HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 1994AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
Regular monthly meeting HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION County Commissioner's
7:30 p.m. Conference Room
Monday, December 19, 1994 7th floor County -City
I. Call 'to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 1319 East Wayne Street- EWS-LHD; replace attic vent with window
2. 713 Cushing -- LL; replace 2nd story back door with window
B. Stephenson Mill National Register Nomination
IV. Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes - November 21, 1994
B. Treasurer's Report
C. Correspondence
D. Committee Reports
1. Budget & Finance
2. Legal
3. Historic Districts
a. Lincolnway West PLHD
4. Historic Landmarks
a. First reading on landmark status for the following properties:
none
b. Second reading on landmark status for the following properties:
none
c. Status of recommendations to Common Council
310 West Monroe (Olivet AME Zion Church, Zion Hill Baptist)
1601 Kemble Avenue (Toth State Bank)
534 LaPorte Avenue (Starzynski Texaco Gasoline Station)
5. Standards & Maintenance
a. COA violation meeting
6. Personnel
7. Staff Reports
a. C of A Staff Approvals
1. 1003 Riverside Drive -- RSD-LHD in-kind porch repair
2. 1043 Riverside Drive --RSD-LHD in-kind replacement of siding
3. 701 Pennsylvania -- LL in-kind porch repair
b. 938 Riverside Drive
c. 739 East Bronson
d. 114 North Frances
e. 1995 Calendar
V. Old Business
VI.New Business
A. Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Survey Update
B. Near Northwest Neighborhood Workshop Series Sponsorship
C. Nominating Committee
VII. Hearing of Visitors
VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
IX. Adjournment
historic preservation commission
SIGN—IN
1.) t1lL
2.) I o
3.)
�rYIY Y c�1 S✓2
4.)
5.)
6.)
7.)
8.)
9.)
10.)
11.)
12.)
13.)
14.)
15.)
16.)
17.)
18.)
19.)
20.)
21.)
22.)
23.)
24.)
25.)
of south bend and st. joseph county
ROOM 1123 COUNTY CITY BUILDING
south bend, Indiana 46601 (219) 235-9798
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 1319 East Wayne North
41 South Bend, Indiana
OWNER -- Gabriel R. Shakour
DESIGNATION -- EW-LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
Whitcomb & Keller built this H. R. Stapp designed Tudor Revival in 1927. Homer
and Bessie Robinson were the first residents and Mr. Robinson was
Vice -President of Whitcomb & Keller. The structure is a two story frame
building with walls of offset polychrome brick, half timbering and stucco. The
windows are casement. It is in excellent condition although it has undergone
alterations. It is rated S/11 in the Indiana Historic Sites and Structures
Survey.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The owner proposes to replace the attic screen vent with a custom made working
window of the same size.
STANDARDS
The standards do not address specifically the issue of replacing a screen vent
opening with a window. Standards state:
I.C.3.... New window or door openings that would alter the scale and proportion
of the building shall not be introduced. Inappropriate new window or door
features such as metal insulating glass combinations that require the removal
of original windows and door shall not be installed.
RECOMMENDATION
It is staffs understanding that the owners need to increase the quantity of
light in the attic story in order to convert it into a comfortable and
functional living space. Because the standards do not specifically address the
present situation, staff bases its recommendation on the following : As
demonstrated by other housing stock in the East Wayne Street district, some
houses were built with attic windows and some with attic vents. The attic vent
itself is not as significant a feature on the structure as the size and shape
of the attic opening. The replacement as proposed by the owner will retain the
existing size and shape of the opening and is compatible with the remainder of
the window stock.
Staff recommends approval.
CAA
12/7/94
I.�
� c� A4A/�
po
``^ ��
�.�'"
�o� ii �9a
o o N o � suau.
,C:,- 2 -�`�—
iu lit k5LI
proposed nee endow for =1 east Boyne na•th
t
®J
•..` CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 713 Cushing
South Bend, Indiana
OWNER -- Dayle Brown
DESIGNATION -- LL
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
This c.1898 Gabled -Ell structure was probably built as speculation by the
Cushing & Lindsey developers. It is a t -plan with a gabled rear extension. The
house is in excellent condition though it has had many alterations to its
original condition. It is rated S/11 in the Indiana Historic Sites and
Structures Survey.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The owner proposes to replace the second story back door with a double hung
window compatible with other windows in the house.
STANDARDS
Group B Paragraph 1- The Commission has the authority to determine the
architectural merits and the extent of any proposed treatment, renovation, or
addition to a historic landmark.
Group B C.2.- All work should be done in the architectural style and in a
technique compatible with that of the original structure.
RECOMMENDATION
This single family house at one time had a second story apartment which had
egress from a rear second story exterior stair. The house is used as a single
family residence again. The door from the apartment is still extant although
there is no interior landing nor any exterior landing or stair. This lack of
landings and stairs renders the door useless.
The standards state "All work shall be done in the architectural style and in
a technique compatible with that of the original style and construction...��
The replacement window proposed by the owner will be larger than other
existing windows in the structure to fit the existing opening of the door, but
will be the same in regard to method of operation and number of panes. The
owner would have to piece in siding to enclose the opening for a smaller
window that was dimensionally the same as other windows, whereas by using a
larger window the owner is able to use the existing door opening without
adding siding material. The Staff also notes the door is at the rear of the
structure and not visible from the main thoroughfare.
Staff recommends approval.
CAA 12/7/94
x by
WARNER CONSTRUCTION
• Custom Carpentry Sunrooms
• Homos • Docks
• Room Additions • Remodeling
r . ______--. __ .... _...,-- -- -- -- - • ---... .... 624 Leland Ave. South Bend. AN 46616
i
. � � _._.. _ _ .. _.�-moo-<x,..�c.,•c-c.�c��-r.�.�.�t-?_,�G� ..� _ _ .. .. _
_.
0+�_ . .
. �. C'►•.. -fie-
L
.... ...+.-,s- ,��•�r , �,•+q<,:s"Y*.'m•�rs+,�z.m+.+•:,r-=�.�..•a,.`a.���..::ter..;-.«o�..st�i,zfx«.+Xt3: r...,.,,y
' .. � ..•. .. iFF/?.;. ...... ... ... .`.tf.' �. - ... ., 1.i- ... �L'::^.)i': �n a-:Fw.f,'v.
NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION STAFF REPORT
PROPERTY -- 322 East Colfax Avenue
South Bend, Indiana
OWNER -- Stephenson Mill Associates Limited Partnership
C/O The Alexander Company
660 West Washington
Madison Wisconsin
STANDARDS
The nomination proposes placement of this building on the National Register of
Historic Places based on Criterion A: Event and Criterion C: Design
Construction.
National Register Bulletin 15 - How to APPly the National Register Criteria
for Evaluation provides that "Properties can be eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places if they are associated with events that have made
a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history." It goes on to
state "Criterion A recognizes properties associated with...a pattern of
events, repeated activities or historical trends .... The events or trends ...
must clearly be important within the associated context...."
With regard to Criterion C, Bulletin 15 states that "Properties may be
eligible for the National Register if they embody the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction...." These
characteristics are further described as "The pattern of features common to a
particular category of resources."
RECOMMENDATION
The Staff of the HPC recommends in favor of the nomination of Building #6 of
the Stephenson Underwear Mill located at 322 East Colfax Avenue, South Bend,
Indiana to the National Register of Historic Places. The building meets
Criterion A as representative of the development of industrial production in
South Bend during the period around the First World War and Criterion C as
exemplary of industrial architecture in South Bend during that period.
As described in the Statement of Significance section of the nomination, the
building is among the only two remaining structures in South Bend
representative of the garment industry which was especially significant for
its employment of women in the industrial workforce. It is also significant as
the only remaining structure associated with industrial production from this
era located on the island by the East Race.
The building is considered architecturally significant for its excellently
preserved representation of. characteristics associated with functional -
industrial architecture of this era, including concrete frame construction
with masonry curtain walls and metal industrial sash windows.
It is the opinion of HPC Staff that this building meets the criteria for
eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places. Staff recommends
that the commission send a favorable ruling to the Mayor of South Bend and to
the State Historic Preservation Office.
DBD
Director
12/8/94
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
November 21, 1994
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Members present: Mrs. Martha Choitz, Mrs. Catherine Hostetler, Mr. John Oxian,
Mrs. Jewel VanDalsen, Mrs. Janeanne Petrass, and Father Richard Bullene as
Architectural Historian.
Staff present: David B. Duvall - Director and Christine Anderson
Administrative Assistant.
Members absent: Ms. Lora Spaulding, Mr. Jerry Weiner, Mrs. Joann Sporleder
(leave of absence).
Also Present: Marsha Stevenson, Ed Talley, Kathy Dempsey (Code Enforcement),
Dwight King, Mary Hendriksen, and Marty Murphy.
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 322 West Washington Drive -- LL, MRA-NRHD, WW-NRHD- asphalt parking lot
Ms. Anderson read the Staff Report. President Oxian inquired if the owners
were asking for tentative approval of the landscaping. Ms. Anderson replied
the owners have no landscape plan at this time other than removing the
asphalt. President Oxi.an asked why the C of A before t ' he Commission was only
for the removal of the parking lot when the letter from the owners requested a
C of A for other work such as a temporary storage shed. Ms. Anderson replied
all other proposals had been done as a staff approval. Mr. Duvall explained
the shed, because it was not a permanent improvement was done as a Staff
Approval also. Commissioner Choitz asked if there was a formal C of A for the
rest of the proposed work. It was noted that the C of A appeared in the
October HPC meeting as a Staff Approval. President Oxian rioted Staff should
not have given approval for the replacement of concrete steps with the wood
steps as seen in the original plan. He added if the owners come in for the C
of A for the carriage house, it would need to come to the Commission.
Commissioner Choitz rioted the Thurin's will, come in with the plans, they just
don't have them made up yet. Commissioner Bullene pointed out between the
removal of the asphalt and the building of a carriage house and landscaping,
there needed to be a lot of dirt brought in. Commissioner Petrass motioned the
plan be accepted as orODOsed. Commissioner. Hostetler seconded the motion. The
motion passed unanimously.
2. 1.035 Riverside Drive RSD-LHD - Replacement of gravel parking area
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. President Oxian made known his opinion
that there is no reasonable excuse for not getting a Certificate of
Appropriateness. He noted the owner is a real estate agent who knew the house
was in a historic district and knew what was required of him as a property
owner. President Oxian added he would like a letter sent out to the owner
stating the next time this happened, the Commission would not be e cooperative. i
09 He stated his belief that if this continues, someday someone s going to do
something serious, and the Commission is going to end up in court.
Commissioner Bullene agreed the procedure was wrong, but the concrete had
helped to tidy up the alley. President Oxian called for a motion to be made.
Commissioner Choitz moved the Commission approve the application for 1035
Riverside Drive as long_ as a letter of protesto� es out to the owners.
Commissioner Petrass seconded the motion. The motion passed with 5 in favor
and 1. abstaining. Commissioner Choitz asked that the matter of people doing
work without a C of A be discussed in Committee and an appropriate reprimand
come up with. President Oxian asked what Committee Commissioner Choitz thought
was appropriate. She stated the best option seemed to be Standards and
Maintenance Committee. Commissioner Hostetler inquired if the Commission is
empowered to fine. President Oxian said under the zoning ordinance, the
Commission is empowered to fine, but they never had done that. Commissioner
Choitz noted many Commissions around ,the country levy fines or take other
action against unapproved work in Historic Districts. President Oxian informed
Commissioner Van Dalsen that as Co -Chair, she needed to call the meeting.
President Oxian stated he would like to attend the meeting as well.
Commissioner Bullene noted the importance of making people aware of the
consequences, because every time, a C of A is approved after the fact, a
precedent .is established. President Oxian informed Commissioner Bull-ene he is
on the Standards and Maintenance Committee.
3. 1081 Riverside Drive -- RSD-LHD - laying paving bricks for driveway flange
Ms. Anderson read the Staff Report. President Oxian opened the floor to the
public. Mr. Talley (owner of 1081 Riverside Drive) supplied the Commission
with photographs taken by the contractor the day the "drive was poured and a
sample of the brick to be used .in the triangular section. He noted when the
excavation was done for the driveway, a brick wall was discovered and was
probably a retaining wall or a course of brick even with the soil. Mr. King
(owner of 1077 Riverside Drive) noted his objection to the addendum as it was
made to the Commission. He stated he and his wife disagreed with the statement
that they claimed to own part of the driveway. They merely contended the
boundary line was uncertain. He also noted it was not true that they had
bodily blocked the project. President Oxian asked how the King-Hendri"ksens
could, still dispute the boundaries after a survey had been done by a well know
surveyor. Mr. King explained the end points are set, but the in-between
sections are in question. He added that he had called Mr. Talley's survey
company and they had stated with the survey they had done, the ownership of
the shrubs and trees could not be definitively determined, and that a survey
with intervening stakes would be necessary. President Oxian stated at this
point, the Commission was not giving a COA for the shrubs because no one had
filed for a COA for the shrubs. President Oxian inquired why t. -he
King-Hendriksens would protest the driveway approach when it: was not even
close to the property line. Mr. King replied that the flange comes out toward
their property, but there is no matching flange on the other side. He added he
did not understand why it had to extend out toward their property. He stated
he understood the City has a easement so far up into the property, but it
seemed to him that the tip, just by eyeballing it, does cross over the
King-Hendri"ksen's property, but if the City had an easement, then that was
fine, but he could not understand why the flange had to come toward their
property rather than the other way. He said they were not objecting to the
flange if the City has an easement there, but that their concern was that when
they came home, the forms were already set for the concrete pour, and there
was damage to their tree from the first COA which was not an appropriate COA.
He said now the owners of 1081 Riverside drive are coming back for a COA to do
legally what they had done illegally the first time and caused the
King-Hendriksen's tree damage. Commissioner Bullene asked if the survey sketch
was inaccurate because it did show a flare on the other side as well. Mr. King
asked if he could see a photo because as far as he could tell, the driveway
only flared on one side, and the flare was quite extensive. Commissioner
Bullene noted it was difficult to read the photographs accurately because of
the angle. Mr. King felt, if examined, the western side would come down
straight from the ribbon and the eastern side, toward his property would flare
off to the side. Mary Hendri.ksen spoke of the inaccuracy of Mr. Talley's
statement of the facts of the case. She said this was not a case in which the
Commission approved the flange and then she and her husband objected to the
flange crossing their boundary line. The Commission Staff approved an in-kind
replacement, which was a straight ribbon. She further contended the owners
used the in-kind COA to extend a few feet over to. create a flange, and that
she believed they knew what they were doing all along. She clarified that
their concern was, as shown in the previous hearing, the owners would do
something illegally and then come and ask for a COA. She reiterated that they
had damage done to a 40-50 year old Norway Maple when the driveway was done
illegally. She explained they did not have a particular objection to the
flange in brick, except that it set a bad precedent as far as doing work and
then seeking approval from the Commission. Mrs. Hendriksen said they wanted
the Commission to know there was not approval for this flange, and they
objected because the approval was in-kind. She explained their real concern
was not so much the bricks and paving, but that the letter she had received
from Mr. Talley and Mr. Geisel demanded in thirty days the owners of 1077
Riverside Drive trim all bushes or trees that overhang the property line or
the owners of 1081 would do it for them. Mrs. King said she and her husband
had never received a copy of the survey. She noted there are two marked points
in the boundary line and Mr. Talley had brought in photographs, but that there
are intervening bushes and Mr. Talley had stretched the string around them in
an are. The string passes behind a rhododendron, behind a lilac and arcs out
again. Mrs. 4;i4ign-uted they had their surveyor come out and do a preliminary
survey who stated given the two iron stakes in the ground, the peonies and
rhododendrons would belong to 1077 Riverside Drive, the lilac would be
commonly shared, and that it would be to the inch on the cedar trees. Mrs.
tjv1��'a said her surveyor b y quoted a purvey with intervening stakes along the line
costing $200. She commented the owners of 108.1 Riverside Drive had not given
any reason to have the trees and shrubs cut down and the specimens are
established plantings that form a boundary line between the two properties.
The plantings don't interfere with access to the driveway nor harm the owners
eHast c
in any way, Mrs.g nt�?i, and she felt this was motivated out of spite
because the day they were pouring the drive she had gone over to discuss with
the workers the impact they were having on the Norway Maple. She continued
with her concern over the tree and their insistence that the owners of 1081
Riverside Drive follow the procedures all the property owners in Riverside
Drive Historic: District agreed to and, especially Ed as Liaison, should know.
She noted if the procedures had been followed, they wouldn't have had a
disagreement at the eleventh hour, the night before the concrete was being
poured and they could have protected their tree. She asked the Commission to
do two things. If the Commission approved the COA, Mr's. K,ng asked it to
include specific language stating it did not in any way approve a boundary
line between the parties and it does not give approval to cut or remove any
plantings. She added there had been actions which made her believe Mr. Talley
and Mr. Geisel linked the approval of the COA with cutting down the bushes and
trees, so she was requesting the Commission establish a protective order for
the bushes and trees. She pointed out the King-Hendriksens own diligence in
conforming with the standards set forth for the Riverside Drive Historic
District and reminded the Commission of the possibility of the owners of 1081
Riverside Drive doing something and then seeking approval. She added that once
these plantings are gone, they cannot really be replaced.
President Oxian noted in the COA the only thing mentioned is, the triangular
part of the driveway. Staff concurred. President Oxian clarified in the COA,
there was nothing about the removal of any trees, bushes, or any other
planting material, so without a COA, Mr. Talley would be violating the
Standards and President Oxian, as well as the rest of the Commission would
strongly object to that. President Oxian stated Mr. Talley was indeed coming
in for the expansion right now, so he really was not putting in the expansion
without approval. Mrs. Hendriksen noted the form had already been put in.
President Oxian countered that Mr. Talley could put the form in, but that did
not mean the Commission considered the work finished, and if the Commission
did not accept it, the form would have to come out. President Oxian did concur
with Mrs. Hendriksen that this was an amended COA to what Mr. Talley had
originally requested.. President Oxian asked for other questions or discussion.
Mr. Talley asked to respond to Mrs. Hendriksen. Mr. Talley stated during the
time he had owned this property, he had repeatedly pointed out the surveyors
stake to the owners of 1077 Riverside Drive that was already extant and the
Eastern side of the curb cut and told his neighbors this must be the property
line. On the day the forms were going in, Mr. Talley contacted Mrs. Hendriksen
to let her know the digging was going on and if she had any problems, the City
is who she should deal with. He assessed it was false that she was caught by
surprise, because several discussions were held over this matter. He presented
the Commission with a letter from the Real Estate Agent who sold the house
stating the owners of 1081 Riverside Drive had never tried to broaden the
area. Mr. Talley said the land mass in concrete and what they wanted to finish
in brick is the same land mass in the driveway as the day they purchased the
house. He also noted the City of South Bend Engineers mark off with
fluorescent orange paint the boundaries two days before the work begins. He
indicated when the forms were put in, the owners of 1077 came to him irate and
he called the City Engineer who came to the property the following morning.
Mr. Talley disagreed with Mr. Kings statement that they did not stop the
pouring of the concrete. Mr. Talley noted the superfluousness of these items
though to the current COA application. He clarified because there was a
property dispute, he decided to be a good neighbor by not pouring the concrete
toward their property until the property was surveyed. He said his neighbors
now contend there is a property dispute and the way for them to resolve that
was to do the same thing he had done, to get a survey. He continued all he was
asking in the current COA was to do what was originally requested to be done
in concrete, but because of the dispute, he decided to back it up... Mrs.
Hendriksen inquired of Mr. Duvall if he had the original photo showing the
ribbon driveway. Mr. Duvall replied the photograph the Commission office has
is so small, one had to use a magnifying glass to see details and even then
one could not tell very well what the condition was. Mrs. Hendriksen said this
question of whether the driveway flanged originally could be resolved with a
photograph.
President Oxian gave his opinion that if a flange is added to one side, it
should be done on the other side. Commissioner Bullene commented it was
dependent on right turns and left turns. Marsha Stevenson pointed out it would
actually be more advantageous to have the flange the other way. President
Oxian clarified the reason he said that was if the flange is only on one side,
it looked like you were doing it for spite, but if it was done on both sides,
there would be equal reasons for it. Mr. Talley replied one side was already
done in concrete and if they put a flange on the other side it would be wider
than the curb cut. President Oxian noted they would be turning left to come
into the driveway. Mr. Talley replied he backs his car in. President Oxian
tried to clarify the direction from which Mr. Talley would be coming and
inquired if the reason they were not putting a flange in on the other side is
because they were never going to enter the drive from the north. Mr. Talley
inquired if President Oxian meant his putting brick in. President Oxian
responded affirmatively. Mr. Talley commented there was no reason to put brick
in on the other side because no one was disputing the other boundary.
Commissioner Bullene asked if the driveway flared on the other side. Mr.
Talley replied that it did, but not to the extend that it does on the East
side. Mr. Talley noted it wouldn't look like a flare had the ori;inal concrete
work been done as intended because there would have been two 90 degree angles
where the apron hit the ribbon. Marsha Stevenson requested to speak. She noted
she lived in the same block and her opinion was the driveway had not had the
large flange and that she was rather surprised when she had seen the forms.
Mr. Talley reiterated he had applied for a COA that he had deemed in-kind for
the same land mass that was covered in concrete, brick and patio block with
one sheet of concrete, and now they were coming back to ask if they could
complete the original COA request in brick because they only had two options.
He explained to be in compliance with the original COA, they would have to
tear up the ramp because the small triangular section would not be
structurally sound. The only other option he saw was to complete the project
with another material, which they were requesting to be brick. Commissioner
Bullene commented there was a third choice which would be to leave it alone
and restore the grass. Mr. Talley responded this was not a choice because fie
had a letter from the Real Estate Agent indicating the land mass was the same,
and the City Engineers Office agreed with that, but could not be that
specific. Mr. Talley stated what his neighbors were contesting was already
there. Mr. King disagreed. Mr. Talley requested that the Commission refer to
his photographs and stated the 4-6 tall bushes evident in the photos were
planted two owners ago at .1081 Riverside Drive, and by the measurements from
the two hundred dollar survey, were 14" in on the 1081 side of the property
line. Mr. Talley further commented that information on the deed from 1077
Riverside Drive, their property line extends 5' toward 1081 Riverside Drive.
He had measured this and that was the rope that was visible in the photographs
he had supplied to the Commission. He further stated this was not the issue at
hand. President Oxian agreed that the only issue before the Commission was the
triangular part of the driveway approach.
Mr. Duvall confirmed what was being contested was the prior condition and
admitted when someone comes in to the Commission office with something as
straight forward as an in-kind replacement of a driveway apron, the Staff
presumes that it is straight forward and supplies such a Certificate of
Appropriateness. He added he had no idea that this was going to become a
pointed issue. He assessed the issue in this case was whether the driveway
approach had been wider than the straight forward straight out shot before the
work was begun. Mr. Duvall clarified that Mr. Talley never maintained the
concrete of the driveway was ever splayed, but maintained that there was a
straight shot of concrete and off to the side was a small triangular area
which contained basically what is now proposed- paving bricks and patio
blocks. He continued this area may have been grown over or unused and not
terribly evident, but he could not verify this one way or the other because he
did not anticipate this dispute and did not take observation to that level of
detail. He restated that the fundamental question was in regard to the in-kind
replacement which was first permitted. He stated it was true the filling in of
the area that had pavers with solid concrete was a divergence from the in-kind
replacement for which the COA was given. He explained the. issue now is whether
brick pavers are substantially different than concrete pavers or whatever was
filling in the space before and whether that accumulated material was
substantial enough to be accredited as pavement.
President Oxian gave his opinion that no one had a COA application for removal
of the shrubs and trees, so to him that was a moot point and removal of them
would be illegal. He also noted the King-Hendriksens had both agreed the brick
material would be better than concrete because the Norway Maple had already
been damaged and this tree was not on the property line, so he didn't see how
approving this COA was going to hurt anyone and would make parking for 1081
Riverside Drive easier. He further stated anything beyond that would be turned
ovor to the, Commission's Legal Counsel and the Commission would not do
anything further until the situation was settled. Commissioner Choitz
disagreed. She stated tier opinion that the flange was too wide and surely
Staff had never approved anything that came up to the driveway ribbon so
unsmoothly. Mr. Duvall clarified for Mr. Talley that Commissioner Choitz was
referring to the right: angle of the apron at the point at which it connected
with the ribbon of the drive. She asked to see what the Staff approved and
suggested tabling the application until more details could be given. Mr.
Talley stated the apron was not too wide because his tires barely fit on the
apron now. Commissioner Choitz inquired if the area had been mud before.
President Oxian referred Coiiimissioner Choitz to Mr. Duvall's statement. of Mr.
Talley's contention that the previous material was various pavers. Mr. Talley
reminded the Commission that although they must give approval for the trees to
be removed, the issue is a legal dispute involving boundaries and the owners
of 1077 Riverside Drive had done nothing to address that issue. Mr. Talley
accused the owners of 1077 Riverside Drive of going around the neighborhood
telling people he. had not followed procedure and he assessed this to be
harassment. Commissioner Choitz noted how often boundary disputes have been
settled peacefully. Mr. Talley noted he had never been involved with anything
like this dispute before either. Commissioner Choitz related her belief that
the letter Mr. Talley had sent to the King-Hendriksens was outrageous. Mr.
Talley disagreed. President Oxian interrupted and asked that one person speak
at a time and wait to be recognized by the President. He pointed out the
Commission had heard from both parties and now it was time for Commissioners
to ask questions. Commissioner Bullene asked the King-Hendriksens if they had
any objection to the shrubbery being left as is. Mrs. Hendriksen stated their
belief that the shrubberies are theirs and emphasized they did not want
anything to happen to them. President- Oxian asked that the Commissioners stick
to the issue filed on the COA. Commissioner Bullene inquired if Mr. Talley's
intention was to remove the shrubbery and charge the owners of 1077 Riverside
Drive. President Oxian stated no one can remove them without a COA. Mr. Talley
confirmed lie had no intention of doing so. President Oxian added that was why
historic preservation commission
of south bend and st. joseph county
ROOM 1123 COUNTY CITY BUILDING
south bend, Indiana 46601 (219) 235-9798
To
Motion for Certificate of Appropriateness for 1081 Riverside Drive Vef)D40K �
f.A' V1 J+C-$
"I am making a motion here that if that flange is cut down so that if it's
36" wide it should be no wider than 25" at the sidewalk and taper back to
wherever you want it to go along where that... I don't know how far back that
went, I've forgotten what he read... Where that 8" offset is ... that that come
to a point back there and be only that wide. And then if it's filled in with
brick, that's what I assume is still in somebody's mind about the finish ... It
could be cobble stones, it could be almost anything, but its got to be light
colored and its got to be something that hassomerelationship to that
concrete strip in color so that it isn't a little funny looking red strip over
there by itself. But I will only make the motion for that if that is cut down
to this reasonable size that I just stated and you can get it off of there ,
(the tape recording) and that furthermore not a thing is to be touched in that
shrubbery or trees... any of that at this time, as far as the Commission is
concerned, we are protecting those trees and shrubs and we intend to continue
to. I believe that my motion doesn't necessarily have it as part of this, but
I believe that you've got to pay for a thorough survey with those stakes every
few inches and find out where you lot line is. That seems to me to be a
reasonable suggestion, that's all that is, a parenthetical suggestion... To
actually not be�standing out there trying to decide that because it can't be
decided like that, there is no such thing. And so actually be serious about a
survey. What you've had so far is not a survey. That is not what's going on
here at all. So have yourself a survey so that it is a legal line and know
what you are talking about before you ever come in here to talk to us about
any of that, either one of you for that matter, you know, about taking them
out or moving them or anything else. Let them alone. Maybe they'll grow high
enough, who knows. But keep that strip small and insignificant and as much
like the concrete that you didn't pour at the beginning and no wider in flare
than I talked about ... about 18 to 20 inches at the sidewalk ... 25 inches that's
right I'm sorry, 25 inches." Commissioner Bullene asked how Commissioner
Choitz got those dimensions. She replied, "Well, at the back, it's eight
inches that I want in, and I want eight inches at the front. I just simply
want the thing trimmed down eight inches or there about. Certainly I'd be
laying out a hose or something to make sure I liked what I saw, but it can't
be any wider than that at either end ... toward their property line ... that it
has to be within something that would give it a little symmetry toward the
other side of the pad there." Commissioner Bullene inquired of Mr. Talley how
that dimension related to the actual curb cut. Mr. Talley replied it would be
on the side of 1077. It would make the driveway not as wide as the curb cut,
by eight,inches. Commissioner Bullene stated that seemed reasonable.
all discussion on this point was moot because no COA had been filed and Mr.
