HomeMy WebLinkAboutD-2453-19 Establsihes a Single Site Historic District Consisting of the Morrison-Cartmel Property SPONSOR: Councilor Carter
ORDINANCE D-2453-19
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CARMEL,INDIANA,DESIGNATING A SINGLE SITE HISTORIC
DISTRICT LOCATED AT 155 AUDUBON DRIVE
Synopsis: Ordinance establishes a single site historic district consisting of the
Morrison-Cartmel property,located at 155 Audubon Drive.
WHEREAS, the mission of the Carmel Historic Preservation Commission(the
"Commission") is to preserve and protect the historic or architecturally worthy buildings,
structures, sites, monuments, streetscapes, squares, and neighborhoods of designated historic
districts located within the City's corporate limits; and
WHEREAS, in order to fulfill its mission, the Commission commissioned an update to
earlier surveys in order to identify historic buildings, structures, and sites located within the City
(the"Survey"); and
WHEREAS, the Commission used the results of the Survey to prepare a map designating
the boundaries of the proposed Morrison-Cartmel House Historic District(the"District"); and
WHEREAS, the Commission held a public hearing on December 13, 2018 for the
purpose of allowing discussion and public comment on the proposed District; and
WHEREAS, at the December 13, 2018 public meeting, the Commission held that the
proposed District has historic and architectural significance that merits the protection of the
property as a historic district; and
WHEREAS,pursuant to Indiana Code §36-7-11-7 and Cannel City Code § 2-188(d),the
Carmel Common Council (the"Council") is authorized to designate a historic district following
the written recommendation to establish such a district by the Commission; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Cannel City Code § 2-188(d),the Commission has
prepared a map of the District, classified and designated all buildings, structures and sites located
within the District, and drafted proposed design and architectural standards for the District, all of
which are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has now presented the District map, classification and
designation of structures located within the District, and proposed standards for the District to
the Council for its approval as a historic district; and
Ordinance D-2453-19
Page One of Three Pages
This Ordinance was originally prepared by Jon Oberlander, Carmel Assistant Corporation Counsel, on 2/8/19 at
10:49 AM. It may have been subsequently revised. However, no subsequent revision to this Ordinance has been
reviewed by Mr.Oberlander for legal sufficiency or otherwise.
SPONSOR: Councilor Carter
WHEREAS,the establishment of the Morrison-Cartmel House Historic District is in the
public interest.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED by the Common Council of the City of
Cannel, Indiana, that:
Section 1: The forgoing Recitals are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2: The map, classifications and designations of structures, and the proposed
standards for the proposed Morrison-Cartmel House Historic District as set forth in Exhibit A are
hereby approved by the Common Council, and the Morrison-Cartmel House Historic District is
hereby established.
Section 3: Two copies of the map of the Morrison-Cartmel House Historic District shall
be placed on file in the Office of the Clerk-Treasurer for public inspection.
Section 4: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and
signing by the Mayor and such publication as is required by law.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
Ordinance D-2453-19
Page Two of Three Pages
This Ordinance was originally prepared by Jon Oberlander, Cannel Assistant Corporation Counsel, on 2/8/19 at
10:49 AM. It may have been subsequently revised. However, no subsequent revision to this Ordinance has been
reviewed by Mr.Oberlander for legal sufficiency or otherwise.
SPONSOR: Councilor Carter
PASSED by the Common Council of lie City of Carmel, diana this /0 day of
rP b 4',tc v' 2019,by a vote of ayes and nays.
COMMO UNCIL FOR THE CITY OF CARMEL
Jeff rre resident ony ree
Laura D. Campbell, Vice-President H. Bruce Kimball
onald E. Carter Kevin D. Rider
.4
A ST: N �n
Christine S. Pauley, Clerk-Treasurer
r1 Presented by me to the Mayor of the Cit of.Carmel, Indiana this I 1 day of
( 2019, at Cl Lf5 AM.
/6-6":"J �28Y)J44u C
Christine S. Pauley, Clerk-Treasurer
7/
Approved by me, Mayor of the City of Carmel, Indiana,this / I day of
FO L)Q a ti 2019, at )?%: P.M.
04
ti
James ainard, Mayor
A 1 "I*107-iitgety
Christine S. Pauley,Clerk-Treasurer
Ordinance D-2453-19
Page Three of Three
This Ordinance was originally prepared by Jon Oberlander, Carmel Assistant Corporation Counsel, on 2/8/19 at
10:49 AM. It may have been subsequently revised. However, no subsequent revision to this Ordinance has been
reviewed by Mr.Oberlander for legal sufficiency or otherwise.
Carmel
Historic
Preservation
Commission
Morrison -Cartmel House
Preservation Plan
...
.. ...„:„..j.„.„,.. ,... ,.. .‹.
.....7411W-7...744.:c......-4.)
'.... ' ' - v" •Z. A:1,.1 itti
/1 , • V 1 111.41'; ' • ( . •-':'jr; - _
• -:r.,-_ !...., „,
.i . 4 . , ....e. ,..v. .
• ,,,., 404 ' • • 'pzi 4 .
. ,,,,.....t. .,, . ..... --....,;*, -, , et ,--, lc ,
•- _ .-Z;, ,' •.. _-_1;7i 0-17•11 • f IN -... '•
•• . r - - '
.. it ' % ' • 'IV•-• o.
• — . ._.• .1 ,r.• :.:‘.... k..1
''' • 1
• • ‘• • .'14.? '4 t. .• 41? ''s S''' ^ . i .' 1 r.',-...,%., . 1.-7.
,.
. ,,.. ,... i ,.. , ., , •,,..-.40 i.:-.-..,- . . •
, , „.....„.: . . i
• 3 ,,.. .. '4.-, , "6,44'
2- '
,, r, e ,• ,
ti;,:41 tiii4.;4.I.,,i1, ,,„!:, ;:.',..-:; :.,,..::-.i..',:e44.( ; go..
.AO"' t'-''
...,,,,: -.• --- .4„
,,. ..4\...,._ . : ‘, . • 4 '' , r ir.
4 . • ',.• '., .. - :„ -.4 i • ).'
1' Yk ... • • V. A Op
.1 • ,. 4"2604. • S
.'•1 _
)1Vf .;'•...X.4o ., 1 '.7 *i... I • -
,•4 .
.4.- •• . .- . 4-
41'4 s '' ' ' '... •!:-.4'.4 '' , - ''.:„..-
..40 . ' ' n ''.45C11 GI 1.-.4.e- • :41'.f •
. ,•,."ri h. . '
'• 1 • . 11 -- . ‘...trA' .. f. .._ • -i., , u.- - ,,,.-
•
W. -.v.
....... 0 r . . ..c...,-.., :,..ii f•,:s. kir
i•tri ,•
1' 4 ,. --i, iii•
4,..., ..•- . - t
4 .4:„...auA .;.....•. „......,-:.-.. ,--- ;_,.:;,,......__
. .. , ..,.; . ..,...., ,,
„.....-44-• .,...,;40“. . • - .. ....
. - .... . .. ... .
..............!,.-- ....:: • •__ ..,-.• .. . - , „•,,. . :-....c....::::.;-_ _. ...,.....,-.„_ , -- .:
,...
•
" t's-.-,•....-..:.:-.- . . ...-_-,-. : __,. ...__..,-.....: ..„; .,,,40
__,..,.... - ...:..,„..
.:-...... -k - - , -..e.,-..,.-7.,-;•,:-:
. _ .. . . • _ ....
- -- .'---•- _- .•-:, .-7. A%-,...'
"PY-..Y - —4. . .,, - _•7.;.:1-''''t.t*'%?
