HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 1995AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of .the
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular monthly meeting County Commissioner's
7:30 p.m. Conference Room
Monday, May 15, 1995 7th Floor County City Bldg.
_ I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 1033 Riverside Drive - RSD-LHD; re -roof & skylights
2. 1333 East Wayne South - EW-LHD; front porch
3. 325 West North Shore Drive - NSD-LHD; garage/guesthouse
4. 1077 Riverside Drive - RSD-LHD; fence & plant removal
IV. Regular Business
A. Approval of Minutes -April 17, 1995
B. Treasurers Report
C. Correspondence
D. Committee Reports r
1. Budget & Finance
2. Legal
3. Historic Districts
a. Lincolnway West- Acceptance of LWW Historic District
Application
4. Historic Landmarks
a. First reading on landmark status for the following properties:
1. 637 South Lafayette
2. 518 South Michigan Street
b. Second reading on landmark status for the following properties:
1. 51.1 West Colfax
c. Status of recommendations to Common Council - Unchanged
310 West Monroe (Olivet AME Zion Church, Zion Hill Baptist)
534 LaPorte Avenue (Starzynski Texaco Gasoline Station)
221 North Michigan (Roma)
237 North Michigan (LaSalle Hotel)
5. Standards & Maintenance
6. Personnel
7. Staff Reports
a. C of A Staff Approvals
1. 909 Riverside Drive - RSD-LHD; replacement playset
2. 1716 East Wayne EW-LHD; In-kind point tuck chimney
V. Old Business
A. 521 River Avenue- EP-LHD; vinyl siding
VI. New Business
A. Survey additions/rerates
VII. Hearing of Visitors
VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
IX. Adjournment
historic_preservation commissi
on
Mal
j—of south bend and st. joseph county
ROOM I t23 COUNTY CITY BUILDING
south bend, Indiana .16601 (219) 235-9798
SIGN -IN'
3.)
4.)
8.)
9.> , �� t •
10.)
12.)
13.)
14.)
15.)
16.)
17.)
18.)
19.)
20.)
21.)
22.)
23.)
24.)
25.)
-- 11� CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION -- 1995-04-28
PROPERTY -- 1033 Riverside Drive
South Bend
OWNER -- Peter Philander
DESIGNATION -- RSD-LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE./HISTORIC CONTEXT
This Bungalow was constructed in 1920 for John S. and Ethel Bartley. Mr.
Bartley was employed as the foreman of Plant #2 of the Studebaker Corporation.
The building is 1 1/2 stories with a side gable roof and gabli front porch.
The rafter ends are exposed and the roof overhangs triangular knee braces. The
roof material is asphalt shingles. The house is rated contributing 9 in the
Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Survey and is in good condition.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The owners propose to reroof the house in-kind with asphalt shingles and
install a Pella 27"x 33" skylight on the north (front) side, east of the porch
to allow additional light into the north facing living room.
STANDARDS
The preservation guidelines for the Riverside Drive Local Historic District
state that:
II.B Roofs and Roofing
1.) Required - The existing shape and materials of the roof shall be
retained...
3.) Prohibited - Nothing shall be done to change the essential character of
the roof as viewed from the thoroughfare by adding architectural features,
large unsightly fixtures, or by using roofing materials inappropriate to the
house.
RECOMMENDATION
The standards require that additional architectural roof features not be
visible from the main thoroughfare. The house is only a story and a half high
and has a moderate pitch roof. These two factors make it clear the proposed
skylight would be at least partially visible from Riverside Drive although the
view would be blocked from the west by the porch. Staff recommends denial of
the installation of a skylight on the north side of the roof.
Staff recommends approval for the in-kind asphalt shingle reroofing.
CAA
5/5/95
$0
ISM
"tis... !1 '?S ,� 3• y `*�- r �, k.: .g
1:
_ .. "c r r ^L �cl'� r�x..•k_, 4-`�, ssy'�?si"'° ��. r %�:.
syte�T it'
QQL
We
veit
LOR
_.__� _��_ _ �F� y^ � Yn";ASh.�"=.i.'T'f�„'+F��Txy��•h�4 ...ss4^%
• , �T � _� �.� .�`�� i ��9:} .T d ar?� �'�-.. � � 3� �}�-'t' '..�,�. S . ��` f `�' <y�b _. �y��.yj
,
k... 2�
-%I-
n-� r
31
siY'�`.:
Y j+J"�- Yws •!' ,yp"��r hf-WF,Z4b^AI
n t5.
- x
-3 Sol• ,.-f+�
ya� ti+� Y � a,S. ti � � _{ � 7h �Y" � '�'YT•+.w.,`.yK .r,'„ �.�� fi '."r ,,Y'i, "�''h. fi � � ao
u
> s.`s x. ,f wsA* ti,...,x. l. - 1.=�tt z 5 5.'.". %A. sw•_' z"�. '• t�� _ .ti. . r Pt ..-..-.-_.,�4+i`.°*aT� ",�fi,. a.Mr'�;. _'e�fi.5_,x,y,l�.tss`y�r y�5tiT�:..�. +�-��,�rfa.�.p��f'-!l Y,�'. �'s7'+`'e^�s1a,-'.ii-L:.a �__Y•3frr'`'""`. �'�4w��i'a-,ms�ai+r:5rve7�rti�s..4.^� �.f'rN.��+Ys��'n�✓+�. ,4i���'►(,="O
'N`��Im�ls
�M•
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION -- 1995-05-03-1
PROPERTY -- 1333 East Wayne Street South
South Bend, Indiana
OWNER -- Ed & Laura Smith
DESIGNATION -- East Wayne Street Local Historic District
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
This Colonial Revival style house was constructed in 1941 for Francis M. and
Mary C. Messick. The two story frame building has had minor alterations
including aluminum storm doors and windows and a one story rear flat roof
addition in 1959. It is an L -plan building with a asphalt shingled gable roof.
The facade material consists of wood shingle and brick. The building is is
good condition and is rated Contributing 9 in the Indiana Historic Sites and
Structures Survey.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The Owners propose to remove the existing rectangular stoop and ornamental
iron railing at the front door and install a semi -elliptical concrete stoop
and semicircular concrete walkway.
STANDARDS
II.D. Porches and Steps
1) Required - Existing original porches, stoops, patios and steps, including
handrails, balusters..... shall be retained or replaced by replicas of the same
design and material when deteriorated beyond repair.......
3) Prohibited - Front porches, stoops, patios, and steps that are important to
the building's style and development shall not be altered or removed.
RECOMMENDATION
The existing stoop shows evidence of deterioration at the foundation level
which is constructed of brick. Depending on the extensiveness of this
deterioration, repair is called for and replacement of the porch slab could be
required. Although the proposed new stoop and walkway design is not
incompatible with the character of the dwelling, the guidelines indicate that
the existing design should be replicated when repairs are undertaken. Staff -
therefore recommends denial of this application. In -Kind replacement of the
existing stoop may be approved by Staff. The commission might consider
instructing Staff to allow replacement of the brick foundation level with
concrete or block.
David B. Duvall
5/5/95
1
I I
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION # -- 1995-05-03-2
PROPERTY -- 325 West North Shore Drive
South Bend, IN
OWNER -- Francis & Flor�nce Yeandel
DESIGNATION -- West Nort�h Shore
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
Max Stryher and Daisy, his wife, purchased this lot in 1925 and were the
builders of this Sears "Magnolia" house. Max Stryher was born in South Bend in
1892. In the 1920's, with his cousin Harry Shroff, he organizld the Federated
Teacher's Service Corporation which published music and operated a service
organization for music teachers. They operated the First National Institute of
Violin and a conservatory in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
The house is a two story Neo -Classical Revival style mail order house offered
by Sears, Roebuck Company. The house has been aluminum sided and has lost many
of its details, but it retains the classical portico with fluted ionic
columns, and dentiled entablature. The front door retains its slender side
lights and fan transom. The property includes a newer frame garage/guest house
which has been considerably altered. The garage/guest house is a flat roof one
story structure clad with 4" shiplap siding. The windows are mostly -9/1 and -
6/1 double hung with aluminum storms. There is a set of multi -pane french
doors at the porte-cochere, a single pane and three horizontal paneled wood
door at the guesthouse entry door, and a four vertical paneled wood door at
the rear. The house is rated Significant 11 in the Indiana Historic Sites and
Structures Survey, the outbuilding is non-contributing.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The Owners propose a general exterior rehabilitation of the garage/guest house
structure characterized as follows:
1) Install 4' white vinyl siding at all sides including covering of the
existing guest house front entry door. The security storm door is to be
re -used at the rear.
2) Remove existing front windows of guest house portion of structure and
install new french doors similar to those located at porte-cochere of main
house.
3) Remove other double hung windows including aluminum storm windows at east
and north walls of guest house and replace with new double -hung wood windows
with double pane glass. Note, insulated glass will eliminate need for
reinstallation of storm windows. Note also, two of these windows (one at east,
one at north) have been altered to accommodate window air conditioners which
are also to be removed. Double window at north wall to be reduced to single
window. Small windows in east wall to be fixed sash. Windows of garage side
are to remain.
4) Replace wood entry door at rear with new insulated metal door with raised
panel motif and requiring modification of opening size. Remove existing
aluminum storm door and re -install security door from front wall.
5) Replace overhead doors front-, and rear with similar new doors.
6) Install central air-conditioning. Unit to be located at rear wall on alley.
Existing metal furnace chimney is to be either encased or removed (if heat
pump option is selected). *
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
7) Repair roof leak(s) in built-up flat roof.
Note - items identified with are may be approved by staff.
STANDARDS
D.2 Basic Structural material and Architectural Features:
Preferred - Retain and Maintain the original exterior building material.
Frame Structures - Repair, repaint, and/or clean'siding to deter
deterioration....
Permitted - If vinyl or aluminum siding is the only economic solution to a
deteriorating frame house, architectural detail must be visually preserved.
The siding should match the original in style, width, & lap as closely as
possible. t
D.3. Windows and Doors
Preferred - Retain and maintain existing windows and doors including sash,
lintels, sills, shutters, doors, decorative glass, pediments, hoods, and
hardware.....
Permitted - Replace deteriorated doors, windows sills,- shutters, etc. with
materials which match the original as closely as possible. A special effort
should be made to match the size and style of the window and door openings, so
that the overall appearance of the structure is not altered.
RECOMMENDATION
This application is especially difficult to address as the structure in
question is a secondary structure which has already been considerably altered.
The individual activities proposed will be addressed in the order stated
above.
1) Installation of white vinyl siding is allowed by the guidelines as a last
resort of economic necessity. The existing wood siding has evident paint
adhesion problems which appear to staff to be related to high levels of
moisture in the walls. While not based on extensive investigation, it would
appear to staff that the difficulty in retaining paint on the walls is
probably related to poor flashing of the flat roof and installation of
insulation and siding over this material could have serious detrimental effect
on the structure through trapping this moisture in walls. It is of note that
the recessed area of the front wall, not directly under a parapet does not
show evidence of this.problem. The relationship of existing siding and trim
does not allow sufficient relief for proper termination of additional layers
of siding without alteration of other features. Staff recommends denial of the
vinyl siding.
2) Though the replacement of the paired windows at the front wall with French
doors constitutes an alteration of a feature, it does fit into the program for
the use of the structure and does not effect the appearance from► the public
areas of the street or alley. So long as the five foot opening is retained at
the window head to respect the integrity of the structure, Staff recommends
approval of this alteration. It would seem reasonable to allow the siding over
of the other existing entry door as a part of this change.
3) Removal and replacement of the other windows has varied rational on a
window by window basis. The removal of the window air conditioning units and
aluminum storm units will clearly restore some of the integrity to the
appearance of the structure. Unfortunately, two of these window units have
been altered to accommodate these A/C units and their removal may therefore
require replacement of the windows (one on each wall). One of these windows
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
located at the rear wall is part of a pair which appears to be identical to
the windows proposed for removal at the front wall. Though these windows are
presently not weather -tight, installation of spring loaded sash tracks could
remedy this problem with considerably less impact to the structure. Staff
recommends re -use of the window sash removed from the front wall to repair the
units at the rear and approval of the replacement both windows on the east
wall for uniformity at that location.
4) The odd sized rear door is somewhat deteriorated and replacement may be
justified. modification of the size to fit the proposed new insulated metal
door and re -use of the security -storm door from the front seems to be
reasonable within the scope of the project and considering the inconspicuous
location.
Items 5,6, & 7 are approvable by Staff as rioted above. t
David B. Duvall
5/5/95
90
�, S40
I�Lj 44 Q /V 91V I �j go q
1 LA
II Ila r)
40
-Ir
AN 10 Qa
j, A- .3 -0, Oti �
(AOChlifA
12100's UNIA11b
tv I IdI.;I S 0 -) -0 -p
Oj- y4Q()
4 no v 3) �j Qj
S DR
CG P7- to co V67K ySbtP LAP W oo P
R
W (T- if (f" V/N`/L S P! til& CW 13 tT.F
CPP,(1 6' W- at)ir5 N� 5
' LDOt'/1NG CA5T
s 1 6 L C VR 7'!aNI
5ovr�t
SSU'Tj
n o+� -r b 5F Rl� p L 11167 ?
` 6C'T U btaiA.t-. LLP VIE i? GLASS
W tp1 17'Cl1ltJ
wjivaow 7'D of ACPLhcEa
Vjjt+ n6ui3L PANED
1AVLOOV4 Ti.? ct- 13 bTTU t4
/ q apt/. WOOR SH IF L A i'
-ro yrAt VINYL gtt?itit('r ViiflrE
_. ��A
S i g K t N�.
ti,)�5 Y C� C -1-C- v F) 7 l 0 N
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION -- 1995.05.04
PROPERTY -- 1077 Riverside Drive
South Bend
OWNER -- Mary Hendriksen & Dwight King
DESIGNATION -- RSD-LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE HISTORIC CONTEXT
This Colonial Revival style home was built c. 1925 for Harriette and Dora
Keller, sisters of Fred W. Keller partner in the prominent real estate company
of Whitcomb and Keller. Harriette Keller was the resident of this house. The
property has a one car garage whose west side is almost even with the west
side of the house. Between the two structures on the west property line is a
row of lilac bushes and.virbinium. This house is rated Significant 11 in the
Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Survey.
PROPOSED CHANGE
The owners propose to install 29'-32' of 6' high privacy fencing using 1X6X6
Western Red Cedar dog-ear style boards, 2X4X8 West Red Cedar backrails and
4X4X8 treated pine posts to be set in cement. The fence is to be 4-8" from the
property .line between 1081 and 1077 Riverside Drive. The Southernmost lilac is
to remain. The owner already has received approval to transplant the other
lilacs and virbinium from along the property line, and is asking for a COA for
their removal if they cannot be transplanted. If they to have to be removed,
they would be replaced with other flora.
STANDARDS
The Preservation Guidelines for Riverside Drive Local Historic District state
that:
I.B Building Site and Landscaping
1.) Required - Plants... which reflect the property's history and development
shall be retained.
2.) Recommended - New site work should be based upon actual knowledge of the
past appearance of the property found in photographs, drawings, and
newspapers. New site work should also be appropriate to existing surrounding
site elements in scale, type and appearance.
...Tree and landscaping material that must be removed shall be immediately
replaced by suitable flora.
3.) Prohibited - No changes may be made to the appearance of the site by
removing old plants... before evaluating their importance to the property's
history and development. Front yard areas shall not be fenced and fences shall
not extend forward beyond the setback line of the property.
RECOMMENDATION
The proposed fencing meets the guidelines as to appropriate scale, type and
appearance and would not extending forward of the setback. Staff recommends
approval.
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
The owner does not want to attempt to transplant the lilacs and virbinium if
her landscape company gives the opinion that they will not survive. The lilacs
and virbinium in question are not listed in the 1993 Historic Landscape
Inventory of Riverside Drive. Staff uses this information to conclude they are
not significant in the property's history and development therefore their
removal would not violate the RSD guidelines. Staff recommends approval for
their removal should it be necessary.
The owner proposes if necessary, to replace the lilacs and virbinium with
other flora (on the 1077 side of the fence). Staff feels the owner would need
to come back to the Commission with a specific planting plan when and if this
becomes necessary unless the proposed flora was minor (flowers).
CAA
5/5/94
...........
PROOUCTMV, tnCGmt0A.M=O14?I. TO OWN PHONE TOUFRUI-M225-00 Fold at to fit 771 DU-0-VUEO Envelope
0 -mi emaraemov ea.
51467 Cherry R6ad
GRANGER, INDIANA 46530
(219) 272.1601
Submitted
ToOwner..0................... .': ....................... ...................
107 %
........... ..........
PHONE
We hereby submit specifications for:
Z' )
- --
Page No. of Pages
Ia 011 ID 0 A
JOB NAME / NO.
JOB LOCATION
ARCHITECT DATE OF PLANS
APPROXIMATE STARTING DATE
APPROXIMATE COMPLETION DATE
DA�_ 2
THE CONTRACTOR AND OWNER HAVE DETERMINED THAT A
DEFINITE COMPLETION DATE:
F� ISCIFTHE ESSENCE F-1 IS NOT OF THE ESSENCE
..................... .................... ...................... .... ...................
. .. . ............. . .. p4.--J� .......... ..........
--LL 11 fle A I
U
..........
. .... ........
.....................
........ ........... ...
_»..........._................. ....... . .............
(
..... ... . .... 0 .............
0
�. MW
F
z�
.s a
Ci�uw�t
tMN1tV
ti
i
r
8
t�
AnLLI
�. MW
F
.s a
Ci�uw�t
tMN1tV
ti
Jul
1.
i
r
8
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
April 17, 1995
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. President Oxian introduced the
new Commission Members; Ed Talley, County Council appointee and Adrian Fine,
Mayoral appointee. President Oxian asked that a motion be made`to put a time
limit on public presentations due to the number of items on the agenda calling
for a public hearing. Commissioner Choitz moved a time limit be set of 5
minutes for the aDDlicants Presentation. 5 minutes for anv re�onstrance. and 5
minutes for rebuttal. Commissioner Petrass seconded the motion. The motion
Passed unanimouslv.
II. Roll Call
Members present: Father Richard Bullene, Mrs. Martha Choitz, Mr. Adrian Fine,
Mr. John Oxian, Mrs. Janeanne Petrass, Mr. Ed Talley, and Mr. Jerry Weiner.
Staff present: Mrs. Aladean DeRose - Legal Counsel, Mr. David Duvall -
Director and Ms. Christine Anderson - Administrative Assistant.
Members Absent: Mrs. Catherine Hostetler, Mrs. Joann Sporleder (Leave of
Absence), and Ms. Jewel Van Dalsen.
Also present: Marsha Stevenson, Mary Hendriksen, Dwight King, Marty Murphy,
Daniel Bernth, David Betson, Emery J. Barany, Peter Hauser, Carl Littrell.
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 1077 Riverside Drive -- RSD-LHD -- Landscape
President Oxian noted he would move up the owners other item on the agenda
under Old Business, so they would only have one presentation. Ms. Anderson
read the staff reports. Mrs. Hendriksen gave a presentation to the Commission
noting the trimming and removal that had been done to the lilacs, cedar trees,
and large evergreen tree that are involved in the boundary dispute between the
owners of 1077 and 1081 Riverside Drive. Mrs. Hendriksen noted that both
parties agree on the exact location of the property line and that a plant by
plant survey had been done as well. This survey showed 8 lilacs and verbinium
and one cedar were growing on the boundary line thus the plants were owned
jointly. Mrs. Hendriksen explained according to property law, the plants were
to be maintained by both parties and neither may remove or harm them without
permission of the other. She said each owner may trim their side but cannot
damage the plant. Mrs. Hendriksen noted that j.n addition, in Riverside Drive
District significant trimming required approval from the Commission. She said
Mr. Talley had a COA application on file to trim the plants on the boundary
line, but this application was removed from the Commission agenda even though
the work had already been done. Mrs. Hendriksen said she had received two
letters from the attorney of Mr. Talley and Mr. Geisel which stated no
boundary line material would be removed without proper approval. Mrs.
Hendriksen related the previous incident involving the driveway of the owners
of 1081 RSD. In light of these issues, Mrs. Hendriksen asked for sanctions
against Mr. Talley and Mr. Geisel, and additionally asked that guidelines
establishing due process for property owners in which a non -owner or co-owner
requests a COA be put into place by the Commission. Mrs. Hendriksen said this
stems from Mr. Talley's COA to trim the lilacs and the cedar. She explained
since she and her husband were the owners or co-owners of these plants, staff
approval should not be given, rather the issue should come to the Commission
so they (the other party) could voice their concerns at a public hearing. Mrs.
Hendriksen asked the Commission for an expedited COA to move the remaining
lilacs and erect a fence on the property line beginning at the garage and
ending somewhere before their back door.
Mrs. DeRose explained the fence issue could not be added on to�the current COA
without the specifications of the proposed fence. She suggested the Commission
could hold a special meeting to consider the COA after the details of the
fence had been submitted. In reference to the co -ownership issue, Mrs. DeRose
said that was a legal issue and the Commission was only concerned with the
appropriateness or inappropriateness of a proposed COA. President Oxian
inquired about approving the removal of the lilacs. Mrs. DeRose indicated the
Commission could take action on that issue immediately and that the Commission
would make a decision regardless of where the property line lies. Mr. King
noted the lilacs are no longer growing on the side of 1081 Riverside Drive
because they have been trimmed down to the ground. He inquired if 1081 still
had an interest in them.
Commissioner Bullene inquired where they intended to move the lilacs. Mrs.
Hendriksen replied it would be a few feet onto their property. Commissioner
Bullene inquired if there was still a necessity for the fence if the lilacs
could be salvaged and they were to be basically in the same location only
further into the property of 1077 RSD. Mrs. Hendriksen said it may be years
before the lilacs are able to serve as a screen between the properties.
President Oxian said a lilac plant could take a lot of abuse and as long as
the transplanting was done properly, they would survive.
Commissioner Choitz moved the COA for 1077 be approved. Commissioner Bullene
seconded the motion. President Oxian explained the motion included the items
in the staff report as well as the removal and reolantinz of the lilacs. The
motion passed with 7 in favor and 1 abstention.
Commissioner Choitz inquired if there could be an immediatemeetingto discuss
the issue of a fence at 1077 Riverside Drive. Mrs. DeRose said a special
meeting could be held, but three days public notice needed to be given.
Commissioner Bullene inquired of Commissioner Talley as the other party who
may have an interest in the lilacs if he had any objections to their removal.
Commissioner Talley replied he had no objection.
Mrs. Hendriksen said the owners of 1077 RSD still had concern for the other
two issues they had brought to the Commission which were due process for
co-owners of property for which a COA will effect and the issue of the
violation of the COA issued for 1081 Riverside Drive involving the driveway.
Mrs. Hendriksen said it was too late for these plants that had already been
trimmed at her property, but she wanted a policy regarding this type of
circumstance for the future. Mrs. DeRose said that was a matter that should be
discussed in Committee with the guideline committee from the district and some
input from the legal department.
Mr. King asked the Commission to consider the driveway for which a COA was
given that stated the dimensions should be 28" at the base. He noted currently
the base dimension is 40". Commissioner Choitz inquired if the owners of 1081
had followed the motion made the Commission regarding the dimensions of the
driveway. Mr. Duvall said he had not measured the driveway flange, but he did
know it was done .in brick. Commissioner Talley raised the point that this
issue was not before the Commission and that the'COA for the driveway lasts
for a year and nothing had been done to it since the hearing. Mrs. DeRose
responded that a citizen within the district that brought the issue to the
Commission that a COA may not have been properly executed and the Commission
could hear the issue at any time. President Oxian inquired of Commissioner
Talley what had been done to the driveway. Commissioner Talley, replied that
the hole with sand and forms had been in place before the hearing back in
December, all he had done was place bricks in the form so he was able to get
in and out of his driveway during the winter. President Oxian answered that
Mr. Talley was right that he had one year to fulfill the COA requirements.
President Oxian advised the staff to investigate and determine if it was a
temporary fix and noted if it was not, the issue would-be brought up at the
next months meeting. Commissioner Bullene noted the motion included the
directive that the color was to match as closely as possible the color of the
concrete.driveway.
Mr. King inquired if there were to be no sanctions for the trimming and
removal of landscape material without a COA. President Oxian replied there had
been a disagreement between the HPC staff and himself on this issue. He
suggested a Standards and Maintenance Committee meeting be held to settle the
issued. Mrs. DeRose explained the property line dispute in this issue was
highly unusual thus did not fit within the normal procedures and that had
caused this problem in interpretation. She noted technically this might not
have required a COA and she felt the Commission had tried to act extremely
conservatively.
2. 521 River Avenue --EP-LHD-- vinyl siding
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. Ms. Anderson noted the owner was not
present to answer questions. President Oxian asked, since the owner was not
present, to table the issue. Commissioner Talley so moved. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner Bullene. President Oxian said he wanted to know the
size and style of the vinyl siding and the details as to the door and window
trim. Commissioner Bullene inquired if this was to be an additional layer or
if the under layers were to be removed. Ms. Anderson explained it was to be an
additional layer and she believed the issue with removal of the extant siding
was the disposal of asbestos shingles was cost prohibitive for the owner.
President Oxian said he had seen vinyl over asbestos shingles before and the
shingles had broken away. The motion passed unanimously.
3. 221 East Navarre --RB-LHD-- garage
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. Mr. Hauser presented his intentions to
rehabilitate the property. Mr. Duvall commented that this application was part
of a broader comprehensive rehabilitation of the property for which several
activities have received staff approval. Commissioner Fine inquired as to the
material of the new garage doors. Mr. Hauser replied they would be wood raised
paneled doors. Commissioner Talley moved the COA application for 221 Navarre
be approved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner, Weiner.' The motion passed
unanimously.
4. 1093 Riverside Drive --RSD-LIiD-- Deck removal. & landscape
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. President Oxian inquired if the stair
portion was to be removed as well. Ms. Stevenson replied her intention was to
remove the wood steps and that there were existing concrete steps under the
wood addition. Commissioner Talley moved for approval. Commissioner Petrass
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
5. 944 Riverside Drive --RSD-LHD-- tree removal
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. Mr. Betson told the Commission he did not
intend to replace the tree to be removed on the East side because of its
proximity to the house. President Oxian inquired who had installed the patio.
Mr. Betson said it was most likely Dr. Sherman Egan in the 1950's.
Commissioner Talley inquired if the removal of the tree would effect the
stability of the riverbank. Ms. Anderson explained she had asked that question
to David Duncan of Custom and Moore and his response had been that no
immediate adverse effect would be caused since the roots would remain, however
there would no longer be the stability of a growing tree to prevent any
further deterioration. Commissioner Talley inquired if Mr. Betson was
addressing the erosion problem on his property. Mr. Betson replied he was
worrying about it.
A discussion ensued on which tress were to be removed. Commissioner Bullene
noted if the trees were not taken down, nature most likely would take them
down eventually. lie asked if since the standards discuss the replanting of
flora that is removed, the ot,ner could plant trees in a different location on
the property. Mr. Betson said he was not sure putting oaks on the bank was a
good idea and that he had been advised willow trees would be appropriate to
place on the bank. Commissioner Talley moved for approval for the removal of
two trees from 944 Riverside Drive. Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
6. 723 Park Avenue --LL-- tree removal
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. She added she had spoken with the owner
after the recent ice storm and that: Ms. Tarbet had even more concerns because
the tree branches were now brushing the house. Ms. Tarbet had also indicated
her intention to plant an ornamental tree farther away from the foundation
once she had gotten approval to remove the evergreen. Commissioner Choitz
moved the COA be approved as recommended by the staff. Commissioner Petrass
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
7. 1142 Lincolnway East --LWE-LHD-- window replacement
Mr. Duvall read the staff report. President Oxian said if this situation
happened again, he would make a motion the application be denied and the
windows be removed. Commissioner Bullene moved the COA be approved as
recommended by the staff. including the denial of the aluminum claddintr of the
window trim and requiring proof of purchase of the buildinfz permit before
issuance of the actual. COA card. Commissioner Choitz seconded the motion. The
motion passed unanimously.
8. 113 West North Shore Drive --LL, WNS-LHD-- re-roof
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. Corrmissioner Petrass moved the COA be
approved for the removal of cedar shakes. turbine vents. and metal chimney and
their replacement with fiberglass Grand Manor roof shinales and three pod
vents. Commissioner Choitz seconded the motion. Commissioner Bullene commented
that although he was inclined to vote in favor of the motion, he wanted to
caution the Commission of "plasticizing" the districts. President Oxian
inquired in cedar roofs are legal. Mr. Duvall replied they are, but there was
information from the owner's contractor that the cedar roofing material
commercially available is not up to the specifications of what would have been
used historically. The motion passed unanimouslv.
9. 803 North Notre Dame Avenue --LL-- window and door replacement
Mr. Duvall read the staff report. President Oxian inquired if the canopy was
going to be repaired. Mr. Duvall replied it had been staff approved as an
in-kind repair. Commissioner Choitz asked what was meant by factory clad. Mr.
Duvall replied it would be metal. Mr. Jack Bennett explained fiche cladding and
showed the Commission the color selections. Commissioner Choitz moved the COA
for 803 N. Notre Dame Avenue be approved as recommended by the staff. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Petrass. The motion passed unanimouslv.
10. 1235 East Wayne--EW-LHD-- fencing
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. President Oxian inquired why the chain
link fence had been removed prior to receiving approval. Ms. Anderson said she
believed the owner assumed the Commission would give approval and had removed
the fencing. Commissioner Choitz suggested a letter be sent to the owner
informing her the fencing should have remained until she received approval.
Commissioner Choitz moved the COA for 1235 East Wavne South be approved as
recommended by the staff. Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion. The motion
Passed unanimously.
11. 300-1200 blks. Riverside Drive --RSD-LIID-- streetlighting
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. Ms. Anderson then read a message from Mr.
Tom Yarger, owner of the George Cutter Home, who was unable to attend the
meeting. Mr. Carl Littrell said the city did not object to leaving the cast
iron lamp at 916 Riverside Drive. Mr. Littrell pointed out the equipment is
currently owned by I&M, but I&M was looking for someone to take it over for
$1. He noted the city would prefer the Riverside Drive homeowners take over
responsibility. Mr. Littrell indicated he was working on a very tight: budget
and he was concerned that in the future a wayward car may knock down a pole
and there would be no replacement poles available. He pointed out if this
occurred, the next owner of the streetlight equipment would have to come to
the Commission for a COA for whatever they are able to do because there would
be no more Hollowspun poles available, except for the one that would be left
from not replacing the cast iron pole at the George Cutter house. President
Oxian inquired if the concrete poles to be removed would be turned over to the
city or if I&M would keep them. Clarification was made on what light fixtures
were on top of the poles to be replaced. President Oxian stated his opinion
that the poles should be saved by the City for future use in other historic
districts and if any of the hooded 4 -sided lights were still extant they
should be salvaged as well. He asked that the motion include the directive to
save the poles and also for the retention of the cast iron pole at 916
Riverside Drive.
Commissioner Talley noted the neighborhood had restored many of the units on
the street and asked if it was possible for himself or other volunteers to
help insure the reconditioned luminaires are installed as historically
accurately as possible. Ile also noted the location of pole x`12 left a large
dark space and he asked if it could be moved or another pole installed.
Commissioner Talley brought up the section of Hudson Avenue that had not been
addressed as far as streetlighting and also informed the Commission of some
aversion of RSD resident to high pressure sodium lamping. Commissioner Talley
said the neighborhood had sealed the existing concrete poles and would like to
do the same thing to the replacement poles to be installed. President Oxian
inquired more specifically what the problem was at Hudson Avenue. A discussion
ensued on the lack of streetlighting on Hudson. Commissioner Talley suggested
three more streetlights be installed on Hudson. Mr. Littrell indicated he only
had one more Hollowspun pole. Commissioner Talley noted a extra pole on Golden
Avenue that could perhaps be used on Hudson. Commissioner Talley asked how
this issue could best be addressed.
Mr. Littrell said when the proposed work on r Riverside Drive was complete,
Riverside Drive would have more lumens 4a9 linear foot then any other
residential neighborhood. lie said if the city used metal halide rather than
high pressure sodium, he believed residents would be unhappy. Mr. Littrell
explained the HPS would give less objectionable shadows and a less bright
light. He felt the level of streetlight on Riverside Drive was exceptional and
high pressure sodium lights should be used, if for no other reason, than to
match all the lighting in the city. He further explained the HPS would come
closer to matching the original incandescent lighting.
President Oxian inquired if the type of lighting proposed would take care of
the dark area Commissioner Talley had discussed earlier. Mr. Littrell replied
it would somewhat. President Oxian asked if the pole could be moved as
Commissioner Talley suggested. Mr. Littrell explained extra wiring would then
be required which would increase the cost and he only had a $9-0,000 budget for
this project.
President Oxian said he had been on the Mayor's Streetlight Committee and knew
the reason the committee had chosen high pressure sodium lamping was to keep
consistency throughout the city. President Oxian inquired if the new light
system would belong to the city. Mr. Littrell responded it would belong to I&M
but their intention was to sell it to someone. President Oxian suggested the
Riverside Drive neighborhood look into taking over the system. He commented if
the neighborhood wanted more done than what was proposed by the city, they
should get together to see if they were willing to take over the system.
Marsha Stevenson, Riverside Drive liaison noted there is no legal neighborhood
group at this time. Marty Murphy, RSD liaison, felt it might not be an easy
thing to organize. President Oxian said if they were going to continue on and
above the city's proposal, the neighborhood would have to organize.
Commissioner Bullene inquired if the alternative was to accept the city's
proposal as is. President Oxian replied positively. A discussion was held on
the role of the Commission in altering the proposal.
President Oxian gave his opinion that the Commission should accept this
particular proposal and then if the neighborhood wanted to make additions,
that should be discussed by the neighborhood, the city, and the HPC.
Commissioner Choitz noted that many historic district residents throughout the
country are responsible for the care and maintenance of their own
streetlighting and this may be necessary on Riverside Drive. She said she felt
the proposal was fine, but she believed it to be temporary. Mr. Littrell
commented if a pole was damaged he would not have the money to replace it with
another historic pole.
Mr. Littrell brought up a point that the Commission had not yet discussed the
service stations. He noted the city would try to make these as unobtrusive as
possible, but that they weren't going to be pretty. He described them as a
fluted pedestal with a box on top, and the meter'on the outside so that it can
be read easily.
Commissioner Talley inquired if President Oxian believed the proposal should
be approved. President Oxian replied lie was in favor of approval. Commissioner
Talley asked for clarification that the neighborhood would noir, have to take
over the system. Commissioner Choitz replied she felt that would be the next
step. A discussion of other cities whose residents had taken over care of the
streetlights ensued.
Commissioner Talley asked if the HPC approved the proposal, did it lock the
neighborhood into having to take over the system and then being unable to make
the changes they would like to see. Mr. Murphy commented that the residents
would get the work as proposed by the city and from his discussion with
residents, that would be great. Mr. Littrell indicated the system would be
able to be adapted.
Commissioner Bullene inquired how many posts the city actually had. Mr.
Littrell responded there would be one extra if the cast iron pole were kept in
place on Riverside Drive. Commissioner Bullene moved the COA be Rranted with
the exception of the removal of the cast iron lamppost and that the
neighborhood be notified so if thev wanted more than the city proposed. thev
could discuss providing for the excess cost. Commissioner Bullene added that
the poles that were removed be stored for future use.
Mrs. DeRose inquired how long before the work would begin. Mr. Littrell
indicated the replacement parts were all in but the bid had not yet gone out.
Mrs. DeRose asked if it made sense to delay the action to give the residents
time to discuss if they want to cover costs above what has been proposed.
Commissioner Talley agreed with Mrs. DeRose.
Commissioner Bullene amended the motion to include the city delavinrs the work
60 days for the neighborhood to discuss the issue. A discussion on the length
of time necessary to organize the neighborhood ensued. Commissioner Talley
suggested 30 days. Mr. Littrell commented no work being done was irreversible..
Commissioner Bullene restated the motion that the cast iron post remain. the
removed poles be stored. other work be approved as proposed. and the
neighborhood was to have sixtv days to discuss the issue before work began.
Commissioner Fine inquired if the cast iron lamp was to be fitted for HPs. Mr.
Littrell responded positively. Marsha Stevenson inquired to whom the
neighborhood needed to respond if they decided to take over the streetlights.
President Oxian replied Mr. Littrell would be the appropriate person to notify
as well as informing the HPC.
Commissioner Fine seconded the motion. Coiraiiissioner Talley pointed out he did
not want to hold up the work, and Mr. Littrell had said nothing was
irreversible. He suggested the delay be removed from the motion. Mr. Murphy
said he did not feel from the liaison members present there was any sentiment
to delay the work for 60 days.
Commissioner Fine withdrew his second. Commissioner Bullene withdrew the
motion. Commissioner Bullene moved that the COA be granted as proposed with
the exception of the retention of the cast iron pole in front of the Georize
Cutter home. and the removed Doles stored by the�city for future use.
Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
IV.Regular Business J
Mrs. DeRose asked if President Oxian would move the legal report up on the
agenda. President Oxian asked the Commission to move ahead to Committee
reports and asked Mrs. DeRose to report on the Preservation Plan. Mrs. DeRose
said she had received the Preservation Plan and would be drafting a resolution
for the Common Council to adopt the plan. Mrs. DeRose said the Common Council
had asked for something within the Commissions guideline to give property
owners notice when their property is being declared a landmark. She said she
felt this may require a resolution or rule to be approved by the Commission.
President Oxian said the other issue that needed to be dealt with was who was
to be the contact person from the property that is a pending landmark. Mrs.
DeRose indicated the Commission would have to approve the policy on notice
after she had drafted it.
Mrs. DeRose discussed the necessity of a COA for the installation of a
payphone. Mrs. DeRose said in her opinion, the guidelines could be interpreted
to say a COA was necessary or'they could be interpreted to say a COA was
unnecessary. Mr. Duvall described the payphone and said the inquiry from a
district property owner had been did this payphone need a COA for installation
and what can be done about it now. Commissioner Choitz said this would be a
burgeoning issue.
