March 2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Sassano: And so I just like the idea that we're not precluding other future options here. That to me is very valuable. Klusczinski: You had something Linda? Riley: I'd like to speak in favor of this, I was presently surprised to see that the staff recommended this after all that we've been through. When you look at these windows, unless you go right up to these windows and bang them and knock on them, you're not going to know the difference between the ones that they want to put in and the old ones. If you saw the window in his house, some of the window frames that the glass fits in is so rotted that it would have to be replaced anyway. The only difference being you're going to probably have a majority of the wood replaced, you're going to lose the original glass which is wavy and unique. Sassano: No, you can repair that wood without losing the glass, you can epoxy fill that. Riley: Well... Chase: We've brought that up a number of times. Riley: Well, ok, but I would like to see him have an energy efficient house and it's not going to lookfrom the street like... Sassano: I think that it's also important to note that in this area of the house, either for now or for opening to wall opening is significantly, is ... in other words there's far more window opening than wall opening. Ido think that it's worth noting that when we look at a lot of the other windows there's a lot of wall in this house and I'm not sure that the gain to energy efficiency is going to be as great as sealing cracks, as insulating, as things like that. Throughout the rest of the house, we're looking at a much smaller percent of the openings. But you know I can appreciate the value in this one spot where it's almost all glass. So I do see this as a somewhat unique condition in this house due to percentage of window to wall. Klusczinski: And how would future boards or petitioners differentiate that particular aspect especially when those qualifications aren't spelled out in the guidelines? Sassano: I appreciate your question. Klusczinski: I think that any window in this house is now at liberty for change because of these four. Sassano: Sure. Klusczinski: If these are original, those are too. Sassano: Sure, I mean precedent is something that we always have to say, I can only offer that not being terribly familiar with the guidelines until recently, I'm a little surprised to not see a specific set of statements regarding energy eff ciency. I can only tell you that in the Secretary of the Interior's standards, it says quite a bit about it. And maybe that's something that we need to consider addressing. Klusczinski: Did you have something to say, or were you... ? Patrick: I'm just listening. Klusczinski: Any one else with comments? Chase: Am I to understand that this proposal would be acceptable to keep the look to the original? Klusczinski: I wouldn't want to comment on that. Chase: And that's just what I needed to know if this proposal is going to duplicate the look that's there with the change in glass to give you double pane and either repairing or replacing pieces of wood. That this is going to solve the security in the home with a warmer window vs changing the sill in all the way we talked. Is this proposal going to be more to the original look? Klusczinski: To each his own. Sassano: My opinion is that visually the lines will be the same. Chase: Ok. Sassano: The sticking point here is how one interprets the guidelines which could suggest that if the window can at all be repaired that it must be repaired. Chase: Well that was our contention, but the problem with that was we didn't know if the fill pac could go in.