Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Windows topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hudson board tables decision on Andersen E‑series windows for 33 East Streetsboro St.
Summary
The Architectural & Historic Board of Review asked the applicant to return with documentation that the Andersen E‑series windows match previously accepted historic products and tabled the item to the April meeting for additional evidence from other historic districts and detailed cut sheets.
The Hudson Architectural & Historic Board of Review on March 11 heard a proposal to install Andersen E‑series aluminum‑clad wood windows at 33 East Streetsboro Street and voted to table the application so the applicant can provide comparative documentation from other historic towns.
Board staff introduced application 2025‑36133 and said the property is in the city's historic district and that earlier proposals for other window brands had been approved or denied at prior meetings. Tracy Crawford, representing her father, the homeowner, said she did not order the existing windows and that contractor work had been done before she realized the product type: "I did not order anything for this house. It was done by a contractor, and I was way behind the 8 ball in finding out that that was not the window that they ordered." (Tracy Crawford).
A representative for Andersen described the product as "an aluminum clad product from Andersen" and emphasized construction details: "It comes with a nail fin, all aluminum clad on the exterior, wood on the inside" (Manufacturer representative (Andersen)). Board members pressed on whether the product is as historically accurate as previously approved Pella Reserve or Marvin UltraClad windows and asked for evidence that similar Andersen products have been accepted in comparable historic districts.
Several board members highlighted installation detail and profile as deciding factors. One member noted concerns about how the window sits in the opening and whether it is recessed to preserve the historic reveal and shadow lines. The board requested comparisons, cut sheets, and local examples showing the Andersen E‑series used in historic contexts, citing the Department of the Interior preservation briefs as the standard guide for historic window appropriateness.
Because the board determined the burden to demonstrate historical accuracy lies with the applicant, it voted to table the application and asked the applicant and vendor to submit cut sheets, photos from other municipalities that have allowed the product, and installation details before the next regular meeting on April 8.
The application will return for reconsideration once the board has received the additional documentation.