President Oxian said in his opinion, a COA was necessary. Commissioner Petrass
inquired why the phone had been installed. Mr. Duvall stated he did not know.
Mrs. DeRose said the new guidelines for the new district (Lincolnway West)
specifically dealt with pay phones, but the old guidelines did not.
Commissioner Talley agreed with President Oxian. President Oxlan said he felt
a letter should be sent to the owner who allowed the post to be put in stating
he had violated the rules and regulations of the Edgewater Place Historic
District and he would need to file for a COA. Commissioner Bullene said it
seemed to fall in the same category as installing a fence or other landscape
changes.
President Oxian asked Mrs. DeRose to review the situation regarding the Rose
Road Log Cabin, which burned down and no notification was given to the HPC.
Mrs. DeRose asked if the Recorders office had the Local Landmarks tagged on
public record. President Oxian replied affirmatively.
12. 221 Hammond Place --RB-LIID-- fencing, tree removal
Ms. Anderson read the staff report. Commissioner Petrass asked if the
alteration were recent. Mr. Duvall explained there was no survey card for this
property and staff had no way of knowing what had been the previous condition.
A discussion was held on the location of the kennel in relationship to the
neighbors garage. Commissioner Petrass moved the COA be approved as
recommended by the staff. Commissioner Choitz seconded the motion. The motion
Passed unanimously.
A. Approval of Minutes - Commissioner Choitz moved for approval of the January
16. February 27. and March 7. 1995 minutes. Commissioner Petrass seconded the
motion. President Oxian noted the February 27th meeting was not a official
meeting, but rather a Committee meeting due to a lack of a quorum. The vote
was unanimous in favor.
B. Treasurer's Report
C. Correspondence
Mr. Duvall reported on the receipt of notification of the Central High School
grand opening. Mr. Duvall reported on receipt of notification of Historic
Landmarks Foundation's annual meeting. Mr. Duvall reported on the annual
meeting of the Indiana Alliance of Historic District Commissions. Mr. Duvall
reported on Center City Associates and Department of Redevelopment meeting to
discuss downtown South Bend strategic planning. Mr. Duvall announce the
National Trust meeting in Fort Wayne on Heritage Partnerships. Mr. Duvall
reported on a newsletter from the Alliance Review with a feature story on the
proposed legislation to extend federal tax credits to homeowners.
D. Committee Reports
I. Budget and Finance
2. Legal - discussed previously.
3. Historic Districts
President Oxian reported on the Lincolnway West Businessman's Association
meeting to discuss the proposed local historic district on LWW. He noted no
one in attendance objected to the proposal. He said the committee was ready to
set up public meetings.
4. Historic Landmarks
a. First Reading
511 West Colfax-Birdsell Residence/ F.J. Nimtz Building
b. Second Reading
None.
c. Status of Recommendations to Council
President Oxian reported the status of 310 West Monroe and 534 LaPorte
remained unchanged. He commented 534 LaPorte had been up for tax sale.
President Oxian reported there were discussions on the demolition of the Roma
Building. Commissioner Fine said he was told the demolition would take place
the next day. Mr. Duvall concurred and said Economic Development was trying to
find means to purchase the whole corner.
5. Standards and Maintenance
President Oxian asked that the committee hold a meeting.
6.Personnel
7. Staff Reports
a. C of A Staff Approvals
1. 528 River Avenue -EP- porch repairs
2. 226 Hammond -RB- in-kind re -roof
J. 221 East Navarre -RB- in-kind door replacement, re -roof, siding, masonry,
and installation of an air condenser in the rear.
b. East Race Tourism Project- Mr. Duvall reported having met with two
representatives from the National Trust, Karen Kiemnec of Historic Landmarks
Foundation of Indiana, and Paul McMinn from the Parks Department and spend the
day touring the East Race. The group is looking for an assistance program to
provide professional technical information for Heritage Tourism programs. He
noted the East Race was among three finalists in Indiana for the program.
c. 507-509 South Michigan
Mr. Duvall reported the DHPA had confirmed the site as eligible for a tax
credit project should the city move ahead with acquisition.
V. Old Business
A. Stephenson Mill
Mr. Duvall reported the Stephenson Mill National Register NomiAation had been
returned due to a discrepancy in the physical description prior to
rehabilitation and as it stands now. He said the opinion was there should be
no problem with the nomination, it was just a matter of clari& cation of the
state of the building at the present time.
VI. New Business
A. Pay Phones in Historic Districts - discussed previously
VII. Hearing of visitors
None.
VIII. Announcements
Commissioner Petrass reported on her concern for the house at 2912 York Road.
She said the property has a second foundation being built on the property and
it appears the house is to be moved so it faces Ridgedale. She said she had -
heard other houses were to be built on the property. Commissioner Petrass
inquired if this would be a zoning violation. Commissioner Fine said it would
be a subdivision if the lot had been divided. Commissioner Bullene pointed out
it may have already legally been two lots.
IX. Adjournment
President Oxian adjourned the meeting at 10:35 pm.
0
FINANCIAL REPORT
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 1 thru March 31, 1995
REVENUE
St. Joseph County $5716.02
Block Grants thru City 4750.00
Anticipated Grants 0.00
$10466.02
EXPENSES
STAFF
Director and 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.
ti
$9462.50
$0.00
0.00
388.59
99.00
19.74
0.00
57.00
106.79
332.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
$ 1003.52
TOTALS $10466.02 $10466.02
Application for the Designation
of an Historic District
South Bend & St. Joseph County
I. Description of Proposed District
1. Name of District - Lincolnway West Historical District
2. District Boundaries - Lincolnway west from LaSalle Av4nue to Bendix Drive
3. Complete list of all property owners and addresses. Attach as Appendix A.
4. Map of District: Obtain a 1" - 200" scale map from the Historic
Preservation Commission of the Area Plant Commission, outline the
boundaries of the proposed District, and attach as Appendix B.
II. Representative Neighborhood Organization or Historic District Sterring
Committee. (Attach Organization By -Laws)
1. Name of Organization or Committee - Lincolnway West Business
Association, Inc.
2. Means of formation of Organization - The Lincolnway West Business
Association, Inc. was formed in 1983 to represent the business owners
in all matters pertaining to Lincolnway West Corridor. (By -Laws
enclosed)
3. Current officers of Organization:
Kevin Weinberg - President
Donald L. Buczynski - Vice -President
Karen J. Orlicki - Secretary
Jeff Corey - Treasurer
4. Means of electing officers or Committee members - The Board of Directors
are elected by the membership at large. The officers are elected by the
Board of Directors.
5. Current officers of Committee:
John Oxian
William Oppenheim
Joseph Lane
Mae Jones
Karen J. Orlicki
Pat Pinckert
Jeff Corey
Donald L. Buczynski
Dr. E. Molenda
Kevin Weinberg
III. Goals:
The preservation and enhancement of the entire Lincolnway West Corridor,
which will also positively effect the immediate neighborhoods on each side.
IV. Reasons for Historic District Designation (inglude reasons for boundaries):
The Lincolnway West Corridor is an historic and cultural resource as
evidenced by its developmental history and material evidence in the Corridor
itself.
Through taking advantage of the Corridors Historical Assets it will enhance
and promote the unique qualities of the neighborhood, convey a substantial
and positive image of the neighborhood and mark the neighborhood as a place
of vitality and prominence.
The boundaries were selected based on the analysis made by Pastor
Preservation & Architectural Services to include the many historical building
located in the Corridor.
637 South Lafayette
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the HPC Local Landmarks Criteria, the building at 637 South Lafayette
has been recommended by the Landmarks Committee of the Historic Preservation
Commission as a Local Historic Landmark. The building meets the criteria in at
least four areas.
1.) Its character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage, or
culture of the City of South Bend, St. Joseph County, the State if
Indiana, or the United States of America.
2.) Its embodiment of elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or
craftsmanship which represents an architectural characteristic or
innovation. t
3.) Its educational value.
4.) Its suitability for preservation.
The building fulfills criteria #1 as material evidence of one of South Bend's
most important manufacturing companies, Studebaker Company later called the
Studebaker Corporation. Studebaker was South Bend's largest employer for most
of its existence and was at the heart of South Bend's development. At the time
of this buildings construction, Studebaker was the largest wagon works in the
world.
The building fulfills criteria #2 as an example of late 19th century
functional architecture. The building is rated Significant 11 in the Indiana
Historic Sites and Structures Survey.
The building fulfills criteria #3 as the earliest of the extant Wagon Works oil
the site later converted to automobile production. This structure is an intact
example of the past industrial cultural of South Bend. Out of over 40
Studebaker buildings constructed in the 19th century in South Bend, this
building is one of a handful not razed during the corporation building boom
after WWI.
The building meets criteria #4 by the integrity of its original construction
with only minor alterations.
CAA
5/9/95
518 South Michigan
REC01MENDATION
Based on the HPC Local Landmarks Criteria, the building at 6M South Lafayett
has been recommended by the Landmarks Committee of the Historic Preservation
Commission as a Local Historic Landmark. The building meets the criteria in at
least four areas.
1.) Its character, interest, or value as part of, the development, heritage, or
culture of the City of South Bend, St. Joseph County, the State if
Indiana, or the United States of America.
2.) Its embodiment of elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or
craftsmanship which represents an architectural characteristic or
innovation. t
3.) Its educational value.
4.) Its suitability for preservation.
The building fulfills criteria #1 as part of one of South Bend few remaining
commercial districts from the period of 1910 -1930.
The building fulfills criteria #2 as an excellent example of 20th Century
Neo -Classical style detailed commercial construction. The building is
especially noteworthy for the prolific use of terra cotta detailing. The
building is rated Significant 11 in the Indiana Historic Sites and Structures
Survey.
The building fulfills criteria #3 as a significant building in the South
Michigan Street proposed National Register Historic District. This district is
significant as one of the city's only remaining commercial districts of the
period, reflecting the use of terra cotta and brick in a variety of styles
from Sullivanesque to Neoclassical.
The building meets criteria #4 by the integrity of its original construction
with only minor alterations.
CAA
5/9/95
511 WEST COLFAX AVENUE f
BIRDSELL RESIDENCE
F.J. NIMTZ BUILDING
Historic and Architectural Significance
Historic Preservation Commission
of
South Bend & Saint Joseph County
May 1995
LI
m
r.
O
r.
CD 511 West Colfax
3
—
---------,
.244
O
M M
M
M
M (h
O O
O
O 0'
U)
10
.o N
%0 •o
m 0%
•o %0
0
N n -
O
0 000
00
30
' cN+
29
I 4
tt
28
.254 a
27
to
26
I
.o
a,
n ao
o
O o• Q a Q
MRA
O '
.
o
.253 -n
I
.243
.MRA
.242
.MRA -263 .264
'
,252
I
•251 •256 .259
.241
%0
.262
.258 �
N OD a` M ., N .261 M
.MRA �
_225
.240N
•+
N N N257 -4
.� .-� .-, r; . .260
'
9
M
.250 ' Jefferson
,
239
.224
.238•
.249 i
.237
.236
0`
.235
•248 �
West Washington
r'
.234
.247 I
.223
_23-->�b
.24 , National Register Historic
District
U)
t
Ln LO 244
.222
-:
'' �'Wayne
a
U)
'.221
.220
•232
,
.231
m
-n
m'
X
X
Cu
Q
r•
it
cD
511 West Colfax
RECOMENDATION
Based on the HPC Local Landmark Criteria [1), the building at 511 West has
been recommended by the Landmarks Committee of the Historic Preservation
Commission as a Local Historic Landmark. The building meets the criteria in at
least- five areas.
1.) Its character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage or
culture of the City of South Bend or St. Joseph County, the State of Indiana,
or the United States;
2.) Its embodiment of elements of architectural design, detai}, materials, or
craftsmanship which represents an architectural characteristic or innovation;
3.) Its educational value;
4.) Its suitability for preservation;
5.) its identification with the life of a person or persons of historical
significance;
The building fulfills criteria #1 as material evidence of one of South Bend's
important industrial families - the Birdsells. The house was built in 1898 for
J.B. Birdsell, President and Treasurer of the Birdsell Manufacturing Co.
The building fulfills criteria #2 as an excellent example of a turn of the
century Tudor Revival style residence rated 0/13 in the Indiana Historic Sites
and Structures Survey featuring half timbering Tudor detailing and a stone
porch and first story facade. The structure was designed by architect Wilson
B. Parker. [2)
The building fulfills criteria #3 as an excellent example of the past culture
of one of the important industrial families of South Bend. This structure
represents an intact example of historic architecture that expresses a quality
of workmanship and aesthetic that is rare elsewhere in South Bend.
The building meets criteria #4 by the integrity of its original construction
with only minor alterations.
The building meets criteria #5 for serving for 30 years as the offices of
attorney F. Jay Nimtz who was a congressman and civic fader.
ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION
The building is located one house west of the northwest. corner of West Colfax
Avenue and Williams Street in the West Washington Local Historic District. The
property retains a grass front yard area and the rear .i: a paved parking area.
The front facade is oriented on Colfax Avenue
The first story is built of field stone with tooled mortar joints. The second
story is of unusually thin brick, and the attic story is frame with stucco and
half-timbering in the gables. The foundation is concrete and stone and the
plan is a simple rectangle with irregularities. The asphalt shingle roof is
essentially a steeply pitched side gable with a hipped roof extension in the
rear. The roofline exhibits two gable front dormers, on(, quite large over the
western half of the front facade, two hipped roof dormers, and a cross gable
dormer in the rear. The gables have large overhanging bellcast eaves, broad
rake boards, and are supported by decorative brackets. There are two
rectangular exterior gable end fieldstone chimneys.
The single story fieldstone front porch is continuous over the south facade
with short romanesque stone columns supporting the hipped tile roof which has
a pedimented entry bay. The entry stairs are stone with massive stone
balustrades. The porte-cochere on the east side has two complete fieldstone
square piers and two round columns supporting the hipped roof.
The windows are double hung on the two lower floors. The glazing is often
elaborate in the top pane with a blank lower pane. There are diamond pane
casements in the attic story of the front facade. The first and second story
windows have rock face stone sills. The second story front facade exhibits an
oval window. The front entry is a double wood door with large single glass
panes and elaborate leaded glass fan light above. The door is recessed into a
arched stone entry.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
The Birdsell Clover Huller was invented by John Comley Birdsell in Monroe
County, New York in 1855. In 1864, Mr. Birdsell's factory was destroyed by
fire. He determined to move west and settle in South Bend. In 1870 the
Birdsell Manufacturing Company was formed and a five story brick factory
building was erected. At the time it was the largest factory building in South
Bend. The company enjoyed the distinction of having the largest clover huller
factory in the world. The Birdsell Clover Huller was one of the important
implements of early farming in the Midwest. [3]
Joseph Benjamin Birdsell was born in Monroe County, New York, December 2, 1844
to John Comley and Harriet Lunt Birdsell. At the age of 19 he began working in
the office of his fathers establishment. When the Birdsell Manufacturing
Company was incorporated in 1870, Mr. J.B. Birdsell was made treasurer. After
the death of his father in 1894, Mr. Birdsell was chosen president and
treasurer of the company in which capacity he served until his death in
1906.[4]
Bank Out Lot 15 was purchased in 1897 by Joseph Benjamin Birdsell and Olive
Tarbell Birsell for $8,800. They hired architect Wilson Parker to design the
house.[5] Parker came to South Bend in 1892 and entered into partnership with
Ennis R. Austin. Parker had previously spent three years with McKim, Meade and
White and two years with the Tiffany Glass and Decorating Company. Other
important buildings designed by Parker & Austin include St. James Episcopal
Church and Epworth Hospital.[6] In 1.899 the home was complete and the
Birdsells had taken up residence.[7] J.B. Birdsell retired from the Birdsell
Manufacturing Company in the spring of 1906 .and died September 27, 1906 at the
age of 61. He was survived by his widow, a son, and two daughters.[8] Mrs.
Birdsell continued to live at 511 West Colfax until the Income Guarantee
Company took possession of the property in 1928 and remodeled the house into
offices. It was sold in 1955 to Damon Burford, H.J. Alley, and Sophia C.
Alley. The property sold again in 1959 to LR Building Corporation.
,4 In 1.960 the building housed the offices of attorney F. ,Tay Nimtz. Nimtz was a
lifetime resident of South Bend. He was drafted into the U.S. Army in 1941 and
attained the rank of lieutenant colonel. He was decorated by seven nations for
his service during World War II. Mr. Nimtz was a longtime civic leader and was
elected to the U.S. Congress in 1956. He was president of the South Bend
Redevelopment Commission from 1974 until his death in 1990.[10] The building
was purchased by Dr. Len Trevino in 1994 and has been renamed the F. Jay Nimtz
Building.
NOTES
1. Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No.3: Historic Landmarks
Procedure (July 14, 1975).
2. City of South Bend Summary Report - Indiana Historic Sitesland Structures
Inventory (South Bend: 1992).
3. Timothy Edward Howard, History of St. Joseph County. Indiana, (Chicago
New York: The Lewis Publishing Company, 1907): 401.
4. South Bend Tribune (obit. J.B. Birdsell) September 27, 1906.
5. Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Survey, survey card, 511 West Colfax.
6. City of South Bend Summary Report - Indiana Historic Sites and Structures
Inventory (South Bend: 1982).
7. Indiana Historic. Sites and Structures Survey, survey card, 511 West Colfax.
8. Tribune (obit. J.B. Birdsell) September 27, 1906.
9. City of South Bend Assessors Records, 1931-1959.
10. South Bend Tribune, (obit. F.J. Nimtz) December 7, 1990.
p
C. Anderson
May 1995
CERTIFICATE OF APP---nRIATENESS STAFF REPORT
k y
PROPERTY -- 521 River Avenue
South Bend, IN
OWNER -- Ernest Hursey, Sr.
DESIGNATION -- EP-LHD
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCEMISTORIC CONTEXT
This American Four -Square was built c. 1920 by Whitcomb and Keller. The house
has been altered by the addition of asbestos shingle siding, aluminum storm
door and windows, and replacement concrete porch steps. It is rated C/9 in the
Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Survey. t
PROPOSED CHANGE
The owner proposes to install vinyl siding on the house.
STANDARDS
II.A.l: Existing exterior building 'materials shall be retained. 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.
II.A.2: Whenever possible, the original building materials should be restored.
Aluminum or vinyl siding may be used when it is the only feasible alternative
to maintaining the original surface material.
RECOMMENDATION
The standards do not specifically address the issue
unoriginal building material. The vinyl siding, if
and style, would be less obtrusive than the extant
staff does have some concerns regarding the window
the additional layer of wall covering. If the owner
staff recommends approval.
CAA
3/1-8/95
of vinyl siding over an
done in an appropriate size
asbestos shingles. The
and door trim being lost in
addresses these concerns,
A PETITION TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
AND THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
WE OBJECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ELECTRICAL BOX METERS IN THE
TREELAWNS OF THE 900 BLOCK OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND THE 800 BLOCK OF
GOLDEN AVENUE. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THE CITY FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE
APPEARANCE AND PRECISE LOCATION OF THESE METERS IN ITS PRESENTATION
ABOUT THE RIVERSIDE DRIVE LIGHTING PLAN BEFORE THE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION ON APRIL 17.
WE BELIEVE THAT, BY ALLOWING SUCH A DEVICE, THE HPC IS FAILING TO
PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. WE REQUEST THAT
THIS MATTER BE SUBJECT TO RECONSIDERATION AND PLACED ON THE MAY
AGENDA OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
NAME
-;- J r, �'�,.-�,=-�� -.tel -�--• � E� _ /
r 1
ADDRESS
/
/oa /a "S, ate(
_. ,,, �.,� �' �� /G'/'% .<� � �-dam•-� G �.��- >
A PETITION TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
. AND THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
WE OBJECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ELECTRICAL BOX METERS IN THE
TREELAWNS OF THE 900 BLOCK OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND THE 800 BLOCK OF
GOLDEN AVENUE. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THE CITY FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE
APPEARANCE AND PRECISE LOCATION OF THESE METERS IN ITS PRESENTATION
ABOUT THE RIVERSIDE DRIVE LIGHTING PLAN BEFORE THE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION ON APRIL 17.
WE BELIEVE THAT, BY ALLOWING SUCH A DEVICE, THE HPC IS FAILING TO
PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. WE REQUEST THAT
THIS MATTER BE SUBJECT TO RECONSIDERATION AND PLACED ON THE MAY
AGENDA OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
NAME
ADDRESS
1 U � 12C�� 1�? f
A PETITION TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
AND THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
WE OBJECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ELECTRICAL BOX METERS IN THE
TREELAWNS OF THE 900 BLOCK OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND THE 800 BLOCK OF
GOLDEN AVENUE. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THE CITY FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE
APPEARANCE AND PRECISE LOCATION OF THESE METERS IN ITS PRESENTATION
ABOUT THE RIVERSIDE DRIVE LIGHTING PLAN BEFORE THE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION ON APRIL 17.
WE BELIEVE THAT, BY ALLOWING SUCH A DEVICE, THE HPC IS FAILING TO
PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. WE REQUEST THAT
THIS MATTER BE SUBJECT TO RECONSIDERATION AND PLACED ON THE MAY
AGENDA OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
NAME
77�
.
1619 ��11PI164 Ok-
/,�r4C
A PETITION TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
AND THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
WE OBJECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ELECTRICAL BOX METERS IN THE
TREELAWNS OF THE 900 BLOCK OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND THE 800 BLOCK OF
GOLDEN AVENUE. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THE CITY FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE
APPEARANCE AND PRECISE LOCATION OF THESE METERS IN ITS PRESENTATION
ABOUT THE RIVERSIDE DRIVE LIGHTING PLAN BEFORE THE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION ON APRIL 17.
WE BELIEVE THAT, BY ALLOWING SUCH A DEVICE, THE NPC IS FAILING TO
PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. WE REQUEST THAT
THIS MATTER BE SUBJECT TO RECONSIDERATION AND PLACED ON THE MAY
AGENDA OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
NAME
h
r
ADDRESS
1�7r itJ1� CrV/-�aIr'4�
q2
J
r
�-PETITION'707HE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
AND .THE: BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS
WE OBJECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO. ELECTRICAL BOX METERS IN THE
TREELAWNS OF THE 940 BLOCK -OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND THE 800 BLOCK OF
GOLDEN AVENUE. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THE CITY FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE
APPEARANCE AND PRECISE LOCATION OF THESE METERS IN ITS PRESENTATION
ABOUT THE RIVERSIDE DRIVE • LIGHTING PLAN. BEFORE THE HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION ON APRIL 17.
WE BELIEVE THAT, BY ALLOWING SUCH A- DEVICE, THE HPC IS FAILING TO
PRESERVE THE CHARACTER -OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. WE REQUEST THAT
THIS MATTER BE SUBJECT TO RECONSIDERATION AND PLACED ON THE MAY
AGENDA OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
NAME ADDRESS
PIV Ac7lv_
T.
' T t �� t
-
1 j �� d�i•(.".��., rrllR, X11 �r ��