HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 2002NOTICE
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION OF SOUTH BEND AND SAINT
JOSEPH COUNTY
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
WILL HOLD A MEETING IN COMMISSION OFFICES AT
125 SOUTH LAFAYETTE BOULEVARD
AT 4:30 P.M.
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2003
AGENDA
I. Selection and scheduling of HPC projects for 2003.
II. Development of Budget and Spending Plan for 2003,
including the following:
a. Southhold Awards & Award Banquet: $2,500;
b. Oliver School Salvage Project: $12,500;
c. District Meetings & Guideline Revision: $1500;
d. Redrafting & Publishing of New Guidelines: $6,000;
e. Newsletters (paper, printing & postage): $1,800.
III. Committee Reports.
NOTICE
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION OF SOUTH BEND AND SAINT
JOSEPH COUNTY
JEFFERSON SCHOOL COMMITTEE
WILL HOLD A MEETING IN SOUTH BEND SCHOOL
CORPORATION OFFICES AT
635 SOUTH MAIN STREET, SOUTH BEND, IN
AT 1:30 P.M.
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 129 2003
AGENDA
I. Jefferson School plans for remodeling and
additions — Certificate of Appropriateness
Proposals.
7G 11,411
.�e
;';= Silk;: , qy;,•=','' "+
vi'. ,t" .'`1'r:3 Ami. �. t'.";�yr,,Aya; .',k,� t;Y.1•'�i,.f: +l^
Regular Meeting — 7th Floor — County -City Building
Monday, February 25, 2002 7:30 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL
H. PUBLIC HEARING
A. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
1. 2002-0220; 1222 East Wayne Street, addition
2. 2002-0128-(b), 612-614 Carroll Street; Garage doors
rear steps.
3. 2001-0122, 231 South Eddy Street; landscape pillars
(Amendment to previous permit)
4. 2002-0115, 215 Hammond Place, fence (Amendment to prior permit)
HI. REGULAR BUSINESS
A. Approval of Minutes
B. Treasurer's Report
C. Committee Reports:
D. Local Landmark, First Reading:
1. 1114 Lincoln Way West, South Bend
2. Driveway lights at 833 Northside Boulevard, South Bend
3. 130 Park Lane, South Bend
D. Local Landmark, Second Reading
806 Leland Street, South Bend
E. Legal Matters
F. STAFF REPORTS:
1. C. of A. Approvals
2. Leeper Park Beautification Committee
3. Elm Tree Project, Edgewater Historic District
4. Street Light Project. Chapin Park Nat'l. Registry District
IV. HEARING OF VISITORS
V. OLD BUSINESS
1. Enforcement Ordinances and Procedures
3. Ordinance on duration of Certificates of Appropriateness
4. Election of Officers
5. Election of Standing Committees
6. Spring Newsletter
VI. NEW BUSINESS
1. Resolutions regarding Leeper Park and Bridge
2. Re Rating report for 619 Sherman Street, South Bend
VH. ANNOUNCEMENTS and MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFIATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Application Number: 2002-0220
Property Location: 1222 East Wayne Street, South Bend
Property Owner: Carol V. Graham
Landmark or District Designation: Local Historic District, East Wayne Street
Rating: C-10
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The house was designed in 1927 by architect Russell Stapp for Whitcomb & Keller, and built in
1929. It was vacant for one year, before being purchased by Dr. Walter and Martha Farnham, who
resided there from 1930 to 1941. Dr. Farnham was a medical doctor, practicing in downtown South
Bend, with offices at the Citizens Bank Building, and later the Shetland Building.
In 1941, Dr. Farnham rented the home to Thomas E. Mills, athletic director and professor at Notre
Dame. Dr. Mills and his family resided there until his death in 1944, which occurred in the Rockne
Memorial Fieldhouse. Dr. Mills had been hired by Knute Rockne as a football coach, and was appointed
director of the Rockne Memorial Fieldhouse after Rockne's death.
Mrs. Farnham, now a widow, sold the home to William and Vaugh Hastings. Vaughn (Peg)
O'Neal married William Hastings in 1924, and they came to South Bend in 1925, for Dr. Hastings to
establish a dental practice in River Park. He maintained his practice in River Park until his retirement in
1971. The Hastings continued to reside in this home until Dr. Hastings death in 1984. Mrs. Hastings
continued to live there alone until 1995, when she sold it to the present owners, Carol V. and David B.
Graham.
RECOMMENDATION
Mr. and Mrs. Graham, after studying blueprints drawn up for the Hastings for an addition they had
considered, revised those plans considerably to allow an addition which seeks to maintain much of the
historic character of this Tudor Revival style house and its yard, though the addition is large, and the yard
will be significantly reduced.
The footprint of the proposed addition is 14'deep by 28' wide on the ground floor, and 14' deep
by 19'8" on the second floor. It will require significant pruning and reduction or removal of a large
mature Maple tree, which is the only significant tree in the back yard. The Grahams are informed that the
tree is infested with carpenter ants, and may require removal anyway.
Staff understands that the windows and sliding French doors to be used in the addition are to be
Anderson vinyl windows, having the same appearance as the steel windows in the original house, and that
the stucco proposed for the walls, the siding for the gable ends, and the roofing, are likewise to appear
identical to the existing house.
The first draft of the Application mentions possible "bump -outs" of two feet on either side of
sliding French doors. That feature has been removed from the present Application. Staff feels that this
was wise; the "bump -outs" would have looked odd and out of place."
Staff recommends that this Application be approved, upon the conditions that (1) any
existing brick or windows removed to accommodate the addition be saved and re -used, (2) that if
the maple tree is in fact removed, that at least one replacement tree be planted, and (3) that the
specifications for materials having the same appearance as the original materials be strictly
adhered to.
For,
'x N / ,� i ot'ta��g� / Idle
r
SIP
NP
nx MA�
�i31 111.1 1t, ��
w
j- t},FtYIfyj£ (}�ti lftt ljlltr' 14E
iht Y
4
it 1 4�,M .,, a � h t `�'"?�, �,�•yt':jl� a
t.' a tii �t iy'7�Lt (r�,,r,yyr
Ru,>}ttllit
S
1
� _ rJXr 1t c s 6
7
1 y
if
} 1'711i�4
}� 4h
1 6si iW n} ',
rl
Ft
ttiS
4t-
Sk
ttiS
4t-
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Residence: 1222 East Wayne South
South Bend, IN 46615
Owners: David and Carol Graham since 1995
Proposal: New addition (first floor family room and breakfast nook/ second floor 2 bed rooms)
Dimensions: 14x 28 feet (may add 2 feet out on either side of gliding French doors in order to enlarge the
family room)
Windows: Anderson Perma-Shield Casement Model with Terratone exterior. The windows will be
complete with screens and divided light grilles.
Door: Anderson Gliding French Door with a screen and divided light grilles. It will also
incorporate an extra security lock for added protection.
Exterior: The addition will be made from Stucco and wood trim to match the existing residence. The
Stucco will match the existing material by texture and color. The Tudor style design on the
front of the house will be carried over to the left side of the addition which is seen from the
street.
Roof: A gable style roof will be used on the new addition with the same pitch. The roof to the
existing residence and the addition will be shingled to match. The soffits, and fascia will
match as well.
Landscape: The maple tree in the backyard will be removed due to safety issues. It has been looked at
by two landscape groups who have stated that it was filled with carpenter ants. The tree will
be replaced upon the completion of the addition. Additional landscape features will be
included (i.e. patio, bushes, etc.) by the Foegley Landscape Company.
If you have further questions regarding this information, please give me a call (219) 234-0317.
Thank you for your time and consideration regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
�/
David and Carol Graham
Ci
.Q
N
121 j.
Z
N 1A
n
Fa„ ,
IS', in
— — — 51TE PLAN Ni
hID6YhRiJ 5E18hGK LitiE !i INt'ORtIA 5m tOR 7E
81
ffOM j P)2bYDNP G
IN b�ov L%5FER I L.DROWN � Si
GOFMTnLVTSON SNTLL
# 15OWW' TO MATC14.
PROP D bt MOM ADDITION
co
0 ! L EXISTIM(o PEWCS TD
—a^a (a beck Raan s� (� KrR2 irrvs:'1�,c
• rSEv1�. LE
EX15TINfa RE51G>EtiGE �: GOMPI- OP NEW
RELOiCATE EXI5TIN6. A
' EXISTIAfa' WAC05 , t UmT m='g1NG PI<'1!
FW% lose
! Y R' / 'fe• � � . &1ERV1Ll:. 6:6.-fi�"M5
s
a gaposeb eiAeAts*ar
LOT s 160
EXiGTlNQ' f LE
WHI1'tOMD i KELLER'S, SuHHYMEDE
1222 E. WA'tNE STREGT SOUT14 Apr pqO.
lQ4.31 -
Pl?5fV 51T e FLAN'
N
r r . • r
. .
N e 'Su,r,
{"CCS! H 0.rntl�l Pc -[: 'Y'
a„dc ccs LEFT ELEVATION
•.> •> •) a •_)
�J> y.>I •Ja ) )
1'.>I__'1> 1•>
> •! > >
y )
.y .y -:y y
-.y
y
y .y y y >
r r . • r
. .
N e 'Su,r,
{"CCS! H 0.rntl�l Pc -[: 'Y'
a„dc ccs LEFT ELEVATION
r4i•Y
PIMP I
-D Rim kl�
I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 I I 1 I
1 1 I i I 1 I! t I
kF . � •- r r
�, w � I w r ! w r w •
• r I r r r
REAR ELEVATION
ya..Y Com.
VMCIOWS_.
Place our awning windows next i
to any other Andersen® window
or patio door to create window
walls that are both. beautiful
A:, -and, functional Add an'electric
°"window,' operator.: or our . new .
p . `;'easyzgrip handle hardware and
t j's:J aEf act *a;a," 7
t,t
:The
`?hinge
3To"
'Adjus
hr�.ing„�F
j- -,t
Patio rs
Our Frenchwood® gliding; pa
door gives you traditionatstyli
along with an elegant wood'fin
worthyof fine furniture. Itglii
,..:. -
smoothly and,-'easily.on stainl,
sPeel''cracks,?and':precision l
bearing roll ers;;giving,,you ease
operation;; highperfonnance; a
a beautiful'piew -Available;ain'-'o
'`maple.`�;and�:pine.-;veneers-;w.
:�handles�andarim�an'.white;'sta
and'three finishes'of soli&brass
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Application Number: 2002-0128
Property Location: 612-614 Carroll Street
Property Owner: Equity Funding Corp
Landmark orDistrict Designation: LHD-TF
Rating: C/9
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
The house located at 612-614 Carroll Street was built in 1901 by Silas H. Joseph. He and
his wife, Annie resided here until 1905 when it was purchased by Reverend Perry J. Price, who was
the last owner to reside in this house. The house was sold several times between 1905 and 1908
when it was converted into a duplex. - The current owner, Equity Funding Corp purchased the house
in September of 2001.
RECOMMENDATION
The Preservation Guidelines for Taylor's Field Local Historic District follow the Rehabilitation
Model.
In December, we wrote to this property owner with some concerns about the condition and
maintenance of his property. January 28, we received a response and Application for Certificate of
Appropriateness from the owner's contractor, Leif Bouskill. We immediately approved and issued
that portion of his Application that related to in-kind replacement of the roof.
The remaining portions of the Application are for (1) replacement of carriage -style swing -
out garage doors to plain overhead garage doors. As the doors were in dilapidated condition, and
the City Code Enforcement Department was threatening a 24-hour clean and seal order, has in fact
have already replaced them. The doors face the alley, and are not visible from the main street,
though they are somewhat visible to some neighbors. The guidelines clearly allow the owner to
transition from swing doors to an overhead door. While a strict interpretation would require the
owner to use new doors that have the appearance of swing -out or carriage style doors, justification
exists for allowing plain doors, where they are not visible. Staff recommends approval.
