Historic District Commission

1 of 59 AGENDA Historic District Commission Meeting Date: Monday, July 10, 2023 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: June 12, 2023 5. Correspondence: 6. Old Business: 7. New Business: A) H05-23 (265 Capital Ave NE) Petition, filed by Joe Rocha for a Certificate of Appropriateness for property located at 265 NE Capital Avenue, Battle Creek for the construction of a new garage in rear yard. Parcel #1640-00-062-0. B) H06-23 (32 Woodmer Lane) Petition, filed by Roach Home Improvements for a Certificate of Appropriateness for property located at 32 Woodmer Lane, Battle Creek for the construction of a deck on back of the home. Parcel #5390-00-030-0. C) H07-23 (200 Capital Ave NE) Petition, filed by Luke Drallette for a Certificate of Appropriateness for property located at 200 NE Capital Avenue, Battle Creek for a 4-foot high white picket fence in the secondary front, side and rear yards. Parcel #4110-00-016-0. D) 2023 2nd Quarter Administrative Approval Report 8. Comments by the Public: 9. Comments from Commission Members and Staff: 10. Adjournment: 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 59 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 10 North Division, Battle Creek, MI 49014 Minutes for Monday, June 12, 2023 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: By Chairperson Newman at 4:00 p.m. This meeting was held in-person. ATTENDANCE: A roll call was taken: Comm. Drozdowski, Present Comm. Newman, Present Comm. Simpson, Present Comm. Davis, Absent Comm. Sallee, Present Comm. Thornton, Present Comm. Steinbrunner, Present Staff Present: Melody Carlsen, Administrative Assistant, Susan Cronander, Planning & Zoning Administrator, Marcel Stoetzel, Deputy City Attorney. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of May 8, 2023 minutes. MOTION MADE BY COMM. SIMPSON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR MAY 8, 2023 MEETING, SECONDED BY COMM. DROZDOWSKI. A vote was taken and all those in favor to say “aye”: ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION APPROVED. CORRESPONDENCE: None. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: A. H04-23 The petition, filed by Climax Solar is for a Certificate of Appropriateness for property located at 11 Crest Lane in Battle Creek, for the installation of a 10 roof mounted solar array panels on the southernmost part of the house on East and West face. Application Presentation: Susan Cronander presented the Staff Report for property located at 11 Crest Lane. The applicant has filed the subject HDC Certificate of Appropriateness application for the installation of a 10-panel roof-mounted solar array along the southernmost portion of the house (garage). Two sets of five panels each are proposed, with one set affixed to the east-facing roof of the garage, and one set affixed to the west-facing roof of the garage. Staff recommends approval. 1  3 of 59 COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS AND STAFF: Applicant Presentation: Mara Schrock of Climax Solar, was present to speak and answer Commissioner’s questions. Commissioner Thornton inquired to weather the Merritt Woods Association was contacted for approval. Home owner wrote a letter the Association for approval. Commissioner Steinbrunner asked if trees would be removed for this project. Trees will be trimmed or removed if necessary. Commissioner Simpson inquired about solar roof shingles. MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER SIMPSON FOR THE APPROVEL OF ITEM H04-23 AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER THORNTON. ALL IN THOSE IN FAVOR, “AYE”, NONE OPPOSED, MOTION APPROVED. COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC: None COMMENTS BY COMMISSION AND STAFF MEMBERS: None ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Newman adjourned the meeting at 4:07 p.m. Submitted by: Melody Carlsen, Planning and Zoning Administrative Assistant 2  4 of 59 Battle Creek Historic District Commission Staff Report Staff Report 265 NE Capital Ave. Meeting: July 10, 2023 To: Historic District Commission From: Travis Sullivan, Planner Date: June 29, 2023 Subject: The petition, filed by Joe Rocha of 265 NE Capital Ave., is for the construction of a new 40’ x 36’ garage in the rear yard of the property. Summary Staff recommends approval of the subject petition at 265 NE Capital Ave., as the proposed garage 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 (265 NE Capital Ave.) located within the local Old Maple Street Historic District. Photo courtesy of Google Maps.  5 of 59 Site & History The subject site is located at 265 NE Capital Ave. between Chestnut St. to the west and Orchard Pl. to the east within the Old Maple Street local historic district. The home on the site was constructed in 1865 with an area of 5,148 sq. ft. and standing 2 ½ stories height, and is currently in use as a multiple- family residence (converted from its original single-family use). The building is sided with a traditional material, and includes a prominent pillars framing an original brick-skirted front porch with a balcony over the top, which includes an original railing, trim and balusters. Figure 2: Street view of the subject site at 265 NE Capital Ave. facing north. Red arrow points to the location of the proposed detached garage. Photo courtesy of Google Maps. Summary of Request The applicant has filed the subject HDC Certificate of Appropriateness application for the construction of a new wood-constructed 40’ x 36’ garage standing 14’ in average height between the eaves and the ridge. The new garage is proposed to be located to the northeast of the main building (approximately 215 feet from the NE Capital Ave. right-of-way line). While significantly set back from the road, the 2 of 6  6 of 59 proposed garage will be visible upon completion. The garage is being proposed to offer more parking and storage space for tenants, and will include three separate doors with parking space for three vehicles. More detailed specifics of the proposed garage are included in the full plan set attached to this staff report. Staff feels that the proposed garage will result in no impact upon any other resources on the site, and that the proposed garage, while likely of a contemporary design, will be similar in character to numerous other garages and accessory buildings in the immediate vicinity of the property (specifically, the property immediately adjacent to the east at 285 NE Capital Ave.). However, as the plans do not include details regarding the siding or roofing materials, staff feels that members of the Historic District Commission may wish to ask to applicant about specifics during the July 10 regular meeting. As an additional note, while not directly related to the Historic District Commission’s review of this item, the proposed garage meets all of the requirements of the City of Battle Creek Zoning Ordinance, and may be granted a permit for construction provided the garage receives approval from the Historic District Commission. Applicable HDC Guidelines and Analysis for a Certificate of Appropriateness for exterior renovations to the existing building at 119 / 121 W Michigan Ave. 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) 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. 3 of 6  7 of 59 (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 that the proposed garage would require no alteration to any resources on the property. The proposed garage would be proportional in scale to rest of the property, as well as to other accessory buildings on surrounding properties within the Old Maple Street local historic district. The proposed garage would not impact the ability to use any resources on the property for their originally intended purpose. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. No alteration is proposed to any resources on the site, as the proposed garage is detached from the main building and existing accessory building on the site. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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 garage will not create alterations that would result in an earlier appearance, as the garage is planned to be constructed of wood and in a typical contemporary fashion while matching the scale of other buildings on the site and in the immediate vicinity. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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 project as no changes to the exterior have taken place which may have acquired significance in their own right. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (e) Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a resource shall be treated with sensitivity. 4 of 6  8 of 59 No alteration to any existing structure is proposed, and staff finds that the proposed garage would not alter any stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a resource. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. This criteria is not relevant as the proposed project does not entail any repairs to or replacement of any architectural features or material. (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. As is typical with projects that involve any degree of digging, staff would recommend as a condition of approval that the discovery of any archaeological resources during the construction process be preserved and reported to the City of Battle Creek. (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. Staff finds that the proposed garage will not destroy any significant historic, architectural or cultural material. Further, the design of the proposed garage is generally compatible with the size, scale, and character of the property, neighborhood, and environment. The Commission may wish to ask the applicant about the proposed material composition of the garage (siding and roofing), as these details were not included in the plans provided. The Commission may find this standard to be met, provided it is satisfied with the applicant’s proposed materials for the exterior of the building. 5 of 6  9 of 59 (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. The proposed detached garage could be removed in the future without impairment of the essential form or integrity of any existing building on the premises, nor the property as a whole. The Commission may find this standard to be met. Recommendation The proposed detached garage will provide additional storage space for the applicant’s multiple-family use while resulting in no alteration to any existing structures on the property. Based upon staff’s analysis of the application and site conditions, the proposal does comply with all standards outlined in Chapter 1470 Historic Preservation and is recommended for approval. As contained herein, staff does not find any conflict with Chapter 1470 Historic Preservation, the Michigan Local Historic Districts Act, or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. However, as has been stated previously in this report, the Historic District Commission may wish to ask to the applicant for additional details regarding the proposed siding, roofing, and exterior finishes to be applied to the proposed garage. Therefore, planning staff recommends approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a new 40’ x 36’ detached garage standing 14’ in height at 265 NE Capital Ave., as 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. Staff recommends the following condition of approval: a) Should any historically significant or archaeological resources be discovered during the course of construction, such resources shall be preserved by the applicant and reported to the City of Battle Creek. Support Material Historic District Commission Application Garage Construction Plans 6 of 6 10 of 59 11 of 59 12 of 59 13 of 59 14 of 59 15 of 59 16 of 59 17 of 59 18 of 59 19 of 59 20 of 59 21 of 59 22 of 59 23 of 59  24 of 59 Battle Creek Historic District Commission Staff Report Staff Report 32 Woodmer Ln. Meeting: July 10, 2023 To: Historic District Commission From: Travis Sullivan, Planner Date: June 28, 2023 Subject: The petition, filed by Roach Home Improvement on behalf of Deaudre Perry of 32 Woodmer Ln., is for the construction of a new freestanding 16’ x 25’ deck at the rear of the home. Summary Staff recommends approval of the subject petition at 32 Woodmer Ln., as the proposed freestanding deck 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 (32 Woodmer Ln..) located within the local Merritt Woods Historic District. Photo courtesy of Google Maps.  25 of 59 Site & History The subject site is located at 32 Woodmer Ln. to the west of Higgins Park and between Chestnut St. and Orchard Ave. within the Merritt Woods local historic district. The home on the site was constructed in 1954 with an area of 2,171 sq. ft. and is currently in use as a single-family residence. The building is a two-story single-family home consisting of a brick façade. The façade includes a covered entryway leading into an area of the home which contains a second story and main floor over the garage. Roofing material on the home consists of diamond-shaped asphalt shingles. The applicant is proposing the construction of a 16’ x 25’ freestanding deck at the rear of the house behind the garage, standing 36” in height from grade. The location of the proposed deck will be mostly obscured from view, with only a portion of the corner likely visible to traffic approaching from the north. Figure 2: Street view of the subject site at 32 Woodmer Ln. facing east, June 2023. Red arrow points to the location of the proposed freestanding deck. Photo courtesy of City of Battle Creek staff. 2 of 7  26 of 59 Figure 3: Street view of the subject site at 32 Woodmer Ln. facing south, June 2023. A small portion of the deck will likely be visible at the rear of the garage from the angle shown. Photo courtesy of City of Battle Creek staff. Summary of Request The applicant has filed the subject HDC Certificate of Appropriateness application for the construction of a new 16’ x 25’ freestanding wood deck behind the garage along the rear (east) side of the home. The deck is proposed to stand 36” in height from grade, with 42-inch 2” x 2” spindles supporting the 2” x 4” treated top and bottom rails. For detailed specifics of the proposed deck, please see the full plan set attached to this staff report. The deck as proposed will be mostly obscured from view from Woodmer Ln. due to the fact that the garage is located between the street and the deck. It is likely, however, that a portion of the corner of the deck will be visible to oncoming traffic approaching from the north. Of additional note, the applicant is proposing a completely freestanding deck which will not require attachment to or alteration of the house. Staff feels that the proposed deck construction would result in minimal to no impact upon the aesthetic characteristics of the home. 3 of 7  27 of 59 Applicable HDC Guidelines and Analysis for a Certificate of Appropriateness for exterior renovations to the existing building at 119 / 121 W Michigan Ave. 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) 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 that the proposed deck would require no alteration to the exterior of the building. The proposed deck will be located behind the garage and in a location of minimal visibility from the street, and will be built to a scale appropriate for the existing building. The proposed deck would not impact the ability to use the resource for its originally intended purpose. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. 4 of 7  28 of 59 The distinguishing original qualities or character of the existing home will not be destroyed by the proposed deck as the deck will be freestanding and will require no alteration to the building. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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 deck will not create alterations that would result in an earlier appearance, as the deck is planned to be constructed of wood and in a typical contemporary fashion. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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 project as no changes to the exterior have taken place which may have acquired significance in their own right. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (e) Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a resource shall be treated with sensitivity. No alteration to the existing structure is proposed, and staff finds that the proposed deck would not alter any stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a resource. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. This criteria is not relevant as the proposed project does not entail any repairs to or replacement of any architectural features or material. 5 of 7  29 of 59 (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. As is typical with projects that involve any degree of digging, staff would recommend as a condition of approval that the discovery of any archaeological resources during the construction process be preserved and reported to the City of Battle Creek. (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. Staff finds that the proposed freestanding deck will not destroy any significant historic, architectural or cultural material. Further, the design of the proposed deck is generally compatible with the size, scale, material and character of the property, neighborhood, and environment. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. The proposed freestanding deck could be removed in the future without impairment of the essential form or integrity of the existing building on the premises, nor the property as a whole. The Commission may find this standard to be met. Recommendation The proposed freestanding deck will provide additional private enjoyment of the property for the homeowner while resulting in no aesthetic change to the property from the street, nor any attachment or alteration to the existing structure. Based upon staff’s analysis of the application and site conditions, the proposal does comply with all standards outlined in Chapter 1470 Historic Preservation and is recommended for approval. As contained herein, staff does not find any conflict with Chapter 1470 Historic Preservation, the Michigan Local Historic Districts Act, or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. 6 of 7  30 of 59 Therefore, planning staff recommends approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a new freestanding 16’ x 25’ deck at 32 Woodmer Ln., as 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. Staff recommends the following condition of approval: a) Should any historically significant or archaeological resources be discovered during the course of construction, such resources shall be preserved by the applicant and reported to the City of Battle Creek. Support Material Historic District Commission Application Deck Construction Plans 7 of 7 31 of 59 32 of 59 33 of 59 34 of 59 35 of 59  36 of 59 Battle Creek Historic District Commission Staff Report 200 Capital Ave NE H07-23 Meeting: July 10, 2023 To: Historic District Commission From: Susan C. Cronander, Planning and Zoning Administrator Date: June 28, 2023 Subject: This petition, filed by Luke Drallette, property owner at 200 Capital Ave NE Battle Creek Michigan 49017, is for the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a new 4-foot high wood picket fence located in the secondary front, side and rear yards for a Victorian house located in the Old Maple Street historic district. Summary Staff is recommending approval of this petition, as a 4-foot high wooden picket fence is appropriate fencing for a Victorian (about 1850-1910 in the United States) era home. Figure 1: Aerial view of 200 NE Capital. The subject property is a corner property at the intersection of Penn St. and NE Capital Ave. (City of Battle Creek Parcel Map 2020)  37 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence Site Location & History The subject site, owned by Luke Drallette, is located at 200 Capital Avenue NE at the southwest corner of Capital Avenue NE and Penn Street within the Old Maple Street Historic District (see Figures 1 and 2.) The site is zoned T-4 Downtown Commercial District, which is a mixed commercial/residential pedestrian-oriented zoning district (Figure 3.) The house on the subject parcel was built in 1891, according to the City’s assessing records. Currently, the site is not fenced (Photos 1-3 below.) Figure 2: 200 NE Capital Ave. is located within the Old Maple Street Historic District, east of the Downtown. Figure 3: Current zoning and surrounding zoning districts. The subject property is zoned T-4 Downtown Commercial. 2 of 9  38 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence Photo 1: Front view of house at 200 Capital Ave NE (Google street view.) No fencing is proposed for the primary front yard, though the fencing in the secondary front yard along Penn Street will be visible from Capital Avenue NE. Fencing is proposed to start at the end of the wrap-around porch facing Penn Street. Photo 2: Side view of the subject house and yard from Penn Street where the proposed fencing is proposed to be located starting at the side entrance along the Penn Street side of the property (staff photo.) 3 of 9  39 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence Photo 3: Side view from Penn Street of the subject house, yard with garden and shared driveway. The proposed fencing will end between the garden and the tree and continue to the other side of the house (staff photo.) Mr. Drallette is proposing a 4-foot tall picket fence in the secondary front yard along Penn Street to the back of the garden, then to the western property line adjacent to the Kimball House Museum and north along the property line back up to the western side of the house and only as far as the house (Figures 4 and 5.) No fencing is proposed for the primary front yard, though the fencing in the secondary front yard along Penn Street will be visible from Capital Avenue NE, as well as Penn Street. (The secondary front yard consists of the subject property between the property line along the Penn St. right of way and the first supporting member of the main structure.) Because a portion of this subject fence will be located in a front yard along Penn St., the City’s Zoning Ordinance requires that the portion in this front yard must be 50% transparent, which means that the spacing between the pickets should equal or be wider than the width of the pickets: 4 of 9  40 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence Figure 4: Location of proposed 4-foot tall picket fence. Figure 5: Applicant’s diagram of proposed fence location for 200 Capital Ave NE. 5 of 9  41 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence According to articles from the Smithsonian and other sites such as This Old House, picket fences in the United States have roots in the Colonial era and continued in popularity into at least the first half of the 20th century. Staff offers the observation that Googling almost any historical picture or photos of Victorian era homes will also bring up images of either metal or wood fencing, and wood picket fencing (Figure 6 below.) Wood picket fencing appears to be compatible with a Victorian era house. Figure 6: Three of the many images of Victorian era homes with picket fences found on a Google search. Summary of Request The applicant has filed the subject HDC Certificate of Appropriateness application in order to construct a new 4-foot high wood picket fence in the secondary front, side and rear of the property. The fence will not be anchored to the house. The will not be located in the primary front yard along Capital Ave. NE. Staff is recommending approval as a 4-foot high wooden picket fence appears to be appropriate fencing for a Victorian (about 1850-1910 in the United States) era home. This property is reviewed in accordance with City of Battle Creek Building and Housing Code Chapter 1470 "Historic Preservation", as amended, the Michigan 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) 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… 6 of 9  42 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence 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 that the proposed wood picket fence will not require any alteration of the historical house. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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 wood picket fence will not require any alteration of the historical house, and the fence will not remove or alter any historical features on the subject site. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. A 4-foot high wooden picket fence appears to be appropriate fencing for a Victorian (about 1850-1910 in the United States) era home. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. Staff finds that this criteria does not apply to the proposed construction of a new wood picket fence, in that the yard itself does not exhibit any changes or development that have acquired historical significance. (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 will not be affected or altered by the proposed construction of a new wood picket fence, as the proposed fence will not be attached to the house. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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 7 of 9  43 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence historic, physical or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other resources. Staff finds that distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship will not be affected or altered by the proposed construction of a new wood picket fence, as the proposed fence will not be attached to the house. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. The applicant is not proposing any cleaning of resources. Staff finds that this criteria does not apply to the proposed project. (h) Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological resources affected by or adjacent to any project. Staff would recommend that as a condition of approval any archeological resources discovered during the construction process be reported to the City of Battle Creek. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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. Not only would a 4-foot tall wood picket fence not destroy significant historic, architectural or cultural material; but staff observes that a wood picket fence design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood and environment of the Old Maple Street historic district. The Commission may find this standard to be met. (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 unimpaired. The essential form and integrity of the house will not be impaired by the proposed construction of a new wood picket fence. The Commission may find this standard to be met. Recommendation Staff finds that the portion of the proposed 4-foot wood picket fence as requested will not negatively impact a contributing historical resource. 8 of 9  44 of 59 H07-23 200 Capital Ave NE picket fence Therefore, staff’s analysis of the application for the proposed new 4-foot wood picket fence in the secondary front, side and rear yards meets the standards outlined in Chapter 1470 Historic Preservation and is recommended for approval; and should be approved with the following conditions: a) Should any historically significant archeological resources be discovered during the course of construction, the discovery of such resources shall be reported to the City of Battle Creek. b) The width between the pickets should be at least as wide as the pickets in order to create a 50% transparent fence in a front yard, as required by the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Support Material Application Packet Applicant’s fence location drawing Fence Application 9 of 9 45 of 59 46 of 59 47 of 59 48 of 59  49 of 59 Battle Creek Historic District Commission Staff Report Staff Report Administrative Approval Quarterly Report Meeting: July 10, 2023 To: Historic District Commission From: Travis Sullivan, Planner Date: July 3, 2023 Subject: Quarterly reporting of all minor classes of work approved administratively in any of the local historic districts, as required by Section 1470.10 (Delegation of Authority) Summary Section 1470.10 of the City of Battle Creek Code of Ordinances requires that the Historic Commission review, on at least a quarterly basis, the certificates of appropriateness, if any, issued for work by the authorities delegated pursuant to Section 1470.10 to determine whether or not the delegated responsibility should be continued. Given this requirement, staff has provided in this packet an inventory of each certificate of appropriateness issued for a minor class as specified by resolution of the Commission adopted on April 18, 2019. Such certificates were issued during the first quarter of the year 2023. 2023 Quarter 2 Administrative Approvals 1. 178 Ann Ave. – Approval for the replacement of the existing 6-foot wood privacy fence with a new 4-foot wood picket fence in the front yard and 6-foot wood privacy fence in the side and rear yards. 2. 19 Walter Ave. – Approval for the replacement of the existing platform and steps to the entry door on the west side of the house. The proposed replacement constitutes the replacement of a existing deck in same location in a matching or similar size. 3. 306 Champion St. – Approval for the replacement of the existing freestanding sign on the site with a new sign of matching overall dimensions, with a changeable copy area, height and overall area that meets the requirements of the Sign Ordinance of the City of Battle Creek. 4. 