Skip to main content Skip to footer

A Systematic Approach To Evaluate Historical Wood Windows For Repair and Restoration

May 15, 2015

ABSTRACT
Historical windows are a key component
of the fabric and character of a building.
In many cases, the windows are neglected
and left to deteriorate. The visible deterioration
of historical wood and steel window
systems, along with energy concerns,
make these windows prime candidates for
replacement with modern metal or plasticbased
systems. This article provides architects
and engineers with an overview of
the materials and construction methods
of these historical window systems with a
primary focus on evaluation and design for
their restoration. A methodical evaluation,
condition assessment rating system, and
repair techniques, including energy-saving
weatherization techniques, are discussed.
Renovation and preservation of historical
structures create many imposing obstacles
for design professionals. Maintaining
the structures’ historical fabric and character
is critical to success, with window restoration
playing a major role. Consultants
evaluating window assemblies have to fully
understand repair techniques used by professional
window restoration conservators.
In addition to familiarity with historical
window constructions and styles of different
periods, the consultant must comprehend
the types and origins of wood decay, selective
wood repair methods, sash stabilization
techniques, glazing, and hardware restoration
or replacement to properly and effectively
evaluate and design the rehabilitation
of historical windows. This knowledge helps
to restore the windows in a manner that
maintains the maximum amount of historical
significance of the window assembly and
helps protect against unnecessary and/or
damaging repairs that might be performed.
COMPILE ARCHITECTURAL AND
HISTORICAL INFORMATION
Confirm purpose and history of windows
In order to provide and execute an
appropriate repair and/or restoration plan,
the original intent and purpose of the windows
in the structure should be considered.
For example, long runs of fixed, continuous,
clerestory windows in a warehouse are
presumably to provide adequate lighting
rather than ventilation to the interior spaces.
Alternatively, casement windows in a
residential building circa 1920 function as
an aesthetic element and can provide a relatively
large amount of fresh air and sunlight
to the interior. Additional window factors,
including provisions for views of the outside
and their contribution to the overall historical
significance of the building façade,
should also be considered.
Establishing the building’s “period of
significance” is critically important. The
period of significance is often identified by
an historical architect or preservationist
during a study of the building and is then
incorporated into an historical nomination
form. It relates to when the building was
considered important, based on an historic
event, association with a significant person,
distinct characteristics of design or construction,
or its potential to yield important
information. Depending on the treatment
selected, all of the building’s remaining historical
features could be preserved equally,
even if they are of different vintages; or the
entire structure could be restored to one
time period that has been identified to be
its period of significance. For example, a
building that was originally constructed in
the 18th century could have had multiple
additions and changes in use, leading it to
incorporate wood windows from the 18th,
19th, and 20th centuries, all of which may
be historical. Unless one period of the building
is identified to be of specific significance,
the appropriate approach may be to restore
each of the windows to their specific time
periods.
Additional research should be performed
to determine if some or all of the windows
have been replaced and just appear to be
original. In some instances, when buildings
undergo major renovations during their history,
the original windows could have been
completely replaced. If original drawings
are not available, care should be taken to
measure and compare muntin, brick mold,
sash rail, and frame profiles for each window
throughout the building. Windows that
look original may not be when compared
to the other windows in the building that
may have been salvaged during the major
renovation. Typically, the slight changes in
A u g u s t 2 0 1 5 I n t e r f a c e • 2 9
This article is reprinted from the Proceedings of the 29th RCI International Convention and Trade Show in 2014 in Anaheim, California.
the profiles of the sash rails and muntins
can differentiate one series of windows from
another. It is not uncommon to salvage the
existing window frames and only replace
the sashes.
Compile Historical Documentation
Gather any available drawings, details,
building elevations, and historical photographs.
These will assist in determining the
original configuration and location of the
windows and if any significant changes or
alterations have been performed. Sources
for this information include building owners,
libraries, local historical societies, preservation
groups, etc. Useful resources and
historical data include the following:
• Original building plans, façade elevations,
window schedules, and window
and wall details—any information
that indicates how the windows
were designed or constructed
• Previous reports or photographs that
document the windows or building
façade
• Knowledge of or records of local
practices or what was normally
installed by builders at that time
and in that region
• Books such as Traditional Building
Details or historical building codes
• Architectural guide books to identify
the style of the building, its vintage,
and typical associated window styles
See Photos 1 and 2.
ESTABLISH DOCUMENTATION SYSTEM
After compiling the available historical
data and researching the building’s service
history, perform a cursory review of the existing
conditions of the façade and windows.
This preliminary and limited review will
allow for a more accurate window assessment
plan to be established. Performing a
cursory review
of the windows
to determine
general
characteristics
including,
but not limited
to, material
type, configuration,
operability characteristics, and
hardware, will help establish and streamline
the documentation system and improve efficiency
when performing more rigorous field
evaluations.
In addition to the initial review, a unique
numbering system for each window or rough
opening should be established. The intent
of the numbering system is to simplify the
documentation process and provide accurate
data collection for each window. It also
serves as a method to link the various data
forms (i.e., photos, window elevation, reports,
checklists, and building elevations) together
so they can all be accessed through this
numbering system. Typically, this alphanumeric
window identification should include
the single letter representing the referenced
building’s exterior elevation (i.e., N, S, E, W),
floor number, and alphabetical window designation
starting from left to right. For example,
the window identification number “N3A”
would indicate the first window from the
left, on the third floor of the building’s north
elevation. If multiple buildings were involved,
the building name or number would precede
the identification number. This unique numbering
system should be established prior
to performing a detailed window survey to
reduce potential confusion when the field
notes and information are compiled in the
office at a later time.
When using the building’s original architectural
drawings, we strongly recommend
comparing them to the building’s existing
façade prior to developing the numbering
system. It is not uncommon for windows
to have been enclosed or altered since the
building’s original construction. Once the
actual number of windows is known, then
the numbering system can be developed,
and modifications can be noted on copies of
the elevation drawings for reference in the
final report.
Prior to initiating field evaluations, a
window designation and condition/defect
checklist for each common window type
(i.e., wood) should be generated. This list
may include, but not be limited to, the following:
• Building name/number
• Window material type
• Window designation number
• Window operability type
• Window glazing type
• Window components and characteristics
• Hardware types
• Defect codes related to materials
including wood, glazing putty, paint,
etc. Defect codes are typically a
numbered rating system, such as a
zero to four (0-4), where 0 is “good
condition” or “no repairs required,”
and 4 is “major decay and substantial
replacement parts” or “entire
window is required.” If the window
is blocked or concealed in some way,
then it should be noted that the unit
is not visible (NV) and could not be
evaluated.
• Window elevation sketch to show
3 0 • I n t e r f a c e A u g u s t 2 0 1 5
Photos 1 and 2 – An historical photo of the Boston Fire Station,
Boston, MA (below) and an historical post card of the Beverly City
Hall, Beverly, MA (left) helped identify the appropriate window
configurations for these buildings.
appearance, dimensions, and location
of defects
An example of a window defect checklist
for a wood window is referenced in Figure 1.
ACCESS METHODS TO EVALUATE
WINDOWS
One of the most important aspects
of performing window assessments is the
field evaluation. After compiling the existing
architectural and historical data and
establishing a documentation system, field
evaluations are performed. Often, the exteriors
of windows are not easily accessible due
to adjacent buildings, site limitations, or
height restrictions. Due to historical window
complexities and potentially unique characteristics,
it is critical to have “hand reach”
access from the interior and exterior of each
window to establish accurate restoration
methods. There are several access methods
that may be utilized to reach difficult areas:
• Aerial Lifts – Aerial lifts, which
generally range in height from 30
to 150 feet, provide access and an
observation platform with the ability
to articulate to precise locations on
the building façade. Note that flat
and accessible grounds adjacent to
the building are required for the use
of an aerial lift.
• Swing Staging – Swing staging
offers a suitable platform for observation
and testing but is more suitable
for straight vertical drops with
a flat building geometry. Roof access
is required to set up and move
the swing staging, which can have
high cost implications and extensive
down time.
• Ground Observation – Ground
observation using high-powered binoculars
is useful to spot potential
problematic areas or simply to verify
or acquire quantities of components.
High-powered binoculars and
vantage points—such as adjacent
buildings or roof levels—will help to
improve the field data collected.
• Rope Access – Rope access allows for
close-up observation of an elevation
when other access (i.e., aerial lifts
and swing staging) is too restrictive.
Rope access must be performed by
a qualified, properly trained person.
It is also necessary to provide safety
tie-offs and anchor points, which can
be limited on historical facilities.
HISTORICAL WOOD WINDOW
CONSTRUCTION
Typically, historical wood windows were
manufactured using old-growth wood. Oldgrowth
wood, commonly used until approximately
60 years ago, is significantly more
durable than the new-growth wood generally
used today. Furthermore, the joints of
historical windows are typically mortise and
tenon, which is more durable than the com-
A u g u s t 2 0 1 5 I n t e r f a c e • 3 1
Figure 1 – Window defect checklist.
mon mitered and glued joint used today.
The material quality of the windows and the
ability of these windows to be disassembled
are critical factors to achieve a fully restored
window, which will result in a reduction of
air leakage through the window sashes. Air
leakage is the primary cause of thermal loss
through an existing wood window, and a
common complaint of building occupants
with historical wood windows.
In general, wood windows consist of a
sash and frame. For the sake of simplicity,
the typical components of a double-hung
wood window will be described below.
The sash (also known as the operable
portion of the window) is typically constructed
of side stiles and rails at the top
and bottom. The stiles (right/left) and rails
(top/bottom) frame and secure the glass,
and are typically joined with a mortise and
tenon joint with an added fastener in the
form of a wood peg or wire nail. The sash
stiles and rails are then rabbeted on the
exterior face in order to receive glass and
glazing putty.
A divided-lite sash is constructed in a
similar manner with the addition of bars and
muntins. The rails are mortised in order to
receive the bars, and
the muntins are then
installed between the
bars. A double-hung
sash requires meeting
rails at the top of the
lower sash and at the
bottom of the upper
sash. The meeting
rails typically have a
beveled surface that
fits together when the
window is closed. For
ease of operability,
double-hung windows
incorporate a parting
bead, which is a
pressure-fitted piece
of wood that sits within
the frame groove in
order to separate the
upper and lower sash
when opening and
closing the window.
The window sash
is set into the frame
and held in place with
the parting bead and
sash stops. The head
and jamb section of
a window frame are
typically constructed of a sash channel,
blind stop, and casings. Within this pocket,
created by these components, are the sash
weights and chords or chains. The bottom
rail typically sits over the sill and adjacent
to the interior stool. Depending on the
existing wall construction of the building,
additional decorative trim, molding, and
casings may be present. Figure 2, taken
from The Old House Journal, presents the
typical “anatomy” of a double-hung window.
Additionally, wood windows come in various
configurations and operability classifications,
including, but not limited to, fixed,
awning, casement, pivots, and project in/
out windows. These typical types are represented
in Figure 3.
IN-DEPTH FIELD ASSESSMENT
In order to establish the proper restoration
techniques, identification and accurate
documentation of defective components
are required. As previously noted, the exterior
and interior conditions of each window
are documented through a specific evaluation
process. Certain defective characteristics
are more suitably determined from
either the interior or exterior of the window.
For example, operability should be tested
from the interior. Ropes and pulleys of wood
windows are reviewed from the interior once
exposed in the window pocket. Glazing
putty conditions are more easily observed
and assessed from the exterior.
A typical assessment plan would include
the following: Every accessible window of
the building will be evaluated at arm’s
length on the exterior and interior. Aerial
lifts, swing staging, or rope access will be
utilized to evaluate windows above the
ground level on the exterior. Study team
members will complete checklists for each
window by sketching the window elevation,
measuring the rough opening, sketching
significant details, noting all window
characteristics and deficiencies, and taking
photographic documentation. To maximize
the data cataloged, it is recommended that
each checklist, sketch, and other notes be
completed for the exterior and the interior
of every window. Photographic documentation
will include an overall photo of each
window from the exterior and interior, along
with any notable defects or characteristics,
such as brick molds, muntins profiles, wood
joinery, sash profiles, and hardware.
Document and detect both interior and
exterior components for the following:
3 2 • I n t e r f a c e A u g u s t 2 0 1 5
Figure 2 – Anatomy of a double-hung window.
Figure 3 – Typical window types. Note that
these diagrams are to show operability
types only and do not reflect the typical
multi-light glazings and decorative muntins
of historical wood windows.
