December 1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

concurred that this was probably most feasible. Returning to the discussion of possible grant funding, Mr. Talley indicated his understanding that at present the site would need National Register status to qualify for such. Mr. Oxian stated that this was not necessarily so. The discussion then turned to playground equipment and what limitations or exemptions might be placed on future improvements not effecting historical resources. Mr. Oxian noted that exemptions could be made to the point that they were acceptable to the commission. He indicated that playground equipment changed over the course of time due to wear and tear, new modes of play and regulations, and he felt that equipment exchanges would not be problematic with or without exemption. He stated that the items which are -to be exempted from review should be recorded in writing. Ms. Harriman sought clarification of procedure henceforth. Mr. Oxian responded that the HPC would make recommendation, but that the Common Council would make the determination as to whether the Landmark was established. Ms. Harriman then sought further clarification as to what the Park Board's role would be as that consideration continued and what the timetable would be for proceeding. Mr. Oxian responded that the Park Board could work with the HPC.in coming to agreement regarding the details of the Landmark proposal or could oppose the proposal at the Common Council. He stated that the Commission could table the consideration until a future meeting. Ms. Harriman agreed that she would appreciate such a continuation until the January HPC meeting in order to give sufficient time for the continued consideration of the details of the proposal. Mr. Talley commented that he had hoped to accomplish 1995 landmarking on the sentiment of the park's centennial. Mr. Oxian Indicated that continuation until January would give sufficient time for the necessary communications. Mr. Oxian observed that Shetterly Park was already included in the Riverside Drive Historic District. and that might be taken -as an example of the sort of cooperation which might occur in a Landmark situation, noting that Landmarks had more flexible standards than districts. Mr. Talley added that the Michigan Street Bridge and North Pumping Station were already established Landmarks associated with the Park. Mr. Talley moved that _the__designation--of—Leeper---Park--as— out lined—and recommended under the heading of Leeper Park Historical Context by Staff be approved. Failing a second, he withdrew this motion and made a motion that matter be tabled to the January meeting of the HPC. Mr. Borkowski seconded the motion which was unanimously approved. B. Certificates of Appropriateness 1. 1995-1103; 520 East Colfax (LL) - Art -glass window Mr. Duvall distributed photographs and read the Staff Report for this proposal. Nancy Hanson, representing Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana then made a brief presentation. Explaining the oral history attesting to the prior presence of art glass at this location but the absence of specific knowledge as to is pattern or appearance. The glass panel is a donation of the Probst family descendants. She presented a full size color illustration of the proposed glass panel. Mrs Choitz inquired regarding exterior protection of the panel. Ms. Hanson indicated that an existing storm glass sash would be retained. Mrs. Choitz moved that the Commission accept the recommendation of Staff for approval of the application. Mrs. Hostetler seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. 2. 1995-11.,XX (1995-1117); 1216 East Wayne Street North - replacement of slate roof w/ shingle