View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: Tuesday, July 2, 2019
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 4, 2019
III. New Business
Case 2019-12 – 234 Houston – Windows
Case 2019-13 – 1413 Jefferson – Fence
IV. Old Business
V. Other Business
HDC Local Standards Draft
Window Repair Workshop
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 calling (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 4, 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, K. Panozzo, A. Riegler
MEMBERS ABSENT: D. Warren, excused; S. Radtke
STAFF PRESENT: J. Pesch, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: A. Dake for the Muskegon Heritage Museum, 561 W Western Ave; E.
Shedd for Parties in the Park
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
K. Panozzo stated that she was present at the May meeting but the minutes showed that she was ab-
sent. The May minutes will be changed to show that Karen was present.
A motion to approve the regular meeting minutes of May 7, 2019 with the above change, was made
by J. Hilt, supported by L. Wood and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
Cases were heard out of order, with case 2019-10 being heard first, since the applicant was present.
Case 2019-10 – 561 W. Western Avenue (Banner). Applicant: Muskegon Heritage Association.
District: Clay-Western. Current Function: Commercial. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The
applicant is seeking HDC approval to install a banner sign on the west side of the building near the
rear alley. The work has already been completed. Per HDC standards, any banner hung either with
or without frames that contains a message, symbol, or which is simply a decorative addition is con-
sidered a sign. Banners, when permitted, are on an interim basis only and shall be annually re-
viewed by the Historic District Commission to ensure their sightly appearance.
Board members concurred that the sign was appropriate. A motion that the HDC approve the re-
quest to install a banner sign on the west side of the building near the rear alley as long as the work
meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained, was made by A. Riegler, sup-
ported by K. Panozzo and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, K. George, L. Wood, K. Panozzo,
and A. Riegler voting aye
Case 2019-08 – 350 W. Webster Avenue (Hackley Park) – Pavement. Applicant: Eric Shedd.
District: National Register. Current Function: Park. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The appli-
cant is seeking approval to pave 5’ x 5’ cement pads on both sides of the stage as well as a sidewalk
2
along the north side of the stage. The paved areas would serve as a ground-level surface for moving
and placing temporary speakers used by events held on the park’s stage. Typically, staff can ap-
prove construction/reconstruction of driveways and sidewalks provided no material is historic in na-
ture (i.e. historic pavers and bricks). However, the Historic District Commission requested to re-
view the proposed changes due to their location in Hackley Park. Other, similar proposals at Hack-
ley Park were reviewed by the HDC in the past.
J. Pesch stated that the Parks Department told him that the raised areas on the sides of the stage were
used for planters. It was also difficult to get speakers up there, since they were raised platforms. A.
Riegler asked if the additions to the stage area would be symmetrical. J. Pesch stated that they
would not, as one side would have a sidewalk in addition to the cement pad. K. George asked why
they wanted a sidewalk on one side; she thought it might look odd and preferred to see a site plan
showing the proposed improvements. E. Shedd arrived and answered board members’ questions.
He stated that they needed a sidewalk on the one side because that was where the stairs and the
handicap-accessibility ramp were. There was also a large electrical box on the other side of the
stage, which would have made it difficult to maneuver around. He stated that foot traffic and the
speakers were already disturbing the landscaping there, and the ground was not always level. Add-
ing the cement pads would fix that, and the sidewalk addition would allow easier accessibility to the
stage.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to pave 5’ x 5’ cement pads on both sides of the stage as
well as a sidewalk along the north side of the stage as long as the work meets all zoning require-
ments and the necessary permits are obtained, was made by L. Wood, supported by J. Hilt and unan-
imously approved, with J. Hilt, K. George, L. Wood, K. Panozzo, and A. Riegler voting aye.
Case 2019-09 – 508 & 512 W. Webster Avenue (House Move / New Construction). Applicant:
Community enCompass. District: Clay-Western. Current Function: Vacant Lot. J. Pesch presented
the staff report. The applicant is seeking approval to relocate the house currently located at 1190
Ireland Avenue to the vacant property at 508 and 512 W. Webster Avenue. The applicant is also re-
questing to construct a new, two-stall garage at the W. Webster location, sided with vinyl siding to
match the existing house. According to HDC standards, new structures should be in keeping with
the existing historical character of the neighborhood or district with a design that is compatible with
the size, scale, material, and color of the surrounding buildings and landscaping.
