Historic District Commission

HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Meeting Minutes January 12, 2015 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mike Troutman, called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Susan Baldwin (Liaison) Bruce Phillips Kaytee Faris Mike Troutman Jim Hopkins Kim Tuck Members Excused: Dan Buscher & Eric Greene Staff Present: Marcel Stoetzel, Assistant City Attorney Glenn Perian, Senior Planner, Planning Dept. Leona Parrish, Admin. Assistant, Planning Dept. ADDITIONS / DELETIONS TO AGENDA: Revised agenda and staff reports handed- out with two additional items: 181 W. Emmett Street (new signs) and 60/62 E. Michigan Ave. (new signs). APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES: MOTION MADE BY MS. KAYTEE FARIS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE NOVEMBER 10, 2014 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING AS PRESENTED, SECONDED BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MINUTES APPROVED CORRESPONDENCE: None OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: A) 112 Frelinghuysen Avenue - (Request from Helping the Community, Mr. Joseph Rocha (owner) for a “Determination of Appropriateness” to remove four(4) French doors and install new windows in their place with siding below windows.) Mr. Rocha, 265 Capital Avenue, N.E., (owner) was present today and stated Helping the Community had purchased this property and is trying to rehabilitate it and put in working order for the public; is requesting to remove the four exterior French doors and balconies as they are not safe and replace with new windows. Said they would like to remove the wood siding and replace with vinyl siding and insulate for warmth as it is needed; also add new flower window boxes under the windows. 1 Mr. Troutman asked owner if he had an opportunity to review the staff recommendations. Mr. Rocha stated no he had not. Mr. Glenn Perian provided Mr. Rocha with a copy of the staff report. Mr. Troutman stated in the application it did not state a request to change the siding. Mr. Rocha stated it had not and is now asking to discuss with the commission. Mr. Troutman asked if there was a reason they were not replacing the balconies. Mr. Rocha stated he is going to put the balconies back on as he likes the nostalgia look and is in agreement with the commission that the balconies should be replaced; they would just not have them functional for persons to walk out on. Mr. Troutman asked Mr. Perian if he could provide Mr. Rocha with a copy of the staff recommendations. Mr. Perian stated yes, and that Mr. Rocha should have received a copy in the mail as it was mailed along with everyone’s. Mr. Perian stated he would like to clarify that based on the application we received from Mr. Rocha that he understood they wanted to remove the French doors and replace them with new windows that look like the others existing windows. Stated this was the first time we had heard any mention of new siding and flower window boxes; also understood they wanted to remove the balconies. Mr. Rocha stated the balconies were basically going to be just a facade look and not have public access. Said he wanted to try and keep it in the historical period as you can see in the photos, the balconies are nice to look at; said he wanted to put the siding under the windows or a flower box to add value, but does not need to be there. Mr. Bruce Phillips asked if the flower boxes would be below the double hung over the balconies. Mr. Rocha stated yes. Mr. Phillips asked if the use of this property was 4-unit and did he intend to rent as a four-unit when finished. Mr. Rocha stated yes. Mr. Phillips asked if there was a building code issue with sealing off the French doors for exit areas. Mr. Perian stated he was not aware of any requirements nor is he qualified to speak to that regarding the building codes for the structure. Mr. Phillips noted that if not an exit door they would need to be sealed so it cannot be opened by a child. Mr. Rocha stated that is one of his concerns and is why the wanted to eliminate the doors and replace with windows. Ms. Faris asked Mr. Rocha what the dimensions were for the original French doors. Mr. Rocha stated 84 inches tall. Ms. Faris stated the proposed windows look significantly smaller than the French doors. Mr. Rocha said just the height and the new windows would be 2 ft. shorter in height and his intent was to fill in the area with siding, which might need to be tabled for today and requested at another meeting. Mr. Jim Hopkins stated the question he would like to know is what the building code is for egress windows and how does it impact the request before a decision is made. Mr. Kim Tuck stated the doors do not meet the criteria for egress; the only criteria would be if it were a sleeping room there would need to be at least one window to meet the emergency egress requirement. Stated this is considered a contributing building and as such those units would need to be maintained for the 2 appearance of the building. Said the alternate would be to replace those doors with windows with the exact same size and need to appear to be the same as this property is recorded to be a Historic Building with the State Preservation and would be required to maintain its original appearance. Mr. Rocha asked if he could replace with solid glass that does not open. Mr. Tuck stated they would need to have the appearance of the building to be the same as the original historic design. Mr. Rocha asked if the window slats need to be kept. Mr. Tuck stated they need to maintain the appearance the windows present. Mr. Rocha asked if the slats would need to be on one window or both windows. Mr. Tuck stated it would have to be 6 ft. 8 inches high or whatever the dimensions of the door units are and the window unit would have to be the full height to replace the doors so you would not know that the doors are not there. Ms. Faris stated to Mr. Rocha he would need to maintain the same outward appearance. Mr. Rocha asked if could not then have any double hung windows at all. Mr. Kim Tuck stated these properties were viewed by the State Historic Preservation office and when the house next door was renovated under the NSP2 program and they had to maintain the original design as even the door units on the adjacent house. Mr. Rocha stated since those windows are not going to no longer be needed for this he will scratch off the two double hung windows and instead put a solid piece of glass over those French doors, so they will have the nostalgia look and would increase the R-factor value. Ms. Faris asked if Mr. Rocha needs to resubmit an application of newly proposed work. Mr. Perian stated it is not needed to resubmit an application; said Mr. Rocha needs to be clear of the work he is proposing to do, as there has not been any mention of the balcony that has been removed and not confident he is proposing to do both upper and lower French doors. Mr. Rocha stated he needs to change the rules of the game because we have implemented changes that the State had implemented that he was not aware of that they had to keep the same look. Said he appreciates that and now needs to rethink and re-evaluate and if they have to keep the original look he will need to put something over it to increase the R-factor and safety value. Mr. Rocha said no flower pot and will put back the balcony and have it not accessible on either side, with no other changes or new construction to take place. Mr. Troutman asked if this should be postponed for one month. Mr. Rocha said no, he was good with this as long as the board is in agreement with one solid piece of plexi-glass over both sides. Mr. Perian said that would be fine if it is acceptable with the commission to deny the original application and then amend it with the new proposal. Mr. Bruce Phillips stated to Mr. Rocha they were not talking about new siding. Mr. Rocha agreed. Mr. Tuck asked what the condition was of the present French doors. Mr. Rocha stated they are in good shape and are oak and look really nice and will paint them. Mr. Tuck suggested the clear glass be put on the inside and not the outside so it would not look like a picture window and have a glossy surface. Mr. Rocha stated they would look like a storm window. Mr. Tuck said it would not look like the present as it would have a glossy surface and would need to appear to look like a real window with divided lights; then if anyone wished at a later date they could be removed and remain as they were originally built. 3 Mr. Troutman asked Mr. Rocco if he was agreeable with what Mr. Tuck is suggesting. Mr. Rocco stated what Mr. Tuck is suggesting is that he put plexi-glass up on the inside and not on the outside to maintain the façade. Mr. Rocco asked if he was not allowed to put storm windows on the outside of the house and also wished to add a storm door on the front and that was acceptable. Mr. Kim Tuck stated if it were a full glass door it would be acceptable by State of Michigan standards. Mr. Rocha said o.k. Ms. Faris asked if they are just doing this on the interior; they would not need to approve the work. It was stated that was correct. Ms. Faris said they would be just amending to repair and replace the balconies. Mr. Rocha asked if they needed to keep the balconies. Mr. Troutman said yes as there has not been an approval to remove the balconies and would need to be replaced at any case. Mr. Hopkins asked if heating the structure was his main concern. Mr. Rocha stated yes. Mr. Hopkins asked how he would repair and mount the balconies. Mr. Rocha stated it would be easy to reproduce as they are just mounted with brackets to the house and would replace just as it was originally. Mr. Tuck asked Mr. Rocha how far does the balconies project. Mr. Rocha stated they project a little more than 18 inches and he would table the siding for another date. Noted this is a nice house and was built as a four-unit where each mirrors the others from top to bottom exactly. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Troutman asked commissioners for a motion. MOTION WAS MADE BY MS. KAYTEE FARIS TO DENY THE NOTICE TO PROCEED TO REMOVE FOUR FRENCH DOORS AND REPLACE WITH WINDOWS AND SIDING FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 112 FRELINGHUYSEN AVENUE, PURSUANT TO HOUSING CODE CHAPTER 1470.09 “REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS” AND 1470.17 “PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC FEATURES” AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES; SECONDED BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED TO DENY Mr. Rocha thank you very much and clarified he was to put the balcony back as they were with newer wood and stated he did not know a permit was required to do the work for the windows. Mr. Troutman said he should follow-up with the Planning and Building department. Mr. Rocha said he did not know if his permit would follow over to the next. (B) 116 Frelinghuysen Avenue - (Request from Ms. Kathleen M. Staib (owner), for a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow a privacy fence and detached deck to be placed in the rear yard) Ms. Katy Staib, 116 Frelinghuysen Ave., (owner) stated she wanted to put a fence up and had pulled a permit for it last summer, had dug the holes and was told she needed HDC approval after reading the application she was not sure on completing the form and then added a deck and was told it would need HDC approval also and is here today to ask approval for both a fence and deck. 4 Mr. Mike Troutman asked if she had an opportunity to review staff recommendations. Ms. Staib stated she was not sure if she had received anything. Ms. Staib was told a meeting packet was mailed with a staff report, agenda and a letter notifying the date and time to attend today’s meeting. Ms. Staib stated she never received packet and only had a message she put on her phone of today’s meeting that was provided by Planning department when application was submitted. Mr. Mike Troutman stated there was nothing in the staff report that was detrimental to Ms. Staib. Mr. Glenn Perian stated the staff report recommends approval of the project. Mr. Kim Tuck asked how high the fence would be. Ms. Staib stated regular 6 feet dog ear style. Mr. Troutman asked if she had the holes dug and ready for approval. Ms. Staib stated yes, and would now need to wait until spring to re-dig the holes. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Troutman asked commissioners for a motion. MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW A PRIVACY FENCE AND DETACHED DECK TO BE IN THE REAR YARD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 116 FRELINGHUYSEN AVENUE, AS IT MEETS THE STANDARDS OUTLINED IN CHAPTER 1470.09 & 1470.17 AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES, AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT; SECONDED BY MR. KIM TUCK. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED Ms. Staib asked if she needed to get another permit and if the original had expired. Mr. Perian stated it had been on hold and will now be processed. (C) 181 W. Emmett Street – (Request from Family Health Center) for three new signs to be installed to reflect their name change from Family Health Center to “Grace Health”.) Mr. Chris Davis, Director of Facilities and Purchasing, Family Health Center, stated as of January 15, 2015, they are changing their name to Grace Health was present today to request new signage to reflect their name change from Family Health Center to Grace Health on the exterior of both buildings (new and existing building). Mr. Davis noted there was a change to the application the new logo would be 33.5 inches in size which is smaller than the 40 inch high letters that what is noted in their application as they would be too large. Mr. Bruce Phillips asked if the new name is affiliated with a national group or is it a local name chosen. Mr. Davis stated it was a name they had chosen as there is another Family Health Center in Kalamazoo and they are their own organization and not affiliated with any hospitals. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Troutman asked commissioners for a motion. MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. KIM TUCK FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW A NEW SIGNAGE TO IDENTIFY THE FACILITY NAME CHANGE FROM FAMILY HEALTH CENTER TO GRACE HEALTH WITH THE SIGN MODIFICATION TO REDUCE THE LETTER SIZE 5  TO THE 33.5 INCHES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 181 W. EMMETT STREET, AS IT MEETS THE STANDARDS OUTLINED IN CHAPTER 1470.09 & 1470.17 AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES, AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT; SECONDED BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED (D) 60/62 E. Michigan Avenue – (Request from Community HealthCare Connections for a Certificate of Appropriateness for new signage: Window vinyl signage; 2-Exterior mounted signs to structure; and 1-Monument sign for building identification.) Ms. Susan Cook, Human Resources Coordinator was present to speak on behalf of the Community HealthCare Connections regarding their request for signage at their new location which uses the of 62 E. Michigan Avenue for their business address. Stated they want to have vinyl signage both on the front and rear entrance; a hanging sign above the main entrance similar to their neighbors; an exterior wall sign on the back of the building with a monument sign in the parking lot showing where to park. Mr. Bruce Phillips stated this is a nice improvement and asked if this was what was known as the Nursing Clinic. Ms. Cook stated yes, it will be one organization and their former location was in the Toller Building. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Troutman asked commissioners for a motion. MOTION WAS MADE BY MS. KAYTEE FARIS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW SIGNS FOR COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE CONNECTIONS PROPERTY LOCATED AT 60(62) E. MICHIGAN AVENUE, AS IT MEETS THE STANDARDS OUTLINED IN CHAPTER 1470.09 “REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS”, & 1470.17 “PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC FEATURES” AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES, AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT; SECONDED BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED (E) Election of Officers for Year 2015 Historic District Commission Election of Chairperson: MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS TO NOMINATE MR. MIKE TROUTMAN TO CONTINUE AS CHAIRPERSON; SECONDED BY MS. KAYTEE FARIS. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED Election of Vice-Chairperson: MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. BRUCE PHILLLIPS TO NOMINATE MS. KAYTEE FARIS AS VICE-CHAIRPERSON; SECONDED BY MR. MIKE TROUTMAN. 6  ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS AND STAFF: Mr. Bruce Phillips asked why they received the document handed out today and would it be a routine document they would be receiving regarding Historic District properties that are currently in a Vacant & Abandoned/Dangerous Building Process. Mr. Glenn Perian noted that at the last Historic District Commission meeting the commission had asked for this report and asked the commission to be mindful that if a property is vacant more than 180 days it needs to be registered as a vacant building with Code Compliance department. Mr. Bruce Phillips asked if Mr. Rocha had been informed his property is on this listing. Mr. Rocha and anyone on this listing who is noted as the property owner of record in the City’s Assessing department receive notification from Code Compliance, and also post notification on the building; when a property is sold the owner is to notify the purchaser of any violations. Mr. Jim Hopkins stated why he had asked for this vacant and abandoned listing was; he was looking for an aerial map that would outline those properties boundaries and in looking at their locations and possibly reducing the Historic Districts boundaries. Mr. Troutman asked if there was a Downtown Historic District and why they were not noted on the listing. It was stated the Downtown District does not fall under the vacant and abandoned monitoring by Code Compliance department. Mr. Jim Hopkins asked if there would be a replacement on the board for Mr. Eric Green. Mr. Perian stated that Ms. Christine Zuzga had informed the Mayor a replacement would be needed. Ms. Kaytee Faris stated the garage located a 200 Capital Avenue, N.E. having no windows and needs to be boarded up as it is open to trespass and is concerned. Mr. Glenn Perian stated he would notify the Code Compliance Department. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Mike Troutman, adjourned the meeting at 4:44 P.M. Submitted by: Leona A. Parrish, Administrative Assistant, Planning Department 7