Historic District Commission

1 of 22 AGENDA Historic District Commission Meeting Date: Monday, December 12, 2022 Time: 4:00 P.M. Where: City Hall, Room 301 1. Call to Order: 2. Attendance: 3. Additions or Deletions to Agenda: 4. Approval of minutes: November, 14, 2022 5. Correspondence: 6. Old Business: 7. New Business: A. H-17-22: (92 W Manchester Street) Petition from Francisco Carrillo to replace all existing windows with new windows, remove extra doors and fill in the walls, for property located at 92 W Manchester Street, Battle Creek, MI 49014 Parcel #: 3550-00-001-0 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS GRAVES ADD LOT 1 & E 1/2 OF LOT 2 8. Comments by the Public: 9. Comments from Commission members and Staff: 10. Adjournment: The City of Battle Creek will provide necessary reasonable auxiliary aids and services, such as signers for the hearing impaired and audio tapes of printed materials being considered in the meeting upon notice to the City of Battle Creek. Individuals with disabilities requiring auxiliary aides or services should contact the City of Battle Creek by writing or calling the following: Office of the City Clerk, P.O. Box 1717, 10 North Division – Suite 111, Battle Creek, MI 49016, (269)966-3348 (Voice), (269)966-3348 (TDD) Division Site 117 Battle Creek M Fax (269) 910 N. 10 N. DIVISION ST. P.O. BOX 1717 BATTLE CREEK MICHIGAN 49016-1717 PHONE (269) 966-3320 FAX (269) 966-3555 WWW.BATTLECREEKMI.GOV  2 of 22 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 10 North Division, Battle Creek, MI 49014 Minutes for Monday, November 14, 2022 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: By Second Chairperson Simpson at 4:07 p.m. This meeting was held in-person. ATTENDANCE: Comm. Simpson asked that attendance be noted. A roll call was taken: Comm. Drozdowski, Present Comm. Simpson, Present Comm. Davis, Present Comm. Sallee, Present Excused: Comm. Newman, Comm. Reid Staff Present: Travis Sullivan, City Planner, Crystal Bax, Customer Serv. Rep. II and Marcel Stoetzel, Deputy City Attorney ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA: None PUBLIC COMMENTS: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 10, 2022 MOTION MADE BY COMM. DROZDOWSKI TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 10, 2022 MINUTES ON THE CONDITION OF THE CORRECTION THAT THE MOTIONS LISTED STATE “TO APPROVE”, SECONDED BY COMM. SALLEE. A roll vote was taken: ALL IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED, MOTION APPROVED. CORRESPONDENCE: None. OLD BUSINESS: None. PUBLIC HEARINGS/DELIBERATIONS: A. H-16-22: (66 Wilkes Street) Petition from the City of Battle Creek to demolish property located at 66 Wilkes Street, Battle Creek, MI 49037 Parcel #: 8810-00-055-0 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS WALTERS ADD S 2/3 OF LOT 48 Staff presentation: Travis Sullivan, City Planner gave the staff report, stated that The City of Battle Creek has filed a Notice to Proceed request to demolish the structure at 66 Wilkes St. due to lack of maintenance and fire damage, which has led to structural instability. At present, the rear of the structure has sustained significant fire damage, which has caused the siding to peel away and allowed water to infiltrate, compromising the structural integrity of the building. Plumbing, mechanical and electrical systems are either not present or do not meet the requirements of the State Code. Further, floor framing members were cut improperly for an attempted plumbing installation, which has jeopardized the second floor bathroom area. 1  3 of 22 Applicant Presentation: None. Comments from commission members: None MOTION MADE BY COMM. DROZDOWSKI TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 66 WILKES STREET AS PRESENTED BY STAFF, SECONDED BY COMM. SALLEE. A roll vote was taken: ALL IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED, MOTION APPROVED. B. 2023 Proposed Historic District Calendar Staff presentation: Proposed calendar presented to the Commission created by staff follows a similar timeline to 2022, with meetings held on the second Monday of every month. Applicant Presentation: None. Comments from commission members: None MOTION MADE BY COMM. SALLEE TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED 2023 CALENDAR AS PRESENTED BY STAFF, SECONDED BY COMM. DROZDOWSKI. A roll call vote was taken: ALL IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED MOTION APPROVED. COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS: None COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: None COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS AND STAFF: None ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Simpson adjourned the meeting at 4:24 p.m. Submitted by: Crystal Bax, CSR II, Planning and Zoning L:\Planning Files\Planning Dept\1. Historic District\2.Minutes\Year 2022\HDC Minutes 11.14.22 DRAFT.docx 2  4 of 22 Battle Creek Historic District Commission Staff Report Staff Report 92 W Manchester St. Meeting: December 12, 2022 To: Historic District Commission From: Travis Sullivan, Planner Date: December 1, 2022 Subject: The petition, filed by Mr. Francisco Carillo of 192 Manchester St. is for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of all windows and the removal of two doors on the existing structure. Summary Staff recommends approval of the subject petition at 92 Manchester St. as the proposed window replacement and door removal meets the standards outlined in Chapter 1470.09 “Review of Applications,” Chapter 1470.17 “Preservation of Historic Features” and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. Figure 1: Red pin on aerial points to subject site (92 W Macnhester St.) located within the local Old Advent Town Historic District. Photo courtesy of Google Maps.  5 of 22 Figure 2: Street view displays the front of the property facing north off of Manchester St. Photo courtesy of City of Battle Creek staff (November 2022). 