HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 2006SoUT &8e AGENDA OF THE AUGUST 21,
2006 a m
r COMMISSION MEETING
i 1865
Regular Meeting 4th Floor Council Chambers
V - County -City Building
° MONDAY, August 21,2006 7:30PM
I. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL
II. PUBLIC HEARING
9 A. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
I� C
B. LANDMARK
1. 1013 Jefferson - Second Reading
Fri 2. 853 Forest - First Reading
' x C. NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION None at this time
Q III. REGULAR BUSINESS
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
July 17, 2006
July 31, 2006
~' B. TREASURER'S REPORT
Department Location Report and 2007 Proposed Budget
~ C. COMMITTEE REPORTS
,./ 1. President's Report: Advisory Board
W 2. Committee Meetings Reports
:�
D. STAFF REPORTS:
1. C of A Approvals; Correspondence;
A. Director's Report
B. Assistant Director's Report
O 1. Six At Risk
2. Other "HPC Image" Projects
Legal
2. Le
g
1�
IV. OLD BUSIN ESS
i
V. NEW BUSINESS
= Main Street
VI. HEARING OF VISITORS AND ADJOURNMENT
853 FOREST
LOCAL LANDMARK
FIRST READING /PROPOSAL
The Charles E. Clipfall House located at 853 Forest can be considered for local landmark
status based on the following reasons:
1. It is historically important and connected to the development of the area
because the house was built on Lot 37 of Chapin's 1st Addition purchased
from Edward Chapin in 1892 by Charles E. Clipfall, a bookkeeper. Mr.
Clipfall sold the house to Albert G. Harlin in 1903. Mr. Harlin was Fifth
Ward Councilman, 1894 -1897, during the administration of Mayor David B.J.
Schaefer. In 1904 Mr. Harlin sold the house to Mr. William Happ a real estate
salesman. Mr. Happ was also Secretary- Treasurer of the Round Table, an
elite dinner - discussion gentlemen's club. It is architecturally important as a
fine example of Stick Style house built in 1892 that has survived with minor
alterations to this day.
2. Its educational value as an architecturally significant home owned by notable
citizens of South Bend involved in the economic, social and political
developments of the city.
3. Its suitability for preservation because it is rated architecturally Significant on
our City Survey as a Gabled T /Stick Style built in 1892.
i gig;
a
•- k is n
• 4
i s. {•
uE hr �
a.
}
a �
y r5 J.� , }i
s y
`• y
f ° ,
_
mil, -•.. -i
`• y
f ° ,
1013 E. JEFFERSON
LOCAL LaND,MARK
The Studebaker'Johnson House located at 1013 E. Jefferson fulfills the criteria of the
Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend and St. Joseph County to be designated
a Local Landmark of the City of South Bend, Indiana.
1. It is architecturally;'historically important and connected to the
development of the area because it was designed by Ennis ALlstin for
Harry D. Johnson, Jr., eldest grandson of John M. Studebaker and a plaster
mechanic at the Stud ebaker Corporation.
2. Its educational value as an architecturally significant honle owned b% a
member of t he prominent Studebaker Family,
3. Its suitabilit% for preservation because It IS rated Signi ficant oil OIIC Clt�"
Survev and was deli med by Ennis :distill in 1 907. Ennis Austin was a
partner of the prominent architectur firm of ALlStin and Sharnbleall.
. � . 'R y � • 'r .�� r."a F' 1 �L ! ( �`i' +i 4 3 � '" • Olt
r;
a1MT •�t1 �f,�'
t
! �'' �� � • ` 1' t'. 1 � � r ���'r ors ..� i '
t
a SL ..e. ..T a :, , r: o.. unr,. +�.ia•erw.Ct��
t 5 iL
l }
In
NIP
4. tlk
Tt
grin
Sir
� "Y, � a Ki1i�t� ! � �.� �� dw, �!" �'
.
,y tr �i•.
ix Y
♦t
I '
}
�I
�ff
IN
r
I''+ "gL X1'
I 1 ` ' It'
1
t
� i
_
µ
• i Uzi.;, �;
, • i °ar fx, ;;,��
a � 1 1 1
1. _.�12
�_
:_
. � . 'R y � • 'r .�� r."a F' 1 �L ! ( �`i' +i 4 3 � '" • Olt
r;
a1MT •�t1 �f,�'
t
! �'' �� � • ` 1' t'. 1 � � r ���'r ors ..� i '
t
a SL ..e. ..T a :, , r: o.. unr,. +�.ia•erw.Ct��
t 5 iL
l }
In
NIP
4. tlk
Tt
grin
Sir
� "Y, � a Ki1i�t� ! � �.� �� dw, �!" �'
.
,y tr �i•.
ix Y
♦t
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OF SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
July 17, 2006
4th Floor Council Chambers
County — City Building, South Bend, Indiana
Members Present: Lynn Patrick [President], Todd Zeiger [VP], Mary Jane Chase [Secretary], Timothy
Klusczinski [Treasurer], Catherine Hostetler, Martha Choitz, Linda Riley
Staff Present: Catherine Hostetler [Director], Amy Herdman [Asst. Director], Shawn Peterson [Counsel]
Others Present: Ginna Anderson, Wayne Curry, Don Sporleder
Absent: Jerry Ujdak Arrived late: Joann Sporleder [Architectural Historian]
I. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL: Lynn Patrick called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm
H. PUBLIC HEARING
A. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS
1.2006 -0626: 1097 Riverside Drive
The Chair recognized Catherine Hostetler to read the Staff Report.
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This American Foursquare was built in
1906 by Emma Lockstidt Schweitzer and Frederick H. Schweitzer. The house was owned by members of
the Sibley family from 1946 through 1967.
APPLICATION ITEMS:: 1. Demolish non - original concrete enclosed front porch and restore porch
with original dimensions, brick piers and wooden columns with the following details and per attached
drawings (Exhibit A). The brick supports and piers will have brick that matches foundation, tongue and
groove wooded porch deck (26'x8'); hip roof with 14" overhand to match main roof; pediment on porch
roof centered over front door; asphalt shingles and gutters to match main roof with downspouts as needed;
tongue and groove bead board ceiling; brick steps, slate topped knee walls; railing with' 1 -1/4" square
balusters and wooden lattice porch skirts between brick supports (similar to other Riverside Drive area
porches like 1075 Riverside Drive). Remove Arborvitae at northeast corner of house for construction of
porch.
2.Construct a small vestibule (7'x3.5') on front porch with the following details: (See Exhibit
A) centered on existing front door opening, siding and trim to match first story of main house,
period -style 9 light wood entry door with dual side lights and tongue and groove bead board
ceiling. Replace non - original front door with vintage door having a large glass area. Retain
original doorframe.
3.Construct a new wooded roof over existing side -door stoop and stairs to replace existing non-
original aluminum roof per attached drawing (Exhibit B). Asphalt shingles to match main roof,
hip roof to match pitch and elevation of front porch, 2X radiused brackets, tongue and groove
"bead board" ceiling, gutters to match main roof with downspout on East side.
RECOMMENDATION: #1. Staff Recommends approval. Mr. Exner has been working with Preservation
Specialist, Wayne Doolittle on this project during the past few months to ensure that it stays within the
guidelines. The 1932 Assessor Card shows a front porch across the entire front of the house. Mr. Exner has
been in contact with a member of the Sibley family who has verified that the current porch was built after
1958 and enclosed in 1986. The aluminum siding has been removed and revealed the pier and column witness
marks. The proposed new porch will conform with other porches of the same period in the neighborhood. #2.
Staff Recommends approval of this vestibule as, it will be constructed in such a way as to fit onto the porch
floor and beneath the porch ceiling which will allow it to be removed without compromising the house or the
new porch. #3. Staff recommends approval as Mr. Exner will be restoring a feature more in keeping with the
period of the house and eliminating a non - conforming one.
Mr. Exner is currently in California. He can be contacted at 831 421 9577 and will be available at that
number on July 17 for questions. Individual commissioners with questions can contact him at that number
before the meeting for clarifications.
Linda Riley: What is the siding on the house currently?
Catherine Hostetler: It's been removed. It was aluminum.
Linda Riley: On the rest of the house though...
Catherine Hostetler: It's all gone, all been removed. It's clapboards. They're going to repaint the house
once the porch is done, I believe that was in the staff report.
Lynn Patrick: I'm correct, Catherine, that the homeowner is not present? So, we'll skip over recognizing
the homeowner, and go directly to the Chair recognizing commissioners with questions. Other questions?
Catherine Hostetler:Exhibit B states that all painting will be in accordance with Historic Landmarks
Foundation oflndiana guidelines titled 'Exterior wood paintingprocedures necessary to obtain a 12 -15
year paint job'. And that's up here in exhibit B.
Todd Zeiger: That photo that you're passing around now, shows the home without the aluminum siding
on it, which I think is outstanding. My question is what is the intention of the home owner with regards to
the belt course that has been removed from the side? Did they ask for that work to be done as apart of
this CoA?
Catherine Hostetler: No.
Todd Zeiger: So how are we supposed to deal with that?
Catherine Hostetler: Well...
Todd Zeiger: I don't want to hold this project up, but something is going to have to happen when you
look at that belt course is gone.
Catherine Hostetler: We could put that in as a recommendation.
Lynn Patrick: Can you define for me what the belt course is?
Todd Zeiger: You're looking at this picture, and its hard in black in white, but in the middle between the
second floor...where the second floor comes down and meets the first, the siding changed color from
brown to white, in between the brown and the white, it looks like black ice and water shield has been put
up there to cover it. That space is where that siding came down and flared out, and had a little crown
underneath it ... its called a belt course and it Hairs out. And that was chopped off which happens a lot to
these houses that are sided. I'm just curious... it was just a decorative feature, it may have had some
practical use, but ... (muffled conversation)
Catherine Hostetler: I think that its called a bell course, not a belt. A bell course because itHairs out
like a bell.
Mary Jane Chase: Is there anything in the standards that if it was there that it must be replaced? How do
we deal with that?
Catherine Hostetler: Because it was it was removed, and they're trying to go back, we can ask them to
restore that. The intention of the homeowner is basically to restore this house.
Todd Zeiger: My intention was not to hold them up for a month, waiting to come back for another CoA,
so that we don't have to have them come back in.
Catherine Hostetler: I think that they'd be amenable to that, I don't think that they'd have a problem.
Shawn Peterson: As a suggestion, you could authorize staff to approve the remainder as long as you
give them some parameters.
Martha Choitz: Are they going to replace the whole front porch?
Catherine Hostetler: Yes.
Martha Choitz: And that was already agreed?
Catherine Hostetler: That was the diagram that was included in your packet.
Martha Choitz: I thought so, but it didn't really tell me in so many words that they'd agreed that they
were going to put the entire porch back.
Catherine Hostetler: Yes.
N
Mary Jane Chase: This is really the most complete presentation that we've had.
Catherine Hostetler: They did a good job.
Martha Choitz: That great to see that, the siding off it.
Lynn Patrick. Has anyone made a motion?
Shawn Peterson: We first need a motion to approve the improvements set forth in the CoA. Then, you
can authorize staff to approve an action plan to deal with the midsection between the first and second
floor. There are really two separate items.
Lynn Patrick. Ok.
Todd Zeiger: I'd make a motion to adopt the staff's findings and recommendations on CoA 2006 -0626
And make the motion approve the Certificate of Appropriateness as applied.
Mary Jane Chase: Second.
Lynn Patrick: All in favor? (Ayes) Opposed? (silence)
Moved: Todd Zeiger Second: Mary Jane Chase Vote: 7 -0
Todd Zeiger: I'd also like to make a motion that would approve the staff working with the homeowner to
develop a plan of action to deal with the midsection between the first and second floor that had originally
a flared siding in that location that's been removed. I'd make a motion that allows the staff to approve an
appropriate treatment for that which would follow the guidelines.
Tim Klusczinski. Second.
Lynn Patrick: All in favor? (Ayes) Opposed? (silence) Both motions carry.
Moved: Todd Zeiger Second: Tim Klusczinski Vote: 7 -0
2.2006- 0711 -1138 E Wayne Street
The Chair recognized Catherine Hostetler to read the Staff Report.
Catherine Hostetler: The home owner and contractor are present.
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCEMISTORIC CONTEXT: This 1935 Tudor Revival House was
owned by Hilda and Raymond E. Cloud. Raymond Cloud was co founder of Cloud Brothers, an electric
appliance store located at 902 S. Michigan. Jeanette and Maurice Herman, owners of a women's apparel shop
on South Michigan, also owned the house in the 1940s. Mr. and Mrs. Anderson purchased the house in 1987
from David Bowers.
APPLICATION ITEMS: Add a 19'4 "x12' irregular shaped (see Construction PlanA1 and site plan)
screened -in porch onto the back of the house. The porch will be on a concrete slab foundation. The porch roof
and siding will match the roofing and siding on the main house.
l
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. The porch is being constructed off of a 15'x15' 1946
addition to the main house (See Assessor Card). The porch will tie in to the brick wall of the 1946 addition
and the roof will tie in to that addition at the opening left by the removal of the air conditioner. All materials
will match the house and compliment its design characteristics. The fabric of the original house will not be
compromised.
Catherine Hostetler: The home owner is here with the contractor, and they've provided the detailed
drawings and pictures.
Lynn Patrick. The chair recognizes the home owner, up the podium if you please.
Ginna Anderson: Yes, good evening my name is Ginna Anderson, my husband and I are the owners of
1138 E Wayne Street, and I'm not sure if you have any further questions. I'd like to say that we really
enjoy our home and love the neighborhood. We've taken great pains to restore our home, we just
completed a complete remodeling of the first floor this past year, and the porch is the next step in our
vision for what we'd like to do with the home. Our intention is to use like materials, 6x6 cedar posts, top
portion of the home has cedar siding, and we intend to use that material as well on the top portion
between the roof and the line of the windows.
Lynn Patrick: My only question would be to raise the volume a little bit ifsomeone asks you a question, I
heard what you said but I had to strain.
Ginna Anderson: I'm the same way, it's alright.
3
Lynn Patrick: The Chair will recognize any commissioners with questions. I think they're still assessing,
give us a moment.
Todd Zeiger: I have a quick question regarding the AC Unit that you've currently got. What are you
going to do with that?
Ginna Anderson: Our plan is to remove that. Our home does have central air, but because this was an
addition to the house back in the 1940's that room does not have central air. However, we don't use it,
we don't feel that its necessary. We're going to remove it, and we'll actually cover that.
Todd Zeiger: So the porch roof will come up high enough that it will just cover that hole in the wall? It
will tie in right underneath the window sills is that the idea basically?
Ginna Anderson: Right. That's my understanding. (Contractors comments unintelligible)
Todd Zeiger: My other question if I might, what are you plans for the existing brick wall on the back of
the house, is that going to remain exposed?
Contractor: Yes.
Todd Zeiger. That's all I have.
Lynn Patrick: Do we have any other comments or questions? Would anyone like to make a motion.
Linda Riley: So moved. I recommend that we approve application #2006 -0711 as submitted.
Tim Klusczinski: Second
Lynn Patrick: All in favor? (Ayes) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries.
Ginna Anderson: Thank you.
Moved: Linda Riley Second: Tim Klusczinski Vote: 7 -0
B. LANDMARKS
1. 1013 East Jefferson — First Reading
Catherine Hostetler: I have here the signed Historic Landmark agreement signed by Serena
Howley, the owner of 1013 E Jefferson. She would like to proceed with the land marking status
and so this will be the first reading for this landmark and then we'll have the second hearing next
month. (Almost completely unintelligible conversation between Catherine Hostetler and Shawn
Peterson, Legal Counsel regarding land marking procedure after a property has been placed in
interim protection) We'll have the full report on it from the staff next month.
Lynn Patrick: Ok.
C. NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION (None at this time.)
III. REGULAR BUSINESS
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Lynn Patrick: Has everyone read the minutes? (Murmured yes, and uh -huh can be heard)
Tim Klusczinski: I have one change.
Lynn Patrick: OK
Tim Klusczinski: And so what I'd like to do is roll in approval of the minutes with one correction that I'll
read before you. Page 2, Paragraph 7, Line S. Under the caption of a particular comment that I made.
Uhm, it says or it states that Tim Klusczinski confirms that the house is properly insulated. That should
be stricken and replaced with Tim Klusczinski questions if the house is insulated and if blown -in material
was used. And then the petitioner after that indicates that blown -in insulation was used.
Lynn Patrick: Very good, very precise. (shuffling) Are there any other amendments?
Linda Riley: I don't know how important this is, on the same page I asked about the peeling paint, and
asked if uh, (Lynn Patrick: In paragraph 4 ?) no, actually it wasn't that one. Somewhere else I'll have to
find it but I want to question on Page 7 Landmarks, the address is 1031 E Jefferson and it should be
1013.
Unknown speaker: Oh, very good.
Linda Riley: Because there is a 1031.
Unknown speaker: Yes, there is.
Lynn Patrick: Good catch.
Linda Riley: I did ask a question (shuffling) and I didn't say aluminum, I said wood. (Unintelligible)
4
Lynn Patrick: OK. I'm not sure where your comment is that you're referring to.
Linda Riley: I submit that the formal change be made on Page 7 under B. Landmarks to read 1013 E
Jefferson and not 1031. 7 1 1 1,
Lynn Patrick: And did you have one other correction Linda?
Linda Riley. I can't find it, It's not that important I guess.
Lynn Patrick: OK
Tim Klusczinski. I move to accept the minutes of the June 19, 2006 HPC meeting with both corrections -
one sited by me, Tim Klusczinski, and the other one by Linda.
Martha Choitz: Second
Lynn Patrick. Ok, all in favor? (Various "ayes " heard.) All opposed? (No response) Alright, the
minutes are accepted with two corrections.
Moved: Tim Klusczinski Second: Martha Choitz Vote: 7 -0
(Conversation between Mary Jane Chase and Catherine Hostetler regarding Mary Jane Chase coming to
the office to sign the minutes once the amendments have been made to the permanent record.)
Martha Choitz: Is it too dijji'cult to put page numbers on them as we make them? And perhaps boldface
the names of the people that are involved. I think that would solve a lot without having numbers right
down the side of the page- that seems overkill.
Lynn Patrick: I think that page numbers would be good. Moving along because it's a hot night out there.
TREASURER'S REPORT
Tim Klusczinski. I'm simply submitting the budget location report, but I did have two quick questions for
staff. One, have we received an invoice for the HPC newsletter publication that we recently circulated?
Catherine Hostetler. No.
Tim Klusczinski: Ok. And then, does any postage expense exist in this June budget location report for
that newsletter?
Catherine Hostetler: No.
Tim Klusczinski. Ok. The reason that I'm asking that is only because I received my newsletter in the ;
packet and I'm not sure when it was originally sent out or distributed, so....
Catherine Hostetler: It went out in July.
Tim Klusczinski. Ok, very good. I'm done.
Martha Choitz: It was a very good newsletter.
Catherine Hostetler: Amy wrote it with an article from Lynn. So, we're getting back on track.
Martha Choitz: Yep.
Lynn Patrick. Yep, getting back on there. Alright.... (unintelligible)
Mary Jane Chase: I make a motion that we accept the Treasurer's Report as presented.
Martha Choitz: Second.
Lynn Patrick: All in favor? (Various "ayes" heard.) All opposed? (No response) Motion carries. Moving
onto committee reports.
Moved: Mary Jane Chase Second: Martha Choitz Vote: 7 -0
B. COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. President's Report
Lynn Patrick: Several things... (addressing Catherine Hostetler) did everyone get copies of these
letters that you gave me?
Catherine Hostetler: No.
Lynn Patrick: Ok. We received two letters at the office, onefrom the Indiana Department of
Transportation (reading) this is the record of decisions of the US 31 Improvement Project from
US 30 at Plymouth to US 20 South Junction at South Bend, Marshall and St. Joseph Counties.
Catherine, do I have to read this whole thing into the...?
Catherine Hostetler: No.
Lynn Patrick: Did you bring copies for the people?
Todd Zeiger: I would suggest that you could stop by the office if you wanted to read it.
5
Catherine Hostetler: There is a CD with it which is rather lengthy, but basically there is no new
information in this letter, and no new information on the CD. This is the same project that we've
seen for the past year.
Lynn Patrick: Ok. The second letter we received was....
Catherine Hostetler: No, that's one that I wrote. That's an FYI.
Lynn Patrick: Has anybody else received this?
Catherine Hostetler: Shawn [legal counsel]
Lynn Patrick: Who?
Catherine Hostetler. Shawn.
Lynn Patrick: Ok
Catherine Hostetler: And I'm going to address that in my report..
Lynn Patrick: Ok, then I won't talk about that. The other thing that I wanted to mention was
Advisory Committee... we've got a list of names, we got bogged down in RestoreMichiana and
some other issues, and we've kind of bogged down in this, and I'd really like to get these advisory
committees going. And I'd like a suggestion from a Commissioner or somebody how they think
that we ought to best approach this because we need to revisit these names. My thought is that
these people need to be called, and I was thinking that we ought to have at least two meetings at
different times and dates because people won't be able to make all of them. My other comment
was should we even try to do this in July going into August or should we wait until September
when the kids go back to school.
Martha Choitz: It seems to me that we could be doing some planning of our own. Its obvious that
we haven't a real schedule on how that should come down. Let's get that done among ourselves
and with Shawn's help and with Catherine's and then work in the fall to begin to find advisors
that are willing to do the work and also understand it.
Lynn Patrick: Ok. Then that plays into my next point with regard to our Commission's various
subcommittees that haven't been meeting very much lately ... I would like to put this into the public
relations and community education committee, which comprises yourself (referring to Martha
Choitz), myself, Mary Jane Chase, Virginia O'Hair (honorary member) with the understanding
that anybody on the Commission would be welcome to come to this and to publish if we have
enough people that we need to publish this meeting.
Shawn Peterson:If you appoint them to a committee, you still need a public notice for when a
quorum or a majority of those individuals meet.
Lynn Patrick: So if I appoint everyone to this committee but only have 3 -4 people meet we would
not have to publish it?
Shawn Peterson: Right, because you would not actually be having a meeting under the statute.
Lynn Patrick: I just get tired of publishing every little meeting that we have. But I want, I know,
to go by the Sunshine Law.
Martha Choitz: You can keep on fighting it, its alright, that's allowed. I think. I could be wrong.
(laughter)Lynn Patrick: Oh yeah. I'd like a little discussion about this before 1 just go and do
something, this getting our Advisory Committee going is a chance to broaden our support and
appeal, extend our reach, bring in more talent, recruit talent, share work and get input from
people in the community there's a lot of people out there that are interested in preservation and
we're not tapping into that.
Tim Musczinski: Were these candidates ever notified that they were selected by this body?
Catherine Hostetler: No. Because nobody was selected we were just putting together a list.
Lynn Patrick: We just put forth names...
Mary Jane Chase: But some were asked if they would be willing, because...
Catherine Hostetler: No, we have not asked anybody... nobody has gone out officially...
Mary Jane Chase: Not officially, but talking to people....
Tim Klusczinski. (simultaneously) These were purely our suggestions?
Lynn Patrick: Yes.
Mary Jane Chase: ... saying to people would you be interested...
Catherine Hostetler: They were on an individual basis, sporadic, we were compiling a list, Mary
Jane ... I know did talk to some people, but I think that you're the only one that has.
2
Martha Choitz: I think that I'm reluctant to do it because I worked on advisory committees on
both sides of the fence, and I think that its important that you not annoy them, for want of a better
word.
Catherine Hostetler: I think that part of the problem was that we really hadn't set a focus for it...
Martha Choitz: ... and we've got to be the ones that appear to know exactly what we're asking of
them, and how much time it will take and what the information is that we have for them, and how
you go about it and how much time is it really going to take them. And then maybe they'll get to
be very interested. Southhold, for a long time, had a very good advisory committee for a long,
long time. Thanks due to when...
Mary Jane Chase: The list that I saw was just a list of names some of them I didn't know what
they did, we do need to be careful that we don't get 10 people as far as on one thing and only one
on another if we can get a good balance...
Martha Choitz: Oh we have to, we have to ... and that's what we have to do. We can't just go
around without telling... (trails offi We first of all have to get a list of prospects, ones that are
good. We've got to compile it together from every source that we have. And uh, and then take a
look at all those names and decide in a logical way which ones should be approached and what
their goal would be. If you needed help in some way and advice they won't for a minute come to
the second meeting if the first one lets them just stand there like, you know, waste their time.