. -
.. - • ' ..414•‘.0,...14.1'-•••••• ‘
Recommended by the Carmel Historic Preservation Commission
December 13, 2018
Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana
Officially adopted
Exhibit_A_
155 Audubon Drive
Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana, 46032
THE CARMEL
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Prepared By:
The Carmel Historic Preservation Commission
Carmel, Hamilton County
Assisted By:
The Carmel Clay Historical Society
December 2018
Recommended by the Carmel Historic Preservation Commission
Officially adopted INSERT DATE HERE
Exhibit IA__
2
TABLE
x���� �~^»���U—����U—���
U ������—�� v���— CONTENTS
��U"� U ��
Owner 4
Historic and Architectural Design Anekmie... 4
° Construction Information 4
° Legal Description 4
° Statement nfSignificance 5
° Boundary Map of the Historic District 11
° Physical Description — 12
Preservation Objectives 14
Architectural and Design Standards 16
° Guidelines for Renovations to the House 17
* Guidelines for Demolition and |nfiU Construction ...24
° Guidelines for Additions tn the House 28
° Guidelines for Site Development and Landscaping 28
APPENDIX I-. PHOTOGRAPHS 31
APPENDIX II: RETRACEN1ENT SURVEY DF PARCEL 16'10'30'00-00'003.000 39
APPENDIX III: PLANS AND ELEVATIONS 42
Exhibit
OWNER
Fernando and Elise Montoya
155 Audubon Drive
Carmel, Indiana 46032
HISTORIC AND ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN ANALYSIS
CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION
Date of original design, construction, or origin: 1966
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The subject property comprises one parcel of land which includes one structure: the "house"
(denoted as the primary structure and the "historic building" in the district). The property is
described as follows:
Parcel 16-10-30-00-00-002.000 located in the City of Carmel, Section 30, Township 18, Range
4 of Hamilton County, Indiana. Containing 3.10 acres.
The "historic district" is defined as the parcel comprising "the house" or "the historic
building."
Exhibit /4
4
STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
For much of its history, Carmel remained a quiet and sleepy farming village, tucked
away in the southwest corner of Hamilton County, Indiana. The townships of Clay and
Delaware consisted of a patchwork of farmsteads, most of whose origins dated to the
early nineteenth century. Many of the early settlers who constituted the population of
early Carmel consisted of members of the Society of Friends (Quakers) and their
Methodist neighbors. Agriculture would remain the predominant theme of the
community through the nineteenth century and well into the next.
155 Audubon Drive is located in the City of Carmel, Clay Township, Hamilton County,
Indiana.
The allocation of land in Clay Township from the federal government to pioneers
occurred largely between the 1822 formation of Hamilton County and 1838 under the
terms of the Northwest Ordinance.' Clay Township itself was established in 1833,
having been carved out of the original territory of Delaware Township, which first
encompassed all land west of the White River in Hamilton County.2
In 1837, the Village of Bethlehem was founded at the intersection of present-day Main
Street and Rangeline Road and would eventually become the downtown center for the
City of Carmel. The name was changed from Bethlehem to Carmel when the town was
incorporated in 1874.3 The site of the historic house was located approximately 5.9
miles from the center of Bethlehem.
By 1866, the land containing the site of the Morrison-Cartmel House was located in an
area that comprised the farms of an A. Atkinson and a William Kineer.4 Mr. Atkinson is
also believed to have held an interest in the Westfield Flouring Mill in Washington
Township by 1880.5 By the mid-to-late 19th century, Clay Township had become more
civilized since early pioneer days while retaining a predominantly agrarian character.
Fourteen schools had been established in Clay and western Delaware Townships by
the late 1850s, including five in south Clay Township.6 Ten churches had also
developed within the same area. United Brethren Church in south Clay Township would
have been nearest to the historic site. In the 1860s, the population of Clay Township
reached 1,161.7
1 Ibid.
2 Elizabeth J. Van Allen, Carmel Grows Up: The History and Vision of an Edge City(Carmel-Clay
Historical Society: Carmel, IN, 2017), 3. http://www.carmelclavhistory.orq/the-history-of-carmel
3 Ibid., 5.
4 C.A.O. McClellan & C.S. Warner. Map of Hamilton County, Indiana, 1866.
http://www.hamiltoncounty.in.qov/DocumentCenter/HonneNiew/5691
T.B.Helm,History of Hamilton County,Indiana, with Illustrations and Biographical Sketches of Some of its
Prominent Men and Pioneers to which are appended Maps of its Several Townships,Kingman Brothers(Chicago,
IL) 1880.
6 Van Allen, 3.
Ibid. Exhibit
5
Advancements in transportation were transformative for the development of Carmel and
Clay Township. In 1883, the arrival of the Monon Railroad linked Carmel to
Indianapolis, Westfield, Sheridan and Lafayette by passenger and freight rail.8 In 1903,
the Indiana Union Traction Interurban Line began serving Clay Township, linking the
area to all parts of the state and coinciding with the electrification of Carmel and its
environs.° Despite the appearance of modern infrastructure, Carmel and Clay
Township remained agricultural in focus with a small population throughout the early
twentieth century. By 1930, Carmel-proper had only 682 citizens, but the town had
managed to erect a Carnegie library in 191010 and a new high school in 1923.11 The
town experienced little change during the interwar; however, the construction of U.S. 31
afforded Carmel the economic and geographic benefits of proximity to an Interstate
while also creating a distinct line of demarcation between the east and west sections of
Carmel and Clay Township.12
When the first house on present-day Audubon Drive was completed in 1937, Carmel
duly remained a very small town that was largely isolated from the City of Indianapolis.
Now identified as 145 Audubon Drive, the Colonial Revival house with French-inspired
features was originally built for O.W. and Eva Nutt. Mr. Nutt was the eponymous owner
of the O.W. Nutt Hardware Company at 110 Main Street in Carmel (now demolished)
and was also a prominent undertaker in town, operating the O.W. Nutt funeral home
until his own death in 1944.13 Mrs. Nutt was instrumental in forming the first library in
Carmel.14 Their couple's son Herman assumed ownership and management of the
hardware store from O.W. Nutt's passing until his death at the age of 48 in 1963.15
During the 1950s and 1960s, Carmel experienced suburbanization amid the postwar
housing boom and patterns of flight from the urban core of Indianapolis.16 It was during
this period that the land surrounding the Nutt House began to be developed with
additional homes along present-day Audubon Drive and Sylvan Lane in the subdivision
known as Carmelwood. Of the extant houses constructed in the mid-20th century in
Carmelwood, the oldest was completed in 1956, and the houses at 137, 119, and 135
Audubon Drive were completed in 1962, 1963, and 1965, respectively. It was thus
during a period of nearby residential building activity that the Morrison-Cartmel House
was completed in 1966. Other subdivisions were rising elsewhere in Carmel at the
same time, though most of Clay Township was still utilized as farmland.
Contemporaneous residential developments include Carmel View, Carmel Meadows,
8 Ibid., 6.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid., 7.
12 Ibid., 8.
13"Undertaker at Carmel Is Dead,O.W.Nutt,68,Was Also Merchant 50 Years,"Indianapolis News(Indianapolis,
IN),December 21, 1944.
14"Mrs.Eva Nutt,"Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),June 9, 1976.
15"Herman Nutt Dies In His Carmel Store,"Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),February 10, 1963.
16 Van Allen Exhibit
6
Carmel Village, Woodland Golf Club, Johnson Addition, Christie's Thornhurst Addition,
Walter's Rolling Acres, and Lady Hamilton Estates, among others."
