View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
July 17, 2025
S. Radtke called the meeting to order at 4:09 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: S. Radtke, G. Borgman, D. Gregersen, C. Davis
MEMBERS ABSENT: J. Huss, excused; K. Kochin, excused
STAFF PRESENT: J. Pesch, W. Webster
OTHERS PRESENT: F. Peterson, A. Riegler, D. Dusendang, B. Cox (1095 3rd); S. Allen
(1541 Peck)
OLD BUSINESS
Case 2025-08 – 1095 3rd St. – Remodel and Building Addition
Applicant: Muskegon Midtown Center - District: Houston - Current Function: Vacant
J. Pesch explained that this case had been reviewed at the April 1, 2025 meeting at which time the
applicant requested to remodel the exterior of the existing building and construct a new two-story
building addition along Houston Avenue. A partial approval was issued by the HDC with the
following motion:
Remodel the exterior of the existing building retaining the original brick, and construct a new two-
story building addition along Houston Avenue as depicted in the drawings included in the April 1,
2025 HDC staff report with exterior cladding and windows being brought to a future meeting for
approval.
The applicant was returning for approval of the exterior cladding materials and windows. A Riegler
shared updated drawings with the HDC and explained the cladding materials proposed. She noted
that a grey brick would be used as infill on the original building where there had previously been
storefront glass. Where there was once glass block windows on the second floor, a dark painted,
horizontal, corrugated metal would be used as infill. The new building would have brick on the
ground floor and the same horizontal corrugated metal on the upper floor.
A. Riegler stated that all new windows would be black vinyl. S. Radtke asked about the style of
windows shown in the drawings, noting that a horizontal muntin pattern was recommended at a
previous meeting. A. Riegler stated that such windows were not available as a stock window
package and said that either vertical muntins or no muntins were the options available. S. Radtke
asked about the proposed doors and A. Riegler stated that they would be fiberglass, three-panel
doors without a glass panel. She added that the door in the set back space connecting the new
building and the existing building would be different because of fire code requirements.
1
J. Pesch added that the zoning ordinance required vertical pilasters spaced throughout the facade,
but that the HDC could overrule this requirement. A. Riegler explained that they did not
incorporate that into the design as a means of reinforcing the horizontal nature of the original
building, and the board agreed that such a design feature would not be desirable in this case.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to remodel the exterior of the existing building
retaining the original brick, and construct a new two-story building addition along Houston
Avenue as depicted in the drawings included in the April 1, 2025 HDC staff report with exterior
cladding materials and windows types presented at the July 17, 2025 HDC special meeting as long
as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained was made by G.
Borgman, supported by C. Davis with S. Radtke, C. Davis, G. Borgman, D. Gregersen voting aye.
For architectural continuity, the HDC recommended overriding the Form Based Code requirement
for pilasters on the new building.
NEW BUSINESS
Case 2025-17 – 1541 Peck St. – Siding
Applicant: Aletha and Starrey Allen - District: Clinton-Peck - Current Function: Residential
The applicant was seeking approval to install vinyl siding with a four-inch reveal over the sections
of the house that were currently sided (with either wide-board lap siding or board and batten siding)
and install wider window trim.
S. Allen explained that he had repainted the house once since he purchased it and was unable to
keep up on the maintenance for a while. He added that he found a number of houses in the
immediate area that were sided with vinyl siding and questioned why his would be any different.
J. Pesch explained the history of the HDC and their approach to vinyl siding through the years.
S. Allen noted that his house was not as old as many of the houses in the Clinton-Peck Historic
District and J. Pesch confirmed that the house was noted as non-contributing when the district was
created in the mid-1980s. G. Borgman noted that the house was now over 50 years old and
considered historic. J. Pesch explained that, based on the research he had done, the original portion
of the house on the west side of the lot likely dated to the late 1930s with the addition on the east
side of the lot likely being built in the early 1940s.
S. Radtke noted that he was concerned vinyl siding was not available with a reveal that would
match the wide boards currently on the house and the corners would require trim boards if done in
vinyl. He added that the existing trim had a minimal reveal and that recreating that appearance
with vinyl would not be possible without recessing the windows. S. Allen explained that he
planned to install wider trim boards around the windows and doors. D. Gregersen asked if the
shutters would be reinstalled and S. Allen stated that he had not yet decided.
S. Radtke stated that the house appeared to be in original condition and while it had not been
deemed historic at the time the district was created, it fell within the HDC’s purview now due to
its age. He added that the HDC local standards strongly discouraged residing houses with original
siding.
2
A motion that the HDC deny the request to install vinyl siding with a four-inch reveal over the
sections of the house that are currently sided and install wider window trim was made by D.
Gregersen and supported by G. Borgman with S. Radtke, C. Davis, G. Borgman, D. Gregersen
voting aye.
S. Allen voiced his frustrations with the Historic District Commission’s decision and the City of
Muskegon, summarizing his past negative experiences with the City. Regarding the HDC’s
decision, J. Pesch explained that there was an appeals process that could be followed. J. Pesch also
discussed the importance of continued historic resource surveys in the historic districts. He noted
that it had been over 40 years since this area was last reviewed and the records from that time were
not thorough.
Case 2025-18 – 430 W. Clay Ave. – Windows
Applicant: Lakeshore Museum Center - District: Clay-Western - Current Function: Institutional
The applicant was seeking approval to replace all lower-level, steel-cased, tilt-in windows with
fixed aluminum windows of the same size with applied horizontal mullions to match the windows’
current configurations. Two of the replacement windows were to have the option to tilt-in for
ventilation. J. Pesch added that J. Huss, who was not able to be in attendance, explained that this
request would allow them to budget for replacement windows and get an accurate price from their
contractor. Work was not to begin immediately.
J. Pesch noted that many variations of these windows existed in the building and that they opened
into both offices and exhibits, with some being blacked out as they had been walled over on the
building’s interior. The board determined that the windows were likely original to the building
despite the difference in style from the larger, decorative windows above them. The lower-level
windows were likely functional, though the original use of the garden-level space was unknown.
D. Gregersen noted that darker, anodized aluminum replacement windows would allow these to
blend in with the surrounding brick and further accent the more decorative, upper windows. The
board had questions about the width of the profile of the proposed replacement windows and J.
Pesch stated that he did not know many details aside from the windows’ materials. The HDC
requested to see a specific window product presented before making a decision.
A motion that the HDC table the request to replace the utilitarian lower windows for clarification
on type of windows, etc. was made by G. Borgman and approved by voice vote.
OTHER BUSINESS
None.
ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:23 p.m.
3
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails