Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 Historic District Commission MinutesApproved: 02/03/00 < < 1 1' [ } To Clerk: 02/24/00 To SHPO: 02/ 24/00 LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES C FL Thursday, January 6, 2000, 5:30 p.m. �� �l`;� Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development � Conference Room 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing, Michigan 48933-1236 I. CALL TO ORDER G. Bachelder, Vice Chair, called the meeting to order at 5:27 p.m. A. Roll Call: Present - Glen Bachelder, Todd Branstner, Mike Kolhoff, Fred McLaughlin and Antonia Miemik. B. Excused Absences: D. Anderson, J. Grau and Leslie Sulskis. C. Introductions: Deborah Dietrich -Smith of 119 N. Foster Street, Bill Stelmach of 819 Eureka Street and Preservation Planner, Susan Cantlon. D. Approval of Agenda: Two items were added to the agenda: D. New Business 1. a. Agency Referral, Z-10- 99; E. Staff Report 1. a. Old Town Design Review - Historic Districts Presentation. Branstner made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to approve the agenda as amended. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5 - 0). II. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None. III. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Stelmach was investigating the possibility of a single resource historic district for his property at 819 Eureka Street (in the Green Oaks) neighborhood. His house was constructed ca. 1910 and is one of three built apparently by the same builder. V. BUSINESS SECTION A. Approval of Minutes: 1. a. Minutes, December 2, 1999 Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to approve the HDC minutes of December 2, 1999 as amended. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5 - 0). B. Old Business: 1. a. 230 S. Butler Blvd., Request for Establishment of Historic District. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. January 6. 2000 Paae 2 Orby Gray submitted a letter requesting the establishment of a single resource historic district for his property at 230 S. Butler (a.k.a. 900 W. Washtenaw). A brief discussion ensued relative to the Seven Block Plan and the City's intentions. Cantlon reported that Emil Winnicker, Development Manager, had received a copy of Mr. Gray's letter and reported that the City had no intentions regarding future acquisition of this property or the additional three properties, directly north of 230 S. Butler, owned by Mr. Gray. No recommendations were made for possibly Study Committee members. Branstner made a motion, seconded by Miernik to move the request forward to the City Council with a recommendation to appoint a Study Committee. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5 - 0). 2. a. Annual Report i. Commission Accomplishments Cantlon has completed a draft report of Commission activities and accomplishments which will be forwarded to the Executive Committee. This draft will be integrated material being developed by Chair, Grau. 3. a. HDC Calendar of Meetings, January - December 2000 Cantlon reported that action taken at the December 2, 1999 meeting regarding a change in Commission meeting dates would required a change in the by-laws . She also noted that Planning Manager, Eleanor Love requested that commission meetings not conflict with Planning Board meetings which are held on Tuesday. This would allow staff to attend either meeting as necessary. Ms. Miemik made the original request to change the commission meeting dates to avoid a conflict with her appointment as President of the Genesee Neighborhood Association. She would have to leave commission meetings by 7:15 p.m., to attend the association meeting. A discussion ensued regarding changing the commission meetings to the second Thursday of the month, same time. Cantlon will poll absent commissioners, before the next meeting, to determine any conflicts before a by-law change is considered. 4. a. Agency Referral Update - None i. 911 and 1003 W. Washtenaw, 106 Review Case Study Cantlon reported the Development Office had received the commission's written comments and was trying to obtain a response from the Historical Society of Greater Lansing before forwarding their report to the SHPO. No further action required. 5. a. Demolition Salvage Materials A. Miemik recommended that the commission consider approaching property owners HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION MINUTES. January 6. 2000 Page 3 who have had demolition applications approved for salvage of architectural materials. The commission would arrange with salvage companies and property owners to salvage materials in exchange for a donation to the commission. A discussion ensued regarding the following issues: ► Commission by ordinance can receive donations ► Ethics questions of Commission benefitting financially from a demolition of a building which may have been identified as "historically significant" by the HDC and/or SHPO, then approved for demolition ► Indemnification letter to protect City and Commission ► Legal considerations - request for City Attorneys review of any proposal and appropriate language ► If the proposal is approved by appropriate City Departments, a request to establish a specific donation account for this purpose would be submitted by the HDC to the Planning Manager Deferred for action until February meeting. Cantlon will discuss project with Planning Manager, Eleanor Love. Cantlon will submit request for review to City Attorney as recommended by Ms Love. C. Committee Reports: 1. Design Review Committee - Branstner, Bachelder a. 1716 Osband, HPP Rehab Project A written report was distributed to commissioners. Branstner summarized the request for HAP funds and indicated the Design Review Committee recommended approval of the request for historic funds. Miernik made a motion, seconded by McLaughlin to accept the Design Review Committee's recommendation for approval of expenditures of HAP funds for the building located at 1716 Osband. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5 - 0). b. 836 Seymour, Rehab Request - Withdrawn Cantlon reported that the Development Office withdrew the request for HAP funds because the owner did not want to wait for HPP fund approval. c. 2408, 2408 Y2 and 2500 E 2500 E. Mt. Hope, Review for Historic Significance - Proposed Demolition for Open Park Space. A discussion ensued regarding the historical significance of Scott Turner, his ca. 1940's hunting lodge and a remaining tenant house ca. 1870's. Cantlon forwarded a preliminary report to the Development Office and Parks and Recreation Department with a recommendation for adaptive reuse if feasible. Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to forward a letter to the Development Office and Parks and Recreation Department recommending adaptive reuse of the historically significant buildings and structures if feasible. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously ( 5 - 0). HISTORIC DISTRICT COMN41SSION AGENDA. January 6. 2000 Page 4 d. Y.W.C.A. Review for Historic Significance A discussion ensued concerning the historical significance of the building based on two criterion: 1. Association with activities and events of the Y.W.C.A.; and 2. Significant architectural design (Neo-Tudor style). The committee also considered the new owner's (Accident Fund) intended land use of the property (zoned G-1 Business District) for a parking ramp, the City/State downtown Parking Study (currently in the R. F. Q./P process); the new Lansing Downtown Comprehensive Plan; River Island Plan as amended and the potential for adaptive reuse for mixed use/loft conversion (to meet downtown residential needs - for critical mass). A media release outlining the historical significance of the building and possibilities for adaptive reuse was discussed also. Branstner made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to refer the preliminary report and SHPO's letter regarding the historical significance of the building to the Executive Committee with a recommendation that a letter be forwarded to City Officials encouraging adaptive reuse of the building. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5 - 0). 2. Education Committee -No meeting scheduled. a. Historic Preservation Exhibit Report Cantlon reported that L. Sulskis will set up an Education Committee for the week of January 17, 2000. She indicated she has some display materials to donate to the Historic Preservation Week Exhibit for 2000 also. 3. Executive Committee: Grau, Bachelder a. HDC Budget Request for FY 2000-2001 i. Program Budget ii. C. L. G. Grant Request for FY 2000-2001 Cantlon reported that it is her understanding that Chair, J. Grau and Planning Manager, E. Love have not met to finalize the budget request for FY 2000-2001. b. Aaencv Referrals i. Proposed "Krentel Block" Historic District Cantlon distributed a copy of the Public Hearing notice for Wednesday, January 26, 2000, at 7:00 p.m., in the department's new conference room. Members of the commission were encouraged to attend the public hearing. A brief discussion ensued regarding the significance of the property. HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION AGENDA January 6. 2000 Page 5 Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to authorize a special meeting of the HDC immediately after the Public Hearing if a quorum is present to take action and if a quorum is not present, authorization for the Executive Committee to forward a recommendation to the Study Committee. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5 - 0). D. New Business: a. Agency Referral L Z-15-99 Rezoning request by Gordon Long and Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership - Proposed demolition of 13 properties for development. Cantlon distributed a late item case to the commission as an agency referral, Z-15- 99 which involves the potential demolition of 13 residential buildings to accommodate the expansion of the Holiday Inn on S. Cedar Street. Miernik made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to refer to the Design Review Committee for a recommendation to the Executive Committee for the referral response. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously ( 5 - 0). E. Staff Report a. Old Town Design Review: Historic Districts Presentation Cantlon reported that Project Manager, Amy Collett of the Old Town Main Street Program requested that Cantlon and the Historic District Commission present the "pros" and "cons" of Historic Districts at a February meeting to be determined. Cantlon will notify the Commissions as to the meeting date and specifically request the active involvement of the Commission Chair and Education Committee. F. Pending Items - No report Review Process for Lansing Demolition Applications - Anderson a. Dangerous Buildings/Receivership Ordinance, Kalamazoo b. Lansing, City Attorney Opinion #98-03 c. Lansing Demolition Permit Application Process 2. a. Letters of Recognition for Preservation Work - Suggestions? Cantlon reported that a letter has been sent to the owner of the Schepp's service station at the comer of Foster and E. Saginaw Street. No additional properties were suggested for recognition at this item. G. Commission Member Comments: HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION AGENDA. January 6, 2000 Paae 6 a. Frances Willard Fountain Update - Miernik Miernik reported that she discussed with Kevin McKenny of the Downtown Blue Ribbon Committee: the history of the Frances Willard Fountain; its original dedication location at the comer of Michigan and Washington Avenues; and its potential relationship to the revitalization of the downtown mall. It was recommended that the scale of the fountain would be better served in its current location at the NE corner of Turner Street and E. Grand River in Old Town. She hopes the goal will be to restore fountain and rededicate it in 2002, one hundred years after its original dedication. VI. COMMUNICATIONS: None Vill. ADJOURNMENT Miernik made a motion, seconded by Branstner to adjourn the meeting. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5 - 0). The meeting adjourned at 7:02 p.m. Next Design Review Committee meeting: Thursday. January 13, 2000, 5:30 p.m. The committee will review the properties on E. Willoughby first, then meet at 5:30 on Townsend in front of the Y.W.C.A. and finally return to the Planning Office Library to draft the committee report and recommendations. Next Education Committee meeting: To be scheduled for the week of January 17, 2000 Next Executive Committee meeting: To be scheduled following Design Review Committee recommendations on Y.W.C.A. and possibly another meeting to be scheduled following the Krentel Block Public Hearing if no HDC quorum (see item 3. b. under Old Business). HDC Special Meeting: Wednesdav, January 26, 2000 at 8:00 p.m., (or immediately following the Krentel Block Historic District Public Hearing) in the Planning and Neighborhood Department's new conference room. Approved: 03/02/00 To Clerk: 03/07/00 To SHPO: 03/07/00 LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, February 3, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development Code Compliance Conference Room 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing, Michigan 48933-1236 CALL TO ORDER G. Bachelder, Vice Chair called the meeting to order at 5:53 p.m. A. Roll Call: Present, D. Anderson, G. Bachelder, T. Branstner, F. McLaughlin, and A. Miemik. B. Excused Absences: J. Gray, M. Kolhoff and L. Sulskis. C. Introductions: Council member Harold Leeman of the Ward 1, Dave L. Zimmerman President, River Point Neighborhood Association, Lloyd Teets of 116 E. Elm Street, Dorothy and Howard Jones of 426 W. Barnes, Diana Stoler of 123 E. Elm Street, Adena Leigh and Susan Cantlon, Planning Office staff. D. Approval of Agenda: Under New Business, item 2. add Request to Establish a River Point Historic District. Anderson moved, seconded by Branstner a motion to approve the agenda as amended. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). II. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None. III. PUBLIC COMMENT Dave L. Zimmerman submitted a copy of a letter and package addressed to the Lansing City Council , requesting the establishment of a local Historic District for the River Point Neighborhood area bounded on the north and west by the Grand River, on the east by the Red Cedar and on the south by the Peninsular Rail Road tracks. Mr. Zimmerman gave a brief historical context for the area. Members of the River Point Neighborhood present, along with Mr. and Mrs. Jones expressed concern for the preservation of the Grand Trunk Depot located at 1203 S. Washington Avenue, built ca. 1905. A fenced 660 space surface parking lot now surrounds the building. Parking is leased to Oldsmobile during the construction of new plant facilities. More Zimmerman noted that the proposed survey boundary area does include Mr. Rycus' Krentel property which may benefit still from this new historic district request. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. February 3. 2000 Paae 2 Howard Jones, a member of the Moore's Park Neighborhood Association, an abutting neighborhood, indicated he was disappointed with the change which has taken place around the depot (asphalt lot enclosed by a fence with barbed wire on top - which he compared to a holding pen for prisoners of war). He voiced his concern for any potential plans to demolish the depot. He recommended moving forward 'with all deliberate speed for a study for the proposed River Point Historic District'. He hoped the HDC would look favorably on the River Point Neighborhood Association's request. He also declared his concern for the loss of historic resources in the city from lack of action. Council member Leeman, 435 N. Francis Street, supported the River Point Neighborhood Association's request to establish a historic district and also thanked the members for volunteering on the Commission. He further requested that staff send HDC agendas, minutes and preservation information to him so that he can be better informed on commission issues. Diana Stoler described efforts to improve the neighborhood by attracting new families to the area and recent increased housing rehabilitation. These endeavors focus on "creating an old town look again" and "a comfy community type feeling" where folks with children are happy to live there and raise their children without fear". She said that in the last six to eight months the neighborhood has had almost complete cessation of police and ambulances with (positive) changes that have occurred. She also hopes the HDC will support the request. Adena Lee. 129 E. South Street, has lived in Lansing all her life and has watched the S. Washington Avenue area fluctuate up and down. She feels the neighborhood is on its way up now and hopes this trend will continue. She just wants "a safe environment and something her children can be proud of and enjoy". Llovd Teets, 116 E. Elm Street, former President of a the Neighborhood Association, noted that "a considerable number of people in the neighborhood are extremely interested in having the neighborhood designated an historic district". It noted that the boundaries of the whole association are not included in the request for an historic district. "We are asking basically for the old Biddle City area and the boundaries include the natural boundaries of the rivers (Grand and Red Cedar) and the rail road tracks on the south". Council member Leeman represents the (proposed) historic area east of S. Washington Avenue. (Anything on the west side of S. Washington Avenue is in Ward 4). "We interested in doing this and any assistance we can provide the Commission, I'm sure Mr. Zimmerman will be our point person - and we would just like to see it move ahead. I understand these things take time - I'm not in as big a hung as Mr. Rycus was, but as part of the oldest part of the city, we would like to have the River Point be an historic district. I hadn't realized until last week that we haven't done such a great job of preservation in this tow with only one historic district. (corrected by Anderson - two districts)". Dorothv Jones, 426 W. Barnes, indicated that she sat through the previous meeting HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION MINUTES, February 3, 2000 Page 3 (Krentel Block) and had the feeling there was some concern about personal pride and process. "I can understand those feelings when you have volunteered time ... your group has to look at what's best for the city". Susan Cantlon, Preservation Planner, noted that the River Point Neighborhood is included in the Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III grant which should be implemented and completed by June 30, 2000 if a request to transfer funds is approved. The Department of State (DOS) has approved a 60% match of $11, 000. The City's match is 40%, $3,200 and staff in -kind. The Intensive Level survey will review the architectural significance and cultural influences of the area. The DOS and consultant have identified February 15, 2000 as the deadline for the execution of the contract. Council member, Leeman, noted that Ways and Means committee members voted at their last meeting to hold the transfer request under "Pending Items". He noted that it is important as individuals or collectively for the River Point neighborhood to help the Council understand why it is important to have this grant continued. Cantlon indicated that she and members of the Commission would be pleased to give a presentation to their neighborhood group on: ► the process for establishing an historic district; and ► the pros and cons of historic districts. V. BUSINESS SECTION Anderson moved, seconded by Miernik a motion to move the River Point Neighborhood request to establish an Historic District to the first order of business. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). D. New Business 2. a. River Point Request to Establish a Historic District A discussion ensued regarding the process for establishing districts and potential members to serve on the Study Committee: ► individuals with a demonstrated knowledge of the history of Biddle City; ► a majority of the members should have a knowledge of historic preservation; ► individual(s) who is(are) members of a historical organization; ► possess a knowledge of architectural styles. It was noted that individuals who live in the neighborhood or who own a business in the area are not prohibited from serving on the Study Committee. The following names were recommended to serve on the Study Committee if they are able to serve: potential neighborhood representatives include Dave Zimmerman, Lloyd Teets, Suzy Stark, Joan Kiddle of Ma Kiddle's restaurant, and Kevin Webb, a woodworker; potential members with historic preservation HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION MINUTES. February 3, 2000 Page 4 knowledge include Dave Anderson (HDC), Jim McLean (Archivist/Libradan, Lansing Local History Room), Mary Toash (Preservation Planner) and Phil Siebert. A discussion followed regarding the funding of the Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III and the need to have the funds approved in Resolution #639, transferred so that the contract with Great Lakes Research Inc. can be executed. Anderson moved, seconded by Miennik a motion to forward the request to establish the River Point Neighborhood Historic District and to recommend members to serve on the Study Committee. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). Bachelder requested that Cantlon forward information on the State Historic Tax Credit information to Council member Leeman. A. Approval of Minutes: a. Minutes, January 6, 2000 Anderson moved, seconded by McLaughlin a motion to approve the January 6, 2000 minutes. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). B. Old Business: a. Requests for Establishment of Historic Districts - Update i 1000-1006 S. Washington Ave., Krentel Block Historic District Anderson moved, seconded by Branstner a motion to forward a letter to reiterate the Commission's support of the Krentel Block Historic Study Committee's recommendation not to establish a historic district for 1000-1006 S. Washington Avenue. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). ii 216 Huron Street, Darius Moon House iii 230 S. Butler Blvd., Charles Blades House Cantlon received verbal notification that the SHPO would forward a letter identifying its concerns with narrowly defined study areas and single resource historic districts. Miernik moved, seconded by Anderson, a motion, based upon the recent recommendations of the SHPO, to forward a letter recommending an expansion of the study area boundaries for the proposed Charles Blades House Historic District to include the west side of the 200 block of S. Butler Blvd. between Allegan and Washtenaw and the south side of Allegan between N. M. L. King Blvd. on the west HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES, February 3, 2000 Paae 5 and S. Butler Blvd. on the east. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. a. Annual Report i Commission Accomplishments Report not available. Deferred action. 3. a. HDC Calendar of Meetings, January -December 2000 A discussion ensued regarding a request to change HDC meeting dates from the first Thursday of the month to the second Thursday of the month and potential conflicts. No action. 4. a. Ethics Training (Anderson, Gray, Sulskis). Cantlon reported that Anderson, Gray and Sulskis have not completed the ethics training. Anderson has read the manual and will make arrangements with the City's Personnel Office to review the tape. Gray has resigned from the Commission. Sulskis will be contacted regarding the training requirements. 5. a. Capitol Historic District Study Committee - Update Cantlon reported that of the original twelve members (and two alternates) the following people have agreed to continue serving on the CHDSC: Glen Bachelder, Todd Branstner, Donna Brockwell, Antonia Miemik, Robert Moms, Dave Muylle, and Stephanie Whitbeck. Glen Bachelder and Robert Morris will refine the historical context statement. Other members will continue working with staff on research to complete the property survey sheets. Branstner will complete the technical evaluation of the structures and make recommendations regarding National Register eligibility and contributing status. The Commission recommended forwarding a letter to the Mayor's Office and Council notifying them of the change in status of the CHDSC membership. Cantlon and Miemik established Tuesdays and Thursdays from 1:00 - 3:00 p.m. as times research would be conducted in the Planning Office library. Committee members are invited to join them and assist with the completion of survey sheets. 6. a. Demolition Salvage Materials Cantlon reported that at the request of the Commission a memo was drafted and forwarded from the interim Planning Manager to the City Attorney. The memo requested an evaluation of a proposal to salvage architectural materials from proposed demolition projects with the profits to benefit HDC educational programs. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. February 3. 2000 Paize 6 This proposal is made under the authority of Section 1220.12(a) of the Lansing Code of Ordinances. A copy of the memo was provided and discussed further. C. Committee Reports: 1. Design Review Committee - Branstner, Bachelder a. Reviews for Historical Significance/Proposed Demolitions ii. 2408, 2408 % and 2500 E 2500 E. Mt. Hope, for Open Park Space. Cantlon reported that Parks and Recreation Director, Eric Reickel called to indicate his department did not feel it was feasible to retain the two structures recommended for preservation. She received a communication from interim Manager, Jim Ruff, to hold any requests for demolition of the structures so that Planning and Neighborhood Director, Dennis Sykes could review the matter further. iii. 217 Townsend, Y.W.C.A. Bachelder and Cantlon reviewed the property which has been evaluated by the SHPO as historically significant for its architectural style (Neo-Tudor) and its cultural history. The Design Review Committee did not review the project. The proposed development is to construct a parking ramp on the site. Anderson moved, seconded by Branstner to authorize a communication to Council recommending the examination of adaptive reuse alternatives (to demolition) for the entire Y. W. C. A. building; the main section only; and/or retention of the facade. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). iv. Z-15-99 Holiday Inn Expansion, 13 Properties None of the 13 properties proposed for demolition were historically significant. One property at the southeastern end of the proposed development area has a building with cobblestone foundation (not proposed for demolition at this time) which should be preserved if possible. No action taken. 2. Education Committee No meeting scheduled. a. Historic Preservation Exhibit Report 3. Executive Committee: No report. a. HDC Budget Request for FY 2000-2001 i. Program Budget ii. C. L. G. Grant Request for FY 2000-2001 - Update HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION MINUTES, February 3, 2000 Paize 7 D. New Business: 1. a. Aqencv Referrals i NCU-1-2000, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa Street Anderson moved, seconded by Branstner to refer the Agency Referral to the Design Review Committee for a recommendation. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). b. Old Town - Historic Districts, Wednesday, March 8, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Gray and Cantlon will make a presentation to the Old Town Committees and North Lansing Neighborhood Association on Thursday, March 8, 2000, 5:30 p.m. at the Main Street Office, 1217 Turner Street. Brian Lijewski of the SHPO will be available also to answer questions pertaining to the state tax incentives for the rehabilitation of historically significant properties. E. Staff Report Cantlon reported that the Planning Office has received a letter of resignation from Jennifer Gray from the Commission due to family and work conflicts. Staff was directed to put "Elections" on the March agenda. The Commission discussed the Rules of Procedures regarding the number of excused absences on the Commission. At the request of the Executive Committee, staff sent a letter to Leslie Sulskis acknowledging her contributions to the Commission and the need to have continuity of membership. Ms. Sulskis' number of service years on the Commission, her creative talents and her support of the Education Committee make her membership a real asset to the Commission. The Commission requested that staff encourage her to remain on the Commission if possible. F. Pending Items Review Process for Lansing Demolition Applications - Anderson a. Dangerous Buildings/Receivership Ordinance, Kalamazoo b. Lansing, City Attorney Opinion #98-03 c. Lansing Demolition Permit Application Process 2. Letters of Recognition for Preservation Work - Suggestions? The Commission recommended sending a letter commending the property owner and new tenant of the former Grey Hound Bus Terminal, 511 S. Washington Avenue, for their efforts in the preservation of the building. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. February 3. 2000 Page 8 G. Commission Member Comments: None VI. COMMUNICATIONS: MHPN Guide to Michigan's Local Historic Districts Act. 2. SHPO Fall Workshop Application for Participation. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Branstner moved, seconded by Anderson to adjourn the meeting. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). The meeting was adjourned at 7:23 p.m. Next Design Review Committee meeting: Thursday, February 17, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Planning Office Library Next Education Committee meeting: TBA Next Executive Committee meeting: TBA r� Approved: 06/01/00 To Clerk: 06/01/00 To SHPO: 06/01/00 $: EANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES •u 0 Thursday, March 2, 2000, 5:30 p.m. '��i'Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development Code Compliance Conference Room 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing, Michigan 48933-1236 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair J. Grau and Vice Chair G. Bachelder recently resigned from the Commission; therefore, staff member, S. Cantlon called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. A. Roll Call: D. Anderson, T. Branstner, M. Kolhoff, F. McLaughlin (arrived at 6:00 p.m., departed at 6:30 p.m.) A. Miernik, L. Sulskis. B. Excused Absences: None C. Introductions: S. Cantlon, staff. D. Approval of Agenda: Recommendations for amendments to the agenda include: • move New Business, item #1 a. for immediate action • add under New Business, item #3 a. 511 S. Washington Ave, Renovations Anderson moved, seconded by Kolhoff to approve the agenda as amended. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). II. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None III. PUBLIC COMMENT - None V. BUSINESS SECTION D. New Business: 1. a. Election of Chair, and Vice Chair S. Cantlon reported that the Planning Office has received written resignations from the Chair and Vice Chair of the Commission. Sulskis moved, seconded by Miernik to approve Dave Anderson as Chair. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). Miernik moved, seconded by Branstner to approve Mike Kolhoff as Vice Chair. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. MARCH 2.2000 Paae 2 A. Approval of Minutes: a. Minutes, February 3, 2000 Miernik moved, seconded by Kolhoff to approve the February 3, 2000 minutes as amended. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). B. Old Business: a. Requests for Establishment of Historic Districts - Update i. 1000-1006 S. Washington Ave., Krentel Block Historic District ii 216 Huron Street, Darius Moon House iii 230 S. Butler Blvd., Charles Blades House S. Cantlon provided a brief update on the status of the three proposed local Historic Districts. A discussion ensued: • Chair, Anderson will forward a request to interim Planning Manager, Jim Ruff, for an update regarding possible Council review and action; • S. Cantlon to send a letter to Orby Gray regarding the possibility of an expanded study area. 2. a. CG99-354, Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III - Update S. Cantlon reported that Council supported fund transfers to survey three areas: the Michigan School for the Blind complex; properties bounded by Genesee on the south, Saginaw on the north, Capitol on the east and Seymour on the west; and the River Point Neighborhood area south the Grand Trunk Rail Road. 2. a. Annual Report i. Commission Accomplishments - Tabled 3. a. Capitol Historic District Study Committee - Update A. Miemik reported thai she and Cantlon continue working on survey forms and that other members are working on historical context. 4. a. Demolition Salvage Materials - Update S. Cantlon indicated a response had not been received from the City Attorney's Office. A second memo was sent. 5. a. Ethics Training (Anderson, Sulskis). HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION AGENDA, March 2, 2000 Page 3 Commissioners Anderson and Sulskis will contact the Personnel Office directly to finalize the ethics training program. C. Committee Reports: Design Review Committee - Branstner a. Reviews for Historical Significance/Possible Demolitions i. Diocese Properties S. Cantlon reported the Michigan Catholic Conference is considering two locations on Ottawa and Seymour Streets for a new office building (square footage unknown at this time) and a parking structure (height and number of spaces unknown at this time). A review for historical significance is being conducted. Miernik moved, seconded by Sulskis to refer the matter to the Design Review Committee for recommendations. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). 2. a. Agency Referral i. NCU-1-00, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa Street, Driveway Kolhoff moved, seconded by McLaughlin to support the request by the applicant to add a second driveway on the west side of the building at 1400-1402 W. Ottawa Street, under NCU-1-00. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). 2. Education Committee a. Historic Preservation Exhibit Report L. Sulskis reported that she would meet with S. Cantlon and E. Sprouls, March 8th, regarding exhibit design and implementation for week of May 14, 2000. 3. Executive Committee: - No update a. HDC Budget Request for FY 2000-2001 i. Program Budget D. New Business: a. 226 S. Fairview Rehabilitation, HPP Fund Request Sulskis moved, seconded by Kolhoff to refer the HPP request to the Design Review Committee for recommendations. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION AGENDA. March 2, 2000 Paze 4 2. a. 511 S. Washington Avenue, MOA and Proposed Renovation A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) exists regarding the rehabilitation of the former Grey Hound Bus Terminal at 511 S. Washington Avenue. A building permit has been pulled for changes to the facades and interior. Miernik moved, seconded by Sulskis to instruct the Chair to forward a letter requesting the proposed work included in the building permit application be in conformance with the MOA; that the windows be of same style, nature and dimension, and to note that the Commission looks forward to the future adaptive reuse of the building. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). E. Staff Report a. Old Town - Historic Districts Presentation, Thursday, March 9, 2000, 5:30 p.m. at the Main Street Office, 1217 Turner Street. Former HDC Chair, J. Grau and S. Cantlon will make a presentation on Historic Districts, "Pros and Cons", on March 9, from 5:30 - 7:30 p.m. at the Main Street Office. 2. a. River Point Neighborhood Association - Historic Districts Presentation S. Cantlon reminded Commissioners of a presentation on Historic Districts which will be held Thursday, March 23, 2000, 6:00 p.m. at the River Point Neighborhood Office, 1111 S. Washington Avenue. Jim Ruff, Zoning Administrator, Amy Collett, Main Street Program and Amy Salisbury, Lisc Program will be on the panel also. F. Pending Items Review Process for Lansing Demolition Applications - Anderson a. Dangerous Buildings/Receivership Ordinance, Kalamazoo b. Lansing, City Attorney Opinion #98-03 C. Lansing Demolition Permit Application Process 2. Letters of Recognition for Preservation Work - Suggestions? No recommendations were made at this time. G. Commission Member Comments: None HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION AGENDA, March 2, 2000 Page 5 VI. COMMUNICATIONS: S. Cantlon distributed copies of Michigan's Preservation Tax Credits (new publication from the SHPO) to commissioners. Vill. ADJOURNMENT Miernik moved, seconded by Branstner to adjourn the meeting. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). The meeting adjourned at 6:52 p.m. Next Design Review Committee meeting: Thursday, March 16, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Planning Library Next Education Committee meeting: Wednesday, March 8, 2000, 8:00 a.m. Impression 5 Science Center Next Executive Committee meeting: TBA r To Approved: 0=1� To SHPO: OBM1100 LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, April 6, 2000, 5:30 p.m. L,;�;,:� •� Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development Conference Room, Suite C3 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing, Michigan 48933-1236 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair, Dave Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:37 p.m. A. Roll Call: D. Anderson, M. Kolhoff, F. McLaughlin (arrived at 5:50 p.m.), A. Miemik, and L. Sulskis. B. Excused Absences: T. Branstner C. Introductions: Rick Van Fossen of Fossen Builders on behalf of Michigan Cable Telecommunications, 412 W. Ionia Street, and Susan Cantlon, staff. D. Approval of Agenda: Miernik made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to recommend approval of the agenda as amended. Dave Anderson .....................Aye. Fred McLaughlin................................ .................................................... Antonia Miemik ........................... Aye. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis.............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 4 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (4-0) 11. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None. III. PUBLIC COMMENT V. BUSINESS SECTION A. Approval of Minutes: 1. a. March 2, 2000 -Tabled B. Old Business: 1. a. Request for Establishment of Historic Districts - Update i. River Point Neighborhood Cantlon reported the consultant has begun the Intensive Level survey process for the River Point Neighborhood. Council has placed a moratorium on resolutions to establish local historic districts pending a review of the Local Historic Districts Historic District Commission Minutes. Andl 6, 2000 Paae 2 Ordinance. A review is scheduled for Tuesday, April 25, 2000 in the Development and Planning Committee meeting. The Commission directed the Chair to send a letter to City Council requesting clarification of the status of the above requests to establish historic districts, appoint and confirm study committees for the areas requesting the establishment of local historic districts. ii 216 Huron Street, Darius Moon House Request on hold, pending Council review of ordinance. Kolhoff forwarded a copy of a research paper by Faith E. Rach, "Moon Remembered", which will be made available to the Study Committee when appointed and confirmed. iii. 230 S. Butler Blvd., Charles Blades House Orby Gray, owner of the property at 230 S. Butler Blvd., notified staff by telephone that he was withdrawing his request to establish a single resource historic district. The Commission directed staff to send a letter acknowledging Mr. Gray's intent. 2 a. CCG99-354, Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III - Update Cantlon reported the Phase III survey work continues with Great Lakes Research Inc. 3. a. Capitol Historic District Study Committee - Update. Miernik reported that she and Cantlon had completed the research work on existing survey sheets. The sheets are available for technical evaluation by Branstner. Photographic work of remaining blocks will be scheduled and completed. 4. a. Demolition Salvage Materials - Update Cantlon distributed copies of the response from the City Attorney's office regarding the HDC's architectural salvage proposal. A brief discussion ensued. Miernik made a motion, seconded by Sulskis to recommend referral of the City Attorney's response to the Executive Committee for review and recommendation. Dave Anderson .....................Ave. Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. Antonia Miemik ...........................Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis.............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 5. a. 911 and 1003 W. Washtenaw, Section 106 Review - Update. Cantlon reported the Development Office submitted required 106 Review documentation to the Environmental Review Coordinator at the SHPO, for the two Historic District Commission Minutes, Aoril 6. 2000 Paqe 3 architecturally significant buildings at 911 and 1003 W. Washtenaw. Documentation will be reviewed by the SHPO and National Advisory Council. If approval is received, the buildings will be demolished following: • a memorandum of agreement is signed by all parties • photographic, floor plans and elevation recordation is completed; and • architectural salvage is accomplished Cantlon and Ellen Sprouls, Executive Director of Impression 5 Science Center, noted that Impression 5 will assist with salvage and provide stewardship (protection, storage and maintain inventory) of the architectural elements for the future benefit of the Commission's education programs. 2. a. Ethics Training (Anderson, Sulskis) - Update. None. C. Committee Reports: Design Review Committee, March 21, 2000 Meeting. a. Reviews for Historical Significance i. Michigan Catholic Conference Projects, includes Diocese Properties Cantlon reported that Wigen, Tincknell, Meyer & Associates, on behalf of the Michigan Catholic Conference (MCC), made a presentation at the March 21, 2000 Design Review Committee regarding preliminary plans for a four-story office building at 300 W. Ottawa and a four and one half story parking ramp at Ionia and Seymour Streets. No action required. b. Agency Referral i. 226 S. Fairview, HPP Fund Request, Re -roof $6,000 Sulskis made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to recommend approval of historic preservation funds up to $6,000 to re -roof the historically significant structure at 226 S. Fairview. Dave Anderson .....................Ave., Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. Antonia Miemik ...........................Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis .............................. Ave., On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. Education Committee Meetings - Sulskis a. Historic Preservation Week Exhibit Sulskis reported the Education Committee has met several times with Impression 5 Science Center staff to plan and implement the Preservation Week Exhibit and Activities. A brief discussion ensued. Sulskis requested assistance in locating Historic District Commission Minutes, April 6, 2000 Pace 4 additional artifacts for the exhibit. b. Memorandum of Understanding Recommendation: Staff recommended that a Memorandum of Understanding be developed and signed between the Commission and Impression 5 Science Center relative to the collaborative sponsorship of the Preservation Week Exhibit. Sulskis made a motion, seconded by Miemik to recommend forwarding a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding to the Executive Committee for review and recommendation. Dave Anderson .....................Ave. Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. .................................................... Antonia Miemik ........................... Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis .............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 3. Executive Committee Meeting Report - None D. New Business: 1. a. Agency Referrals i. SLU-6-2000, SE comer Lapeer and Seymour Streets A front end report for Special Land Use, SLU-6-00 was distributed to Commissioners. The request is for the construction of a parking lot in the "DM-3" Residential District at 532 N. Seymour and 223 W. Lapeer Streets to accommodate 20 spaces for LCC faculty and staff. The SLU, if approved, would involve razing or moving a vacant, four -unit structure, built ca. early1870's. Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Sulskis to recommend forwarding the Agency Referral the Design Review Committee and Executive Committee for review and recommendation. Dave Anderson .....................Ave. Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. .................................................... Antonia Miemik ........................... Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis .............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). ii Z-5-00, 220 N. Sycamore Street, Rezoning from "DM-4" Residential to "D-2" Office This was a late referral. The applicant's request is to rezone the property at 220 N. Sycamore Street from ""DM-4" Residential to "D-2" Office District. The rezoning would permit conversion of a two-family, or duplex dwelling unit to a mixed use Historic District Commission Minutes, Aoril 6, 2000 Paoe 5 structure with office on the ground floor and a residential apartment on the upper levels. The property includes a ca. 1900 residential structure and a three -car carriage house/garage in the rear. A discussion ensued. Sulskis made a motion, seconded by Miernik to support the request for the rezoning from "DM-4" Residential to "D-2" Office District with a recommendation that consideration be given to the preservation of the residential character of the building and carriage house; and also the retention of the residential function of the building (in the upper levels). Dave Anderson .....................Ave. Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. .................................................... Antonia Miernik ........................... Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis .............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 1. a. ii. 412 W. Ionia, Porch Design and Recommendation for Front Yard Setback Variance. Mr. Van Fossen submitted a rendering of a 6' x 20' porch design for the property at 412 W. Ionia Street. Mr. Fossen will be applying to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a front yard variance. The existing 8' deep porch will be removed and a 6' deep porch will replace it which would improve conditions for the front yard setback. A discussion ensued regarding the porch design. Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to recommend supporting the request for a front yard variance in order to construct a 6' x 20' porch at 412 W. Ionia Street. The Commission requested that the Design Review Committee review the porch elevation plan for any further design recommendations. Dave Anderson .....................Ave. Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. .................................................... Antonia Miemik ........................... Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis .............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. a. Frances Willard Fountain, Public Art Policy Cantlon reported the Old `sown Mainstreet, Design Committee considered a proposal from artist, Mark Chattedy, to construct and install a 20' sculpture in the Turner Mini Park. If the project is approved by the City, the historically significant, Frances Willard Fountain would be displaced. A discussion ensued regarding the establishment of a Public Art Policy. Sulskis made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to recommend Antonia Miemik's name be forwarded to represent the Commission on a Committee which will help develop a Public Art Policy. Dave Anderson .....................Ave. Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. Historic District Commission Minutes. April 6. 2000 Pape 6 .................................................... Antonia Miemik ........................... Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis .............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). E. Staff Report 1. a. Recommendations for Commissioners Commissioners recommended the following people be contacted regarding open Commission positions: Jim Perkins, James MacNeal, Mary Tomasch, and a representative from Cherry Hill Historic District (ie. Tom Kosovec). a. Michigan Historic Preservation Network Conference, May 4-6, 2000 Conference applications forms will be distributed. Confirmation of attendance is requested by April 14, 2000. F. Pending Items - Tabled 1, Review Process for Lansing Demolition Applications - Anderson a. Dangerous Buildings/Receivership Ordinance, Kalamazoo b. Lansing, City Attorney Opinion #98-03 C. Lansing Demolition Permit Application Process 2. Letters of Recognition for Preservation Work - Suggestions? Commissioners recommended forwarding a letter of recognition to Michigan Cable Telecommunications and to Fossen Builders for their preservation work at 412 W. Ionia Street. G. Commission Member Comments: Sulskis requested that Anderson act as Master of Ceremonies at the opening Preservation Week Exhibit, Awards Reception. He agreed. Mayor Hollister will attend 5:30 - 6:00 p.m. or send a representative. VI. COMMUNICATIONS: None Vill. ADJOURNMENT Sulskis made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to adjourn the meeting. Dave Anderson .....................Ave. Fred McLaughlin ......................... Ave. .......................................... I......... Antonia Miemik ........................... Ave. Mike Kolhoff .........................Ave. Leslie Sulskis .............................. Ave. On a Roll call Vote, there were Ayes: 5 ; Nays: 0 ; motion carried unanimously (5-0). The meeting adjourned at 7:16 p.m. Historic District Commission Minutes, April 6, 2000 Paae 7 Next Design Review Committee Meeting: Thursday, April 13, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Next Executive Committee Meeting: Next Education Committee Meeting: Review Thursday, April 13, 2000, after Design Review, Conference Room, Suite C3 Friday, April 7, 2000, 8:00 a.m. Conference Room, Suite 3 DRAFT D Approved: / /00 To Cleric: / /00 To SHPO: / /00 *I-ANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING Thursday, June 1, 2000, 5:30 p.m. �! y';' C! '` Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development Conference Room, Suite C 3 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call: Present, D. Anderson,T. Branstner, Mike Kolhoff, Fred McLaughlin and Antonia Miemik. B. Excused Absences: Leslie Sulskis C. Introductions: Douglas Falk of Douglas Sign Company, Bill Rieske, Principal Planner and Sue Cantlon, Senior Preservation Planner. D. Approval of Agenda: Miernik made a motion, seconded by Branstner to recommend approval of the agenda as amended. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miemik............................. Ave ... MikeKolhoff .........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimously (5 - 0) HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) a. HDP-1-2000, 601 S. Grand Avenue, Sign Permit Application Findings: • The property is located in the Cherry Hill Historic District; • The structure at 601 S. Grand Avenue is a brick Itlaiantate, ca 1880's; • The proposed sign design, materials and scale is appropriate for the district; • The property is zoned "D-1" Professional Office District. Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to recommend issuance of Certificate or Determination of Appropriateness for the sign permit application for the property at 601 S. Grand Avenue. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miemik....................... ::.... Ave ... MikeKolhoff .........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimously (5 - 0) III. PUBLIC COMMENT None HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING. June 1. 2000 Paae 2 V. BUSINESS SECTION A. Approval of Minutes: a. Minutes, March 2, 2000 Miernik made a motion, seconded by McLaughlin to recommend approval of the March 2, 2000 minutes as amended. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLauahlin........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miemik............................. Ave ... MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimously (5 - 0) b. Minutes, April 6, 2000 Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to recommend approval of the April 6, 2000 minutes as amended. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miemik............................. Ave... MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimously (5 - 0) B. Old Business: a. CG99-354, Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III Cantlon reported that the staff met with the SHPO and Great Lakes Research Inc. to review the status of the survey report. A revised schedule was submitted to allow appropriate time for SHPO review and comment. C. Committee Reports: Design Review Committee - Branstner Branstner provided a brief report and recommendations for the April 13, 2000 Design Review Committee meeting which included: SLU-6-00; BZA 3581.00 and Michigan Catholic Conference projects for the Seymour, Ottawa and Ionia area. A discussion ensued regarding SLU-6-00, a request by L. C. C. for parking that involved the razing of an 1870's (or earlier) structure. Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to accept the Design Review Committee's report for April 13, 2000 as presented. Dave Anderson .....................Aye... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Aye ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miernik ............................. Ave ... HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING. June 1. 2000 Page 3 MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:-5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimouslv (5 - 0) 2. Education Committee a. Historic Preservation Exhibit Report Anderson reported that the seventh annual Preservation Week Awards Reception, held at the Impression 5 Science Center was very successful. David Wiener represented the Mayor's Office. Staff was requested to draft a letter on behalf of the Commission commending Impression 5 staff for their support of this project. b. Memorandum of Understanding with Impression 5 Science Center No action required at this time. 3. Executive Committee: a. Agency Referrals i. SLU-6-2000, SE comer Lapeer and Seymour Streets Parking Lot for L.C.C. Withdrawn Findings: The Design Review Committee and the Executive Committee, at their respective April 13, 2000 meetings found: • The property at 532 N. Seymour/232 W. Lapeer is located in the proposed Capitol Historic District and immediately south of a potential National Register and local historic district; • Although the building has undergone numerous alterations since its original construction, it has been stabilized, the interior is intact and the structure is salvageable • The structure serves as an anchor for the NW corner of the block; therefore its removal would have a significant impact on the neighborhood; and • The property is located in the "DM-3" Multi -family Residential District Anderson reported the Executive Committee recommended forwarding an agency referral that opposed the SLU-8-00 based upon its findings. Anderson will provide Commissioners and staff with copy of a. communication that was sent to L.0 C. on behalf of the Commission. BZA 3581.00, 412 W. Ionia, Porch Findings: The Design Review Committee and the Executive Committee, at their respective April 13, 2000 meetings found: • The property at 412 W. Ionia Street is located in the proposed Capitol Historic District • The proposed porch design is consistent with the period of the house; HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION AGENDA_ June 1. 2000 Pacte 4 • The proposed setback is consistent with the adjacent neighborhood character Anderson reported the Executive Committee recommended forwarding an agency referral that supported BZA 3581.00 based upon its findings. Branstner made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to accept the Executive Committee's report as presented. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miemik............................. Ave ... MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimously (5 - 0) D. New Business: a. Agency Referrals i. BZA 3580.00, 300 W. Ottawa/209 N. Seymour Streets, Office Height Variance Anderson reported that BZA 3580.00 was tabled at the BZA meeting until the issue of parking associated with the new building could be addressed. The Commission requested that staff notify them as to when the item may be taken up again. Findings: • The property at 300 W. Ottawa Street is located in the proposed Capitol Historic District; • The proposed project would involve the removal of the brick, Chancery structure which appears to meet the criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places; • The scale of the building, as proposed, dwarfs adjacent structures; • The project would have an adverse effect on the adjacent National Register and local historic district; and • The characteristics or focal points of the area are churches not offices. Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Miernik to recommend that the request for a height variance for the property at 300 W. Ottawa Street, BZA 3580.00 not be granted. The Commission opposed the development as proposed based upon their findings. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miernik............................. Ave ... MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimously (5 - 0) ii SLU-8-2000, SLU for parking at 216 W. Lapeer in "DM-4" Residential District Cantlon reported that the applicant has amended the SLU-8-00 application to reflect HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMUSSION AGENDA June 1. 2000 Page 5 retention of the existing building, resulting in a request for 6 parking spaces in the rear of the property rather than 13 spaces. Findings: • The property at 216 W. Lapeer is located in the proposed Capitol Historic District and in a potential National Register and local historic district; • The brick bungalow, ca. 1920's, is a structurally sound building which has had deferred maintenance, particularly regarding the NE comer of the roof • The property is zoned "DM-4" Multi -family Residential District Miernik made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to recommend that approval of the Special Land Use be contingent on the following conditions: 1. The structural integrity of the building exterior be maintained; 2. The functional integrity of the interior be maintained; and 3. Exterior appearance of the property be maintained. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miernik............................. Ave ... MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:-5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimousiv (5 - 0) BZA-3590.00, Front yard variance for new addition at 230 E. South Street Findings: 1. The property at 230 E. South Street is located in the River Point Neighborhood and in a potential historic district; 2. The Grand Trunk Depot which is a brick structure, is located to the west of this property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the State Register of Historic Sites; 3. Residential structures, ca. 1900's with wood clapboard siding are located immediately to the north and northwest; and 4. The property is zoned "H" Light Industrial; Branstner made a motion, seconded by Miernik to recommend that approval of the variance be contingent on the following conditions: 1. The structure have a brick or wood clapboard exterior finish; 2. The structure have a permanent masonry or poured foundation; 3. The chain -link barbed wire fence now extend into the front yard. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miemik............................. Ave ... MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved tnanimously (5 - 0) E. Staff Report - None HISTORIC DISTRICT CONMSSION AGENDA, June 1. 2000 Page 6. F. Pending Items 1. a. Requests for Establishment of Historic Districts - Update i River Point Neighborhood ii 216 Huron Street, Darius Moon House 2. a. Ethics Training (Anderson, Sulskis) 3. a. Review Process for Lansing Demolition Applications - Anderson i. Dangerous Buildings/Receivership Ordinance, Kalamazoo ii. Lansing, City Attorney Opinion #98-03 iii. Lansing Demolition Permit Application Process 4. a. Demolition Salvage Materials - Update 5. a. Letters of Recognition for Preservation Work - Suggestions? G. Commission Member Comments: Anderson reported that he believed Ken Stockwell had received incorrect information from the SHPO regarding potential tax credits for the rehabilitation of his buildings on S. Washington Avenue. VI. COMMUNICATIONS: Cantlon distributed an updated HDC membership list. Vill. ADJOURNMENT Miernik made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to adjourn the meeting. Dave Anderson .....................Ave... Fred McLaughlin ........................... Ave ... Todd Branstner .....................Ave... Antonia Miemik............................. Ave ... MikeKolhoff.........................Ave.................................................................. On a Roll Call Vote, there were Ayes:_5_; Nays:_0_; motion approved unanimously (5 - 0) The meeting adjourned at 7:18 p.m. Next Design Review Committee Meeting: Thursday, June 15, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Planning Library Next Education Committee Meeting: TBA Next Executive Committee Meeting: TBA Approved: 08/ 03/00 To Clerk: 08/ 081oo To SHPO: 08/ 08/00 LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, July 6, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development -- Conference Room, Suite C 3 %r z 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing CALL TO ORDER ' A. Roll Call: Present, T. Branstner, Amy Collett, M. Kolhoff, Kent Love, Antonia Miernik and Kevin R. Webb B. Excused Absences: Fred McLaughlin Absent: Lyle Kissee C. Introductions: New Commissioners, Collett, Love and Webb were introduced. Bill Rieske, Principal Planner, and S. Cantlon, Preservation Planner were in attendance also. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Collett requested that item #3. Old Town Walking Tour Brochure be added under New Business. Miernik made a motion, seconded by Kent to recommend approval of the agenda as amended. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). 3. COMMUNICATIONS A communication, from Planning Manager, James Ruff, welcoming new Commissioners, was distributed. 4. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None 5. PUBLIC COMMENT - None 6. PRESENTATIONS 1. CG99-354 Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III Great Lakes Research, Inc., Mark Branstner, President Cantlon reported that Mr. Branstner was not available to give the presentation. It would be rescheduled for a later date. 7. BUSINESS SECTION A. Nominations and Election of Chairperson HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. July 6. 2000 Page 2 Miernik made a motion, seconded by Collett to recommend Michael Kolhoff for the Chair position until the September elections. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). Webb made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to recommend Antonia Miemik for the Vice Chair position until the September elections. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). B. Approval of Minutes: June 1, 2000 Love made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to recommend approval of the June 1, 2000 minutes. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). C. Committee Reports: 1. Executive Committee - None 2. Design Review Committee - None The next meeting will be held on site at 215 Custer Avenue, 5:30 p.m., Thursday, July 13, 2000. 3. Education Committee - None D. Staff Comments 1. Request to establish a local Historic District for 216 Huron Street Cantlon reported that Resolution #332 established the Darius B. Moon Historic District and set a 180 day deadline for completion following Council confirmation of the Study Committee. A resolution has been drafted and forwarded by the Mayor appointing Glen Bachelder, Kent Love, Fred McLaughlin and Faith Rach to the Study Committee for Council confirmation. 2. Capitol Historic District Study Committee Update Cantlon reported the Council is expected to pass a resolution setting October 31, 2000 as the deadline for submission of the Capitol Historic District Study Committee's preliminary report. Miemik and Cantlon reported that the photographic survey has been completed and the survey inventory sheets need architectural descriptions and National Register assessments. A Study Committee meeting will be scheduled. Webb emphasized the need for neighborhood education on the pros and cons of historic districts. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. Julv 6. 2000 Page 4 3. Cherry Hill Historic District and Neighborhood Study Staff has been requested to conduct a comparative study of the properties located in the Cherry Hill Historic District and surrounding properties in the Cherry Hill neighborhood to assess benefits of the Historic District. E. Pending Items: Future Action Required 1. Requests for Establishment of Historic Districts - Update i River Point Neighborhood Cantlon reported that the River Point Neighborhood Intensive Level Survey, conducted by Great Lakes Research Inc. should be completed by July 31, 200 with recommendations regarding a Historic District or Districts. No resolution has been adopted by the City Council to establish a River Point Historic District or River Point Historic District Study Committee to date. 8. NEW BUSINESS 1. Agency Referrals a. SLU-9-00, 532 N. Seymour, 223 W. Lapeer St., Special Land Use Miernik made a motion, seconded by Kolhoff to recommend opposing SLU-9-00 as previously determined under SLU-6-00. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). b. HPP-3-00, 215 Custer Avenue Todd Branstner recused himself and left the room as he is bidding on the contract for the rehabilitation of this property. Kolhoff made a motion, seconded by Love to refer the request to the Design Review Committee for review and recommendations. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; 1 abstained, motion carried (5-0). c. HPP-4-00, 408 W. Maple Street - Tabled pending receipt of specs. 2. Ethics Training (Collett, Kissee, Love, Webb) Cantlon informed new Commissioners, Collett, Kissee, Love and Webb that they are required to attend an Ethics Training session and were referred to the Personnel Department (483-4004) to schedule the training. 3. Old Town Walking Tour Brochure HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. July 6. 2000 Page 4 Collett requested HDC support for the printing of an updated brochure Old Town Walking Tour Brochure which was developed and printed originally by the HDC and Planning Office in cooperation with the North Lansing Community Association. Comparative "before and after" photos and additional text will be included. The Convention and Visitors Bureau and Old Town Mainstreet Office will be collaborative sponsors also. The commission requested information regarding the anticipated number of brochures that will be printed and anticipated costs for action at the next HDC meeting. 9. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS A discussion ensued regarding the HDC subcommittees. New members were assigned and the memberships now include: Design Review Committee Todd Branstner, Chair Mike Kolhoff Fred McLaughlin Education Committee Amy Collett Lyle Kissee Kent Love Antonia Miemik The Executive Committee is comprised of the Chairs of each subcommittee and the Chair of the HDC as an ex-officio member. 10. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESERVATION RECOGNITIONS The following properties were identified for consideration of Preservation Awards for 2000 at next years HDC Exhibit and Awards Recognition: a. Dave Ferguson's "infill" condos on N. Turner Street b. Diane Burn's adaptive reuse of the 100 Block of E. Grand River (the former Estes Furniture Company c. Todd Mack's Foibles building in the 200 Block of E. Grand River d. ADJOURNMENT Miernik made a motion, seconded by Branstner to recommend approval of the adjournment of the meeting. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). The meeting was adjourned at 7:13 p.m. DRAFT TO CLERK: 08/08/00 APPROVED: TO CLERK: TO SBPO: LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, August 3, 2000, 5:30pm Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development ~_ Conference Room, Suite C-3 316 N. Capital Avenue, Lansing — - r~ `? N 1. CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call: Present, T. Branstner, Amy Collett, Lyle Kissie, Mike Kolhoff, Kevin R. Webb B. Absent: Kent Love, Fred McLaughlin Antonia Miemik (excused) C. Introductions: Bill Rieske, Principal Planner 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Rieske suggested one deletion on the Agenda - Item 8-1 a, Agency Referral for HPP-4-00, 408 W. Maple Street. Collett made a motion, seconded by Branster to recommend approval of the agenda as corrected. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0) 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None 4. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None 5. PUBLIC COMMENT - None 6. PRESENTATIONS 1. CG99-354, Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III, Great Lakes Research, Inc., Mark Branstner, President Mr. Mark Branstner was not present at the meeting. 7. BUSINESS SECTION A. Approval of the Minutes - July 6, 2000 Mr. Kolhoff asked if there were any corrections to the minutes, and noted that he is listed in item 1c as a new commissioner, when in fact that is not the case. Mr. Rieske added that he was in attendance at that meeting also, and the first draft of the minutes does not reflect that. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES, August 3. 2000 Pape 2 Mr. Kolhoff asked if there were any objections to the approval of the minutes as corrected. Hearing none, he moved that the minutes be approved unanimously. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). B. Committee Reports: Executive Committee - None 2. Design Review Committee - HPP-3-00, 215 Custer Avenue. Mr. Branstner provided a verbal report on the committee meeting. Mr. Rieske asked if all members had received all the Design Review Committee Minutes of the July 13, 2000 meeting. He then read the committee report into the record. a. HPP-3-00, 215 Custer Avenue, Request for $6,000. Todd Branstner noted that he is bidding on the contract for the rehabilitation of this property; therefore would recuse himself at the HDC meeting when this item comes up for action. The request by the Development Office, on behalf of Larry Parks, is for up to $6,000 in historic preservation funds for exterior work which includes: Exterior painting of entire structure (two colors, to be consistent with Secretary of Interior's Guidelines - HDC to work with property owner) Remove and replace front step structure and porch flooring (tongue & groove pine) to match original, handrails and guardrail of steps to match original as closely as possible Soffit/Fascia Repair - animal entry area repair (SW & SE corners of house) Roof decking and shingles - entire garage - install new 7/16 inch O.S.B. over existing boards, install new organic felt and asphalt shingles, and flashing Parking pad - south side - 10 x 20 install concrete driveway parking pad The Design Review Committee felt the work requested was consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines, but wanted clarification that the rear, exterior egress stairs were to be primed and painted along with the rest of the structure. The stairs were not specifically listed along with other items in the exterior paint spec description (according to Development Office - stairs will not be addressed due to funding limitations, may be completed by HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. August 3. 2000 Paae 3 property owner). At HUD meeting, the structure's build date and land use was requested. Build date c. 1906, owner -occupied two -unit (lower level rented). Moved by Ms. Collett, seconded by Mr. Kolhoff to recommend approval of HPP-3-00, 215 Custer Avenue, Request for $6,000 in HPP Funds. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0, motion carried unanimously (5-0). The next Design Committee Meeting is scheduled for August 17, 2000. The Agenda has not been set yet. 3. Education Committee - None C. Staff Comments Darius B. Moon House Historic District, 216 Huron Street Mr. Kolhoff and Mr. Rieske noted that examples of similar houses were distributed to the Historic District Study Committee, and that the Historic District Study Committee has received and met once. 2. Capitol Historic District Study Committee Update Mr. Branstner reported that the Study Committee has met twice in the last two weeks. The members have received binders and are filling in historical context information. The study is moving along nicely at this time. A discussion ensued about whether or not members should approach City Council individually to discuss matters relating to this Study Committee report and Historic District Commission matters in general. Mr. Rieske advised that the important thing for the study committee to do is to complete the report and provide the information needed to approach City Council with research -based recommendations. He underscored the need for facts and results over the philosophy of historic preservation at this time. E. Pending Items: Future Action Required - None HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES, Auaust 3, 2000 Paae 4 8. ' NEW BUSINESS 1. Agency Referrals a. HPP-4-00, 408 W. Maple Street was pulled from the agenda. Specs were not available from the Development Offices. 2. Ethics Training (Collett, Kissie, Love, Webb) Ms. Collett and Mr. Kissie reported that they still need to attend the Ethics Training provided by the Personnel Department. Mr. Webb reported that he had completed that training earlier in the day, and had seen a video and received a handbook. It was not known whether or not Mr. Love, who was absent from the meeting, had received Ethics Training. 9. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS - none 10, COMMISSION MEMBER PRESERVATION RECOGNITIONS - None 11. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Branstner made a motion, seconded by Ms. Collett to adjourn the meeting. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). The meeting adjourned at 6:01 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Bill Rieske Recording Secretary DRAFT TO CLERK ] 0/06 W APPROVED: t TO CLERK TO SHPO- LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, October 5, 2000, 5:30pm Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, Suite C-3 316 N. Capital Avenue, Lansing 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m. by Chair, Kolhoff. A. Roll Call: Present, T. Branstner, Amy Collett, Lyle Kissee, Mike Kolhoff, Kent Love, F Fred McLaughlin (arrived at 5:50 p.m., Kevin R Webb. B. Absent: Antonia Miemik (excused) C. Introductions: Pamela Shinn, MSU Urban Planning Student, Jim Williams, 224 S. Washington Square and staff, Susan Canton, Senior Preservation Planner and Bill Rieske, Principal Planner 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ms. Cantlon suggested one addition on the Agenda - Item 8-1 a, Agency Referral for HPP-4-00, 1708 Beal Street. Branstner made a motion, seconded by Collett to recommend approval of the agenda as corrected. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0) 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None 4. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None 5. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Williams, owner of a ca.1929 commercial structure at 224 S. Washington Square indicated in was in the process of renovating the building and would be seeking a grant from the EDC's Facade Improvement Program. He did not have photographs or preliminary drawings with him. He was invited to bring his drawings to a future HDC meeting or Design Review Committee meeting for recommendations. 6. PRESENTATIONS - None 7. BUSINESS SECTION HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. October 5. 2000 Page 2 A. Approval of the Minutes - August 3, 2000 Mr. Kolhoff asked if there were any corrections to the minutes. Ms. Indicated there was a date correction for the Design Review Committee meeting and a couple of minor punctuation changes. Collett made a motion, seconded by Branstner to recommend approval of the minutes of August 3, 2000 as corrected. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (7-0) B. Elections of Officers: S. Cantlon reported that A. Miemik was excused from the meeting due to a death in the family but had indicated that, if nominated for chair or vice chair, she would be pleased to accept either position if it was the commission's desire. 1. Chairperson Collett made a motion, seconded by Branstner to nominate Mike Kolhoff as Chair. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (7-0). 2. Vice Chairperson Kent made a motion, seconded by Webb to nominate Antonia Miemik as Vice Chair. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (7-0). 3. Appointment of Education Chaimerson. Chair, Kolhoff asked if there were any members of the Education Committee would be interested in serving as chairperson for that committee. Seeing none, Kolhoff requested that Amy Collett serve as Chair of the Education Committee. She accepted. C. Committee Reports: 1. Executive Committee - None 2. Design Review Committee - None Next meeting: Thursday, October 19, 2000 at 5:30 p.m. Planning Office Library a. HPP-4-00, !708 Beal Street, Request for $6,000. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. October 5. 2000 Paoe 3 3. Education Committee - None Next meeting: Monday, October 16, 2000 at 5:30 p.m. Old Town Office, 1216 Turner Street. a. Historic Districts: Educational Materials C. Staff Comments 1. Darius B. Moon House Historic District, 216 Huron Street S. Cantlon reported that the preliminary report has been drafted but requires a final review meeting of the Study Committee, tentativelv set for Tuesday, October 10, 2000 at 5:15 p.m. in the Planning Library. 2. Capitol Historic District Study Committee Update Mr. Branstner, CHDSC Chair, reported that the Study Committee continues to meet weekly. Historical context statement revisions and identification of contributing and noncontributing structures are being finalized. 3. CG99-354, Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III S. Cantlon reported that the State Historic Preservation Office and the City of Lansing have accepted the final report. There are some problems with the Ruskin computer program still, but the SHPO will work with the city to resolve them. E. Pending Items: Future Action Required. Requests for Establishment of Historic Districts a. River Point Neighborhood S. Cantlon reported that the CG99-354, Lansing Architectural Survey, Phase III recommends a local historic district for the River Point Neighborhood, bounded by the Red Cedar River on the east, the Grand River on the north and west and the Grand Trunk Rail Road on the south. 2. Request for Funding - Old Town Walking Tour Brochure A Arnold said that Old Town is working with the Convention & Visitors Bureau to xerox additional copies for public self -guided walking tours. S. Cantlon noted that funds for printing are available through the Planning Office for commission projects. She also suggested that A Arnold contact Liz Homer, Curator of the Turner -Dodge House for additional printing support since the House is included on the tour. 3. Ethics Training A Collett and L. Kissee have not completed the ethics training yet. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES, October 5, 2000 Page 4 8. NEW BUSINESS 1. Agency Referrals a. HPP-4-00, 1708 Beal Street (added to the agenda). S. Cantlon provided a summary of the specs for the $6,000 funding request. A discussion ensued regarding the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and whether the work proposed met the standards and/or would provide a historic preservation benefit to the property. S. Cantlon recommended that the request be referred to Design Review. She would meet with the Development staff prior to the DR meeting to obtain answers to the commission's specific questions. 2. Proposal to Modify Historic District Ordinance S. Cantlon reported that she forwarded a draft to the Planning Manager of her preliminary concerns with the proposed modifications to the ordinance but was also anticipating a response from the SHPO regarding Lansing's Certified Local Government status if the changes were made. 3. Frances Willard Fountain Preservation and Relocation. A. Arnold reported that Old Town desires to remove the fountain in order to accommodate a contemporary sculpture for the site. It was noted that the historical ca. 1910 fountain was originally located at the comer of Michigan Avenue and N. Washington Square. The Tumer-Dodge House appears interested in obtaining the fountain (donated by the Women's Christian Temperance Union) for the family gardens and working cooperatively with the HDC for its preservation and restoration. K. Love made a motion, seconded by M. Kolhoff to recommend the relocation of the Frances Willard Fountain to an appropriate setting and to encourage its preservation and restoration. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried (6-0). Arnold Abstained. 9. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS - none 10. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESERVATION RECOGNITIONS S. Cantlon reminded commissioners to call her (483-4084) for recommendations of properties to be considered for historic preservation awards next year. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES, October 5. 2000 Page 5 11. ADJOURNMENT A. Collett made a motion, seconded by K. Webb to adjourn the meeting. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (7-0). The meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Susan Cantlon Recording Secretary Draft to City Clerk / /00 Approved: / /00 To City Clerk / /00 To SHPO: / /00 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, November 2, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development Conference Room, Suite C 3 - 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing CALL TO ORDER A. Roll Call Present: T. Branstner, A. Collett, L. Kissee, M. Kolhoff, A. Miemik, K. Webb B. Excused Absences: K. Love, F. McLaughlin C. Introductions The following people were in attendance: David Brower, YMCA Metro Board Karl L. Gotting, Attorney for YMCA Gary Granger, Emerson Ohl, Karen Cronk, Todd Brunst, Granger Group Tom Tooley, BETA Design Group Ellen Sprouls, Impression 5 Science Center 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Miemik moved, Collett seconded, a motion to recommend approval of the agenda as presented. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None 4. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None 5. PUBLIC COMMENT - None 6. PRESENTATIONS 1. 301 W. Lenawee, YMCA - Granger Group Mr. Gary Granger of Granger Group provided a power point presentation outlining the proposed plans for the YMCA site at 301 W. Lenawee and an upcoming Agency Referral for a rezoning application request for Planning Board review in January, 2000. The presentation and discussion included the following: • the property is zoned "D-1" Professional Office, with application for rezoning to "G-1" Business District for Lots 1 through 4, and 9 through 12, Block 147, Original Plat HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. November 2. 2000 Page 2 • the site is located in the proposed Capitol Historic District and has been evaluated in three historic surveys as a "contributing building" for a proposed Reutter Park Historic District and the larger proposed Capitol Historic District • the previous surveys indicated the scale and setbacks of the buildings surrounding Reutter Park create a unique urban scale and feeling similar to European urban centers • the building was constructed in 1949 and therefore, meets the historic basic review of 50 years old • Granger's previous adaptive reuse included the National Register Place buildings at 118 and 120-122 W. Ottawa St., the BWULegislative House Offices, and Market Square • Summit Real Estate conducted a feasibility study and audit of the existing facility • the Historic Tax Credit incentives were not factored into the feasibility analysis • the former 5 level, 90,000 sq. ft., YMCA building is located on the 2 acre site • the proposal includes demolition of the YMCA to accommodate a 7 floor, 230,000 sq. ft. building with on site parking for approximately 300 spaces (ramp and surface parking lot), which their representatives indicate provide ample parking for their proposed uses • 100 of the parking spaces will be leased by the YMCA • the 1' and 2' levels will be used for a YMCA Health and Wellness type facility • 5 levels will be used for office space and a street level coffee office • the street level design will be pedestrian scale • proposed construction materials for the new building will be a limestone or pre- cast material that looks and feels like limestone (similar to the Legislative House office building at Ottawa St. and Capitol Ave. • the developer indicated the new building will be a "premier Class A office building with anticipated office lease space at $23-24 per sq. ft., and life expectancy of approximately 100 years • the developer felt the exterior materials; scale and massing; and front yard setbacks proposed are compatible with existing buildings surrounding Reutter Park 7. BUSINESS SECTION A. Approval of Minutes: October 5, 2000 Collett moved, Miemik seconded, a motion to recommend approval of the October 5, 2000 minutes as presented. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). B. Committee Reports: 1. Executive Committee - None 2. Design Review Committee i HPP-4-00, 1708 Beal Street, $6,000 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. November 2. 2000 Paee 3 T. Branstner, Design Review Chair, reported that the building was recently acquired and requires interior code compliance and exterior rehabilitation including: tear off and re -roof, repair and replacement of windows and exterior paint. The front porch, guardrail and front steps would be improved if funds were available; however no code compliance issues were identified for these areas; therefore the porch, guardrail and front steps would not be addressed in the funding program. The committee recommended approval of the request for up to $6,000 for the roof re - shingling. The committee further recommended that future rehabilitation on the building include the front facade windows, porch, guardrail and steps in keeping with the Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for Rehabilitation. Collett moved, Webb seconded, a motion to recommend approval of the request for up to $6,000 for a replacement shingle roof for the property at 1708 Beal Street and that future rehabilitation action include improvements to the street facade windows, porch and steps. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). Next meeting: None 3. Education Committee A. Collett reported that the Education Committee met on Monday, October 30, 2000 at 5:00 p.m. at Impression 5 Science Center. The discussion included items for inclusion in a press kit for the proposed Capitol Historic District: • an executive summary of the preliminary report for the proposed district with map, findings, recommendations and state tax credit incentive information FAQ's (or misconceptions and facts) about historic districts definition of "contributing" resources list of knowledgeable contact persons from commission, study committee, SHPO, Michigan Historic Preservation Network Next meeting: Friday, November 17, 10:00 a.m. at Old Town Office C. Staff Comments 1. Darius B. Moon House Historic District Study, 216 Huron Street i Preliminary Report Transmittal 2. Capitol Historic District Study i Preliminary Report Transmittal D. Pending Items: Future Action Required 1. Requests for Establishment of River Point Neighborhood Historic District 2. Ethics Training (Collett, Kissee, Love). 3. Frances Willard Fountain Preservation and Relocation HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. November 2. 2000 Pafze 4, 8. NEW BUSINESS 1. Agency Referrals 1. HPP-5-00, 612 N. Pennsylvania, $6,000 Miernik moved, Collett seconded, a motion to recommend approval of the request for up to $6,000 for emergency roof tear off and replacement with in -kind materials for the property at 612 N. Pensylvannia. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). 2. Proposal to Modify Historic District Ordinance Collett moved, Miemik seconded, a motion to support the State Historic Preservation Office's review comments of the proposed changes to Lansing's Historic Districts Ordinance, and respectfully request the opportunity to be included earlier in the process for any future proposed changes to the Historic Districts Ordinance. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (6-0). 9. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS - None (A. Miemik left the meeting at this time). 10. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESERVATION RECOGNITIONS -None 11. ADJOURNMENT Collett moved, Branstner seconded, a motion to adjourn the meeting. On a Voice Vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). The meeting adjourned at 7:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted Susan Cantlon, Recording Secretary MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF STATE Candice S. Miller, Secretary of State Lansing, Michigan 48918-0001 STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE Michigan Historical Center 717 West Allegan Street Lansing, Michigan 48918-1800 November 2, 2000 MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Ruff, Planning Department, City of Lansing FROM: Amy L. Arnold, Preservation Planner RE: Proposed Revisions to the City of Lansing's Historic District Ordinance Staff members of the State Historic Preservation Office have reviewed the proposed changes to the Lansing historic district ordinance. Our comments are enclosed. The ordinance appears to be in conflict with Michigan's Local Historic District Act, Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended, in three significant areas: Requiring owner consent for the creation, elimination, or modification of a historic district violates the intent of the Act. In 1996, Michigan's Attorney General issued Opinion #6919 stating that communities cannot establish ordinances that require owner consent. Owner consent is also a violation of the Certified Local Government (CLG) Agreement signed by the City. The CLG manual states that ordinances with owner consent clauses are not acceptable. The sunset clause for eliminating historic districts does not meet the criteria set forth in Section 14 of PA 169 of 1970, as amended and violates the intent of the Act. This also violates the Certified Local Government Agreement signed by the City. The CLG manual states that ordinances with sunset clauses are not acceptable. • Allowing property owners to determine what features should be reviewed and protected on historic resources in designated districts. The state enabling law gives this power to the historic district commission. We strongly encourage the adoption of an ordinance that is in compliance with Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended, to ensure that property owners in historic districts will be able to participate in the state's historic preservation tax incentive program. In addition, adopting an ordinance that violates the Certified Local Government agreement may result in Lansing's decertification as a CLG. Should this happen, the City would not be able to apply for Historic Preservation Fund grants. Please be advised that the State Historic Preservation Office does not have the authority to give legal advice. Nevertheless, we do have experience working with the provisions of the Local Historic Districts Act and we are often called on to share our interpretation with local governments as they develop and revise their local ordinances. If you would like to discuss your ordinance further, please contact me at 517-335-2729. We look forward to receiving a copy of your final ordinance for our files. Thank you for this opportunity to review and comment. Enclosures cc: Nicholas Bozen, Director, Administrative Law Division, Department of State Sue Cantlon, Historic Preservation Planner Brian D. Conway, State Historic Preservation Officer a MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF STATE Candice S. Miller, Secretary of State Lansing, Michigan 48918-0001 STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE Michigan Historical Center 717 West Allegan Street Lansing, Michigan 48918-1800 November 2, 2000 MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Ruff, Planning Department, City of Lansing FROM: Amy L. Arnold, Preservation Planner RE: Proposed Revisions to the City of Lansing's Historic District Ordinance Staff members of the State Historic Preservation Office have reviewed the proposed changes to the Lansing historic district ordinance. Our comments are enclosed. The ordinance appears to be in conflict with Michigan's Local Historic District Act, Public Act 169.of 1970, as amended, in three significant areas: Requiring owner consent for the creation, elimination, or modification of a historic district violates the intent of the Act. In 1996, Michigan's Attorney General issued Opinion #6919 stating that communities cannot establish ordinances that require owner consent. Owner consent is also a violation of the Certified Local Government (CLG) Agreement signed by the City. The CLG manual states that ordinances with owner consent clauses are not acceptable. The sunset clause for eliminating historic districts does not meet the criteria set forth in Section 14 of PA 169 of 1970, as amended and violates the intent of the Act. This also violates the Certified Local Government Agreement signed by the City. The CLG manual states that ordinances with sunset clauses are not acceptable. • Allowing property owners to determine what features should be reviewed and protected on historic resources in designated districts. The state enabling law gives this power to the historic district commission. We strongly encourage the adoption of an ordinance that is in compliance with Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended, to ensure that property owners in historic districts will be able to participate in the state's historic preservation tax incentive program. In addition, adopting an ordinance that violates the Certified Local Government agreement may result in Lansing's decertification as a CLG. Should this happen, the City would not be able to apply for Historic Preservation Fund grants. Please be advised that the State Historic Preservation Office does not have the authority to give legal advice. Nevertheless, we do have experience working with the provisions of the Local Historic Districts Act and we are often called on to share our interpretation with local governments as they develop and revise their local ordinances. If you would like to discuss your ordinance further, please contact me at S 17-335-2729. We look forward to receiving a copy of your final ordinance for our files. Thank you for this opportunity to review and comment. Enclosures cc: Nicholas Bozen, Director, Administrative Law Division, Department of State Sue Cantlon, Historic Preservation Planner Brian D. Conway, State Historic Preservation Officer Michigan Historical Center State Historic Preservation Office Lansing Ordinance Revision Staff Comments 10/26/00 First, a word of caution. When using ordinances of other communities as a guide, be sure to note the date they were adopted. Many cities have not updated their ordinances since changes were made to Public Act 169 in 1992 and 1997. You would be better served to base your ordinance on Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended than on other ordinances that may not be in compliance with the law. As I am sure you are aware, the state law would supercede local ordinances in communities that have not yet updated their ordinances to conform with the revisions to the law. Comments on Points Enumerated in Cover Letter We agree that it is an excellent idea to adopt standards for establishing financial hardship. However, financial hardship is considered one component of the "Notice to Proceed" clause. We do not think it necessary to introduce a new permit entitled a "Certificate of Financial Hardship" which could be confusing to applicants and seemingly adds another layer of bureaucracy to the system. Perhaps just including space on the "Notice to Proceed" permit that allows the Commission to write in the explanation for granting the notice is sufficient. In addition, we would not recommend including the standards for establishing financial hardship within the body of the ordinance as it is cumbersome. It may be better to include them in the Commission's rules and procedures along with any special design guidelines that are adopted. 2. Regarding written owner consent in the establishment of a district, in 1996 Michigan's Attorney General issued Opinion #6919 which states that local units of government may not adopt historic. district ordinances that reouire owner consent for the creation of a district. The opinion states that this violates the intent of Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended. A copy of Opinion #6919 is enclosed for your information. Regarding your reference to East Lansing's ordinance, East Lansing requires owner consent for something it calls "historic neighborhood districts," honorary district designations, not local historic districts. Their ordinance states in Section 8.509 that historic districts are created pursuant to Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended. In addition, page 5 of the Certified Local Government Manual states that owner consent clauses are not acceptable in the ordinances adopted by Certified Local Governments. 3. Notifying property owners of the public hearing is required under Section 3 of Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended. 4. Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended does not require that property owners in the proposed district serve on the study committee but you are well within your rights to include this. We caution you that study committees are composed of volunteer members and the law requires that the majority must show a demonstrated knowledge of historic preservation. Do not limit yourself too strictly in your ability to find qualified members to serve on the committee. Potential committee members with expertise in historic preservation, architectural styles, or the history of Lansing may not live in the proposed district. Certainly, however, involving property owners in the district under study in the survey and research process is a good way to get them interested and committed to the project. It is unclear what is meant when you state that the study committee is required to consult with all property owners in a proposed district. The purpose of the public hearing required in Section 3 of Public Act 169, as amended is to give property owners within the proposed district the opportunity to comment on the study committee report. Remember, you are working with a study committee composed of volunteers. They will have limited time to devote to the project. Asking that the study committee consult with each individual property owner in the proposed district is an unfair and unnecessary burden and is not required under the Act. If the study committee follows the law and holds public meetings and hearings according to the procedures set forth in P.A. 169 that is sufficient. 6. Requiring that property owners must agree on what features the commission will review within the district is not in compliance with the state enabling law. Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended states that the historic district commission is the body responsible for the review of anv work that effects the exterior of resources within the districts. P.A. 169 also clearly states that the commission must follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation when considering projects. The intent of the law is to make sure that the rules, regulations, and design guidelines in historic. districts across the state are fairly and equitable applied to all citizens in the districts. That is why the law requires that a qualified commission with expertise in historic preservation principles be established. Home owners rarely have the appropriate knowledge of architectural styles, details, or features to make informed decisions on what makes a property historically significant. 7. Placing an arbitrary completion date for the preliminary study committee report, especially such an unrealistic one, is an unfair burden on a volunteer committee. There are many factors that affect how much time a study committee report will take to complete. Size of the proposed district, size of the study committee, expertise of the study committee, seasons and weather (photographic inventory), and ability to access records are just some. For example, the state library is only open until 6 p.m. making it difficult for volunteers that work 8-5 to use this resource. The local history room at the Lansing Public Library is accessed by appointment only. Perhaps an evaluation of 2 the status of the study committee's work after 6 months or requiring that the study committee submit quarterly reports to the City Council is a more appropriate solution to ensure that the committee's work is moving along smoothly. 8. Regarding elimination of the requirement that City Council can only vote on the adoption of a historic district if the study recommends that one be established, it is our opinion that the local unit does not have the authority to do this since they cannot alter the language that appears in state law. 9. Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended does not require that historic districts be contiguous. However, we caution you that when establishing districts, the study committee must use the guidelines for National Register eligibility set forth by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. The requirements for discontiguous districts are clearly spelled out. A discontiguous district does not mean that selecting individual properties from a larger, cohesive district is acceptable when creating a historic district. 10. Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended does not require that 51 % of the property owners in a proposed district must sign a petition in support of its creation. As stated above, Michigan's Attorney General has issued an opinion that this is a violation of the intent of the Act and communities can not adopt an ordinance with this provision. 11. The ordinance cannot require that 51% of the property owners sign a petition before a district can be modified or abolished. This is also in violation of the state enabling law. Historic district modification and elimination procedures must follow Section 14 of Public Act 169 of 1970, as amended. Again, we refer you to the Attorney General Opinion #6919. 12. Sunset clauses for districts are not allowable in the ordinances of Certified Local Governments. Please see page 5 of the Certified Local Government Manual. Comments on Ordinance At the end of Section H (2) in the Lansing Ordinance, there is reference to petitions in the establishment of a contiguous district. The interpretation in the ordinance of the wording in PA. 169 completely changes its meaning. Admittedly, the law is awkwardly worded and many communities have difficulty understanding it. Section 3(3)(b) of P.A. 169 of 1970,. as amended states that IF the majority of the property owners have approved the establishment of a historic district by written petition THEN the City Council must wait at least 60 days before adopting the ordinance. Your rewrite of this language reads that the Council shall not pass the ordinance UNLESS a majority of the property owners signs a written petition. Again, we refer you to Attorney General Opinion # 6919 and page 5 of the Certified Local Government Manual. We recommend that the more generic term "work" be used throughout the document rather than listing "construction, addition, repair, etc" every time as work is defined in the 3 definitions section and there is less chance of excluding a key element of what constitutes "work" and creating confusion for an applicant. Definitions Section Bureau - We are no longer the Bureau of History. We are now known as the Michigan Historical Center. Your definition list should state "Center - the Michigan Historical Center of the Michigan Department of State." Bureau should be changed to Center throughout the document. Certificate of Approval - Why not use Certificate of Appropriateness, the language of the enabling law? Certificate of Financial Hardship - As noted above, financial hardship is just one component of the Notice to Proceed. An additional certificate separate from the Notice to Proceed is in not necessary and seemingly adds another bureaucratic layer to the process. Commission and Committee - Your definitions should specify that they are appointed by the local legislative body. Demolition - Why include demolition by neglect here when you have a separate definition defining the term? District Resource - We recommend using the more generic term "Resource." Historic - We would recommend not including this term. However, if you choose to do so then please look at the U. S. Secretary of the Interior's guidelines for National Register eligibility and draft language that is compatible with these guidelines. For example, a historic property is typically 50 years of age or older. Historic significance is also based on seven elements of integrity. A resource is also determined historic in relation to the broader context of the community, state, and nation. There are four National Register criteria that are used to establish historic significance that should be referenced. Historic District - We recommend removing the term "geographically." The district could be a thematic district. Honorary Designation - We did not see this referred to in the ordinance. Also, what does it mean? A marker system? Property Owner and New Construction - Are these really necessary? Preservation Standards and Guidelines - The Commission may adopt additional guidelines only after they have been approved the Center. This should be stated in the ordinance. Please see Section 5(3) of P.A. 169 of 1970, as amended. 11 Bodv of the Ordinance Most of the key issues were addressed in response to the cover letter. Please refer to the corrected copy of the ordinance for further comments and recommendations. 5 Copyright (c) West Group 1999 No claim to original U.S. Govt. works 1996 Mich. OAG No. 6919 *238 Office of the Attorney General State of Michigan Opinion No. 6919 October 10, 1996 HISTORICAL PRESERVATION: Placing property in a local historic district Under the Local Historic Districts Act, 1970 PA 169, a local unit of government may not enact an ordinance that restricts that unit from placing property in a local historic district without the consent of the property owner. Honorable Susan Grimes Munsell State Representative The Capitol Lansing, MI 48913 You have asked if under the Local Historic Districts Act, 1970 PA 169, MCL 399.201 et sea; MSA 5.3407(1) et seg (the Act), a local unit of government may enact an ordinance that restricts that unit from rezoning property to a local historic district without the consent of the property owner. The title of the Act establishes its scope: AN ACT to provide for the establishment of historic districts; to provide for the acquisition of certain resources for historic preservation purposes; to provide for preservation of historic and nonhistoric resources within historic districts; to ,provide for the establishment of historic district commissions; to provide for the maintenance of publicly owned resources by local units; to provide for certain assessments under certain circumstances; to provide for procedures; and to provide for remedies and penalties. See Vernor v Secretary of State, 179 Mich 157, 163; 146 NW 338 (1914). The opinion request is framed in terms of whether a local unit of government may enact an ordinance that restricts that unit from rezoning property to a local historic district without the consent of the property owner. However, neither the title to the Act nor any of its provisions relate to a local unit of government's authority to enact zoning ordinances. Rather, the declared purpose of the Act in section 2 is historic preservation. The term "[h]istoric preservation," as defined in section 1 aQ) of the Act, means "the identification, evaluation, establishment, and protection of resources significant in - history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture." In section 1 a(k) of the Act the Legislature has defined "[h]istoric resource" to mean "a publicly or privately owned building, structure, site, object, feature, or open space that is significant in the history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture of this state or a community within this state, or of the United States." Section 3(1) of the Act authorizes legislative bodies of local units of government to establish, by ordinance, historic districts within their respective boundaries. Under section 4 of the Act, legislative bodies of local units of government may enact ordinances establishing historic district commissions to administer historic districts. Under section 3(1) of the Act, property is placed in an historic district when, by ordinance, the legislative body of a local unit of government enacts an ordinance establishing the boundaries of that historic district. This is separate from the zoning process in that same local unit of government. Under the Act, property placed in an historic district is not subject to use restrictions because it is in an historic district. Rather, the property is subject to restrictions on changing its exterior appearance under section 5 of the Act. See also, Letter Opinion of the Attorney General (Mr. Max Altekruse, Secretary to Franklin Historic District Commission,. March 6, 1975.) In section 5 of the Act the Legislature has authorized a local historic district commission to review and act upon an application for a permit for any work affecting the exterior appearance of an historic resource within the established local historic district. Under section 9(1) of the Act, the commission acts by filing a certificate of appropriateness, notice to proceed, or denial of a work permit. The Act contains procedural safeguards to protect the rights of an aggrieved owner of property located in an established historic district whose application for a work permit has been denied by the local historic district commission. These decisions of local historic district commissions are subject to administrative and judicial review under sections 5(2) and 11 of the Act. A review of the Act does not reveal a legislative intent to address zoning. The Act authorizes the preservation of historic resources within established local historic districts and contains procedures under which local historic district commissions administer established historic districts. The judicial review provisions of the Act protect the rights of owners of historical resources located within established historic districts. There is no language in the Act that authorizes a local unit of government to pass an ordinance that restricts that unit from placing property in a local historic district without the property owner's consent. *239 It is my opinion, therefore, that under the Local Historic Districts Act, 1970 PA 169, a local unit of government may not enact an ordinance that restricts that unit from placing property in a local historic district without the consent of the property owner. Frank J. Kelley Attorney General G THE FIVE BASIC REQUIREMENTS The National Historic Preservation Act Amendments of 1980, which established the, Certified Local Government program, contain five broad requirements that a local government must meet to be certifiable. Basic Requirement #1 A local government shall "Enforce appropriate state or local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties." A. In Michigan, Public Act 169 (1970 as amended) is the state enabling legislation that provides for the establishment of local historic districts and local historic district commissions in counties, cities, villages, and townships. To become certified, a unit of government must have passed an ordinance under Public Act 169. B. At a minimum, the following ten components that are deemed consistent with the purposes of the Act must be found in the local ordinance or, in some cases, in other official documents such as commission bylaws or procedures. Numbers 1 - 5 inclusive must be found in the ordinance. A statement of purpose that clearly focuses on the designation and protection of historic districts and individual historic properties in a defined area. 2. A means for establishing an appropriate review body (hereinafter, a commission) that shall administer the local ordinance and designate and protect historic districts. 3. A confirmation that the commission shall have the power of review and the ability to enforce binding decisions. 4. An appeals process. 5. A procedure for identifying, designating, and protecting additional historic districts. 6. Definitions that explain terms associated with historic resources (i.e. district, building, open space), historic preservation (i.e. restoration, rehabilitation), and preservation administration (i.e. certificate of appropriateness, review body). 7. Boundary descriptions that clearly define the location of each historic district. 4 8. A confirmation that the commission shall include members qualified to administer the designation and protection of historic resources. 9. Procedures for the commission's review of alteration, demolition, relocation, and new construction within all designated historic districts. 10. Adoption of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and/or design guidelines that are consistent with the Standards. C. The local ordinance must avoid the following: 1. Provisions whereby the historic district status of a previously designated district shall be terminated on a specific date. 2. Provisions whereby participation in local review is voluntary for property owners within designated historic districts. 3. Provisions whereby historic districts can be designated only upon consent of more than 50% of all property owners. 4. Provisions whereby certain properties are exempt from local review procedures as, for example, a hospital or charitable foundation. It is recognized, however, that the jurisdiction of the CLG is limited to that of the local government. Control of state and federally owned land, for example, are not part of that jurisdiction. D. A code of conduct, including conflict of interest guidelines, for the commission must be found in the ordinance, separate bylaws, or rules of procedure. Basic Regpirement #2 A local government shall "Establish by state or local law an adequate and qualified historic preservation review commission composed of professional and lay members." A. Commissions may differ in name and composition, but they must include members who are qualified to administer the ordinance. The commission members will be responsible for design review and must be able to make binding decisions over historic resources. B. The local government shall appoint the commission's membership so that it includes members qualified to administer the designation and protection of historic resources. All commission members shall have a demonstrated interest, competence, or knowledge in historic preservation. M HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, December 7, 2000, 5:30 p.m. Department of Planning & Neighborhood Development Conference Room, Suite C 3 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Lansing I. CALL TO ORDER Chair, M. Kolhoff, called the meeting to order at 5:37 p.m. Draft to Clerk: 12/22/00 Approved: 01/04 /01 To Clerk: 01/19 /01 To SHPO: 01119 /01 A. Roll Call Present: Todd Branstner, Amy Collett, Mike Kolhoff, Antonia Miernik, and Kevin Webb. B. Excused Absences: Lyle Kissee, Kent Love and Fred McLaughlin. C. Introductions: Staff Present: Bill Rieske, Principal Planner and Susan Cantlon, Senior Planner Others Present: John Peckham of Martin Property, Roy Swan of Accident Fund, Karl Gotting attorney for YMCA, Tony Fragale, YMCA President (301 W. Lenawee), David Brower, YMCA, Karen Cronk of Granger Group, Thomas Stanton and Carol Skillings, property owners for the proposed Darius B. Moon House Historic District at 216 Huron Street. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Miernik moved, seconded by Branstner, a motion to approve the agenda as amended to address item #1 under New Business, Agency Referral, i. Z-15-00 for action under first order of business. On a voice vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None 4. HEARINGS (ADVERTISED) - None 2. PUBLIC COMMENT Carol Killings and Tom Stanton requested clarification on Commission review of permit work if their property is established as the Darius B. Moon House Historic District. They noted that the rose garden identified in the study committee report no longer exists; therefore should be considered a noncontributing resource. It has been replaced with shrub roses. A discussion ensued regarding permit and site plan reviews. Staff noted HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7. 2000 Pace 2 that the ordinance would be followed which requires reviews of exterior work. They also requested opportunities to come before the HDC for consultations in the future. 3. PRESENTATIONS A. YWCA - John Peckham, Martin Property Development, East Lansing Martin Property Development is under contract with the Accident Fund to work with them on a project involving the existing YWCA Building. We are here this evening to present the information that we have gathered over the last few months relative to the YWCA Building as well as evaluate potential uses for that building and/or site. In that evaluation we met with Sue Cantlon and Jim Ruff, requesting their input. We also had a couple of discussions with Dennis Sykes and have just been working through the process for the redevelopment for this particular location. With that in mind, I would like to go through a few things. The primary reason we are before you this evening is that it is our intent to raze that structure and develop anew mixed used office type facility. The plans for that facility have not been completed at this time and we are really not prepared to speak specifically to the uses that are contained therein. The purpose of our appearance this evening is to convey to you the work that has been done to date and to evaluate the existing facility. The Accident Fund purchased the property from Paul Gentilozzi. Paul Gentilozzi hired Hobbs and Black to prepare actual construction drawings to attempt to renovate this building. At the completion of that evaluation it was determined that it was economically unfeasible to redevelop the facility. There are 21 issues here relative to the structure of the roof, walls, structural load capacities of floors, locations of columns and beams, etc. There has been an enormous amount of time and money spent to evaluate this existing building. To that end we have come to the conclusion that it is not feasible to redevelop this structure. In speaking with Ms. Cantlon and Mr. Ruff, part of what we need to look at here was: Is there a good adaptive reuse for this particular building? The answer to this is no, given the economic parameters which we will try to redevelop it. Can we save a portion of the building? It is not feasible to save one wall or two walls or something like that. In looking at it our architects have in essence ruled that out. Can you move it? Obviously you are not going to move a six story building, 65,000 square feet. It can't be done. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 72000 Paize 3 So, without going through all the costs and all the issues that went into it, I would just like to say that there has been an enormous amount of time and money spent to examine this facility and we can't redevelop it. Again, speaking with Ms. Cantlon and Mr. Ruff about the recordation of the building, we have hired a consultant out of Kalamazoo (Sharon Ferraro) to complete this. I have spoken with Ms. Cantlon, we have already engaged a photographer to take pictures of the existing structure, she is going to be up here on Monday to tour the facility to look at the outside as well as the inside of the structure. It is currently being gutted for asbestos abatement so it is not in very good shape inside, but she is going to look at it and complete a recordation for the city and this body as well. So, I believe that in essence is what we are here to present this evening. Roy Swan from the Accident Fund is here. I would be happy to address any questions you might have, but are here really for informational purposes so you are aware of the intent of the Accident Fund. A discussion ensued regarding the significance of the building, the use of preservation tax credits, the possibility of preserving portions of the building, the necessity for immediate demolition in the project time table, and the lack of information for the future use of the site. Mr. Peckham said they are projected to start demolition on December 15, a week from tomorrow night. Also, when will Ms. Ferraro complete the historic structure recordation? Mr. Peckham said she will be working on that, we just got in touch with her after we met with you and Mr. Ruff. The documentation of the structure, in terms of pictures, will be done next week. There will be some plans this weekend for the YWCA so we are going to share that information with Ms. Ferraro. The final report probably will not be out until the end of January. Ms. Cantlon asked if Ms. Ferraro will be taking the photographs? Someone else has been hired to do that. Ms. Cantlon said that the photographic documentation does follow a specific process. Mr. Peckham said he talked about that over the phone and he thinks they have it all cleared up. Mr. Peckham summarized that he and Mr. Swan met with Jim Ruff, Planning Manager, and Sue Cantlon, Preservation Planner on Friday, December 1, 2000 regarding tax credit incentives and options for the preservation of the YWCA building. He referred to a previous study undertaken by Hobbs and Black Associates, Inc. for Gentilozzi Real Estate when renovation for reuse as a state office building was being considered. He said the new owners, Accident Fund, did not review the feasibility study or conduct a separate feasibility study for adaptive reuse of the building or retention of the core building. A discussion had ensued regarding preservation of the facade which has been accomplished in numerous other cities. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7, 2000 Paize 4 Staff noted that a demolition permit application has been received by the Planning Office. Mr. Swan indicated that the proposed use of the site was not available for public announcement. Peckham indicated that the proposed development of the site was approximately 2-3 years out. The concept of "mothballing" the building was discussed very briefly. 4. BUSINESS SECTION A. Agency Referral 1. Z-15-00, 301 W. Lenawee (former YMCA site), Rezoning from "D-1" Professional Office to "G-V Business District. Karl Gotting, Attorney representing the YMCA, has been on the Board for the past several years and is familiar with this particular project. Roughly a month ago, November 2, 2000, Granger made a presentation and we were a part of that presentation. I have had some conversations with Ms. Cantlon and she indicated that it would be helpful if we were able to provide you with some additional information as far as the YMCA is concerned and their point of view. Granger did make an extensive presentation of the building that is proposed for the YMCA. The purpose for being here tonight is to share some 7 to 10 years of work we have done, as far as analyzing that building from the YMCA's perspective of what used to be made of it, if any. There was a question at the last meeting with regard to historic tax credits both from the Federal and State stand point, I happened to deal with that. I can provide you with some information on that particular issue. Tony Fragale is here as well as David Brower, who was here the last time. Tony is the President of the YMCA and is prepared to share information about what we have been able to learn about that particular building and particularly the adaptive uses concern. Then I will try to quickly fill you in on the tax credits and some problems there and why they are not available for that building. Tony Fragale, President, YMCA Lansing. I thought it might be beneficial for the Commission to have a sense of history of what the YMCA is attempting to do with its downtown properties. This building has been on that site since about 1950, moved there from its original location which is now occupied by Lansing City Hall. Having made that move, the building was designed and created for the needs of the community and YMCA members and the mission it was fulfilling in the community as the 1950's presented itself. We have occupied that building continuously going forward to today and continue to occupy and use it to the best of our ability. The age of the building being one of the issues that we have to deal with as far as repair, replacement and care, it was beginning about the 1980's and an issue of actual adaptation to the then current needs of the downtown community. So HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7, 2000 Paize 5 over the past 15 years, my history only goes back 8 years but having access to input from others who have served before me and served on our Board, find out that attempts have been made in the past to either renovate, rehabilitate, or try to reconfigure this building to adapt to what the current needs of the YMCA are without a demolition. Upgrade infrastructure, but also reconfigure its space. That first attempt that I am aware of was in 1988- 89, when we had considered demolishing portions of the building, creating new entrances, and reconfiguring space, all around what the membership and the community was needing and the programming we were offering. The cost related to that was prohibited enough as you can see. It did not get off the ground because of the burden that would be placed on the YMCA financially. Plans up to this point were in abeyance for a while and then it wasn't again until 1998-99 that we relooked at the needs to do the downtown branch. We felt ourselves in a position that the market and the downtown was changing. Were we are now is we have put out again the RRP to local developers and regional developers about what was suppose to be a renovation, or restoration of this building. It wasn't until the feedback we got back from studies done by the people who were involved in the RRP, that we learned that it was not financially feasible for any of them to get involved in a rehabilitation or restoration. In fact, the spaces the YMCA needed and able to make walls move and to make spaces larger or to even comply with current code, included ADA, the costs were such that there was no interest or willingness to get involved in a rehabilitation, so it brought us to partnership with Granger Group and discussions have been around removing that building from the property and starting anew. You saw what was being proposed and what we are really trying to accomplish here is the basic goal for the YMCA and that is where the communication needs to be tonight. With respect to the historic significance to the building. We are proud of the fact that we as an organization we are 123 years old, so we have a keen sense of our history and have a keen sense of where we have been and we archive this information and we don't let go of it so easily. We are fairly traditional, so we are not strangers to holding on to where we have come from and who we have been. But, on the practical side, we have also found that this opportunity now presents itself to fill a basic goal of the YMCA and that is to continue to exist downtown. That is a very basic goal. Never has that been off the table for us. But how we go about doing that, there is limited options for us. The option that has presented itself to us is part of the Granger on or redevelopment of that site, which actually occupies the entire property. So, the message that I would like to give to the Commission this evening is that the YMCA wants to be in the downtown community, not only be there, but it also feels like there is a mission and a purpose before the organization that HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES, December 7, 2000 Page 6 above all the other places in the region where we occupy ourselves, downtown Lansing still needs us and we still very much want to be a part of that. We are trying to get to the solution. The solution is how we make that happen for the next 40-50 years. Someone did a very good job in 1950. They built a building that has gotten a great deal of use and it has served a great number of people, many people grew up in that building. I don't know and don't claim to know much about engineering, I don't claim to know much about historical significance of buildings, but I do know that as a practical matter what downtown Lansing needs in way of services and programs for the YMCA can no longer be served in the spaces in the building that we have. So the remedy for us is to try to create the kind of spaces that people would want and need and be able to benefit from for decades, much like was planned in 1945-50. So with that, I would really, with all due respect, encourage you to look at both the practical side as well as the historical significance of the building of this age. It is the kind of building, right now, that has become expensive for us to operate, and to occupy. About 40% of it (the upper 4 floors of the building) has been unoccupied for the last decade. It is configured in a "U" shape, a dormitory style, single room occupancy. They can no longer be occupied, so we are carrying vacant spaces of burden to us. An inefficient building as well as spaces that are really no longer applicable to what are constituency is looking to have in the YMCA. It is just not working like it use to. So it has driven us to the position where we are today, which is how do we reinvent and recreate the YMCA downtown. At this point, we also really don't know exactly what is going to happen. It is somewhat early to describe to you what the potential is. Granger is exploring and investigating. You have heard about their program, we to are exploring and investigating. Can we financially reinvent this YMCA? Can we do it? We are not prepared to tell you it is a go. We are investigating. We feel like you aught to be aware, not only of what we are doing at this point, but what brought us to this point. That is the point to be made tonight. If there are any other questions or comments that could help us, we would be really happy to have them. David Brower, YMCA. As a lifelong resident of Lansing, I was probably one of the first kids to use the YMCA in terms of swimming and their arts and crafts back in the early 50's. To me that building has a lot of significance and meaning and I have been on the Board in various capacities for a number of years now. I was president of the YMCA back in 1987. 1 went through most of the interactions several times over of how to readapt that facility. This is not just an office building, this facility was designed to meet the specific set of needs with gyms, courts, pools, and locker rooms on multiple floors, the residency in the open "U" shape, the space that was available and trying to use the existing walls. Every time we looked at it, it was prohibited in terms HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7, 2000 Pape 7 of what we can do. It just is not configured the way you would set up a YMCA facility with special types of aspects of the services we are trying to provide. So, every single interation, I have been involved in at least 3, to try to look with developers, with architects, to see if we could redevelop that existing facility and make it have any sort of reasonable payback is just not cost effective to do. I think part of what we are looking for at this point in time is we do extensive market survey of what the downtown community would support at what price points. Part of what the effort that I am trying to coordinate with the staff and other members of the redevelopment committee is to bring together the division of what we want to try to maintain down in downtown Lansing. We obviously have a branch out in Haslett and another branch in South Lansing, but in terms of the community downtown and what facilities we want, it is different from what is in that building. We don't want to have that same kind of operation here. That is not what the community wants now, the pool needs to be much bigger, if we can afford it. We still will have a gym, but the whole configuration of how the locker rooms are now, it is not set up conducive to the type of operations we want. If you have been in there and in the locker rooms they are very cut up and they are organized in strange ways, multiple levels that were not set up any rational way. Beyond the cost issue, the building is not laid out in a way that is any way compatible with what we are trying to get off the building. I think if we are honest with our ability to achieve our vision for what we would like to have in the YMCA, we are looking to see how much of that mission we are able to afford. One of the reasons we are working with the Granger Group is we think there are some synergies of how we can put together a package for the community that would have the ability to be marketed and to be able to be a point that we can afford and obviously be able to support. That is why we are working with the group. The Redevelopment Committee has a target date, roughly the end of February, to have enough information to start discussing this with our Board. It makes sense to see if this has viability. Granger is on a current path to try to see if there is enough interested in the community to try and lease out what space is available in the joint facility. Quite honestly, the facility that was discussed last month is certainly conceptual at this time. There is a tremendous amount of work to do by the Granger Group and the YMCA volunteers and staff to how we use the market research we have done, putting it into an actual architectural rendering of what would be in that facility for a while, and we are looking at putting together the cost information of that roughly by the end of February so we can make a decision if this is a go or no go. But honestly, the stop clock is ticking and we have had two water disasters in the last 8 years, where mains have broken and created a lot of damage in the lower floors. The roof, the whole facility is deteriorating and quite honestly that building is not worth putting the money in to restore it. It is not a full size building that you could develop whole floors. It is "U" HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7, 2000 Paae 8 Shape. The upper floors are not solid. If you were going to try and do anything, the first thing you would do is tear out the center portion of the "Ll" and try to restructure it to find enough space to market. But then you get into the fact that all the special use facilities, the course, the gyms, the locker rooms, the pools, all that stuff is not where you want it. To try to stack that into a side building that we have there is just not cost effective. That is the reality we are at, we are going to have to do something about that facility one way or another and if the project with Granger doesn't happen, we are probably going to have to consider raising that building and building a smaller YMCA to start servicing some component of the downtown operations. As indicated, every board I have been on for over 20 years now has had a commitment to the downtown area. We intend to continue to serve the Lansing community from an operation there. That has been our primary goal in our mission. So, as you take a look and as we bring more information forward as the project starts to evolve but we will have a better idea from the YMCA's standpoint of whether we can continue to work with Granger and we are working in good faith that we will be able to make this thing go. We have committed a great deal of time, effort and resources. The entire association is behind this joint effort. We will see where it leads. It is not just an office building that you can reconvert by tearing everything out and then sitting in a shell, as I heard prior to this, and going ahead and making space available to the community. Karl Gotting, YMCA. The tax credit issue came up at the last meeting and it has already been touched upon. If we were even to attempt to use tax credits, the first thing we would have to do is find a partner. We have not been able to find a partner. Because a 501 C3, which the YMCA is, cannot use tax credits so we have to form a liability company or a limited partnership, which means to find somebody, such as Granger that wants to be part of a rehabilitation and then find an investor that is willing