Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 1990historicpreservation,. commission of south bend and st. joseph county ROOM 1123 COUNTY CITY BUILDING south bend, indiana 46601 (219) 284-9798 MEMORANDUM TO: HPC Members FROM: John Oxian, President DATE: November 9, 1990 SUBJECT: Parliamentary Procedures It has come to my attention that the monthly meetings are becoming more and more difficult to transcribe. It seems the problem is that too many people are talking at the same time, making it difficult to transcribe the main conversation from the tape: This is especially difficult when the person speaking is in the "audience" and someone at the table is holding their own conversation. While total formality is not necessary (i.e. asking for the floor), please raise your hand to be recognized by the presiding officer, or, at the very least, wait until a person has finished speaking before speaking yourself, whether it be to that person, another person, or the body in general. Thank you for your cooperation. DHPA NATIONAL REGISTER WORKSHOP November 7, 1990 The DHPA workshop consisted of two halves. The morning was spent discussing the results of the NPS audit of the state office and how private contractors and contracting organizations should write contracts which will use grant funds. The afternoon session reviewed the National Register forms and what type of information should be entered into the various cataaories. The information was of great value and will assist the commission in its future contracting needs and National Register nominations. GUIDING DESIGN ON MAINSTREET _N___ Indiana Main Street 5th Annual Conference November 1 & 2, 1990 The 5th Annual Main Street Conference provided information on a variety of topics pertinent to historic preservation and downtown revitalization. The conference was divided between general sessions and concurrent educational sessions. Thursday morning began with welcoming remarks by Reid Williamson, President of Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, and Lt. Governor Frank O'Bannon. The keynote address, "Designing Our Future: Why Preservation Makes Sense", was presented by Tom Moriarity, Senior Associate of Halcyon Ltd. In his address, Mr. Moriarity discussed the marketability of historic preservation to downtown businesses and potential clients of those businesses. He pointed out that suburban shopping areas are now being designed to resemble downtown centers. Thus, downtowns obviously are an area to which people relate. These downtown districts provided opportunities for investment protection and attraction, for small business incubation, and for community identity. He also pointed out that full-scale restoration is not necessary to attract attention; signage and graphics, when used properly, will also gain the attention of the desired audience. Mr. Moriarity stated that historic preservation is generally more cost effective in the long run than new construction, and that design evokes behavior in those who live and work downtown; people sense a vibrancy of old in "tired" buildings. The concurrent sessions attended include the following: Main Street Guides Public Improvements Effective Marketing Strategies for Downtown Improving Corporate Image for Main Street Organizations and Businesses Solving Certified Rehabilitation Issues Selecting Historic Paint Colors Main Street Guides Public Improvements discussed strategies used in Greencastle and Valparaiso for developing, implementing, and maintaining public improvements. Effective Marketing Strategies for Downtown discussed reasons for marketing your city (city involvement/pride, economic development, tourism, and to raise the expectation level of the citizens), and how to go about marketing. Both speakers mentioned that a business's logo should be its major investment. Improving Corporate Image took the marketing issue a step further by discussing not only the process of marketing, but some key factors in successful marketing strategies. The most important factor, according to the speakers, is to be consistent. Express what you sell or do in everything that leaves the office. This includes the logo, but is not limited to it. A logo should state who you are and what you do, and should be easily recognizable as yours. Use it on everything. Be creative in looking for and reaching markets. Sell both your services and your people. Take the time to know your business, your competitors, and your market. Certified Rehabilitation Issues discussed the standards for receiving tax credits and provided examples of how-to and how -not -to rehabilitate a building to receive tax credits. One of the most interesting items discussed is the fact that a tax credit project can be reviewed within 30 days in Indianapolis and within 2 to 3 months at the National level office in Philadelphia. Selecting Historic Paint Colors, conducted by Kipp Normand, was an interesting discussion of historic paint colors, and how to analyze paint failure problems. Mr. Normand presented the audience with a five -point system for determining appropriate Paint colors, including one step which stated that just because a building was painted a certain color at one time does not mean that the current owners should adopt that color, even if they do not like it. Overall, the conference was very enlightening and well worth the time and money expended. AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Conference Room A, 3rd Floor County/City Building 7:30 p.m. Regular Monthly Meeting November 19, 1990 I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Public Hearing A. Certificates of Appropriateness --(Review) 1. 1077 Riverside Dr. - RD IV. Regular Business A. Approval of Minutes --October 15,1990 B. Treasurer's Report --October 1990 C. Correspondence D. Committee Reports 1. Certificates of Appropriateness --(Report) a. 1021 Riverside Dr. - RD b. C. bf A. Procedure 2. Budget & Finance a. Request to purchase office equipment 3. Legal 4. Historic Districts 5. Historic Landmarks 6. Public Relations & Community Education 7. Personnel 8. Staff Reports a. Main Street Conference b. DHPA National Register Workshop V. Old Business VI. New Business A. Goals and Objectives for 1991 VII. Hearing of Visitors VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters IX. Adjournment '(�EVIS�C� til=2s�otif 1215/e-1 0 MINUTES Third Floor Conference Room County/City Building 7:30 p.m. --Regular Monthly Meeting October 15, 1990 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. II. Roll Call Members Present: Mr. John Oxian, Mrs. Joann Sporleder, Mrs.Janeanne Petrass, Mr. Jed Eide, Mr. Herb Herendeen, Mrs. Jean Dennen, Mrs. Martha Choitz, Mrs. Lori Dixon = Director, Mr. James Pastor - Survey Manager, Ms. Aladean DeRose - City Attorney. Members Absent: Mr. Odell Newburn, Mr. F. Jay Nimtz. Others Present: Mr. Kevin Gorham - 729 Cottage Grove; Mr. Kevin Boughal - South Bend Tribune. III. Public Hearing A. Certificates of Appropriateness 1. 729 Cottage Grove - LL Mr. Pastor reported that Kevin Gorham, owner of 729 Cottage Grove, was requesting permission to replace wood paired double hung sashes on the second floor, front, with clad wooden windows, double hung. He also wishes to replace the aluminum storms on the paired sashes with wood screens. Mr. Gorham was available to answer the questions of the Commission and provided a brochure and specifications regarding the type of windows to be installed. Mr. Herendeen moved to approve the application, Mrs. Choitz seconded. Motion approved. IV. Regular Business A. Minutes - September 17, 1990 Mr. Oxian asked about the wording of Mr. Eide's motion for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (page 2, paragraph 6). Specifically, he questioned the use of the word "recommending" rather than "requiring". Mrs. Dixon stated that the wording of that paragraph had been taken verbatim from the audio recording of the meeting. No changes were made. Mrs. Choitz moved to approve the minutes; Mr. Herendeen seconded. Motion approved. B. Treasurer's Report - September 1990 Mrs.. Petrass moved to file the treasurer's report for audit; Mrs_ Dennen seconded; motion approved. C. Correspondence Mrs. Dixon submitted the correspondence for review by the Commission. D. Committee Reports 1. Certificates of Appropriateness a. East Wayne Street Parkways - LHD Mrs. Dixon reported that she had approved a C. of A. application submitted by the Liason Committee of the East Wayne Street LHD requesting permission to plant trees, purchased with the city Neighborhood grant, in the tree lawns and parkways of the district. Mrs. Dixon further explained that the C. of A. included a list of property owners who had agreed to plant the trees, and that she felt it would be more efficient to cover the entire project under one C. of A. rather than requiring each individual property owner to submit a separate C. of A. b. Riverside Drive Park Trees - LHD Mrs. Dixon stated that the agenda, which listed Edgewater Drive as the C. .of A. applicant is incorrect and should read Riverside Drive as the applicant. She proceded to explain that the situation for Riverside was similar to that of Wayne Street. Some of the trees in the park along the river had had to be removed earlier in the year, so the neighborhood had purchased a few trees to replace the others. The liason committee filed the C. of A. c. C. of A. Procedure Ms. DeRose supplied members and staff with a draft of proposed C. of A. procedures which she prepared. The draft includes not only procedures for submission of applications, but also the procedures for the entire process which the Commission must go through to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness. Using the state and local ordinances, the document also sets out those items which are not elsewhere explained in detail over which the Commission has power and, authority. She cited the example of hardship, stating that she had defined what constitutes a hardship and the procedures for declaring hardship. She also clarified the appeal process. Mr. Oxian stated that he had suggested to Ms. DeRose that the term be extended from 30 days for the entire process to 45 days, allowing the Commission time to act upon an application after it has been tabled. Ms. DeRose stated that she did not list anything under notice given by the Commission because she was not certain what policies the Commission followed. Mrs. Dixon stated that the Commission follows the Open Door law for the State of Indiana, which requires notice of two business days prior to the meeting. Mr. Oxian asked the Commission to look the proposal over and notify either the staff or Ms. DeRose within two weeks if there are any questions or changes to be made. Mrs. Sporleder asked who must prove hardship in a "hardship case". Ms. DeRose stated that the applicant must be able to clearly demonstrate hardship. Mrs. Sporleder then asked whether the process was strictly procedural, strictly legal, or some of both. Ms. DeRose explained that it was both_ It is procedural, but it complies with and clarifies the law(s) which allow for the Certificate of Appropriateness process. It forms the law which the Commission must follow. If the Commission fails to follow the procedures, their decisions could be considered arbitrary and would not hold up in court. If they follow the procedures, they are able to demonstrate the basis for their decisions. Mr. Oxian reminded the Commission that other commissions have lost court battles due to a lack of written procedures_ Mrs. Choitz thanked Ms. DeRose for her hard work during the month in developing such procedures. 2. Budget & Finance No Report. 3. Legal No Report (See Section D, Part 1.c. - C. of A. Procedures) Q. Historic Districts 5. Historic Landmarks Mr. Oxian asked if the two most recent proposed landmarks had been sent to the Council. Mrs. Dixon stated that they had. b. Public Relations & Community Education Mrs. Sporleder stated that she would be speaking before the Forever Learning Institute on Wednesday on the topic of recycling old neighborhoods. 7. Personnel a) Mrs. Dixon reported that two staff members, Suzanne Booker and Elaine Lawson, had been promoted to Architectural Surveyors. Ms. Booker was promoted from Secretary to Surveyor and Elaine Lawson, who had been surveying on a temporary basis, was promoted to the position of part-time ("permanent") surveyor while she finishes her thesis at the University of Notre Dame. Mr. Oxian reported that those members in attendance at the interview (Mrs. Dennen and himself) had also worked with the Director and Survey Manager to establish personnel attendance and vacation policies. B. Staff Reports a. Main Street Conference Mrs. Dixon requested permission for herself and Mr. Pastor to attend the Indiana Main Street Conference on November 1 & 2 in Indianapolis. Mr. Herendeen asked what cost would be involved. Mrs. Dixon reported that the cost would be $39.00 per person for registration, $20.00 each for the awards banquet, and $90.00 for one hotel room. As she and Mr. Pastor both have friends in Indianapolis, Mrs. Dixon stated that one of them would stay in the hotel and one with friends in order to reduce the cost to the Commission. Mileage would be approximately $75.00 including parking. Mrs. Sporleder moved that the staff members be permitted to attend the conference at an expense not to exceed $333.00. Mrs. Petrass seconded. Motion approved. V. Old Business a) Photo Processing Mr. Pastor reported that, in response to the questions of last month's meeting, he had contacted various professional photographic developers regarding the archival stability of various types of paper. He was told that the paper currently used by the HPC (resin -coated) had an unknown shelf -life. It depends on the thoroughness of the washing process. Therefore, in the interim, while Mr. Pastor has been working on a proposal for the developing contract, Dills Camera has been developing the negatives and Leigh Booker has been processing the negatives into contact prints. This has saved money and time, according to Mr. Pastor. Ms. Booker is using the resin coated paper. Mr. Pastor further stated that, in his discussions with photographic professionals, he was told that the Commission's use of rubber cement to affix the photographs to the survey cards was more detrimental to the print than the type of paper used. The rubber cement will, in time, bleed through the photo, turning it brown and causing it to fall off the card. Mr. Pastor suggested using double -backed tape, but noted that it is very expensive. Mrs. Sporleder suggested using diluted Elmer's glue. Mr. Pastor stated that this was under discussion because the Commission needed to determine whether or not Leigh Booker could be contracted to continue printing the negatives, or whether it should be contracted out to a larger firm. Mr. Herendeen asked if Ms. Booker would be under separate contract. Mrs. Dixon stated that Ms. Booker would be contracted separately for time other than that of her surveyor's contract. Mrs. Choitz pointed out that the HPC could get into trouble by having someone on the payroll being treated two different ways. It could cause problems regarding withholding of taxes, etc. It could be done as a part of her surveying contract, but to contract separately should be checked with the appropriate authorities first. Mrs. Sporleder asked if there was some way that it could be worked into Ms. Booker's current contract; would there be a problem in doing that. Mrs. Dixon explained that the only problem might be that, since no tax or benefits are currently withheld from the staff's pay, the county purchasing system would consider a bill for the developing reimbursement rather than payment for services, and reimbursement is not permitted. Mrs. Sporleder then asked why it could not be taken as a part of the Dills bill. Mr. Herendeen explained that Ms. Booker needed to be reimbursed for her time as well as supplies, and that using the bill for Dills would not work. Mrs. Choitz stated that she felt all of the ramifications should be looked into to be certain that the Commission does not act in such a manner as to create legal problems for itself. Ms. DeRose asked Mrs. Dixon to clarify the status of Ms. Booker's relationship to the Commission. Mrs. Dixon explained that Ms. Booker was a privately contracted individual, contracted to the Commission, with no taxes or benefits withheld from her pay. Ms. DeRose asked why the photographic developing was not included in Ms. Booker's hourly wage. Mrs. Dixon explained that the photographic developing was piece work. When asked why the processing needed to be piecework, Mr. Herendeen explained that that was the way it had always been with Dills, thus the procedure was continued with Ms. Booker. Mrs. Dixon attempted to explain the rather unique situation of the staff payment procedure to Ms. DeRose, asking if the staff, being contractual, should not be determined by a bid process. Ms. DeRose agreed that this was, indeed, the appropriate procedure. Mrs. Dixon went on to explain that the Commission has attempted on several occasions to place the staff on the city and county payrolls, but to no avail. The governmental units will not accept the responsibility of coverage for these staff members. Ms. DeRose suggested that the problem of the photograph processing could be handled if a bid process is used. The bids would be reviewed by the Commission and their decision would be reflected in the minutes. Mrs. Choitz moved that Leigh Booker be authorized to perform the printing duties under separate contract temporarily_ Mr. Herendeen suggested that she refer to the minutes of the September meeting for wording. Mr. Oxian added that the motion should also state that Dills would process the film into negatives. Mr. Oxian clarified that Dills would process the film into negatives and Leigh Booker would process the negatives into contact prints. MMrs. Dennen seconded the motion. Mrs. Sporleder asked if (1) the Commission had a firm set of guidelines upon which a company or individual could bid, and (2) does the Commission have any further applicants for the work. Mr. Pastor referred to the State manual for photographic processing of survey material. Ms. DeRose suggested that a contract description be sent out to all persons and organizations which the Commission knows would be able to perform the duties specified, as well as to other persons or organizations which may have those capabilities. Mr. Oxian suggested to Mrs. Choitz that her motion be amended to state that the contract(s) with Dills and Ms. Booker be through December 31, 1990, and that, in the meantime, the staff send out solicitations for bids to all camera shops. A contract would be awarded in January. Mrs. Choitz amended her motion to include the above stated, and that the contracts would be reviewed annually. Mrs. Dennen seconded the amendment. Motion approved. b). Magnetic Signs Mr. Pastor reported that he had discussed the matter of including one or both logos of the city and county governments on the signs with the sign manufacturers in the area. Several of those companies previously contacted stated that they did not have the capability to include the logos on the signs. The previous low bidder, with a bid of $50 for four signs, does not have the capacity to include logos on the signs. A new bidder has offered the price of $150 for four signs with logos. $50 of that would be a one-time fee for developing the logo. Additional orders would not include this fee because the pattern would be already on file. Mr. Pastor explained the need for magnetic signs to those Commission members who had been absent at the previous meeting. The Commission members proceded to discuss the potential harm to the automobiles and determined that care must be taken to remove the signs from the cars daily. so Mr. Herendeen and Mr. Oxian stated that they felt the logos were important and necessary. Mr. Eide moved that the Commission authorize the purchase of magnetic signs with a logo; Mrs. Petrass seconded. Mrs. Sporleder stated that she did not feel that the logo(s) were necessary, but rather that the important information was the name and the telephone number. Six Commission members voted in favor of the motion; one opposed. Motion approved. Mrs. Choitz reported on the Scenic Vista program in England. The property owners turn their scenic vistas over to the government for protection, similar to a facade easement. Such a program has been instigated in the U.S. for vistas around historic sites, such as battlefields and historic homes, but it has not taken hold with the general public. She further reported that persons at the National Trust in Britain stated that this vista program is the only thing keeping them from looking the way the United States does, in terms of development, etc. The new developments are tucked away, rather than lining the highways as they do in the U.S. VI. New Business a). Landmark Plaques Mr. Oxian requested that a motion be made authorizing the Commission to purchase 50 new Plaques - 20 for the county and 30 for the city. These plaques should be bronze (colored), as the original plaques had been several years ago when the plaque program was first undertaken. The plaques were not promoted in the city, and a third of the landmarks in the county have not had an opportunity to purchase plaques. Mrs. Choitz asked about the cost of the plaques. Mr. Oxian stated that the Commission had charged $32 for the plaques originally. He explained that the original set purchased had been of good quality and the second set had been of a poor quality. Mr. Herendeen suggested that the Commission determine the cost of such plaques before 40 approving the purchase of them. Mr. Oxian requested permission to solicit bids for plaques. Mr. Herendeen moved that Mr. Oxian be permitted to solicit bids for bronze plaques; Mrs. Choitz seconded. Motion approved. b). Historic Landscape Elements Mrs. Sporleder asked the status of the development of standards to identify and preserve historic landscape elements. Mr. Pastor reported that he had done some research regarding the historic landscape features of South Bend, but had found little other than the names of state foresters who had set guidelines on species of trees which grow well in the city. Mrs. Sporleder stated that she felt it would be important to the Commission to have a survey of historic landscape elements in the area. If the Commission has an opinion on the importance of these stands of trees, it should have something to back it up regarding why they are important. Mrs. Choitz remarked that the Commission currently has no jurisdiction over trees and other elements outside of district or landmark boundaries. Mr. Oxian reported that the Commission was in the process of seeking landmark status on the trees on Lincoln Way West. Mr. Eide suggested that research be conducted to determine what other cities have done. Mrs. Choitz reported that, in Great Britain, property owners are not permitted to remove trees, dead or alive, or to cut fallen trees. Mr. Oxian reported that in the East, they have the Conservation Easement program. Otherwise, no status has been given to landscape elements of this nature. Mrs. Choitz asked where to begin_ Mr. Oxian suggested that, since no decision would be made at this time, the meeting should be adjourned and then the discussion could continue informally. VII. Hearing of Visitors No Report VIII. Announcements and Misceilaneous Matters No Report IX. Adjournment Mr. Herendeen moved to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at £3:50. CORRESPONDENCE a. Information from the National Center for Preservation Law b. PANA Newsletter, Aug./Sept. 1990 C. Information from St. Joseph Valley Masonry Contractors d. Mortar Board from St. Joseph Valley Masonry Contractors e. Brochure on Federal Projects and H.P. Law workshops. f. Invitation to Southhold Recognition Day g. Invitation to MOVE breakfast meetings. h. Information from the Office of Maritime Preservation i. Common Ground j. Indiana Preservationist, November/December 1990 k. Fall Newsletter, NIHS 1. St. Joseph Valley Record, Fall, 1990 M. Notice of an audiovisual program available from NTHP regarding Tourism and Historic Preservation n. Invitation to renew membership to HLFI o. MACAIF Newsletters for Oct. 8, 15, 22, 29, Nov. 5 Goals and Ob.iectives for 1991 All committees, with the exception of the C. of A. committee, should meet or correspond amongst their members to determine a preliminary list of goals for that committee for 1991. These goals will be discussed and prioritized at the December meeting, with a workplan for 1991 to be developed and circulated no later than the January meeting. Any committee not submitting a list of goals will not have goals included in the workplan.