[MassHistPres] rulings on technical issues

[Dennis De Witt]

We would be interested in examples of how commissions might have  
ruled in cases where the issue was as much or more one of technical,  
rather than just visual, appropriateness.

The particular case in question goes back to the sort of sunrooms  
discussed a couple of weeks ago -- but any analogous situation where  
the issue is more a matter of appropriate construction technology,  
rather than visual appropriateness, would be of interest.

In this case, the applicant wants to change the specification of an  
approved  ±15° slope roof surface containing an array of Veluxes,  
from soldered copper to aluminum (which cannot be soldered).  Because  
of the low slope and the fact that it is on a rear facade, visual  
consideration are somewhat secondary.  But it would seem that this is  
a very naive detail which is likely to leak and then lead to a  
quasi-"hardship" plea for some more visible, and even less  
appropriate-looking "fix" -- like rubber.

Examples of rulings dealing with technical issues to prevent  
unfortunate consequences further down the road would be welcomed.

Dennis De Witt
Brookline