2 of 8  6 of 22 Figure 3: Current zoning and surrounding zoning districts. Red star indicates location of subject property at 92 W Manchester St. Site & History The subject site is located at 92 W Manchester St., and at the northwest corner of Manchester St. and Howland St. within the Old Advent Town Historic District. The building on the site currently consists of multiple residential units, and was constructed in 1900. The building consists of a sided façade with a historic tower and conical roof atop a rounded covered front porch supported by what appear to be original streel columns. Virtually all of the windows currently installed on the building are damaged or broken, with many openings boarded up. The building also consists of multiple ingress/egress doors intended to serve the individual residential units within the building. The building is currently an abandoned multi-family structure, with the applicant seeking to rehabilitate and convert the building to single-family use. Summary of Request The applicant has filed the subject HDC Certificate of Appropriateness application in order to replace all of the existing windows on the building, as well as to remove two of the excess doors and fill in the openings, thereby in conjunction with interior work converting the building from multiple-family residential to single-family residential. The building consists of existing wood single-hung windows, the age of which are unknown to the applicant. The windows measure 30” in width by 68” in height. The existing doors are estimated by the applicant to have been installed sometime around the year 2000. 3 of 8  7 of 22 The applicant intends to replace the existing wood single-hung windows with vinyl single-hung windows. While the existing windows measure 30” in width by 68” in height, the applicant is proposing replacement with windows measuring 30” in width by 60” in height, as new windows of 30” x 68” dimensions have proven difficult for the applicant to find, and do not appear to be regularly produced and kept in stock. The applicant plans to fill the in the empty space with matching aluminum siding. Additionally, the applicant has stated that the use of vinyl will provide a better option for energy cost reductions and longevity. The proposed color of the windows is white, which the applicant states matches the original window frame color (intact windows are currently covered by storm windows). While no grid pattern appears present on the existing windows, the applicant has provided an additional option for the Historic District Commission to consider which includes a decorative six- lite grid pattern. In addition to the window replacement, the applicant is proposing the cancelling of two entry doors, which were designed to accommodate separate residential units within the building. The first of these additional entryways proposed to be cancelled is the entryway visible from W Manchester St. and immediately adjacent to the driveway. The applicant states that this entryway was an addition that a previous owner had made and is not original to the house. In the immediate term, the applicant is proposing the cancellation of the door with matching siding, wood and insulation. In the future (though not a part of this application), the applicant plans to remove the covered landing area. The second door proposed to be cancelled is visible off of Howland St. The applicant states that this entryway was designed to accommodate the first floor apartment. However, as the applicant plans to convert the building to a single-family use, this area will no longer require a separate entryway, with the applicant proposing to convert the area this entryway leads to into a bedroom. As with the first proposed door cancellation, the applicant plans to remove the covered landing area in the future (but again, not a part of this current application). The applicant is again proposing to fill the door opening with matching siding, wood and insulation. Applicable HDC Guidelines and Analysis for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the existing retaining wall at 10 N Division St. This property is reviewed in accordance with City of Battle Creek Building and Housing Code Chapter 1470 "Historic Preservation", as amended, the Michigan's Local Historic Districts Act, as amended, and the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places as outlined in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. Specifically, the Commission shall follow Section 1470.09 Review of Applications, as follows: (b) The Commission shall also consider all of the following: (1) The historic or architectural value and significance of the resource and its relationship to the historic value of the surrounding area. (2) The relationship of any architectural features of the resource to the rest of the resource and the surrounding area. (3) The general compatibility of the design, arrangement, texture, and materials proposed to be used. 4 of 8  8 of 22 (4) Other factors, such as aesthetic value that the Commission finds relevant. (c) The Historic District Commission shall review and act upon only exterior features of a resource and shall not review and act upon interior arrangements… And 1470.17 PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC FEATURES. (a) Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a resource which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure or site and its environment, or to use the resource for its originally intended purpose. Staff finds both the proposed window replacement and door cancellation provides for minimum alteration necessary to rehabilitate a structure that has fallen into disrepair and to convert the structure from multiple-family to single- family use. While the proposed windows are not a one-for-one match with regard to their size, the applicant has attempted as best as possible to replace the existing windows with a version which will as closely as possible replicate the original aesthetic of the building. The proposed door cancellation will allow for the structure to be converted to single-family use, while matching the replacement materials with the existing siding. (b) The distinguishing original qualities or character of a resource and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features shall be avoided when possible. Staff finds that the proposed window replacement and door cancellations would not destroy the distinguishing original qualities or character of the resource. The most defining historical qualities of this resource appear to be the rounded front porch area with original support columns and the corner tower and conical roof. The replacement of the existing windows and conversion of the multiple- family use into a single-family use will allow for the rehabilitation of a vacant and damaged building. The rehabilitation of the building will allow for the preservation of the aforementioned defining original qualities. (c) All resources shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations that have no historic basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged. The proposed replacement of the existing windows and cancelling of excess entryways do not seek to create an earlier appearance with no historic basis. The proposed replacement windows would be slightly smaller and of vinyl composition, but seek to replicate as closely as possible the existing aesthetic of the building. The cancellation of the two excess doors would result in matching siding material being used to fill in the existing entryways. 