• Wood components
• Hardware
• Paint
• Glazing
• Sealants
• Operability
Documentation on field checklist and
window elevation should contain the following:
• Defect numerical rating system
• Defect symbols for repairs (i.e.,
rotted, checked, or cracked wood;
peeled paint; failed sealant; wood
gouge; cracked glass)
In the above-mentioned spreadsheet,
note that each window component has a
level of defect “code” pertaining to each
item. For example, the wood of each parting
bead may be in satisfactory condition,
with no splitting or rotting. However, the
parting bead paint may be missing or failed.
Therefore, an appropriate restoration technique
for this particular component would
likely be to salvage the existing parting
bead, which will be prepared, primed, and
painted for reinstallation.
Glazing putty and paint deterioration
can be accurately represented as a percentage
or visually shown on the window elevation
sketch. Based on the cost of repairs
and economies of scale, it is considered
reasonable to assume that a 30% or greater
failure of a component may warrant complete
removal and restoration. For example,
glazing putty that is approximately 50%
deteriorated is significant enough to call
for removal and replacement. This will keep
all glazing putties at similar installation
periods and help reduce the potential for
yearly failures as older putties left in place
start to deteriorate. Replacing all provides
a more consistent and predictable maintenance
schedule.
IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
It is important to note that historical
windows identified for restoration may
have received previous repairs or undergone
repainting campaigns prior to 1978, when
the use of lead paint became prohibited.
Therefore, prior to removing the existing
paint, the material must be sampled and
tested for lead. Often, a full restoration
of the existing windows initiates with the
abatement of the existing lead paint, which
requires stripping the windows down to
bare wood. Window sealants and putties
could also incorporate hazardous materials,
such as asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), which must also be removed
prior to any restorations. It is not necessary
to test for the presence of hazardous materials
to complete an evaluation. If the primary
requirement of the evaluation is to just
note the current condition of the windows,
then it may not be necessary for hazardous
material testing at that time. If budgeting
is part of your report, then testing should
be performed, since it can significantly
increase the cost of the restoration, especially
if PCBs are present. PCBs have been
known to leach into porous substrates,
including wood and masonry. Since testing
for these materials will add cost to the initial
evaluation, they should be discussed prior
to arriving on site. It is recommended that
persons trained in sampling and testing be
responsible for collecting the materials.
PLANNING FOR REPAIRS
Once the condition assessment of the
windows is complete, the designer is in a
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah,
Why are we still debating
the merits of cool roofs?
Thermoplastic white roofs have proven
performance in all climates. Bust the myths:
vinylroofs.org/cool-roofing-myths
A u g u s t 2 0 1 5 I n t e r f a c e • 3 3
position to consider the scope of repairs/
rehabilitation. Depending on the goal and
budget of the project, the scale of repairs
may vary from stabilization of the windows
to reduce further deterioration, to wholesale
restoration of the sashes and frames, to
thermal upgrades such as the addition of
weatherstripping or storm windows. The
levels of repairs for wood windows are best
classified by “Technical Preservation Brief
9: The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows,”
published by the National Park Service
(NPS), and are as follows:
• Routine maintenance
• Stabilization
• Splices and parts replacement
• Energy-efficiency improvements
through weatherstrippings, interior/
exterior storms, and/or double glazing
REPAIR METHODS
While many of the wood windows surveyed
could appear to an untrained eye
to be in failed condition, the majority of
the deterioration may be occurring on the
exterior surfaces and be limited to failed
sealants, paint coatings, and putties.
The proper repair of wood windows is an
involved and intricate process and requires
a skilled tradesman. Improper materials
and/or repairs can have a detrimental effect
on historical window renovations, which
can reduce, instead of extend, their service
life. Complete restoration of the windows
includes the removal of the existing sashes
and repair of the existing frames in place. At
the sashes, weatherstripping
can be
replaced or added,
defective muntins
replaced, damaged
wood repaired
and repainted,
and putties and
damaged glazing
units replaced. At
the frames, parting
beads and balances can be replaced,
wood components repaired, weatherstripping
added, all components repainted, and
perimeter sealants replaced. If thermal
upgrades are desired, options—including
the addition of insulated glazing or a storm
window—can be considered. All of these
techniques are further described below.
