. The roof shape of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the structures to which it is visually related.  As noted previously the garage will have a hip roof that reflects the SFR  The new proposed roof shape is the same as the historic garage’s roof shape. (9) Walls of continuity. Facades and property and site structures, such as masonry walls, fences, and landscape masses, shall, when it is a characteristic of the area, form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street, to ensure visual compatibility with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which such elements are visually related.  Not Applicable (10) Scale of a structure. The size and mass of the proposed new Structure in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, porches, adjacent structures, and balconies shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which they are visually related.  Since the replacement garage is of a basic (i.e., 2-car) size, it will maintain spatial compatibility with the home and the surrounding accessory buildings within the neighborhood. (11) Directional expression of front elevation. The proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related in its directional character, whether this be vertical character, horizontal character, or nondirectional character.  As an accessory building, the new garage will be compatible with the existing character aspects of the lot and neighborhood. (12) Destruction or alteration of historic features. The distinguishing historic qualities or character of a Property, Structure, site or Object and its environment shall not be destroyed. The Alteration of any historic or material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible  The SFR will not be altered at all as a result of this work; it is the existing, extremely decrepit accessory building (i.e., detached garage) that will be demolished. Its replacement will allow the owner’s to actually park in their garage and will remove an eyesore from the property, while furthering the preservation of the existing tree. (13) Archaeological and natural resources. Every reasonable effort shall be Page 4 of 5 Page 15 of 124  made to protect and preserve archaeological and natural resources affected by, or adjacent to any project.  The existing garage has no archaeological or natural resources value: it was built within the past few decades and holds no historical significance relative to the house.  The existing garage was not built within the last few decades. At the very least, the current garage is 94 years old. The material of the garage itself is from the 1920s, possibly earlier. See “Garage History” above. However, this does not necessarily mean the garage has archeological value. (14) Architectural compatibility. In considering new construction, the Commission shall not impose a requirement for the use of a single architectural style or period, though it may impose a requirement for compatibility.  With a hip roof and (color) finishes that match the SFR, the replacement garage is compatible with the existing historic home. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings presented above, staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission consider approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the 1936 garage and construction of a new structure at 1442 Forest Avenue. Staff asks that the Commission consider if vinyl is an appropriate material substitute for wood siding. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A. 1993 Landmark Ordinance Attachment B. 1993 Landmark Nomination Materials Attachment C. Previous 2023 HPC Consideration Attachment D. 2024 Historic Preservation Award Winners Attachment E. 1924 Sanborn Map Attachment F. 1932 Building Permit Application Attachment G. 1932 Building Permit Attachment H. Current Conditions Attachment I. Project Narrative Attachment J. Project Plan Set Page 5 of 5 Page 16 of 124 Page 17 of 124 Page 18 of 124 Page 19 of 124 Page 20 of 124 DATE: May 12, 2023 REGULATED STRUCTURE: Alexander Stewart House ADDRESS: 1442 Forest Avenue OWNERS: John Eifler ARCHITECT: John Eifler (312) 362-0180 PROPOSED ALTERATION: 1. Window replacement & window modification COMMISSION REVIEW DATE: May 11, 2023 ABSTAIN: N/A VOTE: 4-0 ACCEPT PROPOSAL X REJECT PROPOSAL ATTACHED Plan Set, 6 pages, submitted by applicant DOCUMENTS: COMMENTS: -Overall support for project SIGNED: Zubin Coleman, Planner II Page 1 of 1 Page 21 of 124 2025 Historic Preservation Award Winners Page 22 of 124 1442 Forest Avenue Summary Location 1442 Forest Avenue Historical Name Alexander Stewart House Historical Historic Local Landmark – Status Designated 1993 Structure Colonial Revival c. 1913 Architect Robert Seyfarth Current Owner Michael Goldner & Ashley Buxbaum Petitioners John Eifler, Eifler & Associates 2 Page 23 of 124 Project Location 3 Page 24 of 124 Awarded Project Scope • Restoration Award • Mostly Interior of the home • Original massing, windows & architectural details maintained • Restored pine shingle cladding • Kitchen enlarged and remodeled • Powder room installed • Primary bedroom layout reconfigured • Interior paint • Bathroom remodel with new fixtures, tiles and marble • Original windows restored • Completed in 2024 4 Page 25 of 124 Before 5 Page 26 of 124  6 Page 27 of 124  7 Page 28 of 124  8 Page 29 of 124  9 Page 30 of 124 After 10 Page 31 of 124  11 Page 32 of 124  12 Page 33 of 124  13 Page 34 of 124  14 Page 35 of 124  15 Page 36 of 124  16 Page 37 of 124  17 Page 38 of 124  18 Page 39 of 124 Page 40 of 124  File under S OWNER' i. I. NAME ... L_ iLE% c3r7L I tom. BUILDING DEPARTMENT, CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT To be filled out in ink Per it No: 76 0 7.:, t3.- C. Highland Park, Ill.,__. The Ort Lea/ thil/ undersigned/ hereby applies to the building department of the City of Highland Park, Ill.,for a permit to erect, alter, construct, or enlarge the structure or part thereof herein described, and if granted the permit applied for 0/ 7 will comply with all requirements of the city ordinances relating thereto and pay the fee required by such ordinances. This building is to be used for the purpose of and located Lot 7 on 7t. Block..... Subdivision No. 6076 St. .' y7° and constructed of dcv, !I of / stories, 212 feet wide feet long, and o c7 feet high, consisting of J rooms, attic, Basement. There will be u Bath, Lavatories, Toilets, Sinks, Laundry Tubs, other plumbing r-/ Fl. Dr. The building will be heated by Lighted by G/ Ventilated , fire escapes will be The items are more fully set forth in the plans submitted with this application, the estimate of the cost of the work contemplated includes plumb - ON ing, heating, wiring, and all construction work necessary to complete the structure C - This estimate is made by Address PiMir i 7 Z: The owner is Address !/ 12 01 Phone General Contractor Z/ S- G izC e/ r ±- I1/ xJCl1/ G jL Address C l?{ G c- Js h,,,,,. Subcontractor Address Phofi& M:.. 4.,. Electrician Address Phone Plumber Address Phone Architect Address Phone No error or omission in either the plans or application, whether said plans or application has been approved by the building inspector or not shall permit or relieve the applicant from constructing the work in any other manner than that provided for in the ordinances of this city relating thereto. The applicant having read thisyapplication and fullyand made are true to the best of .. y' understanding the intent thereof declares that the statements be lief. 3 L. d. knowledge Signature of Owner Address Phone BUIL Il G LINE RECORD NOTE: This application shall be accompanied by Building Line record when required by the Commissioner of Build- ings. T.he Building Line Record shall be: An accurate plat of the block in which the premise of the applicant for a certificate of occupancy is located ( one side of the street only) drawn to scale on tracing cloth cut to the size of this application and in ink with a left margin of i 11/ inches. On it show: ( 1) Front line of premises and depth of block to rear line. ( 2) Street wall line of all buildings. ( 3) Distance of each street wall from front line, indi- cating if wall is of porch, bay, or main wall. ( 4). Use of each building. ( 5) Location of the premises of applicant, and ( 6) Points of the compass. This plat must be signed by the owner. Use sheet this size if additional space is needed) Street Wall: The main wall of a building nearest to and facing on a street, including sun parlors, but not in- cluding bay windows nor ground story porches nor piazzas that are not closed in.) Page 41 of 124  BUILDING DEPARTMENT, CITY OF HIGHLAND PARR St. & No. 4 T707efi Use Dint. 1.. ( l "' - Exam. APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND CONFORMITY OF PREMISES This application must be submitted with the " application for Building Permit" or before a change or extension of a non - conforming use is made.) City of Highland Park, Commissioner of Buildings: Application is hereby made for a certifivate of occupancy of premises situated on the P- f l/' side of esf" o street, distant feet of t e corner formed by the intersec- tion of sc. _...._ Pi1l.._.. CV) / and _. C and known as number 6/ Street .. FQ / sS e_ 7Z- 41 f Underline below whether ( New Building) ( Remodeling or addition to existing buildings) ( Change in use) —(Single Family Dwelling) ( Apartment over Stores) ( Commercial use) ( Manufacturing use). If use is commercial or manufacturing, state if retail store or other commercial or manufacturing use. State fully nature of the business, storage or manufacturing, with manufacturing processes, raw materials used, kind of machinery, and power used, methods of handling materials and products; operations such as processes or materials to be carried on outside of buildings, . and if processes or handling of materials are of a nature which would create dust, fire, gas, smoke, noise, fumes, odors, vibrations, sudden fire or explosions. If the premises are to be used in part for residential purposes and in part for commercial purposes, state how each floor or business or part thereof is to be used. If the premises are in commercial district, state area to be devoted to and its yard storage location on the premises. If all information is not available state why: 2' 00. 3 Area of Lot . List below all buildings ( name those to be demolished) st ating which exist, which are proposed or which are to be altered. State use of each. Buildings Area Cubic Contents Height 74O ie/ Ars . Or $' A 20 sift/./ E 2 7L0 jam' 17c) rh_a arm drYll This application shall be accompanied by a plat in duplic ate of the premises showing the location of all.proposed buildings and of existing buildings ( Drawn to Scale). The plat shall be complete with dimensions of premises and buildings, including the height to top of walls along the s ide lines, and on sheet cut to the size of this application form. I certify to the correctness of the plat and of the above. t]___ r ., This .........:.... must ,__ signed ,_ the is owner e premises or duly authorized agents.) Signature s .. ; Owner by Agent Address over) Page 42 of 124  Permit No. 76 Q a- Building Department, City of Highland Park a j No. l /. tOf'.' St. , Lot 1"/ ''/ 7 Block 7/ Sub X7/ 1? Draw below, to scale, plat of lot, locating all buildings and show distances from buildings to lot lines. Show average building line of existing houses in block. yl1 2+ o 0 0 rn IT;I MOVED T° Signature Page 43 of 124  H.P.C. GARAGE SITE PHOTOS CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK 1442 Forest Avenue – Michael Goldberg & Ashley Buxbaum ` VIEW FROM EAST/DRIVEWAY NORTH SIDE INSIDE OF GARAGE Page 45 of 124  H.P.C. GARAGE SITE PHOTOS CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK 1442 Forest Avenue – Michael Goldberg & Ashley Buxbaum OAK TREE ON NORTH SIDE VIEW FROM WEST/REAR NORTH-WEST CORNER Page 46 of 124  H.P.C. PROJECT NARRATIVE CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK 1442 Forest Avenue – Michael Goldberg & Ashley Buxbaum Criteria for Certificate of Appropriateness for New Construction. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Construction of new Structure within a Historic District shall conform to the standards set forth below: (1) Height. The height of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visibly related. The proposed detached garage will be less than 16 feet to the ridge (based on a 6/12 pitch) and will be located some 85 feet behind the existing SFR. This accessory structure will therefore be compatible with the home and not detract from it. (2) Proportion of front façade. The relationship of the width to the height of the front elevation of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. At 22 feet in width and 16 feet in height, the proposed garage will be of a standard size for parking 2 vehicles. Since it will be located some distance behind the SFR, there will not be an adverse relationship to the house, and the existing hip style roof will be mirrored on the garage. Additionally, the existing trees that will remain on the lot (within the driveway area) will also form an additional visual barrier down the driveway, as will the location for the replacement structure being +/- 30 further into the rear yard. (3) Proportion of openings. The relationship of the width to height of windows and doors of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which the building is visually related. The new garage has been designed to be very proportional with the 22-foot width dispersed with a 16-foot x 7-foot overhead door that is centrally located on that front elevation. (4) Rhythm of solids to voids in front façades. The relationship of solids to voids in the front façade of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. As noted above, the front elevation will have continuity of style, with the overhead door having a glass panel to provide additional interest. Page 47 of 124  H.P.C. PROJECT NARRATIVE CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK 1442 Forest Avenue – Michael Goldberg & Ashley Buxbaum (5) Rhythm of spacing and structures on streets. The relationship of the proposed new Structure or object to the open space between it and adjoining structures or objects shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. This basic-sized garage (22’x22’), has been located in an area of the rear yard that will provide a reasonable amount of open space, within a quite heavily wooded yard. This location is compatible with the subject property and is standard for many neighborhood homes with detached garages. (6) Rhythm of entrance porches, storefront recesses and other projections. The relationship of entrances and other projections of the proposed new Structure to sidewalks shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related The entrance is on the side of the garage which is quite standard for a detached structure. (7) Relationship of materials and texture. The relationship of the materials and texture of the façade of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the structures to which it is visually related The proposed project will have white vinyl siding and white LP Smartside trim, with the overhead door (with glass in the top panel) colored Evergreen to match the shutter details on the house. (8) Roof shapes. The roof shape of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the structures to which it is visually related As noted previously the garage will have a hip roof that reflects the SFR. (9) Walls of continuity. Façades and property and site structures, such as masonry walls, fences, and landscape masses, shall, when it is a characteristic of the area, form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street, to ensure visual compatibility with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which such elements are visually related. Not Applicable. (10) Scale of a structure. The size and mass of the proposed new Structure in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, porches, adjacent structures, Page 48 of 124  H.P.C. PROJECT NARRATIVE CITY OF HIGHLAND PARK 1442 Forest Avenue – Michael Goldberg & Ashley Buxbaum and balconies shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which they are visually related. Since the replacement garage is of a basic (i.e., 2-car) size, it will maintain spatial compatibility with the home and the surrounding accessory buildings within the neighborhood. (11) Directional expression of front elevation. The proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related in its directional character, whether this be vertical character, horizontal character, or nondirectional character. As an accessory building, the new garage will be compatible with the existing character aspects of the lot and neighborhood. (12) Destruction or alteration of historic features. The distinguishing historic qualities or character of a Property, Structure, site or Object and its environment shall not be destroyed. The Alteration of any historic or material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. The SFR will not be altered at all as a result of this work; it is the existing, extremely decrepit accessory building (i.e., detached garage) that will be demolished. Its replacement will allow the owner’s to actually park in their garage and will remove an eyesore from the property, while furthering the preservation of the existing tree. (13) Archaeological and natural resources. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological and natural resources affected by, or adjacent to any project. The existing garage has no archaeological or natural resources value: it was built within the past few decades and holds no historical significance relative to the house. (14) Archaeological compatibility. In considering new construction, the Commission shall not impose a requirement for the use of a single architectural style or period, though it may impose a requirement for compatibility. With a hip roof and (color) finishes that match the SFR, the replacement garage is compatible with the existing historic home. Page 49 of 124  45" BURR OAK A ZLO CK JA K EXISTING W TE S I SITE PLAN M IL O ET I N T E, L L I Page 50 of 124  F.A.R. CALCULATION: Existing SFR & Garage 3,228.75 SF 13.45% Additional Garage 61.82 SF 76.00' 0.30% TOTAL 3,290.57 SF 13.71% ~52.25' 22.00' ~85.17' 45" BURR OAK 22.00' NEW 3' APRON GRAVEL 22'x22' DRIVEWAY GARAGE EXTENSION BY OTHERS 2.00' SPOT SURVEY IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOUNDATION PRIOR TO FRAMING THE GARAGE A ZLO CK PROPOSED JA K TE SITE PLAN W S I IL M I O N ET T E, L L I Page 51 of 124  SOFFIT ON SOUTH SIDE TO REMAIN UNVENTED FOR FIRE-RATING PURPOSES W 22'-0" (/(&75,&'(7$,/ v &,5&8,76  $03*$  $03*$ D/S S N v &217$,1(',13/4" 5,*,'67((/&21'8,7 v %85,$/'(37+,1&+(6 v :,5,1*6(3$5$7(&,5&8,7672(/(&75,&$/3$1(/ 2x6 CROSS TIES @ 48" O.C. E GFI PITCH SLAB 1/8" PER FOOT 1-HOUR FIRE RATED 2x8 RIDGE (TO BE WALL (SEE DETAIL 25 YEAR FIBERGLASS ONE SIZE LARGER ON SHEET 3) T/RIDGE SHINGLES OVER 12# FELT THAN RAFTERS) UNDERLAYMENT OVER GFI 1/2" CDX SHEATHING 2x6 CUSTOM HEEL 18'-0" CUT ROOF RAFTERS TOWARDS O.H. DOOR 12 @ 12" O.C. 6 GFI 22'-0" 2x6 CROSS TIES @ 48" O.C. OHD 6" FASCIA T/PLATE A 12" VENTED SOFFIT 15'-7" w/ 5" GUTTERS 2x4 COLLAR TIES @ 9'-0" 4" VINYL SIDING 24" O.C. IN UPPER 1/3 1/2" CDX GARAGE PL. HT. SHEATHING (2) 2x4 POSTS FOR (2) 2x6 3'-0" 2x4 CONST. GRADE HEADER, TYP. LUMBER @ 16" O.C. HEADER (2) 2x4 AT CORNERS & OPENINGS 6" 1'-0" 16.00' x 8.00' O.H. GARAGE DOOR MIN. T/SLAB (2) 1-3/4"x11-7/8" HEADER SIDE TO SIDE EXISTING D/S 1'-0" GRADE 3'-0" 3'x3' LANDING 2x4 TREATED SILL PLATE 5" CONCRETE SLAB TO BE NOT (1) #4 REBAR ANCHORED WITH 1/2" DIA. STEEL ON 4" GRANULAR FILL NEW CONC. APRON 1'-0" MORE THAN TOP & BOTTOM ANCHOR BOLTS 10" LONG SET @ WITH 6x6 / 10x10 WWF 3'-0" 16'-0" 3'-0" 7-3/4" BELOW 6'-0" O.C. (2) @ EVERY PIECE AND THRESHOLD CORNERS WITH NUTS AND 22'-0" WASHERS TIGHTENED FLOOR PLAN building section SCALE:1/4"=1'-0" SCALE:1/4"=1'-0" CONTRACTOR: SHEET NAME: HEARTLAND GARAGE DETACHED GARAGE - HIP ROOF BUILDERS 602 ACADEMY DRIVE FLOORPLAN& BUILDINGSECTION 1442 Forest Avenue, Highland Park NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 SHEET NUMBER: PHONE: (224) 619-4539 Goldner Residence EMAIL: INFO@HLGBS.COM 1 OF 4 THESE PLANS REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF MACH 1, INC. AND THEIR REPRODUCTION IS EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN. Page 52 of 124  T/RIDGE HIP VENT ASPHALT SHINGLES 12 12 6 6 BOXED IN EAVES COMPLETELY SEALED T/PLATE 1'-0" 15'-7" 4" VINYL SIDING 9'-0" FINISHED CORNER BOARDS (TYP.) GARAGE PL. HT. WEATHERSTRIPPING AROUND OVERHEAD DOOR SIDING BUTTED TO CASINGS (TYP.) T/SLAB EXISTING GRADE CONCRETE SECTIONAL OVERHEAD DOOR east elevation APRON north elevation SCALE:1/4"=1'-0" SCALE:1/4"=1'-0" 12 12 6 6 CONCRETE west elevation south elevation APRON SCALE:1/4"=1'-0" SCALE:1/4"=1'-0" CONTRACTOR: SHEET NAME: HEARTLAND GARAGE DETACHED GARAGE - HIP ROOF BUILDERS 602 ACADEMY DRIVE ELEVATIONS 1442 Forest Avenue, Highland Park NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 SHEET NUMBER: PHONE: (224) 619-4539 Goldner Residence EMAIL: INFO@HLGBS.COM 2 OF 4 THESE PLANS REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF MACH 1, INC. AND THEIR REPRODUCTION IS EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN. Page 53 of 124  3-D PERSPECTIVES *These drawings are for illustration purposes only. Vaulted ceiling or attic heights are approximate and will be confirmed with the permit submission plans. *Exact materials, colors and styles will be selected on proposal. Michael & Ashley Goldner Date: March 7th, 2026 1442 Forest Avenue Highland Park, IL 60035 H.G.B. OFFICE: 602 Academy Drive, Northbrook, Illinois 60062 Page 54 of 124  To: Historic Preservation Commission From: Maddy Markle, Planner I Date: May 14, 2026 Subject: Certificate of Appropriateness – 2012 Grange Avenue Location: 2012 Grange Avenue Historical Name: Sparkling Springs Well House Historical Status: Local Landmark (2013) Structure: Style: Utilitarian Architect: Unknown Built: c. 1896 Petitioner: Barry Hammer (Developer) on behalf of Lisa Herzberg (Owner) 1033 Crofton Ct Highland Park, IL 60035 Project Architect: Scott Renken 555 Oakwood Avenue Lake Forest, IL 60045 SUMMARY OF THE PETITION Developer Barry Hammer, on behalf of property owner Lisa Herzberg, has submitted an application to amend a previously approved Certificate of Appropriateness for the rehabilitation of the historic well house and construction of an attached single-family home at the property located at 2012 Grange Avenue. The proposed amendment pertains specifically to the well-house structure, not the prior-approved design of the new single- family dwelling. The application was submitted April 27, 2026. The historic Sparkling Spring Well House is a square utilitarian structure with a pyramidal roof and venting tower (also referred to as copula). The structure was historically built and owned by the Sparking Springs Mineral Water Company, the oldest family-owned business in Highland Park (founded c. 1896). Figure 1. Historic Structure. Figure 2. Location Prior Commission Consideration. This property was designated a Local Landmark in 2013 (see Attachment A). The property was designated a Local Landmark for its associations with the Sparkling Springs Mineral Water Company (Landmark Criteria 1, 7, and 8). See the 2013 Landmark Nomination materials in Attachment B . Page 1 of 4 Page 55 of 124 In October of 2024 the Historic Preservation Commission (“HPC ”) granted a Certificate of Appropriateness (“COA”) to the current applicant to rehabilitate the historic structure and incorporate it into a new single- family dwelling (see Attachment C ) using the plans originally approved in 2013 1. In April of 2025, the HPC granted a COA to the same applicant that included an updated plan set. The applicant applied for a COA that incorporated an updated design of the proposed home that isn’t identical to the same design approved in 2013 and 2024 (see Attachment D). As part of this past approval the applicant committed to repairing the venting cupola on the roof. PROPOSED AMENDMENT The applicant proposes to amend the 2025 COA to reconstruct the venting cupola, as opposed to repairing it. The project architect, Scott Renken, states, “Upon closer examination of the Historical Building portion of this project, particularly the cupola front dormer and portions of the roof structure, it has become apparent that the current poor quality and deterioration of materials require replacement vs. saving of existing materials…. All proportions, details and dimensions of the original design will be maintained. The replacement materials will be an asphalt shingle roof (as originally proposed), Hardie Bd. cementitious trim or real cedar would be used for all trim and conventional 2x new wood framing as needed for structure. The vents will either be wood or a Hardie Bd. product and would match as closely as possible the original design.” The applicant’s project narrative and proposed amended plans are available in Attachment E . The reconstructed cupola will resemble the current, in terms of massing, proportion, height, and roof shape. The proposed materials will be the same as the current structure with the exception of possible Hardie Board trim and vents. As part of their evaluation of “Standard 7 – Relationship of Materials and Textures,” found in Sec. 24.030 of Code, the Commission should consider if Hardie Board (fiber cement) is an appropriate material replacement for wood. National Parks Service Preservation Brief 16, “Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors” 2 is available in Attachment F as a resource. Figure 3. Proposed amendment. Cupola will be totally re-built rather than repaired. Materials will be asphalt roofing, Hardie Board (fiber cement) trim and 2x framing members. Proportions, details, and dimensions will match original structure. 1 The Oct. 10, 2024 COA was approved by HPC with a condition that the Applicant would return to a subsequent HPC meeting to present an updated plan set of the proposed single-family dwelling. 2 The HPC does not evaluate applications using National Parks Service standards. Applications are evaluated using the Certificate of Appropriateness standards in Ch. 24.030 of Code. The attached is information about modern replacement materials that the Commission may take into account as they evaluate “Standard 7 – Relationship of Material and Texture.” Page 2 of 4 Page 56 of 124 CITY INSPECTION The Department of Community Development’s Senior Plan Examiner / Inspector Horatiu Wolff, and Senior Inspector Jim Ferber inspected the site on April 23, 2026 to verify the Applicant’s claims of the cupola’s poor structural condition. Both City inspectors concluded that the cupola requires reconstruction and cannot reasonably be repaired (see Attachment G). Inspector Wolff notes the following: 1. Internal Observations a. Existing wood rafters supporting the roof structure, show signs of deterioration from water infiltration and age (especially at the bearing ends over the wood top plates along the perimeter exterior masonry block walls), a condition that has progressed over the life span of the existing construction and would render the wood frame construction unable to support building code required structural loads. b. Existing wood framing members framing the rough opening/support for the existing cupola, likewise show signs of deterioration from water infiltration and age. 2. Exterior Observations a. Existing asphalt shingled roof has long exceeded the life expectancy attributed to such a roofing type: with portions of the roof missing roof shingles and the roof shingles themselves curled, cracked and extremely weathered. b. The cupola itself appears to be warped: appears to have rotated slightly around the vertical axis. Horizontal slats on the exterior vent panels of the cupola, are missing and the cupola wood construction itself shows sign of extreme weathering. Inspector Wolff concludes that, “In consideration of such observations, it would be prudent to replace the entire roof structure, with a new roof structure that matches the existing overall design of the existing natural spring/well house: i.e. a hip roof, with a dormer on the South elevation and a rectangular plan shaped, venting cupola (having [2] vent panels on North/South elevations and [1] vent panel on East/West elevations), and with sweeping rafters framing the cupola roof.” These observations are consistent with the project architect and developer’s assessment. STANDARDS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS The following are the Standards for Certificates of Appropriateness as listed in Section 24.030(C), which are for an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for New Construction . (1) Height. The height of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visibly related. (2) Proportion of front façade. The relationship of the width to the height of the front elevation of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. (3) Proportion of openings. The relationship of the width to height of windows and doors of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which the building is visually related (4) Rhythm of solids to voids in front facades. The relationship of solids to voids in the front façade of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. Page 3 of 4 Page 57 of 124 (5) Rhythm of spacing and structures on streets. The relationship of the proposed new Structure or object to the open space between it and adjoining structures or objects shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. (6) Rhythm of entrance porches, storefront recesses and other projections. The relationship of entrances and other projections of the proposed new Structure to sidewalks shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related. (7) Relationship of materials and texture. The relationship of the materials and texture of the façade of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the structures to which it is visually related. (8) Roof shapes. The roof shape of the proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the structures to which it is visually related.. (9) Walls of continuity. Facades and property and site structures, such as masonry walls, fences, and landscape masses, shall, when it is a characteristic of the area, form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street, to ensure visual compatibility with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which such elements are visually related. (10) Scale of a structure. The size and mass of the proposed new Structure in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, porches, adjacent structures, and balconies shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which they are visually related. (11) Directional expression of front elevation. The proposed new Structure shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which it is visually related in its directional character, whether this be vertical character, horizontal character, or nondirectional character. (12) Destruction or alteration of historic features. The distinguishing historic qualities or character of a Property, Structure, site or Object and its environment shall not be destroyed. The Alteration of any historic or material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible (13) Archaeological and natural resources. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological and natural resources affected by, or adjacent to any project. (14) Architectural compatibility. In considering new construction, the Commission shall not impose a requirement for the use of a single architectural style or period, though it may impose a requirement for compatibility. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings presented above, staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission consider approval of an amendment to the 2025 Certificate of Appropriateness for the rehabilitation at 2012 Grange Avenue. Staff asks that the Commission consider if Hardie Board trim is an appropriate material replacement for wood trim and vents as part of the proposed reconstruction. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A. 2013 Ordinance Attachment B. 2013 Landmark Nomination Attachment C. 2024 COA Attachment D. 2025 COA Attachment E. Applicant Submission Attachment F. NPS Preservation Brief 16 Attachment G. City Inspector Opinion Page 4 of 4 Page 58 of 124 Page 59 of 124 Page 60 of 124 Page 61 of 124 Page 62 of 124  HP Zelp, LLC – Landmark Nomination for Well House at 1629 Park Ave. West Exhibit A – Statement of Eligibility The Well House was built in the 1890s as a shelter for pumping equipment for the Sparkling Springs Water Company. It is the oldest surviving structure on the site. The City’s 1999 architectural survey gave the Well House an S-Significant historical status and noted it was probably eligible for inclusion on the National Registry of Historic Places. The Well House is a unique example of a utilitarian structure that illustrates the early development of the west Highland Park area. The Applicant desires to preserve the overall form of the Well House (minus two non-historic brick additions) and incorporate it into a residential adaptive reuse within the Grange Woods Subdivision pursuant to the terms and conditions of a pending proposed planned development special use and development agreement which will be subject to final approval by the City Council. The Well House is eligible for landmark designation on the basis of the following landmarks criteria: (1), (7), and (8). The Historic Preservation Commission has previously issued (i) a Certificate of Appropriateness for a proposed design for adaptive reuse, and (ii) demolition permits for the two non-historic brick additions. Page 63 of 124  HP Zelp, LLC – Landmark Nomination for Well House at 1629 Park Ave. West Exhibit B – Photograph of Well House Page 64 of 124  HP Zelp, LLC – Landmark Nomination for Well House at 1629 Park Ave. West Exhibit C – Survey of Original Spring House (Well House) Page 65 of 124 DATE: October 11, 2024 REGULATED STRUCTURE: Well house structure ADDRESS: 2012 Grange Road / 1629 Park Ave W OWNERS: Lisa Ruby ARCHITECT: N/A PROPOSED ALTERATION: 1. Incorporating the landmarked well house structure into a new single-family dwelling COMMISSION REVIEW DATE: October 10, 2024 ABSTAIN: N/A VOTE: 5-0 ACCEPT PROPOSAL X REJECT PROPOSAL -Plan Set, 7 pages, submitted by applicant ATTACHED DOCUMENTS: -This site is part of a PUD approval (2013). -The attached plans were approved by HPC in 2012 and homeowner COMMENTS: wanted to resubmit them for a COA approval. -The expectation is for the homeowner to come back to HPC with modifications to the approved design at a subsequent meeting. SIGNED: Zubin Coleman, Planner II Page 1 of 1 Page 66 of 124  The contractor shall verify and confirm in writing all elevations and dimensions of existing work. Copies of the official survey are available upon request. Contractors and subcontractors shall examine architectural drawings and drawings of all other trades to verify the location of fixtures, equipment and roughing, and for the coodination of all trades. Copyright 2012 Becker Architects Limited. All rights reserved. OWNER: HP ZELP, INC. 2001 NORTH HALSTED STREET CHICAGO, IL 60614 312.943.1812 LAND PLANNER: TESKA ASSOCIATES 627 GROVE STREET EVANSTON, IL 60201 847.869.2015 - Brick Warehouse Addition (North & West) NEW RESIDENCE INCORPORATING HISTORIC SPRING HOUSE PARK AVE WEST & GRANGE HIGHLAND PARK, IL PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Issues Original Spring House By Date For Brick Warehouse Addition (East) MES 7.19.12 HP HPC SUBMITTAL Drawing Title EXISTING SPRINGHOUSE PLAN Scale NORTH AS NOTED 1 EXISTING BUILDING PLAN Issue Date N.T.S. SEE ABOVE Drawn By Project Number 2012-0016 MES HP ZELP. LLC Drawing Number A200 Page 67 of 124  The contractor shall verify and confirm in writing all elevations and dimensions of existing work. Copies of the official survey are available upon request. Contractors and subcontractors shall examine architectural drawings and drawings of all other trades to verify the location of fixtures, equipment and roughing, and for the coodination of all trades. Copyright 2012 Becker Architects Limited. All rights reserved. OWNER: HP ZELP, INC. 2001 NORTH HALSTED STREET CHICAGO, IL 60614 312.943.1812 LAND PLANNER: TESKA ASSOCIATES 627 GROVE STREET EVANSTON, IL 60201 847.869.2015 FRZR. REF. DN GREAT ROOM 22'9"x25'10" - BEDROOM #5 12'8"x12'0" NEW TV W.I.C. POWDER RESIDENCE 5'6"x7'6" 5'6"x7'6" INCORPORATING BREAKFAST HISTORIC SPRING BATH #5 HOUSE 8'6"x5'0" KITCHEN PARK AVE WEST & GRANGE 20'0"x22'0" HIGHLAND PARK, IL DN GARAGE 22'10"x36'8" FOYER OPEN UP 11'2"x13'0" DN PORCH PRELIMINARY MUD ROOM OPEN TO NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ABOVE AND BELOW Issues By Date For SUNROOM W.I.C. 6'2"x7'0" DINING 19'6"x15'6" STORAGE 8'6"x11'9" PANTRY LIVING ROOM 5'10"x6'2" 20'9"x15'0" MES 7.19.12 HP HPC SUBMITTAL Drawing Title 1 PROPOSED 1ST FLOOR PLAN Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" PROPOSED 1ST FLOOR PLAN Scale NORTH AS NOTED Issue Date SEE ABOVE Drawn By Project Number 2012-0016 MES HP ZELP. LLC Drawing Number A201 Page 68 of 124  The contractor shall verify and confirm in writing all elevations and dimensions of existing work. Copies of the official survey are available upon request. Contractors and subcontractors shall examine architectural drawings and drawings of all other trades to verify the location of fixtures, equipment and roughing, and for the coodination of all trades. Copyright 2012 Becker Architects Limited. All rights reserved. OWNER: HP ZELP, INC. 2001 NORTH HALSTED STREET CHICAGO, IL 60614 312.943.1812 LAND PLANNER: TESKA ASSOCIATES 627 GROVE STREET EVANSTON, IL 60201 847.869.2015 MASTER BATH 10'0"x14'3" - MASTER BEDROOM 14'0"x19'6" NEW BEDROOM #4 CL RESIDENCE 12'8"x14'0" MASTER INCORPORATING W.I.C. HISTORIC SPRING 14'6"x7'6" HOUSE PARK AVE WEST & GRANGE HIGHLAND PARK, IL BATH #3 HALLWAY 8'0"x8'0" DN PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRYER LAUNDRY/ W.I.C. Issues LINEN 9'6"x5'6" By Date For BEDROOM #3 WASHER 11'0"x8'6" 12'8"x14'0" BEDROOM #2 14'0"x14'0" W.I.C. BATH #2 5'0"x11'0" MES 7.19.12 HP HPC SUBMITTAL 1 PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLAN Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" Drawing Title PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR PLAN Scale NORTH AS NOTED Issue Date SEE ABOVE Drawn By Project Number 2012-0016 MES HP ZELP. LLC Drawing Number A202 Page 69 of 124  The contractor shall verify and confirm in writing all elevations and dimensions of existing work. Copies of the official survey are available upon request. Contractors and subcontractors shall examine architectural drawings and drawings of all other trades to verify the location of fixtures, equipment and roughing, and for the coodination of "ARCHITECTURAL" all trades. REPAIR WOOD TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLES Copyright 2012 Becker Architects Limited. All rights reserved. (TYP.) OWNER: HP ZELP, INC. REPAIR CUPOLA 2001 NORTH HALSTED STREET CHICAGO, IL 60614 312.943.1812 STANDING SEAM STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING METAL ROOFING LAND PLANNER: (TYP.) TESKA ASSOCIATES 627 GROVE STREET NEW "ARCHITECTURAL" EVANSTON, IL 60201 ASPHALT SHINGLES 847.869.2015 (TYP.) HALF-ROUND GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS (TYP.) - NEW RESIDENCE INCORPORATING HISTORIC SPRING HOUSE PARK AVE WEST & GRANGE EXIST. MASONRY TO BE REPLACEMENT DOUBLE REPAIR FASCIA DOUBLE HUNG BRICK (TYP.) HIGHLAND PARK, IL REPAIRED & PAINTED HUNG WINDOWS - SDL NEW HALF ROUND WINDOWS - SDL IN EXIST. OPENINGS GUTTERS & (TYP.) DOWNSPOUTS 1 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Issues By Date For MES 7.19.12 HP HPC SUBMITTAL Drawing Title PROPOSED ELEVATIONS Scale AS NOTED Issue Date SEE ABOVE 2 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION Drawn By Project Number Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" MES 2012-0016 HP ZELP. LLC Drawing Number A301 Page 70 of 124  The contractor shall verify and confirm in writing all elevations and dimensions of existing work. Copies of the official survey are available upon request. Contractors and subcontractors shall examine architectural drawings and drawings of all other trades to verify the location of fixtures, equipment and roughing, and for the coodination of "ARCHITECTURAL" all trades. ASPHALT SHINGLES REPAIR WOOD TRIM Copyright 2012 Becker Architects Limited. All rights reserved. (TYP.) OWNER: HP ZELP, INC. REPAIR CUPOLA 2001 NORTH HALSTED STREET CHICAGO, IL 60614 312.943.1812 STANDING SEAM STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING METAL ROOFING LAND PLANNER: (TYP.) TESKA ASSOCIATES 627 GROVE STREET NEW "ARCHITECTURAL" EVANSTON, IL 60201 ASPHALT SHINGLES 847.869.2015 (TYP.) HALF-ROUND GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS (TYP.) - NEW RESIDENCE INCORPORATING HISTORIC SPRING HOUSE PARK AVE WEST & GRANGE HIGHLAND PARK, IL 1 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATIONBRICK (TYP.) DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS - SDL REPAIR FASCIA NEW HALF ROUND STONE SILLS TO MATCH EXISTING NEW DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS - SDL NEW RUSTICATED CONC. BLOCK TO MATCH EXISTING Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" (TYP.) GUTTERS & - PAINTED DOWNSPOUTS PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Issues By Date For MES 7.19.12 HP HPC SUBMITTAL Drawing Title PROPOSED ELEVATIONS Scale AS NOTED Issue Date SEE ABOVE NEW CUSTOM WOOD NEW RUSTICATED CONC. 2 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION OVERHEAD DOORS BLOCK TO MATCH EXISTING Drawn By Project Number Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0" - PAINTED MES 2012-0016 HP ZELP. LLC Drawing Number A302 Page 71 of 124  The contractor shall verify and confirm in writing all elevations and dimensions of existing work. Copies of the official survey are available upon request. Contractors and subcontractors shall examine architectural drawings and drawings of all other trades to verify the location of fixtures, equipment and roughing, and for the coodination of all trades. Copyright 2012 Becker Architects Limited. All rights reserved. OWNER: HP ZELP, INC. 2001 NORTH HALSTED STREET CHICAGO, IL 60614 312.943.1812 LAND PLANNER: TESKA ASSOCIATES 627 GROVE STREET EVANSTON, IL 60201 847.869.2015 - 1 PROPOSED SOUTHEAST VIEW N.T.S. 2 PROPOSED NORTHEAST VIEW N.T.S. NEW RESIDENCE INCORPORATING HISTORIC SPRING HOUSE PARK AVE WEST & GRANGE HIGHLAND PARK, IL PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Issues By Date For MES 7.19.12 HP HPC SUBMITTAL Drawing Title 3d VIEWS @ GROUND LEVEL 3 PROPOSED SOUTHWEST VIEW N.T.S. 4 PROPOSED NORTHWEST VIEW N.T.S. (MASSING STUDY) Scale AS NOTED Issue Date SEE ABOVE Drawn By Project Number 2012-0016 MES HP ZELP. LLC Drawing Number A303 Page 72 of 124  The contractor shall verify and confirm in writing all elevations and dimensions of existing work. Copies of the official survey are available upon request. Contractors and subcontractors shall examine architectural drawings and drawings of all other trades to verify the location of fixtures, equipment and roughing, and for the coodination of all trades. Copyright 2012 Becker Architects Limited. All rights reserved. OWNER: HP ZELP, INC. 2001 NORTH HALSTED STREET CHICAGO, IL 60614 312.943.1812 LAND PLANNER: TESKA ASSOCIATES 627 GROVE STREET EVANSTON, IL 60201 847.869.2015 - 1 PROPOSED SOUTHEAST VIEW N.T.S. 2 PROPOSED NORTHEAST VIEW N.T.S. NEW RESIDENCE INCORPORATING HISTORIC SPRING HOUSE PARK AVE WEST & GRANGE HIGHLAND PARK, IL PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Issues By Date For MES 7.19.12 HP HPC SUBMITTAL Drawing Title 3d VIEWS @ AERIAL LEVEL (MASSING STUDY) 3 PROPOSED SOUTHWEST VIEW 4 PROPOSED NORTHWEST VIEW N.T.S. N.T.S. Scale AS NOTED Issue Date SEE ABOVE Drawn By Project Number 2012-0016 MES HP ZELP. LLC Drawing Number A304 Page 73 of 124 DATE: April 11, 2025 REGULATED STRUCTURE: Well house structure ADDRESS: 2012 Grange Road / 1629 Park Ave W OWNERS: Lisa Ruby ARCHITECT: Scott Renken PROPOSED ALTERATION: 1. Incorporating the landmarked well house structure into a new single-family dwelling COMMISSION REVIEW DATE: April 10, 2025 ABSTAIN: N/A VOTE: 4-2 ACCEPT PROPOSAL X REJECT PROPOSAL -Plan Set, 8 pages, submitted by applicant ATTACHED -Project Narrative, 3 pages, submitted by applicant DOCUMENTS: -This site is part of a PUD approval (2013). -The attached plans were approved by HPC in 2012 and COMMENTS: -The commission generally favored this design and felt it was an improvement from the previously-approved design. SIGNED: Zubin Coleman, Planner II Page 1 of 1 Page 74 of 124 Page 75 of 124 Page 76 of 124 Page 77 of 124 Page 78 of 124 Page 79 of 124 Page 80 of 124 Page 81 of 124 Page 82 of 124  Renken Architects & Builders LLC STATEMENT OF INTENT Re: Park Ave & Grange Ave. property March 5, 2025 Mr. Zubin Coleman City of Highland Park Planning Division 1150 Half Day Rd. Highland Park, Il. 60035 Dear Mr. Coleman & HPC Members; We respectfully submit the attached COA application and supporting documents for a new single family home that incorporates the existing historical building formerly known as the “Spring House”. This project is part of an earlier subdivision of properties along Grange Ave. for single family homes. The building envelope was pre-determined, and this new home needs to incorporate the existing historical structure into the design. A previous scheme by another Owner was presented approx. 2012 but did not proceed. We think this submittal is superior and relates better to the existing historical structure and to the neighboring properties. SITE PLAN: The parameters of the site were pre-determined based on the building envelope. The new home will extend to the east of the existing structure and be connected. We decided to use the existing structure as a 3-car garage and mudroom. The front entry will be facing Grange Ave. to relate to all of the other homes on the street, with the south elevation facing Park Ave. of particular importance due to the historic character of the existing structure and exposure to the public. ELEVATIONS: It is required that the south elevation of the historical structure remain as-is with new repairs as needed: • The 3 windows locations and stone surrounds remain (with new windows) • The painted rough conc. blocks remain • The dormer remains with new windows & trim • The repaired cupola remains • The existing asphalt shingle roof will be replaced & match the home • The fascia, soffit & gutter will be replaced but remain in size & position. 555 Oakwood Ave Lake Forest, Il. 60045 Ph: 847-343-8162 Page 83 of 124  Renken Architects & Builders LLC The new portion of the house is 2-story with a 1-story link. Here are the characteristics of the new portion: • 8/12 +/- pitch on all visible roof forms to match the existing building. • All soffit depths match at 16” +/- on old and new buildings • New casement windows with a cross pattern in old & new • The existing dormer on historical building is duplicated on the east side of the new building for continuity. • The painted masonry on the existing building will be similar to the painted brick elements of the new building. • The fascia sizes will be the same and the link fascia will match the existing in height • The horizontal siding on the new will match the side & rear of the existing building. COLOR & TEXTURE OF MATERIALS: • The trim & siding will be cement-fiber such as a Hardie product. • The gutters and downspouts will be pre-finished aluminum • The windows will be aluminum clad wood or fiberglass. The muntins will be simulated divided lites. • The roof will be architectural asphalt shingle. • All masonry will be painted ARCHITECTURAL STYLE: The existing building has certain characteristics of a “gentleman farmhouse” with the shape, cupola, dormer, window spacing & hipped roof. These date from the early to mid twentieth century. The front has a rugged painted concrete block, while the sides & rear are in a state of disrepair. We chose to complement this architecture with a more modern farmhouse with traditional features such as front porch, dormer, etc. The roof pitches and soffit overhangs match. The painted masonry is duplicated on old & new. Also, in order to break up the the visual height of the new portion and add interest, a horizontal band is added under the second-floor windows and above is board & batten for the top 1/3. We feel that the existing structure is seamlessly incorporated into the overall home design and the result is a new residence that satisfies the needs of today while respecting the historical portion. COMPARISON OF 2012 SUBMITTAL TO THIS SUBMITTAL • New submittal has roof forms & pitches that match the existing instead of 1-1/2 steep gable roofs with shed dormers w/ metal roofs of the previous. • New submittal incorporates existing forms such as the hipped dormer while the previous submittal did not. • New submittal has better compatibility of material, specifically, no standing seam roofs. • The new design fits in better with the neighbors in scale & style, specifically the adjacent home to the north. 555 Oakwood Ave Lake Forest, Il. 60045 Ph: 847-343-8162 Page 84 of 124  Renken Architects & Builders LLC • Superior floor plan 555 Oakwood Ave Lake Forest, Il. 60045 Ph: 847-343-8162 Page 85 of 124 Page 86 of 124 Page 87 of 124 Page 88 of 124 Page 89 of 124 Page 90 of 124 Page 91 of 124 Page 92 of 124 Page 93 of 124 Page 94 of 124 Page 95 of 124 Page 96 of 124 Page 97 of 124 Page 98 of 124 Page 99 of 124 16 PRESERVATION BRIEFS The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors John Sandor, David Trayte, and Amy Elizabeth Uebel National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Technical Preservation Services The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation The term substitute materials is used to describe building generally require that deteriorated distinctive architectural materials that have the potential to match the appear- features of a historic property be repaired rather than ance, physical properties, and related attributes of historic replaced. Standard 6 of the Standards for Rehabilitation materials well enough to make them alternatives for use further states that when replacement of a distinctive in current preservation practice when historic materials feature is necessary, the new feature must “match the old require replacement. in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual properties, and, where possible, materials” (emphasis Compelling reasons to use a substitute material instead added). While the use of matching materials to replace of the historic material include the unavailability or poor historic ones is always preferred under the Standards for performance of the historic material, or environmental Rehabilitation, the Standards also purposely recognize pressures or code-driven requirements that necessitate a that flexibility may sometimes be needed when it comes change in material. When using a substitute material for to new and replacement materials as part of a historic replacement it is critical that it match the historic material rehabilitation project. Substitute materials that closely in all of its visual and physical properties to preserve the match the visual and physical properties of historic historic character of the building and minimize the impact materials can be successfully used on many rehabilitation on its integrity. projects in ways that are consistent with the Standards. Substitute materials can be cost-effective, permit the ac- The flexibility inherent in the Standards for Rehabilitation curate visual duplication of historic materials, and provide must always be balanced with the preservation of the improved durability. While the behavior of traditional, his- historic character and the historic integrity of a building, toric materials is generally well understood, the behavior of which historic materials are an important aspect. of newer materials can be less established and sometimes Any replacement work reduces the historic integrity of less predictable. Substitute materials are most successful a building to some degree, which can undermine the when the properties of both the original material and the historic character of the property over time. With limited substitute are thoroughly understood by all those involved exceptions, replacement should only be considered when in the design and construction process. The architect must damage or deterioration is too severe to make repair be adept at the selection of substitute materials and their feasible. When needed replacement is made with a incorporation into architectural plans and specifications. material that matches the historic material, the impact The contractor or tradesperson in the field must also be on integrity can be minimal, especially when only a small experienced with their use. amount of new material is needed. When a substitute material is used for the replacement, the loss in integrity This Preservation Brief provides general guidance on the can sometimes, although not always, be greater than use of substitute materials as replacement materials for that of a matching material. Also, whether historic or distinctive features on the exterior of historic buildings. substitute material, there is a point where the amount Due to the ever-evolving product market for construction of replacement can become excessive and the building’s materials, this Brief does not provide specifications historic integrity is diminished to an unacceptable for substitute materials. This guidance should be used degree, regardless of the material used—that is, a loss of in conjunction with qualified professionals who are authenticity and the physical features and characteristics knowledgeable in current construction and historic closely associated with the property’s historic significance. preservation practices. 1 Page 100 of 124  This Brief includes a discussion of the appropriate use teenth and early twentieth centuries for details on stone of substitute materials and provides a path for decision- or brick buildings as well as for the entire skin of large and making in their use. In considering the use of substitute elaborately detailed buildings. materials, such issues as the deterioration or failure of the historic building component and material must be Cast iron was also used to imitate stone, often with very understood. The existing component’s physical and visual decorative profiles, for a variety of architectural features properties, profile, surface texture, dimensions, and ranging from window hoods to columns, piers, balus- performance should be identified to establish the basis for trades, and even whole façades. Cast iron offered its own evaluating a possible replacement material. The physical set of efficiencies including cost, fabrication time, and and visual properties of the various substitute materials weight, but required a painted finish. available should also be assessed and compared to the original material for their physical and visual compatibility. While cast stone, terra cotta, and cast iron offered effi- Lastly, the suitability of a given substitute replacement ciencies over quarried and, particularly, carved stone, they material should be determined based on how well the were not cheap or impermanent materials. Less costly, but material matches both the physical and visual properties also less durable, stamped or brake-formed sheet metal, of the existing material as well as any specific performance typically galvanized, could also be used instead of masonry or application needs. The Brief’s descriptions of common for cornices, window hoods, roofing tiles, and even entire substitute materials are not meant to be comprehensive, building façades. and, as the performance history of newer materials continues to grow and new materials are developed, available options will change, and our understanding of current material performance will continue to evolve. Substitute Materials and Applying the Standards for Historical Use of Substitute Rehabilitation Materials The Standards for Rehabilitation are focused on The tradition of using affordable and common materials preserving the important and distinctive in imitation of more expensive and less available materi- character-defining features of a historic property als is a long one. At Mount Vernon, for example, George (Standards 2 and 6), and they are to be applied in a Washington used wood painted with sand-impregnated reasonable manner, taking into account economic paint to imitate rusticated stone. This technique, along and technical feasibility (36 CFR 67.7 and 36 CFR with scoring stucco into block patterns, was common in 68). The Standards have an inherent flexibility that Colonial America to imitate stone. facilitates their application to diverse projects, historic properties, and conditions. They are to Nineteenth-century technology made a variety of materi- be applied on a “cumulative-effect” basis, when als readily available and widely used that were not only the overall effect of all work in the context of the able to imitate traditional materials but were also cheaper specific conditions of the property and the project is to fabricate and easier to use. Traditionally, carved stone consistent with the property's historic character. units were individually worked. Molded or cast materials greatly increased efficiency in creating repetitive ele- ments. Cement-based products such as cast stone could The Standards for Rehabilitation require that the provide convincing imitations of natural stone with care- replacement of a distinctive feature match the old fully chosen aggregates and cements and was typically a in physical and visual properties. While the use of commercially manufactured product. It could be tooled matching materials is always preferred, the Standards like natural stone, though that could reduce much of purposely allow for the use of substitute materials the cost advantage. These carefully-crafted cementitious when the use of original materials is not reasonably products were widely used as trim elements for masonry possible, such as in consideration of economic and structures or as the face material for an entire building. technical feasibility or in new construction. They At the other end of the spectrum, mail-order catalogs also provide additional flexibility in the treatment provided a wide variety of forms for molding concrete of secondary, less distinctive features that are that were merely evocative of natural stone and did little less important in defining the historic character to match its appearance. Concrete masonry units could be of the property. The Standards for Rehabilitation fabricated locally and on site, avoiding expensive quarry- recognize that flexibility is appropriate to facilitate ing and shipping costs. “a compatible use for a property … while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, Offering similar efficiencies as cast stone for reproducing cultural, or architectural values” (definition of repetitive and even complex decorative shapes, terra cotta “Rehabilitation,” 36 CFR 67.2(b)). could mimic the surface characteristics of stone with vari- ous textures and glazes. It was popular in the late nine- 2 Page 101 of 124 Examples of Historical Use of Substitute Materials Figure 2a. Casting concrete blocks to mimic quarried Figure 2b: The 19th century also produced a variety of stone was a popular late 19th- to mid 20th-century metal products used to imitate other materials. Across the technique. Concrete masonry units could be completed by country, cast iron was used in storefronts to imitate stone. local craftsman, saving time and shipping costs. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. Figure 2c: Stucco has been used to imitate a number of Figure 2d: Terra cotta gained popularity in the late 19th building materials for many centuries. Seen here, stucco century as a cheap and lightweight alternative to stone. was applied to a brick structure and scored to represent a Glazing techniques allowed the blocks to imitate a variety stone façade. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. of natural stone materials. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. 3 Page 102 of 124  These examples of one material used to imitate another, more often in initial construction than for later repair and replacement purposes, are referred to as imitative materi- als in the Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restor- ing & Reconstructing Historic Buildings, updated in 2017, that accompany the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. These imitative materials, while evoking other materials, usually had dis- tinctive qualities of their own and were not always a very close match in appearance to the historic material they were meant to imitate. Many of the traditional materials discussed above are still available and used to replace damaged or missing original features, both to replace matching historic materials and sometimes as substitute materials. Because of their exten- sive use over time and their known physical and chemical Figure 3: Incremental repair is best done using in-kind material to properties, cast stone, cast iron, and terra cotta are well minimize differences in the performance characteristics that could understood substitute materials. This continued usage negatively affect the overall assembly. Photo: NPS. and familiarity means their installation requirements and service life are well established, which in turn makes it tures or units of historic material must be replaced. While easier to determine when and how to use these traditional achieving an effective match of all of the visual qualities of materials as substitutes for a deteriorated material. Howev- a material can be challenging, even when replacement is er, innovation in replacement materials continues, and new in kind, it can be even more challenging when the replace- products (many of them consisting of synthetic materials) ment is a substitute material. A good visual match is not are continually introduced. These non-traditional products the only consideration when a substitute material is to be are an increasing part of both the new construction and used for incremental replacement within a larger assem- rehabilitation industries. Some materials, like glass fiber bly of historic material. When an individual siding board reinforced polymers, glass fiber reinforced concrete, or or a single block of ashlar is being replaced, it is usually fiber cement, have been in use long enough for an accu- best achieved with the original material. Introduction of rate prediction of their service life and performance. Other a different material into an intact assembly requires that newer, non-traditional materials may be too new to have its inherent properties, such as expansion and contraction, established performance records, thus, understanding moisture resistance, or permeability, be thoroughly consid- their material properties is critical, and their use should be ered relative to those of the surrounding historic materials approached with more caution. to avoid causing damage. When to Consider Using Substitute Materials in Preservation Projects According to the Standards for Rehabilitation, deteriora- tion should generally be addressed through repair if in repairable condition. Repair can entail a variety of treat- ments that retain the unit of building material and remove and patch or replace only the damaged portion. This ap- proach can be done with traditional methods and materi- als such as a dutchman, where like-kind material is pre- cisely inserted into wood or stone, or it may employ other materials such as epoxies for wood repair or cementitious compounds for masonry. As long as the repair methods are sound and do not damage or accelerate the deterioration of the historic material, repairs are generally preferable to replacement of an entire element. More complex manufac- tured products, typical of more recent historic materials (as Figure 4. While occasionally used to imitate other materials such as well as a lot of modern building materials generally), may wood or slate shingle, many asbestos shingles and siding materials be more difficult to repair, if they can be repaired at all. had their own distinct shape and profile. No longer manufactured today, alternative materials must be found to replace these There are situations, however, when the level of deterio- materials when they are distinctive features on a historic structure. ration makes localized repairs infeasible and entire fea- Drawing: Association for Preservation Technology, Building Technology Heritage Library. 4 Page 103 of 124 Figure 5. (Left) Asbestos shingles were often used as a substitute for traditional slate roof shingles. The historic asbestos roof on this rehabilitation project had reached the end of its lifespan and required complete replacement. (Right) Given the limited replacement materials available to match the historic asbestos shingles, utilizing natural slate was determined to be the best visual match for the original shingles and design intent in this instance. Photos: Crosskey Architects. Circumstances in which the use of substitute materials a natural material, which was the case with asbestos may generally be considered appropriate, taking into shingles meant to imitate slate, the natural material consideration technical and economic feasibility reasons, may now be an appropriate substitute material to include: the unavailability of historic materials; the consider for the manufactured one that is no longer unavailability of skilled artisans or historic craft techniques; produced. inadequate durability of the original materials; the replacement of a secondary feature; construction of a •  new addition; the reconstruction of a missing feature; code-required performance; and for enhanced resilience and sustainability: •  •  Many manufactured materials that were used historically on buildings are no longer made. Terne- plated steel, which was the material most typically used for painted standing-seam or flat-seam roofing, is no longer made. However, because it was always painted, other metals including galvanized steel or copper can generally be substituted if painted. When the historic material needing to be replaced is a manufactured product developed as an imitation of 5 Page 104 of 124  The ready availability of manufactured ornamental Figure 6. The dramatic wood features fed a nineteenth-century taste for difference in the number decorative architectural details that were often of growth rings between used on the exterior of buildings with little concern old-growth wood and wood that was recently for how they would be affected by moisture or harvested from second- maintained. Even old-growth wood from decay- or third-growth forests resistant species often could not prevent features is indicative of the with severe exposure from eventually needing to be diminished dimensional replaced. Today’s available commercial supplies of stability and durability lumber no longer provide the denser, more decay- of most lumber currently resistant wood of old-growth forests, so even careful available. Photo: matching to species, which is not always possible, will Zachary Dettmore. not yield a replacement equal in performance to the historic material. Old-growth wood is likely to be very such a feature, the retention of the overall historic expensive, if it can be found, and may not be available character should still guide selection of an appropriate from a sustainable, environmentally responsible replacement material. For example, replacing source. When features with severe exposure need to secondary features such as those with limited visibility be replaced or reproduced, substitute materials that (e.g., siding materials on a rear elevation) may permit are less susceptible to decay can have a longer life, and replacement materials that are similar in appearance when the feature is painted, as exterior wood features or character without having to be a perfect match. generally are, the visual effect of a substitute material can be minimal. • Construction of a new addition. The Standards require that new additions to historic buildings and • Replacement of a secondary feature. When it related new construction be differentiated from the is necessary to replace a less distinctive, secondary old as well as be compatible with the historic character feature that is less important in defining the historic of the property and its site and environment. Using character of the property, there is more flexibility in materials that evoke, without matching, the historic how it can be replaced. While it may be less important material can be an effective means of achieving to find an exact match in materials when replacing the needed balance between compatibility and Figure 7. A new addition replaced non-historic construction on the rear elevation of this building. Fiber cement gives the addition a compatible appearance without replicating the exposure for thickness of the historic siding. Photo: Ward Architecture + Preservation. 6 Page 105 of 124  differentiation for new additions and new construction. Even if differentiation is achieved through design rather than materials, there generally is no basis for requiring the use of matching historic materials for new additions and new construction as part of a rehabilitation project. • Reconstruction of a missing feature. Many buildings lose significant features over the course of their lives for reasons such as those previously discussed. When a missing feature is to be reconstructed, the importance of matching the original mate- rial may be less important to the effect replacing the missing feature may have on the overall historic character and appear- ance of the building. Though replacement of missing features must be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence, in many cases the authenticity of the material may be secondary to the overall visual qualities. The use of a more cost-effective substitute material for the construction of a missing feature can often be an important factor in the feasibility of undertaking such work. • Code-required performance. Modern building codes are regularly amended to require higher performance levels for new and existing buildings in such areas as life safety, seismic retrofits, and accessibility. Rehabilitation projects often trigger compliance with code requirements that were not in place when a building was constructed. Although building codes may often allow for the retention of historic materials and assemblies, substitute materials can offer an alternative in situations when the historic materials are non-compliant and cannot otherwise be reasonably retained. In these instances, a change in material may be appropriate to meet code requirements, while in other instances selecting the optimal code compliance method for the project may achieve code-compliant solutions that also allow for the preservation of a building’s historic materials and finishes. For example, fire codes may require increased resistance to flame spread for buildings within dense urban environments where building proximity and separation between buildings is a concern. Some substitute materials are non-combustible, have good ratings for flame spread, and Figure 8. A long-missing cast-iron steeple was reconstructed in aluminum and can provide an alternative to help meet fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP). Photo: John Sandor, NPS, Inset: Quinn Evans. 7 Page 106 of 124  fire code requirements. Depending on the building they may have shorter lifespans to their historic mate- component and the material, however, a substitute rial counterparts. When either greater resilience or material may not resist fire any better than the sustainability is a factor, all feasible alternatives should historic material. In addressing code issues, all feasible be considered in finding a balanced approach that alternatives should be considered to minimize the maintains historic character while meeting resilience impact on the historic character of the building while and sustainability goals. still meeting code requirements. With specific provisions in building code related to Substitute Materials and issues such as seismic hazards, the choice of materials for features inherently unstable in a seismic event can Economic Feasibility be a key part of a code-compliant retrofit solution. Elements at risk of falling such as parapets, finials, and Economic feasibility is inevitably a concern when choosing overhanging cornices may be made safe by anchoring a material for any part of a project, whether a historic them to new structural frames. However, for some or substitute material, but it should not be the sole heavy masonry features, especially where there is determinant factor at the expense of maintaining the deterioration or the feature is difficult to effectively brace, adequately anchoring the existing feature may not prove feasible. In such cases removing and replacing these features with lighter-weight replicas that incorporate a resilient structural framework can help preserve the historic character of the building while improving life safety performance. • Enhanced resilience and sustainability. Wildfires, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, and other extreme weather events put historic buildings and their occu- pants at risk and may require adaptive treatments that are more invasive than might be accepted in other cir- cumstances, including related to the use of substitute materials. In these contexts, it is still necessary to try to minimize impacts on a building’s historic character as much as possible while still adapting it to be more resilient. Widespread wildfires, for example, have increased demand for fire resistant materials for the exterior building envelope. Flood events may neces- sitate the replacement of historic materials that have been damaged or inundated with hazardous substanc- es in contaminated floodwaters. When undertaking repairs in such circumstances, substitute materials may Figure 9. Previously bricked-in openings below the flood line were offer greater resilience to anticipated future exposure reopened and new aluminum windows installed with cellular to natural hazard risks. PVC trim detailed to hold back moderate flood waters and survive exposure to water. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. Similarly, efforts to improve energy efficiency and performance may include the use of substitute materi- historic character and historic integrity of a building. Other als as replacement components when modifications to factors may prompt the consideration of a substitute building assemblies are required and the historic mate- material, such as the cost of maintaining the historic rials cannot be preserved. When evaluating substitute material, because it is comparatively difficult or costly to materials in the context of sustainability objectives, reach or access, or the frequency of required maintenance factors such as the environmental impact of produc- the historic material needs. Additionally, where in- tion, the full life cycle of products, and the embodied kind replacement material is found to be prohibitively carbon of the materials already in place should be expensive, it may be reasonable to consider a substitute carefully analyzed. There may be more sustainable that offers an alternative and is a good physical and choices for a replacement material, including the use visual match. Not all substitute materials are, however, of more traditional materials in place of manufactured cost-effective replacements. Long-term durability and products that may consist of non-renewable resources maintainability are other factors that should be considered or hazardous materials. While some synthetic substi- in conjunction with initial cost. tute materials are made from recycled materials or are otherwise sustainably produced, many are not Maintenance of a material, particularly where accessibil- repairable, salvageable, or recyclable themselves, and ity is difficult or expensive, can be an important part of a 8 Page 107 of 124 cost evaluation. Maintenance costs should not be consid- characteristics of a historic natural material with a ered without also considering life-cycle expenses. While man-made substitute can often be quite difficult. some substitute materials may offer reduced initial costs, they may be as or more costly than traditional materials to When the color and surface characteristics of maintain over time. For example, many substitute materials an existing material are important, cleaning the are not readily repairable, necessitating full replacement material should be the starting point for evaluating when damaged. The cost to replace a material or assem- a potential matching material. In situations where bly at the end of its lifespan may also be greater than the there are subtle variations in color and texture accumulated incremental expense to maintain the historic within the original material, the substitute material, particularly if it is a more traditional, repairable material should be similarly varied so that it is not material. Maintenance cost should never be the sole reason conspicuous by its uniformity. If a material is custom for replacing a historic material that is not deteriorated. fabricated, a sufficient number of samples should be supplied to permit on-site comparison of color, texture, detailing, and other critical visual qualities. Criteria for the Appropriate Use For a manufactured product with preset choices of color or texture, it may be necessary to look at of Substitute Materials samples from more than one manufacturer to find the best match. Similarly, prefabricated products, Substitute materials must meet three basic criteria to be such as roofing slate, may offer limited, if any, considered: they must be compatible with the historic choice of unit size, which can be a critical factor materials in appearance; their physical properties must be for achieving a good match. A substitute material similar to those of the historic materials, or the materials should not be used to replace distinctive, character- must be installed in a manner that tolerates differences; defining materials and features if an adequate and they must meet certain basic performance expecta- match in design and appearance is not possible. tions over an extended period of time. As all exposed materials are subject to ultraviolet • Matching the Appearance of the Historic degradation, samples of a new material, particularly Material when custom formulated, should be prepared Any material’s appearance varies depending on the during the early planning phases to allow for nature of the material and how it is used. Some evaluation of the effects of weathering on historic materials, such as wood and ferrous metals, color stability. When that is not possible, or if a were typically painted, making the color of the prefabricated product is used, the fabricator or substitute unimportant, though the texture of the manufacturer may be able to identify regional surface, which telegraphs through a paint layer, is locations where equivalent products have been still an important consideration. Texture can be a installed long enough ago to get a better sense of large part of distinguishing a material formed by how the material weathers and performs. hand from one that is machine-made. Many historic materials, such as most building stones, are used While a perfect match is the desired goal for without any coating, making the color, pattern, and replacing distinctive features, it is not always reflectivity, as well as surface texture, dependent on possible, even when the same matching material is the material itself. Matching the color and surface chosen for the replacement. When any compromise Figure 10. Polymer slates offer a choice of shapes but not sizes, limiting their ability to achieve a good visual match for some historic slate. With the size of the polymer slates (right) being nearly twice that of the historic slates (left), the scale of the entire feature is incompatibly altered. The molded edges of this mate- rial, which contribute to its ability to replicate slate, would be lost if each shingle was resized by cutting. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. 9 Page 108 of 124  Figure 12. Cellulose composite materials, like wood, expand and contract with moisture. Here it was used to reconstruct a missing storefront. Unlike solid wood that is dimensionally stable parallel to the grain, this composite moves equally in all dimensions, resulting in gaps that were not adequately anticipated in the design. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. by carefully designed joints and fasteners. Joints can play a role both in accommodating movement of materials as well as in managing moisture, either to keep it from entering the enclosure assembly or to let it escape from the building envelope, or both. Figure 11. The thickness of the wood siding on the front (left) Because some synthetic materials are less permeable creates a deeper shadow line than is achieved with the fiber cement to moisture than more traditional materials, siding used on the side (right) elevation. While the exposure can installations must take into account the potential be adjusted, fiber cement siding is not available in a matching to trap moisture and cause deterioration of historic thickness. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. and new materials. An assembly incorporating new must be made in the precision of the match, it is and historic materials should be designed so that if wise to consider the vantage point from which material failures occur, the failures occur within the the material will be seen. Sometimes what seems new material rather than the historic one. important at close range, such as variations in the texture of a surface, may be secondary to other During installation, surface preparation is critical to aspects of the material when viewed from some ensure proper attachment. Deteriorated underlying distance. The closer a feature is to the viewer, the material must be removed or stabilized. Non- more closely the material and craftsmanship should corrosive anchoring devices or fasteners that are match the original. An on-site mock-up using a designed to carry the new material and to withstand sample of the proposed material can help evaluate wind, rain, snow, and other destructive elements whether it is an adequate visual match. should be used. Since physical failures often result from poor anchorage or improper installation • Matching the Physical Properties of the techniques, a structural engineer should be Historic Material included in planning any major project. For readily Carefully chosen substitute materials can often available, off-the-shelf materials, manufacturers’ closely match the appearance of historic materials, recommendations for attachment and spacing should but their physical properties may differ greatly. These be followed. differences are most critical when incrementally replacing components of a larger assembly that retains Nearly all substitute materials have some properties significant historic material. The chemical composition that are different from the historic materials they of the material (e.g., the presence of acids, alkalis, may replace. Even when substitute materials are salts, or metals) should be evaluated to ensure that isolated from historic materials and features, it is the replacement materials will be compatible with the important to understand the substitute materials’ adjacent historic materials. Materials that will cause properties in order to use them successfully. galvanic corrosion or other chemical reactions must be isolated from one another. • Performance of the Material Over Time When more traditional materials are used to replace The thermal- and moisture-driven expansion and damaged historic materials and features, their perfor- contraction coefficients of each adjacent material mance is predictable in most cases. An exception may must be within narrow limits or be accommodated be modern wood that has durability and other prop- 10 Page 109 of 124  erties different than those of historic wood from old- Many traditional building materials can be repaired growth forests. Many of the materials used as substi- either with traditional methods and materials or with tutes have been in use long enough to provide some more modern conservation techniques using sub- idea of how they perform over time. Other material stances like epoxies. However, many modern substitute may only have test results from accelerated weather- materials (particularly synthetic ones) are not as easily ing. The length of manufacturer warranties may be an repaired, if repairable at all, as their more traditional indicator of expected durability and lifespan. War- counterparts. Confirming that a material is repairable ranties only predict a manufacturer’s expectation of may be important for those used, e.g., where impact a product’s performance and are no guarantee that or significant wear or abrasion is likely. the manufacturers will still be in business at the time needed to stand behind them. Just as new manufac- Finally, it is critical that the substitute materials be turers emerge with new materials, others disappear. documented as part of the historical record of the Where possible, projects involving substitute materi- building so that proper care and maintenance of all of als in similar installations and exposures should be the building materials continue, ensuring the contin- examined before selecting a new, less-tested material. ued life of the historic building. It is unrealistic to expect a substitute material, which can be quite different in composition than the historic material, not to age differently. Choosing an Appropriate Substitute Material Even traditional materials will not perform well if not used or detailed appropriately, and experienced Once all reasonable options for repair and replacement architects, engineers, fabricators, and installers rely in kind have been considered and sufficient justification on their professional knowledge and experience to for substitute materials has been established, the choice ensure proper installation and techniques when work- among the variety of substitute materials currently ing with familiar materials. This is just one of many available must be made. Rapidly developing technologies reasons that using the original materials for needed allow a wide variety of materials to choose from that are replacement is usually the best choice. Some of the intended to mimic historic materials. Many of the materials materials now available as substitutes have properties that were historically used as substitutes for more that differ greatly from the traditional materials they traditional historic materials have themselves become may be used to replace. It is critical to the successful historic, and some of these early substitutes continue to performance of substitute materials that everyone be reasonable options as substitute materials today. No involved in the selection, design, and installation fully substitute material will exactly match the historic material understands the material’s properties, especially how in all aspects, but many are able to adequately match it is different than the material it is replacing, and the appearance and relevant physical attributes to make how that will affect the surrounding materials and for a potential substitute. If a substitute material is not building systems. Figure 13. Cast stone was used to effectively replace individual blocks of sandstone. Both the original ( left) and the substitute material (right) retain similar physical and visible properties. Having weathered for over 30 years, some erosion of the binder has revealed quartz grains of the aggregate (inset), but it is only noticeable upon close inspection. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. 11 Page 110 of 124  an adequate physical and visual match given the specific conditions of the building and the project, then it should Considering Substitute not be used to replace distinctive, character-defining materials and features. Materials Listed below are various building components or Considering the use of a substitute material features and the substitute materials which may, in should begin with the following questions about some circumstances, be considered for use as possible the conditions and location where it will be used: replacement materials in a historic rehabilitation project • Will the significance or visibility of the consistent with the Standards for Rehabilitation. This list historic feature require a very precise match? includes different substitute material options available today for these building features and poses questions • Is the entire feature being replaced or just a that should be asked and considered when choosing component of it? between the original material and various types of substitute materials. This is followed by a list of some of • Are pre-existing conditions contributing to the more commonly used, currently available materials the failure of the existing material, and, if so, that may have some applications as substitute materials how will they be addressed/corrected? and the properties of each that affect their suitability for use as substitutes. This list should not be read as an • Is the need for replacement due to inherent endorsement of any of these materials, generally, or their deficiencies of the original material? appropriateness for use as a substitute material, but it • Will the material need to resist any serves as a reminder that the successful use of any building environmental hazards such as flooding material requires a careful consideration of its properties or fire? relative to where and how it will be used. Historic Features and Substitute Materials Historic Building Features Masonry Architectural Siding Roofing Decking Molding / Trim Historic Building Features Stone, terra Metals Wood, asbestos Wood shingle, Tongue-and- Wood cotta Cast & wrought slate, tile groove & iron, steel, square-edge pressed metal wood Aluminum • • • • Cast Stone & Precast • • Potential Substitute Materials Concrete Fiber Reinforced Concretes • Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymers • • Fiber Cement • • • Mineral / Polymer Composite • • • • Cellulose Fiber / Polymer Composite • • • • Non-composite Polymers • • • Cellular PVC • • • The above chart lists materials that are sometimes used as substitutes for replacement of historic building features. Even within a given category, all materials may not be equally suitable as a substitute replacement material for the actual historic material or feature. Any substitute material should be selected based on its specific physical and visual characteristics, conditions, and intended application consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. 12 Page 111 of 124 Historic Building Features: Criteria for selecting an appropriate replacement material Masonry Architectural Metals FEATURES: corbels, brackets, balusters, cornices, FEATURES: pilasters, door and window surrounds, window and door surrounds, friezes, wall surfaces, cornices, incidental ornament, columns, spandrels, horizontal surfaces, incidental ornament, columns ceilings, sheathing, roofing HISTORIC MATERIALS: terra cotta, cast stone, HISTORIC MATERIALS: cast and wrought iron, steel, stone, concrete bronze, lead, aluminum, and stamped steel (usually galvanized or terne-coated) POTENTIAL SUBSTITUTES: cast stone, pre-cast concrete, GFRC, GFRP, non-composite polymers (polyurethane), POTENTIAL SUBSTITUTES: GFRP, aluminum, cast or stamped metal non-composite polymer (polyurethane), GFRC, metallic/polymer composite Questions to ask about the replacement material: • Can it serve a structural function? Questions to ask about the replacement material: • How is the material affected by moisture? • Will the replacement material serve a structural or cosmetic role? • Can the material survive flooding and be reused? • Will it expand and contract with temperature change enough to require special • Can it reproduce the surface texture of the accommodation in its installation? original? • If part of an assembly of mixed materials, how • Is its shrinkage in curing low enough to allow it will any expansion and contraction of the to be molded from existing stones? dissimilar materials be accommodated? • Can matching color be achieved without a • Will the replacement material increase coating and with UV stability? deterioration of the historic or surrounding • Can an adequate match of the surface (color elements, for instance due to galvanic corrosion, and texture) be achieved with a coating? moisture entrapment, jacking of original material, off-gassing creating a corrosive • Is a coating required? environment, or poor original design of the • If it is not self-supporting, is it lightweight historic material? enough to be supported by an underlying • How will the replacement material mimic the framework? surface color/patination of the original material? • Can multiple original units be replicated with a • If a coating is needed, what preparation is single replacement piece? needed, and what is its durability or service life • Where thermal movement is different from the of the finish? original material, how will joints accommodate? • What attachment and support systems are • Is the material combustible? necessary? • If the original element is structural, but the new material is not, how can supplemental structure be introduced to support the new? 13 Page 112 of 124  Figure 14. Surface texture is an important aspect in matching the appearance of a historic material, especially when a material is viewed at close range. As seen in these two images, many of the substitute materials produced for siding and trim have an embossed wood grain, making them incompatible for replacing historic wood that was typically planed to a smooth surface. Some substitute products are available with a smooth surface as well. Photos: John Sandor, NPS. Siding Roofing FEATURES: clapboard, tongue-and-groove or shiplap HISTORIC MATERIALS: wood shingle, slate shingle, siding, board and batten, shingles asbestos shingle, clay tile, concrete tile, metal HISTORIC MATERIALS: wood and asbestos POTENTIAL SUBSTITUTES: fiber cement, mineral/poly- mer composite, wood fiber/polymer composite, pre-cast POTENTIAL SUBSTITUTES: cellular PVC, wood fiber/ concrete, metal polymer composite, fiber cement, mineral/polymer composite Questions to ask about the replacement material: • What sizes and shapes are available? Questions to ask about the replacement material: • What are color choices? • What are the widths, lengths, profiles, thicknesses, and textures available? • What is the color stability of the new material, and how will it age/weather? • What, if any, are the finishing requirements, and/or is it available factory-finished? • What is the impact resistance? • How well does it hold paint, and can prefinished • What is its flame spread rating? surfaces be renewed? • What are the installation requirements of the • What tools are needed to cut it, and can it be new material? machined? • Can the feature being replaced be custom- • Does it absorb moisture and, if so, to what effect? produced if ready-made ones of the new material are not an accurate match? • Can the material survive flooding and be reused? • What is the expected lifespan and/or warranty? • Will it expand and contract with temperature change enough to require special accommodation in its installation? • What characteristics can affect its handling (e.g., weight, flexibility, brittleness)? • Does it have specific fastening requirements? • Is it susceptible to insect damage? • What is its impact resistance? • Does it have a flame spread rating? • What is the expected lifespan and/or warranty? 14 Page 113 of 124 Decking Molding / Trim FEATURES: tongue-and-groove, square-edge flooring FEATURES: run moldings, flat boards, casings, cornice, frieze, railings, balustrade, columns HISTORIC MATERIALS: wood HISTORIC MATERIALS: wood, metal POTENTIAL SUBSTITUTES: cellular PVC, wood fiber/ polymer composite, mineral/polymer composite, non- POTENTIAL SUBSTITUTES: cellular PVC, wood fiber/ composite polymers (solid PVC) polymer composite, mineral/polymer composite, non- composite polymer (polyurethane), GFRP, sheet metal Questions to ask about the replacement material: • What are the widths, lengths, and textures Questions to ask about the replacement material: available? • What are the widths, lengths, and textures • Is it site painted or prefinished? available? • How well does it hold paint, and can prefinished • What, if any, are the finishing requirements surfaces we renewed? and/or is it available factory-finished? • What tools are needed to cut it, and can it be • How well does it hold paint, and can prefinished machined? surfaces be renewed? • What dimensional span does its strength allow? • What tools are needed to cut it, and can it be machined? • Does it absorb water, and if so, to what effect? • Does it absorb moisture, and if so, to what • Can the material survive flooding and be effect? reused? • Can the material survive flooding and be • Does it require a drainage plane, or can it be reused? installed atop a membrane? • Will it expand and contract with temperature • Will it expand and contract with temperature change enough to require special change enough to require special accommodation in its installation? accommodation in its installation? • What characteristics can affect its handling • Is it susceptible to insect damage? (e.g., weight, flexibility, brittleness)? • Is it impact resistant? • Does it have specific fastening requirements? • Does it have a flame spread rating? • Is it susceptible to insect damage? • What is the expected lifespan and/or warranty? • What is its impact resistance? • Does it have a flame spread rating? • What is the expected lifespan and/or warranty? Figure 15. Tongue-and- groove porch flooring is manufactured in several different substitute materials. Each type has different properties, though most are more moisture- resistant than wood. The prefinished product shown can be painted when worn, but repainting is not recommended for some product choices. Photo: Oak Alley Foundation. 15 Page 114 of 124  Potential Substitute Materials: Matching properties and performance needs Physical Composition and Properties After assessing different material options based on the intended application, the appropriateness of a substitute material should also be considered in context of the material’s physical composition, associated properties, and necessary visual match. Aluminum MATERIAL: Aluminum is a highly corrosion-resistant alloy that can be cast, wrought, or extruded. Molten alu- minum is cast into permanent (metal) molds or one-time sand molds forming cast aluminum. Extruded aluminum is formed by passing heated aluminum through a die which produces the desired form. Wrought aluminum is worked using the heated metal and then bending, stamping, and otherwise shaping the metal. If not self- supporting, aluminum elements are generally screwed or bolted to a structural frame. Aluminum can be welded, but more often sections, particularly extruded ones, are mechanically connected. PROPERTIES: • Isotropic • Lightweight • Thermal movement greater than cast iron or wood • Corrosion-resistant, but direct contact with other metals may trigger galvanic corrosion • Lower structural strength that iron or steel • Ductile - less brittle than cast iron • Non-combustible • Retains high defnition through molding process and Figure 16. Aluminum is a highly corrosion-resistant metal produces crisp profles through extrusion that is commonly used as a substitute material for cast iron. • Can be given a durable metallic fnish through Aluminum can be a more afordable and lightweight alternative anodization. Surface etching required for paint to cast iron that retains a similar texture, shape, and adhesion maintenance cycle. Photo: NPS. • Can be machined into a large variety of shapes/ dimensions 16 Page 115 of 124  Figure 17. The balustrade con- sists of multiple prior campaigns of using cast stone to replace the natural stone. The efective match for the surface texture and color of the original stone allowed individual elements to be incrementally replaced only when they had failed, thus retaining the maximum amount of original material as long as possible. Photo: EverGreene Architectural Arts. Cast Stone & Precast Concrete MATERIAL: A cement lime and aggregate mixture that PROPERTIES: is dry-tamped into a mold is generally referred to as • Isotropic cast stone. Cast stone is one of the original substitute materials. Its longevity has proved that the material ages • Weight equivalent to stone compatibly with stone. A wet mix of cement and aggre- • Expansion/contraction similar to stone gate poured into molds also has a long history of being • Water absorption may differ from that of any used to produce concrete masonry units mimicking stone particular stone and roofng tiles mimicking clay tile. Both methods have • Can be structural minimal shrinkage during curing, though they employ different curing and fnishing techniques. Both can • Non-combustible include reinforcing bars and anchorage devices installed • Vapor-permeable during fabrication. The dry-tamp fabrication method is • May achieve a wide range of color and surface especially effective at producing an outer surface with textures by varying mix, but use of pigments may the appearance of stone. reduce UV stability • Can be coated • May be tooled to match the appearance of tooled stone • Repairs similarly to stone 17 Page 116 of 124  Figure 18. Missing historic terra cotta spandrel panels on all foor levels were recreated utilizing glass fber reinforced concrete (GFRC) replacements. New spandrels were fabricated as individual components and attached with metal clips between historic terra cotta piers. Photo: Kris Frail, Dewberry. Fiber Reinforced Concretes (GFRC, CFRC) MATERIAL: Fiber reinforced concretes are lightweight PROPERTIES: concrete compounds modifed with additives and rein- • Isotropic forced with alkaline resistant glass fbers (GFRC), or less frequently carbon fbers (CFRC). They are generally fab- • Lighter weight than solid masonry ricated as thin-shelled panels and applied to a separate • Expansion/contraction similar to stone structural frame or anchorage system. GFRC is typically • No load bearing capacity, so underlying framework sprayed into forms, although it can be poured, and an- must be used to accommodate any loads choring devices are included in the fabrication. The color • Material can be fre-rated is derived from the natural aggregates and, if necessary, a small percentage of added pigments. Because of its • Vapor-permeable low shrinkage in curing, it can be produced using molds • Can be produced in larger sections effciently taken directly from the building. reproducing repetitive elements or features that were originally made up of small individual units • Large range of colors achievable by varying aggregates, but when pigments are needed UV stability may be reduced • May be left uncoated or may be painted 18 Page 117 of 124 Figure 19. A new, lightweight fber reinforced polymer is attached to a new metal armature to replicate damaged and missing elements of a terra cotta cornice. Photo: Quinn Evans. Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymers (FRP, Fiberglass) MATERIAL: Fiberglass is the most well-known of PROPERTIES the FRP products generally produced as a thin, rigid, • Isotropic laminate shell formed by pouring a polyester or epoxy resin gelcoat into a mold. When tack-free, • Lighter weight than masonry, similar to sheet metal layers of chopped glass or glass fabric are added • More thermally driven expansion than masonry along with additional resins. The surface gel coat or metals can be pigmented or painted. Reinforcing rods and • No load bearing capacity, so underlying framework attachment devices can be added when necessary. must be used to accommodate any loads Because of is low shrinkage in curing, it can be • High strength to weight ratio produced using molds taken directly from the building. Rather than being produced as standard components, • Flammable FRP is custom fabricated for individual applications. • Not vapor-permeable • Can be produced in larger sections effciently reproducing repetitive elements or features that were originally made up of small individual units • May be diffcult to match false joints in multi- unit assemblies to actual joints that need to accommodate movement • Color can be incorporated into the surface gel-coat, or the surface may be coated 19 Page 118 of 124  Figure 20. Cement board was used to replace a non-historic infll and mimics the confguration of a typical vehicular door of the period. Photos: Historic Augusta. Fiber Cement MATERIAL: Fiber cement products are made from PROPERTIES: fber, sand that is ground to a powder, cement, and • Products are minimally orthotropic proprietary additives to reduce moisture absorption. The fber used in roof products is glass fber alone, • Heavier and more brittle than wood, limiting available lengths whereas siding and trim board products are primarily wood fber. The material is formed with a smooth or • Very little thermal- and no moisture-driven textured surface, cut to standard sizes of panels, boards, movement or shingles, and cured in an autoclave. Roofng material • Low water absorption, but not recommended for has integral color, but board and siding products are ground or roof contact produced with a primer, if not fully factory fnished. • Class A fame spread Most siding and trim boards are embossed with a wood grain on one surface and are smooth on the other, the • Resists insect damage smooth side being the appropriate surface to imitate • Available in limited thicknesses and widths planed wood. • Not machinable, but may be cut with special carbide blades; cutting requires dust collection and personal protective equipment • Cut edges require sealing • Available unfnished, primed, or prefnished, and must be painted (with latex paint) • 15-year limited warranty typical 20 Page 119 of 124  Figure 21. A mineral polymer composite siding was available in the profle very similar to the historic siding. The replacement siding was used where the original material was almost completely missing beneath a more modern covering. Areas where the original wood was largely intact were replaced with matching wood to sustain more of the material integrity of the building. Photo: Belk Architecture. Mineral / Polymer Composite MATERIAL: Calcium carbonate or fy ash are mineral • Must be painted ingredients held in a matrix of various polymers to • 30-year limited warranty typical produce materials formed or molded into a number of building products. Additives found in some of the roof- Calcium carbonate or recycled rubber (roofng) ing products include pigments and UV stabilizers. Some use a substantial portion of recycled material. Different • Isotropic combinations yield products with different properties, • More thermally-driven movement than slate each formulated for a specifc building component. or wood When the material is fy ash with some glass fbers • Little to no moisture absorption bound in a matrix of polyurethane, it is identifed as • As shingles: lighter and more fexible than slate polyash. Siding, trim, bead board, and deck products are primed or prefnished, whereas roof products have • As tongue-and-groove decking: heavier and integral color. harder than wood • Not vulnerable to insect damage PROPERTIES: • Available in limited dimensions Fly ash (siding and trim) • As shingles: Class 4 impact resistance, and fame • Isotropic spread ratings ranging from Class A to Class C • Heavier and more brittle than wood, and lacking depending on the specifc product structural capacity • As shingles: integral color, that may be subject • Little thermal or moisture-driven movement to fading • Suffciently low water absorption to permit ground • As tongue-and-groove decking: prefnished contact with non-renewable fnish, and can be cut with woodworking tools • Class C fame spread • 50-year limited warranties on roofng products • Resists insect damage typical • Available in limited thicknesses and widths • Machinable with carbide tools blades; requires dust collection • Cut edges do not require sealing 21 Page 120 of 124  Cellulose Fiber / Polymer Composite MATERIAL: Wood strands or fbers are coated with PROPERTIES: resin for moisture resistance and zinc-borate for insect and fungal-decay resistance, then consolidated under Predominantly Cellulose (siding, trim and decking) heated pressure. Solid composite core boards are cut • Minimal thermal movement from sheets of material, then factory-primed or fnished. Resulting siding and trim board products can be referred • Resistant to moisture-driven movement to as engineered wood, fber board, or hardboard. • Lighter and more fexible than solid wood, but lacks Products may be embossed with a wood grain or have structural capacity a smooth fnish, the smooth side being the appropriate • Rice hull cellulose: can span typical foor-framing surface to imitate planed wood. Siding, trim, and spacing as decking tongue-and-grove decking with a slightly different • Low water absorption (for wood, no ground or roof properties are produced by extruding polyvinyl chloride contact) (PVC) combined with non-wood cellulose. Roofng shingles are molded from fne wood fbers, color • Class A or Class C fame spread additives, and UV stabilizers bound with polypropylene • Resists insect damage or polyethylene (thermoplastics). • Available in limited dimensions • Machinable with woodworking tools • Wood cellulose: Cut edges must be sealed and may need additional surface prep for fnish; must be painted if unfnished or primed, also available prefnished • Rice hull cellulose: Accepts stain/paint, but no fnish required • 30–50 year limited warranty, depending on manufacturer Predominantly Polymer (roofng) • Minimal thermal movement • Little to no moisture absorption • Lighter and more fexible than slate • Class 4 impact-resistance • Class A fame spread • Available in limited shingle size • 50-year limited warranty typical Figure 22. A porch was reconstructed using posts fabricated on site from a smooth-surface cellulose/polymer composite material. Though the face of the posts are painted, the lack of paint on the bottom at the cut ends is not consistent with manufacturers’ recommendations. This treatment will allow moisture to be absorbed, shortening the life of the new replacement feature. Photo: John Sandor, NPS. 22 Page 121 of 124 Figure 23. 3-D printing using various polymers is occasionally used to replicate missing metal or wood features. This new application is continually being refned, but the application can be successful when a painted, lightweight feature needs to be replicated. Photo: NPS. Non-composite Polymers MATERIALS: The main two polymer materials used • Supplied primed and must be painted (latex paint) without signifcant other components are polyurethane • Lifetime limited warranty typical and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Polyurethane millwork is constructed of urethane foam created by mixing isocya- Solid PVC (fooring) nate and resin. The polyurethane mixture is kept under pressure in a mold as it expands to any desired shape. • Isotropic These molded products have a closed-cell, foamed core • Heavier and less fexible that wood with a denser surface skin. Polyurethane products can • Minimal thermal movement have exterior applications but are more often used for interior features. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) in a solid • Does not absorb water extruded form is another polymer that can have archi- • Strength to span typical foor-framing spacing tectural application as tongue-and-groove decking. Vari- • Impact-resistance greater than wood ous polymers formed using 3-D printing are also being explored as replacements for painted metal or wood • Class A fame spread ornamental features. • No insect susceptibility • Good paint adhesion, but also available prefnished PROPERTIES: Each of the two groupings has distinct physical properties • 20-year warranty typical Urethane Foam (moldings and decorative elements) • Lightweight and fexible, but lacking structural capacity • More thermally-driven movement than wood or stone, but less than cellular PVC • Does not absorb water • Flammable • Resists insect damage • Can be cut with standard woodworking tools • Adhesive and mechanical fasteners both recommended for installation 23 Page 122 of 124  Cellular Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) MATERIAL: Varying amounts of calcium carbonate • For longer pieces, thermal movement requires and a foaming agent are added to melted PVC before manufacturer’s specifcations to be followed for passing through an injection die and then a calibrator attachment, and inclusion of expansion joints when to produce the shape and size of the fnished product. installed at low temperature (joints should be glued) Cellular PVC is produced as sheets, boards, and mold- • Class A fame spread ings. Differences in the specifcs of the equipment and • Resists insect damage the rate of cooling create two varieties of product, with distinct properties. One is known as free-foam, having a • Machinable with woodworking tools, though cut fairly consistent structure throughout its section, and the edges may need additional surface prep for fnish other is identifed as Celuka, having a skin that is denser • Good paint adhesion; if painted, high light than its core. This primarily affects the ease with which refectance (HLV) is recommended to minimize heat the product can be milled and shaped. The material is driven expansion white and needs no applied fnish. When produced for • 25–30-year limited warranty, depending on decking the material has a colored and textured wear manufacturer layer over the PVC core. PROPERTIES • Isotropic • Lighter and more fexible than wood • Less strong than wood (in tension and shear), but can span typical foor- framing spacing as decking • More impact-resistance than wood Figure 24. Cellular PVC when painted can be used to replace • Negligible water absorption; no moisture-driven deteriorated wood features. This beadboard set in a wood frame movement, unlike wood was not historically designed to shed water efectively and had • Subject to thermal expansion and contraction deteriorated. Cellular PVC was able to match the appearance of the signifcantly greater than wood, though the thermal wood details, while its properties were well matched to the shady movement is less for the same dimension than the location, painted fnish, and limited size and confguration within cross-grain moisture-driven movement of wood the overall assembly; thus, it should provide a long-lasting solution for this application. Photo: Jennifer Balson Alvarez, NPS. Acknowledgements John Sandor, Architectural Historian, David Trayte, Historical Architect, and Amy Elizabeth Uebel, Architectural Historian, Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, revised Preservation Brief 16: The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors, originally written by Sharon C. Park, FAIA, FAPT, and published in 1988. The revised Brief contains expanded and updated information as well as new color photographs describing the general issues and application of substitute materials on historic buildings. The authors wish to thank the following: Peyton Hall, FAIA, Principal Architect Emeritus, Historic Resources Group, Mary Jablonski, President, Jablonski Building Conservation, Inc., Thomas Jester, FAIA, FAPT, LEED AP, Principal, Quinn Evans, Sharon Park, FAIA, FAPT, Associate Director Emerita, Smithsonian Institution, Debra Slaton, Principal, Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc., for their guidance and review of this revision; and to Brian Goeken, Chief of Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, and Jo Ellen Hensley, Elizabeth Tune, and Jennifer Oeschger, Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, for their help in the editing of the publication. Illustrations not specifcally credited are from National Park Service fles. Front cover image: Installation of a new roof feature on a ca.1895 commercial building. The dome was constructed of fber-reinforced polymer to replicate the missing original feature in Aurora, Illinois, 2023. Photo: Kelsey Cozens/JH Real Estate Partners LLC. This publication has been prepared pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, which directs the Secretary of the Interior to develop and make available information concerning historic properties. This publication is available from the Technical Preservation Services website at http://www.nps.gov/tps/ or hard copies may be purchased from the Government Printing Offces at the U.S. Government Bookstore at https://bookstore.gpo.gov/. Comments about this publication should be addressed to Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW, Mail Stop 7243, Washington, DC 20240, or by email to NPS_TPS@nps.gov. This publication is not copyrighted and can be reproduced without penalty. Normal procedures for credit to the authors and the National Park Service are appreciated. The photographs used in this publication may not be used to illustrate other publications without permission of the owners. October 2023 24 Page 123 of 124 Good afternoon Maddy, As a follow-up to the Site Visit to 2012 Grange Avenue, made by Jim Ferber and I on Thursday 4/23/2026, the following was observed in regards to the condition of the existing natural spring/well house construction. 1. Internal Observations- a. Existing wood rafters supporting the roof structure, show signs of deterioration from water infiltration and age (especially at the bearing ends over the wood top plates along the perimeter exterior masonry block walls), a condition that has progressed over the life span of the existing construction and would render the wood frame construction unable to support building code required structural loads. b. Existing wood framing members framing the rough opening/support for the existing cupola, likewise show signs of deterioration from water infiltration and age. 2. Exterior Observations- a. Existing asphalt shingled roof has long exceeded the life expectancy attributed to such a roofing type: with portions of the roof missing roof shingles and the roof shingles themselves curled, cracked and extremely weathered. b. The cupola itself appears to be warped: appears to have rotated slightly around the vertical axis. Horizontal slats on the exterior vent panels of the cupola, are missing and the cupola wood construction itself shows sign of extreme weathering. In consideration of such observations, it would be prudent to replace the entire roof structure, with a new roof structure that matches the existing overall design of the existing natural spring/well house: i.e. a hip roof, with a dormer on the South elevation and a rectangular plan shaped, venting cupola (having [2] vent panels on North/South elevations and [1] vent panel on East/West elevations), and with sweeping rafters framing the cupola roof. Thank you for your review and commentary. Horatiu Wolff Senior Plan Examiner / Inspector Page 124 of 124