Talley did not intend to do anything without a COA. President Oxian asked that
everyone keep the discuss focused on the triangular piece of driveway
approach. He saw two choices for the Commissioners- to vote it up or down, or
to put the issue into Committee. Commissioner Bullene inquired if Mr.. Talley
intended to finish the project even if he did not receive approval for the
brick infill. Mr. Talley affirmed he would because it would be very difficult
for him to get in and out of the driveway in winter and was afraid he would
end up sliding into the hole from the excavation if nothing was done.
Commissioner Bullene asked again if Mr. Talley intended to do the work anyway.
Mr. Talley stated something had to be put over the area, whether it was a
piece of plywood, bricks, or new concrete.
Mr. Duvall inquired if there were dimensions for the triangular piece.
Commissioner Bullene gave the dimensions as 36" at the sidewalk, 8" at the top
of triangle, 24' along the West side, and 26' along the East side or
hypotenuse. Mr. Talley noted the top of the flange was 8", the width of a
brick and if that was objectionable, they could simply take out one row of
brick all the way down.
Mrs. Hendriksen clarified she and her husband did not attempt to bring the
boundary line dispute to the Commission, but the 'Commission received the
letter and she believed somehow in Mr. Talley and Mr. Gei.sel's minds the two
issues are intertwined. She explained she simply wanted clarification that the
COA does not include the removal of the bushes. Mr. Talley clarified the
letter was sent to the Commission to let them know one of the two property
owners would be coming to the Commission as early as next month for a COA to
remove or trim bushes and shrubbery. Mrs. Hendriksen stated she and tier
husband would not come with that proposal. Mr. Talley said if the
King-Hendriksens do not then, he would, because there would be items on his
property not belonging to him and they would have a legal right to deal with
them. Commissioner Petrass said from her experience he did not have that
right. She related a dispute with a neighbor regarding an overhanging tree and
Code Enforcement Is determination that they could do nothing. Kathy Dempsey of
Code Enforcement clarified that the issue is entirely a civil dispute, however
if the plantings are overhanging ones property, one may take whatever action
one deems appropriate and a court of law would riot find in favor of the
adjoining property owner. She added it is common courtesy to give the property
owner notification advising them you are going to take action if they do not,
but you have the right to trim back overhanging shrubs and trees or whatever
crosses your property line. Commissioner Bullene asked how that interplayed
with the Historic District. Mr. Talley said you still had to come to the
Commission for the COA. Mr. Talley explained the law says if the bushes are on
the property or overhanging the property, the property owner can trim or
remove them. President Oxian reminded him this was off the subject. Mr. Talley
said it kept coming up in discussion, so he wanted to clarify. President Oxian
agreed, but said they would have to hear the same arguments if this was
brought back to the Commission next month. fie asked that the discussion of the
plant material be held off until the COA appl.i.cation was brought before the
Commission. He requested that the Commission settle the matter of the
triangular driveway approach.
Coma-i`ss-i-oner Choitz made a motion that the f. an e be cut down 8" (one row of
brick) so tha Ll,u flange came a point where it attached to the apron. She
also moved that the material have some relationship to the con,ete as far as
color, he further moved the plant material would not •Fre ouched. She added
she beli.ev_ they needed to have a thoroug�u;^ y done with intervening
stakes, but thi as just a suggestion. ,She asked the survey be done before
either party came ba k to the Commi$.s--k6nn about plant material. She reiterated
Mr. Talley should keep iece of driveway approach as small and
insignificant as possible Comic' loner Bullene inquired how Commissioner
Choitz got the dimens�' n. She replie '`,s simply wanted the piece cut down
eight inches so -� attached to the ribbon m thly. Commissioner Bullene
inquired of Talley how that dimension related t�`o-c rad cut. Mr. Talley
replied o the side of 1077 it would make the driveway not as wide as the curb
cut 8". President Oxian asked for a second. Commissioner Petrass seconded
e motion. Commissioner Bullene asked that the motion include the substance
was to be permeable so to let water --et to the tree. Commissioner Choitz
agreed. The motion passed unanimously. President Oxian thanked the property
owners and asked that the try to settle their dispute.
IV. Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes - October 21, 1994
Commissioner Choitz moved the minutes be approved as written. Commissioner
Hostetler seconded the motion. The motion Passed unanimously.
B. Treasurers Report
There was no report from the Treasurer. Mr. Duvall rioted that Treasurer Weiner
had received a print out from the auditors office, but had not spoken with him
since then. President Oxian reported his request that Staff call Commission
members the day of a meeting to make sure there would be a quorum.
C. Correspondence
Mr. Duvall reported on a national conference held in Chicago March 30 -April 1
called Preserving the Recent Past. He noted it is close at hand and within
driving distance for the Commissioners.
D. Committee Reports
1. Budget & Finance
No report.
2. Legal
President Oxian reported on the Commission meeting held with the Common
Council. Commissioner Hostetler, Mr. Duvall, Mrs. DeRose, and President Oxian
were in attendance. President Oxian reported that Mrs. DeRose (lid most of the
speaking. She spoke mostly of how the Commission operates and the COA process.
President expressed he had asked that the Coimnission be allowed to make a
presentation before the Council as other Department Heads. Fie said the
Commission would be getting an invitation to do that soon. Commissioner
Hostetler added she thought the Commission should get something together with
slides -and do a nice short presentation. President Oxian noted five Council
Members and their attorney were in attendance at the special meeting.
President Oxian described how Mrs. DeRose had discussed the Laskowski case and
how, now that a precedent was set, more procedures could be established to
deal with situations like that.
4. Historic Districts
Commissioner Choitz reported the Historic Districts Committee was meeting with
the Lincolnway West Committee weekly to discuss Standards for the proposed
district. She noted Standards would hopefully be done early in the new year.
She reported the Staff is preparing to do, the other work and help the
Committee to do the property owner search.
5. Historic Landmarks
a. First reading on landmark status for the following properties:
none
b. Second reading on landmark status for the following properties:
none
c. Status of Recommendations to Common Council
President Oxian reported the Lamp -post at Niles and Leeper was declared a
Landmark and 310 W. Monroe was tabled until December 19, 1994. Mr. Duvall
reported 534 LaPorte and 1601 Kemble Avenue had been filed and 534 LaPorte had
first reading and received a no conflict recommendation from Area Plan. He
reported 310 West Monroe was tabled because Ann Kolata of Redevelopment came
to the meeting with a copy of the letter Rev. Derrickson had sent to the
Commission asking that the proposal for the landmarking be withdrawn. Mr.
Duvall explained Ms. Kolata requested a delay and proposed she would arrange a
subsequent meeting between Rev. Derrickson and Commission Members to try to
make some accommodation. Commissioner Choitz inquired if any more had been
heard in regard to that meeting. Mr. Duvall replied negatively. President
Oxian noted something had to be done by December 19 because by then all the
Council Members will have received a copy of the Landmark recommendation from
the Commission. He reported some Council Members had not received that
information because the Commission thought the Council Staff would copy it and
get it to the Council and they did not, so this delay gives the Commission
time for the recommendation to be seen by the Council Members.
President Oxian reported he, John Hunt of Economic Development, and Mr. Duvall
had a meetin-- with the owners of the Lasalle and Roma Buildings and their
attorney. He reported the owners of the Lasalle would let the building be a
landmark, but the problem is the Roma. He explained the conflict was a need
for parking. The owners want to see the building down for parking. He reported
a compromise- had been discussed and the City was doing a structural survey.
President Oxian asked if any Commission members would like to tour the
building. lie noted fie had told the owners if they tried to bring the building
down he would bring it back to the Commission for consideration. He added he
would like the Commissioners to see the interior. Commissioner Choitz inquired
if there was any point to the tour other than idle curiosity.. President Oxian
replied affirmatively and explained part of the building might be saved or
none of it might be saved and if the Commissioners were to approved a
demolition, they should be aware of the condition. Mr. Duvall concurred and
further explained John Hunt of Economic Development would like to put a use
associated with the Morris Civic Auditorium in the Roma Building and wished to
study different scenarios in regard to partial demolition. He noted other
activity in the area such as plans to add on to the. Morris Civic and
discussions of the Waterworks Building coming down, and stated Mr. Hunt seemed
to want to incorporate at least some portion of the Roma into future plans for
the area. President Oxian asked what Commissioners would be interested in
seeing the Building. All present replied affirmatively. President Oxian asked
Mr. Duvall to make arrangements.
