HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 1992Ping . -.
s= students, and said Rogers can han
of, dle ° 1,800 students . now. He ques
a tioned why it would cost up to $2
million'to renovate buildings just t
e; `accommodate 200 more students.
we Gregg Hanke also raised the is
ird. sue of cost. 'We are going to
e , 'spending' millions of dollars: M
r children are going to be paying fo
it," he said.",
d The estimated cost bf $20 millio
al -Would increase the tax rate by a
o proximately, 50 cents over . th
e . course of a 20 year period. The tax
a rate increase would be even higher
t Hanke pointed out,, if 'the middl
school and elementary' school
g, phases also are pursued.
s, Koepke said that this plan would
eliminate, duplicate services, which
s. would in turn save.money.'She,also
s indicated that many of the local
businesses which provide funding
as well as services are willing to do
i- this' for one school but not for two.
She said that more opportunities
thiAkI then, be . made . available to
udents.
Some of the 'people present in-
t dicated ''the loyalties,, they fel
toward' Elston, . however ,the
stressed ' the need forone -high
school. "There is ' nothing wrong
With bringing the rich tradition that
is` Elston. High school to ,Rogers
High School,'. Dibkey said.",,,
".`Where Elston is, isnot sacred."
.she said. "What Elston is; ' .is sa-
cred."' ..
ile.
eitherS'11 .
y HOWARD DUKES
ribune Staff Writer
SOUTH BEND — The next step
i the Riley High School/Jackson
Liddle School saga will be for the
rehitects to develop a feasibility
study for the proposal approved by
the school board during its March
23 meeting.
However, before the architec-
tural firm can get authorization to
develop the study, the board and
administration must clearly define
what they are asking the architects
to do, said board president Karen
White.
The vote taken on March 23
seems clear enough. The trustees
voted 4-3 to convert Jackson Middle
School into a high school and *b1ild
a new middle school on the
venue site.
But since the construction of'a
ew middle school on Ewing was
of among the options considered,
o feasibility study was developed
or that proposal, said Monte
river, superintendent.
"Basically we made a decision
to build a new middle school on
e Ewing Avenue site) with no in-
rmation on that option," said
Ate.
Also, while trustees Nancy King,
6ert Sweeney, Carol Loeffler and
harles Lennon agree that a new
Adle school should be built on
e Ewing Avenue site, they differ
ornewhat in how that school
ould be built and what should
ppen to the current Riley build -
9.
White said before the architee-
at firm of Mathews, Purucker
d Anella Inc. can receive board
uthorization to develop a study, its
cope must be defined better.
Because so much still 'needs to
ironed out, it is unlikely that the
and will vote to authorize the firm
begin work on. the — n
onday's meeting.
White said the board W1911 no
e the authorization vote on Mon -
ay; the May 4 meeting may be
ore realistic.
White said the school board of-
ers will meet today with the ad-
iistration in hopes of hammering
t a more defined proposal.
0 10 4)
historic preservatoon commossuon
of south bend and st. joseph county
I ROOM 1123 COUNTY CITY BUILDING
south bend, indiana 46601 (219) 284-9798
M E M 0 R A N D U M
TO: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
FROM: FRED HOLYCROSS
RE: MAY HPC MEETING
This month's meeting is May 18, 1992 at the regular time and
place. As you can see from the agenda, it is a busy time of year
for COA's! The remainder of the meeting, other than regular
business, consists of first readings for several proposed
Landmarks and the proposed Local Historic'District east of
Memorial Hospital. You will have reports concerning each of these
before second readings in June.
One note: due to the increasing number of COAs, both Jim and I
will be handling individual cases as our schedules permit. Staff
reports submitted to you will reflect the opinion of the staff
person assessing the case; in other words, Jim and I may not
necessarily agree with the others opinion or assessment of a
particular project. If Commission members would like me attach an
addendum to reports that I differ with, I would be glad to do so
if requested.
One final note: as,you can see from this month's packet, the
quality of photocopied materials is not always the best. our
copying costs have more than doubled since last year due to an
increase in fees assessed by MACOG, the office adjacent to ours
that has been allowing us to "rent" the use of their copier.
Last month, the County made available to us an extremely old,
used copier. it, however, has many problems that need to be
fixed, unfortunately our budget does not allow for that at this
time. We will try to provide you with materials that are
readable; I ask for your patience ....
ii
AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING
OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Monthly Meeting County Conference Room
7:30 P.M. 7th Floor, County/City Building
May 18, 1992
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1.1322 Lincolnway East - Lincolnway E. LHD
2.1326 Lincolnway East - Lincolnway E. LHD
3.1017 Riverside - Riverside LHD
4.1071 Riverside - Riverside LHD
5.1091 Riverside - Riverside LHD
6.Entry Posts - East Wayne St. LHD
7.1323 E. Wayne St. N. - East Wayne St. LHD
IV. Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes -- April, 1992
B. Treasurer's Report -- April, 1992
C. Correspondence
D. Committee Reports
la. C of A (Staff Approvals)
a.1077 Riverside - Riverside LHD
2. Budget & Finance
3. Legal
4. Historic Districts
a.River Bend Proposed LHD -
First Reading
5. Historic Landmarks
a.Riley High School -
First Reading
b.Ullery Cemetery -
First Reading
c.Tutt-Stuckey Cemetery -
First Reading
6. Standards and Maintenance
7. Personnel
B. Staff Reports
V. Old Business
VI. New Business
VII. Hearing of Visitors
VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
IX. Adjournment
COMMISSION MEETING VISITOR ROLL
MAY 18, 1992
Visitors: Please fill in your name and organization (if
applicable) so your presence can be officially recorded for the
Commission's records. Thank you.
1 1"1-911 � Y,,L VEST -,Ek y�f' 21
2 C/9%ae-2iA/E b. 71VSTETGc-1Z /� i vele /S END 22
3 0/4/ S4- P ,e/vskxloa Zze 2 3
4 ?Ct+ SC-haPer iQ ley l���n c -x4424
5 �- ��Z / , 25
26
6 De5orak Zlc-�1 �
7 27
8 e�°c�GjIQ-sGIR�6f �� s�% liis�� 28
9 V 11��� 0164 SeAkl,2 9
10 30
11 31
12 32
13 33
14 34
15 35
16 36
17 37
18 38
19 39
20 40
'At
May 11# 1992
STAFF REPORT
Youth gerviCe Rurcaau# Q/o Bonnie Strycker
1322 Lincolnway East
South Bend, IN 46613
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The c. 1904, Free Classic Queen Anne style building located at
1322 Lincolnway East within Lincolnway East Local Historic
District Boundaries, is rated as Non Contributing on the city
survey, having many alterations, including new siding, window
sashes and doors, and a c. 1960 breezeway attaching the main
building to the accompanying rear garage. Its location is on an
elevated lawn among houses of similar proportion, era, and state
of alteration; access to the garage is from a rear alley running
parallel with an operable rail line.
PROPOSED CHANGE
1) Reduce garage door opening, south side of garage, to entry
door (Alumax brand steel door, model #NE 9118). Siding to match
existing treated shingle will be installed to enclose.
2) Replace existing wood panel door, west side of garage, with
steel door (Alumax brand model #NE 900).
3) Replace small fixed wood sash, west side of garage, with wood
clad double hung sash, 2' 10" high X 2' 4" wide (Malta brand
model #2414); install same window on east side of garage,
centered in facade as on west side.
STANDARDS
II. Existing Structures
C) Windows and Doors
1) Required
Existing or 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
duplicates of the existing or original.
2) Recommended
If new sash and doors are used the existing or
original materials, design and hardware should be
used.
3) Prohibited
Existing or 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
!W-
V
may not be introduced.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed changes are not in keeping with the letter of the
above standards i.e. the size, materials, and proportion of
original or existing openings shall not be changed.
However, the building has been significantly altered: synthetic
siding, contemporary windows and doors have been added.
Similarly, the garage has been resided and attached to the main
building with an enclosed breezeway (c. 1960). An interior
inspection of the garage shows that several window openings have
been sided over.
The staff's analysis is that the overall character, style, and
integrity of the building/site will not be significantly
compromised by the nature of the proposed changes.
The staff recommendation is as follows:
1) Approve overall change. Choose more visually compatible door
(e.g. #SI 944 in submitted brochure).
2) Approve overall change. Choose more visually compatible door.
(e.g. #SI 900 in submitted brochure).
3) Approve as submitted (size of windows is approximate size of
existing window on west side of garage.
-- James V. Pastor
Staff, Historic Preservation
SI 9146
S19124
M \,, 994
SL9133
SL 9136
-SI 9128
SL 9127
SL 900
S1992
FL 900
SL 900
" Ill"I"ALU MAX
BUILDING PRODUCTS
A Division of Alumax Fabricated Products, bx.
a..
S1900 SL 900
S1994
SL 952
ET 900
NE 900
SL 990 91
cr-
11 -em
13Z7- 1-wC-
y�yyz - (-)!; C)8 -
LM
R.,--
' i
{;�- i
it
LM
NIALTAI
e o Thermaclad II Vinyl Clad Windows
YEARS "O DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS
Maintenance free
Double Hung Windows
with vinyl clad sash
and frame in White,
Earthtone or Clay Beige
PP Product Presentation
Tough weather -resistant vinyl
outside on exterior frame sash
—blind stops and sills." Attractive
beige jamb liners.