By the 1970s, agriculture ceased to be the dominant land use and category of
occupation in Clay Township as more property was developed for commercial and
residential purposes.18 Indeed, between 1970 and 1980, the population of Carmel
escalated from 6,578 to 18,272.19 The city experienced 21 annexations during the
1960s and 41 annexations during the 1970s.20 Carmel gained City status in 1974 and
experienced significant expansion of transportation infrastructure over the decade of the
1970s, including the widening of U.S. 31, the construction of 1-465, and the extension of
Keystone Parkway through Clay Township —all of which boosted the mutual
accessibility of Carmel and Indianapolis, furthering Carmel's rapid growth as a suburban
community.21 Expansion of roadways and tax incentives created new opportunities for
corporations to locate in Carmel, and many companies established headquarters along
U.S. 31 in the 1980s, including Thompson Consumer Electronics, Delta Faucets, and
Conseco Insurance.22 During the 1980s and 1990s, Duke Associates and Robert V.
Welch also developed the Meridian Technology Center at 116111 and Pennsylvania
Streets and the Carmel Science and Technology Park along U.S. 31, contributing to
further development in Carme1.23 In Carmelwood, two additional houses were
constructed in 1989 and 1990.
Since the 1990s, development and redevelopment have continued at a rapid pace on
the land near the historic district. In Carmelwood, this trend has resulted in the
demolition of several mid-20th century houses and subsequent construction of new
homes. The subdivision currently includes four houses constructed in the 2010s, such
that the construction dates of homes in the addition range from 1937 to 2016 — a
condition resulting in an eclectic collection of houses unified chiefly by a common
wooded setting.
History of Ownership
John ("Jack") and Joretta Morrison — the original owners of the house —were from
Muncie and relocated to Carmel when Jack joined his former college roommate, Gene
Newcombe, in establishing the House of Meridian Furniture Store at 12955 N. Meridian
Street.24 Jack held a bachelor's degree in business administration from Indiana
University and Joretta held a degree in home economics from Purdue University.25 Mr.
Morrison had previously worked in sales for Dow Chemical, and Mrs. Morrison had won
the distinction of Mrs. Indiana in 1959, competing in the Mrs. America contest.26 Mrs.
" 1962 Aerial Map of Hamilton County, Indiana, Hamilton County GIS
18 Van Allen
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid., 11
23 Ibid.
za Ann Rein,"Ex-Roommates at I.U.Are Business Partners,"Indianapolis News(Indianapolis,IN),July 3, 1961.
"Ibid.
26 Ibid. Exhibit
7
Morrison also worked as a Consumer Marketing Specialist for Marion County,
performing weekly market research on grocery prices for the Indianapolis Star's Smart
Shopper column.27
Upon relocating to Carmel, the Morrisons sought to build a house that represented their
personal tastes and met their unique needs,28 electing to build a home from the
imagination of celebrated architectural designer Avriel Shull.29 In March 1968, the
recently completed house at 155 Audubon Drive was featured in the Indianapolis Star.39
Mr. Morrison was quoted therein describing the house as "Spanish, rustic,
Mediterranean, contemporary." A caption beneath a photo of the main façade reads
"MEDIOCRITY GOES OUT THE WINDOW: Arresting Design Provides Escape For
Morrison Family."31 At the time of the home's construction, the couple had three young
children and had selected the plan to suit a variety of family needs.32 In contrast to
traditional American homes, the design includes children's bedrooms, a guest room,
and an informal family room on the first floor and formal rooms, kitchen, and master
suite on the second floor.33 The couple gained their initial inspiration for the house from
a magazine featuring a design for a beach house but hired Shull to create personalized
plans for their residence.34 Between March and May of 1966, Shull created designs for
the residence.35
The Morrisons used their new home for entertaining, hosting numerous parties and
gatherings that were advertised in Indianapolis newspapers.36, 37 Mr. Morrison was
active in both the Lion's Club and the Rotary CIub,38 holding events in the house for his
cohort in both groups.
In 1972, tragedy struck the family when Jack and Joretta's 13-year-old son, Steven, lost
his life in an accident on Morse Reservoir.39 Not long after the event, the Morrisons
relocated to Steamboat Springs, Colorado in 1978.
27 Ann Harrington,"Japanese Party Dish Popular and Informal,"Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),April 14,
1963.
28 Mary Waldron,"Morrisons Like `Rustic House,—Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),March 3, 1968.
29 Pamela Tranfield and Dorothy Nicholson,Avriel Shull Architectural Records, 1949-1999(Collection Guide,
Series 7),Manuscript Collections,William Henry Smith Memorial Library,Indiana Historical Society,Indianapolis,
Indiana,2003.
30 Waldron
31 Ibid.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid.
"Tranfield
3s Tranfield
36"Japanese Party Dish"
37"Half-Way Party,"Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),June 21, 1968.
38"Jack Harold Morrison,"Legacy.com,December 14,2017. https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/name/jack-
morri son-obituary?pid=187608397 Exhibit
39"Steven J.Morrison Memorial Rites Set,"Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),July 18, 1972.
8
The next owners of the house were Thomas O. and Barbara L. Cartmel, who lived at
155 Audubon Drive from 1978 to 2008, rearing seven children in the home.40 Mr.
Cartmel was an attorney who graduated from the Indiana University School of Law in
1964. Politically active, he ran for a seat in the Indiana State Legislature in 1968 and
was a member of the Indianapolis Junior Chamber of Commerce and Northside Political
Action Club.41
From 2008 to 2015, the home was owned by Eshel Faraggi and Natali Teszler. Dr.
Faraggi holds a Ph.D. in Statistical Physics from the University of Texas, Austin.42
During his period of residency at 155 Audubon Drive, he was a research associate for
the Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics in the School of Informatics at
Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis (IUPUI).43 He also served as a
visiting professor in the same department at IUPU1.44 Natali Teszler works in data
analytics for Eli Lilly and Company.
In 2015, husband and wife Dr. Fernando Montoya and Elise Montoya purchased the
house. Dr. Montoya is a physician affiliated with multiple hospitals in the Indianapolis
area and an Assistant Professor of Clinical Medicine at the Indiana University School of
Medicine. He graduated from the Indiana University School of Medicine. Elise Montoya
is a Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner in Indianapolis.
Avriel Shull
Avriel Shull (née Avriel Joy Christie) (1933-1976) was among Indiana's premier
residential designers in the Mid-Century Modern idiom, achieving national acclaim and
influence in her field through the construction of significant custom homes in Carmel,
Indianapolis, Brownsburg, Cool Creek, and Evansville, Indiana and the realization of
many home projects outside of Indiana by way of popular and widely distributed home
plan books.45 Shull established her first design business as a teenager in 1948 and
entered the realm of architecture through drafting work for architectural firms throughout
Indianapolis, founding her own residential design firm - "Avriel" - in 1953.46 Shull
studied at both Butler University and the John Herron School of Art but did not complete
degrees.47 Not a licensed architect, Shull prepared designs for her commissions and
submitted them to architects for their review and approval before construction began.48
Self-taught in many arts and crafts, Shull frequently executed detailed features and
components of her buildings by hand.49 (The front door of the Morrison-Cartmel House
is one of many examples.) Shull's largest concentration of single-family homes is found
40"Thomas O.Cartmel,"Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),December 1,2013.
4I "Here Are Sketches On 17 GOP Candidates For State Legislature,"Indianapolis Star(Indianapolis,IN),April 18,
1968,p.21.
42"Welcome to the home page of Eshel Faraggi,"https://web2.ph.utexas.edu/-faraggi/.
