Historic Wood Window Pilot Rehabilitation€¦ · 4/10/2013 · paned window was too thick compared to the historic windows. in addition, various stakeholders, including fbrc, felt

Historic Wood WindowPilot Rehabilitation

9751 gunston road

final report · june 2013

page 29751 gunston roadhistoric wood window pilot rehabilitation

prepared byfort belvoir

residential communities

Table of Contents

1. Project Overview.............................................................................

A. bAckground .................................................................................................................................5b. MAgnitude of the issue ........................................................................................................6c. options considered ...............................................................................................................7d. the gerber pilot project ...................................................................................................8e. next steps .................................................................................................................................... 10

2. The Pilot Process.............................................................................

A. rehAbilitAtion............................................................................................................................12b. replAceMent .............................................................................................................................. 14

3. Results..............................................................................................

A. tiMe .................................................................................................................................................... 16b. operAbility .................................................................................................................................. 18c. energy............................................................................................................................................ 20d. cost – MAintenAnce ...............................................................................................................21e. cost-initiAl ..................................................................................................................................22f. Aesthetics ....................................................................................................................................23g. historic integrity ..................................................................................................................23e. heAlth & sAfety ...................................................................................................................... 24f. generAl conclusions ......................................................................................................... 25




Table of Contents (cont)

Appendix A. Final Schedule .......................................................28

Appendix B. Final Pricing............................................................30

Appendix C. Before & After Energy Reports..........................39

Appendix D. Environmental Analysis.......................................45

Appendix E. Daily Logs...............................................................57

Appendix F. Project Photographs...........................................108

Appendix G. Storm Cut Sheets..................................................141

Appendix H. Lepage Cut Sheets...............................................161

Appendix I. Meeting Presentation.........................................190

Appendix J. Scope of Work....................................................213

Appendix K. Window Guide....................................................218

1. Project Overview




1. Project Overview

fig 1. Jadwin Loop

A. bAckgroundthe historic district of fort belvoir contains 170 historic homes in four different villages: jadwin loop, belvoir, gerber, & park. these homes have been a significant part of the fabric of the installation and have housed families for many generations. by the time the residential communities initiative (rci) was launched, however, the homes in the historic district were missing a number of program elements that the department of the Army (dA) felt were necessary to provide the quality of life called for by the rci program. for the initial development period (idp), fbrc was tasked with developing a scope of renovation work for the historic district that addressed the most pressing needs and brought the homes up to rci standards. because resources were limited, however, the work had to be prioritized. As part of the scoping process, fbrc conducted resident surveys to rank the most essential updates to the homes. for example, in belvoir Village, inadequate single car garages were eliminated to make room for a significant expansion of the kitchen, the hVAc system was upgraded, and the second floor was reconfigured to create a proper master bedroom with an en-suite bathroom. in gerber Village, a significant new addition was built to create a family room and fourth bedroom, small bedrooms on the ground floor were combined to create a master bedroom suite, and new two-car garages were built.

despite the scale of renovation and new construction work to the overall housing portfolio, the partnership did not have unlimited resources. therefore, fbrc and the installation had to make tough decisions about scope to leave out of the idp. Among the most difficult choices were the decisions to defer adding new garages in belvoir Village and to encapsulate the historic windows throughout the historic district, per an epA approved methodology, rather than rehabilitating or replacing them. With the completion of the idp in 2011, however, windows have emerged as a major quality of life and health issue for families residing in the historic district.

fig 2. gerber Village

fig 3. Belvoir Village




1. Project Overview

residents have raised the following concerns:

• Lead Paint: flaking and chipping paint due to friction increases likelihood of exposure to lead paint, especially for young children who may put debris into their mouths.

• Mold: the combination of single hung windows and exterior storms has made it impossible to clean certain parts of the existing window assembly. When moisture builds up in these areas, mold has often developed. Abatement of mold is necessary, and is a costly process.

• Operability: Windows are difficult to open due to several factors. the numerous layers of paint required for lead encapsulation have left many windows “painted shut.” in addition, the warping, expanding, and contracting of the sashes over the years has led to friction points that reduce the window operability. the existing exterior storms also cannot be easily operated or removed. these deficiencies make it arduous to let fresh air into the home during favorable weather and for natural ventilation. poor operability also poses life safety issues in the event of an emergency necessitating windows as a means of egress.

• Temperature Control: Aging of window sashes over the years and use of storm windows beyond their expected life cycle have both resulted in drafty window openings throughout the historic district.

• Noise: the combination of single pane glass and drafty window openings results in street traffic noise inside the home, especially for homes facing highly travelled streets.

• Aesthetics: Anodized aluminum exterior storms, not part of the original design of the home and well past their intended use period, detract from the exterior appearance of the historic units.

b. MAgnitude of the issueAddressing the issues facing the historic windows will require $12-18 million in construction costs over the course of 10-15 years. the table below illustrates that although there are only 170 historic homes at fort belvoir, there are over 4,500 existing historic window openings within the project portfolio.

fig 4. gerber Village existing wood window - exterior

fig 5. gerber Village existing wood window - interior




1. Project Overview

fig 6. gerber Village new wood mockup - exterior

fort belVoir historic WindoW count

Village # Homes# Windows/

Home*#Windows

jadwin loop 31 25 775

gerber Village 76 17 1292

park Village 2 32 64

belvoir Village 61 40 2440

Total 170 28 (Average) 4571*Actual counts vary from home to home

c. options consideredthrough coordination with the dpW cultural resource Manager (crM) and the installation, fbrc began by investigating the cost/benefit analysis of two options to address the issue. the first solution was to rehabilitate the original trim and replace the existing wood windows with new energy-efficient sashes that mimic the historic character of the original historic windows. the second solution was to fully rehabilitate the historic windows by removing the existing wood windows, stripping them of lead paint, and then re-installing them with improved weatherization techniques (including interior storm windows, caulk, and weather stripping).

in order to simplify the analysis documented in this report, fbrc focused the issue of finding a suitable window solution at the individual window level as opposed to the whole home. therefore, fbrc focused on rehabilitation and replacement as two separate treatments and did not consider the possibility of various mixtures of rehabilitated and replaced windows within a home. this option would have its own pros and cons that may be weighed in the overall portfolio decision, but will not be discussed in this report.

to identify the best replacement option, fbrc mocked-up a new wood window in gerber Village for review by dpW in March 2010. Although the window was ultimately rejected, dpW gave detailed feedback on the features they were looking for in the preferred replacement window. fbrc addressed this feedback and installed a new mock-up window next to an existing wood window in gerber Village for a second review by dpW and the fort belvoir deputy to the garrison commander in february 2011.

fig 7. gerber Village new wood mockup - interior




1. Project Overview

Although the installed mock-up window met the requirements and feedback given by dpW, it too was ultimately not approved at the installation level. the replacement window provided for this second mockup was deemed to be of insufficient quality because it was not aluminum clad and because it did not have a true-divided light profile. As a follow-up, fbrc was asked to investigate other replacement window options that met an additional set of requirements, including that the windows be high quality aluminum clad wood, double paned with low-e, argon-filled glass, and true divided light with a “traditional” muntin profile. fbrc took this feedback and researched replacement window options that met the revised requirements. After completing its research, however, fbrc concluded that aluminum clad true divided light windows could not match the muntin profile of the historic windows. the muntin profile available with an aluminum clad, true divided light, double-paned window was too thick compared to the historic windows. in addition, various stakeholders, including fbrc, felt the aluminum cladding did not provide as authentic an aesthetic as a non-aluminum clad wood window. fbrc, therefore, decided to look at a variety of replacement options in hopes of finding one that could garner more consensus.

in order to evaluate the various window models, fbrc constructed a full-scale mock-up in May 2012 in gerber Village comparing four (4) different replacement windows. based on the mock-up, the installation and fbrc, with the informal assistance of the shpo, reached consensus on which window provided the best replacement option (lepage special Wh-11, double-hung, split sash, sdl, hd 5/8” muntins, low e / Argon. option: Allied storm windows). see Appendix h for cut sheets and specification data for this window.

d. the gerber pilot projectfollowing feedback from dpW and desiring to better understand the rehabilitation option, fbrc decided to execute a pilot window rehabilitation project in addition to an in-situ replacement window mock-up in an existing gerber Village home (9751 gunston rd). this pilot was intended to allow both quantitative and qualitative comparison between

fig 8. replacement window option - full mockup.




1. Project Overview

rehabilitation versus replacement. it is important to note that the window arrangement and style varies between each of the historic villages: belvoir, gerber, jadwin, and park. the pilot project focuses solely on gerber Village, but the findings of the study will be useful throughout the historic portfolio.

prior to the commencement of work, fbrc consulted with dpW in order to review specifications and scope of work for the pilot project so that the results would be as helpful as possible to the decision at hand. in addition to the state historic preservation office of Virginia, the Advisory council on historic preservation and fairfax county history commission were invited to participate in the pilot study. A timeline for the pilot project is as follows:

December 6, 2012: historic housing Windows pre-consultation Meeting. Attendees: fbrc & dpW. discussed scope of work and window specifications for the pilot project.

December 20, 2012: initial consulting parties Meeting. Attendees: fbrc, dpW, shpo, Achp, fairfax county, Wall Works. presented the history of the windows issue at fort belvoir and introduced the scope of work and window specifications to the consulting parties for feedback. see Appendix i for meeting slides.

January 21, 2013 – April 11, 2013: Wall Works usA on-site for pilot project. see Appendix A for the project schedule. Appendix k includes the pilot home’s floor plan and elevations, illustrating the windows as numbered in the schedule.

April 15, 2013: consulting parties pilot house Visit. Attendees: fbrc, dpW, shpo, Achp, fairfax county, Wall Works. Walk-through to present the work product to the consulting parties upon completion of rehabilitation and replacement of windows.

July 25, 2013: deputy garrison commander pilot house Visit. Attendees: fbrc, dpW, fort belvoir dgc, rclo. Walk-through to present the work product to the deputy garrison commander upon completion of rehabilitation and replacement of windows.

fig 9. rehab window with exterior screen

fig 10. rehab window with interior storm window




1. Project Overview

Fall 2013: fbrc, dpW, & consulting parties to review the final report and present options to fort belvoir garrison commander for a decision.

the pilot home provided valuable feedback for fbrc, the installation, and the consulting parties. the “results” section of this report, in addition to various items in the appendix, contains the information gathered from the pilot study.

e. next stepsfbrc and the installation, with the help of the consulting parties, are now in the process of formally recommending a course of action to the shpo per the terms of the programmatic Agreement (pA) governing rehabilitation or replacement work within the historic district. A Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) among the installation, fbrc, the shpo, and the Achp may be required to document and codify this course of action. fbrc and the installation will consult with the shpo on the appropriate process. fbrc hopes to complete this process by the end of 2013, so that work can begin on the historic windows in 2014.

fig 11. replacement window (no interior storm needed)

2. The Pilot Process





both the rehabilitation of historic wood windows and the pilot replacement window at 9751 gunston road followed the specifications set forth in section 08600: Window rehabilitation included herein as Appendix j. All work was performed to the secretary of the interior’s standards. the procedure of work for the various options was as follows:

A. rehAbilitAtiongeneral; All windows and their related components were pre-measured, catalogued, and labeled based upon window mapping for removal and replacement of original components back into the existing window locations.

• removal of existing window components, specifically:

— Window stop

— Window jamb hardware

— upper and lower window sashes

— operating window hardware including:

» sash cords » counter weights » pulley system » Window lock

— exterior storm window removal and disposal

• lead-based paint removal from all related window component surfaces down to existing bare wood condition. prime and paint two coats of interior/exterior latex white paint on all related components including window stool, window jamb both interior and exterior, interior and exterior window casing (trim) and window stop. renovation repair painting (rrp) protocols were used in accordance with epA guidelines for all related window rehabilitation activities. Additionally, rrp to existing entry and kitchen door pilasters, trim, and plinth blocks. fbrc elected to address these additional exterior trim items in order to match the rehabilitated window trim, but this work was not part of the overall window pilot study.

• Window sash glazing removed and salvaged. refurbished

fig 1. Lead-based paint removal from exterior trim via wet scrape





with replacement of glazing components that were damaged (broken) and re-glazed existing components with original glass

• Window sash dipped and stripped of all paint material on window surface

• replacement of window jamb hardware making both upper and lower sash components operational

• replacement of sash cords to metal chain style

• replacement of missing or damaged counter weights

• refurbish or replacement of window pulley hardware

• refurbish or replacement of window locking hardware

• reinstallation of rehabilitated window sash

• interior storm window assembly configured to existing double hung window sizes matching mid rail configuration

• exterior window screen assembly and hardware mounted

fig 2. Exterior dormer windows being stripped of existing paint





b. replAceMentgeneral; All windows and their related components were pre-measured.

• removal & disposal of existing window components, specifically:

— Window stop

— Window jamb hardware

— upper and lower window sashes

— operating window hardware including:

» sash cords » counter weights » pulley system » Window lock

— exterior storm window removal and disposal

• lead-based paint removal from all related window trim surfaces down to existing bare wood condition. prime and paint two coats of interior/exterior latex white paint on all related components including window stool, window jamb both interior and exterior, interior and exterior window casing (trim) and window stop. renovation repair painting (rrp) protocols were used in accordance with epA guidelines for all related window rehabilitation activities. Additionally, rrp to existing entry and kitchen door pilasters, trim, and plinth blocks. fbrc elected to address these additional exterior trim items in order to match the rehabilitated window trim, but this work was not part of the overall window pilot study.

• pre-manufactured window components including sashes and jamb assemblies installed into existing window openings.

• necessary carpentry work performed to tie into existing jamb dimensions and reveals.

• exterior window screen assembled and hardware mounted

WindoW chArActeristics

Characteristic Renovation Replacement

glass single pane, tdl double pane, low-e, Argon

gas-filled, sdl

sash existing Wood (fur)

new Wood (fur)

hardware clam shell latch clam shell latch

lift style chain with counter weight or spring load sash

lift

spring load sash lift

storm interior style required

storm not required

life cycle unlimited with proper maintenance

unlimited with proper maintenance

historic existing historic fabric

Manufactured to resemble historic

Mullions 5/8” 5/8”

Muntins 3 1/2”

Wood species old growth (fur) new growth (fur)

energy n/A (see below)

replAceMent WindoW - energy chArActeristics

Unit Type lepage Wh-11

Glass Type clear ig lowe with Argon

Dividers 5/8 sdl

Spacer foam spacer upgrade

U-Value 0.30

Solar Heat Gain 0.26

Visible Trans 0.45

N Zone y

NC Zone y

SC Zone y

S Zone y

3. Results




3. Results

in order to discuss the differences between rehabilitation and replacement as renovation solutions, fbrc and historic architecture consultant rktects developed the below scoring methodology. the existing window was used in the study as a baseline for comparison to the two proposed options. it should be noted that this scoring methodology is admittedly subjective in areas, but was created as a best attempt to allow for a quantitative analysis of the holistic window decision despite certain factors being qualitative by nature. A system with scoring from 0-5 was chosen because it allowed for a decent amount of distinction between ratings without getting so granular as to be overly subjective. the score of 0 denotes a condition that is not only undesirable, but unacceptable to fbrc and dpW. Weighting the various scoring categories was considered, but because stakeholders in the project place different values upon the categories in question, this did not seem to be a reasonable layer to add. fbrc and dpW concurred on the final scoring, reported as follows:

scoring MAtrix

Current Rehab Replace

time 5 2 3

operability 1 3 5

energy 1 4 4

cost - initial 5 2 2

cost - Maintenance 0 4 4

Aesthetics 2 5 5

historic integrity 4 5 2

health & safety 0 5 5

18 30 30

* 0-5 scale: 5 being most desirable, 1 least desirable, 0

unacceptable

A. tiMeDesirable outcome – Shortest time possible

because continuing to encapsulate the historic windows means that units would not have to be held offline, maintaining the current situation would have the least impact on time. therefore, the option of leaving the windows in their current state received a 5 for the time rating.

the original schedule for the pilot project estimated a 65 working day duration commencing on january 21, 2013 and concluding work on April 19, 2013. Wall Works usA finished the project 6 days ahead of schedule, making the entire project timeline 59 working days. the contractor also believes that this timeline can be reduced further now that the team has a better understanding of existing conditions and necessary project methods. providing space on post for sash treatment may reduce time by 1-2 days, although this may not prove cost effective considering the specialized nature of the glazing remediation facility and disposal criteria. the single most important factor that could reduce the time of the project will be whether the window openings can be pre-measured prior to the home coming offline for renovation work. both options require pre-measurement to stream line the material production and delivery schedule: the window sashes for replacement and the interior storms for the rehabilitation option. taking these measurements will assist manufacturing lead time and should reduce the time a home is offline by up to two weeks per the contractor’s estimates.

the process for the window opening itself remains the same despite the option chosen. removing the existing sashes, treatment of the interior and exterior trim, and installation of rehab/replacement sashes will follow the same timeframe regardless of the method chosen. the difference in completion time between the two processes reflects the treatment of the sashes alone. there are more steps, and therefore more time, necessary for rehabilitation than replacement as illustrated in the simplified procedure shown below (per contractor).




3. Results

Replacement

1. Measure all windows for replacement

2. remove existing sashes and hardware

3. remove paint from interior and exterior window components to remain

4. install new window insert

5. paint all window components

Rehabilitation

1. Measure all windows for interior storms

2. remove existing sashes and hardware

3. remove paint from interior and exterior window components to remain

4. deliver sash components to certified “dip & strip” facility

5. removal/salvage for reuse at dip and strip facility all glazing and hardware, catalog same

6. dip & strip

7. deliver finished sash components to glazer

8. re-glaze window and reinstall hardware components

9. deliver paint ready components back to job

10. install rehabilitated window components

11. paint all window components

12. install interior storms

depending on the village, the additional process necessary for rehabilitation is expected to add 2-3 weeks to the overall project length when compared to replacement. see the chart below for the contractor’s estimation of the number of weeks necessary to

complete a home in each village (pilot duration included for baseline).

Renovation Replacement

pilot 12 n/A

gerber 10 8

belvoir 12 9

jadwin 10 8

park 12 9

taking the overall length and 2-3 week variation between rehab and replacement into account, the methods were rated a 2 and 3 in the time category respectively. this consideration is especially important to the partnership. the wait list at fort belvoir for military families remains in the hundreds, and therefore any extension of the renovation period means that a family must wait that much longer to move into their new home. this most likely necessitates residents living out of a hotel or off-base, unsettled. the longer the historic homes remain offline, the more difficult it is for fbrc to fulfill its primary mission of improving the quality of life for residents on base. in addition, any variation in time leads to lost revenue for the partnership that could be substantial when compounded by the 170 homes to be renovated. Any lost income reduces the reinvestment Account projections, which are the means to sustain and improve the portfolio of homes and amenities for all families over the life of the project.




3. Results

b. operAbilityDesirable outcome – Easy maneuvering of sash up & down; storm window up & down, and install/removal

the existing wood windows have significant operability issues that have repeatedly led to resident complaints. encapsulation of lead-based paint per epA standards has rendered many of the windows in historic homes literally “painted shut.” even when this unintentional seal is broken, the many layers of paint create friction points along the window track that make opening and closing of the windows very difficult. the existing windows also suffer from other system failures that affect operability, such as warped sashes, damage to the weight and pulleys, and hardware malfunctioning. in addition, the existing storm windows are not designed for ease of removal and are therefore a nuisance to the average resident. this blocks residents’ ability to provide natural ventilation through the windows. the existing storms are most likely well past their project life expectancy, rendering repair and maintenance very difficult. the current window situation scored a 1 for operability.

rehabilitation of the wood windows solves the operability issues posed by lead paint encapsulation. the re-installed window sashes slide smoothly up and down within the window track. during the pilot process, it was noted that the gerber homes have two different types of windows. those in the sun room do not operate on the sash weight system that the rest of the windows in the house use. instead, a spring load system is employed that requires aluminum flashing. this additional component renders the sun room windows slightly more difficult to open and close, but they still pass the “two finger” operation test more than adequately.

however, the presence of an interior storm (see Appendix g for product cut sheets) reduces the ease of operability of the window system. in order to open a locked window, residents must lower the upper sash of the interior storm, unlock the clasp, raise the upper sash of the storm, then the lower sash of the storm, and finally the lower sash of the actual window. Also, the locking mechanism of the storm windows is somewhat awkward and the panes themselves are relatively heavy to lift with two fingers, as is necessary given

fig 1. rehabilitated window with interior storm at position 1. Both sash and storm closed.

fig 2. rehabilitated window with interior storm at position 2. storm raised.




3. Results

this mechanism. there is a potential hazard for slamming shut if a resident’s fingers slip while attempting to operate the storm sash. given these factors, the rehab option scored a 3 in operability. because of the design of the replacement window, a storm window is not necessary. this makes the routine process of opening the window significantly easier for the resident. the replacement option also removes the operability problems that plague the existing windows due to the many layers of paint. sashes require limited pressure to move up and down. the replacement option therefore received a 5 in operability.

fig 3. rehabilitated window with interior storm at position 3. sash and storm raised.




fig 4. air leakage in original window #12.

fig 6. replacement window. no air leakage present.

3. Results

c. energyDesirable outcome – Best thermal envelope

thermal imaging and air infiltration testing were performed prior to the commencement of work on the pilot house windows to assess an energy performance baseline. these assessments were then repeated upon completion of the project in order to compare the existing windows to the rehabilitation and replacement options. the results can be found in Appendix c. thermal imagery revealed significant air leakage through the sides of the existing wood window sashes, especially at the bottom edge of the windows. the existing window solution scored a 1 for energy.

in addition, the air infiltration test indicated poor performance of the pilot home’s thermal envelope as a whole, suggesting additional issues beyond the windows themselves. during the blower door test, the industry standard baseline for this size of residence could not be met due to the extensive air infiltration through the existing building envelope. Windows installed in the family room addition as part of the idp, as well as existing thermal seal issues at the baseboards and doors in the unit, also contributed to this weak energy performance.

After reviewing the initial energy performance results, Wall Works suggested installing insulation at the crawl space door to the basement and attic access panel, installing a new weather strip and strike plate at the kitchen door, and caulking between the floor and base trim at all exterior walls. these measures, in addition to the installation of new interior storm windows, improved the home’s energy performance. the home still did not meet the baseline for blower door testing, however. the thermal images of the rehabilitation and replacement options are the only available indicators of comparing the energy performance between these two methods and the existing window. these images indicate that the two methods of renovation allow virtually no air leakage, showing substantially less leakage than the un-renovated windows. because the home still did not meet the threshold for the blower door test suggesting further room for improvement, but thermal imagery showed little to no air leakage, both rehabilitation and replacement were given a 4 in the energy category.

fig 5. reduction in air leakage after rehabilitation of window #12.




3. Results

d. cost – MAintenAnceDesirable Outcome – Lowest ongoing maintenance cost

Maintenance costs for the existing windows are high for a variety of reasons. the existing exterior storm windows are a challenge to remove and make it extremely difficult for residents to clean the outside glass of their windows. the storms also are tightly sealed and therefore trap moisture in between the window sash and storm. this leads to mold growth and deteriorates the wood material of the windows. As previously mentioned, these storms are past their life expectancy and need immediate attention. furthering the maintenance problem, there are areas of the window that prove impossible to access without removing the window sash because of the single-hung nature of the historic windows, allowing for mold build-up over time. the combination of oil-based paint and latex-based paint layered over the years causes regular blistering and peeling of the windows and trim that must also be addressed. lbp encapsulation requirements, poor operability, flaking of paint, and life safety concerns all add to the maintenance demand of the existing windows. because of these many concerns and the associated maintenance dollars and time, the existing windows were deemed unacceptable and scored a 0 in cost – Maintenance.

both the replacement and rehabilitation options remove many of these maintenance concerns. As part of the pilot scope of work, the rehabilitated sashes were altered to make the windows double-hung as opposed to single, so that all areas of the window can be reached for cleaning. Also, the chosen interior storms have a compression-based design that allows for quick and relatively simple removal, unlike the existing exterior storm system. stripping of the windows and trim addresses the lead-based paint and eliminates the maintenance needs associated with encapsulation. the rehabilitated windows benefit from removal of the oil-based paint, resulting in less blistering over time.

Although both window options are significantly easier and less costly to maintain than the existing windows, there is still ongoing maintenance necessary. With proper maintenance, the life cycle of a new window would be 25-30 years

fig 7. Existing window with aluminum storm and noticeable mildew




3. Results

expected at a minimum. depending on the condition of the underlying wood in rehabilitated windows, proper maintenance should allow for a similar if not longer life cycle. both options should be inspected on each turn of the unit for any issues. paint maintenance should only need to be performed every ten years for both options since the starting point for either sash was bare wood with modern-grade paint.

replacement part availability will be similar regardless of option chosen. full replacement of the windows should not be required in either application unless there is catastrophic failure of the system such as termite damage or substantial dry rot. replacing broken glazing would prove less costly in the renovated window because the true divided light configuration leads to smaller fields of glass than the simulated divided light in the replacement. it is important to note, however, that only the glazing would need to be replaced in the lepage windows and not the entire sash, which is a standard and relatively simple operation for new windows of this type.

the interior storm windows required with the rehabilitated windows are likely to need regular maintenance, repair, and replacement due to the many moving parts (sliding latches, compression system, etc) and the generally less sturdy construction inherent to the thin-profile storms. the additional component of having an interior storm versus just a replacement window to open and close will require more maintenance because the more components there are, the more opportunities for malfunction, wear and tear, and potential resident damage. the replacement method received a 4 in cost-Maintenance for substantially lowering maintenance cost as compared to the existing window. A point was docked from “Most desirable” due to the necessity to replace the full sheet of glazing in the case of any window breakage. the rehabilitation option received a 4 in cost-Maintenance as well, due to similar maintenance requirements as the replacement windows. the point subtraction was for the additional maintenance necessary for the interior storm windows not present on the replacement windows.

e. cost-initiAlDesirable Outcome – Lowest initial cost

leaving the existing wood windows would have no upfront cost, and therefore scored a 5 in this category. however, it should be noted that this option is unrealistic given the current condition of the existing wood windows and the intentions of fbrc and the garrison.

the cost of both rehabilitation and replacement as scoped is high. based on pricing from Wall Works usA, which can be found in Appendix b, renovating by these methods would cost approximately $2,500 per window. Wall Works submitted updated pricing for a gerber Village home (same model as 9751 gunston) after completing the pilot project and incorporating the results and lessons learned throughout. Although original pricing quoted rehabilitation as a slightly more expensive option, Wall Works found that material and labor costs for rehabilitation versus replacement were almost identical. the revised quotes reflected this finding, as both options were priced at $46,200 for the gerber pilot home. given natural variations due to material pricing, project timing, and contractor chosen, costs could fluctuate but should remain essentially even between rehabilitation and replacement. for both options, there may be ways to reduce costs such as providing temporary space on fort belvoir for the contractor, supplier discounts due to large orders on storms or replacement windows, choosing an alternative window manufacturer, and economies of scale in project management through ramping up delivery. however, the project also faces the aformentioned potential material and labor cost increases. therefore, for the purposes of this study, costs were only reported as quoted at the time of work.

because of the close proximity in price between renovation options and their high cost in relation to leaving the existing windows as is, both replacement and rehabilitation scored a 2 in this category.




3. Results

f. AestheticsDesirable Outcome – Most historically accurate as viewed from the exterior

refer to Appendix f for detailed pictures of each window option. the existing wood windows scored a 2 in the Aesthetics category. natural degradation over time, chemical reactions between oil- and latex-based paint, and simply the sheer number of paint coats after many years of maintenance have left the windows blistered and peeling, with clumps of paint misshaping the traditionally smooth muntins. in addition, the aluminum exterior storm windows are well beyond their life expectancy and significantly detract from the appearance of the historic windows, hiding the true aesthetic underneath.

both the rehabilitation and replacement options counteract these detractions. by stripping the existing paint down to the substrate wood and repainting, the rehabilitated windows appear fresh and smooth. the replacement sashes are also painted with a smooth finish. the interior storm window has a thin frame that matches the color of the surrounding trim and therefore does not affect the appearance of the window substantially, either from the outside or inside. for both options, the absence of an exterior storm allows the windows to be seen directly. rehabilitation and replacement both received a 5 in Aesthetics for upholding the appearance of the wood windows as it was originally designed.

g. historic integrityDesirable Outcome – Maintains the historic fabric to the highest degree

the existing wood windows have lasted over 80 years in their original form, thereby maintaining a high level of historic integrity. however, the aluminum exterior storm windows that were installed pre-rci initiative are not a component of the original design intent. therefore, the existing windows scored a 4 in historic integrity as opposed to a 5.

the rehabilitation option restores the historic wood windows to their original condition and follows the secretary of the

fig 8. original window

fig 9. replacement window




3. Results

interior’s standards, warranting a score of 5 in historic integrity. While the aesthetic of the replacement window closely matches that of the existing historic windows, the actual historic fabric of the sash and glazing is removed. Window replacement is not in keeping with the secretary of the interior’s standards. because this option retains only the look of the windows and not the original materials and craftsmanship, replacement received a 2 in historic integrity.

e. heAlth & sAfetyDesirable Outcome – Poses no undue health & safety risks to residents

residents have raised considerable concern regarding the flaking of paint that occurs as the existing windows are operated and moved past friction points in the track. because the windows were originally painted with lead-based paints, these flakes may contain traces that could prove harmful to children that may ingest the strewn material. lead tests performed as a part of the rehabilitation work, referenced in Appendix d, proved the presence of lead-based paint. these tests, however, were not performed to test whether prior residents were exposed to harmful doses of lead and give no indication to this effect. instead, they determine the standard by which window waste needed to be disposed and check whether there were lead particles in the air after trim remediation that would prove harmful to renovation workers. lead was present in waste material in high enough quantities that special precautions needed to be taken during disposal. the concentration of particles measured in the air after wet-scraping posed no health risk to the crew working on the windows.

encapsulation of lead-based paint, although performed per epA standards, has raised another potential health and safety issue. due to the layers of paint used to encapsulate, many of the historic windows have been literally painted shut. this denies residents the ability to naturally ventilate their homes. in addition, the windows could pose life safety concerns if residents cannot easily open the sashes as a means of egress in emergency situations. the exterior storm windows and single hung nature of the existing window sashes make

fig 10. rehab window




3. Results

regular cleaning and maintenance of the windows difficult. the storm windows also trap moisture, causing mold to grow on the window sashes. certain areas of the sash cannot be reached without removing the window entirely, creating a further health hazard as mold grows over time. health & safety of residents is a primary concern of the installation and therefore these many issues led to the rating of 0 for the existing historic windows, an unacceptable condition.

both the rehabilitation and replacement windows solve each of the health and safety concerns associated with the existing wood windows. the rehabilitation method strips the windows and trim to original wood, removing lead-based paint and the threat of flaking. the replacement method would involve remediation of the lead-based paint in window trim as well, and provides entirely new sashes devoid of lbp material. both window options allow for direct access to the outdoors, meaning that residents will have no issues with ventilation and emergency egress. the absence of exterior storms will eliminate mold growth due to trapped moisture. in addition, for both solutions it is possible to easily reach all surfaces of the windows for adequate cleaning. rehabilitation and replacement of the existing wood windows both provide substantial improvement over the current situation, and therefore scored a 5.

f. generAl conclusionsthe scoring reveals that both approaches are a significant improvement over the current condition that relies on periodically encapsulating the historic windows following an epA-approved process. the scoring also demonstrates that rehabilitation and replacement have very similar performance when considered holistically. both have similar costs and perform well in energy, aesthetics, and health & safety. the main differences between the options are that the replacement windows are easier to operate and faster to install, whereas the rehabilitated windows are better for maintaining historic integrity. ease of operation is an important consideration to fbrc because it directly affects the quality of life of residents living in fort belvoir Military family housing. the quicker timeline of the replacement option allows fbrc to return homes online sooner and therefore move families off the long waitlist and into homes earlier. this benefits the military families hoping to reside on base and assists the partnership financially. however, preserving the historic fabric of fort belvoir is also a mission of the installation. through the section 106 process, fbrc and dpW will work with the shpo to find a solution that balances these aims and presents a path forward that markedly advances the condition of windows in our portfolio’s historic homes.

appendices

Appendix A. Final Schedule




A. Final Schedule

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish PredecessorsResource Names % Complete

1 Fort Belvoir 9751 Gunston Rd 65 days Mon 1/21/13 Fri 4/19/13 Wallworks 100%2 Site Protection Interior #1-#8 5 days Mon 1/21/13 Fri 1/25/13 Wallworks 100%3 Interior window trim removal/Air Monitor 1-8 5 days Mon 1/28/13 Fri 2/1/13 Wallworks/Envirotex 100%4 Removal of window sashes #1 thru #4 3 days Mon 2/4/13 Wed 2/6/13 Wallworks 100%5 Removal of window sashes #5 thru #8 2 days Thu 2/7/13 Fri 2/8/13 Wallworks 100%6 Windows #1-#8 Frame remediation 10 days Mon 2/11/13 Fri 2/22/13 Wallworks/Envirotex 100%7 Windows #1-#8 sash wet scrape/dip 10 days Mon 2/11/13 Fri 2/22/13 Wallworks 100%8 Site protection windows #9-#16 5 days Wed 2/20/13 Tue 2/26/13 Wallworks 100%9 Interior trim removal Windows 9-16/Air Monitor 3 days Tue 2/26/13 Thu 2/28/13 Wallworks/Envirotex 100%

10 Removal Window sashes #9-#16 5 days Thu 2/28/13 Wed 3/6/13 Wallworks 100%11 Replace/repair metal guides/springs #1-#8 5 days Thu 3/7/13 Wed 3/13/13 Wallworks 100%12 Remove exterior storm windows #1-#8 5 days Mon 3/11/13 Fri 3/15/13 Wallworks 100%13 Paint sashes & trim Windows #1-#8 3 days Mon 3/18/13 Wed 3/20/13 Wallworks 100%14 Re-install sashes & interior storms #1-#8 3 days Wed 3/20/13 Fri 3/22/13 Wallworks 100%15 Replace/repair metal guides/springs #9-#16 5 days Mon 3/25/13 Fri 3/29/13 Wallworks 100%16 Remove exterior storm windows #9-#16 5 days Mon 4/1/13 Fri 4/5/13 Wallworks 100%17 Paint sashes and trim #9-#16 3 days Wed 4/3/13 Fri 4/5/13 Wallworks Actual com 100%18 Re-install sashes & interior storms 3 days Mon 4/8/13 Wed 4/10/13 Wallworks 100%19 Final clean & inspection 9751 Gunston 1 day Thu 4/11/13 Thu 4/11/13 Wallworks/Envirotex 100%

WallworksWallworks

Wallworks/EnvirotexWallworks

WallworksWallworks/EnvirotexWallworks

WallworksWallworks/Envirotex

WallworksWallworks

WallworksWallworks

WallworksWallworks

WallworksWallworks Actual completion date D

WallworksWallworks/Envirotex

13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28Feb '13 Mar '13 Apr '13 May '

Task

Split

Progress

Milestone

Summary

Project Summary

External Tasks

External Milestone

Deadline

Page 1

Project: Fort Belvoir Schedule 4-6-201Date: Wed 5/15/13

Appendix A

Appendix B. Final Pricing




Proposal to Clark Realty Capitol

For US ARMY GARRISON FORT BELVOIR

GERBER VILLAGE WINDOW REPLACEMENT MILITARY DISTRICT WASHINGTON

FORT BELVOIR, VA 05/09/2013

Reference SHPO Product Specification Guide for Finish Selection

Reference Secretary of the Interior’s Standards

B. Final Pricing




Wall Works USA, Inc. is pleased to submit the following proposal for the Window revitalization at FT. Belvoir- Gerber Village. We hereby propose to furnish and install all materials and labor required to perform the following scope of work: INTERIOR DEMOLITION SCHEDULE General: •Provide and locate Container to dispose of trash and debris in designated area. Historic Preservation : •Install combination of rubberized and rosin paper floor protection as required •Perform all wall penetration with accredited carpenter •Determine harvestable materials for pending renovation IE; window casing/trim

Lead Base Paint (LBP) and Asbestos containing materials: •Remove visible blistering and or flaking paint from effected Interior and exterior surfaces, wet scrape Lead Base Paint (LBP) surfaces on wood trim, walls and ceilings. Perform Remediation per Federally mandated rules and regulations, disposal of Lead contaminated materials at approved facility. Upon completion of LBP abatement, supply waste manifest and clearance wipe samples.

Remove and Dispose: •Existing storm windows •Existing double hung windows

B. Final Pricing




INTERIOR RENOVATION SCHEDULE Windows, and Trim General: Inspect all Interior/Exterior casings, jambs, window stools throughout unit, refurbish/refinish/repair as determined. Type, Styles and profiles to be equal and equivalent to existing. •Replace existing double hung windows Reconstruct interior areas to include windows in all common living areas as per the following scope of work. Furnish and Install New Typical Window: •Remove existing wood window sashes, salvage for storage as directed by Project Manager •Remove existing window pulley rope or spring pulley system •Abate both interior and exterior existing wood trim down to wood substrate on all windows. •Abate exterior existing wood trim down to wood substrate on front and side entry pilasters, trim and crown. •Repair existing wood trim using SHPO approved methods. •Install Lapage Special WH-11 double hung window, split sash, SDL, HD 5/8”Muttins, Low E/ Argon or similar model with exterior screen. •Install Lapage Special WH-11 transom window, fixed sash, SDL, HD 5/8”Muttins, Low E/ Argon or similar model . •Finish coat on window interior trim with semi-gloss latex enamel

Finish Clean: Upon completion of all renovation work performed, clean all interior living and storage areas to “turn over” standard subject to final inspection and approval by Project/Site Manager EXTERIOR RENOVATION SCHEDULE

Landscape Protection:

Protect and landscape material from Construction activities, will replace any damaged material due to exterior activities.

B. Final Pricing




Price Schedule: Wall Works USA, Inc. proposes to perform and complete the scope or work as outlined conforming to all applicable codes, standards and methods in consideration of : 17 Wood Window Replacements 1 Wood Window Transom Replacement 2 Exterior Wood Entry Door Pilaster Restoration TOTAL $46,200.00 Unit price shall be considered uniform and specific to property for all house types contained within as specific to unit matrix submitted by OWNER for the aforementioned property. Any subsequent revision to the property matrix may necessitate re-evaluation and unit price addendum to original proposal. Unit price shall remain in effect for two years from ratification of contract. Wall Works USA, Inc. reserves the option of adjusting contract price to reflect increases in direct costs associated with labor and materials on each anniversary date of ratification thereafter. Increases shall be mutually agreed and adopted not to exceed 3% of total contract value annually. Wall Works USA, Inc. will submit to OWNER a schedule of values specific to each property, (contract). Progress billing for work in process will be submitted monthly for remittance as approved by the Regional Property /Project Manager for the OWNER.

B. Final Pricing




Proposal to Clark Realty Capitol

For US ARMY GARRISON FORT BELVOIR

GERBER VILLAGE WINDOW REPLACEMENT MILITARY DISTRICT WASHINGTON

FORT BELVOIR, VA 05/09/2013

Reference SHPO Product Specification Guide for Finish Selection

Reference Secretary of the Interior’s Standards

B. Final Pricing




Wall Works USA, Inc. is pleased to submit the following proposal for the Window revitalization at FT. Belvoir- Gerber Village. We hereby propose to furnish and install all materials and labor required to perform the following scope of work: INTERIOR DEMOLITION SCHEDULE General: •Provide and locate Container to dispose of trash and debris in designated area. Historic Preservation : •Install combination of rubberized and rosin paper floor protection as required •Perform all wall penetration with accredited carpenter •Determine harvestable materials for pending renovation IE; window casing/trim

Lead Base Paint (LBP) and Asbestos containing materials: •Remove visible blistering and or flaking paint from effected Interior and exterior surfaces, wet scrape Lead Base Paint (LBP) surfaces on wood trim, walls and ceilings. Perform Remediation per Federally mandated rules and regulations, disposal of Lead contaminated materials at approved facility. Upon completion of LBP abatement, supply waste manifest and clearance wipe samples.

Remove and Dispose: •Existing storm windows •Existing double hung windows

B. Final Pricing




INTERIOR RENOVATION SCHEDULE Windows, and Trim General: Inspect all Interior/Exterior casings, jambs, window stools throughout unit, refurbish/refinish/repair as determined. Type, Styles and profiles to be equal and equivalent to existing. •Replace existing double hung windows Reconstruct interior areas to include windows in all common living areas as per the following scope of work. Furnish and Install New Typical Window: •Remove existing wood window sashes, salvage for storage as directed by Project Manager •Remove existing window pulley rope or spring pulley system •Abate both interior and exterior existing wood trim down to wood substrate on all windows. •Abate exterior existing wood trim down to wood substrate on front and side entry pilasters, trim and crown. •Repair existing wood trim using SHPO approved methods. •Install Lapage Special WH-11 double hung window, split sash, SDL, HD 5/8”Muttins, Low E/ Argon or similar model with exterior screen. •Install Lapage Special WH-11 transom window, fixed sash, SDL, HD 5/8”Muttins, Low E/ Argon or similar model . •Finish coat on window interior trim with semi-gloss latex enamel

Finish Clean: Upon completion of all renovation work performed, clean all interior living and storage areas to “turn over” standard subject to final inspection and approval by Project/Site Manager EXTERIOR RENOVATION SCHEDULE

Landscape Protection:

Protect and landscape material from Construction activities, will replace any damaged material due to exterior activities.

B. Final Pricing




Price Schedule: Wall Works USA, Inc. proposes to perform and complete the scope or work as outlined conforming to all applicable codes, standards and methods in consideration of : 17 Wood Window Replacements 1 Wood Window Transom Replacement 2 Exterior Wood Entry Door Pilaster Restoration TOTAL $46,200.00 Unit price shall be considered uniform and specific to property for all house types contained within as specific to unit matrix submitted by OWNER for the aforementioned property. Any subsequent revision to the property matrix may necessitate re-evaluation and unit price addendum to original proposal. Unit price shall remain in effect for two years from ratification of contract. Wall Works USA, Inc. reserves the option of adjusting contract price to reflect increases in direct costs associated with labor and materials on each anniversary date of ratification thereafter. Increases shall be mutually agreed and adopted not to exceed 3% of total contract value annually. Wall Works USA, Inc. will submit to OWNER a schedule of values specific to each property, (contract). Progress billing for work in process will be submitted monthly for remittance as approved by the Regional Property /Project Manager for the OWNER.

B. Final Pricing

Appendix C. Before & After Energy Reports




A RESNET Certified Home Energy Professional Company

Property Information Job #: bd-0004

Wallworks USA Test In Date:

9751 Gunston Road Test Out Date:

Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060 Inspector:

Blower Door Test Test In Test Out

Pre-test Baseline -2.53 Pre-test Baseline

Actual Can't Reach Fan Ring: Open Actual Can't Reach Fan Ring:

Avg. Avg.CFM CFM CFM CFM

#1 3570 3575 #1#2 3575 #2#3 3590 #3#4 3565 #4#5 3575 #5

Overall, this house is very leaky. Repairing/replacing the current windows along with the addition of interior storm windows will reduce the amount of air leakage, but not significantly. There are other structural issues, which are outside the scope of this renovation, that can significantly reduce the amount of air leakage, if addressed.

BLOWER DOOR TEST SHEET

Contractor:

Address:

City, State, Zip:

Pressurize De-pressurize

Comments

January 15, 2013


TBD

Randy Swartz

Finding Solutions to Make Your Home Energy Efficient, Durable and a Healthy Place to Live

Appendix C

C. Before & After Energy Reports




Thermal Images Test In 9751 Gunston Road, Ft. Belvoir

Window #3

Window #12

Air leakage through bottom sash. This condition is basically across the board with windows in the house. Fix: If restoring/replacing original windows, ensure that new seals are installed to bottom of sash.

Appendix C





A RESNET Certified Home Energy Professional Company

Property Information Job #: bd-0004

Wallworks USA Test In Date:

9751 Gunston Road Test Out Date:

Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060 Inspector:

Blower Door Test Test In Test Out

Pre-test Baseline -2.53 Pre-test Baseline -1.62

Actual Can't Reach Fan Ring: Open Actual Can't Reach Fan Ring: Open

Avg. Avg.CFM CFM CFM CFM

#1 3570 3575 #1 3555 3556#2 3575 #2 3560#3 3590 #3 3555#4 3565 #4 3550#5 3575 #5 3560

Overall, this house is very leaky. Repairing/replacing the current windows along with the addition of interior storm windows will reduce the amount of air leakage, but not significantly. There are other structural issues, which are outside the scope of this renovation, that can significantly reduce the amount of air leakage, if addressed.

Test-Out CommentsOverall house air leakage remained the same, even though the leakage at the windows was significantlyreduced by the installation of interior storm windows. More air was drawn into the house through areas such as the attic hatch, bathroom vent fans and areas in basement.This house could benefit even more from air sealing in the basement and attic. A door should exist toseparate the basement from the living area. The attic hatch should have foam gasketing installed to sealthe door and at least R-38 insulation attached to the backside. Crawlspace door in basement should havefoam gasketing installed. Air sealing and duct sealing in the crawlspace would be beneficial.

Test-In Comments

January 15, 2013


May 11, 2013

Randy Swartz

BLOWER DOOR TEST SHEET

Contractor:

Address:

City, State, Zip:


Finding Solutions to Make Your Home Energy Efficient, Durable and a Healthy Place to Live

Appendix C





Thermal Images 9751 Gunston Road, Ft. Belvoir

Window #3 - Test In

Window #12 - Test In

Window #3 - Test Out

Window #12 - Test Out

New Window

This is the new "experimental" window in the downstairs bedroom. No air leakage present.

As can be seen from these images, the air leakage at each of these windows has been significantly reduced. These two windows represent what is the current condition of all windows in the remainder of the original part of the house.

Appendix C





Thermal Images (cont'd) 9751 Gunston Road, Ft. Belvoir

Corner of Addition

Attic Hatch

This image represents the massive amount of air leakage infiltrating through the attic hatch.

This image shows a corner of the addition that was caulked at the baseboard shoe molding. Even though I do not have a "before" image, there was a large amount of air leakage in this area prior to sealing.

Appendix C


Appendix D. Environmental Analysis




Appendix D

D. Environmental Analysis




Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D





Appendix D


Appendix E. Daily Logs




Mon

PROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 1/28/2013

CONTRACTOR Project Manager Report # 1 Gerald S. Alden

WORK PERFORMED TODAYNUMBER TRADE HRS

1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 8

WAS A JOB SAFETY MEETING HELD THIS DATE? Yes TOTAL WORK HRS ON JOB SITE, 8(If YES attach copy of the meeting minutes) THIS DATE, INCL CON'T SHEETS

WERE THERE ANY LOST TIME ACCIDENTS THIS DATE? No(If YES attach copy of completed OSHA report) CUMULATIVE TOTAL OF WORK 0

WAS CRANE/MANLIFT/TRENCHING/SCAFFOLD/HV ELEC/HIGH WORK/ HAZMAT WORK DONE? No HRS FROM PREVIOUS REPORT

(If YES attach statement or checklist showing inspection performed.) TOTAL WORK HOURS FROM

WAS HAZARDOUS MATERIAL/WASTE RELEASED INTO THE ENVIRONMENT? No START OF CONSTRUCTION 8(If YES attach description of incident and proposed action.)

Schedule LIST SAFETY ACTIONS TAKEN TODAY/SAFETY INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED SAFETY REQUIREMENTSActivity No. HAVE BEEN MET.

Schedule Submittal # Description of Equipment/Material ReceivedActivity No.

CONSTRUCTION AND PLANT EQUIPMENT ON JOB SITE TODAY. INDICATE HOURS USED AND SCHEDULE ACTIVITY NUMBER.Schedule Owner Description of Construction Equipment Used Today (incl Make and Model) Hours Used

Activity No.

Ladders

Schedule REMARKSActivity No.

Gerald S.Alden January 28, 2013CONTRACTOR/ SUPERINTENDENT DATE

MAX TEMP MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

WORK LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

EQUIPMENT/MATERIAL RECEIVED TODAY TO BE INCORPORATED IN JOB (INDICATE SCHEDULE ACTIVITY NUMBER)

Site protection installed in the Kitchen and basement stair locations. Window #1 removed for rehabilitation.

PM WEATHER

Wallworks USA Production Report(ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY)

WALLWORKS

Gerber Village 9751 Gunston Road

EMPLOYERFirst floor Windows Numbers 1 thru 8 Clockwise Wallworks

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs








WAS A JOB SAFETY MEETING HELD THIS DATE? TOTAL WORK HRS ON JOB SITE, 8(If YES attach copy of the meeting minutes) THIS DATE, INCL CON'T SHEETS


WAS CRANE/MANLIFT/TRENCHING/SCAFFOLD/HV ELEC/HIGH WORK/ HAZMAT WORK DONE? No HRS FROM PREVIOUS REPORT

(If YES attach statement or checklist showing inspection performed.) TOTAL WORK HOURS FROM





Activity No.

Ladders






Removed blinds and stored same in safe location. Removed trim.

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



Appendix E

E. Daily Logs










WAS CRANE/MANLIFT/TRENCHING/SCAFFOLD/HV ELEC/HIGH WORK/ HAZMAT WORK DONE? No HRS FROM PREVIOUS REPORT 16 (If YES attach statement or checklist showing inspection performed.) TOTAL WORK HOURS FROM





Activity No.

Ladders






Removed blinds and stored same in safe location. Removed trim.

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



Appendix E

E. Daily Logs






sunny/windy 57 46WORK PERFORMED TODAY

NUMBER TRADE HRS1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 8








Activity No.

Ladders






Ordered pulleys, chain and window guides.

PM WEATHER sunny


WALLWORKS



Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




FriPROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 2/1/2013


cloudy/windy 36 29WORK PERFORMED TODAY


WAS A JOB SAFETY MEETING HELD THIS DATE? no TOTAL WORK HRS ON JOB SITE, 4(If YES attach copy of the meeting minutes) THIS DATE, INCL CON'T SHEETS







Activity No.

Ladders


Gerald S.Alden February 1, 2013CONTRACTOR/ SUPERINTENDENT DATE

Wallworks

PM WEATHER snow


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERFirst floor Windows Numbers 1 thru 8 Clockwise

Removed windows #2, #3 and #4 for remediation. Covered openings with plywood.




Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




monPROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 2/4/2013


cloudy/windy 38 30WORK PERFORMED TODAY


WAS A JOB SAFETY MEETING HELD THIS DATE? yes TOTAL WORK HRS ON JOB SITE, 5(If YES attach copy of the meeting minutes) THIS DATE, INCL CON'T SHEETS







Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

PM WEATHER cloudy


WALLWORKS






Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




tuePROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 2/5/2013


sunny 42 18WORK PERFORMED TODAY


WAS A JOB SAFETY MEETING HELD THIS DATE? NO TOTAL WORK HRS ON JOB SITE, 6(If YES attach copy of the meeting minutes) THIS DATE, INCL CON'T SHEETS







Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

PM WEATHER sunny


WALLWORKS



Removed windows #5, #6, #7 & #8 for remediation. Covered openings with plywood.




Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




wedPROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 2/6/2013




WAS A JOB SAFETY MEETING HELD THIS DATE? No TOTAL WORK HRS ON JOB SITE, 4(If YES attach copy of the meeting minutes) THIS DATE, INCL CON'T SHEETS







Activity No.

Ladders






Core Contracting walked jobsite. Lead remediation Specialist.

PM WEATHER sunny


WALLWORKS



Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




thurPROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 2/7/2013











Activity No.

Ladders






Envirotex walked jobsite. Lead Remediation Specialist

PM WEATHER sunny


WALLWORKS



Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




friPROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 2/8/2013



NUMBER TRADE HRS1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator








Activity No.

Ladders






No Work Performed on site this date.Windows 1 thru 4 being primed and re-glazed at the office.

PM WEATHER sunny


WALLWORKS



Appendix E

E. Daily Logs







1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator








Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS





Windows 5 thru 8 being scraped and dipped.



Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS








Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders







PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERRepairing Frames 1-8 Wallworks

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERRepairing Frames 1-8





Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS







Appendix E

E. Daily Logs








WAS A JOB SAFETY MEETING HELD THIS DATE? no TOTAL WORK HRS ON JOB SITE,

(If YES attach copy of the meeting minutes) THIS DATE, INCL CON'T SHEETS







Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS






Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




TuePROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 2/19/2013



2 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 161 Carpenter 61 4








Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER


Trim removal/sash removal


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERRepairing Frames 1-8/stripping paint from frames Wallworks

EnvirotexAir Monitoring/samples gathered for testing

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs







2 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 161 Carpenter 61 2








Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERRepairing Frames 1-8/stripping paint from frames


Trim removal/sash removal windows 9-17


MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs







2 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 161 Carpenter 61 Technician 2








Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS




Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




Sashes 9-17 removed/transported to office for scraping and stripping/glass repair

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS




Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS







MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER





PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS




Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS





Trim repair windows 9-17


MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS







MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders


Gerald S.Alden March 1, 2013CONTRACTOR/ SUPERINTENDENT DATE

MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER



Window sashes 1-4 returned to jobsite



PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS




Appendix E

E. Daily Logs







1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 81 Carpenter 61 Technician 32 Painters 16








Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER



Window sashes 1-4 returned to jobsite.


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint

Air Monitoring/samples gathered for testingScraping and painting Frames

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs







1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 81 Carpenter 61 Technician 32 Painters 16








Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER



Window sashes 1-4 returned to jobsite.


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




WedPROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 3/6/2013



1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 81 Carpenter1 Technician 32 Painters 16








Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




Windows 1-4 sashes painted: Frames 1-4 patched and painted.

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER





PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER





PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



Windows 5 thru 8 returned to jobsite. Sashes and frames being painted.




MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs







1 Carpenter/Lead Renovator 81 Carpenter1 Technician2 Painters 16








Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS







MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS







MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS







MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS







MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs




MonPROJECT LOCATION/UNIT 3/18/2013











Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERRe-installing windows 1 thru 8




MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint

Air Monitoring/samples gathered for testingScraping and painting Frames/paint 2nd coat sashes

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS






MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS






MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS






MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS






MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERRe-installing windows 9 thru 17 Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER



Interior storms delivered to job site.

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER



PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders


Gerald S.Alden April 2, 2013CONTRACTOR/ SUPERINTENDENT DATE

MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER



Installation of interior storms to begin. Installation of exterior screens to begin.

PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS


EMPLOYERInstall of interior storms/exterior screens Wallworks

EnvirotexB&W Paint

Air Monitoring/samples gathered for testingPainting interior/exterior trim

Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs















Activity No.

Ladders



MAX TEMP

Wallworks

MIN TEMP AM WEATHER




PM WEATHER


WALLWORKS



EnvirotexB&W Paint


Appendix E

E. Daily Logs

Appendix F. Project Photographs




F. Project Photographs

fig 1. Existing wood window and exterior aluminum storm




fig 2. Existing wood window and storm





fig 3. Existing bay windows with aluminum exterior storms.





fig 4. Existing wood window muntins





fig 5. Window sash removal - exterior storm retained for temporary protection





fig 6. Window sash removal - kitchen window





fig 7. Bay windows removed - trim stripped and repainted. Waiting for rehabilitated sashes.





fig 8. Interior jamb work to make both window sashes operable.





fig 9. Existing storm window with noticeable gap in coverage.





fig 10. rope and pulley system. replaced with chains.





fig 11. rehabilitated sashes, reglazed as needed and primed.





fig 12. rehabilitated sashes ready to be re-installed






fig 13. Interior trim remediation. Wet scraped to remove LBP.





fig 14. Exterior dormer windows being stripped of existing paint.





fig 15. Exterior trim before paint removal process





fig 16. remediation in process with protective suit for LBP exposure.





fig 17. Continued trim remediation work with LBP containment measures.





fig 18. trim stripped down to bare wood.





fig 19. trim remediation work.





fig 20. trim remediation work.





fig 21. Exterior stripping on second floor window.





fig 22. Exterior trim stripped with existing exterior storm window.





fig 23. Exterior view - rehabilitated window upon completion, with screen.





fig 24. Exterior view - replacement window upon completion, with screen.





fig 25. Interior view - rehabilitated window upon completion.





fig 26. Interior view - replacement window upon completion.





fig 27. Closeup - rehabilitated window.





fig 28. Closeup - replacement window.




fig 29. Exterior view - completed rehabilitated bay windows.





fig 30. Interior view - completed rehabilitated bay windows with interior storms.






fig 31. rehabilitated window with storm and lower sash raised.





fig 32. rehabilitated window with storm raised. remediated interior trim.

Appendix G. Storm Cut Sheets




INDEXINDEX

DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

PRODUCT CUT SHEET INDEXNUMBER DATE DESCRIPTION

INDEX 09/22/10 INDEX

CP1 COMPRESSION WINDOW, SINGLE

CP2 COMPRESSION WINDOW, DOUBLE, VERTICAL MULLION

CP3 09/22/10 COMPRESSION WINDOW, TRIPLE, VERTICAL MULLION

CP2H COMPRESSION WINDOW, DOUBLE, HORIZONTAL MULLION

CPD1 09/22/10 CP DETAIL, HEAD

CPD2 09/22/10

CPD3 09/22/10

CPD4 09/22/10

CPD5

CP DETAIL, SILL

CP DETAIL, JAMB

CP DETAIL, VERTICAL MULLION

CP DETAIL, HEAD

CP DETAIL, HEAD (AT EXISTING DOUBLE HUNG)

NOTES

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- - -

CP DETAIL, SILL (AT EXISTING DOUBLE HUNG)

CP DETAIL, HORIZONTAL MULLION (AT EXT. DOUBLE HUNG)

09/22/10

09/22/10

09/22/10

CPD6

CPD7

09/22/10

09/22/10

09/22/10

CP DETAIL, JAMB (AT EXISTING DOUBLE HUNG)

09/22/10CPD8

G. Storm Cut Sheets




CP1COMPRESSION WINDOW CONFIGURATIONS

DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

EXISTING WINDOW FRAME

STORM WINDOW ELEVATION

EXISTING FRAME(VERIFY)

EXIS

TIN

G F

RAM

E (V

ERIF

Y)

EXISTING FRAME (VERIFY)

EXIS

TIN

G F

RAM

E (V

ERIF

Y)

CPD1

CPD3

CPD2

G. Storm Cut Sheets





DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET




EXIS

TIN

G F

RAM

E (V

ERIF

Y)


EXIS

TIN

G F

RAM

E (V

ERIF

Y)

CPD1

CPD3

CPD2

CPD4

G. Storm Cut Sheets




COMPRESSION WINDOW CONFIGURATIONS

DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

CP2H

EXISTING WINDOW FRAME EXISTING WINDOW FRAME

G. Storm Cut Sheets







EXIS

TIN

G F

RAM

E (V

ERIF

Y)


EXIS

TIN

G F

RAM

E (V

ERIF

Y)

CPD1


DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

CPD3

CPD2

CPD4

G. Storm Cut Sheets




EXISTINGEXTERIOR

TRIM

EXISTINGCASEMENT

WINDOW HEAD

U-CHANNELSCREWED TO HEADFRAME

REMOVABLESTORMPANEL

EXISTING INTERIORTRIM

EXISTINGJAMB

CPD1COMPRESSION WINDOW CONFIGURATIONS

DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

G. Storm Cut Sheets




EXISTINGEXTERIOR

TRIM

EXISTINGCASEMENT

WINDOW SILL

REMOVABLESTORMPANEL

EXISTINGINTERIORTRIM

EXISTINGJAMB


DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

G. Storm Cut Sheets




EXISTINGEXTERIOR

TRIM

EXISTINGCASEMENT

WINDOW JAMB

SPRING LOADED STORM PANELJAMB (COMPRESS HALFWAY)

REMOVABLESTORM PANEL

EXISTINGINTERIOR

TRIM

EXISTINGJAMB


DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

G. Storm Cut Sheets




LINE OF EXISTINGINTERIOR TRIM BEYOND

SPRING LOADEDSTORM PANEL JAMB

REMOVABLE STORMPANEL

DOUBLE VERTICAL MULLION(ATTACHED TO EXISTINGHEAD & SILL WITH POCKETSCREWS)

EXISTING CASEMENTWINDOW MULLION

EXISTING SILL BELOW


DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

G. Storm Cut Sheets





G. Storm Cut Sheets





DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

G. Storm Cut Sheets





DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

EXISTINGEXTERIOR

TRIM

EXISTINGWINDOW JAMB

SPRING LOADED STORM PANELJAMB (COMPRESS HALFWAY)

REMOVABLESTORM PANEL

EXISTINGINTERIOR

TRIM

EXISTING JAMB

G. Storm Cut Sheets




U-CHANNELSCREWED TO HEADFRAME

REMOVABLESTORMPANEL

SINGLEHORIZONTALMULLION


DATE: 09/22/10

PRODUCT CUT SHEET

G. Storm Cut Sheets




Window Systems, LLC

Innerglass ®

The Compression-Fit Advantage

Window Systems, LLC

Innerglass ®


15 Herman Drive

Innerglass Interior Storm Windows: Maintain the charm & beauty of your

existing windows Significantly reduce heating & cooling bills Compression-Fit to eliminate drafts completely Greatly reduce outside noise Are perfect for enclosing screen porches Save energy, save money & save history!

Our windows are available in

3 colors: almond, brown & white

G. Storm Cut Sheets




Window Systems, LLC

Innerglass ®


www.stormwindows.com

G. Storm Cut Sheets




Why Innerglass Windows?Thank you for your interest in Innerglass Window Systems, LLC, makers of The Perfect Storm! Our custom-made windows are the most affordable, convenient and energy efficient way to upgrade your existing windows. The Innerglass window is not a replacement window, nor is it a traditional storm window. Instead, it brings together the benefits of both while eliminating the difficulties each of these options can present. Innerglass windows are significantly more effective at insulating your home and lowering your heating and cooling bills than a traditional outside storm window, without the expense of installing replacement windows.