Weatherstripping. Vinyl foam
backed jamb strips assure posi-
tive contact; bulb type at check,
top and bottom rails for a more
positive seal.
Easy to install. 4 9/16" jamb
thickness has a 11/4" mounting
flange that is factory applied.
Fits in standard wafts without
extensions. Interior stops fac-
tory applied. Extension jamb for
6 9/16" jamb optional.
Dual sealed 518" Insulating
glass manufactured with sealant
system of polysulfide and poly -
OP Overall Product
For= cleaning from the inside, both
top and bottom sash pivot.
isobutylene. See your distributor
for high altitude glass (over 5000
ft.) and other special glazing.
Pressure treated water repel-
lent preservatives applied to
exterior wood parts before
assembly into finished window.
Spring loaded gold tone sash
lock and strike. Factory applied.
Completely assembled and
cartoned at the factory.
Options
Full -framed screens in
White, Earthtone or Clay Beige
aluminum.
Extension iambs.
Malta Thermactad Doubt& Hung exterior frame and sash are completely covered
with rigid vinyl. Available in white, Earthtone or Clay Beige. Units are complete
with factory applied nailing flanges.
True Colonial effect of rectan- Energy saving Low-E/Argon
gular wood grids. glass', cuts winter heat loss
White aluminum internal grids. and summer heat gain.
'Argon filled not available with internal grids.
Double Hung Windows
300 Bay Windows
UNIT
RGH OPG,
�1�0� 212
lid
2_110
L328
L33.9101]
4
UNrr DIM 7-2V4 8-101141
RGH OPG84-4/1.8 [7.1
SASH OPrG.
1.9 2.0
2.4 {I
31L3
0
33.2
3e
SASH OPG it 813.4/1.843/&5-01181
_
• M I
T2414
14
T3214
�-�-�- T1114�xa T185&229
Q
®
®
FEM RM 09
7201
16
72816
73216
73616
Q �Q T1636.249 7161&249 71856249
B
E3
El
450 Bay Windows
T2020®
T2s2o
T=
T362o
�--r
IL�� tll
®
El
El
®
UNIT DIM �r 6 8 SASH OPG 1-&3.4/ 8 4
7
RGH OPG I. 8 5 7 5 5 8.1
1 8 h-8/4.4/1.8 h-8/5-0/1.8
Ti622 T2022
T2422
T2822
T3222
73822 r
r -. ❑ p�
ip h N
B®13 El 1131 OCQ
? LL - '"64&229 Tl&%,229
T1624 T2024 T2424 T2824 73224 T3624 T4024 f
'"636249 '"61&249 T1656.249
t±� 0 O.r 0 0 Picture Windows
71628 T20U T2428 T2828 T3221 7362$
(((� UNIT DIM7-t s 8 - a - a-5
T I[�j RGH OPG 7-t+11 8t.01 aa+h t 95+h�
d ~ l�JpEI SASH OPG 4 913 Mt 8 &4.U1 a
�&5 0/t Siii {{22-0 5 OR 0111
T2024136 T2424136 T2824136 T3224/36 73624/36 Yp e ❑ ❑ ❑
'--T'T Double Hung "� 7164&2: Tt666a2
g' ;; n Windows 28" or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
more in width have a sm FE cop q
72034 T2434 T2834 T3234 double locks. �-._.. '"63624 T154"4 '"65&24 T2058.24
Window numbers shown indicate white vinyl exteriors. To order in Earthtone, change T designation to TE, for Clay Beige, change T to T8. For
combinations otter than shown, contact your Malta distributor. For non-standard sizes, see Malta Discovery 111 program on pages 12 and 13.
To determine replacement glass size add 112' to the call size height For example. T2016 glass size is 20"x 16-112"
May 11, 1992
STAFF REPORT
Youth Service Bureau, c/o Bonnie Strycker
1326 Lincolnway East
South Bend, IN 46613
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The c. 1917 American Four Square style building located at 1326
Lincolnway East within the Lincolnway East Local Historic
District boundaries, is rated as non-contributing on the city
survey. An accompanying green house, c. 1920, is also rated as
non-contributing. The green house sits in close proximity to the
main residence, in line with the general massing of buildings
along Lincolnway East. Its distinctive feature is a
deteriorating, front entry portico that is suggestive of the Art
Deco style. The 1932 Portage Assessor card lists the green house
as a "green house & bus[iness] est[ablishment]" under the name
"Riverside Floral Co", owned by Harvey M. Kinzie. Kinzie is
noted in the City Directories as the first owner of the adjacent
Four Square and a florist by occupation. The 1991 Assessor
record notes that the green house is a "Shell only. Building has
been gutted."
PROPOSED CHANGE
Demolish greenhouse.
STANDARDS
Lincolnway East Historic District: Preservation Guidelines
V. General
A) Buildings in the District should not be demolished.
However, where a building poses a threat to the public
safety, and demolition is the only alternative,
documentation by way of photographs, measured drawings, or
other descriptive methods should be made of both the
exterior and interior of the building.
Demolition Standards: Landmarks/Historic Districts
Demolition. Demolition of a historic landmark or significant
building in a historic district is disfavored and requires a
certificate of appropriateness. Such a certificate of
appropriateness shall be granted only if the owner demonstrates
by submission of substantial, competent evidence that:
a) The property in its current condition is uneconomical or
in a substantial state of disrepair, deterioration, or
structural instability not created by the owner;
b) Historically appropriate renovation or rehabilitation is
10 either technically or economically impractical; and
c) The owner has investigated and considered all reasonable
r
alternatives to demolition, not simply the least expensive
alternatives, and that all such alternatives such as sale,
rental, or lease of the property have failed or with reasonable
likelihood will fail or will not earn a fair economic return on
value.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The greenhouse located at 1326 Lincolnway East is an important
element to the Lincolnway East Local Historic District. It is a
unique entity in the district and part of an unusual
residential/commercial site.
The building is rated non-contributing on the city survey. The
staff contests, upon reanalysis of the site, that the rating
reflects only the architectural integrity of the building, and
not its value as an important element in the interpretation of
the site as an intact example of a homestead/business, the
juxtaposition of which was a common expression of mercantile
activity in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
The property is also the first representative of the gradual
change of the district from a primarily residential area to a
mixed business and residential area.
The greenhouse contributes a unique volume to the streetscape of
the Lincolnway East Local Historic District. Arguably, it is not
compatible with the residential construction of the rest of the
district, yet its general volume and relationship to the street
is such that its loss will create a gap in the rhythm of the
streetscape.
It is the staff's assessment that the uniqueness of the
greenhouse is an asset to the district for the reasons sited
above. Its demolition would have a negative impact on the
historic and architectural fabric of the district.
-- James V. Pastor
Staff, Historic Preservation
.r
5/14/92
ADDENDUM TO STAFF REPORT
Upon further consideration, the staff asserts that the demolition
of e green house at 1326 LWE would not necessarily be
detrimental to the historic fabric of the Lincolnway East Local
Historic District on the whole. Expanding on a concession
presented in the original staff report (5/11/92), the building's
architectural details, massing, and overall -appearance are not
compatible with the other buildings in the district. The
counter argument made in the initial report was that this
"'uniqueness" was an asset to the district. Upon reassessment
the staff concedes that the visual and architectural contribution
of the green house to the Lincolnway East streetscape is
predominantly negative.
The primary contributing element, the front Art Deco style
portico, has lost much of its integrity through deterioration and
subsequently detracts from the visual quality of the district as
a whole rather than contributing to it. The building's other
elements, such as the atypically high, poured concrete
foundation, the plastic covered window openings with a heavy
horizontal emphasis, and the sub -standard quality of the wood
board siding, are discordant with the nature of the rest of the
built environment in the district.
However, the value of green house to the specific site, i.e. the
relation between the residence and the greenhouse as cited in the
staff report, should still be considered. To reiterate, the
greenhouse and adjacent residence form a valuable resource: an
expression of the integration of business and private life in the
early twentieth century. Only a handful of such examples remain
intact within the City of South Bend.
The staff recommends further research'nto the possibility of
adaptive reuse before demolition is considered. Adequate
rehabilitation of the building could serve both the owner and the
district in a positive fashion.
In any case, the owner, Youth Service Bureau, has not adequately
dequately
expressed subsequent treatment of the site after demolition.
Such future plans should be obtained and considered with regards
to the appropriateness of demolition.
James V. Pastor
Staff, Historic Preservation
TO: Historic Preservation Com=5,,smon
FROM: Bonnie C. Strycker, YSB
RE: Demolition of Flower Shop _at 1326_ LincolnwAy__East
Date: May 12, 1992
The Youth Service Bureau recently acquired property at
1326 and 1330 Lincolnway East, South Bend. Approval is
being requested to demolish the flower shop at 1326
Lincolnway East. The property.is structurally unstable.
The roof appears near collapse. A portion of the floor is
plywood and a section is dirt. It is deteriorated and it is
not not economically feasible to convert it into a structure
useable for our purposes.
I hope you will favorably consider this request to
demolish the structure.
Youth Development Services 70001 Youth Employment
Helps Hem
CASA Project Safe Station
2222 Lincolnway West
South Bend, Indiana 46628
219/284-9231
YOUTH
SERVICE
BUREAU
Safe Station
1322 Lincoinway East
South Bend, Indiana 46613
of St. Joseph County, Inc.
