Historic District Commission

HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Meeting Minutes July 13, 2015 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mr. Mike Troutman, called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Kaytee Faris Mike Troutman Jim Hopkins Kim Tuck Bruce Phillips Susan Baldwin (Liaison) Members Excused: Dan Buscher Staff Present: Marcel Stoetzel, Assistant City Attorney Glenn Perian, Senior Planner, Planning Dept. Leona Parrish, Admin. Assistant, Planning Dept. ADDITIONS / DELETIONS TO AGENDA: None APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES: MOTION MADE BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE JUNE 8, 2015 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING, SECONDED BY MR. JIM HOPKINS. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MINUTES APPROVED CORRESPONDENCE: Mr. Kim Tuck provided information regarding 26 Fremont Street, which included work description, porch reconstruction design, and site plan. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: A) 60 E. Michigan Avenue - (Request from Community HealthCare Connections requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness to add new building signage “Collins” naming the building to be placed on the front of building in honor of their founder.) Ms. Samantha Pearl and Ms. Susan Cook, Community HealthCare Connections were present to speak; stated earlier this year they had signs approved for Community HealthCare Connections and are here today requesting to have a building sign approved for their founder Dr. John Collins. Ms. Pearl stated their original request was to install it on the center of the upper portion of the building above the 2nd story windows to appear the same as the adjacent “Elizabeth” building. Said they were told it was not allowed by the sign ordinance and that it can only be located on the 1st level; but wished to have a conversation regarding it to be placed above the 2 nd story level. 1 Mr. Glenn Perian, Senior Planner stated the sign ordinance for the downtown district requires signage to be below the 2nd story level and that the Historic District Commission cannot give that approval; they would need to request a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Said the Historic District Commission may discuss that request if the applicant chooses to submit an application to the Zoning Board for a variance to the sign ordinance. Mr. Perian noted that the “Elizabeth” building name was built into the architecture of the building when built and that is the difference in the two buildings. Mr. Mike Troutman asked if the Zoning Board of Appeals was the body that would need to approve a variance for the sign placement and if the sign ordinance had been written as such for some time and not recently changed. Mr. Perian stated the Sign Ordinance was approved in 1984 regarding the placement of signs in the Downtown District and had not been recently revised. Mr. Bruce Phillips noted the ordinance was written as such because it is a sign and not a part of the original building structure design, so business signs can be seen for their place of business. Ms. Susan Baldwin stated she understands the importance and recognizing of somebody as critical as their founder to an organization such as theirs; but is concerned it does not fit with the other buildings with names and that it is their building name and does not think this rises to that same level; asked if they owned the building or are leasing and what if they were to sell this property at a later date. Stated the photo of sign placement does not align with the structure windows, doors, etc. and would like to see it centered for architecturally. Ms. Pearl stated they are the owners of the building and that their original request was to have it placed at the top center of the building and having to place it lower makes it difficult as the windows are not centered on the 1 st level. Stated their original intent was to place it on the brick façade directly centered between the two architectural arches at the top of the building. Mr. Jim Hopkins stated he was in agreement with Ms. Baldwin and asked if the sign was made of stucco material or foam. Ms. Pearl stated it is material like sandstone and is very hard, which can be removed and that they can go to the Zoning Board of Appeals to have it imbedded possibly into the building may be considered. Mr. Troutman stated to him the names of the buildings are 2 ft. x 9 ft. and the letters tend to be smaller. Ms. Pearl stated they measured and are almost the same size as the “Elizabeth” sign which is 2 ft. x 8 ft. wide. With no others wishing to speak, Mr. Troutman asked commissioners for a motion. MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR NEW SIGNAGE FOR COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE CONNECTIONS BUILDING SIGN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 60 E. MICHIGAN 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 AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT; SECONDED BY MR. KIM TUCK. Mr. Troutman asked staff if they approve the motion do they wish to submit an appeal for a variance to the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow the placement on the upper portion of the 2 building and would they need to come back to the Historic District Commission for approval. Ms. Pearl stated it would be their intent to go ahead and affix the signage while they concurrently pursue the variance. Mr. Perian stated yes, they would need to come back to the HDC for approval unless they approved it today with the condition it may be moved higher with Zoning Boards approval; Mr. Perian asked Marcel Stoetzel, Attorney if that was correct. Mr. Stoetzel stated Mr. Perian stated it correctly. AMMENDED MOTION BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR NEW SIGNAGE FOR COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE CONNECTIONS BUILDING SIGN TO BE PLACED ABOVE THE 2ND STORY WINDOWS IN THE CENTER OF THE BUILDING IF APPROVED BY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 60 E. MICHIGAN 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 AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT; SECONDED BY MR. KIM TUCK. Discussion: Ms. Kaytee Faris stated she prefers the upper level placement for the sign and appreciate they tried to match the other building name signs and thinks it would look more appropriate at the higher level. Mr. Perian stated Ms. Faris comment would be shared with the Zoning Board if needed. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED B.) 56 W. Michigan Avenue: (Request from Hall of Toys, Mr. Brett Hall requesting a projection sign for new toy store business.) Mr. Brett Hall stated he is requesting signage for his new toy store business to be located downtown; noted there are no other toy stores in Battle Creek as Toy’s-R-Us and Myers Toy World have both closed. Noted that Mr. Hennink, property owner is requesting the sign be as large as possible, which is 12 sq. ft. maximum size per ordinance. Mr. Troutman asked Mr. Perian if 12 sq. ft. is the largest size allowed by city ordinance. Mr. Perian stated yes, that was correct. Mr. Jim Hopkins asked what the material was for the sign and who the company was making the sign. Mr. Brett Hall stated he believed it was made of aluminum composite and was the same company “Jetco Co.”, who also did the sign for Battle Creek Book Store. Mr. Hopkins noted he hoped it was made of stainless material. MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. JIM HOPKINS TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A NEW PROJECTION SIGN FOR “HALL OF TOYS” STORE LOCATED AT 56 W. MICHIGAN 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 3  AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT; SECONDED BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS. ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED C.) 26 Fremont Street: (Request from Calhoun County & City of Battle Creek, Mr. Kim Tuck for renovation and repair of residential structure) Mr. Kim Tuck, Historic District Commission member removed himself from this item on the agenda for discussion and review for decision because of conflict of interest. Mr. Kim Tuck, KATMA Enterprises Inc., spoke regarding the registration of this property and the use of NSP2 Federal Grant monies to be used and State Historic Preservation Office “SHPO”. Stated will be doing exterior rehab of front porch to have the same concept as the original and as on the north-side porch and would use wood materials with cyprus wood for the deck and stain with semi-transparent stain; have wood spindles and will replicate the gables on the existing house for the porch. Mr. Jim Hopkins asked what the time-frame was to complete the work. Mr. Tuck stated mid- December 2015. Mr. Bruce Phillips asked when they were planning to begin the work. Mr. Tuck stated they have started requesting bids for asbestos and lead abatement if needed. Stated the wood siding had been painted in recent years, which helped to preserve the siding. Noted the detail is of what is going to require restoration to duplicate the original design. Mr. Troutman asked regarding the condition of the brick work. Mr. Tuck stated it is pretty much in excellent condition; needs some tuck point and replication work to make it appear the same as the north chimney. MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. BRUCE PHILLIPS TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE RESTORATION WORK THAT WILL COMPLY WITH ZONING AND HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 26 FREMONT STREET, 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 AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT; SECONDED BY MR. JIM HOPKINS. Discussion: Mr. Jim Hopkins asked what if the deadline was not met in December. Mr. Chris Lussier stated it would be all right if they did not meet that deadline. Said it will be a challenge and will need to be micro managed, of which Mr. Tuck has a lot of experience. Mr. Tuck stated there are not a lot of structural changes to be made and that most of the work is cosmetic and will need to restore the finishes and plan to redo the wood windows per SHPO requirements. 4 Mr. Jim Hopkins asked regarding the roof. Mr. Tuck stated it will need to be replaced. Mr. Bruce Phillips asked regarding the furnace. Mr. Tuck stated it currently has two furnaces. Noted: Historic District Commission members as a group agree it is a very ambitious job and is worthy for this house to be restored. FOUR IN FAVOR (FARIS, HOPKINS, PHILLIPS, & TROUTMAN); ONE ABSTAINED (TUCK); NONE OPPOSED; MOTION APPROVED PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS AND STAFF: Ms. Faris stated the property at 26 Fremont St. is a structure that is worthy of restoration and will be an asset to the community. Mr. Mike Troutman stated he echoes Ms. Faris comment as it is a good house to restore and noted it is also nice to have a new business opening downtown. Mr. Phillips stated he misses the other toy store businesses that are no longer in town and is also happy to see a new store opening in the downtown district. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Michael Troutman adjourned the meeting at 4:34 P.M. Submitted by: Leona A. Parrish, Administrative Assistant, Planning Department 5