HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 2008SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MAY 23, 2008
AT NOON
125 S. LAFAYETTE
OFFICE OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION
AGENDA:
COA#2008-0513
ALLEY VACATION IN RIVERSIDE DRIVE LOCAL HISTORIC
DISTRICT
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 05/13/2008, 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 Grath, 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 see the 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 9 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 9 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, some time 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 I 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: 3 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 and a synopsis of that information follows:
Beginning with the homeowners initial request, a vacate request then goes through
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 under state statutes to allow or
disallow the vacation request. There are allowable objections to such a request. 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. 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
t
AGENDA OF THE MAY 19, 2008
COMMISSION MEETING.
Regular Meeting THIRTEETH FLOOR- ROOM 1308
County -City Building
MONDAY, MAY 19, 2008 7:OOPM
I. CALL TO ORDER, .ROLL CALL
II. PUBLIC HEARING
A. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
1. 215 Hammond Place COA# 2008-0502
2. 14309 Adams Road COA# 2008-0505
3. 620 Carroll COA# 2008-0505A
4. 828 Park Avenue COA#2008-0507
5. 1223 E. Wayne S COA#2008-0508
6. 1061 Riverside COA#2008-0508A
B. LANDMARK
C. NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION
VI. HEARING OF VISITORS AND ADJOURNMENT
III.
REGULAR BUSINESS
[�
A.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
.;
April 21, 2008
�j
B.
TREASURER'S REPORT
W
Location Report
C.
STAFF REPORTS
1. Correspondence
2. C of A Approvals
3. Directors Report
4. Assistant Director Report
�.
5. Legal Counsel
E-�
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
1. President's Report
IV.
OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
VI. HEARING OF VISITORS AND ADJOURNMENT
I
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Date: May 7, 2007
Application Number: 2008-0502
Property Location: 215 Hammond Place
Property Owner: Heidi Cintron (Thacker)
Landmark or District Designation: River Bend LHD
Rating: 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 Lemacks 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.
b
(5/2/2008) Wayne Doolittle - SCAN3688'000-pdf
05/02/2008 10:06 5742359578
HPC SOUTH BEND
PAGE 01
pqT pplication MMI SID
FOR -
Certificate of Appropriateness
a� k listoric Preservation Commission of South Bead & St, joseph County
r s a 125 9. Lab vette Blvd,, South Bend, Indiana 4,6601
Mailing Address: Cuunty-City Building, South Bend, Indiana 46601
Phone 574.2354.98 • Fox: 579-735.9578 • Er,% SMCIiFC9kost joseph&Lus
Website: http//wwwsl—plict)mtylndinia.com/4dV/index hbnl
OFFICE USE ONLY»s>sa DO NOT" COhWLErE ANYENTIUBS•CONMnVED ItV TEAS BOX USE ONLY
Date Received a _YXI q ZOO 8 Application Number •ZOO 8 O Sv 2
Past Reviews: [�S (mkgLw xm a=)� , /1, ZOO 7 C] NO
Staff Approval authorized by: Title:
ifistoric Commission Review Date: It Na f 2-00 8
❑ Local Landmark DT Loeal Histone District (Name) ILAO 4--
❑ National Landmark ❑ National Register District (Name)
Certificate of Appropriateness:
Denied ❑ Tabled ❑ Sent To Committete []Approved and issued
DAn
Address of Property forproposedwork: A15 II fflrnn()& PI r' ++
a' Street Nnmbrr and Slrrel Name
Name of Property Owner(s): (Pimsr Prhit) iU M -rip n (T I -a rk e r )
Address of Property Owncr(s,),:�,atj92 Np(441� wt, Inve� iI%I 4?61�_
Contractors) Name: R„� re -en
Contract Company Name: Luly (:ks x,011, -l1 I iv: .
Contractor Address: 2 k &ir4-
City: elkhv+ Phone: 574.3101- (0055
Current Use ofBuildiny- 77YYl/�Cf'
(SigIs FaW7y —Wfl-F`amslly— Cnmmerdal — Coacrium.ni — lndtronatrial —Ynt —etc.)
Type ofBuf)dingConstructiom� Wor 1'Y me-
(Wxd Fmmr- Brink- Stour -Stat - Cormfe - Olha).
Proposed Work: L`_7 in-kind C I,mdscape ❑ New ❑ Replacement (nut i, kne) ❑ Demolition
(more Dom ma lbs my be d=64
Description of Propc seed Work Q D P nj w+ o oU I ) m -i' roof, m '-6 m- pb (cA .
ownericontractor: r= '3_14- L64 -JT1`1
(Yh(sqre null ft"npwd wM nnly ow dmi =)
e•mati
and/or ..
-- APPUC nON REQEURGkffjV75 A.RE Zd97ED ON.REVERSE SIDF, —
YProPerf ids - ex M
N36
5/2/2008) Wayne Doolittle - SCA§�,�p_df
' -,*-",-"- v:� ...... ... .... Page 8
Reil
Retmmom\
&rk,VJ q6w-
MiEET W%
cucuuTenaY lk Gees Dire
OHECKED BYQATF
Orr,
3 4 a I I
.219 QkMMcA PfUt
6b 4o 04m4il%
4o
Aurv%
. t
o
ports bG t act me, of kA
e.ycept 2/13.
irk, ploice,
•
car
J (5/2/2008) Wayne Doolittle- SCAN3688 O090f
LEmACKS
CONSTRUCTION, INC.
November 14, 2007
Heidi Cintron
215 Hammond Place
South Bend, IN 46601
Re: Front Porch
Dear Ms. Cintron,
Lemacks Construction, Inc. ("LCr) is pleased to submit for your consideration our proposal for
construction of a new front porch to your existing house located at 215 Hammond Place South
Bend, Indiana in the amount of $3,3890.00 (Three Thousand Three Hundred Eighty Nine
Dollars). All work will be in accordance with the soon to follow drawing and the following
outline specifications.
NOTE: ONLY ITEMS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED HEREIN ARE INCLUDED. ANY
OTHER ITEMS WILL BE ADDITIONAL TO CONTRACT.
SUPERVISION
Provide supervision of project.
LAYOUT
Provide layout of the new front porch.
CLEAN UP
Provide clean up of jobsite during construction.
Provide final clean up of remodeled porch.
Construction debris will be hauled off site.
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
Temporarily close up newly created openings during construction as needed.
WEATHER PROTECTION
Costs for weather protection and/or winter conditions requiring temporary control of water run-
off, heat, straw, concrete additives, etc. in several divisions (i.e., sitework, masonry, concrete,
finishes) are not included in this proposal. If required, same will be provided at cost plus 10%.
56935 Elk Court Elkhart, IN 46516
Office (574) 294--6980 Fax (574) 294-5692
6Ox z
Page 3',J ,
,5/2/2008) Wayne Doolittle - SCAN3688�900.pdf
Heidi Cintron - Porch . 1 -2- November 14, 2007
ENGINEERING & PERMITS
An allowance is not included for plan review, engineering, engineered drawings or permits.
EXTERIOR DEMOLITION
Remove and dispose of entire 7' wide by 26' long by 8' tall existing porch.
All debris will be hauled off site.
SITE IMPROVEMENTS
Any and all landscaping will be done by Owner.
CONCRETE
Reuse existing foundation for new porch.
Construct a new porch in a manner similar to the existing porch with the new porch to have a
steeper pitch starting below the second story windows and terminating at the existing porch eve
elevation.
Provide and install new stringers for porch and place decking on stingers.
Provide and install newly framed custom rafters / trusses for the new porch roof.
Provide and install one wood framed 40" wide stairway with handrail.
Provide handrail / fall protection around new deck front and sides.
DERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
SE EETMETAL
26' of sheet metal flashing form existing second story of house to the new roof line.
ROOFING
Provide and install shingles for the new front porch roof.
PAINTING & STAINING
By Others
(5/2/2008)'Way6e Do61ittle-'SCAN3688_000.pdf
Heidi Cintron - Porch -3-
PLUMBING
Not Applicable
HEATING VENTILATION & AIR CONDITIONING
Not Applicable
ELECTRICAL
Not Applicable
TOTAL INVESTMENT
November 14, 2007
$ 3.389.00
1. There will be no binding contract until this proposal is accepted by LCI and Owner. If not
accepted by Owner within 30 days of presentation, LCI is under no obligation to accept.
There are no contract terms or agreements in addition to those provided for herein.
2. Work to be performed by LCI under this contract is described in foregoing proposal
('Work.') Work shall also include any change orders issued as work progresses.
3. Owner agrees to pay LCI sum as indicated in proposal in return for LCI performing the
Work, including taxes, labor, material, and equipment.
4. Payment of contract price will be made as follows:
a. 10% of contract price will be paid at time this contract is signed by Owner.
b. LCI will invoice Owner for cost of all material delivered to jobsite and all labor
performed during each calendar month.
C. If Work calls for pre-engineered steel building, cost of building will be paid by Owner
upon delivery of building. Owner will be notified in advance of cost and delivery date.
d. Balance of contract price will be invoiced upon completion of project and acceptance
by Owner. Possession of building by Owner shall constitute completion and
acceptance.
e. All invoices will become due five (5) days after receipt of invoice by Owner.
f. All invoices not paid when due will bear interest at rate of M % per month. As
applicable, Owner will pay LCI its attorney fees and other reasonable costs of
collection of all overdue invoice charges.
A
Page.5 t
(5%2%2008 Wa a Doolittle - SCAN3688, 000.pdf Page 6
Heldi Cintron - Porch 1-4 November 14, 2007
5. Owner will have no right of occupancy until full contract price is paid unless LCI expressly
consents in writing to possession prior to full payment.
6. LCI guarantees all material and workmanship against defect for one (1) year after completion
of Work. This guarantee is in lieu of any other guarantees, warranties, or representations,
whether express or implied. Normal wear and tear on items such as overhead doors or
service doors is not included in terms of this warranty. LCI shall not be liable for any
incidental or consequential damages in connection with material or workmanship provided,
under this contract.
7. LCI has not surveyed the real estate and Owner assumes all responsibility for proper location
of building on real estate. In addition, Owner is responsible for correctly locating all
easements and rights-of-way and is responsible for any additional costs incurred as result of
such easements or rights-of-way.
8. LCI shall not be responsible for any delay in or failure to complete Work if such delay or
failure is due to any cause or circumstance beyond control of LCI, including, but not limited
to, government restrictions and regulations, strikes, fires, accidents, failure or delay of any
carrier, financial or monetary crisis, force majeure, acts of God, or weather.
9. LCI will maintain insurance to protect it from claims under Workmen's' Compensation Acts
and also such insurance to protect it from claims or damages caused by personal injury,
including death, and claims for damage to property, arising from operations under this
contract, if caused by LCI, its employees, contractors, or subcontractors. Owner shall famish
at his own expense, including payment of any deductible amount, builders risk policy
including of, but not limited to, fire, extended coverage and vandalism, copy of which will be
furnished to LCI.
10. LCI shall secure all permits, licenses, and approvals to extent required for Work to be
performed by LCI.
11. Prior to completion, this contract cannot be terminated without written consent of LCI and
Owner. In case of termination, Owner will reimburse LCI for all expenses incurred in
performance of this contract, including reasonable profit for work actually performed, prior -
to termination of this contract.
12. Owner will pay cost of hook-up for all utilities and all monthly utility bills directly to utility
companies.
13. This contract can only be amended by written agreement signed by both Owner and LCI. In
case of changes to scope of Work, written change orders will contain change in contract
price, if any, caused by change in scope of Work.
`(5/2/2008) Wayne Doolittle - SCAN3688_000.pdf .Page 7
Heidi Cintron - Porch -5- November 14, 2007
QUALIFICATIONS
1. This proposal does not include any changes or fees by utility companies to install water
mains, sewer mains, telephones, gas mains, power poles, line transformers, or connections to
building, unless otherwise noted.
2. Sewage/sewer permits obtained by LCI are permits necessary for disposal of human waste
ONLY and are NOT SPECIAL PERMITS. Usage for anything but human waste (chemicals,
degreasers, etc.) must be cleared by special permit issued by State Board of Health.
3. This Contract is expressly conditioned upon building site having earth with minimum load
capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot within two feet below ground level or existing
grade, whichever is lower. This Contract does not cover any earth conditions not meeting
these specifications; additional excavations, foundations, walls, piles, or special footings; any
other additional foundation costs; excavation of any rock requiring blasting, mechanical rock
breakers or any special equipment (inclusive of, but not limited to, fill material, water pumps
or any condition that exists as result of abnormal water condition); or placement of fill
material in addition to what is stated in Sitework specifications and that is required to achieve
proper grade and/or load capacity necessary for construction. Any extra costs in connection
with non -conforming earth conditions or any special footing or foundation work will be
charged at cost of all labor, material equipment, rental, and overhead plus fifteen percent
(15%) profit.
4. Should it be discovered that contractor's employees or other are being exposed to asbestos
fibers in excess of limitations established by various applicable governmental agencies, all
additional costs necessary to properly protect these individuals will be borne by Owner and,
since Owner desires to have this work completed, said Owner shall indemnify contractor
against all claims or suit brought by exposed individuals. It should be duly noted that any
costs involved for qualified sample testing of any work or for asbestos exposure
concentrations are not included in this proposal price.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
Ryan Green
Project Sales Manager
Lemacks Construction Inc.
Base Bid Accepted by Owner. Date Accepted by Lemacks Construction: Date
02001 by Lemacks Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this proposal may be used, reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means — whether electronic, mechanical,
photocopied, recorded or other - without prior express written permission of Lemacks Construction, Inc.
215 Hammond Court, MayS, 2008
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Date: May 7, 2008
Application Number: 2008-0505
Property Location: 14309 Adams Road
Property Owner: Diana and Ronald L. Snyder
Landmark or District Designation: 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.
Proposed privacy fence
The proposed fence is 35 ft long on the east side and 24 ft wide on
the south side. The south side is to have an arbor centered in the
24 fl span. The fence posts and the arbor posts are 6x6 wood
material set in sand, not concrete. The fencing is made of
individual 3/4 x 13/8 wood and tech trim with 3 1/2 in open area
between slats. The fence is approximately 4 1/2feet high and in 8 fl
8 in panels. The corner post is to have a Post light appropriate to
the house either in Brass or black cast iron appearance. Each post
will be topped with a cap similar to the tops of the porch and
walkway columns. All parts of the fence and Arbor will be painted
to match existing light colored trim "Lancaster white" by
Benjamin Moore.
Ron Snyder
14309 Adams Rd
Granger 46530
574 2771250
E:XI#t6,r /
I
. I
FXfflBrT Z
Page 1 of 1
OXHIS17.3
http://www.walpolewoodworkers.comfimagesf tems/SpindleArb_C5.JPG 10/17/2007
& /I F b1l I A C- rz-
01 trc=zc 5 "
Iry
a
19gv
to i
on
P-NltP-� F/261-'— kSI&LllwlqT4 'TG. fj )Z 6 6- N
F'A 6 f�
ivql'�
P-NltP-� F/261-'— kSI&LllwlqT4 'TG. fj )Z 6 6- N
F'A 6 f�
Me 849 l8 I Ir 4
F__ j T
F 112b rvI —),q L-12 �4
ivql'�
Me 849 l8 I Ir 4
F__ j T
F 112b rvI —),q L-12 �4
r
Certificate of Appropriateness
Staff Report
Application Number: 2008-0505A
Property Location: 620 S. Carroll Street
Property Owner: Great Lakes Property, Inc.
Landmark or District Designation: Taylor's Field LHD
Rating: 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 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.
0
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.sgosephcoungindiana.com/sjchp/index.html
OFFICE USE ONLY »»» DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES CONTAINED IN THIS BOX--- OFFICE USE ONLY
Date Received 05.0b.200'b Application Number a o o 8. o6-a5A
Past Reviews: F] YES (Date of Last review) Ej NO
Staff Approval authorized by: Title:
no
Historic Commission Review Date: o" �� -V " j orb'�j,E]Local Landmark Qv Local Historic District (Name) C'W❑ National Landmark E] National Register District (Name)
Certificate of Appropriateness:
❑ Denied E] Tabled E] Sent To Committee ❑ Approved and Issued
DATE
Address of Property for proposed work:_U2_0 NLV1 n i 1 S .
(( Street Number and Street Name
Name of Property Owner(s): (Please Print) '[' Uino_ -Pr 1'-; U �-cn o . n
Address of Property Owner(s): � � of 1F'_I''1(in ✓� 1)) ���(,( i'�� � � � Q 1 1A
Contractor(s) Name: _ Apra.ii d0L &bei _
Contract Company Name: kftA 'VIAOL#dIeLk
Contractor Address: 1 2C o i -Vin i'Y 'I _;29 - biA_ c,>
Phone:��- c�3Li ��o`Zy
Current Use of Building: '51 q e. ?�L'm 119
(Single Family — Multi -Family — Commercial — Government — Industrial — Vacant — etc.)
Type of Building Construction: WOd V� 6k'Lff\1'(\U.m Gil ti n
(Wood Frame - Brick - Stone - Steel - Conc e - Other)
Proposed Work: F] In-kind Ej Landscape ❑ New Replacement (not in-kind) MDemolition
(more than one box may be checked)
Description of Proposed Work: Ptd I tit, '_s 4W 'ble Y -
i. J.I. / .7 t1 I ' 1 I! �.� /. ./
• r •F'. t.►)L.i1.. t.1 / aol cum.
Mis office will correspond only one designee)
— APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE —
s
� L
•
L <
J
iµ'`40..
a•'1•
S A^tt'
i
r^+
� L
•
L <
J
iµ'`40..
a•'1•
S A^tt'
i
•
L <
J
iµ'`40..
a•'1•
S A^tt'
i
r^+
wlIL'^
xw w
y.
,
ow
r
� „ G ; .� Sr .� "� ±ti`s-` '�- ' y�ea�ye .+ �� • . , .
„:' ..� { 2� .,' da£' }T�fijM1 '32" -i✓ h',W Y+Y �5e + �L� � � T �3^•
x
i f
3f
i 'p e 7l
,r
620S. Carroll, May 5, 2008
. ;,:..> . y)!' b�TM'r•w y� ,.TM. �1M` .�i .�C"Wt .q,� v � »ry;,,;$j( , a � x- p�:, i�� 4 +' ;�. � w^
v'.+i3+ �;i .w.� b 1n. 1M :"�. 'A v. ' F Vi "5: V+.. :4 Yt :d.6 1. ^ h 4 w'• "� ,W +, A'
�., '� .. 'M+o-' „ar'� � ,�,w .,� '� ." � '�a5'i��K:- :��,. w �A: r r �f �M'','i' d�,z ,.r, >+" �, � 1 �" �s�C,•
I
4 r ,
;, w « ,. a � �" ,,,., �, f... �rr�,x�t "ro'M „w r" ,r ,,' „•s"`.ti `x.'x � ��" a >` s r�r" a!� �„�',_;
a .n:• ., ,.. % /"wrv.•,�1'Aw, y:. .� �,��y�.,. �;.
At r..rr., r, � :.y �45,�M�.'. ;. ..,m py,} �`.�,..•^w�AA �r�!''i� �� "AS
r. n::':,' , ,.r' �„,,� ,.r 6 :.r+ r.rC' .. • a,. ,,. .. 4 ti`' 1^ !x. f��'
, acn .« ti �°r a ,z •. � M+ np i6r,;' a. � .:, '(:,,., c'+ ,rv, ., 0.w, , 1w � .s�j >5 ,, 'q' ! a+�•
"J, , y.."; ru ' ,, t " . .*u. ,„.,. +"Aba�p .,,,. , . .. . :..: :p, Yt :, ul��— d . ;�►r � a`;. ,^s:<;�: ` . ,� k _,,' ;:;:: h ,�u � .� t r
kxi„Kl r a",^,.:-. r:;r,*tr" �`ia,,�'T.':, t r, w A '• '.' • ,. , .�Wr�� x .:. �' �� ,... •.,a,. ,, i;.: m`2�... ,.:' k'” .r Y" a'�75,'�' �” ��',"
,. �, �A',4 ..,.,. � ., � ,Y u " a^�'t" _.:.: � GxMA ,'".... -• r �^ , -. `' . « �' ...,t, .::,' . , �a wp,°�h e�d� � W�" � w , 7"� r f � „r,n ^ °Y* Y r , ' 't. I rn LhJ��'e. w 7.n' ,� ,, :, .
,,.;?*M' .. ,. �, ...;:..-. .^'.•-.';e� :..n,. .w r....�yyg .:,.:..,m„ .. ?� "'"'aw �t: ^�"� .:. ""S` „✓M, � '; xa 5 fit;:`, "k* I. � �i A��,k:: •-' ,,,.,�: ,. •.,�.. x.
{"• r `4n„�'WsF �.:.qRM � +3 Y i3r ,,� ,,,,: � �,.. �,'ma t: 3'yvx� .f” ',�'tn r :N �� x�i .
,,. ,,, ,, r. '..z »�. � ,., .. ,a '•..*,h ,;a,.... moi::=.-. ..n.•�:y,¢ �' ;:. ,� ,.. . °°i} `. P�Iv: s41�". ""��; s '46�� `� 'r,' � ,. � � ":y :�$,.i ,� ..;a r' .y ot( ,�.
'.... ., �,., ' ,: w �.; :.' mm _, •-MM",!` • �.., - �. tea,: . , •*,wt.;:,.: ,^�,•:: v'"ri��� v • `,..., '�'�'r ?�?,�;aw .rte` .rc^. G' c. r� w :. .�NY r; Ny;.�".:r� fA` V:)`.'"'".
Y
r.�•,. .: •m. a,,,:,,'. �,m '.; t "e�' ,:: ,RrM+b wF'�1' yr�c _ �"klart 1� rv.a+��, .� > G. i zt, �'fa .. �e 'R z � '� ::. "!lS ' :a.,yGtY
C �-'��µ`z � �" "'�,.' >.;� .�'xy�`:tt ,, .. � ,f�'. •w ,� ihr.. s ,��"*�Rs,�y«t;�"��,r�,.f ;M}�" f
DOZ
,�•�" ��. • .1-
•• 9`
n y 'YRw "�,+«F: a1, r� +oy„�': aR �. r :.'�' ., � •k,s,: ;... .�.. -.4.' '
✓" -""��r�'"' qs � •� : a .,Tyl�yy, A Sa` 'd'4'.�'}M+ �.y"�i•4.7
... � ,�"•n, +�i,a.. .Y` � :�"»'F��f . 'da it x � { ',N -w" ti ` •,- �'�i�
04«,* 3 �,
+
Xl'"F
,
..- „� - 1w.. + "�"'�,ir �r� � - ,.�-. '# �;C�� FKT� _ '%" *"!•�.r�'�:d y',:Y....._
.:r
'�
"t• w '
;
a' , ,.+ i " •�R""" %� _' � :.: .. .�.�' "'or's.-..'i.
Jot
^aT
fi a
..
p,.' .w ,,. s» ": f `,,r✓: ,.'r'. .�r",Y",{AY p.^+� uryy P ri' .�`>y 'f+:-... •,.i.+owpo
""'"w.•.. ,v� M-,'! r" r` .r ,� .. w:.� "'4.:.,
• .:.-ut '� A,4 �" "' �'� .• t� F',' fes`' � ,�,Y \�i"t" a ... a � ": �` T
;, y,t' Vim•
77 :w7' �u.:1ON
As
IY
Ar
�, l+`.�'. F.'}a�'„�Ylrnae ,z► . ., '!4..,N... - v, w
it �. • �f. � �,;�r " 1 +�;: � .t' '�r ti�. � r»,
,J.
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Date: May 8, 2008
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
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.
Required
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 facade —
Rhythm being an ordered
recurrent alternation of
strong and weak elements.
Moving by an
individual building, one
experiences a rhythm of
masses to openings.
B. BUILDING MATERIALS
Wall materials in the district range from brick, stucco and wood clapboard and shingles, to aluminum,
vinyl and fiberboard/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
IV
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 1-4) 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)
a
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 466(11
Phone: 574-235-9798 • Fax: 574-235-9578 • Email:- SBSJCHPC@co.st joseph.inus
Website: http://www.sgosephcountyindiana.com/sjchp/index.html
OFFICE USE ONLY »»» DO NOT COMPLETE ANY ENTRIES CONTAINED IN THIS BOX »»» OFFICE USE ONLY
Date Received 7W4,V.100 8 Application Number ')_ O 0 ey - (f)'5 -o 7
Past Reviews: n YES (Date of Last Review)
Staff Approval authorized by:
0 e
Title:
Historic Commission Review Date: 200'?
[] Local Landmark Local Historic District (Name)
[] National Landmark National Register District (Name)
Certificate of Appropriateness:
R Denied E] Tabled ❑ Sent To Committee ❑ Approved and Issued
DATE
Address of Property for proposed work:
VO t7
Name of Property Owner(s): (Please Print) PC, 10
Address of Property Own
er(s):
/c/
Contractor(s) Name: %i� 7
Contract Company Name:.
Contractor Address:
P4s, k Ave.
Street Num r and Street Name
city. Phone:
Current Use of Building:Ile a K4 i�1 W
(Sing ! ily - Multi -Family - Cotm a- al - Governmet - Industrial- Vacant - etc.)
Type of Building Construction: W'^�{�
(Wood Frame - Brick - Stone - Steel - Concrete - Other)
Proposed Work: ❑ In-kind [] Landscape 0New Ej Replacement (not in-kind) (] Demolition
(more Own one box may be chtxked) ii
Description of Proposed Work: 44r �.. (( el a4 11 A_ 4-t,,.4-
rc�P Ho(a S pP r- %a� �a J i s Go -t ro +M l $ t�
Owner/Contractor: Fax:0,-/: e-mail REiL44 td t ri Int cr,� S EI D�ae,�
ffi Tt mdwithonly deli zee A-1 S-ror-Trf.S Coiv'S7"e[ L-7_10 I we4 B L.V -r7rE r�_j rlC
„¢„ ,e}.tta BEt�' /,•t a �lf� ,moo �G./n� �. A � f-fr�vS,E
. T and/or
— APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE —
1
STOKAM
aerr� rrruwu
r� rr q
.anrr i 1
--
P
r.. a
J
4 STOROCL
- rove
1
Z .
a
. O
1
z
z
-F
az
Fields Residence
III W943
EXISTING
EXISTING FLOOR PLANS I
J.S.L. & Associates, Inc.
E
L
az
Z
Fields Residence I W" J.S.L. & Associates, Inc.
Q0urnum III I'--
[�nasssx w.m wim�eexo. u.rss
Deis 409 { I �� 604.9aJ I nursrnuaassr
P IP'" - PROPOSED ELEVATIONS i
fr �
Fields Residence
Iu�I
PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS
4
J.S.L. & Associates, Inc.
1
fr �
Fields Residence
Iu�I
PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS
4
J.S.L. & Associates, Inc.
'1 ------------
4A
D'+
�l
77
�N.
4 ..
xL•, ny6 ���,
7fi
hLz
P !�
3R�z�Tr�Z°,F �i
5 aX:
'r
r
7fi
hLz
P !�
3R�z�Tr�Z°,F �i
5 aX:
'r
7fi
hLz
P !�
3R�z�Tr�Z°,F �i
tl.ecrt'' i. g ay
+ � � �•} SEN'{ s� yv[v4'�,���4i3k�1.���% t aw �. ' �t'�;
a £
4 r t
S
I 3, Ss.dt
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Date: May 8, 2008
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
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 development. Front yard areas shall not
be transformed into parking lots nor paved nor
blacktopped. Front yard areas shall not be fenced and
fences shall not extend forward beyond the setback
line of the house. The installation 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.
U;; 1111
Ml R
`ml illill
Villager II
Solid Privacy
14R NHL
rear wood
tinn,-.ci
gck,
_Ce
HAGS HAER
SITE
Cl)
17.
.........
Mill 1111
am&
18. INVIRONM
Residential, on double 1ols
J�x
LAW
1. Front of house. SW comer of double lot.
GOA 2008-0508 1223 E, Wayne. Street.
3. Looking NW to our back yard from neighbor's driveway.
5.Facing east from our backyard looking at neighbor's log pile
and garage,
2, Front yard, SE corner of double lot
4. Facing east from our backyard looking at neighbor's garage
and car.
6. Facing north in our backyard looking at neighbor's broken split
rail fence.
7. Facing north in our backyard looking at neighbor's chain link
fence, shed, green chair and log pile,
9. Facing west behind our garage looking at neighbor's shed,
0
a�
"^;^, µ `V,.oa'ro „mac Y'•,
w�• � «Y
8. Facing north behind our garage looking at neighbor's chain
link and wood fence.
.f
STAFF REPORT
CONCERNING APPLICATION FOR A
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Date: May 8, 2008
Application Number: 2008-0508A
Property Location: 1061 Riverside Drive
Property Owner: Mark Beudert
Landmark or District Designation: Riverside Drive LHD
Rating: Notable
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC 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 Robert P. Land in 1922. Mr. Lang was the City Attorney for
Mishawaka. The house became and rental property in the late 1920s until 1947 when it was sold to Mr.
and Mrs. George Hoffinan. The current owner is Mark Beudert.
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 facias with gutters
and downspouts. The
facias 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 -
Application
-for-
Certificate of Appropriateness
k 1.
Historic
P ""a"nCommission of South Bend & St Joseph County
227 =Jeffersoon Blvd - RM 1123 - South Bend IN 46601-1830
Phone: 219-233-9798 Fax: 219-235-9578 e-mail: histon ichianaorg
WO" 1,6cal G4iernmiii
OFFICE USeQld)5;»;>>DdN(vrCOkPtETE ANY ENTRIES CONTAINED IN THIS ROX<<<<«0F77CZVSE0MY
Date Received Appl ca
I ti.. Number: 2000- 05oYA
Past Reviews: YES (DAYEoFiAsTmwim NO
Zoning Type: Lot size
Staff Approval authorized by: Title:
Historic Coni'minion Reviewr D ; ate::' ZO 0 1
National Landmark
National* IQistei Dist l c t!:0i.W:
T
Certificate ofAppropriatinus:
El DO Tabled ❑Sent To Committee
El
4prived aid Iiiiied
■
Address offt6p;Ay'loir"'i
proposed.work. 10 61 -Riverside Drive
City Sou t Township: Po'if.aee'
�
mark, BeudertName POwnix(s):
Ad;"'o*fP r*operly Ourner -1061 Riverside Drive
Cou"cf.or -T B
C,
ontract Company Name: ;T:DA
Contrictor Addreisil city:
C
ontractor's Phone No: TBA = Ownerg
s Phone NO: 541-912-5267.
Cu", t Use of Bafldiug..�
�-)YfkLe f4pl11v residence
Type Building BuIldm'_g ,
Constrnction
(W"dFraw-Xrk*-Stas-Sled- Cones,. Oihr)
MWL
PipQsee - E]
Rpplacemeut(sai�t�
A ®New
(��"W dimtarp c
Form 'Also Reiauired)fL-
;.§A"q,
& MAI �,
P
,D al -le*egress
new at"I operab
roof windows.` cT,-2-Y%on-.;rear •slope.ofl-main roof and (1) on
chimnev side main roof as, depicted in attached drawings.