43 Ibid.
44 Ibid.
as Tranfield
46 Ibid.
47 Ibid.
48 Ibid. Exhibit
49 Ibid.
9
in Christie's Thornhust Addition in Carmel — a development of Mid-Century Modern
residences on land previously owned by Avriel's father, Donald E. Christie.5o
From 1951 until her death in 1976, the designer was married to Richard K. Shull,
prominent television editor for The Indianapolis News.51 The couple had two daughters,
Bambi (b. 1960) and September (1966-2018).52
Carmel, Indiana
Bethlehem, Indiana, straddling the line between Clay and Delaware Townships in
Hamilton County, was first platted in 1837 by Daniel Warren, Alexander Mills, John
Phelps, and Seth Green.53 Located 14 miles north of Indianapolis and six miles west of
Hamilton County seat Noblesville, the settlement was originally started by Quakers who
left the Carolinas during the 1820s, drawn to central Indiana's rich agricultural land.
The town slowly grew, with additional lots platted throughout the 1840s and 1850s.
When the town was granted a post office in 1846, city officials discovered that a
Bethlehem Post Office already existed in Indiana so another biblical name, Carmel, was
chosen. Eventually the town petitioned for incorporation under the new name in 1874,
officially becoming the town of Carmel.54
50 Ibid.
51 Ibid.
52 Ibid.
53 John F. Haines, History of Hamilton County Indiana (Indianapolis: B.F. Bowen & Co., 1915), 274.
Sa Ibid., 275. Exhibit
10
BOUNDARY MAP OF THE HISTORIC
DISTRICT
Figure 1. Red line highlights CHPC boundary of the Morrison-Cartmel House
Historic District, which is consistent with the boundary for Parcel 16-10-30-00-00-
002.000.
Morrison-Cartmel House
NORTH
IIII Morrison-Cartmel House
Historic District
(155 Audubon Dr.)
Historic n
Notable N
District Boundary ----
Audubon Drive Right-of-Way
*See Appendix II for Retracement Survey of the parcel constituting the district
Exhibit___A__
11
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
The Morrison-Cartmel House is a side-gabled Mid-Century Modern two-story with a
semi-detached three-car garage linked to the main structure by an open breezeway.
The house has an oblong rectangular footprint with an east-west primary axis while the
garage is located southwest of the main structure and has an oblong rectangular
footprint with a southwest-northeast primary axis. Brick with weeping mortar joints clads
the first-floor exterior walls, while the second-floor exterior walls are clad in board-and-
batten wood siding. The house is set back approximately 300 feet from the street in a
densely wooded setting and is most visible from Audubon Drive during autumn and
winter. It is approached along an asphalt driveway that runs northeast into the parcel
from Audubon Drive, turning northward near the east end of the property and then
banking slightly northwest, ending in a donut-like circular terminus in front of the house.
At the level of the first floor, the main (south) façade is marked by a loggia-style front
porch with five identical arched openings. (The arches are segmental.) The center bay
frames the double front entry doors. The easternmost bay frames a pair of sliding glass
doors, while the remaining bays frame sections of the front first floor wall that have no
fenestration. At the level of the second floor, the two westernmost bays of the main
façade are likewise without fenestration, while a loggia spans the three westernmost
bays, which are divided by simple square-hewn wood posts. Railings with square-hewn
ledges and balusters enclose the bays of the loggia. A truncated wooden triangle
supports each section of balustrade at the center of its bottom rail. The westernmost
bay frames a glass door flanked by two floor-to-ceiling windows, while the central bay
frames a section of the exterior wall with no fenestration, and the easternmost bay
frames a pair of sliding glass doors matching those in the first-floor bay directly below.
The breezeway between the house and the garage is positioned at a 45-degree angle
to the house and consists of one additional archway matching those along the arcade of
the first-floor loggia. The side-gabled single-story garage is positioned at the same
angle as the breezeway and is marked by three single-car garage doors on its main
(southeast) façade — each doorway matching the other arched openings described
above.
The east façade is marked at its south end by narrow open bays belonging to the sides
of the superimposed first- and second-floor loggias that dominate the main façade. At
the center of the east façade is a brick chimney that is wider at the level of the first floor
and narrower at the level of the second floor with a tapered section negotiating the
difference in width between the upper and lower parts slightly below the center of the
chimney's vertical register. At its north end, the façade is marked by one narrow bay on
each level belonging to superimposed first- and second-story porches that extend
across the rear (north) façade of the house. The second story porch is glazed — each
bay divided by a central mullion into two vertical halves, with each half further divided
into three parts by two horizontal rails positioned in the lower half of the bay. There is
12
Exhibit__A_____,
no fenestration on this façade except for the glazing in the single side bay of the
second-story rear porch.
On its rear (north) façade, the main portion of the house is divided into two parts: a long
segment spanned by the double-decker rear porches described above, and a shorter
segment at its west end consisting of an off-center grouping of three windows at the
level of the first floor and a pair of two windows and an individual third window at the
level of the second floor. With the exception of the easternmost window on the first
floor, each window on this part of the north façade consists of a taller fixed upper sash
and a shorter awning sash. The other window is a floor-to-ceiling single-pane fixed
sash window.
The porches lining the longer segment of the north façade are divided into seven bays
by simple square-hewn posts. At the level of the first floor, the center porch bay and the
two bays immediately to its east frame an off-center grouping of three sliding glass
doors. Positioned arrhythmically along the first-floor wall framed by the westernmost
three bays of the first-floor porch are two pairs of windows — each asymmetrically
divided by a mullion into a wider and narrower single-pane sash. The seven bays of the
second-story porch are screened as described above in the paragraph concerning the
east façade. The four easternmost bays of the second floor screened porch veil a
section of exterior wall with a set of three sliding glass doors, while the three
westernmost bays of the porch veil a section of exterior wall with a set of two sliding
glass doors.
Along the northern two thirds of the west façade, the basement is above ground. Here,
the exterior wall is clad in brick with weeping mortar as at the level of the first floor. The
exposed portion of the exterior basement wall includes a single entrance door toward its
north end with a stack of three horizontal lights of glass above a paneled lower half. To
the right (south) of the door is a pair of one-over-one wood sash windows separated by
a mullion. At the level of the first floor, the façade has no fenestration on its rearmost
(northern) half, while it has a bank of three single-pane windows (the center slightly
narrower than the other two) in the frontmost (southern) half of the façade. At the very
south end of the west face of the main house, the breezeway joins the front first-floor
loggia. At the level of the second floor, the façade again has no fenestration in its
rearmost half. A pair of windows, each with a taller fixed upper sash above a shorter
awning sash, is centered directly above the bank of three windows on the first floor. To
the right (south) of the double window, a small single-light window is centered above the
passage from the first-floor front loggia to the breezeway.
The remaining faces of the building belong to the garage. The southwest façade of the
garage is front-gabled with a central grouping of three windows contained within a
typical arch. The northeast façade features the connection of the breezeway to the
garage structure with a simple access door to the garage centered under the shelter.
The rear (northwest) façade of the garage has no fenestration.
Exhibit jr___
13
PRESERVATION OBJECTIVES
The subject structure, exterior features of the site and architectural and historic
character thereof shall be preserved as a significant resource of Carmel.
Preservation Criteria
1. Any development, construction, reconstruction, or alteration of the subject exterior
structure or site shall be appropriate to the property's historic and architectural
values and significance.
2. Any development, construction, reconstruction, or alteration to the exterior shall be
visually compatible and appropriate in function, general design, arrangement, color,
texture, and materials to the design and character of the subject property.
3. The latest edition Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for Rehabilitation can be used
as a resource when determining proper techniques to meet the above preservation
criteria.
Exhibit
1A--
14
ARCHITECTURAL AND DESIGN
STANDARDS
Purpose of Architectural and Design Standards
These standards are intended to assist the property owner of the Morrison-Cartmel
House in choosing an appropriate approach to issues which arise when working on or
developing this historic property. The standards are not meant to restrict creativity, but
rather are meant to suggest appropriate approaches and to guard against
unsympathetic actions.
Each standard contains a set of guidelines that provide recommended and not
recommended approaches to specific kinds of work to be undertaken.
Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs)
The Carmel Historic Preservation Commission (CHPC) grants approvals by issuing
Certificates of Appropriateness (COA). The CHPC uses the design standards when it
reviews and makes decisions regarding alterations, new construction, reconstruction,
and demolition.
The CHPC's Statutory Authority to Approve
A state statute (I.C. 36-7-11) authorizes the CHPC to review and approve the following
actions before they occur in a district:
• Construction of any structure
• Reconstruction of any structure
• Alteration of any structure
• Demolition of any structure
Unless otherwise stated in this plan, it is presumed that all actions related to the above
four items MUST BE APPROVED by the CHPC and it is presumed that related design
guidelines are enforceable.
Exhibit
15
The CHPC's Jurisdiction
The historic area as defined on pages 3-4 in this preservation plan is the site of one
building, the "house," which includes an attached addition encompassing a three-car
garage and breezeway.
The original portion of the "house" is of a basic rectangular form measuring
approximately 60 X 40 feet. The combined garage and breezeway addition to the
"house" is also of a basic rectangular form measuring approximately 46 x 30 feet. The
"house" (including its addition) retains a high degree of integrity, and the "house" is a
significant local and regional example of mid-century modern residential architecture
and a notable example of the work of nationally recognized architectural designer Avriel
Shull.
Under the Morrison-Cartmel House Historic District Preservation Plan, the CHPC does
not have any authority over the interior of the building or any interior furnishings and
elements.
Exhibit_A____
16
GUIDELINES FOR RENOVATING
155 Audubon Dr.
Accessibility
The City of Carmel recognizes the need to accommodate and include persons with
disabilities to the greatest extent possible. With regard to historic areas, the goal is to
facilitate universal access for all persons without destroying a building's historic and
architecturally significant materials and character defining features. When modifying
an existing building to provide accessibility, the following guidelines should be followed:
RECOMMENDED:
1. The new element or alteration will have as little visual impact as possible on the historic
character of the building.
2. The new element or alteration shall be easily reversible (i.e., impermanent) such that it could
be removed to return the building to its original appearance.
3. Ramps shall be carefully designed and located to preserve the building's character.
4. Materials for ramps shall be compatible with the building. If the building is painted or stained,
wood ramps shall be painted or stained to match the building.
6. Handrails shall be made of metal or wood. Wire or cable handrails are not appropriate.
7. Lifts shall be as inconspicuous as possible. If feasible, lifts will disappear into the ground, be
built into another feature, or painted to match the adjoining materials.
8. Ramps, lifts, etc. can be screened with landscaping.
9. If an existing door opening is too narrow to accommodate a wheelchair and its alteration
would significantly diminish the historic integrity and character of the building or result in the loss
of a significant historic door, consider installing off-set door hinges to increase the effective
width of the door opening without physically altering it.
10. Consider installing automatic door openers or frictionless hinges to make doors easier to
open.
11. Accessibility components shall be:
A. temporary,
B. not destroy historic fabric, and
C. be of materials and/or color that has the least visual impact on the historic structure.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Unnecessarily covering significant architectural details or damaging historic material.
Note: The CHPC is not responsible for ensuring that applicants meet federal, state and local accessibility
requirements. The recommendations in this plan are guidelines and are not descriptions of legal
requirements regarding accessibility. Consult the local building code and state and federal laws and
regulations to determine legal requirements for accessibility
Exhibit it�
17
Doors and Door Openings
RECOMMENDED:
1. Original doors shall be retained, or, if beyond repair, replicated. This recommendation
applies to garage doors as well as all entry doors to the house.
2. If an original door is lost, its replacement will reflect the character and style of the building.
3. If an alteration to a door opening must be made, it shall be done with as little effect on the
historic character of the building as possible.
4. Special care shall be taken to maintain and preserve the house's original front door, custom
designed and hand-crafted by Avriel Shull. In the event of damage to this feature, replacement
shall be regarded as a last resort, and repair shall be deemed most appropriate.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Eliminating original or adding new door openings, especially on significant facades. Any
new openings should be distinguishable from the original openings.
2. Changing the original size and shape of door openings.
Masonry
RECOMMENDED:
1. Identify and stop the causes of damaged masonry before undertaking repairs.
2. If mortar is missing or loose, the joints shall be cleaned out with care so as not to damage the
brick or stone.
3. Repoint using a mortar mix that closely matches the composition,joint profile (i.e., weeping
mortar joints) and color of the original. An expert will be consulted to assure the proper mortar is
used.
4. Whenever replacement brick or stone is needed, use new material which closely
matches the original in size, color, uniformity and texture. Salvaged masonry is not necessarily
favored but may be used if a suitable new material can not be found to match the original.
5. Any cleaning shall be done using the gentlest method possible and will be stopped at the first
evidence of damage to masonry. Test patches shall be used to assess the effect of any
proposed cleaning method.
6. If original chimney pots are damaged, an effort should be made to repair rather than replace
the features. If it is determined that the chimney pots cannot be repaired, they should be
replaced with new chimney pots that resemble the originals as closely as possible in size,
shape, color, and materials.
7. If chimney cowls are installed to deter the ingress of vermin, they should be compatible with
the historic chimney pots in size, shape, scale, color, materials, and overall design character.
Exhibit A
18
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Power grinders. The mechanical equipment is cumbersome and even the most skilled
worker will tire or slip and cause irreversible damage.
2. Sandblasting, high pressure water blasting (over 600 psi), grinding, and harsh chemicals.
3. Painting, waterproof and water repellent coatings, unless masonry has been previously
treated. They are generally not needed and can potentially cause serious damage to the
masonry. Also avoid covering masonry with tar or cement coatings.
Wood
RECOMMENDED:
1. Identify and stop the causes of damaged wood before undertaking repairs.
2. Retain coatings, including paint, which protect the wood from moisture and weathering.
3. Repair wood features by patching, piecing-in, or limited replacement in-kind using
remaining elements as prototypes.
4. Replace any wood that cannot be repaired with in-kind material that matches the original in
size, profile, texture, and species or a comparable species that is reasonably available. Owing
to the scarcity of redwood lumber, any redwood elements may be replaced with a clear cedar if
redwood is not available or if the use of redwood is demonstrated to be cost-prohibitive.
5. Wood surfaces that were stained at the date of adoption for this preservation plan shall
remain stained and not be painted.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Stripping paint and varnish to bare wood.
2. Utilizing substitute materials that do not convey the visual appearance of existing wood
features or are not physically or chemically compatible.
Paint
RECOMMENDED:
1. Gently remove all loose, flaking paint and clean the surface before repainting. It is not
necessary to remove all old paint as long as it is firmly fixed to the surface.
2. If changing paint colors, employ earth tones that are sympathetic to the original design
intention for the house.
Exhibit
19
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Any type of permanent coating system.
2. Waterblasting and other forms of abrasive cleaning as a method of paint removal.
3. Painting any previously unpainted masonry or wood.
4. New surface treatments that are permanent or effectively irreversible, such as ceramic
coatings on wood surfaces.
Roofs and Roof Elements
RECOMMENDED:
1. Asphalt shingle material should be used for roof replacements unless owner wishes to install
another roofing material that is documented to have been used on the house during the house's
history. Most of the roof has historically been covered in asphalt shingles. Evidence indicates
that the house originally had a black rubber membrane material on the portion of the roof
covering the rear (north) screened porch and the kitchen, and such material is also deemed
acceptable for future roofing replacements on that portion of the roof.
2. Mechanical and service equipment(such as condensers, transformers or solar collectors)
shall not be installed on the roof, other exterior surfaces, or other locations on the property
where they would be visible from the public right-of-way.