6. Standards .& Maintenance
No report. President Oxian reminded Commissioner Van Dalsen she was to call a
meeting for the Committee to discuss action to be taken against those doing
work without a COA.
r 7. Personnel
no report
8. Staff Reports
a. C of A Staff Approvals
1. Shetterley Park -- RSD-LHD - Lights and decorations for Holidays
2. 941 & 943 Riverside Drive -- RSD-LHD - In-kind replacement of roof shingles
3. 1204 East- Wayne Street- EW -LHD - In-kind replacement of roof shingles
b. East Race
Ms. Anderson reported the East Race Business Association had a meeting at
which a discussion was held regarding the possibility of a National Register
District in the area. She reported Paul McMinn of the Department of Recreation
was spearheading this idea. She explained all present at the meeting showed
interest in the idea though they were adamant about not having any more
restrictions placed on their property, they wanted recognition for the
historic value of the area. She reported Karen Kiemnec of HLFI had agreed to
help them with the Nomination. President Oxian inquired as to what areas were
to be included. Mr. Duvall explained it would be similar to the Downtown
Multiple Resource Area encompassing the Mill Buildings and associated
structures like the railroad trussel.
c. 114 Francis Street
Mr. Duvall reported this was a proposal to rezone a single site which is
presently a contributing house in the East Washington National Register
District which was identified in the Summary Report_. He explained he attended
the Area Plan Meeting to remonstrate the proposal which was to rezone the lot
and raze the house. He added a similar action had been taken last. February at
116 Francis which resulted in the demolition of a house and rezoning of a .lot
to "C" commercial. He stated his belief that this was a manifestation of the
domino theory. He clarified that it was approved at Area Plan Commission and
it will be coming up before Common Council in the near future. President Oxian
noted he was asking Mr. Duvall to attend these meetings that affect structures
in a proposed district areas so people know that the Commission .is on top of
these issues and it's opinions are known. Commissioner Choitz inquired if a
timetable ,had been set up for the nomination of that area as a National
Register District. Mr. Duvall explained that had not been given high priority,
but he certainly had interest in pursuing it. President Oxian noted several
years ago steps had been taken for the area to be a local historic district,
but other things had come up and there wasn't much support. He added a lot of
new owners had come in since then. Commissioner Choitz proposed if it could be
shown the Commission had serious intentions to make that a district in the
near future, it may help the case.
9. Old Business
A. 739 Bronson Street--EP-LHD
Mr. Duvall read the Staff "report. President: Oxian recognized Kathy Dempsey of
Code Enforcement. She presented the Commission with a letter giving her
opinion as Director of Code Enforcement on the condition of the structure and
reasons for the application for Certificate of Appropriateness. She showed her
own photos and explained their representation of the foundation washing away,
a sagging porch, roof problems, and a severe amount of deterioration on the
exterior of the house. She noted the interior had suffered a fire and had been
gutted. She explained the legal and financial problems of the property
including a $5,000 mortgage from Trans America. She further explained the
owners, Randy and Kathleen Hess were divorcing and Mrs. Hess has no interest
in the property and is unable to transfer title to the property because of
several reasons including an outstanding warrant out for the arrest of her
husband. She also noted the bank has foreclosed on the mortgage and has been
attempting to sell it for over a year to no avail. In addition she noted the
City had affirmed the demolition order and had worked with no less than half a
dozen prospective buyers who had all decided the City's estimation of $30,000
to make repairs was a conservative estimate plus all of the title problems.
She explained there are also back taxes owed on the property which further
raised the cost. She also had discussion with other property owners including
Ron Farr of 740 Bronson who had circulated a petition asking for the approval
of the demolition. Mrs. Dempsey presented the Commission with the petition
which bore 55 signatures of property owners in the Edgewater Place Historic
District. She concluded with that evidence, she believed the structure to be a
burden to the tax payers of the City of South Bend. She explained the City had
incurred bills in excess of $700 to clean the property and bills in excess of
$1,100 to keep the property secure. She concluded that it was a blight on the
neighborhood and unsafe to the public and the only available solution she saw
was demolition.
Commissioner Bullene inquired if anyone from the district had opposed the
demolition. Mrs. Dempsey responded she was not aware of any. Commissioner
Choitz noted it was late now, but that Southold Restorations had not been
notified and they might have been able to do something. She noted she had no
idea from the statements given what the initial investment would have to be to
get the property nor did she know how big the house was. Mrs. Dempsey replied
she believed there were no more than two bedrooms. Commissioner Bullene noted
it goes back quite far. Mr. Duvall clarified the size of the building to be 5
rooms as the original house with 2 subsequent layers of additions and he
stated removal of some of those additions would be appropriate. President
Oxian inquired of Mr. Duvall how much he estimated the rehabilitation cost to
be. Mr. Duvall agreed with Code Enforcements assessment of $30,000 for
contract labor. lie noted the real impediment was not so much the construction
cost, but the entanglements of ownership. Commissioner Choitz inquired if
anyone had clear title. Mr. Duvall said last time he had spoken with
TransAmerica they had not foreclosed, but Mrs. Dempsey had more recent
information. Mrs. Dempsey said she was advised by the Legal Department that
$10,000 in legal fees would get the problems remedied and a year or two in
court would be necessary. President.Oxian inquired if Mrs. Dempsey felt by the
time all of that could be taken care, nothing would be left of the house. He
inquired if the house was secured now, in two years would the house be in a
state that someone could rehab it. Mr. Duvall said if you could control access
to it, the porch would probably be gone and the roof may have problems.
President Commissioner inquired if the house was rehabilitated for $30,000 and
$10,000 in legal fees were paid, would you be able to sell it for $40,000 in
that area. Commissioner Choitz said houses in the area did sell. for that
amount, but she was not sure. Mr. Duvall could not give a definitive answer
either. Commissioner Hostetler asked if any adjoining property owners had
established they would assume the property and care for it. Mrs. Dempsey
reported the question had not been asked, but some property owners had been
maintaining the property. Commissioner Hostetler restated the question. Mrs.
Dempsey replied the only way that could legally happen was for it to go
through tax sale to have the title cleansed. Mr. Duvall asked if this was on
the October 1 tax sale. Mrs. Dempsey replied it may have been and that it
would need to go through another sale and then someone would have the tax
certificate for another year after that. She stated the County or new owner
would not get title until October 1996. Commissioner Choitz said she did not
believe it was a buildable lot. Mrs. Dempsey concurred. President Oxian asked
for a motion. He reminded the Commissioners if a motion was not made within 45
days of receipt of the application, it was automatically approved.
Commissioner Bullene asked if in the Commission's experience there was any
reasonable hope the building could be rehabilitated. Commissioner Choitz said
she had no doubt it could have been saved, but the time frame now was too
close to winter. She added if Southold had known, they may have been able to
do something. Commissioner Bullene asked in this particular case if it was a
lost cause. Commissioner Choitz stated her belief that there is no lost cause.
Commissioner Petrass noted the neighbors in this case need to be taken into
consideration for their safety. She elaborated especially if it is going to
take two years to accomplish anything with it. Commissioner Choitz asked if
the 45 days commenced starting now. Mr. Duvall explained the waiver had been
signed to continue the application from last month. A discussion of the policy
on waivers and the time frame ensued. It was determined that the 45 days began
starting November 21. Commissioner Bullene stated that regrettably he saw no
other feasible solution and moved the application for demolition be anproved
with the condition that the building be properly documented as stated in the
standards. Commissioner Van Dalsen seconded the motion. The motion was
approved 5 to 1. President Oxian reminded Mrs. Dempsey the Commission Staff
would need access to the interior of the building to do documentation. A
discussion was held on whether this demolition could have been prevented.
VI. New Business
No Report.
VII. Hearing of Visitors
Mr. Talley announced the Report from the Army Corps of Engineers for the St.
Joseph River has been completed and a copy provided to the Commission by Ed
Talley at a cost of $20. He reported the area of Riverside Drive in the
Historic District is in condition red which means 1-5 years before major
structural damage occurs. He made a formal request for the audio tapes from
the Commission meeting for the reasons that the color of the concrete is white
because of a spray used for the curing process and it should fade to a color
similar to the brick he proposed, and because the motion made included the
plantings which was not an issue before the Commission.
VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
President Oxian inquired as to the situation at 938 Riverside Drive which was
approved last month but he had not heard whether the tree had been taken out
or what the situation with the deck and steps was. Ms. Anderson replied she
had not spoken with the owners regarding that matter, but she knew they did
not plan on doing landscaping until the spring. President Oxian requested that
the situation be checked and reported on. Mr. Duvall reported that fie hoped
during the winter to do an assessment of all COA's issued in the previous
year.
IX. Adjournment
President Oxian adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
PRELIMINARY BUDGET FOR 1995
REVENUE
St. Joseph County
Block Grants thru City
Anticipated Grants
STAFF
Director
Assistant
OFFICE EXPENSES
Books
Conferences
Copier
Dues and Subscriptions
Legal Notices
Legal Services
Office Supplies
Phone
Photography
Postage
Printing
Travel
SPECIAL PROJECTS/
Surveys,nominations,
studies,etc.
$18850.00
16896.90
$35746.90
$200.00
600.00
1050.00
300.00
100.00
900.00
400.00
300.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
500.00
$ 5250.00
$5000.00
$5000.00
$24100.00
16896.90
5000.00
$45996.90
TOTALS $45996.90 $45996.90
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
PRELIMINARY BUDGET FOR 1995
REVENUE
St. Joseph County
Block Grants thru City
Anticipated Grants
STAFF
Director
Assistant
OFFICE EXPENSES
Books
Conferences
Copier
Dues and Subscriptions
Legal Notices
Legal Services
Office Supplies
Phone
Photography
Postage
Printing
Travel
SPECIAL PROJECTS/
Surveys,nominations,
studies,etc.
$18850.00
16896.90
$35746.90
$200.00
600.00
1050.00
300.00
100.00
900.00
400.00
300.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
500.00
$ 5250.00
$5000.00
$5000.00
$24100.00
16896.90
5000.00
$45996.90
TOTALS $45996.90 $45996.90
INDIANA HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES SURVEY UPDATES
DECEMBER 19, 1994
902 Cottage Grove
This structure was rated S/11. It has recently been synthetically sided.
Staff asks that it be re -rated to C/10.
1013 Yukon
When surveyed this structure was rated C/9. When examined by staff it was
determined the following changes should be made:
1. Building Intergrity- Unaltered
2. Style- Prarie
3. Walls- Horizontal board and batten
4. Specific alterations- Enclosure of porch was not an alteration
5. Areas of significance- Architecture box should be checked
6. Rating- S/11
534 LaPorte (Starzynski Texaco)
When surveyed this structure was rated C/9. When examined by staff it was
determined the following changes should be made:
1. Historic Name- Starzynski Texaco (Marathon)
2. Time period(s) (dates)- c.1927
3. Building Integrity- Altered
4. Additions- Brick veneer
5. Areas of Significance- Architecture, and Transportation should be
checked
6. Legal description and additional historic information should be added.
7. Rating- S/11
1115 Emerson
Additional information: Sears House "Starlight" #P7009.
515 West LaSalle
Additional information: R.K. Schutt- Architect
708 Forest
Additional Information: R.K. Schutt- Architect
2102 Lincolnway West
Address should be 2101 Lincolnway West
1533 Lincolnway West
Upgrade from C/10 to S/11.
2918 Lincolnway West
Address should be 2922 Lincolnway West.
938 Riverside Drive
Garage misplaced on survey card.
The following rated structures have been demolished:
339 Lincolnway West 116 North Francis 743 Leland
1034 Lincolnway West 1818 Mishawaka Avenue 312 Laurel
�— 121.3 Lincolnway West 17391 State Road 23 436 N. Lafayette
2210 Lincolnway West 1228 Thomas
rl-Aatinq 2. County --- "--- - vurvaY no.
a a ICOutstandmg 0SignificantINotable ❑Comrmuung S/II St. Joseph 14 1-4 5 1 74-598
14. Historic ri"'_ 5. Township I rfeiiminaly No.
William 6 Sarah PflS_;Pr Portage
6. Address 7. City l a. UuaO Name
902 Cottage jtrnvp South Bend, TN. 46616
INDIANA HISTORIC SITES AND ST Y State of Indiana Department of Natural Resources state Form iee22IRSAaed 19ee 1
19 Common Name u. ViSiUie ' fI I. uwniynieu cay�e��. ®Yea ❑No I❑Yes ONO
12. Ownership Owner's Address (d ddl—rit)
C1 Public LIS F'rvale -
13 Use Present Past la. Uttlegory ,5. Surveys / Legal Protections 16. Location NotesI Legal Description Ti. Busidin j integmy
Residence ® CZ ® Buildinglsl Near Northwest Lots 36 S 37 Cushing 6 Lindsey ❑ Excellent ❑ Unaltered
Commercial ❑ ❑ ❑ District potential His. Dis. 12 Good J3 AlteredHinor
❑ C ❑She 18-1071-3016 ❑ Falr 13 Moved
❑ ❑ ❑ Structure fl DetenorateC Data Building was mo.ed
L�- ❑ Object ---- _'_ ❑ Ruine
i t9 Time Penodlsl(Date$) lU.Style(s) - 2t.ArchdectlBudder — --" ---�
1897 Yet[ ... tax t�IQos6 �,-nI.E.
22. SPECIFY ALTERATIONS
�aemo.als Replacement n:Shed roof small en-
i I (trance to rear ALum. St. door
23. DESCRIPTION —_--_-_-_".- _ __--- _ i - 24. SITE PLAN -
(—
(Stones 1 I/2-
_ 11ranIrregular• Chim: central interior square. brick unadormed _-_ — �t �_ \ \ N
(Foundation brick I• I,
4 1/2" to the weather painted clapboard, corner boards, fishscale_-
Walls Shiinolea in_g Ze.__.____.. ___ T' -•.i'', :. __ i i
'—le
[Root 12/12 intersectin9_Rables one four overhang aro3snd,..—_Sim frier_P
board
•Porches Side and front entryDOrch,g w/lnw hip roofs supported by square -._.-
wood columns on brick piers.
'Openngs
1/1 wood D. -H. generally w/simple wood jamb and sill, molded ent. ` +,
8 leaf
,single lazed wood panel door. No
8 1del.
'C"'���•` "';1 "'f?iS��:pf<"�''' '~{ �L�ti�"'� iGmunos/Outbwld,n sPyramidal, clapboard garage in rear. sh. trees at St.
j�5, rte of Contributing Resources 1 126. No. of Non-contnbulmq Resources X27. Env��onment Res identia.l
28. Areas of Significance. statement of Significance) Additional Descnption.
This house v_a_s bu_ilt_in 1897by William_and_Sarah Pfister.
Ag• -culture
Architecture Mr. NEGATIVE
Arc
Mr. Pfister was a foreman at the Oliver,.CHille_d—_ i
Art I ENVELOPE HERE 1,
_ Commerce In 1943 the house was turned over for taxa,,g�nd..in_ 19441he __. i
C Communications I home was purchased by Frederick and MargorS-BnIlCF"._._Mr-Kanner_-was_.a mechanic_at
_ Community Planning
1 _
Conservation
Studebakers.
Economics In 1965 the estate of Frederick and,_M�gaLet. Kanner_was.sold-to"Joyce-Greenwood
'.: Education
{ = En ITetzloff in the care of CharlesJlahn anarr^Y-----whomaintains St as a rental un-- gineering --
i - Entertainment l recreation This is a one a� a half souanti orches
ld S) Vu;iacular_home wi-th.side__and_front-__-._X_ 2rc-_—
i Ethnic heritage land square wood columns on brick piers.
._ E,cioration l settlement --------------- -----' ----- ---'--
Heaitn l medicine
' -- •neon
industry
_Invention
Landscape architecture
C Law
Literature
[ Military
C Performing arts
—29. FOR STATE OFFICE USE ONLY
Philosophy
C Politics I government -
❑Religion _._.... NR .. _._ --___ .__." —
ti ❑ Science SR .—
i._• Social history I F
❑ Transportation
❑ vernacular l Construction NF
1 ❑ Other til 1ITM Reference
" { ❑SEE CONTINUATION SHEET t e m I t t
I3o. Information sources Deed Records: Bk.104_2_30 i Bk -'t- ,, 139: BK.'1't 6��n. los• Bk.371. D. 506: 9k 665 D,'t2_g: A]L,_l -5G
j Abstract and Title -
Portage Assessors Office South Bend City Directories _ _
13t.Surveyor 111, un Date--�
• I BC 12/28/77
III---------_ _'
�32. Revised by Atliliatmn Date
1. Rating 2. County
• COut standing OSigmhcantlNotable ®Contributing C/9 St. Joseph
14, Historic Ndrre 5. Township - I Prellminary No.
Portage 141-598-45888
6. Address T. City 6. Ouad Name
1013 Yukon - South Bend, IN 46616 1
INDIANA HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY State or Indiana Department of Natural Resources Stan Farm 158221Aevlaee 1984
a i
19. Common Namef0. VISIDl9 11. Endangered Esplain
1 $]Yes❑Noe❑Yea ERNo
12. Ownership Owner's Address 01 different)
------- � -_--"- "--' - -- -' -
FPubfic Cc Private
tJ Use vresent Pasl ii Category 15. Surveys l Legal Protections 16. Location Notes l Legis description
17 COIIMIIO I18 6uuding lnlegrily
Residence C3 ® [Z Buddmg(s) Near Northwest potentia'
X E.celnnt O Unaltered !
Commercial ❑ ❑ O District Rist. Dist.
_ _^ O O Site
C Good I$ Altered
❑ Fair ❑Moved
Date Budding --�
❑ ❑ ❑ Structure
❑ Oblect_
!
C Deteriorated was mo.ea
^_ R_ s
19 Time Per od(s) (Dates) 20. Style(s) -----
_ ___
21. _Afchilect I Buifiler
-- '— -"- ------ -
1915 American Foursquare
1
22. SPECIFY ALTERATIONS
'
_
Removals Replacement Alum. Stewindows I Add, -ns -
rile
16
__ __
joiner Alum. windows enclosing
door.
porch.
23. DESCRIPTION
--. ---- — -
2a _SITE PLAN-
LAN_2
2
Rectangular --_ _ _ _ -
N
!%c•ndanon Concrete Chim: tear*at t,>-�r•1r .__-_____._______
"warts
"
Shi lap horizontal wQad ��atb_aseslapboard,-wood-6hingle-
..on -pLnd swLy. tdi
-i
•---• -----
Medium
• i
pitch hip w/asphalt shingles. _ _ ____ ____
-
-•_nes Full width, enclosedsc�uaLg_3and_cornecsuppnr ts;_.solid shiplap
\�•'-.
wood siding.
dbl. hung w/proieCtjng_jint_els--nnLststory___—_ .._-.7
—'
G_ounos:outbudd.ngs Slightly elevated w land scn;Ln _.].n_front; alley -on
east; wood plank fence around site.
l
__ __
25 No of Contributing Resources 1 126. No of Noncontnbutinq Resources
_
'27En�ironment
0
i
Residential
~:eas of Significance'
A; -,culture
- Arcnitecture
Art
Commerce
Communications
Community Planning
Conservation
_ Economics
_ Education
- Engmaerinq
Entertainment/recreation
Ethnic heritage
_ Evolorabon l settlement
j Health I medicine
_ Indian
Industry
_ Invention
Landscape architecture
_ Law
Literature
Military
1 � Performing arts
Philosophy
Politics l government
Religion
= Science
J Social history
Transportation
1-? Vernacular I Construction
I
Other
I
i30 information Sources
I
31 Surveyor
Chris Nagy
:32 Revised by
Statement of Significance 1 Additional Descrip:,on
O SEE CONTINUATION SHEET
_I ihitafion - - -
9/87 _
IAffiliation
ATTACH NEGATIVE
_ENVELOPE HERE i
29. FOR STATE OFFICE USE ONLY
NR
SR
F
NE
. iITM Reference
1 a= 1
Date
"--- 1 Date -�-
1 Faring 2. County _- ----_I 3. Survey No.
Outstanding S1gndicant l Notable x. Coninommg C/9 St. Joseph __ _ I4t-4.5355_-_598
jIa Historic Name j5. lownsNp Prenmmary No
t_-----
Portage
-- --
I6. Address 17. City 8 Uuad Name
534 LaPorte South BEndt IN. 4662$
I INDIANA HISTORIC SITES -AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY State 01 Indiana Department of Natural Resources Slate Form 16622111—tied 1966
I9. Common Name
Visible 111. Endangered Explain
I10.
I]Yes ONO OYes ®No
12. Ownership
Owners Address
If/ different)
Public
K: Private
13. Use
Present
Past
14. Category
15. Surveys I Legal Protections 16. Location Notes I Legal Description
17 Condition
1B. BuildmqInl-egnty
Residence
�.
0
12 Buitdmg(s)
R Excellent
o-4' Unall eretl
Ccmmerc'ai
"X
R
❑District
C Good
I V Altered
0
C
❑ site
[i Fair
G Moved
❑
❑ Structure
� I
Deterraled
Date Building
9 was moved
❑ Object
, Ruins
1°
time Pernodlsl(Dates) 20. Style(s) �2VArcnnect--
_..1910 Period Revival /_C_o_m_m_ercial --_—____ ___
22. SPECIFY ALTERATIONS
. ;2e,T.ovals I Replacement I Additions Olner
I 27. DESCRIPTION I 24.S ITE PLAN
slopes 1 1
(Plan Square _ I N
(Foundation Poured concrete
ails brick t'
Rwoor Pyremidal w/asphalt
I
opepinp Side by side single light casementsy._.-�lxedsashinF>•nnt. Glazed door w transom.,-
�Orrrbs:0utbuiid�ngs Cas stat_Son w/pumps in front parking_la rear.. __.. .
25 Contnbuiing Resources 126. No. of Non-contributing Resources 127 Environment Residential
�Id -•ees of Sign�hcance.
I :g•ic Wture
i a.cmtec:me
�•t
Comm_r-e
Communications
Community Planning
Conservation
Economics
Educdlion
E-gmeering
Enter:ammenu recreal—
Emnic heritage
E.Dloralion i settlement
.seam I medicine
nman
industry
Landscape architecture
1 L.feraiure
i 1.•intary
-erformmg arts
- Philosophy
Politics I government
Rehgmn
Science
Social history
-" Transportation
_ Vernacular l Construction
Omer
30 Information Sources
;Statement of Signa icance l Additional Desonpbon - -- ---� -- --- — ----- _ --" - '
r ATTACH NEGATIVE
.... ... _... —
ENVELOPE HERE
I
t _
29. FOR STATE OFFICE USE ONLY
NR
I
SR
IF
❑SEE CONTINUATION SHEET 'i' i1TM Reference
1 6= I I I I. W I I I I
—� I Alliliation --- — " - — (Date - ---�—
t Rai.rg
2. County - -
.3. Survey NO._—_
- ATTACH NEGATIVE
-0u1sl-ol,n0 ❑Slgndgantl Nola DIB
UConulbuting 10 St. Joseph
141-597-43173
e
A. Historic Name
_
5. Township
JPrel -nary No.
Seifert Howe
Portage
Conservation
141-597-67057.3
6 Address
_. ..,_
7. City
i8 OuaO Name
I 1
' 1115 Emerson
- South Rend
_. Em namment l recreation
South Bend East
INDIANA HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY Stale of Indiana Department of Natural Resources Stats Form
169221 Revised 1997
rvoration I settlement
.,wth I medicine
,
ndian
mustry
I-enbon
(
. Landscape architecture
I4 1
—
Law
Literature
_ Military
Imp
Per loaning ahs
`I
9. Common Nameplain
1 30. FOR STATE OFFICE USE ONLY
Politics I government
_
'
)'Yes ❑No ❑Yes V, No
Science
I SR
12. Ownership Owner's Address
(1I different)
Transportation
F
_Public ($i Private
1 NF
._ Other
I ❑SEE CONTINUATION SHEET 31. UTM
t i e d 1 1 1 1 1 = 1 1 1 1 1 I
13 Use Present Past 1e. Category
15. Surveys I Legal Protections 16. Location Notes I Legal Description
:17. Condition
IXX
Inlegrlty
Residence E3 IN fix BudOmg(sl
Lot 26 Oakland Park
E,cellent
- Unanered
118
Commercial ❑ ❑ ❑ District
Key i 18-6019-0454
I E3 Good
[2 Altered minor
-
❑ ❑ ❑ Site
Fair
❑Moved
_
❑ ❑ O Structure
r. DeleriOreteO (Dale moved
-
. ❑ Object
C Ruins
19 Time Periods)
20. Style(.) AIchllecl I Builder
1924
121
Bungalow
22. SPECIFY ALTERATIONS
Removil9
1RBplacemenl Cement eRCCy Stoop 1Add,I—s
joiner
with metal rails. Alum. sto,rma-
I
23. DESCRIPTION
2a. SITE PLAN
Stories 1 1/2
(
-
Plan Rectanaular
i
-
N
- Foundation Rouah face block
Walls Clapboard with cornerhoards; warorrahla
Root NteeRo�id �t�igpfroof with jerk11nhead frggnt gorn9r._ Exposed rafters.
r i= board on dormer 8r#-:
Portnss Full front po ch inset under _main z column
'�Su�paGes wi mo-de�ps• L ld. r—ai �s�rra a w'th luted square _
balusters, s m �e wood ince and a ovate woo ec c.
Ccenm�s_4/1 double hung sjshe w Siil c�nR1e._s _
-- ag entry Q�or s ig v o set j t with wide wood CaSemen[.
mood pane dor has g ass pane ih upper I Dormer has ?alllllaClan-es.gwe _•=i
course ->.-.e. .'1
3•ou=es l Outouilmnes Front Rable clapboard garagg at rear with r orhoar� i- ,n'{t -•tr-lir'• O -Ft -n- r' 1'1
paired trxea sashes, and alley access. �. _-y' t �y
C' Contnbullng Resources TwoResidenti=l
126 No. of Non-contributing Resources 127 Ennrpnmenl
none
28 Areas of Significance:
129. Historic Contexts) I Statement of Significance i Additional Description:
_ Aghculture
-_
- ATTACH NEGATIVE
arcnnectore
1
ENVELOPE HERE I
=Ar,
_ Commerce
1
_. Communications
Commumty Planning
Conservation
Economics
1
-_ Education
I 1
Eng-- g
_. Em namment l recreation
El-ic heritage
rvoration I settlement
.,wth I medicine
,
ndian
mustry
I-enbon
(
. Landscape architecture
I4 1
—
Law
Literature
_ Military
1
Per loaning ahs
`I
Philosophy
1 30. FOR STATE OFFICE USE ONLY
Politics I government
=
_ Religion
1 NR
Science
I SR
Soclal history
1
Transportation
F
.$ Vernacular I Construction
1 NF
._ Other
I ❑SEE CONTINUATION SHEET 31. UTM
t i e d 1 1 1 1 1 = 1 1 1 1 1 I
32 Inlormation Sources
1�
33 Surveyor
IAlhliatlon Date
Leigh Booker
HPC I Fall 1990
34 Revised by
lANiliatlon Date
v
1115 Emerson Avenue
The clapboard -sided Bungalow at 1115 Emerson was built in
1924 for Fae and Ivan Seifert. The Seiferts purchased the lot in
1923 and mortgaged the property for $2500.00 the next year to
have the house constructed. Ivan was employed as a mechanic in
the early to mid -1920's. The couple moved elsewhere and used the
property for rental income by 1930. Tenants here included-
Crystal and Vernon Graham from 1930 to 1940, Gordon Keller for
the next.five years, followed by Viola and Clarence J. Calmus in
1945.
