Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Windows And Roofing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board requires window muntin pattern for 403 North Swinton renovation; raises concerns about roof material
Summary
The Historic Preservation Board approved a certificate of appropriateness for renovations at 403 North Swinton Avenue but required new windows to include a muntin pattern similar to existing windows; staff and several board members expressed concern about proposed standing‑seam metal roofing.
The Historic Preservation Board voted May 7 to approve a certificate of appropriateness for exterior renovations at 403 North Swinton Avenue, with a condition that newly installed windows include a muntin pattern similar to the building’s existing divided‑light appearance.
Why it matters: windows and roof material are character‑defining features for mid‑century and masonry vernacular buildings; the board’s decision illustrates how the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the city’s design guidelines shape acceptable modern interventions.
What was proposed: the applicant sought approval to install impact windows and doors, add two windows to the north elevation, replace the asphalt shingle roof with a mill‑finished standing‑seam metal roof, remove existing shutters and repaint the building (proposed Sherwin‑Williams Tea Berry with Bright White trim), and replace a gable vent. Staff reported that permit records show the structure originally had shingle roofing and that the building likely began as a wood‑frame structure later stuccoed; staff noted the owner proposed large clear glass windows without dimensional muntins and the standing‑seam metal roof.
Staff analysis and board discussion: staff referenced the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Delray Beach design guidance warning against altering character‑defining window patterns. Planner Michelle Hewitt told the board that a 1970s permit shows a window on the north elevation and that a matching window would be historically consistent. Board members supported impact windows for storm protection but expressed concern about the loss of the appearance of divided lights. Several members said a metal roof is a pragmatic choice for longevity but that a metal shingle profile would better match historic character than standing‑seam panel roofing.
Condition and vote: the board approved COA‑2025‑153 by roll call, requiring that “the new windows contain a muntin pattern similar to existing as shown in the plans.” Vote: Chris Cabeza, Peter Dwyer, Ezra Craig, John Miller and Jim Chard voted yes; Carol Perez and Vlad Dumitrescu were absent.
Implications: the approval allows the owner to proceed with impact windows and a roof replacement but preserves the building’s visual rhythm by retaining a divided‑light muntin pattern in the new sash. The board left the roof material decision to the applicant but discussed preferring a metal shingle profile over long‑panel standing seam when historic appearance is a priority.
Next steps: staff will finalize the COA with the window‑muntin condition; the owner’s contractor must order windows with the required muntin pattern and submit final product specifications for permitting.