J. Pesch stated that there were currently two vacant lots on Webster Avenue, but there was a bound-
ary adjustment planned to create two buildable lots. K. George represented the applicant, Commu-
nity enCompass. She stated that Avasure, the property owner of 1190 Ireland, contacted her to see
if she wanted to salvage any parts of the house, as they planned to demolish it. She stated that the 5-
bedroom house was in very good shape with all intact wood, and she preferred to preserve the house
rather than build something new. She described the size and condition of the house, and felt that it
would be a good fit for the Webster Avenue lot. She answered questions about the new garage and
stated that it would match the house in scale and appearance. They planned to use vinyl siding, as
there was already vinyl siding on the house.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to relocate the house currently located at 1190 Ireland
Avenue to the vacant property at 508 and 512 W. Webster Avenue and to construct a new, two-stall
3
garage at the W. Webster location sided with vinyl siding to match the existing house as long as the
work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained, was made by A. Rieg-
ler, supported by K. Panozzo and approved, with J. Hilt, L. Wood, K. Panozzo, and A. Riegler vot-
ing aye. K. George abstained from voting due to being the applicant’s representative.
Case 2019-11 – 380 Houston Avenue (New Construction). Applicant: Bethany Housing Ministries
District: Houston. Current Function: Vacant Lot. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The applicant
is seeking approval to construct a fourplex on this vacant lot. A site plan and elevation drawings
were provided. The structure will be sided with SmartSide engineered wood siding and trim, and the
front of the structure will also have decorative trim to reflect existing homes in the area. HDC de-
sign guidelines for new construction were provided.
K. George stated that there had previously been a multi-unit home on this site but a fire at the struc-
ture led to its demolition. Board members reviewed the renderings. A. Riegler stated that she was
concerned about the scale of the side elevations. K. George stated that, although the building ap-
peared to be long, it would be a good fit for the lot as the lot was very deep. She explained the con-
struction style, which was a pre-manufactured home. They had tried to come up with a design that
fit with the rest of the houses on the street. A. Riegler asked what the square footage of the house
would be. K. George stated that the building would be 30’ x 60’ and would contain 4 affordable
rental properties. One unit on the ground floor would be fully accessible. She also stated that the
house would be built to conform to the form-based code zoning for a multi-unit home. A. Riegler
asked if there was any flexibility in the home’s design, as she still had concerns about the scale. K.
George stated that they had some leeway in trim details and suggested that they could add a frieze
board and other details to make it unique. She expected that once the house was viewed on the lot,
it would be a better fit than what was apparent in the drawing. A. Riegler and K. George discussed
what features could be added to improve the home’s appearance. K. George stated that, because of
the pre-manufactured construction style, the renderings were not done locally so she was not able to
add any details to the standard pictures. However, she assured board members that they would add
exterior details to improve the appearance. J. Hilt suggested that landscaping could also benefit the
building’s appearance once it was installed. K. George stated that they did include landscaping in
their budget.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to construct the fourplex as depicted in the drawings
provided at the June 4th, 2019 HDC meeting except that the applicant will add exterior details to im-
prove the appearance of the scale of the house, and to approve the use of SmartSide engineered
wood siding and trim with additional decorative trim added to the structure, as long as the work
meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained, contingent upon review of
final drawings reflecting the items discussed at this meeting, was made by K. Panozzo, supported by
J. Hilt and approved, with J. Hilt, L. Wood, K. Panozzo, and A. Riegler voting aye. K. George ab-
stained from voting due to being the applicant’s representative.
OLD BUSINESS
Case 2018-42 – 240, 250, 254 Monroe Avenue (New Construction). Applicant: City of Mus-
kegon/Dave Dusendang Custom Homes. District: Houston. Current Function: Vacant Lots. J.
Pesch presented the staff report. At the December 4, 2018 meeting, a motion that the HDC approve
4
the concept of six new modular rowhouses to be built on the vacant lots at 240, 250, and 254 Mon-
roe Avenue was approved, but final approval was tabled until revised drawings were presented
based on input given by the HDC. The applicant is now seeking final approval to construct the six
rowhouses on three vacant lots on the north side of Monroe Avenue between 3rd Street and 4th Street
(four additional rowhouses will be built across the street on 235 and 239 Monroe, but those will not
be located in an historic district). The units will have attached garages accessed from the rear alley.
Updated drawings were provided.
Board members did not like the updated drawings. The units’ windows were shown as sliders in-
stead of double hung, as was discussed and preferred at the previous meeting. They also did not like
the vertical trim shown extending down from the end of the false roofline, and the front columns
appeared too large and out of scale for the homes. Board members concurred that the photo shown
on page 15 of the staff report was preferred over the new drawings (page 15 of the staff report was
appended to these minutes as Appendix A). J. Hilt asked if the board could recommend that the
SmartSide engineered wood product be used instead of vinyl siding, especially since the previous
case (case 2019-11), involving new construction, would be using that material. J. Pesch stated that
they could.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to construct six rowhouses on the vacant lots at 240,
250, and 254 Monroe Avenue as depicted in the staff report drawing provided at the June 4th, 2019
HDC meeting, with the conditions that 1) the front elevation matches the elevation shown in the
June 4 staff report (see Appendix A), 2) double-hung windows are used instead of sliders; 3) the
vertical trim piece shown in the new drawings is eliminated; 4) the dimension of the front porch
columns are built to within one (1) inch of eight (8) inches square; 5) that an engineered wood prod-
uct is recommended over vinyl siding, and 6) the work meets all zoning requirements and the neces-
sary permits are obtained, was made by A. Riegler, supported by K. Panozzo and unanimously ap-
proved, with J. Hilt, L. Wood, K. Panozzo, A. Riegler, and K. George voting aye.
OTHER BUSINESS
HDC Local Standards Review – J. Pesch stated that he would assemble a final draft of the revised
HDC local standards, incorporating the various changes discussed over past meetings and present it
to the board for approval at their next meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:25 p.m.
5
APPENDIX A – PAGE 15 OF JUNE 4, 2019 STAFF REPORT
IV. OLD BUSINESS
Case 2018-42 – 240, 250, 254 Monroe – New Construction
Applicant: City of Muskegon/Dave Dusendang Custom Homes
District: Houston
Current Function: Vacant Lot
Discussion
At the December 4, 2018 meeting, a motion that the HDC approve the concept of building six mod-
ular rowhouses on the vacant lots at 240, 250, and 254 Monroe Avenue but table the approval until
revised drawings were presented based on input given by the HDC, was approved. The applicant is
seeking approval to construct six rowhouses on three vacant lots on the north side of Monroe Ave-
nue between 3rd Street and 4th Street (four additional rowhouses will be built across the street on 235
and 239 Monroe, but those will not be located in an historic district). The units will have attached
garages accessed from the rear alley. Updated drawings will be available at the meeting.
Original drawing submitted showing front façade
Standards
See above Design Guidelines for New Construction included with case 2019-9.
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the request to construct six rowhouses on the vacant lots at
240, 250, and 254 Monroe Avenue as depicted in the drawings provided at the June 4th, 2019 HDC
meeting as long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained.
6
III. NEW BUSINESS
Case 2019-12 – 234 Houston – Windows
Applicant: Heidi and Jason Morey
District: Houston
Current Function: Residential
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to replace two wood windows with vinyl windows. The two win-
dows – located on the second floor above the front porch – were recently damaged by a fallen tree.
7
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.
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.
8
Primary Doors
Every effort should be made to preserve or repair the original doors where damage has occurred.
When repair is not possible, the first choice shall be a similar salvaged door from a structure of the
approximate age and style. A new wood door may be used when a salvaged door is not available.
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 an 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
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 replace the two damaged, wood windows located
on the second floor above the front porch with vinyl windows as long as the work meets all zoning
requirements and the necessary permits are obtained.
9
Case 2019-13 – 1413 Jefferson – Fence
Applicant: Tracy Montgomery
District: Campus
Current Function: Residential
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to construct a six-foot tall privacy fence in the backyard of the
property as well as four-foot tall open fencing along the sides and front of the property. Photos of
the proposed fence style will be provided at the meeting.
View of house from the corner of Jefferson and Washington
10
View of backyard from Washington
11
Site plan highlighting proposed fencing location
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, re-
quire review and approval by the Historic District Commission.
Sometimes it is necessary to use fencing for other than decorative purposes, such as marking bound-
aries, privacy, screening unsightly areas, or security. Fencing for utilitarian purposes sometimes re-
quires fencing materials which are not of the period or character of the house. Nonconforming fenc-
ing 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
project, adequate post foundations, weatherproofing, color, and amount of maintenance required.
Simple variations of wood picket-style fencing are appropriate to many period homes. Wood fences
12
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 pro-
portion, 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 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 be-
tween the front and rear).
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the request to construct a six-foot tall privacy fence in the
backyard of the property as well as four-foot tall open fencing along the sides and front of the prop-
erty in the style presented at the July 2, 2019 HDC meeting as long as the work meets all zoning re-
quirements and the necessary permits are obtained.
13
IV. OLD BUSINESS
None
V. OTHER BUSINESS
HDC Local Standards Draft – Staff has assembled a draft of the local standards incorporating the
various changes discussed over past meetings. Copies will be shared with Commissioners at the July
meeting. A future workshop will be held to review the updated local standards in more detail before
final adoption.
Window Repair Workshop – A workshop will be held at the Hackley and Hume Historic Site on
Saturday, July 13th from 9:00am to 1:00pm. The workshop will be hosted by Mat Moore, Preserva-
tion Manager for the site. Tickets are available at the following link:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/window-repair-workshop-tickets-61159607031?aff=efbeventtix
VI. ADJOURN
14