Archito4t: st
Owner/Contractor:'' ax.-'-: e-mail: c r u m l i s h b @ aol.cbin"
.4
Architect Signature of Contractor
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE LISTED ON REVERSE SIDE.
7i"y�a * and all bus(ness of dds oh1ce Is hand(ed. via &nwU andfar, with least preference to U.S Mail
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.
m
-z
i............ iq
STUDIO B ARCHITECTS, LLC PROJECT: Beudert Residence Attic
3215-B SUGAR MAPLE COURT ADDRESS: Riverside rive, South Bend, IN %� �%`
SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46628
574-233-4550 DRAWING: Attic Floor Plan j f
SCALE: 1 i4° =1' - o'r :05/08/2008
i............ iq
STUDIO B ARCHITECTS, LLC PROJECT: Beudert Residence Attic
3215-B SUGAR MAPLE COURT ADDRESS: Riverside rive, South Bend, IN %� �%`
SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46628
574-233-4550 DRAWING: Attic Floor Plan j f
SCALE: 1 i4° =1' - o'r :05/08/2008
�j
0
=3
CL
CD
I
... ........ .. . .... .. ... ..... . .. .... .. ... ..... .
STUDIO B ARCHITECTS, LLC PROJECT: Beuderl Residence Attic
3215-B SUGAR MAPLE COURT ADDRESS: Riverside rive, South Bend, IN
SOUTH BEND, INDIANA 46628 DRAWING: Attic Floor Plan
574-233-4550
A6
05/08/2008
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OF SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
April 21, 2008 -DRAFT
13th Floor Conference Room
County — City Building, South Bend, Indiana
Members Present: Timothy Klusczinski, Mary Jane Chase, Linda Riley, David Sassano, Todd Zeiger
Members Absent: Jerry Ujdak, Lynn Patrick
Staff Present: Catherine Hostetler, Amy Herdman, Larry Metiever
Also Present: Andy Place, Tim Bowadiel (sp?), Michael Dregits, Kevin Griffith, Margie Griffith, Mark
Beudert, Brendan Crumlish
CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL: President Tim Klusczinski called to order at 7:01 pm.
Quorum established.
I. PUBLIC HEARING
Date: April 10, 2008
Application Number: 2008-0404
Property Location: 1118 East Wayne Street
Property Owner: Margie and Kevin Griffith
Landmark or District Designation: East Wayne Street LHD
Rating: Contributing
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: The Clare House has been
reclassified in the 2005 Interim Survey published in 2007 as a Tudor Revival. It was designed by H.R.
Stapp for Whitcomb and Keller in 1926. The house was originally owned by the Ralph E. Keller's who
then sold the home to Edmund and Edith Clare in 1930. The house was used as a rental from 1938 to
1945 until Sarah Slick of Slick Engraving and Slick's Laundry and Dry Cleaning lived there until 1958.
The current owners are Margie and Kevin Griffith.
APPLICATION ITEMS: Adding French Doors and Slate Patio to front exterior of the home.
Restoring the original French Doors and patio within the original footprint of the patio. Pergola will be
attached to a non -original structure that was added to the original structure in the 1930s. Exhibit A
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR EAST WAYNE:
II. EXISTING STRUCTURES: D. ENTRANCES, PORCHES AND STEPS
Most houses in the district have small open porches at the main entrance. Stoops and small
patios also are in evidence. Of those porches that have roofs, many have either hip or gable
roofs or are covered by the main roof of the house. Columned porticos, porches with broken pediments
or turrets, and other porch forms characteristic of the Period Revival styles are also found in
the district.
Required
Existing or original porches, stoops, patios and steps, including handrails, balusters, columns, brackets,
tiles and roof decorations, shall be retained or replaced by 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.
Recommended
When enclosing porches for heat conservation or for other reasons, it should be done in a manner that
does not alter the architectural or historical character of the building.
Prohibited
Front porches, stoops, patios and steps that are important to the building's style and development shall
not be altered or removed.
Not Recommended
Original porch details should not be replaced with materials representing an earlier period or style from
the original.
III. NEW CONSTRUCTION
New construction includes any new building or structure constructed within the boundaries of the
historic district, or any new addition to an existing building. New construction should be designed
considering the appearance of the other buildings in the neighborhood.
A. HEIGHT AND PROPORTION
The majority of structures in the district are two stories high and are square, rectangular, or irregular in
plan. There are a few story -and -a -half residences. The prevalent facade proportions are between a 1:1
and a 1:2 height -to -width ratio.
Required
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 of the same type in the same block.
Facade proportions shall be established by permitting no structure with a facade 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
Contemporary designs should be compatible in character and mood to the building or neighborhood.
Prohibited
Additions may not be constructed that would change the existing facade of a building, alter its scale
or architectural character, or add new height.
Not Recommended
New stories should not be added, nor should existing stories be removed, which would destroy
important architectural details, features or spaces of the building. Any style or period of architecture
that is incompatible with what exists should not be permitted in the new additions.
RECOMMENDATION: The 1932 Assessor Card for this property indicated that there was an open
porch 12'X8'6" on the left side of the front fagade. (Exhibit B) This was later enclosed in the 1940s or
1950s. The original French doors were removed and stored. The Griffiths would remove the windows
and construct the opening to accommodate the French Doors. They would then reconstruct a patio and
add landscaping and the pergola. Staff recommends approval of the project since original features
would be replicated in the enclosed porch and the patio recreated. The pergola could be installed as a
free standing structure rather than attached to the house.
Klusczinski: Is the petitioner present?
Hostetler: Yes they are.
Klusczinski: If you could come up here please. State your name and address for the record
and as close to the microphone as you can get.
Dregits: My name is Michael Dregits, I'm with Custom Carpentry. I'll be the contractor
on the job at 1118 E Wayne Street.
Klusczinski: Ok, does the C of A accurately describe the nature of the project?
Dregits: Yes, it did.
Klusczinski: Would you care to make any opening comments?
Dregits: We just want to install, basically, the French doors where the front windows are
on the left side of the front elevation and then an attached or detached pergola. I would
like to design something a little bit nicer than this pergola here, to better compliment the
house. And the walkway leading up to it.
Klusczinski: Ok. Thank you. Chair recognizes any Commissioners with questions for the
petitioner.
Riley: Are the French doors original doors that were stored?
Dregits: I don't think so, I don't have any original doors, but we're going to restore them
to as close to original, with wooden French doors they won't be glad they'll be original
French doors.
Sassano: What is the purpose of the pergola?
Dregits: Just to, I would think that it adds attraction to the house, would compliment the
house, gives appeal.
2
Sassano: Because Ilike the terrace idea very much, and there are several of them on a
couple of my favorite houses in that neighborhood. The pergola is rather foreign to that
neighborhood and I agree with you that this is a rather inelegant pergola. And, I'm just
not sure what its purpose is. It faces north so we're not really looking at sunshade. It's a
dijjicult thing to design so that it doesn't look like a back porch and I was a little concerned
that there's no indication of any kind of moldings or trims. You've got pretty simple 2x10
probably standing upright. It doesn't seem to have any scale that goes with the house.
Dregits: I agree, and I didn't design this but I was thinking something more of a revival,
something that would tie in with this architecture and not necessarily this pergola. Maybe
something with an elliptical.
Sassano: My concern really is that a front porch pergola is just not something that we see.
And it's a pretty significant visual aspect, typically you'd have a low brick wall, possibly
brick peers, pavers, beautiful hedging, nice lighting and I'm not so sure that the
methodology of having four additional columns to the back or attaching it to the house... to
me, to approve it, I'd expect to see a little more resolution and I don't know how we can
approve it on his word that he's going to approve it.
Dregits: I agree with that. Would you be willing to, if I render some drawings, would you
be willing to...?
Zeiger: We just need more information and more detail than what's here.
Sassano: I would offer that you might want to build the terrace and come back if he could
with a separate C ofA for the pergola. What that might do too is really give the owner a
chance to mock it up and figure out what they might really want to do. But then you're not
held up from getting the most important part done which is the access and the terrace.
Hostetler: If the owners are amenable to amending their C ofA to come backfor the
pergola at a later date and go ahead with the French doors and the patio that would be
fine.
Dregits: That would not hold up the process at all?
Sassano: At least not the most importantpart.
Klusczinski: Sir are you authorized to negotiate on behalf of the owners as far as the C ofA
is concerned?
Hostetler. The owners are here.
K Griffith: We're right here. That's certainly fine with us.
Klusczinski: Could we get your name and address on the record?
K Griffith: Kevin Griffith, 1118 E Wayne. The project manager designed that and that's
not in the aesthetic value of what we wanted to do. I'm fine with amending that and putting
in the patio and the French doors and resubmitting something aesthetically more pleasing.
Within our street, what I'm going towards, and would like some input, there are the free
standing on our street which I don't' care for. So, we're wanting to put something more
aesthetically pleasing connected to the house, but the free standing that we see in the
neighborhood is not what we want. We want something more distinctive and more to the
original flavor with the home.
Sassano: Are we allowed to offer suggestions?
Klusczinski: I'd like counsel to weigh in on something first. Larry, do we entertain public
hearing before we ask for the C ofA to be modified or amended?
Metiever. I think that it's a good idea to hear public comment just so that if there is any
other comment then we can consider that as we discuss the entirety of the C ofA. So we
should listen and see if there would be serious support or serious opposition to the
proposal.
Klusczinski: Ok, thank you very much. Any other questions for the petitioner?
Chase: Personally I can see how this shelters the doors and doesn't make them quite as
inviting for entrance, and for a better design ... I happen to have a pergola and they're
marvelous. It would give a little more, well-yes, designed well.
Dregits: Yes, I just saw this for the first time tonight.
3
Zeiger: I have a couple of quick questions. Because I don't seethe details on here, so I just
want to have some clarification on it. How wide is this patio going to be?
Dregits: To be honest, I don't know as this has been...
K Griffith: There are hedges that are in front of the window now so going from the border
edge of the home to the equivalent side...
Dregits: Looking at the scale, it appears to be in the nature of 12 ft. if this is a 6 ft wide
door.
Chase: I think that the recommendations said a 12x8.6.
Hostetler: No, that's what the original porch was.
Zeiger: I'm just reading in the application items and it doesn't mention width, it doesn't
mention how far away from house, it just says slate it doesn't talk about is it going to have
a wall or any sort of bushes. There's just a lot of details here, I'm not opposed to your
proposal here, but for us to make an approval of something that doesn't have any
dimensions or anymore specificity is really difficult. I don't have a problem with the patio
I think that it meets the guidelines, it's just a matter of modifying the C of A, if you'll agree,
I want to make sure that we get those details in.
