View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: Tuesday, February 4, 2020
TIME OF MEETING: 4:00 p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: City Commission Chambers, City Hall
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Election of Chair and Vice Chair
III. Approval of Minutes of the regular meeting of December 3, 2019
IV. New Business
Case 2020-1 – 316 W. Webster – Sign
Case 2020-2 – 416 W. Webster – Window
V. Old Business
VI. Other Business
New Board Member
HDC Enforcement
Public Art
Certified Local Government
VII. 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 calling (231) 724-
6705 or TTY/TDD: Dial 7-1-1 and request that representative dial 231-724-6705
1
III. MINUTES
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
December 3, 2019
Chairperson J. Hilt called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Hilt, K. George, L. Wood, D. Warren, A. Riegler, K. Panozzo
MEMBERS ABSENT: S. Radtke
STAFF PRESENT: J. Pesch, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: J. Wilder, M. Belt, Architect for 512 W Webster; F. Madrid, Home
Depot for 416 W Webster Ave; J. Zappacosta for 315 W. Webster; A.
Nulf, 1314 Peck St.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the regular meeting minutes of November 5, 2019, was made by D. Warren,
supported by K. George and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
Case 2019-27 – 427 W. Muskegon Avenue (Siding). Applicant: Brent Playford. District: Houston.
Current Function: Residential. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The applicant is seeking approval
to replace all existing siding with a treated engineered wood lap siding. The work has been partially
completed. Similar residing work was approved at the November 6, 2018 HDC meeting but for the
southwest façade only. The motion from that meeting reads as follows: “A motion that the HDC ap-
prove the request to re-side the southwest façade of the structure using a treated engineered wood
lap siding with a smooth texture as long as the necessary permits are obtained, was made by A.
Riegler, supported by K. Panozzo and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, S. Radtke, L. Wood, K.
Panozzo; D. Warren and A. Riegler voting aye.”
J. Hilt stated that the siding had already been removed, so it was not possible to tell what the condi-
tion of it was. B. Playford stated that it was in poor condition; he had not realized that the previous
HDC approval on this building was for the southwest façade only. J. Pesch provided photos of the
siding before it was removed. D. Warren observed that the new siding looked wider than the old sid-
ing. B. Playford confirmed that the new siding was 6 inches wide and the previous siding was 4
inches wide.
A. Riegler arrived at 4:15 pm.
J. Pesch stated that, based on HDC files, the original wood siding was previously covered with as-
bestos siding. K. George asked if any trim would be replaced. B. Playford stated that he intended to
2
replace the trim with Smart Trim, but the architectural details on the front of the building would not
be altered.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to replace all existing siding with a 6-inch treated engi-
neered wood lap siding as long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits
are obtained, was made by L. Wood, supported by K. Panozzo and unanimously approved, with J.
Hilt, K. George, L. Wood, D. Warren, A. Riegler, and K. Panozzo voting aye.
Case 2019-28 – 512 W. Webster Avenue (Siding, Porch, Windows). Applicant: Community en-
Compass. District: Clay-Western. Current Function: Residential. J. Pesch presented the staff report.
The applicant is seeking approval to make several changes to the original plans for the house. They
would like to 1) replace the three windows on the second floor of the front façade with vinyl win-
dows of the same size and configuration (to match the rest of the house’s existing vinyl replacement
windows), 2) rebuild the porch columns to their original size and finish the bases with brick veneer,
3) add poured concrete steps and sidewalls to the front porch and finish the sidewalls with brick ve-
neer, 4) replace the rotted wood windows on the rear porch with vinyl windows, 5) replace the side
and rear doors with craftsman-style doors, 6) replace the vinyl siding on the house with a treated en-
gineered wood lap siding and side the garage with the same material to match, 7) eliminate the pair
of windows on the southwest façade closest to the street (facing 520 W. Webster), and 8) make
changes to the door on the northeast façade of the house. The applicant would provide additional
information on that. Photographs of the house showing the Webster Avenue façade where the front
pair of windows on the left side of the house were proposed to be eliminated, the proposed brick
work that had been started on the right side of the front staircase, the view of the rear porch from
alley and the door on northeast façade were provided and reviewed by the board.
K. George discussed the requests as listed in the above staff report. She stated that all windows
except the three on the 2nd floor of the front façade had already been replaced with vinyl windows
before the house was moved into a historic district. During the move, the porch was compromised
and the support posts were no longer sufficient to support the roof. She stated that they would like to
install poured concrete steps instead of wood, and that the steps on most houses in this area were
poured concrete. The homeowner also wanted to add brick to the front porch to match the porch
supports. K. George stated that the house was in between two larger old homes, and she thought the
brick would help this house fit in better. The rear porch also needed work to stabilize it after the
move. The wood windows were damaged and they wanted to replace them with vinyl to match the
rest of the windows. She stated that, regarding item #5, the side door no longer worked so it needed
to be replaced; they wanted to replace the back door also, to match the new side door, as the back
door was not original. The front door would remain. The house had been sided with vinyl before
being moved to the historic district, and they had originally wanted to side the garage with vinyl to
match the house. However, some of the vinyl siding was damaged during the move and they now
wished to side the house and garage with a treated engineered wood lap siding. There was no lap
siding underneath the vinyl, as it had been previously stripped off. Per item #7, the homeowners
wanted to remove the two windows near the front of the house on the SW façade, as they were only
a few feet from the neighbor’s house, and they preferred to install a fireplace inside on the wall
where the windows were located. She stated that fireplaces were common in Craftsman-style homes.
A. Riegler asked if the windows were original to the house. J. Wilder stated that they were, and if
removal was approved, they would be covered with siding when the house was re-sided. K. George
explained #8 of the request: to make changes to the door on the NE façade of the house. When the
3
house was placed on its foundation after the move, the indoor stairway to the basement did not meet
current building code. There was not enough space to meet the code now, because it required that
the steps be wider, but the chimney was in the way. They proposed to add a bump-out where the
east side door was, to accommodate a landing for the stairs. J. Wilder stated that the door would
then face the rear of the house. M. Belt stated that the headroom, run, and rise of the basement
stairway could not meet the current building code requirement, as there was not enough room to
accommodate the space required. D. Warren asked if the house was in a historic district prior to
being moved to its current location, and if they knew the age of the home. K. George stated that the
house was estimated to be about 100 years old and it was not previously located in a historic district;
it sat on a corner lot in the Nims neighborhood. A. Riegler stated that, although HDC standards did
not allow for the removal of windows, this house was not in a historic district before. K. George
stated that one side of the house only had 3 small windows, so she didn’t think that removing the
two requested would throw off the aesthetic of the home. Regarding the addition of a bump-out on
the side to accommodate the new stairwell, A. Riegler suggested widening the bump-out to match
the size of the dormer above it. J. Wilder stated that he planned to enclose the side yard with a fence
in the future, and the bump-out wouldn’t be very visible. K. George stated that the side proposed for
the bump-out was currently flat and plain with few windows, so a bump-out would add some
interest. Board members and the applicant discussed the request to eliminate the two side windows,
and what affect the standards would have on a house that was just moved into a historic district. A.
Riegler asked if the motion could be split into multiple motions; staff affirmed that it could.
A motion that the HDC approve requests 1 through 6 as follows: 1) replace the three windows on
the second floor of the front façade with vinyl windows of the same size and configuration which
will match the house’s existing vinyl replacement windows, 2) rebuild the porch columns to their
original size and cover the bases with brick veneer, 3) add poured concrete steps and sidewalls to the
front porch and finish the sidewalls with brick veneer, 4) replace the damaged, rotted windows on
the rear porch with vinyl windows, 5) replace the side and rear doors with craftsman-style doors as
shown in the December 3rd, 2019 HDC Staff Report, and 6) replace the vinyl siding on the house
with a treated engineered wood lap siding and side the garage with the same material to match with
the conditions that the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained,
and to have a separate vote on items 7 and 8 was made by A. Riegler, supported by K. Panozzo and
unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, L. Wood, D. Warren, A. Riegler, and K. Panozzo voting aye. K.
George abstained from voting, as she was representing the applicant.
A motion that the HDC approve request #7 as stated in the staff report, to eliminate the pair of win-
dows on the southwest façade closest to the street (facing 520 W. Webster), was made by D. Warren
and supported by K. Panozzo and was denied, with D. Warren voting aye and J. Hilt, L. Wood, A.
Riegler, and K. Panozzo voting nay. K. George abstained from voting, as she was representing the
applicant.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to build a bump-out on the northeast side of the home
where the current side door is located, with the suggestion that the size of the bump-out match and
align with the existing dormer above it and that a hip roof be considered with the conditions that the
work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained, was made by A. Rieg-
ler, supported by L. Wood and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, L. Wood, D. Warren, A. Riegler,
and K. Panozzo voting aye. K. George abstained from voting, as she was representing the applicant.
