Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Window Replacement After The Fact topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
HARB denies after‑the‑fact window alterations at 5 Saragossa Street, tells owner to reapply with remediation plan
Summary
The board voted to deny without prejudice an after‑the‑fact partial demolition application for wholesale vinyl window replacements at 5 Saragossa Street, directing the applicant to reapply with a plan to restore appropriate fenestration and warning of referral to code enforcement.
Get email alerts on the Window Replacement After The Fact topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Historic Architecture Review Board on Jan. 15 denied without prejudice an after‑the‑fact request related to wholesale window replacement at 5 Saragossa Street, citing alterations that the board said have changed the building’s historic character.
Staff reported the two‑and‑a‑half‑story residence contributes to the Model Land Company National Register historic district and that permitted work did not authorize wholesale window replacement; multiple street‑facing windows were replaced with vinyl units that do not match original muntin patterns or sizes. "The replacement windows do not match the original in design," staff wrote in the report and recommended additional framing details or a continuance to develop a more appropriate solution.
Neighbors and preservation advocates criticized the after‑the‑fact work. Guy Quarter, who lives next door, said the porch originally had 14 windows that were reduced to four and called the house "a classic structure" that had been "totally destroyed." Elizabeth and Pete Miller said they followed the HARB process when they replaced windows and warned that allowing after‑the‑fact alterations encourages flippers to sidestep rules.
Board members described the case as egregious and repeatedly urged the applicant to restore original fenestration and siding where possible. Several members said referral to code enforcement was appropriate if the applicant did not reapply with an acceptable remediation plan. The board voted to deny the after‑the‑fact partial demolition without prejudice so the owner or contractor can return with detailed elevations, a window schedule and a plan to make the building compatible with its contributing status.