(2) the owner seeks to replace the rear steps to the house, which are missing. The steps do
need to be replaced, but as of February 22, information was not available regarding the type of steps
the owner wishes to install, so staff cannot make a recommendation at this time.
g
1'
612-614 Carroll Street
February 6, 2002
612-614 Carroll Street
February 6, 2002
South Bend and St. Joseph County
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
227 WEST JEFFERSON BLVD.
SOUTH BEND, IN 46601-1830
- - - -Phone: 219-235-9798 — Fax- 219-235-9578
e-mail: historic@michiana.org
John Oxian, President I A Certified Local Government
Monday, January 28, 2002
Mr. Leif A. Bouskill
BOUSKILL RENOVATIONS, INC.
1326 Miami Street
South Bend, IN 46601
RE: 612-614 Carroll Street; Application # 2002-0128(a) & (b)
Dear Mr. Bouskill:
Rhonda Saunders, Director
I have received and reviewed your Application for renovation work on the house at 612
and 614 Carroll Street. The only crucial item missing was the $10.00 Application Fee which is
supposed to accompany it. Please send that at your earliest convenience.
The part of your Application relating to replacing the asphalt shingle roof we immediately
approved, and the Certificate of Appropriateness for that work is enclosed. I have given a copy to
the Building Department, so there should be no delay when you go to get your Building Permit for
the roof.
The part of your Application relating to garage doors and rear steps will be placed on the
Commission Agenda for 7:30PM, Monday, February 25. I expect your matter to be the first item
on the agenda.
The Commission generally approves changing from swing -out to overhead garage doors,
provided that the owner either give the new door the appearance of the original type of door, or
demonstrate that the door is not visible from the street. Similarly, I would expect the rear steps to
be approved, if you can supply some information as to what the new ones steps will look like.
Please do call if you have any questions, or if there is assistance which we may provide.
Yours,
Karen R. Hammond -Nash
Assistant Director
COMMISSIONERS
Martha Choitz Richard Helmus Jerry Wiener (Treasurer)
Mary Jane Chase Catherine Hostetler (Vice -President) Gerald Ujdak (Secretary)
Richard Morrison Joann Sporleder (Historic Architect) Thomas Bodnar(Attorney)
Application
-for-
Certificate of Appropriateness
Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County
227 West Jefferson Blvd - South Bend IN 46601-1830
Phone: 219-235-9798 Fax: 219-235-9578 e-mail: historic@michiana.org
- - - - A Certified Local Government
OFFICE USE ONLri»»>DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES CONTAINED IN TIiIS BOX«««OFF/ICE USE ONLY
Date Received — 2 20 69-2— Application Number: 20qp_�%��02
Past Reviews: ❑ YES (DArEOFUSTREWEn7 iXi NO
Staff Approval authorized by: &,-::P +/, �C .OL- .v<{�!�"%b iJTititlle':
U ✓
Historic Commission Review Date: 2 2002- , Xe- /;i' -F Uf t
❑ Local Landmark ❑ National Landmark
❑ National Register District (x—.):
Local Historic District .): 7—
Certificate of Appropriateness:
❑ Denied ❑ Tabled ❑ Sent To Committee
❑ Approved and issued 20
Address of Property for proposed work: / /,Z — 6/q Carroll i
Sden Namber and S—a Name)
City : So /J r,vrl 1'cv Owner's Phone No: 2 / ? 2 3 -t/ 3 0 3 �%
Name of Property Owner(s):lPRINr)._. V, fjl F,,.,,A
Address of Property Owner : 2 c7-7 W e L y4e 1 ( a H ,t 41hr L,
L !3A& rt7f-r��«1 S/� Sp, 4, �,W cii�o/ 70/
Contractor(s) Name: �T�ta �4, /-
Contract
Contract Company Name: j34,g-sF ,
Contractor Address: 13) b , n m i City: f:► 4
Contractor's Phone No: 2 t h _23t/ — 30a
c /'
Current Use of Building: r't u I -f I I --ti.+. /a ( /amu i
(Single Family - Muhi-Family - Camnercid: &dMnn,ent- Industrial- Vacant - etc
Type of Building Construction: LV o oe
OVood Frame- Brick - Stone- Steel - Concrete - Othrr)
Proposed Work: ❑ Inkind ❑ Landscape JO New �a Replacement(nat;n-kind)
(more than one bas may be checked)
❑ Demolition
Description of Proposed Work: c�G g2„ R4,1 v., rs' , rc I�/�/ � f
6✓l�� r� hrlw, �-Z rP aJu l,.✓ s �t._.tp,/� ✓� Wo�l� It/=/
�r7 S�-art 4uY /'vvf �„/ ,��/3 300- `� itplaccrin /'Ptii' Sires
Owner/Contractor: Fax: _21q 1 y —3d e-mail:
(This office will correspond with only one dengnee)
Signature of Ow/er Signatureof ontrector
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE.
South Bend and St. Joseph County
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Office Address - 125 S. Lafayette
Mailing Address - 227 WEST JEFFERSON BLVD.
SOUTH BEND, IN 46601-1830
Phone: 219-235-9798 Fax: 219-235-9578
e-mail: historic@michiana.org
John Oxian, President A Certified Local Government Rhonda Saunders, Director
December 14, 2001
Equity Funding Corp
1326 Miami
South Bend IN 46601
Dear Property Owner,
The Historic Preservation Commission has recently been informed that you have purchased a property located
at 612-614 Carroll, South Bend Indiana. This property is located in the Taylor's Field Local Historic District
and therefore falls under the minimum maintenance standards and guidelines (see attachments). These stan-
dards deal with, among other issues, the required maintenance of historic properties as well as the does and
M�on'ts for exterior work on all structures as well as landscaping. This district is realitively new and as such
you may have been unaware of the historical status of this building. A quick summerization: all exterior work
requires a permit from HPC including out buildings and landscaping; in-kind work i.e. replacing same for same
can be immediately staff approved; all non -in-kind work must be reviewed by the Commission which meets
once a month.
The Commission has some concerns regarding the condition of this property. Our inspector has indicated that
the structure at 612-614 Carroll has a substandard roof, water damage at the eaves, missing rear steps, water
damaged porch, missing windows and roof steps.. All of these issues can seriously jeopardize the stability of
the house as well as leaves the structure vulnerable to vagrants and vandals. If these issues are not addressed
soon such deterioration will lead to very expensive problems in the near future.
,The staff realizes that winter is setting in and out door work is harder to accomplish, nonetheless, you will
need to submit a written time table for the completion of the needed repairs no later then February 2, 2002.
Simple repair and maintenance items such as the replacement of missing pieces of wood with wood in the
same fashion as original does not require a permit.. Replacement of windows, large areas of wood replace-
ment, step replacement and new roof will require a permit, as will any repairs that alter materials or style of
what is existing. As such I have enclosed an application for the needed work.
If you have any questions regarding this notice or would like to talk with our new inspector please contact the
staff at 235-9798.
�i ely,5-et�
Rhonda Saunders
Director HPC
612-614 Carroll Street
February 6, 2002
612-614 Carroll Street
February 6, 2002
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE_ OF_ APPROPRIATENESS-
Application Number:
Property Location:
Property Owner:
2001-0122 AMENDMENT
231 South Eddy
Philip Schatz
Landmark or District Designation: LL
Rating: S/12
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
William C. Sibley constructed this, Austin and Shambleau designed, Dutch
Colonial Revival Style house in 1921. Mr. Sibley was born in 1881 to Mr. & Mrs. Irving
Sibley. After college William worked as a salesman for the malleable Steel Range
Manufacturing Company and the Germer Stove Company of Erie, Pennsylvania. In 1904
He went to work for his father in the Irving Sibley Hardware business. Four years later
he married Marie Greene. By 1916 William left the hardware business to become the
president and treasurer of the South Bend Foundry, later known as the Sibley Machine
and Foundry Company, which manufactured gray -iron castings. Mr. Sibley died in 1957
leaving the house to his wife, Marie, who continued to reside there until 1961 when she
sold the house to lawyers, Hahn, Zimmerman, Nafe and Fisher. In 1979, the house was
sold to Associates Bancorp Inc. who sold the house in 1982 to Joseph and Phyllis
Baldoni. The house was eventually sold to the current owner, Philip Schatz, in 1992.
RECOMMENDATION
The Local Landmarks guidelines follow the rehabilitation model.
The owner submitted a letter dated February 3, 2002 requesting that Certificate of
Appropriateness 2001-0122 be amended as follows:
Construct two 16" pillars (still 8' in height) rather than the 8" pillars that now
stand. The pillars would be placed on concrete bases to avoid rotting.
Previously the Commission approved two 8' tall, 8" wide wood pillars at
entranceway to garden. The new pillars would be of the same style, height and
placement, they would simply be twice the width.
The staff finds the alteration to be with in the guidelines and recommends
approval.
yev)ru,, i - ,
I low IF"
1 ' : � Ate., t j�„� `�i"a••a:.�`�n,_ �. \ •'�,. .Y,y' �� a� ,
R
x
MEN
Im-
r�fys .. '•.- '.r , �' �.�+ 'eta i _ ar r - —•� at.
ISM
" ��� tea.• Z. �! v �x .^ _ � _, f
fz
{ � � mow. � y{�y *t�xj �`'SO, ,. ..• x<1._... - - _
�-�,• �'. x �=Y � � !" v � '-wy �` ate,.• * � _ � }'% j �V-7' �. t � {.� •'� w "
.. ' � � ��y�y � ���ii r`s � q � ' .{ �.`• �fR�' � �:- SpyF 7f3 '*< �, k, �i i\ � a� � -a�, �A c " :'i �- '� .. . - .Y
4h � i. � ![ � • .. �"'<. 3. �L �, ��'+� at� .,yamy �: � ^ �{ �a � � � � � kms' 's � � # ¢ �".� � re' .� - f � � 4 Y�• . .
t3
so-
.. §� a"•'�l y`��w'.�`✓ Sry .^�- �a`�ih '�'t'LL.:11�.��` � w` #'.'•�F*,RI �. ti...- €+;w`Cn ��y,v�' ��++,.. � � ` d yr . �-�, �� a�yti. �"
,.. _ `" ;�,4-�• _ l�+i w .: �� i._ i � +`�C'hC.. +i v.\ � \a►i�` vti �e� ..
if ��,�"alS�.,, +R, ��2"'s� .� � illi +w `�: �-•. �•, �•�•a,, as �... �'��,� +'�k`+r - �:.
moi:+-k�1�.re s `� , `� K '+y{.r�. � y, �� i �° , � J•.,'+ � '•t r�t,, .yw�.
AMENDED
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
-- - - - - - _ CERTIFIATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Application Number: 2002-0114
Property Location:
Property Owner:
215 Hammond Place
Heidi Thacker
Landmark or District Designation:
Rating: C-11, C-9
Local Historic District — River Bend
On Friday, February 18, the Historic Preservation Commission held a special meeting to consider
the Application, as the homeowner felt some urgency regarding the installation of a fence to contain
her two dogs.
In preparing the first Staff Report, HPC staff found from the Building Department that they do have
a concern about maintenance, which can be difficult when two solid wood fences are installed
touching or very near one another. This might be alleviated by (a) sharing one fence between two
neighbors, or (b) enclosing a smaller area, and installing the fence post and horizontal supports on
the inside of the yard, and having the smooth side facing outward. A combination of these remedies
could be used.
The Commission President, chairing the special meeting, asked the homeowner which of these
proposed solutions she favored. Ms. Thacker said that she had spoken to at least one set of adjacent
neighbors, and that her and their preferred solution would be for her to take down their existing
fence between their properties, and install her own. This was also her preference regarding the
fence on the other side of her property, and she felt sanguine about the agreement of that owner, too.
Therefore, the Commissioners present at that special meeting directed HPC staff to issue a permit
allowing the installation of new fencing, as applied for, across the back of the back yard, the front of
the back yard, and CONDITIONAL UPON THE APPROVAL OF THE NEIGHBORS, removal of
their existing fences between their yards and Ms. Thacker's yard, and installation of her new
fencing there.
Several days later, we heard that both sets of neighbors had refused their consent to the removal of
their fences. We therefore issued a permit for Ms. Thacker to install her new fencing in those
areas that did not require removal of the neighbors' fences. This should at least address the
concerns she expressed as urgent regarding the safety of her dogs. It still, apparently, leave her with
a problem of multiple fencing styles in her back yard, and for that reason, she elects to come before,
the Commission with a revised application.
This time, she seeks approval for either installing the new fence directly along the neighbors'
existing fences, or else a little way in from them.
The proposal to run the new fence directly along the old fences was previously rejected by this
Commission, as inappropriate for the reason that it would then be impossible properly to maintain
either fence. Staff recommends that this part of the Commission's decision remain the same,
and that permission to sister the new fence directly along the length of the neighbors' existing -
fences be denied. - - - - -
As to the proposal that the to install the new fence along the sides of the back yard, there might be
circumstances in which staff could recommend approval. We could recommend approval if the new
fence along the sides of the back yard were installed far enough inward of the existing fences to
allow for routine maintenance between the two fences. This would include regular mowing and
cutting of weeds and volunteer trees, as well as routine repair and sealing of the fences themselves.
However, staff is reluctant to recommend this alternative for several reasons. First, we are
concerned that the gaps between the side fences would either be so narrow as to make routine
maintenance difficult and unpleasant, though still possible — or, if spaces big enough to allow for
easy maintenance were left, then the fenced area of Ms. Thacker's yard would be so reduced as to
lose much of its value and benefit to the owner and her dogs.
We can think of several alternative solutions that might be preferable. First, she might return to the
appropriate merchant the cedar dog-ear style fencing that she purchased before seeking a permit or
CofA, and exchange it for a style of fencing that is agreeable to at least one of her neighbors. Then
she could fence three sides of her back yard with that, and have only one side of the yard a non-
matching fence. Alternatively, she might consider chain link fencing. Light wire fencing, of a
predecessor style to current chain link, was recommended by Frank J. Scott in Suburban Home
Grounds. a monograph for design of small urban properties in the Victorian era. Such fences are
also mentioned favorably in Michael Weishen's Guide to Creatine & Restorine Authentic American
Gardens (Ballantine Books, 1999). Third, she might use the fence of her choice to fence those
portions of her back yard not enclosed by her neighbors' existing fences, and leave the rest as it is.
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFIATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Application Number: 2002-0114
Property Location:
Property Owner:
215 Hammond Place
Heidi Thacker
Landmark or District Designation:
Rating: C-11, C-9
Local Historic District — River Bend
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
In 1910, Jackson B. Harper, yard conductor for the New York Central built this American
Foursquare home, and lived there until 1920, at which point he began renting it out. In 1942, Mrs.
Agnes Vrabel rented it, and then purchased it in 1951. In 1957, she sold it to the Bunyan family,
some of whom lived there until 1987. In 1987 the property was sold at a sheriff's sale to the
mortgage holders. The house is highly rated because of its originally excellent quality of
workmanship and material, and essentially unaltered condition. However, later surveyors lowered
its rating as its condition deteriorated.
RECOMMENDATION
(1) FENCE:
The owner seeks to install a 6'tall board -to board solid privacy fence around the perimeter of
her back yard, being unable otherwise to control her dog or keep it in the yard.
Presently, the neighbors on either side of her have deteriorating 6' tall fences down the sides
of their back yards, and this owner has a 3 or 4' wooden picket fence across the back of her yard,
bordering the alley. She also has the same picket fence running from her neighbors' fences on
either side to the back corners of her house.
Standards: page 20, Building Site, Landscaping & Accessories:
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 be appropriate to existing surrounding site
elements in scale, type, and appearance. Accessory structures ... should be
appropriate to surrounding site elements in scale, type, and appearance."
Consultation with Mr. Markle of the Building Department establishes that there are no
building code prohibitions against installing two "privacy" fences next to each other. However,
they do have a concern about maintenance, which can be difficult. This might be alleviated by (a)
sharing one fence between two neighbors, (b) enclosing a smaller area, and/or. (c) installing the
fence post and horizontal supports on the inside of the yard, and having the smooth side facing
outward. A combination of these remedies could be used.
The proposed fence, one the one hand, is out of scale with the small lot and the historic style -
- - of fence. On the -other hand, the neighbors on either side have deteriorating fences similar to the
one this On
seeks, and there are other such fences in the neighborhood.
Staff recommends that if the fence is approved, it be approved only under several
conditions: First, that no mature or significant trees be injured in the installation, second,
that at least one of the suggestions made by the Building Department for ease of maintenance
be adopted, and third, that the fence across the front of the back yard, and across the alley
from the neighbors yard be either more moderate in height, (i.e., 4' to 51) or be screened from
the neighbor's view by appropriate landscaping, or both.
(2) PORCH:
The foundations of the porch are crumbling, the vertical balusters are missing (Note: we
never issues a CofA for their removal), the steps are crumbling, and the paint is pealing off.
Detailed plans for repair or reconstruction have not been submitted. Staff recommends approval
of the application conditional upon restoration of the porch's original historic appearance,
with: (a) 1" square wooden vertical balusters spaced at 2" to 3" intervals, running from the
porch rail down to the ground support,
(b) square pillars at the corners of the porch and one in the middle, running from the rood
down to the ground support or foundation, and
(C) the front steps maintaining their original width and style.
PROPOSED LOCAL LANDMARK
806 LELAND
SOUTH BEND, INDIANA
Historic Preservation Commission
Of
South Bend and St. Joseph County
February 2002
1
k
846 LELAI3D -
1
"s
wfe . -78 19ty}• - - - 0•eFh Rl,/sr ..,��-..,.nye.
.301 O't St 3
tS .300 �s �\
74 .299.3 22 •�`
- - �• - 73 •298 .321
?72 .297.320 .346 .372 a ~_
,36b,�•A•:.0 • y" X02 X771 .296.319 .345.371
b:Z-s.270 .29$ .316 .344.370
y""�Ji-1" 2� .294
" 269 .317 .343 -369 Plrk un• _+�
'6'10y4 Ddr. ?y6" % y► .293..316 .342 .368
yti1q'1 41� :ly? a .267 .292 .315 .341 .167 ,
.266 .291..311 .340 .366 .415 '
,339 .36S .405 ,414
Von Spars* 1'6y1 0 .254.265313
.290 .312 .33S .364 .112
ly1q$� .2S..264 .2b5 .311 .337 x.363 .111
�y� b •2$C 310 .336
y x.362 .403
1 f' ?261 .28T a.309^
.335a 6t
y>>A ».260 2$6i Sas» •334 .1 :3v 0 M y
2.2SI ,
• .259 N n .
p 0» A333p .. t
25C,�,.258 0
» Ay0
2$4 .a3q�4$•rtieRt
• >>' .2$3=306
30S .J 33 •'� a n ' » i ' e i
04k
? .291 304• »•., .401 .n a
.290 ;103 .329 s •;,39: ,10�0� 1 q
.274 �+ w w M n• N w �! .391 t
355. ,19
3 389 •
r
i 1q � �•� � » n'1.32 .3 � .38
32 .351 .152.1b6 .19
,32 .319
. .150 .394 .18
�• 1 yo6g .32 -349 +9 1
,yq a10 " 324 -
tip 'L001 w32 .347 .381
lb
.360 ChsPin Perk
•��'� Nstloo4l Re91sWr Historic District
I
,378
n • st _37.
,\ ,20D1� a d " : jT.j .399 .409
.199 .408
'C'o �• i. l
•149
".198
.197
.197 1
1196
.195 .396 .406
0 1 1A4^
� talc Y
ot�'•r 4"4t N
n
LOCATION MAP
2
ate- - 2II'yuvy
"tBRUMLY
• `� �` {;; � � Vii. .
y
. o, \ Tit "i^• � ;:.1 . � i
ILK
-+rte...;,. � . \ rr••
tau
I�M! ��..' �,�,L♦jr�Zr�� jC, w}� �� ,�,y` ty,+ ,t„`._,*,�`_ ;,,t . tea,
IFPW
tz
,vas "7 • .t ',c.:.
MM
♦,i �j�~ t,, ��� a '�.�t„ '� r _jam• r_ -
'YAW
Ort ^+. 51 r•^ �+ti`� i-' a+r„ .5 .,� • t�an
ml
06
"y'jl+c �, � � wi�"�\\y�,s+,'�ti .,,.z ^�`yy,�"� �l \� \�' ..w.• � ' .;�� �_ M ��a1
��l ` it �^^� �.y�,'+� + i.� ,r y � F ty'1,.: ji t ~j \` , S'r -,.. `.'K• t � �,•. ` + � "'"' �e , s. '�.. �� •C`y._ ♦♦
µ L�'w4T t ;'1�5..'+ =�}ws .f.�+."�' µ.w'� +r $,=e` may, i ��� \� * < ` '�`'F"^y •`.`+, � e "5v-+••.r,,+ , ^.-•`....,. .; fir. "�iit��lt
. 2'�a "n"•'"=�_,. � �l "��-.� fit.. �, i'i'i
a
806 LELAND
FEBRUARY 21, 2002
806 LELAND
FEBRUARY 21, 2002
806 LELAND
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Richard and Maude Elbel constructed this Queen Anne style house in 1894. Mr. Elbel
started a music store at 114 N. Michigan Street in 1887, his brothers joined the business
shortly after and renamed it "Elbel Brothers", with Richard serving as president. Richard
Elbel also was the conductor of the Elbel Orchestra, which played in various local
theaters. Mr. & Mrs. Elbel resided at this address until 1904 when they sold it to Frank &
Ida Korn for $4,500.00. Frank Korn was a farmer until 1902 when he fell from a silo
breaking his back. The Koms lived here until 1909 when the property was sold to Wilkie
Barton who in turn sold the property to Norman P. & Maude Kelb in 1916. Norman was
a railroad postal clerk; he and his wife resided here until their deaths, Maude in 1949 and
Norman in 1950. Upon Mr. Kelbs passing the property was inherited by their children
who immediately sold the property to Peter J. & Dolly Klimishin. Peter was an employee
of the Bendix Corporation, he was also the first owner to rent part of the house out to
boarders. The property remained in the Klimishin family for several decades. The
current owners, William Ahern and Michele Morin purchased the house in 1992.
ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION
This is a two and a half story, Queen Anne style house with an irregular plan, brick
foundation and brick central interior chimney. The first story walls are cladded in insul-
brick while the second and third stories are covered in wood shingle siding. The roof is
pyramidal in design with cross gables, asphalt shingles, and molded cornices below the
eaves. The windows are one over one double hung with molded entablatures. The corner
windows on the south fagade have pendills and the front door is wood with dentils and
light. The house also boasts a decorative one have width front porch. The porch has a
coffered front pediment, balustrades, two groups of three square fluted wood columns on
brick piers at corners with brackets and turned spindles at eaves. The general
landscaping consists of a lawn, three mature trees in front yard, driveway to the south and
a garage to the rear.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the Historic Preservation Commission's Local Landmark Criteria's adopted by
the Common Council, the structures and property at 806 Leland are recommended for
designation as a Local Landmark based on the following criteria.
The building and site meet the following criteria:
1) Its embodiment of elements or architectural design, detail, material or
craftsmanship which represents an architectural characteristic or innovation;
2) Its suitability for preservation;
3) Its identification with the life of a person or persons of historical significance.
4
The structure fulfills criteria #1 as excellent example of a very popular 1800s style of
architectural design known as Queen Anne. It is exemplified in architecture by the use of
a mixture of siding materials, ornate and columned porches, irregular rooflines and
- gables. - The house at 806 Leland is a wonderful example of the Queen Anne style of
architecture, which is experiencing resurgence in popularity, evident in modern
construction.
The structure fulfills criteria #2 by its integrity of construction and style with limited
alteration to its original fabric in over one hundred years.
The structure fulfills criteria #3 by its association with Richard Elbel, owner of Elbel
Brothers music store and conductor of the Elbel Orchestra.
5
,
SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
LOCATION BUDGET REPORT
RUN DATE 2/04/2002 1 PAGE 72
REPORT DATE 1/31/2002
UOl COUNTY GENERAL
037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
UNENCUMBERED
UNEXPENDED
ACCOUNT NO
APPROPRIATION
ENCUMBRANCE
EXPENDITURE
BALANCE/PCT
BALANCE/PCT
11075
000 ASST. DIRECTOR
23,710^00
8'00
1,823,84
2I.886,16
21,88$'16
GENERAL Q0/'T.
