HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 1996•
r1
L_J
•
I�
AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Special monthly meeting
7:30 p.m.
Monday, February 26, 1996
County Commissioner's
Conference Room
7th Floor County City Bldg
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 221 West North Shore Drive - General rehabilitation
B. National Register Nomination
1. Studebaker Wagon Works - Carpentry Shop - 637 South Lafayette St.
IV. Regular Business'
A. Approval of Minutes - January 15, 1996
B. Treasurers Report
C. Correspondence
D. Committee Reports
1. Budget & Finance
2. Legal
3. Historic Districts
4. Historic Landmarks
a. Status of recommendations to Common Council -
534 LaPorte Avenue (Starzynski Texaco Gasoline Station)
b. Leeper Park LL proposal
c. 415 Parry Street (LL) zoning change
5. Standards & Maintenance
a. 1414 East Wayne Street (LHD-EW) - front yard fence
6. Personnel
E. Staff Reports
1. C of A Staff Approvals
2. DHPA Grant status
a. Request for bridge appropriation 1996
b. National Register nominations
c. Economic Benefits Study
3. Legal
a. alternative modes of certification.
V. Old Business
VI. New Business
A. First reading of recommendations for Local Landmark designations
1. 130 Park Lane
VII. Hearing of Visitors
VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
IX. Adjournment
R ?L
� 0
G ,A
Z:A" k LL,
4o,,,�k
C7\-\-CL-
30 , (:f HIJ S P; F, b,) i �j i ET
L:51"�
c j A
LTJ C 1 ?Lo 2
3
4.u).
/:) -6 +, ?,-, . L 6
6
AP
C1vt -t � U. , J
L��Ax�, zp
F, be
�av' 1 0 � ��.ei-
1 ti, 1i .✓{����L-, p��I �) �[ cru :.�j I w.�� �'! �-•�-4
j�f
Su1ti�� lo�sj ;%o+o-,b lt.--�l� cU v✓✓`�w1��j �DJ� S�l� 1
C1vt -t � U. , J
L��Ax�, zp
•
I
11
NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION STAFF REPORT
• PROPERTY -- Studebaker Brothers Manufacturing Company
Building 30-30A
637 South Lafayette Street
South Bend, Indiana
OWNER -- Ivy Tower Corp.
P.O. Box 395
South Bend, IN 46624
STANDARDS
The nomination proposes placement of this building on the National Register of
Historic Places based on Criterion A: Event.
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...."
RECOMMENDATION 3Q
The Staff of the HPC recommends in favor of th o enation of Building.�t<of
"s o IuA Avc11uC,' 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 of rapid industrial expansion following the Civil
War in the late Nineteenth Century.
As described in the Statement of Significance section of the nomination, the
building is the only remaining structure in South Bend associated exclusively
with the Studebaker Wagon Works prior to the commencement of the automobile
industry to which Studebaker became dedicated. During this period, Studebaker
was the largest employer in South Bend and was world renowned for their
products.
Although not stated on the application, Staff also finds Criterion C to apply.
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." Though the building
under consideration is humble in origin and use, its physical characteristics
are typical. of utilitarian industrial buildings of its period. The building
has experienced some alterations which effect its integrity. Yet its
original character is clearly discernible.
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
2/2/96
• MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Regular Monthly Meeting County Commissioner's
7:30 p.m. Conference Room
Monday January 15, 1996 7th Floor County -City Building
I. Call to Order
John Oxian, president of the commission, brought the meeting to order at 7:35
p.m.
II. Roll Call
Commission members present were: John Borkowski, Richard Bullene, Catherine
Hostetler, John Oxian, Jerry Wiener, & J. Edward Talley.
Commission staff present were: David Duvall, director and Aladean DeRose,
counsel.
Also attending the meeting was: Philip Schatz
Mr. Duvall raised the issue that the term of Joanne Sporleder, the
commission's architectural historian, had expired in December. The floor was
opened for nominations to fill this vacant seat which is elected by the eight
appointed members of the commission. Mr. Wiener nominated Mrs. Sporleder for
re-election to this position with the understanding that Fr. Richard Bullene
will continue to act as her proxy for the duration of her stay in Rome. Mrs.
Hostetler seconded the motion. Mrs. DeRose indicated that there was no problem
• with the continuation of this proxy. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Oxian indicated that Mrs. Petrass' term had also expired and that he had
sent a letter to the Common Council requesting her reappointment. He also
noted that Mrs Choitz had been reappointed by the County Commissioners for
another term.
