HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION

Transcription

1 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS Chair Amanda Harrell-Seyburn Vice-Chair Karessa Wheeler Mikhail Filipovitch James Robertson Chuck Roboski Aron Sousa VACANCY City Coucil Liaison Ruth Beier Staff Liaison Timothy Schmitt, AICP Cty of East Lansing PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 410 Abbot Road East Lansing, MI (517) AGENDA November 13, :00 p.m. 54-B District Court, Courtroom #2 101 Linden Street 1) CALL TO ORDER 2) ROLL CALL 3) APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 4) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES September 11, ) COMMUNICATIONS 6) COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 7) PUBLIC HEARINGS A) 426 Park Lane - A request for approval for the replacement of the front porch on the house in treated lumber. The work has already been done without a permit. B) 321 Kensington - A request to replace windows on the north and northwest side of the home, on the second floor. The applicant is proposing to change the windows to double hung style windows. C) 215 Kensington - A request for approval to convert the existing narrow, cottage-style windows on the house to traditional doublehung windows. The work is being done to restore the house after a 2013 fire. 8) OLD BUSINESS 9) NEW BUSINESS 10) COMMITTEE REPORTS 11) ADDRESSES FROM THE FLOOR City of East Lansing Historic District Commission Agenda November 13, 2014 Page 1 of 2

2 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS Chair Amanda Harrell-Seyburn Vice-Chair Karessa Wheeler Mikhail Filipovitch James Robertson Chuck Roboski Aron Sousa VACANCY City Coucil Liaison Ruth Beier Staff Liaison Timothy Schmitt, AICP Cty of East Lansing PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 410 Abbot Road East Lansing, MI (517) AGENDA November 13, :00 p.m. 54-B District Court, Courtroom #2 101 Linden Street 1) CALL TO ORDER 2) ROLL CALL 3) APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 4) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES September 11, ) COMMUNICATIONS 6) COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 7) PUBLIC HEARINGS A) 426 Park Lane - A request for approval for the replacement of the front porch on the house in treated lumber. The work has already been done without a permit. B) 321 Kensington - A request to replace windows on the north and northwest side of the home, on the second floor. The applicant is proposing to change the windows to double hung style windows. C) 215 Kensington - A request for approval to convert the existing narrow, cottage-style windows on the house to traditional doublehung windows. The work is being done to restore the house after a 2013 fire. 8) OLD BUSINESS 9) NEW BUSINESS 10) COMMITTEE REPORTS 11) ADDRESSES FROM THE FLOOR City of East Lansing Historic District Commission Agenda November 13, 2014 Page 1 of 2

3 12) COMMISSIONER REPORTS 13) STAFF REPORT 14) ASSIGNMENTS 15) ADJOURNMENT Future Meeting: December 11, 2014 Historic District Commission Meeting, 7:00 PM City of East Lansing Historic District Commission Agenda November 13, 2014 Page 2 of 2

4 Historic District Commission Amanda Harrell-Seyburn Chairperson Karessa Wheeler Vice Chair Mikhail Filipovitch, James Robertson, Charles Roboski, Aron Sousa, and VACANCY Timothy R. Schmitt, Secretary Historic Preservation Code The East Lansing Historic Preservation Code was adopted in The purpose of the ordinance, as noted under Section 20-2, is to: "Ensure the recognition, preservation and protection of historical and architectural sites, buildings, structures, objects, features, and open spaces;...encourage property owners and residents to participate in preservation activities; enhance, improve, and preserve neighborhoods; stabilize and improve property values...strengthen the local economy; foster civic beauty and pride; and promote the use of Historic Districts and Heritage Neighborhoods for the education, pleasure and welfare of the citizens of East Lansing... In addition, the scope of the Ordinance notes under Section 20-4: "The provisions of this Code are intended to acknowledge the eclectic nature of early 20th century architecture and are expressly intended to permit changes to buildings within Historic Districts which help them retain their historic character as established by this Chapter." Historic District Commission Review The Historic District Commission meets the second Thursday of each month. The Historic District Commission's review of proposals that require a public hearing use the following process: 1. Staff report is given which describes location, property owner, description of building and building history, current zoning, applicant's request, and the relevant sections of the Historic Preservation Code. 2. Applicant's presentation - Applicant may speak on his/her own behalf and present additional information. 3. Questions by the Commission. 4. Public Hearing Opened (pertaining to this case). 5. Rebuttal/additional comments by applicant. 6. Public Hearing Closed, followed by Commission discussion and action. The Historic District Commission will act on each request within 60 days of the filing date of the application unless an extension is agreed upon in writing by the applicant and the Commission. Guidelines for Public Comment The Commission asks that if you have written comments, please submit a copy to the Secretary for inclusion in the record and give a summary of the comments in the public comment portion of the meeting. Thank you for your interest in East Lansing s Historic Districts

5 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS Amanda Harrell-Seyburn Chair Karessa Wheeler Vice Chair Mikhail Filipovich James Robertson Chuck Roboski Aron Sousa VACANCY MEETING MINUTES July 10, :00 p.m. 54-B District Court, Courtroom #2 101 Linden Street Ruth Beier City Council Liaison Staff Liaison Timothy R. Schmitt (517) Present: Absent: Staff Present: Harrell-Seyburn, Robertson, Roboski, Sousa, and Wheeler Filipovich T. Schmitt City of East Lansing DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT 410 Abbot Road East Lansing, MI (517) ) CALL TO ORDER T. Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. 2) ROLL CALL At the calling of the roll, Commissioner Filipovich was absent. The Commissioners introduced themselves and shared their interests in historic preservation. 3) APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion: Sousa moved to approve the agenda. Motion was seconded by Roboski. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 5 to 0. 4) ELECTION OF OFFICERS Wheeler nominated Harrell-Seyburn for Chair. Vote: All yeas. Harrell-Seyburn nominated Wheeler for Vice Chair. Vote: All yeas. Nominations approved unanimously. 5) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Roboski moved to approve the November 14, 2013 minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Sousa. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 5 to 0. City of East Lansing Historic District Commission July 10, 2014 Page 1 of 2

6 6) COMMUNICATIONS None 7) COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS None 8) PUBLIC HEARINGS None 9) COMMITTEE REPORTS None 10) OLD BUSINESS None 11) NEW BUSINESS A) Crack Art Project Valley Court Stairs T. Schmitt explained the crack art program in general and outlined the specific application for the Valley Court Stairs. Although color is usually not reviewable, in this case, it was brought forward due to the prominence of the stairs in the area. The Commission discussed the request and had no major concerns. The two suggestions they agreed on were the use of high quality acrylic paint, to avoid slipping issues, and that doing a three-section gradient, instead of repeating the pattern, would be a better approach. B) Bylaws/Rules of Procedure T. Schmitt introduced the bylaws/rules of procedure and explained the process for modifying them. The previous Commission had suggested changes, but they were never formally adopted. The Commission discussed the changes being proposed and agreed that they should be brought to the next meeting for a recommendation of approval 12) ADDRESSES FROM THE FLOOR None 13) COMMISSIONER REPORTS None 14) STAFF REPORTS None 15) ASSIGNMENTS None 16) ADJOURNMENT Motion: Wheeler moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Sousa. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 5 to 0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Amanda Harrell-Seyburn Chair Timothy R. Schmitt, AICP Secretary City of East Lansing Historic District Commission Minutes July 10, 2014 Page 2 of 2

7 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: November 6, 2014 HISTORIC DISTRICT: College Grove PROPERTY ADDRESS: 426 Park Lane PROPERTY STATUS: USE DISTRICT: PROPERTY OWNER: Single-Family structure Licensed rental property R-2, Medium Density, Single-Family Residential New Millennium Investment Properties, LLC (CRMC) APPLICATION RECEIVED/ACTION REQUIRED BY: DESCRIPTION - HISTORICAL OWNERSHIP - HISTORIC DISTRICT SIGNIFICANCE: Description: This house has Colonial Revival influences (towards a Four Square stlye) with a small porch/stoop at the front door. The building was built in 1917 according to City records. Many of the decorative features of the house have been removed over the years, including the exposed roof rafters, and some of the upper floor details on the front of the house.

8 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 2 November 6, 2014 Historical Ownership: Larry Kestenbaum's book, Significant Figures in the History of East Lansing, regarding historically significant past residents of that home, indicates one previous resident of note: George R. Price (1946), an Assistant Professor of English at Michigan State. Historic District Significance: There are 233 properties in the College Grove Historic District. According to City records, 19 (8%) of which were constructed between 1930 and 1939, while the majority, 142 (61%), were built between 1920 and The City of East Lansing Historic District Study Committee, Final Report of March 1988, states the following: OVERVIEW OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROPOSAL The Committee s proposal has a very strong neighborhood preservation emphasis and is designed to maintain the early 20 th Century streetscapes of East Lansing s older neighborhoods; increase private investment in the older housing stock; foster a greater awareness and appreciation of our City s architectural heritage and diversity; and to enhance the quality of life and livability of our older residential areas. HISTORIC DISTRICT DESCRIPTIONS COLLEGE GROVE (Excerpt) The College Grove Historic District included most of the College Grove Subdivisions west of Division Street, and some visually related structures on the north side of Burcham Drive. The centerpiece of the district is M.A.C. Avenue, formerly the route of the streetcar, which for years has been a preferred location for many fraternities and sororities. Grove Street has a high concentration of some of Bailey s oldest homes; and both Grove and Charles are attractive, intimate urban streetscapes with mature trees and picturesque early 20 th Century houses. EXISTING CONDITIONS/BACKGROUND - PROPOSAL Existing Conditions: The house shows signs of its age, but has been reasonably well maintained since converting to a rental property before City record keeping began on rental properties. The applicant has recently begun to perform some repairs on the structure, although no major work has been performed on the structure in many years. There is an outstanding code violation on the property for reconstructing the front porch without a permit. Additionally, Historic District Commission approval was not sought before the porch was reconstructed.

9 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 3 November 6, 2014 Proposal: The applicant has already reconstructed the porch on the structure. The front porch previously had wrought iron detailing, with decorative features on the corners and the sides. The applicant, without a permit, removed the wrought iron detailing and replaced it with treated, unpainted, lumber, in a modern design.

10 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 4 November 6, 2014 The applicant indicated that the porch needed to be replaced, but they did not seek permits. The previous employee of CRMC who did the work without a permit is no longer employed with the company. The new porch retains the concrete steps and cap, but is made of treated lumber, with standard spaced, square porch rails, spaced substantially closer than the wrought iron rails were. Additionally, the corner decorative iron work has been replaced with a square beam. REPORT Sec Definitions CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: The written approval by the Historic District Commission or Historic Preservation Officer of a permit application for work that is appropriate and that does not adversely affect a resource. DEMOLITION means the razing or destruction, whether entirely or in part, of a resource which includes, but is not limited to, demolition by neglect. NOTICE TO PROCEED means written permission, issued by the historic district commission, to permit work that is inappropriate and that adversely affects a resource, pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.

11 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 5 November 6, 2014 RESOURCE: One or more publicly or privately owned historic or non-historic buildings, structures, sites, objects, features or open spaces located within a Historic District, to include streetscape and street trees. b. BUILDING: A residential, commercial, industrial or institutional resource created to support or shelter any use or occupancy, including accessory buildings such as garages or sheds; WORK: Construction, addition, alteration, repair, excavation, demolition, or temporarily or permanently moving of a resource. Sec Powers and duties of Historic District Commission. The Commission established by this Chapter shall have the following powers and duties: 7. To review and approve or deny applications for Certificates of Appropriateness in accordance with preservation guidelines, and where appropriate, advise and refer applicants to appropriate persons, agencies and organizations for technical and financial assistance to meet the requirements of this Chapter. In reviewing plans, the Commission shall follow the U.S. Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, as set forth in 36 CFR part 67. Sec SCOPE a. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to work and ordinary maintenance on all resources within designated Historic Districts in the City of East Lansing. This Chapter is designed to effect proper restoration and rehabilitation of resources within designated Historic Districts in accord with the historic character and architectural design of the resource itself, the surrounding properties, the streetscape, and the district as a whole. b. The provisions of this Chapter are intended to acknowledge the eclectic nature of early 20th century architecture and are expressly intended to permit changes to buildings within Historic Districts which help them retain their historic character as established by this Chapter and are applicable to the following resources located within a Historic District: (1) The facade of structures and those sides of structures which are visible from any adjacent street, affect the streetscape, and to any resource which has a visual impact on the streetscape. This shall include such man made changes as fences, decks, and parking arrangements.

12 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 6 November 6, 2014 Sec Prohibitions and exemptions (a) (e) Whether or not a building permit is required under the Building Code, no person shall perform any work, as defined by this Code, erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, excavate, reconstruct, rehabilitate, restore, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish any resource, as defined in this Chapter, or cause or permit the same to be done unless the person first obtains a Certificate of Appropriateness or Notice to Proceed, as required by this Chapter. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall not be required for the following: (1) Additions and alterations to the rear and sides of structures, including porches, patios, decks and additional rooms, not visible from any adjoining street and which have minimal impact on the streetscape. A Certificate of Appropriateness is required if any work being undertaken is visible from an adjacent street. REVIEW PROCESS AND STAFF REVIEW Note: In order to assist in reviewing applications as required under this Code, Staff has included those portions of the Historic Preservation Code that it feels could be used in making a decision. These are intended to be a guide in assisting the Commission and are not intended to be all inclusive. These sections include: Section Review Process and Section Preservation Guidelines, which includes: (b) (1)1-10 The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation (Revised 1990), National Park Service Preservation Brief #14, and (b) 2-19 Preservation Guidelines Sec Review process (c) Standards for decisions. In reviewing applications for a Certificate of Appropriateness, the Commission shall base its decision only on the preservation guidelines stated in Section , and on any additional preservation guidelines adopted by the Historic District Commission and approved by the City Council and 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 to the surrounding area.

13 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 7 November 6, 2014 (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. (5) Recommendations from the Historic Preservation Officer, Building Official, the Design Assistance Team, and any affected neighborhood association. Please see Staff Review Findings Recommendation (d) Interior features. The Commission shall review and act upon only the exterior features of a resource and shall not review and act upon interior arrangements unless authorized by City Council or unless interior work will cause visible change to the exterior of the resource. Sec Preservation guidelines. Staff comments are noted in italics and within box unless specifically noted. (a) (b) The Commission shall establish preservation guidelines in accordance with the requirements of this Chapter. The preservation guidelines shall govern the Historic Preservation Officer and Commission's decisions with regard to Certificates of Appropriateness. The preservation guidelines shall include the following: (1) The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings as set forth in 36 CFR part 67. The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation (Revised 1990) 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. Conforms The use of the building would not be changed with the proposal. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Does Not Conform The porch is one of the only unique features on the front of the house and the removal of the detailing from the porch design and rails is inappropriate in a historic context. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding

14 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 8 November 6, 2014 conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. Not Applicable 4. Most properties change over time; and that provide that those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Not Applicable 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. Does Not Conform The wrought iron detailing on the porch was the only remaining unique detail on the structure that had not been removed or altered over time. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Does Not Conform The applicant has chosen to remove the feature and the new design does not match in material, design, color, or other visual qualities. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Not Applicable 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. Not Applicable 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. Not Applicable 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Not Applicable STAFF REVIEW FINDINGS - RECOMMENDATION REVIEW: Staff discovered this work after it had been completed. The Building Department issued a violation and the builder came into the City to pull a permit. At that time, they also

15 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 9 November 6, 2014 attempted to receive approval for the change from a Historic Preservation Ordinance perspective, claiming they did not realize the structure was protected. CRMC has done a great deal of work in the City of East Lansing, owns many properties, and is well aware of the historic districts. The wrought iron porch was essentially the only remaining historic detail on the property. The wood structure that was put in place is out of character and utilitarian, not fitting into the character of the house or the neighborhood generally. FINDINGS: Applicable Code areas referenced as follows: Section 20.63(c) Review Process The Secretary of the Interior s Guidelines for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1990) Finding: To be determined by the Historic District Commission Section Preservation Guidelines (2) Protected architectural features include, but are not limited to, a building's general shape; gables, dormers and other roof features; cornices, brackets and eaves; size, shape, arrangement, number and size of window panes and muntins; beveled, leaded and stained glass; door and window trim; ornamental moldings; distinctive siding, such as stone, stucco, brick or patterned shingling; distinctive roofing, such as false thatch, slate and Spanish tile. Finding: To be determined by the Historic District Commission RECOMMENDATION: It is Staff s opinion that the porch replacement is an inappropriate change in both design and materials. Had this been brought to Staff's attention prior to the work being completed, that opinion would not change. A character defining feature of the house has been removed and the Commission may wish to consider requiring its replacement, or something of a similar character. Alternatively, the Commission can issue a Notice to Proceed, that the work is not historically accurate, but is approved. Staff would not recommend this approach. Additionally, based on the information submitted and the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation, Staff would not recommend approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness. ACTION NEEDED: Motion to approve or deny the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted based on above information and Findings, or as determined by the Commission.

16 Staff Report 426 Park Lane Page 10 November 6, 2014 Sec Resubmission and appeals (b) (c) (d) (e) An applicant aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may make modifications to the application and shall have the right to resubmit the application within 60 days of the Commission decision without the payment of any additional fee. An applicant aggrieved by a decision of the Commission concerning a permit application may file an appeal with the state historic preservation review board of the Michigan historical Commission of the Department of State, in accordance with the provisions of PA 169 as amended. The appeal shall be filed within 60 days after the decision to deny is furnished to the applicant. If an application is for work that will adversely affect the exterior of a resource the Commission considers valuable to the City, and the Commission determines that the alteration or loss of that resource will adversely affect the public purpose of the City, the Commission shall attempt to establish with the owner of the resource an economically feasible plan for preservation of the resource. Any citizen or duly organized local historic preservation organization, as well as resource owners, jointly or severally aggrieved by a decision of the Historic District Commission may appeal the decision to the Circuit Court, except that a permit applicant aggrieved by a decision rendered by the Commission may not appeal to the court without first exhausting the right to appeal to the State Historic Preservation Review Board. Attachments: Certificate of Appropriateness Application & attachments

17

18

19 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: November 7, 2014 HISTORIC DISTRICT: Chesterfield Hills PROPERTY ADDRESS: 321 Kensington Road PROPERTY STATUS: USE DISTRICT: PROPERTY OWNER: Single-Family Home R-2, Medium Density, Single-Family Residential Mike and Robin Vallender APPLICATION RECEIVED/ACTION REQUIRED BY: DESCRIPTION - HISTORICAL OWNERSHIP - HISTORIC DISTRICT SIGNIFICANCE: Description: This house is a Colonial Revival home that was built in The exterior of the house is entirely brick in nature, with some original windows remaining in the house. Some of the windows, specifically on the lower level, have been replaced with modern, aluminum clad wood windows, which matched the original windows. Overall, the house has not been substantially altered from the original design Assessor s Photograph

20 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 2 November 7, 2014 Historical Ownership: Larry Kestenbaum's book, Significant Figures in the History of East Lansing, regarding historically significant past residents of that home, indicates one previous resident of note: Eugene M. Cooley ( ), a clerk and treasurer at Michigan Supply Company. Historic District Significance: There are 220 properties in the Chesterfield Hills Historic District. 176 of these (80%) were constructed between 1900 and 1929 according to city records. At least 195 (89%) are 50 years or older in age. The City of East Lansing Historic District Study Committee, Final Report of March 1988, states the following: OVERVIEW OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROPOSAL The Committee s proposal has a very strong neighborhood preservation emphasis and is designed to maintain the early 20 th Century streetscapes of East Lansing s older neighborhoods; increase private investment in the older housing stock; foster a greater awareness and appreciation of our City s architectural heritage and diversity; and to enhance the quality of life and livability of our older residential areas. HISTORIC DISTRICT DESCRIPTIONS CHESTERFIELD HILLS This district is composed of primarily of the Chesterfield Hills I and II Subdivisions, platted in 1916 and 1923, respectively by Ehinger Realty. The winding streets and irregular lots are a perfect adaptation to the rolling terrain; the streetscape is dominated by hundreds of mature maples. Most of the houses were built in the 1920 s and 1930 s, and contain a splendid collection of architectural styles popular during this period. Dutch Colonial, Bungalow, Tudor and Prairie styles are found here, along with a few post WWII Cape Cod and ranch houses. Exterior colors and materials are equally diverse; brick, stucco, clapboard, aluminum and shingles. Asphalt, wood and tile roofs are all present. Despite, or perhaps because of the architecturally diversity, Chesterfield Hills has a unified character. Different styles, materials, and building volumes sit next to each other comfortably and without discord, producing a unified character, much as a mosaic is formed by disparate elements.

21 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 3 November 7, 2014 EXISTING CONDITIONS/BACKGROUND - PROPOSAL The house has been extremely well maintained, as many brick houses are. Virtually nothing on the house of a historical nature has been removed, with the exception of some windows on non-street facing sides of the house. In 2001, administrative approval was granted for a side porch along the south side of the house and a dormer along the rear roofline of the house which had minimal impact on Oak Ridge Avenue. Front of House Side of House (facing Oak Ridge)

22 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 4 November 7, 2014 Proposal: The applicant intends to replace the windows on the north and northwest sides of the home, facing Oak Ridge Avenue, to match windows that have already been replaced in the home. The windows proposed to be replaced are in-swing casement windows and the proposed windows would be standard double hung windows. Specifications on the windows is attached to this report. The intention of the replacement windows would be to match the size and look of the existing windows. Pictures of Existing Windows

23 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 5 November 7, 2014 REPORT Sec Definitions CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: The written approval by the Historic District Commission or Historic Preservation Officer of a permit application for work that is appropriate and that does not adversely affect a resource. DEMOLITION means the razing or destruction, whether entirely or in part, of a resource which includes, but is not limited to, demolition by neglect. NOTICE TO PROCEED means written permission, issued by the historic district commission, to permit work that is inappropriate and that adversely affects a resource, pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. RESOURCE: One or more publicly or privately owned historic or non-historic buildings, structures, sites, objects, features or open spaces located within a Historic District, to include streetscape and street trees. b. BUILDING: A residential, commercial, industrial or institutional resource created to support or shelter any use or occupancy, including accessory buildings such as garages or sheds; WORK: Construction, addition, alteration, repair, excavation, demolition, or temporarily or permanently moving of a resource. Sec Powers and duties of Historic District Commission. The Commission established by this Chapter shall have the following powers and duties: 7. To review and approve or deny applications for Certificates of Appropriateness in accordance with preservation guidelines, and where appropriate, advise and refer applicants to appropriate persons, agencies and organizations for technical and financial assistance to meet the requirements of this Chapter. In reviewing plans, the Commission shall follow the U.S. Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, as set forth in 36 CFR part 67. Sec SCOPE a. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to work and ordinary maintenance on all resources within designated Historic Districts in the City of East Lansing. This Chapter is designed to effect proper restoration and rehabilitation of resources within designated Historic Districts in accord with the historic character and architectural design of the resource itself, the surrounding properties, the streetscape, and the district as a whole.

24 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 6 November 7, 2014 b. The provisions of this Chapter are intended to acknowledge the eclectic nature of early 20th century architecture and are expressly intended to permit changes to buildings within Historic Districts which help them retain their historic character as established by this Chapter and are applicable to the following resources located within a Historic District: (1) The facade of structures and those sides of structures which are visible from any adjacent street, affect the streetscape, and to any resource which has a visual impact on the streetscape. This shall include such man made changes as fences, decks, and parking arrangements. Sec Prohibitions and exemptions (a) (e) Whether or not a building permit is required under the Building Code, no person shall perform any work, as defined by this Code, erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, excavate, reconstruct, rehabilitate, restore, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish any resource, as defined in this Chapter, or cause or permit the same to be done unless the person first obtains a Certificate of Appropriateness or Notice to Proceed, as required by this Chapter. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall not be required for the following: (1) Additions and alterations to the rear and sides of structures, including porches, patios, decks and additional rooms, not visible from any adjoining street and which have minimal impact on the streetscape. A Certificate of Appropriateness is required if any work being undertaken is visible from an adjacent street. REVIEW PROCESS AND STAFF REVIEW Note: In order to assist in reviewing applications as required under this Code, Staff has included those portions of the Historic Preservation Code that it feels could be used in making a decision. These are intended to be a guide in assisting the Commission and are not intended to be all inclusive. These sections include: Section Review Process and Section Preservation Guidelines, which includes: (b) (1)1-10 The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation (Revised 1990), National Park Service Preservation Brief #14, and (b) 2-19 Preservation Guidelines Sec Review process

25 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 7 November 7, 2014 (c) Standards for decisions. In reviewing applications for a Certificate of Appropriateness, the Commission shall base its decision only on the preservation guidelines stated in Section , and on any additional preservation guidelines adopted by the Historic District Commission and approved by the City Council and 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 to 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. (5) Recommendations from the Historic Preservation Officer, Building Official, the Design Assistance Team, and any affected neighborhood association. Please see Staff Review Findings Recommendation (d) Interior features. The Commission shall review and act upon only the exterior features of a resource and shall not review and act upon interior arrangements unless authorized by City Council or unless interior work will cause visible change to the exterior of the resource. Sec Preservation guidelines. Staff comments are noted in italics and within box unless specifically noted. (a) (b) The Commission shall establish preservation guidelines in accordance with the requirements of this Chapter. The preservation guidelines shall govern the Historic Preservation Officer and Commission's decisions with regard to Certificates of Appropriateness. The preservation guidelines shall include the following: (1) The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings as set forth in 36 CFR part 67. The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation (Revised 1990) 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. Conforms The use will continue to be a single family home.

26 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 8 November 7, The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Conforms? The look of the windows will change, as they are proposing to change from three window units to two windows. The overall size of the windows would not change. Additionally, the function of the windows will change to a more modern double-hung configuration, to match the remainder of the house. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. Conforms The changes being proposed would not create a false sense of history or architectural significance. The house will remain a textbook example of a brick Colonial Revival home. 4. Most properties change over time; and that provide that those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Not Applicable 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. Conforms? The windows are a major feature of the home, but visually they will not change substantially. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Conforms? The windows are substantially deteriorated, to the point of replacement. The proposed windows will closely match the existing in design and visual quality, with the exception of the function, switching from a casement to a double hung. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Not Applicable 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. Not Applicable 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be

27 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 9 November 7, 2014 differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. Not Applicable 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Not Applicable STAFF REVIEW FINDINGS - RECOMMENDATION REVIEW: The house is not being substantially altered with the request, but the windows are in need of replacement. Aluminum clad, wood windows are the recommended type of window replacement, in situations where the cost of true wood windows is out of reach. They retain the look of the window from the exterior, while bringing a modern, energy efficient window to the home. The change in the window type (from casement to double hung) is a change that wouldn't necessarily be historically inaccurate, as Staff was somewhat surprised to see casement windows on a Colonial Revival home. It is entirely possible that these casement windows were not original to the house, but were added on at a later time, although Staff cannot find evidence of this. FINDINGS: Applicable Code areas referenced as follows: Section 20.63(c) Review Process The Secretary of the Interior s Guidelines for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1990) Finding to be determined by Historic District Commission Section Preservation Guidelines Finding to be determined by Historic District Commission RECOMMENDATION: The house is a contributing structure to the district. Changing the windows so they match throughout the site is an appropriate change and one that Staff can recommend. ACTION NEEDED: Motion to approve or deny the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted based on above information and Findings, or as determined by the Commission.

28 Staff Report 321 Kensington Road Page 10 November 7, 2014 Sec Resubmission and appeals (b) (c) (d) (e) An applicant aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may make modifications to the application and shall have the right to resubmit the application within 60 days of the Commission decision without the payment of any additional fee. An applicant aggrieved by a decision of the Commission concerning a permit application may file an appeal with the state historic preservation review board of the Michigan historical Commission of the Department of State, in accordance with the provisions of PA 169 as amended. The appeal shall be filed within 60 days after the decision to deny is furnished to the applicant. If an application is for work that will adversely affect the exterior of a resource the Commission considers valuable to the City, and the Commission determines that the alteration or loss of that resource will adversely affect the public purpose of the City, the Commission shall attempt to establish with the owner of the resource an economically feasible plan for preservation of the resource. Any citizen or duly organized local historic preservation organization, as well as resource owners, jointly or severally aggrieved by a decision of the Historic District Commission may appeal the decision to the Circuit Court, except that a permit applicant aggrieved by a decision rendered by the Commission may not appeal to the court without first exhausting the right to appeal to the State Historic Preservation Review Board. Attachments: Certificate of Appropriateness Application & attachments

29

30

31

32

33

34 From: To: Subject: "Otis, Tom" 'Tim Schmitt' RE: 321 KENSINGTON WINDOW REPLACMENT PROJECT I am proposing to use our wood with aluminum clad exterior double hung windows. The windows will have our simulated divided light grill pattern 3x2 in both upper and lower sash,(6 over6). Each of the current 3 wide windows will be removed and new 2 wide units will be installed with a spread between them approximately 4" to have the break between like the other windows have in the home which carries true to the original look. >>>> "Otis, Tom" <totis@pellabyhorne.com>>>> Tim, Attached is some info on the windows for the 321 Kensington. The intent is use 2 wide double hung windows in the openings that are shown in the picture that I had sent previously as well included. I would also like to point out that the existing windows are currently 3 wide inswing casements that have double hung storm windows that distort the look of the original look to when the house was built. Please let me know if there is anything else you would like of need. Thank you Tom >>>> "Otis, Tom" <totis@pellabyhorne.com>>>> > Good Morning Tim, > It's the second floor on the back side of the house; the pictures I attached are ones facing north; from the side street and west side. They have a detached garage that the drive is off the side street that the west windows look out to. The room has 3 walls 2 that are visible from the road and we would make all 3 the same. > > Thank you > Tom > >>>> "Otis, Tom" <totis@pellabyhorne.com>>>> > Tim, > We met last year and began on replacing the windows for Robin Goodwin Vallender. I spoke with you earlier this year regarding the final phase which is the back side of the house. > Currently the existing windows are small inswing casements that have double hung style storms (these are not original probably added in the 60's are they are aluminum.) The windows are becoming deteriorated and in poor shape. Replacing the windows as a pocket install as we did for the rest of the windows to keep the original look is not an option due to the very small size and if it could be done would pose a great danger in the event if there was a fire. I am attaching pictures that I took of the house and modified to what I believe would maintain the

35 look of the house for the period of the house matching what we have done already but improve the safty if there ever was a fire. Please review pictures and let me know what I need to do to get the ball rolling as Robin has some concerns of water getting in due to wood rot as well. > > Feel free to call me as well > > Thank you > Tom Otis > Pella Windows and Door > >

