What Replacement Windows Can’t Replace: The Real Cost of Removing Historic Windows

WALTER SEDOVIC and JILL H. GOTTHELF

Sustainability looks even better

through a restored window.

in this case, windows — without fullyevaluating the consequences. Once au-thentic material is lost, it is lost forever.It does not matter how accurate the re-placement window, it never reflects thenuances of the original.

Taking the Long View

Historic windows possess aesthetic andmaterial attributes that simply cannotbe replaced by modern replacementwindows. Like preserving whole build-ings, restoring historic windows is asolid step forward into the realm ofsustainability. The present approach tosustainability, however, still too oftenfocuses on new construction and issuessuch as “intelligent” windows andenergy efficiency, while overlookingother important, holistic benefits ofpreserving historic windows, such as the following:• Conservation of embodied energy

(i.e., the sum total of the energyrequired to extract raw materials,manufacture, transport, and installbuilding products). Preserving his-toric windows not only conservestheir embodied energy, it also elimi-nates the need to spend energy onreplacement windows. Aluminumand vinyl — the materials used inmany replacement windows — andnew glass itself possess levels of em-bodied energy that are among thehighest of most building materials(Fig. 1).2

• Reduction of environmental costs.Reusing historic windows reducesenvironmental costs by eliminatingthe need for removal and disposal ofexisting units, as well as manufactureand transportation of new units.Also, many replacement units aremanufactured with such materials as

25

For all the brilliance reflected in effortsto preserve historic buildings in the U.S.,the issue of replacing windows ratherthan restoring them remains singularlyunresolved. Proponents on both sides ofthe issue may easily become frustratedby a dearth of useful data, as well asconflicting information, or misinforma-tion, promulgated by manufacturers.Indeed, it often seems that many preser-vation practitioners and building own-ers remain in the sway of advertisingclaiming that the first order of businessis to replace old windows. In the con-text of preservation and sustainability,however, it is well worth reconsideringthis approach.

Sustainability and Authenticity

In considering alternatives to replacinghistoric windows, one needs to keep inmind two important elements: sustain-ability and authenticity. Sustainability(building green) and historic preserva-tion are a natural marriage, so long asone remains mindful that sustainabilityis not just about energy conservation.1

Preservation and sustainability involvemyriad elements that can work in sym-biotic and synchronized ways toward afavorable outcome. For example, pres-ervation work is more labor- thanmaterial-intensive, which benefits localeconomies; natural ventilation affordedvia operable windows can reduce thesize of mechanical equipment, especiallyof air-conditioning; and salvaging his-toric materials, such as wood sash,obviates the need to harvest live treesand other natural resources for themanufacture of replacement units.

Similarly, retaining and celebratingauthenticity is one key element of anexemplary preservation program. Noone should take lightly the option ofdiscarding authentic historic materials —

Fig. 1. Comparative values of the embodied-energy levels of common building materials.Note that glass and aluminum (i.e., principalcomponents of many replacement windows)are ranked among the highest levels of embod-ied energy, while most historic materials tend topossess much lower levels. Courtesy of TedKesik, Canadian Architect’s Architectural Sci-ence Forum, Perspectives on Sustainability.

26 APT BULLETIN: JOURNAL OF PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY / 36:4, 2005

Fig. 2. Many excellent worksheets are available for calculating payback of replacement windows; this one is produced by the Missouri Department ofNatural Resources. Results of payback calculations often reveal grossly overstated claims. Courtesy of the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.

WHAT REPLACEMENT WINDOWS CAN’T REPLACE 27

Payback

Focusing on windows as the principalsource of heat transfer may lead to theconclusion that windows are moreimportant than, say, insulating the attic,foundation, or walls. While data varysomewhat, up to 25 percent of heatmay be lost through doors and win-dows.15 But when the aforementionedpotential 50 percent loss through infil-tration is taken into account, the totaleffective percentage of heat loss at-tributed to the window units themselveswould be only 12.5 percent. That is arelatively small percentage for a poten-tially large investment, especially whenother options are available.