5 of 8  9 of 22 (d) Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of a resource and its environment. These changes may have acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall be recognized and respected. This criteria is not relevant to the proposed window replacement. However, the doorway proposed to be cancelled that is visible from W Manchester St. appears to have been an addition by a previous owner, and is not original to the structure. That said, in the opinion of staff, this doorway is strictly utilitarian for the purposes of supporting a multiple-family use. The cancellation of this doorway would not impair a portion of the resource which may have acquired significance in its own right. (e) Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a resource shall be treated with sensitivity. Staff finds that distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize the resource on the property to be the rounded porch/landing area at the front of the building associated with the main entrance, as well as the corner tower and conical roof. Neither of these features would be altered by the proposed window replacements and door cancellations. (f) Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced wherever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture and other visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historic, physical or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other resources. Staff finds that the applicant has, to the best of their ability, attempted to match the material being used for the window replacement with the original material. Unfortunately, the exact dimensions of the original windows are not readily available. However, the applicant has attempted to, as closely as possible, match the aesthetic nature of the replacement windows with the original windows. The applicant has proposed the use of vinyl framing instead wood for the purposes of energy efficiency and longevity. Staff further finds that with regard to the cancellation of the two excess doorways, the applicant intends to use matching siding material to fill the empty space, remaining consistent with the existing façade. The applicant, at this time, is not proposing the removal of the covered entryways associated with the doors, but may in the future explore that option. 6 of 8  10 of 22 (g) The surface cleaning of resources shall be undertaken with the gentlest means possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage the historic materials shall not be undertaken. Intensive cleaning application such as sand blasting will not be necessary for the project. (h) Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological resources affected by or adjacent to any project. Staff does not anticipate that any digging will be necessary in order to complete the proposed work. (i) Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing resources shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historic, architectural or cultural material and when such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood or environment. The proposed replacement windows will utilize a vinyl material, as opposed to the original wood. The applicant has attempted to the best of their ability to match the size, color and character of the existing windows, with the proposed replacements to be slightly shorter (8 inches) than the existing windows. The proposed cancellation of the excess doors will result in the space left open by the cancelled doors being filled in with siding matching the existing. In staff’s opinion, the proposed alterations will not result in the destruction of any significant historic, architectural or cultural material. (j) Whenever possible, new additions or alterations to resources shall be done in such a manner that if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the resource would not be impaired. Staff finds that the proposed alterations would be done in such a manner that if such alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the resource would not be impaired. Recommendation The proposed replacement of the existing windows on the building and the cancellation of the two excess entry doors are intended to assist the applicant with the rehabilitation of a currently vacant and deteriorated structure. Further, the proposed alterations are not anticipated to negatively impact any defining qualities or characteristics of the resource. With staff’s analysis of the application, the proposal complies with the standards outlined in Chapter 1470 Historic Preservation and is recommended for approval. As contained herein, staff is not aware 7 of 8  11 of 22 of any issues that the Commission might find in conflict with Chapter 1470 Historic Preservation, the Michigan Local Historic Districts Act or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. Therefore, planning staff recommends approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the replacement of the existing 30” x 68” wood-framed windows with 30” x 60” vinyl framed windows, and the cancellation of two excess doorways designed to accommodate multiple-family usage. The request meets the standards outlined in Chapter 1470.09 “Review of Applications,” Chapter 1470.17 “Preservation of Historic Features” and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines, as outlined in the staff report. Support Material Historic District Commission Application Additional Photos 8 of 8 12 of 22 13 of 22 14 of 22 15 of 22 16 of 22 17 of 22 18 of 22 19 of 22 20 of 22 21 of 22 22 of 22