HomeMy WebLinkAboutFeburary 1993historic reservation commissi
p on
of south bend and st. joseph county
ROOM 1123 COUNTY CITY BUILDING'
south bend, indiana 46601 (219) 284-9798
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: HPC
FROM: F. Holycross
DATE: 2-10-93
RE: February Monthly Meeting
This month's meeting will be at the usual time and place. As you
can see from the agenda, there are a good number of COA's this
month; I hope you can all attend as there are four Commissioners
unable to attend this month and we need a quorum.
COA #6 (1081 Riverside Drive) has been tabled the past two
months; you have all of the necessary information for the
proposal in your December packets; please bring it along as the
staff will not have extra copies available for you.
0
historicpreservation commission
of south bend and st. joseph county
ROOM 1123 COUNTY CITY BUILDING
south bend, indiana 46601 (219) 284-9798
AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Monthly Meeting County Commissioner's
7:30 p.m. Conference Room
7th Floor, County/City Building
February 15, 1993
I.
Call to Order
II.
Roll Call
III.
Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 525 Edgewater -- Edgewater Place LHD
2. 1414 Leer -- Lincolnway East LHD
3. 1154 Lincolnway East -- Lincolnway East LHD
4. 415 Parry Street -- Local Landmark
5. 557 River -- Riverside Drive LHD
6. 1081 Riverside -- Riverside Drive LHD
IV.
Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes -- January 1993
B. Treasurers Report -- January 1993
C. Correspondence
D. Committee Reports
1. C of A (Staff Approvals)
a. 909 Riverside Drive
2. Budget and Finance
3. Legal
4. Historic Districts
5. Historic Landmarks
a. 1027 East Wayne; 1029 East Wayne;
231 South Eddy -- First Reading
6. Standards and Maintenance
7. Personnel
8. Staff Reports
V.
Old Business
VI.
New Business
A. Landscape Committee
VII.
Hearing of Visitors
VIII.
Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
IX.
Adjournment
•
•
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 1414 Leer
South Bend, IN 46613
OWNERS -- Christopher Kohler
(Shirley Kohler - manager)
DESIGNATION -- Lincolnway East LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
This Commercial building at 1414 Leer lies within the boundaries
of the Lincolnway East LHD. The building was built circa 1900 and
has been given a Non -Contributing (NC) rating on the Indiana
Historic Sites and Structures Inventory. It was given this rating
because the numerous alteration made to the structure over the
years has virtually destroyed its architectural integrity. Some
of the various businesses that were housed in the building
include a grocery, a mercantile, and an auto paint shop.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The proposal includes the construction of 2 wolmanized wood
planters (9" in height) on either side of the entrance steps;
planting of small spreading shrubs in these planters; placing sod
in the area between the sidewalk and the planters; wrap (3) wood
corner posts, window sills, and (3) door frames in white vinyl;
cover area below window sill (north side of the front facade)
with siding matching that on the remainder of the building.
STANDARDS
District standards (1,A,1) state
fencing, walkways, streetlights,
compatible with the character of
material, and color."
that "New plant materials,
signs, and benches shall be
the neighborhood in size, scale,
Standard (2,A,2) states "Aluminum or vinyl siding may be used
when it is the only feasible alternative to maintaining the
original surface material. When used on wood surfaces this siding
should be of the same size and style as the original wood."
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is the staff's recommendation that this proposal b
by the HPC. The wolmanized wood planter are temporary
and all siding to be used will match what is already
the remainder of the building. Furthermore the vinyl
wrapped around the door frames will resemble in size
the original wood frames, and the original doors and
areas will remain intact.
A. Kotzbauer
2-8-93
e approved
structures
in place on
to be
and style
transom
J
Y1y':
r
f
If 14 f�:. ocutsf p��� ��oLo rAlurrD
r�'r ��velE ,Uo�;n .moo;%:iii ;:/1'C iN�lF.�r l•.$ Ci��J !' CLd:.. 1' ;'A iil; d' ',i ,I ..
r� ilk T N, - � • '
tD �l /l�l�ii� ✓Y C°;d w, ? �7��i�9/';lJ /
S; �-Cel9CF bhlcK d,, //, iJ, t ,w' 'j-
-
l (/(!
E
i
LU .
I,_� r +: rF t }"�-j.' I �. �-r-ac � �F.'t '';!f 'C' •-T f� •
I' ,F I yrs � R �-.�� � `� I�I.. a ..,ti � t'4 �.^�+���� r,, i r•, ) .�
ff
1
} ..�, t I ::.,a + , � -! Y I . I � �7'r-I ::: 1 .,^a4 k � ,t""�$�+ t � ^ ' � {, t ,*1'-i'•a ,,
i... I
' � I .. I rt. +fry I ..cwnzr 1 ..r• ,�,.
.w
., pQ
iz,t
+(\ � •Y 1 : r j / � ;. ��, ; r r 1 r p.: I j . I 1. 1
j`3! 4, I I k^P
COATI 0205-1993-2
•
cn
0
M
—0,6 QVxmt�ov
--�o � MR H i
�PH z
mtqH:4.va z , 0
Z , 0 1-3
H z 0.5 �o 0
HOO
14
t. -I L-4 ro 0
WHM
GZ ,! 1-3
tj m m m m H
ca
JC�U /
�4 H
z W HWM COCAM
>
tZI rA W 1-4 C-1
CyAh-dd,
0U M
w C'n
VI 0 0 t -I 0 0
to tIq 0 H m V9 p t-1.
ko C9 C7 >
vq z V9 m LZJ M
" JH
M H w
Z CO W PO :4 1-4
14 � to M Z bd Z
w M 0 L-3
1-3 m m tj 0300
tZI co �4
Ho
1-3
>>
Z;v 0
t:p 0
Vi a
1-4
oto'
C)
in
L I j
L3
31 x OZ 104
:0 0 c
PAS3,
0
t -I M
:0
Cl 0
14
co
, td
"
U m
U
0
Vj V
m
'4
0
L-3
;o
0
W
0 L21
0
14
0
H 0
0 z
En co
to
m
I m
0
C�
co
� 0
C'j 1-3
ca
ca
5E
. 4 -
Vs
i, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 115+ Lincolnway East
South Bend, IN 46613
OWNERS -- Joseph & Cindy Bellina
DESIGNATION Lincolnway East LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
1154 Lincolnway East is located in the Lincolnway East LHD. This
Queen Anne style house was built circa 1905. The house is
currently rated as a C/10 on the Indiana Historic Sites and
Structures Inventory. The first owner of 1154 was Elmer C. Miller
who was a lumber purchasing agent for the Studebaker Corporation.
