Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
June 1996
AGENDA OF THE REGULAR MEETING of the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular monthly meeting County Commissioner's 7:30 p.m. Conference Room - Monday, June 17, 1996 7th Floor County City -Bldg I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Public Hearing A. Certificates of Appropriateness 1. 715 Riverside Dr. - fence alterations 2. 1121 East Wayne Street - new storm door 3. 1314 East Wayne Street - sunrooin roof alterations 4. 13$3 East Wayne Street - landscaping B. Local Landmark Recommendations 1. 521'East South Street - second reading 2. -Brick Streets - second reading: Navarre Street (Michigan to Portage), Lafayette Blvd. (Colfax to Navarre), Park Avenue (Navarre to Riverside), Forest Avenue (Portage to Riverside), Lamont Terrace (Forrest to Park), Marion Street ( Portage to Main). IV. Regular Busines's A. Approval of Minutes 1. May 20, 1996 B. Treasurer's Report C. Correspondence D. Committee Reports 1. Budget-& Finance 2. Legal 3. Historic Districts a. South St. Joseph Street (Monroe Park) 4% Historic Landmarks a. Status of recommendations to Common Council 1) 30750 Inwood Rd. 2) 16581 Chandler Blvd. 3) 501 West Colfax b. Leeper Park LL proposal 5. Standards & Maintenance 6. Personnel E. Staff Reports 1. C of A Staff Approvals a. 1102 East Wayne Street - Privacy fence ence in-kind replacement b. 1121 East Wayne Street - front door-- in-kind replacement 2. DHPA Grant status a. 1995-96 1) National Register nominations 2) Economic Benefits Study b. 1996-0 1) Grant Start-up meeting 2) Activities 3. Legal 4. Hardy Manuel Log House V. Old Business A. Adoption of Landscape Standards for Local Landmarks B. Leeper Park Local Landmark - second reading VI. New Business VII. Hearing of Visitors VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters IX. Adjournment pV'ejCAe vo: ILID41 • G(17/ u, STAFF REPORT 715 Riverside Drive South Bend, IN -- Non -Contributing STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT This house.is an American Foursquare in design executed with free -classic detail elements with Adamesque'influences. The house has been covered with aluminum siding and is considered non-contributing at the present time. The house was built by Seth Hammond in 1911. It was first rented in 1912 t Rollo and Blancehe Bunch who purchased the property in 1915. Mr. Bunch was salesman for Spiro's. The house was sold in 1920 to Charles Worden, an electrician -for I&M and his wife Ethylan. The property remained in their family until being sold to the present owners in 1977. PROPOSED CHANGE The application was submitted after the fact to allow alterations to the existing chain-link fence which delineates the property lines at each side of the front yard. This fencing has been modified by the addition of wood lattice panels which have been tied to the existing fencing. The avowed purpose of this alteration is to provide a measure of protection for young children who visit the house from sharp edges found on the chain-link. STANDARDS . The Preservation Guidelines and Standards District state: I.B.(1) Required - Plants, trees, property's history and development for the River Bend Local Historic (and) walkways... which reflect retained. I.B.(2) Recommended - New site work should be based upon actual knowledge the past appearance of the property found in photographs, drawings, and newspapers. New site work should -be appropriate to existing surrounding si elements in scale, type and appearance... I.B.0) Prohibited - No changes may be made to the appearance of the site by removing trees, fencing, walkways, outbuildings, or other elements before evaluating their importance to the property's history and development.... Front yard areas shall not be fenced or fences shall not extend forward beyond the setback line of the property..... RECOMMENDATION Few houses in the district have front yard fences and the installation of n fencing is -such location is generally prohibited by the guidelines noted above. Since the fencing in question predates the establishment of the district and,its regulations, the existing fence is allowed and its removal may not be required. However, removal of these fences,would enhance the continuity of the open space along Riverside Drive. It is worthy to note th CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT • since the present fencing location is legally established, its replacement with a more historically appropriated picket fence might be allowed if removal of the fences is not acceptable to the Owner. Since chain-link fencing is a common material found in residential, institutional and commercial settings, it may be inferred that the material is generally considered to be safe and hazard -free. Depending on the ages of the children involved and the specific conditions particular to these sections of fence,, there may be some justification for a temporary utilization of the lattice application. Staff would note however that a collateral hazard from wood splinters is probably present, especially as the wood lattice is unpainted. Staff also has concern for the long-term viability of the assemblage as presently constructed. The unpainted garden lattice is not sufficiently substantial to long resist the wear and tear from wind loads and soil contact and rapid deterioration of_this material should be anticipated. Due to the reasons stated above, Staff recommends that the application be denied. The commission may wish to grant some temporary period for the material to remain in consideration of the stated safety concerns with the intention of allowing the Owner a grace period to develop a more permanent and appropriate plan which meets the requirements of the site. DBD 6/11/96 • 0 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT • APPLICATION -- 1996-0531-2-B PROPERTY -- 1121 East Wayne Street South Bend, IN OWNER -- Jerome & Paula Eide DESIGNATION -- East Wayne Street Local Historic District RATING -- Contributing (C-10) STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT * This dwelling was built in 1925 for H.R. Stapp, the architect of many houses in the Sunnymeade area, and his wife Eva. Stapp designed this house in the Tudor Revival style. The house and garage are substantially finished in brick with half-timber effects at gable locations. PROPOSED CHANGE The owners propose to install a new storm door at the front entry which is to be custom built following the documentation provided. STANDARDS The Preservation Guidelines and Standards for the East Wayne Street Local Historic District state: • II.A.(1) Required - Original building materials shall be retained. Deterioration of wood materials shall be prevented through repair, cleaning, & painting. The existing or original architectural detail around windows, porches, doors, and eaves shall be retained or replaced.by replicas of the same design and material when deteriorated beyond repair.... II.A.(2) Recommended - Whenever possible, original building materials should be restored.... Every effort should be made to retain the original trim around windows, doors,... and other architectural Features. II.C.(1) Required - Original windows and doors including sash, lintels, sills, shutters, decorative glass, pediments, hoods, and hardware shall be retained or when deteriorated beyond repair, replaced with units resembling the original. II.C.(2) Recommended - Wood frame storm windows -and doors should be used but should not damage existing frames.... RECOMMENDATION The proposed new wood storm door is being installed in conjunction with in-kind replacement of the existing wood entry door with a similarly custom built door. The new storm door is designed to reflect the materials in the original and replacement entry door. Staff recommends approval of this application. • DBD 6/10/96 • a 0 0 E-- V400d rv(Ar-O i, E Glass sfi,IFM t7var- 3111 _1'-01% t I b6 � ou% 5V4HP HEART DESIGN ENTRANCE DOOR LOCK SETS • MORTISE CYLINDERS • HANDLES & PULLS • RIM & MORTISE LATCH SETS • LEVER LATCH SETS MORTISE . TRANCE DOOR LOCK SETS CYLINDER LOCKS Handle w/Knob Lock Sets Double Handle Lock Sets a ■ Solid Brass ■ 2 Keys For residential entrance doors For residential entrance doors 0 Standard cam ILCO 1021 where handle operation is ' where handle operation is ' ■ Standard keyway: Schlage C required for exterior and knob required for both exterior and for interior. Inside knob, rose, interior. Cylinder is provided 3-5/8" and thumbturn are included. for exterior and thumbturn for Handle -101/2" x 2,W' interior. H LACKUT Knob - 2" ` Handles-10-1/2" x 2-3/4" Sets designed for 1-3/4" door Sets designed for 1-3/4" door only. Specify on order if other only. Specify on order if other l E than 13/4". - than 1-3/4".1,9132"' 1201 C ' 0 RT313I RT4BI 3116' TMWBI RT1BI RT2BI TMZBI Complete Complete Lock OnlyComplete Set Complete Set Lock Only Set Set Front - 7.1 /8" x 1-'8 p p Y Case 5-1/2" x 3.58" .' 8" DOOR PULLS t SINGLE HANDLE MORTISE LATCH SET a RU9BI Handle 9-1/4" x 2-1/4" . RP1BP RPDBP RP2BP RPEBP Front 2-1/4" x 1" 10-1/2" x 2-3/4" 10-1/2" x 2-3/4" 9-1/4" x 2-1/4" 8-112" x 1-5/8" Depth of mortise 3-1/2" Door Pull Door Pull Door Pull Door Pull 2-3/8" backset; 2-3/4" available RIM LATCHES DOUBLE HANDLE MORTISE LATCH SET RTWBI RU6BI RU4BI• RTXBI Rim Latch Reverse Bevel Reverse Bevel RUSBI' Handles 9-1/4" x 2-1/4" 9-1/4" x 2-1/4" Rim Latch Cottage Rim Latch Cottage Rim Latch Front 2-1/4" x 1" 9-1/4" x 2-1/4" 8-1/2" x 1-5/8" 8-1/2" x 1-5/8" Depth of Mortise 3-1/2" Combination of both latches- RUFBI Combination of both latches - RUEBI 2-3/8" backset; 2-3/4" available SINGLE HANDLE DOUBLE HANDLE LEVER LATCH SET MORTISE LATCH SET MORTISE LATCH SET Fits all standard interior doors Fits all pre-drilled doors 2-1/8" cross bore; ',, Fits all pre-drilled doors 2-1/8" cross bore; • 2-1/8" cross bore 15/16" edge (latch) bore 2-3/8" backset 15/16" edge (latch) bore. A • 1" edge � L 2-3/4" available. 2-318" backset; 2-314" available. # , . (latch) bore , • 2-3/8" latch backset ' IRUQB. 2-3/4' 'available1-3/8", 1-3/4", 2" door thickness 2-1/4", 2-1/2" available RULBIRUMBI'• • Levers-3"art Design Heart Design • Projection 2-3/4" andle 11" x 3-3/8" 1Handle 11" x 3-3/8" RURBI-Passage Set RUSBI - Privacy Set Front 21/4" x 1" Front 21/4" x 1" For use on all interior For use on bedroom, Depth of Mortise 31/2" ' Depth of Mortise 31/2" doors where locking bathroom and other feature is not required. interior doors where latch back latch assembly is smooth iron.? privacy is required. "RUMBI available with XM9BG single cylinder deadbolt as a complete entrance door set - specify Mortise latch sets for use on doors 1.318" to 1-3/4" thick only. Rim latches for doors 7/8" -1-314" thick. Specify Emergency entry 2 on order If door thickness is greater than 1-3/4". Handles are cast malleable iron except the cottage latch which is steel. feature is Included. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT • APPLICATION -- 1996-0604 PROPERTY -- 1314 East Wayne Street North South Bend, IN �0 OWNER -- Jeff & Sue Bernard DESIGNATION -- East Wayne Street Local Historic District RATING -- Contributing (C-10) STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT This dwelling H. R. Stapp designed house was built in 1926. Stapp designed this house in the Colonial. Revival style. The first occupants were William B. Schafer, owner of a lumber business and his wife, Madge. PROPOSED CHANGE The owners propose to construct a low pitched (less than 3/12) hip roof over the existing flat roofed area over the sunroom located on the east side of the house. The soffit, cornice, and eaves conditions are to be retained as they presently exist. STANDARDS The Preservation Guidelines and Standards for the East Wayne Street Local Historic District state: II.A.(1) Required - Original building materials shall be retained. Deterioration of wood materials shall be prevented through repair, cleaning, & painting. The existing or original architectural detail around windows, porches, doors, and eaves shall be retained or replaced by replicas of the same design and material when deteriorated beyond repair.... II.A.(2) Recommended - Whenever possible, original building materials should be restored.... Every effort should be made to retain the original trim around windows, doors,... and other architectural Features. II.B.(1) Required - The existing shape and materials of the roof shall be retained. all architectural features which give the roof its essential character shall such as dormer windows, cupolas, cornices, brackets, chimneys, cresting and weather vanes shall be retained. II.B.(2) Recommended - Whenever possible, the shape and materials of the roof should be restored. Particular effort should'be made to retain materials such as slate, tile, and other unique materials not commonly found in new construction. Roof covering which is deteriorated beyond repair should be replaced with new material which matches as closely as possible the original in composition, size, shape, color, and texture.... II.B.(3) Prohibited - Nothing shall be done to change the essential character of the roof as viewed from the thoroughfare by adding additional features, large unsightly fixtures, or by using roofing materials not inappropriate to the style of the house. The roof shall not be stripped of architectural • features important to its character. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT • RECOMMENDATION The proposed alterations to the roof form indicated in this application would modify the roof form from a simple flat roof to a hipped roof of minimal pitch. The Owners stated purpose -in this alteration is to alleviate repeated interior damage which has resulted from the past failure of the flat roofing membrane. Past replacement of the original built-up roof with more modern membrane roofing has failed to fully remedy this problem. Under the proposed specifications the new structure would rise'a maximum of 2 1/2 feet above the existing flat roof in a half -pyramidal form. The height of this rise is restricted by second story window placement on the main body of the house. This would yield'a minimal visual impact from the street. The proposed roof will not result in removal of original roof surface or'original eave soffits and mouldings. Subsequent work would_ therefore be capable of restoring the original flat -roof character should this be desired in the future. It is noteworthy that the flat roof character of this appendage to the house derives from open porch features on the "Colonial original" whereas it would appear that this room was originally constructed as enclosed space. Although the proposed work does constitute an alteration of the shape of the roof, this alteration is minimal and should be perceived only upon close examination. Therefore it affect on district character may be considered as negligible. The procedures are also entirely reversible. Staff therefore recommends approval of this application. • DBD 6/11/96 J • Schumacher Sons 127 W Lawrence St. Mishawaka, Ind. 46545 219-255-6357 Proposal Submitted To: Mr. Jeff Bernard 1314 E Wayne N South Bend, Ind. 289-8677 Project: Proposal No. Date Work to be Performed at: 5/3/96 We hereby propose to fumish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the completion of - Subject; Install a new hip roof over the existing flat roof. •framing will be 2x6's with 1/2" five ply sheeting entire roof will be covered with ice shield roofing will be picked out by the owner flashing against the house will be copper and we will diamond cut the existing brick. soffit and facia to be white aluminum install vents two in the roof and vent the soffit. Total amount to complete the above items is not to exceed 3,000.00 THANK YOU f/10MTAJeAvCi5 -- 0179RW) 6-24fCiv . r Proposaf Includes:ti :ia'`.t t,e� Q►t,l? ¢., ..� _._ All material guaranteed as specified and the above work The aboveprices, specifications and conditions are performed in accordance with the drawings and satisfactory and are hereby accepted., You are specifications submitted for above work and completed in authorized to complete this contract as specified. a substantial workmanlike manner for the sum of- Payment will be made as outlined. Dollars Date of Acceptance: taymen to be made as follows: Signature. nature Si •/{ ."`� Dates' Signature. 9 r,AOArs LZ5811 01995 1-800-444-0038 ext. 305 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT • APPLICATION -- 1996-0604-2 PROPERTY -- 1333 East Wayne Street South South Bend, IN 014NER -- Laura Smith DESIGNATION -- East Wayne Street Local Historic District RATING -- Contributing (C/9) STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT This Colonial Revivial style house was constructed in 1941 for Francie M. and Mary C. Messick. The two story frame building has had minor alterations including the redirection of the front stoop toward the street by removal of metal railing as approved in May 1995.' PROPOSED CHANGE The owner proposes to install a comprehensive landscaping program•as indicated in the attached documentation. This plan includes a new yard light mounted on a pole as well as various plant materials. STANDARDS The Preservation Guidelines and Standards for East• Wayne Street state: • I.B.I. Required Major landscaping items, trees, fencing, walkways, private yard lights, signs (house numbers), and benches which reflect the property's history and development shall be retained..... I.B.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. Plant materials in close proximity to the building that are causing deterioration to the building's historic fabric should be removed. However trees and plant material that must be removed should be immediately replaced by suitable flora.... .I.B.3 Prohibited No changes may be"made to the appearance of the site by removing old plants, trees, fencing, walkways, outbuildings, or other elements before evaluating their importance to the property's history and development..... RECOMMENDATION The proposed landscaping plans is considerably more developd than the previously existing foundation shrubs which have become somewhat overgrown. Replacement of the existing foundation plantings should prove advantageious to the maintenance of the house. The new proposed work is consictant with the style and construction date of the house. As of this writing no specifications have been received for the pole lamp. In the absence of such documentation, • •Staff recommends tabling of this item until such information is made available. Staff recommends approval of this application. David B. Duvall 6/10/96 • 521 East South Street HISTORICAL CONTEXT The location of this house was developed for suburban residential use in the early 1870s, having been platted in 1869 by John Rush. By 1874, a house had been constructed on this lot as indicated in the 1874 bird's eye view. published by Chas. Shober & Co. and the 1875 Atlas published by Higgins Belden & Company. according to the Sanborn maps, the prior house appears to have been a gable and wing type. The site was occupied until approximately 1906 when this address is found'to be vacant in city directories. In 1911, Hannah Auer purchased this property from Edward Auer. Sometime around this date the present house was constructed. This house was occupied by Hannah and her siblings Margaret and James. Margaret moved from the house in 1914. James became a Captain of the Fire Department. Hannah taught at the South Bend Conservatory of Music. James who retired in 1935 lived in the house until'1952 and Hannah is last listed there in 1954. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION This two story frame house is located on the north side of South Street and the west side of Rush Street. The foundation is brick. The house is very eclectic in style having generally Queen Ann features in plan and massing including protruding side bays in a more or less cruciform shape, wrap-around porch at the front and street side, and a two story porch at the northeast rear corner. The front porch roof is supported by Tuscan columns. In contrast, .the siding and window placement has a evident Prairie style influence with horizontally divided areas of beveled siding divided by a stringcourse of drip mould at the second floor window sill line. The main roof of the house and porch are hipped as is common in both the Queen Ann and Prairie styles and the gables over the side bay extensions feature triangulated gable pediments common to Queen Ann design. RECOMMENDATION Based on the HPC Local Landmarks Criteria, the building at 521 East South Street 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 three 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 o,f elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship which represents an architectural characteristic or innovation. • 3.) Its suitability for preservation. The building fulfills criteria #1 as a large suburban house type typifying the second wave of development in the Monroe Park neighborhood. The building fulfills criteria #2 as an example of a transitional style embodying characteristics common to both late nineteenth Century and early Twentieth Century design. The building is rated Significant 11 in the Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Survey. The building meets criteria #3 by the integrity of its original construction with only minor alterations. DBD 6/12/96 • • Brick Streets of Chapin Park and Associated Near Northside HISTORICAL CONTEXT The Horatio Chapin estate.was divided among his children following his death in 1871. Subsequently, the property was platted for suburban residential development beginning in 1890 and 1891. By approximately 1910, the subdivision was built -out assuming its present character, In 1897 most of the streets of Chapin Park were paved in brick with the exception of the Navarre Street which had been previously paved in cedar block and the 300 block of Lamonte Terrace. The section of Lafayette Street from Colfax to Navarre was also paved in cedar block sometime prior to, 1897. The sections of Navarre and Lafayette noted above were repaved in brick in 1901. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION The streets included in this proposed Landark include' Navar a Street from Main to Portage; Lafayette Boulevard from "G__ K *0 *T^<��r-Ft�'�,00*; Park Avenue from Navarre Street to Riverside Drive; Forrest Avenue from Portage Avenue to Riverside Drive; Lamonte Terrace from Forrest Avenue to 41anum; Marion Street ro Portage Avenue to Main Street;'all inclusive of the curb and intersections contiguous to them. This street network follows a somewhat irregular meandering pattern which responds to the general street grid, the • diagonal of the.old Portage road, now Portage Avenue, and the slightly hilly terrain of the site. The paving is uniformly 3"X4"X5" fired red clay paving bricks with the exception of Park Avenue which has slightly smaller masonry units. Specifications called for 6" gravel base with 2" sand cushion as underlayment to the brick. RECOMMENDATION tt j }., Based on the HPC Local Landmarks Criteria, the Viiidli-', at .5z1 EaSi_ .3outli. Street 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. I 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. 3.) Its Educational value. 4.) Its suitability for preservation. 0 The street network fulfills criteria #1 as among the earliest and oldest permanent.pavement laid in the City of South Bend. The street network fulfills criteria #2 as an example of a transitional pavement technology providing all-weather surface for streets with greater durability than the cedar block first used as an alternative to dirt and gravel and preceding monolithic paving systems such as asphalt and concrete. The street network meets criteria #3 as an integral part,of the Chapin Park National Register Historic District easily available to the general public. The street network meets criteria #4 by the integrity of its original construction with only minor alterations. DBD 6/12/96 • • • �._. A QR -22-96 03:18 PM le, 4 4 � 0 a • 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE r 219 288 6314 THE FOLLOWING AnE PRESENTED FOR LANDMARK STATUS, PLEASE SCHEDULE FOR FIRST READING AT ,THE MAY HPC MEETING, 07,#; Ay �•� P��t'�cr� N•A VAR RE STREET - MICHIGAN ST. TO PORTAGE AVE. KIND OF PAVING MATERIAL FOUNDATION DATE OF COMPLETION GUARANTEE OF STREET NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS COST PER SQUARE YARD TOTAL COST OF STREET NAME OF CONTRACTOR 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK 6" GRAVEL BED WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER 26 SEPTEMBER 1901 10 YEARS 5,215.40 $1.33 $7,208.61. ROBERT, HOBAN & ROACH P.02 I, 1 ' rev Asoherarr LAFAYETTE BOULEVARD - COLFAX AVE. TO NAVARRE ST. KIND OF PAVING MATERIAL 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK F FOUNDATION 6" GRAVEL BED, 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER o DATE OF COMPLETION 9 DECEMBER 1901 GUARANTEE 10 YEARS NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS 10, 097.02 COST PER SQUARE YARD $1.33, TOTAL COST $ 14,003.20 CONTRACTOR 'C. H. DEFREES THE ABOVE STREETS WERE LAID DURING THE SCHUYLER COLFAX ADMINISTRATION. I THE TOTAL BRICK STREETS LAID DURING 1901 WAS 16,279 FEET, AT A COST OF $111,228.31 ��,Y�f��_�n�fs//�//jam//J}� f Rei YW"' Ya�"'C C„ } �`.K.,.(•�'� ✓i�,,.�`� �~ �� q" �� � �� �_ AIjR-22-96 93:18 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.09 P I • ; PARK 8&,r - NAVARRE ST. TO FORREST AVENUE tNOTE: THE 900—BLOCK OF PARK AVENUE IS TODAY RIVERSIDE DRIVE FROM PARKAVENUE TO FORREST AVENUE).:, fY x � $ x ? �� e � MATERIAL_4"_x-9" RED BRICK FOUNDATION 6" GRAVEL WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER DATE OF COMPLETION 9 AUGUST 1897 GUARANTEE 10 YEARS ' NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS 71404.40 ° COST PER SC "v��$ 1.59 TOTAL COST $ 6,508.69 CONTRACTOR ROBERT, HOBAN & ROACH • EQEST AVENUE -PORTAGE AVENUE TO PARK AVENUE MATERIAL 3!!zk4" "" RED BRICK ; FOUNDATION 6" GRAVEL WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER ' DATE OF COMPETITION 9 AUGUST 1897 GUARANTEE 10 YEARS NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS 5,120.07 our COST PER SR©- $ 1.71 TOTAL COST $ 4,324.77 CONTRACTOR ROBERT, HOBAN & ROACH i TeX Euc qflo"4 e • P I ARR-22=96 03:19 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.04 i M LAMONT, TERRACE - FORREST AVE. TO PARK AVE. 6 MATERIAL 3" x 4" x 9-" RED BRICK FOUNDATION 6" GRAVEL WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER d DATE OF COMPLETION 27 SEPTEMBER 1897 GUARANTEE 10 YEARS ' NUMBER OF_SQUAR Y�ARDS 1,096.40 ito+r o0 COST PERS $ 1.74 TOTAL COST $ 1,698.60 CONTRACTOR DEFREES & WHITTEN ` D. B. J. SCHAFER WAS MAYOR DURING THIS TIME PERIOD. n 0 -------------------------------- ,,..._---- AfOrO: LAFAYETTE STREET NORTH TO NAVARRE STREET, THEN WEST ON NAVARRE STREET TO PORTAGE STREET WAS ORIGINALLY PAVED WITH CEDAR BLOCK. THIS TYPE OF BLOCK STREET PAVING WAS LAID IN SOUTH i BEND FROM 1890 TO 1892. TOTAL LAID DURING THIS TIME WAS 35,107.13 FEET. THIS COMPARED TO 2,250 FEET OF RED CLAY BRICK BEING LAID DURING THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME. i SOURCE: CITY OF SOUTH BEND ANNUAL REPORTS , :G i ° 14, 6 -raaGC;�I i AWR-22-96 03:20 PM 0. 16 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 6 J. EDWARD TALLEY 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE SOUTH PEND IN 46616-1403 (219) 288.6314 1 PHONE, & FAX 0 TO: SOUTH BF,NU S'T'REET DEPARTMENT - SAM HENSLEY FAX NUMBER: 235-9272 FROM: ED TALLEY - COMMISSIONER, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IF YOU DID NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES OF TRANSMISSION, OR HAD A PROBLEM WITH RECEPTION, PLEASE CALL NUMBER LISTED 'ABOVE. INSTRUCTIONS: SAM; THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF •SOUTH BEND & ST. JOSEPH COUNTY IS P.LANNING TO NAME CERTAIN BRICK STREETS WITHIN THE CITY,LIMITS OF THE CITY AS LOCAL LANDMARKS. I. WISH TO PASS THIS BY YOU SO THAT YOU ARE KEPT AWARE OF THE PROCESS AS IT UNFOLDS. THE FOLLOWIING SHEETS BEING TRANSMITTED ARE MY INITIAL RESEARCH NOTES CONCERNING THE SUBJECT. THESE STREETS ARE SCHEDULED FOR FIRST READING AT THE MAY IIPC MEETING (3rd MONDAY OF THE MONTH), AND THEY INCLUDE: 1. NAVARRE STREET - MAIN TO PORTAGE 2. LAFAYETTE BOULEVARD - MARION TO BARTLETT 6 3. PARK AVENUE - NAVARRE TO RIVERSIDE DRIVE 4. FORREST AVENUE - PORTAGE TO RIVERSIDE DRIVE 5. LAMONT TERRACE - FORRES`T' TO LAFAYETTE; 6. MARION STREET - PORTAGE TO MAIN J INTERPRETATION OF NOTES: NAVARRE ST. - MICHIGAN TO PORTAGE: THIS IS • THE DESIGNA'T'ION INDICATING WHAT PORTION OF THE STREET WAS PAVED IN A SINGLE; CONTRAC'T'. THE PENCILED NOTES INDICATE WHAT EXSISTS TODAY. I IF "YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS GENERAL 'TOPIC, PLEASE COMMUNICATE WITH ME. THANK YOU. ' 6 0 PAGE ONE OF Fain National Tluq or Historic I reservatlon Fax: 202-6734038 1 To: Duvall David Page 1 of3 Monday, July 08,1996 8:13:35 PM • ]urge 1996 Vol. b Preservation Advocate, News National Trust for Historic Preservation Department of Public Policv I Ei ihancements C)nference Held in s Aashington, D.C.; ° ork Begins for ISTEA Ri .tauthorization 0 The ;'ederal Highway Administration, in cooperation witl the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Rail -to-Trails Conservancy, Scenic America and the Surf cc Transportation Policy Project, presented a two- day. •-iational conference on June 9-11, 1996 focusing on the 'ransportation Enhancements Program and its effe, s on communities across America. The conference sho, cased the multiple benefits typical of Tra, iportation Enhancement projects; explored the elen :nts of successful State Enhancement Programs; and adds �ssed the prospects for reauthorization of the enhicements set aside program of the Intermodal Surl cc Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), which Till e taken up by Congress in 1997. The Transportation Enhancements program is a desk nated 10% share of each state's allocation of the $13. billion Surface Transportation Program - a block . grar which provides flexible funding for a wide variety of ti nsportation projects. Projects undertaken with enh • icements funding have provided important new tran portation options, protected scenic roadside vistas, con- rbuted to Main Street revitalizations, and preserved hist ric transportation facilities. Of the ten specific Tra, iportation Enhancements activities authorized in IST! A, four have historic preservation aspects, and togc her they account for 30%, or $486,235,598, of the $1.6 pillion in enhancements projects approved as of Feb 1ary, 1996. In f, .1r major ways, Enhancement projects have con, •ibuted to making transportation more fully a part of tl ! communities it serves. First, the program is imp wing our multi -modal transportation system. Second, it is making an important, measurable contribution to economic development in America's communities. Third, the program is promoting livable communities, and fourth, the Enhancements program is fostering an unprecedented level of public involvement and support for transportation projects. Nevertheless, opponents of the enhancements program [who believe that transportation investments that do not involve concrete and asphalt are complete wastes of taxpayers' money] are forming a powerful chorus in the ISTEA reauthorization debate. Their motto and rallying cry is "You will run out of grass before we will run out of is The value of the progressive features of ISTEA, including unprecedented funding flexibility, a strong local government role in decision making, an emphasis on multi -modal planning, greater participation on the part of the public, and attention to environmental impacts, will have to be vigorously defended. There can be no retreat from the hard-won progressive principles embodied in ISTEA. The National Trust for Historic Preservation takes great pride in having been one of the principal leaders in promoting those principles in 1991, and we intend to take the lead in defending them in the upcoming reauthorization struggle. There are two steps you can take to help right now. First, items have been appearing in newspapers around the country mis-characterizing and ridiculing locally developed and state approved Enhancements projects. If you see articles like this, or recall having seen one in recent months, please find copies and send them to the National Trust's Public Policy Department, to,the attention of Dan Costello. Our mailing address, fax number and e-mail address are listed on the last nage. We want to work with you to put agroUip together to visit the newspaper and set the record straight about the value of Transportation Enhancements and the absolute necessity of building upon the advancements in transportation policy contained in.ISTEA. Second, we are assembling a working group within the 4 I .Y, hist ric preservation community to spearhead the Tru :'s reauthorization efforts. If you are interested in part lipating, use any of the above forms of com nunicatrons to let us know. We welcome all intd :sted persons, especially if you are associated with a lope y sponsored enhancements project, or are assn fated with a state historic preservation office deeply inv( ved in Your state's enhancement program, or are a c167 n who serves on a state enhancements advisory cour :it. We n6ed to know about successful tran portation enhancements projects in your c jri nunitie6 and bout the willingness of these ) r iunities t6 bear witness to the value of the project and is contributions. ' A -n x publication entitled Buildine the Past, Traveling to ti ! Future: A Preservationist's Guide to the ISTEA Tra,ortation Enhancement Provision is now available free )facharge. Prepared by the National Trust and the Fed. -al Highway Administration, this booklet provides a ge eral understanding of the way the Transportation Emit ncement provision with the Intermodal Surface Tra, sportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) works at both Fed, -al and State levels. Written with a special focus on the reservation community, this booklet defines what, tran portation enhancements are and outlines the app) .ration process for funding enhancement projects. In a dition, several outstanding examples of Tra, ;portation Enhancement -funded historic pre,; rvation projects are highlighted to show the pots itial of these,projects to help revitalize a nein borhood, rebuild a community, and stimulate ecor 3mic growth. Copies of the Guide can be ordered from the National Trust's Department of Public Policy at 2( !-073-4255: ; Ele ten Most Endangered Historic Pla• ;es List Released Eac) year, the National Trust names "America's Eleven Mo; End4ngered Historic Places", choosing sites that illus rate highly significant symbols of our American peri ige threatened by neglect, deterioration, lack of mai, tenance, insufficient funds, inappropriate dev, opment or insensitive public policy. Thr 1996 Eleven Most List contains a diverse mix of hist ric sites that are representative of America's indt trial heritage, the plantation economy of the 18th cent pry, religious freedom, public education, historic stru tures in national parks and national historic disti cts, historic hotels and theaters, railroad heritage, )^fist, ric neighborhoods and communities, and the home of a American president. This year the National Trust has' 3dressed the' arson that has affected over 35 Afri an -American community churches in the South. Giv. i the scope of the threat to these communities' ch ti, 7hes and the sense of place they offer, it was decided to h .:ak with tradition and name the Black Churches of the South as a 12th site to the 1996 Eleven Most Endangered List. The sites selected are as follows: Kriight Foundry, Sutter Creek,•Calif. Adobe Churches of New Mexico Sotterley Plantation, Hollywood, Md. Historic Structures of Glacier National Park, Mont. Uptown Theater, Chicago, Ill. Petoskey, Mich. Harry S. Truman Historic District, Independence, Mo. Central High School, Little Rock, Ark. East Elpd Historic District, Newburgh, N.Y. Wenthworth by the Sea Hotel, New Castle, N.H. East Broad Top Railroad, Huntingdon Co., Pa. Black Churches of the South In addition to naming the Black Churches of the South to the Eleven Most list, the National Trust is taking steps to assisting in the rebuilding of the Historic churches that have been ravaged by the recent arson fires, including: ► making loan funds available to historic churches that have been destroyed or damaged; ► participating in a fundraising campaign coordinated by the National Council of Churches; I ► providing technical assistance to congregations (through our Southern Regional Office in Charleston, South Carolina and Southwest Field Office, in Fort Worth, Texas. The first widespread threat posed by arson calls for a united response by Americans of all faiths and races to join in this critical effort to stop these fires and rebuild these cfiurches. The National Trust encourages all preservationists to join in this very public effort to rebuild the historic Black Churches of the South. Monetary contributions to the rebuilding effort may be sent to the Black Church Fund, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. House Approves Level Funding for HPF in FY97 The House approved the FY97 Interior Appropriations Bill (H.R. 3662) on June 20th by a vote of 242-174, affirming the funding levels provided by the Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies and the full Committee on Appropriations for historic preservation. Earlier this month, the House Subcommittee on Interior & Related Agencies and the full Committee on' Appropriations provided the same levels of funding. I I 'National TI �s' or Hlstor c Preservation Fax: 202-6734038 To: Duvall David i I � r I I r) I•I I I l rete ,ed in FY96 for the National Trust ($3.5 million), the rants -in -aid ($32.712 million), and the Advisory Cot, Icil on Historic Preservation ($2.5 million). , I i Thu :ommittee agreed to report language sustaining Cor ,ress's commitment to provide federal funding to the lational Trust through Fiscal Year 1998. The Hot e report also contained language stating that the Cor mittee Will recommend adjustments to the Ad-, ,ory Council's funding based on the rccc emendations of the authorizing committee, while also •ncouraging the Council to pursue private sources " of f1 iding to support its technical development and i trait ng activities. I ' The \lational Trust is very pleased with the funding leve provided by the House and appreciates the efforts of tl faxboard network in making calls, visits and writ .1 letters to Members of Congress to let them kno how important federal funding for historic pros rvation is to your communities and the nation. Sucl communications with your elected officials clearly mad a difference as there was no attempt on the House flop this year to eliminate the National Trust's share of fede al funds. Wol : has also begun in the Senate on the FY97 Interior Apl oppriations Bill. It is important that an equal effort be n ade to contact your Senators and ask them to sups )rt level funding the National Trust, the States, and .+ the .dvisory Council for Fiscal Year 1997. More details of d -- Senate schedule on the FY97 appropriations will be p ovided as they become available. I i . 'reservation Advocate News is published on a nonthly basis by the National Trust's )epartment of Public Policy and distributed via = ascimile to its grassroots faxboard network. For ignup information contact: == National Trust for Historic Preservation Department of Public Policy 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20036 (202) 673-4254 (phone) -_ 202-673-4038 (fax) E-mail:lawpol@nthp.org Tamar L. Osterman Director of Government Affairs Editor ° Writers: Carl Wolf, Dan Costello @.l 996; Preservation Advocate News Page 3of3 Monday,Ju 08,1996 MTV PM } I i • I F I , FIRST LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR BRICK STREETS, IN THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND • PRESENTED BY THE LANDMARK COMMITTEE • HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ~: s� r. AVo 0 aTREE T AF Lb M F A, -M= A Ll V 1 H LIZ CL LU Ix 04; -�-)T LM CLICY S �7 1 ',-A L I FeRrM A 5r JEX T U)) -5r,c dA H Z n—Wuj 3.r LL) J 4z > �s D 5--- r so) I t: FAATIE T F5 -r. r Q tl V) , =sm",IiMlt sr. trlanr E-Irn. f y Erlln�* ul V) r 3: i 0:ViaVAXRE Sr IIAKIOM TAAMEA Lik 19 V) vV*) 'v asRln4l ,ac ST N A K LU WATER v [1 1 CeLr4X AVE.A 0 th n F -- --- n L I I it -A IAPo L Eon ST I. V) 57 VI S' .CEtIT 5T ui i v U11, Ll ppyT • CiTy ENral N E E; R: U,-TjFnl,---y 5T. P D� L 0 1 r MA L aRA A 5 a �Er5L;m I B G /Y % 5Gv = v ST �l._� LU r'Ilne L_._J r Li lir M 111-111 E. MAll' 1 0 -,--rlIC P. ]T�ncr P'll _j FIE [IF] NO m m Z: [ I -1 O,IE_. I DF— J E ME] rl -c — M E. 5r. I E. of V if,10 [I f USE �E Q LHICA&LO 8d 611 -- --- n L I I it -A IAPo L Eon ST I. V) 57 VI S' .CEtIT 5T ui i v U11, Ll ppyT • CiTy ENral N E E; R: U,-TjFnl,---y 5T. P D� L 0 1 r MA L aRA A 5 a �Er5L;m I B G /Y % 5Gv = v ST �l._� LU r'Ilne L_._J r Li lir M 111-111 E. MAll' 1 0 -,--rlIC P. ]T�ncr P'll _j FIE [IF] NO m m Z: [ I -1 O,IE_. I DF— J E ME] rl -c — M E. 5r. I E. of V if,10 [I f 0 0 • NAVARRE STREET —MAIN STREET TO PORTAGE AVENUE' KIND OF PAVING MATERIAL FOUNDATION DATE OF COMPLETION GUARANTEE OF STREET NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS COST PER SQUARE YARD TOTAL COST OF STREET NAME OF CONTRACTOR 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK 6" GRAVEL BED WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER 26 SEPTEMBER 1901 10 YEARS 5,215.40 $1.33 $7,208.61 ROBERT, HOBAN & ROACH LAFAYETTE BOULEVARD —MARION STREET TO BARTLETT STREET2 e KIND OF PAVING MATERIAL 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK FOUNDATION 6" GRAVEL BED, 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER DATE OF COMPLETION 9 DECEMBER 1901 GUARANTEE 10 YEARS NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS 10, 097.02 COST PER SQUARE YARD $1.33 TOTAL COST $ 14,003.20 CONTRACTOR C. H. DEFREES NOTES: THE ABOVE STREETS WERE LAID DURING THE SCHUYLER COLFAX ADMINISTRATION. THE TOTAL BRICK STREETS LAID DURING 1901 WAS 16,279 FEET, AT A TOTAL COST OF $111,228.31. 'Original contract was Michigan Street to Portage Avenue. 2 Original contract was Colfax Avenue to Navarre Street. 1 • PARK AVENUE - NAVARRE STREET TO RIVERSIDE DRIVE 3 MATERIAL FOUNDATION, DATE OF COMPLETION GUARANTEE NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS COST PER SQUARE YARD TOTAL COST CONTRACTOR 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK 6" GRAVEL WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER 9 AUGUST 18974 10 YEARS 7,404.40 $ .87 $ 6,508.69 ROBERT, HOBAN & ROACH FORREST AVENUE - PORTAGE AVENUE TO RIVERSIDE DRIVE MATERIAL 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK FOUNDATION 6" GRAVEL WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER DATE OF COMPETITION 9 AUGUST 1897 GUARANTEE 10 YEARS NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS 5,120.07 COST PER SQUARE YARD $ .84 TOTAL COST $4,324.77 CONTRACTOR ROBERT, HOBAN & ROACH 9 Original contract was Navarre Street to Forrest Avenue. The 900 -block of Park Avenue later became part of Riverside Drive. ` Gravel foundations for brick streets laid during 1897 were compacted with a horse drawn five ton roller, five feet in length. City of South Bend Second Annual Report, 1897, p.60. 5 Original contract was Portage Avenue to Park Avenue. The 900 -block of Park Avenue later became part of Riverside Drive. • 2 • �J �J LAMONT TERRACE - FORREST AVENUE TO LAFAYETTE BOULEVARD' MATERIAL FOUNDATION DATE OF COMPLETION GUARANTEE NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS COST PER SQUARE YARD TOTAL COST CONTRACTOR 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK 6" GRAVEL WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER 27 SEPTEMBER 1897 10 YEARS 1,996.40 $ .85 $ 1,698.60 DEFREES & WHITTEN D. B. J. SCHAFER WAS MAYOR DURING 1897. NOTES: LAFAYETTE STREET NORTH TO NAVARRE STREET, THEN WEST ON NAVARRE STREET TO PORTAGE STREET WAS ORIGINALLY PAVED WITH CEDAR BLOCK. THIS TYPE OF BLOCK STREET PAVING WAS LAID IN SOUTH BEND FROM 1890 TO 1892. TOTAL LAID DURING THIS TIME WAS 35,107.13 FEET. THIS COMPARED TO 2,250 FEET OF RED CLAY BRICK BEING LAID DURING THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME.' SOURCE. CITY OF SOUTH BEND ANNUAL REPORTS FOR THE YEARS MENTIONED. Original contract was from Forrest Avenue to Park Avenue. After lots were laid out in 1911 the street was extended through to Lafayette Boulevard and paved with brick during 1912 and 1913. 7 City of South Bend Map of Sewers & Paved Streets, January 1898, W. H. Rosencrans, City Engineer; City of South Bend Annual Report, 1898. 3 0 0 MANITOU PLACE - FORREST AVENUE TO PARK AVENUE KIND OF PAVING MATERIAL FOUNDATION DATE OF COMPLETION GUARANTEE OF STREET NUMBER OF SQUARE YARDS COST PER SQUARE YARD TOTAL COST OF STREET NAME OF CONTRACTOR 3" x 4" x 9" RED BRICK 6" GRAVEL BED WITH 2" SAND CUSHION AND FILLER 10 OCTOBER 1898 10 YEARS 1,170.23 $ .86 $ 1,010.31 C. H. DEFREES 'This street was originally called Hodson Street. City of South Bend Annual Report, 1898, map. 0 4 • The City of South Bend is more fortunate than some cities whereby we still have a number of brick streets still in use today. The life of these streets was actually only guaranteed for about ten years but they have lasted for a hundred years or more.' The foundation for brick streets is the determining factor for their longevity; along with traffic volume, weight and speed of vehicles traversing across the surface which also determine a brick street's life expectancy. Brick streets are probably the most durable road surfaces that we know.' The brick streets which are being presented for landmark status are all rolled - base brick pavements (see Brick Paving Systems, next page). The width of the streets vary, as does the volume of traffic each carries. Some of the brick streets were originally paved with wood cedar block in the early 1890's, but were later repaved with vitrified brick. Early municipal health officials believed that the wood blocks contributed to disease because they held moisture and dirt, thus providing a breeding ground for bacteria.' Most of the early downtown business district was paved with cedar block, some of which was soaked with tar or creosote. Residents preferred the cedar block over brick because wood was quieter under the horse hoofs and carriage wheels. Out of the original seven miles of cedar block streets, laid between 1890 and 1892, only 91-hundreths of a mile were all that remained In South Bend as of 1901.1 The gravel foundations for early brick streets was compacted by a five -ton roller which was pulled by a team of hoses. By 1901 the horse and roller were being ° • replaced by coal powered steam rollers. * These rollers eventually were used for the compaction of asphaltic macadam streets, which replaced brick pavement. By the early twenties portland cement concrete was being introduced as the new method of paving streets. As the cost of producing this concrete began to fall and construction techniques became more efficient, no more brick streets were laid.' Maintenance of a brick street is considerably less than that of other paving materials. As long as the repairs are done correctly, these brick streets will endure for hundreds of years. Since some of the older residential and historic districts still retain their brick streets, the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County wish to designate them as landmarks in hopes that they will be preserved, thus adding to the historical significance of these neighborhoods. ' The Preservation and Maintenance of Brick Streets, Royce Baier, Illinois Preservation Series, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, 1991. 2ibid. 3City of South Bend Annual Report, 1901, p.73. 4ibid. • 5 Preservation and Maintenance of Brick Streets, Harry Kelso & Joy Dunn, Oklahoma Southwest Prologue Series. Brick Paving Systems Local conditions Influenced the selection of brick paving sys- tems. Engineers could choose from several types depicted in Report of Local Conditions in the Design of Brick Pavements, 1921. j"�.�•�i ;'ty �� is •<'.►,••� • `;�. .i!'t "'�: ,,,;,'':;.'t;; .:.� .: •.r Cross section of a brick pavement over a concrete base typically used for country highways. Bituminous material or sand was used as filler, and sand or a similar material for the roadbed Rolled base brick pavement, used for city streets •_tet. •• -{ � :�; � .'�•• ••• �•,w' � ..+7i::7%7T1. 7rr"'"':�.•�1.7J":.•T'""Tr. T17".,•.'.7.�....i..... .•' Typical monolithic brick pavement for country road& In this type of construction, brick were laid in a wet concrete base. Brickpavement over a concrete base, used in city streets. The base is covered by abed of sand, or a cement -sand composition if the joints are to be filled with cement grout • 1" Combination rolled base and separate curb commonly used in country road brick pavement CROSS SECTION SOn STREET SHOWING BRICK PAVEMENT ,& CEMENT SIDEWALK SGALC J il� y �I. lIjI �t1}i �,i1 "�{. �1 �� Ii� It! � I.i II�, ' Ii II1 !�.'!jj (I'1i i;Itr JI �I �( II1 �SI lII liI� �1},Jill, 11�i!.1i i,IiI ta�0 11 �il, ,� )t ql.�� �( �!1 !1 (1, i ji I� i!j , � 4! 11. ti{I Ii 1 MIt=l i !I �jII ;c? � it� ri I !,I i� �{, I.ii11i Ii?II1i !Ii �1i �I►1l► Ij�{ IfliI€ ���,11.►„1�) � I,{ �l �� fI1 �!I 1,� I� �I}I 1 ( 1 ��� ((Ij iI1i II ��ttt� ��•itt!1�1 .l�i "1(I i 1�1� 1�z, �l i(+J,•I1' ii {�,`I=, �,,i!: ;1. Il i ,( .I 7, ii' !)� �if t I'iI��1 j i i1�I (�i1�t �I31. C( 11I 1 �, 1 i ��1�Il�1("I/ �{j,i Ipill �� 4oa_t. I{ ,i{ l�lijI�1 I�,,?.i�l' l1��. �1i1� l!` i ,� Il {���Ii Al {,�� �I !(� l�l !!� � 1{i ► If! i�,I` JIi �( !i !I l �1 , 1I •1 I�I. �11 aI!!�II�( ��II� .�( ttI ai i1Ilt( Jj i�{,I!/, !Il Ill,i,�I�!!I!1IIll.� .��I1i l1i1{.1i,li \ A • REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA CONCERNING STREETS AND PAVEMENTS • • AFP 10 :t; Il��atl�,N I,ERt OF F1_1",_IC 1.1C '1 S IDEND MUNICIPAL CODE STRFF:7'S AND SIDEWALKS § 1&2 r.I the sum of twenty-five doll No. 7405 [ public Works and Safety and, in case of a single or -Si, § 5(1)} .-bond, shall maintain on file in the office of the Board permit request; filing; con to �;pithe continuation in force of such insurance throughout any such bond is issued. (Code 1962, 35-25) to make any opening or excaY. !or which ;hall file with the Board of 2't,a ;;' 13e6toration of surface; specifications, ,rson finitely State the location of tbe, ' making any opening or excavation or causing the be made in any street shall be required to replace all to if the opening. (Code 1962, § material and pavement as herein set forth in the City red; amount; conditions; 1. pons entitled "Street Excavation Repair 1964." A copy of shall be attached to each permit issued. c m plications specification is set forth as follows; - o = :ng the request under section j•"Street Excavation Repair 1964 I opening or excavation shall f I sum the City Engineering Department Bend, Indiana n as Board of Public South ''"RtUreas: The Board of Public Yti'orks and Safety deems it ed with the Board of Public 'iqo i to establish a firm policy for the backfilling of excava- z oned to save the City harmless ison tnd replacement of pavement disturbed as a result of making M of such proposed work, and ng or excavation in any street, these specifications are set ��d �v respects in conformity with the_ other ordinances the compliance therewith shall be a requirement of ob. for of the City re single or continuing bond inay apermit said opening or excavation under the provisions if e 2 of this chapter. It shall be the obligation of any person, petitioner for a period of time i the h1ppceorporation obtaining a permit for'an opening or excavation same and January 1. Any b& right-of-way to backfill the excavation and replace the ' reunder may be.renewed on an Board of Public Works and Saj pltrinetit as set forth in these specifications." (1) Backfill. All excavations under shall be . pavement ,rating under the jurisdiction of - b cWled in accordance with Section J entitled "Backfilling" of the � the State may give an inde gond. Wneer'ing Standards adopted pursuant to section 13-1 of this , CA together with all amendments and supplements. to make any opening or ercavg (2) pavement replacement All pavement shall be replaced 4" Parry insurance against all pe claims which wM a type of construction equal to or better than that which is l may arise from ;uch amounts rt=ed as approved by the City Engineer. All cuts in concrete as may be establi parment ,hall be first outlined with a saw cut not less than one ordinance ass g emending or is•2Q;s at ped that � 6 of Faid ordinance tad bile -half (1,'fa) inches. ✓ (3) Concrete or brick pavements. Concrete used in replace• provided ;e and permit fees shall be in eli'ect 11 OEM' Unt of concrete or brick pavements not presently surfaced With an 982. Any fee amountof the Municipal rQheltic material shall he Class A, Type I, as prescribed in the City tach appears to �;,, ccnfi;ct w;ih ibis Sttstdards. Brick pavements will be replaced with eight (S) inches of We and permit procedures related he' of the City of South Bend, Indiana, fticrete, except in some residential streets where the City Engi- indu and licensing procedures, are hereby a!i' 1m may require the brick to be replaced. I kW. • Na, i•82 i 449 E 0 IL r_ -7, I -EFT CF FLE�IC P. 1400 - STREET EXCAVATION REPAIR The following Section shall be added: 1400.01 - AUTHORITY: Chapter 35, Article I-1, Division 2 Municipal code, City of South Bend, indiana 1400-02 - DESCRIPTIONS Whereas: The Board of Public Works deems it necessary to establish a firm policy for the backfilling of ez--avations and replacemen of pavement disturbed as a result of making an opening or excavation in any street, these specifications are set forth and the compliance therewith shall be a requirement of obtaining a permit for said opening 9 excavation under Chapter 35, Article 11, Division 2,, Excavations, as set forth in the South Bend Municipal Code. Xt shall be the obligation of an person, firm or corporation obtaining a permit for an opening or excavation in the public right -o£ -way to backfill the excavation and replace the pavement as set forth in these 'specif i cations: BackfIll. - All excavations under pavement shall be backfilled with reasonably clean granular material w -it -h good compaction qualities. The material shall be placed in layers not to exceed 6 inches in depth. Eac layer shall be thoroughly tamped with a vibratory type mechanical tamper Special care shall be taken in filling around sewers, water pipes, gas lines, etc., to keep the earth at the same height on both sides to avoid shifting the pipe line. No removed paving materials or debris shall be used in backfilling the excavation. Excavations not under a pavement riz I be backfilled with virgin material removed from the excavation. Pavement Replacement - All pavement shall be replaced with a type i, construction equal to or better than that which is removed,' as approvecl, writting by the City Engineer. All concrete pavement removal shall be the nearest joint. Joints in concrete replacement pavement shall match the existing joints in the pavement - 17 .J A 117 '96 10:51AM DEPT OF PUBLIC WORKS P. 3/3 .:rete or Pisphaltic Pavenents Concrete or asphaltic pavement shall be replaced with concrete of i thickness equal to that which existed or six (6) inches, whichever is greater. Concrete used in pavement replacement shall consist of Type A concrete with 7% air entrainment. Slump shall not exceed three (3) inches. Coarse Aggregate shall be Limestone ox Blast Furnace Slag. No natural gravel aggregate may be used. When concrete is used in replacement of asphaltic pavement, a blacking agent such as C-250 Super Black (Color Pigments, Inc.) or its equal, shall be used. L"I" Brick Pavement When excavating brick pavement, the existing brick shall be removed a stockpiled, arior to excavation. said brick shall then be used for pavement replacement. j Temporary Patch if it is not possible, due to weather conditions, for the Contrac to replace the pavement within 14 days following bacItfilling of cut, a Coarse Aggregate base 8 inches thick and a cold asplial.ti.c surface s1ltl applied and maintained as a temporary patch until permanent repairs ca made. Concrete pavement patching shall not be done. from October ist through March 31st. During this time period, pavement cuts shall be repaired with a temporary patch. Such temporary patches shall be replz with permanent repairs no later than June 15th of that year. 18 is E. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISIONS IN REPAIR PROCEDURES 1. Excavations: a. Brick must be lifted in a manner which does not damage the bricks themselves. b. Brick shall be stacked and delivered to either the City or to the contractor who makes the final repairs, to be used for the final repair. c. Brick shall be removed to expose an area large enough to prevent any damage to the surrounding bricks. d. If, in the event a brick sub -base is encountered, the brick is to be lifted in the same fashion as bricks encountered on the surface. These bricks are to be stacked and delivered to the City. e. Concrete which is to be excavated should be, whenever possible, cut at pavement joints. When the area to be excavated exceeds fifty percent of a panel, ora diagonal cut is made, the entire panel shall be removed and replaced in original kind. 2. Permits: • a,. Permits should be applied for and received before any right-of-way cutis made. b. Permit applications should be reviewed on an individual job basis only. Each job should should have a separate permit. c. Permit exceptions: if personal welfare or traffic hazards exist, a permit may be applied for after the cut is made. However, all specifications must be followed as if a permit had been issued. 3. Storage of removed brick: a. Brick is to be stored by the City or by the contractor who will be making the final repairs. b. Brick which is to be stored by the City can be used by the contractor to replace any bricks which were damaged during the street excavation. These bricks should be available for a charge to the contractor. 4. Repairs: a. All repairs should be made in like materials and patterns. No exceptions. b. All repairs should be made according to the latest edition of the City of Dayton Construction and Material Specifications. c. Brick repairs are to be made with the same bricks which were removed from the site during excavation. 7 • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING of the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Special Monthly Meeting County Commissioner's 7:30 p.m. Conference Room Monday May 20, 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, Martha Choitz, Adrian Fine, Catherine Hostetle-r, John Oxian, Jerry Wiener, &.J. Edward Talley. Commission staff present was: David Duvall, director. Also attending the meeting were: Jane and Stan Hernandez III. Public Hearing A. Certificates of Appropriateness Mr. Duvall reported that no applications had been received during the last period which required public Hearing. B. Second Reading of Recommendation for Local Landmark Designation • 1. 501 West Colfax Avenue Mr. Duvall presented the Staff Report. Mr. Oxian reviewed the history of the move when the building was threatened with demolition by the South Bend Tribune expansion. He also not the association with the Frederickson house which was similarly moved. Mrs. Hostetler moved that the commission send the recommendation to designate 501 West Colfax as a local Landmark to the Common Council. Mr. Wiener seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. C. National Register Nominations 1. St. Casimir's Parish Historic District Mr. Duvall read the Staff Report. He further summarized the composition of the district by reviewing items from the nomination form itself.' Mr. Oxian . inquired as to whether the (former) Oliver Plant was included. Mr. Duvall stated that the westmost building of the plant was included in this district as constituting the edge of the district and that this building contributed to the. district reflection of the life patterns of the districts period of significance. Mr. Oxian inquired .as to whether the present owner of the (former ) Oliver plant had been identified. Mr. Duvall stated that he had located the owner in Chicago and a local real estate management firm. Mrs. Choitz moved that the commission send a favorable recommendation to the Mayor and to State Historic Preservation Office for the nomination of the St. Casimir's Parish Historic District to the National Register of historic Places. Fr. Bullene seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Oxian indicated that he had instructed Mr. Duvall to arrange a tour of the tour of the former Oliver factory for the commission. 2. Northern Indiana College/South Bend Chilled Plow • Mr. Duvall read the Staff Report. Mrs. Choitz indicated that the Miller family had taught at the College and that there was a book which had been published about them. Noting that the nomination indicated some serious deterioration at sections of the Building, Mr. Talley inquired as to whether the nomination would cause the owner to repair the structure. Mr. Duvall stated that placement on the National Register did not make any requirement of a building • owner, the regulatory effects of the National Register being limited to the federal government itself. He further noted that the owner in this case was primarily interested in the possible financial benefits of National Register designation as an incentive to sale of the property. Mr. Oxian inquired as to whether Mr. Duvall had discussed the property with the Owner. He indicated that he had not but that Historic Landmarks foundation had and that the owner, provided ready access to the commission's consultant -for purpose of developing the nomination. Mrs. Choitz asked how much land area was involved. Mr. Duvall responded that the site described contained 4.7 acres. Mrs. Choitz moved that the commission send a favorable recommendation to the Mayor and to State Historic Preservation Office for the nomination of the Northern Indiana College/South Bend Chilled Plow Building to the National Register of Historic Places. Mr. Fine seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3) North Pumping Station Mr. Duvall read the Staff Report. Mr. Talley noted the boundary description in the nomination and inquired if the recently enacted amendment to the Local Landmark legal description would affect',this boundary. Mr. Duvall responded that it would not. He further noted that the National register listing could be amended in future to encompass more area if a significant association were to be established. Mr. Duvall stated that the amendment of the legal description followed the land purchased by the city for the well fields whereas the proposed National Register boundary was a boundary of convenience drawn to define the land immediately surrounding the structure. Mr. Talley asked if there was any particular advantage or disadvantage of broader site description vis-a-vis the Landmarking of Leeper Park and the development of a • Preservation Plan for this park including funding sources etc. Mr. Oxian suggested that he felt it was wise, to separate the issues as the Parks Department would then be drawn into the Pump Station issue increasing the inter -departmental posturing around these issues. He asked for further clarification of the ,proposed National Register site. Mr. Duvall clarified that the boundary of convenience essentially followed the drive which surrounds the Pumping Station and includes the above ground cistern but does not include the reservoir. Mr. Oxian indicated that he felt National Register designation for the park should be developed as'a separate issue but that he could agree.with the inclusion of the reservoir in this nomination&a.i133c aft+y-- ,•1?� b�-??�� *^ hP^^ g�-�ed. Mr. Duvall' explained that in this case, the nomination was being developed according to Criterion "C" for its architectural style rather than for Criterion "A" for association with events. He went on to say that under these criteria, if the eventual intention is to list the park as a planned landscape, then it would need a separate nomination and that if a broader site were applied to this nomination its scope would be limited to the well fields associated with the utility use of the building during its period of significance (1912-1945). This designation would then cause any preservation plan based on this listing to focus on the utility uses rather than the planned landscape aspects related to the park's history and development. Mrs. Choitz discussed that the reservoir did have architectural interest featuring a buttressed surround although the retaining wall cap had been altered. Mr. Talley then discussed some discrepancies between his own research and Ms. Greiff's noting that he believed the reservoir to have been built in 1912 to 1914 simultaneous with the Pumping Station whereas Ms. Greiff had stated that it was constructed in 1910. Mr. Talley noted that the • cistern .was the oldest extant structure having been built in 1£399. This led him to ponder where the small pump houses figured in this issue as they were also constructed during the period'of significance. Mr. Duvall allowed that he could not account for Ms. Grieff's chronology but that she had been provided with Mr. Talley's chronologies as they had been developed. He also noted that. most of the bibliographic citations in the nomination predated the I • construction of the Pumping Station itself. Mr. Oxian indicated that he did not understand why the reservoir was not included. Mr. Duvall explained that the Pumping Station was being nominated for its architectural character and that the cistern was included not because of its character but simply because it lay within the boundary of convenience which circumscribes the Pumping Station itself. Mr. Oxian stated that the reservoir -was a man-made structure and did have architbetural style. Fr. Bullene observed that although all structures have a style the question here was the significance of the architectural style. He felt that he was not prepared to vote on an amended site at this meeting as he was not clear about- the architectural style embodied in the reservoir. Mr. Duvall suggested that with regard to the site definition, there needs to be clarity regarding the intentions for future development of the park. If the intention is to develop a preservation plan which seeks to preserve and restore its character as a planned landscape then a nomination should be prepared on that basis. Any preservation plan organized around the North Pumping Station's significance would need to emphasize the utility related aspect and site limits and would necessarily preclude some portions of the larger park from such a plan. Mr. Fine asked whether the Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology had been contacted regarding the eligibility of the Park for designation as a planned landscape. Fr. Bullene indicated that he found an educational value in the inclusion of the cistern as providing contrast of the utilitarian approach of 1899 to the high -style development found in 1912. He further stated that similar -contrast may be found in the attitude to the reservoir but repeated that there was insufficient information at present. Mr. Duvall noted' that it was not • necessary to amend the nomination at this time but that it could'be amended in the future based on subsequent research and interpretation. Mr. Talley inquired if this would require a repetition of the whole nomination process including competitive bidding for consultants, etc. Mr. Duvall stated that this would not necessarily be required so long as resources could be found for the work in-house adding that if the commission did not act on the nomination on this evening.it would miss timely placement on the agenda of the July State Historic Preservation Review Board. Fr. Bullene moved that the commission send a favorable recommendation to the Mayor and to State Historic Preservation Office for the nomination of the North Pumping Station Building to the National Register of Historic Places and that the commission investigate later amending the nomination with reference to the cistern and the reservoir. Mr. Talley sought clarification of the resources to be included. Fr. Bullene clarified that he was allowing that further consideration might determine to remove the cistern as well as addition of the reservoir. Mrs. Choitz seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7 to 1 with Mr. Talley casting the no vote. IV. Regular Business A. Approval of Minutes 1. March 18, 1996 Mr. Oxian provided Mr. Duvall with his minutes with slight corrections inserted. Mr. Talley moved that the March minutes be approved as corrected. Mrs. Hostetler seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. • 2. April 15, 1996 Mr. Oxian observed that the motions for approval of -COAs were not fully stated as recorded in the minutes. Mr. Duvall indicated that he had been in the habit of fully recording simple motions only when they were for denials as he did not anticipate legal challenges to approvals but that he could fully record such motions if the chair so desired. Fr. Bullene offered as an example that • the commission had in the last year approved one skylight and disapproved another and that the fully recorded motions might make such distinctions more clear to someone wishing to understand how the cases differed. Mr. Oxian also noted that a comment., attributed to Mr. Talley about the suggestion of re—ranking not being relevant to a COA application- had been made by him. Mr. Fine moved that the March minutes be approved as corrected. Mrs. Hostetler seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. Treasurer's Report , Mr. Wiener distributed a financial statement. Fie noted that about $500 in reimbursements were not specified as to the purpose of the expenditure. He is sorting them out but most of the costs are related to travel expenses. Mr. Talley asked if the National Register and other grant funding was not reflected in this report. Mr. Duvall responded that this was not entirely correct, stating that the grant cashflow was not included -but that some expenses listed did reflect our match funding to the grant projects, most notably travel reimbursement to Ms. Greiff and photographic costs. C. Correspondence Mr. Duvall indicated that there was no correspondence to report which was not discussed elsewhere in the agenda. D. Committee Reports 1. Budget & Finance Mr. Duvall indicated that there was no report for this month. • 3. Legal Mrs. DeRose was absent this meeting. Mr. Duvall stated that he had sent violation -notices which would be covered in his staff report. 4. Historic Districts , A) Mrs. Choitz distributed a report for the Three Year Plan prepared by the committee. Mr. Oxian asked what portion of the Near Northwest Neighborhood was included here . Mrs. Choitz responded that only -a small ,area was included: Mr. Duvall clarified that the area presently under consideration was approximately described as Madison and Marion Streets between Lafayette and Chapin and the side streets adjacent. Mrs Choitz observed that past efforts to designate more extensive districts in.this area had met resistance. Mr. Oxian indicated that it would be more descriptive, to use the title :"Kankakee Race District" to further describe the area under consideration. Mr. Oxian expressed resistance to the establishment of rural Historic Districts at this time. The report was unanimously approved. B) Mr. Oxian reported on his discussion with a representative from the Monroe Park neighborhood to resume discussions on ,designating some portion of this neighborhood as a Local Historic District. A preliminary meeting is being organized and this activity will be undertaken by the Districts Committee. 5. Historic Landmarks a. Recommendation s to the County Council Mr. Oxian reported that 30750 Inwood Rd. and 165£31 Chandler Blvd. are still awaiting completion of survey work by Staff. • b. Leeper Park Proposal Mr. Talley reported that Betsy Harriman .of Parks Dept. has been notified of the HPC's intention to proceed with second reading of Local Landmark Designation. Second reading will be placed on the agenda for the June meeting. The standards and Guidelines have been provided to Parks Dept., Common Council • members Lueke and Coleman, and the Northern Indiana Historical Society. Mr. Oxian proposed that the general landscape standard be first adopted by the commission at the June meeting and that specific standards be adopted thereafter as part of the Landmark designation. There was discussion regarding drafting a boilerplate or frontpiece to attach to the Landscape standards similar to the Landmark Building Standards. • c. Landmark Proposals , 1) 521 East South Street Mr. Oxian indicated that Owners consent had been received for this property and therefore this meeting could be considered the First Reading for the designation. Second Reading will be scheduled for the June meeting of the commission `J 2) Brick Streets: Navarre St. (Michigan to Portage), Lafayette Blvd (Colfax to Navarre), Park Avenue (Navarre to Forrest), Forrest Av. (Portage to Riverside), LaMont Terrace (Forrest 'to Park), and Marion St. (Portage to Main). Mr. Oxian indicated that this would be First Reading for Landmark Designation of the above referenced sections of street. Mr. Wiener noted that the section of Park should extend from Navarre to Riverside. Mr, Talley stated that this discrepancy arose from the renaming of the section of Riverside from Forrest to Riverside in 1905. He also noted that the 900 block of Park Avenue has one layer of asphalt over the brick. Mr. Duvall stated that he has difficulty with developing a legal description for a web or network of streets. He suggested that each length of street be designated as. a separate Landmark for purpose of descriptXon. He also noted a collateral ambiguity regarding the inclusion or exclusion of tree lawns, curbs, and sidewalks of the proposed designated areas. Mr. Oxian felt that -the street network could be included in a single ordinance so long as street numbers and edge conditions were defined. He allowed that if protection of street lights is intended to be included, then the sidewalk areas may need to be included. Mrs. Choitz suggested that the centerline of the street could be used as a benchmark with described widths of paved areas to identify the intended area. Mr. Talley observed that for instance, Riverside Dr. has a 60 foot right of way but only 30 feet of pavement. Duvall observed that it was not going to be possible to describe a boundary condition as is usual in designating a landmark property because a single contiguous area is not being inscribed. He felt that the best way to describe the areas will be to describe a right—of—way from point A to point B and that a litany of such locations could be listed. Fr. Bullene indicated that he felt the network aspect of this group of street is the aspect which establishes significance in, this case. He suggested language like: "A web of streets composed of:...." followed by a list of the streets to be designated. Mrs, Choitz indicated particular concern to include the intersections of these streets. Mr. Duvall noted that the center of right of way does not necessarily correspond to the center of the paving. Mr. Oxian indicated that the curbs need to be included. Mr. Fine inquired whether the commission had received grant funding for the study of brick streets. Mr. Duvall responded that one of the projects indicated in our Certified Local Government General Assistance Grant for the coming year would be for such a city—wide Context Study. Mrs. Choitz suggested landmarking the brick streets remaining in Monroe Park as well. Mr. Fine asked if we were going to attempt to landmark all brick streets in the city and if not, how the determination was being made as to which streets were of importance. Mr. Oxian indicated that he felt the commission. could proceed with this landmark proposal prior to completing the context study as this interconnecting group of streets was obvious and probably unique in the city. Mr. Fine stated that the purpose of the study was to define the significance of brick streets in the city implying that this should be done to • make the case for such designations. Mr. Oxian stated that he believed at least some of the indicated streets to be threatened and that immediate action was called for. Mr. Talley asked whether the Park Avenue street lights should be included. Mr. Oxian suggested to leave the streetlight issue to a later time. Mr. Talley stated that since the section of Riverside Drive east of Forrest was already in a Local Historic District it could be omitted from this designation. He also pointed out that the sections of street identified had been taken from original contracts and that in some cases the brick paving was no longer complete (e.g. Navarre [Main to Portage]) d. Landmark Committee Three Year Plan Mr. Oxian submitted the Landmarks Committees Three Year Plan Report indicating that the first priority would be for a re -survey of the County. The 1975 survey is badly in need of updating. Priority was also placed on cemeteries, downtown South Bend buildings, industrial buildings, schools, Bendix Woods, and churches and synagogues. Mrs. Choitz stated that it was necessary to emphasize the regulatory capability of local designation, fearing that after National Register listing is accomplished owners may have exhausted their efforts and fall short of providing local protective measures. She asked if there were buildings being proposed for National Register where the .Owner was not giving permission. Mr. Duvall replied that the only property where owner opposition had become a problem was, at_the Studebaker Carpentry Shop and that although owner consent is not generally required. He stated some dismay at what occurred in this case but noted that the result would probably be a determination of eligibility as • opposed to placement on the Register. With regard to upcoming projects, he stated that two projects might meet with owner objection, those being the South Michigan Street and Colonial Gardens districts. He stated that if -owner objection seemed to be forthcoming we would probably reprogram the funding for another use. Mrs. Choitz indicated that 'she has observed increasing inappropriate alteration of buildings and reemphasized her concern that as many Local Districts be moved forward as possible and that the distinctions between the National and Local programs be clear. Mr. Oxian removed himself from the Chair which was assumed by Mrs. Hostetler. He then made a motion that the commission approve the Landmark Committee Three Year Plan. Mr. Borkowski seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Oxian the resumed the Chair. Mr. Talley asked if he could amend the plan on this evening to add the Park Avenue Streetlights as a priority. Mr. Oxian indicated that this should be brought to the Landmarks Committee first. 5. Standards & Maintenance Mr. Fine indicated that the committee had no report. Mr. Oxian asked whether there was a Three Year Plan. Mr. Fine indicated that the Three Year Plan had been submitted at the April Meeting. Mr. Oxian indicated that it should be adopted by the commission. John Borkowski moved that the commission adopt the Standards and Maintenance Committee report delivered at the April meeting. Mr. Wiener seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. Personnel Mr. Duvall reported that there had been no change since the last meeting but • the recent appropriations in Washington might result in the release of CDBG funding to allow the employment of an Administrative Assistant.. Mr. Talley asked whether there would be problems related to scheduling the use of funding. Mr. Duvall indicated that there would be complications in that the funding would only be good for the calender year which could make expenditure of all funding difficult. He noted that assuming approval of an already • interviewed candidate it should not take long to fill the position but that the'possibility of losing those candidates to other opportunities increased as time passes. E. Staff Reports 1. C of A Staff Approvals Mr. Duvall reported that there had been no Staff approvals during this period. 2. DHPA Grant status a.National Register nominations: Mr. Duvall reported that work for -this grant cycle had been completed. b. Economic Benefits Study The Appraisal Group has indicated that the report should be completed in the next 30 days. c. Mr.. Duvall reported that DHPA funding for the coming cycle commences June 1. The start—up meeting, with DIiPA representatives was postponed and will require rescheduling. Jon Smith has given verbal consent to start preparing for the projects. The activities to be included are: Context studies for Brick Streets and the WPA in South Bend; National Register nominations for Colonial Gardens, South Michigan Street, Multiple Property Nomination for the old City of Lowell, and the Jacob Rush House. • Mr. Talley inquired about the development of a preservation plan for Leeper Park. Mr. Duvall responded that this was not- included in the application submitted in October. 1995 but that one advantage of the General Assistance Grant is that funding may be reprogrammed within it if project feasibility changes.. 3 Legal Mr. Duvall reported having sent two letters of violation during the past month: 715 Riverside Drive for fence alterations and 725 Lincolnway East for porch alterations, both without COA. Mr. Oxian asked what the Department of Buildings had done regarding these violations. Mr. Duvall indicated that there had been copies circulated to them but that permits were probably not required in either instance. Mr. Oxian indicated that Mrs. DeRose should be notified. Mr. Duvall indicate that he had spoken to her about these cases. ' Mr. Duvall also brought the commission attention to the proposed new zoning category for Professional/Health Care Use. This had been scheduled for hearing this month but has been continued to the June Area Plan Commission meeting. lie expressed concern with how this could affect some historic properties near hospital locations. Mr. Oxian indicated that he was not sure where to assign responsibility for investigation of this issue. Mr. Talley expressed concern. Mr. Oxian suggested that he might call a special meeting to further discuss this since its seems to not fit in a committee. Mr. Duvall reminded him that a meeting of the committee of the whole would require public notification. It was finally concluded to discuss the issue further at the regular June meeting. A discussion will be held at 7:00 prior to the regular meeting. • V. Old Business There was no old business -to consider. VI. New Business There ►vas no old business to consider. 'ail • VII. Hearing of Visitors Mrs. Hernandez indicated that they had not been able to submit the application for their COA before the deadline. Mr. Duvall determined that the fencing could be approved as an in-kind replacement. VIII. Announcements & Miscellaneous Matters none IX. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. • • APR -10-96 11:38 PM 14381 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 • 9.0 LANDSCAPES - STANDARDS ANIS CRITERIA FOR LEEPER, PARK 9.1 Introduction 1. In these guidelines the verb Should indicates a recommended course of action; the verb Shall indicates those actions which are specifically required to preserve and protect significant architectural elements. 2. The intent of these standards and criteria is to preserve the overall character and appearance of Leeper Park including its spatial organization, topography, vegetation. circulation and features. 3. The standards and criteria acknowledge that there will be changes to the landscape and are intended to make the changes sensitive to the historic character of the landscape. 4. Each property will be'separately studied to determine if a later §Lddition(s) and/or alterations) can, or should, be removed. 5. Since it is not possible to provide one general guideline, the following factors that will be considered in determining whether a later addition(s) and/or alteration(s) can, or should, be removed include; a. Compatibility with the original property's integrity in scale, materials and character. b. Historic association with the property. c. Quality in design and execution of the addition/alteration. d, Functional usefulness. G. Recreational facilities which exist should be allowed to remain as long as they serve substantial community functions, In some cases these features can be redesigned Lo be more compatible with the overall landscape. . 7. Additions to existing recreational facilities shall not be allowed unless such additions make the facilities more compatible with the overall landscape. 8. The development of additional facilities for active recreation or single purpose uses for limited user groups shall not be allowed. 9. Proposals for special activities and events which cause significant impacts or require permanent or even semi- permanent (seasonal) structures or facilities shall not be r� U A P_02 i APR -10-96 11:39 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.03 • permitted. 10. The Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County recommends that the work proposed to the landscape be executed with the guidance of landscape professional with expertise with historic landscapes. 11. The land, streets, island(s), street lighting, park lighting, topography, vistas, vegetation, circulation, architectural elements, structures, spatial organization, street furniture, sewer covers, electrical and water vault and/or manhole covers, parking areas are subject to the terms of the landscape guidelines herein stated. 12. Items under Historic Preservation review include but are not limited to the following: 9.2 Spatial Organization (includes Views, Vistas, Landscape Spaces, ete.) Refer to Sections 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7 and 9.8 for additional Standards and Giiteria that may apply. ' 1. Views and vistas are among the most important aspects of a landscape, therefore, they should be maintained and • preserved. 2. All views, vistas, landscape spaces, located in the eastern section and central section of Leeper Park shall be preserved. All views, vistas, landscape spaces located north and east and west of a line designated as the northern fence of the tennis courts located in the western section of Leeper Park shall also be preserved. This shall include the island(s) located in the St. Joseph River and the slough which lies between the island(s) and the mainland. All views, vistas and landscape spaces shall also include the: entirety of the riverbank as well as the area lying between the roadway of Riverside Drive up to and including the riverbank and cut stone wall along the riverbank. 3. Original or later contributing spacial organizational features shall be retained in their existing configuration and shall be retained in their Qxisting configuration and shall be maintained through proper drainage, access and erosion dontrol, pruning and removal of invasive vegetation or otherwise using recognized horticultural and soil management practices. 4. Alteration of existing or addition of new spacial organizational features will be considered if they do not alter 0 APR -10-96 11:40 PM 1051 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 222 G914 P.04 • the basic concept of the historic landscape design. b. Deteriorated or missing spatial organizational features shall be replaced with features that match the original in form, " .shape, color and texture. 6. When replacement of features is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 7. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materirils may be considered. 8. Important visual connections between spaces within the landscape shall be retained by maintaining vegetation, circulation and topography features which contribute to these visual relationships. 9. The historic spatial and functional relationship of circulation systems, water features and structures shall be preserved by maintaining the ma*sing of adjacent vegetation, vistas, or other associated features.` 10. Maintenance of removal of, and additions of vegetation • . materials and features should consider maintaining existing , or intended vistas and spaces, screening intrusions, creating new spaces where appropriate and maintaining defined areas of .shade and sun. 11. The form and shape of individual spaces and their associated vertical elements shall be retained in order to preserve the historic relationships of the Iandscape. Examples include the relationship between open fields and hedgerows or the width and length of an allec. 12. Moving or demolishing historic structures that would alter spacial and visual relationships in the landscape shall not be allowed. 13. Construction of new structures that would alter historic spacial and visual relationships in the landscape shall not be allowed. 14. Intrusive views or new construction may be screened with compatible fencing or plant material so long as the screening would not detract from the historic character of the landscape. n NPR -10-96 11:41 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 • 9.3 Zbpogmphy (includes the Shape, Slope, ]Elevation, Contour of land.forxns and Ground Plane, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.2, 9.4, 9.t5, 9.8 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standard and Criteria that may apply. , 1. All locations and items listed in 9.2.2 shall also apply to this section and shall be preserved. • 2. Original or later contributing topographical features shall be retained in their existing configuration and shall be maintained through proper drainage, access and erosion control, and recognized soil management practices. 3. Alteration of existing or addition of new topographical features will be considered if they do not alter the basic r concept of the historic landscape design. 4. Natural features (e.g. rock outcroppings) which are integrated into the landscape shall be treated as part of the overall design and shall be retained. 5. Deteriorated or missing topographical features shall be replaced with materials that match'the original in form, shape, color and texture. • - 6. When replacement of materials or features is necessary, it ' should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 7. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may may be considered. 8. Wherever appropriate, plant materials rather than structural materials should be used to solve erosion problems. Repair of the WPA island and slough stone construction projects is strongly encouraged. 9.4 Vegetation (includes Trees, Shrubs, Ground Covers, Hedges, Allees, Fields, Forests, Planting Beds, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.2, 9.3, 9.5, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. Refer to Section 9.2.2 for items within this section which shall be preserved. Also included in this section shall be the diverse w variety of trees, shrubs bushes and other vegetation which may or may not be indigenous to this region. Lists of such 0 P- 05 APR -10-96 11:41 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.06 types of vegetation can found in lists and inventories which were published in the annual reports of both the City of South Bend and the South Bend Park Commission from the years 1910 to 1940. 