View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
January 7, 2025
S. Radtke called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: S. Radtke, J. Huss, G. Borgman, C. Davis, K. Kochin, D. Gregersen
(late)
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: J. Pesch, W. Webster
OTHERS PRESENT: R. Kraai (263 W. Muskegon); A. Riegler (1095 3rd)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the regular meeting minutes of November 12, 2024 was made by G. Borgman,
supported by K. Kochin and approved with J. Huss, C. Davis, G. Borgman, K. Kochin, and S. Radtke
voting aye.
ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR
J. Pesch noted that S. Radtke was the current Chairperson and J. Huss was the Vice Chairperson. G.
Borgman made a motion to retain S. Radtke as Chairperson, supported by J. Huss, and S. Radtke
accepted the nomination. K. Kochin made a motion to retain J. Huss as Vice Chairperson, supported
by S. Radtke, and J. Huss accepted the nomination. A vote was taken and unanimously approved, with
S. Radtke, J. Huss, C. Davis, G. Borgman, and K. Kochin voting aye.
OLD BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
Case 2025-01 – 263 W. Muskegon Ave. – Siding
Applicant: Ryan Kraai - District: Houston - Current Function: Residential
The applicant was seeking approval to remove the existing wood siding and install foam board
insulation beneath new cement siding, remove and replace the existing wood window, door, and
corner trim with new composite trim, install soffit vents, and replace the front, back and side exterior
doors with new steel or fiberglass doors. J. Pesch noted that all doors proposed to be replaced were
already replacement steel doors, and that a related request to reroof the house would be approved by
staff.
1
D. Gregersen arrived at 4:06 p.m.
R. Kraai stated that he was seeking guidance on the requirements from the HDC, and noted that all
siding and trim on the house was currently wood, adding that the current wood siding and trim
contained rot in areas, had recurring issues with peeling paint, and that he was looking for long-term
replacement. G. Borgman noted that fiber cement trim was being proposed for the replacement
window trim, but R. Kraai stated that he was not committed to that if the HDC had any
recommendations. The HDC noted that it was preferred that fiber cement replacement siding have a
smooth finish, but that supply was limited as it was no longer being manufactured. D. Gregersen noted
that it may be smart to use smooth-faced PVC trim in some areas to avoid water damage to fiber
cement trim.
A. Riegler cautioned that installing foam board insulation beneath the new siding would have a
noticeable effect on the appearance of the trim around the windows. D. Gregersen stated that the trim
would need to be built out to properly align with the new siding. R. Kraai stated that he was not
committed to installing the insulation and that it was something his contractor recommended.
The HDC reviewed the existing trim and detailing and agreed that most of the Queen Anne-style
detailing had been modified heavily in the past, but dental molding on the side porch and scrollwork
in its gable remained. Since no original details existed with the exception of the side porch, it was
recommended that those be retained, and R. Kraai agreed that very little would be changed on that
porch to preserve the architectural detailing still in place.
S. Radtke stated that it was likely the house had been resided in the past due to the existing wood
siding’s wider reveal. G. Borgman added that the house previously had asphalt siding and J. Pesch
shared a historic photo that confirmed this. S. Radtke explained that the existing siding’s reveal
appeared to be four-inches, but a three-inch reveal would have been common for a house of this style;
he preferred that the replacement siding have a three-inch reveal. The HDC noted that siding with a
three-inch reveal was also common on surrounding houses.
The HDC reviewed a drawing showing common door styles for Victorian houses, and recommended
that staff work with the applicant to select a replacement door style that matched one of these options.
D. Gregersen noted that the panels on the replacement door should be raised instead of flat; he also
recommended that a reclaimed door could be installed for the front door which was shielded from the
elements.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to remove and replace the existing wood siding with new
cement siding with a three-inch reveal, remove and replace the existing wood window, door, and
corner trim with new smooth-faced PVC trim of the same width and thickness, and replace the front,
back, and side exterior doors with new wood, steel, or fiberglass doors of an approved style as long
as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained was made by G.
Borgman, supported by K. Kochin and approved with K. Kochin, D. Gregersen, G. Borgman, C.
Davis, J. Huss, and S. Radtke voting aye.
Case 2025-02 (Walk-on) – 1095 3rd St. – Chimney
Applicant: Andrea Riegler - District: Houston - Current Function: Vacant
2
The HDC agreed to review a walk-on case. A. Riegler, architect, was present to explain the proposed
work. The applicant was seeking approval to remove the chimney on the building. A. Riegler
explained that the chimney was no longer functional.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to remove the chimney as long as the work meets all
zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained was made by J. Huss, supported by S.
Radtke and approved with S. Radtke, J. Huss, C. Davis, G. Borgman, D. Gregersen, and K. Kochin
voting aye.
J. Pesch reminded the HDC that they had approved exploratory demolition on the exterior of the
building a few months prior and shared photos of the building’s current condition. A. Riegler was
looking for some direction from the HDC and shared a couple preliminary design concepts with the
HDC. The board and applicant informally discussed the plans for the existing building’s exterior and
a building addition proposed for its parking lot along Houston Avenue. The project was still in the
planning stages and a vote would be handled at a future meeting once plans were finalized.
OTHER BUSINESS
Local Standards Update – J. Pesch noted that this item had been tabled for the past few meetings.
The HDC discussed creation of a guide for shutter designs appropriate to various architectural styles.
D. Gregersen agreed to create drawings of various shutter styles for possible incorporation into the
HDC’s Local Standards. The HDC agreed to review the topic at a future meeting once drawings were
prepared.
2024 Staff Approval Update #3 – J. Pesch explained that, since the last update in September 2024
(but before the end of that year), staff had approved 12 projects:
- 1284 Ransom – Reroof house
- 1563 Jefferson – Reroof house and repair damaged trim
- 1183 Terrace – Construction of storage shed (discussed at September meeting)
- 1243 Ransom – Reroof house
- 315 W. Webster – Construction of storage shed
- 1302 Ransom – Reroof house
- 1468 Clinton – Replace porch steps maintaining similar materials/appearance and same railing
- 349 W Webster – Reroof building
- 1625 Peck – Reroof house
- 1507 Peck – Reroof house
- 1542 Peck – Reroof house
- 561 W. Western – Repoint and replace bricks with like material
3
2024 CLG Annual Report – J. Pesch explained that the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
requires that all Certified Local Government (CLG) communities submit an annual report to be in
good standing and remain eligible for grant funding and technical assistance activities. SHPO had
created a template for CLG communities to follow when completing their annual report, and the HDC
reviewed the report template as well as the previous year’s annual report.
S. Radtke proposed that the HDC’s annual goals be listed at the end of each meeting agenda, and at
meetings that allow time for such, more frequent discussion of these goals could be held. The board
agreed that this was a good idea. J. Pesch requested that the questions from the annual report be
included on the next meeting’s agenda for further discussion and asked board members to share their
thoughts and responses to these questions with him to create a summary that would serve as a starting
point for that conversation.
ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:20 p.m.
4
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails