HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 1991AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING
OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Monthly Meeting County Council Caucus Room, #411
7:30 p.m. County/City Building ,
November 18; 1991
1. Call to order
11. Roll Call
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 1501 E. Wayne LHD
IV. Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes --October 21, 1991
B. Treasurer's Report --October, 1991
C. Correspondence
D. OaTmittee Reports
1., C of A -- (Staff Approvals)
a. 723 Park Avenue -- LL
b. 121 N. Studebaker -- LL
la.. C of A -- (CaTmittee Meeting)
a. 1421 E. Wayne -- LHD
1b. C of A -- (Enforcement)
a. 1205 E. Wayne N. LHD
b. 805 Arch Avenue LHD
2. Budget & Finance
a. 1990-1991 Grant Reimbursement
3. Legal
4. Historic Districts
5. Historic Landmarks
6. Public Relations & Community Education
7. Personnel
a. Reinstatement of Surveyor
8. Staff Reports
V. old Business
1. Data Entry: Original inventory Catalog
V1. New Business
1. C of A Docunentation Requirement
VII. Hearing of Visitors
VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
IX. Adjournment
enough funding to operate.
He stated that the National Register Extension
project will be completed, despite the loss of
funding. The State Office had advised restarting
the application procedure; this, however, would
cost a lot of money, and would therefore be better
avoided. He said the third technical review would
instead be resubmitted after Jan. 1, 1992, and
would probably be acceptable.
Mrs. Choitz asked about the status of the survey.
Mr. Holycross assured her that it would be finished
by June 1992. On further questioning, he said that
a book, to be compiled from the results of the
city survey, was still only a proposal for which
a grant had been applied. No work had yet begun
on the book. Only one volume was planned; a multi -
volume summary report/inventory catalog had
been compiled from the previous city survey.
3. Legal.
Ms. DeRose reported that, yet again, the Legal
Department had failed to agree on the proposed
maintenance standards. The disagreement concerned
enforcement procedures. She described two
options; to pass the standards and try to get
the Building Department to enforce them, or to
adopt standards such as she had set up, which
had their own mode of enforcement. In either
case, she foresaw enforcement problems.
Mr. Oxian said some decision must be reached
and an ordinance need not be passed for the HPC
to adopt maintenance standards. He asked Mrs. DeRose
to bring the standards with her to the next meeting,
for adoption. She agreed to do so.
Mr. Oxian went on to say that having the maintenance
standards written and passed was the most important
thing; enforcement problems could be addressed
later. Further, these standards must be
extended to the historic districts, because
they all have a section on maintenance.
Ms. DeRose passed on some ideas she'd heard at
a recent historic preservation law conference
in Indianapolis. Chief Justice Randall
T. Shepard (Indian Supreme Court) had spoken;
he had said that the present Supreme Court was
conservative, anti-government, and potentially
anti -preservation. She therefore advised strict
adherence to standards and procedures in all cases.
Mrs. Choitz said that the Hon. Mr. Shepard would
speak at the Southhold dinner Nov 22, possibly on
the same lines. She also urged Mr. Holycross and
Mr. Pastor to take exhaustive notes of all phone
conversations, and follow up calls with letters.
Mr. Eide supported this suggestion, saying that
Mrs. Toal's account of his words and actions was
out of context.
Mr. Oxian said all committee meetings should be
taped; a secretary should be present to take notes.
4. Historic Districts.
No report.
5. Historic Landmarks
a. Southern Hotel.
Mr. Oxian reported that the Southern Hotel
would appear on next Monday's Common Council
agenda. He, Mr. Holycross, and Steve Luecke
had met with Jon Hunt to discuss the hotel and
other preservation issues. One important
point made concerned the lack of communication
between the commission and city government;
Mr. Oxian said the only way he could find out
about city plans was to visit the city offices
himself. He felt the commission should be
informed routinely of city plans.
Mr. Herendeen agreed that the city generally
failed to pass on plans, even when they knew
them to be of interest to the commission.
Mrs. Choitz asked whether demolition of the
hotel was inevitable. Mr. Oxian replied that
no definite answer was yet available.
Mr. Holycross said Redevelopment planned to
tear down the hotel and sell the land to
Schaeffer Gear, which had already offered to
buy it.
6. Public Relations and Community Education
Mr. Herendeen suggested that commissioners be
somehow identified at meetings, for the sake of
visitors and petitioners. He mentioned name -
plaques as a possibility, and offered to pay for
his own. Mrs. Choitz suggested name tags;
Mr. Oxian, a public roll call.
7. Personnel
a. Reinstatement of Surveyor.
Mr Holycross asked
the reinstatement
commission staff;
problems had been
moved: Mrs. Choitz
8. Staff Reports.
No report.
V. Old Business
1. Data Entry Project.
the commission to approve
of Suzanne Booker onto the
he felt that all personnel
resolved. Mr. Herendeen so
seconded.
Mr. Pastor reported that the State Office had
approved the data entry project. Computer
Associates, the lowest bidder, had tentatively
been selected to carry out the project. He said
he was going to meet with -Mr. Shinall, a
representative of the company, and obtain a sample
to see if it could be imported into the office
computer. If this proved successful, Computer
Associates would be awarded the contract.
Mr. Holycross said the State Office was enthusiastic
about the project because they wanted every local
office to create a database compatible with their
own.
2. Historic District Data Lists
Mrs. Choitz expressed concern over the absence of
up-to-date data lists for the historic districts.
On the old lists, ownership, phone numbers, and
addresses were quite obsolete. She questioned how
the staff could operate effectively without updated
lists.
Mr. Holycross said he hoped to get neighborhood
committees to update the lists on their own.
Mrs. Choitz said that such committees were lacking
and suggested gathering volunteers from various
organizations to do the work. Once the lists were
compiled, she said they should be made into a usable
and dynamic database.
Mr. Oxian asked Ms. Steele if Southhold Restorations
had a recent list. She said no, the list they had
was partially corrected but still obsolete.
Mr. Oxian said that this list would nevertheless
provide a useful starting point for the project.
VI. New Business
1. Certificate of Appropriateness Documentation
Requirement
Mr. Pastor submitted this document, which he had
compiled, to the commission for recommendation.
Mr. Eide listed a number of changes. Mr. Oxian
advised Mr. Pastor to bring back an amended version
for approval at the next meeting.
VII. Hearing of Visitors
1. Monroe Park --Proposed Local Historic District.
Mr. Todd Zeiger of Monroe Park presented his case
for extending the proposed district. He said South
Bend Heritage had done much valuable restoration
work in the neighborhood over the past five years,
but had moved out. In the last year, ten houses had
been demolished, and many incompatible alterations
done. He felt quick action was needed to stabilize
the neighborhood.
He asked the commission to reconsider
the district's tentative to include the whole
neighborhood: he felt this to
be the only way for the district to succeed. He
expressed his belief that Monroe Park could become
one of South Bend's finest neighborhoods.
A number of concerns were then raised. Mr. Zeiger
said another reason for extending the boundaries
east to Lincolnway was to include lots now owned by
the city. The city's plans for these lots, he said,
would certainly destroy the neighborhood. Prompted
by Mrs. Choitz, he said the city now owned much less
than 50% of the land.
Mr. Oxian said the originally proposed boundaries
included only St. Joseph, Carroll, and Michigan
Streets (two residential, one commercial). The
city, John Hunt of Redevelopment, and Center City
Associates support these boundaries; he had never
considered an eastward expansion.
Mr. Holycross cautioned against the extension,
saying the property in the extension area was either
city -owned or owned by absentee landlords; neither
was likely to support the district. He did agree
with Mr. Zeiger that it might be easier to get
support from residents of the southeast portion of
the extension, who were mostly owner -occupants.
On Mrs. Choitz's urging, Mr. Oxian asked the
Historic District Committee to meet in December,
prior to the monthly meeting, to generate a
preliminary report. He told Mr. Zeiger to prepare
a presentation for the January meeting, when the
Monroe Park proposal would appear on the agenda.
VIII. Announcements and Miscellaneous Matters
Mr. Pastor introduced and thanked intern Chris Kramer.
