Historic Commission Minutes

(back to Archive Overview)

Commissioner Tom Swigart called the Historic District Commission meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.

Present: Cryderman, Culp, Swigart, Bayly

Excused: Gudritz, Worley, Holleman

Also Present: City Manager, Gary Word

MOTION by Cryderman supported by Bayly, to approve the February19, 2003 minutes as submitted. Voice vote: Motion carried unanimously.

None.

City Administration: None.

City Council: None.

Historic District Commission: Chairman Swigart reported that City Council passed a Resolution to encourage MayBerry State Park to rebuild the barn and farm destroyed by the horrific fire last month.

Other Community / Governmental Liaisons: None.

Mill Stream Apartments
430/450 E Main St

The applicant, Michael Shaw described plans to repair the back entryway of 450 E. Main St. The stairway is currently in disrepair with broken crumbling steps, inadequate stairway access to the upper floor, and needed repairs to the basement access. The rear deck is to be extended four feet to allow for a stairway to be added to the south of the building. The first floor steps and landing will be rebuilt as well as the access well to the basement. New siding will be consistent with the old and painted to match. Stairway posts, and rails will be added.

The exterior of the building will be painted. Colors include: Balusters - Cyprus Green, Base - Cypress Moss, Accent- Eggplant, Trim Boards – Cottonwood.

Commissioner Comments and Concerns: The detailing of the posts and the caps should be kept in a uniform style.

MOTION by Culp, supported by Cryderman, to approve the application for Mill Stream Apartments with the condition that the stairway clearances and heights meet the building codes for commercial stairway and with exterior colors as submitted. Voice vote: Motion carried unanimously.

After the motion, Mr. Shaw stated he has reached an agreement with Belanger over the south easement and the storm sewers. He plans to asphalt the rear parking lot and install a new fence to the south. He asked for direction on the fence style. The Commissioners stated that good examples were on High St and the N.W. corner of Wing and Dunlap.

Chairman Swigart stated that only two Commissioners turned in comments regarding the

Demolition Guidelines and HDC Ordinance revisions.

Discussion followed regarding Tom Swigart’s notes and comments (2-4-2003.)

D.1.a. Written report by the Building Inspector identifying the hazard posed by the building. Who would cover the cost of the services for the report? What if it is a judgment call by the Building Official? Should the applicant absorb the cost of hiring a Certified, Structural Engineer?

E.1 "If the applicant cannot be accepted…" The time begins (within reason) according to the ordinance, from acceptance of the completed application (photos, square footage, floor plan of the basic interior, overall dimensions, and how it lays on the site, date of construction, historical importance etc.)

Tabling vs. deferring is yet to be resolved. Manager Word stated, "Robert’s Rules of Order uses the term "defer" as a defined process, used by the Commissioners because of insufficient information. It is not a denial, but offers the applicant to gather the missing and needed information.

Financial Hardship – What is the process of denial and shouldn’t this be defined as a second paragraph or as an appendix?

Discussion followed regarding Tom Swigart’s notes and comments (2-24-2003.)

42-9 What are the "rules"? The term "rules" needs to be defined.

42-6 We need an accurate map that represents the text. Manager Word stated that a current up to date is in progress.

42-6 (8) Is it the applicant’s responsibility to know the "rules" and comply with them? M. Cryderman suggested that the Guidelines would be available to the applicant. It is up to the applicant to read and understand.

42-6 (9) It appears that Ms. Sacks that this goes outside the ordinance. Perhaps a list of outside resources (other than the HDC Ordinance) could be made available. The HDC application could be revised. Perhaps there could be a box on the application for the applicant to check indicating that he was familiar or made aware that a HDC Guidelines was available.

42-9 (3) Fees – Can fees be referenced generically and determined "as set by Council"? City Council adopts and sets the fees.

42-9 (4) (a) how much expertise is needed to comply with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Standards. How much credibility will there be in our Standards?

42-11 (1) (b) 60-day action period and extensions. Manager Word stated that an applicant should expect a decision and should not be held hostage to an arbitrary date. Sixty days is arbitrary. The act of "deferring" an action is an action. This means that you the Commissioners are not comfortable with the direction the applicant is taking. To defer action is a judgment call on part of the Commissioners. For example, minor changes need to be made, the rules have changed (Building Code, etc.)

42-16 Conflicting Jurisdiction. All agreed that the terminology "the Commission", "The Northville Historical Commission", "the Historic District Commission" needs clarification. The different terminology was very confusing.

MOTION by Cryderman supported by Culp, to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

P. S. Howard
Recording Secretary