My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
February 2008
sbend
>
Public
>
Historic Preservation
>
Meeting Minutes
>
HPC Meeting Minutes 2008
>
February 2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2019 1:16:18 PM
Creation date
6/8/2020 10:13:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
South Bend HPC
HPC Document Type
Minutes
BOLT Control Number
1001361
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Klusczinski: And this is the fill pac. I guess that I'm of the mind still, and until I die, that <br />unless, because of the nature of the windows, because they contribute greatly to the <br />structure and because there are no better matches to the building than the windows that it <br />was constructed with. Unless they're deteriorated, and I think that where they fall short, as <br />far as thermal efficiency and all that which would allow us to guide the public to be able to <br />introduce those solutions and be able to retain the original windows. I don't have enough <br />experience to know what might happen to compromise the aesthetics of this building since <br />it's not yet a National Register landmark in and of itself. And, it right now has it's original <br />136 year old original windows in it- and a matched set all the way around, 54 windows, <br />something like that. If we start piece mealing this, or if people do, it should be an all or <br />nothing and I'm not sure that I'm comfortable in saying that if it's an all replacement <br />house that it really serves the public or historic preservation for the example.... <br />Sassano: I would argue that it doesn't have to be all or nothing. Nothing in our guidelines <br />suggest... <br />Klusczinski: But this would be National Register consideration. And it would be what they <br />would call on it. <br />Sassano: Well, National Register would certainly valuate their review of this based on how <br />much of that material is authentic. Which is why a critical aspect of this is that we save <br />them; and that they're there. And that, should someone in the future want to put this on the <br />National Register and David Duval comes up and says you want the register then you have <br />to put the windows back in, well then ok, they're going back in. Or should he decide that <br />after he puts two tilt pacs in that he doesn't like them and the interior sash isn't such a bad <br />idea after all, there they are. <br />Klusczinski: Or do you know that in the installation process... <br />Sassano: In the installation process that they won'tfit right or will be damaged. The <br />question that I have a hard time answering is when you evaluate whether something <br />requires replacement. What role does inefficiency play in that determination? That's <br />where our guidelines are just unfortunately not clear. <br />Klusczinski: But I think that we do offer latitude to be able to satisfy those things. <br />Sassano: And you're looking at interior storms? <br />Klusczinski: Yes, I am. Any other questions, comments. <br />Chase: I'm just really not clear on this, so ... in suggesting the fill pack, you're still saying <br />this isn't what HPC is looking for? <br />Klusczinski: My opinion and it's not the same as everyone on the Board, my opinion would <br />be is that it conflicts with the guidelines. And it's capable of setting an unfortunate <br />precedent that could undermine many of the suggestions that we would make to support <br />these guidelines in and of themselves. So, I worry about that, and I worry about what this <br />Board's role would be if it wasn't for the retention of original historic features and <br />amenities and parts and pieces of a building that are not deteriorated beyond repair. When <br />I look at this, I don't see us as the pseudo -historic design review committee. I see us the <br />Historic Preservation Board. In my mind, there's a reason beyond just the aesthetics of <br />what we're looking at or what one of us would feel they'd see from a sidewalk view of the <br />building or area in question. I think that what we're trying to do is to preserve a structure <br />of a certain period in time of history with windows that do more than just operate as <br />windows. Its part of a matched set, its part of a building, and it compliments a structure - <br />they are the original Anderson windows. The other Andersons. <br />Chase: Not the Anderson company, the other Andersons... <br />Klusczinski: Yeah, so I look at more than just architectural features, that certainly plays <br />into it. We're historic preservation, we're not historic architecture, there are other <br />things... prominentpeople living in this house, whether or not the original features can or <br />should be retained. -I think that it's in our mission to help that to happen whenever it's - <br />possible. Without that, everything is subject to change. This building inevitably would <br />become something completely different, if the HPC hadn't intervened since 1973 and there <br />weren't other C of As, and because it's such a unique example to... <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.