In actuality, typical window-replace-ment systems offer payback periods thatare often nowhere near manufacturers’claims: the payback of a typical unitcould take as long as 100 years (Fig. 2).16

Heat Loss/Heat Gain

Heat loss is often discussed, but whatabout heat gain? In summer, heat gaincan add significantly to the energy costsassociated with cooling a building.17

Long waveforms within the daylightspectrum that enter through the glassmust be able to exit, or else they de-grade to heat that then must be over-come by the building’s cooling system.18

Low-emittance (“low-e” or “soft low-e”) glass handles this task best, improv-ing thermal performance by virtuallyeliminating infrared (long-wave) radia-tion through the window.19 It accom-plishes this task by allowing short-waveradiation through and reflecting long-wave heat back to its source, while atthe same time providing an appearancethat is virtually clear.20

Low-e glazing can be substituted intoexisting units that are only single-glazedand still achieve important energy sav-ings. Single-pane low-e glass can providea virtually equivalent level of combinedenergy savings as a standard new dou-ble-glazed unit when used in concertwith an existing single-paned sash (e.g.,as a storm or interior sash).21 Replacingpanes of glass, then tightening up thesash and frame, is a very simple andcost-effective way to achieve the desiredwhole-assembly U-value without havingto modify visible light, mullions, or sashweights.22

the value through the center of the glass(the location of the best U-value), notthat of the sash nor the average of theentire unit.6 To be sure that data arebeing presented appropriately, requestthe U-values published by the NationalFenestration Rating Council (NFRC),which rate whole-window performance.7

When U-values are offered for theentire window assembly, they often aresignificantly worse (i.e., higher) due toinfiltration around the frame and roughopening.8 In cases where replacementstend to warp and bow over time (andthey do), this factor becomes ever morecrucial.9 It is also important to watchfor comparative analyses: some replace-ment-window manufacturers comparetheir window units to an “equivalent”single-pane aluminum window. Clearly,this is an inappropriate analogy sincethese types of windows are not likely tobe found in a preservation context.

Infiltration of Outside Air

Infiltration of outside air — rather thanheat lost through the glass — is theprincipal culprit affecting energy; it canaccount for as much as 50 percent ofthe total heat loss of a building.10 Whenretrofit windows are installed over orwithin the existing window frame, theargument for preservation already ex-ists: restoring the integrity of the fitbetween the frame and building wallshould be the first component of a pres-ervation approach.

Sash pockets, pulleys, and meetingrails are areas prone to air infiltration indouble-hung units. Yet, several weather-proofing systems for existing windowscan overcome these heat-sapping shortcircuits.11 Replacement-window manu-facturers themselves admit that evenamong replacements, double-hung unitspresent the greatest challenges for con-trolling heat loss because infiltrationoccurs most frequently at sash-to-sashand sash-to-frame interfaces, which arehighly dependent on the quality of theinstallation.12 The energy efficiency ofrestored windows incorporating retrofitcomponents (weatherstripping andweatherseals combining pile, brush,bulb, or “Z” spring seals) can meet andeven exceed the efficiency of replace-ment units.13 This approach is suggestedas the first alternative among green-building advocates.14

vinyl and PVC, whose production isknown to produce toxic by-products.So, while energy savings is green, thevehicle toward its achievement — inthis case, replacement windows — islikely to be the antithesis of green.3

• Economic benefits. Restoration proj-ects are nearly twice as labor-inten-sive as new construction, meaningmore dollars spent go to people, notmaterials. This type of spending, inturn, has the beneficial effect of pro-ducing stronger, more dynamic localeconomies.4

• Ease of maintenance. “Maintenance-free” is a convenient marketing slo-gan; many replacement windows, inreality, cannot be maintained well orconserved. Vinyl, fiberglass, sealants,desiccants, and coating systems alldegrade, and they are materials thatremain difficult or impossible to re-cycle or conserve.5

• Long-term performance. While man-ufacturers’ warranties have beenlengthened in the past few years (theyare now generally from 2 to 10 years),they still pale in comparison to theactual performance life exhibited inhistoric windows, which can reach 60to 100 years and more, often withjust minimal maintenance.

Clearly, sustainability takes into ac-count more than just the cost of energysavings. It also promotes salient social,economic, and environmental benefits,along with craftsmanship, aesthetics,and the cultural significance of historicfabric. Still, the issue of energy savingsis often used to justify replacement overrestoration, but just how valid is thisargument?

Energy Savings

If the foremost goal for replacing his-toric windows is energy savings, bewareof “facts” presented: they very likelywill be — intentionally or not — skewed,misinformed, or outright fallacious.Window manufacturers universallyboast about low U-values (the measureof the rate of heat loss through a mate-rial or assembly; a U-value is the recip-rocal of an R-value, which is the mea-sure of resistance to heat gain or loss).For example, U-values are often mis-leadingly quoted as the value for theentire window unit, when in fact it is

28 APT BULLETIN: JOURNAL OF PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY / 36:4, 2005

though, that a U-value is not the onlycriterion that determines the relativethermal efficiency of a window. Solarand light transmittance also affectperformance, and they may be benefitwhen low-e laminated glass is selected.27

The benefits of laminated glass, though,go much further when considered partof a comprehensive program to restoreand thermally upgrade historic sash:• Laminated glass offers significantly

higher levels of noise abatement thanIG.

• Historic glass may be laminated,offering energy and noise benefitswhile maintaining an authentic finish.

• Laminated glass is far easier and lessexpensive to procure and install andallows for field cutting.

• It offers superior safety and securityfeatures.

• Laminated glass may be equippedwith low-e glazing to help offset heatgain.

• Historic sash, both metal and wood,can be outfitted with laminated glasswithout modifying or replacing mul-lions and frame elements (somethingthat would be required by the installa-tion of significantly thicker IG units).

• Condensation is reduced as a result ofthe internal thermal break of lami-nated glass.

• A variety of features (UV protection,polarization, translucency, etc.) canbe incorporated as layers withinlaminated glass. Efforts to achieve the

Insulated Glass

Replacement windows nearly alwaysincorporate insulated glass (IG) units.The effectiveness of an IG unit is greatlydependent on the depth of the airspacebetween inner and outer panes, as wellas on the nature, type, and amount ofdesiccant and seals employed aroundthe unit perimeter.23 While manufactur-ing techniques for IG units have contin-ued to improve, when IG units fail, theyare difficult and time-consuming toreplace.24

The additional weight and thicknessof IG units preclude their use as retrofitsin historic sashes of either wood ormetal. Indeed, to compensate for theirheft, virtually all IG replacement win-dow mullions, sash, and frames arebulkier than their historic counterparts.The result is that visible daylight levelsare reduced by 15 percent or more andviews are interrupted.25 Reducing day-light and negatively affecting views areexplicitly not consistent with a sustain-able approach (Fig. 3).

Laminated Glass as an Alternative

Laminated glass remains an often-overlooked alternative to IG units,perhaps because of the industry’s focuson marketing it as “safety” glass. Whilelaminated glass cannot compete withtechnologically advanced, complex IGunits, it does offer enhanced U-valuesfor monolithic glass without having tomaterially alter the mullions of thehistoric sash into which it is beingfitted.26 It is important to recognize,

same results in IG units through theuse of applied films (as opposed to anintegral layer within the glass) hasbeen shown to greatly reduce the lifeof double-glazed units by inhibitingthe movement of their seals.28

Performance and Material Quality

A hallmark of sustainability is long-term performance. Intrinsic within thatpremise are issues about material qual-ity, assembly, and conservability. Asnoted above, some material choices(e.g., PVC) incorporated into replace-ment-window units are inherently notable to be conserved.29 When the mate-rial degrades, it then becomes necessaryto replace the replacement.30

One of the great virtues of historicwindows is the quality of the wood withwhich they were constructed. Historicwindows incorporate both hardwoodsand softwoods that were often harvestedfrom unfertilized early-growth stock.Such wood has a denser, more naturallyoccurring grain structure than what isgenerally available today from second-growth stock or fertilized tree farms.Also, historically, greater concern wasgiven to milling methods, such as quar-ter- or radial sawing. The resultingwindow performs with greater stabilitythan its modern counterpart. This alonehas far-reaching benefits, from minimiz-ing dimensional change, to holding apaint coating, to securing mechanicalfasteners.

No amount of today’s staples, glue,finger-splices, and heat welds can matchthe performance of traditional joinery.31

Similar comparisons could be made ofthe quality of hardware employed inreplacement windows, such as spring-loaded balances and plastic lockinghardware; they cannot compete with thelasting performance and durability ofsuch historic elements as pulley systemsand cast-metal hardware.

Ease of Maintenance

For cleaning windows, traditional sin-gle- and double-hung windows are oftenoutfitted with interior sash stops thatmay be removed readily, allowing forfull access to the interior and exterior, aswell as to the pulley system. Both case-ment and pivot windows are inherentlyvery easy to clean inside and out.

Fig. 3. At left is a drawing of a typical late-nineteenth- to early-twentieth-century six-over-six, double-hung window. At right is a modern “equivalent” replacement. The considerably thicker mullions andframe of the replacement unit (necessitated by the use of insulated glass) result in a nearly 15 per-cent reduction of visible light and views. Drawing by Walter Sedovic Architects.

WHAT REPLACEMENT WINDOWS CAN’T REPLACE 29

10. Ibid.

11. Shapiro and James.

12. Bill Mattinson, Ross DePaola, and DariushArasteh, “What Should I Do About My Win-dows?” Home Energy 19, no. 4 (2002).

13. The growing market for retrofit seals hasresulted in an ever-increasing supply of high-quality weatherstripping products manufac-tured in a variety of materials and configura-tions for application in both typical and non-typical applications.

14. Shapiro and James.

15. Hastings Borough Council, “Have You GotMoney to Burn?” http://www.hastings.gov.uk/energy_efficiency/heat_every_home.aspx#money_to_burn (accessed November 1, 2005).

16. Shapiro and James.

17. Fisette, 68–73.

18. Ibid.

19. The National Energy Foundation, “EnergyAdvice: Saving Energy: Insulation,” http://www.nef.org.uk/energyadvice/insulation.htm(accessed September 16, 2005). A. Roos and J.Karlsson, “Performance Criteria for CoatedGlazings in Windows,” in Proceedings fromGlass Processing Days, Tampere, Finland,653–656 (Uppsala, Sweden: Dept. of MaterialScience, Angstrom Laboratory, Uppsala Univer-sity, 2001). See also http://www.glassfiles.com/library/23/article440.htm (accessed November1, 2005).

20. Roos and Karlsson, 653-656.

21. Mattinson, DePaola, and Arasteh.

22. Shapiro and James.

23. “Product Information: Insulating Glass,”PPG Industries, Inc., http://www.ppg.com/gls_residential/share/res_ins.htm (accessed Novem-ber 1, 2005).

24. James Piper, “Windows: Repair or Replace?”Building Operating Management (Jan. 2004).

25. Chad Randl, Preservation Tech Notes,Windows, No. 19, Repairing Steel CasementWindows (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Departmentof the Interior, National Park Service, CulturalResources, 2002).

26. California Glass Bending Corporation,“Static-Exchange Correlation-Polarization(SECP) Tables,” http://www.calglassbending.com/secptabl.htm (accessed November 1, 2005).

27. Roos and Karlsson, 653–656.

28. James Piper, “Avoiding Common Windowand Window Film Mistakes,” Building Operat-ing Management (Oct. 2004).

29. Fisette, 68–73.

30. John M. Corbett, “A Last Look at HistoricWood Windows,” Traditional Building 14, no.6 (2001).

31. Fisette, 68–73.

Replacement windows incorporatingtilt-in sash — a feature that on its sur-face appears enticing — require thatthere is no interior stop, increasing thepotential for air infiltration around thesash. Compressible jamb liners thatallow for the tilt-in feature are oftenconstructed of open-cell foams that,once they begin to degrade, lose boththeir compressibility and sash-to-frameinfiltration buffer.

The ability to readily disassemblehistoric wood windows also allows forselectively restoring, upgrading, andadapting individual components of awindow throughout its life. Most re-placement-window systems cannotmake that claim.

Aesthetics and Authenticity

Nuances in molding profiles, shadow,line, and color of windows, along withquality and appearance of the glass,contribute greatly to the overall build-ing aesthetic and generally emulate thestylistic details of the building as awhole. Even what might seem like smallchanges in these elements can and doeshave a noticeable and usually detrimen-tal effect on many historic facades.Outfitting historic buildings with mod-ern replacement windows can and oftendoes result in a mechanical, contrived,or uniformly sterile appearance. Worse,when historic windows are replaced,authenticity is lost forever.

Value and Cost

Repairs of historic windows should addto the value of the property, as an au-thentically restored automobile wouldcommand greater value than one “re-stored” with plastic replacement parts.

While there is a dearth of cost-com-parative analyses between a replacementwindow and its restored, authenticcounterpart, empirical knowledge basedon field experience covering a widevariety of window types suggests thatrestoration is on a par, cost-wise, with amiddle-of-the-road replacement. Corol-lary conclusions are that:• cheap replacement windows will

always exist to superficially counterthe cost-basis argument for restora-tion; and

• high-quality equivalent replacementunits have been shown in practice tocost as much as three times that ofrestoration.Windows are a critical element of

sustainability, but sustainability is notjust about energy. It is about makingenvironmentally responsible choicesregarding historic windows that takeinto account the spectrum of associatedcosts and effects. The choice of whetherto replace or restore requires embracinga more encompassing definition ofsustainability. The answer is not assimplistic as some would have us be-lieve.

WALTER SEDOVIC, the principal and CEO ofWalter Sedovic Architects, works in historicpreservation and sustainable design. His workand firm are recognized for integrating green-building approaches and ideologies into preser-vation projects.

JILL H. GOTTHELF is an associate at WalterSedovic Architects, providing project manage-ment, design, and construction administration.She has extensive experience in integratingsustainable building technologies into preserva-tion projects.

Notes

1. Walter Sedovic, “History’s Green Genes”(Greenbuild 2003, The 2nd InternationalConference on Sustainability, U.S. GreenBuilding Council, Pittsburgh, Pa., November12-14, 2003).

2. Ted Kesik, “Embodied Energy ComparativeValues,” Canadian Architect, ArchitecturalScience Forum, Perspectives on Sustainability,January 2002, http://www.canadianarchitect.com/asf/perspectives_sustainibility/measures_of_sustainablity/measures_of_sustainablity_em-bodied.htm (accessed November 1, 2005).

3. “Windows,” Global Green USA, PublicHousing Authority Toolbox, http://www.globalgreen.org/pha-energytoolbox/tech_windows.htm (accessed November 1, 2005).

4. Don Rypkema, “The Economics of Preserva-tion” (keynote address, Preservation 360°,Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation,Saratoga Springs, N.Y., March 18, 2005).

5. Paul Fisette, “Understanding Energy-EfficientWindows,” Fine Homebuilding 114 (1998):68–73.

6. Ibid.

7. National Fenestration Rating Council, http://www.nfrc.org.

8. Andrew M. Shapiro and Brad James, “Creat-ing Windows of Energy-Saving Opportunity,”Home Energy 14, no. 5 (1997).

9. Fisette, 68–73.

PRESERVATION LEAGUE OF NEW YORK STATE ●●●● 44 CENTRAL AVENUE, ALBANY, NY 12206 518-462-5658 ● INFO@PRESERVENYS.ORG ● WWW.PRESERVENYS.ORG

SEVEN TO SAVE ENDANGERED PROPERTIES LIST, 2006:

Original & Historic Wood Windows:

Repair and Preservation

PROJECT CO-SPONSORS: HISTORIC ALBANY FOUNDATION, INC. & ASSOCIATION FOR PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY, NORTHEAST CHAPTER.

The Preservation League of New York State designated Original & Historic Wood Windows as one of the listing for the “Seven to Save Endangered Properties Program” of 2006.

Each year thousands of historic wood windows are removed and sent to landfills across New York State. Along with project partners Historic Albany Foundation and the Association for Preservation Technology-Northeast Chapter, the League has been particularly concerned about this issue because original wood windows are such an important part of the appearance and character of a historic home. Property owners should have all of the facts before they opt for replacement. What’s all the fuss about windows?

You might think that windows mainly serve as functional components of a building to provide light, ventilation and a view outside. Of course, they also impact the overall appearance of the building—just consider the effect of unpainted windows on an otherwise attractive building. And that may be why you are thinking about sprucing up the exterior of your property with new windows.

You have many options for improving the looks and function

of your historic wood windows. I’m just changing the windows and keeping the rest of the house the same.

While often seen as interchangeable parts, windows are actually one of the most important aspects of a building’s original material fabric and historic appearance. The design of the windows is just as important as any other decorative element. Windows offer clues to the age of the house, demonstrate the styles or construction techniques of a region or period, reflect later changes to the building, and can be exceptional examples of craftsmanship or design. Since they are original design elements which relate to other parts of the architectural style, overall scale and proportion of a building, we say that the windows are an important part of a building’s character.

By considering the changes in window design brought about by changes in technology and in design ideas, we can construct a timeline of window types that help us identify the original style of a house or the period during which it was updated. In the United States, the earliest windows were casement (hinged windows opening out like a door), and buildings retaining such windows were likely constructed during the

earliest period of European settlement. In later revival styles they were installed to imitate the historic period. An examination of the materials themselves would help determine the age and date of the windows in each case.

As double-hung windows (with top and bottom sash) became more common in the eighteenth century, glass technology improved to produce larger panes of glass. The earliest sash commonly contained anywhere from 6 to more than 16 individual panes (also called “lights”). As the nineteenth century progressed, the industry was able to make larger panes until only two panes were used per sash or even a single pane sash became more common. At the end of the nineteenth century, as revival styles came into vogue, multiple-light and patterned sash became the norm, solely for aesthetic reasons, as technology allowed for virtually unlimited pane size. There were also stained glass windows available and affordable even for middle class homes. In addition to the number and size of panes, the shape of the window also changed over time. Certain window types are essential parts of architectural styles. But my windows are old and junky.

In the case of wood windows, old does not necessarily mean

Seven to Save Endangered Properties 2006: Repair and Preservation of Wood Windows Page 2

PRESERVATION LEAGUE OF NEW YORK STATE ●●●● 44 CENTRAL AVENUE, ALBANY, NY 12206 518-462-5658 ● info@preservenys.org ● www.preservenys.org

obsolete or lower quality. In fact, given the quality of materials and craftsmanship involved in the original fabrication of your windows, they may be better than anything being made today. Windows built before the 1950s were likely constructed of milled heartwood or old-growth wood which is more dense than the woods now available. Older windows will nearly always far outlast their replacements if properly restored. In addition, traditional joinery such as pegged mortise and tenon joints used in older windows have proven to be more durable through changes in climate and moisture than are glued finger joints.

If just one part of an old wood window fails, it is easier to repair than a component in a modern window. The wood window sash can be removed from the window openings, the problem piece can be repaired and the sash reinstalled in good working order. With a modern window unit, a broken pane of glass usually requires the installation of an entirely new insulated glass unit which is not easily removed from the wood, aluminum or vinyl window members. Typically the cost for repairing the glass alone is close to the amount of a new replacement window. When I do finally get my windows to open, I can’t get them to stay in place. I’d rather have new, working windows.

Many a stubborn window can be repaired by simply replacing a cord which is broken or painted so that it no longer rolls easily along the pulley. This allows it to properly use the counter weight which not only aids in moving the window but also in keeps it in place. If you are replacing the weights, make sure that they are the right size—neither too heavy

or too light—to function properly with your windows. If the cords are not the culprits, you may need to remove paint from the window or frame itself which is causing the window to stick. I don’t think there are any repairs that I can do myself.

This is the true benefit of old wood windows – they were built to be reparable. Most homeowners have the skills needed to repair old wood windows, whether the problem is a broken sash cord preventing the window from moving up and down easily or staying in place, or there is a broken pane of glass. Old window sash can be

easily removed from the window openings, paint and glazing putty that has built-up can be stripped and renewed, a broken pane can be swapped out for a new pane (reglazing), the cord holding the weight can be replaced and reattached and window put back in place.

No engineering degree is necessary, and all the tools and materials needed are available at your local hardware store. Replacing the glazing putty, the glass, the sash cords, and the weather-stripping can be done at a cost equal or less than $1/linear foot. There are countless step-by-step instructions available in books or on the Internet to guide a homeowner in making these repairs. Don’t be overwhelmed by trying to do all the windows at once. Try to assess which windows need which type(s) of repair and break the project down into phases. Begin with the more simple repairs. Find out whether a workshop is available in your region. I barely know a hammer from a handsaw, and I don’t know of any contractors who repair windows.

A local hardware store can easily replace a broken pane of glass within a sash (reglazing). Most contractors can do simple repairs to wood elements or reglazing. (Others may try to sell homeowners on replacement windows, where most of the mark-up is in the product, not the labor.) For larger projects, property owners can contact a local historic preservation organization which might maintain a list of contractors who work on historic buildings. Homeowners can also reach out to their municipality or state preservation office for contractor lists.

When interviewing a contractor it is important to ask for and check references. It is also a good idea to get several contractor estimates to compare. What one person says is irreparable may be another person’s idea of a simple repair. I live in an historic district and am not allowed to install storms or screens over my windows. I don’t want to have to mess with installing and removing storm windows.

Many buildings dating to the late-19th and 20th century added protection during the winter by using wooden storm windows in the North and shutters or blinds in the South. Therefore, it is absolutely historically appropriate to install wood storms over your wood windows. In fact, this added layer will protect the paint and glazing of your primary window and eliminate any drafts the weather-stripping has not stopped.

Most homeowners associate wood storms with the obligation of having to install them in the fall and remove them in the spring. This was often the case in the past,

Seven to Save Endangered Properties 2006: Repair and Preservation of Wood Windows Page 3

PRESERVATION LEAGUE OF NEW YORK STATE ●●●● 44 CENTRAL AVENUE, ALBANY, NY 12206 518-462-5658 ● info@preservenys.org ● www.preservenys.org

when homeowners would take that opportunity to wash the windows and touch up any failing paint. Today there are many manufacturers of traditional-looking wood storm windows that incorporate screen panels which eliminate the need to swap the storms for screens each year. My contractor just shook his head and told me it would be cheaper to replace all the windows.

It is rare that all windows on a single building fail at the same time, and the most cost effective approach to windows is to repair and maintain individual windows as they need work. By definition, repair work is most often done on site by local workers and is limited to only the work needed for each individual window: One window may need only new or reset hardware while another more deteriorated needs an entire new bottom sash. One advantage of repair is that it can be easily phased to spread the work and costs over a time period, as permitted by weather and budget. One efficient way to carry out needed maintenance may be to combine the work with an exterior painting project. This will most likely require coordination between the painter and window repair specialist.

Because wood has the advantage of being repairable with readily available materials and tools, a program of repairing windows to a like-new condition, followed by periodic maintenance, is the most cost efficient long term solution. Stop and think—if only one or a few windows are in bad shape, repairing them is easier than replacing all windows in the whole house. I was told I’d be better off with all new windows that would help me battle high heating bills.

Many property owners think they must replace their old wood windows in order to save energy. Studies have indicated that in most cases [15 to] 20% of heat loss in a building is through the windows. The remaining 80% is through walls, roofs, floors and chimneys. Following this model, reducing the heat loss through windows by 50% will only result in will only result in a 10% decrease in the overall heat loss in the building. Replacement windows can be built using wood, vinyl, or aluminum sash, and may have single, double, or even triple glazing. It is this capacity for double or triple glazing which is thought to be more energy efficient.

However, most heat loss from a window occurs from air infiltration between the sash and the window frame. Homeowners will gain better energy efficiency by maintaining the caulk around a window and using a properly-fitting storm window (R factor 1.79), than with a double-paned replacement window (R factor 1.72). To put it a different way, according to the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), an historic wood window with storm transfers LESS heat per square foot of material (known as U-value), than replacement windows on vinyl tracks with either a double-glazed wood sash or a double-glazed metal sash.

Replacement windows can contribute to heat loss due to the spring-loaded vinyl track along the frame. As previously stated, most air loss occurs in the space between the sash and the frame. Wood is a far superior insulating material than vinyl, particularly the dense, old-growth wood found in historic houses. New window installation, no matter what the material used for the sash,

requires vinyl tracks to hold the sash and allow it to move up and down. Vinyl, which contains vinyl chloride, classified by the EPA as a Group A, human carcinogen, expands and contracts in heat and cold, and will deteriorate with sun exposure more rapidly than wood.

Because vinyl window tracks are naturally exposed to heat, cold and sun, they will degrade and eventually lose their air seal. When this happens, they must be completely replaced. Historic wood windows, which run along wood tracks with the help of counter weights, can be maintained. If the wood finally deteriorates, it can be easily repaired or replaced without having to replace the entire window. In many instances, therefore, the vinyl windows do not deliver energy savings nor last as “permanent” windows. I was told that my historic windows aren’t up to code.

Code requirements for windows are generally applied only when rehabilitation or construction projects are undertaken. One- and two-family residences are governed by the Residential Code of New York State which regulates various aspects. Sections:

a) Energy Conservation. Historic buildings are exempt from the energy conservation requirements of the code, per Section 1101.2.5.3. The code’s definition of historic buildings includes those determined significant by the state or local governing body, and those listed in or determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. For existing (non-historic) buildings, Section 1101.1.3 of Chapter 11 identifies buildings and conditions that need not comply with the chapter’s energy provisions, including when less than 50% of the building’s

Seven to Save Endangered Properties 2006: Repair and Preservation of Wood Windows Page 4

PRESERVATION LEAGUE OF NEW YORK STATE ●●●● 44 CENTRAL AVENUE, ALBANY, NY 12206 518-462-5658 ● info@preservenys.org ● www.preservenys.org

windows are not being altered.