3. Original chimneys that contribute to the roof character shall be repaired and retained. If no
longer in use, they shall be capped rather than removed.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Altering a roof slope and shape in a way that changes the historic character of the building.
2. Adding dormers or roof sheds which change the significant character of the building.
4. Adding skylights visible from a public right-of-way.
5. Placing roof vents, metal chimneys, antennas, solar panels, satellite dishes (over 18 inches),
air conditioning units, and other mechanical equipment where visible from the street.
6. Covering roof in an inappropriate material, such as standing-seam metal or similar products.
Exhibit A
20
Security Items
RECOMMENDED:
1. Security devices that will not detract from the character of the building and surrounding
area. Acceptable examples include installing locks on windows and doors, installing
alarm systems, and installing lighting.
2. If a security door is necessary, it is recommended the security doors will:
a. have as few bars as possible,
b. be simple in design with no decorative details,
c. fit the door opening exactly, without alteration to the door frame, and
d. be painted to match the door it protects.
3. Consider installing fixed bars on the inside of basement windows because of their minimal
impact to the character of a building.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Overly decorative security doors.
2. Exterior folding gates on the front of the building.
Windows and Window Openings
RECOMMENDED:
1. Windows define architectural character and historic significance. Original materials and
features will be retained.
2. Window replacement shall be considered only when one of the following conditions exist
and can be documented:
a. The existing windows are not original and are not significant.
b. The condition is so deteriorated that repair is not economically feasible.
c. An existing window would not permit safe and timely egress in the event of a fire. Under the
design guidelines, this provision applies exclusively to the master bedroom windows on the west
facade of the house.
If windows are replaced for any of the above reasons, they shall match the originals as closely
as possible in shape, size, proportions, and material. Original window designs are available in
the elevations found within Appendix III of this document.
Exhibit
21
3. Rather than replacing windows to attain energy efficiency, existing windows shall be
repaired and retrofitted using caulk, weather-stripping, modern mechanical parts, and
storm windows. Some windows can be slightly altered to accept insulated glass.
4. Storm windows may be of any material, provided the finished product is the same color as
the underlying window frame. They should be as invisible and unnoticeable as possible from the
exterior of the house.
5. Original window trim shall be preserved and retained. Badly deteriorated sections shall be
replaced to match the original.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Replacement windows not similar to the original in size, dimension, shape, design, pattern,
and material.
2. Creating new window openings or eliminating original window openings. This will be
considered only when necessary. Avoid doing so on significant, highly visible facades.
Lighting
RECOMMENDED:
1. Any original exterior light fixtures shall be preserved and retained.
2. The guidelines do not provide specific requirements for additional new exterior lighting;
however, homeowners are encouraged to select fixtures that complement the character
of the house when choosing replacement lighting.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Light fixtures that shine upward, contributing to light pollution.
Porches and Stoops
RECOMMENDED:
1. Existing porches shall be retained without alteration to their character.
2. Existing stoops not associated with porches and may be altered or removed as needed.
3. All original framing and features of first- and second-floor porches shall be retained and
preserved, including all balustrades, posts, mullions, and other wood elements.
4. Loggias and porches shall remain open if originally open. Rear second-floor screened
porch shall remain screened.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Alteration, removal, or enclosure of porches. Glazing of second-floor rear screened
porch.
Exhibit
22
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
EXEMPT FROM REVIEW AND APPROVAL
(No Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) required):
Repaving of streets in the same manner and with the same materials
as existing. Replacement of existing light poles and fixtures with new ones to
match.
RECOMMENDED:
1 . Maintain the current configuration of streets and sidewalks.
2. New public street lights shall be compatible with the heritage of the historic area.
3. Preserve historic brick posts and lanterns at south end of driveway within the
public right-of-way.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1 . Widening streets or sidewalks when there is a negative impact on the character
of the historic area.
2. Removal or relocation of historic brick posts and lanterns at south end of
driveway within the public right-of-way.
Exhibit A
23
GUIDELINES FOR DEMOLITION AND INFILL
CONSTRUCTION
Introduction
This section explains the type of work considered in this plan to be demolition to be used when
reviewing applications for Certificates of Appropriateness that include demolition. Before
receiving any permits or undertaking any work that constitutes demolition, a Certificate of
Appropriateness from the Carmel Historic Preservation Commission must be issued.
Definition
For the purpose of this plan, demolition shall be defined as the razing, wrecking or removal by
any means of the entire or partial exterior of a structure. The following examples are meant to
help define demolition and are not all-inclusive:
1. The razing, wrecking or removal of a total structure.
2. The razing, wrecking or removal of part of a structure, resulting in a reduction in its mass,
height or volume.
3. The razing, wrecking or removal of an enclosed or open addition.
Some work that may otherwise be considered demolition may be considered rehabilitation, if
done in conjunction with a CHPC Certificate of Appropriateness for rehabilitation.
Examples include:
1. The removal or destruction of exterior siding and face material, exterior surface trim,
and portions of exterior walls.
2. The removal or destruction of those elements which provide enclosure at openings in any
exterior wall (e.g., window units, doors, panels).
3. The removal or destruction of architectural, decorative or structural features and
elements which are attached to the exterior of a structure (e.g., parapets, cornices,
brackets, chimneys).
Examples of work not included in demolition:
1. Any work on the interior of a structure.
2. The removal of small exterior elements of the structure that are not structurally integrated
with the main structure and are generally considered rehabilitation, such as utility and
mechanical equipment, awnings, gutters, downspouts, light fixtures, fire escapes, signs,
paint, fencing, sidewalks, streets, curbs, landscaping, asphalt, and clear glass with no
historic markings. Such work may require a Certificate of Appropriateness under other
guidelines in this plan.
Exhibit A
24
Approval
The CHPC requires a Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition if any of the proposed
activities include razing, wrecking or removal of any part of the historic house, the garage, or
the corn bin. The CHPC may ask interested individuals or organizations for assistance in
seeking an alternative to demolition. The Commission will also consider how the loss of a
building, or a portion thereof, will affect the character of the surrounding area, and in the
case of partial demolition, the building itself.
The CHPC will consider issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness for the full or partial
demolition of a building within the historic district only if one or more of the following are true:
1. The structure poses an immediate and substantial threat to the public safety.
2. The historic or architectural significance of the structure or part thereof is such that, in the
Commission's opinion, it does not contribute to the historic character of the structure and
the historic area, or the context thereof.
3. The demolition is necessary to allow new development which, in the Commission's
judgment, is of greater significance to the preservation of the historic area than its retention
of the structure, or portion thereof, for which demolition is sought.
4. The structure or property cannot be put to any reasonable economically beneficial use for
which it is or may be reasonably adapted without approval of demolition.
When evaluating a proposal for demolition, the CHPC shall consider the following criteria for
demolition as guidelines for determining appropriate action:
CONDITION
Demolition of a historic building may be justified by condition. In certain instances demolition
of selective parts of the building may be authorized after proper evaluation by the Carmel
Historic Preservation Commission.
SIGNIFICANCE
The Commission has the responsibility of determining the significance of a structure. With
the adoption of this plan, the commission has determined:
1. The 1966 house is contributing to the architectural and historical significance of the site.
2. The attached garage addition is contributing to the architectural significance of the site.
The Commission will also consider how the loss of a building, or a portion thereof, will affect
the character of the surrounding area and, in the case of partial demolition, the building
itself.
REPLACEMENT
Demolition of a structure may be justified when, in the opinion of the Commission, the
proposed new development with which it will be replaced is of greater significance to the
preservation of the area than retention of the existing structure. This will only be the case
25
Exhibit A
when the structure to be demolished is not of material significance, the loss of the structure
will have minimal effect on the historic character of the area, and the new development will
be compatible, appropriate and beneficial to the area.