M Griffith: I guess what you'll allow. We don't want something large, and it's what's
within your guidelines, we'll follow your guidelines as far as, I'm not interested in...
(unintelligible due to distance from microphone)
Zeiger: I think that we're all on the same page, it's just a matter of, I think that you can
understand that we can't just say "ok, go build a patio ", if we didn't know you or...
M Griffith: Right. Are there specific guidelines as to how big one in front of the house can
be?
Klusczinski: That's more of an architectural question than a guidelines question because of
the house.
Chase: And the proportion.
Zeiger: I see the sidewalk there...
M Griffith: Well then what is appropriate and what is not? If I come back to you and say I
want a 12 ft one then how do you decide that's ok.
Zeiger: It's a matter of, well, that's why I was trying to get a sense of what you were
proposing...
Klusczinski: It's a judgment call.
Zeiger: If you come back and say well, its 40 ft, and it's all the way out to the sidewalk,
that's not really in keeping with nature of no front yard, so I was just trying to get some
specifics.
Klusczinski: Any other questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, Chair moves to
Commission discussion. Any comments? Very good. Per legal counsel, Chair opens the
public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to speak in support of the current petition? Is
there any member of the public wishing to speak in opposition to the current petition?
Hearing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any final comments?
Dregits: Basically, I think that there is no scale to this and that this is the first time that I've
seen this but from what I understand in dealing with the Griffiths they want a nice patio but
nothing that will dominate the front yard. Basically, it's going to be a 12x10 patio with a
walkway to it, with an attractive pergola to go with it to be approved by the Board at a
later date, or whatever you decide. I don't see a problem with that.
Klusczinski: Chair would entertain a motion then that we eliminate the pergola detail from
this particular C of A as long as the property owner is amenable to that, and allow them to
proceed with the other parts of the project.
Chase: Ok, application number 2008-0404, I move that we accept the application
eliminating the judgment on the pergola until we are approached or the Director is
approached with one that is more in scale and appropriate. That's with the approval of the
owners.
Riley: Second.
2
Zeiger: Just for clarification is that for no larger than 10 ft x 12 ft size that they're
indicating that they...
Klusczinski: I don't think that we called that out.
Chase: No, we didn't.
Hostetler. First you have to amend it and then vote on it.
Sassano: But we would be amending it by adding a dimension to it. What we're approving
is that patio part and we could amend it to delete the pergola and put a 1 oft maximum
projection from the house stipulation.
Chase: So stated.
Herdman: You have a motion and a second sir.
Klusczinski: Oh, seconded by?
Herdman: Commissioner Riley.
Klusczinski: Thank you. Motion has been made and seconded, any discussion? Hearing
none. All in favor? (ayes are heard) Opposed? (silence) Motion carries.
Moved: Chase Second: Riley
To approve 2008-0404 Approved 5 — 0 unanimously
as amended and agreed to by petitioner.
Date: April 10, 2008
Application Number: 2008-0410
Property Location: 1246 E. Jefferson Blvd.
Property Owner: Suzanne and Patrick Ruszkowski
Landmark or District Designation: East Wayne Street LHD
Rating: Notable
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC CONTEXT: This 1907 home designed by
Austin and Shambleau has been reclassified as Neo Classical in the 2005 Interim Survey published in
2007. It was constructed by the Studebaker family to house Studebaker Corporation executives. It was
sold in 1919 to Howard A. Woolverton who eventually became Chairman of the Board for St. Joseph
Bank and Trust. He lived there until his death in 1960. Mrs. Woolverton passed away in 1944. The
current owners are Suzanne and Patrick Ruszkowski.
APPLICATION ITEMS: Replace %2 of the tennis court with in -ground pool. Extensive amounts of
bushes and pines will be planted to compliment current yard and make the pool private and out of eye
sight from Jefferson, Sunnyside and Wayne. Per site plan (Exhibit A), support documents (Exhibit B)
and drawings submitted (Exhibits 1-5).
STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR EAST WAYNE STREET:
B. BUILDING SITE, LANDSCAPING AND ACCESSORIES
Individual properties in the district are characterized by a house located in the center of a flat lawn,
often divided by a walk leading to the front entrance. Several of the residences are sited on two or
more building lots; however, the preponderance of the homes have been erected on a single lot.
Most of the properties include a double garage, usually located at the rear of the property. The
majority of garages are accessed from straight driveways leading from the main thoroughfare,
while a few are accessed from the alley. There are also a few homes with a covered carport located
at the rear of the property, as well as a few with circular driveways. Driveway and sidewalk materials
include concrete, asphalt and brick. All of the properties have trees and most have trimmed
shrubbery and/or hedges. Most of the houses conform to a uniform setback line within each block.
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.
5
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
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 development. Front yard areas shall not be transformed into parking lots nor paved nor
blacktopped. Front yard areas shall not be fenced and fences shall not extend forward beyond the
setback line of the house. The installation 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: The Staff recommends approval as careful attention to all of the details has
been given to this project so that it conforms to the East Wayne Street Standards and compliments the
site in all of its aspects. The pool will be located within the footprint of the current tennis court. The
pool will be in- ground will not be visible from the street from any angle. The landscaping design
elements replicate the existing materials and plantings. The ornamental and perennial gardens are
located where Mrs. Woolverton had her rose gardens.
Klusczinski: Is the petitioner present?
Place: They are not, I'm Andy Place representing the petitioner.
Klusczinski: Can we get that one more time?
Place: Yes, Andy Place, address is 50760 Marine Court.
Klusczinski: Would you care to make any opening comments?
Place: Basically, we're just trying to replace the tennis court that wasn't particularly being
used. There's extensive landscaping around this structure right now and an in ground pool
in the same location will be used more than the tennis court is. The tennis court is a bit old
and dated and needed a lot of work to get it to be played on. In reference to some of the
site along Jefferson Blvd, there is an extensive slope, probably 7 ft, that you really can't see
the tennis court anyway. The only reason why you'd know that it was there is because
there's a high fence towards the back of the yard. There's also one of the Studebaker cabin
homes that's off of Sunnyside that blocks quite a bit of the site lines in that area as well.
Klusczinski: Do you know when the tennis courts were installed?
Place: I don't. I do know the owners said that they were there previous to them purchasing
this home, more than 7 years ago. I can't say that they have spent extensive amounts of
money on the property...
Klusczinski: So they're relatively new, they're not original details?
Place: What's that?
Klusczinski: The tennis courts.
Place: The tennis court is not new but a lot of the, there's a walkway and a pond and some
other features that have gone in around it.
Klusczinski: Ok. Any other questions for the petitioner?
Zeiger: You're not proposing any new fences for around the pool?
Place: I don't believe so, Tim, the landscaper, can...
Hostetler. They're having a special covering on the pool.
Zeiger: So the answer is no?
Bowadiel (sp): No additional fences.
Riley: The property is enclosed by a fence already, it's not secure but there is a fence there
already.
n
Bowadiel: Along the back and even the side along Sunnyside. The front is pretty much a
hedge.
Klusczinski: Very good, any other questions? Chair opens up Commission discussion.
Zeiger: I think that it's a perfectly appropriate place to put it, they've already disturbed
part of the grounds with the tennis court with the site and I think that it's very much in
keeping with ... Linda's very interested in the cover.
Place: They say that you can park a car on it.
Riley: Well, I see children ... did you say you can drive a car on it?
Place: So they say.
Chase: Don't try it.
Klusczinski: Very good. Any other question, comments? Chair opens the 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 and seeing none, Chair closes public hearing. Any additional comments?
Zeiger: I make a motion to approve application number 2008-0410 as presented and
outlined in the staff report.
Chase: Second.
Klusczinski: Motion has been made and seconded. Any additional discussion? All in favor
signify by saying aye. (ayes are heard) Opposed. (silence) Motion carries. Thank you.
Zeiger: We'll be over for a swim.
Moved: Zeiger Second: Chase
To approve 2008-0410 Approved 5 — 0 unanimously
Date: April 11, 2008
Application Number: 2008-0410A
Property Location: 1061 Riverside Drive
Property Owner: Mark Beudert
Landmark or District Designation: Riverside Drive LHD
Rating: Notable
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC 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 Robert P. Land in 1922. Mr. Lang was the City Attorney for
Mishawaka. The house became and rental "property in the late 1920s. until 1947 when it was sold to Mr.
and Mrs. George Hoffman. The current owner is Mark Beudert.
APPLICATION ITEMS: Removal of one dead tree. (Exhibit 1) Construction to new attic gable on
rear of house with in kind materials to match existing house as depicted in attached drawings. (Exhibits
A 1-A4)
RIVERSIDE DRIVE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
III. NEW CONSTRUCTION
New construction includes any new building or structure constructed within the boundaries of the
historic district, or any new addition to an existing building. New construction should be designed
considering the appearance of the other buildings in the neighborhood.
A. HEIGHT AND PROPORTION
The majority of structures in the district are two stories high and are square, rectangular,
or irregular in plan. There are a few story -and -a -half residences. The prevalent facade proportions are
between a 1:1 and a 1:2 height -to -width ratio.
Required
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 of the same type in the same block.
Facade proportions shall be established by permitting no structure with a facade 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.
7
Recommended
Contemporary designs should be compatible in character and mood to the building or neighborhood.
Prohibited
Additions may not be constructed that would change the existing facade of a building, alter its scale or
architectural character, or add new height.
Not Recommended
New stories should not be added nor should 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 what exists style should not be permitted in the new additions.
B. BUILDING MATERIALS
Wall materials in the district range from brick, stucco, clapboard, shingles, aluminum and vinyl siding.
Required
Exterior materials used on a new structure shall be compatible in scale, texture and color with adjacent
structures. Materials used on an addition to an existing structure shall relate to the existing or original
materials of that structure. 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
Aluminum or vinyl 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, molded or artificial 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
foundations.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the removal of the tree pending City
Forester's recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the dormer to the rear of the house as it will
not change the way in which the house is view from the street and the materials proposed will match the
existing.
Klusczinski: Thank you, is the petitioner present? Please state your name and address for
the record.
Beudert: Mark Beudert, 1061 Riverside Drive.
Klusczinski: Thank you, and if you could make a brief statement.
Beudert: We want to make this addition to the top floor of the house to expand itfor living
space. We want to do so in a manner consistent with the guidelines, and uh... we love our
house and we love our neighborhood if that helps.
Klusczinski: Any questions for the petitioner from Commissioners?
Zeiger: I think that you've answered mine, but you're going to leave that back stoop on
there, this is really more roof work on the top?
Beudert: Yes sir.
Riley: And these two windows will be above these two?
Beudert: Yes.
Klusczinski: Any other questions? Hearing none, Chair opens Commission discussion.
Zeiger: I think it's, it seems to fit in well in the back, it matches the roof line, good job,
matches very well good job to the architect.
Klusczinski: Chair opens 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? Seeing and hearing none, both times, Chair closes public hearing. Any
final comments? I'll entertain a motion.
Riley: I make a motion that we approve application number 2008-0410A.
Klusczinski: Is that as presented?
Riley: As presented.
Klusczinski: And submitted?
Zeiger: I'll second the motion.
Klusczinski: Very good. Motion has been made and seconded. Any additional discussion?
Hearing none, all in favor signer by saying aye. (Ayes are heard) Opposed? (silence)
Motion carries.
Moved: Riley Second: Zeiger
To approve 2008-0410A Approved 5 — 0 unanimously
B. LANDMARKS — None.
II. REGULAR BUSINESS
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 17, 2008
Moved: Riley Second: Chase
Approved 5 — 0 Unanimously
B. TREASURER'S REPORT
i. Received as presented. Per Treasurer Chase, any questions should be
addressed to Director Hostetler.
C. STAFF REPORTS
1. Correspondence
2. Director — Catherine Hostetler
Distributed to Commission.
3. Assistant Director — Amy Herdman
Distributed to Commission.
4. Legal Counsel — Larry Metiever
Counsel reported that homeowner Georges Enderle had filed an appeal regarding
HPC denials of his C of A's. At the time of the meeting, Counsel had not had time
to examine the appeal, but will keep Commissioners apprised of the appeal and the
process.
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. President's Report — Tim Klusczinski
A special meeting of the HPC was held to clarify HPC bylaws. That meeting was
held on 4/16/2208. By resolution, the definition of quorum is now the presence of
the majority of the HPC's seated membership, with no less than three being
represented. Chair thanks all that participated.
Committee Reports —Advisory Board — Tim Klusczinski
The Advisory Board sat for its first meeting on March 18, 2008. The next meeting
is scheduled for April 29, 2008, at 5:15pm, location TBD. Objectives of the
meeting will be to select Board size and quorum, select regular executive members
and to set vision and goals.
III. OLD BUSINESS
At Commissioner Riley's request, Director Hostetler reviewed the recent developments
regarding Marquette School, including a proposed visit to South Bend by DLGF agent Cheryl
Musgrave that is tentatively scheduled for 4/25/2008. Information will be disseminated to
Commissioners as it becomes available from Indianapolis.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
President Klusczinski appointed an ad-hoc committee of one (himself) to review the HPC's
current C of A practices from receipt at the HPC office, through consideration and voting by
Commissioners.
CLG Training was postponed until the May HPC meeting. Commissioner Zeiger distributed
handouts to Commissioners and will present the CLG training next month.
Commissioner Zeiger announced the date of the program "Greening Your Historic House" on
May 21, 2008 at 7:00pm in the Colfax Auditorium at the St. Joseph County Library Downtown
South Bend. The program was to have been presented at Restore Michiana but had to be
reschedule. All parties on the wait list for the workshop will be notified.
D
484 V. HEARING OF VISITORS
485 No one asked to be recognized.
486
7 ADJOURNMENT 8:00 p m
8 Moved: Riley Second: Chase
9 Approved: 5-0 Unanimously
490 Attest:
491
492
493 Jerry Ujdak, Date
494 Secretary, Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County
10
Location Budget as of 04-30-2008
Saint Joseph county
Note: Includes transactions after the last posted date of 01-01-2008.
Fund: 001 County General for 01/01/2008 thru 04/30/2008
Loc: 037 Historic Preservation
Account
Original
Addt'VAdj
Total
Unencumbered
Unexpended
Object Description
Appropriation
Appropriation
Appropriation
Encumbrance
Expenditure
Balance/Percent
Balance/Percent
11075 Deputy Director
30,000.00
0.00
30,000.00
0.00
9,059.08
20,940.92
20,940.92
000 General GovT.
69.80
69.80
11309 Historic Preservation Admin.
36,050.00
0.00
36,050.00
0.00
11,092.32
24,957.68
24,957.68
000 General GovT.
69.23
69.23
10000 Totals *******......""`...........::.........
66,050.00
0.00
66,050.00
0.00
20,151.40
45,898.60
45,898.60
69.49
69.49
21030 Office Supplies
700.00
131.98
831.98
0.00
162.40
669.58
669.58
000 General GovT.
80.48
80.48
22010 Gas Oil & Lubricants
880.00
63.18
943.18
0.00
217.33
725.85
725.85
000 General GovT.
76.96
76.96
22120 Garage & Motor Supplies
700.00
0.00
700.00
0.00
93.89
606.11
606.11
000 General GovT.
86.59
86.59
20000 Totals ""`*****""""`***""`*"*****`""
2,280.00
195.16
2,475.16
0.00
473.62
2,001.54
2,001.54
80.87
80.87
31070 Other Contractual Services
29,000.00
1,815.50
30,815.50
0.00
9,735.00
21,080.50
21,080.50
000 General GovT.
68.41
68.41
32020 Travel
500.00
0.00
500.00
0.00
0.00
500.00
500.00
000 General GovT.
100.00
100.00
32050 Instruction & Training
900.00
0.00
900.00
0.00
0.00
900.00
900.00
000 General GovT.
100.00
100.00
32053 Public Relations
1,570.00
190.00
1,760.00
0.00
279.12
1,480.88
1,480.88
000 General GovT.
84.14
84.14
32200 Telephone
160.00
0.00
160.00
0.00
0.00
160.00
160.00
000 General GovT.
100.00
100.00
32350 Postage
2,588.00
392.88
2,980.88
0.00
791.36
2,189.52
2,189.52
000 General GovT.
73.45
73.45
33010 Publication Of Legal Notices
300.00
0.00
300.00
0.00
55.95
244.05
244.05
000 General GovT.
81.35
81.35
User ID ksobecid _
05/01/2008 01:01 PM
Page 77
Location Budget as of 04-30-2008
Note: Includes transactions after the last posted date of 01-01-2008.
Fund: 001 County General for 01/01/2008 thru 04/30/2008
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.
4,543.80
39010
Dues & Subscription
300.00
000
General GovT.
98.44
39600
Refunds, Awards & Indemnities
0.00
000
General GovT.
300.00
39750
Data Processing
400.00
000
General GovT.
100.00
30000
Totals ='____________`_„____::__•____________=
37,218.00
Location Totals •_____'_•__'_______"_____________•_____= 105,548.00
Investment Accounts
Transfer Accounts
f=
Saint Joseph County
Addt'I/Adj
Total
Unencumbered
Unexpended
Appropriation
Appropriation
Encumbrance
Expenditure
Balance/Percent
Balance/Percent
3,416.00
4,616.00
3,416.00
72.20
1,127.80
4,543.80
24.43
98.44
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
8,022.98
45,240.98
3,416.00
18,698.65
23,126.33
26,542.33
51.12
58.67
8,218.14
113,766.14
3,416.00
39,323.67
71,026.47
74,442.47
62.43
65.43
0.00
0.00
39,323.67
User ID ksobecki 05/01/2008 01:01 PM Page 78
User ID ksobecki 05/01/2008 01:01 PM Page 146
Location Budget as of 04-30-2005
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 04/30/2008
Loc: 037 Historic Preservation
Account
Original
Addt'UAdj
Total
Unencumbered
Unexpended
Object Description Appropriation
Appropriation
Appropriation
Encumbrance
Expenditure
Balance/Percent
Balance/Percent
00000 Gen GoVt
0.00
9,123.25
9,123.25
0.00
0.00
9,123.25
9,123.25
000 General GovT.
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 Yff!!!flfff:fffY!!lYfffYflflff!!!!!!f!!:
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 ksobecki 05/01/2008 01:01 PM Page 146
STATE OF INDIANA
DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE
May 1, 2008
Dr. Robert L. Zimmerman
Superintendent
South Bend Community School Corporation
215 S St. Joseph St
South Bend, IN 46601
Dear Dr. Zimmerman,
INDIANA GOVERNMENT CENTER NORTH
100 NORTH SENATE AVENUE N1058(B)
INDiANAPOLIs, IN 46204
PHONE (317) 232-3777
FAx (317) 232-8774
Thank you for your hospitality during my visit last week to the South Bend Community School
Corporation. I appreciate the time that you and your staff spent describing the school
corporation's needs. 'Our meeting focused primarily on the proposed demolition of Marquette
and the building of a new facility to house Marquette's current population and a new Montessori
pre -kindergarten program.
I share your goal of ensuring that students of the South Bend Community School Corporation are
provided the best possible education and opportunity for a successful future. I am sure you
understand that I take seriously my responsibility of protecting the taxpayers.in balancing both
educational and financial aspects. The obligation of the citizens of South Bend to pay for any
decision will last for decades and will affect the future family budgets Of the students taught at
Marquette today.
With this project also comes a unique additional duty of honoring and perhaps preserving the
past, given the rich history of Marquette Elementary. I take very seriously the heritage of such
landmarks and what they mean to a neighborhood and a community. Prior school
administrations determined that the best procedure was to add to the original structure more than
once, preserving the building and meeting the changing demands of education. today and in the
future: I note that the current administration also understand the role renovation can take by
rehabilitating a similarly aged and constructed building, Monroe.
I look forward to the report you agreed to provide within 30 days of our April 25th visit, or May
26th. During this time, architects from Hebert and Hebert and Bill Latoza of Bauer Latoza will-
have
illhave met and worked to find common ground as to the comparison method for the cost to
rehabilitate Marquette EIementary compared with the cost to build a new facility. It appears
there is significant disagreement on the elements included in the definition of "rehabilitation." I
hope the report will clarify this issue.
Dr. Robert L. Zimmerman
May 1, 2008
Page Two
In addition to the cost comparison, copies of the federal grant application and approval
documents for the Montessori program were requested and are to be supplied at your earliest
opportunity.
A substantial amount of time was spent discussing the federal desegregation order of 1981 (and a
later consent decree). Please supply copies of these documents and the name and contact
information of the relevant individuals at the U.S. Justice Department who administer this
compliance effort.
Again, I thank you for all information as I contemplate this decision. I am confident that a
decision is possible that will balance the interests of the taxpayers of South Bend and the
students of Marquette Elementary as well as those of the South Bend Community School
Corporation and the Historic Preservation Commission.
4Sin erely,
4-�A
Cheryl AjMusgrave
Commissioner
Department of Local Government Finance
Cc:
Historic Preservation Representatives:
Paul Hayden, Catherine Hostetler, Tim Klusczinski
Bill Latoza, Todd Zeiger
J. Murray Clark, Baker & Daniels
Ken Hebard
Richard L. Hill, Baker & Daniels
Bob Orlowski
Director's Report
May, 2008
April 22 Met with Inn Keeper's concerning Calendar Project to coordinate with Walking
Tour. Presented to Common Council concerning the Conservatories.
April 24 Met with Randy Ray concerning the Sons of Israel Synagogue and the Center for
History's strategic plan.
April 25 Meeting with the Department of Local Government Finance Commissioner,
Cheryl Musgrave, Tony Samuel, Deputy Commissions, Chuck McLean, Control Board
Administrative Office, Mary Jane Michalak, Director of Communications, Bill Latoza of
BauerLatoza Studio along with Tim Klusczinski and Paul Hayden concerning Marquette School
and Monroe School. Luncheon meeting was followed by tours of both schools. Commissioner
Musgrave requested a joint proposal for Marquette from the architects to be on her desk by May
26 --later to May 27 because of holiday.
April 29 Contacted Frank I-Iurdis concerning National Register nomination of the
Synagogue and its eventual move. Russ Luchies concerning the status of the repairs on the
Birdsell Mansion chimineys.
May 2 LaPorte Historic homes and areas
May 5 Read names for Yom Hashoah in 1898 Courthouse.
May 9 Met with Larry Meteiver concerning the Enderle hearing before the Common
Council.
May 12 Center for History Finance Committee meeting. Common Council meeting for
the Enderle hearing. The Commission's decision was sustained by a unanimous vote.
May 13 County Council meeting for Budget appropriations and Preserve America
Resolution ratification. Both passed with unanimous votes.
May 14 Met with Kathy Sobecki concerning the proceeds from the sale of the City and
County Surveys and they should have their own line item. It was established and the money will
remain there as it is collected for the next survey publications.
May 15 National Association of Business Economists meeting of the Economics Club of
Michiana. Presentation on the changes to the Family Medical Leave Act by the Healy Group.
May 16 Evaluation of the Troyer Groups proposal of the changes to Intersection at
Western and Walnut. Received copy of Indiana Bridge Study to verify for Commissioner Dobson
which is due May 31.
Assistant Director's Report
HPC Meeting — 05/19/2008
■ Wrote, edited and finalized pod cast script for W Washington Walk.
■ Wrote, edited and finalized brochure component for W. Washington
Walk.
■ Met with Grass Roots Media to plan pod cast recording.
■ Attended County Council committee meeting to secure favorable
recommendation for bill payment to Troyer Group.
■ Recorded, with Wayne Doolittle, the pod cast of W Washington Walk at
Grass Roots Media.
■ Ordered quantity of brochures.
■ Proofed and mailed summer newsletter.
■ Attended Common Council hearing on Enderle appeal.
■ Attended County Council meeting regarding Preserve America
resolution and permission to pay Troyer Group bill.
■ Wrote Comelius O'Brien grant request for Lincoln Hwy National Mtg in
2009.
■ Wrote/proofed St. Joe County Preserve America application.
■ Designed historic district signs to be installed.
■ Collaborated with Wayne on Wood Window Workshop logistics, created
flier.
■ Created publicity for Green + Historic.
■ Spoke to SBT regarding upcoming programs: Green + Historic and Wood
Window Workshop.
■ Received DHPA scholarship to attend NAPC Forum in New Orleans in
July 2008.
MWalk W,,y West Washington was
made possible by a generous grant from
the Indiana Humanities Council.
RR•
And is brought to you by:
A&
IMI HISTORIC
HOC LANDWDATIOKS
FOUNN OF
1640-* NC=2110'n COMMMORINDIANA
South Bend16-1-St. Joseph County; hcfis FP'
If you wish to schedule a guided walking tour of
West Washington Street, or to find out when
public tours are scheduled, please call:
574.232-4534
Many thanks are due to
the neighbors of West
Washington Street for
their assistance on this
project and the
continued good
stewardship of their
homes and businesses.
o "Io beautiful West washington Stfeek"""
me-
D'na R6gigt6iDistrict;showeasing an"
exemplary`:
ec e , ctic $iend ofarchife'qitural sty16S
�"'hcixne' to influential 6tizebs;-titafi-S* 'p"'04 -d
est,'v
messes
js--,noW,rqp
fi
e'' fits'th andjpr-ese-r'4've'effie� ne�'-
49,
you 6-4iSP
VV19 '-Kpqiwy
MIN
riy�YV,
es-,
���
�- :ash �on V.,
4=; .,.
o "Io beautiful West washington Stfeek"""
me-
D'na R6gigt6iDistrict;showeasing an"
exemplary`:
ec e , ctic $iend ofarchife'qitural sty16S
�"'hcixne' to influential 6tizebs;-titafi-S* 'p"'04 -d
est,'v
messes
js--,noW,rqp
fi
e'' fits'th andjpr-ese-r'4've'effie� ne�'-
49,
you 6-4iSP
VV19 '-Kpqiwy
,�4Walk 95r- West Wash 1*ngton
Please use caution while on your walking tour, particularly
when crossing busy city streets, alleys and driveways.
Enjoy your visit to historic West Washington Street!
302 West Washington Street _
=ws First Presbyterian Church
This massive, field stone structure built in 1888, is the third
church building to stand on this site. All three were built
for the First Presbyterian Church. This Romanesque g.T4
Revival church was designed by JP Bailey, and built byr
Christopher Fassnacht; also the builder of Tippecanoe'
Place further west along West Washington Street. This
church building includes 20 -inch thick walls, elegantly N
carved interior wood work, pews and furnishing. All of
the jewel toned, glorious stained glass is original to the
building.
322 West Washington Street
V2't Rose Morey Lamport House
This expansive home, built in 1893, is an extraordinary
example of the splendor of the Queen Anne style. Now
operating as The Inn of West Washington, The Rose Morey Lamport
House is replete with fine details inside and out including a stained
glass window that was a medal winner at the
famed 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago.
Lovely architectural details decorate the outside
including finely turned spindles on the cut
sandstone porch, a corner turret with a conical
roof, and cut and leaded glass windows.
115 St. James Court (Historic address)
South Bend Central High School
South Bend Central High School stands on land that was
originally donated by city co-founder Alexis Coquillard in
1845 for the purposes of building a school. Central was built in 1911,
and served all of South Bend as our only high school until 1929; thus
originally it was known only as "South Bend
High School". Famed NCAA coach John
Wooden established a winning record and
exemplary basketball program at Central as
Head Coach of the South Bend Central Bears
from 1934-1943• Central is now apartments.
402 West Washington Street
The Remedy Building
'4. The Remedy Building was built in 1895 as the office and
headquarters of the South Bend Remedy Company, a mail
order pharmaceuticals house. This lovely Queen Anne style building
is embellished with garlands, sea shells, egg and
dart and other decorative motifs. The Remedy
Building is now the Northern Regional Office of
Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, the
National Headquarters of the Lincoln Highway
Association, and other professional offices. The
third floor is an apartment.
110 North William Street
The Vocational Building
' The Vocational Building, an adjunct of Central High School
once educated high school students just as the name
implies— in vocational studies. Young women learned sewing and
what came to be known as home economics. Young men learned
welding, machining, and aircraft engine
repair as preparation for the competitive
7,..F°*
industrial job market that once thrived in
South Bend. In keeping with its industrial
appearance, the Vocational building has
been repurposed into loft style apartments.
420 West Washington Street
j" Good House
The Good House is another example of a "transplanted"
home that fits seamlessly into the neighborhood of West
Washington Street. The home once stood on
Lafayette Blvd but was relocated during the
construction of South Bend Medical Foundation.
This lovely Queen Anne is also replete with
architectural details, leaded glass and curvilinear
lines that add visual interest. The Good House
now hosts guests and visitors as The Queen
Anne Inn.
0
501 West Washington Street
The Rushton
The Rushton was designed and built in 1906 in the Neo-
classical style of apartment buildings familiar to many who
have visited Chicago. This building was designed by a local team of
Schneider and Austin. The apartments of the Rushton were what
would now be considered studio or efficiency
apartments and were meant for single men that
had arrived in South Bend to take work.
Luckily, residents would not have to fend en-
tirely for themselves, a large dining room is in
the basement for meal service and socializing.
AM 502 West Washington Street
$ The Parsonage
The Parsonage is also a creation of the architectural design
team of Schneider and Austin, and sits majestically at the
corner of West Washington and William Streets. The house was built
as the parsonage for the stone church 302 West
Washington Street in 1907. This fine home, turned
office building is a typical example of a Free
Classic, a sub -type of the Queen Anne style which
was waning in popularity by the first decade of the
loth century. Free Classics typically boast classical
features applied to the asymmetrical massing.
508 West Washington Street
gCushing House
. The Cushing House was built in 1872 for Albert and Martha
Cushing, and remains one of the finest examples of Second
Empire architecture in South Bend. The elegant mansard style roof,
ornamental arched dormer windows and highly decorated entrance
give the impression of grandeur even from the
outside. Once inside, the irreplaceable butternut
woodwork, leaded windows and 12 ft ceilings leave
little doubt. The massive front doors were
awarded a design medal at Chicago's Columbian
Exposition of 1893.
617 West Washington Street
'= Washington Co fax Apartments
The Washington Colfax Apartments were built in 1923, and
are also in the Neo -Classical style of architecture, complete
with limestone quoins along the corners of the building and
along the southern facade. The apartments earned
their name because the building is as deep as the
block between West Washington Street to the south
and West Colfax Avenue to the north. The
Washington Colfax Apartments still operate as
apartments and are a unique but complimentary part
of this largely single-family home street.
620 West Washington Street
urns
11r Tippecanoe Place
Splendid Tippecanoe Place was built in 1886-89 as home to
Clem Studebaker, and his family. Henry Ives Cobb
designed Tippecanoe Place in the Romanesque Revival style, one
typically used only in large public or commercial buildings, though
Tippecanoe Place surely qualifies as large at 26,000
square feet. All was nearly lost in 1889 when a fire €
broke out that could have easily claimed the newly
ry-
occupied home. The home was saved though and
the damage repaired. Today, Tippecanoe Place ,
serves its restaurant guests in the high style once
enjoyed by the Studebakers themselves.