XI. Adjournment
Mr. Herendeen moved to adiourn: Mrs. Dennen seconded.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING
OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 18, 1991
7:30 p.m.
I. Call to Order
County Council Caucus Room, #411
County/City Building
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Members Present: Mr. John Oxian, President; Mr. Herb
Herendeen; Mrs. Janeanne Petrass; Mr. Jed Eide; PAA1 AfNN:,✓
Mrs. Martha Choitz; Mr. James Pastor, Survey'Manager;
Mr. Fred Holycross, Director; Ms. Suzanne Booker,
Surveyor; Ms. Aladean DeRose, City Attorney.
Members Absent: Mr. Bill Welsheimer; Mrs. Joanne
Sporleder; Mr. Odell Newburn.
Also Present: Ms. Barbara Steele, Southhold Restorations:
Mr. Todd Zeiger, HLFI; Mr. Chris Kramer, HPC intern;
Mr. and Mrs. Michael Toal, owners, 1421 E. Wayne;
Mr. R.W. Dunfee, interior designer; Mr. Sean Coleman,
City Councilman at large.
Mr. Herendeen suggested that each commission member
identify himself/herself for the benefit of the visitors;
this they did.
III. Public Hearing
A. Committee Report
Mr. Oxian proposed that 1421 E. Wavne be placed at the
head of the aqenda. Mrs. Petrass so moved:
Mr. Herendeen seconded.
1. 1421 E. Wayne --Local Historic District.
Mr. Herendeen presented the committee report
on the owners' proposal to replace the existing
casement windows with Pella 8/12 double hung
sashes. The owners, Mr. and Mrs. Toal, proposed
to replace the front three casements with two
double hung sashes, and the four side casements
with three double hung sashes.
Mr. Herendeen reported that the committee had met
with Mrs. Toal October 24 so as to better understand
her request for a certificate of appropriateness.
He said he and the other committee members,
Mrs. Sporleder, Mr. Eide, and Mrs. Choitz, had felt
it necessary to uphold the standards of the
district. They had advised Mrs. Toal to retain the
existing window openings, and to retain a three-
part set of windows in front, rather than installing
a set of two. They had left the choice of window
type to Mrs. Toal.
The committee had then listened to Mrs. Toal's case
for the original proposal. At the meeting's end,
they had advised her to consult her interior
designer, Mr. Bob Dunfee, to determine whether
windows of the existing size and number could be
made compatible with her needs. No decision was
made on the Certificate, and no certificate has
since been issued.
Mr. Pastor stated that the staff recommendation had
not been altered.
Mr. Oxian then opened the floor for presentations.
Mrs. Toal read a review she had compiled of the
process she had followed over the last seven weeks.
The list included phone calls, visits to her house
from staff members, and the like. After her
recitation, she submitted her notes to the legal
counsel for the record.
Mr. Toal spoke next. He said his wife had been told
at the committee meeting to consult Bob Dunfee and
to research the feasibility of using a different
type of window suggested by the commission. He
said he had done these things, and distributed
a folder containing the following materials:
--sheets comparing the cost of the commission's
proposal ($5,500) with the original proposal
($9,000)
--a photograph of the house
--Sketches from Pella comparing the house fitted
with Pella windows to the house fitted with the
windows proposed by the commission
--a letter from Pella stating that the Pella
windows would be cheaper, more historically
correct, and more appropriate to the owners' needs.
--a letter from a Mrs. Coral Stapp Weirich, daughter
of the architect who designed 1421 E. Wayne,
claiming that originally the house had an open-air
porch, not an enclosed sunporch.
Mr. Toal stated that a Pella representative had
inspected the neighborhood and found nowhere the
same style of window as is now in his sunporch.
Mrs. Choitz thanked Mr. Toal for compiling the
documentation.
Mr. Toal then introduced Mr. Dunfee, who listed some
of his credentials and stated that he generally
strove to "debastardise" houses which had been
ruined by inappropriate additions. He said he had
worked with Mrs. Toal to change the sunporch
windows, which she had always considered incongruous
They had searched, he said, for a way to complement
the long, narrow windows on the main facade.
Mr. Eide commented that he considered the letter
from Mrs. Weirich the most compelling evidence.
If the windows were indeed not original, their
replacement was not so crucial a problem.
Mr. Pastor said that the 1932 Assessor card, which
had been cited as evidence that the sunporch was
original, had a site plan which specifically
included a sunporch. The house was built in 1925.
Mr. Holycross said that while he had no
contradiction to an eyewitness account, staff
research had indicated that the casements were,
indeed, original.
Mr. Oxian then pointed out that the commission
recognized and accepted the elements of a historic
district as they existed the day the district was
created. In other words: even non -original
architectural features were protected, so long as
they were in place when the district was founded.
Thus, anyone wishing to make a change must
thoroughly justify that change. Legal decisions
are not based on how any house looked the day it
was built. This is in the ordinance, he said;
it is what historic district guidelines are based
on. Mr. Oxian urged the commissioners to consider
this point before making their vote.
Commissioners then questioned the Toals for
several minutes about details of their proposal.
Mrs. Toal reiterated that the cost of the
commission's proposal was prohibitive, and added
that, since her house had uniquely long and narrow
front windows, it was impossible to compare it to
other houses in the district.
Mr. Herendeen expressed surprise that the Pella
windows were so much cheaper than the proposed
alternative windows. He asked to see the survey
of the house, and noted its "A" classification,
indicating that it had major alterations. He also
stated that he had heard of no further developments
on the case since the committee meeting Oct. 24.
Mr. Eide repeated that the committee's decision had
been based on the official standards of the East
Wayne district, and on the appearance of the house
on the day the district was created.
Mr. Oxian outlined precedents for decisions about
houses lesser historical importance; he said that,
when a house had major alterations or was rated
noncontributing, economic and other factors should
be considered.
Mr. Herendeen moved to approve the Toal's proposal.
based on the high cost of the alternative windows
and on the fact that the house had major alterations
Mrs. Choitz seconded.
Ms. DeRose advised the commission that one goal of
a historic district was to reverse inappropriate
alterations, not simply to preserve the district
as it appeared the day it was founded. Whether or
not the casements were original was therefore a
voting issue.
Mr. Eide suggested that the economic factor had not
been fullv established. He proposed to modifv the
motion to exclude mention of economics.
Mr. Herendeen so moved; Mrs. Petrass seconded;
motion carried.
Mr. Coleman, City Councilman at large, then spoke
briefly in support of the Toal's proposal. He
affirmed the Toal's good faith, and said their _ -
intentions, in his opinion, mirrored the underlying
intent of the district.
Mrs. Choitz said that, while the committee members
had not accepted Mrs. Toal's invitation to inspect
the interior of the home, they had all viewed the
exterior. The exterior appearance is all the
commission is responsible for. Interior design
problems should not be allowed to sway the
commission from their commitment to the exterior
appearance of the house.
B. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 1501 E. Wayne --Local Historical District.
Mr. Pastor reported a case of code violation,
in which a project had been started without prior
approval from the commission. He had
sent an application form to the owner
and received no reply to date.
Mr. Oxian stated that no further action could
be taken until a signed application was submitted.
Mr. Holycross pointed out that a violation of
standards, not just procedure, had occurred.
Although a stop -work order had been issued, the
owner had already replaced the door in an
incompatible style. Work on the porch had been
halted; other changes were not in obvious violation
of the standards.
Mr. Oxian tabled the case.
IV. Regular Business.
A. Approval of Minutes
Mrs. Dennen indicated that Mr. Bob Dunfee is an
interior designer, not, as stated in the October
minutes, a contractor. Mr. Oxian also pointed out
that Mrs. Metzger had received a certificate of
appropriateness, a fact that the October minutes omit.
Mrs. Choitz moved to approve the minutes as amended:
Mr. Herendeen seconded.
B. Treasurer's Report
Mr. Herendeen moved to approve the treasurer's report
as written; Mrs. Dennen seconded.