219/284-9396
TO: Historic Preservation Com=5,,smon
FROM: Bonnie C. Strycker, YSB
RE: Demolition of Flower Shop _at 1326_ LincolnwAy__East
Date: May 12, 1992
The Youth Service Bureau recently acquired property at
1326 and 1330 Lincolnway East, South Bend. Approval is
being requested to demolish the flower shop at 1326
Lincolnway East. The property.is structurally unstable.
The roof appears near collapse. A portion of the floor is
plywood and a section is dirt. It is deteriorated and it is
not not economically feasible to convert it into a structure
useable for our purposes.
I hope you will favorably consider this request to
demolish the structure.
Youth Development Services 70001 Youth Employment
Helps Hem
CASA Project Safe Station
May 11, 1992
STAFF REPORT
R. J. Bennett
1017 Riverside Drive
South Bend, IN 46616
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
This c. 1904 American Four Square residence is rated a C/9 on -the
city survey. The building is located within the Riverside Drive
Local Historic District, set in a streetscape of similarly
proportioned houses. A detached garage sits at the rear of the
property and is accessed from the alley.
PROPOSED CHANGE
Remove existing rear entry vestibule/utility room (measures 5' X
8') and replace with utility/bathroom (to measure 10' X 12').
STANDARDS
III New Construction
A) Heiqht and Proportion
__-1)---Required
Additions to existing buildings shall be related in
height and proportion to the existing structure.
3) Prohibited
Additions that would add new height or change the
existing facade of a building and change its scale
and architectural character may not be constructed.
4) Not Recommended
Any style or period of architecture that is
incompatible with the existing should not be
permitted in new additions.
B) Building Materials
1) Required
Materials used on an addition to an existing
structure shall related to the existing or original
materials of that structure. Also, as much of the
original structure as possible shall be retained so
that the addition could be removed without damage to
the basic structure and appearance of the building.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The existing rear vestibule/utility room, with its vertical
tongue and groove siding, is an addition or porch enclosure of
typical of the 1930's and early 1940's. There are other examples
within the district boundaries.
The proposed addition closely adheres in form, material, and
character to the existing, and is therefore generally in keeping
with the standards above. Several minor changes have been
introduced in the new plans: (a) the scale and proportion of the
addition changes in relation to the rear facade in that it is
larger (10' X 12' vs. 5' X 8'); (b) the proposed east window
opening in the existing extension is relatively small as compared
to the corresponding replacement sash, which is in scale with the
existing windows on the rest of the house; (c) the proposed entry
door will be 2" wider than the existing, but will replicate in
form and material the existing; (d) the orientation of the entry
stoop is different from the existing.
The staff asserts that the change cited in (a) does not
compromise the historic or architectural integrity of the
building. The addition will be offset from the east corner of
the rear facade by at least 6", thus keeping the cornerboard
detail and profile. Similarly, the changes cited in (b) and (c)
are of no detriment. The commission may want to consider the
change cited in (d); the reorientation and/or proposed materials
may detract from the existing facade.
Furthermore, the commission should require that the existing
molded entablature in the roof/wall junction be replicated in the
new addition.
-- James V. Pastor
Staff, Historic Preservation
4pMay 5, 1992
STAFF REPORT
Ann Manion / Stephen Murphy
1071 Riverside Drive
South Bend, IN 46616
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The c-1911 American Four Square/Prairie dwelling located at 1.071
Riverside Drive is within the Riverside Drive Local Historic
District boundaries. The building is rated a C/9 on the city
resurvey and sits amid a streetscape of houses of similar
proportion and ear. A contributing garage is located at the rear
of the property and is accessed via a rear alley.
PROPOSED CHANGE
1) Replace existing concrete walk running from side entry to
garage in kind: materials and dimensions to replicate existing.
2) Install rectangular patio to extend fifteen feet from rear of
house. Width of patio to run from fence to fence (width of lot)
with three foot buffer between fence and patio (three foot
flowerbeds). Area at side entry will be all concrete to fence.
Sidewalk to be replaced will be incorporated into patio area.
STANDARDS
I. Environment
B)-Buildinq Site and Landscapinq
1) Required
Plants; trees, fencing, walkways ... which reflect
the property's history and development shall be
retained.
2) Recommended
New site work should be based upon actual knowledge
of the past appearance of the property found in -
photographs, drawings and newspapers. New site work
should also be appropriate to existing surrounding
site elements in scale, type and appearance.
3) Prohibited
No changes may be made to the appearance of the site
by removing old plants, trees, fencing, walkways ...
before evaluating their importance to the property's
history and development.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed walk and patio is out of scale with the rest of the
site. A smaller patio, with a reduced concrete area, would be
more appropriate. The replacement walk should closely adhere to
the width and path of the existing.
James V. Pastor
Staff, Historic Preservation
BATH -02
APRIL 23,93
PROPOSED BATH & UTILITY ROOM ADDITION
to 1017 Riverside Drive South Bend
Quotation is for removing present rear porch and constructing -_a
n evi 1 a i � g 6 r room approximately -'-------- 10x12 feet.
Foundation of concrete block or poured concrete.
Exterior to be vertical ',.,,"4d anifttvt" n and finished complete.
with one double hung window and exterior nine glass light door
with two lower wood panels and storm door less painting.
Subfloor, ready for linoleum, must a continuation of the existing
kitchen floor for level and height.
Roof overhang to be compatible to existing overhang on the rest
of the hone. [ approx. 1211 ] Green Shingles similar to those on
house applied with the roof line similar to main body of house.
East wall of edition must be positioned to allow a minimum
offset maintaining original corner detail of house.
Rough plumbing to be installed by contractor for washer, gas
dryer, water closet and wash stand. Shower to be instaled and
hooked -up.
All other work such as dry wall installation, insolation, inside
partitions, electrical, heating, and interior finishing to be done
by home owner.
Basic framing dimensions.
81feet deep by 121 wide by standard 81 wall height.
161, O.C. framing
all wood sheeting, no celotex.
(particle board O.K.) 41 .
Wood stoop with suitable steps down to grade with iron
railings. Approximately 3 X 5 ft pluss steps.
40
NO
U6�F
C7,
qr2-
1011
May 11, 1992
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Brian Crumlish
1091 Riverside Drive
South Bend, IN 46616
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The c.1909 dwelling at 1091 Riverside drive was designed by local
architect Ernest Young for Thaddeus M. Talcott, a prominent
attorney. The building is an outstanding example of Ernest
Young's Prairie style designs; Ernest Young also designed several
other Prairie style residences in the Riverside Drive Local
Historic District.
PROPOSED CHANGE
Replace existing cedar shingle roofing on garage with simulated
cedar shingle, Timberline series.
STANDARDS
II. Existinq Structures
C) Windows and Doors
1) Required: The existing shape and materials of the roof
shall be retained.
2) Recommended: Whenever possible, the original shape and
materials should be restored. Particular effort should be
made to retain unique materials not commonly found
in new construction. Roof covering which is
deteriorated beyond repair should be replaced with new
material that matches as closely as possible the existing
or original in composition, size, shape, color and texture
3) Prohibited: Nothing shall be done to change the essential
.character of the roof by adding architectural features or
roofing materials inappropriate to the style of the house.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposal is not in keeping with the letter of the standards
as cited above. However, the owner asserts that he changed the
roofing material of both the garage and main house from asphalt
roll to the existing cedar shingle in 1977. The roofing is
currently in deteriorated condition; the owner indicates the
cause is in performance problems with the current material.
The proposal is to replace with Timberline asphalt shingle, which
advertises that it replicates the wood shingle profile. Upon
viewing the sample, the staff is not in accordance with this
assessment. The staff suggests locating an alternative material
that would preserve the visual integrity of this Prairie
residence as did the previously installed cedar shingle.
-- James V. Pastor
Staff, Historic Preservation
Certificate of ADoropriateness Staff Report:
Entry Posts/East Wavne Street LHD
Owner: City of South Bend, c/o Georgia Shaw (EWLHD Liaison
Committee)
Location: N.E and S.E corners of Eddy and East Wayne Streets
Historic Context:
The brick and poured -concrete entry posts at the corner of Eddy
and East Wayne Streets are an important historic element of the
District. They were constructed by Sunnymede's developers, Leslie
Whitcomb and Fred Keller, after the neighborhood was platted in
1925.
Entry posts and lights have historically been a popular means
with which to differentiate specific neighborhoods in the built
environment. Intended to resemble entry gates protecting estates
and manors, entry posts provide a formal entryway into what was,
in this case, a distinctive and "fashionable" place to reside.
These posts and lamps also represent the developer's intention to
require communal neighborhood responsibilities; homeowners in
Sunnymede were assessed a fee to finance the maintenance of the
entry posts and lamps along with other streetlights, trees in the
tree lawns and recreational areas in the neighborhood.
Proposal:
The East Wayne LHD Liaison Committee proposes to have two new
lamps wired and mounted on top of the brick posts that flank the
entryway into the district. A meter box will be attached to the
post on the northeast corner of the streets (see photo for
proposed location). Electrical wiring will be run on the outside
of the posts and under the street between the posts.
Applicable Standards:
I. Environment
A. The District Environment
(1) Reauired "Distinctive existing features such as brick entry
pillars [sic] ... shall be retained."
(2) Recommended "Whenever possible, original features should be
restored."
