Princeton homeowner withdraws siding replacement application after commission objects to vinyl proposal

Catherine Millett, owner of 258 John Street, withdrew a proposal to replace the house's existing wood siding with a new premium vinyl product after the Princeton Historic Preservation Commission raised concerns about losing defining historic features and urged repair or replacement in kind. The commission reviewed a staff report and heard from Millett and her contractor, Emmanuel Pujols of Pujols Roofing and Siding LLC, before recommending the applicant work with staff rather than pursue the current application.

Why it matters: Commissioners said the house's two‑material treatment — clapboard below and staggered shingles above — and its two‑tone colors are characteristic of the American Foursquare examples in the Witherspoon‑Jackson Historic District and contribute to the block's coherence. Several commissioners said replacing both levels with a single modern vinyl product would erase that historic character.

Elizabeth (staff) opened the item with a summary of jurisdiction and findings from White's Preservation Planning LLC's 2015 property inventory, noting the house is a contributing building in the Witherspoon‑Jackson Historic District and listed as a "type 2" property subject to preservation plan review for visible changes. She said the application described the lower level as vinyl lap siding and the upper level as a composite staggered cedar‑shake style, and that the applicant's submission proposed Mastic Carved Wood 4' vinyl siding by Ply Gem with different colors for each floor. The staff report asked the applicant to confirm existing materials and provide profiles and finish choices because those details affect the commission's review.

Millett said she bought the house in February 2003 and that it had been renovated previously; she told the commission she wants a low‑maintenance solution because she expects to remain in the house long term. Contractor Emmanuel Pujols described the condition he found on inspection: "throughout the house, there are multiple soft spots" and some evidence of moisture behind the siding. He said the existing boards appear to be an engineered wood lap, irregular in exposure, and that the proposed premium vinyl offers lower maintenance and a long warranty.

Commission discussion focused on material and character. Commissioners repeatedly recommended retaining the visual distinction between the upper and lower levels. Several members noted that American Foursquare houses in the district historically used clapboard below and shingles above, and that that contrast 'including differences in texture and exposure'is a defining feature. One commissioner urged the applicant to "try to use the two different materials top and bottom" to preserve the house's contribution to the neighborhood. Another commissioner told the applicant the commission generally does not consider cost when making preservation determinations.

Commissioner Elrick advised that, if the sense of the commission was not to approve the proposed material change, the applicant could withdraw the application and work with staff administratively or return later after revising plans. Millett accepted that option and said, "Well, then I think we'll withdraw." The commission did not take a formal vote to deny the application.

What happens next: Staff told Millett that ordinary maintenance and in‑kind replacement generally do not require a certificate of approval, while a change to a new material would. The commission also said it is preparing design guidelines with photographs and examples to clarify acceptable materials and treatments in the district. Millett and her contractor left samples with staff to consider while they explore repair or in‑kind replacement options.

Key quotes from the record include Millett: "I purchased the home in 02/2003, and it had been completely renovated'... that's the colors that we have now." Contractor Emmanuel Pujols: "throughout the house, there are multiple soft spots." Commissioner Elrick: "One suggestion might be that if it's the sense of HPC not to approve this application, you might wanna consider withdrawing the application at this time." Millett: "Well, then I think we'll withdraw."

Meeting context: The discussion occurred during the commission's regular meeting on Sept. 15, 2025, after staff presented a written report. Commissioners spent substantial time on material‑and‑character issues rather than procedural questions; the applicant withdrew rather than proceed to a denial vote.