HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCDATE=APRIL 01, 2003 (4) told not replace those items. Theis no way or mllingwhat is under the exterior
- sheathing g the xt Nfir trawler arguedthat Ty e not reeraciric'
the exterior sills or carrier, then the extenoris not extra to chane wIt npmf or
rcpincenenl 'fhr .ftp e, r was Mr. Iazabs; a belief that replacing the existing wood
will with vinyl windows "arid riot hollvalrerthe appearance from the exterior.
Rurtherni Mr. Jazwlcc mgied that the replacement vinyl IS Fullws should not be
owed as an extent or alteration b ramet a err jonty OfIll e work will be done on the
interior. Staff add tossed All Jacancers con cern and explained that in fact the main
alteration in the appearance from the exterior would be in the profile ofdie window. The
existing ward windows am Solid metrial and have a more appropriate pro If rather
than Wel ofvinvl It hich is an exuded material and naturally has a thinner mail le that is
not appropriate for the structure. fit Serval fallow ed rip on the change in appearance
Isnoring the vino yl stating that it is ifact an extruded matted arm would cause a charge
n tic pointe by 1 inch m I sa inch.
He bounce it is taking the Guidelines too far on 'a building that is not cnnuibuting(i.c.
additions and aluminum siding). He facts it Foes beyond what is constitutional
Vice Chairman I Tartrequested to address the issue ofecnlu hardship that Mc ra'dwlUn
had indicated at die public hearing_ Vice Chatrinumadedhlr lus.ict p lasaxperisever
row thewindmxs. Nit_lmwiec replied that they had act and only issued estimates on
replacement. Crmmisaioncr Hail further gnexiioned if there was anything that would
leadmwnfustrninthe Design Guidelines. Mr. Letriec arrmvrcd that he felt the
opinians oil repair vsreplacement wcasabjecrive
Commissiener,rmina asked Mr. Steel iI any, of the windows werenon original. 1Ic.
Snivel indicated that some vineme c on the south and east side svuni offamarth wood
windows. C iribirearnr Rocwrrthy asked if any ofthc ekes of Openings changed. Mr.
Stud answered yea. He stated that It looked like the enclosed asomm
Vice Chzimtan Hart also inquired of whet the Design Review botanist
perspective was. Conmiiasirnr billion, Histone District Rcf ercntatva from the
Sprig/Douglas Historic District ansveted abut he docs not speak the all, but was present
for the initial design review discusswri tit the turner. Be did not feel that the MIndat
sasked m do anything that Visna others have ml faun asked m do_ He Stated that he
did not feel that trio Gnldch Vcs ere Suhrsoft e. Vice Chairman Han staled that he did Vol
feel it was the purpose at this nom lr qtr YlOn the constitutionality of the rrdlnannc
Corin estrner Stroud stared that he believes the argument to be that the building is uo)y
and what is the difference to make it ughr. The Douce review process is meant to
pe.serve, with the hope that someone would restore the building VlnyValmmnuin siding
is temporary but thc removal Of windows is permanent.
Commissioner Smith smwm Wet Ito does flat feel Waite charge is subjcutse when it Is
residues that the liable will change.
Commissioner tumid stated that he point of the Guidelines is to mSmrc. AFphnximately
30 homes have been restored by the mmosal of aluminum siding