Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Windows topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies retroactive approval for vinyl windows on Sherman Boulevard house
Summary
The Milwaukee Historic Preservation Commission denied retroactive approval for vinyl window replacements at 2443 North Sherman Boulevard, saying there was no documentation the historic windows were beyond repair and directing replacement with wood 6-over-1 windows.
The Milwaukee Historic Preservation Commission unanimously denied after-the-fact approval for vinyl window replacements at 2443 North Sherman Boulevard and directed the property owner to pursue replacement with wood windows that match the house’s historic 6-over-1 sash proportions.
Staff told the commission the house, a 1920 Mediterranean Revival property, had at least seven windows replaced with vinyl 1-over-1 and sliding units without a Certificate of Appropriateness. Staff said the applicant provided no documentation that the original windows were beyond repair and recommended denial. "The original windows were 6-over-1 double-hung sashes," staff said, and preservation guidelines call for duplicating original sash appearance when replacement is necessary.
LaDonne Tipton, the property owner, said she replaced the windows after being told no permits were required; she told the commission she lacks funds to restore the original windows. The commission and staff discussed that the contractor used, Felco/Champion (named in testimony), is a large licensed contractor and should have known to check for COA requirements in a historic district.
A commissioner explicitly told the owner, "This is a pretty open and shut case. You gotta put the wood windows back." Commissioners urged the owner to pursue remedies with the contractor and noted that permits and COA requirements apply specifically to historic properties.
The commission voted to adopt staff’s recommendation to deny retroactive approval. The commission also invited the owner to contact the contractor to pursue financial relief or remediation and discussed the possibility of the contractor rectifying the work.
After the vote the commission ratified a batch of staff-approved Certificates of Appropriateness for other properties and approved minutes from the August 4 meeting; those routine ratifications were carried by separate, unanimous votes.
No timetable or explicit penalty was stated in the meeting record; the commission’s motion recorded denial and a direction that replacement should be with solid wood, 6-over-1 sash windows matching historic proportions.