They won't do it, that's the kind ofpeople we want on it. That's exactly what we want. We've got
to do our homework first and very, very thoroughly. And I don't think that there'd be any
(unknown) or any problems about that around South Bend at all. They would come forth if they
thought that there was something that they could really do.
Lynn Patrick: Here's what I'd like to propose to do because I think that this advisory committee
thing is real important and I'd like to have all of the Commissioners weighing in on this if
possible. I would like to suggest that for the short term, and you can correct me if I'm wrong on
this, I'd like to for the short term appoint everyone on the Commission to serve on this committee,
I would like to set a meeting with Catherine and myself and a couple of other people that can "
come ... a series of meetings...so that every Commissioner can weigh in on this via responding by
email or phone call. Catherine and I will look at our schedules and pick out a couple times for
meetings, people can email if they're coming or not. If we have a quorum of the special
committee, which is going to be comprised of everyone, then we will duly advertise and publish.
We will have to have several meetings, and I forsee a meeting where possibly a quorum will be
present, possibly one or two people. But I'd really like to move this forward without waiting for
the stars and planets to align for everybody to come together. Catherine and I will look at our
schedules and start with us two, pick enough meetings and then somebody else can weigh in and
if you feel you need another meeting, you can certainly set one up.
Catherine Hostetler: And we can send the list out on email.
Lynn Patrick: Yeah. We'll say here's the time that we'd like to meet, and just meet for a half
hour, maybe and hour to get something done, as we have met in the past after work at 5:00. So
you're not going to be there all night. We'll have a couple of meetings and we'll do it before the
next regular Commission meeting. And if we do have a meeting where we're going to have
enough people and we're going to have a quorum, we'll advertise it. If we have a meeting and
we have not advertised, and enough people show up that we have a quorum, somebody will leave,
ala Survivor. (laughter) Does that meet with your approval, Counselor?
Shawn Peterson: Yes, as long as you don't have enough to constitute a meeting.
Several voices: Oh yes, oh of course.
Linda Riley. Could I add, I'm not sure I understand. We bring names to this meeting, that...
Lynn Patrick: You're welcome to bring names or submit names.
Linda Riley. And so that we don't all ask the same people...
Lynn Patrick: By the time that we go to ... after we've looked at our lists, and pulled people from
different disciplines, different neighborhoods, different areas, we won't have two or three people
calling the same person. We can either portion them out, or we can do a phone bank. First I'd
like to get our list going. I'd like to go about this methodically, and not just all of a sudden swing
out a net and see who we can pull up.
7
Mary Jane Chase: And when we get our final list, I think that an invitation from the office or
from yourself would be most appropriate.
Lynn Patrick: I think that would be very appropriate.
Mary Jane Chase: It should be a formal invitation.
Lynn Patrick. Although I don't think that it would be bad to make a phone call and see if they re
interested before we do a formal invite. That's kind of paving the way before the formal
invitation, I think that would be appropriate to determine if there's a level of interest- some
people are going to tell you right off, my dad's sick can't do anything right now or whatever.
That's how I'd like to conduct....
Shawn Peterson: Remember, you can't appoint then until you have approved as much at a public
meeting.
Lynn Patrick: We don't have any conversations without bringing you in on it, Shawn. (laughter)
Shawn Peterson: That is what I wanted to here.
Lynn Patrick: I haven't even talked to her in probably like two weeks. Yeah. Ok, that's good.
Amy, was what just transpired clear enough for your notes?
Amy Herdman: Yes, ma'am.
Lynn Patrick: Ok, because I'll be looking at those notes to make sure what I said...
Amy Herdman: You can listen to them as well.
Lynn Patrick, I'm not sure that I want to go there. Also regarding advisory committees no not
advisory committes, our standing committees... I spoke with Linda Riley a few moments before
the meeting and I would like to appoint her to serve in the capacity of Diane on the three
committees that she served on, to serve out Diane's term of office. Because as it stands right
now, on the Budget and Finance Committee we have Tim and Diane. I'd like that to be Tim and
Linda Riley, and currently on the Landmarks committee we have Todd Zeiger, chair, and Diane.
I'd like Linda to fill that spot so we'd at least have two people on the committee. And lastly,
fagade easements, um, we have Joann Sporleder, chair, John Oxian and Diane. I'd like to add
Linda to that as well. Also regarding our committees I asked about people having a meeting, and
we haven't been putting enough into the committees lately but also I think that its important that
we keep these going because these will be the basis for the advisory committees of the future. I've
suggested this before, and we've kind of been lax about this, but I'd like to bring it forth to people
again, even if its on the phone in which case we could advertise a date in time, oh which we
couldn't do over the phone, we'd have to meet at the office, ok..a brief meeting at the office. I'd
like these committees to just meet even if its briefly, because they haven't met in awhile.
Shawn Peterson: I would suggest that if you set a particular time then you could notice those
meetings and cancel them if you do not need them.
Lynn Patrick: Yes
Shawn Peterson: If you set regular committee meetings you need only provide the notice once a
year, unless the times or locations change.
Lynn Patrick: mm -hmm.. I'd like to move in that kind of direction because I think that we're not
meeting regularly enough. And again, I want to prepare the ground so when we have our
advisory committee we create a structure in which they can bring their ideas and
accomplishments and assignments to us before the meeting.
Mary Jane Chase: Maybe like a half hour before this meeting....
Lynn Patrick: Mmm -hmm
Linda Riley: I have a question for Shawn. If it's a working meeting, why does that have to be
open to the public?
Shawn Peterson: The Open Door Law provides that even meetings in which you only deliberate
or discuss an item must be duly noticed and open to the public.
Todd Zeiger: Can I offer an observation about an issue if we met just before this meeting there
really isn't any time to do anything. Meeting as a committee directly before this really means that
nothing is going to really happen til the next month. 1 would just offer that as an observation, if
we're trying to get things moved through the Commission the committee would need to have their
meeting say two weeks before the Commission meeting or something like that. Otherwise, if you
meet before the Commission, you'd talk about what you might like to do over the next month and
then ... I'm not sure how that's workable.
Lynn Patrick: I wanted to put forth another suggestion because that's a good point Todd.
Another opportunity would be the consideration of moving our meeting's earlier. People have
talked about this many times. (Gasp)
Todd Zeiger: Sorry, it was a small gasp. God forbid we get home before 10.00
Lynn Patrick. Moving our meetings earlier and then having the committee meetings after that.
They could address whatever was brought up at the meeting. I'd be open to that as well.
Martha Choitz: That sometimes works very well, we used to do that. In my case, the Standards
and Maintenance that I'm chairman of, really don't need to meet unless there's a need for it. .
Lynn Patrick: That's true.
Martha Choitz: And they're the same people that know that they have to go out and look at the
house or whatever they're doing. So, I don't know... we certainly need to know to get together at
least once every half year, twice a year whether we're doing anything active or not. Because we
get so we don't know one another. And we've got to at least know that we can still count on those
people to do that work when the time comes and someone says that this is going to Standards and
Maintenance, we've got to know that we've still got a committee. There are practical things
about it that way. If we delay it too long and we kind of let it go, they may have other obligations
and can no longerfill that role, and we would never know. I wouldn't you know, not really.
Shawn Peterson: I would say this for the purpose of efficiency, when you have a certificate of
appropriateness that's referred to a committee you may want to readjust this time slot you may
want to adjust to allow for a short meeting before as well as meetings after because you may meet
after and say here are the issues that we need to look at, and we want to take action before your
formal recommendation and take quick action before so you can address it before the meeting.
Otherwise you're kind of caught, you know, in the same dilemma if you refer....
Martha Choitz: Well, ordinarily the staff is with us... and they already know whatever the let's
say the Standards and Maintenance committee have thought is probably the way we should be r
trying to help these people find what they need. And so, before anything happens, Catherine
knows what we've thought and can talk to them just giving them suggestions, we're not trying to
ram anything down anybody's throat. But in other committees, don't require that kind of quick
answers from... but they aren't that quick but she has them all ready so that she can talk to them
and that she knows that we thought that there were somethings that we needed to find out further,
or we didn't, or whatever the case might be. That way, we don't have to do anything at the last
minute, Catherine has already done it on the phone or in person with them. It comes back to her,
and I think that is the way that has worked pretty well. I don't know if you think that it has or not.
Todd Zeiger: I'm unclear... what are you looking for from us tonight? Do you want a
recommendation on all this stuff right now?
Lynn Patrick: I would like a recommendation on if we should... what your feelings are about
having our meetings either before or after our regular meetings, and I've already talked about
the advisory committee and having several meetings about that to be duly advertised if necessary.
To have the full committee serve on that so that I don't have to worry about the quorum thing,
and more importantly so I can get input from everybody about a series of meetings. The second
part was about having our committees meet in a format that is more conducive to getting actual
work done, and a format for taking care of things that are better dealt with in a context outside of
a meeting.
Todd Zeiger: If you say that all of the committees are going to meet an hour before the regular
commission meeting, how do we duplicate ourselves?
Lynn Patrick: That's my other question, because the way that we have it set up right now, we
really can't.
Todd Zeiger: That's what I'm asking.
Lynn Patrick: Should we think about reformatting our committees? Yes.
Mary Jane Chase: Question. The only time that committees need to get together is when there is
something to take care of. For instance the Nominating committee is once a year, for luncheon
or whatever .... a lot of these things are just as needed.
2
Lynn Patrick: Right, well on the right hand column are pretty much ad -hoc committees but if you
look on the left hand we've got Historic Districts, Standards and Maintenance, FaVade
Easements, Landmarks, Budget and Finance, Legal and Executive...
Mary Jane Chase: Yeah, but if you meet, say, twice a year and then you try to do this every
month, what do you talk about?
Todd Zeiger: I think we just....I appreciate your efforts trying to get the committees to meet but I
think that we should just continue to put the reminders in front of the chairs and let us call the
meetings as necessary. I just think if you meet before the meeting, you just end up discussing
what you're going to discuss at this meeting and you're just going to roll everybody into the next
room and have the same meeting again. I see it at City Council all the time. It's really kind of a
waste.
Lynn Patrick: Well good, I'm glad. That's why I wanted to put this out for discussion.
Todd Zeiger: We can go back in the back room and have a meeting of all the committees and
then come out here and report to the public, I just see it as a duplicate...
Lynn Patrick: I don't want to do that.
Todd Zeiger: You just need to keep reminding us chairs to get our butts together and have a
meeting and now that we have fellow committee members we can now have a meeting.
Lynn Patrick: That's what I want. I don't want to set something up that's not going to work.
I've been thinking about this as I talk about it. But I do think that having us all meet about the
advisory committee, I think that's very important. If that's what comes out of this, that's what I
wanted, that's the important thing.
Todd Zeiger: The sub committees need to have at least an organizational get together with their
members if there's no other business to report back to the commission if that's the case. I would
resist putting together a standing meeting right now and instead report as needed.
Linda Riley: Could you possibly advertise when the committees will meet during the year, and
then if anybody from the community is interested in being involved and hearing what they had to
say to call the office andfind out when they're meeting? Then that would be a publication for the
whole year then we could go ahead and meet.
Shawn Peterson: The way it has to be is that you can set up a regular meeting date and do that
once a year as far as a regular meeting time. And then, you'd have to hold to that then basically
cancel them all and you can do that and you've basically met your requirement. I think it could
be solution here if you decide to move the meeting up to 7:00 or 6:00 or whatever, you could
always publish that there's a meeting and if there's nothing to do, the meeting could be cancelled
due to nothing to do that way its always there as a blocked out time frame where you could meet.
And then say if you had something like a particularly difficult certificate of appropriateness that
was referred to committee, that committee then in a sense could meet at the same time as this
meeting and do like they do in Council which is go to the committee of the whole. You just go to
the first committee, they do their vote, and then the next meeting the committee makes its
recommendation formalized- there's two routes you can do with itj think either one is
acceptable.
Mary Jane Chase: The question that I have is if you look at these committees if you publicize
them and people don't understand what they are perhaps let's take Landmarks and people don't
understand what is a landmark, you don't know what landmarks are you can have people coming
and asking questions, and that could take hours. And off the wall questions, you know, about
buildings and the committee is not prepared to get into a lot of detail. Maybe Landmarks is
working on a specific landmark, but to say that it's a public meeting for the public to attend and
to throw all of these questions...
