A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Historic preservation panel approves most changes for 817 Washington, denies scalloped shingles and bay-window standing seam

February 03, 2026 | LaPorte County, Indiana


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Historic preservation panel approves most changes for 817 Washington, denies scalloped shingles and bay-window standing seam
The Michigan City Historic Preservation Commission approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for much of the work proposed at 817 Washington on Feb. 2 but denied two design elements staff and commissioners said lacked period evidence.

Blake Swyart, the commission’s consultant, recommended approval of in-kind window replacement using Andersen Fibrex windows, reactivating covered second-story windows, porch repairs and rear French doors. Swyart recommended denying scalloped shingles on the front façade because “there’s no evidence that scallop shingles were on this particular structure” and denying standing-seam roofing on the bay window because the record did not show that material historically existed there. He told commissioners that the proposed skylight and paint scheme meet district guidelines and that porch standing seam “may be considered by the commission.”

Following discussion, commissioners voted to deny the scalloped-siding proposal on the front façade and to approve standing-seam roofing for the porch while denying standing seam for the bay window. The commission then approved the front porch repairs as submitted, approved the front door repair with final staff sign-off, approved window replacement as submitted with a recommendation to change the proposed window color from black, and approved the rear French doors as submitted. Staff will issue a written decision letter to the applicant.

Commissioners emphasized that decisions should be evidence-based and suggested resources such as Indiana Landmarks and style guides to help applicants align proposals with district-appropriate details. Swyart recommended that applicants provide documentary evidence when asserting that historic features are damaged or missing so commissioners can “trust but verify.”

The vote broke out along roll calls recorded by the clerk during the meeting and the motions carried as stated by Swyart’s recommendations.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee