March 2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

As romantic as preservation might appear, it is also anchored in science and economics. Successful preservation must be furthered by reasonable, objective standards. It sometimes must differentiate between society's needs and its wants. We are only stewards of our domain and the buildings that we occupy. Rare and unique examples of the past must be carefully guarded. Preservation must strive to be informed and energy conscious. It must respect the birth of new ideas with respect to the need for change and the impact of change to the surroundings. That does not mean that it conflicts with progress and technology. It also does NOT mean that historic features are wasteful and inefficient. Nothing could be further from the truth! According to "The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows " Preservation Brief no.9 - issued by the US Secretary of the Interior and National Park Service -Technical Preservation Services, and relating to historic properties and windows, "After all of the factors have been evaluated (these are, "admitting light to the interior spaces, providing fresh air and ventilation to the interior, providing a visual link to the outside world, and enhancing the appearance of a building'), "windows should be considered significant to a building if they. 1) are original, 2) reflect the original design intent for the building, 3) reflect period or regional styles or building practices, 4) reflect changes to the building resulting from major periods or events, or 5) are examples of exceptional craftsmanship or design. " Preservation Brief no.9 continues, "Consider energy efficiency as one of the factors for replacements, but do not let it dominate the issue. Energy conservation is no excuse for the wholesale destruction of historic windows, which can be made thermally efficient by historically and aesthetically acceptable means. " Therefore, I vote to deny C of A #2008-0214 for the following reasons: 1. Page 74175 of the Chapin Park Guidebook directs that "original windows and features shall be retained" and that they "shall not be discarded when they can be restored and reused in place. " It goes on to say that `features... that require the removal of original windows and doors, shall not be installed. " 2. The existing windows on the structure are not deteriorated beyond repair and can be reconditioned and repaired as necessary. 3. A correctable, lack of maintenance is not a case for the replacement of existing or original window units or window components. 4. Enhancements and upgrades that do not compromise the structure or the Guidebook language are available and can be installed to compliment the existing and original window units (i.e. interior storms). 5. The proposed changes are in stark contrast to practices endorsed by the HPC for the preservation of historic structures. 6. While the owner volunteers to store the old sashes in a safe place, the HPC has no mechanism to verify that this practice will be carried out satisfactorily or that sashes will be sustained in an acceptable form to permit reinstallation, which I believe to be the rationale for storage. It is also conceivable that the original window frames will be compromised or damaged from the installation of the "tilt pacs " thereby negating the opportunity for stored sashes to be re -installed into their corresponding frames - in the future. 7. The maintenance and repair of original and unique features (including windows) is endorsed by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Historic Preservation & Archeology, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and honor the US Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for Restoration. 8. The Anderson House is a signature Local Historic Landmark that resides inside the Chapin Park Local and National Historic Districts. In its present state, it is a National Register candidate. Modifications and adulterations to the structure including the replacement of exterior features (windows) will undermine its qualifications for that status. 14