92.31
X
92.31 X
11309
000 HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADMIN.
35,000'00
U^OU
2.692.30
32.307.70
32,307.70
'
GENERAL GON'T.
92'31
X
92.31 %
lUOOO TOTAL ^/Aa44Auh^^
58,710'00
0.00
4,516.14
54,193.06
54.103'86
92,31
%
92'31 %
21030
000 OFFICE SUPPLIES
5.741.46
306.06
492.26
4,943,15
5.249'20
GENERAL &OV'T.
86'10
t
91.43 *
22010
OOO GAS OIL & LUBRICANTS
1,000.00
0.00
0.00
1.000.00
1,000.00
GENERAL QOV'T.
100'80
x
100'08 %
22120
800 GARAGE & MOTOR SUPPLIES
700.00
0.00
44.88
656.12
665'12
GENERAL QOY'T.
93'50
%
93'80 %
20000 TOTAL
7.441.46
306.05
637'14
5.698'27
6,904'32
88'67
Z
92.78 %
UU
-
JI�O
000 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
49,170'00
20.000.00
I,220.00
27'050'00
47^960.00
GENERAL &OV'T.
56'84
X
97.52 X
32020
OOO TRAVEL
2,000.00
0.00
47.75
1.052'25
1.962.26
GENERAL &OV'T.
97'61
*
07'61 X
32050
000 INSTRUCTION & TRAlNIN8
1.000.00
0.00
0.00
1,000.00
1,000.00
GENERAL G0'T.
100'00
%
108.00 t
32280
OOO TELEPHONE
2,160.80
0'00
0.00
2.160'00
2.160.00
GENERAL GOV'T.
100.08
*
100.00 X
32360
000 POSTAGE
2,000'00
0'00
65'58
1^034'42
1,934.42
GENERAL GOV'T'
'
96.72
X
96.72 %
33010
000 PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICES
600'80
0'00
17.08
482.92
482^92
GENERAL GOV'T'
96'58'%
96.58 �
33100N0PRINTING
3'000'00
0'00
10'68
2.819'32
2.09.32
GENERAL GOV'T'
93'08
%
93.98 X
332000dO
PHOTO ABLUEPRINTING
19,463'89
0'00
0'00
19.463.89
19,463,89
GENERAL GOV'T'
100'00
100,00 %
- V@�
000 AUTO LEASE
3.854'80
0.00
0.00
3.854.80
3,854,80
s$
FIN14X
SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
RUN DATE 2/04/2002
PAGE 73
LOCATION BUDGET REPORT
REPORT DATE 1/31/2002
ND 001 COUNTY GENERAL
037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
—
UNENCUMBERED
UNEXPENDED
ACCOUNT NO
APPROPRIATION
ENCUMBRANCE
EXPENDITURE
BALANCE/PCT
BALANCE/PCT
39010 000 DUES & SUBSCRIPTION
1.500.00
0.00
41.95
1,458.05
1,458.05
GENERAL GOVT.
97.20
X 97.20
X
39750 000 DATA PROCESSING
5.000.00
0.00
0.00
5_,000.00
5.000.00
GENERAL GOVT.
100.00
X 100.00
X
30000 TOTAL
89.648.69
20,000.00
1.573.04
68.075.65
88.075.65
75.94
X 98.25
X
44250 000 OFFICE MACHINES
1.066.00
1.633.00
266.00
833.00-
800.00
GENERAL GOVT.
78.14-
X 75.05
X
40000 TOTAL
1,066.00
1,633.00
266.00
833.00-
800.00
78.14-
% 75.05
X
LOCATION TOTAL *********
156,866.15
21,939.05
6,892.32
128.034.78
149.973.83
81.62
X 95.61
X
INVESTMENT ACCOUNTS
0.00
TRANSFER ACCOUNTS
0.00
6,892.32
FIN14X SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY RUN DATE 2/04/2002 PAGE 24
OUTSTANDING PURCHASE ORDERS BY FUND/LOC/ACCT/OBJ/PO AS OF: 1/31/2002
NO 001 COUNTY GENERAL
037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
- -
P.O. VENDOR - P.O.
NUMBER NUMBER VENDOR NAME BUDGET CODE DATE
AMOUNT
078557 001312 U.S. OFFICE PRODUCTS 001 21030 000 037 12/04/2001
287.75
078574 000902 MARKING SOLUTIONS INC. 001 21030 000 037 12/06/2001
18.30
078820 000449 DOOLITTLE,WAYNE 001 31070 000 037 12/14/2001
20.000.00
079088 000070 ADAMS-REMCO INC 001 44250 000 037 1/07/2002
663.00
079317 000331 BETHEL BUSINESS MACHINES 001 44250 000 037 1/23/2002
970.00
FUND/LOC TOTAL
21.939.05
R
FIN40X SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY CURRENT COMBINED LEDGER
RUN DATE: 2/04/2002 PAGE 195
FUND: 001 COUNTY GENERAL
FOR 1/01/2002 THRU 1/31/2002 LOC: 037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
EFFECTIVE TRAN TRAN
1/10/02 CLM
1,346.15
PO#000000 VEN#005528COUNTY PAYROLL BK#008 CHK#783232 PyDst 1/11/2002
RDGET
CODE DATE DATE TYPE
AMOUNT OTHER DATA
1,346.15
PO#000000 VEN#005528COUNTY PAYROLL BK#008 CHK#784864 PyDst 1/25/2002
001.02711.000.037 REIMBURSEMENTS
- GENERAL GOV'T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS
1/31/2002 1/01/02 EST/ADJ 28.396.00 BUDGET REVENUE
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
001.02711.000.037 REIMBURSEMENTS
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
35,000.00 2,692.30
TOT 0.00
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS
UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE
EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 28,396.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
10.63
TOT 28,396.00 0.00
28.396.00 0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
001.05600.000.037 REFUNDS
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/02 APP
18.30
1/04/2002 1104/02 REC
2,500.00 REC#062996 BK#007
1/01/02 APP
110.10
1/22/2002 1/22/02 REC
354.80 REC#063231 BK#007
1/01/02 APP
287.75
001.05600.000.037 REFUNDS
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS
UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE
EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00 2,854.80
0.00
0.00
TOT 0.00 2.854.80
2,854.80- 0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
001.05602.000.037 RETURN OR VOIDED
CHECKS GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/03/2002 1/03/02 REC
19.463.89 REC#062981 BK#007
001.05602.000.037 RETURN OR VOIDED
CHECKS GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS
UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE
EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00 19.463.89
0.00
0.00
TOT 0.00 19.463.89
19,463.89- 0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
06500.000.037 NON -IDENTIFIED REVENUE GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/17/2002 1/17/02 REC
1.06500.000.037
2.049.76 REC#063169 BK#007
NON -IDENTIFIED REVENUE GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS
UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE
EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00 2,049.76
0.00
0.00
TOT 0.00 2.049.76
2,049.76- 0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
001.11075.000.037 ASST. DIRECTOR
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002 1/01/02 APP
23.710.00 From BdgtProj
1/10/2002 1/10/02 CLM
911.92 PO#000000 VEN#005528COUNTY PAYROLL BK#008 CHK#783228 PyDst 1/11/2002
1/24/2002 1/24/02 CLM
911.92 PO#000000 VEN#005528COUNTY PAYROLL BK#008 CHK#784860 PyDst 1/25/2002
001.11075.000.037 ASST. DIRECTOR
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS
UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE
EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB 8AL
CUR 0.00 0.00
23,710.00
1.823.84
TOT 0.00 0.00
0.00 23,710.00 0.00
1,823.84
21,886.16 21,886.16
001.11309.000.037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADMIN. GENERAL GOW T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
35.000.00
From BdgtProj
1/10/2002
1/10/02 CLM
1,346.15
PO#000000 VEN#005528COUNTY PAYROLL BK#008 CHK#783232 PyDst 1/11/2002
1/24/2002
1/24/02 CLM
1,346.15
PO#000000 VEN#005528COUNTY PAYROLL BK#008 CHK#784864 PyDst 1/25/2002
001.11309.000.037 HISTORIC
PRESERVATION ADMIN. GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS
UNRECV REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
35,000.00 2,692.30
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
35.000.00 0.00 2,692.30 32.307.70 32.307.70
�P�030.000.037 OFFICE SUPPLIES
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
10.63
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
57.16
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
18.30
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
110.10
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
....................................................................................................................................
1/01/02 APP
287.75
Carry Forward
r.
FIN40X SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY CURRENT COMBINED LEDGER RUN DATE: 2/04/2002 PAGE 196
FUND: 001 COUNTY GENERAL FOR 1/01/2002 THRU 1/31/2002 LOC: 037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
EFFECTIVE IRAN TRAM
tT CODE DATE DATE TYPE
1/01/2002 1/01/02 APP
-_ 1/01/2002 1/01/02 APP
1/01/2002 1/01/02 APP
1/01/2002 1/01/02 APP
1/01/2002 12/04/01 PO
1/01/2002 12/04/01 PO
1/01/2002 12/04/01 PO
1/01/2002 12/04/Oi PO
1/01/2002 12/06/01 PO
1/01/2002 12/06/01 PO
1/01/2002 12/06/01 PO
1/01/2002 12/09/01 PO
1/08/2002 1/08/02 CLM
1/08/2002 1/08/02 CLM
1/08/2002 1/08/02 CLM
1/22/2002 1/22/02 CLM
1/22/2002 1/22/02 CLM
1/22/2002 1/22/02 CLM
1/22/2002 1/22102 CLM
1/31/2002 12/04/01 PO/BAL
1/31/2002 12/06/01 PO/BAL
001.21030.000.037 OFFICE SUPPLIES
j ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS
f��l0.00 0.00
ill 0.00 0.00
AMOUNT OTHER DATA
59.88 Carry Forward -
23.20 -Carry Forward
174.44 Carry Forward
5,000.00 From BdgtProj
287.75 PO#078557 VEN#001312 U.S. OFFICE PRODUCTS Carry Forward
59.88 PO#078554 VEN#001144 RIBBONS INK, INC. Carry Forward
23.20 PO#078553 VEN#000870 INDIANA CARBON CO INC Carry Forward
174.44 PO#078552 VEN#006158 COMMERCIAL OFFICE Carry Forward
10.63 PO#078591 VEN#001312 U.S. OFFICE PRODUCTS Carry Forward
18.30 PO#078574 VEN#000902 MARKING SOLUTIONS INC. Carry Forward
110.10 PO#078595 VEN#000070 ADAMS-REMCO INC Carry Forward
57.16 PO#078697 VEN#006209 R I S PAPER COMPANY. INC Carry Forward
59.88 PO#078554 VEN#001144RIBBONS INK, INC. BK#008 CHK#782786 INV#22101
174.44 PO#078552 VEN#006158COMMERCIAL OFFICE BK#008 CHK#782711 INV#191879
23.20 PO#078553 VEN#000870INDIANA CARBON CO INC BK#008 CHK#782751 INV#SI205519
57.16 PO#078697 VEN#006209R I S PAPER COMPANY. INC BK#008 CHK#784348 INV#1151120
10.63 PO#078591 VEN#001312U.S, OFFICE PRODUCTS BK#008 CHK#784399 INV#09ER0011
110.10 PO#078595 VEN#000070ADAMS-REMCO INC BK#008 CHK#784152 INV#464396
56.85 PO#000000 VEN#000507COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BK#008 CHK#784207 INV#50420011
287.75 PO#078557 VEN#001312 U.S. OFFICE PRODUCTS Po Balance
18.30 PO#078574 VEN#000902 MARKING SOLUTIONS INC. Po Balance
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION Po-
UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
5,741.46 492.26
0.00 5.741.46 306.05 492.26 5.249.20 4.943.15
001.22010.000.037 GAS OIL & LUBRICANTS GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002 1/01/02 APP 1.000.00 From BdgtProj
001.22010.000.037 GAS OIL & LUBRICANTS GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00
TOT 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 1.000.00 1.000.00
001.22120.000.037 GARAGE & MOTOR SUPPLIES GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002 1/01/02 APP 700.00 From BdgtProj
1/22/2002 1/22/02 CLM 44.88 PO#000000 VEN#005440CITY OF SOUTH BEND BK#008 CHK#784192 INV#
001.22120.000.037 GARAGE & MOTOR SUPPLIES GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00 0.00 700.00 44.88
TOT 0.00 0.00 0.00 700.00 0.00 44.88 655.12 655.12
001.31070.000.037 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GENERAL GOV'T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
20.000.00
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
1/01/02
APF
26,670.00
From BdgtProj
1/01/2002
12/14/01
PO
20.000.00
PO#078820 VEW00449 DOOLITTLE,WAYNE
Carry Forward
1/08/2002
1/08/02
CLH
780.00
PO#000000 VEN#000449DOOLITTL€.WAYNE
BK#008 CHK#782732 INV#
1/10/2002
1/10/02
CLM
440.00
PO#000000 VEN#000449DOOLITTLE.WAYNE
BK#008 CHK#783250 INV#
1/31/2002
1/04/02
APP/ADJ
2,500.00
QUIETUS 62996
1/31/2002
12/14/01
PO/BAL
20.000.00
PO#078820 VEN#000449 DOOLITTLE.WAYNE
Po Balance
070.000.037 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
STIMATED REV RECEIPTS UNRECV REV BAL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00 0.00 49.170.00 1.220.00
TOT 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.170.00 20.000.00 1.220.00 47,950.00 27,950.00
FIN40X
SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
CURRENT C"INED LEDGER
RUN DATE: 2/04/2002 PAGE 197
FUND: 001
COUNTY GENERAL
FOR 1/01/2002 THRU 1/31/2002
LOC: 037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
BUDGET EFFECTIVE
TRAN TRAN
ACCT CODE DATE
DATE TYPE
AMOUNT
OTHER DATA
001.32020.000.037 TRAVEL
- - GENERAL GOV'T. HISIORIC PRESERVATION
1101/2002
1/01/02 APP
2,000.00
From BdgtProj
1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
47.75
PO#000000 VEN#001468SAUNDERS. RHONDA L.
BK#008 CHK#782789
INV#191MILES
001.32020.000.037 TRAVEL
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL
UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
2.000.00
47.75
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000.00 0.00
47.75 1.952.25
1.952.25
001.32050.000.037 INSTRUCTION & TRAINING
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
1,000.00
From BdgtProj
001.32050.000.037 INSTRUCTION & TRAINING
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL
UNENCUMB BAL'
CUR 0.00
0.00
1 1.000.00
0.00
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
1,000.00 0.00
0.00 1.000.00
1,000.00
001.32200.000.037 TELEPHONE
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
2.160.00
From BdgtProj
001.32200.000.037 TELEPHONE
GENERAL GOV'T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL
UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
2.160.00
0.00
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
2.160.00 0.00
0.00 2,160.00
2.160.00
1.32350.000.037 POSTAGE
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
2.000.00
From BdgtProj
1/22/2002
1/22/02 CLM
65.58
PO#000000 VEN#000507COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BK#008 CHK#784209
INV#50420011
001.32350.000.037 POSTAGE
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL
UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
2.000.00
65.58
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
2,000.00 0.00
65.58 1,934.42
1,934.42
001.33010.000.037 PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICES GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
500.00
From BdgtProj
1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
237.00
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
80008 CHK#782796
INV#T3464581
1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
260.96
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#782796
INV#T3465288
1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
264.96
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#782796
INV#T3465807
1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
6.83
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#782797
INV#T3449792
1/10/2002
1/08/02 CLM/ADJ
237.00•
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#782796
INV#
1/10/2002
1/08/02 CLM/ADJ
260.96•
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#782796
INV#
1/10/2002
1/08/02 CLM/ADJ
264.96
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#782796
INV#
1/22/2002
1/22/02 CLM
3.42
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#784379
INV#T3439575
1/22/2002
1/22/02 CLM
6.83
PO#000000 VEN#001538SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
BK#008 CHK#784379
INV#72449790
001.33010.000.037 PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICES GENERAL GOV'T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS. UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL
UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
500.00
17.08
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
500.00 0.00
17.08 482.92
482.92
001.33100.000.037 PRINTING
GENERAL GOV'T._ HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
3,000.00
From BdgtProj
VIIII II 1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
180.68
PO#000000 VEN#313494WESTERLY GROUP INC
BK#008 CHK#782816
INV#
W1.33100.000.037 PRINTING
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED BAL
UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
3.000.00
180.68
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
3.000.00 0.00
180.68 2.819.32
2.819.32
v . �
FIN40X SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY CURRENT COMBINED LEDGER RUN DATE: 2/04/2002 PAGE 198
FUND: 001 COUNTY GENERAL FOR 1/01/2002 THRU 1/31/2002 LOC: 037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
�lUDGET EFFECTIVE TRAM IRAN
CT CODE DATE DATE TYPE AMOUNT OTHER DATA
001.33200.000.037 PHOTO & BLUEPRINTING -
- - -GENERAL GOV'T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/02/2002
1/01/02 APP/ADJ
19,463.89
CFWD-01 APPR
001.33200.000.037 PHOTO & BLUEPRINTING
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
19.463.89 0.00
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
19.463.89 0.00 0.00
19.463.89 19.463.89
001.37100.000.037 AUTO LEASE
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
3.500.00
From BdgtProj-
1/31/2002
1/22/02 APP/ADJ
354.80
QUIETUS 63231
001.37100.000.037 AUTO LEASE
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
3.854.80 0.00
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
3.854.80 0.00 0.00
3.854.80 3.854.80
001.39010.000.037 DUES & SUBSCRIPTION
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
1.500.00
From BdgtProj
1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
41.95
PO#000000 VEN#325724OLD HOUSE JOURNAL BK#008 CHK#782774 INV#
001.39010.000.037 DUES & SUBSCRIPTION
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
1.500.00 41.95
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
1.500.00 0.00 41.95
1,458.05 1.458.05
x.39750.000.037 DATA PROCESSING
GENERAL GOV'T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION .
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
5.000.00
From BdgtProj
001.39750.000.037 DATA PROCESSING
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
5,000.00 0.00
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
5.000.00 0.00 0.00
5.000.00 5.000.00
001.44250.000.037 OFFICE MACHINES
GENERAL GOVT. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
182.00
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
84.00
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
1/01/02 APP
800.00
From BdgtProj
1/01/2002
12/06/01 PO
84.00
PO#078641 VEN#003845 CONNECTING POINT
Carry Forward
1/01/2002
12/06/01 PO
182.00
PO#078617 VEN#000637 ABC WAREHOUSE
Carry Forward
1/07/2002
1/07/02 PO
663.00
PO#079088 VEN#000070 ADAMS-REMCO INC
Auto Po
1/08/2002
1/08/02 CLM
182.00
PO#078617 VEN#000637ABC WAREHOUSE BK#008 CHK#782684 INV#NR2555
1/22/2002
1/22/02 CLM
84.00
PO#078641 VEN#003845CONNECTING POINT BK#008 CHK#784201 INV#49660
1/23/2002
1/23/02 PO
970.00
PO#079317 VEN#000331 BETHEL BUSINESS MACHINES
Auto Po
1/31/2002
1/07/02 PO/BAL
663.00
PO#079088 VEN#000070 ADAMS-REMCO INC
Po Balance
1/31/2002
1/23/02 PO/BAL
970.00
PO#079317 VEN#000331 BETHEL BUSINESS MACHINES
Po -Balance
001.44250.000.037 OFFICE MACHINES
GENERAL GOV'T. HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV
RECEIPTS UNRECV
REV BAL
APPROPRIATION. ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE
UNEXPENDED BAL UNENCUMB BAL
CUR 0.00
0.00
1,066.00 266.00
TOT 0.00
0.00
0.00
1,066.00 1.633.00 266.00
800.00_ 833.00--
~^, °
FIN40X SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY CURRENT COMBINED LEDGER RUN DAT[: 2/04/2002 PAGE 199
FUND: 001 COUNTY GENERAL FOR 1/01/2002 lH0 1/31/2003 LOC: 037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
JUDGET EFFECTIVE 7BAN TRAW
%3 CODE DATE DATE TYPE AMOUNT OTHER DATA
*
TOTALS FOR LOCATION: 037 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ESTIMATED REV RECEIPTS UNRECV REV 8AL APPROPRIATION ENCUMBRANCE EXPENDITURE UNEXPENDED RAL UNENCUHB BAL
CUR 28.396.00 24.308.45 156,866.15 6'892.32
TOT 28.306.00 24'368,45 4,027^56 156,866.15 21,939.05 6,892.32 149,973'83 128.034.78
Memorial
Health. -System, Inc:"
Quality
of Life
February 18, 2002
Rhonda Saunders
Executive Director
Historic Preservation Commission
227 W. Jefferson Blvd.
South Bend, IN 46601
Karen R. Hammond -Nash
Assistant Director
Historic Preservation Commission
227 W. Jefferson Blvd.
South Bend, IN 46601
Dear Rhonda and Karen:
Thank you for your quick response regarding our discussion on the Junior League House.
I am forwarding the proposed ordinance to the Junior League for their review and "sign off
I do not anticipate that they will object. In fact, I expect their enthusiastic support.
Sincerely,
cl, Y,-,
Theodore J. Foti
Senior Vice President
TJF/be
615 North Michigan Street
South Bend, Indiana 46601-1033
Website - bttp.11qua1ityof1ife-o;:,q
C
,1 printed on recycled paper
John Oxian, President
South Bend and St. Joseph County
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
227 WEST JEFFERSON BLVD.
SOUTH BEND, IN 46601-1830
_
Mr. Ted Foti
MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
707 North Michigan Street
South Bend, NI 46601
Dear Ted:
Phone: 219-235-9798- - Fax: 219-235-9578 -
e-mail: historicOmichiana.org
A Certified Local Government
Wednesday, February 13, 2002
Rhonda Saunders, Director
Thank you for your helpful response to our letter regarding the Junior League House at 130 Park Lane, and
for taking the time to discuss the matter with me in the absence of our Executive Director.
As I understand your thoughts, the hospital has an agreement with the Junior League that the League may
use the house in its present location in perpetuity, or as long as they like, and present plans involve improvements to
the night lighting for the house and landscape. Moving the house is not a part of any present pians. I also under-
stand that you feel that, should the house be moved at a later date, the land that it is on should remain non-
commercial, and be preserved for a use compatible with the neighboring park.
There are a couple ways that these goals could be accomplished. The simplest is probably to ask the Com-
mon Council to adopt an ordinance designating the house, garage, and landscape design at 130 Park Lane a local
landmark. This way, if one or more of the elements of the landmark were removed, the other would remain. As
you know from the example of the Remedy Building, and others, moving of historic landmarks is fairly common,
though it is becoming increasingly expensive.
A zoning restriction limiting usage to eleemosynary purposes, or a grant of a fagade easement to HPC
would, of course, be perfectly fine with us. However, the usual reason for such things is tax exemptions for the
grantor, and that would not likely benefit the hospital, since you are already tax exempt. Landmark status would
not restrict future use quite so much, but it would probably be enough for the goals you and we have presently in
mind.
We have discussed the above with John Oxian, and he is in agreement. We enclose a proposed Ordinance,
for your comments. If it meets with your approval,, we will add it to our agenda for a First Reading. Please do let
us know what you think, and feel free to play with the proposed language!
Yours,
Karen R. Hammond -Nash, -
Assistant Director
Rhonda Saunders,
Executive Director
COMMISSIONERS
Martha Choitz Richard Helmus Jerry Wiener (Treasurer)
Mary Jane Chase Catherine Hostetler (Vice -President) Gerald Ujdak (Secretary)
Richard Morrison Joann Sporleder (Historic Architect) Thomas Bodnar(Attomey)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING
THE JUNIOR LEAGUE HOUSE AND LAWN
A HISTORIC LANDMARK
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND INTENT
The house and property commonly known as the Junior League House, and located at
130 Park Land, South Bend, Indiana, has been important to the community life of South Bend
for many years. Memorial Hospital, as the owner of the property, recognizing its historic sig-
nificance and architectural beauty, has granted its use in perpetuity to the Junior League, and
further recommended that it be publicly recognized as a Local Landmark. The Historic Preser-
vation Commission of South Bend and Saint Joseph County, having reviewed the matter, re-
ports to the City that the property in question meets the City Ordinance Criteria for a local his-
toric landmark, and recommends to the City that Historic Landmark designation be granted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above described real property, consisting of house, attached ga-
rage, and landscaped lawn, [insert legal description] commonly called the Junior League House,
is hereby designated and established as an Historic Landmark under Ordinance 5565-73, as
amended.
Section 2. That if the house and garage are, in the future, moved to another location,
they shall remain an Historic Landmark, at their new location.
Section 3. That if the house and garage are, in the future, moved to another location,
the lawn shall remain an Historic Landmark, and shall be called the Junior League Lawn.
Section 4. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
passage by the Common Council, approval by the Mayor, and legal publication.
Member of the Common Council
. - ' � ' s _..�^'" �„� ,mss ^"; ` • ��
� t�.. �Mrr{ • i
rL -M P+s✓^stel; �i�"s� `t'•:.r.`. * �(t1,1 �.
�' '':l' �1 3;, '•+j•, w .'. (j1(. c��vli`j/�'�i`R;�4 `t:• � ljjss(Yyi i
"'���:/SSY`r •ri1 ii 1"lr V�j� *:`���6�C \t.� � � ;� ,
r if is}} !l ° �l i+y t 3+`i �,�� r `3 ;t� -t�'��''����'S� 1• i'�
r • ✓ �t'�� � � =, a� 7rlr ',�r���,y4.i j � ;'�,�'� ��+t� Jtx'��ut:. � 1 '
r�
jp
.y A+,•i
r 4
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 6.5
OF CHAPTER 21 OF THE SOUTH BEND MUNICIPAL CODE
TO PROVIDE DIRECT ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES FOR
ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND INTENT
The present version of Article 6.5, Chapter 21, of the Municipal Code does not provide
means for direct enforcement by Historic Preservation Commission staff to enforce Historic
Preservation Ordinances. Rather, it requires the Historic Preservation Commission to rely on
the staff of other departments. Consequently, a property in violation of this article of the mu-
nicipal code is reviewed by our inspector who then notifies either Code Enforcement or the
Building Department, whose staff then inspect the property again, before tagging it themselves.
This wastes man hours and delays the stoppage of unapproved work. This proposed amend-
ment would afford the Historic Preservation Commission staff the ability to enforce the munici-
pal code directly by granting the HPC Staff authority to "tag" or issue "stop work orders" for
violations. It would also grant the Commission authority to petition the courts to levy specified
amounts as fines for violations. It will also clarify Article 6.5, Chapter 21 of the Municipal
Code by creating a procedure for handling violations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. Chapter 21, Article 6.5, of the South Bend Municipal Code shall be
amended to add a new Section 21-117.4 entitled Enforcement Procedures, to read as follows:
Section 21-117.4. Enforcement Procedures.
The Historic Preservation Commission, by its Staff, shall have the power to enforce the
provisions of this article by means of:
A. "tags" or "Ston work orders." served by HPC staff either directiv to violator or by
posting at premises where violation of this article is occurring, and
B. Petitioning the appropriate Court for the levving of a fine upon anv propertv owner
who violates this article. Fines levied by a court pursuant to this article shall be eaual to those
defined in Section 6-37. Article 8(h) of the South Bend Municipal Code, i.e., not less than fifty
dollars ($50.00) for the first day of violation, a fine of not less than one hundred dollars
($100.00) for the second day of violation and a fine of not less than two hundred dollars
($200.00) for every day of violation thereafter with each day of violation constituting
a separate violation for which a citation may be issued. No fine, however, shall exceed two
thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00).
- - -- - - Section II. Amend section 22.166(a) to read:
"Any person or anyone acting in behalf thereof who violates or fails to comply with any of the
provisions of this chapter, with the exception of the provisions of Article 8 subdivision and of
article 6.5, Historic Preservation Commission".
Section III. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage by
the Common Council and approval by the Mayor and publication of any required notice.
Member of the Common Council
FEB -21-2002 10:53 CITY OF SB MAYORS OFFICE
TO: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DATE: -February 21, 2002
FROM: THOMAS L. BODNAR `7t43 f je
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
I have two recommended changes for the ordinance as presented.
P.01/01
The first is that a new Section II be added (the current Section II be renumbered as
Section III). The new section is necessary to eliminate the overlap which will result without the
amendment and the possible double jeopardy defense which could be raised. There is, at this time, a
§22.166(x) which provides for fines for:
"Any person or anyone acting in behalf thereof who violates or fans to
comply with any of the provisions of this chapter, with the exception of
the provisions of Article 8 subdivisions..."
The penalties provided for are somewhat different from this neer ordinance. The Historic Preservation
Commission was established under the Article under the zoning code. Therefore, these fines at this
time would apply to violations with which we are involved. The amendment is a simple one, After
"Subdivisions" we would need to add the words:
"and of Article 6.5, Historic Preservation Commission."
The second change is to eliminate the phrase "and Minimum Maintenance Violations"
from the title of the ordinance. Without a further and more substantial amendment of the ordinance,
there is no violation of the ordinance for failing to maintain maintenance standards. §21-117.2(e)(7)
says the Commission shall petition the Building Commissioner and the Department of Code
Enforcement to require repair standards at a certain address. §21-117.2(f) provides that we may
establish reasonable and just standards for the preservation of landmarks concerning such things as
alteration, demolition, and removal, but does not mention repair nor does it mention minimum
maintenance. In short, it is foolhardy to acquire a power to enforce our maintenance standards when
the ordinance does not allow us to establish minimum maintenance standards.
K.NWPDATA\TLV43I 4 PC ORD MIN Ma taLfrm
.I+
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES
The following are procedures, as adopted by the Historic Preservation Commission, for
enforcing HPC Code, Standards and Guidelines.
Definition of Terms
Code = All powers given to Historic Preservation Commission by the City of South Bend and
St. Joseph County.
Standard = Mandates set forth by the Historic Preservation Commission setting levels
pertaining to minimum maintenance of Local Historic Districts and Local
Landmarks.
Guidelines = Mandates that stipulate the dos and don'ts with in Local Historic Districts and
Local Landmarks, as set forth by the Historic Preservation Commission.
HPC = Historic Preservation Commission
CoA = Certificate of Appropriateness
Action to be taken when work commences with no CoA:
1) Inspector will go to site.
a) Inspector will decide if there is a violation and what type.
b) Inspector will either tag the violation or issue a stop work order, both of
which shall carry a penalty of fine for failure to comply.
1) Tags and stop work orders will clearly state the violation,
pertinent fines and the course of action to be followed by the
property owner.
c) Inspector will inform the Building Department and or Code Enforcement.
2) HPC Staff will send notice, via certified mail to the property owner.
a) Notice will include the following:
1) Detailed description of violation.
2) How it violates either HPC Code, Standards and/or Guidelines.
3) The owner will be required to file an application for the
proposed project by a designated date, blank application form will
be enclosed.
1
a 4
4) No work can commence until said application is approved, by
either HPC Staff or HPC.
5) List of fines that can be imposed if the owner fails to comply - - - -
- - with any mandates set forth by the HPC and/or HPC Staff.
6) Cite City and County ordinances that pertain to HPC's powers.
7) Copies to be sent to the Building Department and or Code
Enforcement.
3) If an application is received it will be reviewed following the CoA procedures
outlined in the Preservation Plan.
a) If an application is approved work may immediately commence and fines
will either be waived or sought per the circumstances.
b) If an application is denied the owner will receive notice of the denial
detailing the reasons for such action. The notice will also outline the
HPC's mandates pertaining to the project. The owner will be given a
set time frame to complete the mandates. The HPC Staff will have the
power to extend the deadline, per their discretion, but not to exceed one
year with out HPC approval.
1) The HPCwill decide if any fines should be waived or
sought.
2) The owner may contest HPC's finding by appealing to the
appropriate council.
d) If the owner fails to comply and does not receive an extension then the
HPC Staff shall send notice of failure to comply and will instruct the City
Legal Department to seek all pertinent fines, as approved by the HPC,
through the local courts.
e) If the maximum allowable fine is sought and the owner has not complied
then HPC will take the appropriate legal action.
4) Owner fails to respond.
a) Notice will be sent by HPC Staff to the property owner, of failure to
respond and the impending consequences.
b) HPC, HPC President and/or HPC Staff will immediately instruct the City
Legal Department to seek an injunction to stop all work. HPC will seek
all pertinent fines up to the maximum allowed by Code, through the local
courts.
C) Owner refuses to comply then HPC will take the appropriate legal action.
Action to be taken when work violates existine CoA
1) Inspector will go to site.
a) Inspector will decide if there is a violation of the existing CoA and to
what extent.
2
b) Inspector will either issue the appropriate tag or a stop work order for
either the entire project or the portion of the project that is in violation.
The type and extent of the notice will be chosen at the discretion of the
HPC Staff, unless otherwise instructed by the HPC. All cited work will
cease immediately.
1) Tags and stop work orders will clearly state the violation,
pertinent fines and the course of action to be followed by the
property owner.
c) Inspector will inform the Building Department and/or Code Enforcement.
2) HPC Staff will send notice, via certified mail to the property owner.,
a) Notice will include the following:
1) Detailed description of violation.
2) How it violates the existing CoA.
3) The owner will be required, by a set date, to; a) submit in writing
actions to be taken to bring the violation into code with existing
CoA; b) submit a new CoA application requesting approval of
changes.
4) Stipulate that no work may commence until the matter is resolved
and all proposed work is approved.
5) List the fines that can be imposed if the owner fails to comply
with any mandates set forth by the HPC and/or HPC Staff.
6) Cite the ordinance that pertains to the HPC's powers.
7) Inform Building Department and/or Code Enforcement.
3) Owner complies by removing the violation and complying with the existing
CoA.
a) The owner will submit in writing exactly what actions will be taken to
correct the violation, bringing it into agreement with the existing CoA.
b) The HPC Staff will determine if the document submitted and the
course of action purposed by the owner is acceptable.
c) If the proposal is accepted by the HPC Staff work may commence. The
HPC will decide if any fines should be sought or if existing fines should
be rescinded.
1) The Inspector will visit site regularly to ensure work is
done according to the approved proposal and existing
CoA.
2) Inform Building Department and or Code Enforcement.
d) If the proposal is not accepted the owner will work with HPC Staff
and the HPC Standards and Maintenance Committee to resolve the
points of contention. -
- - e) _ -If no resolution can be afforded then the owner has the right to bring the
proposal before the HPC as a whole, for review. The decision issued by
the HPC will stand as the course of action to take.
1) The HPC will decide at this time if any fines should be sought
or if existing fines should be rescinded.
2) The property owner can contest the decision made by HPC by
petitioning the appropriate council.
f) If the owner does not comply with HPC and/or HPC Staff mandates the
imposition of appropriate fines will be sought from the local courts.
g) Inspector will visit site regularly to ensure no further violations occur.
h) Inform the Building Department and/or Code Enforcement.
4) Owner complies by submitting a new CoA.
a) Owner will submit a new application, by a set date, for a CoA which will
encompass the violation.
b) The application will be heard by the HPC, following the regular CoA
procedures.
1) If the application is approved by the HPC then the owner
may commence with the project.
a) HPC will decide if any fines should be
imposed or rescinded.
2) If the application is denied the owner will receive a notice
of the denial detailing the reasons for such action. Notice
will also include HPC's mandates pertaining to the
application and project along with a date for completion.
c) If the owner does not comply with HPC mandate then imposition and
collection of the appropriate fines will immediately be sought through
the local court system.
d) Inspector will visit site regularly to ensure no further violations occur.
e) Inform Building Department and/or Code Enforcement.
4
5) Owner does not respond.
a) Notice will be sent to the owner of failure to respond stating that the HPC
has instructed the City Legal Department to seek the necessary fines - -
- - through the local courts.
b) Owner will continue to be fined until such time the violation is brought
into compliance. If the maximum allowable fine is sought and the owner
has still not complied then the HPC will seek the appropriate legal
actions.
Action to be taken for minimum maintenance violations
1) Inspector will evaluate site to determine if the minimum maintenance standards
have been violated.
a) Inspector will tag properties that are in violation.
b) The tag will list the violations, pertinent fines and the appropriate action
to be followed by the property owner.
c) Inspector will inform Code Enforcement and Building Department.
2) The HPC Staff will send a notice, via certified mail to the property owner.
a) The Notice will include the following:
1)
A list of violations.
2)
How the issues violate the standards.
3)
A mandate that the owner must submit, in writing, a response
identifying specifically the corrective and remedial steps that
are to be taken to correct the violations. The owner will have
twenty days from the date the notice is received to respond.
4)
Owner will be informed of which violations will require a permit
before work can commence.
5)
Notice will include an application and information regarding the
CoA process.
6)
HPC Staff will copy the Building Department as well a Code
Enforcement.
4) Owner complies by submitting corrective measures.
a) HPC Staff will review corrective measures.
1) HPC Staff approves of measures.
a) Owner will be asked to submit an application for items
which require one.
b) HPC Staff will approve all in-kind corrective measures
and the HPC will review all other applications per the
standard CoA procedures.
5
c) HPC will decide if fines should be sought or rescinded.
d) HPC Staff will inform Code Enforcement and the
Building Department. -
- --- -- -- - -
- - - e) _ Owner may commencewith approved work.
f) Inspector will visit site to ensure compliance.
5) Owner attempts to comply with out working with HPC.
a) Owner corrects matters that do not require a CoA in a manner acceptable
by the HPC.
1) HPC Staff will submit a letter to the owner recognizing the
corrections but stipulating that in the future a notice will have to
be submitted in writing outlining the corrective measures to be
taken prior to the work commencing.
a) HPC will decide if fines should be sought or rescinded.
2) If it is the owner's second violation HPC Staff will notify owner
that a written response outlining the measures taken will still
have to be submitted in order for the matter to be considered
closed.
a) Upon receipt of the written response HPC Staff will
decide if fines should be sought.
b) Owner corrects matters that require a CoA with out a CoA.
1) This is to be handled according to procedures laid out under the
section entitled "Action to be taken when work commences with
out a CoA".
6) Owner fails to respond or comply.
a) HPC Staff will send notice of failure to respond and/or comply to the
property owner.
b) HPC will instruct the City Legal Department to seek imposition of
all pertinent fines through the local courts.
c) Fines will be sought until such time the violation is brought into
compliance with HPC Code, Standards and/or Guidelines.
d) If the maximum allowable fine is sought and the owner has yet to comply
then HPC will seek the appropriate legal actions.
e) HPC Staff will inform Code Enforcement and Building Department.
2
Non-Comuliance .
The appropriate fines shall be sought through the local courts for all property owners who vio-
late tags and/or stop work orders or who fail to comply with HPC mandates. HPC Staff will
send notice to the property owner and immediately request that the HPC seek the appropriate
fines from local courts and the appropriate actions from the City Legal Department.
Fines can be sought for any violations of HPC Code, Guidelines and/or Standards.
All HPC mandates that require the removal of violations will require that it be done so at the
owner's expense. Failure of an owner to comply will result in HPC instructing the City Legal
Department to seek all fines and any further required legal action.
Fines
In order to impose fines the HPC must instruct the City Legal Department to seek the appropri-
ate fines from the local court system.
HPC can seek the imposition of fines of not less then fifty dollars ($50.00) for the first day of
violation, a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the second day of violation
and a fine of not less than two hundred dollars ($200.00) for every day of violation thereafter.
No fine, however, shall exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00). Fines may be
adapted, applied and/or rescinded at the discretion of the HPC.
FINE SCHEDULE
Fines shall commence with the first day of violation being the day the violation was
tagged and will follow the above fine schedule.
7
HPC Rescinding Powers
HPC may rescind any fine at the discretion of a majority_vote of the Commission during a pub- - - -
-licly announced meeting-.
HPC policy pertaining to fines should be as follows: waive all fines if first offence and there is
complete compliance of citation; immediately seek fines if second offense or lack of compli-
ance.
Tag Tvnes and Stou Work Orders
There are two different types of tags and a stop work order notice.
A Stop Work Order will consist of a notice the size of a building permit, it shall be posted at the
violating property and if possible hand delivered to violators. It shall be issued when a viola-
tion is in process.
The two tags will have different purposes and different colors to differentiate them.
1) Red Tag—will be issued for violations that have occurred where all the work is
already done.
2) Blue Tag - will be issued for all minimum maintenance violations.
(Red tag and Stop work order will be used for both violation of an existing CoA and no CoA)
8
Volume 1, Issue 1
Spring 2002
INSIDE THIS ISSUE: PRESERVATION AWARDS
Preservation Awards 1 R E S E R E C T E D
2
Studebaker Convention
HPC Notes
New Local Landmarks
liaison Electrons
CoA's
Special points of Inter-
est:
• Awards Nomination
forms available in HPC
office.
• Studebaker Tour Books
now on sale.
• Election Ballots for one
year Liaison Terms en-
closed.
2
3
3
3
4
Southhold Restoration,
Inc., a not-for-profit
agency, was formed ??? to
promote and preserve
South Bend's history and
historic built environment.
Among their numerous
preservation efforts the
organization recognized
property owners who had
saved and/or restored a
piece of South Bend's built
history. Southhold held
open nominations in three
categories, preservation,
restoration and adaptive
reuse. The winners would
receive a plaque in recog-
nition of their efforts in
preservation during a
press conference highlight-
ing their projects. Unfortu-
nately, Southhold Restora-
tion, folded two years ago,
at which time it delegated
portions of its existing pro-
grams to various local
preservation groups.
The Historic Preservation
PROBST HOUSE - 520 EAST COLFAX
PAST PRESERVATION AWARD RECIPIENT
Commission was given the
honor of continuing the
Preservation Awards. As
such, HPC will be holding
open nominations this
spring for the three previ-
ously mentioned catego-
ries. Nominees may in-
clude but are not limited to
residential, commercial
and environmental. De-
tailed information and
forms are available at the
HPC office, 125 S. Lafay-
ette South Bend, Indiana,
235-9798.
LIAISON BALLOTS INSIDE
Page 2
`Thousands of
Studebakers will be
coming home to celebrate
the Com
panys 150th
Anniversary. "
ANYTHING
This story can fit 150-200
words.
One benefit of using your
newsletter as a promotional
tool is that you can reuse con-
tent from other marketing
materials, such as press re -
leases, market studies, and
reports.
While your main goal of dis-
tributinga newsletter might
be to sell your product or ser-
vice, the key to a successful
newsletter is making it useful
to your readers.
Caption describing picture or graphic.
A great way to add use-
ful content to your
newsletter is to develop
and write your own arti-
cles, or include a calen-
dar of upcoming events
or a special offer that
promotes a new prod-
uct.
You can also research
articles or find "filler"
articles by accessing
Volume 1, Issue 1
the World Wide Web. You can
write about a variety of topics
but try to keep your articles
short.
Much of the content you put
in your newsletter can also be
used for your Web site. Micro-
soft Publisher offers a simple
way to convert your newslet-
ter to a Web publication. So,
when you're finished writing
your newsletter, convert it to a
Web site and post it.
STUDEBAKER NATIONAL CONVENTION
The Studebaker Drivers
Club will be holding its
38th Annual Meet in South
Bend June 23-29, 2002.
Thousands of Studebakers
will be coming home to
celebrate the companys
150th anniversary.
The Studebaker Drivers
Club was formed in 1962
when the Studebaker Cor-
poration gave its permis-
sion to the clubs founder,
Harry Barnes, to form the
organization. From its
small but loyal beginning
the club has grown into an
international organization
with over 15, 000 mem-
bers world wide.
The National Convention
will host numerous events,
starting with an opening
reception on Monday
which will be followed by
through out the week with
various tours, an auction,
1931 Studebaker Promotional Presidents
Four Season Roadster & several Stude-
baker employees.
style show, awards banquet,
car show, drag races and a
tour of the Studebaker Prov-
ing Grounds.
For more information re-
garding events and registra-
tion go to the official web
site at
www.southbend2002.com.
The Historic Preservation
Commission has published
a Studebaker Tour Guide
Booklet for local sites.
These booklets are on sale
through the Studebaker Na-
tional Museum and the His-
toric Preservation Commis-
sion office for $$$$.
HPC NOTES
The Historic Preservation
Commission would like to
introduce two new staff
members and one new
Commission member.
Karen Hammond -Nash has
joined our team osthe new
Assistant Director and
Wayne Doolittle has come
aboard anapart-time in-
apactor,under contract
Rhonda Saunders, former
Assistant Director, has
been promoted tothe posi-
tion ofUineotor. The Com-
mission hnoaiaowe|-
onmedanmwConnmisa|on
member, ?????, was ap-
pointed bytheCommnon
Council onY?7.
Along with the new faces
the HPC has anew office
�
located onthe 1stfloor nf
the Law Building, 125 S.
LohayatUa' Tocoincide with
these changes the Staff
and Commission have
been working onseveral
new in-house projects
which include new infop
madona|broohuraanaQard-
|nQtheCoApn)caooand
landmark and district des'
/gnnUon,nn°mUao,lndi-
vidua|broohuraofbreaoh
local historic district which
will feature examples of
the districts various archi-
tectural sty|ao.|nadd|don,
the Commission has ap-
plied for oState Preserva-
tion GrantwithdeYollow-
ingobjoctiveoin mind:
creation ofanindustrial
Multiple Resource Historic
District, creation ofthe W.
LaSalle Street National
Register District, nomina-
tion mfthe Natatorium to
the National Register and
creation ofaTour Guide
Brochure for Local Land-
marks.
The Commissions goal im
increase our presence in
anattempt tobetter assist
and educate historic prop-
erty ownero.
NEW LOCAL HISTORIC LANDMARKS
The Commission spent o
majority oflast year fight -
Ing top,otenttwoofSouth
Bend's Historic Schools,
Nunorand Washington,
unfortunately the Commis-
sion oowell asthe Com-
munity )ost both struc-
tures. As a result of the
truc-tuma.Aoammultofthe
extensive effort given to
these two schools only 7?
structures have been offi-
cially deciaradlandmarko'
The new landmarks are:
3337bntirStrickland
House,a Dutch Colonial
Revival style house built in
1920byElias Strickland,
anattorney with Stude-
baker Corp; 1313Liston
-
DomheHouse, oQueen
Anne Style house built in
1313 Liston
LIAISON COMMITTEE ELECTIONS
Once again it is time to
elect new Liaison Commit-
tee memberato1Ueona
year term position. Each
district has three liaison
positions aone year, two
year and three year. The
one year positions will ex-
pire inAugustof2OO2.
Since wedonot currently
have asummer newsletter
waare sending out nomi-
nation beUotsaorly. All
ballots must bafilled out
and submitted tothe HPC
Office byMay 1T,2OO2.
The staff will gather the
information and send out
election ballots byJuly 1.
2UO2,All election ballots
1912 by Widow, Adele
Domke; D24W.Colfax -
The Corset Shop, aSuUl-
vanesquestye Commer-
cial building built In 1915
omnnepcialbuiN|ngbui|t|n1915
byEdythe Brown, principal
|nthe South Bend Commu-
nity School Corp and her
sister, Gertrude Brown,
prominent local philanthro-
pist.
must bnsubmitted tothe
HPC Office by August 1,
2002' For information on
the duties ofaliaison con-
tact HPC9fflicaaL235-97S8
orbyemail ot
""Once
' it is
lime to
.
elect new Liaison
Committee members to
the oneyear term
Historic Preservation Commission
of South Bend & St. Joseph County
Mailing Address: 227 WestJefferson Blvd.
South Bend IN 46601
Return Service Requested
Protecting The Irrrplaceable
1920 Studebaker Corporation
Entry Gates
Historic Preservation Commission
of South Bend & St. Joseph County
Mailing Address: 227 West.lefferson Blvd.