4
D. Warren left at 5:00 PM.
Case 2019-29 – 315 W. Webster Avenue (Sign). Applicant: Hackley Public Library. District: Na-
tional Register. Current Function: Institutional. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The applicant is
seeking approval to install a new, 36” wide by 48” tall aluminum panel ground sign supported by 4”
x 4” wood posts in the yard facing the intersection of W. Webster Avenue and Third Street. A ren-
dering showing the proposed location with the post and panel sign as viewed from the corner of W.
Webster and Third Street was provided.
Board members concurred that the sign met HDC standards and had no questions.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to install a new, 36” wide by 48” tall aluminum panel
ground sign supported by 4” x 4” wood posts in the yard facing the intersection of W. Webster Ave-
nue and Third Street as long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits
are obtained, was made by L. Wood, supported by J. Hilt and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt,
K. George, L. Wood, A. Riegler, and K. Panozzo voting aye.
Case 2019-30 – 416 W. Webster Avenue (Windows). Applicant: Home Depot USA, Inc. (Robert
Lusby, Property Owner). District: National Register. Current Function: Residential. J. Pesch pre-
sented the staff report. The applicant is seeking approval to remove and replace five wood windows
on the house (one 53”x77” picture window on the front façade and four 29”x70” double hung win-
dows on the second floor) with vinyl vinyl-wrapped wood windows (Staff was notified of this win-
dow specification and the motion has been updated to reflect this). The applicant is also requesting
to remove and replace four basement windows with new windows. Pictures of the house showing
the windows proposed to be replaced were provided to board members.
F. Madrid from Home Depot, who had provided a quote for replacing the windows, spoke on behalf
of the applicant. He stated that the picture window was a 70/30 split and that style of window was
no longer made. The material on the new windows would be a wood-look Fibrex and they wished to
replace the picture window with a fixed picture window with no separation. K. Panozzo asked if the
picture window was original. J. Pesch stated that he was unsure; the photo he had was from 1946
and it showed the picture window. K. George stated that she was not comfortable replacing a front-
facing window with a different style, and asked what condition the window was in. F. Madrid stated
that there were dry-rotting issues with the wood. J. Hilt asked if the windows were repairable. F.
Madrid stated that it was not something that Home Depot could do. F. Madrid stated that it might be
possible to join two picture windows to form a divided window, but that doing so would create a
six-inch-wide mullion where the frames meet. K. Panozzo asked if they intended to remove and re-
place the entire basement windows, and if they could be opened and were operable. F. Madrid stated
that they would save as much of the surrounding wood as possible, but some would not be salvagea-
ble due to the removal process. The replacement windows would not open, but would look the same
as the windows currently in place.
Board members discussed the front picture window and decided to separate that request from the
others, for the purpose of making a motion.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to remove and replace four wood double hung windows
on the house (the four 29”x70” double hung windows on the second floor) with vinyl-wrapped
wood windows of the same size and configuration and to remove and replace four basement win-
5
dows with new windows with two glass panes of the same appearance as the current windows and
with sculptured mullions, as long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary per-
mits are obtained, was made by K. George, supported by J. Hilt and unanimously approved, with J.
Hilt, K. George, L. Wood, A. Riegler, and K. Panozzo voting aye.
A motion that the HDC deny the request to remove and replace one 53”x77” picture window on the
front façade of the house was made by K. George, supported by K. Panozzo and approved, with J.
Hilt, K. George, and L. Wood voting aye, and A. Riegler and K. Panozzo voting nay.
L. Wood left at 5:35 pm.
Case 2019-31 – 1314 Peck (Trim/Cladding). Applicant: April Nulf. District: McLaughlin. Current
Function: Residential. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The applicant is seeking approval to install
vinyl soffit and aluminum trim to the fascia of the house and the garage. The two window bays on
the north and south facades will not be altered.
A. Nulf stated that there was not much of the original workmanship left on the inside of the house.
She needed to repair the outside soffit and fascia, as animals were getting in through holes. K.
George stated that the HDC preferred to see repairs made to the current structure rather than replac-
ing items, as even minor changes to the architectural details would change the look of the house. A.
Nulf explained that she had been trying to find a contractor to do the repairs, but she had been una-
ble to get any of them to call her back. K. George stated that she could help her find a contractor,
and suggested that this request be tabled.