The Calmus family occupied the house into the 1970's,
probably_ as tenants. Clarence was employed as an engineer at the
Rendix Corporation. The couple's sons, Clarence Jr. and Howard
E., were both enlisted in the United States Army and listed as
occupants in the 1945 city directory. In 1950 Clarence Sr. worked
as a laborer at Oak Ridge Dairy before returning to engineering
at Utica Bend by 1960. He retired in 1960 and died four years
later.
Brent Harlow, a laborer at Kap Recapping, next owned the
house briefly in the mid -1970's. He and his wife then sold the
property to Greg Brownell, a Engineering 'Technician at Mario
Thonix Research, in ,lune, 1979. The present (1991) owners,
Shelley A. and Bruce Allen Bihlmire, purchased it in 1988 -and
remain as owner/occupants.
Sources:
South Bend City Directories- 1919-1988.
Portage Township Assessor Reports= 1932 and 1989.
Plat Book 6, p.89.
Deed Index 16,17,18,31; Deed Book 95,112,117,180,.
Mortgage Index 23; Mortgage Book 161.
The South Bend Tribune, 6-21-74 (obit.).
,G
`,;
THE STARLIGHT
his tasty design of a bun-
galow is a winner for the
price which we ask for all the ma-
terials required in its construction.
Nearly 200 of these houses have
been built. As will be seen by the
floor plan, the porch extends
across the entire front of the J
house. Five rooms, also a pantry . _'
and bathroom, all of good size, 't.
make this house quite convenient
for the average family desiring to
own a home at small cost.
Details and features: Five rooms and one or no bath. Full -width front porch supported by
wood columns; shed or hipped -gable dormer in front; glazed front door. Two floor plans.
Years and catalog number: 1913 (217); 1916 (264P217, 2009); 1917 (C217, 2009, 2038);
1918 (2009); 1919 (2009); 1921 (7009); 1922 (7009); 1925 (3202, 7009); 1926-(P3202,
P7009); 1928 (C3269); 1929 (P3269); 1932 (3007); 1933 (3007) r'
dining room
,fiITCHEN • �� "',
��,�-�2-5"x9"z• �' �.. ;: ,
��'— � BEDROOM II
IPIN'_ .RDOM h.► i02�i0 1'
_ jfiSxGO.
1, ,a C, PWM' g t. :a•a�.m fico
iBeD C%OM �l
b 102"xez 1
PORCH
No. 7009
Living -room
Price: $543 to $1,645
Locations: Delman, L
Bloomington, Joliet
Peoria, Ill.; Franklin,
and LaPorte, Ind.; AI
City, Iowa; Havre de Gr
Md.; Jackson, Mich.; D
ark, N.J.; Albany, �
Zanesville, Ohio; Belle
non, Pa.; Sioux Falls,,,'
La Follette, Tenn:;: Al
Tex.; Thaxton, Va. y
�I--- VITCHEN
DGNTQY
'i:ea
!::" -
BE�iOQM t
VI DIN7NCj,QOOM
_i0 -Q 2''o.o d
'-'-
•. UD
�
�L VNI Doom
10'2*X10'-7' fl
;� DORCn
No. 3202
,fiITCHEN • �� "',
��,�-�2-5"x9"z• �' �.. ;: ,
��'— � BEDROOM II
IPIN'_ .RDOM h.► i02�i0 1'
_ jfiSxGO.
1, ,a C, PWM' g t. :a•a�.m fico
iBeD C%OM �l
b 102"xez 1
PORCH
No. 7009
Living -room
Price: $543 to $1,645
Locations: Delman, L
Bloomington, Joliet
Peoria, Ill.; Franklin,
and LaPorte, Ind.; AI
City, Iowa; Havre de Gr
Md.; Jackson, Mich.; D
ark, N.J.; Albany, �
Zanesville, Ohio; Belle
non, Pa.; Sioux Falls,,,'
La Follette, Tenn:;: Al
Tex.; Thaxton, Va. y
I
gating 2. County 3 Survey No.
I COmstanding ❑ SignlhcantI Notable )Clcontrlbming C/10 St. Joseph - .___ _. 141-45449-598
a. Historic Name 5. Township .. - - /'rellmina,y No.
Alexanian Brothers Portage
11, Address 7. city a. uuad Nama
1533 Lincolnway West South RPM. TN 4fifiI8
I INNANA MlSTnRIC SITFS AND STRUCTURES INVENTORY Stab of Indiana Department of Natural Resources State Form 16522 r Reweed 1996
9. Comn Name
to. Visible 11. Endangered Explain
Oxian Brothers
Ilya$ ONO ❑Yes is No
12.Owueralap Owner's Address
(it different)
❑Public j;3 Private
13. Use Present Past le. Category
15. Surveys ) Legal Protections 16. Location Notes I Legal Description
1vv7. Condition 18. Building Integrity
'
Residence EN M CS Building(s)
Near Northwest potential S end of Alley Lot 8, Samuel
X3 Excellent ❑unaltered
C. mmerclal ❑ ❑ ❑District
historic district Smith's Plat
❑Good MAltered minor
❑ C 13 Slta
L
oLw a. 14, s riff I L
❑ Fair ❑ Moved
r Deteriorated Date BulidipQ was. oved
_ ❑ C ❑ structure
❑ Mittel
, A. & NWT.K 18-1083-3476
Ll Rums --...- ----
.y. ,.me Penod(s) (Dates)
-
20. Style(s) • i 21, Architect I Bwloer
' 1909
Vemaettlap• Cw!+F rJ r 4
• 22. SPECIFY ALTERATIONS
°rrpvals
Replacemanl (Addlllons
Alum.Alum. storm windows
Other
-�_-__._-__
23. DESCRIPTION
2a. SITE PLAN—_• -.._-
•
<tones
_�---_,__--
I
licit
r
Rectangular
l�
N
�7lan
j
IFoundalmn Concrete block
Chim• offset brick
I
Iwmts Coursed wood shingle_-.�-
:TI
m
1 Roof Gable w/ able win at rear kne kC3ckeS �_exposedlafiet_tai ,
9--m--4- -_-- -
:'
If
at eave; asphalt
1Porches Small pentroof over door.
'
1
t
oPen_ys 5/1 dbl. hunt in front, the rest fixed sash (?): wood panel_
door, w/3 rectan9- ilia----�-c li tits.
- - ._. _...- ---'-- --- -- ----- ---
r -
iG�cund6loytbyrcnnys Hi.p1,_2 car,
ngle garage v?LA1jjm _ayerbLead._door.
'
_
-- -' -- - ' - -
�25
_wood_shi
--'..-...
No. Res—o—urces---'-------.- 27. Enviro
-_- ---- .. ..
No of Conlnrul•ng Resources
X26. of Non-contnDullnp
Residentialnment
&_G94911erilal-.S.tr.,ep_t_.-__
Ili>•L---rs�grir.lcahce
.av o r—
sot;on----
I Statement of Significance l Add,tlonal Tecn
------ - ~
Agncwtu1B
`--'---------'----------"--'-"---
I..
f Architecture
John Alexanian built this commercial building
ACH
at 1533_Lincolnway ATT_NEGATIVE
commercu
in 1921. The building housed the Alexanian
ENVELOPE HERE
Hoopoe -Manufacturing-__- ......._-_. _...-
^-umca••o s
yWest
I Co. and Rug Cleaning Co. John Ale&dpian was-preci7ient_ M_ __1Uexaaia_n
Commumtl Planning
Iwas aAsaT. •kh•---'
Conservation
vice-president, an,asse
d sian was secretary-treasur_er..of
the_riiq rlPaniq-
Economlcs
(business.
Education
Engineering
._
Entertainment lrecreahon
Ethnic heritage
1 - -----
.' E,01o1a110niselilemenl
. _. Heartnlmea¢ios--
-. Indian
-
I
---- -
invention
1
_
_. Landscape architecture
1 -------- --__--
.. ...—_... ..... _ .... -____
Literature
( -
- 71 Military
C Performing arta
❑ Philosophy
1
29, FOR STATE OiFICE,IISE ONLY _—
❑ Politics l government
C Religion
' ❑ ScienceSR
1 -
—... _.._.._
C Social history
❑ Tranaporlation
I
E ._
❑ Vernacular l Construction
NE
❑ Olha
❑SEE CONTINUATION SHEET
" ' 17M Relevance
130. Information Sources Abstract &
Title Co. Index Book A. vq. 192•, Citv Directory 1973_
SurveyO!
- IAItIItaliOn
Date
171.
J. Stamper
10/79 _1
--__---_•_----- - --
Dale
172. Revised by CN 7/87
Iw101ialwn