(from East Wavne Street Historic District Preservation
Guidelines, 1987)
1
Recommendations
The intention of this project is to restore the original function
of the entry posts by replacing the missing lamps. The lamps
chosen (W.J. Whatley Inc. Luminaire, Model 1010; see—
manufacturer's
ee—manufacturer's drawing) replicate the original, as can be seen
from a historic postcard contemporaneous with the early years of
the neighborhood.
The project includes a meter box as part of the Liaison
Committees' agreement with I.and M. for financing the cost of
electricity -- it is intended that the Liaison Committee pay for
the electricity used. The project sponsor has chosen the most -
inconspicuous placement for the meter box where it can least be
seen from either street (see photographs). The HPC should require
that the proposal include the painting of the meter box to match
the color of the bricks.
This project will enhance the District and its streetscape; the
proposal is within the requirements of the District's standards;
I recommend that the Historic Preservation Commission approve a
Certificate of Appropriateness for this project.
F. Holycross
5-11-92
2
v
1.*,i.�. J;: r
li 'v
tr:F! ili
d..
'0100
.. 15- - -�
lZ
r, Mpl:•4
.. 15- - -�
lZ
r, Mpl:•4
Ir
Luminaires & Accessories
W. I Whatley, Inc. offers replicas of twelve authentic turn -of -the -century
luminaire designs to complement our ornamental fiberglass lamp post models.
A = r A
B
Model: 1002
Available with Smooth (SM)
or Flu �Lf ,a54 iilW
n atter
: 15' B: 291h 1
_ >A
B."
Y
A
B
Model: 1003
Available with Smooth (SM)
or Fluted (FL) cast alumi-
fitter
A: ' B: 28'/x"
Model: 1010
Octagonal cast aluminum
housing with polycarbonate
panels. Shown with optio
spikes. A: 211 B:
A
B
V
'r
Model: 1041
Arm and fixture assembly.
21 O.D. aluminum arm with
smooth octagonal fitter. Not
recommended for 100 series
shaft. A: 161i' B: 36%
ldel: 1011
ium Priced octagonal
cast aluminum housing with
white acrylic lens.
A: 131h' B: 23'/41
A' r A
B
'V I
Model: 1050 '
Aluminum housing with
four clear acrylic panels.
A: 103A I B: 221b'
Most globes are produced from virtually unbreakable polycarbonate, material
that provides the highest possible strength and durability. Fixtures are
integrally ballasted, glare -free, energy efficient, and W stabilized for color.
clarity. Contact the factory for available wattage and other accessories.
- A
B
Model: 1004
Available with Smooth (SM)
or Fluted (FL) cast alumi-
num fitter
A: 16" B: 341/4 1
A
B
r mss:
Model: 1020
Cast aluminum housing with
polycarbonate globe.
A: 18' B: 301
B
- ------ o- A
Model: 1005
Available with Smooth (SM)
or Fluted (FL) cast alumi-
num fitter
A: 14' B: 218/,61
�---► A
B
r �
Model: 1030
Spun aluminum housing,
low glare reflector with
acrylic enclosure.
A: 18" B: 38'
A
Model: RA38
2' O.D. aluminum arm
A: 38' B: 48"
A -i r
Model: SA25-2
Cast aluminum arm.
A: 25'
Model: DA34-2
Deluxe cast aluminum arm.
Fbr 500, 400, and 300 ser-
ies posts only.
A: 34'
Y
Model: RA18`
16/81 O.D. aluminum arm.
Not recommended for fluted
shafts.
A: 18' B: 291h'
B
J
B
Model: 1006
Available with Smooth (SM)
or Fluted (FL) cast alumi-
num fitter
A: 181 B: 261/x'
Model: 1040
Cast aluminum bell with
spun aluminum dome
enclosing glass globe.
A: 261h 1 B: 16'/a "
>A
Model: RA30
2' O.D. aluminum arm
A: 301 B: 48'
A
2' O.D. aluminum arm for sin-
gle, or twin luminaires with
option banner bracket. Fbr 500,
400, and 300 series posts only.
A: 28"
B: 30."
j.�
May 4, 1992
STAFF REPORT
Mr. and Mrs. Bamber
1323 E. Wayne Street North
South Bend, IN 46615
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
This c.1963 Ranch style dwelling is located in the East Wayne
Local Historic District and is rated as non-contributing. The
predominant building materials are brick and wood shingle. A
detached carport towards the rear of the property is accessed
from a straight drive from E. Wayne Street North. An inground
pool is located in the rear portion of the property and
surrounded by a wood picket fence. A wood pool shed is located
at the rear -east corner of the building.
PROPOSAL
1. Build 6" block wall in place of existing wood fence on east
and west sides of property. Height of wall to be that of
existing fence. Use existing wood fence as veneer over block
wall facing neighbors on east and west sides. Veneer west block
wall with brick to match house on the driveway side.
2. Rebuild existing wood pool shed at rear -east side of corner of
house in brick. Extend shed up to air conditioning units on east
side of house.
3. Enclose existing car port.
STANDARDS
I. Environment
B. Building Site and Landscaping
1) Required
Major landscaping items, trees, fencing, walkways, ...
which reflect the property's history and development
shall be retained ... Structures such as gazebos, patio
decks ... new walls ... and other similar structures
shall be compatible to the historic character of the
site and the neighborhood and inconspicuous when viewed
from a public way.
2) Recommended
New site work should be based upon actual knowledge
of the past appearance of the property found in
photographs, drawings, and newspapers.
3) Prohibited
No changes may be made to the appearance of the site
by removing major landscaping items, trees, fencing,
walkways, outbuildings, and other elements before
evaluating their importance to the property's history
and development.
III. New Construction
A. Heiqht and Proportion
1) Required
Additions that would add new height or change the
existing facade of a building and change its scale and
architectural character shall not be constructed.
B. Buildinq Materials
1) Required
Materials used on an addition to an existing structure
shall relate to the existing or original materials of
the structure.
C. Accessory Buildings
1) Required
Accessory buildings shall be located at the rear of
residences and as unobtrusively as possible while
preserving the historical relationships between the
building, landscape features, and open spaces.
Proportions and materials shall conform to those
required for New Construction (see A-1 and B-1).
2 ) Recommended
Accessory building designs should be compatible in
character and mood to the residences and the
neighborhood.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The property at 1323 E.W.N. was developed in 1963 and is
subsequently considered a non-contributing resource. However,
the building mass and materials are compatible with adjacent
homes considered as contributing resources. Decisions regarding
the proposed changes should be seen in this context.
1) The existing rear fence has little historic and architectural
value. Its replacement should be permitted. However, the
adhering of fragments of the existing wood fence to a 6" block
wall may be problematic. It is important that the rough masonry
to be used not be visible as it could prove unsightly. Facing
with brick to match house as proposed on the driveway side of the
west wall should be applied in all visible sections of the block
fence.
2) Reconstruction of the pool shed as proposed would have no
detrimental impact on the district environment.
3) The staff recommends against the
port as it is a unique treatment of
neighborhood. This element of the
historic significance.
-- James V. Pastor
Staff, Historic Preservation
enclosure of the existing car
automobile storage in the
property has potential
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING
OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Monthly Meeting
7:30 p.m.
April 20, 1992
I. Call to Order
County Conference Room
7th Floor, County -City Building
The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m.
11.- Roll Call
Members Present: Mrs. Martha Choitz, Mrs. Jean Dennen,
Mrs. Joann Sporleder, Mr. John Oxian--President, Mr. Jed
Eide, Mr. Bill Welsheimer, Mr. Dennis Schafer, Mrs.
Janeanne Petrass, Mrs. Aladean DeRose--City Attorney,
Mr. Fred Holycross--Director, Mr. James Pastor --
Administrative Assistant, Suzanne Booker --Surveyor.,
Mr. Fritz ValSaint--intern.
Members Absent: Mr. Herb Herendeen.
Also Present: Mr. Gene Oakley, Ms. Pat Schafer, Ms. Trudy
McManama--Riley-at-Ewing,.Ms.-Luane X_ajzer,-.Ms.Deb
71 1
RAvers-i--de,-Mr'... Tom-.Haas—:--Zouth
Te z i chPrice- !,-1 04..9
Bend Distr-.l-ctz-,-G'o-If--Asso-ci-ati-oni----Ms.-�,S-haroii-l;Ber-ko, -Mr.. -Jay
Tidmarsh--938',,.R-i,ver,-z-�i-de
Wash in gton,;--,, MrRoger�,McKi c.ha-e-1 Monte
Sri ver--'-S-up-erinte-ndent-.-o.fl.',,Schoo--Is 1--Mr.�GeorqeF--Trzi ch; Ms.
Barbara, -St:ee7.1,e--:--!So:*ut-hhol'.d--,�starat�onsi-, %'-Mr.. 1 -,S-tephen
Luecke--South Bend Common-Counc1l..
Mr. Oxian introduced-Mr,...Dennis-,,Schafe.r, newly appointed
to--the-;4iPG-.to,
representative.
III. Public Hearing
A. certificates of Appropriateness
1. 938 Riverside Drive --Riverside LHD
Mr. Pastor summarized the staff report and
distributed polaroids. The owner, Mr. Tidmarsh,
wished to replace his front porch in-kind. The
list of proposed changes was as follows:
--replace porch deck, latticework, supports, and
balustrade in-kind with cedar wood. Balustrade
replacement to include reconstruction of missing
sections on east side of porch.
--replace porch foundation with brick or concrete
pier supports.
--leave roof and entablature intact
--replace existing brick porch steps in front with
wood risers/treads
--leave brick side steps for foundation concerns
Mr. Pastor reported that the staff considered this
proposal to be a positive step, in keeping with the
pertinent standards, towards restoration of the
building. Approval was therefore recommended.
Mr. Tidmarsh then told the HPC he had decided to
use brick pier supports, not concrete. The bricks
to be used were part of the present structure.
Mrs. Sporleder moved to approve the proposal; Mr.
Welsheimer seconded the motion. Mr. Oxian added
that the COA should stipulate brick pier supports.
Motion approved unanimouslv.
2. 1049 Riverside Drive --Riverside LHD.
This COA concerned the installation of a 9' high
pole, backboard, and basketball hoop in front of
the garage, in a flared rear drive apron.
Mr. Pastor summarized the staff report and
distributed polaroids of the site. He directed the
commission members' attention to the schematized
drawing of the hoop included in their April
information packets.
The staff recommended approval of the proposal
because the unit would be difficult to see from the
street; moreover, the unit was freestanding, and
well clear of any historically relevant fabric.
The owner, Mr. Tom Price,*said Mr. Pastor had
presented an adequate description of the project;
he had nothing to add.
Mrs. Sporleder moved to approve the proposal; Mr.
Welsheimer seconded the motion. Approved
unanimouslv.
3. 630 W. Washington --Local Landmark
Mr. Pastor summarized the staff report. This
house, rated 0-13, was built in 1886 by James
Oliver. It was protected both as a City Landmark
and as a part of the Southhold Restorations facade
easement program.
Plans were now underway to convert the property
2
into a Bed & Breakfast. The owners were applying
for a COA to make the following three changes:
a. Provide required parking spaces for the bed &
breakfast patrons as per submitted plan. Parking
proposal to involve removal of one damaged.maple
tree (to be replaced) and the relocation of three
bushes._ Paving -of the area required.
b. Place a sign, similar in size and design to the
Queen Anne Inn's, in front of the house near the
front steps.
c. Install air conditioning unit near the rear
southeast -corner of the main building -
The staff recommended approval of part (a) of the
proposal, which allowed the owners to meet City
Code parking requirements. No further expansion of
the parking area, however, should be permitted.
Should additional need for parking arise (and the
owner had indicated that it might), the staff
recommended that the owner .find alternate means to
accomodate the increase.
Mr. Eide here asked Mr. Pastor to define "alternate
means." Mr. Holycross said arrangements might be
made with neighboring businesses to share parking
- space, possibly on the street. Such arrangements,
- - - --he said, were increasingly being made in cities
around the country.
Mr..Oxian asked whether the parking spaces would be
perpendicular to the curb. Mr. Holycross said
that, in previous plans, the spaces were slanted;
in the present plans, they were perpendicular. Mr.
Oxian then asked whether the parking space beside
the carriage house had been eliminated. Mr. Pastor
said they had not.
- =- Ms. Lisa-MaGuire, leasee and proprietor of the
-� proposed bed & breakfast, said that, due to
maneuverability problems, she and a surveyor had
changed the parking plans. Instead of angled
spaces facing Tippecanoe place, they had settled on
-- - perpendicular spaces facing the garage. The
original drawing did not show a 5' area beneath the
garage overhang which allowed additional parking
space.
The old plans, she said, were drawn up by a
previous bidder for the property. The new plans
provided much greater maneuverability, and followed
the lines of the driveway more gracefully. Area
3
Plan had told her that the new plans were
acceptable.
Mrs. Sporleder said the plans specified "asphalt
paving for 12 parking spaces." She could only see
8 spaces in the drawing. Ms. MaGuir-e explained
that 4 spaces, next to the garage, already existed;
the plans i-ncreased_--the total number of parking
spaces on the site to 12. - -- — — -- - -
Mrs. Sporleder asked Ms. McGuire to clarify the
issue of additional future parking requirements.
Ms. Maguire explained that she might need more
parking space to accomodate business conferences,
wedding receptions etc. Area Plan required that
parking areas be paved. Rather than increase the
paved parking area on the site, she said she would
negotiate a shared -parking agreement with
neighboring businesses. She also said that, should
her zoning require her to increase the size of her
parking lot to accomodate conferences, she would
forego the project.
Mrs. Choitz asked whether the staff had recommended
some means of screening the parking lot from view.
She saw no provision for this in the plans. Ms.
Maguire said bushes would be used to help soften
the aesthetic effect of the new parking lot. Mr.
Oxian then asked whether the bushes would also act
as a barrier between the parking lot and the lawn.
Ms. Maguire said there would be a curb to protect
the lawn.
Mrs. Choitz moved to approve to approve the parking
plans, as submitted; Mrs. Soorleder seconded the
motion. Approved unanimouslv.
Part (b) of the proposal was then discussed. Mr.
Pastor reported that the staff recommended
approval, but suggested that the 11 ' high sign
might be too tall. The staff also advised against
using gingerbread bracketwork on the sign, as
proposed.
Ms. Maguire said one problem was the sheer size of
the house; it was so large that it might dwarf a
lower sign. Mr. Oxian questioned whether a
motorist going west along West Washington could see
the sign; the wall around Tippecanoe place might
conceal it. Mr. Welsheimer said that a principle
requirement for signage was that it be visible from
cars passing by on the street. He suggested that a
V tall sign might be more conspicuous to passing
motorists. Ms. Maguire replied that the vantage
4
point about which she was most concerned was the
driveway head of Tippecanoe Place. She wanted the
patrons of Tippecanoe Place to see her sign.
Also, she wanted to assure herself of a certain
amount of flexibility in deciding the height of the
sign. There were many factors to consider; for
example, there were lilac bushes on the site which
i,light--scree-rf-theF-s-i-gn-durtng-p-eak
Mrs. Choitz moved to approve part (b) of the
proposal. Mr. Eide seconded the motion. Approved
unanimouslv.
Part (c) was then discussed. Mr. Pastor reported
that the staff recommended approval of the AC unit,
since it would not be visible from either
Washington or Scott streets.
Mr. Eide moved to approve part (c). Mrs. Petrass
seconded the motion.
Mrs. Sporleder asked whether the AC unit was to be
screened in any way --possibly by a,fence. Ms.
Maguire said bushes would be used to conceal the
unit.
Motion approved unanimously.
4.. 1121 E. Wayne.Street--East Wayne LHD
Mr. Eide, the petitioner,submitted architectural
drawings for a two-part proposal.. Mr. Pastor
distributed.polaroids and summarized the staff
report.
The first part of the proposal, he reported, was to
replace a brick.patio in the back yard. The new
--bri-cks were to closely match the color and pattern
of the existing bricks. Also, the rebuilt patio
would -.be. raised apx. 2 -over the existing
ion-; this was to. improve -drainage, and to
harmonize- the r6-1_ativelii'�V_"els of yard and, patio.
-the to
The area of, patio would be increased by 30
.-cover a small area of. lawn where grass had failed
to grow.
Since only ink'i nd replacement materials were.to be
_-.=.used on the rebuilt patio, the. staff recommended
..approva-I..
Eiid6l-ta.i.,d-rthat.het�di-�d'hot,.-':know whether the
'only-Rnew that it was in bi
or. ig ina e
p r I :'h' ad
at -i'- was::
0
shape. The.:patio :had sunk_,;. creating drainage
5
problems, and many of its bricks were deteriorated.
Mrs. Dennen moved to approve the first oart of the
mr000sal; Mrs. Sporleder seconded the motion.
Approved unanimouslv.
Mr. Pastor reported that the second pert of the
proposal was to enclose a second -story screened
------�--------�'--sleeping poroh-in-the-reaff-lf-the-house-'.-At-------�'��-------'
present, traffic noises from Jefferson and Eddy
streets made the space unusable as a sleeping
porch. The screens were to be replaced by a
combination of fixed windows and operable
oasenents. The size of all openings was to be
maintained. The screens were to be saved and
stored above the garage, should any future owner
wish to restore the porch.
The staff considered the porch a unique element of
the house, important to its historic fabric; it
represented climate-accomodating design (since
superseded by AC and ventilation systems) of the
early twentieth century. However, since the
proposed alteration neither destroyed the porch nor
contradicted the architectural style of the house,
the staff recommended approval. A further
consideration was that the porch was a back porch,
not a front porch.
Mrs, Sporleder asked Mr. E-ide what type of windows
he planned to use. Mr. E1de said they were Pella
-- windows which opened along the oenterlinm. The
original openings had been retained. Although it
was not possible to fully conceal the alteration,
he needed to enclose the porch to create more space
' for hi.0 family. He said such adaptations were
sometimes necessary, even within historic
districts, to keep the neighborhood viable.
^
In response to a queetion'from Mrs. Choitz, Mr.
Eide said the altered porch was not visible from
the street.
Mrs. Choitz moved to approve the porch enclosure;
Mrs. Petrass seconded the motion. Motion'apormved
unanimouslv.
8.- Studebaker Administration Building --Second Reading
Mr- H-
o l�oro��--summarized the staff report on this
_building. The report described the building as "an
-integral part of the cultural landscape of South
Bend's downtown." It was historically significant for
the following reasons:
--as the center of the Studebaker firm's management
and social activities in the 20th century
--as an important landmark in the city's built
environment
--as a structure designed by Solon Beman, one of the
Midwest's most influential 19th -century architects
= as—a=l-oca-1—examp 1 e- of - Renai ssance-rev-i-va ] --influenced
architecture
The building had been continuously occupied by the
Studebaker firm from its construction 1908-9 until
1965. Since 1970, it had served as administrative
offices for the South Bend School Corporations. The
School Corporation's future plans for the building
were unknown.
Mr. Holycross concluded his summary by saying that the
building, rated as significant on the Indiana Historic
Sites and Structures Inventory, deserved landmark
status. To begin the landmark designation process
would be an opportunity to educate/inform the
community of the building's significance. It was the
staff's opinion that the HPC should also ask the
Common Council to support an effort to have the
structure placed on the National Register of Historic
Places.
_ _- _..-This concluded the summary. Mr. Oxian then opened the
issue to public debate.
Mr. Sriver, Superintendent of Schools, spoke first.
He described the situation as "difficult" because he
understood the urge to preserve some of the past.
However, he said he was speaking for an organization
that had concerns other than historic preservation,
and had come to-the-meeting-toexpress his forma]
opposition to landmarking the Studebaker
Administration Building.
He listed the following reasons for his opposition:
--the need to maintain flexibility in making decisions
regarding the facility
--the need to maintain the building's practical
usefulness
--the duty to the taxpayers to minimize maintenance
costs; the School Corporation was taxpayer -supported.
Mrs. Sporleder asked Mr. Sriver why he thought
landmark status would jeopardize the efficiency and
efficacy of future modifications/repairs to the
building. Mr. Sriver said he didn't foresee any major
7
changes to the building's exterior as long as the
School Corporation kept its administrative offices
there. However, these offices might be moved elsewhere
in 1998; in this event, the School Corporation hoped
to sell, donate, or re -use the building without
hindrance from the HPC.
Mrs. Sporleder said she doubted the HPC would
seriously -hinder --any--repai-rs--or--a-It-er-at-i-ons-th-at-th.
School Corporation might wish to make. The most
difficult problem, in her experience, would be window
repair. An important reason for landmarking the
building was to forestall major changes to the
building's exterior; still, the HPC would be helpful
and flexible in negotiating C of A's.
Mr. Oxian said there were only two types.of standards
for maintaining historic buildings, "A" and "B." The
"B" standards, which had overwhelmingly been assigned
to city and county landmarks, were relatively
flexible. So far, only Tippecanoe Place had been
assigned the stricter "A" standards; Tippecanoe Place,
however, was also bound by a number of restrictions
from the Southhold Restoration Facade Easement
Program. "B" standards were more negotiable, and
would be recommended for the Administration building.
Mr. Oxian then said that landmarking the building now
would help assure its future. It was important to
apply standards early rather than waiting,until
demolition was imminent.
Mrs. Petrass pointed out that landmark status wouldn't
place limits on interior alterations.
Mr. Gene Oakley then suggested that, eventually, the
Administration Building might be used as a repository
for ---the -papers-now- stored -in -the- Studebaker -National
I`UTSeUm.- - The museum, it had rec-ent-1-y --b-een----d+s-c-overed,
had such serious structural problems that its
viability was in doubt. The papers, which included
letters from the 19th century, might simply rot away
if a place were not found for them.
Mr. Oakley then further suggested that the -automobiles
at the museum might be moved to the Shetland Building,
west of the Administration Building. This would place
,.--..the entire museum within the historic boundaries of
--complex.
.�'.Studebaker
-_the
Mr. Oxian then briefly outlined a history of the
-,attempts, since 1971, to find an appropriate location
for the Studebaker National Museum. His long-term
goal in preserving the Administration Building, he
said, was to see it ultim'atelyibecome the nucleus,of
the Studebaker National."Museum.:'-' He said he considered
this.building the most -vital: part -of the whol e
Studebaker complex.
Mrs. Petrass pointed out`"th_at cars,and carriages had,
oncebeen exhibited in-the-back,'part of the
Administration Building .-",.'.Sh6 asked whether there were
any--surp-1 us--space—at—the".'.'Admi-ni-str-a-t-i-on—Bu-i-l-d-i-ng—t-c
accomodate overflow from: the Museum--temporarily,.:at
least.
Mr. Sriver replied that the, museum -needed far more
space than the School Corporation could offer. Mrs
Petrass said she wasn't suggesting moving cars into..
the Administration buildi'ng';- nor was she suggesting a
permanent.arrangement.-.,She was, however, concerned
about the papers -and artifacts
facts stored in the
ar-chiv*a,lly unstable environmenton the museum's 2nd
floor..
Mrs. Sporleder said she was convinced of the
building's historical significance. To landmark the
building now, before a crAs.is threatening its very
existence could arise, seemed a -reasonable and orderly
thing to do.. With all the outcry over the fate of the
Studebaker Corridor, it would be irresponsible for the
HPC not to landmark the*building--it--seemed.an obvious
step to take. She expected that, once the building
became a landmark, the School Corporation would
continue, as always, to:care for it.
Mr. Welsheimer said he'.d,.been`on a committee a year
before which had-discussed,-thefuture uses of various
School Corporation buildings ' . -Although the committee
had not reached any final.agreements, it had emerged
that --when funds became available and the time seemed
right --the School Corporation would relocate its
administrative offices.- The future of the building,
therefore, was far from 'certain-. As a compromise, he
suggested postponing the .,landmark procedure another
year.
The School Corporation,_:h'ewas� 'sure 'would continue to
maintain the building. He�:also believed that
landmarking the building:lwou'ld.have no negative impact
on its value; rather, the -.building's value might go
up.
Mr. Sriver explained that his main concern was not the
building's value, but the School Corporation's ability
to repair it quickly, cheaply, and efficiently.
Mr. Welsheimer said the HPC would willingly help the
9
School Corporation find answers to its maintenance
problems --locating windows, windowframea, eto. This
was one of the benefits of landmark statue,
Mrs. Choitz said the HPC should press on with its
landmarkinB plans. The Studebaker Administration
Building was high on the HPC's list of buildings
needing protection. She thought it unwise to delay__
r--- the plans until pressures mounted and issues became
confused. Also, she could observe, at present, no
obvious need for repairs or changes to the building's
exterior.
Mr. Sriver agreed that no major exterior changes, to
his knowledge, were being contemplated. The building
did, however, need air conditioning; and he didn't
think the School Corporation should have to seek
permission to install air conditioning units.
Mr. Oxian said window AC units were not considered a
permanent change to the building. The School
Corporation would only have to appear before the
Commission to gat permission to, for example, cut into
the wall,
Mrs. Sporleder asked Whether the School Corporation
was planning to replace the windows. Mr. Sriver`a
assistant replied that replacing the windows would be
a major project; and, since the School Corporation
might leave the building in 1998, the expense couldn't
be 'uotif1ed, Instead, they would simply glaze and
paint the windows, all of wh-ich were °open,°,
Mr. Oxian cited a test case, Muesael School, the
subject, had replaced its windows in cooperation with
the HPC. No problems had arisen.
Mrs, 8porleder moved to recommend landmark status for
'-- ------ the Studebaker Administration 8uildinp' Mrs. Dennen
seconded the motion. Motion approved 6-0-1; Mr..
-- , VValaheimer abstained.
C. Studebaker Golf Course --Second Reading
Mr. Oxian reported that,Mr. Haas, who had the previous
month introduced a petitionto landmark the Studebaker
Golf Course, had asked that this petition be
withdrawn. Mr. C>uian proposed instead tabling the
matter indefinitely. The HPC staff had suggested
alternatives such as landnarkin8 a group of golf
courses, or landmark1ng other parklands.
Mrs. Choitz said she wanted to hear the staff report
before making any decision. Members of the audience
supported her request.
Mr Holycross summarized the staff report, which.
contained the following case against landmark status
for the golf course:
s
--it wasn"t Ancluded on the Indiana Hi *toric Sites &
Strluctures.SUrvey. To be eligible, a site2had to rate
--it had been altered in 1923 by encroachments from
Riley High School
--the.identity of the golf course designer had -not,
Been established
-7it was not -the site of an important historical event
.--it had no unusual merit as an example of
:
-neighborhood culture, and had little educational value
.--the land bore no traces of - the life of a - significant
person.
For similar reasons, Mr. Holycross continued, the golf.
course wasn't.eliqib..le for placement on the National.'
Register of Historic Places.
Mr. Oxian asked for comments. A woman asked why- the
HPC wished to table the issue
ssue instead of voting on it.
Mr. Oxian said tabling gave the HPC the opportunity to
work on the alternative proposals mentioned above. At
this point, however, tabling was still only a
proposal. The woman then declared that she wanted to
see the petition defeated; the golf course simply
wasn't a historical site.
Ms. Pat Schafer of the Riley -at -Ewing Association then
read a statement opposing the landmark petition. in
brief:
--the fate of Riley High School was still far from . .
sealed, and steps were being taken to keep it at Ewing
--landmarking the golf course would eliminate several
planning options, making it 'even less likely that the
school would remain where it was
--the-HPC-should avoid getting involved in,.the heated
polit-ica,l-,--s1tuation surrounding the relocation of
Riley.
Mr. Haasthen said he wanted to maintain a good
r.elationshAp between the HPC and his organization, the
Distr.ict-,Golf Association. For this reason, he now
thought it best to withdraw his petition.
-a-ga-In requested-' appr-ova1to'-w1-tfidraw the
petition: Mr. Eide.asked what -,difference existed
between withdrawing the petition and voting it down.
Mr.. Oxian said withdrawing the petition free'd
�77'
'
Commission members from the obligation to take a stand
on the issue. Under any circumstances /tabling,
'
withdrawal, voting -down), the petition could be
reintroduced in the future,
Mr.Qakley said he'd prefer a vote. A'definite vote
would clarify the HPC^m stand on this issue. He
`
endorsed Mr. Holycroas`s report,
4 woman said vote should be taken because it would
` prove to the School Board that the landmark issue was
closed.
Mr. Eide said he maw no reason to perpetuate the
issue; the golf course would never meet landmark
criteria. He moved to recommend against landmmrking
the golf course. Mrs. Petraas seconded the motion..
Mrs. 'porleder said she would prefer a oositive
motion. Mr. Eide -acoordinglY withdrew his motion'
Mrs. Sporleder moved to recommend landmark status for
the golf course. Mr' YVelsheimar seconded the motion.
Mr. Dxian then made a statement. First, he said be
. thought it a mistake to say the golf course should not
be saved. Second, he said he couldn't understand the
need to choose between the golf course and the high
school --neither should be destroyed. A school's
quality had nothing to do with the number of acres it
occupied; other factors made aa school good -or bad.
The decision to demolish a high school simply because
it stood on less than ZO acres baffled him: perhaps
the School Board wished to move all the schools from
the City to the County area.
Mrs. Sporleder then questioned 1-2 statements in the
staff report. She said she considered the location of
the golf course --completely surrounded by the
city --unusual. Mrs. Choitz^pointed out that,
originally, the golf course lay in an outlying rural
area; development had come later. Mrs. Sporledar said
that, nevertheless, it was unusual to have a green
space in the center of a city.
Mr.Oakley remarked that, even if Riley High
School -
annexed part of the golf course, 65% of it would
remain. According to option #5, (a set of plans
submitted by Dr. Sriver that kept Riley at Ewing), the
school's east end would be extended by no more than
80,000 feet. This would not run all the way across
the golf course. Moreover, the trees to be removed
were not remarkably old.
Mr. Haas said South Send was lucky to have a 9 -hole
public golf course. Also, the golf course, one of.
only 4 places in South Bend still bearing the
Studebaker name, was an important part of the city's
heritage; also, it occupied what was originally
Studebaker land.
A recent South Bend Tribune article, he said, had
argued in favor of retaining the golf course, saying
it .was-_ important-.-to---maintain---an—o.p-en--Sr-een-..spac,e--j-n
the city. Therefore he still favored landmark status
for the golf course.
A man said that keeping Riley at Ewing was more
important to the city than was maintaining a green
space. if Riley were relocated, and not replaced with
another school, there would be far too much "open
space" in that neighborhood.
A woman said that, despite all efforts at persuasion,
the School Board insisted that Riley High School
needed more land. Annexing part of the golf course
was the only way to keep the school at Ewing. Under
these circumstances, she felt the best solution was to
move the golf course 71 blocks west. She drew the
HPC's attention to a petition she'd brought, bearing
the signatures of 1,000 people whoendorsedthis
position. She also pointed out that the school, rated
S-12, had far more historic value than the golf
course.
Mr. Oxian said he considered moving the golf course a
mistake; all of it would not be lost even if Riley
were enlarged, and moving it'would mean the demolition
of 110 houses. The woman pointed out that the land
she had in mind for the golf course was an unused
tract near Rum Village, not the Kesey-Ohio street area
north of the existing golf course.
Mr. Oxian asked for closing remarks from the HPC.
Mrs. Sporleder said that this case had pointed up the
need to establish landmarking standards for
landscapes. Mr. Oxian said that, while he had written
standards for landscapes, these standards only applied
to landscapes that formed a context for a historic
landmark. There were no standards for landmarking
landscapes alone.
Mr. Oxian called for a vote (see D. 12). Mr. Eide.
Mrs. Choitz. Mr. Schafer. and Mrs. Petrass opposed the
motion; Mr. Oxian, Mrs. Dennen. and Mr. Welsheimer
abstained. Motion defeated.
13
V1. Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes --March 1992
Mr. Oxian called for corrections to the minutes, as
did Mrs. Sporleder.
Mrs. Choitz moved to accent the minutes. as corrected;
Mr-. Eide seconded the -motion. ADoroved unanimously.
B. Treasurer's Report --March 1992
Mrs.'Sporledel- moved to acceot the Treasurer's reoort
as submitted; Mrs. Petrass seconded the motion.
Approved unanimously.
C. Correspondence
D. Committee Reports
la. Certificates of Appropriateness (Staff Approvals)
a. 1212 Lincolnway East--LHD
Mr. Pastor reported that the owner had
requested and received a COA to replace the
asphalt shingle roofing on the house. Mrs.
Choitz asked whether a staff report had been
prepared; Mr. Oxian said that, since only one
item had been staff -approved that month, no
staff report had been necessary.
1b. Certificates of Appropriateness (Update)
a. Riverside Drive--LHD
Mr. Pastor reminded the HPC of an existing
controversy, concerning an oval window, at this
nrr+-j ha Rlso apprised them of ;; npw C.04—
violation. The previous month, the HPC had
issued a COA for the installation of a
wrought -iron railing; the owners had installed
a pipe railing instead. The oval window had
not been removed.
Mr. Pastor reported sending a letter to the
owners March 25, parts of which he then read
aloud. The letter advised the owner of their
legal options, and given them 30 days to
appeal.
Mr. Holycross stated that no further
regarding either violation had
been received from the owners. Mr. Pastor then
14
said.that co=owner Steve Murphy had called to
- -
request"a COA for,a new patio and walkway.. His
only reply.to the threatened legal action had
been that he "planned to -sell-the property."
'Mr.-Oxian said that if the owners failed to
meet the 30 -day appeal -deadline; the -.staff
should go next to the -Legal department for
Mrs. Choitz suggested reinstating an
enforcement mechanism.that'had fallen into
disuse. In the past, COA violations.had
sometimes been referred to Code Enforcement for
a preliminary hearing. in many cases, simply
to avoid this hearing, owners had corrected the
COA violation. She.wanted to know whether this
arrangement still existed; it had worked very
well.
-
Mr. Welsheimer.pointed out that .the,pipe
railing wasn't sturdy enough to meet Building
Code safety requirements. Mr. Oxian advised
referring the.case to the Building Department.
Mrs. Choitz said the HPC`s standards had also
been violated,. -and urged sending the.owners a
letter to this effect. Mr. Oxian said such a
letter had -already been sent; the next step
should be to go to the Legal Department. In
this case; however, it was possible to go also
-
to the -Bu i 1 d i ng -Department .--
Mrs. DeRose ascertained that the case would be
referred to -the Building Department as a safety.
violation. .Mrs. Choitz said the HPC had
nothing,to-do with safety, and should explore
other ways of dealing with the problem before
resorting to the Legal Department.
Mr. Oxian repeated that once' the 30 -day time
limit had exp -i red, the matter should be sent to
-, -.
-._,the- Legal :Department. Mrs. DeRose said that,
while the .HPC, could not now --take any direct
_
legal action, it could send a writ of les
pendens to the:Abstract-& Title Company. When .
_
any -prospective buyer .looked at the abstract
:-�
for the`house," 'he would discover that it was
the subject -of -litigation and that, if he
�_..
bought the house, he would inherit that
1-itigation. This,measure might discourage the
--b.uyer_. _
Mrs. Dennen sai d co-owner Steve Murphy had
given many contradictory accounts of his plans
- _ -
1�
for the house. She suggested warning the
owners by letter of the writ of les pendens.
b. 1716 E. Wayne Street--LHD
Mr. Pastor reported on the staff's ongoing
efforts to find a replacement gate for the
inappropriate one the owner had installed some
---- months ----ear- 1 i.er-.---He---sa-i-d--r_esear-ch_so__f_ar__had
not been very fruitful. Mr. Holycross said the
only appropriately -priced gates on the market
were the same as, or worse than, the existing
gate. An attractive wrought -iron gate had been
found, but it cost $1200. in short, he said,
replacing the gate in a manner consistent with
the C of A was not possible.
Mrs. Dennen said the fence was unsightly. Mr.
Holycross agreed, but reminded her that the HPC
had .already granted a C of A for it, pending
approval of the gate.
Mrs. Sporleder advised all Commission members
to go out and look for appropriate gates.
2. Budget & Finance
No report
3. Legal
No report
4. Historic Districts
Mr. Oxian mentioned that the Near Northwest
Neighborhood Association was planning a meeting
and a fundraising event. Also, he and Mr.
- -- Holycross had recently attended a meeting with
the Park Avenue Neighborhood Ass n. and
discussed the possibility of Park Avenue
- becoming a historic district. Most of those
present had favored the.district.
5. Historic Landmarks
No report
6. Standards & Maintenance
No report
7. Personnel
16
-
T:
No report
-
8. Staff Report
-No report
,;V:.,
.:01.d Business
A. Proposed:COA Review procedures ___. _
Mr.'-Oxian proposed adopting these standards as a
means°of standardizing the �.processing of COA
applications at meetings.
Mrs..DeRose said that, while the standards were not .
legal..ly.required, they would.-help protect the HP-CI
:. from..charges of violating due pr.ocess.
Mrs: Choitz moved to'adopt,the procedures: Mrs.
Sporleder seconded the motion. Approved
unanimously.
B. Clay .Township Cemeteries
Mrs. Sporleder asked what.-progress-had been made
toward landmarking these sites. Mr. Holycross said
the staff historian was researching the cemeteries: _
Mrs. Sporleder suggested sending a letter to Clay
Twp. Trustee Otis Romine., soliciting his approval
for the landmarking of these sites. The Clay Twp..
Board,"she said., would meet that Wednesday, so the
letter should be-drafted as soon as possible. The
Board, she believed, strongly favored landmark
status.
Mr...Oxian instructed Mr. Holycross to write such a._.
letter the next day.
C.. Darden Bridge
Mrs.- Sporleder asked for.an.update. Mr..Holycross,
-
Said he was trying"-to .arrange a meeting with
County "Commi ss i oner-:.Larr-i son. :The staff would .put -
__- -
together a grant app.11cat:ion'by-the June' deadline.
Stili lacking was Mr.'LarrIson's signature. He at
this -:stage was tr,y i nq Ao :persuade Mr. Larr i son . to .. .
-support the grant application; he was now composing,.
_.
a-Tetter:which argued the HPC's case. He asked the
--Commission members whether':.they wanted a copy of
this letter.
-
Mrs. Sporleder asked :fora=_copy of the relevant "
transportation bill..
17 .
V|. New Business
A. Proposed New Regulation --"Originality"
Mr, Oxian said this regulation was needed to
clarify' HPC policy. Briefly, the regulation stated
' that HPC standards applied to buildings as they
were on the day the district/landmark was declared.,
-__Jiovvevo�-_the_owoer_cou]dmakeirepai�/�
r_�-obanges-�o__-__--_
any ahistorical parte of the building, provided he
did so in a historically consistent manner, with
HPC approval.
Mrs. Sporleder questioned the need for this
regulation. Mr. Oxian said it would make a clear
policy statement on an issue that cropped up
frequently, and caused much disagreement among
Commission members, It would save time and
argument, but was still sufficiently flexible.
Mrm. Choitz moved to adoot the repulation; Mr.
VVelsheimer seconded the motion. Mrs. Sporleder,
voted aqainst it. Motion aoproved.
V||. Hearing of Visitors
V|||. Miscellaneous
Mr. Oxian and Mrs. Petraas pointed out two corrections
to the Commission member address list.
Ms. Steele asked the Commission members to nominate
candidates for the upcoming Southhold awards
presentation.
Mr. Pastor intrpducted HPC intern Fritz ValSaint^ a
5th -year architecture student from Notre Dame.
X|. Adjournment
- - The meeting was adjourned at 9;35 p.m.
TREASURER'S REPORT: APRIL - 1992
As can be seen from the St. Joseph County computer ledger
(account #001.39211.000.034) for April, 1992, we have incurred no
unusual expenses. This month's expenditures came to $4567,.78.
Total expenditures for 1992 come to $15,314.64. Our unencumbered
account balance is $26,508.96 with $737.33 encumbered but not yet
expended.
001.3921.1_.000.034 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSIONERS
03/92
03/17/92
CLAIM
645.83
PO
000000
VEN
004741
PASTOR JAMES
BK
02
CHK
143071
AUDIT MASTER
03/92
03/17/92
CLAIM
20.00
PO
000000
VEN
300016
BK
02
CHK
143123
AUDIT MASTER
04/92
10/10/91
ENCUMB
8.00
PO
051071
VEN
007716
C.B.I./GRAPHICS
PO.MAS
04/92
12/03/91
ENCUMB
645.83'PO
051924
VEN
004741
PASTOR JAMES
PO.MAS
04/92
02/26/92
ENCUMB
83.50
PO
053287
VEN
000553
DILLS CAMERA SHOP
PO.MAS
04/92
04/07/92
CLAIM
441.00
PO
000000
VEN
007044
BOOKER SUZANNE
BK
02
CNK
143887
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/07/92
CLAIM
156.50
PO
000000
VEN
007716
C.B.I./GRAPHICS
BK
02
CHK
143892
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/07/92
CLAIM
225.79
PO
000000
VEN
000507
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BK
02
CNK
143906
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/07/92
CLAIM
396.90
PO
000000
VEN
000907
HODGES, SUSHMITA
BK
02
CHK
143946
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/07/92
CLAIM
66.40
PO
000000
VEN
001617
KELLY SERVICES, INC.
BK
02
CHK
143959
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/07/92
CLAIM
24.00
PO
000000
VEN
001287
OLD HOUSE JOURNAL
BK
02
CHK
144003
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/07/92
CLAIM
645.83
PO
000000
VEN
004741
PASTOR JAMES
BK
02
CHK
144008
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/21/92
CLAIM
189.90
PO
053496
VEN
000684
GENES CAMERA STORE INC
BK
02
CHK
144686
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/21/92
CLAIM
661.50
PO
000000
VEN
000907
HODGES, SUSHMITA
BK
02
CHK
144703
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/21/92
CLAIM
200.40
PO
000000
PEN
001617
KELLY SERVICES, INC.
BK
02
CHK
144725
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/21/92
CLAIM
82.58
PO
000000
VEN
001154
MICHIANA AREA COUNCIL OF
BK
02
CHK
144746
DOCKET
DIST
04192
04/21/92
CLAIM
645.83
PO
000000
VEN
004741
PASTOR JAMES
BK'
02
CHK
144770
DOCKET
DIST
04/92.04/21/92
CLAIM
5.66
PO
000000
VEN
001538
SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK
02
CHK
144801
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/21/92
CLAIM
674.10
PO
000000
VEN
007044.
BOOKER -SUZANNE
BK
02
CHK
144639
DOCKET
DIST
04/92
04/21/92
CLAIM
151.29
PO
000000
VEN
000507
COUNTY:COMMISSIONERS
BK
02
CHK
144660
DOCKET
DIST
001.39211.000.034 HISTORIC
PRESERVATION
COMMISSIONERS,
ESTIMATED. REV
RECEIPTS
UNRECV
REV BAL
1PPROPRIATION
ENCUMBRANCE ,.;,EXPENDITURE
_UNEXPENDED
BAL
UNENCUMB BAL
TOT_._.:__ G.W
_:_._____..:MO..
MO.. .._ .
0.00
42,560.93„_.::
-337.33..;”, ,:1.5_;31.4.64_
27,246.29
26,508.96
Correspondence
--brochure for the Goshen town tour, May 19 ,
--subscription materials for a new architectural magazine, Competitions
--May edition of "Face of the City," a enwsletter from the Goshen Main Street
Program -- -------
--MACIAF plans, May 11, 1992
--May/June eidtion of The Mortar Board from the St. Joseph Valley Masonry Contractors.
--letter from the U.S. Dept. of the Interior soliciting preservation plans for
possible inclusion in an annotated bibiography
--May/June edition of the "Southhold Newsletter."
--brochure from the ULI Real Estate School
--MACIAF plans, April 20
--a brochure listing Preservation Week events in Indianapolis, May 10-17
--presevation week "Update," a flyer from the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
--ICLEF conference brochure; conference entitled "Litigating Claims under the New
Employment Discrimination Statutes."
--invitation to sign up for an informational tour at Memorial Hospital's Leighton
Center for Senior Health.
--April issue of the "Progressive Profile," a tri -annual newsletter from South, Bend
Economic Development.
--application materials,for two state grants, the Community Promotion Fund and the
Neighborhood Assistance Program.
--MACIAF plans, April 27
--the newsletter "Volunteerline" from the South Bend Community Resource Center, Spring,
1992
--brochure from ARM Computing telling the monthly sale items.
--announcement of Southhold Restoration's 19th annual "Recognition Day for Outstanding
Achievement in Historic Preservation," held May 17 at the Erskine Clubhouse.
--MACIAF plans, May 4
-announcement of Indiana Dept. of Commerce workshops May 11, 12, 20 & 21
--announcement of two.internships available at the State Historic Preservation
Office-a,summer internship and a half-year internship.
--offer of a free fanny pack for joining the National Parks and Conservation
Association
--offer of hotel rooms at the Marriott at prices wishing the government "per diem."
--a catalog from Smith & Hawken, makers of garden furniture.
--ICLEF brochrue for a June 18-19 conference' entitled "Municipal Law IX."
--announcement from the South Bend Heritage Foundation of a May 8 reception
recognising the completed restoration of Dunbar Corner.
May
18, 1992—
992 .HISTORIC
HISTORICPRESERVATION COMMISSION -- STAFF APPROVALS
ST,# -- STREET -NAME CATEGORIES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
-------------------------------
1077 Riverside Drive accessories
---------------.-----------.----
Install A.C. service unit
#
along west facade of main
house. Unit to be installed
on south side of side entry
and will be concealed from
street view by•existing
shrubbery. No shrubbery need
. . _ __ __
be _remo_v_e.d�f_or install_atiLan.
Unit will be free standing.
1520 Wayne Street (E) fence
replace existing fence with
Schuell brand fence ("Western
Picket") as per submitted
specification. extend fence
by 8 ft.. on east side of
backyard