June 1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

guesthouse, it preserved the aesthetic of the main house. Commissioner Choitz mentioned the option of an inside storm window which would not change the appearance from the outside. President Oxian inquired if the owners were going to have to use new windows to replace the two windows that were altered by AC units. Mr. Duvall responded they would if they did not reuse the window units that would be taken out to install french doors. Commissioner Fine pointed out if the vinyl siding was not allowed and the french doors were approved, the owners would need to deal with the existing door in a different manner since they would not want to vinyl side over it. Commissioner Bullene moved the Commission approve the replacement windows for 325 West North Shore Drive. Commissioner Petrass seconded the motion. President Oxian asked for clarification. Commissioner Bullene said his motion included all window and door items as proposed by the owner. Commissioner Bullene included in his motion that the removed windows were to be saved. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Hostetler moved the Commission accept the staff recommendation- regardina the replacement of the rear door. Commissioner Petrass seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimouslv. President Oxian informed the Yeandels that the Standards and Maintenance Committee would make a site visit and have the authority to grant the COA for vinyl siding if the Committee felt it was appropriate. 4. 1077 Riverside Drive --RSD-LHD-- fence & landscape Mr. Duvall and Ms. Anderson read the staff report. Mrs. Hendriksen said her landscaper had indicated it was not feasible to move the lilacs in front of the fence because of the lack of sun. He suggested instead the plants be moved along the river. Mrs. Hendriksen asked that they not be held to the 4-8" from the property line for the installation of the fence as was written on the application. President Oxian asked if the fence would face out or in. Mrs. Hendriksen said the picket side would face 1077 Riverside. Jim Giesel, co-owner of 1081 Riverside Drive, explained the owners of 1081 had no objection to the installation of a fence, however they did have an objection to the type of fence because it would be visible from the street. He said he felt something more historically appropriate would be a better choice. Mr. Geisel said the owners of 1081 also had an objection to the fence being so close to the property line. He said they would like it to be 2-3' from the property line so the owners of 1077 would be able to maintain and mow around the fence. President Oxian asked for clarification on the style of fence to be installed. Commissioner Bullene noted he was not certain what the local feeling on fences is, but in his home town whoever owned the fence had the structure on their side. He said he did not know if this was tradition or courtesy, but if this was followed the fence in question would need to face opposite what the owner was proposing. Mrs. Hendriksen explained she had checked and South Bend had no ordinance regarding the way a fence faces, but the main reason she wanted to do it with the boards facing toward her property was because the fence company said they would need to go onto the neighbors property to install the fence with the boards facing out toward the neighbors. She noted she had received a letter from the owners of 1081 stating their property was not to be trespassed upon. She noted the neighbors did not want her children to get a ball that strayed onto their property. Mr. Geisel asked that the owners of 1077 be held