Shawn Peterson: You'll have that, no matter when they meet its going to be a public meeting. It
doesn't mean you have to allow the public to speak. So ... they can be there, and have the
opportunity to see you meet and whatever else, and then they'll leave. They'll say 7 want to
speak' and you'll say 'You're out of order'. Just be sure that the agenda does not provide a
privilege of the floor.
Mary Jane Chase: Would you advertise that as a non - comment meeting because...
Shawn Peterson: No, just a normal meeting.
10
Mary Jane Chase: You know, have a meeting then say, you know ... I'm just seeing some
problems there. Where do you want to step there?
Lynn Patrick. We're getting bogged down in this. How about we hold off on this and discuss this
a little bit more as we have our meetings to discuss the advisory committee.
Shawn Peterson: Conversations.
Lynn Patrick. Conversations. We need to call them conversations?
Shawn Peterson: Well, that's what they are, they're not meetings.
Lynn Patrick. There not meetings because they're not quorum?
Shawn Peterson: Right.
Lynn Patrick: Ok. Conversations. Very good.
Todd Zeiger: I have a landmark committee report when you're ready for it.
Lynn Patrick: I'm ready for it.
2. Landmarks Committee Chair: Update
Todd Zeiger: I met, the landmarks committee, I had a conversation, a phone conversation with
myself. (Laughter) I did talk to Linda, thank you Linda for joining my committee. Um, Julie and I
met before Julie left, and I got a good sense of where the report is at with regard to all the
individual landmarks and how many photographs, how many have been taken photographs of.
Wayne has really captured I'd say % of all of the individual landmarks. Julie has all the
landmark files in order. And so, the next step in that process is to finish the photography so that
we have a photo of every one. And then my goal is to do some sort of a report in some fashion
that each of Commission members can have so that everybody knows what all the individual
landmarks are. I'm tired of asking myself, 'is that a landmark, is that a landmark, so we need
that list. Whether we do it at a meeting here where 1 just throw the images real quick on a power
point and run through them, or we want to take the time during a session, as an educational
piece. There aren't that many, I mean there's a bunch but we could flip through them really -
quickly. Or I could just put it in a CD format for everyone to look at on their own. I'd look for
some advice on that, but that's my first goal for landmarks so everybody knows what they all are
and has a list and a picture of them so you know where they all are. And then from there that will
fold into the preservation plan of what we do with that vs. adding new ones or whatever.
Lynn Patrick: That sounds excellent. Moving onto staff reports.
C. STAFF REPORTS
1. Director's Report — Catherine Hostetler
Catherine distributed her report, and reminded Commissioners that they had copies of the Staff
Approved CoA's in their packet. Commissioners also received a flyer about the Tree Workshop
that was received in the office.
Catherine read thank you letter from Urban Enterprise Association regarding the Commission's
timely handling of their CoA regarding the Burke Building. And informed the Commission that
the Burke project will include the skylights that were questioned during the approval process of
that CoA.
Todd Zeiger: They're working on it.
Catherine Hostetler: Yes, they are.
Discussed issues of tax credits and other information for homes in local historic districts and
national register districts, as well as zoning issues regarding student housing. The Director also
received a phone call from a resident of River Bend that stated that the resident was circulating a
petition to revoke district status. Caller claimed most of neighborhood had signed in favor of the
petition, but further conversations with the liaison and other neighbors revealed that no one was
aware of their efforts. The call may have been related to a conversation that Catherine Hostetler
had with a resident of River Bend upon his request to demolish his mother's house that he
consider other options first. The petition or CoA may follow.
Linda Riley: Can you tell me the boundaries of River Bend?
11
Catherine Hostetler: Yes, the boundaries start on Riverside Drive, and then they go down to the
corner of Riverside and Bartlett, go up Bartlett to North St. Joseph Street across St. Joseph street
to the alleys at Hammond Place and then include the two houses on the alleys of Hammond place
and the two houses on Navarre on the north side.
Lynn Patrick: Alright, thank you.
Catherine Hostetler also reported progress in meeting with other department heads including
Sharon Kendall, John Wiltrout of Water Works, and discussed July 26 meeting with Lynn
Patrick and the mayor to discuss the City Plan., and HPC topics.
Two items needed voted on due to new County procedures for permission to travel. The first
request is a request from Wayne Doolittle, to attend a 3-day course "The Upkeep of Historic
Structures" to be held August 17 -20 at the Pine Mountain Settlement School in Kentucky. Cost
is $250 for tuition, lodging and meals. Roundtrip airfare to Louisville is approximately $180.
Lynn Patrick: Sounds like a real good deal.
Martha Choitz: Do we have the money?
Catherine Hostetler: Yes.
Martha Choitz: I make a motion to approve the trip as was just explained to us.
Tim Klusczinski: Second.
Lynn Patrick: All in favor? (Ayes heard) Opposed? (No nays) Motion carries.
Moved: Martha Choitz Second: Tim Klusczinski Vote: 7 -0
Also for approval is a staff request to attend the Cornelius O'Brien Main Street conference, this
year being held in Wabash, Indiana. Between September 28 -30, 2006. Room board and tuition is
anticipated to be the same as last year at approximately $150, but none of those details have yet
been published.
Mary Jane Chase: I'll move that we approve the tuition etc for the Cornelius O'Brien
conference, it is a very worthwhile
Lynn Patrick: Do we have a second?
Martha Choitz: Second.
Lynn Patrick: All in favor? (Various Ayes) Opposed? (Silence) That carries too.
Moved: Mary Jane Chase Second: Martha Choitz Vote: 7 -0
Todd Zeiger: (Addressing Director Hostetler) Have you gotten any feedback from the County
regarding the budget situation, any heads up at all?
Catherine Hostetler: None.
Lynn Patrick: So its all in the papers, but nothing yet... ?
2. Assistant Director's Report — Amy Herdman
Assistant Director Herdman distributed her report to the Commissioners and reviewed a number
of new initiatives that the HPC is currently pursuing, including The ArtCard Project, creation of
the Six at Risk list, the logo project, a partnership with South Bend Chodolate Company and
Workshop Wednesdays at the Library.
Catherine Hostetler: The motivation behind these projects is not just to raise the profile of the
HPC but also to raise funds to help offset our operating expenses. We realized the budget
situation that the County is in and decided to utilize the information and know -how that we have
in the ojjice to begin 'leveraging the franchise' so to speak. John Livingston (former Counsel)
was previously approached with the matter offundraising and was of the opinion that we could
do such things. We have the seed money available from Southhold Foundation to do this, and our
plan is to use that money, then replenish and grow it. We intend to position the HPC as a profit,
or at least a revenue center, above the fees that we charge for CoA's etc.
Amy Herdman: It bears mentioning that we'd begun all of these projects before we truly knew
how dire the County budget situation was, so these efforts aren't reactionary in any way, but
were very proactive.
12
Catherine Hostetler: And we're really pleased with the response that we've received from South
Bend Chocolate.
Todd Zeiger: The logos that you're designing, will those be used for the chocolate that you're
trying to come up with?
Catherine Hostetler. Its going to be for that, and other items like stationary, note cards...
Todd Zeiger: for the chocolate though, is it going to be printed or imprinted on a label?
Catherine Hostetler: It would be on boxes.
Mary Jane Chase: I have two questions. Have you decided on a goal, a financial goal that you
want to reach?
Catherine Hostetler: Not yet.
Mary Jane Chase: Have you talked to anyone from the Center for History, because they're in
desperate need for finances too.
Catherine Hostetler. Well, the thing of it is that we can't position anyone else's product. Their
marketing person (SB Chocolate) was the one that looped in Northern Indiana Center for
History, because they had never thought of doing this before we approached them. Their
suggestion was why don't we split the profits between the two of you because Mark is on the
board.
Mary Jane Chase: It seems a perfect fit.
Catherine Hostetler: It wasn't an issue for us, we just told them to remember who had the idea
first. (laughter)
Lynn Patrick. You're not asking us to vote on any of these logos tonight are you?
Amy Herdman: No, not at all. Its just to let you know where we're going with things and if any of
you want to offer guidance or suggestions, obviously we're happy to have that. The Six at Risk
will be on next month's agenda-so I'd like your input on that in a timely manner, as I'll need to
do some research on the sites that you recommend and we'll want to approve that as a
Commission and then the press release will follow.
Catherine Hostetler: And also follow up in the newsletter.
Todd Zeiger: I have a couple of things... on the logo, a great start, it really is. The Courthouse is
a great building, but I think that a lot of people think about government when they think about the
Commission and that reinforces the issue that we're just a government agency. I love the
building, but we're thinking about the image. And with that logo the image is "Oh my god, I have
to go get a CoA ". (laughter) The house on the other end of the spectrum though, doesn't
represent everything that we get into. It's a Victorian which is great, but we also get into the
teens, we've got mid- 1800's, we're going to have deco and all that and I always shy away from ,
specific styles, so if there's some way to graphically represent elements of dierent styles...
Tim Klusainski. Can we get a hybrid?
Todd Zeiger: I'm looking at the text on number 2, the text is very crisp and clean and nice and
doesn't tell you anything about a particular era, commercial or residential because we've got
commercial, residential, tressels, lamps... without the flower, but maybe you could do something
graphically that would represent a variety of styles ...Ilike the crisp lettering ... butjust the crisp
lettering without the leaf. Very straightforward, right there. doesn't really judge what we are or
aren't, just here we are. Simplicity is really.....
Lynn Patrick: You make a very good point. I was at first drawn to the Courthouse drawing
because Iliked that the best of the three submitted, but you're right people would have that
negative connotation. Just to interject, there is a little giftshop in a castle in England and the
members of the committee went all around about this wonderful old church they have there
looking at statues of St. George because its called St. George's Shop or something, so they went
around to all the different statues to find something that would symbolize that... one was too
masculine, one was too feminine, but they went backforth but did find one image that they
thought was appropriate, so that is very important.
Todd Zeiger: Switching gears to the Six at Risk, I had mentioned this to Amy that perhaps on the
first list we focus on buildings in existing districts or land marks that we've already got
landmarked. If we're trying to call attention to things then maybe we should start at home in a
sense with buildings and things that we've already got in districts or landmarks that may be in
13
danger before we go outside picking on buildings that aren't even under our control unless the
goal is to landmark. Just a thought. It's a great start though and the newsletter was awesome, it
was good to get that out it looked good and great start.
Martha Choitz: (on logos) We used one for Southhold that was particularly effective was one that
represented tiny little buildings here in town, and houses, that and artist can render. We had
every kind of building that was in town, or landmarked at that point had a representation, but it
was a very effective thing, you had to look closely to decide that's a hotel, and that's a building
and that's a house... but lots of people said, how did you get that done, who did that, how did it
happen? I probably have a copy of it, but all of our records... all of our copies and things... but
all of our big stuff is over with Pat Collins at the museum in storage. You can get it out with a
good reason. We had all different kinds of things for various things.
Lynn Patrick: Do you think that you could find that in the next week?
Martha Choitz: I don't know, I haven't thought about it in a number of years. These things could
be ... I mean, we could make new ones.
Amy Herdman: These logos that you're seeing represent what we found over and over
again ...from clicking around online to similar organizations whether other commissions, history
museums or whatever. So, what you have here are the most common themes that we saw.
Martha Choitz: They're very good... but what Todd said is true too, people really don't know that
we have... what landmarks that we have.
Todd Zeiger: Do you have any dollars that you might hire some graphic assistance?
Catherine Hostetler: We wanted to do it in house.
Todd Zeiger: Just to brainstorm some graphic ideas with you.
Catherine Hostetler: Mr. Sedlack was supposed to be working on this, but he's not done
anything. He teaches at ND, graphic arts and did the Chapin Park logos.
Mary Jane Chase: I don't know if you want to do this or not, or maybe to draw more attention,
would be to have a contest to have people submit, if you had one picture that represented South
Bend, or its history, what would you do.
Amy Herdman: We thought of something similar, and thank you for that suggestion, but when we
thought about it, more often we came up with things that we wanted avoid .... not to feature a
specific house as Todd pointed our or a specific style, we didn't want to tie to any Studebaker
reference per se, because that doesn't represent South Bend as a whole or the HPC as a whole,
so we really are treading delicately.
Lynn Patrick: You've given us a lot to think about, but I think that we should move on...
Joann Sporleder: (late arrival) I have a question I'd like to address to Counsel though with the
potential of doing cards or representations of historic structures... whether we need the
permission of the owners before we proceed with anything? We've run into that... we did maps
and did drawings and we needed to get permission from every home owner ahead of hand to
allow us to do thatfor a public distribution context. Maybe these things don't apply anymore, but
I'm just raising the issue.
Martha Choitz: That's absolutely necessary. We found that out. I mean, we never made that
mistake at Southhold, but we had to be told we should. One artist on calendars, beautiful things,
we'd done them for years ... but someone took it, and cut the thing out, and put it somewhere else.
And it was discovered that this guys picture had gone into some other kind of form. It was
nothing that we did, but this picture was now in some other form...and we got a letter, a very
strict letter from an attorney that told us that we weren't going to do that. And I simply wrote
back and said I know we're not going to do that, we didn't even know that had been done, we
didn't do it, someone else did it. You've got to be very clear or something will come up later.
Now, if you make them up that's fine. If you have an artist that will draw imaginary buildings,
why, you're in good shape. You just pay him or her.
Lynn Patrick: Another good point, and something to consider as this project unfolds. I'd like to
move on, if we're done with this, because this sounds like its still in its naecency. I'd like to move
onto the legal...
3. Legal Report — Shawn Peterson
14
Shawn Peterson: In the interest of time what I'll do is... I have uh, been brainstorming on how to
revise our application procedure and the CoA process, trying to streamline... but what I'll do is
just circulate it via email and talk about it next time. Some things aren't contested like today, but
some are... and when they are we need to be sure we're following procedure. So, I'll email it to
you for comments next time.
Lynn Patrick: At our last meeting, you said that you'd have something for us this meeting, I was
noticing when I read the minutes.
Shawn Peterson: If you want the drafts you could...
Lynn Patrick. No, just checking, just prodding, just looking for pain, not looking for product.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
1. Chapin Park Booklets distribution
Catherine Hostetler: The booklets have all been distributed.
Lynn Patrick: Excellent
Linda Riley: Do you want to tell us how?
Catherine Hostetler. The staff delivered them and signed off on them. Every house received one.
V. NEW BUSINESS
Tim Klusczinski was recognized by the Chair.
Tim Klusainski. As a rookie, I've been enlightened to understand many of the challenges
facing local preservation efforts. The list is daunting! Despite those
obstacles, the HPC continues to overcome the hurdles and move forward.
That's a credit to both our conviction and a remarkable staff!
I'm encouraged by our recent progress regarding the Preservation Plan
document. It reminds me of the old adage: 'once begun, half done.' It's
true that more work lies ahead, but we should all accept some early
acknowledgement for the initiative alone. This year especially, we could
easily have put that task on the back burner. But instead, we chose to
engage it. I hope that my contribution to the work was useful. I wish to
thank our President and this entire body for the opportunity to serve in
that capacity. lith these sentiments, I believe that we owe the HPC Ordinance a similar
respect. Now, with afresh grasp of related information we could ensure
that the Ordinance and the Preservation Plan evolve together. I believe
that will serve us well in the long term.
Therefore, 7 move to charge this Commission with the duty of establishing a
committee, chosen by its President and aimed to review and analyze the
current ordinance language. Questions and comments arriving out of those
sessions could then be funneled through the Legal Committee (as one
suggestion) with a goal to improve the ordinance, suggest clarifications and
offer amendments. Once our internal sessions conclude, I support an invitation to the St...
Joseph County Council and the South Bend Common Council asking for one
representative from each body, to collaborate with this Commission in
drafting any recommendations for policy."
Todd Zeiger: Was that in the form of a motion?
Tim Klusainski. That is a motion.
Todd Zeiger: I'd second the motion for the sake of discussion.
Lynn Patrick: Ok, all in favor.
Todd Zeiger.• Wait wait...
Lynn Patrick: You said you seconded the motion for the sake of discussion...
Todd Zeiger: To move it to the next point of Robert's Rules which is discussion, I'm sure people
would like to ask Tim what he's talking about, so I seconded the motion to get it onto the table for
discussion and then action. Your idea as I understood it is to review the ordinance look for
where there are deficiencies, I was taking notes as you were reading, look at the ordinance look
15
for where there may be deficiencies, offer suggestions, then you said you would route that
through where?
Tim Klusczinski: Well one suggestion would be that after we establish a preliminary committee
to do this fact finding then for the purpose of legal suggestions we may take our
recommendations through the legal committee but that's only a suggestion. Once that happens,
then you would make their recommendations and this commission body together with
representatives the South Bend Common Council and St. Joseph County Council would then
make formal recommendations to each of those bodies of any changes that we'd like to make
referring to the ordinance.
Joann Sporleder: Were you fcnished Todd, I'm sorry. What exactly is the objective of doing what
you are proposing?
Tim Klusczinski: I'm not sure that the ordinance is completely with respect to enforcement
procedures. And, also it makes references to a "Section X" that I could not find. A few other
things like that.
Joann Sporleder: In that sense it sounds like perhaps its more of a concern that needs to go to
legal counsel first to clarify where the inconsistencies of the language is. Unless what you had in
mind really is to change some of the intent of what's there.
Tim Klusczinski: To clarify some of the intent of what's there.
Joann Sporleder: I guess I would have thought that it would go to counsel first, to clarify the
language, and then go to a committee to see if with clearer legal language it then represents what
we think it does, or what we thought it meant.
Tim Klusczinski: Since a lot of the content is applicable to either the Districts committee or the
Landmarks committee, I thought that it might be in our best interest to have representatives from
those panels sit in to understand what we're really reading here. Then, for the purpose of making
a legal suggestion from that instead of doing it the other way, its certainly a method, but I would
like to know what should be there first instead of what is there, or what we think we're reading.
Joann Sporleder: I guess I would have thought as I said before that we should understand what
is there, and see if that represents what we want it to represent. Then make changes as
appropriate...
Tim Klusczinski: And I think that those points are obvious in the document. I think that it's
what's missing that the respective committees either Landmarks or Districts need to address.
Lynn Patrick: Can I make a comment? It strikes me that this is growing out of two sources, one
was our visioning meeting, the retreat that we had back in December, and two its coming out our
goal to streamline and clarify the massive compilation of ordinances etc that we were working on
clarifying.
Catherine Hostetler: Also in the codified ordinances there are references to sections that don't
exist. Which causes confusion.
Todd Zeiger: Sounds like it also works with what you were just talking about the revamping the
CoA procedures, it all works together.
Lynn Patrick: Its all part and parcel of the whole. And I think that the reason that we're
suggesting that Tim and Todd for instance start on this...
Todd Zeiger: Wait a minute, how did 1 get involved? (laughter)
Lynn Patrick: 1 just threw you in there just as an example, as a result of the Preservation Plan
analysis that you worked on, because the alternative is to just dump all this on Scott (Shawn)
And go... 'here,read this, analyze this then tell us what's up ; I don't think that we're taking
anything away from Todd, if we start looking at this in a preliminary way ... I think Shawn has a
comment.
Shawn Peterson: I think it is appropriate for legal to review the ordinance but our review should
be in context. It appears that you have some specific issues with the ordinance. If not, then it
may be best if a few people are selected to review the ordinance and their issues could then be
brought to my attention and I can review the ordinance to see if it needs to be amended to resolve
those issues.
Tim Klusczinski: Getting back to Joann's question, I think that's probably how my brain works
on this.
16
Joann Sporleder: I guess that's why I asked what is your objective. I don't think that I'm still
quite clear on that. I think that my suspicious mind is, not that I'm suspicious of you Tim, is that
I'm always looking for somebody's other agenda that maybe they don't even recognize
themselves. You know, like a hidden agenda, and I guess that's why I question what the objective
is here... having gone through (such things) several times in Roseland only to discover to my
shock and horror that they're just simply changing the law ,anyone with any (occasion ?)
can ... you know... this was not the way that it was written in the first place, somebody just had
something else in mind.
Martha Choitz: That sounds like what happened here about 25 years ago when I got my first one
handed to me, no one could tell me where it came from. I looked at it, and asked what's it for,
when did we ever use it ... how would you use that little beauty ifyou ... there was no answer, but
they kept coming up and coming up, and my God, here it is again... who mandated it?
Catherine Hostetler: The Preservation Plan?
Martha Choitz: Yes.
Catherine Hostetler. It's in the ordinance
Martha Choitz: It's in the ordinance? Is it in the wording that's in that last one?
Catherine Hostetler: Yes. The ordinance that we have is the codified version.
Martha Choitz: The very first one?
Catherine Hostetler. I think that you're confusing the Preservation Plan. with the ordinance.
Martha Choitz: I'm sure I am though I know that they're two different things. All I'm asking is
why is one necessary, why is the plan necessary when we have the ordinance?
Catherine Hostetler. The ordinance mandates us to have a Preservation Plan.
Todd Zeiger: The ordinance is the law that we operate under, the plan is the actions that we take
to implement the law.
Martha Choitz: You couldn't take them ifyou wanted to.
Todd Zeiger: That's why we need a new plan.
Lynn Patrick: Its not a (unknown) plan, but its something to work from and I view part of this
an overall reprofessionalizing (?) our whole commission and looking at things and clarifying
things and just continuous improvement throughout the whole commission.
Martha Choitz: And this one is so far from being adequate that it needs to be reinvented. There
is nothing there that tells anyone how to do anything.
Lynn Patrick. Just like the city was doing the City Plan.... we need our Preservation Plan
updated.
Shawn Peterson: Getting back to the motion that is on the floor, we can discuss it or the
committee that has the authority could meet with me and go through the items that you're
interested in...
Todd Zeiger: I call for the question please. Motion is seconded on the floor.
Lynn Patrick: Could you re -read the motion?
Tim Musczinski. 7move to charge this Commission with the duty of establishing a
committee, chosen by its President and aimed to review and analyze the
current ordinance language. Questions and comments arriving out of those
sessions could then be funneled through the Legal Committee (as one
suggestion) with a goal to improve the ordinance, suggest clarifications and
offer amendments. Once our internal sessions conclude, I support an invitation to the St.
Joseph County Council and the South Bend Common Council asking for one
representative from each body, to collaborate with this Commission in
drafting any recommendations for policy. "
Lynn Patrick: Can we second that motion?
Todd Zeiger: Its already been seconded.
Lynn Patrick: Are we ready to vote on it? All in favor? (Ayes heard) Any Opposition? (Aye) The
motion carries with one against.
Moved: Tim Klusczinski Second: Todd Zeiger Vote: 7 -1
Joann Sporleder Opposed
17
Todd Zeiger: May I give an update on the Preservation Plan since we were talking about that?
Briefly ... I did talk to the State Historic Preservation Office, Steve Kennedy, and we can apply for
DHPA grant for professional assistance in writing the new preservation plan in that's the way
that we wanted to go, uh.. it's a one to one match maximum $30,000, so whatever you ask for you
have to match dollar for dollar. We can apply for up to $30, 000, I'm not expecting that to be the
case, but I'm saying that's the limit. I've got calls into a couple various places to see how much
they paid to have their plans worked on. I think that it would be helpful to have some outside
consultation to work within the neighborhoods and in the districts as an impartial liaison in this
process, that's why I'm kind of pushing this to be an idea. I'll find out some numbers, but I
guessing that you're talking about a range of $20, 000 to $30, 000 range for the whole project,
with booklets, done, delivered.
Lynn Patrick: That sounds great. If there's no other new business, do we have any visitors that
wish to speak?
VI. HEARING OF VISITORS
Thank you madam chairwoman, Don Sporleder, professor of architecture emeritus, University of
Notre Dame, and resident of the town of Roseland. Mark your calendars and welcome to all of
you to attend this coming Saturday, July 22n the Highland Games and Celtic Festival at the
Roseland Town Park. This Saturday, come on out. Also, may I also commend the Commission
for effectively working together with Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, and the Center
for History on the restoration of Navarre cabin in Leeper Park, too bad that Indiana stone is not
in place, but good job, well done. And in the spirit of that just note that the cabin did work well in
Cabin Days that was just on the calendar last Saturday. And well attended too, and important
facet of Leeper Park, and uh there are still tasks in the Leeper Park restoration that need to be
done. I would request the help of the Commission in listing as locally historically significant that
first covered bridge, that crosses the St. Joseph river in South Bend. You know where that is,
documentation was put together several years ago by the Center for History, with students of the
University of Notre Dame. I did forward to you all that memo from the Dept of Transportation,
Federal Highways and the National Historic Covered Bridge program, an intriguing one.. it
seems to me that it would be fairly important that we in South Bend would identify and list as a
historic place that spot across the St. Joseph river where Coquillard, that covered bridge, my
shirt illustrates what it was, a few years ago it was in place, and I'd ask the help of the
commission in identifying that could that it could be possible eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places. On that same point there is another aspect in Leeper Park and that
again is the development of that underpass for development of a peopleway, or even a carriage or
bicycle, underneath that south span of the Michigan Street bridge. That's our 933 at present
under Indiana DOT. It seems tome an ideal opportunity for that to come to be. If we need to
push INDOT a little, they have their annual meetings scheduled for August 1 our district,
LaPorte District, and I would suggest that if anyone could make it, it would be a good session to
attend. Again, I would ask the help of the commission to keep pushing to bring that former
underpass back to life underneath that south span of the Michigan Street bridge to bring together
the East and West parts of Leeper Park for all to use safely. On that point, I'd ask the help of the
commission in looking forward to 1907 (2007), that first weekend in April, will be an important
time to celebrate a series of important birthdays, and we'll have a major river cleanup then,
either March 31 or April 2 but that happens to be the National Architects Week, and I think
that the city is actually recognizing it. But its also the birthday of ....ofMichiana Watershed,
that had that first major clean up just 50 years ago, so 2007 is a good time to celebrate its V
birthday, Youth Services Bureau comes up with its 30` birthday in 2007, and of course the AIA
will be celebrating its 150`" birthday that first week in April as well. Come on out for the birthday
bash on April 7` Thanks much.
Lynn Patrick: There being no other visitors, we are adjourned. Oh, motion to adjourn?
Moved: Mary Jane Chase Second: Martha Choitz Vote: 8 -0
ADJOURNMENT
IN
MINUTES OF AN EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETING
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OF SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
July 31, 2006
HPC Office
125 S. Lafayette Blvd, South Bend, Indiana 46601
Members Present: Todd Zeiger (VP), Mary Jane Chase (Secretary), Linda Riley, Jerry Ujdak,
Catherine Hostetler, Tim Klusczinski (Treasurer), Joann Sporleder (Architectural Historian)
Staff Present: Catherine Hostetler [Director], Amy Herdman [Asst. Director], Shawn Peterson [Counsel]
Others Present: John Wiltrout
Absent: Lynn Patrick, Martha Choitz
In the absence of President Lynn Patrick, Vice - President Todd Zeiger chaired the Executive Session.
Vice President Zeiger called the Executive Session to order at 5:06pm.
Shawn Peterson, Legal Counsel, explained to those present that this was an Executive Session called for the
limited purpose of discussing items listed under IC 5.14.1.5.6.1(b)(7) and (b)(13). Mr. Peterson confirmed
that based upon his conversation with Catherine Hostetler that the special meeting notice for the Executive
Session was properly posted and distributed in accordance with the Open Door Law.
Catherine Hostetler briefed the Commissioners on reason for the Executive Session. The Commissioners
were joined by John Wiltrout who informed the Commissioners on matters related to the purposes for which
the Executive Session was called. The Commissioners and Mr. Wiltrout discussed said information and the
impact said information has on matters within the Commissioners' jurisdiction.
Meeting was adjourned at 6:09pm.
Moved: Catherine Hostetler Second: Tim Klusczinski Vote: 7.0
Approval of these minutes for Executive Session shall constitute the Commissioners' affirmation that no
subject matter was discussed in executive session other than the subject matters related to items
specified in IC 5.14- 1.5.6.1(b)(7) and (13), the provisions specified in the public notice for said Executive
Session.
Location Budget as of 07 -31 -2006
Note: Includes transactions after the last posted date of 12 -31 -2005.
Fund 001 County General for 01 -01 -2006 thru 07 -31 -2006
Loc 037 Historic Preservation
Account
Object Description
11075 Deputy Director
000 General GovT.
11309 Historic Preservation Admin.
000 /�/� Ge GovT.
10000 Totals '••'•f* ..... - ... ff.flf.. ...* * * *ff.
21030 Office Supplies
000 General GovT.
22010 Gas Oil & Lubricants
000 General GovT.
22120 Garage & Motor Supplies
0 00 G G GovT. ` 20000 Totals • f�ttlltff��l t11} fff�fiftffttt ►ttRtftt.l���f�fff
31070 Other Contractual Services
000 General GOVT.
32020 Travel
000 General GovT.
32050 Instruction & Training
000 General GovT.
32053 Public Relations
000 General GovT.
32200 Telephone
000 General GoVT.
32350 Postage
000 General GovT.
33010 Publication Of Legal Notices
000 General GovT.
User ID
Saint Joseph County
Unencumbered
Unexpended
Appropriation
Encumbrance
Expenditure
Balance/Percent
Balance/Percent
30,000.00
0.00
18,461.12
11,538.88
11,538.88
38.46
38.46
36,050.00
0.00
20,798.10
15,251.90
15,251.90
42.31
42.31
66,050.00
0.00
39,259.22
26,790.78
26,790.78
40.56
40.56
1,750.00
314.01
563.99
872.00
1,186.01
49.83
67.77
1,000.00
0.00
266.39
733.61
733.61
73.36
73.36
700.00
0.00
62.75
637.25
637.25
91.04
91.04
3,450.00
314.01
893.13
2,242.86
2,556.87
65.01
74.11
51,502.60
4,015.00
32,079.32
15,408.28
19,423.28
29.92
37.71
500.00
0.00
125.12
374.88
374.88
74.98
74.98
1,000.00
0.00
0.00
1,000.00
1,000.00
100.00
100.00
3,070.00
0.00
1,057.24
2,012.76
2,012.76
65.56
65.56
160.00
0.00
0.00
160.00
160.00
100.00
100.00
2,160.00
0.00
1,458.70
701.30
701.30
32.47
32.47
500.00
0.00
73.81
426.19
426.19
85.24
85.24
08/01TOr 2:08 PM
III
Page 81
Location Budget as of 07 -31 -2006
Note: Includes transactions after the last posted date of 12 -31 -2005.
Fund 001 County General for 01 -01 -2006 thru 07 -31 -2006
Loc 037 Historic Preservation
Account
Object
Description
33100
Printing
000
General GovT.
37100
Auto Lease
000
General GovT.
39010
Dues & Subscription
000
General GovT.
39600
Refunds, Awards & Indemnities
000
General GovT.
39750
Data Processing
000
General GovT.
39980
Funds W/O Approp.
000
General Gov/T.
30000
Totals ............... ...............................
44250
Office Machines
000
General GoMT.
40000
Totals ............... ...............................
Location Totals .................. ...............................
Investment Accounts
Transfer Accounts
Appropriation
8,528.00
500.00
750.00
0.00
1,500.00
0.00
70,170.60
800.00
800.00
140,470.60
Encumbrance
5,528.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9,543.00
465.00
465.00
10,322.01
Expenditure
788.78
85.77
10.00
7,714.00
8.29
37,485.00
80,886.03
0.00
0.00
121,038.38
0.00
0.00
121,038.38
Unencumbered
BalancetPercent
2,211.22
25.93
414.23
82.85
740.00
98.67
(7,714.00)
0.00
1,491.71
99.45
(37,485.00)
0.00
(20,258.43)
(28.87)
335.00
41.88
335.00
41.88
9,110.21
6.49
Unexpended
Balance/Percent
7,739.22
90.75
414.23
82.85
740.00
98.67
(7,714.00)
0.00
1,491.71
99.45
(37,485.00)
0.00
(10,715.43)
(15.27)
800.00
100.00
800.00
100.00
19,432.22
13.83
hi nt Joseph County
User ID ksobecki 08101/2006 2:08 PM Page 82
2007 St. Joseph County BudOot
COUNTY GENERAL
HISTORIC PRESERVATION zoos ExPExnED zoos BUDGET
0 m = 0 Series
,S DEPUTY DIRECTOR
$6, 000 funded by City of South Bend Grant.
11309 HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADMIN.
10000 Series TOTAL
20000 Series
21030 OFFICE SUPPLIES
22010 GAS OIL & LUBRICANTS
22120 GARAGE & MOTOR SUPPLIES
20000 Series TOTAL
30000 Series
31070 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
32020 TRAVEL
32050 INSTRUCTION & TRAINING
53 PUBLIC RELATIONS
00 TELEPHONE
32350 POSTAGE
33010 PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICES
33100 •PRINTING
37100 AUTO LEASE
39010 DUES & SUBSCRIPTION
39750 DATA PROCESSING
30000 Series TOTAL
40000 Series
44250 OFFICE MACHINES
45510 FURNITURE & FIXTURES
40000 Series TOTAL
DEPARTMENT TOTAL
bEPARTMENT REQUESTED
2007 Budget _/- ♦/-
30,000
30,000
30,000
0
35,357
36,050
36,050
0
65,357
66,050
66,050
0
-0.00
2,275
1,750
1,250
-500
-28.57
500
1,000
1,000
0
700'
700
700
0
3,475
3,450
2,950
-500
-14.49
48,635
29,000
28,000
-1,000
-3.45
450
500
500
0
400
1,000
1,000
0
7,820
3,070
2,570
-500
-16.29
249
160
160
0
1,620
2,160
2,160
0
162
500
500
0
13,100
3,000
3,000
0
369
500
500
0
555
750
750
0
55
1,500
1,000
-500
-33.33
73,415
42,140
40,140
- 2,000
4.75
474
800
800
0
3,042
3,516
800
800
0
0.00
145,763
112,440
109,940
-2,500
-2.22
DEPT. 37
COUNTY GENERAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION 56
Historic Preservation Commission
Of South Bend and Saint Joseph County
Committee Assignments
July,2006
Executive Committee: Ad hoc Committees
Lynn Patrick, President Chair St. Casimir Parish Committees
Todd Zeiger, Vice President Jerry Udjak
Mary Jane Chase, Secretary
Tim Klusczinski, Treasurer
Legal Committee:
Todd Zeiger, Chair
Jerry Udj ak
Budget and Finance:
Tim Klusczinski Chair
Linda Riley
Landmarks Committee:
Todd Zeiger, Chair
Linda Riley
Fagade Easements Committee
Joann Sporleder, Chair
Linda Riley
John Oxian
Nominating Committee
Lynn Patrick, Chair
Joann Sporleder
Mary Jane Chase
Todd Zeiger
Public Relations and Community
Education - aka - Southold Awards
Catherine Hostetler, Chair
Martha Choitz
Lynn Patrick
Mary Jane Chase
Virginia O'Hair, Emeritus
Survey Committee (Est. June 2005)
Lynn Patrick
Catherine Hostetler
Standards and Maintenance:
Martha Choitz; Chair
Joann Sporleder
Lynn Patrick
Bob Yapp
Historic Districts:
Martha Choitz, Chair
Jerry Udjak, Co -Chair
Tim Klusczinski
In the Summer of 2006, the Historic Preservation Commission decided to compile a list of the sites and
structures here in our community that are endangered, or "at risk ". These sites are at risk because of
benign neglect, vacancy, financial distress and other factors. All contribute to the literal and figurative
landscape of South Bend and St. Joseph County, and are worthy of our attention. The S&AtRlsk list is in
no way an attempt to embarrass anyone nor criticize the management of any site. Instead, it is the intention
of the HPC to inform everyone of the delicate condition of these properties, with the hope that efforts to
rescue them will follow. Demolition is certainly not preservation, and in this instance, nor would it be
progress, either. If you'd like more information about any of the Six at Risk, please call the HPC.
N St. Paul's Memorial Methodist Church 1001 W Colfax Avenue. South Bend
St. Paul's, built by and for a tribute to Clem Studebaker, is rich with treasures and is a wonderful interpretation of Gothic
r rte?
• �r � architecture by S.R. Badgely. Franz Mayer of Munich designed their beautiful windows. Mayer windows are also found
• ":= �t in St. Peter's in Rome. The congregation has dwindled from hundreds of affluent families to just 30 people, and the
Studebaker Trust that has sustained St. Paul's has dwindled as well. The advisory board of the church is now struggling
r- to identify alternative funding sources as well as uses for the building that do not compromise fY 9 9 it or its mission. P
The Burke Building LOCAL LANDMARK 1019 S. Michigan Street, South Bend rr
This lovely building replete with graceful terracotta accents, has recently undergone some necessary roof repairs
and is eagerly being marketed by the Urban Enterprise Association, with the intent of occupancy before winter so
that interior' drain work isn't compromised by cold. The second floor could easily be configured into apartments, as
the floor plan is currently divided into sixteen efficiency (one room) units.
The Oliver House LOCAL LANDMARK 119 LaPorte Avenue. South Bend
This home was built as a speculative venture by James D. Oliver of the Oliver Chilled Plow Works in 1905 and has
been a designated local landmark since June of 1990. The home has suffered as has the surrounding neighborhood.
Foreclosure has put this home and its charming interior back on the market. A very worthwhile fixer upper.
Fredrickson Candv Store LOCAL LANDMARK 314 W. LaSalle. South Bend'
This structure was built in 1892 and was the original home of the The South Bend Remedy Company a medicinal
products mail order company. Later the building was a residence, then eventually the Fredrickson Candy Store
beginning in 1927. The grand home that was once attached was moved in 1987. This structure, though in disrepair, "' 1
is a good candidate for relocation and restoration. The site is currently owned by a downtown church.
The Wenaer House LOCAL LANDMARK 701 Pennsvlvania Ave.. South Bend
A lovely Italianate built in 1860, this home was designated a local landmark in July of 1979. The South Bend Rede-
velopment Commission has done a heroicjob stabilizing the building and restoring the exterior. However, a preser-
"11 vation minded contractor is needed to restore the interior to complete the renaissance of this important landmark.
The home is very convenient to Ivy Tech and downtown South Bend.
"Fat Daddv's Block" 501.505 S. Michigan Street. South Bend
A fire in the middle building and general wear and tear on the structures put these buildings at previous risk for
demolition, but they have been saved. The 2nd floor above Fat Daddy's used to be the Arthur Murray Dance ; MIR .
4 9 g ;.: .,:.,..
gy m.
Studio. The corner location and available square footage makes this a most desirable location though much res-
toration work is needed post haste. The buildings are available for sale. ,zz
August 2006
Main Street Proposal
Historic Preservation Commission
The National Trust Main Street Center is an initiative of the National Trust for Historic Preservation
created in the 1970's. This innovative approach to commercial district revitalization combines
historic preservation with economic development to restore viability to downtowns and
neighborhood business districts. Main Street employs a comprehensive approach that both rural
and urban areas can use to revitalize commercial districts by championing historic preservation
and supporting grassroots based economic development. A network of more than 40 statewide,
citywide and /or countywide Main Street programs and 1200 active Main Street programs currently
span the United States.
The Main Street Four- Point Aparoach to Commercial District Revitalization
Organization- Main Street assists communities in assembling the appropriate human and financial
resources to embark upon a sustainable revitalization effort with clearly delineated goals and
direction.
Promotion- Main Street promotes a positive image of the commercial district and reinforces the
interest in living, working and recreating in a Main Street district. This effective promotional
strategy improves consumer and investor confidence in the district and encourages investment and
activity.
Design- Main Street makes every effort to ensure that the commercial district is in its best form -
capitalizing on its best assets from interesting historic structures to pedestrian friendly streets.
Design activities also include instilling good maintenance practices, enhancing the physical
appearance of existing structures, encouraging appropriate new construction, developing design
management systems, and long -term planning.
Economic Restructuring- Main Street seeks to bolster the existing economic assets of the district
while expanding and diversifying its economic base. Main Street presence enhances the
competitiveness of existing business owners and recruits new businesses to further invigorate the
commercial district.
Main Street's EiQht Principles of Success
A comprehensive approach — no single focus can revitalize a commercial district. To ensure long
term, sustainable, responsible revitalization, a comprehensive measured approach is essential. -
An Incremental approach — successful programs begin with small advances that create a buzz and
an interest in the commercial district.
Self -help — local leadership is crucial to fostering an atmosphere of community involvement and
commitment to the effort.
Partnership — public and private sectors will forge lasting relationships that will strengthen each
exponentially.
Identifying and capitalizing on existing assets — businesses must capitalize on the features that
make the area unique and consider these assets as the foundation of all further activity and effort.
Quality— all efforts from restoration, promotional campaigns, and programming must be high
quality professional efforts; anything less reinforces a negative image of the district.
Change- the most convincing way to change the opinion of a skeptic is through positive,
incremental, sustainable change.
Implementation — visible results and changes for the better manifests in projects completed
successfully.
Source: National Trust Main Street Center website, Page 47, Section 2.
The Staff of the Historic Preservation Commission respectfully requests your support of further
investigation of what the Main Street program might offer South Bend. Specifically, Staff requests
permission to invite Ellen Harper of Main Street Indiana to South Bend to present information and
engage in information sharing via questions and answers etc. Upon her acceptance, invitations will
be extended to all relevant local officials, interested parties, downtown merchants, community
leaders and commissioners to attend the presentation.
Director's Report
August 2006
,July 19 Guest speaker at die River Park Business Owners Breakfast.
July 25 Meeting with Todd Zeiger, Marco Marini and Chris Dressler concerning the
Burke Building, new roof and marketing the building
July 26 Meeting with Mayor and Lynn Patrick concerning HPC and City Plan
July 28 Meeting at NNN with Ted roti, Gary Gilot and Wayne Doolittle (representing
Chapin Park) concerning Memorial's parking issues over the next four years.
July 31 Executive Session of HPC
August 1- August 7 Vacation
August 9 Meeting at Memorial Hospital concerning parking need issues and setting up a
meeting with neighborhoods.
August 10 Meeting with Catherine Topple concerning code issues in the Districts.
August 18 Lunch with Community and Economic Development staffers Jennifer and
Andy Laurent.
The 2007 HPC Budget was prepared with the requested 2% cuts and submitted to the
Auditor's Office. I also submitted appropriations to our budget to reimburse the HP
Commission from the City Grant and Insurance proceeds for the purchase of the 2005
Malibu, reimburse our Public Relations line item for the purchase of the Southhold
Awards from the Southhold money, and recapture die fee collected for the Southhold
Breakfast to reimburse Other Contractual Services line item. The hearing is set for August
22.
Amy and I both met with Mark Tamer and his staff at South Bend Chocolate concerning
the creation of Historic Preservation Nuts. Product should be available in September.
The Edgewater Liaison nominee forms were received and tabulated. The announcements
to the neighborhood mailed on August 17. Sue Deal, Chris Wilson and Cyd Malovolo are
the liaisons.
Evaluated die Tax Sale list and identified properties in historic districts and local landmarks
and submitted findings to the County Treasurer.
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE -
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OF SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
August 21, 2006
4` Floor Council Chambers
County — City Building, South Bend, Indiana
Members Present: Lynn Patrick LP[President], Mary Jane Chase MJC[Secretary], Catherine Hostetler CH,
Martha Choitz MC, Linda Riley LR, Joann Sporleder JS,[Architectural Historian], Jerry Ujdak JU,
Staff Present: Catherine Hostetler CH [Director], Amy Herdman AH [Asst. Director],
Others Present: Don Sporleder
Absent: Shawn Peterson SP [Legal Counsel], Tim Klusczinski TK [Treasurer], Todd Zeiger TZ [Vice President]
I. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL: Lynn Patrick called the meeting to order at 7:30pm
H. PUBLIC HEARING
A. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS
None on the agenda.
B. LANDMARKS
1. 1013 East Jefferson — Second Reading
CH: We have the landmark agreement signed off on by..
JS: Signed on or signed off ?
CH. She's signed off on the form; she signed on the dotted line, on the landmarks form- the
owner Serena Howley.
MC. May I make a motion that we pass this on to the Common Council for approval?
CH. Yes, you may.
JS: I'll second that motion.
LP: All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence)
Moved: MC Second: JS Vote: 7 -0 Unanimous -
LP: Oh yes, I'm sorry, we were so eager to begin that we did not do our roll call.
Roll call followed as recorded above.
LP: I'd like to make a motion that the roll call be included in the beginning of the minutes of
this meeting, even though we started....
JU. Second
LP: All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence)
Moved: LP Second: JU Vote: 7 -0 Unanimous
LR: Could I make a suggestion? On the second reading, could you mention the address?
CH. I did. 1013 EJefferson.
LP: Did you mean mentioned on the minutes or in her verbal statement?
LR: Both.
JS: Once it's sent to Council, then they'll send it back... ?
CH. • Right.
LP: Ok.
CH. • We have a proposal for anew landmark that's come before us. And we were approached by
the homeowners and they requested that we investigate whether or not their property was eligible
and met the three criteria mentioned in the Ordinance for land marking. Staff reviewed what we
have which are the survey cards and the assessor cards, which is all that the office has.
LP: Is this on Forest Avenue?
CH. • Yes.
CH: And I hope that you all had a chance to drive by it. I have some color photos here that show
the house a little bit better.
LP: When you present this, do you use color pictures or black and white?
CH.• Color.
JS: This is already in a local district, why does it need special attention?
CH.- The owners have requested that the Commission consider it to be a landmark It meets the
three criteria that we have for a property to be considered for landmark status. It's up to the
Commission to decide whether it's worthy to be a landmark
JS: Are there other designated landmarks in this district?
CH. • I believe there are some, yes.
LP: As with anything, I'm sure that there are some that we would consider even more worthy, but
given where this is, and that the owners are this interested in it, I have no problem land marking
it. Especially given the wonderful district that it's in, their interest, and it does meet the criteria.
And there are other places that meet the criteria, and the owners don't want them land marked...
CH: I spoke to the chairman of the landmarks committee, which is Todd, to verify that he wanted
this put on the agenda for this evening and he said to go ahead and put it on here. We can either
send it back to the committee for further research, or move it on to the second reading.
JU. What's his recommendation?
CH.- He didn't give me one I didn't even know that he wasn't going to be here tonight.
JU: Oh, ok. I don't have any problem with it.
LP: I have no problem. I'd like a motion.
JU: So moved.
MJC: Is this the first or the second reading?
LP This was the first reading.
CH. • There's really no need for a motion. (Discussion ensues)
MC. We still have next month to do anything about it.
LP: Jerry, your motion is that we accept the first reading of 853 Forest and you move that it be
moved forward to the next meeting for a second reading? All in favor? (Ayes heard) All
opposed? (Silence) The motion carries.
Moved: JU Second: , LP Vote: 7 -0 Unanimous
MC: I would like some clarification, do we have any history of the building at any time that it's
been in ourfiles?
CH.- No, you have what we've got.
MC: Ok, that answers that then.
CH. And we checked to see if it was designed by a notable architect and we could find no
notation of an architect. We can go back to the owners and ask them if they have anything in
their abstract, of even if they have their abstract...
JU.- They would have an abstract...
CH. We would hope.
JU: Yeah, you're right, we would hope. How long have they owned the home?
CH.- I don't know.
MJC.- Do we have a list of all of the previous owners?
CH: That's not really ... see, we've got some history, but when we went down to the Main Street
Cornelius O'Brien Conference in Madison we discussed that genealogy alone is not enough to
establish the historic nature of a house. It's got to have some architectural features to it. The
fact that it's a stick style, and that it's a cross gable, and that it's been well maintained and
according to our survey card it's also been unaltered.
JS: (unintelligible due to shuffling paper)
CH.- I think that stayed in the Happ family for a number of decades.
JS: When was this card done?
CH: Either in '79 or '80.
2
. t '`s f
JS: I think that what Mary Jane said would be interesting. To have some information about
ownership, and I guess that I would like to know who, I mean, not that it makes any difference
really, but someone has restored it very nicely. I think that might be an interesting part of its
history as well.
MJC: It says that in 1903 Mr. Clipfall sold the house to Albert Harlin, and the following year
sold the house to Mr. Happ and its been in his ownership since.
CH. • And now the Prince's own it. The Happ family owned it through the 1970's or '80's. The
last notation on the survey card was from 1987. But we just did another survey.
MJC: So then we would have up until the present owners.
JS: But there may be a gap between the Happ's and the present owners.
LP. • Did they send you a letter or anything about the house?
CH.- Yes, well no, not about the house.
LP: How about this. I'm sensing that the Commission would like a little more background, even'
though they seem to be generally in favor of it. Can you request of them that they put together
something, whatever they've got, give them some of the questions that we asked...
JU.• The Portage Township Assessor would have the chain of ownership.
MC.- But they wouldn't have things like whether or not the windows had been replaced or things
like that that would be if interest to us.
JU: Oh, heavens no.
LP: Maybe Amy could call or go over to the Portage Township Assessor and get the chain of
ownership?
AH Yes, sure.
CH. • We've got it on the tax rolls, but they don't show anything past conversion. They just say
"conversion record".
LR: Is there an advantage to the owner to have it become a landmark.
CH.- Well, not really... they're already in a National Register District, and in a Local Historic
District.
LP: R just makes it a trifecta. (laughter) Just one more feather in their cap. It's nice when you
market it, it's not just historic and in a historic district, it's a landmark.
LR: Some people don't want a landmark
LP: Well, you're selectively screening out the people that don't. Alright, I'd like to move on from
this. And there are no National Register nominations at this time.
CH.- No.
LP: On to the regular business, the approval of minutes.
C. NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION
None on the agenda
III. REGULAR BUSINESS
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
LP: If people have read them, including the amended version, and even if they haven't ... I'd like a
motion on approval of the minutes ofJulyl7, 2006.
MJC: I'll make a motion that we approve the minutes of July 17, 2006.
JS: Which version are you...?
MJC.- The amended version
JS: The amended version.
LP: Yes, the amended version with our Counsel's comments.
JS: Which he put in later, you might make that part of your motion.
LP: I'd like a motion to approve the amended minutes of July 17, 2006, which includes Counsel's
comments which he clarified after reading the first draft.
JS: I'll second that motion.
LP: All in favor? (Ayes are heard) All opposed? (Silence) The motion carries
Moved: MJC Second: JS Vote: 7 -0 Unanimous
3
MC. Would you like the old ones kept for our records?
CH. • If you'd like or you can just hand them to me and I'll throw them out.
LP: Is that why it says July 17, and July 31?
CH.- No, those are two separate minutes.
AH.• July 31" was the Executive Session.
LP: Oh, I didn't see that it said Executive Session.' '**
JU.• Amy, is there part of this that was changed ?"
AH.• No, he added probably added 7 or 8 comments starting with page three where previously, on
the original version it read "unintelligible" because it really was. I thought it better to leave it
that way and then ask him to clarify rather than try to surmise what he had said.
JU.• Oh, ok.
AH.• I did that as I was only able to hear about every tenth word.
CH.- If you'd like to give me the old copies...
JU.• No, I'll keep it.
LP: Next up for approval is the minutes from the July 31, 2006 Executive Session on the
goldenrod paper. The single sheet.
AH.• Catherine those were amended as well, correct?
CH.- Yes.
AH.• What you got in your packets has also been amended and is on goldenrod colored paper.
That was also by Shawn's directive.
LP: Ok. I only have one copy.
CH.- You just need the gold copy.
LP: That's the one I have.
CH. • That's all you need, that one's correct.
LP: I'd like a motion on the minutes.
MC. I move that we accept the minutes of the July 31' Executive Committee.
LP Mary Jane Chase has seconded it. All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Any opposed? (Silence)
No? The motion carries.
Moved: MC Second: MJC Vote: 7 -0 Unanimous
TREASURER'S REPORT
LP: The Treasurers Report we'll hold off until next time, unless he gave you something?
CH. No, what you have is the standard location report that the County generates for the
departments budget, plus our proposed budget for 2007 that reflects the required 2% cuts.
LP: Ok.
CH. And we go in for hearings on that later this month.
JS: Did you get the 2% out of the total?
CH. That is just the proposed budget with the 2% reduction.
JS: My observation here is that some of the line items are the same, and yet some are different
and what you've done is managed to make them total 2% not 2% in each line item.
CH. • Oh heavens no.
JS: Am I correct?
CH. Yes.
JS: That would be pretty monumentally awful.
CH. No, it's just out of the total budget. It doesn't require any action, just for information.
LP: Next up is me.
B. COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. President's Report
LP: The President's Report, Advisory Board. Catherine and I, through no fault of her own, have
not yet met about the Advisory Board. I do have a printout of the names. I'm planning to meet
4
with Catherine and Amy at our earliest opportunity. It strikes me that we have a new person on
our professional staff who is extremely motivated, full of new ideas, and I know she likes to start
up new things, but I'd like to see if we could better utilize Amy to help us get this going because I
think that its going to require some concerted effort.
CH. • But nor have we had any input from any of the other Commissioners. Everyone was emailed
the list. And I think that Jerry, did we mail that to you?
JU. You can't.
CH: No, regular mail.
JU: No.
CH. • We'll get you a copy of it. It's a working list of ideas that everyone was adding onto. We
emailed it to you, all the other Commissioners got it, it was on the same email, if Lynn got it, and
Linda got, it got out. It was attached.
MC: I may have disconnected already to go away.
LP: We got it some time ago.
CH: We sent it out by email.
LR: I haven't seen that
LP: I have another version, but I can get another one from the office. I'm going to give mine to
Jerry, so he'll know what we're talking about. Pass this down to Jerry please.
JU. • That should have been mailed to me. When was this given to me?
CH: We've been working on this since the retreat.
JU: Since when?
CH. • The retreat.
LP: Last fall.
CH. It went out, Lynn got it.
MJC: If I did get it, it's probably something that I didn't open.
CH: We sent it out in two different versions, in a .PDF file and in a word file.
LP: When you get back to the office tomorrow can you resend the most recent one?
CH. • Yeah, sure. We were hoping to get this thing going. To get this list, go through it, so people
could make their recommendations, delist people that they didn't think would be interested, then
we would narrow it down and then appoint some people to contact those that we wanted to have
on an advisory board for the Commission.
MJC: On some of these, I don't know why ... I don't know what they do.
CH: I know.
MC: It's hard to vote when you don't know...
CH. • We didn't compile the list. People were throwing names at us and we were writing them
down.
JU. • When was this?
LP: This started last fall, and there was some minor discussion, and Catherine typed it up.
People threw in names periodically when we talked about it.
CH: If we knew that they were architects, we tried to put that little designation by their name.
JU: Have any of these people been contacted.
LP: No, we haven't done anything. This is just in its nascence. It's good that we brought this up
at this meeting because apparently a couple people were unaware...
MC. • Yeah, I haven't seen anything like this at all. I know that we're going to disconnect from
our AOL very soon, and it may already be out of commission to get the high speed stuff.
CH. • Ok, what we will do is we will mail everything out.
MC. Or I could pick it up.
CH: No, we'll mail it out. This is getting ridiculous as we have sent this list out at least 3 other
times.
JU. • I've never seen it.
CH. This is very frustrating.
LP: I know lets move on from this. I'll have a more comprehensive report next meeting.
CH. • If you want to move on, we've have to move on it.
5
LP: That's why I need to come to the ojjice and talk to Catherine and Amy. I've said before we
need to go over this more. Catherine's done a great job with this, as I know that these names
have come from a lot of different quarters. Some of these names were from our retreat, people
threw out a couple of names then and then periodically we've revisited this theme, more names
have been added, and its kind of morphed into what's in front of you now. I'll get with Catherine
and Amy and try to have something more substantive, and I'll also try to get a little background
on these people.
MC: It's the entire thing, because of how you make contact with those people.
LP: We haven't made any contact. What I'm thinking of doing, and I'll get with Catherine on
this, is just get some numbers, and make a phone call. You know? "Would you be interested ?"
Just keep it very,....
CH: I think that happens after the Commission decides who they want to .... we could even have
an A list and a B list and let it filter that way.
JU: Why does the Commission have to decide what these people would do? What the
parameters? What's the purpose? And then go out—we're getting the cart before the horse here.
CH: Well the parameters were, and I think that this was while you were out ill Jerry, that we...
JU. We need to set it down on paper.
CH. It was, it was in the minutes. Basically, it was to get a group of experts to help the
Commission in areas where it doesn't have the expertise. Architects, designers, review people,
that sort of thing. The second item was, according to my understanding, to have a group of
people that would give the Commission guidance in the future as to where it should be lookingfor
its direction. We've got nine people here, nine different backgrounds, but you know, that's it. It
was also a means to broaden the net of the Commission to other area professionals who are
historians, and architects, and knowledgeable of and appreciative of historic preservation to help
the Commission in its goals of reaching out the communities.
JU: Put that on paper.
CH. • It's on paper, Jerry.
JU: Well then you need to get it to us. Get it to us again; I'm not going to go digging around in
past minutes.
CH: Ok.
JU. • Life is tough sometimes. There's a name that's obviously been left off of that list.
LP: And that is?
JU: Our past President.
LP: I think that he was on the list, but he said that he was not interested.
JU: I don't know.
CH: Our indication was that Mr. Oxian does not want to have anything to do with this
Commission as long as I am the Director.
JU: He told you that?
CH: He told Julie Schutte that.
JU: Maybe you ought to check that out.
MJC. And if anyone knows what skills these people have that would be helpful.
LP: You've given us a lot to noodle on here.
CH. • If any of you know what these people do, please let us know. We were merely compiling this
list of names.
JS: If I could just stick one little thing here. Apparently none of sitting here submitted names, so
who are the people that did?
CH Joann, you submitted a name to us, and that's on the list.
LP: I know Riverbend Blacksmiths have been at our last two awards banquets. There are subtle
differences in first and second generation drafts of the list. We'll come up with a thorough list ad
we'll date it. We'll comeback to this at the next meeting, if not sooner. I don't believe that there
are any committee meetings reports? Are there any CoA approvals, in house ones?
CH: We'll do our quarterly report on those.
T
w r,' � . .
2. Correspondence
Director Hostetler presented correspondence from The Holland Historic District Commission of
Holland, MI. The note thanks HPC Staff for their assistance and proposes a visit to tour our
districts, meet Commissioners, and observe a meeting. Our colleagues from Holland will be
visiting South Bend on September 18, 2006. President Patrick reviewed previous plans to
reschedule the September meeting, but has decided to leave the meeting as scheduled. Martha
Choitz, Mary Jane Chase, Jerry Ujdak and HPC stiff will assist with hosting and visit with our
visitors from Holland.
Catherine shared a letter from Ted Foti of Memorial Hospital inviting "hospital neighbors" to a
meeting on August 26` 2006, loam, at the NNN Office on Portage Avenue to discuss the parking
situation facing Memorial and its surrounding neighborhoods.
C. STAFF REPORTS
1. Director's Report — Catherine Hostetler
Distributed to Commissioners.
2. Assistant Director's Report — Amy Herdman
Amy distributed the Six at Risk Report for Commission review, including color photos of the
properties on the list. Amy specifically thanked Commissioner Zeiger for his assistance and
guidance in the preparation of the report and the accompanying press release. -
Commissioners were given 2 pieces of HPC note cards that were recently delivered to the office,
bearing the new HPC logo.
Commissioners were also given samples of "Historic Preservation Nuts" the new confection
created with South Bend Chocolate as a fundraiser for the HPC.
Commissioners approved an invitation for Ellen Harper of Main Street Indiana to South Bend for
an informational presentation on bringing that program to South Bend.
Moved: JU Second: JS Vote: 7 -0 Unanimous
A discussion followed regarding the.pcogress of a project at the Firehouse on Hill Street. Greg
Kil has been working on the addition•fo the building and won the praise of the Commissioners
that have seen the work thus far.
3. Legal Report — Shawn Peterson
None given as Counsel was absent from the meeting.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
None discussed.
V. NEW BUSINESS
Martha expressed concern that the Portage Avenue corridor is being "lost", and encouraged the
Commission to do something to save the area. She further clarified the area that she was referring
to as both sides of Portage Avenue from Marquette St. North to Riverview Cemetery.
President Patrick moved this issue into the Districts Committee (chaired by Martha Choitz) for
further review and consideration. President Patrick asked to have a preliminary report prepared
for the September meeting.
VI. HEARING OF VISITORS
Guest Don Sporleder was recognized to speak.
Unfortunately due to paper shuffling, and other background disturbances, Mr. Sporleder's
comments are unintelligible.
ADJOURNMENT 8:40 pm
7
Attest:
Al (�� L
Mary JanlChase
Secretary
Historic Preservation Commission
South Bend & St. Joseph County
Date
SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
AUGUST 21, 2006 MEETING
GUESTS: PLEASE SIGN THIS LIST SO THAT
YOUR PRESENCE CAN BE NOTED FOR OUR
MINUTES
Print Name Address Signature
0.0- n, jj� (p 9 1 qt S-�3