View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: Wednesday, July 11, 2018
TIME OF MEETING: 4:00 p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: City Commission Chambers, City Hall
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Approval of Minutes of the regular meeting of June 5, 2018
III. New Business
Case 2018-17 – 550 W. Western – Exterior Vents, AC Units, and Awnings
Case 2018-18 – 314 Monroe – Deck and Fence
Case 2018-19 – 320 Monroe – Fence and Deck
IV. Old Business
V. Other Business
VI. Adjourn
“We admire that which is old not because it is old, but because it is beautiful.” Winston Churchill
AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT POLICY FOR ACCESS TO OPEN MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION AND ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTEES
The City of Muskegon will provide necessary reasonable auxiliary aids and services, such as signers for the hearing impaired and audio
tapes of printed materials being considered at the meeting, to individuals with disabilities who want to attend the meeting, upon twenty-
four hour notice to the City of Muskegon. Individuals with disabilities requiring auxiliary aids or services should contact the City of
Muskegon by writing or calling the following: Ann Marie Cummings, City Clerk at 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, MI 49440 or by call-
ing (231) 724-6705 or TTY/TDD: Dial 7-1-1 and request that representative dial 231-724-6705
1
II. MINUTES
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
June 5, 2018
Chairperson J. Hilt called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Hilt, S. Kroes, L. Wood, A. Riegler, K. Panozzo, S. Radtke
MEMBERS ABSENT: D. Warren, excused
STAFF PRESENT: J. Pesch, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: K. Zimmerman, Community enCompass; C. Kotchka, City of Muskegon
Community & Neighborhood Services (CNS) Department
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the regular meeting minutes of May 1, 2018 was made by J. Hilt, supported by K.
Panozzo and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
Case 2018-15 – 34 E. Isabella Ave – Windows and Siding. Applicant: Community enCompass. District:
McLaughlin. Current Function: Residential. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The applicant is seeking
approval to remove the existing wood windows and replace them with vinyl windows. The rough open-
ings will remain the same, as will the existing trim. The applicant is also proposing to remove and replace
the existing wood siding with a wood composite siding of the same profile. The existing wood trim and
posts will remain.
K. Zimmerman was working on this project for Community enCompass. She stated that they would re-
move the wood trim and components, strip it, and re-use it. They would like to replace the wood siding
with a wood composite material, and replace the windows with vinyl. She provided a sample of the wood
composite material and pamphlets showing the proposed new windows. A couple of board members
mentioned that they preferred a smoother finish on the wood product. K. Zimmerman wasn’t sure if it
was available, but she would check. She also stated that there was lead-based paint in the colored window
on the house and they planned to wet-scrape and encapsulate that so they could keep that window. K.
Zimmerman also stated that vinyl windows now came in a variety of colors, so they would blend in better
than the bright white vinyl windows previously available.
S. Radtke arrived at 4:07 PM.
A. Riegler asked if they were going to keep the corner trim. K. Zimmerman confirmed that they were,
and stated that she had made the contractor aware of what they wished to preserve. She stated that, re-
garding the windows, they had looked into wood windows but they were about $200 more expensive than
2
vinyl, per window. Since Community EnCompass was already putting about $80,000 into this remodel, it
was not feasible to spend that much more on wood windows. She stated that the house had been vacant
for over 10 years and had been close to being demolished.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to remove the existing wood windows and replace them with
vinyl windows within the same rough openings while retaining the existing trim, to remove and replace
the existing wood siding with a wood composite siding of the same profile with no alteration to the exist-
ing wood trim and posts, and to use a smoother-finish wood composite siding if one was available, as
long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained, was made by A.
Riegler, supported by S. Radtke and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, S. Kroes, L. Wood, A. Riegler,
K. Panozzo, and S. Radtke voting aye.
Case 2018-16 (Walk-on) – 1179 4th Street – Houston Historic District – City of Muskegon Community
and Neighborhood Services. This was a walk-on request, although the property owner had appeared be-
fore the HDC in the past to discuss the work that needed to be done on this house. C. Kotchka from the
City’s CNS Department spoke on behalf of the property owner, as the CNS department was assisting the
homeowner with repairs through the City’s grant programs. The applicant wished to remove the remain-
ing (partially disassembled) chimney and firebox, stud in the opening, and repair and cover the exterior
wall with cedar siding closely matching the original siding on the house. The applicant also requested ap-
proval to install vinyl siding on the entire house through the City CNS Department’s vinyl siding program
at a later date.
J. Pesch showed board members pictures of the house. C. Kotchka stated that the City was assisting the
homeowner through their home repair programs and they were hoping to get vinyl siding approved in the
future; they only had one contractor doing the siding and he was working on another project at this time.
She stated that the houses on both sides of this one had vinyl siding. Since the City did not have a pro-
gram to help property owners paint their houses, they were hoping to be able to take advantage of the vi-
nyl siding program. J. Pesch asked when someone had started taking the chimney apart. C. Kotchka stat-
ed that she was told that a family friend had started the demolition but she was not sure when. J. Hilt
asked what other houses in this area were like. J. Pesch stated that several of the houses on this block had
been before the HDC and had vinyl siding. It was near the site of the new Midtown Square development.
S. Radtke suggested allowing the removal of the chimney and firebox now, and to consider the roof and
siding at a later date once J. Pesch had been able to look into it further and write up a staff report.
A motion to allow removal of the remaining chimney and firebox, with the roof and siding being repaired
to match the materials currently on the house, was made by S. Radtke, supported by S. Kroes and ap-
proved, with J. Hilt, S. Kroes, L. Wood, A. Riegler, K. Panozzo, and S. Radtke voting aye. Board mem-
bers concurred that they would consider the vinyl siding request at a future date.
OLD BUSINESS
None
OTHER
1133 6th St. An audience member was considering purchasing the house at 1133 6th St, and was seeking
input from the HDC on restoring the house, since it was located in an historic district. Board members
3
and staff answered his questions and referred the gentleman to the City’s Zoning Administrator for other
issues. He was informed that it was unlikely that vinyl siding would be approved at this location.
Certified Local Government (CLG). J. Pesch continued exploring this program through the State. He and
the board discussed reviewing sections of the City’s historic district standards each month so they could
be updated to reflect the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. He stated that the State would also be look-
ing for consistency in applying the standards.
Case 2015-10 – 316 W. Webster Avenue – Hackley Library doors. J. Pesch updated the board on his dis-
cussions about the replacement door issues. He had also reached out to the State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO) for guidance, and determined that it is not likely that the HDC will be able to take further
action in this case. J. Pesch stated that consistency in records was stressed by the SHPO concerning prop-
er HDC case documentation, and that he would discuss the matter with K. Huss, President of the Li-
brary’s Board of Trustees.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:07 PM.
4
III. NEW BUSINESS
Case 2018-17 – 550 W. Western – Exterior Vents, AC Units, and Awnings
Applicant: Trillium Amazon Owners
District: Clay-Western
Current Function: Residential
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to 1) install five low-profile furnace vents painted to match the brick on
the exterior of the building, 2) install five, 4” hooded vents painted to match the brick on the exterior of
the building, 3) install five AC condensers screened behind the retaining wall at the NE corner of the
building, and 4) remove the red awnings from the building façade.
5
Existing vents on the building
Furnace vent and 4” hooded vent – both painted to match brick
6
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the request to 1) install five low-profile furnace vents painted to
match the brick on the exterior of the building, 2) install five, 4” hooded vents painted to match the brick
on the exterior of the building, 3) install five AC condensers screened behind the retaining wall at the NE
corner of the building, and 4) remove the red awnings from the building façade as long as the work meets
all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained.
7
Case 2018-18 – 314 Monroe – Deck and Fence
Applicant: William D. and Judy Kendrick
District: Houston
Current Function: Residential
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to build a 300 square-foot deck with railings. The applicant is also pro-
posing to install 6 foot tall, white vinyl fencing around the backyard.
8
Standards
Covered Porches
Existing screen or open porches shall not be enclosed with framing or windows without approval by the
Commission. Generally, when an open or screened porch is enclosed, the enclosure materials or windows
should preserve the appearance of a porch in order to maintain the original design and to avoid the visual
effect of a boxed-in appendage. This can often be accomplished with full length windows and exterior
screens which would extend from within a few inches off the floor or base of the existing porch opening
thus maintaining the effect of a screened in porch or solarium. On most full length porches, building up a
half-wall at the base and enclosing it with short windows would not be in keeping with the original design
of the house and would detract from the overall appearance. Each request for a porch enclosure will be
carefully analyzed by the Commission, taking into consideration the practical and intended usage of the
area and the overall visual effect upon the house.
Newly constructed covered porches shall be decked with tongue and groove decking and painted to com-
plement or contrast the house (unless the construction involves the rebuilding of a missing original porch
where documentable evidence shows a different method of decking). Ventilation under the porch deck is
necessary to prevent excessive moisture from causing deterioration to the porch members. Therefore, the
porch skirt shall be detailed in a similar manner to that shown on the attached decking detail illustration.
Freestanding or Attached Decks (Uncovered Porches)
Placement and design of all decks shall be approved by the Commission. Decks should be located in un-
obtrusive locations and shall feature one of the edge details featured on the attached decking detail illus-
tration. Decking boards shall consist of 5/4” thick pressure treated decking or square-edged fir decking
and appropriately finished.
Handrails and Guardrails
Existing original handrails and guardrails shall not be removed without the approval of the Commission.
Deteriorated rails shall be repaired as a first course of action. When replacement is necessary, the original
details shall be replicated. In cases where height or spacing is required to be modified to meet code re-
quirements, the Commission will carefully review the options to determine the most appropriate method
to accomplish this requirement. In cases where handrails or guardrails are new (including those for new
decks), the design shall generally conform to the railing and balustrade detail illustrated on the attached
sketches.
Paint
All exposed deck or porch wood shall be painted to complement or contrast the existing structure. Pres-
sure treated wood shall be painted no later than one year after installation.
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the proposed 300 square-foot deck with railings and the 6 foot tall,
white vinyl fencing around the backyard as long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the neces-
sary permits are obtained.
9
Case 2018-19 – 320 Monroe – Fence and Deck
Applicant: Iesha Collins
District: Houston
Current Function: Residential
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to build 6 foot tall, white vinyl fence enclosing the backyard, as well as
a 10’x10’ deck adjacent to the attached garage.
10
Standards
General
Fences and gates are an extension of the architecture of a home. They should be compatible in style and
material. They should be appropriate to the size and scale of the structure. They, therefore, require review
and approval by the Historic District Commission.
Sometimes it is necessary to use fencing for other than decorative purposes, such as marking boundaries,
privacy, screening unsightly areas, or security. Fencing for utilitarian purposes sometimes requires fenc-
ing materials which are not of the period or character of the house. Nonconforming fencing materials may
be considered for use in the back of the structure.
Fence Guidelines
When building wood fencing, consideration should be given to the kind of wood best suited for the pro-
ject, adequate post foundations, weatherproofing, color, and amount of maintenance required. Simple var-
iations of wood picket-style fencing are appropriate to many period homes. Wood fences must be painted
to complement or contrast the colors of the house. Pressure treated wood shall be painted no later than one
year after installation.
Iron fencing is an appropriate option for Victorian-era homes. Iron fencing was often modest in propor-
tion, seldom exceeding four feet in height. A popular standard was 36 inches.
Fencing materials such as split rails, stone, and brick may be considered if they reflect the feeling of the
home in material and character.
Chain-link and similar utilitarian fencing, such as industrial fencing, wire mesh, and barbed wire, is not
permitted in the front of a structure.
Hedges and natural fencing are possible alternatives to fences.
Fence Standards
LAYOUT REQUIREMENTS: (Please see the attached Supplementary Graphics sheets) Conforming
fences not over four feet (4’) in height are permitted between the property line and half way between the
front and rear setback lines.
Corner lots will be considered to have two front yards, except that non-conforming fences higher than 4’
will be permitted immediately behind the existing side setback line (rather than half way between the
front and rear).
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the proposed 6 foot tall, white vinyl fence enclosing the backyard, as
well as a 10’x10’ deck adjacent to the attached garage as long as the work meets all zoning requirements
and the necessary permits are obtained.
11
IV. OLD BUSINESS
None
V. OTHER BUSINESS
None
VI. ADJOURN
12
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails