Laserfiche WebLink
replacement of the front windows with the materials in the design standards, and <br />potential price difference. Commissioner Dux gave Mr. Werstein the option to present <br />the specification of the vinyl windows he is considering. The commission would <br />review their compatible in terms of flexibility, distortion, with one of the windows that <br />are approved in the standards, then possibly consider changing the Design Standards <br />and adding that particular type of vinyl window. He did note it is a process to change <br />the Standards that takes a few months and must be approved by City Council. <br />Commissioner Hider explained that he was using the Fiberglass windows in his new <br />construction, and had compared the cost, and would be willing to share information <br />with Mr Werstein. Mr Werstein said he would be willing to check the fiberglass <br />windows and see if it would fit within budget. <br />Chairman Dux made a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness as <br />presented with the condition that the owner used the window materials required in the <br />Design Standards of the .Historic District. Motion was seconded by Commissioner <br />Coyle. Chairman Dux called for further discussion. Mr. Werstein stated he was a little <br />hesitant to put one type of window in the front and another type in the sides, as he <br />would receive bulk pricing. He would do his research on the windows, and if his <br />budget allowed, would consider this. Chairman Dux reiterated that if budget did not <br />allow him to use the approved materials, then Mr Werstein present the windows <br />specifications for the vinyl windows he desires, and the commission would review <br />compatibility with what is approved in the design standards. If compatible, the <br />commission was open to revising the design standards changes Hearing no further <br />discussion a vote was taken on the existing motion. Motion carried 5 —1, <br />Commissioner Vandiver opposed. <br />Commissioner Hider was recused to make present his Certificate of Appropriateness. <br />C. Mr. Hider presented plans for his new construction located at 1110 S. Church St. He <br />explained that he had all the approvals. He was ready to start construction. He <br />presented architectural plans to the commission. He noted that he anticipated using <br />metal standing seam roofing but budget would not allow, so he will have standing <br />seam only on the front porch. After further discussion on the project, a motion was <br />made by Commissioner Coyle to approve the new construction as presented without <br />the shutters and the roofing being architectural shingles. Motion was seconded by <br />Commissioner Emmite, motion carried 6-0 <br />Mr Hider was requesting a fagade grant of $1000 for the new construction his historically <br />compatible house. A motion was made by Chairman Dux to approve this grant, seconded by <br />Commissioner Caffey. Motion Carried 6-0 <br />Commissioner Hider was brought back to the commission. <br />Chairman Dux made a motion to approve a $1000 Fagade grant for 562 SW 1" St, Mr Werstein, <br />with the condition that he used the materials approved in the Design Standards for the Historic <br />District in regards to window replacement. Seconded by Commissioner Caffey, Motion Carried <br />6-0 <br />Ms. Bedford HPO report included: <br />