627 West Washington Street
12 Studebaker House
This Studebaker House was once occupied by P.E.
Studebaker, and family. P. E. purchased and significantly
altered and enlarged this home. Originally built in 1895 in the Queen
Anne style, the home now boasts Jacobethan design features, and an
eclectic blend of materials and elements that lend to
the unique appearance of this home. The foyer is
resplendent with stained glass. After the home left's` "
the Studebaker family, it was divided into several .
individual apartments and remains as such to this
day.
0
630 West Washington Street
Ford -Cunningham House
The colorful Ford -Cunningham House was built in 1886 in
the asymmetrical Queen Anne style that is so prevalent
along West Washington Street, though the whimsical design features
make it unique. The Ford- Cunningham House now operates under
the name of The Oliver Inn, in tribute to JD Oliver
who bought and remodeled the home for his
daughter Josephine. Josephine and her
prominent lawyer husband, George Ford,
occupied the home before it was passed to niece
Gertrude Oliver Cunningham; thus the historic
name Ford- Cunningham House.
705 West Washington Street
Gorsuch House
W.W. Schneider designed this very -modern -for -its -time
American Foursquare/Free Classic in 1905. Mr. Schneider
was also the designer of other local landmarks such as the
Natatorium also on West Washington Street and the Beiger Mansion
in Mishawaka. The symmetry of the American
Foursquare is an unusual but complimentary
find along the architecture of West Washington
Street. Wilber and Loretta Gorsuch had their
home built very near to Wilbees father, an
elderly Civil War veteran who lived at 709, Just
next door. {
710 West Washington Street
1 Warner House
The Warner House at 710 West Washington presents the
first example of Italianate architecture. The home was built
in 1873, and bears all of the hallmarks of Italianate architecture
which intended to celebrate the rural Italian villa,
though American influences abound. The Warner
House displays projecting eaves with ornately
fashioned brackets and the intricate spindle work so
common to this style. First floor leaded glass
windows also contribute to the beauty of the porch
and front facade.
715 West Washington Street
6 DeRhodes House
The angular roof line and window composition typify the
Prairie style of this home, designed by one of America's
most famous architects; Frank Lloyd Wright. The home was
designed and built for Mr. and Mrs. K.C. DeRhodes in 1906 at a cost
of only $6000.00. The windows are finely leaded
glass also designed by Mr. Wright. The DeRhodes
home is one of two Frank Lloyd Wright designed k
homes in South Bend, the other is located in the ` "'
Ridgedale area, and was designed and built some 40
years after this home.
72o West Washington Street
>�. Bartlett House
Lj The Bartlett House was built in 1850, making it one of the
oldest homes along West Washington Street. This federal
style house is built of "Notre Dame" bricks, which are readily
identified by their distinctive yellow color. Although Federal style
architecture had lost favor by 1850, the house was modeled after the
prevalent architecture of original owner Joseph ,
Bartlett's native New Hampshire. Mr. Bartlett was
a grandson of one of the signers of the Declaration
of Independence who immigrated to South Bend in
1837 and built a successful bakery business.
724 West Washington Street
i8
Taylor House
Premier South Bend architects Austin and Shambleau
designed this exemplary bungalow in 1904 for original
owner James Taylor and his family. Mr. Taylor was a secretary with
the Indiana Lumber and Manufacturing Company which may
account for the fine materials and craftsmanship of
this home. 724 West Washington displays many of
the hallmarks of the typical bungalow including
wooden shingles, a narrow profile, and distinctive
roof line. The home was previously office and retail
space, but has been restored to a single family home.
726 West Washington Street
{ Baker House
,19 The Baker House dates from 1888 and offers another
interpretation of the Queen Anne Style. In architecture,
phrase to describe a traditional style, blended with current trends
and adapted to a particular location or preference is vernacular
architecture. Though the exterior fagade is less complicated than
previous examples along West Washington
Street, the significant porch and artfully,: _
articulated spindle work, projecting bays and .
gables are appropriate to both the time and
intentionally casual appearance of this home.
the
73o West Washington Street
Meagher House
The Meagher House, built in 1884, offers a visually
stimulating example of the Stick Style. Stick is considered
both the first "modern" house of the Victorian age, and also a style
that "bridges" the picturesque Gothic of the 1840-50's and the Queen
Anne style seen elsewhere on West Washington
Street. However it is categorized, the Stick Style is
an unmistakable celebration of carpentry in ways
that were new, modern and described as vivacious
for it's time. As was typical, the Meagher house is
highly ornamented and colorful. AN
739 West Washington Street
2i Gergam House
Just as some homes along West Washington display new
styles and innovation, 739 West Washington is an example
of a nod to the classics. This Renaissance Revival home was built in
1923, as the popularity of that style was waning. As the renaissance
looked to history (Greek and Roman) for
inspiration, Renaissance Revival looks to the
European villas built at or near the time of the
renaissance for inspiration. The symmetrical
organization of the home, and hipped roof with e
wide overhang denote an Italian influence here.
744 West Washington Street
122r Listenberger House
Another classic Italianate graces the corner of West
Washington and Chapin Street in the Listenberger House,
built in 1880. This style was widely popular through the 189os. As
seen previously, the roof line complete with
decorative brackets indicate the Italianate style; this
time realized in brick construction. The tall, narrow
windows and ornate window hood moldings add to
the elegance of the home. In the recent past, this
home had been re -purposed into a funeral home but
has returned to single family occupancy.
803 West Washington Street
Kizer House
Masonry construction, round_ towers or turrets and conical
roofs are all typical of the Romanesque Revival style of the
Kizer House built in 1890, some six years before its formidable
neighbor Copshaholm. Romanesque Revival owes its 4.
inspiration for design and materials to loth -13th.:;
century Europe, and typifies what most would consider
the somewhat stylized "castle -like" architecture of
thick reinforced walls, gables, towers, turrets and
belfries. The Kizer house and its carriage house has = "
long been subdivided into several apartments.
808 West Washington Street
2 ` Copshahoim
This extraordinary home was designed by the New York
design firm of Lamb and Rich in 1896 for J. D. Oliver and
family. The Oliver's were the very prosperous owners of the Oliver
Chilled Plow Works of South Bend. This grand home, built of
Indiana limestone, boasts 38 -rooms, large
elegant porches, and many fine details realized
in colored stone. Copshaholm is named for the
Oliver's ancestral home in Scotland. The home fY 4
is now operated as a museum by the Northern
Indiana Center for History. k ,; . _,-
Historic Preservation Commission
President's Report — May 19th, 2008
• 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 IUSB. 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 and Catherine Hostetler.
• 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
During the HPC meeting on April 21St, 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 19th, 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
1. RECORDS:
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
2. NEW PROJECTS:
1. All APPLICATIONS originate from the staff office.
2. 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.
3. Site investigations are sometimes performed.
3. ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL:
1. Staff currently approves APPS that propose "In-kind" maintenance work, the
removal of dead trees, and small landscaping projects.
2. 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.
3. Occasionally, outside sources are also consulted for project consideration.
4. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Executive Director generally writes the
staff recommendation for APPS requiring board review.
5. 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.
6. 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.
Recommendations
• FORMS:
1. The C of A Application form should be updated to only focus on information
relevant to the consideration of the proposal.
2. The social history component should be removed unless specifically relevant
to the nature of the building.
3. Individual signatures should be required when making staff recommendations
and approvals.
4. The By-laws do not govern the C of A forms and more importantly the
application requirements for them.
1. 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).
2. 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:
1. 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.
2. C of As and Agendas should be made available to District Liaisons. Or these
items may be made regularly available through digital technologies.
3. The HPC should investigate any new requirements for Open Door Law,
requiring a descriptive publication of any public hearing items.
SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MAY 199 2008 MEETING
GUESTS: PLEASE SIGN THIS LIST SO THAT
YOUR PRESENCE CAN BE NOTED FOR OUR
MINUTES -
Print Name Address Signature
� $ hwr_ L Aye.
cry I I0
i
fly ✓� c Z�-� n�,�c �c r• `%I
/OqY /1l✓ft2c6)6"wo
i_
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OF SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY
May 19, 2008
1P 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 of A 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.
Musczinski: 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 actually four
pieces of wood.
Sassano: I 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.
2
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: Soffit?
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'll 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 ofsolid 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, ok. And then thewood soffit instead of the aluminum. Petitioner is ok
with those things so we can go into Commission discussion. Anyone have any thoughts?
Yery 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: I 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 SIGNIFICANCEMISTORIC 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 SIGNIFICANCEMISTORIC 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
S
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. Anyfinal 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
mire 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.
Required
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.
Ioportion of openings within the fagade —
e relationship of width to height of windows and doors.
ythm of solids to voids in front fagade —
2
Rhythm being an ordered recurrent alternation of strong and weak elements. Moving by an individual building,
one experiences a rhythm of masses to openings.
B. BUILDING MATERIALS
Wall materials in the district range from brick, stucco and wood clapboard and shingles, to aluminum, vinyl and
berboard/composite siding.
Reauired
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 1-4) 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 brief presentation 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 modern function to add onto
the back with the kitchen, bedroom and stuff like that.
Klusczinski: Thank you; does anyone have questions for the petitioner?
Zeiger: Just a quick clarification from the photos. So, just to make sure that I'm
understanding, I'm looking at picture #4, 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 of A?
Fields: Right.
7
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
_TATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCEMISTORIC CONTEXT: This 1927 Colonial Revival house was built for
azel 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 11 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
improved by the Historic Preservation Commission.
=rohibited
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
development. Front yard areas shall not be transformed into parking lots nor paved nor blacktopped. Front yard
lims-eas shall not be fenced and fences shall not extend forward beyond the setback line of the house. The
Astallation 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 ft 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.
Klusczinski: 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 SIGNIFICANCE/HISTORIC 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
4obert P. Land in 1922. Mr. Lang was the City Attorney for Mishawaka. The house became and rental property
= the late 1920s until 1947 when it was sold to Mr. and Mrs. George Hoffinan. The current owner is Mark
Beudert. .
z
APPLICATION ITEMS: Installation (3) new operable egress roof windows. (2) on rear slope of main roof and
11 ) on chimney side main roof as depicted in attached drawings. Exhibit A6 & A7
IVERSIDE 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
�r 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 of A. 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 1 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 3rd
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 21", 2008 President Klusczinski announced that he would begin, an
investigation into the process of Certificates of Approprt aateness (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 U
Secretary
Historic Preservation Commission of South Bend & St. Joseph County
ate
15