#3 Review Tallman House Conditions Report
Community Development Department Memorandum
Date: August 19, 2009
TO: Eric Levitt, City Manager
FROM: Bradley A. Cantrell, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Tallman House Conditions Report.
_____________________________________________________________________
Attached is a summary memo of the Tallman House Conditions Report. This report was
commissioned in the Fall of 2008 and was prepared by Engberg Anderson Architects, a
firm with expertise in restoration and historic architecture. The firm collaborated with J.P.
Cullen & Sons, Millen Roofing Company and Sutterlin Restorations in order to determine
the estimated costs, priorities and options associated with potential restoration efforts.
Kevin Donahue, of Engberg Anderson, the primary author of this historic structures report,
will be in attendance at the City Council study session. Kevin will be summarizing the
conditions report, suggested priority improvements and improvement options.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
August 10, 2009
TO: Eric Levitt, City Manager
FROM: Bradley A. Cantrell, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Conditions Report for the Tallman House.
I. SUMMARY
The Tallman House has been in City ownership since 1950 when the Tallman Family
donated the property to the City for use as a museum. Since that time, it’s been open to the
public as a museum and subsequently leased to the Rock County Historical Society for its
operation. Over the course of the last 60 years, extensive interior improvements have been
made to the home with relatively minor exterior improvements. A historic structures report
was recently prepared for the Tallman House which identifies several major improvements
that need to be conducted in the next few years to ensure overall preservation of the historic
site. If these improvements are not undertaken in a timely fashion, they will lead to further
deterioration of the building. The historic structure report provides a strategy that outlines a
systematic approach for the repair and restoration of the Lincoln-Tallman House. In
addition to summarizing the needed repairs, it provided cost estimates and a recommended
priority of improvements. Significant funding will need to be secured in order to adequately
address these restoration efforts. In addition to city funding, additional funding as identified
in this memorandum should be pursued to fulfill both near term and long term physical
improvement to the exterior of this structure.
Coupled with the need for a complete exterior restoration, the city needs to work with the
Rock County Historical Society to consider revisiting the programming of the Tallman House
and grounds through the development of a business plan. A business plan could provide
insight into programming for the property, identify other possible uses and increase
awareness of the historic site as a community asset. In order to provide for the long term
financial stability of the property, measures, programs, and opportunities must be developed
to maintain funding. Finally, a maintenance program should be developed and funded to
ensure the house is adequately and proactively cared for in the future.
Recommended Action --- Staff recommends that the Council authorize the City
Administration to take the following actions:
A. Provide direction to the Administration regarding the level of local funding that the
City Council wants to contribute to the renovation of the Tallman House.
B. Direct the Administration to apply for grants to cover some of the cost of necessary
improvements to the Tallman House and grounds.
C. Direct the Administration to work with the Rock County Historical Society to
commission the preparation of a business plan for the Tallman House.
II. BACKGROUND
In October of 2008, the City contracted with Engberg Anderson, an architectural firm which
specializes in historic buildings and historic restoration, to prepare a conditions report for an
evaluation and assessment of the exterior envelope of the Tallman House. The report has
been finalized and it provides an evaluation and assessment of building materials and
elements and identifies appropriate sequencing of repairs. The project team involved a
collaborative effort led by Engberg Anderson with field expertise support from J.P. Cullen &
Sons, Millen Roofing Company and Sutterlin Restorations.
The study was limited to the exterior envelope of the Tallman House. To further understand
the conditions and elements found on the exterior, limited investigation of the interior face of
the exterior walls was made. A review of the City’s previous restoration and repair project
documents related to the Tallman House was conducted. The report captures the physical
state of the Tallman House which was evaluated in October/November of 2008 and
therefore is time sensitive. Prior to moving forward on any of the suggested phases of
improvement, further study and investigation into the specific work activities will be
necessary.
Several major condition problems are threatening the integrity of the building envelope.
Those include a collapsed stone foundation wall in the privy area (rear portion of the
house), heavily efflorescing foundation walls, spalling stone foundations along the west
elevation, an overturning retaining wall, eroding mortar joints, failing paint, rotting
ornamental woodwork at the porches and conservatory, rotting soffits, chronic leaking of the
built-in gutters, and a roof at the end of its useful life, are significant physical challenges to
the building. Of these physical problems, immediate attention must be directed to the
collapsed privy foundation wall. From there, stop gap repairs are needed for the gutters,
roof, and cracks in masonry to buy time to raise funds for a full exterior restoration. Given
the historic nature of the materials and the craftsmanship used in the original construction,
in-kind repairs using traditional materials and applications are recommended in order to
avoid adverse side effects between materials and loss of historic integrity.
III. TALLMAN HOUSE EXTERIOR CONDITIONS REPORT
The conditions report evaluated specific exterior components including site, masonry,
foundation walls, brick walls, brick chimneys, carpentry and roofing and flashings. Table 1
summarizes the list of needed repairs, estimated cost and recommended priority. A more
detailed description of improvements recommended in Table 1 is attached as Exhibit A.
TABLE 1
EXTERIOR CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND REPORT
(PRIORITY RESTORATION PROJECTS AND COST ESTIMATES)
Phase I: Immediate Priority Work (2009) Estimated Cost
Privy Foundation Wall Stabilization and Repairs $32,500
Temporary Roof Repair $5,000-$10,000
Subtotal $37,500-42,500
Phase II High Priority Work (2010): Roof, Chimneys, Cupola and Gutter
Replacement
Complete replacement of existing roofs with painted, standing seam copper roofs $350,000
Repair and restoration of cupola woodwork including finial $34,000
Repair and pointing of chimneys includes mortar testing and training $153,000
Complete removal and reworking of existing gutter system $26,000
Masonry Wall Stabilization and Repair $46,000
Salvage Threatened Ornament $3,000
Subtotal $612,000
Phase III: Near Term Priority (2011-2012)
Site Work - Water Management Program $33,000
Disassemble stone retaining wall, numbering stones for reassembly $65,000
Repair stone steps at Conservatory stair $3,500
Storm Window (Sash) Refurbishment $55,000
Portico restoration $130,000
Conservatory restoration $51,000
Masonry Foundation Restoration $188,000
Masonry Superstructure Repointing $520,000
Subtotal $1,045,500
Phase IV: Long Term Priority Work (2012-2013)
Site Work ($20,000) $20,000
Masonry Foundation Restoration - Interior Face $415,000
Carpentry Work - Soffits, Friezes, and Carriage Porch $255,000
Cast Iron Crown and Sill Restoration $16,500
Subtotal $706,500
Total $2,401,500
IV. CARRIAGE BARN CONDITIONS REPORT
Although not a part of the conditions report for the Tallman House a separate report was
prepared in 2005 for the Tallman House Carriage Barn. This is a separate building on the
Tallman property which once housed the stables and carriage. The Carriage Barn was
remodeled in the 1950’s and used as a gift shop and offices for the Rock County Historical
Society. When the Rock County Historical Society moved into the old Armory on High
Street the carriage barn was used for collection storage. Because of the deteriorating and
structural condition of the building in recent years, collection storage was removed.
Although the building has been stabilized, it is currently vacant. The report evaluated the
condition of the building and its potential conversion to either a programming space for the
Rock County Historical Society or a complete internal and external restoration of the
building for use as an historic exhibit of a mid-19th century carriage barn and stable. The
cost estimates for restoring the exterior but remodeling the interior for an adaptive reuse
was $360,000. The cost estimate for restoring the building to its original carriage barn use
for an historic exhibit was $263,000.
V. OPTIONS FOR FUNDING
This memo also outlines alternative funding options for immediate and long-term improvements
for the Tallman House.
In 2006, the City Council included, with the General Fund Note Issues, $100,000 for tuck-
pointing of the Tallman House. A project scope was developed for tuck-pointing and bids
were obtained, however, the bids came in much higher than the $100,000 amount that the
City had borrowed and therefore all bids were rejected. Since 2006, some of the $100,000
has been used for repairs to the bathrooms, funding the structural condition report, minor
repairs to the Tallman House roof and repair of the privy wall as identified by this study.
The remaining balance is $67,000. These funds could be applied toward the priority repairs
listed above.
Estimated repair costs for the Tallman House have not been included in the five-year capital
improvement program or General Fund borrowing. As a result, this project would likely
have to be programmed over several years similar to other municipal improvements such as
the parking garage, ice arena and a new central fire station.
In addition to public financing, there are historic preservation grants which could be pursued
to fund a portion of the needed improvements. The Jeffris Family Foundation is a local
foundation dedicated to preserving Wisconsin’s cultural history and heritage. The
foundation supports significant projects that strive for high preservation standards and show
a strong degree of local support. They indicate on their website that the foundation grants
about $1,000,000 annually. Examples of projects the foundation has supported include
restoration of the Villa Louis in Prairie Du Chien; Fairlawn Mansion in Superior, Wisconsin;
the Milton House in Milton; the little chapel in the Mt. Olivet Cemetery in Janesville; funding
for the interior restoration of the Lincoln Tallman House in Janesville; and a grant to the City
for the Senior Center expansion.
If the project is selected by the Jeffris Foundation, financial support ranging from 25-30% of
the total project cost could be expected; however, the foundation requires broad-based
community support in the form of grant match. The Jeffris Family Foundation has been
supportive of the Tallman House in the past and submission of a grant proposal to the
foundation is recommended. The foundation would require improvements be conducted in
a manner consistent with the National Register Historic Preservation Guidelines.
Due to the scale of this project, financial assistance from outside the city is critical. In
addition to the Jeffris Foundation, other local area foundations may be approached
including the Theodore W. Batterman Family Foundation, the Alliant Energy Foundation, the
Tallman Trust, the Hendricks Foundation and the Community Foundation. The Rock
County Historical Society believes a statewide appeal for funding could be mounted based
on the property’s connection to President Lincoln.
VI. BUSINESS PLAN
Maintaining the status quo in relation to funding and use clearly have not been sufficient to
sustain the Tallman House. Low numbers of visitors and low profile in the public eye have
contributed to a low priority for municipal funding. The revenue generated from visitors and
funding provided by the City have not been sufficient to support continued operation of the
house and undertake preventive maintenance much less the current extensive repairs. To
simply restore the building again without taking into account its continued economic use
would likely result in a repeat cycle of major repairs in the future.
In reprogramming the use of the Tallman House, a balance must be struck between
preservation of artifacts and building fabric. House museums across the country are failing
due to limited appeal because of their self limiting programs. The Tallman House is in itself
a jewel, but it is still part of an estate, a larger landscape. Reprogramming should not solely
be limited to the house. A full accounting of the property’s amenities and their potential
should be made. A business plan needs to be prepared in order to expand the museum’s
attendance and annual revenue. A business plan would provide a clear understanding of
the use of the property, both as an educational asset and as a revenue generator to help
establish some level of self sufficiency. A business plan could lay the foundation for the
needed long term funding stream for the house and grounds.
VII. RECOMMENDED ACTION --- Staff recommends the Council authorize the City
Administration to take the following actions:
A. Provide direction to the Administration regarding the level of local funding the City
Council wants to contribute to the renovation of the Tallman House.
B. Direct the Administration to apply for grants to cover some of the cost of necessary
improvements to the Tallman House and grounds.