It is rumored that Mr. Miller had all the wood for this home
imported from Oregon. The woodwork on the interior is said to be
of high quality and excellent craftsmanship. The current owners
are Joseph and Cindy Bellina.
PROPOSED CHANGE
This proposal includes:
1. Removal of all asphalt and aluminum siding.
2. Replace all missing corner trim (with wood).
3. Repair and replace in-kind all miscellaneous siding and trim
as needed.
. 4. Replace crown moldings (drip caps) over all first story
windows and doors.
5. Replace flared bell course between first and second stories.
6. Prime and paint exterior with oil based paint.
STANDARDS
District standard (2,A,2) states that "Whenever possible, the
original building materials should be restored".
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is the staff's recommendation that all portions of this
proposal be approved. The owners have gone to considerable
lengths to determine what original elements were removed from the
house when it was covered with asphalt siding, and are replacing
these elements in-kind.
A. Kotzbauer
2-8-93
•
•
1154 L.W.E.
COM 0205-1993
i
view of north and west facades
view of south facade (rear)
view of east facade area - evidence of bell
course removal
I 4.
•
0
ilA
G
Q'
� n
N• O
rt y
rt
(D
a0
N
C O
�C Ui
O r�
fD W
•
•
0
A. K.
COA# 0205-1993
_ ye„
L,-L,af5oArp-l-)
c�ow�l Mo�t��
Ove
COA# 0205-1993
submitted by owner
SEG-n0� T�-�2,ovcnH I�[.AR-E7 �Ec-r �UueSE
GAP, SID1a &,
CaowN �''bi�tNH
- Fzlem- Bongo
•
Pq
0
rt
LM
•
0
EN
Tc-=
M -
0
EN
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 525 Edgewater
South Bend, IN 46618
• OWNERS -- Nancy TenBroeck
DESIGNATION -- Edgewater Place LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
This Dutch Colonial Revival style house is located in the
Edgewater Place LHD at 525 Edgewater. It was built-in 1922 by
Whitcomb & Keller, whom were also responsible for platting this
portion of Edgewater Place in 1919. Emma Oppenheim purchased the
home in 1923. Mrs. Oppenheim's son-in-law, David Glicksman, was
deeded the house in 1931. Mr. Glicksman was the proprietor of the
Broadway Pharmacy and the Rex Pharmacy in South Bend. In 1956 the
house was given to the Hebrew Orthodox Congregation. The
subsequent owners were the Administrators of Veterans Affairs.
The present owner is Ms. Nancy TenBroeck.
PROPOSED CHANGE
Replacement of all (13) first story wood double -hung windows with
vinyl double -hung windows (with• decorative grids). Eleven windows
will have styling and design similar to the original. The two
windows in the kitchen will be replaced with sliding windows and
• the central mullion will be removed.
STANDARDS
District Standard (2,C,1) states "Existing or original windows
and doors including sash, lintels, shutters, sills, decorative
glass, pediments, hoods, and hardware shall be retained or when
deteriorated beyond repair, replaced with duplicates of the
existing or original."
Standard (2,C,2) also states that "If new sash and doors are used
the existing or original materials, design, and hardware should
be used".
Furthermore standard (2,C,3) reads "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 may not be
introduced. Inappropriate new window or door features such as
aluminum insulating glass combinations that require the removal
of original windows and doors may not be installed."
RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff is especially concerned with the portion of the
proposal that calls for the removal of the central mullion in the
kitchen window grouping. The staff would suggest that this
mullion remain in place and any replacement windows introduced
fit within the existing two openings. In considering this
proposal the HPC should be aware that, in the staff's estimation,
1
ro
i
the windows are not deteriorated beyond repair. The replacements
proposed will not match the original in materials, however, they
do resemble the original in design through the use of snap -in
decorative grids to mimic the existing multi -pane over one pane
double -hung windows.
• A. Kotzbauer
2-8-93
•
•
2
view of front aid east side facades
•
i view of'front and west side facades
i
COA#0201-1993
Ba% =y s
WINDOW WORLD
2902 W. WESTERN AVENUE
SOUTH BEND, IN 46619
(219)288-4896 OR 1-800-525-3452
•
1808 EAST BRISTOL STREET
ELKHART, IN 46514
264-2260 OR 1-800-525-3452
January 23, 1993
Ms. Nancy Tenbroeck 288-3886 hm
525 Edgewater 282-4649 wk
South Bend, IN 46601
PROPOSAL - VALID FOR 30 DAYS L�� V 10 (► � zoo 04
D�� �w� Rooms
Install five (5) white solid vinyl replacement window(s) with "ordinary"
double -glazed insulated glass. Breakdown: five (5) double hungs with five
(5) half screens. Upper sash of all windows are to have colonial grids.
Pattern: 1H, 3V.
Window installation to include:
A) Removal of existing wood sash (mainframe remains intact):
B) Installation of new vinyl window(s) into existing opening(s).
C) Packing of insulation around entire perimeter of window(s).
D)' Seal window(s) with silicone.
E) Trim out exterior sill and frame of window(s) with aluminum.
Color: WkRW •
F) Clean up and haul away all debris.
G). Discuss window cavities with customer.
Material and labor cost of job as specified above using the
following different brands of vinyl replacement window: LIST DISCOUNT
PRICE PRICE
(W/30 DAY SIGN)
1 --"Economy" grade Fiberlux #690 (assembled with screws) ............ $1,460.00 $
2 --"Economy" grade Lifestyle single hung (welded) ................ .$ $.
3 --"Economy.. grade Olympian ............... ........................$ $
4 --"Economy" grade Republic's Ramguard................... ...........$ $
5 --"Economy" grade Great Lakes ............................ .......$1,900.00 $1.725.00
6 --"Good" grade Classic (welded).......... ......... ..•..••••$2,200.00 $1,990.00
7 --"Good" grade Traco (Classic double hung replacing Traco).. ......S S
3 --"Better" grade Newport (welded).... ........ ..........$2,345.00 $2.125.00
9 --'Beater' grade American (welded).................................$2,420.00 $2,190 . 00
10 --"Best" grade Ultimate grade 500 (alum. reinforced sash) .......... $ $
11 --"Best" grade Uniframe (welded)...................................$2,640.00 52,390.00
12---"E;est" grade Vinyline 400 (welded)........... ..................$ $
13 --"Best" grade Woodland (welded, oak laminate unfinished interior).$ $
14 --"Super" grade Omega (welded, steel reinforced sash) ..............$ $
15--"5 uper" grade Omega (welded, main and sash frame steel reinfor.).$ $
GLASS OPTIONS:
For all five (5) windows with the Low -E glass option add
For all five (5) windows with the Low -E Argon glass option add
For insulation of five (5) window weight cavities add
$ 125.00
S 250.00 •
$ 100.00
ro
Y
COA# 0201-1993
• TENBROECR PROPOSAL CONTINUED
January 23, 1993
PAGE 3 OF 4
PROPOSAL - VALID FOR 30 DAYS
OPTION III: Install six (6) white solid vinyl replacement window(s) with "ordinary"
double -glazed insulated glass. Breakdown: six (6) double hungs with six (6)
half
screens. Upper sash of all windows are to have colonial grids. Pattern: 1H,
2V.
Window installation to include:
A) Removal of existing wood sash (mainframe remains intact).
B) Installation of new vinyl window(s) into existing opening(s).
C) Packing of insulation around entire perimeter of window(s).
D) Seal window(s) with silicone.
E) Trim out exterior sill and frame of window(s) with aluminum.
color: WV M
F) Clean up and haul away all debris.
G) Discuss window cavities with customer.
Material and Tabor cost of job as specified above using the
following different brands of vinyl replacement window: LIST
DISCOUNT
• PRICE
PRICE
(W/30
DAY SIGN)
1 --"Economy" grade Fiberlux #690 (assembled with screws) ............ $1,615.00
$
2 --"Economy" grade Lifestyle single hung (welded).......
3 --"Economy" grade Olympian .........................................$
$
4 --"Economy" grade Republic's Ramguard ..............................$
$
5 --"Economy" grade Great Lakes......................................$2,100.00
$1,905.00
6 --"Good" grade Classic (welded)....................................$2,425.00
$2.200.00
7 --"Good" grade Traco (Classic.double.hung replacing Traco)......... $
$
S --"Better" grade Newport (welded)..................................$2,590.00
$2,345.00
9 --"Better" grade American (welded)..... ..........................$2,670.00
$2,420.00
10-.-"Best".grade Ultimate grade 500 (alum. reinforced sash) .......... $
$
1.1 --."Best" grade Uniframe (welded)...................................$2,915.00
$2,640.00
12 --"Best" grade Vinyline 400 (welded) ....... .......................$
$
13 --"Best" grade Woodland (welded, oak.laminate unfinished interior).$
$
14-7"Super.•' grade Omega (welded, steel reinforced sash) ..............$
$
157 -"Super" grade Omega (welded, main and sash frame steel reinfor.).$
$
GLASS OPTIONS:
For all six (6) windows with the Low -E glass option add
$ 150.00
.For.all six (6) windows with the Low -E Argon glass option add
$ 300.00
For insulation of six (6) window weight cavities add
S 100.00
TENBROECK PROPOSAL CONTINUED
January 23, 1993
PAGE 4 OF.4
PROPOSAL - VALID FOR 30 DAYS
1'r % A -C -k L.V/
Install one (1) white solid vinyl replacement window(s) with "ordinary"
double -glazed insulated glass. Breakdown: one (1) two -lite slider with one
(1) half screen. Both sash are to have colonial grids. Pattern: 2H,1V.
Window installation to include:
A) Removal of existing wood sash and one (1) vertical mullion (mainframe
remains intact).
B) Installation of new vinyl window(s) into existing opening(s).
C) Packing of insulation around entire perimeter of window(s).
D) Trim out interior with wood stops as necessary.
E) Seal window(s) with silicone.
F) Trim out exterior sill and frame of window(s) with aluminum.
Color:
G) Clean.up and haul away all debris.
H) Discuss window cavities with customer.
Material and labor cost of job as specified above using the
following different brands of vinyl replacement window: LIST DISCOUNT
PRICE PRICE
1 --"Economy" grade Fiberlux ;690 (assembled with screws) ............ $
2 --"Economy" grade Lifestyle single hung (welded)...................S
3 --"Economy„ grade Olympian. ........ .. ..........................$
4--"Economy",grade Republic's Ramguard....................... ......$
5 --"Economy" grade Great Lakes.......... ................... .......$
6--"Good",grade Classic (welded) .............. ..... .............$
7 --"Good" grade Traco (Classic double hung replacing Traco)......... $
8 --"Better" grade Newport (welded). .. .............$
9 --"Better" grade American (welded).............. .......... ......$
10 --"Best" grade Ultimate grade 500 (alum. reinforced sash) .......... $
11 --"Best" grade Uniframe (welded)... .. .............................$
12 --"Best" grade Vinyline 400 (welded).... .......... .............$
13 --"Best" grade Woodland (welded, oak laminate unfinished interior).$
14 --"Super" grade Omega (welded, steel reinforced sash) ..............$
15 --"Super grade Omega (welded, main.and sash frame steel reinfor.).$
GLASS OPTIONS:
For one (1) window with the Low -E glass option add
For one (1) window with the Low -E Argon glass option add
For insulation of two (2) window weight cavities add
COM 0201-1993
0
(W/30 DAY SIGN)
425.00 $
$
$
$
540.00 $ 490.00
610.00 $ 560.00
650.00 $ 590.00
665.00 S 610.00
$
720.00 $ 660.00
$
$
$
$
$ 50.00
$ 100.00
$ 100.00
yIN.'
