Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
June 2008
OtAlsslovr AGENDA OF THE JUNE 169 2008_ o COMMISSION MEETING Regular Meeting THIRTEETH FLOOR- ROOM 1308 County -City Building MONDAY, June 16,2008 7:OOPM I. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL II. PUBLIC HEARING A. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 1. 510 Lindsey COA #2008-0512 Chapin Park 2. 713 W. LaSalle COA#2008-0521 Local Landmark t' 3. 1031 E. Jefferson COA#2008-0523 Local Landmark 4. 1329 E. Washington COA# 2008-0523A Local Landmark 5. Leeper Park West COA# 2008-0529 Local Landmark 6. 710 Park Avenue COA#2008-0604 LL Chapin Park 7. 215 W. No. Shore COA#2008-0605 W. North Shore 8. 818 Leland COA#2008-0605A Chapin Park III. REGULAR BUSINESS A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 19, 2008 May 23, 2008 April 16, 2008 5:15 April 16, 2008 5:45 B. TREASURER'S REPORT Location Report C. STAFF REPORTS 1. Correspondence 2. C of A Approvals 3. Directors. Report . 4. Assistant Director Report 5. Legal Counsel D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: 1. President's Report IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS VI. HEARING OF VISITORS AND ADJOURNMENT 10 STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Date: June 3, 2008 Application Number: 2008-0512 Property Location: 510 Lindsey Property Owner: City of South Bend Landmark or District Designation: Chapin Park LHD Rating: non contributing STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This American Foursquare was built in 1903. Clifford and Esther Snell were the first residents of this house. Clifford was a bookkeeper for an oil company. The Snell family resided there until 1932. APPLICATION ITEMS: The City of South Bend plans to make selective repairs to the property at 510 Lindsey as part of the Dollar House Program. The City is requesting permission to do the following: 1. Replace all windows with Kolbe and Kolbe'wood sash kit replacement windows. 2. Remove the concrete steps/porch on the west side of the property, which was previously used as the entrance to the second floor apartment. (See Attachment B for photo of porch) 3. Remove wrought iron railing and posts from the front porch and replace with railing and posts in a style similar to surrounding architecture. (See attachment B for example) 4. Remove existing aluminum siding and install LP Brand smooth "Smart Siding" that will match the reveal of the original siding. (See Attachment B for example of Smart Siding") 5. Repair crack in northeast corner of foundation by tuck -pointing. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: I. The Environment B. Building Site, Landscaping & Accessories Recommended: New site work should be based upon actual knowledge of the past appearance of the property found in photographs, drawings and newspapers. New site work should also be appropriate to existing surrounding site elements in scale, type and appearance.... II Existing Structures A. Building Materials Original exterior building materials in the district include brick, stucco, clapboard, wood shingles and brick or stone masonry. In some instances vinyl, composite and aluminum siding have been applied over the original material Required: Original exterior building materials shall be retained when possible. Deterioration of wood materials shall be presented though repair, cleaning and painting. The existing architectural detail around windows, porches, doors and eaves shall be retained or replaced by replicas of the same design when deteriorated beyond repair.... Recommended: Whenever possible, the original building materials should be restored. When maintaining or repairing original siding is not feasible aluminum, vinyl or composite siding may be used. When used over wood surfaces, the siding should be the same size and style as the original wood. Every effort should be made to retain original trim around windows, doors, cornices, gables, eaves and other architectural features.... C. Windows and Doors: Required: Original windows and doors shall be retained including sashes, sills, shutters, decorative glass, pediments, hoods and hardware. When deteriorated beyond repair, they shall be replaced with units and trim resembling the original. Prohibited: Original doors, windows and hardware shall not be discarded when they can be restored and reused in place. New windows and door openings, which would alter the scale and proportion of the building may not be introduced. Inappropriate new window and door features such as metal, vinyl or fiberglass awnings, hoods or aluminum insulating glass combinations that require removal of original windows and doors shall not be installed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of items 2,3 & 5. Item 1, staff recommends that the original windows be retained as they appear to be in good condition and that new storms and screens be approved. Staff recommends approval of item 5 with the condition that if any architectural features, decorative siding and trim, etc., are uncovered with the removal of the aluminum siding that they be left exposed or replicated with the LP Smartside products. r� Application - FOR - Certificate of Appropriateness Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County 125 S. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend, Indiana 46601 Mailing Address: County -City Building, South Bend, Indiana 46601 Phone: 574235-9798 • Fax: 574-235-9578 • Email: SBSJCHPC@co.st joseph.in us Website: http://wwwst osephcountymdiana.com/s chp/mdex.html OFFICE USE ONLY »»/j» DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES CONTIMINED THIS {BBOX >>>>>> OFFICE USE ONLY Date Received 05• � d-'..L�0� Application Number �Q o b_ O" t� Past Reviews: ❑ YES (Date of Inst xeaiew) Staff Approval authorized by: Title: • Historic Commission Review Date: �. t [] Local Landmark [Local Historic District (Name)�yv� National Landmark F} National Register District (Name) Certificate of Appropriateness: n Denied E] Tabled [] Sent To Committee n Approved and Issued DATE Address of Property for proposed work: [b (_ 1 I� L :_ 'c::5MF4T Street Number and Street Name Name of Property Owner(s): (Please Print) Ct-rq C5F 54r -v -JT14 Address of Property Owner (s): IF)CO C C5_ -t tT`I Contractor(s) Name: K", 1 1T)F=V.1T1 Fri Ik-T- _T_H t.:` _1 E -AE -r Contract Company Name: Contractor Address: City: Phone: Current Use of Building. iiflt i� t�t"i' (Single Family — Multi -Family — Commercial — Government — Industrial — Vacant — etc.) Type of Building Construction: \^--Iocj� (Wood Frame — Brick — Stone — Steel — Concrete — Other) Proposed Work: n In-kind [:] Landscape E] New [( Replacement (not in-kind) E] Demolition (more than one box may be cheaW) Description of Proposed Work: Owner/Contractor: Fax: Q35__9L0Ci_' e-mail G��<�" �C]tstti l►�1•( ( ('17 is office will correspond with only one designee) Liz- �,AAr i�, u-1 and/or —TA-1✓l W — APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE — Attachment A Description of Proposed Work The City of South Bend plans to make selective repairs to the property at 510 Lindsey as part of the Dollar House Program. The City is requesting permission to do the following: ■ Replace all windows with Kolbe and Kolbe wood sash kit replacement windows ■ Remove the concrete steps / porch on the west side of the property, which was previously used as the entrance to the second floor apartment. (See attachment B for photo of porch.) ■ Remove the wrought iron railing and posts from the front porch and replace with railing and posts in a style similar to surrounding architecture (See attachment B for example.) ■ Remove existing aluminum siding, and install LP Brand smooth "Smart Siding" that will match the reveal of the original siding. (See attachment B for example of Smart Siding.) ■ Repair crack in northeast corner of foundation by tuck -pointing. Attachment B Photographs of 510 Lindsey 510 Lindsey Remove the wrought iron railing and posts from the front porch and re- place with railing and posts similar to style in photo below. icemove the concrete seeps i pUrch / awning on the west side of the prop- erty, which was previously used as the entrance to the second floor apartment. ill r Sk I ��ZN :1111WHill kill III V�e ' Lap Siding - LP Page 1 of 7 � � Q All LP@ SmartSide@ Lap Siding comes pre -primed in 16 - foot lengths for fewer seams. And like all our LP SmartSide products, it's treated with SmartGuard@ to help prevent damage from fungal decay and termites. ARCHITECTURAL COLLECTION CEDAR COLONIAL BEADED LAP tr 5 150W ct.4c>c�" _,., Ctct nett) (-ti3mm) I f Fiber Substrate QUICK LINKS TO PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS Architectural Collection Colonial Beaded Cedar P Architectural Collection Colonial Beaded Smooth i Architectural Collection 12" Bold Profiles i Architectural Collection 16" Bold Profiles o Architectural Collection Self -Aliening o Precision Series Cedar s Precision Series Smooth Foundations Cedar i Foundations Smooth ILength Nominal Width . Nominal Thickness Actual Width Actual Thickness 16' (192") (4$77 mm) 8" 7/16" 8" (203 mm) -400"(10 mm) ARCHITECTURAL COLLECTION http://www.1pcorp.com/sidingtrim/lpsmartside/products/lap.aspx 6/3/2048 Lap Siding - LP COLONIAL BEADED SMOOTH LAP W« IS/50 t n.G.. _ (lo rnm) I(2tr; mm, Fiber Substrate Length I Nominal Width Nominal Thickness 16'(192") (4877 mm) ` g„ 7/16„ 16'(192") (4877 mm) 9„ 7/16" ARCHITECTURAL COLLECTION 12" BOLD PROFILES 5150YEAR Y!7 12' TRIPLE 4' SOLD PROFILES 134 k" I ry1mt [ant) f 12' DOUBLES" BOLD PROFILES is (.:tostnml Page 2 of 7 Actual Width I Actual Thickness 8" (203 mm) 9" (209 mm) .400" (10 mm) .400" (10 mm) http://www.1pcorp.com/sidingtrim/lpsmartside/products/lap.aspx 6/3/2008 11 r -4 Lap Siding - LP Fiber substrate Length Nominal Width Nominal Thickness 16'(192") (4877 mm) 12" 1/2 ft ARCHITECTURAL COLLECTION 16" BOLD PROFILES IEAR 5%50wmanD IVQUAO4' SOLD PROFILES M )-4(-W (12 nu u) M9(A" (4bG Rett') 16" TRIPLE S' SOLD PROFILES 1 I o.4WI (32In�t�y 16" DOUBLE 8' SOLD PROFILES j ir.4(u�" (ts utrrsl Fiber Substrate Page 3 of 7 Actual Width IActual Thickness 117/8" (302 mm) .46o" (12 mm) Length Nominal Width Nominal Thickness k Actual Width Actual Thickness 16' (1927) (4877 mm) 16" 1/2" 15,.968" (4o6 mm) 460" (12 mm) ARCHITECTURAL COLLECTION SELF -ALIGNING LAP 15- /5a:, us+uzcu http://www.1pcorp.com/sidingtrim/lpsmartside/products/lap.aspx 6/3/2008 a Lap Siding - LP 3. 1„111 IT Fiber Substrate Length ( Nominal Width Nominal Thickness 161(192") (4877 mm) ( 811 1/2" PRECISION SERIES CEDAR LAP 5OWu�m �a•„„��'"gym 'e� �.,,.,,;��;�.�-, M" LAP S10MG 7M6" LAPSIDING i 87-7 7.871-. 118775- (149mm. s001n,n. gti21 mm) min) L ! 01,127 (1o,nm) ��n :1t.j (3 nun) , 1 i " t W%vI 1 knvl SMARTLIOCK LAP SIDING Y �� n,1"'Sm1nm1 as. Crest I5, N71 ;'1 Strand Substrate Length Nominal Width ( Nominal Thickness 161(192") (4877 mm) 6" 13/8" Page 4 of 7 Actual Width I Actual Thickness 7 7/8" (200 mm) ( .46o" (12 mm) Actual Width 5 7/8" (149 mm) Actual Thickness l 324" (8 mm) http://www.1pcorp.com/sidingtrim/lpsmartside/products/lap.aspx 6/3/2008 .1 ,I Lap Siding - LP Page 5 of 7 16'(192") (4877 mm) 811 3/8" 7 7/8" (too mm) .324" (8 mm) 16'(1927) (4877 mm) 12 3/8" 117/8"(302 MM) .324" (8 mm) 16'(192") (4877 mm) 6" 7/1600, 5 7/8" (149 mm) .377" (10 mm) 16'(192")* (4877 mm) 8" 7/16" 7 7/8" (200 MM) -377" (10 mm) 16'(192") (4877 mm) 12 7/16" 117/8"(302mm) .377" (10 mm) *Available in self -aligning SmartLock siding. PRECISION SERIES SMOOTH LAP YEAR UUITZD S/50 WAIN&NTV %W"00or 318" LAP 510114 7116"LAP SIDING S 7! i. 7.6"r 5".11-a 75 (149 MnL 200 "Ard-302 30m) 7.117 (-11VIM Irun) 'H7(-1100srun) —(go sum) t Strand Substrate Length Nominal Width Nominal Thickness Actual Width Actual Thickness 16'(192") (4877 mm) 6" 7/16" 5 7/8" (149 mm) .377" (10 mm) 16'(192") (4877 mm) 8" 7/16" 7 7/8" (200 MM) .377" (10 m1n) W(192") (4877 n1m) 12 7/16" 117/8" (302 MM) -371" (10 mm) FOUNDATIONS CEDAR LAP YEAR UUMD [S/ SO WAXAMM http://www.lpcorp.com/sidingtrim/lpsmartside/products/lap.aspx 6/3/2008 Lap Siding - LP Page 6 of 7 (111 Iain) -IT 148".'(149 juju. 2uF j MILLI, 241 nnn, :2112 julit) Fiber Substrate Length Nominal Width I Nominal Thickness Actual Width I Actual Thickness 16'(192") (4877 mm) 6" 7/i6" 1 5 7/8" (149 mm) I .400" (comm) 16'(192") (4877 mm) 8" 7/1611 ( 7 7/8" (200 mm) I .400" (10mm) 16'(192") (4877 mm) 91/2" 17/16" 91/2" (241 mm) I .400" (10mm) 16'(192") (4877 mm) I 12 ( 7/16" 1117/8" (302 mm) I .400" (10mm) FOUNDATIONS SMOOTH LAP 5/SCIS xµ cl.400' (111 Intl)) t tilm,2nQnuu.:; J ., Lap Siding - LP Page 7 of 7 16'(4877 mm) 6" 7/i6" 1 5 7/8" (149 mm) .400" (comm) 16'(4877 mm) 811 7/i6" 7 7/8" (200 mm) .400" (10mm) 16'(4877 mm) 12" 7/16" 117/8" (got mm) .400" (10mm) tc) 20o8 Louisiana-Pacific Corporation x. http://www.1pcorp.com/sidingtrim/lpsmartside/products/lap.aspx 6/3/2008 SMARTS lEGENERAL NAILING (CONTINUED) • There are no National Standards for wood composite substrate trim • LP SmartSide trim and fascia can be applied directly over materials such as siding, or nailed directly to structural members up to 24" O.C. • Do not let trim contact masonry. • Minimum 6" clearance must be maintained between trim and finish grade. • Trim applied adjacent to porches, patios, walks, etc. must have a clearance of at least 3/8" above any surface where water might collect. The surface must be sloped or otherwise designed to provide proper drainage so the siding is at no time directly exposed to standing water. • LP SmartSide trim and fascia are not designed for (a) use as siding; or (b) structural applications and should not be used as a structural member in construction such as a trellis, railing, fencing. • A non -corrosive drip -edge or drip -cap must be applied at bottom edge of roofing where it meets the fascia. • Trim and fascia must not be applied to green or crooked structural framing members. Do not apply trim and/or fascia over rain soaked or buckled sheathing materials. u� Moisture control and moisture vapor control are critical elements of proper housing design. Check your local building codes for application procedures for handling moisture and moisture vapor in your area. Follow all applicable building code specifications relating to prevention of moisture intrusion into the wall assembly. LP SmartSide trim and fascia is a wood product, and, as with all wood products, must be kept free from constant sources of moisture. Lack of proper ventilation; exposure to repetitive sources of water such as sprinklers, condensation, inadequate flashing; improper sealing; or failure to follow common building practices that prevent moisture intrusion into the wall -system; may cause damage, and will void the warranty. • LP will assume no responsibility for water penetration. • For the cleanest cut and longer blade life, a fine-tooth carbide tipped blade is recommended. • LP" SmartSide" trim and fascia are manufactured with a special edge coating which reduces moisture -related issues. Ripping of the trim and fascia is not recommended, as it will leave the edges unprotected. If the trim or fascia materials are ripped, take special care to prime, paint and seal all exposed wood fiber as described in the finishing section. Use a minimum 8d, corrosion resistant (according to ASTM 641), box style nail, with a minimum 1/4" diameter head Penetrate studs or studs and wood sheathing a combined 1". • Leave 3/16" gap where trim butts into other materials and at butt joints, miter joints and ends. Where edges of trim meet siding material, windows, doors or other finished openings, leave a minimum 3/16" gap to allow for proper sealing. Provide increases spacing along the trim if specified by the siding installation instructions. • Leave 1" clearance between trim and roofing materials at roof rake. • For edge -nailing, all nail holes must be pre -drilled. Do not attempt to edge -nail without pre -drilling. • When applied as rake, corner or band board, nails must be spaced no further than 12" apart on alternating edges. Nails must be at least 3/e" from the edge. CONDITION CORRECTION Snug ® OK ta Flush (Cl OK Visible fiber ® Paint Countersunk'/16"-1/e" _ t1a® Seal with caulking—® Countersunk more Seal with caulk and — than 1/e" lley re -nail WINoows, DOORS & OPENINGS • All openings must be sealed and flashed in a manner that prevents moisture intrusion or water buildup. Several examples that accomplish this are shown. BUTT JOINT DETAIL 0* O O O W I/%• O O O O INSIDE CORNER DETAIL Trim must extend beyond face of siding. Minimum 3/16" Gap Sealant /" \ Gap � TRIM - ? Sin OUTSIDE CORNER DETAIL i Minimum 2" Gap 3/16" overlap behind trim ALTERNATE OUTSIDE CORNER DETAIL DOORS Fr WINDOWS Minimum 3/16" Gap /Code Approved Flashing ^- Trim Nail Fin (do not damage) Glass Minimum Trim must extend beyond 3/16" Gap face of siding. • HORIZONTAL TRIM Siding Code Approved Flashing Trim Siding GAPS, SEALANT Ei JOINTS • Seal all gaps with a high-quality, non -hardening, paintable sealant with a minimum stated service life of 30 years. Follow the sealant manufacturer's instructions for application. •GABLE ENDS At gable ends, a backer board (such as a barge rafter) should be used under fascia to provide maximum support along the length of the product (see Diagram A). • If LP SmartSide trim and fascia is installed directly to lookouts on an overhanging rake, the lookouts must be installed edgewise and must be spaced no wider than 24" O.C. (see Diagram B). DIAGRAM A DIAGRAM B N n rafter d or verge er e rafter 2x or 4x lookouts DO common rafter ge rafter its the some rs&016'or 24'0.C. provides strength and nailing for boxedTn take Install drip -edge or' drip -cap to prevent.41`:v' �_ water bulldup behind w$ fascia and trim. FASCIA DETAIL FASCIA SOFFIT TRIM • Prime and paint all exposed surfaces. • Apply finish coat as soon as possible or within 180 days of application. • High-quality acrylic latex paint, specially formulated for use on wood and engineered wood substrates, is highly recommended. Semi -gloss or satin finish oil or alkyd paints are acceptable. For flat alkyd paint, please check with the coating manufacturer for their recommendations for use on composite wood siding. • Follow the coating manufacturer's application and maintenance instructions. 3 DO NOT USE A r. • Sem 1-transpare nt and transparent stains. • Shake and shingle paints. • Vinyl -based resin formulas such as vinyl acetate, PVA, vinyl acetate/acrylic copolymer paints. APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS (CONT.) • Store off the ground on a flat surface, under a roof or separate waterproof covering. • Keep trim and fascia clean and dry. inspect prior to application. • Allow trim and fascia to adjust to atmospheric conditions before application. r=� STORE TRIM FLAT ON STRINGERS The Louisiana-Pacific Corporation ("LP") LP SmartSidetrim and fascia (the "Products") limited warranty (the "Warranty") applies only to structures on which the Products have been applied, finished and maintained in accordance with the published application, finishing and maintenance instructions in effect at the time of application. The failure to follow such application, finishing or maintenance Instructions will void the Warranty as to the portion of the Products affected by the variance (the "Affected Products"). LP assumes no liability for any loss or damage sustained by the Affected Products and is expressly released by the purchaser or owner from any such loss or liability. Any modification of the Warranty's application, finishing or maintenance requirements is void and unenforceable unless approved in writing prior to application by the Siding Business Manager or his designee and a member of the LP Legal Department. For a copy of the warranty or for installation and technical support, visit the LP SmartSide product support Web site at: www.lpcorp/smartside.com or for additional support call 800AS0.6106. WARRANTY REMEDIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE IF REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT FOLLOWED. SMARTSIDE` TRIM 6 SIDING BUILDING PRODUCTS 0 2007 Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, All rights reserved. LP and SmartSide are registered trademarks of Louisiana-Pacific Corporation. Printed in U.S.A. _ NOTE: Louisiana-Pacific Corporation periodically updates and revises Its product information. To verify that this version is current, call 800-4S0-6106. LPZB0024 STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Date: June 4, 2008 Application Number: 2008-0521 Property Location: 713 W. La Salle Property Owner: Naomi Cassier Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark Rating: Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: The Neitzel House was built in 1884 and re-classified as Free Classic in the 2005 City of South Bend Survey. _ It is a 2 storey clapboard residence with an irregular plan. It has a decorated cornice and the attic storey is of wood shingles. It was built by Barnhard Neitzel, a South Bend carpenter. The residence is a good example of what a carpenter. could do with pattern books of architectural styles which were available to the public at that time. APPLICATION ITEMS: House has lead base paint. Cover house with cement board, replace gutters, fascia and frieze board. Replace three windows per attached (Exhibit A). This is a HUD project. The intention of the cement board is to replicate the structure of the home. Also the ornateness of the house will remain the same. Also°please read letter from homeowner (Exhibit B) LOCAL LANDMARK STANDARDS: Group B Standards A. Maintenance The maintenance of any historical structure or site shall in no way involve any direct physical change except for general cleaning and upkeep of the landmark. The Commission shall encourage the proper maintenance of all structures or sites. C. Renovation and Additions 2. Material Additions and improvements involving any new material in the landmark should be of the same materials the original. It should be the same size and texture. An alternative material may be allowed if it duplicates the original b. siding materials—The Commission discourages the covering or alteration of original materials with additional siding. Structures already sided with incompatible materials should be returned to a siding similar to the original when renovation is considered. RECOMMENDATION: This is a proposed HUD Lead Abatement Program project in which the entire house is required to be encapsulated. The HUD Lead Abatement Program does not allow for a partial covering of the house. Therefore staff cannot recommend approval since the cement board cannot replicate all of the architectural features (Exhibit C) and trims that are on this building. With regard to the windows the applicant did not realize that Window World's proposal was for all of the windows so only the three appeared on the COA application. The proposal is to replace all of the windows in the house with vinyl replacement windows and wrap the sills and casings as part of the HUD lead abatement project. The Staff does not recommend approval. The windows are in very good condition and do not need to be replaced. The only reason for this COA is so that the applicant can avail themselves of HUD grant money instead of painting the house. JUN -6-2008 10:57A FROM:PORTAGE REALTY 2727758 TO:92359578 P.3 Start Date: Approx. Completion: Customer: Naomi Casaier Window World of Michiana 1'2748 Sandy Drive • Unit 109 • Granger, IN 46530. (574),277-3280 - (574) 277.3296 Fax Install Address: 713 W. LaSalle Street Bill Address: South Bend, Indiana 46628 Phone (h) Phone (w) .E -mall WINDOWS * Install 'a aeries -4000 white doable hung- vi.a l.. wiado,r;r * All windows will-.havo..#pow ,E .argon 1/e . insulated glassf, .1/2 screen * (1) Bow window t#' front, 4a00m4:ats ilnst;al,led# Loa E Argon (1) Oval & (1) .Full ' Circls in white, * All windows will hava'the sill's and casingh trimmed out in a PVC coil, Color is ( �. * Lifetime warranty on labor and material * Total coat is. S.1.3.6.20.00 Nota: Any bad wood will be replaced with new and all interior trim will repain the same. You the buyer may cancel this transaction at any time prior to midnight of the thlyd�jbusinoss dayy after the -.date of this transaction. Notice of cancellation must be in writing postmarked no later than midnight.of the foliowingj Ird business day. THIS IS A CUSTOM ORDER NOT FOR RESALEI EACH WINDOW WORLD IS INDEPENDENTLY OWNED AND OPERATED Customer shall pay all of Window World's expenses incurred to enforce or collect any and all indebtedness and other obligations under this contract, including, without limitation, all attorney fees. Owner Date Dennis Papczynski 6.5-06 Salesman Date Owner Date Granger EW SP 4-09 White Copy - Original . Yellow Copy - File Pink Copy - Customer JUN -6-2008 10:58A FROM:PORTACE REALTY 2727758 TO:92359578 P.5 i , - SPECIAL SHAPE WINDOW - GRID CONFIGURATIONS Ov - oval 'Mrs is no OY 1 I I ' 0" (Fro) OV* (F/D) 04►4 (FIC) 01-8 tit ovIs (F) aur (F) ova (FIC) FC - Full Circle_��` 00 M1 (FIC) FO -2 (F/D) FC -3 (FID) FC -4 (FIC) FC -5 (FIC) NOTE: (F) *flat grids only. (FIC)• Flat or contour grids, must specify when ordering. (D) «Docratita - aety white or batge, additional ton day lead time. gp Cali our CUSTOMER SERVICE Hotlinal 866.257-4336 Prices subjectto change without nodes. .4r p:o�o ct car.11p : atious must be ordema as vievied front die exterior, 0 May 14, 2008 The National Historical Society South Bend, Indiana 46601 Dear Friends at the Historical Society, Recently, I applied for a city grant to put siding on my house at 713 W. LaSalle Ave, with the help of my property management company's representative, Sharon Czarnecki. I have just learned that this request was turned down because of the concerns of the Historical Society that my house is an historical landmark. I understand and agree with the mission of the historical society to preserve the history and character of our South Bend downtown. However, as a homeowner, I find myself in a difficult position in trying to keep up financially with the needs and costs of preservation for the home and the area. I bought the home because I love both the historical craftsmanship and beauty of the home and because I am committed to the neighborhood and area. But I have had to move from South Bend for employment reasons. I have tried to sell the home to someone else who would appreciate its value. After two years on the market, I had no takers, only one bid that came in at 20 per cent below the market appraisal value. I have been subjected to a very high tax rate as a nonresident of the house, increasing the costs for me of owning the home. As a landlord, I try to keep the home in good condition for the tenants, as my property management company can confirm. I have made necessary repairs, upgraded the heating system and added air conditioning, replaced appliances, and generally tried to keep the house in good shape. All this comes at considerable costs, which is not fully covered by the revenues from rental income. It has not always been easy to attract tenants because of perceptions about the safety and quality of life in the neighborhood, and the house has at times sat vacant. Given these challenges, partly due to a skewed property tax system, partly due to larger challenges of urban regeneration and historical preservation in a town with extensive suburban housing construction, partly due to a nationwide market slump in housing, it is very difficult in South Bend as a property owner of an historical landmark to maintain the house in the conditions that either I, the city, or the Historical Society would aspire to. Every year, I lose money on this house. I have sought quotes for painting the house with the assistance of the property management company. It is very expensive; it costs more than 10 percent of the house's value to paint it, a sum that is high in absolute terms as well as relative terms. As the sole breadwinner for my family, covering my own family's living expenses as well as trying to keep the house in South Bend in good condition while trying to sell it, I have been unable to afford the cost of repainting the house. It was for this reason, as well as the problem of the age of the house and its corresponding risks of lead paint that we were interested in the grant program to assist 0 homeowners. in putting siding on their houses. The city program also offers assistance replacing the front window, which would be another great reat improvement to the house. If the Historical Society does not agree to enabling property owners of historical landmarks to participate in the city's assistance program, can it directly offer me any assistance? If not, can it reconsider its decision to exclude homeowners such as myself from participating in this program? I simply cannot afford to put this investment in the house. Would anybody agree that leaving the house in the current condition, in need of a paint job, is in the best interest of preserving the neighborhood and the home? I would ask the Historical Society to reconsider their decision or to propose some alternatives for helping me to cope With a house that is costing me money- every year but which I cannot sell. I thank you in advance for your guidance in this matter. Please do share any information and thoughts with Sharon Czarnecki who has been my trusted representative in helping me care for this house..' Kind regards, Naomi Cassirer 24 Grand Rue 1296 Coppet Switzerland 713 W. La Salle, May 5, 2008 C- STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Date: June 4, 2008 Application Number: 2008-0523 Property Location: 1031 E. Jefferson Property Owner: Don Dietz Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark Rating: Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: . This property was part of the tract of land owned by John Mohler Studebaker since the 1880s. In 1899 he commissioned architects Dirharn and Schneider to design this thirteen room (originally it had nine rooms) Queen Anne Style house and then sold it to his nephew, George Mohler Witwer on 1899. George Witwer was married to Mary E. Violette of Elkhart in 1895. He served as a private secretary to his uncle and as a consultant to the Studebaker family after his uncle's death. This Studebaker-Witwer House was reclassified as a Free Classic in the 2005 City of South Bend Survey. APPLICATION ITEMS: Replace wooden stockade fence with new design (Exhibit A), 6 foot tall fence. In kind materials. Repair of clapboards in-kind on carriage house. LOCAL LANDMARK STANDARDS GROUP B Building Site and Landscaping: Required: Major landscaping items, trees, fencing, walkways; private yard lights signs (house number) and benches which reflect the property's history and development shall be retained... Recommended: New site work should be based upon actual knowledge of the past appearance of the property found in photographs, drawings and newspapers.... RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the replacement of the stockade fence with the new design. The new design is more sympathetic to the architectural style of the house and will be in the same location (Exhibit B). Staff recommends the approval of the in-kind_ repair of the clapboards on the carriage house as well. -0 - C4 4o -t Application - FOR - Certificate of Appropriateness Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County 125 S. Wayette Blvd., South Bend, Indiana 46601 Mailing Address: County City Building, South Bend, Indiana 46601 Phone: 574-235-9798 • Fax: 574-235-9578 • Email:- SBSJC 1PC@co.st joseph.inus Website: http://www.sgosephcountyindiana.com/s chp/index.html OFFICE USE ONLY »»n» DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES COMAINENO HIS BOX >"" OFFICE USE ONLY Date Received OD. 2A. 20 Application Number Q (- O Past Reviews: 0 YES (Date of fast m iew) [:] NO Staff Approval authorized by: Title: Historic Commission Review Date: 12/Local Landmark R Local Historic District (Name) National Landmark E] National Register District (Name) Certificate of Appropriateness: Ej Denied [] Tabled F� Sent To Committee [] Approved and Issued DATE Address of Property for proposed work: 10 V 1 t P P P Street Number and Street Name Name of Property Owner(s): (Please Print) Address of Property Ow rrY(�,$)). CAMO ,e � C Vv Contractor(s) Name: U/ V V t�r& Vb w Contract Company Name: ( Contractor Address: City: Current Use of Building: le Fart ily — Multi -family — Cc Type of Building Construction: ucc 1 0 DIVU (Wood Frame — Proposed Work: [2/ln-kind [E/Landscape ❑ New4 (more than one lax may be checked) � t Dc cription o P o ed or +1p1' qf�" i -Tv (n Tky, AAj w4of Owner/Contra r: x. e-mail ( is c wdI n r wi r ly on cignce) and/or Phone: `—^Gov^en�n 6dustrial — v nt — etc.)Uft tco N a re — Steep Concrete — O) CQa[�i - 1 ~placement (not in-kind) ❑ Demolition 1 — APPLICATION.REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE — LAWSON-FISHER ASSOCIATES P.C. job # Sheetof 525 WEST WASHINGTON AVENUE By nate SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46601 Cled Date Project Subject 4A-4 .... . .. .... .... ........ . ... .. . . ...... -1 - --4 4 J .......... 1- 4. IT Pr -4 t F 4 4-- t J _J_ .4 till, A_ A.. — . .. ....... r . ... ... ..... 4- _44A 4- .. . ... ..... j _"�+ J tt _44 .... . ... . . M7 t e, T -71 T +1 r 4- 7 7-f1 J 4. i... 44 t T t -4- --a _'144 .. .. .... ....... .. f f T _4 4 --- ---- -4 -4 1+ L __F_ 4_1 4, _7 + - - ----- 4-i LAWSON-FISHER ASSOCIATES P.C. 525 WEST WASHINGTON AVENUE SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46601 Project Subject Job # Sheet—of— By Date Ck'd Date �7_717 I -J t 4 A t + J A, _4 4 J 71 4 1 ,.,...„-..,-i,..e—�,...i_.�`r-»,:,..�....w.y i..a- ...,.,-., i..«..__•-...:,.,._,«.�....�. I,..-,....,- .... .....®:......-_,_�..r,�. f �,,..w.,,tw..c..},..c.. ...a.. --...,n,».;» .,. ' «.:-m-...,a..�<...� � .,,w.,., . :,< � ,........�.,,•.aM<{i...: - f.... ... 7- `77:�t.�-7:7 ------- gg r. J7... -41- j f _4 -A I V-' Ev! 6 wk 4 . 4 .. . STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Date: June 5, 2008 Application Number: 2008-0523A Property Location: 1329 E. Washington Street Property Owner: Kathleen and Mark Neal Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark Rating: Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: The house at 1329 E. Washington was designed by Austin and Shambleau for Joseph Maxwell Stephenson in 1923. The house has been re- . classified as Tudor Revival in the 2005 City Survey. Mr. Stephenson lived in the house until his death in 1946. The house was then sold to Eugene O'Brien, Vice -President of the O'Brien Varnish Company. The home was landmarked on October 25, 1982. APPLICATION ITEMS: Replace 11 Wood Casement windows I 18"x48" with 11 new Marvin Alum. Clad casement windows with SDL (divided lite) to sit in existing openings, clad color to match existing (dark brown). See Exhibits A -C and Photographs GROUP B STANDARDS C. Renovations and Additions 2. Material: Additions and improvements involving any new material in the landmark should be of the same material as the original. It should be the same size and texture., An alternative material may be allowed if it duplicates the original. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. The Marvin windows duplicate the casements with the SDL (Simulated Divided Light with space bar installed between the glass creating the essence of Authentic Divided Lites p.44) The house already has aluminum clad wood windows in a number of locations including a large arched kitchen window so these will match the other windows. So, aluminum clad windows have been allowed in the past. The Group B Standards allow for alternative materials and it uses the term "should" which allows for compromise. See Definitions on page 2. (Exhibit D) q.4 22'�1-2- OIa50 Application - FOR - Certificate of Appropriateness Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County 125 S. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend, Indiana 46601 Mailing Address: County -City Building, South Bend, Indiana 46601 Phone: 57¢235-9798 • Fax: 574235-9578 • Email: SBSJCHPC@co.st josephin.us Website: http://www.sgosephcountyindiam.com/sjchp/index.html OFFICE USE ON1,Y »»» DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES CONVIINEDXVTHISS BOX""" O ICE USE ONLY Date Received lib•��. Q-00(?) Application Number - � V - ODE� Past Reviews: [2/YES (Date of Last Review) Staff Approval authorized by: Historic Commission Review Date: 3 -Mdkzi 02 Do '? ❑ NO [Local Landmark ❑ Local Historic District (Name) ❑ National Landmark ❑ National Register District (Name) Certificate of Appropriateness: Title: ❑ Denied ❑ Tabled ❑ Sent To Committee ❑ Approved and Issued DATE Address of Property for proposed work: L,2 2- 9 G. /n)a.,4, k - & n Street Number andName Name of Property Owner(s): (Please Print) .�, `r /�c���pr� :n �to 'I, i Address of Property Owner(s): Contractor(s) Name: �� (1517W. Contract Company Name: etq (I C_9 -r -/v _?L to ti )�1 "t� Contractor Address: / ; r 6r- city: r_City: Sec) u ON Rp,.,N Phone: Current Use of Building: ----51" I,. (Single Family - Mult3amily - Commercial - Government - Industrial - Vacant - etc.) Type of Building Construction: Mtne9r/ (Wood Frame - Brick - Stone - Steel - Concrete - Other) Proposed Work: ❑ In-kind ❑ Landscape ❑ New ;K Replacement (not in-kind) ❑ Demolition (more than one box may be checked) Description of Proposed Work: _90d 0 / ctr,n f l Wc2oje�Qr .�• i. P „ u9 H �.n ci1 S ",'-it. _sL74. C12'-d.'jej 1.fP��� Owner/Contractor: F 'h' _ e-mail h r- 1 t+Y- (This office d 'th ly ne designee `- -7 and/or — APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE — - w Marvin Windows & Doors, MDS Version 17.0„ MDS RB Tabs Version 17.0, MDS RB Code Version 17.0 E Scale: 1/2" = 1'-0" Call Name: CCM2048 R.O.: 21" x 47 5/8" - M.O.: 201/2 x 47 3/8" Project Name: Untitled w0c :CIES WOR CHERRY DIVIDED LITES VERTICAL GRAIN DOUGLAS FIR WHITE OAK SIMULATED WITH SPACER DIVIDED LITE BAR P, SDL is an energy-efficient way to create the SDL bars are combined with spacer bars look of divided lites. SDL bars are permanently installed between the glass, creating the adhered to both sides of the glass. essence of Authentic Divided Lites. Solid wood Grilles on the interior offer the look of classic divided Cites, but can be easily removed for cleaning. MAHOGANY Separate panes of glass are glazed between muntin bars—the way windows have been made since the beginning. Now, Marvin's state-of-the-art design adds traditional appeal. (Available for wood units only) Grilles are permanently installed between the glass panes. This low -maintenance option creates the look of divided lites. III f GLASS za�r INSULATING GLASS d1 SINGLE GLAZING (WOOD UNITS ONLY) INSULATING LOW E 11 GLASS (WITH OR WITHOUT ARGON SINGLE GLAZING WITH REMOVABLE ENERGY PANEL (WOOD UNITS ONLY) Hat virs nl'crs a bread array of s,^ec;i,ky wltsas otrivo(!s. C.hccrsr. s.•iesr, vxiitt'r:;exf in e61:ns-:;hv¢ g:azu s} ex brave OJ?' iV-Isars r^ -mate" a spce -,vadi-ass jvss r„ ycu. COnbd a maryin represe-ma'.a.'e t;x avarlb :y. -3:4� ie.� i:�'•.pv'• -� t !Rs:'='i'.'- 2-' �w �m�»' c „t?Y�s§q,.6� .B; rr+%p w— .:°, .>4'aCida ~�P w`...� .> d= - .. ,•..e.x..K+'t`s•rtl yta x, :. :_'�,,. p�s��v ss .yrY � �F `++T � �:•^` s:.0 ._U�."'::e^� xr �3. r.t�,.,�.'.: �.; L ,� `>;�>•;x,� S ✓" lki .iis;,?v+i" ,�4°a ""rMy?F m�+ %�:..:' �.t3,AAy4 .} '#• , o„�, r,'a I!onze %rsy' G:'. r: ' t:''tu' .:r.:.:sx ' Saeceak G 3's - - =:!•i;;d Gii9>:'i le^:?1i Ck'l!:X LOW E II GLASS SAJRYACEN HARDWARE FINISHES SATIN TAUPE BRONZE WHITE $BASS ,.; .�g SATIN NICKEL SATIN CHROME OIL RUBBED ANTIOUE BRASS BRONZE WOOD SPECIES PINE VERTICAL GRAIN MAHOGANY DOUGLAS FIR'`„"mom ����� • ve'vY.xr�w i _ CHERRY WHITE OAK PRIMED WOOD CLAD COLORS STANDARD COLORS PEBBLE CRAY' :; BAHAMA RROWN• 'EcV.ERGREEN- . BRONZE* STONE WHfTE' SELECT COLORS EBONY COBALT BLUE: WINEIIERRY _ -. T� r . F' ir IC a r .. j �k i! !"V :sites "+� •v�✓'' .. r'�.• �~_ .r y s4. , r �'•k"' S, '�„� ��� .per ��"�.''.�� ��, ' ',iY',ulM .nc iW , WNS'LW, 71 LL a ' T� r . F' ir IC a r .. j �k i! !"V :sites "+� •v�✓'' .. r'�.• �~_ .r y s4. , r �'•k"' S, '�„� ��� .per ��"�.''.�� ��, ' ==finitions Shall—Defined as an expression of something that is mandatory or must be done. Should—Defined as an expression of obligation, something that ought to be done but that is open to compromise. Required—Defined as work which shall be done in a restoration or rehabilitation project in order to restore or maintain the original or existing character of the structure. or site. Recommended—Defined as work which should be done to help restore or maintain the original or existing character of the structure of site. Prohibited—Defined as work which shall not be permitted in a restoration or rehabilitation project because it may have a negative impact on the original or existing character of the structure or site. N 2 . STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Date: June 4, 2008 Application Number: 2008-0529 Property Location: Leeper Park West Property Owner: City of South Bend Landmark or District Designation: Rating: — -- - ------ -- - Landscape Landmark STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: Leeper Park is a designed landscape located north of the downtown commercial district of the city. The park was designed by renowned landscape designer George Kessler in 1912. APPLICATION ITEMS: Planting a Liberty Elm in Leeper West between Riverside Drive and river off of Michigan Street. (Exhibit A) LANDSCAPE STANDARDS FOR LEEPER PARK:, 9.4 Vegetation #3 Alteration of existing or addition of new vegetation materials and features will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Liberty Elm. That portion of Leeper Park West has been the site of trees and appears as such in the Kessler design (Exhibit B). ' 5/29/2008) Wayne Doolittle 20080529134320948.pdf "" tl ._- ,. __ Page 2 ....... - -- -._._. r —' Application `013TH . for c yynaloeye Certificate, of Appropriateness Mstoric Preservation Commission Of South Bend & St. Joseph County s6 227 West Jefferson Blvd - RM 1123 — South Bend IN 46601-1830 } Pkoae 219-235-9799 Far 219-235-9578 a mail: historic®michimsorg 1 A Certified Local Government OF"CrUUSX OA%Yw- 00 NOT COa4IZU ANY al'rMM COrfMSM DI THE 110Z.< OF77Cff M901VLY DNeRxeired CZ? 200 ApplkatteuNumbx: 20ce �29 Past Rovlews: e�S (arserusrasranj S" Z Oe - Z OO B NO ZoetnC T7Pm Lot SIM r' SIeRApprwaiaetherhedbys // p ]ills: Historic Commkslos Review Dots: / (/ y // k%4 240 O v BS -I Landmark EINNlond Landmark _ ❑ NnaonN Regleter District d:.a ❑ local Hhtork Dtrtrktpa.y: . Certificate of Appreprieundar. []'Deoled Tabled Saot To Commh'M Approved and boned 20 ' Address of Property for proposed work L cew Web4 ifw:A,.r.wy.eery City: Township: Name of Property Owner(srlrmm 04 4 R" 4A Address ofProperty Owner: Me�.eon R.ws Contractor(s)Name: 164 S.o..it Contract Company Name: Contractor Address: CRY- Contractor's ityContractor's Phone No: Owner's Phone No: Current Use of Baildiny: W'Wrf'm+b•incaam.re.cti....rW.a......�.rmsw.v r..as Type o(Building Construction: (Irwrrarw.att.a..r..or.c ,r,.ods .. Proposed Work: Inkind Landscape New Replacementowa,mo . few tl+npnrlstpNdrnb-0 - ' ❑ DemoBNon (C—Pledee of Seperah Ferm Abro Reaulrad) DeseiiptlonofProposedWork: 'T4( 1.6..1, 69. leq.r carni 6rl.;e... R.rArb Q.A r.eu ak ci m..t„„ SI Owner/Contractor. Fa:: e-mail: mw�OA��4ye.�,rs«.�.rs..b .rbar�y S mNre dOwnw Slseemre of Contractor APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE. My and all business o.fthIs off7ce h hmedled We &MAU Mdjap with leastFWermce to M Mab CD .o + s < DRIVE RIvERStDE LEEPER PARK CO1J iw pass v -T" LANE 717 PARK Via LEEPER L 6-t- PARK 642 + + BARTLETT 10 —W-tMORIAL of i —7— }{AM MONO TERRACE L; zrg -4 t34 cGNiMi I q1 4R1,- eq HOSPITAL fly 614 L4f j'oy IM STREET b, RRE pf--ira g" �:`v :rw..;r: .-, .� ..tea' � \ :z-�'^1• ``-F;'-=•-:..` ~_ ..,` -.. - �� '"� v"� \ �� `�� • tom'^�.: ♦\ F � _" � -i �� i fir`// • �:+f' j _ �,,,,,,_../'�\j 1•\` 1, i.\k``'. ��•� s.� ..•�. .i�. yt. J� i/� -'---- -.- ♦ ".' :." by .. 1' .��: .� .,. ( 'may .J•+ 1 r' ��\ � r'i e r STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Date: June 4, 2008 Application Number: 2008-0604 Property Location: 710 Park Avenue Property Owner: Georges Enderle Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark in Chapin Park NR/LHD Rating: Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This Eclectic Italianate was built for Mary Chapin Anderson and Andrew Anderson between 1875 and 1877. Four generations of the Anderson-DuShane family lived in this house until 1962. This is one of the most significant residential architectural structures in the city of South Bend and in Chapin Park. APPLICATION ITEMS: Refurbish/restore/retrofit existing window sashes in the bay area as described in annex, (See Exhibit A). Old glasses will be stored in basement. CHAPIN PARK STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: C.. Windows and Doors Required: Original windows and doors shall be retained including sashes lintels, sills, shutters, decorative glass, pediments, hoods and hardware. When deteriorated beyond repair, they shall be replaced with unites and trim resembling the original. GROUP B LANDMARK STANDARDS: b. Treatment: Treatment shall be defined as any change of surface materials that will nor alter the style or original form. Such improvements include reproofing, glazing, or landscaping lawns and may involve a change that can potentially enhance or detract from the character of the landmark.... RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. Mr. Spigelmyer's proposal meets the Chapin Park Guidelines and Dr. Enderle's need for insulated glass in his bay windows. APPLICATION REQUMEMENU ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SR7,' "=' REPLACEMENT SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, LTD. R.fl. �IIoc � KAtAM�. i�� ':�itt3 933-ir�ta SOW TO Now Mr. �Georae. Ended e PROPOSAL Nor. Same Job Lc=doa �., 710 Park Avenue AAdreff ;a, -South Bend, Indiana - (574)234-6582 CRY .sena Ara Efttmdby Richard C. Spigelmyer Raqu StamzaDat• We propose to Refurbish/Restore/Retrofit existing window sashes as follows: 1. Remove the sashes from the frames and label/mark for identification. 2. Pickup of sashes only from the job site and deliver the sashes to our shop. Redeliver to job site and reinstall sashes into the original frames. 3. Remove the existing putty and glass from the sashes. 4. .Strip the paint from the sashes. Where caustic chemical strippers are used properly neutralize the wood prior to painting.or epoxy reconsolidatioA to a 'litmus Ph of 5-8.5. 5. Restore the sash with two part epoxy wood consolidants as necessary and in accordance with specifications and U.S. Department of Interior Guidelines . 6. Custom mill new window members/profiles to match existing where needed. 7. Route sash pockets as required and reglaze with new sealed insulated glass (dual sealed). Prime/seal glass pocket before installing insulated.glass. Set glass with beveled.wood stops. 8. Weatherstrip the operating sashes at the perimeter and meeting rails with integral woven pile weatherstripping for maximum air tightness and durability. 9. Install new Samson -Red Spot sash cords and furnish additional sash weight ballast to balance the additional weight of the insulated glass. 10. Refurbish pulleys/hardware. 11. Prime and finish paint all stripped, restored or new wood. 12. Use.resorcinol or Urethane waterproof exterior glue -in all exterior joinery where exterior glues are required. TERM: 1/3 down payment due upon acceptance of this Proposal/Contract. Balance due upon -delivery of each shipment based upon invoice value of the delivery less 1-/3 of the invoice amount. TW, estimate shop, vpoa baing cccoplod Gad gig -ad by bWh ponim bares vs a f:onfrad and mil spdoes Laust ¢ttt wea";4-d out. TN*-nteriais used to the fetillfalent Of fhh coatroct oro asoeefoctarod of solectcd Ga saa-.fol order. lh: if tk Date: June 5, 2008 STAFF REPORT - CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Application Number: 2008-0605 Property Location: 215 W. North Shore Property Owner: Ryan Dvorak Landmark or District Designation: - --Rating: Non Contributing W. North Shore LHD STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: In 1903 Samuel Leeper sold off a portion of his farm located at Section 1 Township 37 north range #2, all of which would make up Navarre Place Addition to the City. He sold this property to the Home Improvement Company for $7,500.00. They sold Lot 22 of Navarre Place to Franklin and Carrie Carson in 1904. A year later the Carson's built this American four Square. Mr. Carson was a dentist and eventually became Mayor of South Bend. The Carsons resided there until 1991. APPLICATION'ITEMS: #1 Remove Aluminum siding and repair siding and trim. Prime and paint original clapboard siding. #2 Reconstruct front porch per attached drawings (Al & A2 -with detailed project description) Design based on old postcards of house (copies attached). See Exhibit A West North Shore Standards: VII GENERAL: House alterations, restoration, preservation and rehabilitation shall be such as to' not change a house to a style previous to its original style. No mention has been made in these standards about color. We trust restraint and good taste will be exercised. III. STRUCTURES C. Porches and Stens Which are Readilv Visible From the Street: Permitted: Replace porches and steps with materials matching the original as closely as possible. A cement porch floor is permitted for the structure on Lot 12. RECOMMENDATION: #1. Staff Recommends approval as the proposal is to return the house to its original appearance with painted wood siding. #2. Staff recommends approval as this proposal is reconstructing an original feature to the house based on historic documentation. (See Photographs 1-3 for current view of exterior and current porch conditions) Pico W MR t50 sssioyr��o� slis' 1"11ie a Application p tl�l;MO – FOR – ar ° E �i3 Certificate of AppropriatenessDA Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St Joseph County r 125 S. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend Indiana 46601 1865 Mailing Address: County -City Building, South Bend, Indiana 46601 Phone: 574-235-9798 • Fax: 574-235-9578 • Email: SBSJCHPC@co.st joseph.lrLus Website: http://stjosephcosmtyindian&com/sjchp/ A Certified Local Government OFFICE USE ONLY-- DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES CONTAINED IN THIS BOX »»» OFFICE USE ONLY Date Received Application Number Past Reviews: YES (Dnteoft.ntR view) [51<0 Staff Approval authorized by: Title: Historic Commission Review Date: l- a,ve Local Landmark [r Local Historic District (Name) Ej National Landmark F] National Register District (Name) Certificate of Appropriateness: Denied n Tabled E] Sent To Committee n Approved and Issued DATE Address of Property for proposed work: �� IV.,rf4 Shute bi.JJ ,56,A (�tv? ,:TN Ar Street Number and Strdet Name Name of Property Owner(s): (Please Print) _940A d- Ar VC t Address of Property Owner(s): uS W- Alar4 SW%r d)r. . Contractor(s) Name: To. r• i l Contract Company Name: Contractor Address: City:Phone: Current Use of Building: 5i4 ��2 "d) (Single Family JMulti-Fatuity — Commercial — Government — Industrial — Vacant — etc.) Type of Building Construction: ti000t 4M{, ( Wood Frame — Brick — Stone — Steel — Concrete — Other) Proposed Work: FlIn-kind ❑ Landscape ❑ New F� Replacement (not in-kind) R Demolition (more than one box may be checked) 0p - l /` , Description of Proposed Work: 9tMOVL A�V/MiA UM SrG 114 4kt!A re14"t lI&4 Sl�ik, ,A4 cvtar Oaidit 414c ticl cLAP2 Letd`ef' SrGlit r. J Owner/Contractor: Fax: e-mail rV" dvh L 0, Gmr, LeM (This office will correspond unth only one desi ee) Xw -- 4A• ez') and/or Signature cif Owner Signature of Contractor — APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE — _ - z—...;_ ....-...- _... .. DescriptionofProposedW. 6rk: Reconstruct front Dorch per attached drawings. Design -based on --old postcards of house (copies attached); Architect: QxW3WJGatikt W= - Fax: (Ihk office will correspond with only one deli eJ . Si nature of Owner e-mail: crumlishb@aol,.com _. Signature of Contractor APPLICATION REOUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE. • A .05 CD X az 0 5 FD' C, Nro cr C m a 00 < CD CL 0 U) CD m M. CD ADDRESS: 215 W. North shore Drive Al DRAWING: Proposed Front Elevation 1111.11III��II UL SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0" 6/5=8 CL 0 Z m 0 33 0 .�E 8 Lr STUDIO B ARCHITECTS, LLC 3215-8 SUGAR MAPLE COURT SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46628 574-233.4550 LA - m & CD X az (13 U ©U 0 U) m PROJECT: Dvorak Residence Front Porch ADDRESS: 215 W. North shore Drive Al DRAWING: Proposed Front Elevation SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0" 6/5=8 11 Dvorak Porch Project Description Q �o A. New face brick piers 24" x 24", and step walls to match existing house foundation. Existing modern brick piers and stair walls and steps to be demolished and replaced with face brick, in the same size, but reinstall existing 8" T limestone caps. New 4" -thick limestone caps (to match existing) required for two new porch comer piers and two new piers at house comers. B. 6 new loadbearing painted round wood columns. Tapered shafts without necking, "Empire" style bases and capitals, similar to columns inside house. C. New exposed continuous aluminum gutter, 3 sides. D. New white fiberglass composite decorative balustrade system by Fypon. Seven, 6x6 ball top newel posts equally spaced with Fypon top and bottom rails and turned spindles.16 OE 0 EU E. New black single -ply adhered membrane roofing over new wood �tj frame roof framing system flashed to existing siding. 1:12 roof pitch, hipped at corners, alum. drip edge into new alum. gutters (3 sides). _ D flA nA R EXISTING HOUSE— F. New painted wood beam and crown mould trim to match existing(gray) _ 66 z W house with new 1 x 3 beadboard ceiling. C ao< a C ��— connect new a a CZ w G. New wood railing system with turned spindles, top and bottom rails. gutter to I OH exist. us ea.. I '_ H. New painted T&G wood floor over new treated wood floor framing — siae system, floor level to match existing threshold height. _ I v 1. New concrete steps to replace existing concrete steps. — _J J. New painted treated wood lattice for vented crawl space beneath — I w o new porch. Fwa =J z . M<0 7_J - I Q¢- --' m�z$ ]wn NEW PORCH (black) =N= jN ~NOn 4'-7" 10' Field Verify Field Verify t These are postcards from the year or so after the house was constructed, ca. 1905. In both images, our house is at the far left. .. - �„�•3 F�°����1.��" t��-tee '�e'� L,+�.r' ,�.�^'�'tc1, �.',���.� � M"'�"-`.'i '.�'✓� „+ A s,rF ¢ r ."{r 'mow - •�xs~�. .. �'�"' r �„�,�� .. t�'-_ ... c ;. �-. •'�, _ � � Ems` �" �'• r f i ! e,�+•ry5 y } 'b �, ^7 i 'fir` a.- 07 ZOO TPA Ps Max lip ON WE zl it � F AFRF! ij%r, V, '� zt t 4?� r''<3 at''�' •.� '` �tl'�Lr1' ".;;Y '" �-� �-+ ^k.m;. * . r SeaUxed b # �� M Y �`'� "� �'�rT � .. ��J ! K,t+W �,� s� . ` �,. ^:F w t �� �"a •�F' �y y s � ` Tti h. *r '. 215 W. North Shore, June 2, 2008 K s w: STAFF REPORT CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Date: June 6, 2008 Application Number: 2008-0605A Property Location: 818 Leland Property Owner: Peg and Steve Luecke Landmark or District Designation: Chapin Park NR/LHD - - Rating: -- -- - No Rating- STATEMENT ating STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: Built prior to 1899, maybe 1894, this house was an investment property. Dennis (Dewey) Shoemaker, a tea salesman, rented the house for a short time and resided here with his wife, Agnes, and son, Ellsworth. George H. Leslie, an engineer, purchased the house by 1906. He and his wife, Florence, raised four daughters: Florence, Consuela, Blanche and Rita. The house had a 6'x8' addition on the second floor in 1942 and an outside entrance to the basement created in 1946. The house was not included in the 2005 Survey of the City of South Bend. APPLICATION ITEMS: Convert from a 3 -unit apartment house to single-family dwelling. Scope of work - Exterior: 1.4'x8' addition to create new rear entry, reuse existing door and redo back hip roof to accommodate addition and replace flat roof section (See Sheet A). 2. Remove two kitchen windows, E side, replace with shorter double window and remove one bathroom window, E side, replace with skylight or high horizontal window (See sheet A). 3. Install three square windows in dining room N wall (See Sheet B). 4. Remove on kitchen window N side; replace with shorter window (See Sheet C). 5. Repair foundation as needed- install glass blocks at window (See Sheet D). 6. Remove side door, N side of house; install window (See Sheet D). 7. Remove entry door to 2°a floor apt., S side of house; install small window (See Sheet D). 8. Relocate fir tree on south side (See sheet D). CHAPIN PARK STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Please refer to pages 68-78 for this COA. RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Staff recommends approval because it conforms to the guidelines for new construction and is improving the roofline at the rear of the house and the changes will not be visible from the street. 2. Staff recommends approval of the 2 kitchen windows and the changes for the bathroom window in this later addition to the house. 3. Staff recommends approval of the removal of the non -original door and its replacement with three fixed windows to accommodate a dining room. Change will also not be noticeable from the street. 5. Staff recommends approval of the repairs in the foundation. The use of glass block is not recommended (page 78) however, its use in this case will be in the basement window and not visible from the street because of landscaping and can be allowed if a suitable substitute such as LEXAN is not feasible for this application. 6. Staff recommends approval of the removal of the non-original/non-contributing entrance (0) and the modification of the window in the later addition to the house. 7. Staff recommends approval of the non-contributing door with the option to install a window or replace with siding. 8. Staff recommends approval of the relocation of the tree that is too close to the house and compromising its foundation. The staff has already approved the removal of the siding materials and the restoration and painting of the original clapboards, shingles and trim. Included in the staff approvals were: in-kind re -roof, porch and step restoration, sidewalk and curb restoration and removal of old garage concrete pad and a concrete platform in the rear of the house. Application - FOR - Certificate of Appropriateness Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County 125 S. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend, Indiana 46601 Mailing Address: County -City Building, South Bend, Indiana 46601 Phone: 574-235-9798 - Fax 574-235-9578 - Email: SBSjCHPC®co.st josephin us Website: http://www.s§osephcoungindiam.com/s chp/index.html OFFICE USE ONLY »»» DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES CONTAINED IN THIS BOX »»» OFFICE USE ONLY Date Received o7�a Application Number Past Reviews: n YES (pate of rpt Rmieso) ago Staff Approval authorized by: Title: Historic Commission Review Date: " oo F1 Local Landmark Local Historic District (Name) CZ Al rk n National Landmark Certificate of Appropriateness: National Register District (Name) [] Denied C] Tabled [] Sent To Committee ❑ Approved and Issued OATS Address of Property for proposed work: �� �i Leland At'. 1 Street Number and Street Name Name of Property Owner(s): (Please Print) .7" , J�7 Luv(,skP_-� Address of Property Owner(s): �+ Contractor(s) Name: 7 b Contract Company Name: Contractor Address: City: ,Phone: Current Use of Building- &.L-" � Y���-��x��}-���� �Y�'-`-- (Single Family — Multi -Family — Commercial — Government — Ind ustr — Vacant — etc.) Type of Building Construction: Fp�w ei' (Wood Frame —Brick — Stone —Steel —Concrete —Other) Proposed Work: In-kind (] Landscape n New (Replacement (not ire x nd) ❑ Demolition ("sore titan one box may be checked) j Description of Proposed Work: ChP�f l!',07 Owner/Contractor. Fax: (This of 5j ,will corm's nd wit only one designee) J -- APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE — e-mail I�GCIrII�'e'C�'(?�f7C'�ICG�Zl1L' and/or -40 818 Leland Avenue - Remodel �C f5' 14 I � Convert from 3 -unit apartment house to single-family dwelling Scope of work - Exterior 48 addition to create new rear entry, reuse existing door — Se --G Sal C'� ,' Redo back hip roof to accommodate addition and replace flat roof section $eB sf pW If Repair foundation as needed - install glass blocks at window,( 'Stz P Remove side door, N side of house; install window " 1JW Remove entry door to 2nd floor apt, S side of house; install small window ,Q. A II Remove two kitchen windows, E side; replace with shorter double window –:56P 5,16 tX Remove one kitchen window N side; replace with shorter window C Remove one bathroom window E side; replace with skylight or high horizontal window ^,Q�i f% Install three square windows in dining room N wall – Relw�c lo free M sN4111s16� - s -a P Steve & Peg Luecke 234-2814 .► Application for Certificate of Appropriateness 818 Leland - Supplemental information. We are restoring the house to a single family home. Address first appears in City Directory in 1894, so I am assuming that is the year of construction. We believe the exterior northeast corner (rear) was originally a back entry porch that was enclosed when indoor plumbing was added- early 1900's? The upstairs rear dormer was added to afford an upstairs bathroom in 1942. We think the house was subdivided into apartments in the late 1940's, probably in 1946 when the outside rear door was added to access the basement. (confirmed with multiple resident listings in the City Directory). Foundation needs repair and in some places replacement (behind south side steps to side entrance) Will do so with brick as similar as available. Some interior floor joists will be fortified and sup- ported to reverse the sagging evident in the rear portion of the house. Let me know if additional information is required. Thanks Peg Luecke / Ile ��, I)k,,k �%!� w� �✓ cl'�e � icy �r�, ���° � ��, y�v 818 Leland Avenue Fraposed Csee a a' oaf T/V A� a 6d4mm X&r Gue are ahe rq�n, y --A cone OV.1w ,11A (1wrotf U hoe, E�aro, eey Ale A /f�✓" aad/ha�r u� /CoM" 6d4 was NEW WALL ---------------� FRAMING TO MATCH NE104 EAVE ADDITION HEIGHT PROP05ED HOUSE ROOF 5CALEe 1/8' = I'-0" i r )�Zy/ql ern* �� awWw 2925-od�j ,v,4s(h 0 b WW "A 6 fg/ �r t _ �. _- ;I. SPECIAL MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 16, 2008 5:15 pm HPC Conference Room Called to order at 5:15 p.m. Members attending: David Sassano, Lynn Patrick, Linda Riley, Mary Jane Chase, Timothy Klusczinski, Larry Metiever (Counsel) This is a Special Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County to consider language within the bylaws. Proper notification of this meeting was filed with the South Bend Tribune on April 11', 2008. During this session, the HPC will discuss the legal definition of its Quorum as set forth in the Bylaws and, where needed, consider changes and clarifications that will improve its ability to perform its duties and best serve the public. Some background information... A full HPC board is comprised of nine members. Presently, our board has seven members resulting from two member vacancies. We are anticipating appointments from both the Mayor's Office and the County Commissioner's Office. Although, confirmations for these positions have not yet been relayed. ARTICLE 4 MEETINGS Section 3. Quorum. A quorum shall consist of a majority of Commission membership. Robert's Rules of Order govern the Parliamentary Procedure of the HPC and state that a quorum must be sustained before taking action. The HPC bylaws further define the quorum level based upon majority of membership. However, it is the opinion of our counselor that membership must always be viewed against a theoretical nine -person board. In that strict interpretation, vacant seats are equal to filled seats. Meaning that a minimum of fivemembers would be a prerequisite before the HPC could ever take action. Action includes everything from receiving information, to holding a meeting or approving a project. Given these temporary but concurrent vacancies, what was once a forgivable level of absenteeism from regularly scheduled meetings might now stop the HPC from reviewing public projects and C of A applications. I personally disagree with this interpretation and do not believe it was intended when the bylaws were drafted or subsequently altered. Perhaps our current circumstances were not a consideration back then. In any case I defer to the advice of our counsel representative, as it's always best to err on the side of caution. Therefore the chair will honor the limitation until a change is adopted. Fortunately, there is an easy remedy to this problem where we make a minor change to the bylaws (at ARTICLE 4 MEETINGS Section 3. Quorum). Please note that the HPC is board is authorized to make changes within its bylaws as referenced by Article 10 in the by laws. ARTICLE 10 AMENDMENTS Section 1. These by-laws may be altered, amended, repealed, supplemented or superseded by a vote of a majority of the Commissioners voting at a regular or special meeting of the Commissioners attended by all of them, provided that no such action shall be taken at a meeting of the Commission attended by less than all of the members, unless the members are given at least (10) days notice of the substance of the proposed action to betaken at the meeting. The proposed amendment shall be introduced atone meeting and shall be acted upon at the next regular meeting or a special meeting called within at least ten (10) days notice. I will open the discussion by reading the substitute language for ARTICLE 4 MEETINGS Section 3. Quorum as proposed by Mr. Meteiver, Attorney for the HPC from a recent . _ correspondence. In it he makes the suggestion that, "a quorum shall consist of a majority of the duly appointed and serving members, provided that a quorum shall never be less than three (3) members. " I ask that you consider this language, in its current form, as a suitable replacement for the current definition of quorum appearing in the bylaws under ARTICLE 4 MEETINGS Section 3. Patrick: Ilike your wording, I agree. It makes perfect sense. lam in favor of this amendment. Riley: I also agree. Sassano: It seems to me that the current language poses potential unintended negative consequences on the public. I certainly see no negative effects to changing the language, only positive. Chase: With the sincerity of all of the members that we do have and that we would anticipate, I'd think that 3 members would be sufficient because they could speak for the Board. Klusczinski: And that's worst case scenario too. Sassano: Quorum would then become four? Klusczinski: Well, worst case scenario if the quorum level can not be less than 3 members, that would mean that we couldn't drop below S members on the Board. Sassano: And right now there's how many members currently appointed? Klusczinski: Seven. Sassano: So at 7, the quorum is 4. Klusczinski: It could be 4. Right now it's 5... Patrick: I thought that it could be 3. I thought that you said not less than 3. Sassano: If we adopt this language, the current count, the quorum would be 4, we'd go from S to... Patrick: But if I died tomorrow, or someone should die or be unable to serve in that capacity then the quorum would go to 3. Sassano: Right. Hence, there can never be less than 6 members, or S, that's still the majority. Chase: But still with the people that we have I still think that they could give honest and sufficient judgment on anything. I think that everyone is quite serious about what they do. Riley: I only have one question, and I shouldn't even question you, but my feeling was that "consists of the duly appointed and serving ", I would think that it would say "sitting" members. Meteiver: "Sitting" is what we'd originally talked about, and with discussions particularly with Aladean, she felt that the language that we've proposed here is a little bit more concise. Sassano: "Serving" implies engaged. Meteiver: Mm-hmm. Sassano: It seems to me that you could lay that ground work if you ever had to. Not that you'd ever have to. Let's just say that we ever end up at a meeting with only 3 people or even 4, anyone coming before us could always request a tabling if they felt that they needed more members there. Meteiver: They certainly could. Sassano: So there's really no down side from that perspective, that somebody might think that 'hey I'm getting a raw deal here ; but in fact that person is perfectly within their rights to say that I want to come back next month... and in truth, if there were only 3, they'd have to be back next month anyway. 2 Patrick: Likewise, even the Commission might feel that we need to table if it's something particularly complex, if someone absent has some particular knowledge of, something where we feel that someone's expertise would be valuable in rendering a decision about, so I agree with you that there's no downside. Sassano: Right, my point is just that we're sure that there's no downside for the public. Patrick: Right, no 1 don't think that we are. Sassano: Right, it's either that there's no meeting, or you come and if you don't like the results you wait til next time. Patrick: I'd like to add that we're very conscious of our responsibility to the public, we're very service oriented and we do factor in the urgency of the request, the particular project, etc. Many of our constituents are very eager to initiate these projects which are valid and worthy and do not compromise the historicality of a particular structure. Chase: Do you need a motion? Klusczinski: Chair would accept a motion. Chase: I'll make a motion that we accept the language that was presented by our President. Riley: Second. Klusczinski: The motion has been made and seconded, any further discussion? Meteiver: We'll have to table that motion until the second meeting. We can't... Klusczinski: Is it to accept the language? Sassano: You have to have two meetings? Meteiver: Yes, you have to have two meetings. The by-laws require two separate meetings. That's why we called the meetingfor 5:45. So we adjourn this meeting... Riley: So don't we vote on this and then pass it on to the next one? Metciver: No. The motion is made to accept it, and it's seconded, so now we have to wait for public comment. Patrick: Ok. Meteiver: And then once we have our public comment and then adjourn and then we have the second meeting. Klusczinski: Larry, I was under the impression that this meeting would be to accept the language and the second meeting would be to adopt the language and include it with the by laws. Meteiver: If you want to do it that way, that's fine. Patrick: Do we need to keep the tape recorder on due to the fact that we don't have no member of the public wishing to make comment? Klusczinski: We'll do it anyway. Meteiver: You do need to call for public comment. Riley: Go out on the street. Sassano: Anybody here? Klusczinski: Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current, petition? Hearing none, any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Also, hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Motion is made and seconded. The motion is, if I may paraphrase Mary Jane, was to accept the language that was offered. Chase: Yes. Klusczinski: Very good. All those in favor indicate by saying Aye. Riley: But you didn't start the new meeting. 3 Sassano: No, we're just accepting the language. She's made a motion to accept the language. Klusczinski: Which just means that everyone is ok with the way that this sounds. Riley: Ok. Klusczinski: It's not binding. No, we're voting at this point. All in favor indicate by saying aye. (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. Moved: Chase Second: To accept the language as presented Passes: Moved: Sassano Second: To adjourn Passes: Riley 5-0 Patrick 5-0 n SPECIAL MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 16, 2008 5:45 pm HPC Conference Room Called to order at 5:45 p.m. Members attending: David Sassano, Lynn Patrick, Linda Riley, Mary Jane Chase, Timothy Klusczinski, Larry Metiever (Counsel) A previous meeting was held during which the 5 present Commission members listed above voted unanimously to accept the language presented by President Klusczinski regarding a proposed change to the HPC by laws as detailed below: "a quorum shall consist of a majority of the duly appointed and serving members, provided that a quorum shall never be less than three (3) members." Procedure and authorization for making this amendment was detailed in the minutes of the previous Special Meeting of 4/16/2008. Please see that document for that information. President Klusczinski made the motion to adopt the accepted language in the form of a resolution. "Therefore be it resolved by the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County as follows: Section #1 Article 4, Section 3 of the by laws should be amended as follows: Article 4, Section 3 Quorum: ' a quorum shall consist of a majority of the duly appointed and serving members, provided that a quorum shall never be less than three (3) members'. Section #2 This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the Commission, adopted at a meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County held on April 16, 2008 at the HPC Conference Room, 125 S. Lafayette Boulevard, South Bend, Indiana 46601. " Klusczinski: Is there a second? Chase: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded. Any discussion? Sassano: None from me. Patrick: None. Klusczinski: Hearing none, we move on to public hearing. Is there any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current resolution? Hearing none, is there anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the current resolution? Also hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. All those in favor? (Ayes are heard) All those opposed? (Silence) The motion carries by a 5-0 vote of all of those present. There is no further business to discuss. Moved: Klusczinski Second: Chase To adopt the amendment to the bylaws Passes: 5-0 Moved: Riley Second: Sassano To adjourn at 5:49pm Passes: 5-0 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY May 19, 2008 13`h Floor Conference Room County — City Building, South Bend, Indiana Members Present: Todd Zeiger, David Sassano, Tim Klusczinski, Linda Riley Staff Present:Catherine Hostetler [Director], Amy Herdman [Asst. Director], Larry Meteiver [Legal] Absent: Lynn Patrick, Jerry Ujdak, Mary Jane Chase Also Present: Paul and Kristin Fields, Alicia Fullenkamp, Kevin Griffith,. Sharon Czarnecki, Brendan Crumlish, Heidi Cintron, Amanda Webber. I. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL: President Tim Klusczinski called to order at 7:00 pm H. PUBLIC HEARING Application Number: Property Location: Property Owner: Landmark or District Designation: Rating: 2008-0502 215 Hammond Place Heidi Cintron (Thacker) River Bend LHD Contributing . STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This American Four Square with Craftsman features was built in 1910 for Jackson B. Harper. He lived in the house with this family until 1920. From 1920 the house was used as rental property by various owners. APPLICATION ITEMS: Replacement of ailing and rotting front porch. The only differences from the current structure would be a pitch on the roof, wood stairs and railing instead of concrete stairs to prevent future problems like the current one. Per drawing attached (Exhibit 1) and Lemack's Construction Proposal (Exhibit 2) RIVER BEND STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: D. ENTRANCES, PORCHES AND STEPS Most houses in the district have either an open or a closed porch across the front. Most porches have gabled, hipped, shed or flat roofs. Many frame porch floors and steps have been replaced with concrete. REQUIRED: Existing or original porches and steps, including handrails, balusters, columns, brackets, tiles and roof decorations, shall be retained, or replaced with replicas of the same design and materials when deteriorated beyond repair. Porches and additions reflecting later architectural styles and which are important to the building's historical integrity shall be retained. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. The porch has deteriorated beyond repair. (Exhibit 3). The change in the pitch of the roof is necessary for the proper draining of water away from the structure. The in-kind replacement of the handrail, balusters are to replicate what was original to the house. (Exhibit 4) The concrete steps have failed and their replacement with wooden steps would replicate the original wooden steps. Klusczinski. Could the homeowner come up here, please? Please state your name and address for the record, and you're allowed to make a brief presentation. Cintron: Heidi Cintron, 215 Hammond Place, South Bend, Indiana. I'm fine with what staff has recommended. The only thing that we didn't have on this is the banister. With, what are they called? Help me... Sassano: The pickets? Cintron: Yeah, there you go. Which is fine, we can replicate what they had in the past. So, that's the only addition that we'd have made. Just like the picture. Which you sent me copies of. Hostetler: Yes, and that's the same thing that they had in their packets. That's what the original porch looked like. Klusczinski: So at this time are you amending your C ofA to include that provision? Cintron: If that's what the staff recommends and that's what we need to do, then we'll amend it. Klusczinski: Are you ok with that? Cintron: Yeah, I'm fine with that. Actually that is better than even what I turned in because it will keep animals out from underneath the porch. It's a cleaner look as well. Klusczinski: Very good. Any members of the Commission have questions for the petitioner? Sassano: I've got a couple. On the drawing it says that you're going to put 6x6 posts but then those posts are going to be encased by bigger pieces to approximate the 12x12 columns that are there now? Cintron: I'm sorry; I haven't looked at the proposal for awhile. Sassano: (reading) treated or cedar 6x6 minimum. Typically what they would do is there would be a 6x6 post that is the actual structure, then encase that... Cintron: Yeah, right. To replicate the original pillars. Which exactly, honestly, exactly what they did, because when you look at the pillars themselves they're actually four pieces of wood. Sassano: 1 just wanted to make sure that we weren't just going to see 6x6 treated lumber there. And then, I don't know how much thought that you put into the deck. It says here just a treated deck and typically they're painted. And, I mean, treated wood is what we use on backyard decks, but if you look at porches, they're almost always painted. Yeah, you might have to paint it in 10 years, but you actually get a much longer life, you don't get the discoloration and the fungus that grows on treated lumber. It's much more formal. Cintron: I'm actually getting quotes right now for painting the entire thing. I've got 3 different quotes coming in. So as far, as this construction part of it, it's just the treated lumber. And this particular guy that's doing this is just doing the construction part. Sassano: You don't want to paint treated lumber. Once you put down treated, you're kind of stuck with treated. I mean, you could put sealer on it, even the stain is questionable how it might discolor, I wasn't sure if the staff had discussed that? What we're trying to do is not make it look like a backyard deck. Cintron: Honestly my preference is that I'd rather stain it or seal it, rather than paint it. Zeiger: Our experience with the new tongue in groove is that it's rotting out so fast that it's a problem even after it's painted. Sassano: The new wood? Zeiger: Mm-hmm. Sassano: So you're suggesting that you've had better experience with the treated? Zeiger: Unfortunately, unless you go with something like, something that's really high end which ... I agree, the new pine tongue in groove floors, no matter how well you try to take care of them they're just rotting out so fast even if you paint them all of the time. I don't really like treated either, but I'm not sure that I can recommend an alternative. Sassano: Obviously for me, a big concern is the columns and my comment was more of a comment... Cintron: I think that more if that drawing says what it says than it's more of a structural aspect than it is the... Sassano: Ok. Zeiger: Just a clarification if you're done, David? Sassano: Yeah, that's it. 7 Zeiger: Just for clarification too, it says on the write up that the porch stairs are going to be 40 inches wide, so from pillar to pillar. On the drawing just shows a small stair, so I just wanted to double check... Cintron: Right, they will be the original way. Zeiger: Thank you very much; I just wanted to double check Riley. And I have a question, you're going to put an aluminum soffit? Cintron: Mm-hmm. Riley. Instead of wood tongue in groove? Cintron: Soft? Riley. That's the ceiling of the porch. Cintron: No it would be wood. Sassano: It says aluminum. Cintron: If it says aluminum than it needs to be wood. Riley. It does say aluminum. Cintron: No, the original is wood. Riley. Does that have to be in the... ? Cintron: He's writing down the... Klusczinski: I'm trying to keep track of everything. Cintron: No, that's fine. Sassano: That way we can just read that into the motion? Klusczinski: That's right. . Riley. I know that I couldn't find it in your proposal... Cintron: Find what? I know that I don't know any technical terms so looking at it, I wouldn't have caught that, I'm not a construction person. Riley. I don't think that it says anywhere in the proposal. Sassano: Just on the diagram. Klusczinski: Any other questions? Riley. No, that's all. Can you go ahead and approve it with that? Klusczinski: We'11 just.get clarification and we'll do that right now. Help me in case I miss something, but what we want to do is include the balusters per staff recommendation that weren't originally cited on the C ofA... Hostetler. Well, it was in the staff recommendations. Klusczinski: But not in the original proposal. Cintron: Application?, Right. I didn't have it on there, no. Klusczinski Your preference is for wrapped columns instead of solid timber... Sassano: No, no, she clarified. Cintron: They're 6x6 for support, and then they're the wrap around. Sassano: The diagram shows that. The diagram shows them as being large; the 6x6 piece is the structural support. Klusczinski: Right, ole And then the wood soft instead of the aluminum. Petitioner is ok with those things so we can go into Commission discussion. Anyone have any thoughts? Very good. I'll open up public hearing. You can take your seat for a moment, thank you very much. Is there any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Hearing none. Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition to the current petition? Also hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. I'll entertain a motion. Riley: 1 make the motion that we approve 2008-0502 with the changes already noted. Zeiger: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded, any additional discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? (Ayes are heard) All opposed? (Silence) Moved: Riley Approval of C of A 2008-0502 Second: Zeiger Approved 4-0 3 Application Number: 2008-0505 Property Location: 14309 Adams Road Property Owner: Diana and Ronald L. Snyder Landmark or District Local Landmark Rating: Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: At least three generations of Metzger's, a prominent agricultural German family, built and lived in this house. The earliest constructions took place around 1847. It is possibly the third oldest house in the county. As the family needed more space, additions were built with the same materials and fine craftsmanship. In the mid 1800s the house became a stop on the Old Chicago Trail stagecoach line. It also served as a center of Catholic faith as Holy Cross priests regularly held Mass here before building the chapel at the St. Joseph Farm. This residence is an outstanding example of a two-story Greek revival farmhouse built with local yellow brick. APPLICATION ITEMS: Install a new privacy fence surrounding brick courtyard/patio. Per attached description. (Exhibit 1) and site plan (Exhibit 2) LANDMARK STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Building Site and Landscaping: Required: Major landscaping items: trees, fencing, walkways, private yard lights, signs (house numbers) and benches which reflect the property's history and development shall be retained. Dominant land contours shall be retained. Structures such as: gazebos, patio decks, fixed barbecue pits, swimming pools, tennis courts, green houses, new walls, fountains, fixed garden furniture, trellises and other similar structures shall be compatible to the historic character of the site and neighborhood and inconspicuous when viewed from a public way. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. The fence and arbor entrance (Exhibit 3) to the patio area are in front of new construction approved by the Commission in March, 2004 (Exhibit 4). It will not interfere with the original structure. The fencing will be installed on posts that will not be footed in concrete. Neither petitioners, nor their representatives were present at the meeting. Klusczinski: We can still entertain the petition though, I'll just move right to public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Any member of the public wishing to speak against the current petition? Hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any additional consideration by Commissioners, discussion, anyone have any comments? We'll entertain a motion then. Riley. I make a motion that we approve 2008-0505. Sassano: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded. Any additional discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. Moved: Riley Approval of C of A 2008-0505 Application Number: Property Location: Property Owner: Landmark or District Designation: Rating: Second: Sassano Approved 4-0 2008-0505A 620 S. Carroll Street Great Lakes Property, Inc. Taylor's Field LHD Non Contributing STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: 620 S. Carroll Street was constructed in 1889 by Julie E. and William Lontz. Mr. Lontz was associated with Lontz Brothers Coal Company. They lived in the house until 1918 when the house was inherited by their 4 children, Clifford Lontz and Neva Roberts. They sold it in 1919 to Otto Schultz, and employee at Sibley Manufacturing. APPLICATION ITEMS: Demolition of garage. "Building is deteriorated beyond repair, and we are unable to keep it secured due to structural damage. Cost of repairs is greater than (the) structure's value and has become a neighborhood nuisance. TAYLOR'S FIELD STANDARDS: V.GENERAL A. Buildings in the district should not be demolished except where a building poses a threat to the public safety, and demolition is the only alternative. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the demolition request for the following reasons: 1. 620 S. Carroll Street has been rated non-contributing in the most recent survey, and 2. The garage is only minimally visible from S. Carroll Street, and 3. Demolition by neglect has been underway for many years, and has now rendered the building unsound, and is a magnet for vagrants, drug use, and illegal dumping- all to the detriment of public safety. Klusczinski: Please state your name and address for the record, please. Webber. Amanda Webber. Klusczinski: And an address? Webber: 620 South Carroll Street. Klusczinski: Thank you very much. Any comments? Webber: Basically, what's on our application is why we're petitioning to demolished, it's cost prohibitive to repair, we can't keep it secured, and I mean its just basically going to be a pile of rubble very soon. It's falling apart as we speak Klusczinski: Any member of the Commission have questions for the petitioner? Riley. I've seen it. Webber: It isn't pretty. Klusczinski: Ok, any Commission discussion? In that case, the Chair opens public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in favor of the current petition? Hearing none. Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Hearing none on both occasions, Chair closes public hearing. Thank you very much, perhaps a brief discussion and vote. Klusczinski: Any final thoughts or comments? Zeiger: One quick comment on staff recommendation. I don't think that #3 is really, for my purposes, I'm concerned about that being a reason to approve a demolition. There may be some buildings in the future that just because the owner decides not to maintain it, we don't necessarily want to approve a demolition. I just have a problem with, for purposes of a C ofA its not necessarily germane to our discussion and really kind of sets a bad precedent that we don't want people moving towards demolition because they don't want to repair their building. Klusczinski: Noted. Anything else? Chair entertains a motion. . Zeiger: I make a motion that we approve 2008-0505A as it's a non-contributing structure in the district and the garage is not visible from S. Carroll Street, so the demolition is appropriate for only those two reasons. Sassano: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded. And for the record, I heard Commissioner Sassano just ahead of Commissioner Riley for the second. All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. 5 Moved: Zeiger Second: Sassano Approval of C of A 2008-0505A Approved 4-0 Application Number: 2008-0507 Property Location: 828 Park Avenue Property Owner: Kristin and Paul Fields Landmark or District Designation: Chapin Park LHD/NR Rating: Notable STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT The Anderson House was built in 1892 and is classified as gabled -ell in the 2005 City of South Bend Survey. The house was remodeled in 1917 by W. W.Schneider when he was working for real estate developers, Happ and Taggart. The lot was purchased from Mary Anderson in 1890 and it is believed that Delle Alward built the house. APPLICATION ITEMS: Rear Addition that maintains aesthetics. Home previously re -modeled, now compromised structural integrity of the home. Past re -modeling is not to Code or Standards, rear of house is compromised. Also to remove gabled dormer on north elevation and reproduce it on the south elevation; replace with new shed former. Most of the construction will be in the rear and behind the roofline of the house. Per drawings on sheets 2, 3 &4 Chapin Park Local Historic District Guidebook III. NEW CONSTRUCTION New construction includes any new building or structure built within the boundaries of the historic district, or any new addition to an existing building. New construction should be designed considering the appearance, scale, styles and setbacks of the other buildings in the neighborhood. New work may be contemporary or may suggest motifs from historic buildings in the district. A. HEIGHT AND PROPORTION The majority of the structures in the district are two stories in height and have square or rectangular plans. There are several houses that have L- or T-shaped or rambling ground plans. There are a few single -story cottages and one- and one -and -a -half -story bungalows. The most prevalent fagade proportions are between a 1:1 and 1:2 height to width ratio. Reauired The height of a new structure and its height to width proportions shall be consistent with adjacent buildings in the district. The building height shall be no greater than that of the tallest existing structure and no less than that of the lowest existing structure in the same block. Fagade proportion shall be established by permitting no structure with a fagade wider or narrower than those existing in the same block. Additions to existing buildings shall be related in height and proportion to the existing structure. Recommended Design of new construction should be compatible in character and mood to the building or neighborhood. Prohibited Additions that would add new height or change the existing fagade of a building, and change its scale and architectural character shall not be constructed. Not Recommended New stories should not be added nor existing stories be removed which would destroy important architectural details, features and spaces of the building. Any style or period of architecture that is incompatible with the existing should not be permitted in the new additions. Height — This is a mandatory criteria, which new buildings be constructed to a height within 10% of the average height of existing adjacent buildings. Proportion of buildings' front fagades — The relationship between the width and height of the front elevation of the building. Proportion of openings within the fagade — The relationship of width to height of windows and doors. Rhythm of solids to voids in front fagade — G'7 Rhythm being an ordered recurrent alternation, of strong and weak elements. Moving by an individual building, one experiences a rhythm of masses to openins. ieBUILDING MATERIALS 11 materials in the district range from brick, stucco and wood clapboard and shingles, to aluminum, vinyl and rboard/composite siding. Required Exterior materials used on a new structure shall be compatible in scale, texture and color (as pertains to masonry) with adjacent structures. Materials used on an addition to an existing structure shall relate to the existing or original materials of that structure. Also, as much of the original structure as possible shall be retained so that the addition could be removed without damage to the basic structure and appearance of the building. Recommended Alternative or composite siding may be used when it is the only feasible alternative. This siding should be compatible with the original size and style and with the materials of other buildings in the district. Prohibited Inappropriate materials such as asbestos, asphalt, cast stone or artificial brick shall not be used. Not Recommended Glass blocks should not be used. Concrete block should not be used for anything other than the foundations. RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommends Approval. The owners wish to completely remove a non- contributing and poorly constructed addition) Photographs 14) and replace it with a larger addition that will reflect the architectural features of the front of the house -notably the porch and the bay window for the parlor. (Photograph 5) The owners also wish to remove a gabled dormer on the north elevation and reproduce it on the south elevation. The gabled dormer on the north elevation will be replaced with a new shed dormer. Most of the construction will be in the rear of the house and set behind the roofline of the house and not visible from the street. (Photographs 6- 8) Klusczinski: Thank you, is the petitioner here? Fields: Yes. Klusczinski: Sir, please state your name and address for the record. " Fields: Paul Fields, 828 Park Avenue. Klusczinski: Thanks. You're entitled to make a briefpresentation about the project. Fields: We're just adding onto the back of the house and some of the structural integrity in the back of the house is a little iffy. It helps serve a more modernfunction to add onto the back with the kitchen, bedroom and stuff like that. Klusczinski: Thankyou" does anyone have questions for. the petitioner? Zeiger: Just a quick clarif cation from the photos. So, just to make sure that I'm understanding, I'm looking at picture 94, and that's the back? Fields: Yes, 3 and 4 that's the back Zeiger: And that window there, that's where the new addition will butt up against?. Is that right? Fields: Yes, it's a first and second story renovation, so those are both coming out. Zeiger: So it comes right in there? Fields: Yes. Riley: That's what I didn't understand. All of this is coming out?. Fields: Well, it's being extended into the backyard By about 17 feet Zeiger: They're adding onto the back. Sassano: Wood siding?, Fields: Yes. Klusczinski: Wood was not called out in the application? Riley: Is the south elevation the back of the house? Fields: East is the back of the house. Klusczinski. Would you be amenable to wood siding being a component of the C ofA? Fields: Right. VA Klusczinski. Any other questions. Any other discussion? I'll hold public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current. petition? Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Hearing none, the Chair closes public hearing. Any final thoughts? Zeiger: I think that it's a really well done addition that follows the guidelines and it's not visible from the public way and suits the house and the neighborhood very well. Riley: It's very nice. Klusczinski: Very good. All in favor? Sassano: Wait, we need a motion. Klusczinski: Whoa, point of order. Riley: I make a motion that we approve C ofA 200%0507 with wood siding added to the application. Klusczinski. Or, specified on the application? Riley: Yes, it should be specified. Sassano: Second. Klusczinski. Motion has been made and seconded. All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. Moved: Riley Second: Sassano Approval of C of A 2008-0507 Approved 4-0 Application Number: 2008-0508 Property Location: 1223 E. Wayne Street South Property Owner: Alicia and Joseph Fullenkamp Landmark or District Designation: E. Wayne Street LHD Rating: Contributing STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This 1927 Colonial Revival house was built for Hazel and Harry Ullery. Mr. Ullery worked at both Studebaker and Oliver Chilled Plow before taking a position as an efficiency engineer for Wilson Brothers Manufacturing Company. He later founded and became president of the Harry D. Ullery Coal and Mason Supplies Company and the Ullery Cold Storage and Warehouse Company. APPLICATION ITEMS: Install wood fence, either a Solid Privacy Fence or Villager II style, along north side of property approximate 120', install fend to west side of property approximately 20'; install fence to east side of property approximately 72'. Per site plan and photographs attached.. EAST WAYNE STREET STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Required Major landscaping items, fencing, walkways, private yard lights, signs (house numbers) and benches which reflect the property's history and development shall be retained. Dominant land contours shall be retained. Structures such as gazebos, patio decks, fixed barbecue pits, swimming pools, tennis courts, greenhouses, new walls, fountains, fixed garden furniture, trellises and other similar structures shall be compatible to the historic character of the site and the neighborhood and inconspicuous when viewed from a public walkway. Recommended New site work should be based upon actual knowledge of the past appearance of the property found in photographs, drawings and newspapers. New site work should be appropriate to existing surrounding site elements in scale, type and appearance. Plant materials and trees in close proximity to the building that are causing deterioration to the building's historic fabric should be removed. However, trees and plant materials that must be removed should be immediately replaced by suitable flora. All high intensity security lights should be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Prohibited 8 No changes may be made to the appearance of the site by removing major landscaping items, trees, fencing, walkways, outbuildings or other elements before evaluating their importance to the property's history and Jtvelopment. Front yard areas shall not be transformed into parking lots nor paved nor blacktopped. Front yard as shall not be fenced and fences shall not extend forward beyond the setback line of the house. The allation of unsightly devices such as television reception dishes and solar collectors shall not be permitted in areas where they can be viewed from the public thoroughfare. Not Recommended Telephone or utility poles with high-intensity overhead lights should be installed so that they cannot be seen from the thoroughfare. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. The selection of the wooden fencing styles are appropriate to the architecture of the house and will be located along the rear and sides of the house bordering other fences. The fence will not be noticeable from the street. Klusczinski. Please state your name and address for the record. Fullenkamp. Alicia Fullenkamp, 1223 E Wayne Street South. Klusczinski. Any other remarks or presentation you'd like to make before we consider this? Fullenkamp. We'd just like to put up a privacy fence to cover up the sheds and the wood piles in our neighbor's yard, we're tired of looking at them. And our neighbors are probably tired of hearing our kids screaming, so... Zeiger: Is it going to be the Villager II or how are you going to make the decision? Fullenkamp:. I don't know, I'm leaning toward the privacy one, Ilike the look of that one better. Zeiger: Are they both the same height? Fullenkamp: Yes, both 6 jt tall. Zeiger: They're both six feet? Ok, it was hard to tell from the picture. Riley. Are they going to be painted or natural? Fullenkamp. No, just the natural cedar. Klusczinski. Any other questions? Chair opens public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition to the current petition? Hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any other discussion? None? Chair will entertain a motion. Zeiger: I move to approve 2008-0508 as applied for and recommended. Riley. Second. Musczinski. Motion has been made and seconded. Any other discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries unanimously. Moved: Zeiger Second: Riley Approval of C of A 2008-0508 Approved 4-0 Application Number: 2008-0508A Property Location: 1061 Riverside Drive Property Owner: Mark Beudert Landmark or District Designation: Riverside Drive LHD Rating: Notable STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCEMISTORIC CONTEXT: The Shetterly House is classified as Free Classic in the 2005 Interim Report published in 2007 and its rating upgraded from Contributing to Notable. The Shetterly house was built in 1908 as a rental property by J.L.M. Shetterly and Fred W. Keller. It was sold to Lucille and kbeert P. Land in 1922. Mr. Lang was the City Attorney for Mishawaka. The house became and rental property late 1920s until 1947 when it was sold to Mr. and Mrs. George Hoffman. The current owner is Mark Beudert. E APPLICATION ITEMS: Installation (3) new operable egress roof windows. (2) on rear slope of main roof and (1) on chimney side main roof as depicted in attached drawings. Exhibit A6 & A7 RIVERSIDE DRIVE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: B. ROOFS ANDROOFING Roof shapes in the district encompass all the various designs found in residential structures: hipped, gable, gambrel, flat, and combinations of these. Roofs are covered with a variety of materials such as asphalt, asbestos, wood and slate shingles as well as clay tiles. Residences in most cases have wood fascias with gutters and downspouts. The fascias of some vinyl or aluminum sided houses are covered with the same material. Required The existing shape and materials of the roof shall be retained. All architectural features which give the roof its essential character shall be retained, including dormer windows, cupolas, cornices, brackets, chimneys, cresting and weather vanes. Recommended Whenever possible, the original shape and materials of the roof shall be restored. Particular effort should be made to retain materials such as slate, tile, and other unique materials not commonly found in new construction. Roof covering which is deteriorated beyond repair should be replaced with new material that matches as closely as possible the original in composition, size, shape, color and texture. Gutters and downspouts are often a necessary adjunct in order to prevent deterioration of the structure; they should be maintained whenever possible or replaced with a style comparable and suitable to the architectural period. Prohibited Nothing shall be done to change the essential character of the roof as viewed from the thoroughfare by adding architectural features or large unsightly fixtures, or by using materials inappropriate to the style of the house. The roof shall not be stripped of architectural features important to its character. Not Recommended Overhanging eaves, soffits, brackets and gables should not be covered or enclosed when adding metal or vinyl siding to a building. RECOMMENDATION: This is being proposed as an economical alternative to COA#2008-0410A. Staff recommends approval of the two egress roof windows on the rear slope. Staff does not recommend that the one proposed behind the chimney be installed as it appears to be seen from the street. Klusczinski: Thank you is the petitioner here? Crumlish: No, but their architect is. Klusczinski, Let the record show that the architect representing the home owner is presenting for him. Crumlish: I'm Brendan Crumlish, Studio B Architects. My client is awaiting bids on the previous C ofA from last month and he's concerned that it might be very expensive and he presented this request as a contingency C ofA. He hasn't received a bid yet, but he will be receiving it soon, and the impetus is this is either or. He's not going to do both. Should the cost of the gable construction be beyond his budget, he'll fall back to this alternative. He requested that we put one on the side trying to conceal it a little bit behind the chimney because he's hoping to get something of a view from the attic out towards the street. Sassano: And will there be a bedroom up here? Crumlish: There will be. One. Sassano: So, in terms of egress, that window isn't really needed. Crumlish: No. It was just a... Riley. Can they be opened? Sassano: They have to be. Crumlish: Yes, I've got the literature here that I did not have when I submitted this. 10 Riley: Egress is an exit. The last proposal that you made was so attractive, it seems a shame... Klusczinski: Any other questions? If none, we'll move to Commission discussion, comments. Very good. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Hearing none. Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition of the current petition? Also hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any final thoughts or discussion? Zeiger: I'm in agreement with the staff regarding the side window there. They've got, " there's another window therefor light and there's also a gable window there in the front and two in the back It's a pretty big window that you could see coming down the street, so that's the way I would be leaning, I think also that long term that could be a water nightmare next to the chimney there. From an architectural standpoint the two in the back are... Klusczinski: Would you care to make an amended motion? Zeiger: Do we have to know if the petitioner is agreeable to that? Klusczinski: Yes, once we spell it out. Zeiger: I move that we approve 2008-0508A with an amendment that we eliminate the 3'd window on the side near the chimney, allowing for the two in the rear. Sassano: Facing east. Riley: Second. Klusczinski.. Motion has been made and seconded. Speaking on behalf of the petitioner is that.. ? Crumlish: That's acceptable. Klusczinski: Let the record reflect that the architect has agreed to the change. Motion has been made and seconded any additional discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. Moved: Zeiger Second: Riley Approval of C of A 2008-0508A Approved 4-0 B. LANDMARKS None C. NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION — None. . III. REGULAR BUSINESS A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved: Riley Second: Zeiger Approval of Minutes of 4/21/2008 Approved Unanimously B. TREASURER'S REPORT Submitted as presented. C. STAFF REPORTS 1. Correspondence Correspondence from Cheryl Musgrave of DLGF was included in Commissioner's packets. President Klusczinski presented information that was given to him regarding an alley vacation request for the Riverside Dr. local historic district. The HPC was previously unaware of the request, despite the fact that the item is to be heard at the 5/27/2008 Common Council meeting. Staff/Counsel will investigate the process to determine HPC's place in it. If necessary, a special meeting will be scheduled to discuss the matter should it be determined that an official opinion/position should be rendered to Common Council on behalf of the HPC 11 2. Director — Catherine Hostetler Distributed to Commission. 4. Assistant Director — Amy Herdman Distributed to Commission, including copy of W Washington Walks brochure. 5. Legal Counsel — Larry Meteiver Reviewed the Common Council decision of 5/12/2008 to sustain HPC denial of Professor Enderle's C of A regarding 723 Park Avenue. The vote was decisive at 9-0 to sustain denial. Counsel acknowledged the contributions of Director Hostetler and Commissioner Klusczinski's testimony during the Common Council meeting. Counsel was also resoundingly complimented for his work on the legal brief and testimony at the Council meeting. C. COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. President's Report — Tim Klusczinski 04/22: Meeting at HLFI to discuss the Marquette Feasibility Analysis and costs. 04/25: Met with officials from the Indiana Department of Local Government Finance regarding local landmark buildings (Marquette and Monroe Schools) now under consideration for construction projects. Others present: Catherine Hostetler, Bill Latoza (BauerLatoza Studio), Paul Hayden (HLFI), administrators and legal representation for the SBCSC. Dr. Robert Zimmerman, Superintendent of the SBCSC, hosted brief walking tours of each facility. At the completion of the tours, DLGF Commissioner Musgrave asked the SBCSC and architects Hebard & Hebard to collaborate with BauerLatoza Studio. The purpose of this joint effort would be to investigate alternate design solutions for the existing Marquette that would enable it to satisfy the current educational objectives for the proposed Montessori program. Final reports from this architectural committee are due in 30 days. 04/29: The HPC Advisory Board Meeting was cancelled due to scheduling conflicts among the membership. An alternate meeting date will be set in the near future. 05/04: Attended "Art & Community: Converging Paths" presented by Janis Martin at NSB. Ms. Martin showcased her oil color exhibit and discussed her current project, which is adapting the Greene & Berkey School Building (Goshen, IN) into a new open studio for local artists. HLFI provided assistance in the effort to acquire and rehab the building. 05/09am: Meeting with Todd Zeiger to discuss improvements to the C of A form. 05/09pm: Review of legal response/documentation with Larry Meteiver and Catherine Hostetler, relating to litigation over the C of A #2008-0214 denial and the ensuing Common Council request for appeal. 05/12: Attended the Common Council meeting and provided testimony to challenge an appeal resulting from HPC denial of C of A #2008-0214. Others present: Larry Meteiver, Catherine Hostetler, and Amy Herdman. 05/15: Interviewed Catherine Hostetler about the C of A procedure, routing and archiving of records. Briefly discussed improvements that could be considered for the forms and public hearing segments. Historic Preservation Commission Report on the C of A procedure — May 19th, 2008 12 During the HPC meeting on April 215', 2008 President Klusczinski announced that he would begin, an investigation into the process of Certificates of Appropriateness (C of A's). Evidence of that activity is now available within the President's Report for May 19 , 2008. The HPC Staff, its Executive Director and Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana were consulted to better understand the current routing method of C of As along with suggestions that might improve the overall process. Within the context of the study, it is important for C of As to be seen strictly as a record of approved projects. That is either Projects that have been completed or those that have the approval to begin. For clarification, it is the APPLICATION (APPs) for a C of A that proposes a project and provides the opportunity for consideration by the HPC board and staff (where administrative authority is granted). An APP does eventually become a permanent component of the C of A register once the Commission Board grants approval. In its most basic sense, a C of A has an archival purpose in documenting the evolution of a designated site or structure. As with any effort of record-keeping accuracy is always of paramount concern. Similarly, APPs must be clear, concise and complete as a true representation of a project that must be reviewed. Observations and Comments RECORDS: Beginning in July 2007, "C of A" forms have been created from the office computer system (DataEase). A benefit of that entry method is that we now automatically generate a digital record of the project — searchable by address or index number. Through "DataEase," an effort is underway to eventually interface C of As with the Building Department, Code Enforcement, the Area Plan Commission, and possibly the County Assessor. Completion of that project to be determined. The HPC office maintains earlier C of A documents from 2004, forward, with a few earlier (2002). Indefinite numbers of earlier records are stored at Central Archives. Eventually, those records should be assimilated into the HPC property address files. NEW PROJECTS: All APPLICATIONS originate from the staff office. The staff provides assistance for those filling out the forms. This includes guidance for the petitioner, as - the project details are conveyed with respect to property standards, solutions experience and established cost principles. Site investigations are sometimes performed. ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL: Staff currently approves APPs that propose "In-kind" maintenance work, the removal'of dead trees, and small landscaping projects. The Executive Director usually approves administrative C of As. In special circumstances arrangements would allow the Assistant Director to authorize certain projects on behalf of the Executive Director. Occasionally, outside sources are also consulted for project consideration. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Executive Director generally writes the staff recommendation for APPs requiring board review. BOARD DECISION: Once the board renders its decision, a staff member (generally the Executive Director) finalizes the C of A for the petitioner, including any amendments, modifications or changes. In the case of a Denial, a letter detailing any reasons is provided as a substitute for the C of A. FOLLOWUP: Staff Inspector investigates the work during the project and upon completion verifying that the proposed work is in accordance with the C of A. Presently, no final report is made. 13 Recommendations FORMS: The C of A Application form should be updated to only focus on information relevant to the consideration of the proposal. The social history component should be removed unless specifically relevant to the nature of the building. Individual signatures should be required when making staff recommendations and approvals. The By-laws do not govern the C of A forms and more importantly the application requirements for them. PROCEDURE: Administrative approvals should be authorized through specific parameters — detailed and understood by the HPC board. It may be useful to have the staff authorize other incidental work (projects that are hidden from view). The Legal Affairs committee should review any changes proposed. A summary (inspection form) should supplement the C of A process — once the project is complete. PRESENTATION: Digital photos (PowerPoint) will improve the presentation of the project to the HPC Board and public. Currently, hardcopy materials are only available to Commission members and the petitioner. The public has far less information required for making informed comments. C of As and Agendas should be made available to District Liaisons. Or these items may be made regularly available through digital technologies. The HPC should investigate any new requirements for Open Door Law, requiring a descriptive publication of any public hearing items. IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS Moved: Zeiger Second: Sassano To suspend agenda for hearing of visitors Approved 4-0 before CLG Training portion of the meeting. VI. HEARING OF VISITORS Kevin Griffith was acknowledged to speak. He'd come to the HPC to request a modification to a staff approved C of A, 2008-0513. Because the modification requires hearing by the Commission, a Special Meeting will be scheduled. (The matter is not actionable because public hearing could not be held at this meeting.) The meeting will be Friday May 23, 2008, pending proper notification per Open Door Law. Sharon Czarnecki appeared on behalf of the homeowner of the local landmark at 713 W LaSalle. The homeowner is seeking HUD assistance for lead paint remediation at 713 W LaSalle. Ms. Czarnecki, who is authorized to be a proxy for the homeowner, was instructed that a C of A application would be necessary due to the scope of the proposed work (vinyl siding) to the exterior of the home, per the HUD program information. That C of A should appear on the June meeting. It was determined, due to low meeting attendance, that the CLG Training would be postponed until the July 21, 2008 meeting. ADJOURNMENT Moved: 8:12 pm Zeiger Second: Sassano Approved: 4-0 14 Attest: Jerry Ujdak Date Secretary Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County 15 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION May 23, 2008 12 NOON HPC CONFERENCE ROOM Called to order at 12:05 pm Members attending: Lynn Patrick, Jerry Ujdak, Mary Jane Chase, Todd Zeiger, Linda Riley, Timothy Klusczinski Staff attending: Larry Meteiver Public Present: Kevin Griffith, petitioner, 2008-0513 Meeting convened to discuss two matters; an amendment to C of A 2008-0513, and an alley vacation request in the Riverside Drive local historic district. Klusczinski: Thank you, onto the first topic on the agenda. The applicant, Mr. Griffith, made a presentation at our last HPC meeting under Public Comments, addressing a current C ofA issued by staff dated 05113/2008, and previously staff approved. Mr: Griffith indicated that there would be a change to this particular C ofA and he was . asking for consideration for a different window to be applied to the rear of the property. Because that's not a staff approved issue, the Commission agreed to convene a special meeting to consider that topic in the interest of time and material ordering dates. The original C ofA read. • "the HPC of South Bend & St. Joseph County has reviewed the proposed work; replacement windows in rear of house designed to match the remaining configuration of originals- 6 over 1. " Mr. Griffith could you state your name and address for the record and describe for the Commission and describe what alteration you would like to see to amend this C ofA. . Griffith: Sure, thank you. I'm Kevin Griffith, 1118 E Wayne Street. What were looking to do is with the two first floor windows in the kitchen, as opposed to the 6 over 1, we're looking at 9 light windows which would match the door of the 1980's work that had been done, that's a 9 panel, as well as characteristically the dormer in the front of the house. We seethe windows for the kitchen being more with that period, and those are 9 as well. Klusczinski: For the record, Chair is sharing pictures of the facades of the house and the rear as it exists, photos date from May 20, 2008 from our field representative. So, basically, you have a 9 panel or S light door and the other two windows that are in the rear of the property, the 2 x2 and a 3, you're proposing a S light window for both of those locations? Griffith: Correct. Klusczinski: Is there any member of the Commission that has questions for the petitioner? Zeiger: Just for clarification, those windows that you were showing, those were replacements done in the 1980's? Griffith: Yes, sometime in the 1980's. Riley: We saw a picture of your windows the other night where the smaller kitchen windows came out like this, right? Griffith: The ones that we're looking to put in? Correct. Riley: Now, what about the ones that are in your other room? They're bigger, are they the same? . Griffith: Yes, they push out also. That's relevant to both sizes of windows, yes. Riley: Ok, so it's one solid window with 9 panes. Griffith: Correct. Ujdak. Each half is 9, correct? Griffith: Correct. Klusczinski: Any other questions. for the petitioner? Hearing none, we'll move on to... oh. Chase: On the front, are these I by 1, am I seeing a blind through, or are those 1 by 1 on top? Zeiger: Those dormer windows look like they're 3 over, 3 lights over 3 lights... Chase: Are they? Griffith: Yes. Ujdak: That's a shutter. Are you looking at this? Zeiger: a lights over 3 lights. Ujdak: That looks like some kind ofshade or something. Griffith: And that's the same window basically that we're looking to put into the back. Chase: Were those replacements? Griffith: No those are originals, and we're trying to restore the originals. These are originals, all of the windows in the front are original to the home with the exception of this and the original C ofA allowed us to put French doors there, which is what was there originally. So basically, we're trying to get all of the original stuff... Ujdak: Back to the way it was? Griffith: Yes. Chase: Oh, right because you're doing the pergola over this? Griffith: Thinking about it. Klusczinski: Any other questions? We move on then to Commission discussion. Just for the record, the survey card for the property shows some precedent for a 9 over 9, and I'll read under Item 15, description "... attenuated 9 over 9 double hung windows with wood casings ". Just as part of the record. Ujdak: What make are the windows? Griffith: They're wood. Ujdak: What make... Pella or what? Riley: He's having them custom made. Griffith: Yes, custom made. Klusczinski: Any other Commission discussion? Hearing none, Chair opens public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition to the current petition? Also hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any other comments, Mr. Griffith? Griffith: No, just thank you for putting this together on a holiday weekend, I appreciate it. Klusczinski: Chair will entertain a motion for this certificate. For the record, this would be C ofA 2008-0513 as amended. Zeiger: So moved. Riley: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded, any additional discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Staff will provide you with a copy of the updated C ofA with the alterations reflected. Moved: Zeiger Second: Riley Passes Unanimously President Klusczinski reviewed the alley vacation request, specifically: "The alley to be vacated is the first east/west alley south of the Golden Avenue from Riverside Drive a distance of 120 feet and width of 14 feet." The alley vacate petition is in process and is scheduled to be heard by Common Council on May 27, 2008. The focus of the HPC review and consideration of this topic was to determine if the HPC has any jurisdiction and/or any place in this process before this, or any other alley vacate in a local historic district or adjoining a landmark, reaches Common Council for consideration. Counsel was asked to review the vacation request process from the homeowners initial request, through the contacts that are made with various city agencies, i.e. Fire, Police Department, Redevelopment, etc. The purpose of that contact is to solicit opinion and any objection(s) to the request. Common Council has the jurisdiction understate statutes to allow or disallow the vacation request. Counsel also reviewed the allowable objections to such a request. Counsel explained that, at present, the HPC doesn't have a prescribed role in the consideration of alley vacates, but that any private citizen is allowed and encouraged to speak either for or against such a request if they perceive that it effects them. Per Counsel, the first foreseeable insertion of HPC input may not come until or unless the alley is vacated by Council, and then the homeowners wish to build upon it or alter it in a way that would require a C of A. Thus, it is Counsel's opinion that the HPC does not, at this point in the process, have purview, but any individual member affected by the petition may be heard and considered. President Klusczinski clarified that the current petition is being heard pursuant to IC 36.7-3-12 Alleyway Vacation procedures, and the HPC has no place in that particular process, also Zoning Chapter 21, Sect 21-13.02 Powers and Duties of the Historic Preservation Commission. Because the alley doesn't qualify as a "structure" and because the use of the alley is not changing (as far as is known at this time), the Zoning code cited also does not provide for HPC input in this matter. President Klusczinski expressed concern that because the HPC doesn't have a currently have a place in the vacation petition process, homeowners might pursue vacation with a plan to build or alter the alleyway, leading to confusion or frustration after the vacation is secured without understanding that a C of A would then be needed to further pursue their plans. Aside from that consideration, the conclusion is that the HPC does not have any obligation to take any action, unless individual members wish to be heard due to their personal reservations about the request. President Klusczinski polled Commissioners to determine if any Commissioners held the opinion that to allow an alley vacation was a compromise of the "historic viability" of the District. Commissioner consensus was that no Commissioner wished to pursue this petition formally. Commissioner Chase relayed that petitioners must state the reason for their vacation request, so their prospective plans should be known at the outset of the process; although it's possible that homeowners could be duplicitous in their filing. President Klusczinski relayed the details of the petition, per the petitioner, without specific knowledge of the truth or untruths of the contents. Commissioner Zeiger suggested that possibly the extent of HPC involvement should be to ensure that homeowners know that any subsequent building or altering of a vacated alley within a historic district must come before the HPC, but until a C of A is received, then its just conjecture to discuss what a homeowners plans might be. President Klusczinski closed the matter, and thanked Commissioners for their participation. Moved: Zeiger Second: Ujdak For adjournment Passes Unanimously 4�J Location Budget as of 05-31-2008 Unencumbered Unexpended Expenditure Balance/Percent Note: Includes transactions after the last posted date of 01-01-2008. 12,449.08 17,550.92 17,550.92 Fund: 001 County General for 01/01/2008 thru 05/31/2008 58.50 58.50 15,251.94 20,798.06 Loc: 037 Historic Preservation 57.69 57.69 27,701.02 Account Original Addt'I/Adj Total 58.06 Object Description Appropriation Appropriation Appropriation Encumbrance 11075, Deputy Director 30,000.00 0.00 30,000.00 0.00 000 General GovT. 72.14 93.89 606.11 606.11 11309 Historic Preservation Admin. 36,050.00 0.00 36,050.00 0.00 000 General GovT. 79.03 79.03 12,144.00 10000 Totals """""'"'""""'"`"""""""`""""" 66,050.00 0.00 66,050.00 0.00 21030 Office Supplies 700.00 131.98 831.98 0.00 000 General GovT. 0.00 900.00 900.00 22010 Gas Oil & Lubricants 880.00 63.18 943.18 0.00 000 General GovT. ` 84.14 0.00 160.00 22120 Garage & Motor Supplies 700.00 0.00 700.00 0.00 000 General GovT. 2,158.50 72.41 72.41 20000 Totals '"""'""""""""""""`"""""""""' 2,280.00 195.16 2,475.16 0.00 31070 Other Contractual Services 29,000.00 4,315.50 33,315.50 0.00 000 General GovT. 32020 Travel 500.00 0.00 500.00 0.00 000 General GovT. 32050 Instruction & Training 900.00 0.00 900.00 0.00 000 General GovT. 32053 Public Relations 1,570.00 190.00 1,760.00 0.00 000 General GovT. 32200 Telephone 160.00 0.00 160.00 .0.00 000 General GovT. 32350 Postage 2,588.00 392.88 2,980.88 0.00 000 General GovT. s 33010 Publication Of Legal Notices 300.00 0.00 300.00 0.00 000 General GovT. Saint Joseph County User ID ksobecki 06/02/2008 01:11 PM Page 77 Unencumbered Unexpended Expenditure Balance/Percent Balance/Percent 12,449.08 17,550.92 17,550.92 58.50 58.50 15,251.94 20,798.06 20,798.06 57.69 57.69 27,701.02 38,348.98 38,348.98 58.06 58.06 162.40 669.58 669.58 80.48 80.48 262.73 680.45 680.45 72.14 72.14 93.89 606.11 606.11 86.59 86.59 519.02 1,956.14 1,956.14 79.03 79.03 12,144.00 21,171.50 21,171.50 63.55 63.55 0.00 500.00 500.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 900.00 900.00 100.00 100.00 279.12 1,480.88 1,480.88 84.14 84.14 0.00 160.00 160.00 100.00 100.00 822.38 2,158.50 2,158.50 72.41 72.41 74.06 225.94 225.94 75.31 75.31 User ID ksobecki 06/02/2008 01:11 PM Page 77 Location ludget as of 05-31-2008 Note: Includes transactions after the last posted date of 01-01-2008. Fund: 001 County General for 01/01/2008 thru 05/31/2008 Loc: 037 Historic Preservation Account Total Original Object Description Appropriation 33100 Printing 1,200.00 000 General GovT. Balance/Percent 37100 Auto Lease 300.00 000 General GovT. 1,127.80 39010 Dues & Subscription 300.00 000 General GovT. 24.43 39600 Refunds, Awards & Indemnities 0.00 000 General GovT. 300.00 39750 Data Processing 400.00 000 General Gov T. 100.00 30000 TotalsflflfR!lN..YRRR.R!.RttflffffffftYYYR!!! 37,218.00 Location TotalslltRlttRRRRRRflfltlRRttlttRlfflftf!lftftR 105,548.00 Investment Accounts Transfer Accounts User ID ksobecki Saint Joseph County Addt'VAdj Total Unencumbered Unexpended Appropriation Appropriation Encumbrance Expenditure Balance/Percent Balance/Percent 3,416.00 4,616.00 0.00 3,488.20 1,127.80 1,127.80 24.43 24.43 0.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 300.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 300.00 0.00 27.00 273.00 273.00 91.00 91.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,529.42 (5,529.42) (5,529.42) 0.00 0.00 2,208.60 2,608.60 0.00 2,208.60 400.00 400.00 15.33 15.33 10,522.98 47,740.98 0.00 24,572.78 23,168.20 23,168.20 48.53 48.53 10,718.14 116,266.14 0.00 52,792.82 63,473.32 63,473.32 54.59 54.59 0.00 0.00 52,792.82 06/02/2008 01:11 PM Page 78. User ID ksobecid 06/02/2008 01:11 PM Page 148 Location Budget as of 05-31-2008 Saint Joseph County Note: Includes transactions after the last posted date of 01-01-2008. Fund: 013 County Special Gifts for 01/01/2008 thru 05/31/2008 Loc: 037 Historic Preservation Account Original Addt'VAdj Total Unencumbered Unexpended . Object Description Appropriation Appropriation Appropriation Encumbrance Expenditure Balance/Percent Balance/Percent 00000 Gen Godt 0.00 9,123.25 9,123.25 0.00 0.00 9,123.25 9,123.25 000 General Gov T. 100.00 100.00 00000 Totals'***'**""""'*'...... ""'**""* 0.00 9,123.25 9,123.25 0.00 0.00 9,123.25 9,123.25 100.00 100.00 23240 Other Supplies 0.00 2,846.00 2,846.00 0.00 173.75 2,672.25 2,672.25 000 . General GovT. 93.89 93.89 20000 Totals!fflffffffYfffffYYlYttRRffRRRYtttRRRRtR! 0.00 2,846.00 2,846.00 0.00 173.75 2,672.25 2,672.25 93.89 93.89 Location Totals """""**""*"**"""""**"""" 0.00 11,969.25 11,969.25 0.00 173.75 11,795.50 11,795.50 98.55 98.55 Investment Accounts 0.00 Transfer Accounts 0.00 173.75 User ID ksobecid 06/02/2008 01:11 PM Page 148 Director's Report June, 2608 May 20 Rotary Board of Director's Meeting May 21 Submitted St. Joseph County Bridges Report to INDOT. May 28 Met with County Commissioners Mark Dobson and Bob Kovach concerning Department Car and also concerning landmark at 14297 SR 23 and the Road widening. May 30 106 Review concerning the Intersection at Walnut and Western June 2 Met with Ryan Dvorak and Brendon Crumlish concerning the proposed porch at 215 W. Northshore June 3 Meeting with Terry DeRosa, Zoo Director and the BSSB Executive Committee members to set priorities for the Conservatories and the volunteer staff. June 5 Department Head training seminar on Critical incident Stress De- Briefing June 9 Finance Committee meeting for the Center For History; meeting with Marti Lewis on BSSB priorities for June 10 meeting. June 10 Meeting with Terry DeRose and Growing House Manager, Bob Monroe and BSSB with the priorities for the facilities. Participated in the groundbreaking ceremonies for the American Trust Plaza and Preserve America Presentation. June 11 Arranged with Janice Talboon to have the City Survey Presentation to the Common Council on June 23. Met with Memorial Hospital, NNN and Chapin Park about the plans of Memorial and NNN for the neighborhood. June 12 Began the grant writing process for the endowment of the Horticulturalist position for the Conservatories. Assistant Director's Report HPC Meeting — 06/16/2008 ■ Awarded KPEF fellowship to attend NAPC Forum in New Orleans. ■ Finalized reservations for Forum. ■ Submitted necessary permission request to County Commissioners for out of state travel. ■ Marked 2"d anniversary on staff with HPC. ■ Met with Streets Dept regarding delay in hanging LHD signs. ■ Delivered photos of 1975 Beiger Mansion fire to the present owners of the Beiger. Photos donated by Jerry Kline of W. Northshore LHD. ■ _ Informed of Preserve America designation by the American Council on Historic Preservation. Shared designation information with Mayor's Office. ■ Attended ground breaking/press event at 101 N. Michigan Street. ■ Invited Lt Gov and DHPA to Preserve America announcement- neither could attend due to previous obligation. ■ Continued work on Cornelius O'Brien lectureship grant requests on behalf of LHA 2009 National Conference. ■ Conferred with John Kovach regarding grant sources and applications. ■ Met with Steve Nemeth of Parks Dept. ■ Took receipt of A Walk Along W. Washington Street brochure and pod cast file. ■ Submitted files to County IT to be included on our dept. web page. ■ Prepared minutes from 5/19,5/23,4/16A & B. 0 Completed final report on W Washington grant and submitted it to IHC. THE WHITE HOUSE May 30, 2008 Dear Citizens of South Bend, Congratulations to South Bend on your designation as a Preserve America community! The preservation and enjoyment of your historical and cultural resources celebrate an important part of our nation's heritage. You honor our nation's past and inspire and educate for the future. President Bush and I applaud your achievement. As your community shares its story with residents and visitors, you set a great example for others. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation will soon send a package of relevant information and materials. Thank you for your enthusiastic participation in the Preserve America initiative. . Sincerely, Laura Bush Honorary Chair, Preserve America SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 169 2008 MEETING GUESTS: PLEASE SIGN THIS LIST SO THAT YOUR PRESENCE CAN BE NOTED FOR OUR MINUTES Print Name Sb►¢n o"j cz9 �i��s �'nohrl e Address Signature �l� P�►� �v¢ . � r�1h ��sf,� _( lwk AW f S7A E, GJ °alae,,, ,��� �: !��� J21L--1 Moth -D ,1_�4vSLln MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY June 16, 2008 13"' Floor Conference Room County — City Building, South Bend, Indiana Members Present: Mary Jane Chase, Timothy Klusczinski, David Sassano, Lynn Patrick, Jerry Ujdak Staff Present: Catherine Hostetler [Director], Amy Herdman [Asst. Director], Larry Meteiver [Legal] Absent: Linda Riley, Todd Zeiger Also Present: Sharon Czarnecki, Pete Payne, Liz Maradik, George Enderle, Mark Neal, Kathleen Neal, Lance Roush, Bob Grant, Ryan Dvorak, Angie Dvorak, Brendan Crumlish, Don Deitz. I. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL: President Tim Klusczinski called to order at 7:00 pm. Quorum was duly established. II. PUBLIC HEARING Application Number: 2008-0512 Property Location: 510 Lindsey Property Owner: City of South Bend Landmark or District Designation: Chapin Park LHD Rating: Non contributing STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This American Foursquare was built in 1903. Clifford and Esther Snell were the first residents of this house. Clifford was a bookkeeper for an oil company. The Snell family resided there until 1932. APPLICATION ITEMS: The City of South Bend plans to make selective repairs to the property at 510 Lindsey as part of the Dollar House Program. The City is requesting permission to do the following: 1. Replace all windows with Kolbe and Kolbe wood sash kit replacement windows. 2. Remove the concrete steps/porch on the west side of the property, which was previously used as the - entrance to the second floor apartment. (See Attachment B for photo of porch). 3. Remove wrought iron railing and posts from the front porch and replace with railing and posts in a style . similar to surrounding architecture. (See attachment B for example) 4. Remove existing aluminum siding and install LP Brand smooth "Smart Siding" that will match the reveal of the original siding. (See Attachment B for example of Smart Siding") 5. Repair crack in northeast corner of foundation by tuck -pointing. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: I. The Environment B. Building Site, Landscaping & Accessories Recommended: New site work should be based upon actual knowledge of the past appearance of the . property found in photographs, drawings and newspapers. New site work should also be appropriate to existing surrounding site elements in scale, type and appearance.... II Existing Structures A. Building Materials Original exterior building materials in the district include brick, stucco, clapboard, wood shingles and brick or stone masonry. In some instances vinyl, composite and aluminum siding have been applied over the original material Required: Original exterior building materials shall be retained when possible. Deterioration of wood materials shall be presented though repair, cleaning and painting. The existing architectural detail around windows, porches, doors and eaves shall be retained or replaced by replicas of the same design when deteriorated beyond repair.... Recommended: Whenever possible, the original building materials should be restored.. When maintaining or repairing original siding is not feasible aluminum, vinyl or composite siding may be used. When used over wood surfaces, the siding should be the same size and style as the original wood. Every effort should be made to retain original trim around windows, doors, cornices, gables, eaves and other architectural features.... C. Windows and Doors: Required: Original windows and doors shall be retained including sashes, sills, shutters, decorative glass, pediments, hoods and hardware. When deteriorated beyond repair, they shall be replaced with units and trim resembling the original. Prohibited: Original doors, windows and hardware shall not be discarded when they can be restored and reused in place. New windows and door openings, which would alter the scale and proportion of the building, may not be introduced. Inappropriate new window and door features such as metal, vinyl or fiberglass awnings, hoods or aluminum insulating glass combinations that require removal of original windows and doors shall not be installed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of items 2, 3 & 5. Item 1, staff recommends that the original windows be retained as they appear to be in good condition and that new storms and screens be approved. Staff recommends approval of item 4 with the condition that if any architectural features, decorative siding and trim, etc., are uncovered with the removal of the aluminum siding that they be left exposed or replicated with the LP Smartside products. Maradik: Liz Maradik with the City of South Bends division of Community Development, 1200 County City Building. The city is requesting a C ofA for work to be completed at 510 Lindsey Street in conjunction with the Dollar House program. The premise of the program is that the City purchases a property and conveys it to a homeowner with the agreement that they will complete specific rehabilitation to the property within one year. The city has the opportunity to complete selective repairs to the properties prior to turning it over to the new owner. However, the cost of these repairs and acquisition is not to exceed $45,000. The purpose of the program is help make it financially feasible for a household to rehabilitate a property within the City of South Bend without having to over invest to bring it up to quality. The City is requesting an in-kind replacement of all windows with Kolbe and Kolbe wood sash kit replacements. The City recognizes that the staff recommendation is not to allow this but the windows are not in good condition and would need significant work to be functional and weather tight and as such the City requests that the Commission consider an in-kind replacement. Klusczinski: Are there any questions for the petitioner? I have one for staff.' The current condition of the house is derelict and non-contributing? Hostetler. It's not derelict, it's non-contributing. I mean it's not like falling apart or anything. Klusczinski: I have one particular consideration for the product material, the LP Smartside. I wasn't sure if what you were attempting to present was something that might be in-kind to clapboard style that you might be found under that house. I couldn't find any evidence of anything that was a clapboard model. Maradik: The one that would be used is found on Page 5. It's the Precision Series Smooth Lap. Klusczinski: Catherine, do we have any way of knowing right now if there would be clapboard siding on that house once the aluminum siding is removed? I mean, potentially so. Hostetler. Foursquares typically had that on them, but I did not pull apart any of the siding to check on that. Sassano: Is the intention to remove the vinyl or aluminum is it aluminum? Maradik. It's aluminum right now. Sassano: If it's aluminum it more than likely has the furring strips and you're going to find clapboard underneath it. And then you're just going to cover that back up again. Maradik.• Yes. Sassano: Is there a reason that decision has already been made on how to proceed when nobody really knows what the condition is to begin with? Maradik: Just in general, the thought is that we want to provide a material that will withstand a period with time without necessarily needing maintenance as far as painting it. 2 Sassano: Just to give me a general understanding does the Dollar House program requires a minimum of a $75, 000... ? Maradik: No, it differs according to each property based on the specifications that are created for that house. Sassano: So, what can you tell us specifically about this house? Maradik: For how much the... ? Sassano: Yes, what the expect amount that the owners will be expected to ... Maradik: I believe it's $60,000. Sassano: And that's in addition to what you're spending? Maradik: Yes, that's in addition to. Sassano: And so that's your goal to bring it to a certain minimum level? Maradik: Exactly, so that they don't have to over invest. So that in the end their property isn't worth less than what they spent. Sassano: Is there a potential purchaser at this point? Maradik. No, right now we're waiting to get these repairs completed before going to another lottery. Sassano: It just strikes me as odd that you would make the decision without knowing what you're getting into. The first thing you'd want to do is remove the siding, and since there is no homeowner, and there is no schedule that somebody is waiting to move in, certainly leaving it exposed to have to come back in to this process again isn't going to cause any kind of significant damage even if it's in horrible shape. Maradik: The process that we have to use is through the City's Board of Public Works and we're hoping to be able to bid it out so -that we can have the raffle by late summer. And so when we bid it out to a contractor, we have to have those specifications. Sassano: Do you have to bid it out to remove the aluminum? Maradik: I think that we wanted to complete all of those exterior improvements before turning it over to a homeowner, yes. Sassano: I guess what I'm asking is could you just have someone remove the aluminum without bidding it through Public Works. Maradik: No. Sassano: My guess is that you could probably get someone to do it for free. I sure would like to see what we're dealing with; I'm not very comfortable approving the replacement of materials when we have no idea what the condition is. Klusczinski: And when the replacement material isn't necessarily in-kind to anything that might be underneath. Sassano: And it would give you a much better chance to see what the windows are really like. To see if the windows really do need to be replaced then it's much easier to make that case. Maradik: Well, it's just the sash kits that we're asking to replace. Sassano: Yes, but you don't know the condition of the frames, the sills the trims, many of which could have been covered or maybe cut it looks like the sills were probably cut. Chase: You know, I know that you've worked on a number of other homes, but mostly you have torn off to see what's underneath, I've never seen a home that you didn't tear something off to see what you're working with.- And my other question is has this siding been used before? Maradik: Yes. The Smartsiding, you mean has it been used in houses around here? Yes. There were a couple of pictures in your packet of houses that already have it on them. Sassano: The product itself is not my problem, just the general approach to the design. You're specking a dimension and we don't even know what the dimension is, I mean how do we know that we're not going to find 4 inch boards? Are you going to find existing corner boards? Will there be soffit boards? Maradik: All of those things, the corner boards and all of that are things that they do put on. 3 Sassano: I'm just responding to your criteria that you have to bid it out. to find existing corner boards? Will there be sojjit boards? Maradik: All of those things; the corner boards and all of that are things that they do put on. Sassano: I'm just responding to your criteria that you have to bid it out. You're bidding out something that... (unintelligible- paper shuffling near microphone) Klusczinski: Any other questions for the petitioner? Thank you very much. We move on now to Commission discussion. I share Davids thoughts. I would certainly like to know what's under the house before it's committed to have a certain appearance especially in the historic district that we're talking about. The AWN house rehab model is north of that I believe? Maradik: It's just east of the property. Klusczinski: Ok. And there were some features that were incorporated into their version of the siding that were not called out in this particular C of A application. So, what I would like to do, I would only feel comfortable tonight giving a conditional approval where I would have some limits if we were going to go that way so that you might consider part of the work and be able to move forward in some way. It seems that there's a difference of opinion between the staff recommendation that the windows be left in place and that they're good enough and it would be worth doing, and your testimony that says they're deteriorated. We could certainly charge the Standards and Maintenance committee to do some investigation but I think one consideration for this case is that the City of South -Bend might have to take a look at some of the things that wouldn't get approved tonight and maybe we could find some compromise or some happy ground or something like that. And consider in the most expeditious way anything that you might be willing to come back with. Those are just my thoughts; I'd certainly appreciate anyone else's. Chase: Well, we've always taken some siding off, trim off, whenever we've looked at a house something has been taken off to determine what's underneath. So to do all this, to put bids on an unknown is unusual. Klusczinski: If there's no other discussion, we'll move on to public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Hearing none, is there any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition of the current position? Also hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. What's your pleasure? As the by-laws allow the President to make a motion here I will do so. I would approve a conditional approval of C ofA 2008-0512 with the following contingencies: to substitute the replacement of new storms and screens for the sash kits currently called out, no replication of decorative features in siding, recommending instead that the existing uncovered features be rehabilitated and remain visible not covered by new siding and replacement may only occur if these features show extensive damage. I would allow the use of Smartside conditionally if it will match the style, profile and reveal of the original siding now covered by aluminum, and if features like the belt course may be achieved or re-created by using it. Foundation repairs must be repaired by patching agents or mortar that are compatible with existing structural materials. The proposed porch reconstruction should be permitted. HPC staff should have the authority to recommend and approve unknown project elements as they occur and within the parameters approved by the HPC Board under this application and these criteria. That is my motion. Chase: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded. Any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion, carries. Moved: Klusczinski Second: Chase Approval of amended 2008-0512 Approved 5-0 n Application Number: 2008-0521 Property Location: 713 W. La Salle Property Owner: Naomi Cassier Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark Rating: Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: The Neitzel House was built in 1884 and re-classified as Free Classic in the 2005 City of South Bend Survey. It is a 2 storey clapboard residence with an irregular plan. It has a decorated cornice and the attic storey is of wood shingles. It was built by Barnhard Neitzel, a South Bend carpenter. The residence is a good example of what a carpenter could do with pattern books of architectural styles which were available to the public at that time. APPLICATION ITEMS: House has lead base paint. Cover house with cement board, replace gutters, fascia and frieze board. Replace three windows per attached (Exhibit A). This is a HUD project. The intention of the cement board is to replicate the structure of the home. Also the ornateness of the house will remain the same. Also please read letter from homeowner (Exhibit B) LOCAL LANDMARK STANDARDS: Group B Standards A. Maintenance The maintenance of any historical structure or site shall in no way involve any direct physical change except for general cleaning and upkeep of the landmark. The Commission shall encourage the proper maintenance of all structures or sites. C. Renovation and Additions 2. Material Additions and improvements involving any new material in the landmark should be of the same materials the original. It should be the same size and texture. An alternative material may be allowed if it duplicates the original b. siding materials—The Commission discourages the covering or alteration of original materials with additional siding. Structures already sided with incompatible materials should be returned to a siding similar to the original when renovation is considered. RECOMMENDATION: This is a proposed HUD Lead Abatement Pro gram project in which the entire house is required to be encapsulated. The HUD Lead Abatement Program does not allow for a partial covering of the house. Therefore staff cannot recommend approval since the cement board cannot replicate all of the architectural features (Exhibit C) and trims that are on this building. With regard to the windows the applicant did not realize that Window World's proposal was for all of the windows so only the three appeared on the COA application. The proposal is to replace all of the windows in the house with vinyl replacement windows and wrap the sills and casings as part of the HUD lead abatement project. The Staff does not recommend approval. The windows are in very good condition and do not need to be replaced. The only reason for this COA is so that the applicant can avail themselves of HUD grant money instead of painting the house. - Klusczinski: Thank you, Are you prepared to..? Czarnecki: Yes, and also brought... Klusczinski: Sorry, name and address for the record. Czarnecki: Sharon Czarnecki for Naomi Cassier, 713 W. LaSalle. Klusczinski: And for the record, you're not the property owner, you're acting on the property owners' behalf. Czarnecki: That's correct. Klusczinski: And you've provide staff with some evidence...? Czarnecki :Yes, the letter from Naomi giving me the authority to be here. The house is in very bad condition in terms of the paint peeling off of the house. And so we would like to reside it. I've brought Pete with me here from Window World who's brought some of the materials with him and to try to duplicate to the originality of the home and it's existing condition. At the time, as was stated, I'd thought that all of the windows were in the first exhibit, but it's not it's just three of them, but we are askingfor all of the windows to be replaced. And again, the other three windows will be as close to the original as possible, As the house is over 100 years old, obviously structures have changed, but we will try to duplicate I have pictures here to show you how closely we will duplicate the house to it's original condition. , Klusczinski: Are there any Commissioners that have questions for the petitioner? Sassano: Where is the lead paint? 5 Czarnecki: All over the house. The outside, we had it tested, and it's around the window frames and the peeling paint on the house itself. Sassano: What about the columns and the porch rails? Czarnecki: I would assume that that does have paint. We would probably... what were you going to do...? Payne: Yes, we would stabilize the paint. I'm not sure that they contain it or not. The columns. Sassano: So the only lead that you know of... was there a report submitted? So right now, this is all just, I mean where does it come from, how do we know this is lead paint? Czarnecki: Because I had Charles McManus do the lead based analysis. And you were with him at the time, right? Payne: No. I wasn't at the inspection. Normally they do provide a report. Czarnecki: He never gave it to me. Sassano: Isn't that kind of why we're all sitting here? I mean, without that report... Payne: Just the verbal with Chuck he did say that there's lead paint, but I can't tell you whether it was in the railing and columns but I can say that it is in the windows and siding. Klusczinski: Any other questions for the petitioner? Payne: The columns actually look like they're in good enough structural condition that if there was lead paint that it could be stabilized. Sassano: What does that entail? Payne: That entails any wet scraping and sanding that's necessary and then painting over it. Klusczinski: I'm personally curious- if you could stabilize and pass the HUD requirements on elements that aren't the siding, by repainting them, couldn't that also be the approach for the siding as well? Czarnecki: Well, the cost to repaint the home, I'd gotten some bids, were around $15,000 to repaint this large home. It would be more applicable to reside it so that the house doesn't have to continuously be repainted again. The cost of the siding is $26,000 which would make it more marketable appearance wise. Payne: That's siding, soffit, fascia and also gutters. Seamless gutters. And the product, unlike cement board is the same throughout, never needs painting or staining. It's 25% stronger than cement board and it has a 40% overall better rating than cement board. It retains water less, there's no face nailing, no caulking joints, it's a good product. It's a composite made of plastic and wood fiber. Klusczinski: Any other questions? Czarnecki: I guess that I'd like to also say that we're not asking for a freebie from the cityjust to get this grant, the owner is willing to put in another $19, 000 into the repairs that isn't going to be covered by the grant because of the windows and the siding cost is not going to be enough so she's willing to pay the difference on that. Klusczinski: Ok, thank you very much. Czarnecki: Did you want to see any pictures of that? Klusczinski: If you have any to present. Czarnecki: And for the fascia they do have some beading material for the ornateness of the house that will replicate what is on there now? Sassano: But it only comes in the one 7 inch height size? Payne: That's correct. Klusczinski: Any other materials? One final question, is the property owner aware of the current rating and designation of the house? It's listed as outstanding. Czarnecki: I would assume that she would when she purchased it, I can't answer that no. I would think when she purchased it that it was mentioned to her, but other than that... Klusczinski: But you wouldn't be able to attest to that? Czarnecki: No. Klusczinski: Ok, thank you very much. G Sassano: Just one more question, Mr. Chairman? Klusczinski: Please. Sassano: Assuming that we were to approve this, who would be responsible for designing and coordinating all of the detailed parts of this? It seems to me that even if you were to go ahead with this there's a lot of design work in this, and determinations that would have to be made and how details get handled. Who would do that? Czarnecki: To my understanding it would be from Window World because he is knowledgeable and he has done other historical homes. Payne: We're actually licensed in lead paint stabilization. Sassano: What does that have to do with the design details and determining how to create... ? Klusczinski: Who would be accountable for the project? That's another way to say it. Payne: We would work with Sharon and the owner on that... Sassano: Are you going to prepare shop drawings? Payne: I guess if necessary, yeah we could. Sassano: Have you ever done that before? Payne: Not personally, but we do have someone that could. Sassano: Who's that? Payne: Dennis (name unclear) the owner of the company. Hostetler: What about the curved glass? Payne: I'm sorry? Hostetler. The window on the front of the house has curved glass. Payne: Yeah, we were going to propose installing a bow window with three bow casements. Sassano: And when were you going to propose that? Payne: It's in this one... Sassano: Oh, it is? I didn't pick that up, I'm sorry. Payne: It's the only way to do anything like that, to do a three light bow. Sassano: You can still get curved glass. Payne: I don't think so, not in a thermal pack. Sassano: Well... Payne: If it's there, we'll get it. Klusczinski: Thank you, we'll need to move on to Commission discussion at this point. I would like to share a couple of points with the Commission. In sympathy with the staff recommendation, the Group B standards for rehabilitation; page one of those standards indicate that the building be maintained as is and if possible returned to original. The standards for material changes: additions and improvements involving any new material in a landmark should be of the same material as the original. Windows, in this case, vinyl clad? Hostetler: The original windows? Klusczinski: No, the replacements. Hostetler: Yes, vinyl clad. Klusczinski: It should be the same size and texture though there were a couple of times that I picked up that the applicants didn't necessarily know if that could be fulfilled. It also says that an alternative material could be used if it duplicates the original- may be allowed, if. Wood or wood trim should conform with existing trim in shape and size. And, for siding material, the Commission discourages the covering or alteration of original materials with additional siding. This is an outstanding rated local historic landmark and I'm not sure what harm would come to this particular building if this particular project comes to fruition. And I'm not sure that anyone of us can make that assessment other than if it's rated outstanding right now and proposed, existing features of the building were to be covered then that certainly be in the buildings long term best interest. Having said that, I'd also like to hear everyone's thoughts here on this matter. 7 Patrick. I'd like to make one comment regarding the letter. I am sympathetic to problems with the skewed property tax system and the cost of maintaining a house, but this is a local landmark rated outstanding and many of the items, while she makes some good points, really aren't germane to this project and I am sympathetic to it, but that does not impact on the historic appearance of this house. These are extenuating circumstances that are going on throughout South Bend, Indiana and the whole world. I'm not comfortable with this project, covering up this house like that. Klusczinski: Thank you, any other thoughts? Chase: I feel that so much is unclear. Very little is definitely said. You can't paint the house, but you'll paint the trim, well that trim and posts will have to be periodically repainted anyway and without a certificate on the lead where they think that it's on some places but not on others and decisions would have to be made as situations arose, there's just too much not clear. Klusczinski: I agree. Chase: The house looks in good condition. Ujdak: My opinion is that since this has an outstanding rating that it deserves perhaps more than just average treatment. I think what needs to be done is to do as much as possible to keep it in it's originality. It's rated outstanding, were it something else, much lower, then it would be a different story perhaps. Klusczinski: Chair opens public hearing, is there any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Hearing none, is there any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Dietz: I have a question. How long has this person owned the house? Klusczinski: Wait, if you're going to make a public comment are you going to be speaking in support or opposition to the petition? And then we'll need your name and address too. Dietz: Oh, I'm sorry, I would be in opposition. Klusczinski: We're open for opposition comments right now if you'd like to make one. Dietz: Sure, I'm Don Dietz, 1031 E Jefferson and I do also own a historic landmark house where the paint is failing and with the understanding that when you buy these properties it is brought to your attention that it does need to be maintained according to a standard. Just because it's a longer process to repaint it and it may cost more in the long term to do so, it's part of the responsibility that you assume when you do buy these properties. So just be able to change it for your convenience, I don't agree with. Klusczinski: Thank you very much sir, any other comments? Chair closes public hearing. I'll entertain a motion. Chase: I'd like to make a comment first. In the letter, it says and I'll quote, 'I bought the house because I love old historical craftsmanship, the beauty of the home and because I'm committed to the neighborhood and area'. Seems contradictory to what's being asked. Patrick: Good point. Klusczinski: Chair will entertain a motion. Patrick. I'll move. Does anyone else want to? For application number 2008-0521, be - declined, is that the correct word? Klusczinski: Denied. Patrick: Be denied. Do I have to state the specific reasons? Klusczinski: When we take roll call. Sassano: Each of us has to. Klusczinski: If it's in accordance with the motion to deny, then we'll have to state a reason against this C of A. Motion has been made, is there a second? Ujdak: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded, any additional discussion? Hearing none, I call for a roll call. E:3 Ujdak: I vote in favor of the motion to deny. I just think that the home deserves better treatment its rated outstanding and the gentleman from the audience stated it ... it's part of the game. That's the way it is. Klusczinski: Thank you. Timothy Klusczinski, I move, or vote in favor of the motion to deny C ofA 2008-0521. I have grave concerns that the owner may not be aware of the rating or the condition as it currently stands. And may not know what this change would do to compromise that rating. Speaking also to public comments about painting, its not necessarily more expensive in the long term to do a proper paint job and some studies have shown, and certainly this is a case by case basis, that you can achieve even a 15 year paint job and life expectancy. Still other studies suggest too that the national marketing value of a landmark property could be 10-15% if preserved than if covered. So there are marketing issues that should be investigated. I don't feel, given the current Group B standards that this project is in complement with those and that's why I vote to deny or in favor of the motion to deny. Patrick. Lynn Patrick in favor of my motion to deny because the C ofA 2008-0521 as submitted is incompatible with the standards of that district. Klusczinski: It's a single site landmark. Patrick. Mm-hmm. Sassano: David Sassano, I'm in favor of the motion. The project appears not to live up to the requirements of the standards. It appears to significantly change or alter the existing character of the house and it doesn't appear to be any good rationale for that change. Chase: Mary Jane Chase and I vote in favor of denying the application. The C of A is ambiguous as to what's going to be done. Too many decisions would be made on site. When you buy a house of this structure you're a caretaker, and the reasons for wanting to do this despite a comment about loving the historical aspects are all personal. I understand and I sympathize with taxes and all that, it's something that we are all going through and I sympathize with her. I find confusion though with saying you love the house but the taxes etc, and I don't' see any correlation and I vote to deny. Klusczinski: Motion is defeated, or ... C ofA 2008-0521 is defeated. Catherine will forward a letter of denial... Czarnecki. Can I ask one question though? If the house gets painted, do I have to come back to a meeting? Klusczinski: No, that's an in kind maintenance repair and you don't need an application for that. Moved: Patrick Second: Ujdak Denial of 2008-0521 Approved 5-0 Application Number: 2008-0523 Property Location: 1031 E. Jefferson Property Owner: Don Dietz Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark Rating: Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This property was part of the tract of land owned by John Mohler Studebaker since the 1880s. In 1899 he commissioned architects Dirham and Schneider to design this thirteen room (originally it had nine rooms) Queen Anne Style house and then sold it to his nephew, George Mohler Witwer on 1899. George Witwer was married to Mary E. Violette of Elkhart in 1895. He served as a private secretary to his uncle and as a consultant to the Studebaker family after his uncle's death. This Studebaker-Witwer House was reclassified as a Free Classic in the 2005 City of South Bend Survey. APPLICATION ITEMS: Replace wooden stockade fence with new design (Exhibit A), 6 foot tall fence. In kind materials. Repair of clapboards in-kind on carriage house. 0 LOCAL LANDMARK STANDARDS GROUP B Building Site and Landscaping: Required: Major landscaping items, trees, fencing, walkways, private yard lights signs (house number) and benches which reflect the property's history and development shall be retained... Recommended: New site work should be based upon actual knowledge of the past appearance of the property found in photographs, drawings and newspapers.... RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the replacement of the stockade fence with the new design. The new design is more sympathetic to the architectural style of the house and will be in the same location (Exhibit B). Staff recommends the approval of the in-kind repair of the clapboards on the carriage house as well. Klusczinski: You're entitled to make a brief presentation for the record, state your name and address for the record, please. Dietz: Don Dietz, 1031 East Jefferson. Basically the fence is in poor shape, part of it is falling down, and we'd like to replace it with a more solid fence as shown on the drawing that 1 submitted. I have some bad shingles on the upper half of the carriage house that need removed and replaced. Klusczinski. Were there any questions for the petitioner? Chase: Will this be painted or stained? The clapboards and the fence? Dietz: Well, the clapboards will be painted to match the house. You won't even know that they were replaced. The fence? My understanding is that it doesn't have to be painted and quite honestly that is a debate that's still raging at 1031 E Jefferson. Sassano: Material? Dietz: The material will be wood. Sassano: Cedar, or just treated... ? Dietz: Probably treated. But more than likely it will be painted. Patrick: Maybe I'm missing it, but is the current fence 6 ft high? Hostetler: It's a stockade fence. Patrick: Are those all 6ft high? Hostetler: Yes, and it's not original to the house at all. Klusczinski: So another way to review this C ofA is that it's two almost in-kind maintenance items. Hostetler. He's changing the style of the fence. Klusczinski: But the scale and the arrangement and the perimeter of the fence isn't changing? Ok. Any other questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, we'll move to Commission discussion. Anyone have any comments? Thoughts? Observations? Very good. We'll move onto public hearing then. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Hearing none, is there any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Thank you very much. Any other final thoughts before we consider a motion? No thoughts? A motion then. Chase: I move that we accept C ofA 2008-0523 as recommended by staff and as stated by the owner. Klusczinski: Motion has been made is there is a second? Sassano: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded any additional discussion? All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. Moved: Chase Second: Sassano Approval of 2008-0523 Approved 5-0 Application Number: 2008-0523A Property Location: 1329 E. Washington Street Property Owner: Kathleen and Mark Neal Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark Rating: Outstanding IN STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: The house at 1329 E. Washington was designed by Austin and Shambleau for Joseph Maxwell Stephenson in 1923. The house has been re- classified as Tudor Revival in the 2005 City Survey. Mr. Stephenson lived in the house until his death in 1946. The house was then sold to Eugene O'Brien, Vice -President of the O'Brien Varnish Company. The home was landmarked on October 25, 1982. APPLICATION ITEMS: Replace 11 Wood Casement windows I 18"x48" with 11 new Marvin Alum. Clad casement windows with SDL (divided lite) to sit in existing openings, clad color to match existing (dark brown). See Exhibits A -C and Photographs GROUP B STANDARDS C. Renovations and Additions 2. Material: Additions and improvements involving any new material in the landmark should be of the same material as the original. It should be the same size and texture. An alternative material may be allowed if it duplicates the original. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. The Marvin windows duplicate the casements with the SDL (Simulated Divided Light with space bar installed between the glass creating the essence of Authentic Divided Lites p.44) The house already has aluminum clad wood windows in a number of locations including a large arched kitchen window so these will match the other windows. So, aluminum clad windows have been allowed in the past. The Group B Standards allow for alternative materials and it uses the term "should" which allows for compromise. See Definitions on page 2. (Exhibit D) Klusczinski: Please state your name and address for the record. Neal: Kathleen Neal, 1329 E Washington. MNeal: And Mark Neal of 1329 E Washington. Neal: We've been before you before, I think this is our 3'd or 4`h time in the 2 years that we've owned the house. It's a beautiful old time to which little if anything of value or historical significance has been done in the last 50 years. So we are slowly piece by piece to its former glory. The next project is an upstairs bathroom. It has full south and east facing windows on two walls these have, because of the Tudor revival house with little and in some cases no eave what so ever have been subject to extreme weathering. The sashes are rotten, some of the windows if they do open, the glass comes but part of the sash frame stays behind. The storms are gone. Most of the screens are missing. Most of the hardware is either broken or missing. And in some cases, you can put your finger right through the wood to the exterior. They've been patched with all sorts of different foams and bondos. We have gone to what we think is really the top of the line material to replace these. The most authentic looking that we could find. The divided light is not between the panes but on the exterior so it looks as close to the original leading as is possible. We hoped to preserve as many windows in this house as we can. There are over 100 windows in this house, but these are, they're in really really bad shape. Given that it's a bathroom with no fan on the inside at the moment they're getting abuse from both inside and out. So, we ask for your approval for this replacement. Klusczinski: Are there any questions for the petitioner? Sassano: Other than the sash, are you going to be adding any aluminum to the sill, the muttons, the trim on the outside or the casings? MNeaI. No. Sassano: Are you going to be doing any sill repair as a part of this too? Neal: I'm told we may have to at some point, right now the sills are actually covered in copper which has been painted brown. MNeal: It's actually painted brown copper, we'd like to restore it to the copper. Neal: To the extent that we can retain that we would like to. Klusczinski: Any other questions? Chase: It's nice to see such attention given to the house. Klusczinski: So the windows that exist throughout the house, most of the 100 are they wood, are they clad..? Neal: Some are, the ones that are still original are wood, some are double hung, some are casement, a number of them had been replaced prior to our purchasing the house- in particular there are two very large arched windows in the kitchen that have been 11 replaced with aluminum clad simulated divided light and there are a number on the north side of the house and one on the west that have been replaced with aluminum clad, some with divided light, some not. Klusczinski: Have you considered replacing any of the rotted wood windows with in-kind wood replacement windows. Neal: Our concern with being on the second floor with such full exposure and especially on the east side where there is no eave- the roof edge is maybe an inch over the stucco side. The weathering is really extreme, so we would prefer from a maintenance stand point to match the aluminum clad windows that have already been replaced so that we can spend our time maintaining as many of the original windows as possible- they're going to take some good coats of paint to keep them in good shape. In this particular location it's subject to a lot of wear. Klusczinski: I just wanted to clam one point from the staff. Catherine you mentioned that it says that aluminum clad windows have been allowed in the past. Did you have any documentation of when those C of As came before the Commission and when that was allowed? Hostetler. No. Klusczinski: Do you know in fact that they were allowed by the Commission or was it done.. ? Hostetler: We don't know. Klusczinski: So maybe no body allowed them. Hostetler: But they're there. Klusczinski: They were done, but that's not to say that... Hostetler: We don't have any way of going back unless we go back through all of the C of A boxes because they're not filed by address. MNeal. I would note that we did have the windows replaced on the north side, with aluminum clad, in the work that was completed last year. And then the rest of it was done in the original cedar wood framing around it. Hostetler: We don't know when those kitchen windows were done. MNeal: No, we don't know either. We've also bought our contractor, Bob Grant. Klusczinski: Idents yourself, please. Grant: Bob Grant, Bob Grant construction, 512 Tasher Street, South Bend. This is a wood window with aluminum cladding on the exterior, the way this is set up, all that you're going to see from the outside is the sash. Aluminum on the sash and a 5/8 aluminum frame around it. Around that, right now, is someone's replacement of the original hand hewn trim. We have found a supplier for hand hewn cedar trim that we're going to replace around the windows to match the windows around the rest of the house. So, all you're going to see is a 5/8 inch brown aluminum clad frame and the sash itself. But it is a wood window. Sassano: Which of these are you replacing to match the original hand hewn cedar? Grant: You've got the pictures so you can see those series of windows, and there is mullions between the windows, and there's trim above the windows that was originally hand hewn some of it is now rough sawn cedar, some of it is #2 pine, a variety of materials that have been replaced over the years. We're going to replace that trim on the exterior of the window with the hand hewn so that it looks just like the original. Sassano: So some of this work will actually entail restoration to in-kind or.... Grant: Yes, the trim around the windows on the outside. All of what's up there now is weathered and rotten, and we're going to replace it with the hand hewn that was original. Roush: And I'm part of their entourage, Lance Roush, 17850 New Road, Bremen. The whole point of the Marvin exterior cladding is to maintain an architectural set back like original wood windows had. In fact, there's actually a putty line that's in the aluminum extrusion as well as a line to simulate an exterior stop like would have been on original 12 equipment. So the point is to have the exact look, without the maintenance and the color is perfect for the exterior. Sassano: Have you done and inspection of the existing windows? Roush: Oh yeah. Sassano: And what's your evaluation? Roush: They need to go. The entire operating mechanisms, I've dealt with architectural hardware manufacturers, and I don't even think that the particular hardware that they have can be obtained. It would be going to some sort of a finger pull and hook and eye closure at this point. Klusczinski: Catherine, has staff investigated current condition of the windows? Hostetler. We've not been on the interior? , Klusczinski: So you wouldn't be able to corroborate the damage or that you can put your fingers through it or whatnot? Hostetler: No. Klusczinski: Ok. Hostetler: We're going on Bob Grant's assessment of the windows. Klusczinski: Any other questions? Thank you very much. Any Commission discussion? On to public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the .current petition? Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Hearing none on both occasions, Chair closes public hearing. Any Commission discussion on the matter? Sassano: I think you know it's a tough problem and there is always the question of why not just restore the existing windows. It appears though in the history and life of this house that these windows have been repaired many many times and it's just... it seems like probably because of the design and the exposure it's a very difficult location. Obviously the casings have rotted out over time. And the sills, there was a need to put copper over them which likely wasn't original, so there's a history of maintenance problems. I think that the owners have really done a very thorough job enhancing the aspects of the house that are entirely more visible which is the casings and the mullions between the windows and the sill. I think that replacements probably make a pretty good long term solution. Klusczinski: Any other discussion? Hearing none, chair will entertain a motion. Is there a motion? Chase: I'll make a motion that we accept 2008-0523A as presented. Klusczinski: Motion has been made is there a second? Sassano: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded. Any additional discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion passes. Moved: Chase Second: Sassano Approval of 2008-0523A Approved 5-0 Klusczinski: I would say that I vote for this conditionally. My first inclination is always to see the wood windows replace the ones currently existing or original to the structure. It's a little bit of a stretch but changes made in light of Group B standards again state that the building be maintained as is, ifpossible be returned to the original in this way the would should encourages the use in presence of original materials as a first option and such that a structure's current rating be maintained or improved, and the current proposal does contradict that particular strategy. The testimony from the petitioners though demonstrates that there are about 4 generations of window changes in the house already and I'm not sure that the house is hurt one way or the other with this change although it does take a step backfrom a restoration attempt at that, so it's a trade off. 13 Application Number: 2008-0529 Property Location: Leeper Park West Property Owner: City of South Bend Landmark or District Designation: Landscape Landmark Rating: NA STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: Leeper Park is a designed landscape located north of the downtown commercial district of the city. The park was designed by renowned landscape designer George Kessler in 1912. APPLICATION ITEMS: Planting a Liberty Elm in Leeper West between Riverside Drive and river off of Michigan Street. (Exhibit A) LANDSCAPE STANDARDS FOR LEEPER PARK: 9.4 Vegetation #3 Alteration of existing or addition of new vegetation materials and features will be considered if they do not alter the basic concept of the historic landscape design. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Liberty Elm. That portion of Leeper Park West has been the site of trees and appears as such in the Kessler design (Exhibit B). Petitioner was not present at meeting. Klusczinski: Any Commission discussion before we move on to public hearing? Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition? Hearing none on both occasions, Chair closes public hearing. Any additional discussion? Is there a motion? Patrick. I'd like to make a motion that we approve 2008-0529. Klusczinski: I would amend that motion so that we would have the City Forester's opinion on record also in accordance with this particular project but I have no reservations about it. Motion has been made and amended is there a second to the amendment? Chase: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made, amended and seconded. Any additional discussion? Hostetler: Staff requests clarification. What did you mean by your comments? Klusczinski: I would prefer that we have the City Foresters approval on this project. Hostetler. It is. He's the one that made the application. Klusczinski: Oh, it's on the back of this. I see. Well, that won't hurt the motion at all, no big deal. Any additional discussion? Hearing none. All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. Moved: Patrick Second: Chase Approval of 2008-0529 Approved 5-0 Application Number: Property Location: Property Owner: Landmark or District Designation: Rating: 2008-0604 710 Park Avenue Georges Enderle Local Landmark in Chapin Park NR/LHD Outstanding STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This Eclectic Italianate was built for Mary Chapin Anderson and Andrew Anderson between 1875 and 1877. Four generations of the Anderson- DuShane family lived in this house until 1962. This is one of the most significant residential architectural structures in the city of South Bend and in Chapin Park. APPLICATION ITEMS: Refurbish/restore/retrofit existing window sashes in the bay area as described in annex, (See Exhibit A). Old glasses will be stored in basement. CHAPIN PARK STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES; C. Windows and Doors Required: Original windows and doors shall be retained including sashes lintels, sills, shutters, decorative glass, pediments, 14 hoods and hardware. When deteriorated beyond repair, they shall be replaced with unites and trim resembling the original. GROUP B LANDMARK STANDARDS: b. Treatment: Treatment shall be defined as any change of surface materials that will nor alter the style or original form. Such improvements include reroofing, glazing, or landscaping lawns and may involve a change that can potentially enhance or detract from the character of the landmark.... RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. Mr. Spigelmyer's proposal meets the Chapin Park Guidelines and Dr. Enderle's need for insulated glass in his bay windows. Klusczinski: Thank you. Your name and address for the record, please. Enderle: My name is Georges Enderle, and I'm happy to present this proposal. Richard Spigelmyer visited my house and inspected and examined the windows quite thoroughly and so as you know he has experience over 40 years in old houses and he's quite an expert in that field. Sassano: And a good guy. Enderle: So he proposed restoring, refurbishing and retrofitting in 12 steps and it's explained here so we will store the old glass. Basically the old sashes will be restored and inside the sashes a double pane window would be retrofitted. That's it. Klusczinski: Ok, any questions for the petitioner? Just a clarification, these are not leaded windows for anyone that may have forgotten this particular bay area. They're standard windows and they're on the western fagade, no the northern fagade, and the' front of the propertyfaces west. Enderle: Yes. Klusczinski: Any other questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, we move to Commission discussion. Thoughts or comments? Sassano: I'll just add that Richard Spigelmyer is about as good as it gets when it comes to restoring windows, so I commend Dr. Enderle on going to that extent. I'm sure that you'll appreciate the end result. Chase: I appreciate your patience with us. You area caretaker of a wonderful house. Klusczinski: Without further discussion we'll move on to public hearing. Is there any member of the public wishing to speak on behalf of the current petition? Hearing none. Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition to the current petition? Also hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any additional discussion Commissioners? None? Is there a motion? Patrick: I'll move that we approve application 2008-0604 as submitted. Motion is made is there a second? Ujdak: Second. Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded. Any additional discussion? All in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) Motion carries. Moved: Patrick Second: Ujdak Approval of 2008-0604 Approved 5-0 Application Number: - Property Location: Property Owner: Landmark or District Designation: Rating: 2008-0605- 215 008-0605-215 W. North Shore Ryan Dvorak W. North Shore LHD Non Contributing STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: In 1903 Samuel Leeper sold off a portion of his farm located at Section 1 Township 37 north range #2, all of which would make up Navarre Place Addition to the City. He sold this property to the Home Improvement Company for $7,500.00. They sold Lot 22 of Navarre Place to Franklin and Carrie Carson in 1904. A year later the Carson's built this American 15 four Square. Mr. Carson was a dentist and eventually became Mayor of South Bend. The Carson's resided there until 1991. APPLICATION ITEMS: #1 Remove Aluminum siding and repair siding and trim. Prime and paint original clapboard siding. #2 Reconstruct front porch per attached drawings (Al & A2 -with detailed project description) Design based on old postcards of house (copies attached). See Exhibit A West North Shore Standards: VII GENERAL: House alterations, restoration, preservation and rehabilitation shall be such as to not change a house to a style previous to its original style. No mention has been made in these standards about color. We trust restraint and good taste will be exercised. III. STRUCTURES C. Porches and Stens Which are Readilv Visible From the Street: Permitted: Replace porches and steps with materials matching the original as closely as possible. A cement porch floor is permitted for the structure on Lot 12. Klusczinski: And the petitioner is present, could you please state your name and address for the record? Dvorak. Sure, Ryan Dvorak 215 W Northshore Drive, along with my wife Angie Dvorak who's back there. Crumlish: I'm Brendan Crumlish with Studio B Architects. Klusczinski: You're entitled to a IS minute presentation. Dvorak: We're just trying basically to restore it back to it's original appearance. We're in the first block of Northshore Drive and we're one of the few non-contributing houses because in the 1950's they took off the porch, added the siding. We're going to take it back to how it looked before that happened. We don't have extremely detailed picture of the porch, only those postcard views and so that's guided the design here. If we find more detailed images as we go we'll try to get it closer, but that's the best image that we can find of how the porch originally looked. Klusczinski: Any questions for the petitioner? Ujdak: Yes, bless you. Klusczinski: That wasn't a question! Ujdak: I commend you. Sassano: Is the new porch to be black? Crumlish: No, I bet that's `brick'. Sassano: Yeah, you know I have to ask too because I love doing these projects and you always have to ask why they took it off. Any luck in figuring out why they took it off? Dvorak. You know, I don't know when they took it off they put in this white stone patio thing. They replaced the piers and I think that they just decided that it looked neater? I cant' really say. Crumlish: It rotted out. I'm pretty positive that that handrail up there wasn't flashed to the roof and it rotted out and the roof just leaked and eventually just degraded everything, the ceiling and then it was just demolition by neglect. Sassano: Yes, it had a flat roof. Crumlish: It appears to be or a very low slope. Dvorak. The back service porch or our mud room area has a flat metal roof with boxed gutters so I imagine that's what probably what the front porch originally had. We've put a 1/12 slope on this which is pretty close to flat. - Klusczinski: Any other questions? Sassano: Can it be designed so that we can't see it? Crumlish: Oh, you're not going to be able to see the black there's quite a rise in elevation to this house, you won't see it...the roof and it's 1/12... Hostetler. There's steps that go down. Sassano: It's just that as you're walking down the sidewalk, as low as you can get it, I mean, obviously you want the water to, I mean you don't want the same problem again. Klusczinski: Any other questions? We'll move to Commission discussion. Thoughts, comments? Chase: It's nice to see a house restored. 16 Klusczinski: Yes, it is. On to public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition of the current petition? Hearing none on both occasions, Chair closes public hearing. Any final thoughts or discussion? None? Is there a motion? Patrick, I'll make a motion that we approve application 2008-0605A, oh wait, excuse me, I'm looking at the next one. I move that we approve 2008-0605 at 215 WNorthshore. Klusczinski: Motion has been made is there a second? Chase: Second. Klusczinski: Motion is made and seconded. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) 2008-0605 is approved. Moved: Patrick Second: Chase Approval of 2008-0605 Approved 5-0 Application Number: 2008-0605A Property Location: 818 Leland Property Owner: Peg and Steve Luecke Landmark or District Designation: Chapin Park NR/LHD Rating: No Rating STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: Built prior to 1899, maybe 1894, this house was an investment property. Dennis (Dewey) Shoemaker, a tea salesman, rented the house for a short time and resided here with his wife, Agnes, and son, Ellsworth. George H. Leslie, an engineer, purchased the house by 1906. He and his wife, Florence, raised four daughters: Florence, Consuela, Blanche and Rita. The house had a 6'x8' addition on the second floor in 1942 and an outside entrance to the basement created in 1946. The house was not included in the 2005 Survey of the City of South Bend. APPLICATION ITEMS: Convert from a 3 -unit apartment house to single-family dwelling. Scope of work - Exterior: 1.4'x8' addition to create new rear entry, reuse existing door and redo back hip roof to accommodate addition and replace flat roof section (See Sheet A). 2. Remove two kitchen windows, E side, replace with shorter double window and remove one bathroom window, E side, replace with skylight or high horizontal window (See sheet A). 3. Install three square windows in dining room N wall (See Sheet B). 4. Remove on kitchen window N side; replace with shorter window (See Sheet Q. 5. Repair foundation as needed- install glass blocks at window (See Sheet D). 6. Remove side door, N side of house; install window (See Sheet D). 7. Remove entry door to 2nd floor apt., S side of house; install small window (See Sheet D). 8. Relocate fir tree on south side (See sheet D). CHAPIN PARK STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Please refer to pages 68-78 for this COA. RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Staff recommends approval because it conforms to the guidelines for new construction and is improving the roofline at the rear of the house and the changes will not be visible from the street. 2. Staff recommends approval of the 2 kitchen windows and the changes for the bathroom window in this later addition to the house. 3. Staff recommends approval of the removal of the non -original door and its replacement with three fixed windows to accommodate a dining room. Change will also not be noticeable from the street. 5. Staff recommends approval of the repairs in the foundation. The use of glass block is not recommended (page 78) however, its use in this case will be in the basement window and not visible from the street because of landscaping and can be allowed if a suitable substitute such as LEXAN is not feasible for this application. 6. Staff recommends approval of the removal of the non-original/non-contributing entrance (0) and the modification of the window in the later addition to the house. 7. Staff recommends approval of the non-contributing door with the option to install a window or replace with siding. 8. Staff recommends approval of the relocation of the tree that is too close to the house and compromising its foundation. The staff has already approved the removal of the siding materials and the restoration and painting of the original clapboards, shingles and trim. Included in the staff approvals were: in-kind re -roof, porch and step restoration, sidewalk and curb restoration and removal of old garage concrete pad and a concrete platform in the rear of the house. 17 RECOMMENDATION: #1. Staff Recommends approval as the proposal is to return the house to its original appearance with painted wood siding. #2. Staff recommends approval as this proposal is reconstructing an original feature to the house based on historic documentation. (See Photographs 1-3 for current view of exterior and current porch conditions) Luecke: Thank you Catherine, Steven Luecke, reside at 810 Leland, 2 doors down the street from us. First I want to thank the staff, they've been very helpful in helping us to move forward with this project, we're looking forward to converting this back to single family. We appreciate the staffapproval to allow us to take off the old asphalt siding and we were excited to discover cedar shakes in the upper level of the house. We'll be repairing and painting those, unfortunately they were painted in the past so we can't stain them. Of course, we uncovered the clapboard siding on the first floor. This is a modest house but it will I think become a contributing house for the historic district after we're able to complete the work. Just a couple of questions—some of the window concerns have to do with configuration of the inside of the house. We believe that the original kitchen was in the NE corner, it was a very small kitchen so we're enlarging it to make it more adaptable to modern usage. That calls for the moving for the two windows at the rear of the house and combining a double window so that they don't' conflict with counter placement. There is a #4 also in the application items that was not covered in the recommendations. That was a kitchen window on the north side of the house which would stay in the same place but would be a shorter window in that place which would allow a kitchen counter to run along that wall. Concerning the glass blocks, there are 3 basement windows 2 on the south, none are really visible from the street. We asked for the glass blockfor a couple of reasons; 1 for security reasons and 2 for ventilation to get into the basement, it's an old Michigan basement. It really needs to have some ventilation in there so we would put in glass blocks with a vent in it and a window for a variety of reasons is impractical. The window line is actually below grade. I know you can put a window well and stuff, but it wouldn't be practical in terms of opening for ventilation. There is a 3rd window that we didn't mention on the back of the house on the addition where the bathroom is, there's a concrete blockfoundation there, we'd actually propose to fill that in with additional concrete block. There's no need for a window or glass block. IfI need to amend we will certainly do that. Again, because the house had been converted to apartments, you can see that the there was an additional entry on-the-sout,r side of the house, we're removing that and we'd like to be able to put a smaller window in there because the stairway comes down at that point and to let some natural light into the stairway right there would be helpful. We can't put a full sized window in there because I need to have turning stairs at that location to bring the stairs down into the living room. Is there anything else? That covers it pretty much, but I'd be glad to answer any questions that you might have. Chase: It's a big project. Luecke: It is a big project, it's more than we really wanted to take on at this point, but... Chase: And we just do the outside, you've got the whole inside to deal with too. Luecke: The house had been seriously under invested in over a number of years. Klusczinski: Would you be willing to formally amend the petition right now to state that the window in the back would be blocked in so that we can consider that? Luecke: Yes. Klusczinski: Any objection from counsel? Meteiver: No. Hostetler: And staff would also recommend approval of the shortening of the kitchen windows... Klusczinski: And that was that number 4 item? Hostetler: Yes, because it really wouldn't be that noticeable from that angle from the street. In Luecke; And it doesn't take it up much, maybe... Hostetler: About two, the width of two of those little clapboards and that's about it, it's very minor. Klusczinski: Any other questions for the petitioner? Chase: Would you like to do some more houses? Luecke: Well, the house between our house and this house we also own, and we took the siding off years ago and have restored the wood siding and painted it. It makes a huge difference and we're believers in restoring houses and adding to the neighborhood. Sassano: What, were you a carpenter or something? Luecke: Yep, unfortunately. Ujdak: How long have you owned this home? Luecke: We've owned this home... we bought in January, it was foreclosed on and we bought it after the foreclosure. I'm still not sure that we'll make any money on it, hopefully we'll just break even. In the long run we'll earn a return on it just for the improvement in the neighborhood. Klusczinski: Any other questions? None? Commission discussion? Sassano: I wanted to commend the illustrations. Luecke: Peg did those. Sassano: Tell Peg I'll call her when I need some work done. Luecke: We took some photos and she did the Photoshop and it really did ... yeah ... it really helps you to see. Thank you. Klusczinski: Very good, we'll open public hearing. Any member of the public wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Hearing none, any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition to the current petition? Also hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any additional discussion Commissioners? Is there a motion? Patrick: I motion that we approve application 2008-0605A as amended. Klusczinski: Thank you. Motion has been made to approve C ofA 2008-0605A as amended, is there a second? Chase and Ujdak: Second. Klusczinski: For the record, Chair heard Commissioner Chase slightly ahead of Commissioner Ujdakfor the second. Any additional discussion? All those in favor? (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (Silence) C of A 2008-0605A is approved. Luecke: Thank you Commissioners. - Moved: Patrick Second: Chase Approval of 2008-0605A as amended Approved 5-0 B. LANDMARKS - None C. NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION — None. III. REGULAR BUSINESS A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved: Chase Approval of Minutes of 5/19/2008 Moved: Klusczinski 5/23/2008 Continued for clarification Moved: Chase . Approval of Minutes of 4/16/2008 5:15 Second: Klusczinski Approved 5-0 Second: Chase Approved 5-0 Second: Sassano Approved 5-0 19 Moved: Chase Second: Klusczinski Approval of Minutes of 4/16/2008 5:45 Approved 5-0 B. TREASURER'S REPORT Submitted as presented. C. STAFF REPORTS 1. Correspondence 2 thank you notes and the copy of the Preserve America letter from First Lady Laura Bush were circulated. 2. Director — Catherine Hostetler Distributed to Commission. 4. Assistant Director — Amy Herdman Distributed to Commission. 5. Legal Counsel — Larry Meteiver Counsel informed the HPC that Attorney Rhodes has filed another appeal, this time to the Circuit Court, regarding the constitutionality of the authority of the HPC. Counsel will be in contact with Mr. Rhodes to determine if the outcome of tonight's vote on C of A 2008-0604 will affect this appeal. Counsel will include that information in his July report. C. COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. President's Report — Tim Klusczinski Continued until next meeting. IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Ujdak suggested that either Director Hostetler or President Klusczinski meet with Interim Superintendent Kapsa regarding Marquette and other issues. VI. HEARING OF VISITORS No one asked to be recognized. ADJOURNMENT Moved: Patrick Second: Approved: Attest: i QFF+. SeC- Jerry Ujdak Secretary Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County Ujdak 5-0 0$" Da 20