Madison Historic District District Board of Review (HDBR), Happy Smith and Ken McWilliams, are evaluated by some renovation projects and replaced how the historical materials for some renovation projects are assessed and replaced.
On numerous occasions in the past few months, the HDBR members have questioned historical houses and companies in Madison's work in Madison's proposed work or in some cases that use substitute materials if existing materials could have been recovered and renovated.
The concern is that the use of some replacement materials undermines the contribution of the structures to the historical district and leads to the destruction of what the city center of Madison calms down for its historical authenticity.
Smith, who was unable to participate in the last week, has apparently created a change to change the guidelines for the replacement for windows, and McWilliams was noted that he will make a similar change from the board meeting in the next month to the board seats with siding and other external functions.
Madison's ordinance tries to protect the integrity of the historical district – a national historical symbol of the national register of historical places – and to review the HDBR with reviews for repairs and renovations to ensure that the external appearance structures that contribute to the historical district are restored as closely as possible if the structures were originally built.
Characteristics such as windows, doors, siding, verands, roofs, chimneys and others have an enormous impact on the preservation of the historical appearance of a structure and the historical district. However, since owners of old buildings have to struggle with decay, costly repairs and the desire for modernity, the economy of modern replacement materials often prevails the aesthetics of the restoration.
Smith and McWilliams both noted that part of the problem is that some contractors who work on houses and companies are not sent in historical renovation and that faster and often less costly replacement options for the time and work orders for the repair of windows and workers who repair and register the right materials, can repair and prevent the correct materials, and work with Correct materials and workers with correct material and workers with work.
There are a number of modern replacement products that are approved for use in the historical district – such as Hardie board as a replacement for wooden cladding and wooden windows dressed in aluminum as a replacement for traditional wooden windows – and many of them offer a lower cost repair and the potential for energy efficiency, but the Ordinance restored through the exchange.
If it is not taken into account and properly installed, replacement materials can negatively influence the appearance of the structure and the historical district and do not provide repair duration compared to original materials with proper recovery.
In the latest sessions, the HDRB applicants have pushed to the material selection and asked them to contact one of the city's approved craftsmen to restore the replacement and to do it before being demolished, and the restoration can no longer be an option.
The board members have also recommended that those who are granted the replacement permit so much of their original materials – such as vintage window glass, doors and wooden cladding – possible to be available for other structures that are involved in the restoration but are unable to find the time materials that are necessary for the completion of their projects.
According to McWilliams, one of the most important changes he is looking for is a break in projects so that the obligation to work and materials can be evaluated for the restoration or recovery of restoration. As soon as the materials are removed and destroyed, they are lost by the historical district.
“We have to stop the work and have someone checked what is there and I am writing an amendment in this sense,” he said.