A motion that the HDC table the request to install vinyl soffit and aluminum trim to the fascia of the
house and the garage was made by K. George, supported by J. Hilt and unanimously approved, with
J. Hilt, K. George, A. Riegler and K. Panozzo voting aye.
OLD BUSINESS
Case 2019-20 – 1575-79 Peck (Doors). J. Pesch stated that he noticed that the property owner had
replaced the unapproved replacement doors that had been installed on this house with new doors
more in line with the HDC local standards. Photos of the doors were provided, offering a side-by-
side comparison of the original doors, the denied replacement doors, and the doors currently on the
house. The homeowner had been denied approval to install the previous, windowless doors, after
they had completed the work without HDC review. The new doors with windows were closer in ap-
pearance to the original doors and samples provided in the HDC local standards.
OTHER
HDC Enforcement – A number of recent cases, unfortunately dealing with both unapproved and
denied work, have led to a review of Historic District Commission’s procedures for enforcement on
such work. Staff continues to evaluate this process. J. Pesch provided a sample enforcement letter
than he had created followed by a brief discussion. H. Mitchell was also present, and stated that she
was a Planning staff member who could assist J. Pesch with enforcement issues. H. Mitchell shared
a sample of a municipal civil infraction ticket that the HDC is empowered to issue for unapproved
work as part of enforcement procedures.
6
Public Art – The HDC local standards do not cover the topic of public art, although an assortment
of public art pieces have been installed in Muskegon’s historic districts in recent years. The topic
has been brought to staff, requesting discussion with the board. Because of the late hour, it was de-
cided that this topic would be discussed at the next meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m.
7
IV. NEW BUSINESS
Case 2020-1 – 316 W. Webster – Sign
Applicant: Hackley Public Library
District: National Register
Current Function: Institutional
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to install a new, 36” wide by 36” tall aluminum panel ground sign
supported by wood posts in the garden facing Third Street. The sign will replace the aging sign cur-
rently located in the garden.
Rendering of proposed 36” x 36” post and panel ground sign
8
Existing sign to be replaced
Proposed location and view of sign rendering from Third Street
9
Standards (Abbreviated)
Ground signs. Any free standing sign located on or close to the ground, the top of which does not
extend more than four feet above the ground.
…
Metal – Any metal shall be painted or varnished engraved mechanically or chemically etched.
Bright chromium effect is not acceptable. Individually cast or cutout letters applied to building sur-
face or separate background of wood would be acceptable.
…
Shape and Form: The physical form of a sign shall be proportioned in massiveness and scale to the
building for which it is meant. All shapes shall be simple (square, rectangle…) and relate directly to
the architectural features of the immediate and surrounding historic structures.
…
Location and Size: Sign use, sign type and location may be dictated by established district zoning
ordinances. Whether those ordinance requirements are established or nonexistent, the following
standards shall apply and prevail for all signs used within the City’s designated historic districts.
…
Sign size shall be visually compatible with the scale of the building for which it is meant. No sign
shall be located in such a manner or position as to affect adversely the use and enjoyment of neigh-
boring historic district properties.
…
Ground signs. These shall not exceed twenty (20) square feet per sign face. No such sign shall ex-
ceed four (4) feet in height from ground level. To maintain consistency with the objectives and
standards of this Policy, the Historic District Commission may require a smaller sign face and spe-
cific location.
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the request to install a new, 36” wide by 36” tall aluminum
panel ground sign supported by wood posts in the garden facing Third Street as long as the work
meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained.
10
Case 2020-2 – 416 W. Webster – Window
Applicant: Home Depot USA, Inc. (Robert Lusby, Property Owner)
District: National Register
Current Function: Residential
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to remove and replace one 53”x77” wood picture window on the
front façade with a new, vinyl-wrapped wood picture window of a similar size and configuration.
View of house from W. Webster Ave. with picture window visible to the right of the front door
11
Proposed replacement for picture window
Standards
General
These guidelines pertain only to proposed changes to the structure and do not affect existing con-
struction.
These guidelines are primarily directed toward the front and side elevations of the structure. Greater
variances and more leniency may be extended toward proposed changes to the rear elevation of the
building by the Commission. All desired or proposed changes should be referred to the Historic Dis-
trict Commission for consideration. Extenuating circumstances, the effect upon the architecture of
the particular structure together with the general effect upon the surrounding structures, variables in
architectural design, or the effect upon usage and viability of the structure could dictate a variance
from these guidelines.
No exterior doors, windows, or exterior woodwork shall be altered, removed, relocated, or added
without Historic District Commission approval.
