View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
January 3, 2006
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by J. Hilt.
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Hilt, S. Thompson, L. Spataro, A. Brown, T. Russo, T. Bosma,
S. Kroes
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: J. Fitzpatrick, D. Leafers
OTHERS PRESENT: E. Pizunski, 16149 Baird Cr; B. Herrmann, Buck Construction; F.
Rozyski, 487 W. Clay; D. LaBrenz, City Inspection Department; T.
Kleibecker, City of Muskegon Public Safety Director; M. DeWitt,
361 Rosengren; V. Sieradzki, 487 W Clay; J. Elsey, 1115 Third St.;
C. Vanderwier, 1115 Third St.; T. Tubergen, 4371 E. Fruitport Rd
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the regular meeting minutes of December 6, 2005 was made by T. Bosma,
supported by T. Russo and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC HEARINGS
Case 2006-01 – 609 W. Western Ave Approval for Neon Sign. Applicant: Edward Pizunski.
District: Clay-Western. J. Fitzpatrick presented the staff report. The applicant is requesting
approval for a neon sign for 609 W. Western Ave. Although sign guidelines for the HDC generally
prohibit neon signs, Western Avenue has a history of having had neon signs in the past. Recent
HDC policy has also been to allow neon signs along Western Avenue. Applicant had gotten HDC
approval for a sign in December, but was asked to provide more detail. Staff recommends approval
of the request.
E. Pizunski provided members with a color copy of what the sign would look like. L. Spataro stated
that neon was appropriate for the architectural age and style of this building. S. Kroes asked if the
size of the sign was appropriate for the size of the building. E. Pizunski stated that he had checked
into the City’s sign requirements, and the sign complied with those.
A motion that the HDC approve the request for the neon sign as proposed for 609 W. Western Ave.,
with the condition that it complies with the City’s sign ordinance, was made by S. Kroes, supported
by A. Brown and unanimously approved.
HDC Minutes 01/03/06 1
Case 2006-02 - 552 W. Clay Request to Demolish Warehouse. Applicant: Alan Workman.
District: Clay Western. J. Fitzpatrick presented the staff report. The applicant is requesting
approval to demolish a building. The building is a cinderblock structure which has no historic
value. J. Fitzpatrick reviewed HDC Guidelines (Sec. 11-30) regarding plans to construct, alter,
repair, move, or demolish a structure. Because the building has no historic value, staff recommends
approval of the request.
L. Spataro stated that the adjacent building was attached to this one, and it was relatively intact. He
wanted to ensure that this request did not include that building. J. Fitzpatrick stated that only the
cinderblock structure would be demolished. B. Herrmann stated that they were only requesting
approval to demolish the building at 552 W. Clay at this time. S. Thompson asked what plans there
were for the property. B. Herrmann stated that a realtor would be trying to sell the lot.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to demolish the building located at 552 W. Clay, not to
include the adjacent gray brick structure, was made by S. Thompson, supported by L. Spataro and
unanimously approved.
Case 2006-03 – 487 W. Clay Request to Demolish All Buildings on Site. Applicant: City of
Muskegon Inspections Department. District: National Register. The applicant is requesting
approval to demolish the house and outbuildings at 487 W. Clay Ave. The building does have
historic value, but because it has been deemed a hazard to public safety and because retention of the
structure would not be in the interest of the community as a whole, staff recommends approval of
the request, with the condition that the certificate not go into effect for 6 months.
F. Rozyski stated that Mr. Sieradzki’s attorney was not available today and she felt the case should
not be heard. J. Hilt stated that the board wanted to hear the facts of the case. L. Spataro asked
what the demolition process was, and what would happen next. D. LaBrenz explained the past
history of this property, stating that it had been in disrepair for quite some time. He stated that the
next step would be City Commission approval, followed by solicitation of bids for demolition.
There was also a timeline for the appeal process. J. Hilt asked what the time line was. D. LaBrenz
stated that if the City Commission concurred, bids wouldn’t be sought for 30 days, giving Mr.
Sieradzki time to file an appeal, if he chose. He also stated that since the City had started this
action, one of the chimneys on the property had started to fall apart. T. Kleibecker stated that it
would be a minimum of 90 days and possibly up to 6 months before the case was presented to the
City Commission. L. Spataro asked if the property owner could obtain building permits and make
repairs during that time. T. Kleibecker stated that he could, and that Inspections staff was willing to
work with the homeowner. T. Bosma asked if there was an estimate of the cost to bring the
property up to code. D. LaBrenz stated there was not, as it was still early in the process.
F. Rozyski stated that she had lived at 487 W. Clay for 12 years and she hadn’t had any injuries or
problems. L. Spataro asked if she lived in the house. F. Rozyski stated she did. L. Spataro asked
about the condition of the inside of the home, and if there was electricity and running water. F.
Rozyski stated that there was electricity, but she wasn’t sure about running water because she
bought bottled water. L. Spataro asked if the gas was on for heat. F. Rozyski stated that she didn’t
know. J. Thompson stated that he was disappointed in the City’s recommendation to demolish
historically significant properties. He stated that he had called the State Office for Historic
Preservation in Lansing to discuss this issue. He provided HDC members with copies of his notes
from the conversation and stated that there were other alternatives to demolition. He stated that
there was an ordinance regarding “demolition by neglect” which allowed municipalities to intervene
HDC Minutes 01/03/06 2
in these types of cases and fix up the property. L. Spataro asked if the State office provided funding
for this. J. Thompson stated that he did not know. M. DeWitt stated that he had known Mr.
Sieradzki for 20 years and had assisted him with repairs to this property in the past. He stated that
they had materials for fixing the garage, but that the City had seized them. He felt that a mediator
was needed in this case, since Mr. Sieradzki was hard of hearing and was unable to hear the case
being presented. He questioned why the demolition request included “all buildings on site”,
because he stated the garage was sound. He also stated that the chimney had been that way for 20
years and did not just deteriorate. L. Spataro asked how long Mr. Sieradzki had owned the
property. M. DeWitt stated, since his parents gave it to him many years ago. L. Spataro asked what
was preventing Mr. Sieradzki from fixing the house. M. DeWitt stated that the City had seized their
building materials. L. Spataro asked if they had obtained building permits. M. DeWitt stated they
had not. L. Spataro stated that if the homeowner was making a good faith effort to fix the property,
City staff would work with him. He asked why this case had gotten to this point. M. DeWitt stated
that Mr. Sieradzki’s health was not good, and that he was hard of hearing. L. Spataro stated that
there had been problems with this property for years.
V. Sieradzki stated that because of hearing problems, these proceedings were blank to him and he
requested to table the case. He stated that he hadn’t received a letter regarding this meeting until
last weekend, and he was unable to get his attorney to attend on short notice. He stated that one of
the listed defects on the home, the roof, was currently being worked on. He stated that he had
previously pulled a permit, but that he was later informed it was invalid and his check was returned.
He also stated that due to the late notice and City Hall being closed for the holidays, he was unable
to arrange for hearing assistance. L. Spataro asked staff about the circumstances of the denied
building permit. D. LaBrenz stated that the work that was to be done required staff approval from J.
Fitzpatrick, the HDC staff liaison, before a building permit could be issued. T. Bosma asked about
the nature of the work. J. Fitzpatrick stated that it was roofing. T. Bosma asked when this was. D.
LaBrenz stated that it was in October or September of 2005. T. Bosma asked if the permit request
was in response to a City communication. D. LaBrenz stated it was. T. Russo stated that problems
with this property dated back to 1971 and the arguments from back then were nearly identical to
what was being discussed today. L. Spataro stated that even if the board voted to approve the
demolition request, Mr. Sieradzki would still have six months to pull the necessary permits and
bring the property up to code. He stated that the City had complied with all court orders regarding
this case, and that it had been a very expensive process. He stated that the property owner needed to
be held accountable, and this would give him to opportunity to repair his property. J. Hilt felt that
the case should be tabled, due to Mr. Sieradzki’s need for hearing assistance. She also stated that
tabling the case would provide an opportunity to discuss it with the State Historic Preservation
Office. L. Spataro stated that, considering the history of this property and the recent Housing Board
of Appeals case, he was confident that the owner was aware of what was going on.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to demolish the buildings located at 487 W. Clay with
the condition that the certificate not go into effect for 6 months, was made by L. Spataro, supported
by T. Russo and approved, with J. Hilt and S. Thompson voting nay. L. Spataro suggested to Mr.
Sieradzki that he contact the Public Safety Director regarding the building permits.
Case 2006-04 – Former St. Joseph’s Property, Lot D Request to Construct Garage. Applicant:
Neighborhood Investment Corporation. District: Houston. J. Fitzpatrick presented the staff report.
Applicant is requesting approval to construct a garage. This garage will be located on the same lot
as the house that was recently moved. HDC guidelines for new structures were reviewed. Staff
HDC Minutes 01/03/06 3
recommends approval of the request to construct the garage, pending further information regarding
construction.
C. Vanderwier provided some details regarding the garage construction. He stated that the roof
pitch would match the house, as would the siding and shingles. T. Bosma asked if there were any
drawings of the proposed garage. J. Fitzpatrick stated there were not. T. Bosma stated that
normally, applicants provided sketches to the Board, and he did not want to start a precedent of not
requiring them. L. Spataro agreed, and stated that he wanted to make sure the eaves and soffits
were historically accurate. T. Bosma stated that reviewing the sketches would also allow board
members the opportunity to make suggestions to the applicant regarding building construction. C.
Vanderwier stated that the fascia and soffits on the house were boxed in, so they planned to do the
same on the garage to remain consistent.
A motion that the HDC table the request to construct a garage on Lot D of the former St. Joseph’s
church property until drawings of the proposed garage are provided, was made by L. Spataro,
supported by S. Thompson and unanimously approved.
Case 2006-05 – Former St. Joseph’s Property, Lot C Request to Construct 1-Story Home.
Applicant: Neighborhood Investment Corporation. District: Houston. J. Fitzpatrick presented the
staff report. Applicant is requesting approval to construct a one-story home. HDC guidelines for
new structures were reviewed. Staff recommends approval of the request.
J. Elsey provided members with updated building plans. L. Spataro asked what materials would be
used for the columns, porch railings, and siding. He also asked whether the porch would be
cultured stone or brick. Members reviewed the revised plans and discussed them with the
applicants. L. Spataro stated that there were no dimension or material specifications on the plans. J.
Elsey did not realize that the board would need that much detail. Details regarding the posts, siding,
and porch were discussed. L. Spataro asked which side was the front of the house. C. Vanderwier
stated that it was the short side. L. Spataro asked if the front door faced the side. C. Vanderwier
stated it did. L. Spataro asked if the roof would be gabled or hipped. J. Elsey stated they would
leave that up to the homeowner.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to construct a one-story home on Lot C of the former
St. Joseph’s church property as requested in the submitted plans, with the conditions that 1) cultured
stone is used for the porch foundation, 2) simulated shakes will be used on the roof if the gable
option is chosen, 3) porch supports will be clad to create a 16 x 16 inch column, and 4) the
handicap-accessible ramp be concealed within a level base, was made by L. Spataro, supported by
S. Thompson and unanimously approved.
Case 2006-06 – Former St. Joseph’s Property, Lot B Request to construct two-story home.
Applicant: Neighborhood Investment Corporation. District: Houston. J. Fitzpatrick presented the
staff report. Applicant is requesting approval to construct a two story home on Lot B of the former
St. Joseph’s church property. HDC guidelines for new structures were reviewed. Staff recommends
approval of the request. The structure appears to meet the guidelines for new construction.
Board members reviewed plans supplied by the applicants. L. Spataro asked if brick or cultured
stone would be used. J. Elsey stated that it depended on which option was chosen by the
homeowners. Members considered the two options and which conditions would need to be met for
each one.
HDC Minutes 01/03/06 4
A motion that the HDC approve the request to construct a two story home on Lot B of the former
St. Joseph’s church property as requested in the submitted plans, with the following conditions: 1) if
Option 1 is chosen, the porch will be brick with 14.5” x 14.5” square columns, and 2) if Option 2 is
chosen, the porch will be cultured stone with round columns having a 14.5-inch diameter, and a
metal roof will be allowed, was made by L. Spataro, supported by A. Brown and unanimously
approved.
Case 2006-07 - 511 W. Clay Request to install aluminum storm windows. Applicant: Tim
Tubergen/Robert Bosch. District: National Register. J. Fitzpatrick presented the staff report.
Applicant is requesting approval to install aluminum storm windows. HDC guidelines for storm
windows were reviewed. However, the guidelines do not provide explicit requirements for window
trim, and only stated that greater scrutiny will be used in the AA districts. Because the house is
located within an AA district, staff is recommending denial of the request. Staff has not seen
pictures of the proposed windows at this time.
T. Tubergen stated that the house currently had old wooden windows, some of which were in poor
condition. He wanted something that was more durable. He stated that the house was very tall, and
trying to put up and take down wooden storm windows every year would be very difficult. He
stated that if the aluminum windows were allowed, he planned to paint the frames a matte black.
He was also willing to consider any other suggestions the HDC had. J. Fitzpatrick stated that this
issue hadn’t come up since he was the HDC staff person, so he was not familiar with what might
have been done in the past on similar issues. S. Kroes stated he could have the aluminum inset and
painted black. L. Spataro stated that replacement windows could be used as long as they matched
the original windows and the original openings were maintained. T. Tubergen stated that he would
like to save as much of the original windows as possible. L. Spataro stated that it was preferable to
maintain original materials rather than replacing them all. T. Bosma felt that it would look fine if
the frames were inset and painted black.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to install aluminum storm windows in the home at 511
W. Clay with the conditions that the aluminum is inset and painted matte black, was made by T.
Bosma, supported by L. Spataro and unanimously approved.
Other Business
None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
dml
01/03/06
HDC Minutes 01/03/06 5
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails