Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Windows topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic board recommends repair-first approach for windows at 158 South Pershing
Summary
The York City Historical Architectural Review Board recommended that owners first attempt sash/frame repair and glass replacement at 158 South Pershing, allowing a like-for-like trim-line wood replacement sized to match the existing opening only if repair proves infeasible; the board approved the recommendation by voice vote.
The York City Historical Architectural Review Board recommended that the owners of 158 South Pershing first attempt to repair existing sashes and frames and replace only broken glass, allowing full trim-line wood replacement sized to the existing openings if repair is not feasible.
The recommendation, offered in a motion by a committee member (S3) and seconded by the chair (S2), followed an applicant presentation that described two damaged windows — a bay/oriel window and a kitchen/front window — with approximate sizes provided by the applicant.
Why it matters: board consultant and members stressed that in many cases the oriel damage appears to be a single broken pane and that repairing the sash and frame preserves original historic materials. The consultant (S6) cautioned that wholesale all-wood replacements often fail sooner than modern clad or composite options and said, “why not repair rather than replace?” which anchored the board’s repair-first approach.
What the board decided: the motion instructed staff to recommend that the applicant first attempt sash/frame repair and glass replacement; if repair proves infeasible, replacement windows must be trim-lined wood sized to match the existing openings. The board also asked that any existing storm windows be reinstalled over new sashes to preserve a uniform facade appearance. The motion passed by voice vote (the board recorded “ayes have it”).
Details and conditions: members requested elevation or sash-dimension drawings to verify how replacement units would fit the existing, often non-square openings. Several members urged the applicant to consider replacing all oriel windows rather than a partial replacement that could appear mismatched; others noted that repair contractors and parts availability (Andersen/Anderson parts were referenced) would influence feasibility.
Next steps: the board’s recommendation is advisory in the certificate-of-appropriateness review process; applicants were asked to provide documentation (photos, sash dimensions or drawings) and to explore repair options before pursuing full sash replacement.
The board moved on after the vote; the minutes record that the motion carried by voice vote and that staff will include the consultant’s recommendations in the certificate-of-appropriateness paperwork.