To afford the Commission the ability to consider demolition on the basis of replacement
development, the applicant shall submit the following information as required by the
Commission or its staff:
1. Proposed elevations and floor plans.
2. A scaled streetscape drawing showing the new development in its context (usually
including at least two buildings on either side).
3. A site plan showing the structure(s) to be demolished and the new development.
4. A written description of the new development.
5. A time schedule for construction and evidence that the new construction will occur.
6. Any other information which would assist the Commission in determining the
appropriateness of the new development and its value relative to the existing structure(s).
Infill Construction
An individually designated historic building demonstrates a higher level of significance.
Designing an addition or new construction within the historic district will require a higher
level of scrutiny by the Commission to ensure the historic building retains its individual
significance. One of the purposes of design review is to ensure that any negative visual
impact of new construction is eliminated or minimized. In the best situation, new construction
can aid in the understanding of the district. Aspirations for new construction in a historic
district are:
1. To maintain the character of the district;
2. To Reinforce the integrity of the district;
3. Not to impede the sense of time and place created by the district.
The basic test for any new construction, both additions and infill structures is: How does the
project affect the ability to perceive the district's historic character?A new building that
hinders this perception is unacceptable. It is generally the policy of the Carmel Historic
Preservation Commission that contemporary and compatible new design is preferred to
overly replicative design. Respecting the characteristics of the district is more important
than replicating its architectural form.
SIZE AND SCALE
The overall mass of a new building or addition should convey a sense of human scale. A
new building will be respectful of the current size and scale of the historic building(s) within
26
Exhibit A
the district. New construction shall appear similar in height and width to the historic building
and maintain the current views of the house. New construction shall not overpower any of
the existing historic buildings on the site. New accessory structures on the site shall not be
taller than the house and in most cases shall not exceed one story in height.
ROOFLINE
The roofline of any new construction in the district shall match as closely as possible the
gabled form and pitch(es) of the roof of the house.
MATERIALS
Exterior materials used on new construction should be the same as those found on the
historic house, namely, brick and hardwood. Materials should be used in the design such
that the new construction is distinguishable from the old but still visually compatible with the
historic structure(s) in the district.
DOORS AND WINDOWS
Doors and windows in new construction should be compatible with doors and windows of
existing historic structures on the site in terms of size, scale, proportion, materials, spacing,
and orientation.
BREEZEWAYS
Though additions are generally not recommended, construction of a new breezeway may be
permitted between a non-dominant façade and an addition to the house. Any new
breezeway should be compatible in character and materials with the house but should still
be distinguishable from the historic structure(s).
USAGE
As noted above, any new building or structure erected in the district shall be modest in size
and scale. Accordingly, any new construction in the district shall be limited to accessory
buildings, such as small workshops, storage sheds, or studios. The construction of a new
primary building or structure, such as a house, shall not be permitted within the district.
Likewise, the construction of a large secondary structure, such as a detached garage with
second-floor storage or finished space, shall be deemed inappropriate.
27 A Exhibit
GUIDELINES FOR ADDITIONS
Additions to the house shall generally be deemed inappropriate, and additions attached
to the south façade of the house shall be explicitly forbidden. Any additions permitted to
be constructed shall follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment
for Historic Properties (SOI's Standards), and, more specifically, SOI's Standard 9:
New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy
historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale,
and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its
environment.
Furthermore, any new additions permitted under the COA process shall conform to the
same guidelines set forth above for new construction within the district
GUIDELINES FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT AND
LANDSCAPING
Walls and Fences:
RECOMMENDED:
1. A fence may be installed along the west boundary of the property, provided it is suitable
in character to the natural setting of the site and the design intention for the house and
its surrounding landscape. A fence may also be installed along the northern boundary of
the property, provided it does not encroach on the path of the creek.
2. A fence or wall may be installed if it is of a wooden picket, wood split-rail, wrought iron,
aluminum picket, or wooden post and rail style, or consists of masonry posts with
horizontal wooden rails spanning the spaces between. Any masonry used in a fence or
garden wall shall be compatible in design and material with the masonry on the house.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Placement of fences in front of the house or anywhere other than the north or west edge
of the property. Fences along the east edge of the property are not recommended as
they are liable to detract from the integrity of the setting of the historic O.W. Nutt House
to the east at 145 Audubon Drive. Fences at other locations within the district are not
recommended as they are apt to obstruct views of the historic house, thereby altering
the setting and obscuring Avriel Shull's design intention.
2. Chain link fences, privacy fences, or any other fencing type that is incompatible with the
natural setting or historic character of the property
28
Exhibit A
Trees and Landscaping
RECOMMENDED:
1. Mature trees shall be protected and retained. A mature tree shall be defined as follows:
a) a shade tree with a trunk at least 12-inches in diameter,
b) an ornamental tree with a trunk at least 4-inches in diameter or fifteen feet in
height, or
c) an evergreen tree with a trunk at least 8-inches in diameter or fifteen feet in height.
2. Any dead, diseased, or overgrown shrubs or trees shall be replaced with plants of like
Species, unless the species has been deemed invasive.
3. Layout of existing landscaping beds shall be retained.
4. Where new planting is necessary, native species shall be favored in the interest of
preserving the natural woodland setting of the district.
5. Historic masonry posts at the south end of the driveway are part of the house's historic
landscape setting and shall be retained.
6. Terracing of sloped portions of rear yard shall be preserved. If the timbers that retain the
terracing become deteriorated and need to be replaced, they shall be replaced with an
in-kind timber that matches the original pieces in size, shape, material, and profile.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Removal of mature trees.
2. Removal of other existing landscape features without prompt replacement of those
features with similar elements.
3. Removal or alteration of historic brick posts at south end of the driveway.
Subdivision
Subdivision of the existing property shall not be permitted, as the existing size and
wooded nature of the parcel is essential to the character of the property. Any proposal
to subdivide the property shall require a Certificate of Appropriateness and shall be
made subject to maximal scrutiny by the CHPC.
RECOMMENDED:
1. Maintaining existing parcel size and boundaries
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Subdividing the existing parcel into smaller properties
29
Exhibit A.
Walkways and Automobile Areas
RECOMMENDED:
1. The course of walkways and driveways shall not be altered.
2. Any new paving material on existing walkways or driveways shall be compatible with the
historic character of the district.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. Substantial changes to the course of walkways or driveways.
2. Significant increases in the surface area of the district covered by pavement.
Swimming Pools
RECOMMENDED:
1. The installation of an in-ground swimming pool may be considered appropriate only if it is located on
the north (rear) side of the house and only if the pool and any surrounding hardscaping do not require
the removal or destruction of mature trees or the underlying root systems of mature trees.
NOT RECOMMENDED:
1. A swimming pool located anywhere in the district other than the portion to the north (rear)of the house.
2. A swimming pool the installation of which requires the removal of mature trees.
30A
Exhibit
APPENDIX I: PHOTOGRAPHS
Iti�. fir ` ;: •I
• 1, 5 , a
itli
t r, .#, lam "� •
fit" ' , t/
1 ;,`* li . 1,- , . P. ' 7' t!
t. .Oii .. v .. . .:
,i
1 i . , .
_ _ � t
._ ...... ._ __. . _
t•w4 n�. 'T�' .e:au►aw �1 i+ . ____ ....
...
rr. ,'+
' r
�"•.'-
.•.004' r -,._ r ki
• `yN tSYQ,:
1 ^ ..fie:T,Oti `D",P,04 7#'te.4M�� + • ..A.) { ,. t
A
PHOTO 1: Main (South) Facade, looking north
�!{y�p6' -` a. of •.x.,7 'IG,�
• ,Cam.. �A I +., . . s �
IC
Im.� •w r n _
t Fy TFs, a a . <..h- ...... 2 '., .y i `1 • jV1`- / - s• k yt t 4 s:.