III. Public Hearing
A. Certificates of Appropriateness
1. 1995-1222; 1027 East Wayne Street (LL).- Request to cap chimney(s)
Mr. Duvall distributed photographs and read the Staff Report for this
proposal. Mr. Duvall noted that the applicant was present. Mrs. Hostetler
moved for approval of the application per the Staff recommendation. Mr. Wiener
seconded the motion. The floor was opened for discussion. Mr. Oxian inquired
after the purpose of the capping. Mr. Schatz indicated that the purpose is to
prevent penetration of precipitation into the chimney throat which has been
causing occasional interior damage in severe weather. Mr. talley inquired
about the visual impact of the caps. Mr. Schatz stated that they would be
fairly standard stainless steel flue caps. The motion was passed unanimously.
2. 1996-0105; 1314 East Wayne Street (LHD-EW) - Installation of triple -track
storm screen combinations at the sunroom located at the west end on.the house.
Mr. Duvall distributed photographs, catalog copy, and read the Staff Report
for this proposal, noting that the windows in question were eight over one
rather than the eight over eight indicated. Mr. Duvall further noted that
• though there were wood storm windows on the house that the sunroom had a
mixture of aluminum triple -track storm/screens and fixed screen mesh existing.
Mr. Wiener moved for approval of the application as recommended by staff with
the deletion of the requirement to store existing wood storm windows. Mr.
Talley seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved.
IV. Regular Business
• A. Approval of Minutes - December 18, 1995
Mr. Talley moved for approval of the minutes as submitted. Mr. Wiener seconded
the motion. The minutes were approved unanimously as submitted.
B. Treasurers Report
Mr. Wiener distributed copies of the 1995 year end financial report, noting
that it did not reflect DHPA grant funded activities but only the City - CDBG
and County Budget activity. He also distributed copies of the preliminary 1996
Budget.
C. Correspondence
Mr. Duvall Indicated the following, including items carried forward from the
previous month:
Received:
1) Re -appointment of Martha Choitz by the County Commissioners.
2) Copy of letter from Jerry Wiener to the Common Council requesting
reappointment to the HPC.
3) Response from Calvin Murdock declining Local Landmark designation for his
property at 131 S. Taylor Street. Mr. Oxian indicated that this should be
directed to the Landmarks Committee rather than the committee of the whole.
Outgoing correspondence included:
1) Request for the reappointment of Janeanne Petrass by the president of the
• commission.
2) Response made by staff to the County Commissioners regarding FOIA request
for a list of all county owned property listed on the National Register of
Historic Places or established as Local Landmarks. Mr. Duvall indicated that
his correspondence was directed to the County Commissioners but he believed
the FOIA request to have been made by "Common Sense'.
3) Response to request for tax credit information to Bob Humbarger acting as
designer for the Farmers Savings Bank Building which is listed in the downtown
multiple resource area on the National Register.
4) Response to Panzica Architects regarding all National Register listed
properties within the proximity of the new GSA building for which they are
developing environmental impact assessment.
D. Committee Reports
1. Mr. Oxian requested a motion to move the nominating committee report to the
end of the agenda. Mr. Talley so moved. Mrs. Hostetler seconded the motion.
The motion was unanimously approved.
2. Budget & Finance
Mr. Wiener indicated that there was no report for this month b(,gond his
previous presentation.
3. Legal
Mrs. DeRose indicated that she had no report.
• 4. Historic Districts
No report was made.
5. Historic Landmarks
A) Mr. Oxian reported the following status of local landmark proposals:
534 LaPorte remains tabled by the Common Council but has not been withdrawn.
237 North Michigan Street, the former LaSalle Hotel. was established by the
• Common Council at their 1/8/96 meeting.
The ordinance establishiiig the streetlight at Napoleon & Stanfield Streets was
passed by the Common Council on 12/18/95. This presentation was the cause of
his absence at the December meeting of the HPC.
B) Leeper Park Proposal
Mr. Oxian requested a report on the status of devlopments regarding the Leeper
Park Designation. Mr. Talley indicated that he had ordered historical
photographs of the pari: and would be ready in the coming week to develop a
chronology of the development of the park's features. Mr. Duvall indicated
that he had corresponded with the Parks Department informing them that the
proposal would not be considered on this agenda and that the Commission is
gathering information on how other cities are dealing with the designation and
protection of historic resources in their public parks. He stated that there
had been some discussion of developing a third categorical landmark grouping
to address parks and other landscapes and that the Landmarks Committee should
probably meet to determine if this was the preferred direction and if so what
those standards should state. Mr. Talley discussed the Chicago "template"
method of standards and referenced National Register Bulletin #18 as model
criteria. It was generally agreed that the best methodology would be to
generate a general statement of Landmarks Standards for Parks and Landscape
areas and to address exemptions on a case by case basis at the time of
designation. Playground equipment may be generally exempted, provided that
such is well defined.
•
C. 415 Parry Street - Mr. Duvall stated that he had received a call from
Rebecca Shriner, the owner of this Local Landmark regarding her concern that
Robert Henry, the owner of a nearby contracting firm had indicated an
intention to rezone her property and several adjacent residential lots for
light industrial use related to expansion of his business. Ms. Shriner is no
longer residing in South Bend and is coming to town in the near future. During
this visit, she hopes to discuss this issue with Mr. Henry and the HPC. Mr.
Oxian indicated concern for determining the attitudes of other residential
property owners on Parry Street.
Mr. Talley raised a concern regarding the Leeper Park Landmark proposal that
Robert Henry is on the Park Board and that conflict of interest might arise
because of simultaneous consideration of these issues. Ms. DeRose indicated
that he would have no conflict of interest as he has no financial interest in
Leeper Park.
Mr. Duvall further described the other rated but non -designated buildings on
the street. Mr. Talley inquired as to whether the house could be moved. Mr.
Oxian indicated that most houses on Parry Street are owner occupied as was the
Landmarl: before the divorce of the owners. Mr. Schatz offered his appreciation
for the concern of the commission for this area, his neighborhood, observing
that the Henry Company had gradually been demolishing several structures and
had angered many local residents during the development of his facilities.
At this point Ms. DeRose indicated that if some action of the HPC regarding
this issue preceded action of the Park Board on Leeper Park designation then a
is
conflict: of interest objection could be raised questioning his objectivity the
HPC and its concerns. She phrased this as a "appearance of impropriety" issue.
Mr. Oxian indicated that he did not believe that it was appropriate for the
HPC to attend the meeting proposed between Ms. Shriner and Mr. Henry as the
Landmark issue was seperate from the land -use issue presently being discussed.
• Mr. Duvall indicated that the HPC did need to make an assessment as to the
viability of the historic structures in the present context to better respond
when some alteration is requested, citing Mr. Talley's question about moving
the structure. Mr Oxi_an indicated that the HPC should await some proposal
specifically regarding the Landmark for which the commission to respond.
Ms. Hostetler inquired about the residential context created by the existing
zoning. Mr. Duvall indicated that it was isolated having no connecting
intersection with any other residential street and being accessed through the
light industrial area on Frances and the commercially zoned properties on
Eddy.
Mr. Talley moved that this concern be referred to the Landmarks committee in
the case that further discussion is required which cannot be delayed for a
commission meeting. Ms. Hostetler seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously. Mr. Oxian instructed Mr. Duvall to make further inquiries
regarding the status of this proposal and the attitudes of other affected
property owners.
6. Standards & Maintenance
Mr. Duvall stated that the committee has not met and that he was anticipating
new committee appointments.
Regarding the fence at 1414 East Wayne, Mr. Fozo of the Building Department
has enforced the outstanding roofing permit violation and an in-kind COA was
issued for such. However, he had not heard from the fencing company. He
• presumed that the owner has not instructed them to remove the fence which is
in non-compliance. Some discussion ensued in which Ms. DeRose clarified that
although the 'commission may seek an injunction this would be a long drawn-out
remedy. Furthermore at this time the application has been tabled and not
denied. Ms. Hostetler and Fr. Bullene both indicated that this was a very
unfortunate situation as an owner acting in good faith had been placed in
this position by the contractor's negligence.
6. Personnel
Mr. Duvall reported no change in the personnel status. He anticipates
republishing our notice of the available position in the upcoming Southhold
Newsletter. The position description will be changed to indicate the
part-time position. An intern has been established for 3 hours of work per
week during March. This person has expressed interest in the assistant's
position.
E. Staff Reports
1. C of A Staff Approvals
a. 723 Park Av. (LL) - removal and replacement of tree.
b. 1414 East Wayne Street (LHD-EW) - In-kind roofing replacement.
2. DHPA Grant status
a. National Register nominations:
The nomination of the Studebaker Building has been received and proper
notifications made. Commission review of this nomination will be on the
February Agenda. Ms. Greiff is proceeding with work on the other nominations.
b. Economic Benefits Study
The Appraisal Group has completed approximately 80/1. of their work. Receipt of
the Draft Report is anticipated in the coming month.
3. Regarding the request for bridge appropriation, Mr. Duvall stated that
this item is for cash-flow for the DHPA grant funding. Ms. DeRose reinforce
•
•
•
Mr. Duvall's concern regarding the State Board of Accounts which is
disapproving of the use of the HPC account. Mr. Oxian instructed Mr. Duvall to
further consult with John Lentz regarding the authorization of the needed
payments.
V. Old Business
A. Streetlight I.D. signage.
Mr. Talley reported on his investigation of means for tagging the historic
streetlights. IIe indicated that neither Rink: -Riverside nor the city's sign
supplier in Bloomington were found to have appropriate devices. He distributed
brochure materials from a supplier of plaques of approximately 2X6. Mr Talley
moved that the provision of signage for Landmarked Streetlights be referred to
the Landmarks Committee. Mrs. Hostetler seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously.
Mr. Talley further reported on the completion of the streetlight project in
the Riverside Drive District. He also noted that the state of the Lightposts
in the East Wayne District is deteriorating due to failures in the concrete
posts. Jay Alexander of I&M has corresponded with him regarding the
development of East Wayne along the lines of Riverside Dr.
VI. New Business
There was no new Business
John Borkowski, Chair of
following slate:
President - John Oxian
Vice President - Catherine
Treasurer - Jerry Weiner
Secretary - Ed Talley
reported. Mr. Oxian then turned the chair over to
the Nominating Committee for nomination of the
Hostetler
Hearing no other nominations the slate was unanimously approved.
Mr. Oxian indicated that the committees would stand until the next month.
Members desiring new assignments should contact him during the coming month.
VII. Hearing of Visitors
VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters
IX. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
RESULTS OF LISTING IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
The National Register is the nation's roster of properties important in the history,
architectural history, archaeology, engineering, and culture of the United States,
its States and regions, and its communities. The National Register is maintained
by the National Park Service, and expanded through nominations by individuals,
organizations, State and local governments, and Federal agencies.
The National Register includes buildings and strictures such as houses,
commercial buildings, and bridges. It also includes sites such as battlefields,
parks, and archeological sites. It includes districts- groups of buildings,
structures, or sites that make up a coherent whole, such as a neighborhood, a
Central Business District, or an industrial complex. Finally, it includes objects -
not portable museum objects - but large movable properties such as fountains
and monuments.
What are the benefits of National Register listing?
1. Recognition that a property is of significance to the nation, state of
community.
2. Consideration in the planning for federally assisted projects, including review
by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation under Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
3. Eligibility for certain federal tax benefits, such as the investment tax credit for
rehabilitation of income-producing buildings and the charitable deduction I
or donation of easements/
4. Qualification for federal preservation grants when funding is available (not
currently available).
Once a building is on the National Register, a building owner can make any
changes to his/her building provided they are not taking advantage of one of the
benefits listed above. An owner using the investment tax credit or easement
benefits must follow the Secretary of the Interior standards for Rehabilitation.
•
0 Criteria for Evaluation
The following criteria are designed to guide states, Federal agencies, and the
Secretary of the Interior in evaluating entries for the National Register.
The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and
culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that
possess integrity of location, design, setting, material, workmanship, feeling, and
association, and:
A. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution
to the broad patterns of our history; or
B. that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
C. that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of
construction, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity
whose comments may lack individual distinction, or
D. that they yielded or may be likely to yield information important in
prehistory or history.
Ordinarily, birthplaces, or graves of historical figures, properties owned by
religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been
moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties
primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved
significance within the last 50 years shall not be considered for the National
Register. Such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that
meet the criteria, or if they fall within the following categories:
A. a religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or
artistic distinction or historical importance; or
B. a building or structure removed from its original location but which is the
surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or
event; or
C. a birthplace or grave of a historic figure of outstanding importance, if
there is no other appropriate site or building directly associated with his
productive life; or
D. a cemetery that derives its primary significance from graves of persons
of transcended importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or
from association with historic events,- or
E. a reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable
II
environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration
master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same
association has survived, or
F. a property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age tradition, or
symbolic value has invested it with its own historical significance; or
G. a property achieving significance within the past 50 years, if it is of
exceptional importance.
� 40
01-2/09/96 16:23 HISTORIC LANDMARKS—HRO 4 219 235 9030 P021
m
HISTORIC Northern Regional Office
t p1 Probst House
LA V DI v i P,KS 520 East Colfax Avenue
FOUNDATION OF South Bend, Indiana 46617
• 2192324534
INDlV VA iFax: 219 232 5549
February 9, 1996
To: David Duvall
From: Adrian Fine
Standards and Maintenance Committee
Ke: 1995 - 1201 -- 1414 East Wayne Street
Despite your misfortune, the members of the Standards and Maintenance
Committee met to discuss the COA application for 1414 East Wayne Street.
Independently, each committee member visited the site to look at the PVC fence
that extends along the west property line towards the front sidewalk. The
Guidelines state, "new site work should also be appropriate to existing
surrounding site elements in scale, type and appearance." Unless grandfathered
prior to the district's establishment, no other property in the district features a
fence that extends.beyond the front facade towards the street. The district is
characterized by its continuous band of landscape where only hedges, a low -
impact feature, interrupt and separate the lawns.
Based on the Guidelines for the East Wayne Street Historic District, the members
of the Committee recommend to the Commission that this portion of the COA
application be denied. One suggestion would be the applicant remove either four
(4) or five (5) of the fence panels. It appears that if four (4) of the panels were
removed, the fence would only extend beyond the house into the front yard by
approximately two (2') feet. If all five (5) panels are removed, the fence would be
well behind the front facade and comply with the Guidelines.
• Historic Preservation Commission
Room 1123 County City Building
South Bend, IN. 46601
Attention: David Duvall, Director
Dear Sir:
February 5, 1996
Having received notice of Wednesday's meeting on Saturday, I have been unable to change my
work schedule in order to attend this meeting. I would like to share this letter with the committee
members in lieu of my personal appearance.
Having purchased my house 4 years ago in badly deteriorating "as is" condition I hope I have
shown my commitment to improving my neighborhood as well as historic preservation as I have
renovated the house inside and out at a cost in excess of $75,000 to date. I have attempted in all of
these projects to restore the house to its former beauty and have used the highest quality products
and contractors to achieve this aim.
I would like the committee to be aware that I never received a copy of the historic guidelines when
I moved in and my understanding is that this book is apparently not presently available for
distribution. I would also note that I was never advised of these guidelines when other exterior
work was done (including a new roof, replacing storm windows and tuckpointing the foundation).
certainly question the fairness, if not the legality, of forcing removal of the fence which has been
• installed, given these circumstances.
I would also like the committee to be aware of the extremely positive, unsolicited feedback I have
received from neighbors. No fewer than seven neighbors have commented on the improved
appearance of the front yard since the fence was installed. The level of enthusiasm has been very
gratifying. I have also been made aware through the "neighborhood grapevine" that there is a real
level of concern that the historic preservation designation may be counter-productive by inhibiting
needed improvements and imposing unnecessarily rigorous guidelines which don't reflect
neighborhood consensus. I have been advised that there are neighbors who would like to see the
historic district designation rescinded and are interested in using my fence as a "cause celebre". I
am in favor of the historic designation but I do believe it is clear that neighbors and I would urge a
common sense approach that encourages a "spirit of the law" interpretation with particular
sensitivity to the wishes of the neighborhood for whom these regulations are presumably to serve.
S�cerely,
1;14�i
Jennifer Lackman
1414 E. Wayne St.
0
•
0
zz)l
vo
146"
i
I
I
Superintendent
fillip L. St. Clair
Administrative Director
Betsy Harriman
235-9414
Director of Concessions
Mary Moore
235-94U1.
Maintenance Superintendent
A. Michael Dyszkiewiez
.235-9414
Forester
Karl T. Stevens.
2336121
sr',.
Director
Susan O'Connor
235-9328
Zoo Director
Johnny Martinez
235-9800
Fiscal Officer
Ronald A O,'Connor.-
235-9401
Security
Joseph J. Radecki ..
235-9401
Joseph E. Kernan, Mayor
SOUTH BEND
PARKS & RECREATION
DEPARTMENT
To: Ed Talley
From: Betsy Harriman
Subject: Leeper Park
Date: February 22, 1996
Ed, the Park Board members received copies of the proposed standards for
Leeper Park last week. They decided at Monday's board meeting to
designate Park staff as their representatives at meetings with HPC staff.
Can we set up a time during the week of March 4th so we can sit down
and discuss the standards and designations? I cannot do it on March 7th.
Mornings are usually the best time.
Regarding tax credits, the Park Department is not eligible. They are used
in reducing federal taxes which we do not pay. If we had a project in mind
for Leeper and could get a developer for it, then the developer could be
eligible for tax credits, which I assume would reduce the cost of whatever
the project would be by the amount of the credits. That's how it was
explained to me.
301 South St. Louis Boulevard • South Bend, Indiana 46617 • 219-235-9401 • Fax 219-235-9331 • TDD 235-5567
727 South Eddy • South Bend, Indiana 46615 • 219-235-9328 - Fax 219-235-5566