Super Amputee Cat
Cyburbian
- Messages
- 2,379
- Points
- 32
ludes98 said:Hmm must have been a price break on that size.
Since I live in house with some overly tall/long windows, I can say they are sometimes a pain. Try placing furniture when the wall has a floor to ceiling window, or windows that are only 24" from the floor. When you have the luxury to waste space it is nice, but when you have to put double beds and desks in the kids' rooms, it is hard.
el Guapo said:Q. - Who gave the preservationistas the right to place a financial burden on individuals to support what they think is a grand idea?
A - Normally I agree with most of your rants SAC. But this one is different. Why is it a "shame?"
BKM said:While I agree with the "ughs," I also agree with Guapo on this one. It may look "ok" when done. I have a problem with rigid preservationist regulations.
Modesty of means to me is allowed more leeway...
el Guapo said:Q. - Who gave the preservationistas the right to place a financial burden on individuals to support what they think is a grand idea?
Will keeping a crappy house looking like a crappy house increase its resale value? Will keeping a crappy house "in-period" do anything other than please a Preservationista? Will dumping big money in to the house to stay with NHS suggested design critera in any way enhance the resident's lives? No, thinks I.
You don't know the owner/resident's economic or life circumstances. The people may need more light from bigger windows because they are older and have failing eyes. There could be many reasonable and rational reasons for what they are doing to that home.
To the presercvationistas I say "If you don't like the way a property is being managed - buy it"
BKM said:While I agree with the "ughs," I also agree with Guapo on this one. It may look "ok" when done. I have a problem with rigid preservationist regulations.
Modesty of means to me is allowed more leeway.
Save the real focus of your rants for the mega-mansions. (God you should see some of 'em in my town. If you have $750,000 to spend, couldn't you hire someone besides Billy Bob the Local Yohkel to design your house) You do Yuppie rants so well, Cat.
Dan said:Looks like a Community Development Department rehab job of some sort. If it's subsidized by a local government., don't expect any sort of attention to architectural detail.
It does look bad ... but IMHO not because there's siding and plastic windows. The new architectural elements are horizontally oriented, while the house is vertically oriented. A rhythm is broken, and it's a problem that could have been easily solved by using more vertically-oriented windows, even if they're plastic and have fake mullions.
The house was never a beauty to begin with. It wasn't a textbook Queen Anne Victorian, Italianate or shingle style, but rather a simple vernacular style that was considered plain for the day. The house seems typical of a style popular among simple German working-class immigrants, who probably built it with their own hands. Note the two front doors - it was a two-flat, which meant the original owners were probably not that well-off, using rent from a tenant to help pay the mortgage.
Super Amputee Cat said:As far as I know, this is a private rehab, but you're right in a way. Outside of historic districts, community development projects can pretty much do anything they want.
Gedunker said:Replacement windows are not always the best alternative. Modern single-pane glasses can achieve very high energy efficiency without the destruction of architectural elements that are important to defining the structure and its environment. (An important fact, particularly if you are a neighbor that has invested in the sensitive rehabilitiation of a historic structure.) Interior storm windows are another possibility that would have been both cost efficient and architecturally superior to replacement windows. Those wood windows lasted at least 100 years -- will the vinyl perform that well for that long?
This looks to me like putting a Hundai grille in a Volvo. It's just not right.
Preservation that does not go hand-in-hand with education is not acceptable. These homeowners might have saved money and ended up with a better project if they had consulted a preservationist, IMO.
Gedunker said:You must not be talking about CDBG. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act would not permit a remodel of this nature with CDBG funds. If CDBG were used and the HUD CPD office visited this rehab, the sh!t would hit the fan in these parts.
michaelskis said:To quiet an extent, I am in support of historic preservation on homes that deserve them. This house does not.
michaelskis said:This house.... no... one that might be in better condition... yes.
From many of the indications in the picture, (apathetic attempt and a wrap around porch, abandoning of the window styles, and obvious neglect of the yard as well and maintenance) make me think that this house might be just this side of disrepair.
Super Amputee Cat said:Yes, but this house, despite its age is not in an historic district, so such a rehab would be determined to be "No Effect" and we could do nothing to control the type of window being installed and only offer recommendations.
boiker said:Gedunker: planner of historic preservation? Our SHPO would react exactly as you described, and in fact, has before.
boiker said:It is a contributing structure to a larger district. However, liberal use of the contributing tag would mean that practically all of the old housing stock in my town would qualify to be included on the national register.
Gedunker said:I disagree SAC. Any building listed or eligible for listing in the NRHP must be protected under 106. Rehab would qualify as an undertaking, triggering 106 and my SHPO would determine that this remuddle would have "an adverse effect". (Fortunately, we operate on a Programmatic Agreement, so SHPO and Advisory Council don't look over my shoulder on every project.)
SAC: Do you guys have a survey of historic sites and structures? Indiana has nearly completed all 92 counties (and updated many, including my City). Outstanding resource. Unfortunately, not on-line |-)
michaelskis: I would rate this house as a "contributing" resource to a historic district (based on the b/w photo), meaning that, by itself, it is probably not eligible for the National Register. However, if more research showed that it was a unique example of its style or construction, or if it had an association with a historic event of person, a possible "notable" rating. Notable means that it may be eligible for listing in the NRHP (but is not a sure thing). In Indiana, "Outstanding" resources are individually eligible for listing in the NRHP.
Super Amputee Cat said:Yes, but that's the point. This building would be classified as Not Eligible, even before the alterations.