My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
January 1992
sbend
>
Public
>
Historic Preservation
>
Meeting Minutes
>
HPC Meeting Minutes 1992
>
January 1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2019 1:16:25 PM
Creation date
6/8/2020 10:07:39 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.
/
35
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
There is.no documentation other than the owner's testimony as to <br />the nature of the vestibule prior to alteration, i.e. window and <br />door openings. - -- <br />According to the owner, the previously existing window openings <br />were not part of the original vestibule: they were make -shift <br />fixed sashes, fashioned out -of parts from 1/1 double hung wood <br />sashes. The owner also claims that the previously existing door <br />to the vestibule was not original, that it fit the opening only <br />roughly and appeared to be more of an interior door. The owner <br />also claims that the work to the soffit was begun prior to his <br />purchase of the home and left incomplete. <br />The project,.as it exists, is in keeping/not in keeping with the <br />Lincolnway East Local Historic District standards as follows: <br />1) Part One is in keeping with standards II.C.(1)(3). The <br />replacement door is similar in form to that previously existing. <br />Although somewhat out of. character with -other exterior doors in <br />the building, it is not contradictory to the Free Classic Queen <br />10%â–ºAnne style of the house. This type of door is not without <br />precedent in the district: identical doors were approved in the <br />summer of 1991 for installation at the rear of 1346 LWE. <br />-------------- ---- <br />2 - Part --Two is -not -in - keeping -with- standards II.C. (1 )(3) . The <br />commission should consider, however, that the previously existing <br />sashes were not historic and were unsympathetic to the style and <br />form of the entry vestibule and more generally, the building. <br />Also, the change occurs at the rear of the building and cannot be <br />seen from the street. <br />The staff asserts that the replacement sash on the west side is <br />in accord with the building's historic and aesthetic character, <br />and therefore should be retained. The window replacement on the <br />south side, however, should be moved, perhaps to the east 'side; <br />it currently appears as a misplaced element in the south face of <br />the entry vestibule.. <br />3) Part three is not in keeping with standards II.A.(1)(2). <br />The owner claims that the siding is applied directly to the stud <br />wall. He would like to remove the siding and install building <br />materials to make the vestibule more weather resistant, and apply <br />new clapboard to replicate the original. <br />The original siding, however, appears to be in good condition <br />The staff recommends that the owner be permitted to install <br />weather resistant materials and return the original siding in <br />place. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.