36 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: November 7, 2014 HISTORIC DISTRICT: Chesterfield Hills PROPERTY ADDRESS: 215 Kensington Road PROPERTY STATUS: USE DISTRICT: PROPERTY OWNER: Single-Family Home R-2, Medium Density, Single-Family Residential Cynthia and Judith Davis APPLICATION RECEIVED/ACTION REQUIRED BY: DESCRIPTION - HISTORICAL OWNERSHIP - HISTORIC DISTRICT SIGNIFICANCE: Description: This house is a Colonial Revival home that was built in The house had a major fire in 2013 and is currently under repair from that. The exterior of the house remains the same as it was before the fire (the house was already vinyl sided) and the majority of the historic features, windows specifically, were destroyed in the fire Assessor s Photograph

37 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 2 November 7, 2014 Historical Ownership: Larry Kestenbaum's book, Significant Figures in the History of East Lansing, regarding historically significant past residents of that home, indicates no previous residents of note having lived in the house. Historic District Significance: There are 220 properties in the Chesterfield Hills Historic District. 176 of these (80%) were constructed between 1900 and 1929 according to city records. At least 195 (89%) are 50 years or older in age. The City of East Lansing Historic District Study Committee, Final Report of March 1988, states the following: OVERVIEW OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROPOSAL The Committee s proposal has a very strong neighborhood preservation emphasis and is designed to maintain the early 20 th Century streetscapes of East Lansing s older neighborhoods; increase private investment in the older housing stock; foster a greater awareness and appreciation of our City s architectural heritage and diversity; and to enhance the quality of life and livability of our older residential areas. HISTORIC DISTRICT DESCRIPTIONS CHESTERFIELD HILLS This district is composed of primarily of the Chesterfield Hills I and II Subdivisions, platted in 1916 and 1923, respectively by Ehinger Realty. The winding streets and irregular lots are a perfect adaptation to the rolling terrain; the streetscape is dominated by hundreds of mature maples. Most of the houses were built in the 1920 s and 1930 s, and contain a splendid collection of architectural styles popular during this period. Dutch Colonial, Bungalow, Tudor and Prairie styles are found here, along with a few post WWII Cape Cod and ranch houses. Exterior colors and materials are equally diverse; brick, stucco, clapboard, aluminum and shingles. Asphalt, wood and tile roofs are all present. Despite, or perhaps because of the architecturally diversity, Chesterfield Hills has a unified character. Different styles, materials, and building volumes sit next to each other comfortably and without discord, producing a unified character, much as a mosaic is formed by disparate elements.

38 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 3 November 7, 2014 EXISTING CONDITIONS/BACKGROUND - PROPOSAL The house is in the middle of a massive remodel from fire damage. This work was approved administratively in April of 2014 (a copy of the Certificate of Appropriateness is attached). The house was a near complete loss and the work has been ongoing for the entire summer, bringing it up current building code standards, as well as making interior changes for the owners of the house. There were no exterior modifications approved for the house, with the exception of the removal of a large staircase in the rear yard, which no longer met code for egress from an upstairs rental unit that was not in the City's system. Proposal: The applicant has approval for the replacement of the windows on the house, as-is, with aluminum clad wood windows. Vinyl window replacements were expressly prohibited by the terms of approval from the original Certificate of Appropriateness. The owner is now asking to modify the casement windows on the property, to be double-hung windows, matching all the other windows on the house. The casements are located on the south addition to the house, and on the north wall of the house. In the picture above of the house currently, there are no windows shown. Given the timing of the project, the applicant framed in the windows, but sided over them, given the lead time on ordering the windows after the Commission's approval. Ultimately, the owner will be living in the house, prior to the windows having been installed. The windows will be replaced, regardless of the Commission's ultimate decision. If the Commission turns down the modification request, the applicant intends on installing casement windows, as per the original approval.

39 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 4 November 7, 2014 Pictures of Old Windows REPORT Sec Definitions CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: The written approval by the Historic District Commission or Historic Preservation Officer of a permit application for work that is appropriate and that does not adversely affect a resource. DEMOLITION means the razing or destruction, whether entirely or in part, of a resource which includes, but is not limited to, demolition by neglect. NOTICE TO PROCEED means written permission, issued by the historic district commission, to permit work that is inappropriate and that adversely affects a resource, pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. RESOURCE: One or more publicly or privately owned historic or non-historic buildings, structures, sites, objects, features or open spaces located within a Historic District, to include streetscape and street trees. b. BUILDING: A residential, commercial, industrial or institutional resource created to support or shelter any use or occupancy, including accessory buildings such as garages or sheds; WORK: Construction, addition, alteration, repair, excavation, demolition, or temporarily or permanently moving of a resource.

40 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 5 November 7, 2014 Sec Powers and duties of Historic District Commission. The Commission established by this Chapter shall have the following powers and duties: 7. To review and approve or deny applications for Certificates of Appropriateness in accordance with preservation guidelines, and where appropriate, advise and refer applicants to appropriate persons, agencies and organizations for technical and financial assistance to meet the requirements of this Chapter. In reviewing plans, the Commission shall follow the U.S. Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, as set forth in 36 CFR part 67. Sec SCOPE a. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to work and ordinary maintenance on all resources within designated Historic Districts in the City of East Lansing. This Chapter is designed to effect proper restoration and rehabilitation of resources within designated Historic Districts in accord with the historic character and architectural design of the resource itself, the surrounding properties, the streetscape, and the district as a whole. b. The provisions of this Chapter are intended to acknowledge the eclectic nature of early 20th century architecture and are expressly intended to permit changes to buildings within Historic Districts which help them retain their historic character as established by this Chapter and are applicable to the following resources located within a Historic District: (1) The facade of structures and those sides of structures which are visible from any adjacent street, affect the streetscape, and to any resource which has a visual impact on the streetscape. This shall include such man made changes as fences, decks, and parking arrangements. Sec Prohibitions and exemptions (a) (e) Whether or not a building permit is required under the Building Code, no person shall perform any work, as defined by this Code, erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, excavate, reconstruct, rehabilitate, restore, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish any resource, as defined in this Chapter, or cause or permit the same to be done unless the person first obtains a Certificate of Appropriateness or Notice to Proceed, as required by this Chapter. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall not be required for the following:

41 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 6 November 7, 2014 (1) Additions and alterations to the rear and sides of structures, including porches, patios, decks and additional rooms, not visible from any adjoining street and which have minimal impact on the streetscape. A Certificate of Appropriateness is required if any work being undertaken is visible from an adjacent street. REVIEW PROCESS AND STAFF REVIEW Note: In order to assist in reviewing applications as required under this Code, Staff has included those portions of the Historic Preservation Code that it feels could be used in making a decision. These are intended to be a guide in assisting the Commission and are not intended to be all inclusive. These sections include: Section Review Process and Section Preservation Guidelines, which includes: (b) (1)1-10 The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation (Revised 1990), National Park Service Preservation Brief #14, and (b) 2-19 Preservation Guidelines Sec Review process (c) Standards for decisions. In reviewing applications for a Certificate of Appropriateness, the Commission shall base its decision only on the preservation guidelines stated in Section , and on any additional preservation guidelines adopted by the Historic District Commission and approved by the City Council and 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 to 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. (5) Recommendations from the Historic Preservation Officer, Building Official, the Design Assistance Team, and any affected neighborhood association. Please see Staff Review Findings Recommendation

42 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 7 November 7, 2014 (d) Interior features. The Commission shall review and act upon only the exterior features of a resource and shall not review and act upon interior arrangements unless authorized by City Council or unless interior work will cause visible change to the exterior of the resource. Sec Preservation guidelines. Staff comments are noted in italics and within box unless specifically noted. (a) (b) The Commission shall establish preservation guidelines in accordance with the requirements of this Chapter. The preservation guidelines shall govern the Historic Preservation Officer and Commission's decisions with regard to Certificates of Appropriateness. The preservation guidelines shall include the following: (1) The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings as set forth in 36 CFR part 67. The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation (Revised 1990) 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. Conforms The use will continue to be a single family home. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Unclear The applicant is proposing to modify a portion of the windows on the structure to match the other windows on the structure. The windows being modified are on an addition the structure and on the north side, which is not immediately visible from the street side. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. Unclear The changes being proposed may create a false sense of history by blending the addition area into the overall house more fully. 4. Most properties change over time; and that provide that those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Not Applicable 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. Conforms There are no distinctive features remaining on the house after the fire damage.

43 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 8 November 7, Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Unclear The windows had to be replaced after the fire. The new windows will be the best option for the house, however, the change in design makes the windows all match, which was not the case previously. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Not Applicable 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. Not Applicable 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. Not Applicable 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Not Applicable STAFF REVIEW FINDINGS - RECOMMENDATION REVIEW: Staff has previously approved substantial work the house to renovate after the 2013 fire. This change was discussed early in the process and Staff indicated that the change of window would require the Commission's approval and it would not be in keeping with the historical character of the house. After work began, the homeowner again made the request and a formal application was made to request modification. The main area in question, on the south side of the house, was always designed to have different windows from the main house, as it was physically different (not two stories) and jutted out to the side of the house, set back from the main line of the front of the house. FINDINGS: Applicable Code areas referenced as follows: Section 20.63(c) Review Process

44 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 9 November 7, 2014 The Secretary of the Interior s Guidelines for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1990) Finding to be determined by Historic District Commission Section Preservation Guidelines Finding to be determined by Historic District Commission RECOMMENDATION: The house is a contributing structure to the district. Changing the windows so they match throughout the house would be inconsistent with the historical nature of the structure and space and therefore Staff cannot recommend approval. ACTION NEEDED: Motion to approve or deny the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted based on above information and Findings, or as determined by the Commission.

45 Staff Report 215 Kensington Road Page 10 November 7, 2014 Sec Resubmission and appeals (b) (c) (d) (e) An applicant aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may make modifications to the application and shall have the right to resubmit the application within 60 days of the Commission decision without the payment of any additional fee. An applicant aggrieved by a decision of the Commission concerning a permit application may file an appeal with the state historic preservation review board of the Michigan historical Commission of the Department of State, in accordance with the provisions of PA 169 as amended. The appeal shall be filed within 60 days after the decision to deny is furnished to the applicant. If an application is for work that will adversely affect the exterior of a resource the Commission considers valuable to the City, and the Commission determines that the alteration or loss of that resource will adversely affect the public purpose of the City, the Commission shall attempt to establish with the owner of the resource an economically feasible plan for preservation of the resource. Any citizen or duly organized local historic preservation organization, as well as resource owners, jointly or severally aggrieved by a decision of the Historic District Commission may appeal the decision to the Circuit Court, except that a permit applicant aggrieved by a decision rendered by the Commission may not appeal to the court without first exhausting the right to appeal to the State Historic Preservation Review Board. Attachments: Certificate of Appropriateness Application & attachments

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68