to put the money in to invest to buy the tax credits. That applies to both Federal and State credits. That would be the first thing. We have not been able to find a partner that is even interested in that building at this point in time and we have tried over the years. The second issue is if we did that would the tax credits be available. The answer is no they would not be available because we are 501 C3. The financing that we are going to be using on that building is also tax exempt bond financing, which kills the tax credits. We will be occupying it, if we were to go forward of the building essentially by ourselves without Granger we would be occupying most, if not all, the vast majority of the building. Which means that part of the building is not available for tax credits, you can't use that for the rehabilitation. It does not apply. So basically, the answer is, which Ms. Cantlon raised the last time to Gary HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December T 2000 Pai4e 9 Granger about tax credits, it is just not possible. They are not available. That is a big chunk of your money, that is your equity money to try to develop and save that facade. It is not there, we don't believe that physically you can save it anyway, but I wanted to answer that tax credit issue. It is not a practical thing to do, they won't be available. Because it is the type of structure we would use, financial or operating. That hopefully responds to that question. I was president of the YMCA when a lot of this was going on, frankly I thought it was going to happen and I made a major contribution and it did not happen. We have tried everything we could. That building does not lend itself to a rehabilitation. Mr. Branstner said he appreciates that the tax credit issue was clarified. Some of the groups that we bring up here don't even take it seriously, but that is an enlightening review of how it affects non -profits. Ms. Collette was asked if she has experienced this struggle herself. She responded by saying that a lot of the Old Town Business have done this and found investor fine, but that is a different situation. You can usually find banks that will buy the tax credits from you as an investment or use for your debt. I am not sure about the bond issue. Mr. Gotting said that they involve non -profits in this all the time, and as a matter of fact I have bee involved in some of the projects over on N. Grand River. Those are situations where the non-profit is not making the major use of the building, they may own the building, they are usually turning them into a commercial or residential or something like that, so they are not occupying the building. They are not also using the tax exempt financing that is the tax exempt bond. So since we are involved and we are going to occupy the building immediately that illiminates that part of the building as far as the credits are concerned. If you are only occupying a small part of it then you can structure your ownership that you can avoid that. But we can not do that because we are going to be occupying the building. So that eliminates that rehabilitation. The normal situation is with a non-profit, yes you can work it out, I do it all the time, but on this one I have researched it, it just is not going to be available. Ms. Cantlon asked about of the market study, I have worked in recreation for 20 years, it does change. It is a considerable consideration here. How do you project with a new building to accommodate changes it the future? You are making a significant investment obviously and it could change in 5 - 10 years in a totally new direction. Mr. Frangale responded that understanding that people change, there are certain things that we have done to see if certain programs are going to live long. It is not a low risk option, there is risk to deciding what people are going to want in 2012, but we do believe HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7, 2000 Paae 10 what we will create is more flexible adaptable space, which is the wave of recreation or either social or physical recreation is to create adaptable space, large base space, partition wall space. Building it around a center stairwell encased in concrete block and steel which you are never moving, that is what our building looks like. Instead they start moving things out the perimeters and allow us to reconfigure to the needs of people. What may need 8,000 square feet in 2003, may only need 6,000 square feet in 2010, but we can move the components of the box and that is really the best hedge against locking yourself into program space. That was not thought about in 1950, we wanted to house people, so we built 130 residence rooms and that is it. That is 40,000 square feet of building that is for one purpose only and that was the thinking back then and now you have to do it differently, you have to create larger base space and larger floor plates and the expandable, adaptable pieces. Granted, once you stick a pool in the ground it is a pool. But that is where you take that risk, I think though after 100 years of teaching people to swim, we are reasonably sure that that type of program will be there for the YMCA, but for other things, we like the adaptable space. Ms. Cantlon said she had a couple more questions. Did the YMCA have any other consideration for another property? To sell this property so that it may be adaptively reused for residence. We have a border across the way. As you said, it was designed for residences. Was there another property in Lansing that you looked at? It was answered by saying no, we like our location. Ms. Cantlon said it is a prime location overlooking a park. It was stated that we like this property and the way the downtown is moving and kind of settling in we are really committed to Lenawee Street and where we are situated. Ms. Cantlon asked one more question. This is a relatively young building, it is 51 years old. In the scheme of things, and perhaps in America we are very short sighted, in Europe buildings are 300-400 years old. In both cases people have referred to maintenance issues and the University recently got quite a bit of flack about their buildings because they were prepared to raise buildings because money that had been identified for maintenance had been deferred and used for other purposes. I guess this seems to be a trend in Lansing is deferred maintenance. Mr. Fragale stated that Michigan State University has a tradition of building 100 year buildings. We put much more money into the exterior and the components so that they last a long time. As I sat there and listen, I worked in the Universities so I have some knowledge of this. We try to put a lot more money into these buildings so we can readapt them and use them, but there is a point on which even that extends. This facility was designed without flexibility in mind and the residence piece that we talked about a little bit HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7. 2000 Paae I 1 gives the upper 4 floors in a "U" shape. You have a lot of other space in the first floors and the basement. All of the plumbing, the infrastructure, the roofs all those components are worn out. But, the problem with trying to readapt this and just save the facade, which was one of the goals at one time, is the way that building is completed is like no building that we would build in this day and age. As we went through a whole series of trying to upgrade our YMCA facilities, it is very difficult to accomplish all our missions with the site. Whether we can afford it is a whole other issue. I look at my age group, the baby boomers and I think that I look at water aerobics and see seniors with arthritis and trying to help others to swim, we feel the pool is a very integral part of what the YMCA should have if we can afford it. It is a size of pool that is much bigger than what is in that facility now. Also, I think that the YMCA invented basketball and we should try to maintain a gym for the children and the adults in the downtown area. Those are two key components that we want to keep in there that are a special use and part of the design that is initially proposed with Granger. The remaining space that we would use then is a whole different configuration that we don't have the ability to readapt in this building. And you are right, we don't know how we are going to want to configure that space, but the idea is to keep it as flexible as possible. We would like to have additional space for Granger. We are trying to make sure that in any design that in 10-15 years we could have additional space because we outgrew our facilities. Those are strategies we want to have as we continue to work with the Granger Group to try to develop this. I am not an architectural engineer either and I would not profess the ability to go into detail. Having gone through this with other developers for a better part of two decades mobile people looking at how we can redevelop that space, nobody has even come close to making it work because it was not developed in a way that allows for this to happen. The issue of deferred maintenance, maybe that is a trend in Lansing, I don't know, but at some point it seems that we can't keep up. Has maintenance been deferred on that building, possibly, it has not been in the last 7 years because we have seen to it. But we are finding now that we cannot keep up. We can not plead ourselves totally innocent of not deferring things from one year to the next, I just don't know that, but I would say in terms of trying to keep the membership fees down as low as possible, I don't think enough of that money was set aside for maintenance. I don't think we were unique unfortunately and I know that since Tony has come here we have made a huge effort in all the facilities to put more money aside for maintenance and maintain the facilities the way they should be and upgrade them as we could, to make them accessible and maintain them all they could. To help the committee on the tax credits, another thing that when you speak to non profits in the future who are more capital intense is that every decision made is about accessibility. The history of the town and its buildings and wanting HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7, 2000 Pa.ve 12. to preserve them is understandable. We make our decisions based on accessibility and every dollar that we spend for a new YMCA is a dollar that must be funded by the community. That means to be paying back the improvements that are made. Depending on how much it costs to make that happen, that is what is costs for people to come in through our doors. The more we limit accessibility, the more expensive we get, with either our plans, renovations or improvements. So, non -profits are looking at every dollar translated into a dollar impact on the accessibility. People could otherwise not afford to come to the YMCA, so we are always pulled by what they are saying as the need to read down as far as we can in the community by our pricing. That is what keeps us from going underwater on anything. It also goes the other way on the scale and that is it makes you trade off maintenance decisions sometimes because the cost of things at the YMCA are out of reach for this group of people or that group of people. It is how we keep it in reach of people and take care of our own. It goes back and forth, it is not justification, but what happens sometimes. Ms. Cantlon asked about the target market downtown, are you looking at, for example, state workers, city workers, office workers primarily or is it still primarily family? It was answered that it is the whole thing. The best position, income wise, to have as far as the workforce goes is right in downtown Lansing. But, the contradiction to that is that the household income is on the opposite end of the scale from the outlying regions. So, we can appeal to the worker market, but we exist for the kids and families who live in and around the downtown area and that is what this building has to end up being. It has to be that kind of place. Sure we will appeal to the people who work downtown, we appeal to them now, but we have always served the kids and families downtown, that is one of the really nice components of our program. That is going to stay. Another comment was made by a representative. He said, I asked to be on that board many years ago for one reason. Because of the service it gave to the youth and children and the underprivileged of this community. The only reason I am still involved in that YMCA is because that is what it serves. As an Attorney, I can go down there and pay my way, it is these folks that can't pay there way. That is the population we are concerned about, that is why I am involved in the YMCA. We have a scholarship program and you have a health plan. The YMCA is a partner with the United Way, we are still funded from them. The money from our supporters are divided to give these families the chance to participate. The YMCA is a family oriented organization. Mr. Branstner said, first of all, you have made a very good case, I think, for the need to replace the building and I also appreciate the fact that the YMCA wants to stay in that location in the downtown and maintain their commitment to the downtown. I hope that you have also looked at what the solution has HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES, December 7, 2000 Page 13 been in other city's because I am sure an aging YMCA is not an uncommon thing. I hope you have looked at that and I hope that the design of this building that you propose to replace, make an effort, we don't need anymore ugly buildings downtown. Maybe styling from the old building can be pulled into the design of the new building particularly in the entrance. Just do a good building if you are going to do something. Do it right. Ms. Collette said, I go to the YMCA and am one of those people who walk in and say can't we have a nicer place than this for what we pay, I do really feel the need in the downtown, the kind of people we are trying to attract to the downtown really need a better YMCA and I am really glad that you are looking at that. I think our job is to look at the building and not the use. We are not against the Y it is like apple pie, we love the Y. We have to look at the building. Lansing is the worst place I have ever lived in my life for its concern for its properties and especially its historic properties. We raze things right and left, we ruin a lot of the base of our city and I feel very strange knowing that there is a building with a permit for demolition and that 20 years from now people will look back at that decision and say, "That was a beautiful building and nobody cared about it". I think it is a shame that the building is in the shape that it is in right now. That a 50 year old building would be in that condition, whose fault it is I don't know. I really think we should take a look at the building, although I know you have done a ton of research on it and you guys have sat in meetings for hours on end and pounded through this, but I think it would be very profitable thing to go through that building. This is a rezoning request by the YMCA that will be referred to the Planning Board in January. As far as developing your agency referral response, normally you would refer this to committee and then the action will be taken in January. Mr. Rieske said you meet before the Planning board anyway. The Planning Board is going to meet on the January 9 and you can submit an agency referral at your next meeting or you could have a committee meeting in between and come up with a referral on your January 4 meeting. Kolhoff moved, seconded by Branstner, a motion to refer Z-15-00 to the Design Review and Executive Committee for recommendation. On a voice vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5- 0). HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7. 2000 Page 14 B. Approval of Minutes: November 2, 2000 Webb moved, seconded by Miernik, a motion to approve the minutes of the November 2, 2000 meeting. On a voice vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). C. Committee Reports: 1. Executive Committee i. Agency Referral - Act-19-00, 115 and 119 S. Washington Square, Balconies in ROW Next meeting: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 at 5:30 p.m., Planning Office, Library. Collett moved, seconded by Miernik, a motion to approve the Executive Committee's agency referral recommendation to deny approval of Act-19-00, a request for balconies in the ROW. On a voice vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. Design Review Committee - None Next meeting: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 at 5:30 p.m., Planning Office, Library 3. Education Committee i. Press Kit: Preliminary Reports for Proposed Historic Districts Collett and Cantlon met on November 17, 2000 to outline materials to be included in a press kit for the public hearing notice on the proposed historic districts: • Executive Summary of the preliminary report • Benefits and responsibilities of historic districts • Facts and Myths • Tax credit incentives (1 page sheet to be provided by SHPO) • List of knowledgeable contact persons Next meeting: TBA (Cantlon will contact members). HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES. December 7. 2000 Paae 15 D. Staff Comments 1. Darius B. Moon House Historic District Study, 216 Huron Street i Preliminary Report - Property Owner Notification Cantlon reported that public hearing notification will be sent week of December 11, 2000 to avoid Christmas mail rush. Ordinance requires 14 days advance notice. 2. Capitol Historic District Study i Preliminary Report - Property Owner Notification Public hearing notification will be sent week of December 11, 2000 to avoid Christmas mail rush and will include similar materials outlined in Education Committee press kit report. ii Property Owner Questionnaire Jim Ruff is developing a questionnaire/response post card for inclusion in public hearing notification to property owners in the proposed Capitol Historic District. E. Pending Items: Future Action Required Requests for Establishment of River Point Neighborhood Historic District No action 2. Ethics Training (Collett, Kissee). No action 3. Frances Willard Fountain Preservation and Relocation Miernik reported that Parks and Recreation and Old Town Main Street are working cooperatively to accomplish the goal of relocating the fountain to the Turner -Dodge House Park. Local 9 of the Brick Layers Union have identified contractors who will donate the construction of a platform base for the fountain in its new location. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION AGENDA, December 7, 2000 Paize 16 8. NEW BUSINESS 1. Proposal to Modify Historic District Ordinance i. Draft # 3 (11/15/00) for Public Hearing 12/04/00 Cantlon reported that the proposal to modify the Historic District Ordinance was on the Council agenda December 4, 2000. It was referred to Development and Planning Committee and is anticipated for adoption in January, 2001. 3. Approval of HDC Meeting Calendar for 2001 Miernik moved, seconded by Collett, a motion approve the HDC 2001 calendar. On a voice vote, there were Ayes: 5, Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5- 0). 4. Annual Review and Accomplishments Cantlon distributed program and tasks measurements for the HDC annual budget report. 9. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS - None 10. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESERVATION RECOGNITIONS - None 11. ADJOURNMENT Miernik moved, seconded by Kolhoff, a motion to adjourn the meeting. On a voice vote, there were Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously (5- 0). Meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Susan Cantlon Recording Secretary