February 1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

--replaced a fixed sash on the west side with a 1/1 double hung sash --replaced two adjacent fixed sashes on the south side with 1/1 double hung sashes --removed a fixed sash on the east side and infilled with clapboard. Mr. Pastor reported that the owner also planned to reside the entire vestibule with in-kind clapboard. These alterations, said Mr. Pastor, were done without a certificate of appropriateness. As in the previous case, the staff deemed some of the alterations historically appropriate, while others required modifications. The owner had claimed that the door was not original, and fit the opening only roughly. Also, he had said the soffit work had been started before he bought the house. The new door, reported Mr. Pastor, met neighborhood requirements, -and had precedent in a nearby property. The staff therefore recommended approval of the door. The second part of the proposal --replacement of windows --presented some problems. Mr. Pastor asked the Commission to consider the owner's claims that the windows were not historical, and were not sympathetic to the general character of the house. Also, the renovations were to the rear of the house, not visible from the street. Mr. Pastor reported that the staff affirmed the appropriateness of the west -side window, but believed that the south window should be moved, perhaps to the infilled opening on the east side. As to the third part of the proposal, not yet carried out, the staff had inspected the existing clapboard, found it to be sound, and recommended retaining it. Mr. Herendeen noted that removing lap siding generally destroyed it. Since it seemed that the owner wished to convert the vestibule into a warm space, it would be easier to leave the original siding intact and to insulate from within. Mr. Oxian recommended approving the door and the west window, but disapproving the south window and requiring the owner to move it to the infilled (8) window opening. He also recommended requiring a