The Innerglass window is a vinyl-framed, glass interior window that mounts on the inside of your primary window using our Compression-Fit technology. It seals tightly, eliminating drafts, condensation and outside noise. The Compression-Fit Advantage eliminates the need to install a track for the window to sit in, thus providing an airtight fit, even for windows that are not perfectly square. Innerglass windows are so quick and easy to install, most people do it themselves. They also come with options like Low E glazing, tempered glass, laminated or Plexiglass to further improve their efficiency.

Because there is no carpentry required to install Innerglass windows, you avoid all of the headaches associated with installing replacement or traditional storm windows. Not only that, our windows do not disturb the integrity of your existing windows, so they are perfect for historic renovation, condominiums and commercial applications. Our windows are available in three colors and fit so well with your existing windows, they are virtually invisible, especially from the outside.

Innerglass Windows pass all the tests!Our windows were tested for air infiltration by theVermont Energy Investment Corporation for the This Old House television show. At wind speeds of 25 mph, our windows performed 7X better than the industry standard!

Innerglass windows were also tested by Intertek Testing Services for their noise reduction capabilities. Our windows performed so well that we earned a qualification which allowed us to supply windows to homes and business around the construction sites during the Boston Central Artery Project. The noise reduction was so dramatic that even after our windows were hermetically sealed and tested again, those results were only a fraction better that when they were testedwithout being sealed. Now that’s The Compression-Fit Advantage! “

”What a difference the windows have made! The soundproofing is amazing. We now have to look outside to tell if the wind is blowing. - Arthur Z.

G. Storm Cut Sheets




Compression-Fit makes it Easy to InstallInstalling Innerglass windows is literally as easy as 1-2-3!

1) Cut the header channel to fit the inside

of the top of your window frame and

secure the channel in place.

2) Squeeze the compression sides

in to insert the top of the

window into the header

channel, then continue

pressing the sides in from

top to bottom as you push

it in place.

3) Drill a 3/32” hole on each side,

in front of the window about

1/3 of the way up from the sill

and insert the blocking pins.

Projects CompletedThis Old House – Salem US Military Academy at West Point Boston Central Artery Project Olana Mansion Grand Portage National Monument Coe Hall Museum Rutgers University

Butler McCook House Lafayette County Courthouse Rutland Free Library Eliot HotelAvon Congregational Church Granville Town Hall Sunnydale Academy Fuss & O’Neil Engineers

Southampton Historical Society Wickham Library Little Red Schoolhouse Bayside Historical Society Raintree B & B Wiremold Corporation Fort McHenry Huntington House Museum Hotel Fauchere

Germantown Jewish Center Cambridge Hotel Henry Whitfield Museum House & Garden TVE. Windsor Historical Society Penniman Architects Winvian Seth Bird House Saint Luke’s Metcalf House

EMS Inc. Ferndale Historical Society Van Syckle’s Tavern Canton Museum St. Francis ChurchAllen Mansion Canajoharie Library Mahopac Schools Binbrook Memorial Hall Pettibone Tavern

Scott’s Bluff National Monument Mansion Ridge Loughry & Lindsey LLC Altnaveigh InnWirth County Courthouse Fort Laramie National Historic Site Antietam National Battlefield

Hilltown Historical Society Bixby Library & Museum S. Windsor Historical Society

“”We had all 21 windows done before supper, I couldn’t be happier. - Marilyn C.

G. Storm Cut Sheets




1-800-743-6207www.stormwindows.com

Compression-fitsto any window, no

matter how crooked!

Preserve the history. Keep the original windows.Innerglass windows are “The Perfect Storm” for insulating historic homes and buildings. The standards that define a “historic” home or buildingare very specific. The original window units are part of the building’s historic integrity and replacement of these windows is strongly discouraged. The guidelines specifically say, “If the original windows are in place, repair and retrofit of these windows is preferred.” That’s where Innerglass comes in. Because our windows compression-fit inside of the stops of the primary window, there is no need to disturb the integrity of the original windows. And because each of our windows are custom made to fit the exact measurements of each window, they are extremely efficient for windows that are no longer square, which isvery often the case in historic homes and buildings.

Innerglass windows are also a great way to insulate condominium windows, which can often be significantly less efficient than a window you would find in a house.

“

”

Your windows are everything we hoped they would be. They are attractive and fit very well with the architecture.- Chuck P.

The Fort McHenry ProjectThe Fort McHenry Project

G. Storm Cut Sheets




Window Systems, LLC

Innerglass ®


Innerglass gives you optionsInnerglass Windows Systems, LLC also produces Double-Hungand Slider windows that fit inside of your existing window. We are also proud to offer interior compression-fit screens and full opening exterior screens for your existing windows. For more information on our various window and screen options, pleasecall us at (800) 743-6207.

All Innerglass windows are available with hard coat pyrolyticLow-E glass. This advanced technology further enhances energyconservation and efficiency by allowing visible light through butacting like a heat mirror, doubling the R-value by reflecting theroom heat and your body heat back inside in the winter, and reflecting the sun’s heat out in the summer. Low E glass also blocks most of the UV light and solar heat that can damage furniture and carpeting.

The Eliot Hotel ProjectThe Eliot Hotel Project

“”

I am a woman with no carpentry experience and I completed the measuring and installation myself. It was a breeze.- Jean K.

LOW-EGLASS

Summer heatreflected out

Visible light passesthrough

UV lightreflected

Winter heat reflectedback inside

©2010 Innerglass Window Systems, LLC

G. Storm Cut Sheets

Appendix H. Lepage Cut Sheets




DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS

H. Lepage Cut Sheets




DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS





DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS





DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS





DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS - TRANSOMS





DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS - PICTURE UNITS





DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS





WOOD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW WITH

908 BRICKMOULD CASING AND STANDARD SILL NOSING





WOOD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW WITH

908 BRICKMOULD CASING, STANDARD SILL NOSING AND

A HALF SCREEN OPTION





WOOD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG PICTURE UNIT WITH

908 BRICKMOULD CASING AND STANDARD SILL NOSING





WOOD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG TRANSOM WITH

908 BRICKMOULD CASING





WOOD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG

HEAD JAMB OPTIONS






SILL NOSING OPTIONS






HORIZONTAL MULLING OPTIONS






VERTICAL MULLING OPTIONS






BAY AND BOW VERTICAL MULLING OPTIONS





ALUMINUM CLAD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW WITH

NAILING FIN AND NO SILL NOSING





ALUMINUM CLAD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW WITHNAILING

FIN, NO SILL NOSING AND THE HALF SCREEN OPTION





ALUMINUM CLAD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG PICTURE UNIT WITH

NAILING FIN AND NO SILL NOSING





ALUMINUM CLAD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG TRANSOM WITH

NAILING FIN





ALUMINUM CLAD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW

HEAD JAMB AND SILL OPTIONS





ALUMINUM CLAD 1 3/4" SASH DOUBLE HUNG

HORIZONTAL MULLING OPTIONS






VERTICAL MULLING OPTIONS






BAY AND BOW VERTICAL MULLING OPTIONS


















Appendix I. Meeting Presentation




I. Meeting Presentation

UNCLASSIFIED 8/21/2013

1

FORT BELVOIR WINDOWS IN HISTORIC FAMILY HOUSING

SECTION 106 CONSULTATION December 20, 2012





UNCLASSIFIED

Welcome / Introductions Status of Housing on Belvoir (FBRC) Historic Housing Overview (DPW/FBRC) Existing Programmatic Agreement (DPW)

Review of Current Process

Historic Windows (DPW/FBRC) Existing Condition of Historic Windows History of Past Maintenance/Repair Major Concerns

Pilot House Project (FBRC) Proposed Scope of Work Interior Storm Windows

Objectives of Pilot House & Consultation Process (DPW/FBRC) Data Collection & Factors for Comparison Decision Process

Future Consultation & Submission Schedule (DPW) Site Visit (FBRC/DPW)

8/21/2013 2

AGENDA





UNCLASSIFIED

To Discuss the Current Status of Historic Housing at Fort Belvoir

To the Discuss Historic Windows in Housing

To Discuss the Proposed Pilot House Project & Project Objectives

To Define the Next Steps in the Consultation Process

To Establish A Future Consultation & Review Schedule to Achieve, in

Accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, the Garrison

Commander’s Intent to Provide, in a Timely Manner, Operational

Windows that are Historically/Aesthetically Compatible with the Fort

Belvoir Historic District

8/21/2013 3

PURPOSE

15 NOV 09





UNCLASSIFIED

Status of Housing at Fort Belvoir

• Fort Belvoir Garrison and Fort Belvoir Residential Communities (FBRC) Partnership

• Mission -To improve the quality of life for service members and their families

• The Partnership Structure – Clark – Fort Belvoir Garrison – Fort Belvoir Residential Communities Initiative (RCI)

8/21/2013 4





UNCLASSIFIED

Accomplishments & Innovations

Belvoir Town Center





UNCLASSIFIED

Market-Leading Amenities

Woodlawn Village

Neighborhood Center

Fairfax Village

Neighborhood Center





UNCLASSIFIED

Tradition of Firsts

Wounded Warrior Homes

Patriot Home Freedom Home





UNCLASSIFIED

Award Winning – 40 Awards to Date!