b) Light and Ventilation (Section 310.1). When windows or rooms are changed or substantially altered, windows are required to provide a minimum amount of light and ventilation for basements and habitable rooms. For light, habitable rooms must be provided with aggregate glazing area of not less than 8 percent of the floor area of that room. For ventilation, the minimum operable area is calculated as 4 percent of a room’s floor area, a total of the amount provided by windows, doors, louvers or other approved openings.

c) Emergency Egress. Windows may also be required for emergency egress purposes. Section 310.1 requires one emergency escape opening for basements with habitable space and every sleeping room. These must have a sill height of not more than 44” above the floor, and a minimum net clear opening of 5.7 square feet (5.0 square feet for grade floor openings): minimum dimensions are 24” in height and 20” in width. I know there is lead paint on my windows and I’ve heard that they are not safe.

While eliminating lead paint on windows may be required for projects funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), no such requirements exist for New York State homeowners undertaking work at their own houses. Lead dust can create critical health issues, especially for children, however the presence of a stable lead surface is acceptable. The key is to keep finishes in good condition, repair and repaint on a regular cycle, and avoid stripping paint unless there is evidence of real paint failure. When stripping is determined to

be necessary, the procedures outlined in the National Park Service’s publication Preservation Brief #37 Appropriate Methods for Reducing Lead-Paint Hazards in Historic Housing will provide excellent guidance. Among the most important recommendations for dealing with lead paint: (1) children should live elsewhere while the work is being done

(2) all existing paint need not be removed-only that required to provide a sound surface for repainting

(3) it is important to use appropriate protective gear which can be found at a hardware store

(4) clean up after every work session.

Note that wet sanding can minimize dust. Chemical strippers can present problems. In addition to the potential health concerns associated with working with chemicals, the pores of wood wet from the chemical reaction can open up and permit lead based paint to seep into the wood. You can find the Preservation Brief on the National Park Service website at: www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/briefs/ brief37.htm, or visit www.cr.nps.gov/buildings.htm, then go to “Preservation Briefs” No. 37.

Resources

Books and Booklets The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows, John H. Myers, National Park Service Preservation Brief #9. Online version in Preservation Briefs section at www.cr.nps.gov/buildings.htm or order at 866-512-1800.

Repairing Old and Historic Windows, New York Landmarks Conservancy, 1992; www.nylandmarks.org/; 212.995.5260

Save Your Wood Windows, John C. Leeke, www.historichomeworks.com/hhw/office/consult.htm; 207 773-2306;

Windows on Preservation, John C. Leeke, William McCarthy & Ann Lawless,

American Precision Museum, 2005; 802-674-5781; www.americanprecision.com Articles What Replacement Windows Can’t Replace: The Real Cost of Removing Historic Windows, Walter Sedovic & Jill Gotthelf, Association for Preservation Technology (APT) Bulletin, 36:4, 2005.

“What Should I do about my Windows?” by Bill Mattinson, Ross DePaola, Dariush Arasteh, Home Energy, July/Aug 2002, p. 24-31.

“Wood Windows: A Guide to Repair and Replacement” by Richard Spigelmyer, Traditional Building, Jan/Feb 1997, p. 35, 44.

Websites: Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Detailed guidelines on the accepted practices for various approaches to preservation work, see www.cr.nps.gov/local-law/arch_stnds_0.htm.

www.historichomeworks.com Includes many restoration topics including windows.

www.windowrepair.com/ “A website devoted to the fine art of making old windows work like new and be energy efficient too.”

The Old House Journal has all types of information about preservation issues, restoration, history and products: www.oldhousejournal.com/index.shtml (Not to be confused with “This Old House”)

www.oldhouseweb.com/ Has a section on step-by-step window repair.

Project Co-sponsors: Historic Albany Foundation: www.historic-albany.org Association for Preservation Technology: www.apti.org/, APT Northeast Chapter: www.apti.org/chapters/northeast/index.cfm Contributors: Kimberly Konrad Alvarez, Landmark Consulting ◘ Erin Tobin Bearden, Director of Preservation Services, Historic Albany Foundation ◘ Marilyn Kaplan, Principal, Preservation Architecture ◘ Tony Opalka, Historic Preservationist and Architectural Historian ◘ Lorraine E. Weiss, Program Manager, Technical and Grant Programs, Preservation League of New York State