', I s _' .y 14 7` l � 6 a'i.'i"..� \ �� ''f � ✓ t I$ lu'F m�`*(8 >��i`M J'..'�� 4 �yj,
h ,y,7Y sy„.. '�}r�'t i'{5U < -, 4 z{x� '�.s'n Yr - ♦ i :;r•
V"''
Fl
Z
_ • • s ♦•• •-• ♦tar iaesw�--a.
♦ ♦ ♦ r: • r -r a ♦ ♦ •'.• a •.Ira a • i•r-Ms
ced--- ,,,�-E;.,� • •...�.. ar+_.,- • .- ria f -# • rasaS�` ..
i N raj j ( ♦
Via
• ± � :.� at1. v gyp.. -" � •
1 �
j
;,
Options—they're yours!
\ �ffL_' -
System AR -4"' is the amazing technology
of Argon gas injected between the panes
in a window with Low -E (low emissivity)
solar glass. Together. Low -E and Argon
create the highest energy efficiency possi-
ble today.
• Bronze -Tinted Glass
For simple sun -shading.
• Patterned Obscure Glass
Provides extra privacy for baths or similar
areas.
Grids
create
ssic
-- --- -- - -de
like leaded glass (right).
• Low -E (low emissivity) Solar Glass
The high-performance glass that works
with the sun's free energy for year-round
efficiency.
• Three Different Frame Colors
Your choice of White. Tan, or Bronze
frames is available in all styles.
•E
L�..awu�..0
Standard patterns or custom designs high-
light that special room in your home.
Sealed inside the insulated unit for protec-
tion and cleaning ease.
NEWPORT TM
R E P L A C E M E N T
�W I N D O W S
WINDOW WORLD
SUPERSTORE FOR ALL BRANDS OF REPLACEMENT WINDOWS
(219) 288-4896 1-800-525-3452
2902 WESTERN.AVE., SOUTH BEND, IN 46619
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 415 Parry
South Bend, IN 46617
OWNERS -- Rebecca Shriner
DESIGNATION -- Local Landmark
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The house at 415 Parry was built circa 1880. It is the most
outstanding, as well as the most intact, example of an
Upright -and -Wing vernacular house form found in South Bend. This
house is currently rated as an S/12 on the Indiana Historic Sites
and Structures Inventory. The first known owner of this home was
John G. Sommerer, a local grocer. The current owner is Ms.
Rebecca Shriner.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The replacement of metal half -round gutters with rectangular,
plastic extruded gutters.
STANDARDS
Landmark standard (Group B, A) reads " The maintenance of any
historical structure or site shall in no way involve any direct
physical change except for the general cleaning and upkeep of the
Landmark. The Commission shall encourage the proper maintenance
of all structures or sites."
RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff recommends that approval for this proposal be denied by
the HPC. Historic half -rounds were taken off the house and
replaced with what the staff feels are inappropriate plastic
gutters. However, staff was never given the opportunity to
consult with the owner, and the project was completed without a
Certificate of Appropriateness.
A. Kotzbauer
2-8-93
•
Ar
0
41.5 Parry
COA# 0203-1993
view of front and side facades
from street
closer view of front facade
COAT; 0203-1993
r
541a COLONIALLi
R.J. ROOFING AND CONTRACTING.
F IMA-nc4*r. t'.RFntTNDIAt4A 466.1.4. ..-..219/2`x.1.-
SENT BY:Kinko's Ann Arbor #1 2-15-93 ; 9:18 ;Kinko's Ann Arb, #1-
Historic Preservation Commission
Room 1123 County -City Building
South Bend, IN 46601
r Commissioners:
092501;# 9/12
February 15, 1993
1 am unable to atte i"
Historic Preservation Commission (NPC). I only received
notification of this hearing a little over 48 hours ago. I live
almost 4 hours away in Ypsilanti, Michigan. I.have asked Mr.'
Mike Milson to represent my interests in this hearing.
I an requesting "that my request for, replacement of the gutters be
approved or the -decision be postponed for future consideration..
It is with great sadness'that I will be formally requesting in
the near future :that the home at 415. Parry Street be considered
for.un-designation as a local landmark. The situation of'this
property -has deteriorated into a'such a burden that I am not in a
financial position to deal with the loss.. I an forced to attempt
to sell the property:
'As it has been stated in the staff report, this work has already
been done. This fact was not "discovered" by Mr. Holycross but
was one that I disclosed to him in a visit I made to the office
on December 8th .to discuss my concern of this property and the
deterioration of the neighborhood. It was at that time when I
discovered t'hat'I should have applied fora Certificate of
Appropriateness.. In that conversation with Mr: Holycross, I
offered to fill out the forms and pay the application fee. That
offer was rejected.
As Mr.. Hol.ycrossi indicated in his letter (copy attached), he
witnessed the work the next day. As r explained to him at the
time of my visit, I was under the impression that all the -work
had been completed. The contractor had told me it would have
been completed by that time. I question why Mr. Holycross didn*t
attempt to explain the situation to.the gutter installers and
stop them or request the workers to not dispose of the gutters so
that they might:salvage'something of them. Immediately placing'a
phone call to me instead -of a letter might.have averted at least
some of the problem. I.had just given him my business and home
phone numbers the day before.
These events and others are very telling.to the amount of.concern
HPC staff have to &saint me to preserve this home -and the
neighborhood.- When I visited the HPC office the staff
questioned my claim that there was, in fact, a historically
designated house existing at that location. Xf it is as the
staff report points out, "the most outstanding, as well as the
most intact, exrsmple of. an Upright -and -Wind vernacular house form
SENT BY:Klnko's Ann Arbor #1 2-15-93 ; 9:19 ;Klnko's Ann Arr #1- 092501;#10/12
. RE: 415 Parry Street
February. 1.5 , 19 9, 3
page 2 .
found in 'South wend, why was it such a surprise to the staff?
Over the last few years why wasnrt the area even considered for
historical designation?
—.._•• •-- . ••+.. b.h�..— aw, Uii i.4. rr . v r aGu VV V•r r � MA1a H. LLVLKfi
from the deterioration and destruction befalling the other houses
in the area. Thix house is not in a historic. district. There
was never any neighborhood.restoration programs available to me.
I was the one•tlliat approached HPC about this house and the others
like it in this:area. I was told by the HPC staff -that -riot any
other houses in -that area have been designated. The staff is
very unaware of -other potential properties in the area. I must
therefore assumo that the property owners have not even been
asked to try and preserve the other houses much less the
neighborhood. My visit to the HPC office was to discuss with the
staff as to how I could possibly save the property and not loose
all the equity in the only b mm
Additionally, this neighborhood -ii obviously not considered as
preservable as a neighborhood to the city. Particularly, in the
last few years,:the increased commercial zoning.use has destroyed
any last semblance of a neighborhood. This house is now
surrounded by a construction companies parking lot for equipment,
gays tanks and supplies.
I feel I have been totally left out on a.limb. Since visiting
the HPC office to discuss my concern over facing a major
financial loar. over this home, I have not heard one thing from
them except about the gutters. I ask,'are gutters even
historically and architecturall.y•appropriate for an 1880
building?
When I contracted this work, it•was under the intention to
maintain and provent further deterioration of the property. I
was also complying to a request made verbally to me by, an
insurance inspegtor. .The metal gutters had been patched many
times over the years, but were so rusted much of it was beyond
repair. over three.years ago 1 attempted to have some
replacement of exceptionally deteriorated section. Two
contractors nevgr even got back with me on an estimate and the
one that did never -showed to do the work. As they'stated, it
wasn't a „typic$1" job.
In my contract with ,fit Roofing, he states he would obtain the
necessary permits. Was I mistaken in assuming that if he could
obtain a pex-tit;for the work, that it was in compliance? If so
then I plead ignorance and apologize to the commission.
SENT BY:Kinko's Ann Arbor #1 2-15-93 9:19 ;Kinko's Ann Arb, 11- 092501;#11/12
• RE: 415 Parry Street
February 15, 1903
page 3
Saving this home. has always been an uphill battle. Thirteen
years ago I invested in this home in a partnership with my
mother. Tt was an abused rental property in very poor condition
both internally and exter_nAl_ly. Over +-he ,rpa,rp r ho-tr- .-_M+-.,.,,-A
Yiis A,o is tQ t1lo ;u Cit Qi. .ugv ,finaricia�l bj�)_. tv.
Ninety-five percent of the work has been my'own sweat equity ,-
all of which is?lost because of the conversion of a neighborhood
to heavy commercial use. It is very difficult to rationalize a
heavy expenditure on a property to which I cannot even recoup my
direct costs.
It is nearly -impossible to get insurance on this house, primarily
because the house is so old andin a transitional, neighborhood.
Features like tie chimneys, for which there are no stoves in the
home', still.make insurance companies leery of providing coverage.
Mike Wilson and -his wife, Mary rent this property from and are
exceptional tenants, as well as personal mend's. since Mr.
Wilson has resided in the neighbarhood for two years before even
renting my home,; he is very knowledgeable of the upkeep on this
home and the deterioration of the neighborhood. T resided in the
home until moving out of South Bend for -employment.
I appreciate%the consideration HPC will give this matter and
again request that the replacement be appproved or a decision on
this matter be deferred to .a future meet ng..that I can make
arrangements to attend personally:
Sincerely,
Rebecca E. Shriner
1160 S..Grove Road
.Ypsilant, MI 48198-6449
CC: Ann Puzzello, City Councilwoman
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 557 River Avenue
South Bend, IN 46618
OWNER -- Aaron Williams
DESIGNATION -- Edgewater Place LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The house at 557 River Ave. is located in the Edgewater Place LHD
and has been given the rating of C/10 on the Indiana Historic
Sites and Structures Inventory. This Bungalow style house was
built in 1922 for Charles and Edith Crum..Mr. Crum was a building
contractor and in the past was credited with building the first
concrete building in South Bend. He later formed a real estate
and insurance company, C. W. Crum and Son. The current owner of
the house is Mr. Aaron Williams.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The project includes stabilizing the garage structurally;
replacing existing wood clapboards with matching wood clapboards
and reusing what original clapboarding can be salvaged; infilling
the rear window; replacing all other wood double -hung windows
with metal double -hung windows; replacing all eaves, fascia, and
trim with white synthetic siding; and replacing asphalt shingles
on roof with similar asphalt shingles.
STANDARDS
In regard to these types of changes to a building, district
standards state the following:
(2,A,1) -- "Existing 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."
(2,A,2) -- "Aluminum or vinyl siding may be used when it is the
only feasible alternative to maintaining the original surface
materials."
(2,B,1) -- "The existing slope and materials of the roof shall be
retained".
(2,B,2) -- "Roof covering which is deteriorated beyond repair
should be replaced with new materials that match as closely as
possible the original in composition, size, shape, color, and
texture."
(2,B,1) -- "If aluminum or vinyl siding is added to a building
overhanging eaves and gables should not be covered or enclosed."
(2,C,1) -- "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."
1
RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff recommends that this proposal be approved by the HPC.
It should be noted that the staff feels that portions of this
_ proposal are inappropriate in regards to issues of design and
materials, however, this project was nearly complete before it
came to the attention of the staff. Therefore, staff was not
given an opportunity to consult with the owner in regards to
these issues, or the possibilities of alternative solutions. The
staff was also unable to make a determination as to whether the
garage was deteriorated beyond repair before alterations had
commenced.
A. Kotzbauer
2-8-93
is
•
2
rr@ p� M1 i bpi
err..v'
Jl riI ii
-77;
r
-
l
h
efr
3
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Monthly Meeting 7th Floor, County Commissioner's
7:30 p.m. Conference Room, County -City Building
February 15, 1993
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Members Present: Ms. Cynthia Brubaker, Mr. Jed Eide, Mr. John
Oxian, Ms. Jewel Van Dalsen.
Members Absent: Mrs. Martha Choitz, Mrs. Jean Dennen, Mrs.
Janeanne Petrass, Mrs. Joann Sporleder, Mr.
William Welsheimer, Sr..
