In a message dated 03/10/2000 11:12:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes: > I agree with most of the responses on vinyl siding - it's icky, cruddy stuff. > But I can't help feeling that the preservation movement is unnecessarily > isolating itself by holding vinyl siding at arms length while holding its > nose. The people who are butchering their nice old three deckers are > unlikely to be brought into the preservation fold right away, especially if > the price of admission is a hefty first time painting & repair bill. > > I am surprised that (some part of) the preservation movement does not > embrace > these owners and try to work out some guidelines for helping them do a good > (or just not-so-bad) vinyl job. There are several communities in New Jersey that allow vinyl siding within historic districts; so I don't think it's a total rejection of the industry. However, usually this is accompanied by guidelines that stipulate the siding must match the reveal of the original clapboard, and that during installation the other architectural elements on the building must not be obscured or destroyed. The problem is.... when you have a really complicated house, it's going to cost more to do 'visually compatible' vinyl siding that doesn't wreck the architectural elements... which effectually negates the impetus for siding in the first place, because most people want a cheap fix-up. I've never minded siding in theory, but the people who are siding their houses rarely take the initiative to find visually compatible siding. It's usually the cheapest, most convenient siding providers-- which usually means that they choose an inappropriate siding size, which changes the whole balance of the exterior. And there is a cumulative effect that happens when the architectural elements get stripped away, one by one. Like in some of the suburban bungalows from the 'teens here in town: in a charming neighborhood of 50 - 60 bungalows, only 1 has an intact bracket. That's pretty sad. I'd be much happier with the siding industry if 1) they touted their product as a product, not a miracle cure 2) the product was repairable (i.e. what Wm. Rose said) 3) low prices and standardized product weren't the main objective Sign me, Bracketless in NJ (I do have copies of some of those architectural guidelines, if you are interested.)