Design & Planning

Environmental Stewardship

Construction






9

Historic Housing at Fort Belvoir 3 Historic Villages, Gerber, Belvoir, & Jadwin Loop

144 historic housing units

Primary style is Colonial Revival

Constructed between 1920 -1939

All historic housing units are contributing resources to the National Register (NR) eligible Fort Belvoir Historic District (FBHD)

District also includes three historic landscapes identified during the update to the NR nomination

FBHD consists of 213 resources with the majority managed under privatized housing

All historic housing is managed through a Programmatic Agreement established in 2003

Historic Housing Overview






10

Belvoir Village 59 single-family homes, developed in the 1930s by the Quartermaster General Four basic plan types, all using the same form and materials Village also features Commanding Officer's Quarters No.1, most prominent residence on Fort Belvoir Units utilize exterior storm windows As part of privatization, garages were enclosed, new kitchens installed, & interiors renovated


Typical Belvoir Village Housing Unit






11

Gerber Village Gerber Village consists of 64 single-family homes and six duplexes, built during the 1930s as non-commissioned officers' quarters The village features two basic plan types, all of which were expanded per concepts included in the Programmatic Agreement As part of privatization Gerber Village units received rear additions to provide more space for residents All historic units feature a mixture of historic and replacement windows Additional in-fill units and garages were added to the village and were designed to fit appropriately within the district


Typical Gerber Village Housing Unit






12

Jadwin Loop Village Jadwin Loop consists of 6 single family units and 5 multi-family units The single family units, constructed in the 1920s, are wood frame construction, and were fully rehabilitated under privatization, including restoration of exterior character-defining features The 5 multi-family units, built in 1939, are brick construction and were designed to match the Colonial Revival style found elsewhere on post Additional in-fill units have been added to the village to match the historic multi-family units


Jadwin Loop Single Family Unit

Jadwin Loop Multi-Family Unit






13

In 2003, Programmatic Agreement established to take into account the effects of privatization on military housing at Fort Belvoir

Housing PA established stipulations for the management and maintenance of historic housing on Belvoir

Stipulations dictated management conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards

PA provides exemptions from review for some activities associated with maintenance and emergencies

All other proposed projects are reviewed by Belvoir CRM

CRM conducts coordination with SHPO and other consulting parties as required by PA

Privatized Partner and Fort Belvoir jointly are required to submit annual report of activities conducted to the SHPO and the Council

o This report includes those items exempted through the PA

Existing Programmatic Agreement






14

Existing Conditions Repairs prior to privatization consisted of regular maintenance and emergency repairs Since privatization, windows have continued to receive regular maintenance and emergency repairs Due to budget limitations, the Partnership made the decision to defer comprehensive work on historic windows in order to address other issues deemed more pressing by residents As a result, windows have never undergone a full rehabilitation since original construction Lead-based paint has been encapsulated in windows Many windows are painted shut and cannot be opened

Historic Windows






15

Major Concerns Residents in historic districts have expressed major dissatisfaction with historic windows

Life safety – emergency egress ( windows painted shut/mechanical systems failure) Life safety – lead paint & mold Natural ventilation – difficult to operate or inoperable, inconvenience of exterior storm windows Energy performance – homes are drafty Aesthetic concerns

DPW has also expressed similar concerns regarding window operability, paint failure and energy efficiency

Historic Windows






16

Alternatives Considered Garrison & FBRC have worked together to indentify two options:

Historic Windows

Rehabilitation Rehabilitate existing trim and sashes (includes LBP Abatement)

Replacement Rehabilitate existing trim, replace current windows with a new, but aesthetically similar model






17

Scope of Project FBRC and Fort Belvoir will rehabilitate the historic windows of a single house in Gerber Village Exterior storm windows will be removed and replaced with new interior storm windows Project will also include the installation of a single replacement window in the unit

House Selected: 9751 Gunston Rd Fort Belvoir has provided all consulting parties with a copy of the scope of work and cut sheets FBRC has selected a qualified contractor to perform the rehabilitation and replacement work SOW requires that all work be performed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation

Pilot House Project

Typical Gerber Village Housing Unit






18

Goal of Pilot House Project To assess the installation time, the operability/performance, the aesthetics, the energy efficiency, the noise reduction, and the cost of rehabilitation and compare those factors against replacement

Project will be documented through-out the entire rehabilitation process

An assessment comparing rehabilitation, replacement and/or a combination of those activities shall be developed based on the findings of the pilot house

Goal to find a window that: Improves the quality of life for residents of Fort Belvoir

Maintains architectural integrity of Belvoir’s historic district

Minimizes downtime and lost income to the project

Objectives of Pilot House & Consultation Process





UNCLASSIFIED

Consultation Process

Proposed Consultation Process Fort Belvoir and FBRC will invite consulting parties to see completed pilot house and

provide comments on alternatives

Fort Belvoir and FBRC will meet with SHPO to discuss the results of the pilot house project and potential paths forward based on the findings

The installation will also hold internal meetings to discuss the best way ahead to meet the Garrison Commander’s Intent

Fort Belvoir will continue consultation with the SHPO and all other consulting parties, as appropriate, dependent on the results of these discussions and comments received on pilot house project

8/21/2013 19





UNCLASSIFIED

Discussion on Draft Consultation Schedule

Proposed Future Consultation & Objective Schedule • December 20, 2012 – Initial Consulting Parties Meeting – Discussion of Pilot House

(Fort Belvoir 10:00 AM)

• January 14, 2013 (Estimated Start Date) – Start Pilot House Rehabilitation • February 18, 2013 (Base on Estimated Start Date) – Completed Pilot House Site

Visit – Meeting to Walkthrough & Review Completed Pilot House (Fort Belvoir) • March 18, 2013 – Meeting with SHPO, FBRC and DPW – Review of Pilot House

Findings (Fort Belvoir) • April 18, 2013 – Consulting Parties Meeting – To Consult on Proposed Alternative

Selected (Fort Belvoir)

• TBD – Additional Consultation Meetings and Submittals as Required

• December 20, 2013 – Complete Consultation on Selected Alternative

8/21/2013 20






21

Site Visit – Gerber Village Pilot House






22

QUESTIONS

Kelly Lease Acting Compliance Branch Chief

703-806-0020 [email protected]

Christopher Daniel Cultural Resources Support


Patrick McLaughlin Environmental & Natural Resources Division Chief


Appendix J. Scope of Work




Fort Belvoir RCI Window Rehabilitation Specification The RKtects Studio, Inc.

WINDOW REHABILITATION: 08600-1

Section 08600: WINDOW REHABILITATION I. GENERAL

A. Work of this Section includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Rehabilitation of historic windows to a weathertight, operable condition. 2. Installation of new interior storm windows. 3. Related Wood Trim, Plaster Repair and Painting work.

B. Contractor Qualifications Window restoration work shall be performed by a firm having not less than 5

years successful experience in comparable restoration projects and employing personnel skilled in the restoration processes and operations required.

1. All work must be done per the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, consistent with the Treatment Standards for Rehabilitation (the Standards).

2. Qualifications of company and superintendent/lead carpenter shall be submitted for review.

3. Contractor shall have experience with the methods described in “Preservation Brief #9: The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows.”

C. Pre-installation Conference:

1. Prior to start of work, meet at site, under Contractor’s direction, to review sash removal, paint stripping and glazing procedures and coordination with other work. 2. Contractor to observe all precautions and follow all regulatory requirements with respect to the removal of lead paint.

D. Submittals

1. Product data for storm windows, screens, glazing and any replacement hardware. 2. Product data for caulk, paint and epoxy consolidants. 3. Replacement milled sash and trim samples. 4. Replacement glass samples. 5. Additional samples may be required based on review of product data.

J. Scope of Work






E. Lead Based Paint Remediation

1. Prior to beginning work, install rubberized and rosin paper floor protection in immediate work area. Install plastic barriers secured to walls and ceiling to contain Lead contamination. 2. Install protection for all exterior landscape, and means to collect lead paint from the perimeter of the house. 3. Perform all remediation per federally mandated rules and regulations to RRP standards, including disposal of contaminated materials at an approved facility. 4. Upon completion of remediation efforts, supply waste manifest and clearance wipe samples. 5. Upon completion of project, remove all protection and repair finishes as required, including exterior plantings. 6. Take air samples to ensure unacceptable lead levels are not present in the house.

II. PRODUCTS

A. Storm Windows: 1. Vinyl frame, interior storm windows, by Innerglass Window Systems LLC, or approved equal. (www.stormwindows.com 800.743.6207).

a. Double Hung Window, with bottom operable lower sash. b. Custom sized to fit each window opening, matching meeting rail.

2. Air Infiltration a. ASTM E 283-83, Vermont Energy Investment Corp., November 1995. Air infiltration with 25 mph wind pressure measured at 0.07 cfm, exceeding the test standard of 0.50 cfm.

3. Noise Reduction a. ASTM E90-90, Intertek Testing Services, June 1997. Tested to exceed test standard of STC 27.

III. EXECUTION

A. Remove and dispose of existing storm windows. B. Remove sash from opening, including interior window stops and parting bead.

1. Board up window to secure and make weathertight while sash

J. Scope of Work






is removed. 2. Remove glazing putty and window glass, numbering panes and sash for proper re-installation of original glazing. 3. Remove all sash hardware, strip all paint and recondition to working order. 4. Strip all paint from sash, using the gentlest means possible, following the guidelines in the Standards. 5. Repair sash as required by epoxy consolidation or dutchman patches. Mill new replacement sash members using cedar, or approved hardwood. 6. Re-glaze sash, replacing all old glazing putty with new, installing original glazing in original openings. Replace any broken glass with new. 7. Prime coat and paint sash with a semi-gloss latex enamel. Any raw wood to be primed and receive at minimum two finish coats. Color to match original.

C. On frame, open blindstop at jambs and remove pulley wheel and rope. 1. Clean and replace ropes with new chains, weighting for proper operation. 2. Vacuum out jamb pockets and sills to remove loose paint. 3. Strip paint from frame and trim, interior and exterior, first wet scraping to remove all visible blistering and flaking paint. 4. Repair as required by epoxy consolidation or dutchman patches. Mill new replacement frame and trim members to match existing as required, only if members are missing or deteriorated beyond repair. 5. Prime and paint frame and trim, including brickmold, using latex semi-gloss enamel. Re-caulk as required.

D. Re-install sash, installing new stops and parting beads as required. Ensure that lower sash operates smoothly and is weathertight.

1. Inspect frame for proper flashing, and install where required. E. Re-install refinished sash locks. F. Install new interior storm windows per manufacturer’s recommendations.

1. Contractor to verify in field all window dimensions and types. 2. All storm windows are to be custom manufactured to exactly match size and style of existing historic window. 3. Parting rails on operable double hung storm windows must align exactly with parting rails of original windows. 4. Windows shall be securely fastened in place to a straight, plumb and level condition without distortion. Final adjustments shall be made according to manufacturer’s instructions.

J. Scope of Work






5. Fastening of storm windows shall be according to manufacturer’s requirements, and shall be done in such a way that the window may be removed with minimal damage to the historic window frame. Only mechanical fasteners shall be used, no adhesives.

G. Install new exterior screen full screen, fiberglass mesh.

END OF SECTION

J. Scope of Work

Appendix K. Window Guide




K. Window Guide

Documents

Historic Wood Window Pilot Rehabilitation€¦ · 4/10/2013 · paned window was too thick compared to the historic windows. in addition, various stakeholders, including fbrc, felt