Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Herendeen pointed out that, if the owners had <br />followed procedure, they would have been advised <br />against an elliptical window. Mr. Oxian stated <br />that Commission judgments were made based on the <br />condition of the property on the day the district <br />was established. <br />Mr. Herendeen said that the owners could even, if <br />they wished, construct a rear addition, provided <br />they followed proper procedure. Such an addition <br />would have to complement the architectural <br />character of the house.. <br />Mrs. Sporleder said the Commission's task was to <br />decide whether or not to compel the owners to <br />remove the elliptical window. <br />Mr. Pastor, quoting from the standards, said that <br />new window or door openings that alter the scale <br />or proportion of the building may not be <br />introduced." He said the Commission should decide <br />whether or not the elliptical window altered the <br />scale. <br />Mrs.. Sporleder said that, had the owners followed <br />procedure, they would have been advised to forego <br />the elliptical window in favor of a more <br />appropriate type. Now, since the window had <br />already been installed, the Commission had to <br />decide whether the owners must remove it. Had it <br />been placed on the front of the house, she would <br />certainly have insisted on its removal. Since the <br />window was in back, she found the decision more <br />difficult. <br />Mr. Oxian said that nowhere in the standards is <br />any one facade deemed more significant than the <br />others. <br />Mr. Herendeen asked Mr. Murphy how big an impact <br />the cost of replacing the window would have on the <br />total project cost. Mr. Murphy said the <br />elliptical window had cost him $800 to date; a <br />replacement would probably cost another $800. <br />Mr. Herendeen advised Mr. Murphy that he must <br />present exact documentation of these costs, if he <br />wished to argue the hardship of replacing the <br />window. <br />Mrs. Dennen asked Mr. Murphy why they had put in <br />the window after telling the staff that "no <br />further exterior work of any consequence" was <br />(5) planned. He said he had been adhering to a <br />