Title
9952 W 144th Street Wilson’s Foundation Tuck-pointing
History
The petitioner seeks a certificate of appropriateness in order to repair moisture damage to the foundation masonry of his historic home, which is a contributing structure in the Old Orland Historic District.
Project Description.
The petitioner proposes to replace some deteriorated historic masonry units at the foundation of his structure that have been damaged by moisture. It is evident by the photographs attached to this staff report that the masonry units had been pargeted at some point in the history of the house. Pargeted masonry is when the joint profile between masonry units is “repaired” by plastering the profile with a compound (usually concrete or plaster of Paris) in order to either a) improve/ support the structural integrity of the masonry unit, or b) repair any cracks or failures to the masonry. Pargeted masonry is noticeably sloppy and does not fit the joint profile or the original tuck-point.
It is important to note that pargeting masonry is not a recommended preservation practice because it damages the stone or brick more than fixes it. Aside from being unsightly and unruly along the joint profile, pargeted masonry traps moisture inside the masonry joints. It does not seal any cracks in the masonry, nor does it provide any kind of structural support. Instead, it further deteriorates the wall’s integrity and causes moisture to build up and expand and contract, resulting in the typical damage noted in the photographs attached-namely spalling of the unit or wall, which is essentially chipping and masonry failure.
It is important that the tuck-pointing and re-making of the historic joint profile for this building be completed by an experienced contractor who can repair the joints structurally, and restore the historic profile. The Village’s historic preservation consultants, McGuire Igleski and Associates (MIA) categorized the joint profile as a “beaded joint” and noted that it is worth preserving.
It is also important to note that tuck-pointing and restoring the historic joint profile known as “beaded” will not stop the deterioration of the foundation wall alone. The house should be checked for greater water damage as the damage to the foundation may be a symptom of an overall condition.
Various references and explanations were provided to the petitioner to help deal with further moisture problems.
MIA further noted that Marion Restoration, the petitioner’s chosen contractor, is familiar with the type of work that needs to be done. The petitioner’s contractor has already done an analysis of the composition of the original mortar materials and intends to match those materials for the proposed job.
On April 15, 2008, the HPRC moved to recommend approval to the Village Board of Trustees of a Certificate of Appropriateness for minor changes-- such as tuck-pointing and masonry unit repair-- to 9952 W 144th Street, a contributing structure in the Old Orland Historic District per the sketch provided by Restoration by Marion, titled “9952 W 144th St.”, dated 4-8-08, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the petitioner avoids the use of sealers such as silicone, or any treatment intended to “waterproof” the masonry and thereby inappropriately fix any cracking or spalling etc.;
2. That the petitioner does not paint the foundation;
3. That the petitioner ensures that the new mortar and joint work is matched with the color, texture, joint tooling, and physical composition of the building’s historic pointing;
4. That the flush joints are truly flush, without excess mortar smeared on the surfaces of the bricks or stone;
5. That the historic joints known as “beaded joints” are preserved where appropriately and repaired/ restored/ re-pointed where appropriately on the historic foundation of the contributing structure to match the original;
6. That the foundation is not coated with any stucco materials or treatments;
7. That stucco or a similar material not be used to simulate stone foundation walls;
8. The petitioner does not paint or stucco the exterior of the foundation;
9. That where necessary the original limestone be replaced with limestone to match the original in color and profile;
The petitioner is aware of and has agreed to all the conditions, which can only be fulfilled upon executing the project.
This case is now before the Village Board of Trustees for final review/approval.
Recommended Action/Motion
I move to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for minor changes-- such as tuck-pointing and masonry unit repair-- to 9952 W 144th Street, a contributing structure in the Old Orland Historic District per the sketch provided by Restoration by Marion, titled “9952 W 144th St.”, dated 4-8-08, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the petitioner avoids the use of sealers such as silicone, or any treatment intended to “waterproof” the masonry and thereby inappropriately fix any cracking or spalling etc.;
2. That the petitioner does not paint the foundation;
3. That the petitioner ensures that the new mortar and joint work is matched with the color, texture, joint tooling, and physical composition of the building’s historic pointing;
4. That the flush joints are truly flush, without excess mortar smeared on the surfaces of the bricks or stone;
5. That the historic joints known as “beaded joints” are preserved where appropriately and repaired/ restored/ re-pointed where appropriately on the historic foundation of the contributing structure to match the original;
6. That the foundation is not coated with any stucco materials or treatments;
7. That stucco or a similar material not be used to simulate stone foundation walls;
8. The petitioner does not paint or stucco the exterior of the foundation;
9. That where necessary the original limestone be replaced with limestone to match the original in color and profile.