C. Correspondence
Mr. Holycross announced an Indianapolis conference on
National Register policy and procedure which he and
Mr. Pastor planned to attend Dec. 10. Mr. Herendeen
asked what other conferences were upcoming, and asked
Mr. Holycross to describe the conference -going
obligations of the commissioners. Mr. Holycross said
a majority of the commissioners must attend a qualified
conference once a year.
Mr. Zeiger then announced an HLFI conference Dec. 12 in
Lakeville. It was, he said, a regional quarterly
which would fulfill conference obligations.
D. Committee Reports.
1. Certificates of Appropriateness (Staff Approvals).
a. 723 Park Avenue --Local Landmark.
b. 121 N. Studebaker --Local Landmark.
c. 1120 E. Jefferson --Local Historical District
d. 814 Arch Avenue --Local Historical District
e. 1154 Lincolnway East --Local Historical District
Mr. Pastor distributed a second staff report with
three properties to supplement the report sent
to commissioners in the monthly mailing.
Mr. Oxian advised him to follow up on
1120 E. Jefferson and make sure the trees
were replaced.
Mr. Pastor asked commissioners to make a site
inspection at 121 N. Studebaker. He wanted
assurance that the door would be replaced
in-kind, and had advised the owner that such
an inspection would take place.
la. Certificates of Appropriateness --Committee Meeting
a. 1421 E. Wayne (see III a above)
1b. Certificates of Appropriateness --Enforcement.
a. 1205 E. Wayne N. --Local Historical District.
Mr. Pastor reported that he had inspected the
property and found that the window had really
been replaced, as promised. The case was
therefore closed.
b. 805 Arch Avenue --Local Historical District.
Mr. Pastor reported that a certificate had been
issued last April for the reconstruction of an
illegally -removed back entry porch.
The certificate had since expired. Mr. Oxian
advised him to inform the building department,
since building permits are good for only one
year. He also advised sending a letter to the
owners, telling them the certificate had
expired.
2. Budget and Finance.
Mr. Holycross reported that he and Mr. Pastor had
gone to Indianapolis Nov. 12 for a meeting at the
State Office. The survey project had been accepted,
and $19,329 awarded. He failed_ to obtain full
funding for two other projects (the new brochures
and the proposed extension of the National Register
District) because of tardiness and other problems.
Nevertheless, the staff had a surplus budget, with
As can be seen from the computer ledger of our items under the
County General Fund (as of 12-03-91) we have had no unusual
expenses in the month of November. Expenditures claimed totaled
$3,520.20 for the month. Our unexpended balance was $18, 662.90;
with encumbered funds --$16,938.15. We have more than enough
operating funds to close out the final month of fiscal year 1991.
MV0576-77 SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
FUND: 001 COUNTY GENERAL
PROCESS TRAN TRAN
FUND.ACCT.OBJ.LOC MO/YR DATE TYPE
AMOUNT OTHER DATA
001.39211.000.034 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
} 11/91
09/27190
ENCUMB
11191
03/04/91
ENCUMB
11/91
10110191
ENCUMB
# 11191
10124/91
ENCUMB
11/91
10/29/91
ENCUMB
11191
10/31/91
ENCUMB
} 11/91
11/12/91
ENCUMB
11/91
11/12/91
ENCUMB
11/91
11/14/91
ENCUMB
11191
11/14/91
ENCUMB
11/91
11114/91
ENCUMB
11/91
11/18191
ENCUMB
} 11/91
11118/91
ENCUMB
11/91.11/18/91
ENCUMB
'41/91
11/18/91
ENCUMB
11191
11/18/91
ENCUMB
11/91
11/04/91
CLAIM
11191
11/04/91
CLAIM
i I1/91
11/04/91
CLAIM
11191
11/04/91
CLAIM
11/91
11/04/91
CLAIM
11191
11/04/91
CLAIM
11/91
11104/91
CLAIM ..
11/91
11/04/91
CLAIM
11/91
11/18/91
CLAIM
11191
11/19/91
CLAIM
11/91
11/19/91
CLAIM
11/91
11119/91
CLAIM
11/91
11119/9€
CLAIM
11191
11/19/91
CLAIM
11/91
11/19/91
CLAIM
11/91
11/21191
CLAIM
€1/91
11/25/91
ENCUMB
` 001.39211.000.034 HISTORIC PRESERVATION"
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV REV B
CUR 0.00
0.00
TOT 0.00
0.00 0.
LAST UPDATE: 11/91 RUN DATE: 12/03/91 PAGE 5
LEDGER OFT: ALL DETAIL
COMMISSIONERS
61.00 PO 1042474.VENDOR 1007449 SPRING HOUSE INN
0.00 PO #046312 VENDOR 1000790 HISTORIC LANDMARKS
8.00 PO #051071 VENDOR 1007716 C.B.I./GRAPHICS
3.52 PO #051310 VENDOR 1000917 INSTY-PRINT OF SOUTH
66.00 PO 1051400 VENDOR 1000331 BETHEL BUSINESS MACHINES -
16.00 PO #051451 VENDOR #007716 C.B.I./GRAPHICS
21.00 PO 1051587 VENDOR #007716 C.B.I./GRAPHICS .
101.4E PO 1051590 VENDOR #000553 DILLS CAMERA SHOP
264.60 PO 1051667 VENDOR 1000907 HODGES, SUSHMITA
645.83 PO #05€668 VENDOR #004741 PASTOR JAMES
375.00 PO #051669- VENDOR -#007044 BOOKER SUZANNE
15.00 PO 9051713 VENDOR -1001246 NATIONAL TRUST FOR
34.50 PO 1051714 VENDOR 1000259 INDIANA CONTINUING LEGAL
50.00 PO #051715 _VENDOR #001246 NATIONAL TRUST FOR
20.84 PO 1051719 VENDOR #607600 HOLYCROSS FRED
10.00 PO 1051720.VENDOR 1007546 DIVISION OF HISTORIC
375.00 PO #051091.VENDOR.1007044 BOOKER SUZANNE
439.50 PO'#050755 VENDOR -#007716 C:B:I:/GRAPHICS
68.87. PO.,#0.00000.:VENDOR"#000507 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
€0.73 PO #050996" VEhiDOR -1000553 DILLS'. CAMERA SHOP
101.44 F0 9051000"VENDOR�#000553 DILIS:.CAMERA SHOP
. ,,.
4410.0.P0 X451078`;VENDOR`8007600`HOLYCROSS'FRED
645.83 PO f0S1079`VENDOR-#004741 PASTOR JAMES.
27.00 P0.1050957.9ENDOR #001686 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
0.00 PO 1000000:; VENDOR 1007449 SPRING"�HOUSE;INN
30.00- FO 1051113.VENDOR -1001538 SOUT0 1END TRIBUNE_
578.13 PO 1051453�VENDOR-1007064 BOOKERrSUZANNE
33.50 PO 1051194`VENDOR 1007716 C.B.I:/GRAPHICS
123.19 PO 1051211 VENDOR 1004741 PASTOR JAMES
645.83 PO 1051452 VENDOR. 1004741 PASTOR JAMES
30.00 PO 1051113 VENDOR 1001538 SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
30.00 PO #051113 VENDOR 1001538 SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
32.02 -PO 1051868 VENDOR #000553 DILLS CAMERA SHOP
COMMISSIONERS
AL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPE
0.00 3,520.02
00 69,240:32 .1,724.75 50,577.42 1
BANK #02 CHECK #132612
BANK #02 CHECK #132619
BANK #02 CHECK #132631
`BANK�102 CHECK 1132639
BANK #02 CHECK #132639
BANK 102 CHECK 1132667
BANK #02 CHECK 1132119
BANK #02 CHECK 1132769
BANK #02 CHECK 1000011
BANK #02 CHECK 1135484
-BANK #02 CHECK.#135330
BANK #02 CHECK #135336
BANK #02 CHECK 1135450
BANK 102 CHECK 1135450
BANK #02 CHECK #135484
BANK 102 CHECK 1135898
LADED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
8,662.90 16,938.15
xxxxxxzxzzxzxxxxzxzxzzxzxxzzzzxzxxx:exzxxxxzxxxxzxxxxxzzxxxxxxxxzxxxzzxzxzzzzxzxxzzzzxxxxzzzxxxzzxxxzzxzxzzxzxzxzzzxxxxxzxzxzzzxxzxxz
CORRESPONDENCE
--Lecture series flyer from Indiana University
--Nov/Dec. issue of "The Mortar Board" (Masonry contractors newsletter)
--Oct 1 edition of "Preservation Law Update"
--Agenda from MACIAF
--Fall issue of "Society and You" (Society -bank newsletter)
--October issue of "Historic Preservation News"
--flyer for a three-day course on preservation law
--United Parcel Service confirmation of delivery notice for survey forms sent to
Indianapolis office
--Catalogues from "Architects and Designers Book Service"
--1992 renewal form from "Preservation Law Update"
--Two copies of CRM (newsletter from U.S. Park Services)
--invitation to a dinner honoring Southhold Restoration's 25th anniversary
--announcement of a grammar and usage seminar from "Fred Pryor Seminars"
--Oct 21 plans from MACIAF
--announcement of a Nov 18 San Francisco conference entitled "The Seismic Retrofit
of Historic Buildings"
--October issue of "Team Tourism" from the Indiana Department of Commerce
--October issue of the "Main Street Missive", from the Indiana Dept. of Commerce
--Fall quarterly calendar from the Northern Indiana Historical Society
--solicitation from Community Resource Center to buy brass ornaments
--September/October issue of "Center City Update" from Center City Associates
--invitation to a holiday open house at Carriage House gift shop
--invitation from Historic Landmarks Foundation to attend the Porter County
Interim Report presentation on Nov. 14
--inviatation from Community Resource Center to attend their Winter Wonderland
festival
Nov 18, 1991 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION -- STAFF APPROVALS (SUPPLEMENT)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ST,# STREET NAME FILED CATEGORIES DESCRIPTION
------------------------------------- ------------------------------
=1 Arch Avenue 11/14/91 chimney 1) Rebuild chimney from roof
line up (2) Wash.house siding
and brick to remove vine roots
and stains (pressure water
wash)
1120 Jefferson 11/12/91 trees
Boulevard ( E )
1154 Lincolnway East 11/14/91 gutters
Removal of two trees in tree
lawn with appropriate
replacements from the Parks
Department listing, and
removal of one tree in yard.
This certificate is a renewal
of a certificate issued
7/17/90
replace 2nd story aluminum
gutters with same.
Nov
8, 1991 HISTORIC
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESERVATION
COMMISSION --
STAFF APPROVALS
ST,#
STREET NAME
FILED
CATEGORIES
DESCRIPTION
Park Avenue
10/17/91
roofing
replacr-e rafters and 3 layers
of asphalt shingle with
plywood decking, felt paper
and Indc>pendence Weathered
Wood (asphalt type) shingle.
121
Studebaker (N)
11/7/91
doors
replace solid oak door damage
in fire with the same.
`-A
October 25, 1991
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Axelberg (&
1501 East Wayne
South Bend, IN
Holm Construction)
St.
46615
PROPOSAL
Replace garage door stops with replicas in poplar; bed molds for
front door surround replace simpler, non -historic trim; remove
aluminum storm door at front and replace with wood storm; replace
standard 1/3 glazed wood panel door in south side of garage with
unglazed colonial style metal door, replace door jambs, frame
with similar to original (molded wood).
Rear porch: replace tongue and groove ceiling with beaded
paneling and bed molding to resemble the original; replace full
length tapered wood doric column in-kind; replace simple and
non -historic balcony rail with spindle rail to Uniform Building
Code requirements, encasing intermittent posts with V pine and
caps. Repair original wood latticework.
STANDARDS
II. Existing Structures,
A) Building�Materials
1) Rec�ui_red
Original exterior building materials shall be
retained. Deterioration of wood materials shall be
prevented through repair, cleaning, and painting.
The existing or original architectural detail around
windows, porches, doors, and eaves should be
retained or replaced by replicas of the same design
and materials when deteriorated beyond repair.
C) Windows and Doors
1) Required
Original windows and doors, including
sash, lintels, sills, shutters, decorative glass,
pediments; hoods, and hardware shall be retained or
when deteriorated beyond repair, replaced with units
and trim, resembling the original.
2) Recommended
If new sash and doors are used, the
existing design and hardware should be used.
3) Prohibited
Original windows, doors, and hardware
shall not be discarded when they can be restored and
reused in place. New windows or door openings that
would alter the scale -and proportion of the building
shall not be introduced. Inappropriate new window
or door features such as metal insulating glass
combinations that require the removal of original
windows and doors shall not be -installed.
D) Entrances Porches,_and Steps
1 ) Required
Porches and additions reflecting later architectural
styles, and which are important to the building's
historical integrity shall be retained.
3) Prohibited
Front porches, stoops, patios, and steps that are
important to the building's style and development
shall not be altered or removed.
REC_OMMENDAT_IONS
~^� The proposed porch balcony rail and the replacement of the'
side entry door at the garage are alterations not in keeping with
the above standards. All other proposals are in-kind
replacements or sympathetic restoration that qualify as staff
approval items.
The proposed porch balcony.rail alters the appearance, the
proportion and design of the rear porch (not in keeping with
standard II.A(1) - see also standards II.D(1,3)). Although the
turned spindles are a great improvement over the cedar balusters,
they are not typical of balcony or porch railing treatments on
Tudor Revival style homes. Characteristic balustrade treatment,
as seen throughout the East Wayne Historic District, is typically
in wrought iron. Turned spindles are used occasionally in Tudor
Revival style designs in front entry porch screens.
A conversation with HPC legal council, Ms. Aladeen Derose
(10/24/91), revealed that Building Code takes precedent over
aesthetic and historic district standards. In keeping with this,
the porch rail will necessarily be 39" high with spindles 6" on
center.
It is the opinion of this staff member that a spindle railing
is an acceptable improvement over the non -historic railing.
However, the increased sizing of the intermittent posts detracts
from the scale and design of the porch as well as the building on
the whole.
The proposed side entry door replacement for the.south side
of the detached garage is not in keeping with standards .
II.C(1-3). The owner has installed the unglazed metal door in a
concern over safety.
Work for this project was begun prior to application for a C
of A and is near completion. The owner has been advised to stop
work on all projects that qualify for review under the district
standards.
GRANTS --1990/1991: Update
I met with the D.H.P.A (SHPO) on Tuesday, November 12 in
Indianapolis. Our discussion concerned two grants awarded to the
HPC in 1990. These were to assist in the completion of the city
survey and a CLG Assistance Grant for a variety of projects.
The Survey project was deemed acceptable --total federal grant
monies awarded to the project were $19,329.00. However, we were
unable to receive total funding for two other projects in that .
calendar year.
The Historic District Brochure and the West Washington National
Register Extension projects were both received by the state well
after the agreed upon ending date of June 30, 1991. Therefore the
cost of printing the brochures was disallowed. (We were given
reimbursement for all costs incurred within the grant period.)
The tardiness of the National Register application and major
problems with the document also have forced the state to deny
part of the cost of this project. Of $12,200 originally allocated
we will receive $9,926.00.
Total cost to the HPC of monies lost due to project tardiness is
$2,274.00. We did receive final grant reimbursement from the
state in the amount of $11,890.00. This was quiatesed into the
County General Fund on November 13, 1991.
I have agreed to continue the National Register application with
no time restrictions. Further research and reorganization of the
Nomination are likely to take a number of months. I hope to
resubmit the application sometime this winter.
COMMISSION MEETING VISITOR ROLL
NOVEMBER 18, 1991
Visitors: Please fill in your name and organization (if '
applicable) so your presence can be officially recorded for the
Commission's records. Thank you.
21
2 A f, 22
15i6f{C Wt4kMAWI GCr4k-ticP (3r' 2141W"^
3 Ch --15
23
4 it 24
525
6 P I OA 26
7 27
8 28
9 29
10 30
11 31
12 32
13 33
14 34
15 35
16 36
17 37
18 38
19 39
20 40