South Bend IN 46601
Office Location: 125 S. Lafayette
South Bend IN 46601
Phone; 219-235-9798
Fax: 219.235-9578
Email: histodc@michiana.org
DO NOT FORGET YOUR COA
Please remember that if
you own a property with
in a Local Historic Dis-
trict or a Local Land-
mark, work which af-
fects the exterior of your
property (Le., main
buildings, outbuildings,
grounds, landscaping)
requires a Certificate of
Appropriateness (COA)
from the Historic Preser-
vation Commission be-
fore any work can com-
mence.
Routine periodic work
such as re -roofing with
similar materials and
removal of dead trees
may be approved by the
Commissions' Staff with-
out delay. Painting of
previously painted sur-
faces does not require a
COA.
Less routine or more ex-
tensive projects such as
window replacement or
construction of a room
addition require review
by the Historic Preserva-
tion Commission in a
Public Hearing and may
entail a delay of 10 to
45 days depending on
when the application is
received by the HPC Of-
fice. Call 235-9798 if
you have questions re-
garding whether your
proposed project re-
quires a COA and how to
have it reviewed.
Footnote to all owners,
the application fee for a
COA is $5.00 for all staff
reviewed applications
and $10.00 for Commis-
sion reviewed applica-
tions. Contact Staff for
meeting schedules and
application deadlines in
advance to expedite the
permit process.
RE
-RATE REPORT FOR
619 SHERMAN
HISTORY
This Gabled Ell style house was built in 1898 by Herman Glaser who sold it in 1900 to
Joseph and Margaret Avery. Mr. Avery ran a storage warehouse on the property.
ARCHITECTURE
This is a two story Gabled Ell style house with an irregular plan, stone foundation and
brick chimney at ridge. The walls are brick with wood clapboard on rear addition. The
roof is a cross gable with gable single story addition to rear which has a gable prairie
style dormer. The windows are one over one double hung with stone lintels and sills.
The house boasts a large corner porch which wraps around the south gable. It has square
stone supports set on random rubble piers and rubble rails with stone cap. This is a very
uncommon style of porch for this type of architecture.
CRITERIA AND EVALUATING
All properties are evaluated in terms of historical significance, architectural merit and
integrity. Each resource was evaluated by a professional using the National Register
Criteria for.Evaluation. The three main criteria are:
1) Historic Significance: An association with exploration and settlement,
Commercial or Industrial development and or the attachment to the lives
of important people.
2) Architectural Merit: Representative of a particular architectural style.
3) Integritv: Determine how much of the original historic fabric remains
by looking at any extensive alterations, such as the installation of synthetic
siding, removal of architectural features, additions or structural
modifications, all of which could lowering the property's rating.
RATINGS
After consideration of the above factors a rating was assigned, they are:
1) Outstanding: property has enough historic or architectural significance that it
is or should be listed on the National Register by itself.
2) Significant: property does not quite merit an outstanding rating, but is still
above average in its importance and may be eligible for the National Register.
TO l/ DATE TIME
FROM PHONE
3
H OF CELL �f t FAX ( )
Na j1�
E ff __
s n4 �lQ a A01 k bAlW a �C SIfCt�'� S
A - ji W".dZ
M E � D� f��� dr
0 E-MAILADDRESS SIGNED J
1 PHONED ❑ I BACK I CALL RNED ISEE YOUO I AGAIN ALL WAS IN I URGENTEJ
3) Contributing: property meets the basic inventory criterion of being at least
fifty years old, but that is not important enough to stand on its own as .
individually outstanding or significant.
It is stated in the city survey that ratings are to be viewed as advisory recommendations
based on information available at the time of the survey and any changes in location,
sensitive restoration, additional research, extensive physical damage or inappropriate
remodeling could affect the rating at a later date.
The Staff finds that given the unique architectural features of this structure and its
retention of integrity over the past one hundred years this property should be re -rated
from a C/10 to an S/11.
619 SHERMAN
FEBRUARY 21, 2002
AMENDED
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFIATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Application Number:
Property Location:
Property Owner:
2002-0114
215 Hammond Place
Heidi Thacker
Landmark or District Designation:
Rating: C-11, C-9
Local Historic District — River Bend
On Friday, February 18, the Historic Preservation Commission held a special meeting to consider
the Application, as the homeowner felt some urgency regarding the installation of a fence to contain
her two dogs.
In preparing the first Staff Report, HPC staff found from the Building Department that they do have
a concern about maintenance, which can be difficult when two solid wood fences are installed
touching or very near one another. This might be alleviated by (a) sharing one fence between two
neighbors, (b) enclosing a smaller area, and/or (c) installing the fence post and horizontal supports
on the inside of the yard, and having the smooth side facing outward. A combination of these
remedies could be used.
The Commission President, chairing the special meeting, asked the homeowner which of these
proposed solutions she favored. Ms. Thacker said that she had spoken to at least one set of adjacent
neighbors, and that her and their preferred solution would be for her to take down their existing
fence between their properties, and install her own. This was also her preference regarding the
fence on the other side of her property, and she felt sanguine about the agreement of that owner, too.
Therefore, the Commissioners present at that special meeting directed HPC staff to issue a permit
allowing the installation of new fencing, as applied for, across the back of the back yard, the front of
the back yard, and CONDITIONAL UPON THE APPROVAL OF THE NEIGHBORS, removal of
their existing fences between their yards and Ms. Thacker's yard, and installation of her new
fencing there.
Several days later, we heard that both sets of neighbors had refused their consent to the removal of
their fences. We therefore issued a permit for Ms. Thacker to install her new fencing in those areas
that did not require removal of the neighbors' fences. This should at least address the concerns she
expressed as urgent regarding the safety of her dogs. It still, apparently, leave her with a problem of
multiple fencing styles in her back yard, and for that reason, she elects to come before the
Commission with a revised application.
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFIATE OF APPROPRIATENES,1VI
Application Number:
Property Location:
Property Owner:
2002-0114
215 Hammond Place
Heidi Thacker
Landmark or District Designation:
Rating: C-11, C-9
Local Historic District — River Bend
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT
In 1910, Jackson B. Harper, yard conductor for the New York Central built this American
Foursquare home, and lived there until 1920, at which point he began renting it out. In 1942, Mrs.
Agnes Vrabel rented it, and then purchased it in 1951. In 1957, she sold it to the Bunyan family,
some of whom lived there until 1987. In 1987 the property was sold ata sheriff s sale to the
mortgage holders. The house is highly rated because of its originally excellent quality of
workmanship and material, and essentially unaltered condition. However, later surveyors lowered -
its rating as its condition deteriorated.
RECOMMENDATION
(1) FENCE:
The owner seeks to install a 6'tall board - -to board solid privacy fence around the perimeter of
her back yard, being unable otherwise to control her dog or keep it in the yard.
Presently, the neighbors on either side of her have deteriorating 6' tall fences down the sides
of their back yards, and this owner has a 3 or 4' wooden picket fence across the back of her yard,
bordering the alley. She also has the same picket fence running from her neighbors' fences on
either side to the back comers of her house.
Standards: page 20, Building Site, Landscaping & Accessories:
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 be appropriate to existing surrounding site
elements in scale, type, and appearance. Accessory structures ... should be
appropriate to surrounding site elements in scale, type, and appearance."
Consultation with Mr. Markle of the Building Department establishes that there are no
building code prohibitions against installing two "privacy" fences next to each other. However,
they do have a concern about maintenance, which can be difficult. This might be alleviated by (a)
sharing one fence between two neighbors, (b) enclosing a smaller area, and/or (c) installing the
fence post and horizontal supports on the inside of the yard, and having the smooth side facing
outward. A combination of these remedies could be used.
The proposed fence, one the one hand, is out of scale with the small lot and the historic style
of fence. On the other hand, the neighbors on either side have deteriorating fences similar to the
one this applicant seeks, and there are other such fences in the neighborhood.
Staff recommends that if the fence is approved, it be approved only under several
conditions: First, that no mature or significant trees be injured in the installation, second,
that at least one of the suggestions made by the Building Department for ease of maintenance
be adopted, and third, that the fence across the front of the back yard, and across the alley
from the neighbors yard be either more moderate in height, (i.e., 4' to 5') or be screened from
the neighbor's view by appropriate landscaping, or both.
(2) PORCH:
The foundations of the porch are crumbling, the vertical balusters are missing (Note: we
never issues a CofA for their removal), the steps are crumbling, and the paint is pealing off.
Detailed plans for repair or reconstruction have not been submitted. Staff recommends approval
of the application conditional upon restoration of the porch's original historic appearance,
with: (a) 1" square wooden vertical balusters spaced at 2" to 3" intervals, running from the
porch rail down to the ground support,
(b) square pillars at the corners of the porch and one in the middle, running from the rood
down to the ground support or foundation, and
(C) the front steps maintaining their original width and style.
SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
235-9798
u :+ NiI�M11
Thursday, February 21, 2002
TO: Kelly Pierce
FROM: Karen R. Hammond -Nash
Assistant Director
RE: 709 Arch Street
At the Neighborhood Association Meeting yesterday, you mentioned that your company has
handled or facilitated sales involving distressed properties, and might be able to negotiate with
the owners of 709 Arch Street.
The present owner is:
Sunrise Atlantic Corporation
1750 East Sunrise Boulevard
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33304
Rhonda believes that that company has a representative or agent in the area, but no one here
knows how to contact that person. The company keeps all information sent to their main office,
and the local guy is rarely involved.
There must be a stack of liens on the property, from all the fines levied prior to the demolition
order, and then from the demolition and re -grading itself. If those fines and costs are not paid,
then any purchaser will take subject to the fines and costs.
Those costs alone may be more than many buyers would find the property to be worth, because
the lot is too small to build upon, under present code. That is one of the reasons why HPC tried
so hard to push for a different solution from demolition of that house. I have no idea whether the
City would consider any sort of zoning variance.
If your neighborhood association wishes to put a garden there, I suggest that you write to the
owner and seek permission. If you don't get an answer, you can write again, and indicate that
you will interpret silence as agreement. Then get a Certificate of Appropriateness, and dig right
in.
The only down side is that if the present owner were to re -assert ownership, or if the city were to
finally seize and sell the property, then any fencing or planting could be plowed under or pulled
up at will by that owner. You might want to see what you can find out from Sunshine and/or the
City about time frames for something to happen, and then consider whether the risk is so
minimal that it is worth taking, or so imminent that your labor might really be lost.
Personally, I suspect that the road to any change in ownership, or assertion of ownership, is
likely to be so long, that you really might as well go for it, as long as you have people who have
the time, and want to garden. Just don't underestimate the time a garden takes.
SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
235-9798
MEMORANDUM
Thursday, February 21, 2002
TO: Edgewater Neighborhood Association
Edgewater Liaison Members
HPC Commission Members
Exec. Director Rhonda Saunders
FROM: Karen R. Hammond -Nash
Assistant Director
RE: NEIGHBORHOOD CRIME
At the Neighborhood Association Meeting Wednesday, Feb. 20, the subject of
neighborhood crime came up, and in particular a couple recent home invasions that had
not been reported to the police. I understand that the people whose homes had been
entered did not call the police, because they did not think much could be done, and did
not want to be a bother. The conclusion of the discussion at the neighborhood meeting
was that anyone whose home is broken into should call the police. --
I am writing to encourage everyone in Edgewater (or anywhere else) to report gilLcrime,
especially something as potentially serious as your home being illegally entered,
immediatelv to the police. Those of you who have not immediately reported,, should still
do so now. But, in the future, please, please, do call the police the very first instant
that you possibly can, after being aware that a crime has been committed against
you, your property, or anyone else.
For any home invasion case, even an old one, the police will send a detective out in a
marked car to collect whatever information he can.
The South Bend Police 24-hour general information number is 235-9201, and their
address is 701 West Sample Street.
If the police have prompt information of a crime, they actually fairly often can find and
preserve evidence — such as fingerprints on a door, for instance — that might not be
obvious to an untrained person, and they really can capture and convict criminals. I
know that there is a perception among some people that the police must actually catch a
criminal in the criminal act in order to arrest and prosecute. But the fact is that most of
the time the police don't catch criminals in the act, but some time afterwards, based on
information collected from objects and witnesses.
SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 25, 2002 MEETING
GUESTS: PLEASE SIGN THIS LIST SO YOUR PRESENCE CAN
BE NOTED FOR OUR MINUTES
o
�o ati.,
i
v