One of the most elementary and critical
steps for the stabilization of the existing
windows is the maintenance of the paint
coatings. Failed paint coatings can result in
damage of the wood components, resulting
in extensive repairs in order to return the
systems to proper operation. Proper repainting
of operable units involves removing the
existing sashes and painting the frames and
sashes separately. Painting the sashes while
they are in place can result in a buildup of
paint at the frame-to-sash interface, which
may cause the sashes to be stuck in place
and the windows to be inoperable. In addition,
painting would not be able to extend
within the sash channel, leaving portions of
the wood sash untreated. Proper painting
should also consist of scraping off loose or
chipped paint to limit the buildup of paint
layers. For components that are removable—
such as existing sashes—one means
of removing paint is via infrared heating.
For components that remain in place, such
as the frame, chemical strippers are often
utilized. Both methods are typically used in
combination with hand-scraping and sanding.
Note that all paint removal methods
need to be done in accordance with proper
lead-abatement procedures if lead-based
materials have been identified.
Another key component of window stabilization
is the replacement of the existing
window putties. As previously mentioned,
the putties may be a hazardous material
and need to be tested prior to the work. If
the putties are found to contain asbestos
or lead (from being painted over with leadbased
paint), abatement of this material is
required. The replacement of putties both
weatherizes the windows and allows for
access to the glazing units to replace any
cracked glass pieces. Perimeter sealants
should be replaced in a similar method and
may also contain lead, asbestos, or PCBs.
3 4 • I n t e r f a c e A u g u s t 2 0 1 5
Photo 3 – Epoxy repair of checked
wood with resin.
Photo 4 –Dutchman repair of
wood sash corner.
In addition to paint and putty replacement,
many historical windows may also
require additional wood repairs. There are
two main types of wood repairs: epoxy and
dutchman.
Epoxy repairs consist of using an epoxy
resin or paste to fill in cracks, gauges, and
rot (after removing the existing rotted wood)
to stabilize the wood. Epoxy repairs are
often required at sash corners where the
joinery has failed. Epoxy repairs require
significant preparation of the existing wood
and may need several applications of epoxy
to completely fill the damaged area. Epoxy
requires time to set, and the repairs need to
be sculpted and shaved to match the profile
of the surrounding wood finishes.
Dutchman repairs involve repairing
existing areas of rotted or missing wood
with new wood. Ideally, the new wood
should match the species of the original
wood. If the species of the original wood
cannot be matched, the new wood should
be mahogany, cedar, or oak in order to be
as similar as possible to the density of the
original old-growth wood. With a dutchman
repair, the area of rotted wood is cut out,
and the replacement wood (dutchman) cut
to match the opening. The dutchman is set
into the opening with a resin. Dutchman
repairs are most suitable for large-area
repairs. See Photos 3 and 4.
Other wood window stabilization repairs
include replacing broken or missing hardware,
sash lifts (if present), balances, and—
in isolated instances—weights. The main
factor of these repairs is locating appropriate
materials. For example, the original
windows are likely to use brass, bronze, and
steel for hardware. Balances are typically
supported or connected by rope or metal
chain and use metal tape pulleys. Most
historical weights are brass, but steel is
not unusual. Sometimes these replacement
materials are difficult to locate and require
searching in specialty restoration sites or
salvage yards.
Once the window has been stabilized,
its performance can be further improved
with the addition of weatherstripping to the
existing frame and/or sash components.
Weatherstripping can be metal, pile type,
or neoprene. Sheet metal weatherstripping,
which is composed of copper or brass, can
sometimes be found in the original window
assembly, nailed to the sash along the base
and at the meeting rail (two joints through
which air leakage can occur). If in good condition,
this may be salvageable. If not, it can
be replaced in kind, or alternative forms of
weatherstripping can be considered. Other
commonly used techniques include the
addition of metal weatherstripping to the
jamb tracks and integral pile weatherstripping
set into the sash stops (at the interface
of the stop and sash).
While the previously described repairs
both stabilize and weatherize the existing
wood windows, there are several options for
further improvements to the window’s thermal
performance. The first option, which
may be considered the most common and
the least invasive (since it does not alter the
existing window fabric), is the addition of
a storm window. A storm window provides
a second seal, which acts like a secondary
glazing. The dead space between the window
and storm increases thermal resistance
for the assembly and reduces air leakage.