Existing exterior window or door casings, sills, and caps shall not be altered from the original design
or appearance. Damaged or deteriorated wood shall be repaired as a first course of action. When re-
pair is not possible, elements shall be replaced with matching wood members. Damaged or deterio-
rated wood elements may be replaced or covered with formed aluminum or vinyl, subject to Com-
mission approval and provided that the original profile of the woodwork is not altered or changed.
12
Primary Windows
Existing damaged or deteriorating window frames and sash shall be repaired as a first course of ac-
tion. When repair is not possible, elements shall be replaced with matching wood members. Metal or
vinyl replacement windows may be acceptable provided they match the original windows in design
and type and that they consist of or are painted an appropriate color. Bare metal finishes generally
will not be acceptable.
The size of glass lites and muntin arrangements shall not be altered without Commission approval.
Special glazing, such as stained or leaded art glass, shall not be removed without Commission ap-
proval. Unusual decorative windows such as Palladian windows, oriels, bays, Gothic arch or seg-
ment tops, etc. shall not be removed or altered.
Storm Windows
Wood storm and screen windows are the most appropriate for use in the historic district. Other types
of storm, screen, or combination windows will be approved provided that the new storm window
mullions align with the mullions of the primary windows. Blind stop storm and screen windows
(where such windows are placed inside the existing window frames rather than affixed to the exteri-
or of the frames) are preferable and may be required in some instances. Bare metal storm and screen
windows must be painted to match or complement the trim. Interior storm windows may be ac-
ceptable as long as they do not detract from the appearance of the primary windows. Care should be
taken, however, when using interior storm windows because condensation tends to form on the in-
side surface of the primary window and could cause damage to the wood and paint if not properly
ventilated.
Primary Doors
Every effort should be made to preserve or repair the original doors where damage has occurred.
When repair is not possible, a new wood door may be used. Such new door shall match the original
in detail and finish.
The Commission may approve new wood doors that may slightly differ from the original in cases
where replicating the original may not be feasible, as long as such doors generally conform to the
ones illustrated on the attached sheet. Under certain circumstances, the Commission may approve
doors made of material other than wood provided they conform to the same design requirements.
Storm Doors
Wooden storm and screen doors are preferred and will generally be the required option especially on
the front of the structure. Aluminum or metal storm and screen doors may be used so long as they
are not mill finished or anodized aluminum. Baked enamel or other applicable paints or finishes will
be acceptable. In general, storm and screen doors shall conform to those illustrated on the attached
sheet. The door stiles and rails should be a minimum of 4” wide and one lite doors, where practical,
are preferred in order not to detract from the existing primary door. Jalousie doors are not acceptable
for use as storm doors in the historic districts. Ornamental iron work safety doors are also generally
inappropriate in the historic districts.
Exterior Woodwork
13
Existing decorative woodwork such as railings, moldings, eave, and gable cornice trim, tracery, col-
umns, observatories, scrolls, bargeboards, lattice, and other carved or sawn wood ornament shall not
be removed or altered without Commission approval. Existing deteriorated ornamental woodwork
shall not be removed but shall be repaired or replaced with matching materials where possible.
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the request to remove and replace one 53”x77” wood picture
window on the front façade with a new, vinyl-wrapped wood picture window of a similar size and
configuration as long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are ob-
tained.
V. OLD BUSINESS
None
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
New Board Member – New City Commissioner, Teresa Emory, has been appointed to the Historic
District Commission, replacing Debra Warren. Kimi George and Steven Radtke were reappointed to
the HDC.
HDC Enforcement – A number of recent cases, unfortunately dealing with both unapproved and
denied work, have led to a review of Historic District Commission’s procedures for enforcement on
such work. Staff continues to evaluate this process and provided a brief update at the December
2019 meeting. This meeting will allow for more time to continue this discussion.
Public Art – The HDC local standards do not cover the topic of public art, although an assortment
of public art pieces have been installed in Muskegon’s historic districts in recent years. The topic
was brought to Staff, but was not discussed with the board in December due to the meeting running
late.
Certified Local Government (CLG) – Staff is continuing with the application to become certified
through the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Alan Higgins, the CLG Coordinator for
SHPO, will be attending the upcoming, March 3rd HDC meeting to discuss the program. Staff asks
that board members review the certification manual in preparation for that meeting, and come pre-
pared with any questions. The City of Muskegon’s plan to apply for certification was the impetus
for updating the HDC’s local standards in 2019. The CLG certification manual is available online
here:
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mshda/mshda_shpo_20120629_clg_certification_manual_39
1053_7.pdf
VII. ADJOURN
14
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails