Local Item on Council Agenda Tomorrow
The city council meets tomorrow at 6:00 p.m. and there is local item that might be of interest to some that live in the Springhill Old and Historic District. The full agenda is here.
Res. No. 2009-R83 (Patron: Mayor Jones, By Request) – To reverse the decision of the Commission of Architectural Review denying *** Joseph W. Musgrave, to replace original wood windows with vinyl windows at ***600 West 20th Street in the Springhill Old and Historic District.
Res. No. 2009-R84 (Patron: Mayor Jones, By Request) – To affirm the decision of the Commission of Architectural Review denying *** Joseph W. Musgrave, to replace original wood windows with vinyl windows ***600 West 20th Street in the Springhill Old and Historic District.
Personally I am of the opinion that switching the windows from wood to vinyl would not ruin the historical integrity of a building. Thanks to John M. for pointing this out to me.
Agree or not, a line was drawn when the neighborhood chose to seek the City Old & Historic Designation a few years back. The standards and expectations have not changed in that time.
Completely understand that living in a City Old & Historic area comes with obligations and is something to consider when buying a house in Richmond.
“Personally I am of the opinion that switching the windows from wood to vinyl would not ruin the historical integrity of a building.”
Depends on the vinyl windows…cheap replacement windows can look like LEGO. Most replacement windows are just that. Cheap. Many aren’t even made to fit the original window openings!
There can be many subtle differences, and, when attention is not paid to these details, they can be lost forever because they are costly to restore or replicate. The charm of old houses is frequently found in these details: there wouldn’t be much of a market for architectural salvage otherwise.
Mullions sandwiched in between double glazing on modern windows(for ease of cleaning)leave a single surface to reflect light vs. the mosaic effect of individual panes of wavy old glass. Double glazing also can translate into windows that are not recessed into a facade leaving a house without the added detail contributed by light and shadow.
That having been said, there are window companies that make vinyl clad windows that incorporate enough of the details to provide acceptable replacements.
Good points Stephanie. I probably should have with held my opinion on the windows and their affect until I actually saw them. As you eloquently stated not all windows are created equally.
Being only somewhat familiar with Springhill, I went over and took some photos (and added’em to the Hills and Heights flickr pool).
This is the house at 600 West 20th Street:
This house is one of the most amazing that I’ve seen in Richmond (comparable to that house with the tower in Highland Park):
The house in question has loads of potential. For starters, restoring the front porch (get rid if the ‘modern’ ironwork)and getting rid of the other cheap stuff(bolt on shutters, etc.) would add good value more so than replacement windows, IMHO.
Thanks for posting the pictures John.
The original windows have already been removed and disposed of. The owners simply went ahead and did what they wanted to without a building permit, let alone getting a COA from the CAR.
As I understand it, the owners argue that they didn’t know they had to go through the CAR to replace the windows, or to get a building permit for that matter. Apparently, the vinyl window contractor that they hired told them that they didn’t need to get a building permit or seek out CAR approval.
They have also claimed at one point that they didn’t know that they lived in a OHD, yet there is a survey card at the CAR offices with their support vote for the OHD when the neighborhood sought designation.
Arguing vinyl v wood isn’t the point. The point here is that they willfully disregarded any legal process required by the city to apply for permits to replace their windows – through the permit dept and CAR. On that basis alone, they should be denied their appeal and fined accordingly.
The more recent CAR appeals involved property owners who went through the proper channels to begin with, yet were unable to resolve their issues with the CAR for whatever reasons. This is when the appeals process is a valid one.
As a heating & air contractor & neighborhood resident, this window issue really is a biggie, as any of you with original windows can attest come heating season. They’re horribly inefficient, pretty as they might be. So, which is more important, energy efficiency in older homes or looks? It is an either/or question for most I’m afraid.
#9:
I understand your concerns, but this neighborhood wanted the OHD designation with all its protections for better or worse. The guidelines and standards are what they are, and were publicly available to all for all the read through before making a decision about supporting Springhill OHD.
You can’t have it both ways. For now, one must follow the rules they asked for. If you don’t like how the guidelines are written or enforced, then lobby and work toward changing them. In the meantime, home owners are obligated by law to adhere to the rules they asked to be enforced in their neighborhood.
And once again, the appeals process is there for a reason when a property owner feels the process or decisions by the CAR were in error. Unfortunately, the property owners being discussed in this thread ignored their responsibility to go through the process and proper channels prior to a possible appeal.
I disagree completely with the assertion that there is a question of efficiency vs.looks. Properly restored wood windows with a wooden storm get a performance that will rival most replacements and they will never lose their gas and become ineffective. Cheaper as well, esp someone interested enough to learn to do it themselves.
There are ways to keep original material without sacrificing efficiency. Internal storm windows can make a difference.
11 and 12:
Agreed. Dixon Kerr in Union Hill restores old windows. He can be reached at http://www.oldhouseauthority.com/experts/window_restoration/dixon_kerr.php
Council voted to uphold CAR.
#10, please let me clarify, I agree completely that historical areas with OHD designation are to be respected–I do not in any way shape or form support changes outside of the regulations.
I merely meant to point out, as old houses are all my company does, windows have a dramatic effect on energy efficiency.
In this day and age, it is ever more important to use energy wisely, and this is an challenge with older homes.
Consider that a 10SEER a/c unit, only 4 years old, uses enough electricity to require the burning of over 4 pounds of coal PER DAY to operate. That’s a lot of air pollution.
I’m about to start a beautiful re-hab on Monument Ave, and storm windows, inside or outside as well as double glazing the originials, is not allowed. My personal little opinion, for what it’s worth, is I wish there was a good middle ground to save this air pollution and retain the historic look.
Our forebears did without A/C.
Exterior and interior window treatment can go a long way to making an old house more energy efficient. Shutters and awnings to shade windows, blinds and curtains to shade from the inside and reduce drafts…these tings all work well. Fully functional double hung windows and transoms, when put to use, work very well.
And of course there’s the simple option of adjusting the thermostat…
#15, I am curious about the window restrictions you mentioned on the rehab on Monument. Our home is in an O&H district and the CAR approved our exterior storm windows (which made a huge difference in reducing winter drafts). Are there other zoning overlays in place on Monument Ave that are restricting the window weatherizing options?
On another note, I would just like to say that during our renovation, the CAR very helpful and easy to work with — we found the best approach was to keep an open mind and discuss our ideas with the CAR staff prior to submitting an application. They were often able to suggest certain materials or styles that are typically ok for use in O&H districts.
I think Sherri has hit on a key point. Staff is very knowledgable and helpful. It is not until one gets to the CAR itself that some pretty massive egos take over. One only had to listen last night to Jean Wight, a former CAR member, lecture and insult Council into doing what council planned to do anyway, unanimously, to get a sense of where the problem lies. “Now in our stars, Horatio, but in ourselves.”
Make that “Not in our stars…”
I agree with Sherri. We are in the restoration business and have found that by doing our homework and communicating well with CAR throughout the process, we can avoid problems.
It is also helpful when homeowners and contractors understand the differences between reconstruction, rehabilitation, remodeling, renovation and restoration. These terms are NOT synonymous.
#18:
I would agree that Ms. Wight’s tirade was typical of her behavior on the CAR. Her resignation was a relief. She’s done the CAR no favors by “standing up” for them.
To say that it was “an outrage” that the Council has not appointed new members to the vacant slots is a little hypocritical. She’s the reason for one of those slots being empty. She resigned when the Oakwoods project didn’t go her way, abandoning the very thing that she feels so strongly about.
I don’t think all members of the commission have such an arrogant and surly attitude. I think some of them are out of touch with the community and interact very little with OHD residents in one-on-one conversations. Also, many of them don’t live in OHD’s.
I think the task force is a good thing. Hopefully there will be some good results from it.
There are reasons that certain neighborhoods have more difficulty with the CAR concept than others. And a lot of it has nothing to do with CAR itself, but doubt that Council will stand up to their developer buddies on behalf of citizens.
Preserving Monument Avenue is a lot different from preserving Church Hill. There is more to preserve than just mansions.
# 17 Sherri, I am not a window person, just a humble heating & air contractor, but it is my understanding at least on Monument Ave. storm windows are completely forbidden; not the case in other districts I’ve worked in, like the Fan, Churchill & Jackson Ward
Oh, and # 16 I’m with you, I hardly run the a/c at my house preferring a dehumidifier instead; my t-stat is 78
Just out of curiosity, what’s the result of losing their appeal? A fine, or do they have to take the new windows out and go to Caravati’s?
#26. Good question. What comes to mind is that the contractor did work without a permit, so he is liable. Owner may be on the way out of town, since he/she did not come to council Monday night. On a different note, for those who don’t know Spring Hill, take a little while and walk the neighborhod. It’s small so it won’t take long. It’s a interesting mix, and the residents, most of them, fight a daily fight against the litter left by park users.
I have been reading all of the comments made in regards to the situation at 600 West 20th St. and I cannot get over how cavalier people can be when discussing other people’s lives and actions when they are using information gained primarily via hearsay. I happen to be the resident of 600 West 20th St. and I am quite sure that noone listed above ever confirmed any of their facts with me or my ex-husband. Some of the information stated here is absolutely FALSE. I think it is important to clarify this because what has actually happened is not as simple or negligent as what has been portrayed and the situation has been very frustrating and stressful for various reasons. What disturbs me most, perhaps, is the fact that we live in a VERY small, intimate neighborhood. We have never been anything but kind to our neighbors. Not one person from the neighborhood has attempted to talk to us about what has happened, not even the people that live one block away and are closely involved with CAR. I do not see the good of a neighborhood association that serves to alienate, frustrate, and distance neighbors in addition to causing them financial distress. Our property was never more at risk than it was after CAR halted construction on our windows. And though some may find it hard to believe, my ex-husband actually DID NOT KNOW about the OHD nor did he vote for it. I did. And I am not on the deed for this house, but he is and he purchased it before OHD designation. I made this perfectly clear to CAR from the onset of this situation. My ex is the one who purchased the windows through the contractor. They were in desperate need of repair due to the damage they were causing our home, the extreme spike in energy bills, and their unpleasant appearance. Most importantly, the rotting frames were putting my two children at risk.
Another point: there are several homes in the district that have vinyl windows that have been installed AFTER 2005. I am sure of this. They are my neighbors.
In regards to the comment made in post #10: My ex-husband and I attended a meeting at City Council on June 16th after submitting our appeal to CAR. At this meeting, we were happily informed that we could proceed with our windows as the decision by CAR was reversed by all three council members. But today my ex received a letter stating that the decision was again reversed during a hearing that took place in our absence yesterday. We received absolutely NO notification of this additional hearing. For the first hearing, we were notified twice by certified mail and via both of our e-mail accounts. So, to post #26, I just thought I’d let you know that I am not going anywhere.
I sincerely want to refrain from letting my anger get the best of me. This has been a frustrating process and after realizing that we were in error, we indeed did everything that we were told to do.
We are being made out to be deceitful, negligent, irreverent, and irresponsible people by all of these comments. I think it is important to clear the record for several reasons. First of all, the danger of not getting your facts straight has been proven time and again to be hurtful and destructive. I was not concerned about what other people thought at first, but now I realize that these types of broad stroked truths are often what sustains the momentum of some of these organizations and I think that is very dangerous. I do not begrudge anyone wanting to improve the value of their home; in fact, I’m not one to begrudge people much. But I am someone who believes that even the best intentions do not always serve the people involved. When you organize on behalf of people, you should be constantly vigilant about the welfare of the people that are affected by your decisions. You should be willing to reevaluate your policies if they are costing citizens way too much money, time, and energy. If not, you become another elitist, self serving organization that will breed resentment and anger in your community.
Wow, I only wish there was this much conversation about topics relevant to peoples real lives. I really can’t believe the hearsay that is in post #8. Each party involved might have a different experience of what happened and to make the assumption that this homeowner was some renegade trying to dismantle the fabric of a historically working class neighborhood is quite repulsive to me personally. I would get out of that neighborhood as fast as I can if I were this homeowner. With people snapping photos and discussing what they would do with the house (so much potential, it’s a shame), I bet they don’t have many friendly neighbors. Has anyone actually talked with these folks in the flesh about what happened and about what their experience of this situation has been? Probably not, but I guess that would be too out of the realm of possibility. It’s much easier to make assumptions and pass judgment than it is to actually try to understand how this person could have been ill-informed about regulations particularly when I remember this house being on fire a couple years ago on the news; good thing someone let them rebuild the front of the house!
I also wanted to add that I happen to often watch city council meetings on the local cable access program as it is replayed throughout the week. I have voted for Marty Jewell in each election he’s run in and currently live in the 5th district. I thought he was someone who looked out for the people. I was shocked with how dismissive he was when he made a statement about how the residents must not care because they didn’t show up to the hearing. Now that I read Jean’s post, it’s even more absurd because the residents didn’t even know there was to be a hearing. Last word from city council was a go ahead decision on the new windows. These aren’t coin tosses or card games to be decided on a whim; these decisions affect real people and their families and I would expect the city council person from the district after having seen this go through the CAR appeal process to at least be certain that the parties were notified of a new hearing before dismissing their absence as lack of care. As articulated by Jean, these folks do care about their home, the safety of their children and the neighborhood. I believe Marty Jewell will be hearing from me on this one.
Interesting. I can only point out that City Council did not meet on June 16th, a Tuesday. Council meets on the second and fourth Monays of the month. I have found the Springhill group to be pretty responsive to their neighborhood. The contractor in this case clearly knew that a permit was reuired for this work, and that the permit would have notified all that an O&H approval was required. I am no fan of O&H districts for just this kind of situation, but it was there, it was widely discussed for more than a year. Now we deal with the consequences.
straight from the horses mouth: we had some awful rotten windows in that house. heating bills were out of control. got an hvac expert in there and he said we needed to overhaul the system. i did that, new insulation, new hvac system an d finally new windows. never thought it was anyone’s business what i did to my house. neighbor changed his windows last year. why would i have thought anything i was doing was illegal? Jean even asked the other day if he got permission from CAR and he had no clue what CAR or OHD was. I’m not the only one who isn’t involved with this “neighborhood organization.” (although i’m the only one among many who is being singled out) i’ve since read the oHD guidelines and they are pretty ambiguous about my situation. the owners responsibility, it reads, is to keep the appearance the same. Well, that’s what i have done. The windows are exactly the same size and style as the previous ones. Only more efficient. The handbook also says that I can make repairs on my house. Oh thank ya! I’m so happy that I am able to make repairs on the house that I OWN. So after unknowingly breaking a law that i really feel is unjust I went through the process to rectify it. I assumed it would be just a matter of filing the proper paperwork. Melissa Linkous told Jean that if it’s just windows it should be no problem. Even the president didn’t know it was a violation! But CAR only meets once a month. Wait. And you have to file a month before they meet with you. Wait. So when I finally got before them i explained the situation – that i was unaware that there was this regulation of asking permission to work on my house. They were not at all reasonable. In fact I was thoroughly insulted and angered by their obtuse and bureaucratic treatment of me. No solution was talked about. They cut me off when I asked what I was supposed to do. One lady said if i had come to them before they would have approved the project. However, it was after the windows were removed, now, and CAR could not get beyond that stipulation. I had no pictures or proof other than my word that the windows were in disrepair. They have no protocol apparently for my situation. I thought it would be reasonable to just allow me to finish installing the windows since they were already in and only needed to be sealed from the outside. Everyone there made a huge fuss about the material being vinyl. What difference does that make??????? It’s a window, people. So I could not resolve the issue from CAR. Then had to follow the next step and wait several months more for an appeal. Meanwhile the March, April, May rains came pouring in the unfinished windows. So anyway I waited because i truly wanted to follow the law and do what was required even though by this point I felt like K from Kafka’s the castle. Finally was the Land and Use hearing that was before the city council members. They ruled in my favor. unanimously. I was very pleased and thanked them for finally being reasonable. Mr. Conner even sent me a note saying that he was happy that he could resolve a situation where the office (car) worked FOR the citizens instead of against them. Thanks, Mr. Conner. that’s what i feel these gov’t agencies are supposed to do too. So here I am another month later getting word that CAR went back to council with all their guns blazing and without any defense from me because as far as i was concerned, the issue had been resolved last month. they reversed the decision and struck the previous one from the record. How nice. So the bottom line is i am utterly disgusted with the amount of time and effort and money and especially taxpayer money that has been wasted on this topic. I’m over it. Fed up with CAR and especially resentful to the man who walked by my house on the day the windows were going in and decided to drop a dime on his neighbor and call CAR to report this malicious crime. So thank you very much Greg Johnson. you should be very proud of yourself. YOu are a great neighbor!
Just for the record, and for anyone reading this in the future: a committee of city council can only make recommendations. The final decisio0n always rests with the full council.
Joseph-
First I would like to say that I am sorry for all the frustration you have had with this entire situation. Yes I do support CAR, although I do think some of the processes should be reviewed, and I am hoping this CAR Taskforce will address some of the problems with the system. Unfortunately your assumption is incorrect that I “dropped the dime” on your project. I had nothing to do with that.
I am glad to read the homeowner’s account of events. I do wonder what the contractor’s responsibility is in all this.
To #29: As someone who is in the old-house restoration business as well as being an owner of a Woodland Heights home that is in a perpetual state of restoration let me assure you that people snapping photographs and commenting on a home’s potential is normal, even affectionate and respectful behavior. There are many people (myself included) who will tour neighborhoods photographing paint color combinations, architectural details, fences, etc., to document what we like, what our home may have lost over the years and so forth. Please do not assume that comments are pureley judgmental
Gee – there is a lot of bad information here
First; #15 & 24, there is absolutely no ban on storm windows for Monument Ave. Have you talked to with any CAR staff regarding this. It looks like you are going only on rumor. Please call CAR and talk to someone, there are several types of storm windows that are acceptable. Having recently installed some storms it does make a big difference to the comfort and energy use.
#28 – It was very clear at the council COMMITTEE meeting on June 16th that they were merely voting on a recommendation to present to Council at a later meeting. It is too bad you were not at the Council meeting this past Monday as it would have been interesting to see how your testimony might have changed the outcome. Also, it does sound like Mr Conner might have confused the issue for you with his personal note about “resolving the situation” as it was a not done deal at the COMMITTEE meeting.
johnson- i suppose you’ll also claim that you were not at the council meeting monday fighting alongside your friends at CAR to argue against my reasonable request to have permission to have the windows finished being put in. Why don’t you explain this contradiction to all the people reading these posts? You were there. And you remain the single most cause of all of this nonsense.
WOW is correct. There is no ban on exterior or interior storm windows for buildings in any of the Old and Historic Districts. CAR members encourage the use of storm windows because they help improve energy efficiency and keep the old windows in place. It’s very helpful to read the comments about CAR and its staff. I’ve been on the CAR for more than 5 years. Being able to hear from people who live in Spring Hill and must go through this process is humbling and informative to all of us on the CAR.
Ms. Sadler is much more knowledgable than I about this issue, and she is undoubtedly correct. But when the message from CAR members consistently is that one should repair old windows rather than replace, that original is better than replacement, it’s hard to get to a position of agreeing to storm windows.
Speaking of great neighbors and being kind, perhaps one should not point fingers at another? Especially after he has said he had nothing to do with turning in your violation.
i’m neither great or kind, nor am I a neighbor. And I’m well aware of those truths. But that does not mean I deserve to be punished because I don’t share yalls’ interests in property values and architecture. If my word is subject to yalls’ condemnation so should your words. johnson claims to have had nothing to do with this situation. that is an utter lie. and he knows it. if he wants to admit it or not is irrelevant. at this point i have a right to be an asshole. Especially to this man who claims to have the authority to speak on behalf of the Springhill citizens in front of city council. If you have a problem with me then come on down. I’d love to meet you. 612 Freeman Road. My ph #405 8185.
Perhaps the angry homeowners could pick up the phone and give Mr. Jewell a call. I am confident that in a matter of minutes (and more likely seconds) they will find that the “single most cause of this nonsense” is City Council and not Greg Johnson.
This whole post makes me real sad. I thought we all were neighbors. So much for community. My heart goes out to the homeowners, who I imagine spent thousands of dollars never expecting to run into this kerfuffle.
If any of y’all want to live in some ivory tower, gated-community, where there’s a committee to approve paint colors and window styles, well, that’s great for you. It’s a bummer for the rest of us who want to live in a vibrant and diverse community, though.
I don’t understand the victim mentality expressed by the homeowners. What I see is a very sad personal situation and a lack of communication within the household.
Why did one of you vote for an OHD? Did you fully understand what you were getting into?
Why did you pony up $150 for an appeal without fully understanding the process of that appeal? It is not the responsibility of Mr. Conner (however inept his communication with you was) to hold your hand through this. You initiated the appeal. The rest of the folks involved, Land Use and Council has the responsibility to recommend and decide the outcome of the appeal, not to guide you through the process.
It is also not Mr. Jewel’s responsibility to contact you about your appeal. It is your responsibility and you didn’t. Lobbying your Council rep regarding your case is part of the deal, and holds great weight.
As one person said at the Council hearing, “saying ‘I didn’t know.’ doesn’t exempt you from the law.”
And since the word “hearsay” is getting thrown around in this conversation, I would suggest that the homeowners and contractor relied on hearsay in determining whether or not to seek CAR approval prior to their home repairs.
Sad situation. No work can lawfully be done on thnis project (windows) without the approval of the Department of Commu nity Development. Maybe, if the windows are standing open to the rain, the neighbors could help tack poly over the openings. The owners(s) need to move quickly with DCD to resolve the issues. Call the DAR staff person, jim Hill, at 646-6313 to get/keep things moving. If work is done without permits, the contractor and the homeowners will be cited.
Hopefully, Council, CAR, and any and all other parties involved can sift through this and determine where the process went off the rails, and make improvements or streamline so that this sort of situation can be avoided in the future.
Sometimes a simple checklist to follow can work wonders.
Old and Historic Designation is far from a “ivory tower, gated-community” It’s about the responsibility we as neighbors and a community hold, to preserve the work and craft of a great generation. A generation which is greater then yours or mine will ever be… Learn from them.
CAR is much more than “a committee to approve paint colors and window styles. It’s set up to prevent common people from being swayed by today’s equivalent of Traveling salesmen, touting vinyl this and PVC that… Cheap usually is cheap. Vinyl should never be used. CAR and community development are a resource to help…use them.
Springhill is truly a vibrant and diverse community, and CAR prevents it from turning into another Vinyl and EIFS wonderland of Mc-Mansion. If you truelly feel we are otherwise… move to Short Pump.
The process is not the greatest… deal with it, learn about it and prosper from it…It’ll save you a lot of money in the long run, oh and your house will sell for more when the time comes.
Being our current President, in fact gives one the the right and DUTY to speak for the neighbors. That’s called Democracy. He had nothing to do with this, how many more people need to tell you this… move on.