Furthermore, a low-emissivity (low-e)
glass storm window will provide additional
thermal performance to the existing singleglazed
unit, making it comparable to a
double-glazed replacement system. Storm
A u g u s t 2 0 1 5 I n t e r f a c e • 3 5
American Hydrotech, Inc.
303 East Ohio | Chicago, IL 60611 | 800.877.6125 | www.hydrotechusa.com
© 2015 Garden Roof is a registered trademark of American Hydrotech, Inc.
American Hydrotech introduces the Garden Roof®
Planning Guide iPad® app – a first-of-its-kind digital
brochure that helps design professionals take a vegetated
roof from initial concept to completion.
Packed with photography, technical information and
videos, design professionals can explore assembly
options and components, growing media and vegetation,
and learn about topics such as design considerations,
economic and sustainable benefits, installation and
maintenance, and much more.
19 years of vegetated roof experience…
brought to life in one app.
Download your copy today at
hydrotechusa.com/GRPG
windows can have a metal or wood frame
(aluminum is most common) and can be
installed on the exterior or interior of the
existing window unit. Properly installed
storm windows are continuously sealed
around the perimeter with weeps left at
the bottom to allow air and condensation
to escape to limit the potential of condensation
between the window and storm. See
Figure 4.
Another means of thermal improvement
of the sash is replacing the existing single
glazing with insulated glazing panes. This
option is partially dependent on the configuration
of the existing sash—whether the
current wood is sufficiently thick and durable
to accommodate the much thicker and
heavier insulated glazing unit in lieu of the
original single glazing. For operable sashes,
the result of the added glass weight will also
likely require the replacement of the existing
sash pocket weights to accommodate the
heavier sashes.
If the addition of insulated glazing to
a window is feasible, there are still several
factors that should be considered from both
an aesthetic and a performance standpoint.
From an aesthetic and historical perspective,
it is important to note that the insulated
glazing will impact the existing muntin
profiles and change shadow lines. The other
main consideration is the amount of thermal
improvement that can be achieved and
if alternate means (such as storm windows)
may provide a more feasible option.
CONCLUSION
The restoration of historical wood windows,
in lieu of replacement, is both the historically
appropriate and sustainable option
when repairs or replacement of existing
window systems are considered. Too often,
the choice to replace existing wood
windows is made by those who do
not have the appropriate qualifications
to both review the conditions
of the existing windows and
understand that these windows
were constructed of quality materials
in a manner that facilitates
their repair. In many instances,
the apparent conditions of the
existing wood windows make them
an easy target for replacement.
However, the actual defects may
only be surface-deep and easily
repaired by the appropriate
tradesman by restoring the condition
of the wood components or
even thermally improving them
with the addition of weatherstripping,
storm windows, and/or
insulated glazing.
The appropriate repairs and
upgrades result in a window unit
that, with minimal maintenance,1
can extend the service life of these
windows by up to 30 to 50 years,
which would likely exceed the life of new
metal or vinyl replacements.
REFERENCES
1. Typical maintenance for wood windows
after a wholesale restoration
would include painting every five to
ten years and replacement of failed
sealants and glazing putties.
3 6 • I n t e r f a c e A u g u s t 2 0 1 5
Steven Marshall
is a senior project
manager for
Gale Associates.
He specializes in
site investigations,
design, administration,
and coordination
of roof,
wall, and window
projects. Marshall
has extensive
experience in evaluation,
repair, and
replacement of roof, window, curtain wall,
storefront, door, and masonry wall projects.
He has been responsible for the management
of more than 30 historical window
projects.
Steven R. Marshall,
RRC, CDT, LEED AP
Catherine Matathia
is a past project
engineer for
Gale Associates.
She specializes
in structural engineering
and building
envelope evaluations
and fieldwork
for building
projects, including
investigations,
analysis, design,
coordination, specifications,
and construction administration.
She has been responsible for the field evaluation
and assessment of historical wood
and steel windows at over 30 historical
buildings at a National Historic Site. This
includes field drawings of window details
and “hands-on” assessments of each window
component.
Catherine A.
Matathia, PE, LEED AP
Figure 4 – Wood window restoration details: stabilization repairs at the sash and frame, as well as
the addition of weatherstripping and exterior storm windows.