October 1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mrs. Choitz stated that the Commission should hear the remaining portions of the applicaiton concerning window replacement before they vote on the kitchen window. There was some discussion over which windows contianed the leaded glass. Mrs.-Choitz asked if the only_ leaded glass windows were the ones located in front. Mr. Van Overberghe stated that there is one set of leaded glass windows located on the second floor of the front elevation and another set located on the second floor of the rear elevation. He also noted that there used to be a diamond pattern leaded glass window on the east elevation, however, it was replaced years ago with a modern, large wood diamond mutin pattern window. Mr. Van Overberghe clearified that the owner was proposing to remove all the remaining leaded glass windows and replace them with new wood mutin windows with a diamond pattern to closely match the existing. There was some discussion over where the mutins would be located and if it would be possible to reuse the leaded glass in combination with a new window. Mr. Van Overberghe stated that the mutins would be snap ins located on the inside of the sash. Mr. Van Overberghe also noted that by adjoining the original leaded glass window with a new window would more than likely jeopardize the new windows affectivness. Mrs. Sporleder asked if the existing leaded glass window could be retro -fitted into a new frame. Mr. Overberghe stated that it may be possible, however, he will not know for sure until the existing window is removed. He further stated that the most cost effective method of solving the window problems is to replace the leaded glass windows with wood mutin casement windows. Mr. Zmyslo interjected that the Commission views the leaded glass windows as an important architectural feature of the house. Mr. Oxian stated that the Commmission was leaning toward saving the leaded glass window so Mr. Van Overberghe will have to come up with another alternative to the snap in wood mutins. Mr. Van Overberghe asked if the owner would have to save the existing leaded glass window or could they install a new leaded glass window. Mrs. Choitz stated that a new leaded glass window would be fine. Mr. Oxian reiterated the importance of landmarked houses. Mrs. Sporleder read the portion of the guidelines that stated that work has to be done in a compatible way and should be of the same size and texture, although substitute material may be allowed. She further noted that she does not feel that the proposed alteration in any way violates the landmark guidelines. Mrs. Hostetler noted that the guidelines also stated that removal of any significant architectural detail, such as the leaded glass windows, is not allowed. Mr. Van Overberghe stated that the new windows would duplicate the existing windows in size, shape and pattern. Mrs. Choitz stated that the leaded glass window issue should be placed into the Standards and Maintenance Committee for further discussion. She went on to remind the Commission of the difficulty the Commission had with the School Board when they wanted to remove all the windows in the Central High Building. Mrs. Choitz moved to place the leaded glass window portion of the Certificate of Appropriateness into the Standards and Maintenance Committee for further study. Mrs. Hostetler seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 2