Laserfiche WebLink
495 Georges Enderle: <br />No, he did not say that. We looked at it, we discussed it, but he did <br />496 <br />not make a judgement. <br />497 Shawn Peterson: <br />Who said that it wouldn't support the double windows? <br />498 <br />END OF TAPE #1. <br />499 Don Sporleder: Don Sporleder, 205 Cripe Street, Professor of Architecture <br />500 <br />Emeritus, University of Notre Dame. I would speak in favor of this <br />501 <br />petition for a Certificate of Appropriateness. On the points that the <br />502 <br />proposed is a remedy to a problem that is a problem. It is not <br />503 <br />invasive, and indeed maintains the appearance of the existing land <br />504 <br />marked house. A very important part. The fact that the storm <br />505 <br />windows, which is an option, if that were done it would definitely <br />506 <br />change the appearance. It's not an easy one because the existing <br />507 <br />situation would not accommodate the use of storm windows except <br />508 <br />for a jerry=rigged thing. The fact that the house is historic and has <br />509 <br />not had storm windows, I would submit, is a good case for not <br />510 <br />doing exterior storms as well not withstanding the change in <br />511 <br />appearance that would occur. And the interior storms which I think <br />512 <br />the petitioners points were well presented though I think that the <br />513 <br />windows are proposed are good ones and would work well. <br />514 Tim Klusczinski: Thank you sir. Any member of the public wishing to speak in <br />515 opposition to the current petition? Hearing none, I close the public <br />516 hearing. Final comments? No? Any other Commission comments, <br />517 discussion, questions? <br />518 <br />519 <br />520 <br />521 <br />522 <br />523 <br />524 <br />525 <br />526 <br />527 <br />528 <br />529 <br />530 <br />531 <br />532 <br />533 <br />534 <br />535 <br />536 <br />Joann Sporleder: <br />Yes, I would just like to say that this has been long and torturous <br />for all of us, but I'm sure that Tim hasn't enjoyed this any better <br />than anyone else has. I think that it's important to keep the overall <br />appearance architecturally and historically. The outside appearance <br />is kind of critical. Also equally important is making the structure <br />livable in an accommodating, modern way that we like to live in. <br />To consign someone to perpetually living in single pane glass and <br />it's all made nice and tight and is perfectly wonderful so that the <br />air doesn't blow in around the edges, you've still got frost on the <br />windows unless you put plastic on the inside. I think to use the best <br />technology that is currently available to achieve all of the purposes <br />of improving the livability of our most important historic structures <br />and not treat them as museum pieces because we want people to <br />live in them and enjoy them. I think that he has worked hard to try <br />and- find a way to fit this in with the deteriorating fabric of his <br />house in anyway and still give the appearance of the outside to be <br />the same as it currently is. And to maintain his livability as he <br />wants to in his own house, as we all do. I think he's tried very hard <br />to do the best he could with this. The economic thing is happily not <br />15 <br />