Staff Present: Fred Holycross--Director
Amy Kotzbauer--Administrative Assistant
Also Present: Aladean DeRose--Deputy City Attorney, Marsha
• Stevenson --Riverside Drive Liaison, Kevin Boughal--South Bend
Tribune, Mike Wilson (415 Parry -tenant), Nancy TenBroeck (525
Edgewater -owner), Joe and Cindy Bellina (1154 LWE-owners).
The Historic Preservation Commission was unable to conduct a
regular monthly meeting due to a lack of quorum. Instead, Mr.
Oxian chose to call. a Committee of the Whole to discuss the COAs
on the docket. The remainder of the items were postponed until
the March, 1993 meeting.
III. Committee of the Whole
A. Certificates of Appropriateness.
1. 1414 Leer -- Lincolnway East LHD
Ms. Kotzbauer read the staff report describing the
proposed project: The proposal includes: construct two
wolmanized wood planters (9" in height) on either side of the
entrance steps; plant small spreading shrubs in the planters;
place sod in the areas between the planters and sidewalk; wrap
three (3) wood corner posts, window sills, and three (3) door
frames in white vinyl; cover area below window sill (north side
of front facade) with siding, matching that on remainder of
building.
Ms. Kotzbauer stated that the staff recommended approval of the
proposal for the following reasons: the wolmanized structures
are temporary; all siding will match that in place on the
remainder of the building; the vinyl additions will resemble in
size and style the original door frames and; the original doors
and transom will remain intact.
1
Mr. Oxian asked whether the owner was present; Ms. Kotzbauer
answered that neither owner nor representative was present.
Ms. Brubaker asked whether the frames to be wrapped were
deteriorated; Ms. Kotzbauer answered that they were. Mr. Eide
inquired as to what was in front of the proposed planters; Ms.
Kotzbauer explained that there was dirt in that location.
Mr. Eide moved to approve the proposal as submitted. Ms. Van
Dalsen seconded the motion.
No discussion.
Motion approved unanimously.
Mr. Oxian announced that the matter would be sent to the full
commission for final approval.
2. 1154 Lincolnway East -- Lincolnway East LHD
Ms. Kotzbauer read the staff report describing the
proposed project. The proposal included: 1. removal of all
asphalt and aluminum siding from walls; 2. replace all missing
corner trim with wood; 3. repair and replace in-kind all
miscellaneous siding and trim as needed; 4. replace crown
moldings (drip caps) over all first story windows and doors; 5.
replace flared bell course between first and second stories; and
6. prime and paint exterior with oil based paint.
Ms. Kotzbauer stated that the staff recommended all portions of
the proposal be approved because the owners had gone to
• considerable lengths to determine what original materials had
been removed when the house was covered with asphalt shingles,
and that all elements were being replaced in-kind.
Mr. Eide complimented the owners on the project. Discussion
ensued as to the condition of the siding.
Mr. Eide moved that the proposal be approved as submitted.
Ms. Brubaker seconded the motion.
Mr. Oxian asked that after the project was completed the house
be resurveyed by staff.
Motion approved unanimously.
Mr. Oxian announced that the matter would be sent to the full
commission for final approval.
3. 41.5 Parry Street -- Local Landmark
Ms. Kotzbauer read the staff report describing the
proposed project: the replacement of metal, half -round gutters
with rectangular, plastic extruded gutters.
0 2
Ms. Kotzbauer stated that the staff recommended against approval
of the proposal because historic half -round gutters had been
removed from the structure and replaced with inappropriate
plastic gutters. The staff was not given the opportunity to
consult with the owner, as the project was completed without a
certificate of appropriateness.
Mr. Mike Wilson, tenant at 41.5 Parry, read a letter from the
owner, Ms. Rebecca Shriner, asking for postponement of the
decision until she could attend the hearing (see appendix #1 for
complete text). The letter, also described her displeasure with
the staff and its handling of the matter, and described the
various financial problems she was having with the property.
Mr. Oxian stated that the owner was quite aware of Local
Landmark standards and knew that she must apply to the HPC and
for a building permit before making changes to the property.
Mr. Wilson stated that the owner felt Mr. Holycross should have
contacted her immediately when he saw the work in progress and
that she thought she was "in compliance."
Mr. Oxian explained the staff was not legally able to stop work
in progress. Mr. Holycross added that the work was essentially
finished when staff arrived on the scene.
Mr. Oxian stated that the Building Department was notified and
that their inspectors placed "stop work" orders on projects when
necessary.
The matter was tabled until the March 1993, HPC meeting.
4. 525 Edgwater -- Edgewater Place LHD
Ms. Kotzbauer read the staff report describing the
proposed project: replacement of all first story, wood,
double -hung, windows with vinyl double -hung windows (with
decorative grids). Eleven widows to resemble the original;
kitchen windows to be replaced with a sliding window and the
center mullion replaced.
Ms. Kotzbauer explained that the staff was especially concerned
with the part of the proposal that called for removal of the
mullion in the kitchen grouping. Staff suggested that the
mullion remain and any replacement fit into the original opening
exactly. In addition, in the staff's estimation, the windows as
a whole are not "deteriorated beyond repair" as is required by
district standards before removal can be approved.
Mrs. TenBroeck explained that she was having difficulty keeping
the house warm. She had investigated replacing the windows with
wood, double-hungs; they were too expensive. She was also having
problems opening several, and keeping others open; they had to
be "propped up." She added that both houses on either side of
her's had replacement windows, as did another farther down the
• 3
• block. She cited this as "precedent."
Mr. Eide asked why she wanted the sliding window. Mrs. TenBroeck
answered that it "was impossible for her to lean over the
cabinetry ... and raise the window."
Ms. Brubaker asked about the other house with replacement vinyl
windows in the neighborhood. Mrs. TenBroeck answered that she
thought they had been done in the previous several years.
Ms. Brubaker asked about the cost differential between wood and
her proposed windows and whether alternative repairs had been
considered. Mrs. TenBroeck cited the difference as being between
$4500 and $10,000 and that previous repairs had not been
successful.
Ms. Brubaker stated that she would be unwilling to approve
replacement of historic windows. Mrs. TenBroeck reiterated her
problems with the windows.
Ms. Brubaker made other suggestions for repair and replacement
of parts rather than total removal. She then asked the staff if
they had inspected the project window by window.
• Ms. Kotzbauer replied that she had not; Mr. Holycross replied
that the owner had presented staff with a proposal she was
committed to, in such cases the staff would help the owner
gather the necessary information for the commission to review
and make suggestions if they so desired.
Mr. Oxian turned the matter over to a COA Committee for them to
come up with a appropriate compromise; the committee would
review the matter and work with the owner.
Mr. Holycross stated that the commission must approve or deny a
COA within thirty days. Mr. Oxian responded that the commission
need only "act" on the matter within that time, tabling would be
acting.
Mr. Eide suggested that the committee pay a visit to the site.
The committee and owner agreed that they would meet with the
owner at her home on Wednesday, February 17 at 5:30 pm. The
committee would then make a determination and report to the
commission in March.
Mr. Oxian stated that he remained concerned with the project: he
would want replacement windows that "match" the original windows
exactly and, only if the original windows were deteriorated. He
also told the owner that she would need to compromise,
especially with the kitchen windows.
5. 557 River Ave. -- Edgewater Place LHD
Ms. Kotzbauer read the staff report describing the
proposed project: stabilize the garage structurally; replace
4
•
existing wood clapboards on wall of garage with matching wood
clapboard, salvaging all original materials as possible; infill
the rear window (remove and cover with clapboard); replace two
double -hung windows on east side of garage with metal
double-hungs; replace all eaves, fascia and trim with white
synthetic siding; replace asphalt shingles on roof in-kind.
Ms. Kot:zbauer then noted that the project was begun without a
COA so that the staff had not had an opportunity to work with
the owner; staff feels that portions of the project are
inappropriate and that they were unable to make a determination►
of the original condition of the structure.
Mr. Holycross stated that the staff had reconsidered their
original recommendation and that they were recommending against
approval of the project because, overall, the changes made were
inappropriate.
Mr. Oxian asked whether the owner was present; he was not.
Mr. Eide inquired as to the exact changes the project entailed.
Mr. Holycross reiterated that staff had no way of knowing, as
the project began before they were contacted.
Discussion ensued as the other changes made; staff again
reiterated that no determination of the original state of the
building could be made.
Mr. Oxian asked whether the owner had a building permit. Mr.
Holycross replied that he did not, and that when staff was
notified of the project the Building Department was contacted
and a estop worker order" was placed on the property.
Mr. Oxian stated that the project "was a total violation of all
rules and regulations and it would set a bad precedent." for
future projects.
Mr. Eide asked whether the proposed siding would match the
house; Ms. Kortbauer answered that the owner had said that it
would.
Mr. Oxian moved that the owner be required to bring detailed
information about the project to the Historic Preservation
Commission and that be contact the Building Department to apply
for a Building Permit.
Mr. Holycross asked for clarification;it was his understanding
the owner need a COA from the HPC before he could obtain a
building permit.
Mr. Oxian again stated that the owner was in violation of both
sets of codes.
Ms. Brubaker asked whether the owner had applied for a COA;
5
staff replied that hey had contacted the owner repeatedly for
three months before he would respond. They then met with him and
asked that he apply for a COA for the project so that the HPC
could a determination on the matter.
Mr. Oxian withdrew his motion.
Mr. Oxian moved to disapprove the Certificate of Appropriateness
for 557 River Avenue as submitted or until the owner could
provide more detailed information concerning the original
condition of the garage, the exact changes he proposed to make
and verify that the changes already made were not inappropriate.
Ms. Van Dalsen seconded the motion.
Mr. Oxian then stated that the HPC must send a message to the
neighborhoods that all property owners must apply for COAs for
all projects. In his opinion, he "could not see making
exceptions to the rules."
Motion approved unanimously.
Mr. Oxian announced that the matter would be sent to the full
commission for final approval.
6. 1081 Riverside Drive -- Riverside Drive LHD
Mr. Holycross announced that the owners were not present
as they had not been the previous month. Staff had contacted the
owner repeatedly by mail and had spoken to one co-owner
informing him that the matter would be on the February agenda.
Mr. Holycross reiterated that the staff was recommending against
the proposal and that the project_ had been completed without a
COA.
Mr. Oxian tabled the COA and directed staff to send a letter to
the owners informing them that the matter will be placed on the
March agenda for a final time.
IV. Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes
Postponed until March, 1993.
B. Treasurer's Report
Postponed until March, 1993.
C. Correspondence
No discussion.
D. Committee Reports
1. C of A (Staff Approvals)
a. 909 Riverside Drive
0 6
No discussion.
2. Budget and Finance
Mr. Holycross read a report concerning Division of
Historic Preservation (DHPA) grant monies. He related that
late last week he had received word from the DHPA that the
HPC grant application for fiscal year 7-1-93 to 6-30-94 had
been denied. This application was for monies to publish two
educational pamphlets and to continue updating the HPC Survey
computer database for city and county data. Having spoken
with state officials, Mr. Holycross was told that the state
had $60,000 to disperse amongst all the CLGs in the state and
that the top priority projects were sites and structures
surveys as half of the state was as yet unsurveyed. Five CLGs
were provided funds to survey and the city of Elkhart had
received $25,000 with which to renovate the Elco Theater --HPC
projects as applied for did not rate high enough to compete
with these. The HPC was currently completing the Resurvey of
South Bend and the County was last surveyed in 1.985 --the
determination was therefore made by staff that the HPC could
not apply for grant money to survey.
In addition, Mr. Holycross was told that "past performance"
contributed to the denial: the South Bend Survey had taken
. too long to complete and a National Register Nomination for
West Washington was never completed in 1989 and 1990. In
addition, moneys were "left over" during several grant
periods --these monies went back to the federal government
rather than being used for Indiana preservation projects.
The HPC will receive Community Development Block Grant funds
for the period ($13,650/year) as it now stands. The County
commissioners continued the HPC staff budget for 1993 of
$39,650 and are likely to approve the same for 1994. The
staff will therefore have sufficient funds with which to do
necessary work minus special grant projects. Mr. Holycross
concluded by saying that, in his estimation, the lack of a
state grant project for the period, which typically takes up
at least half of the staffs time, would enable the pursuit
of educational and organizational projects, and/or other HPC
approved projects, and that a grant would again be applied
for 1994-95.
Ms. Brubaker asked how the funding for CLGs broke down. Mr..
Holycross replied that the other five CLGs each received
funds with which to survey and do smaller projects; and
Elkhart received the $25,000 for the theater project. He also
stated that it would be some years before there was a local
need for a survey; perhaps the commission would like to
consider acquisition and development projects for the next
period; a small project with Southhold, for instance; those
are the types of projects that receive priority.
Mr. Holycross then suggested that the commissioners begin
7
considering likely projects with which to apply in October of
this year.
Mr. Oxian asked how many times the county had been surveyed;
• Mr. Holycross replied once. Mr. Oxian then stated that the
thought the county should be resurveyed and a new book
published.
3. Legal
No report.
4. Historic Districts
Mr. Holycross announced that the staff had met with the
River Bend Guideline Committee previously that evening; the
next meeting would be on March 1 at 5:30 pm.
Mr. Holycross stated that the Riverside Drive Liaison
committee had asked for a public Question and Answer meeting
with the HPC and staff on March 3, 1993 at the YWCA.
Mr.. Oxian stated that he would prefer a meeting after the
present legal case was settled since the commission cannot
discuss the case.
Ms. Marsha Stephenson stated that the Liaison Committee
viewed the meeting as opportunity for the district to get
educated about the HPC and how the neighborhood and
commission could work together.
Mr. Holycross asked the commission whether they could approve
• a meeting where it was announced that the legal case would
not be discussed. It was decided that under those
circumstances a public meeting could be held; staff was to
inform HPC members when the meeting was scheduled.
5. Historic Landmarks
a. 1027 East Wayne; 1029 East Wayne;
231 South Eddy.
Mr. Holycross stated that the owner of these properties
had asked for HPC consideration for Local Landmark status. He
asked that the HPC consider the properties in April.
There were no objections.
Mr. Oxian announced that the Riley High School proposal for
landmark designation was scheduled to be heard by the Common
Council on February 22, 1993. The Madison School proposal
would be heard by the Common Council on April 12, 1993.
6. Standards and Maintenance
No discussion.
7. Personnel.
Mr. Holycross announced that. Dr. Sushmita Hodges had
submitted her resignation as of March 25, 1993. He stated
that the research portion of the grant project was
• essentially complete; he would not be replacing Dr. Hodges.
8. Staff Reports
Mr. Holycross announced that there were two upcoming
conferences that HPC members should consider attending in
order to comply with the Certified Local Government
requirement that all members attend at least one approved
workshop or conference each year. The first was the Historic
Landmarks Foundation Quarterly meeting on March 10, 1993 in
Crown Point. The other is the National Trust Midwest meeting
on April 17 and 18, 1993 in Kalamazoo; more information will
be provided later.
V. Old Business
VI. New Business
Mr. Oxian announced that he was setting up a committee to
organize landscape workshops in the historic districts and other
interested neighborhoods. He asked for approval from the HPC to contact
district liaisons and other parties to participate.
There were no objections.
VII. Hearing of Visitors
Ms. Marsha Stephenson asked for clarification of. the Madison
School matter.
Mr. Oxian explained the proposal to the Common Council for
designation and the procedures and regulations attached to such
status.
VIII. Announcements/Miscellaneous Matters
IX. Adjournment
Mr. Oxian called for adjournment.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
•
Correspondence Received -- January 13, 1993 to February 9, 1993
-- Michiana Area Construction Industry Advancement Fund: "Plans
on File,"
January 11,18,25 & February 1,8 1993.
-- Monitor 15:1 Michiana Area Construction Industry Advancement
Fund.
--.Volunteer Line 8:1 Dec. 1992 Community Resource Center.
-- Announcement for "Getting to the Heart of Main Street" Feb.
3 & 4, 1993:
Conference sponsored by Ind. Dept. of Commerce.
-- 1993 At the Morris -Butler House: Schedule of Events, 1993
(Indianapolis).
-- Indiana Greenstreets Winter 1993, Indiana DNR, Div. Urban Forestry.
-- Center City Update Feb./March 1993. Center City Associates.
-- Indiana DOT: Notice of Public Sale/Auction; land located at
17703 SR 23,
S.B., IN. (2-24-93).
---Historic Preservation Forum Sept./Oct. 1992.
-- Historic Preservation News February 1993.
-- Southhold Newsletter Jan./Feb. 1993.
-- Common Ground Jan./Feb. 1993 (The Conservation Fund).
-- Preservation Law Update August 14, 1992.
-- Preservation Law Reporter Oct. 1992.
is
a
•
•
•
Feb 10, 1993
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
STAFF APPROVALS: DECEMBER 13, 1992 -- FEBRUARY 10, 1993
ST,# STREET CATEGORY PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESIG
--------------------------------------------------------
909 Riverside doors;st Replacement of existing LHD-RD
orms eight panel wood front door
with another eight panel
wood door, and the
replacement of the existing
aluminum storm door with a
white aluminum wood core
storm door. ( All new doors
with dimensions matching
the originals.)
CASE#
1993-0113
• Historic Preservation Commission
of South Bend and St. Joseph County
Visitor Roll February 15, 1993
Please print your name, address and organization, if applicable, so your
presence at tonight's meeting can be officially recorded. Thank you.
1 Marsh ca �fi�lensoh _ ` F\1efJ�0iQ �21
2 /111 jC. - (A)4L,504 ` J 15 PAR -(Z y - OC4-1- fL� 22
t _
3r�,c��ac-i3cC— r�`�` �.�+ e�_"' 23
4 Joh, s�/c':r�a ?Et,-IAJ4 24
5Fw <"i F...;+ x�•/[ nv aur qui=a�c.��� 25
26
7 27
•
8 28
9
29
10
30
1.1
31
12
32
13
33
14 34
15 35
16 36
17 37
18 38
19 39
20 40