Laserfiche WebLink
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT <br />fishing areas, -access points, scenic -overlooks or terraces is prohibited.. <br />I.B.I. Required <br />Plants, trees ... which reflect the property's history and development shall be <br />retained.- <br />I.B.2. Recommended - <br />New site work should also be appropriate to existing surrounding site elements <br />in scale, type and appearance.'The development of private boat landings-, <br />access points... should be done in such•a way as to avoid obstructing the view <br />of the river and its banks. <br />I.A.3. Prohibited <br />No -changes may be made to the appearance of the site by removing old plants, <br />trees, fencing...and•other elements before evaluating their importance to the <br />property's history and development. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />The Historic Preservation Commission has long been aware of the problems of <br />erosion and specifically the progressive slumping of the riverbank in this <br />section of the Riverside.Drive Local Historic District. Over the past several. <br />years, Staff has sought to develop a project or set of guidelines to assist <br />:the owners of threatened structures in this vicinity in addressing these <br />problems. Thoubh these attempts have not yet come to fruition, Staff welcome <br />responsible attempts -by owners to impede the effects of erosion and slumping. <br />The applicants have.'in this case consulted with John Law of the Indiana Dept. <br />of Natural Resources to develop the proposed program of coordinated terracing <br />and flora above the floodway where development would require permission from, <br />DNR and the Army Corps of Engineers. Staff has discussed the issues ?with the: <br />applicant to assure their understanding of the dynamic nature of the erosion <br />problem and the limitations of any singular property addressing it without <br />concerted efforts at adjacent properties. Within these limitations,.the <br />proposal represents a responsible and most immediately available response on <br />their parts. <br />Their proposal for terracing and flora is consistent with the guidelines <br />listed above. For the sake of clarity, Staff understands the limitation found <br />in I.A.3 prohibiting "public...,, scenic overlooks and terraces" as meaning <br />spaces intended for occupation and not the more mundane terracing of a- slope <br />for the support of vegetation which is clearly indicated in other language. <br />Staff recommends approval of this application and recommends careful. <br />monitoring•of its performance-for•indications to direct future developments. <br />DBD <br />7/7/98 <br />