My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
April 1992
sbend
>
Public
>
Historic Preservation
>
Meeting Minutes
>
HPC Meeting Minutes 1992
>
April 1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2019 1:16:25 PM
Creation date
6/8/2020 10:07:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
South Bend HPC
HPC Document Type
Minutes
BOLT Control Number
1001404
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
II. Existing Structures, <br />D) Entrances. Porches. and Steps <br />1) Required <br />Existing or original porches ... shall be retained <br />or replaced by replicas of the same design and <br />materials when deteriorated beyond repair. Porches <br />and additions reflecting later architectural styles, <br />and which are - important - __to the building's historical <br />-- - — •integrity - shall-- be__retained.______ -__. <br />2) Recommended <br />When enclosing porches for heat conservation or <br />other reasons, it should be done in a manner that <br />does not alter the architectural or historical <br />character of the building. <br />3) Prohibited <br />Fr porches, stoops, patios, and steps that are <br />important to the building's style and development <br />shall not be altered or removed. <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br />The existing porch is a unique element and important to the <br />building's history and development. It is representative of <br />climate accommodating design in the early twentieth century, <br />which has since been replaced by central air conditioning and <br />ventilation systems. Its value as material evidence of historic <br />construction is significant. <br />However, the proposed alteration is not in conflict with the <br />-- - -- -- pertinent standards as sited above. The proposal alters the <br />existing porch, but retains it. The proposal does not alter the <br />-- architectural cha- racter of the building, i.e. it is not <br />incompatible with the style of the building. Also, the porch in <br />question is not a front porch; thus the proposal does not <br />conflict with standard II.D(3). <br />The staff encourages the preservation of the porch as it <br />exists for reasons sited above. However, the commission must <br />_ <br />..take into account the proposal's coherence to the district <br />standards. F <br />J. - Pastor <br />' r=- HPC Staff <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.