2. Original or later contributing vegetation materials and features shall be retained in their existing configuration and shall be maintained through proper horticultural management practices. 3. Alteration of existing or addition of new vegetation materials and features will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 4. Deteriorated or missing vegetation materials and features shall be replaced with materials that snatch the original in size, shape, color, form and texture. 5. When replacement of vegetation materials and features, is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 6. If using the same vegetation material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute vegetation • materials may be considered if they convey the same growth habit, form, foliage and bloom characteristics as the historic « plant. 7. Existing healthy vegetation material shall be retained unless it is part of a later non -compatible design or is volunteer vegetation inconsistent with the original design. S. Consideration for removal of existing healthy vegetation materials and features will be given when it is in conflict with the original design intent of the landscape, such as when an important vista has become overgrown or when plants have grown out of r:cale with their intended purpose. 9: Maintenance of, removal of, and additions of vegetation materials and features should consider maintaining existing or intended vistas and spaces, screening intrusion~ , creating new spaces where appropriate and maintaining defined areas of shade and sun. 10. Invasive vegetation shall be removed' whenever technically feasible and shall be replaced with appropriate vegetation consistent with the original design of the park and with current factors such as security, ecological conditions and wildlife management practices. 0 n It 0 APR -10-96 11:42 PM 1031 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 283 6314 11. Hazardous plants or portions of plants should be removed promptly, 12. Plants with diseases that are difficult or not practical to control or cure should be removed promptly to prevent their infection of other plants. 13. Mutilated or distorted plants should be removed. 14. Plant replacements should be added on a schedule that will insure a continuity in the landscape design. 15. Existing vegetation shall be protected adjacent construction activities by fencing the root system prior to the start of construction. 16. Future plantings of the main floral garden in the central section of the park shell be guided by the design of the main floral garden as laid out by George Kessler in 1912. 9.5 Circulation • (includes Roads, Paths, Parkways, Drives,' gaits, Walks, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.2, 9.4, 9.6, 9.8, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. The following shall be preserved: Riverside Drive, Lafayette Boulevard, Park Lane (Foote Street), Bartlett Street, the Alleyway east of Michigan Street running north from Bartlett Street, all sidewalks, curbs, pathways around the duck pond(west lagoon), stairways, pathways in and around the Sunken Garden, and the footbridge from the mainland to the island. Alteration or addition of Roads, Paths, Parkways, Trails, Walks, etc. shall he based upon physical or historical documentation of these items as they existed from 1910 to 1940. 2. Original or later contributing layouts of walks, roads and paved areas shall be retained and maintained. 3. Alteration of existing or addition of new circulation layouts will be considered if it can be shown that better site circulation is necessary and that the alteration does not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. I 4. When replacement of circulation layouts is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. _ P- 07 1 V APR -10-96 11:43 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE ' 219 233 6314 5. Original or later contributing circulation materials and features shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing -in or reinforcing the material or feature using recognized preservation methods. 6. Deteriorated or missing circulation materials and features shall be replaced with materials that match the original in size, shape, color, profile, form, texture and detail of installation. 7. If using same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. 8. Alteration of existing or addition of new circulation materials and features will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape desigii, 9. Consideration will be given to an alternate paving material if it can be shown that its properties will improve the original or later contributing design concept. 10. When replacement of circulation materials or features is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary • evidence. 11. Consideration for removal of existing circulation systems and features will be given when it is conflict with the original design intent of the landscape or when they are no longer appropriate to their intended purpose. 12. No vehicles unless of or approved by the South Bend Park Department shall be permitted on any part of the park surface at any time. Vehicles of American Electric Power, and/or other vehicles of the City of South Bend, shall use predetermined routes to and from their destination, when said travel would cause them to cross any area of the park which is not paved and designed for vehicular traffic. Any damage caused by any vehicle, shall be repaired immediately to look as it did prior to said damage. 13. Encroachment of vehicles off the paved roadway of any area of the park shall not be permitted. Areas now used for vehicular parking which are not part of the historical design concept of that park shall be removed. 14. Construction of any type within the park shall be done so as not to disturb any feature of the park. Sheets of plywood or other approved material may need to be laid upon the surface P_ 132 NPR -10-96 i1:43 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRI:+E 219 288 6314 • of the park prior to construction equipment. Repairs which must match the original historic design concept shall be made in any and all circumstances of damage. 9.6 ' Water Features (includes Fountains, fools, Irrigation Systems, Ponds, Rivers, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.I1 B, C and D regarding treatment of materials and features; and Sections 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.7, 9.8 and 9.14 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. Features which shall be preserved include: the duck pond (West Lagoon), the water pond in the Sunken Garden, the slough between the island and the mainland, all drinking fountains, pump houses, manhole covers, drainage grates, horse and dog fountain and the path of the St. Joseph River in relation to the park. 2. Original or later contributing water features shall be retained and maintained. 3. Existing water courses or bodies should not be altered. Consideration will be given to proposals that improve site • drainage, improve water quality, enhance the landscape design or improve wildlife habitat. 4. Alteration of existing or addition of new water features will be considered if the alteration does not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 5. When placement of water features and their materials are necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 6. Original or later contributing water feature materials shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing in, consolidating or reinforcing the material using recognized preservation methods. 7. Deteriorated or missing water feature materials shall be replaced with materials that match the original in size, shape, color, profile, form, texture and detail of installation. 8. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. 9. Alteration of existing or addition of new water feature R P_ 09 APR -10-96 11:44 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6914 i e 1 • materials will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. > 10. When appropriate from an ecological perspective, dredging of waterways shall be permitted as a means of retaining historic waterways, 11. All wetlands shall be preserved. 12. All shorelines of water courses or bodies shall be protected from erosion in a manner in keeping with the basic concept of the landscape design. 13. Consideration for removal of existing water features will be given when it is in conflict with the original design intent of the landscape or when they are no longer appropriate to their intended purpose. 14. Some areas of Leeper Park are utilized for the pumping of it water for the City of South Bend, And there exists both within the park and the St. Joseph River and on the island(s) wells, well -houses and other water supply entities. Repairs that may be necessary to existing services, or additions to existing ' services, or the sinking of additional or new wells, all such • work, installations and/or- repairs shall return the disturbed area(s) of the park, island(s) and the St. Joseph River to conditions of the park as in that time period of 1912 to 1940. Any new installations of any type may be considered if the ` alteration does not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. • 9.7 Furnishings and objects (includes Benches, Lights, Signs, Drinking Fountains, Trash Receptacles, Fences, T)ree Grates, Flagpoles, Sculpture, Monuments, Memorials, Planters, Urns, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.11 B, C and D regarding treatment of materials and features; and Sections 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5,•9.6, 9.8, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. All items listed herein shall be preserved: a. The Duck Pond(West Lagoon), including the Island in the lagoon, the Walls, Curbing, Fence and Shelter House. b. The Stone and Plaque of the DAR, with related Tulip and Gingko Trees. z c' The Concrete Stairway leading west southwesterly from the Duck Pond(West Lagoon). 11 P_10 NPR -10-96 11:45 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 i • d. The High Embankment on the west-southwest side of the Duck Pond (West Lagoon). ' e. The Pump Houses,, number 2 and 3. f. ' The Edward B. Reynolds Horse and Dog Watering • Fountain. g. The Drinking Fountain in the south east portion of the central section of the park. h. The central section of the park, the area of the large Floral Garden and Pathways as designed y George E. Kessler in 1912.. i. All Sidewalks on Lafayette Boulevard, Riverside Drive, Park Lane(Foote Street), Bartlette Street and Michigan Street, j. The Retaining Wall on the western boundary of the western section of the park. k. The Wall comprised of Cut Stone, which extended west- northwest and east-southeast from the southern approach of the Leeper Bridge(Michigan Street Bridge.) 1. The Log Cabin known as the Navarre House, and the footings of the cabin/house which was burned down. m. All Drinking Fountains located in the eastern section of the park and/or on the island(s). n. The Sunken Garden in the eastern section of the park, along with all Vegetation, Pathways, Stairs and the • Fountain and Statues. o. The WPA walls and Slough(s) in the eastern section of the park and the adjoining St. Joseph River. p. All Park Benches. q. All Manhole Covers, Sewer Covers and Grates, and all Electrical Underground Vault and/or Raceway Covers. r. The north/south alleyway east of Michigan Street, running north from Bartlett Street which used to run between Lot 'A' and Lots 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and part of 20 of the Rockstroh Addition. s. All Plaques, Monuments, Sculptures Memorials, Planters, Urns, Curbings, Roadways, Marker Stones, Sundiais, Well -Head Covers, Fences, Trellises, Pergolas, Pathways, and Trees. 2. Original or later contributing furnishings and objects, materials, elements, features and details shall be retained and. if necessary, repaired by . patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing using recognized preservation methods. 3. Deteriorated or missing furnishings and objects, materials, elements, features 'and: details shall be replaced with materials that match the original in'material, size, shape, color, profile, form, texture, configuration and detail of 0 P. I; APP -10-96 11:45 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6914 installation. 4. Alteration of existing of addition of now furnishings and objects will be considered if the alteration does not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 5. When replacement of furnishings and objects and their materials are necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 6. If using the same material it, not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials, may be considered. 7. Existing memorials, statues, monuments and fountains sbiill be carefully preserved and restored where necessary, maintaining the integrity of the original material and design. This work shall be coordinated with the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County. & New furnishings and objects should be ,designed using vandal resistant standards. 9. Location of signs shall be guided by a master plan. 10. Signs shall conform to a simple sign system. 11. Existing non -conforming signs should be removed. 12. All new monuments and fountains shall be placed so that they conform to and with the original historic landscape design of the park and park system. • P.12 9.8 Structures (includes Walls, Terraces, Arbors, Gazabos, Follies, Playground Equipment, Picn Shelters, Plazas, Greenhouse, Steps, Bridges, Dams, Buildings, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.11 B and D regarding treatment of materials and features; and Sections 9.2,9.3,9.4,9..5,9.6,-9.7,9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteiia, that may apply. I The general intent is to preserve the original or later contributing structures that enhance the historic landscape. 2. Refer to Sections 9.2.2 and 9.7.1 of structures, elements and materials that need to be preserved, such as Walls, Terraces, Arbors, Gazebos, Follies, Playground Equipment, Picnic •i APR -10-96 11:46 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 • Shelters, Plazas, Greenhouses, Steps, Bridges, Dans, Buildings, etc. which shall be preserved. 3. Original or later contributing structures, materials, elements, details and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired using recognized preservation methods. 4. Deteriorated or missing structures, materials, elements, details and ornamentation shill be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, - texture, size, shape, profile and detail of installation. 5. When replacement is necessary, it should be based on physical of documentary evidence. 6. if using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered, 7. New additions/alterations to the landscape (such as: parking lots, comfort stations, buildings, etc.) shall be as unobtrusive as possible and preserve any original. or later contributing landscape features. 8. Removal of non -historic structures from the existing • landscape is encouraged. 9. Structures shall be protected from arson and other acts of vandalism through proper monitoring procedures and methods such as; permanent installation of smoke detectors, alarms, or other security systems, or temporarily boarding up windows and openings. 10. No building(s) shall be erected in the central section of the park; the western section of the park, north of the northern fence to the tennis courts; the eastern section of the park, west of the rear set -back of the North Pumping Station, or in the area north and cast of the Log Cabin. 9.9 Archeology r Refer to Sections 9.11 B and C, and D regarding treatment of materials. Refer to Sections 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7 and 9.8 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. The landscape should be surveyed for potential archeological sites prior to the beginning of any construction project. 13 Is Al • APR -10-96 11:47 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.14 .• 2'. Known Archeological site(s) shall be .protected during any construction project. 3. Disturbance of the terrain within the landscape shall be kept to a minimum so as not to disturb any unknown archeological materials. 4. All planning, any necessary site investigation, or data recovery shall be conducted by a professional archeologist. 9.10 Accessibility Y Refer to Sections 9.11$, C and D regarding treatment of materials. Refer to Sections 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7 and 9.8 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. A three-step approach is recommended to identify and implement accessibility modifications that will protect the integrity and historic character of the property_ a. Review the historical significance° of the property and identify character -defining features; b. Assess the property's existing and required level of accessibility; c. Evaluate accessibility options within a preservation context. 2. Because of the complex nature of accessibility the Historic Preservation Commission will review proposals on a case by case bases. The Commission recommends consulting with the following document which is available from the Commission office: U.S. Department of the Interior, National ` Park Service, Cultural Resources, Preservation Assistance. Division; Preservation Brief 32, "Making Historic Properties Accessible" by Thomas C. Jester and Sharon C. Park, AIA. 9.11 Architectural Materials A. General The Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County recommend that work proposed to the materials outlined in sections B, C and D be executed with the guidance of a professional building material conservator. 1. Removal of the speakers atop Pump House Number 3 is w I � APR -10-96 11:47 PM 4 %- I -1 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 282 6314 . encouraged. Masonry (Brick Stone, Terra Cotta, Concrete, Stucco and Mort") 1. 2. Original or later contributing masonry materials, features, details, surfaces and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing -in, or consolidating the masonry using recognized preservation methods. 3. Deteriorated or missing masonry materials, features, details, surfaces and ornamentation shall be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, texture, size, shape, profile and detail of installation. 4, When replacement of materials or elements is necessary; it should be based on physical or documentary evidence, 5. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. 6. Original mortar shall be retained. 7. Deteriorated mortar shall be carefully removed by hand - raking the joints. 8. Use of mechanical saws and hammersshallnot be allowed. 9. Repointing mortar shall duplicate the original mortar in strength, composition, color, texture, joint; size, joint profile and method of application. 10. Sample panels of raking the joints and repointing shall be reviewed and approved by the staff of the: Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County. 11, Cleaning of masonry is discouraged and should be performed only when necessary to halt deterioration, 12. If the building is to be cleaned, the mildest method possible shall be used. I 13. A test patch of the cleaning methods) .shall be reviewed and approved on site: by staff of the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County. Test patches should always be carried out well in advance of cleaning (including exposure to all seasons if possible). P- 15 I APR -10-96 11:48 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.16 14. Sandblasting (wet or dry), wire brushing, or similar abrasive cleaning methods shall not be permitted. Doing so changes the visual quality of the material and accelerates deterioration. 15. Waterproofing or water repellents are strongly discouraged. These treatments are generally not effective in preserving masonry and can cause permanent damage. The Commission does recognize that in extraordinary circumstances their use may be required to solve a specific problem. Samples of any proposed treatment shall be reviewed by the Commission before, application. 16. In general, painting masonry surfaces shall not be allowed. Painting masonry surfaces will be considered only when there is documentary evidence that this treatment was used at some point in the history of the property. C. wood 1. 2` Original or later contributing wood surfaces, features, details and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing -in, consolidating or reinforcing the wood using recognized preservation methods, 3. Deteriorated or missing wood surfaces, features, details and ornamentation shall be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, texture, size, shape, profile and detail of installation. 4. When replacement of materials or elements is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 5. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. 6. Cleaning of wooden elements shall use the mildest method possible. 7. Paint removal should be considered only where there is paint surface deterioration and as part of an overall maintenance program which involves repainting � or applying other appropriate protective coatings. Coatings such as paint help protect the wood from moisture an ultraviolet light and stripping the wood bare will expose the surface to the effects of APR -10-95 11:49 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 5314 P.1; r i • weathering, S. Damaged or deteriorated paint should be removed to the next sound layer using the mildest method possible. 9. Propane or butane torches, sandblasting, water blasting or other abrasive cleaning and.or paint removal methods shall not be permitted, Doing so changes the visual quality of the wood and accelerates deterioration. 10. Repainting should be based on paint seriation studies. If an adequate record does not exist repainting shall be done with colors that are appropriate to the style and period of the building. z , D. Architectural Metals (Cast Iron, Steel, Pressed Tin, Copper, Aluminum and Zinc) 1. All metal materials, features, details and ornamentation of the buildings in the park shall be preserved. This also includes all metal parts of all- fountain;, monuments, memorials, plaques, street lights, drinking fountains, etc. • 2. Original or later contributing metal materials, features, details and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, splicing or reinforcing the metal using recognized preservation methods, 3. Deteriorated or missing metal materials, features, details and ornamentation shall be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, texture, size, shape, profile and detail of installation. 4. When replacement of materials or elements is necessary, it should be based on physical evidence or documentary evidence. 5. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible then compatible substitute materials may be considered. 6. Cleaning of metal elements either to remove corrosion or deteriorated paint shall use the: mildest method possible. t 7.• Abrasive cleaning methods, such as low pressure dry grit blasting, may be allowed as long as it does not abrade or damage the :surface. • APP -10-96 11:49 PM Joel RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6914 S. A test patch of the cleaning method(s),shall be reviewed and approved on site by staff of the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County. Test patches should always be carried out well in advance of cleaning (including exposure to all seasons if possible), 9. Cleaning to remove corrosion and paint removal should be considered only where there is deterioration and as part of an overall maintenance program which -involves repainting or applying other appropriate protective coatings. Paint or other coatings help retard the corrosion rate of the metal. Leaving the metal bare will expose the surface to accelerated corrosion. 10. Repainting should be based on paint scriation studies. If an adequate record does not exist repainting shall be done with colors that are appropriate to the style and period of the building. C P- 18 The Landscapes - Specific Standard and Criteria was financed in part with funds from the National 'Par -k Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, through the Massachusetts Historical Commission, Secretary of State Michael Joseph Connolly, Chairman, and adopted for use by the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County, Indiana, by permission of the Environment Department, City of Boston, Massachusetts, by Michael A. Cannizzo, Staff Architect, 1996. • JA) -4-29-96 02:51 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.02 Nota: Statements written ill this Mj-1c of fe.vt are notes to used in completing file Standards and Criteria, This text Inas been set up so that it can be typed over ►vhlle still remaining in the document. In order to keep the text froth not printing, please do the following: Go into the File menu; select Print command; press Options button; in the Options dialog bo_x under Include with Docut ent find the option Hidden ktvY, clicA the box to clear the option. 9.0 LANDSCAPES - SPECIFIC: STAND.WDS AND CRITERIA (Landscape Name) (Landscape Address) 9.1 Introduction 1. In these guidelines the verb Should indicates a recommended course of action; the verb Shall indicates those actions which are specifically required to preserve and Protect significant architectural elements. 2. The intent of these standards and criteria is to preserve the overall character and appearance of the (Landscape name) including its spatial organization, topography, vegetation, circulation and features. • 3. The standards and criteria acknowledge that there will be changes to the landscape and are intended to make the changes sensitive to the historic character of the landscape. 4. Each property will be separately studied to determine if a later addition(s) and/or alteration(s) can, or should, be removed. S. Since it is not possible to provide one general guideline, the following factors that will be considered in determining whether a later additions) and/or altcration(s) can, or should, be removed include: a. Compatibility with the original property's integrity in scale, materials and character. b. Historic association with the property. c. Quality in the design and execution of the addition/alteration. d. Functional usefulness. 6. Recreational facilities which exist should be allowed to remain as long as they serve substantial community functions. In some cases these features can be redesigned to be more compatible with the overall landscape. 7. Additions to existing recreational facilities shall not be allowed unless such additions snake the facilities more compatible with the overall 40 landscape. 0 JAN -29-96 02:52 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.©3 8. The development of additional facilities for active recreation or single purpose usc5 for limited user groups shall not be allowed, 9. Proposals for special activities and events which cause significant impacts or require perniatictlt or even s.:Itli-pernlanetit (seasonal) structures or facilities shall not be permitted. 10. The Boston Landmarks Commission recommends that the work Fropo�cd to the landscape be executed with the guidance of a landscape professional with expertise with historic landscapes. 11. The (list what is ander review.) are subject to the terms of the landscape guidelines herein stated. 12. Items under Commission review include but are not limited to the follow1s: 9.2 Spatial Organization (includes Views, Vistas, Landscape Spaces, etc.) •Refer to Sections 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7 and 9.$ for additional Standards and Criteria that may apple. 1. Views and vistas are among the most important aspects of a landscape, therefore, they should be maintained and prescn•cd. 2. All (List the Spatial Organizational features of the landscape that need to be preserved, such as: views, vistas, landscape spaces, etc.) shall be preserved. 3. Original or later contributing spatial organizational features shall be retained in their existing configuration and shall be maintained through proper drainage, access and erosion control, pruning and removal of invasive vegetation or otherwise using recognized horticultural and soil management practices. 4. Alteration of existing or addition of new spatial organizational features will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape deign. 5. Deteriorated or missing spatial organizational features shall be replaced with features that match the original in forth, shape, color and texture. U • JAH-29-96 02:53 FM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 228 5314 F_434 G. When replacement of ft;aturos is neccssan•, it should be based on physical or documentari• ci-idcnc- . 7. If using the same auue;:al is not technicalIv or econoniicalk- feasible, then compatible suhsti,ute materials mai' be considered. 8. Imp{)nant visual connec:iotu bemcen spaces within the landscape shall be retained by mainttinin_ %epetation, circulation and topography features which contribute they.-- visual relationships. 9. 'rhe historic spatial ar.J fiutetional relationship of circulation systems, water features and str-jctures shall be preserved by maintaining; the massing of adjacent vegetation, vistas. or other associated features. 10. Maintenance of. removal of. and additions of vegetation materials and features should consider maintaining; existing or intended vistas and spaces, screening intrusions. creating, new spaces where appropriate and maintaining def in;d ares.. of shade and sun. 11. The form and shape o individual spaces and their associated vertical elements shall be retained in order to preserve the historic relationships of • the landscape. FIxamples include the relationship bet,,vccn open fields and heduerows or the titiidth and length of an allee. 12. Moving or demolishing historic structures that would alter spatial and visual relationships in th,- landscape shall not be allowed. 13. Construction of new structures that would alter historic spatial and visual relationships ut the land_�ape shall not be allowed. 14. Intrusive views or neer construction mai• be screened «ith compatible fencing or plant material so long as the screening would detract from the historic character of the landscape. {List an additional items such as: New construction in the Young Pleadow shall not be altoived.) 9.3 Topography (includes the Shape, Slope, Elevation, Contour of Landforms and Ground Plane, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.2, 9.4. 9.3, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that may appy-. 0 JAN -29-96 02:53 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.05 1. All (List the Topographical features (f the landscape that need to be preserved, such as: shape, slope, elevation, landform conrours, etc.) shall be prescrved. 2. Original or later contributing topographical fe:nures shall be rrtained in their existing confiMMItion and shall be maintained through proper drainage, access and erosion ;ontrol. and recoLmizl.d :oil mana"ctnent practices. 3. Alteration of existing or addition of mw topographical features will be considered if tho• do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 4. Natural features (e.g. rock outcroppings) which are integrated into the landscape shall be treated as part of the overall design and shall be retained. 5. Deteriorated or missing topographical features shall be replaced with materials that thatch the original in form, shape, color and texture. 6. When replacement of materials or features is necessary, it should be based • on physical or documentary evidence. 7. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible: substitute materials may be considered. 8. Wherever appropriate, plant materials rather than structural materials should be used to solve erosion problems. (List any additional dents such as: Repair of the ,Dray Cliffs is encouraged.) 9.4 Vegetation (includes Trees, Shrubs, Ground Covers, Hedges, Allees, Fields, Forests, Planting Beds, etc.) Refcr to Sections 9.2, 9.3, 9.5, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that mai• apply. 1. All (Livt the Vegetation tnaterialr and features of the landscape that need to be preserved, such as: trees, shrubs, ground cover, hedges, allees, fields, forests, etc.) shall be pmsen•cd. 2. Original or later contributing vtgetation materials and features shall be retained in their existing configuration and shall be maintained through • proper horticultural matnagernew, practices. • JON -29-96 02:54 PM 1051 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.06 3. Alteration of existing or addition of new vegetation materials and features will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 4. Deteriorated or missing vegetation materials and features shall be replaced with materials that match the original in size, shape: color. forst and texture. 5. When replacement of vegetation materials or features is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 6. If using the same; vegetation material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute vegetation materials may be considered if they convey the same growth habit, form, foliage and bloom characteristics as the historic plant. 7. Existing healthy vegetation material shall be retained unless it is part of a later non -compatible design or is volunteer vegetation inconsistent with the original design. 8. Consideration for removal or existing healthy vegetation materials and • features will be given when it is in conflict with the original design intent of the landscape, such as when an important vista has become overgrown or when plants have grown out of scale with their intended purpose. 9. Maintenance of, removal of, and additions of vegetation materials and features should consider maintaining existing or intended vistas and spaces, screening intrusions, creating new spaces wvhere appropriate and maintaining defined areas of shade and sun. 10. Invasive vegetation shall be removed whenever technically feasible and shall be replaced with appropriate vegetation consistent -'7th the original design of the park and with current factors such as security. ecological conditions and wildlife management practices. 1 l . Hazardous plants or portions of plants should be removed promptly. 12. Plants with diseases that are difficult or not practical to control or cure should be removed promptly to prevent their infection of ether plants. 13. Mutilated or distorted plants should be removed. 14 Plant replacements should be added on a schedule that .'ill assure a continuity in the landscape design. JAN -29-96 03:00 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 222 6314 P.02 I 15. Existing vegetation shall be protected a�iacent construction activities by fencing the rcwt systern prior to the start of construction. (List any additional items such as: Future plantings shall he guided by the original design for the mall, as modified by Shurtleff.) 9.5 Circulation (includes Roads, Paths, Parkways, Drives, Trails, Walks, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.0, 9.$, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. All (List the Circulation layout, materials and features of the landveftpe ' that need to be preserved, such as: roads, paths, parkwat-s, drives, trails, walks, brick sidewalks, granite curbing, stone dust paths, etc) shall be preserved. 2. Original or later contributing layouts of Nvalks, roads and paved areas shall be retained and maintained. • 3. Alteration of existing or addition of new circulation layouts will be considered if it can be shown that better site circulation is necessary and that the alteration does not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 4. When replacement of circulation layouts is necessary-, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 5. Original or later contributing circulation materials and features shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing -in or reinforcing the material or feature using recognized preservation methods. 6. Deteriorated or missing circulation materials and features shall be replaced with materials that match the original in size, shape, color, profile, form, texture and detail of installation. 7. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. R. Alteration of existing or addition of new circulation materials and features will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. • JAN -29-96 09:01 Pro 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P.03 9. Consideration .will be given to an alternate paving material it' it can he shown that its properties will improve the original or later contributing design concept. 10. When replacement of circulation materials or features is neeessur, . it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 11. Consideration for removal of existing, circulation systems and features vvill be given when it is in conflict with the original design intent of the landscape or when they are no longer appropriate to their intended purpose. (List any additional items such as: No motor vehicles of an}- Aind, except maintetrance vehicles approved by the Department of Parks and Recreation, shall be permitted on any part of the Mall at any time.) 9.6 Water Features (includes Fountains, Pools, Irrigation Systems, Ponds, Rivers, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.11 B, C and D regarding treatment of materials and features; and Sections 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.7, 9.8 and 9.10 for additional • Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. All (List the Water Features of the landscape that need to be preserved, such as: fountains, pools, irrigation s}+stents, ponds, rivers, etc.) shall be preserved. 2. Original or later contributing water features shall be retained and maintained. 3. Existing water courses or bodies should not be altered. Consideration be given to proposals that improve site drainage, improve %vater quality, enhance the landscape design or improve wildlife habitat. 4. Alteration of existing or addition of new water features will be considered if the alteration does not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 5. When replacement of water features and their materials are necessary. it should be based on physical or doeunientary evidence. 6. Original or later contributing water feature materials shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing -in, consolidating or reinforcing the material using recognized preservation methods. 0 JF'H-29-96 03:02 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 5314 P-04 � r � • 7. Deteriorated or missing water feature materials shall be replaced with materials that match the original in size, shape, color, profile. form, texture and detail of installation. 8. if using the sante material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. . 9. Alteration of existing or addition of new water feature materials will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. 10. When appropriate from an ecological perspective, dredging of waterways shall be permitted as a means of retaining historic waterways. I I .!LII wetlands shall be preserved. 12. All shorelines of water courses or bodies shall be protected from erosion in a manner in keeping with the basic concept of the landscape design. 13. Consideration for removal of existing water features will be given when it is in conflict with the original design intent of the landscape or -when they • are no longer appropriate to their intended purpose. . (List any additional items such as: New store: drains should not be added until an accurate survey has been taken of the existing condition of the storm drainage system and the ability of the existing lines to handle additional water.) 9.7 Furnishings and Objects (includes Benches, Lights, Signs, Drinking Fountains, Trash Receptacles, Fences, Tree Grates, Flagpoles, Sculpture, Monuments, Memorials, Planters, Urns, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.11 R, C: and D regarding treatment of materials and features; and Sections 9.x, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.8, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply 1. All (List the Furnishings and Objects materials, elements, details and features of the landscape that need to be preserved, such as: benches, lights, signs, drinking fountains, trash receptacles, fences, tree grates, flagpoles, sculptures, monuments, planters, urns, etc.) shall be preserved. 2. Original or later contributing furnishings and objects materials, elements. features and details shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired b,, 0 • • JAN -29-96 03:02 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing using recognized preservation methods. . 3. Deteriorated or missing furn:,hing.s and objects materials, elements, features and details shall be rep'..teed with materials that match the original in material, size, shape, color. profile, term, texture, configuration and detail of installation. 4. Alteration of existing or addition of neer fumishings and objects will be considered if the alteration doe, not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. S. When replacement of furnishings and objects and their materials are necessary, it should be based on physical or documentar.! evidence, 6. If using the same material is no: technically or economically- fea_Sible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. 7. Existing memorials, statues, monuments and fountains shall be carefully preserved and restored where necessary, maintaining the integrity of the original material and design. This work shall be coordinated .with the Boston Art Commission. 8. New furnishings and objects should be designed using vandal resistant standards. 9. Location of signs shall be guided by a master plan. 10. Signs shall conform to a simple sign system. 11. Existing non -conforming signs should be removed, (List any additional items such as: All new monuments and fountains shall he located on the central path.) 9.8 Structures (includes Walls, Terraces, Arbors, Gazebos, Follies, Playground Equipment, Picnic Shelters, Plazas, Greenhouse, Steps, Bridges, Dams, Buildings, etc.) Refer to Sections 9.11 B, C and D regarding treatment of materials and features; and Sections 9.2, 9.3, 9.4. 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.9 and 9.10 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apph•; I. The general intent is to pre-z,:rvc the original or later contributing structures that enhance the histo_ is landscape. P_05 I I • JAN -29-96 03:03 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 282 6314 P.46 2. All (Lint the structures, elements and materials that need to be preserved, such as. n'alls, terraces, -arbors, gazebos, follies, playground equipment, picnic shelters, plazas, gree,rlrouses, steps, bridges, dans, buildings, etc.) shall be preserved. 3. Original or later contributing structures, materials, elements, details and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary. repaired using recognized preservation methods. 4. Deteriorated or missing structures, materials, elements, details and ornamentation shall be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, texture, size, shape, profile and detail of installation. 5. When replacement is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentary evidence. 6. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. • 7. New additions/alterations to the landscape (such as: parking lots, comfort stations, buildings, etc.) shall be as unobtrusive as possible and preserve any original or later contributing landscape features. 8. Removal of non -historic structures from the existing landscape is encouraged. 9. Structures shall be protected from arson and other acts of vandalism through proper monitoring procedures and methods such as; pernlanent installation of smoke detectors, alarms, or other security systems, or temporarily boarding up windows and openings. (List any additional items such as: No buildings of any type shall be erected on the mall. Refer to the ,-iteriors - Specific Standards and Criteria for additional .Standards and Criteria that may apply. Individual structures should be listed with accompanying Standards erred Criteria) 9.9 Archeology Refer to Sections 9.11 B, C, and D regarding treatment of materials. Rcfcr to Sectinns 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, and 9.8 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 0 • • JA,4-29-96 03:03 RM 1051 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 258 6314 1. The landscape : hould be sunvyed for potential archeological sites prior to the beginning of an}- construction prcJcct. 2. Known Archeological site(s) shall be protecied during any construction project. 3. Disturbance of the terrain within the landscape shall tv kept to a minimum so as not to disturb any unknown archeological materials 4. All planning, any, necessary site irivestigation. or data recovery shall be conducted by a professions:l archeologist. (List any additional items such as: Nete construction in file park area in front of the building shall not disturb the ground below four feet in order to protect known archeological sites.) 9.10 Accessibility Refer to Sections 9.11 B, C, and D regarding treatment of materials. Refer to Sections 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7 and 9.8 for additional Standards and Criteria that may apply. 1. A three-step approach is recommended to identify and implement accessibility modifications that ttiill protect the integrity and historic character of the property: a. Review the historical significance of the property and identify character -defining features: b. Assess the property's existing and required level of accessibility; c. Evaluate accessibility options «ithin a preservation context. 2. Because of the complex nature of accessibility the conuitission will review proposals on a case by case bases. The commission recommends consulting with the following document which is available from the commission office: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Scrr-ice, Cultural Resources, Preservation Assistance Division; Preservation Brief 32 "Making Historic Properties Accessible" by Thomas C. ,Tester and Sharon C_ Park, AIA. 9.11 Architectural Materials 0 A. General P_07 • JAr4-29-96 03:04 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 P_08 'rhe Boston Landmarks Commission recommends that work proposed to the materials outlined in sections B, C and D be executed with the guidance of a professional building materials conservator. (List any specific comments such as: The removal of the exhaust fairs at the grade level on India Street is encouraged.) R. Masonry (Brick, Stone, Terra Cotta, Concrete, Stucco and Mor(ar) 1. All (List the masonq materiats, features, details and ornamentation of the building that need to be preserved, such as; granite, brownstone, etc. brick cornices and door pedintents, stare window architrave, terra cotta brackets, railings, etc. Alco include masonry surfaces that need to be preserved, such as; surface modeling, tooling, bonding patterns, joint sizes, color, etc.) shall be preserved. 2. Original or later contributing masonry materials, features, details, surfaces and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing -in, or consolidating the masonry using recognized preservation methods. 03. Deteriorated or missing masotm. materials, features, details, surfaces and ornamentation shall be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, texture, size, shape, profile and detail of installation. 4. When replacement of materials or elements is necessary, it should be based on physical or documentan. evidence. 5. If using the salve material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. 6. Original mortar shall be retained. 7. Deteriorated mortar shall be carefully removed by hand -raking the joints. S. Use of mechanical saws and hammers shall not be allowed. 9. Repointing mortar shall duplicate the original mortar in strength, composition, color, texture, joint size, joint profile and method of application. 14, Sample panels of raising the joints and repointing shall be reviewed and approved by the staff of the Boston Landmarks Commission. • • JAN -29-96 03:05 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6314 11, Cleaning of masonry is discouraged and should be perfomied only when necessary to halt dctcrioration. 12. If the building is to be cleaned. the mildest method Possible shall be used. 13. A test patch of the cleaning meowd(s) shalt be reviewed and approved on site by staff of the Boston Landmarks Commission. Test patches should always be: carried out Nvell in advance of cleaning (including exposure to all seasons if possible). 14. Sandblasting (wet or dry), wire brushing, or other similar abrasive cleaning methods shall not be permitted. Doing so changes the visual quality of the material and accelerates deterioration. 15. Waterproofing; or water repellents are strongly discouraged. These treatments are generally not effective in preserving masonry and can cause permanent damage. The Commission does recognize that in extraordinary circumstances their use may be required to solve a specific problem. Samples of any proposed treatment shall be reviewed by the Commission before application. • 16. In general, painting masonry surfaces shall not be allowed. Painting masonry surfaces will be considered only wltcn there is documentary evidence that this treatment was used at some point in the history of the property. C. Wood 1. All (List the wood surfaces, features, details and ornamentation of the building that need to be preserved, such as: clapboards, cornices, brackets, entablatures, shutters, Columns, balustrades, shingles, etc. AL -to include paint colors and finishes) shall be preserved. 2. Original or later contributing wood surfaces, features, details and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, piecing; -in, consolidating; or reinforcing the wood using recognized preservation methods. 3. Deteriorated or missing wood surfaces, features, details and ornamentation shall be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, texture, size, shape, prefile and detail of installation. 4. When replacement of materials or elements is necessary, it should be • based on physical or doeUInentary evidence. P.09 • JAH-29-96 03:05 PM 1021 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 282 6914 P.10 5. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. G. Cleaning of wooden elements shall use the mildest method possible. 7. Paint removal should be considered only where there is paint surface deterioration and as part of an overall maintenance program which involves repainting or applying other appropriate protective coatings. Coatings such as paint help protect the wood from moisture and ulrraviolet light and stripping the wood bare will expose the surface to the effects of weathering. 8. Damaged or deteriorated paint should be removed to the next sound layer using the mildest method possible. 9. Propane or butane torches, sandblasting, water blasting or other abrasive cleaning and/or paint removal methods shall not be permitted. Doing so changes the visual quality of the Nvood and accelerates deterioration. • 10. Repainting should be based on paint seriation studies. If an adequate record does not exist repainting shall be done with colors that are appropriate to the style and period of the buildutg. D. Architectural Metals (Cast Iron, Steel, Pressed Tin, Copper, Aluminum and Zinc) L All (List the metal materials, features, details and ornamentation of d,e building that need to be presen,ed, such as: cast iron facades, porches and steps; sheet metal cornices, roofs, roof cresting and storefronts; and cast or roller/ metal doors, window sash, entablatures, and Hardware etc.. Also include paint colors and finishes.) shall be preserved. 2. Original or later contributing metal materials, features, details and ornamentation shall be retained and, if necessary, repaired by patching, splicing or reinforcing the metal using recognized preservation methods. 3. Deteriorated or missing metal materials, features, details and ornamentation shall be replaced with material and elements which match the original in material, color, texture, size, shape, profile and detail of installation. 4. When replacement of materials or clemenLs is necessoux, it should be • based on physical or documentary evidence. z JCLH-29-96 03:06 PM 1081 RIVERSIDE DRIVE 219 288 6914 P-11 �J • 0 5. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered. G. Cleaning of metal elements either to remove corrosion or deteriorated paint shall use the mildest method possible. 7. Abrasive cleaning methods, such as low pressure dry ,grit blasting, may be allowed as long as it does not abrade or damage the surface. $. A test patch of the cleaning method(s) shall he reviewed and approved on site by staff of the Boston Landmarks Commission. Test patches should always be carried out well in advance of cleaning (including exposure to all seasons if possible). 9. Cleaning to remove corrosion and paint removal should be considered only where there is deterioration and as part of an overall maintenance program which involves repainting or applying other appropriate protective coatings. Paint or other coatings help retard the corrosion rate of the metal, Leaving; the metal bare will expose the surface to accelerated corrosion. 10. Repainting should be based on paint striation studies. If an adequate record does not exist repainting shall be done with colors that are appropriate to the style and period of the building. The Landscapes - Specific Standards and Criteria has been financed in part with fbnds from rhe National Part: Service, U.S. Milart,nent of the Interior, through the Massachusetts Historical Commission, Secretary of State Michael Joseph Connolly, Chairman. The U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color. national origin, age, gender, or handicap in ifs federally assisted programs_ fryou believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activiq• or facility as described above, or if you desire further information, plca%(.- write to: Orrice for Equal Opportunity, 1849 C Street NW, Room 1324, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. L` PLEASE NOTE: COMMISSION MEMBERS WILL ASSEMBLE 1/2 HOUR EARLY TRIS MONDAY TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL/HEALTH CARE ZONING ORDINANCE! 10 � 0 � o f _ o N�rA6 O . _ IX�wovp A�1EtcNcu� , u6Nr Huta -c,N IL c ry,.,A L` 4. . . . . ..... ..................................................................