PHOTO 2: Southwest and Southeast Facades of Garage, looking north
31 A
Exhibit
. ,. .
„., ..„
. . .
• .,....... , ...-----,, , , .., ,....... -1 .,* ,., •
. •
. , •- -;- .
‘°...''
,.;' " • .', i _
104° ''' : — ' . . , i frk. .._ , .''14. • ''*14‘, A ./. 1,1, ':. ..-
..:,• ''..''b o I,,,', .
... -
, -.'''; !:''''',' , " , ' . 'i '' • ',,,'
4 ' .'-•••'''S . . ' - 4' ft... ' ' 1 '
:0 ' ' !• • • 1 ' ' =I . I •
r<1— e.at-'
• 4,,r
..-- • - -,, .0. t- . --- :, ..,',.--,..,......-_, ' .... •-
-4 .
.• , ,
• se . .i.,:t ,.. t . *."- ' '•J; .
ii; •
‘. 4
::141111:--j)._.....,, O 417111/4.• - ''• la, '''' '
4,
r - _.,--- , . ,.,---. 0 , r.-.....---.
.....
...,..
' ',Y.' --44 • 7- .e ,' ; - . : ; `. 'i. ••• , '
_ , 4. 4
.- .0 d - . — ...di
.„ .
.
- -- .. •
._. . a.
., , ..4-- . it tr.,-,... --,.• r, - ,... - - •,.. - . - .1-,
-
Ilir- A
47.ta
, ..., .r
......-- •_ ' , r
5 , . . 41,. '
......11115:
' 1
., k
i i ' b ' a
- ' .1 ' ViOi r 1 ', . . .-. .
..
.:0 vil , 1 .. -;
-' -., ' 4 ' ' -. .'"/
. . ,
t ' .
. ..
I vg,
. r oli -.."' ar , ; ; .
IP :.1 , Is
' ..-
. 7
-
I
•---- -7""—- -5- -...7. -d-, - -- ;al.° _. . lit
... ,. ,.., 1 . .
•
PHOTO 3: Exterior Face of Front Door
32 k
Exhibit a
...:•.�1 Y a '
Il
. r"- T.-.i
• u
f".." IM1 N } •+ ice, P.
i II
, .........3.,... .„;,.,..: ., e-,,..-'4,7i.t.,::-.4'-. ::k.. .-..- ..1`..,-...,
e, �, , .: ,...,..,..... , .;:40.,....„......,..,,,:,‘,,
k....'i' .P......."4.' '-it,.,- ..:,,,,,, ..r.
k
:
......, - • + •
V
_ � _ -- y ..� - {} :Z`f ,Sep ' t
. 4., ..„et
O.
---� is v
yy' -t
xyt -. �:
•
f • ../ I.y ,n _ Q
' , -.. . . -: . , fr.,":-&..-,' • . . '- . fr;-iiii* .it
... . ..• . ..s..,..„..4,p,...5....,.:..i_• . _ ,, ,
. ,
. .. . .. ..,...).itrs.•...,:_sT.
PHOTO 4: East Facade, looking northwest
33
Exhibi
t n
._...
...... .- - - .,..„_A__.•-• ! i -,../
• _
., .
.:
,_
. - „ NMI
1111111
.• I
MN 1
4. i ,
- . ..
. , .
•
• —
ttt....,,,.......4„,-_-- .i....,g..,..i,-:4_,.. 2...t:,. .... ._ . „..,___,.2___,..r•--1„.,....,..,.„..A1-..„.1 ....s... ._,,._‘-....-__k,, -. ,--,,,...,_,..-1.k.-:-. ..,a,......--..4,...,...- --_,._4,..-,-...:-..
er .t.:'.°4 :':'''I ii- ' -1k-.4:2z.4 '74/-4737itirt ...4;---i‘s. -.. -,._,-.,N2-:rpt---5;•;„‘....i..1.titz..77.19_
PHOTO 5: North Façade, looking south, featuring screen porch*".-•- • c.:' .• : - k*V, . 404):,,. "IllrigrrTi
E,IF,-1-, ... ,•; 's - ????-7.' '1 - 1, , -------: :Afii.-',
\ ., -"":.: .- 4:7%,s., ,::, * ',I,•.,,. , 4 I ' -:w..:.1;"-
. -
N s, ''..,-' :^i. ''':: .1;" ' .1' At:1'k A''' •—,.....:c,y;',,.-ff -
1%, - .........5g.-..-:,,... .
- 4
'.,e'''.' '..,'•Cr z ="4.t"., --.r,p-• ._
t--t.,in-,„•
''..,Wil.%••1 . ".',,...,-,.,,,,s' 2,... . , , ..., • 1,, , 4.. 4....:.i.e, -7.)',...tir';,..:., c, • ,, r.- :,i,;%:... ..v Alf; ;",„,....4,4—,4-4;f-
t ,N. •‘ - . ,' - _ *..:.?.....„,,
• __ .." ,. ... . ,
2 ' 111'"-- . IC - .
1
IIIIII 11111311M1 1E11 , 4.1„,,44,
•,
I 1
P.0....
-----.' '
'' ' •
'et Alk.-,
-- • . . " di,'i ',/, .- 114- ‘ IIP
..._-
_ -
. ., ..
. • - ,... - ' —14N -. ,,.
.I.I. '1"• • ..7 . " 1 4% ••? Ilk• '4
“-“.••• ,_
PHOTO 6: North Façade, looking south, general view
34
ir
l 1 I - �`
/f ram NM
1-. ivi ,i01 INA tok ,.,1. "..''''''.”'
fie. -..� - A 1
' -5,
PHOTO 7: North Façade, second floor screen porch interior, looking southeast
i
..
,..,-, -____Ase.- .-- . ..... ,. i 1
' ' \ \ 1
4604000,. .
, , \ i. \ \,,
PHOTO 8: North Façade, second floor screen porch interior, looking west by southwest
35
Exhibit
\ ••
R k.
itihr
:a
- .�• -war ' '•;rt";.,../.,
�, z i �; `tom' - ' `.
•
. . -_Via. a,.7 .a` q. _
PHOTO 9: West Facade, Northwest Side of Breezeway, and Northeast Side of Garage, looking
southeast
Exhibit _._
36
rel \SQ,
'
i" i � �`> �Y r .g
. . , !•':/ -}:7'T.
,iiA.
_ .t M.% it �l r'±
4 ,,, Y r, N „ 3, W
41 `. ,„,, ,._ .�f i. IG� n' # r,s� ,�.1�' I t a t a+ _._ .R',
!ft
ILA' • '1'I O A * Y '��
�.•. ,' ,rr, Ski,' ,
r
.J� .3 ...�,-me.µ .� � �
Lr .a ,. . .,,A,..4„, . 2 ,
„At
r �• '� i- .f y / .1Ij
z. • , .„.
_ ,
. 1,— „
,-,., : ,
! 'r.,ear :!
)146.---- •
\ r.�• 'fir ' '
-., _
I / `''
' I
I''
- _' "* & o
}- 1_ a a _ 0
a)
- i', i� -0
co
i ,- ,* 'it
•
d 1 b * al
.
'�'Yy
S
l
7 a`•�r"'.zk++r - r ' •�- r T <•' !� _ " .- 0
I, axt.,.iyyrr' r ' ir� i{
PHOTO 11: South End of Driveway, featuring original brick posts and lanterns Exhibit___iL
38
APPENDIX II: RETRACEMENT SURVEY OF PARCEL 16-10-30-00-00-002.000.
THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Exhibit
39