C. Direct the Administration to work with the Rock County Historical Society to
commission the preparation of a business plan for the Tallman House.
cc: Eric Levitt
Jacob Winzenz
EXHIBIT A
Summary of Recommendations, Estimated Repair Costs and Programming
Repair work documented in the condition report was organized into a series of projects that
placed a priority on protecting existing construction, limit backtracking and reworking recently
completed work, and provide a sound footing for each subsequent project. While one scenario
is outline below, changing building conditions, financial constraints, or as yet unknown
opportunities or strategies require reorganization.
Phase I: Immediate Priority Work (2009)– In order of priority
Privy Foundation Wall Stabilization and Repairs ($32,500)
Stabilize and repair the privy foundation wall. This is single most pressing issue confronting the
future of the building. Work in this phase would include:
?
Because current mortar mixtures could damage the building over time it is necessary to
perform mortar analysis on stone foundation wall mortar and obtain matching mortar. This
analysis will be able to address all future foundation work.
?
Shoring and rebuilding in-kind of the collapsed portion of the privy foundation wall.
?
Complete pointing and repair of interior face of remaining stone privy foundation wall, and at
spot locations of the exterior.
?
Provide venting in privy pit to remove humidity and encourage pit to dry out.
Temporary Roof Repair ($5,000 to $10,000)
In order to protect the structural integrity of the building and its contents until a full roof replace
can be done some repair may be necessary. Staff has estimated that this would range from
$5,000 to $10,000 and only be viewed as a stop gap measure until a full roof replacement is
done. The consultant’s report recommends that immediate attention be focused on the roof for
total replacement.
Phase II High Priority Work (2010): Roof, Chimneys, Cupola and Gutter Replacement
The Tallman House has the original roof which is a terne or tin plate metal roof. Originally
thought to be a 30-50 year roof, it has survived 153 years. Per the roof observations and
conclusions, roof repair is only part of the water management issue that is adversely affecting
the Tallman House. The roof, flashings and the gutter/downspout system need to be addressed
as a whole.
It is recommended that a complete roof, flashings, and built-in gutter replacement be
undertaken. Given sequencing issues resulting from unrelated work that must be staged on the
roof, this project consists of more than a roof replacement. This phase also includes repair of
the four Brick chimneys, cupola and gutter system. Work in this project will include:
?
Complete replacement of existing roofs with painted, standing seam copper roofs:
($350,000)
Document existing roof and roof detailing. Salvage portions of the roof and
o
details for archives and display.
Repair or replace decking in-kind.
o
Provide standing seam copper roof constructed of 20 oz. red copper pans and
o
valley flashing. Match existing width of panels if possible.
Paint to match original red painted finish of tin/terne plate.
o
Provide copper flashing at all roof penetrations and terminations, including
o
around chimneys and cupola, and at abutting walls.
?
($34,000)
Repair and restoration of cupola woodwork including finial;
Reworking of attic vents at cupola walls in order to raise sills and reduce damage
o
from wind driven rain infiltrating wall cavity;
?
($153,000)
Repair and pointing of chimneys includes mortar testing and training.
Inspection of chimney flues, full length;
o
Replacement of all chimney and flue caps with copper chimney caps with
o
removable vented flue caps. The caps should be painted to match the brick.
?
($26,000)
Complete removal and reworking of existing gutter system. Work to include:
Reframing and resloping of built-in gutters to maximize capacity and direction of
o
flow.
Constructing gutter as a double pan system.
o
Addition of 3 supplemental downspouts at main house roof, 1 at kitchen wing
o
roof, and possible relocation of 2 existing downspouts at woodhouse/storage
wing.
Temporarily seal up damaged soffits with exterior grade plywood and paint out.
o
Prime and touchup bare or exposed wood on soffits, brackets, and frieze. This is
only to prevent further deterioration of wood until a full restoration of the
soffit/frieze area can be accomplished Phase IV.
Masonry Wall Stabilization and Repair ($46,000)
?
Perform mortar analysis of masonry wall bedding mortar and white pointing mortar.
?
Point bedding mortar at cracked joints and at joints eroded deeper than 3/8”.
?
Replace in-kind missing or spalled brick.
?
Reset loose, slipping, or rolling cast iron window crowns and sills. Restoration of cast iron is
intended to occur in a later phase, Phase V.
?
Repair and pointing of backup masonry as required at areas of settlement, cracking, and
eroded joint.
Salvage Threatened Ornament ($3,000)
?
Document in situ with scaled photographs wood and wood paste ornament threatened by
continued deterioration due to lack of treatment. Unique or last remaining best examples
should be considered for in situ restoration or removal and storage until full restoration of
carpentry is possible.
Phase III: Priority Near Term (2011-2012) – In order of priority
Site Work – Continuation of Water Management Program
This project is a continuation of the water management that started with the roof, gutters, and
downspouts. It addresses those site conditions which impact the performance and maintenance
of the foundation walls and needs to be accomplished prior to repair of the foundations. Work to
($33,000)
include:
?
Removal of plantings to either side of Conservatory;
?
Installation around perimeter of building of 5’ wide subgrade clay caps 12” below grade and
sloped away from the building.
?
Installation of drainage tile at basement servants’ entrance retaining wall along south
elevation of kitchen wing. Drain tile to downhill grade at north edge of site;
?
Regrade surface around house and at memorial garden to drain away from building.
?
Disassemble stone retaining wall, numbering stones for reassembly. Cut away retained
grade and provide fully buried modular CMU retaining wall with geotech fabric. Provide fully
sleeved drain tile (to drain down hill to north end of site). Reassemble stone retaining wall;
provide Dutchman repairs and stone replacement as required. Backfill with free draining fill.
($65,000)
?
Repair stone steps at Conservatory stair. Remove Portland cement based mortar from
Conservatory stair joint. Excavate below bottom stair to base of stone stringers and provide
($3,500)
well drained backfill. Reset bottom two stone steps.
Storm Window (Sash) Refurbishment ($55,000)
This is given a high priority because of their advanced state of disrepair, the hazard presented
by possible loose and falling glass, and considering that they protect a far more important and
expensive item – the windows and ultimately the interior finishes.
?
Remove storm sash for in-shop evaluation.
?
Repair or replace storm sash. Removal of all glazing, repair, priming, and painting of glazing
pockets part of general sash repairs. Reinstall glazing and paint glazing compound. Missing
or broken glass should be replaced in-kind with true float or polished plate glass to maintain
the historic look and experience.
?
Repair or replace deteriorating or rotten wood.
?
Prime and paint sash.
?
Inspect window frames, sills, sash, and trim. Provide required maintenance and repairs
(sealant replacement, spot repairs, spot refinishing) as needed. A full repainting of the
windows is not anticipated at this time.
?
Reinstall storm sash.
Carpentry Work – Portico and Conservatory Restoration
Given the condition of the items listed in this carpentry project, their placement ahead of the
masonry repointing is warranted. Unfortunately, conducting this work before the masonry
pointing work will result in additional damage and required repair/touchup to the carpentry.
Damage from staging, scaffolding and bucket lifts, mortar removal and pointing procedures can
be expected. But given the condition of these carpentry components, it is a risk that must be
taken if a complete reconstruction of these elements is to be avoided. As part of the Phase II:
High Priority section, it was recommended some of the more critical unique ornament be
restored or removed. If the carpentry in this project were to wait further, much more ornament
would be lost to deterioration resulting in far higher restoration costs. Ideally, the masonry work
and carpentry work would be done as one project, providing coordination between the two
tasks. As it is more likely that these tasks will be assigned as separate projects, the following
carpentry work is placed ahead of the masonry pointing:
?
Portico restoration. The portico work should be coordinated with the front porch roof
replacement work and with the masonry wall tuck pointing given the need for staging
($130,000)
equipment.
Removal of failing finishes and refurbishment or replacement of rotted,
o
weathered, and damaged wood.
Repair of damaged ornament. Replication of ornament lost or too damaged to be
o
reused.
Remove existing decking and steps. Repair and supplement deck and stair
o
structure as required. Provide historically compatible new wood decking,
stringers, and risers.
Prime and paint porch.
o
Remove all glazing compound and glass at transom. Repair, prime and paint all
o
glazing pockets prior to resetting glazing.
Repair and refinish existing doors, frame, and trim.
o
Repair existing hardware.
o
Doorbell: remove or repair.
o
?
Conservatory restoration. The conservatory work could be a stand alone project, but is
($51,000)
preferred to occur after masonry work because of required staging.
Remove all French doors and door level glazing panels for in-shop
o
refurbishment.
Remove all glazing compound and glass. Repair, prime and paint all glazing
o
pockets prior to resetting glazing. Includes doors and glazing panels as well as
transoms.
Refurbish exterior doors and glazing panels, consolidating or replacing damaged
o
wood. Restore doors at chairlift (to be removed) to original condition and
configuration. Prime and paint.
Repair and refinish black walnut doors into house proper.
o
Repair door and glazed panel hardware.
o
Provide custom wood sills and sill weather stripping to control water infiltration.
o
Refurbish exterior and interior woodwork of conservatory.
o
Clean interior masonry, removing efflorescence and paint stains.
o
Provide sealant bead between existing masonry wall and woodwork.
o
Masonry Foundation Restoration ($188,000)
This project addresses only the foundation wall masonry. Work on the interior and exterior faces
of the stone foundation walls will occur following introduction of subgrade clay cap and/or
drainage tile, and regrading of site immediately surrounding house. Foundation wall restoration
work to include:
?
Excavate along north foundation wall of Woodhouse/storage wing to examine condition of
settled foundation wall and determine:
Cause of settlement;
o
Is settlement active?
o
Determine and enact needed repairs to foundation.
o
Coordinate with roof/site runoff water management work (installation of clay
o
cap/drain tile).
?
Gain access to cistern in kitchen wing to examine internal conditions and determine and
enact any required repairs.
?
Using mortar developed for privy foundation repair; provide 100% pointing of exposed
exterior foundation walls. To include:
Removal of all Portland cement based pointing and stone repairs;
o
Removal of all sealant pointed joints;
o
Removal of brick repairs to stone foundation walls at basement window jambs.
o
New stone to match existing in type, color, and finish.
Provide Dutchman repairs at spalled stone and point;
o
Provide stone mortar repairs at spalled stone joints;
o
Provide replacement stone for repairs at basement window jambs.
o
?
At basement windows, remove existing sealant and improper repairs to windows and trim.
Repair or replace wood sills, trim, and sash as required. Remove all existing glazing
compound and reset glass. Prime and paint sash, frames, sills, and trim.
?
Secure louvers into openings in foundation walls and provide backer rod and sealant at all
exposed perimeters and along top of louvers.
Masonry Superstructure Repointing ($520,000)
This project addresses only the brick masonry wall above the stone water course. Work on the
stone foundation walls will occur separately and following implementation of roof and site runoff
management work. Given that the exterior masonry continues behind the architectural
woodwork (including half columns at porches and friezes below the soffits), it is suggested that
the architectural woodwork restoration begin only after the masonry work is completed. This will
permit the repair of woodwork impacted by the masonry work to be repaired as part of the
overall general restoration of the woodwork. It would also permit flashing to be set into repaired
masonry. However, given the fragile state and advanced decay of some of the architectural
woodwork, particularly the street porch, this sequence may need to be revised and the added
expense and physical impact of out of sequence work tolerated. Work to include:
?
Perform 100% pointing of brick. To include:
Removal of all modern Portland cement based mortars and mortar repairs;
o
Removal of all sealant at sealant repaired joints;
o
Provide two step mortar pointing, first step bedding mortar, second step white
o
pointing mortar with tooled finish.
Temporarily remove and reinstall kitchen wing frieze to permit pointing behind
o
scroll cut frieze.
Resetting of loose brick and cracked/displaced brick at window sills and heads.
o
Phase IV: Long Term Priority Work – No order of priority but related prerequisite work
must be complete
Site Work ($20,000)
This work addresses site conditions which do not directly impact the performance or
maintenance of the foundation wall or house directly. Work to include:
?
Repair of Jackson Street fence.
?
Updating and reworking of plantings and landscape.
Masonry Foundation Restoration - Interior Face (415,000)
This work requires that a full water management program be completed and that moisture levels
at the below grade portion of the interior face of the foundation wall are decreasing. Work will
include:
?
At interior face of exterior foundation walls, rake back soft and degraded joints back to solid
material, minimum of 2.5 times width of joint. Wash masonry wall to remove efflorescence
and allow to dry for several months. Once walls are within an acceptable range of
established baseline moisture levels, perform final cleaning of efflorescence, point walls,
and perform final construction cleaning.
Carpentry Work – Soffits, Friezes, and Carriage Porch ($255,000)
This work is partially protected from the elements and is therefore considered to be at a lower
risk. The work includes:
?
Rebuild soffits and soffit framing; restore fascia and ornamental wood and cast iron
brackets. Prime and paint.
?
Repair, prime, and repaint frieze and frieze windows.
?
Carriage Porch restoration. Side porch work should be coordinated with the replacement of
its roof if it is decided to push that work forward. In addition, given the challenges of staging
for masonry repair work above this area, it is preferred that the masonry work be done prior
to the restoration of this porch. An additional concern is the rebuilding of the retaining wall
below the kitchen wing portion of the carriage porch. The porch rests on this wall and will
need to be temporarily shored when the wall is replaced.
Remove and rebuild existing unroofed south portion of porch and steps as
o
required.
Assess handicap accessibility options and either repair or remove existing lift and
o
provide alternative.
Repair existing porch deck structure as required.
o
Remove all decking and replace with historically compatible wood decking.
o
Refurbish general porch structure and integral ornament of columns.
o
Properly repair porch rail and treat feet of scroll cut stiles.
o
Repair or replace damaged and missing running trim and scroll work ornament.
o
Repair or replacement of damaged scroll cut fans on roof of porch.
o
Replacement of furred out column bases below porch deck. Consult historic
o
photos if possible to determine original form.
Repair and refinish doors, frames, and trim.
o
Cast Iron Crown and Sill Restoration ($16,500)
The cast iron window crowns and sills will have been reset as part of the masonry restoration
work. This project is concerned with the actual restoration of the crowns and sills:
Restoration of cast iron crowns and sills. Work will include:
?
Remove loose and built up paint.
o
Repair or replace damaged and missing ornament. Provide cast iron ornament
o
for missing cast iron pieces where possible.
Prime and paint.
o
Remove existing sealant and clean masonry and sill/crown. Provide new sealant
o
and backer rod at top of crowns and down sides accessible from above. Maintain
bottoms open to permit breathing of masonry and weep points.
Restoration of bracketed cast iron pediment crowns which also include wood and sheet
?
metal elements.
Remove loose and built up paint.
o
Repair or replace damaged and missing ornament. Provide cast iron ornament
o
for missing cast iron pieces where possible. Consolidate and patch in with
salvaged wood damaged wood ornament.
Prime materials with material specific primers and paint.
o
Rework or replace metal flashing over pediment crowns with TCSII flashing,
o
painted to match trim work. The stainless steel in the TCSII flashing will not
interact with the cast iron crowns, and the lead free “terne” coating is paintable.
Slope for drainage and properly detail flashing reglets at masonry.
Remove existing sealant and clean masonry and sill/crown. Provide new sealant
o
and backer rod at top of crowns and down sides accessible from above. Maintain
bottoms open to permit breathing of masonry and weep points.
Bird control to prevent further damage to brackets from birds nesting.
o