60 W Van Buren St. – Approval for the replacement of the existing freestanding sign on the site with a new sign of matching overall dimensions, and with a changeable copy area, height and overall area that meets the requirements of the Sign Ordinance of the City of Battle Creek. 5. 77 NE Capital Ave. – Approval for the replacement of the existing freestanding sign on the site with a new sign of matching overall dimensions, and with a changeable copy area, height, and overall area that meets the requirements of the Sign Ordinance of the City of Battle Creek.  50 of 59 6. 95 Oaklawn Ave. – Approval for the replacement of a garage roof with a new roof having a similar appearance with similar materials. Support Material HDC Minor Class of Work Resolution 178 Ann Ave. Certificate of Approval 19 Walter Ave. Certificate of Approval 306 Champion St. Certificate of Approval 60 W Van Buren St. Certificate of Approval 77 NE Capital Ave. Certificate of Approval 95 Oaklawn Ave. Certificate of Approval 2 of 2  51 of 59 Historic District Commission Resolution Delegating Minor Classes of Work For Staff Approval WHEREAS, Michigan’s Local Historic District Act, being MCL 399.205(10), authorizes the City of Battle Creek Historic District Commission to ‘delegate the issuance of certificates of appropriateness for specified minor classes of work to its staff”, and “the commission shall provide to the delegated authority specific written standards for issuing certificates of appropriateness”; and WHEREAS, THE City of Battle Creek Ordinance 1470.10 authorizes the City of Battle Creek Historic District Commission to “delegate the issuance of certificates of appropriateness for specific minor classes of work to its staff,” and “the commission shall provide to the delegated authority specific written standards for issuing certificates of appropriateness”; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, the City of Battle Creek Historic District Commission defines the following activities as “minor classes of work” which may be approved by the Planning Supervisor or their designee: 1) Installation of new storm windows and storm doors that match the opening size and are not bare metal; that mullions and meeting rails of storm windows match the prime windows; and the design of the storm door is similar in style to the prime door. 2) Replacement of non-original windows or doors; or windows or doors in non- contributing resources; with new windows or doors that are an accurate restoration using historical, pictorial, and physical documentation, or a new design that is compatible with the openings and historic character of the building. 3) Installation of any awnings at any opening on the rear elevation of a structure for properties not situated on a corner lot. 4) Replacement of existing awnings in the same location and dimension. 5) Replacement of existing signage in the same size, dimension, and location. 6) Installation of new skylights or solar panels on non-character defining roof surfaces not visible from the street provided the skylights are flat, do not extend more than 8 inches above the roof surface, are similar to the color of the roof material and cover not more than 10% of the roof surface on which they are located; bare metal finishes, bubble or domed skylights are permitted only on flat or rear-facing roofs. 7) Replacement of roofs with a material exactly matching the existing top roofing layer or with the original roofing material or a replica of the missing or covered original roofing material. 8) Installation of new wood clapboard siding or artificial siding that replicates clapboard where the existing siding is artificial and provided the exposed vertical dimension of the new “clapboard” is no more than five inches or within one inch of the missing or covered original; no new material may cover nor require the  52 of 59 removal of any original trim or architectural detail such as ornamental shingles, carved brackets, window hoods and the like. 9) Removal of artificial siding to repair and restore original siding. 10) Cleaning of masonry provided the application meets the requirements in Preservation Briefs 1: Assessing Cleaning and Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic Masonry Buildings and Preservation Briefs 6: Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Buildings. 11) Reconstruction of masonry to exactly match the existing in color, size, texture, coursing, mortar profile, color, composition, and joint width. 12) Gutter and downspout replacement with exactly matching design, materials, and placement. 13) The installation of satellite dishes or antenna, provided the location is not visible from the street or sidewalk in the front, or if a corner lot, the street or sidewalk on the side. 14) Installation of new handrails that match the existing balustrade may be added to porch steps, or the replacement of non-original handrails with replicas of documented original handrails, or new compatible handrails. 15) Re-construction of existing fire escapes in a matching or smaller size. 16) The removal of dead, diseased or damaged trees with a written statement from a professional service or arborist. 17) The replacement of existing on-grade walkways, stairways, retaining walls and driveways in the same location in matching or compatible materials. 18) Replacement of fences of any kind except that chain link or metal security type fences may not be installed in the front open space or within the side open space on the street side of corner lots. 19) Installation of glass block in existing basement openings that are not on the front or street facing side elevations provided that the glass block is recessed to the same plane as the window. 20) Replacement of concrete basement walls provided that the exterior of the portions of the walls above grade are finished in a material matching the original or with a smooth parge coat. 21) Window and door boarding provided that the boarding-up is temporary and for the protection of the building. 22) Installation of artwork that is non-permanently attached to a building exterior provided that it measures less than 25 square feet in total area, does not damage or destroy historic materials, does not obscure historic or architectural features, and is not visible from the street or sidewalk. 23) Reconstruction of existing historic porches or porch elements provided the materials and design exactly match the existing materials and design. 24) Reconstruction of existing non-historic porches to match the existing design or the historic design that is documented using historical, pictorial, or physical documentation, or a new design that is compatible with the historic character of the building. 25) Replacement of non-original garage doors with new doors that are compatible with the design of the garage and are located within the existing or historic opening.  53 of 59 26) Installation of air conditioning or mechanical equipment provided that the equipment is not visible from the street or sidewalk and does not destroy historic features. 27) Replacement of existing playground equipment in public parks. 28) The replacement of existing decks in the same location in a matching or smaller size; or the expansion of decks on non-contributing resources provided the expansion is not greater than 25% of the existing deck area and does not negatively impact historic resources. 29) Installation of a new or replacement of an existing accessory, detached building or structure which consists of 199 square feet or less and does not connect to a permanent foundation provided that the 1) exterior cladding matches in color and design of the main existing building; or 2) is mostly screened or not easily seen from the nearest street(s). ADOPTED April 18, 2019 EFFECTIVE April 18, 2019  54 of 59 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK C O M M U N I T Y S E RV I C E S D E P A RT ME N T 10 N. DIVISION STREET, ROOM 117 ● BATTLE CREEK MI 49014 PHONE (269) 966-3406 ● FAX (269) 966-3555 ● WWW.BATTLECREEKMI.GOV HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL 178 Ann Ave. Petition submitted by the Justice Fence for the replacement of the existing 6-foot wood privacy fence with a new 4-foot wood picket fence in the front yard and a 6-foot wood privacy fence in the side and rear yards. Justice Fence 1276 E Columbia Ave Battle Creek, MI 49014 By authority given by the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek Planning Department, staff may review applications for approval on minor renovations on behalf of the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek. By decision of the Planning and Zoning Administrator, your request to replace the existing 6-foot wood fence with a 6-foot wood fence in the side and rear yards and a 4-foot wood picket fence in the front yard, as described in the Minor Class of Work application you submitted meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings for property located at 178 Ann Ave. and has been APPROVED as submitted with the stipulation that it meets City Code (which requires fences in front yards to be 50% transparent.) Note: Historic District Commission only requires approval of exterior renovations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Ms. Susan C. Cronander, Planning and Zoning Administrator at (269) 966-3320 ext. 1519. Sincerely, HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BATTLE CREEK Susan C. Cronander By Direction of the Chairperson CC. Building Inspections MISSION: TO ENSURE A SAFE, PROSPEROUS AND CULTURALLY ENRICHED COMMUNITY. VISION: WE ENVISION BATTLE CREEK AS AN EXTRAORDINARY COMMUNITY WHEREPEOPLE CHOOSE TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY.  55 of 59 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK COMMUNITY SERVICES DE PART MENT – PLANNING & ZONING 06/22/23 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL 19 Walter Ave. Petition submitted by Hicks Builders for the replacement of the existing platform and steps to the entry door on the west side of the house. The proposed replacement constitutes the replacement of an existing deck in the same location in a matching or similar size. Hicks Builders 12785 Minges Rd. S Battle Creek, MI 49015 By authority given by the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek Planning Department, staff may review applications for approval on minor renovations on behalf of the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek. By decision of the Planner, your request to replace the existing platform and steps to the entry door on the west side of the house with a platform/steps in the same location in a matching or similar size as described in the Minor Class of Work application you submitted meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings for property located at 19 Walter Ave. has been APPROVED as submitted with the stipulation that it meets City Code. Note: Historic District Commission only requires approval of exterior renovations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Travis Sullivan, Planner at 966-3320 ext 1506. Sincerely, HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BATTLE CREEK Travis Sullivan By Direction of the Chairperson CC. Building Inspections ________________________________________________________ 10 N. Division St., Suite #117/ Battle Creek, MI 49014 Phone: (269) 966-3320 / Web Site: www.battlecreekmi.gov  56 of 59 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK COMMUNITY SERVICES DE PART MENT – PLANNING & ZONING 06/23/23 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL 306 Champion St Petition submitted by Fritz Signs for the replacement of the existing freestanding sign on the site with a new sign of matching overall dimensions, and with a changeable copy area, height and overall area that meets the requirements of the Sign Ordinance of the City of Battle Creek. Fritz Signs 8032 Spring Arbor Rd. PO Box 397 Spring Arbor, MI By authority given by the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek Planning Department, staff may review applications for approval on minor renovations on behalf of the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek. By decision of the Planner, your request to replace the existing freestanding sign with a new sign of the same dimensions, as described in the Minor Class of Work application plans you submitted meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings for property located at 306 Champion St. has been APPROVED as submitted with the stipulation that it meets City Code. Note: Historic District Commission only requires approval of exterior renovations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Travis Sullivan, Planner at 966-3320 ext 1506. Sincerely, HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BATTLE CREEK Travis Sullivan By Direction of the Chairperson CC. Building Inspections ________________________________________________________ 10 N. Division St., Suite #117/ Battle Creek, MI 49014 Phone: (269) 966-3320 / Web Site: www.battlecreekmi.gov  57 of 59 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK COMMUNITY SERVICES DE PART MENT – PLANNING & ZONING 06/23/23 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL 60 W Van Buren St. Petition submitted by Fritz Signs for the replacement of the existing freestanding sign on the site with a new sign of matching overall dimensions, and with a changeable copy area, height and overall area that meets the requirements of the Sign Ordinance of the City of Battle Creek. Fritz Signs 8032 Spring Arbor Rd. PO Box 397 Spring Arbor, MI By authority given by the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek Planning Department, staff may review applications for approval on minor renovations on behalf of the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek. By decision of the Planner, your request to replace the existing freestanding sign with a new sign of the same dimensions, as described in the Minor Class of Work application plans you submitted meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings for property located at 60 W Van Buren St. has been APPROVED as submitted with the stipulation that it meets City Code. Note: Historic District Commission only requires approval of exterior renovations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Travis Sullivan, Planner at 966-3320 ext 1506. Sincerely, HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BATTLE CREEK Travis Sullivan By Direction of the Chairperson CC. Building Inspections ________________________________________________________ 10 N. Division St., Suite #117/ Battle Creek, MI 49014 Phone: (269) 966-3320 / Web Site: www.battlecreekmi.gov  58 of 59 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK COMMUNITY SERVICES DE PART MENT – PLANNING & ZONING 06/23/23 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL 77 NE Capital Ave. Petition submitted by Fritz Signs for the replacement of the existing freestanding sign on the site with a new sign of matching overall dimensions, and with a changeable copy area, height and overall area that meets the requirements of the Sign Ordinance of the City of Battle Creek. Fritz Signs 8032 Spring Arbor Rd. PO Box 397 Spring Arbor, MI By authority given by the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek Planning Department, staff may review applications for approval on minor renovations on behalf of the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek. By decision of the Planner, your request to replace the existing freestanding sign with a new sign of the same dimensions, as described in the Minor Class of Work application plans you submitted meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings for property located at 77 NE Capital Ave. has been APPROVED as submitted with the stipulation that it meets City Code. Note: Historic District Commission only requires approval of exterior renovations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Travis Sullivan, Planner at 966-3320 ext 1506. Sincerely, HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BATTLE CREEK Travis Sullivan By Direction of the Chairperson CC. Building Inspections ________________________________________________________ 10 N. Division St., Suite #117/ Battle Creek, MI 49014 Phone: (269) 966-3320 / Web Site: www.battlecreekmi.gov  59 of 59 June 28, 2023 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL 95 Oaklawn Avenue Petition submitted by Mr. Lance Shaver, property owner, requesting approval to replace garage roof with new one having similar appearance with similar materials. _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. Lance Shaver 169 Oaklawn Ave. Battle Creek, MI 49037 By authority given by the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek Planning Department, staff may review applications for approval on minor renovations on behalf of the Historic District Commission of the City of Battle Creek. By decision of the Planning Manager, your request to replace a garage roof with a new roof having similar appearance, as described in the Certificate of Appropriateness application you submitted meets the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings for property located at 95 Oaklawn Avenue has been APPROVED as submitted with the stipulation that it meets City Code. Note: Historic District Commission only requires approval of exterior renovations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Ms. Susan Cronander, Planning and Zoning Administrator at 269-966-3320 ext. 1519. Sincerely, HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BATTLE CREEK Susan C. Cronander Planning and Zoning Administrator ______________________________ By Direction of the Chairperson CC. Building Inspections 10 N. DIVISION ST. P.O. BOX 1717 BATTLE CREEK MICHIGAN 49016-1717 PHONE (269) 966-3320 FAX (269) 966-3555 WWW.BATTLECREEKMI.GOV