05-2008 HDC PACKET Short

REGULAR SESSION OF THE ANN ARBOR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2008 AT 7:00 P.M. SECOND FLOOR, CITY COUNCIL

CHAMBERS, 100 N. 5th AVENUE, ANN ARBOR, MI
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
A- HEARINGS
A-1 310-314 SECOND STREET – remove two garages – OWSHD
A-2 713 WEST LIBERTY – rear addition and exterior modifications – OWSHD
A-3 617 FIFTH STREET – remove and replace garage – OWSHD
A-4 1310 HILL STREET – remove existing garage, rear addition – WHHD
A-5 315 EAST LIBERTY – rear stairwell addition, egress windows -- ELHD
B- OLD BUSINESS
B-1 302 SOUTH MAIN STREET – new storefront awning and sign – MSHD
B-2 522 DETROIT STREET – substitute rail materials on approved project – OFWHD
C- NEW BUSINESS
C-1 Design Guidelines – discussion and recommendation to City Council
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION – GENERAL (Limited to 3 Minutes per Speaker)
D- APPROVAL OF MINUTES
D-1 Draft Minutes of the April 10, 2008 Regular Session
E- REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS
F- ASSIGNMENTS
F-1 May 2008
F-2 Review Committee: June 9, 2008 at 5pm for the June 12, 2008 meeting
G- STAFF ACTIVITIES REPORT
G-1 April 2008
H- CONCERNS OF COMMISSIONERS
I- COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT
Persons with disabilities are encouraged to participate. Accommodations, including sign language
interpreters, may be arranged by contacting Planning Development Services by telephone at 994-2696 or by
written request addressed to Planning Development Services C/O Board of Appeals, 100 N. Fifth Ave., Ann
Arbor, MI 48104, at least 24 hours in advance.
ANN ARBOR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
Staff Report
ADDRESS: 310-314 Second Street, Application Number 08-049
DISTRICT: Old West Side Historic District
REPORT DATE: May 1, 2008
REPORTED BY: Jill Thacher, City Planner/Historic Preservation Coordinator
REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: Tuesday, May 6, 2008
OWNER APPLICANT
Name: 310-314 Second LLC Andrew Johncox

Address: 7844 Fischers Way 10267 Byron Road
Dexter, MI 48130 Howell, MI 48855
Phone: (734) 277-7474 (517) 404-7147
BACKGROUND: 310 Second Street was built before 1853, and was moved to this site in 1898
from the corner of Liberty and Second. 314 first appears in city directories in 1897.
LOCATION: The site is on the west side of Second Street, between West Liberty and West
William.
APPLICATION: The applicant seeks HDC approval to remove a garage behind 314 Second
Street and a barn behind 310 Second Street.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
From the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation:
(2) The historic character of a

property will be retained and
preserved. The removal of distinctive
materials or alteration of features,
spaces, and spatial relationships that
characterize a property will be
avoided.
(5) Distinctive materials, features,

finishes, and construction techniques
or examples of craftsmanship that
preserved.
(6) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced.
Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive
feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and where
possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by
documentary and physical evidence.
From the Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings :
Building Site
Recommended: Identifying, retaining, and preserving buildings and their features as well as
features of the site that are important in defining its overall historic character. Site features can
include driveways, walkways, lighting, fencing, signs, benches, fountains, wells, terraces, canal
systems, plants and trees, berms, and drainage or irrigation ditches; and archeological features
that are important in defining the history of the site.
Retaining the historic relationship between buildings, landscape features, and open space.
Not Recommended: Removing or radically changing buildings and their features or site features
which are important in defining the overall historic character of the building site so that, as a
result, the character is diminished.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The barn behind 310 Second was originally part of 413 West Liberty (a Greek Revival
house built prior to 1894), and appears on the 1908 Sanborn map. Sanborns mark it as a
stable at first, and later an automobile garage. Until at least 1971, it had the address 413
½ West Liberty. In 1908 there was a one-story addition with the same size footprint next
to the existing barn, accessed through the east side door that can be seen in the
photographs. The addition was removed between 1925 and 1931. At some point,
property lines were redrawn and the barn went to 310 Second.
The garage behind 314 Second was built between 1931 and 1971, per Sanborn maps.
The photographs provided seem to indicate that the garage is a separate structure
immediately adjacent to the barn.
2. The garage has a negative impact on the spatial integrity of the barn. Therefore, it is
appropriate to remove it.
3. The barn is possibly much older than 1908, given that 413 West Liberty was probably
built before the Civil War. The Review Committee visit will help determine its condition
and whether the barn has lost its integrity through the removal of the one-story addition
and the lot reconfiguration. Until it is determined otherwise, staff considers it to be a
contributing structure in the Old West Side Historic District.
4. 310 and 314 Second Street are in common ownership.
5. More information on the condition of both structures has been requested.

POSSIBLE MOTION: (Note that the motion supports staff findings and is only a suggestion.
The Review Committee, consisting of staff and at least two Commissioners, will meet with the
applicant on site and then make a recommendation at the meeting.)
I move that the Commission issue a certificate of appropriateness for the portion of the
application at 314 Second Street in the Old West Side Historic District to remove a one-car
garage. The work is generally compatible in exterior design, arrangement, texture, material and
relationship to the surrounding area and meets The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation, in particular standard 2.
I move that the Commission deny the portion of the application at 310 Second Street in the Old
West Side Historic District to remove a barn. The work is not generally compatible in exterior
design, arrangement, texture, material and relationship to the surrounding area and does not
meet The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, in particular standards 2, 5,
and 6.
MOTION WORKSHEET:
I move that the Commission
____ Issue a Certificate of Appropriateness
____ Deny the Application
For the work at 310/314 Second Street in the Old West Side Historic District
____ As proposed.
____ Provided the following condition(S) is (ARE) met: 1) CONDITION(s)
The work
____ Is generally compatible with the size, scale, massing, and materials and meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, standard(S) number(S) 1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
____ Is not generally compatible with the size, scale, massing and materials, and DOES
NOT MEET the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, standard(S)
number(S) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 for the following reason(S): 1) REASON(s)
ATTACHMENTS: application, photos.

A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-1
A-2
Staff Report
ADDRESS: 713 West Liberty Street, Application Number 08-045
OWNER APPLICANT
Name: Michael Bielby Same

Address: 605 N. Fifth Ave
Ann Arbor, MI 48014
Phone: (734) 996-0119
BACKGROUND: This two-and-a-half-story, gable-front house appears to have been

constructed about 1885 for John Goetz Jr, a grocer, John Goetz & Sons, on South Main Street.
John’s widow, Dorothea Goetz, lived in the house until 1940. From about 1920 until 1940 a
Lydia Henne, a Christian Scientist also lived in the house. Marwood H. Goetz, a student at
Cleary College lived in the house in 1941, but by 1943 several members of the Bensinger family
who worked at Liberty Food Lockers lived in the house. By 1945 a Ford employee, Herman G.
Wieterhoft and his wife Rosa lived in the house. The 1916 and 1925 Sanborn maps show the
house in its current configuration with two, one-story outbuildings on the property. One
outbuilding had an ice house attached to it.
The current owner received a staff approval to remove the artificial siding and two non-original
concrete porch stoops to repair the foundation behind them.
In April, 2008 the applicant received HDC approval to remove a non-original rear door enclosure
and a chimney on the rear section of the house.
LOCATION: The site is on the south side of West Liberty Street, between Fifth and Seventh.
APPLICATION: The applicant seeks HDC approval to 1) remove an original knee-window on

the second floor of the south elevation and replace it with an egress window and shed dormer;
2) remove a 1950s sunporch addition (7’2” by 9’9”) from the southwest corner of the house and
replace it with an 8’ by 18’ deck; 3) add a second floor to the existing one story rear addition,
which would remove the hipped roof, a non-original bathroom dormer, and an original window;
4) install a new window in a new opening at the top of the south-facing rear gable; 5) cut four
new window openings and install Andersen double-hung windows on the existing south
elevation that match the height of an existing double-hung window on that elevation; 6) replace
three exterior doors that currently have interior doors installed with half-light exterior doors, and
A-2
install a small shed roof approximately 4’ wide and extending 3’ from the building face over the
south elevation basement door.
(2) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of
distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that
characterize a property will be avoided.
(5) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or

examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
(9) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy
historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize a property. The
new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic
materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the
property and its environment.
(10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken
in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of
the historic property will be unimpaired.
From the Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
(please see the entire section on New Additions to Historic Buildings in the Guidelines):
Recommended: Constructing a new addition so that there is the least possible loss of historic
materials and so that character-defining features are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed.
Locating the attached exterior addition at the rear or on an in-conspicuous side of a historic
building; and limiting its size and scale in relationship to the historic building.
Designing new additions in a manner that makes clear what is historic and what is new.
Not Recommended: Attaching a new addition so that the character-defining features of the
historic building are obscured, damaged, or destroyed.
Designing a new addition so that its size and scale in relation to the historic building are out of
proportion, thus diminishing the historic character.
Building Site
Recommended: Designing new exterior additions to historic buildings or adjacent new
construction which is compatible with the historic character of the site and which preserve the
historic relationship between a building or buildings, landscape features, and open space.
Not Recommended: Introducing new construction onto the building site which is visually
incompatible in terms of size, scale, design, materials, color and texture or which destroys
A-2
historic relationships on the site.
Health and Safety Code Requirements

Recommended: Identifying the historic building’s character-defining spaces, features, and
finishes so that code-required work will not result in their damage or loss.
Complying with health and safety code, including seismic codes and barrier-free access
requirements, in such a manner that character-defining spaces, features, and finishes are
preserved.
Not Recommended; Undertaking code-required alterations to a building or site before identifying

those spaces, features, or finishes which are character-defining and must therefore be
preserved.
Altering, damaging, or destroying character-defining spaces, features, and finishes while making
modifications to a building or site to comply with safety codes.
Windows
Recommended: Identifying, retaining, and preserving windows – and their functional and
decorative features – that are important in defining the overall historic character of the building.
Such features can include frames, sash, muntins, glazing, sills, heads, hoodmolds, paneled or
decorated jambs and molding, and interior and exterior shutters and blinds.
Designing and installing additional windows on rear or other non-character-defining elevations if

required by the new use. New window openings may also be cut into exposed party walls. Such
design should be compatible with the overall design of the building, but not duplicate the
fenestration pattern and detailing of a character-defining elevation.
Not Recommended: Removing or radically changing windows which are important in defining
the overall historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished.
Changing the number, location, size or glazing pattern of windows, through cutting new
openings, blocking-in windows, and installing replacement sash which does not fit the historic
window opening.
Introducing a new design that is incompatible with the historic character of the building.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. Staff does not support the replacement of character-defining windows with egress
windows. The second floor knee window on the east elevation is original, important to
defining the character of the building, and prominently placed near the front of the house.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings are very
clear about the need to preserve character-defining features when complying with health
and safety codes.
2. The applicant is proposing a rear addition on top of an existing first-floor addition. The
addition would cause the removal of an original window, which the applicant would keep
A-2
and use to repair other original windows on the house, and a non-original bathroom
window and dormer. The height and width of the addition is appropriate and subordinate
to the main house. Egress windows proposed in the addition will serve most of the
upstairs bedrooms.
3. The removal of the 1950s sunporch addition is appropriate and will expose the cellar
door, which is currently blocked by the sunporch foundation. The installation of a deck in
this location will allow the continued utilization of the kitchen door above the cellar door.
The use of half-light wood and half-light metal doors in the kitchen and cellar,
respectively, is appropriate. The current cellar door is an interior door that is not
appropriate for exterior use.
4. All of the proposed windows are Andersen wood windows, double-hung or casement.
Information on the particular styles is provided in the packet.
I move that the Commission issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the portion of the
application at 713 West Liberty Street in the Old West Side Historic District to remove a 1950s
sunporch addition and replace it with an 8’ by 18’ deck; to add a second floor to the existing one
story rear addition; to install a new window in a new opening at the top of the south-facing rear
gable; to install four new double-hung windows in new openings on the existing south elevation;
to replace three exterior doors, which currently have interior doors installed in them, with half-
light exterior doors; and to install a small shed roof over the south elevation basement door, as
proposed. The work is generally compatible in exterior design, arrangement, texture, material
and relationship to the rest of the building and the surrounding area and meets The Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, in particular standards 2, 5, 9, and 10.
I move that the Commission deny the portion of the application at 713 West Liberty Street in the
Old West Side Historic District to remove a knee window on the south elevation and replace it
with an egress window and shed roof wall dormer. The work is not generally compatible in
exterior design, arrangement, texture, material and relationship to the rest of the building and
the surrounding area and does not meet The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation, in particular standard 2.
MOTION WORKSHEET:
For the work at 713 West Liberty Street in the Old West Side Historic District
____ As proposed.
A-2
The work
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
ATTACHMENTS: application, proposed changes list, drawings and photos.

A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-2
A-3
Staff Report
ADDRESS: 617 Fifth Street, Application Number 08-048
REPORT DATE: May 1, 2008 by Jill Thacher, Historic Preservation Coordinator
OWNER APPLICANT
Name: Lisa Granger Marc Rueter

Address: 617 Fifth Street 515 Fifth Street
Ann Arbor MI 48103 Ann Arbor, MI 48103
Phone: (734) 769-0070
BACKGROUND: This two-story craftsman-influenced house features full-width front and rear
porches. It first appears in the city directory in 1929 as the home of Glen W. Naylor, a driver for
the Arctic Electropure Creamery (which was located at the northeast corner of First Street and
West Liberty), and his wife Melvina.
LOCATION: The property is located on the east side of Fifth Street between West Madison
Street and Princeton Ave. It backs up to Turner Park Court.
APPLICATION: The applicant requests HDC approval to demolish an existing single-car

garage and construct a new two-car garage.
From the Secretary of the

Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation:
(2) The historic character of a

property will be retained and
preserved. The removal of
distinctive materials or
alteration of features, spaces,
and spatial relationships that
avoided.
(9) New additions, exterior

alterations or related new
construction will not destroy
historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The
A-3
From the Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings:
Building Site
construction which is compatible with the historic character of the site and which preserve
the historic relationship between a building or buildings, landscape features, and open
space.
Retaining the historic relationship between buildings, landscape features, and open
space.
incompatible in terms of size, scale, design, materials, color and texture or which
destroys historic relationships on the site.
Introducing a new building or site feature that is out of scale or otherwise inappropriate.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The existing garage is located at the rear of the property and can accommodate one car.
The garage door is on the east side of the building and is accessed (by motor vehicles)
from Turner Park Court, which runs along the rear of the property. The new garage will
be oriented in the same manner with access from Turner Park Court.
2. The existing garage is approximately 12’ x 18’. Currently the garage has a gable roof,
however, it appears the garage originally had a nearly flat roof that pitched towards the
rear or west side of the structure. The garage has a concrete foundation and the original
structure is constructed of wood framing and wood siding. The gables of the roof appear
to be scored plywood sheeting, similar to T-111 material. The roof is covered with
asphalt shingles.
3. The garage is not a character-defining feature of the property or the district, it does not
carry-over any of the house’s architectural features, and it is a utility building.
4. The proposed new two-car garage is 21’ x 21’. The height of the structure is not noted on
the plans; staff estimates the height to the peak to be approximately 16 feet. It is
proposed in the same location on the property as the existing garage, only extending
farther to the north. The proposed garage meets all setback requirements for the zoning
district in which the property is located. The footprint and placement of the proposed
garage is similar to existing garages on adjacent properties to the north and south of the
subject property.
5. The proposed garage will have a concrete foundation, wood frame construction, and
cement board siding. An 8/12 pitched gable roof is proposed, to be covered with asphalt
shingles. A hood is proposed to extend over the garage door and a 16” x 24” window is
A-3
proposed in the gable. Two 3-over-1 windows are proposed on the north elevation of the
structure. One person-door and two more 3-over-1 windows are proposed on the west
elevation. A gabled roof is proposed extending over the person-door.
6. The applicant has stated that the property owner is seeking more storage space by
constructing this garage instead of an addition onto the house. Staff believes this is an
appropriate way to achieve that goal since the proposed garage is similar in size and
placement to neighboring garages and its design is compatible with the house and
neighborhood.
POSSIBLE MOTIONS: (Note that the motions support staff findings and are only a suggestion.
I move that the Commission issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the application at
617 Fifth Street to demolish the existing one-stall garage and construct a new two-stall
garage as proposed. The work as proposed is generally compatible in exterior design,
arrangement, texture, material and relationship to the rest of the building and the
surrounding area and meets The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
standards, particularly numbers 2 and 9.
MOTION WORKSHEET:
For the work at 617 Fifth Street in the Old West Side Historic District
____ As proposed.
The work
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
ATTACHMENTS: application, description of work, drawings, window and door information,

photographs.
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-3
A-4
Staff Report
ADDRESS: 1310 Hill Street, Application Number 08-048
DISTRICT: Washtenaw Hill Historic District
OWNER APPLICANT
Name: David Chua Marc Rueter

Address: 845 Babb Circle 515 Fifth Street
Wayne, PA 19087 Ann Arbor, MI 48103
Phone: 769-0070
BACKGROUND: This 1890 Georgian Revival house was first occupied by Edward deMille
Campbell, a professor of analytical chemistry and metallurgy, and his family. The front façade’s
symmetry is notable, particularly the pedimented front gable, window placement, and chimneys
at both ends. See the attached study committee report for more information.
LOCATION: The site is on the south side of Hill Street, between South Forest Avenue and
Olivia Avenue.
APPLICATION: The applicant seeks HDC approval to 1) remove an original knee-window on

the second floor of the south elevation and replace it with an egress window and shed dormer;
2) remove a 1950s sunporch addition (7’2” by 9’9”) from the southwest corner of the house and
replace it with an 8’ by 18’ deck; 3)
add a second floor to the existing
one story rear addition, which would
remove the hipped roof, a non-
original bathroom dormer, and an
original window; 4) install a new
window in a new opening at the top
of the south-facing rear gable; 5) cut
four new window openings and
install Andersen double-hung
windows on the existing south
elevation that match the height of an
existing double-hung window on that
elevation; 6) replace three exterior
doors that currently have interior
doors installed with half-light exterior
A-4
doors, and install a small shed roof approximately 4’ wide and extending 3’ from the building
face over the south elevation basement door.

(10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken
in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of
the historic property will be unimpaired.
(please see the entire section on New Additions to Historic Buildings in the Guidelines):
Building Site
Identifying, retaining, and preserving buildings and their features as well as features of the site
that are important in defining its overall historic character. Site features can include driveways,
A-4
walkways, lighting, fencing, signs, benches, fountains, wells, terraces, canal systems, plants
and trees, berms, and drainage or irrigation ditches; and archeological features that are
important in defining the history of the site.
Retaining the historic relationship between buildings, landscape features, and open space.
Removing or radically changing buildings and their features or site features which are important
in defining the overall historic character of the building site so that, as a result, the character is
diminished.
Permitting buildings and site features to remain unprotected so that plant materials, fencing,
walkways, archeological features, etc. are damaged or destroyed.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The two sugar maples in the backyard are landmark trees and contribute to the character
of the site and the neighborhood. The design as proposed, with the second floor
cantilevered over the first, will reduce the building’s footprint and impact the trees’ root
systems less severely. This design and its intent is commendable. Per the city Land
Development Coordinator, the other threat to the trees is trucks and equipment driving
over their shallow root systems during construction. There are measures that can be
taken to prevent this from happening, such as (but not limited to) fencing surrounding the
critical root zone to keep equipment and materials away. Therefore, any approvals should
be conditioned with the requirement that adequate protection is given to the trees during
construction.
2. The applicant has provided information proving that the garage is a modern structure,
probably built after 1953. There is no evidence of the earlier garage present in the current
one. It is therefore a noncontributing structure, and its removal is appropriate.
3. The hyphen connection between the house and the addition is appropriate and protects
the form and integrity of the house. The addition could easily be removed in the future
and the house would be unimpaired.
4. The addition is too tall in relation to the house. If the garret bedroom were removed, the
remaining hipped roof would be an appropriate maximum height equal to the height of the
front gable (see page A7 of drawings).
5. The footprint of the addition is 756 square feet, of the hyphen is approximately 180
square feet, and of the main house is 1315 square feet (from the city assessor’s website).
The addition is 1835 total square feet and the main house is 2709 square feet. The
addition appears especially large from the west elevation drawing, but since a large
church sits not far from the proposed addition only a few feet across the west property
line, that view is blocked from the west. The lot is probably large enough to support an
A-4
addition of this size once the garage is removed. Staff would prefer an addition with an
overall smaller mass, but given this house’s contextual setting between a large church
and a large sorority, the impact to the neighbors will be minimal. The largest visual impact
will be from Hill Street, where the addition will be visible on the west side of the house.
Offsetting the addition (instead of placing it directly behind the house) is justified in this
case in order to protect the two landmark trees in the backyard. If the height were
lowered to that of the front gable or less, the appearance of the addition from Hill Street
would also be lessened.
6. Staff has requested line drawings of the elevations and these will be emailed to
commissioners or distributed at the meeting.
I move that the Commission deny the application at 1310 Hill Street in the Washtenaw Hill
Historic District to remove a garage and add a duplex addition. The work is not generally
compatible in exterior design, arrangement, texture, material and relationship to the rest of the
building and the surrounding area and does not meet The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
for Rehabilitation, in particular standard 9.
MOTION WORKSHEET:
For the work at 1310 Hill Street in the Washtenaw Hill Historic District
____ As proposed.
The work
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
A-4
ATTACHMENTS: application, drawings, project information and photos.

A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-4
A-5
Staff Report
ADDRESS: 315 East Liberty Street, Application Number 08-046
DISTRICT: East Liberty Historic District
OWNER APPLICANT
Name: Vahan Basmajian Mike Van Goor

Address: 315 E Liberty 118 N Fourth Ave Suite A
Ann Arbor, MI 48014 Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Phone: (734) 662-7888 (734) 741-9422
BACKGROUND: This two-story Queen Anne residential building was built in 1890 and was
the home of grocer William F. Stimson. It features wood one-over-one windows with small
colored squares of stained glass outlining the clear glass on many of the upper sashes.
In 2004 and 2005, certificates of appropriateness were issued to alter the front façade, install
a sidelight next to the front door, build a new front porch, and replace siding on the structure.
LOCATION: The site is on the north side of East Liberty Street, between South Fifth Avenue
and Division Street.
APPLICATION: The applicant seeks HDC approval to add an enclosed rear three-story
stairway; and replace three original windows with egress windows (two double hung on the
east elevation, and one fixed on the west elevation.
From the Secretary of the Interior’s

Standards for Rehabilitation:
(2) The historic character of

a property will be retained and
preserved. The removal of
distinctive materials or
alteration of features, spaces,
and spatial relationships that
avoided.
A-5

materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of
the property and its environment.
(10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be

undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form
and integrity of the historic property will be unimpaired.
(please see the entire section on New Additions to Historic Buildings in the
Guidelines):
Building Site
Health and Safety Code Requirements

Recommended: Identifying the historic building’s character-defining spaces, features, and
finishes so that code-required work will not result in their damage or loss.
Complying with health and safety code, including seismic codes and barrier-free access
requirements, in such a manner that character-defining spaces, features, and finishes are
preserved.
A-5
Not Recommended; Undertaking code-required alterations to a building or site before

identifying those spaces, features, or finishes which are character-defining and must
therefore be preserved.
Altering, damaging, or destroying character-defining spaces, features, and finishes while

making modifications to a building or site to comply with safety codes.
Windows
Recommended: Identifying, retaining, and preserving windows – and their functional and
decorative features – that are important in defining the overall historic character of the
building. Such features can include frames, sash, muntins, glazing, sills, heads, hoodmolds,
paneled or decorated jambs and molding, and interior and exterior shutters and blinds.
Designing and installing additional windows on rear or other non-character-defining

elevations if required by the new use. New window openings may also be cut into exposed
party walls. Such design should be compatible with the overall design of the building, but not
duplicate the fenestration pattern and detailing of a character-defining elevation.
Not Recommended: Removing or radically changing windows which are important in defining
the overall historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished.
Changing the number, location, size or glazing pattern of windows, through cutting new
openings, blocking-in windows, and installing replacement sash which does not fit the historic
window opening.
Introducing a new design that is incompatible with the historic character of the building.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. Space that was formerly commercial has been converted to residential, and the
owners are now trying to bring it up to City housing and building codes. An excellent
description of the project was provided by the applicant and may be found in the
packet.
2. Staff does not support the replacement of character-defining windows with egress
windows. All three windows proposed to be replaced are original, highly visible, and
help define the Queen Ann character of the house in their style and proportions. On
the east elevation, the proposed lengthening of the windows would interrupt the
horizontal character of the second floor and unbalance the pairs of equally-sized
windows near the front and back. On the west elevation, moving the square fixed
stained-glass window and replacing it with a much larger double hung would be an
even more egregious violation of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings are very
clear about the need to preserve character-defining features when complying with
health and safety codes. Because a property owner wants to put six bedrooms in an
apartment is not reason enough to set the standards aside. Also, the applicant could
work with the building official to reach an acceptable alternative design.
A-5
3. The proposed rear stairwell is an appropriate addition to the building. One original
window would be lost, but it is not character defining in the same way that the side
elevation windows are, which work in tandem with other windows and features. The
design is balanced and compatible with the existing house.
I move that the Commission issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the portion of the
application at 315 East Liberty Street in the East Liberty Historic District to add an enclosed
rear three-story stairway, as proposed. The work is generally compatible in exterior design,
arrangement, texture, material and relationship to the rest of the building and the surrounding
area and meets The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, in particular
standards 2, 5, 9, and 10.
I move that the Commission deny the portion of the application at 315 East Liberty Street to
remove three original windows and replace them with egress windows in larger openings.
The work is generally compatible in exterior design, arrangement, texture, material and
relationship to the rest of the building and the surrounding area and meets The Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, in particular standard 2.
MOTION WORKSHEET:
For the work at 315 East Liberty Street in the East Liberty Historic District
____ As proposed.
The work
____ Is generally compatible with the size, scale, massing, and materials and meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, standard(S) number(S) 1,
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
____ Is not generally compatible with the size, scale, massing and materials, and
DOES NOT MEET the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation,
standard(S) number(S) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 for the following reason(S): 1)
REASON(s)
ATTACHMENTS: application, proposed changes list, drawings and photos.

A-5
A-5
A-5
Jill Thacher
Historic District Commission Coordinator
Planning & Development Services
100 N Fifth Ave
Ann Arbor MI 48107-8647
734.994.2797 Phone
April 21, 2008 Project: Renovation at 315 E. Liberty Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Dear Jill,
Following is the information requested in the HDC Application.
Description of the existing property: The existing property has a three-story mixed-use
building located roughly in the center of the property. There is currently a commercial use on
the first floor and the residential use on the second and third floors. Previously, the entire
structure was utilized as a hair salon. Parking spaces are located adjacent to the building on the
north and east sides, and along the back (North) property line.
Description of proposed changes: A new code conforming stairwell is proposed on the back
(North) elevation in the location of the existing covered porch, which will serve as the private
entrance to the apartment and provide access to the second and third floors. The gable dormer
on the back elevation would be raised for the required headroom, and extended to as the
roofline of the new stairwell. The stairwell is proposed to have a split face masonry foundation
where exposed above grade, and concrete board beveled siding with a four-inch exposure to
match the existing siding on the back elevation.
Three windows are proposed to be changed on the side elevations to serve as an emergency
means of egress from the bedroom spaces. Two double hung windows are proposed to be
replaced on the East elevation with new double hung windows of similar width, but an
increased height to provide the code required in egress area, yet maintain the vertical
appearance of the existing windows. One fixed window is proposed to be replaced on the west
elevation with a new double hung window of similar width, but an increased height to provide
the code required egress area. As this window appears to be an original window with stained-
glass at the perimeter, it is proposed to be relocated to the first floor lobby directly below it in
exchange for the replacement window there.
Reason for proposed changes: As a part of the change in use group in occupancy from
commercial to residential space, code conforming in stairs to all levels and egress windows
from bedrooms are required to be provided as a means of egress.
Additional information: This building currently has an apartment on the third floor and an
apartment on the second floor. The second-floor unit is accessed either through the commercial
lobby on the first floor at the front of the building, by means of a non-code conforming stair
and non-fire rated door, or by means of the non-code conforming stair from the back porch at
the back of the building. The third-floor unit is accessed by means of the non-code conforming
stair from the back porch at the back of the building. Further, the apartment on the third-floor
does not have any code conforming egress windows. As an alternative to modifying the roof
lines with dormers to provide the required egress windows (which would be visible from the
street), the decision was made to combine the apartments and locate all the bedrooms on the
second floor with the common areas on the third-floor. In doing so, the only modifications
visible on the side elevations would be for new egress windows, which would be required
regardless if there were one or two apartments in the building.
118a north fourth avenue ann arbor, michigan 48104 734.741.9422 fax: 734.741.0414
A-5
Additional information (continued): The entrance to the second-floor will be closed off from
the commercial lobby, and a new code conforming fire rated stairwell is proposed at the back
elevation adjacent to the previous existing two-story addition.
It is the intent of this proposal to preserve the existing structure intact and in its current state to
the greatest extent possible, with exterior modifications provided only to satisfy current housing
and building codes. The overall goal of this project, therefore, is to allow this building to
remain a functional, occupied structure, which is safe for its occupants.
Application requirements:
1. Sets of scaled drawings on 11” x 17” sheets have been provided for the commissioners,
which explain the proposal and use of the site.
2. Exterior elevations and plans are included in the submission.
3. A site plan and photographs of the original building are included in the submission.
4. Larger scale drawings are not required, as the scaled drawings fit on 11” x 17” sheets.
5. Three windows are proposed to be replaced as a part of this proposal for an emergency
means of egress out of bedrooms to conform with the Housing and Building codes.
6. The exterior materials to be incorporated in this project include:
a. Siding: concrete board lap siding with a 4” exposure (which matches the siding
exposure on the front elevation).
b. Trim: 5/4 x 6 concrete board trim (which matches the trim dimension on the front
elevation).
c. Windows: painted wood windows by Marvin – model numbers as shown on the
drawings.
d. Masonry: exposed masonry foundation will be a split-faced block, to provide a similar
texture to the original dressed granite foundation, but distinguish it as being
contemporary and not original.
Please review our proposal, and notify me if any further information is required.
Regards,
Michael T. Van Goor, AIA

A-5
van goor architects, inc.
118a north fourth avenue, ann arbor, michigan 48104 • 734.741.9422 • fax: 734.741.0414
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12
PROPOSED STAIR
ADDITION (SHADED)
13
14
15 DRIVE
DRIVE
16
SITE PLAN
1" = 20'-0"
© 2007 VanGoor Architects 0703 Basmajian 1 : 240 #93 - HDC 315 E Liberty - Site Plan
A-5
EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY
EXISTING
ASPHALT SHINGLES
EXISTING DORMER ROOF
TO BE REMOVED (DASHED)
NEW ROOF - SHADED
ASPHALT SHINGLES
TO MATCH EXISTING
12
12
NEW ALUMINUM GUTTER
& DOWNSPOUT
TO MATCH EXISTING
NEW WOOD LAP-SIDING

W/ 4" EXPOSURE TO
MATCH EXISTING
NEW PAINTED WOOD

WINDOW TRIM
TO MATCH EXISTING
NEW CLAD AWNING WINDOW
MARVIN CAWN2828
EXISTING
EGRESS
EXISTING STRIATED
CONCRETE SIDING
W/ 11" EXPOSURE
EXISTING STAIR, DOOR

AND COVER TO REMAIN
EXISTING PARGING
OVER EXISTING BRICK
NEW SPLIT-FACE
CMU FOUNDATION
NORTH
PROPOSED BACK ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
© 2008 Van Goor Architects 4/23/2008 0703 Basmajian 1 : 64 #74 - HDC 315 E. Liberty - Proposed Elevations
A-5
EXISTING STRIATED
CONCRETE SIDING
W/ 11" EXPOSURE
NEW ROOF (HATCHED)

W/ ASPHALT SHINGLES
TO MATCH EXISTING
NEW ROOF BEYOND - SHADED
EXISTING SKYLIGHT
EXISTING
ASPHALT SHINGLES
2'-6 3/8" R.O. 2'-6 3/8" R.O.
NEW WOOD DOUBLE HUNG

EGRESS WINDOW NEW WOOD DOUBLE HUNG
MARVIN WUDH2434 NEW NEW EGRESS WINDOW
6'-5 1/2"
EGRESS EGRESS MARVIN WUDH2434

R.O.
EXISTING
6'-5 1/2"
EGRESS
R.O.
EXISTING STRIATED
CONCRETE SIDING
W/ 11" EXPOSURE
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD LAP-SIDING
W/ 4" EXPOSURE
EXISTING PARGING
OVER EXISTING BRICK
EAST
PROPOSED SIDE ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
A-5
DN
HVAC
9'-7"x5'-9"
56 SF
08
36
BATH #2
6'-6"x5'-9"
38 SF
KITCHEN
7'-0"x9'-5"
60 SF
COMMON ROOM
9'-7"x5'-9"
532 SF
SKYLIGHT SKYLIGHT
ABOVE ABOVE
PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN

1/8" = 1'-0"
© 2007 VanGoor Architects 0703 Basmajian 1 : 96 #92 - HDC 315 E. Liberty - Third Floor Plan
A-5
EGRESS
BEDROOM #4
15'-6"x15'-5"
151 SF
DN.
UP
08 08
26 26
STUDY
13'-7"x5'-9"
EGRESS
78 SF
BEDROOM #3
10'-7"x9'-6"
101 SF
BATHROOM #1
13'-5"x6'-0"
62 SF
EGRESS
BEDROOM #5
12'-3"x9'-1"
118 SF
EGRESS
BEDROOM #2
10'-7"x9'-6"
101 SF
88
26
BEDROOM #6
9'-0"x15'-6"
EGRESS
EGRESS
128 SF
BEDROOM #1
12'-8"x13'-7"
157 SF
PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN

1/8" = 1'-0"
© 2007 VanGoor Architects 0703 Basmajian 1 : 96 #91 - HDC 315 E. Liberty - Second Floor Plan
A-5
DN.
08
EXISTING
36
WORK ROOM
12'-8"
DN.
7'-4"
UP
UP DN
EXIST. FITTING
ROOMS
CABINETRY
EXIST.
BATH
EXISTING
STORE
UP
EXISTING
LOBBY
DN
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN

1/8" = 1'-0"
© 2007 VanGoor Architects 0703 Basmajian 1 : 96 #90 - HDC 315 E Liberty - First Floor Plan
A-5
FRONT (SOUTH) ELEVATION

Historic District Commission Submission 315 E. Liberty St. 04/21/08
A-5
SIDE (WEST) ELEVATION

A-5
BACK (NORTH) ELEVATION

A-5
SIDE (EAST) ELEVATION

A-5
EGRESS
WEST
EXISTING SIDE ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
© 2008 Van Goor Architects 4/23/2008 0703 Basmajian 1 : 64 #69 - HDC 315 E. Liberty - Existing Elevations
A-5
SOUTH
EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
A-5
EXISTING
EGRESS
NORTH
EXISTING BACK ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
A-5
EAST
EXISTING SIDE ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
A-5
EXISTING STRIATED
CONCRETE SIDING
W/ 11" EXPOSURE
EXISTING
ASPHALT SHINGLES
NEW ROOF (HATCHED)
W/ ASPHALT SHINGLES
TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING SKYLIGHT
NEW ALUMINUM GUTTER

& DOWNSPOUT
TO MATCH EXISTING
3'-2 1/2"R.O.
NEW WOOD LAP-SIDING
W/ 4" EXPOSURE TO
MATCH EXISTING
NEW WOOD DOUBLE
5'-1 1/2"
HUNG EGRESS WINDOW
R.O.
MARVIN WUDH3226
NEW PAINTED WOOD
5-1/2" WIDE INSIDE AND NEW
OUTSIDE CORNER BOARDS EXISTING EGRESS
TO MATCH EXISTING EGRESS
27'-0"
EXISTING STRIATED
CONCRETE SIDING
W/ 11" EXPOSURE
EXISTING WOOD
LAP-SIDING W/ 4" EXPOSURE
NEW HB&G PVC RELOCATED EXISTING

HANDRAIL SYSTEM: WINDOW
NEWEL #03872
NEWEL CAP #03877
BALUSTER #03958
W/ STANDARD TOP
& BOTTOM RAIL W/
WOOD INSERTS
NEW PAINTED WOOD

LATTICE TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING STONE FOUNDATION
WEST
PROPOSED SIDE ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
A-5
A-5
A-5
A-5
B-1
MEMORANDUM
To: Historic District Commissioners
From: Jill Thacher, Historic Preservation Coordinator
Date: May 1, 2008
Re: 302 South Main Street Postponed Application
This application was postponed from the April HDC meeting pending more information on the
structural elements of the awning and sign. Two additional drawings have been submitted by the
applicant and are attached, along with last month’s staff report.
B-1
Staff Report
ADDRESS: 302 South Main Street, Application Number 08-028
DISTRICT: Main Street Historic District
REPORT DATE: April 2, 2008 By: Jill Thacher, City Planner/Historic Preservation Coord.
REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: Monday, April 7, 2008
OWNER APPLICANT
Name: Rob Spears Sami Valija

Address: 514 Main Street 27249 James St
Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Warren, MI 48092
Phone: (734) 260-3611 (734)763-1710
BACKGROUND: This three-story brick Italianate commercial block has been remodeled twice:
once after a major fire in 1910 when the original single windows were replaced by the present
bands of multiple windows, and again in 1976 when the roof was raised to accommodate the
Downtown Racquet Club on the third floor. At the same time the storefronts at 300 and 302
were both remodeled with darker brick facing and dark aluminum store window frames. Only the
Carrara glass storefront at 304 has remained unchanged.
LOCATION: The site is located on the west side of South Main Street between Liberty and
William.
APPLICATION: The applicant seeks HDC approval to install a 24-foot wide awning and an
integral 13 foot 10 inch wide sign over the storefront.
From the Secretary of the Interior’s

Standards for Rehabilitation:
(5) Distinctive materials, features,

finishes, and construction techniques or
examples of craftsmanship that
characterize a property will be preserved.
(9) New additions, exterior alterations

or related new construction will not
destroy historic materials, features, and
spatial relationships that characterize the
property. The new work will be
differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features,
size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its
environment.
B-1
(10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in
such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic
property and its environment would be unimpaired.
Storefronts
Recommended: Identifying, retaining, and preserving storefronts – and their functional
and decorative features – that are important in defining the overall historic character of
the building such as display windows, signs, doors, transoms, kick plates, corner posts,
and entablatures.
Not Recommended: Introducing a new design that is incompatible in size, scale, material,
and color.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The awning appears to have been designed so as not to harm the existing architectural
features and materials.
2. A sign would be mounted on brackets that go through the awning and hold it away from
the wall in front of the canopy. Staff has reservations about this arrangement, since signs
are traditionally placed in the sign band, or the business name is printed on the canopy
itself. Also, much more framing would be needed to support the sign and the awning than
to support a simple fabric awning alone.
3. The city’s draft Design Guidelines for Historic Districts addresses awnings and signs
separately. This particular storefront may not have a tall enough sign band area above
the front windows to accommodate both a wall sign on top and a awning below it. The
applicant should choose one or the other, but not try to combine them in the same space.
4. The awning’s height and placement along the storefront is compatible with surrounding
buildings. The business to the south (Seyfried Jewelers) has only a sign. The business to
the north (Starbucks) has a flat canopy that extends out from the building, and signage
on top of the canopy. The top and bottom of the awning would align with the Starbucks
canopy. (See photo at end of report.) The top of the awning would be mounted just
below the stone sill of the second floor windows.
5. The sign is externally up-lit by LED tubes mounted along the base of the sign that are
shielded by a small lip along the front edge of the sign. This type of lighting is
appropriate.
B-1
I move that the Commission deny the application at 302 South Main Street to install a
combined awning and sign over the storefront. The work is not compatible in exterior
design, arrangement, texture, material and relationship to the rest of the building and the
surrounding area and does not meet The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation standards 5, 9, and 10.
MOTION WORKSHEET:
For the work at 302 S. Main Street in the Main Street Historic District
____ As proposed.
The work
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
ATTACHMENTS: application, drawing

B-1
302 South Main (red awning) in April, 2007

B-1
B-1
AWNING MOUNTING DETAILS

B-2
MEMORANDUM
To: Historic District Commissioners
From: Jill Thacher, Historic Preservation Coordinator
Date: May 1, 2008
Re: 522 Detroit Street Postponed Application
This application was postponed from the April HDC meeting due to a split vote which prevented
the Commission from taking action on the replacement railing portion of the application. An
additional drawing and letter have been submitted by the applicant and are attached, along with
last month’s staff report.
B-2
Staff Report
ADDRESS: 522 Detroit Street, Application Number 08-003
DISTRICT: Old Fourth Ward Historic District
REPORT DATE: April 3, 2008
REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: Monday, April 10, 2008
OWNER APPLICANT
Name: Dina Greenway Same

Address: PO Box 2301
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
Phone: (734) 369-4641
BACKGROUND: This 1 ¾ story gable-

front Queen Ann house features
decorative banding, second-story wood
fish scale shakes, a triangular sunburst
pattern in the front gable, shaped window
architraves on the front elevation, and a
shallow hipped-roof tower on the north
elevation. It first appears in the Polk
Directory in 1929, though the house
appears to be older. It may have been
moved to the lot around that time.
At the December 2007 HDC meeting, an

application (07-144) was approved for an
exterior stairwell below grade for
basement access. The Commission
substituted a metal railing for the wood
one proposed by the applicant.
LOCATION: The site is located on the east side of Detroit Street, between East Kingsley and
North Division.
APPLICATION: The applicant seeks HDC approval to: 1) eliminate a non-original entry door
and related porch and stairs on the north elevation and replace them with a window identical to
two others on that elevation; and 2) substitute a wood railing for a metal one around the exterior
stairwell that was approved by HDC in December, 2007.
B-2
historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize a property.
The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the
historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the
integrity of the property and its environment.
Building Site
Recommended: Removing nonsignificant buildings, additions, or site features which
detract from the historic character of the site.
Not Recommended: Removing a historic building in a complex, a building feature, or a

site feature which is important in defining the historic character of the site.
Windows
Recommended: Designing and installing new windows when the historic windows (frame,
sash, and glazing) are completely missing. The replacement windows may be an
accurate restoration using historical, pictorial, and physical documentation; or be a new
design that is compatible with the window openings and the historic character of the
building.
Not Recommended: Introducing a new design that is incompatible with the historic
character of the building.
STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The entry door that is proposed to be removed is clearly not original. It formerly served as
an entry to the second floor apartment, but is no longer used. Its placement is at an
awkward height, most likely where a window was previously located. The side porch does
not appear on Sanborn maps last updated in the 1960s.
2. The window that would replace the door matches exactly the other windows on this side
elevation. All are replacement windows, and the one proposed to be used was previously
located on the back of the house. When it was removed and replaced with a rear door,
the owner saved it. While there is no documentation of a window being located where
the entry door currently is, the location of the door (at window height) and fenestration
pattern of this elevation make it likely. The window is compatible with the historic
character of the building and of an appropriate design.
B-2
3. When the exterior stairwell was approved in December 2007, the commission substituted
a metal railing for the proposed wood railing that would surround the well on the basis
that a metal railing would recede and make the stairwell less conspicuous. The owner
feels very strongly that a wood rail would be stronger, more compatible with existing
railings on the rear deck, and less out-of-character with the house. Please see the letter
submitted by the owner for more information. The wood rail would match the railings on
the rear decks, and consist of 2” by 4” top and bottom rails, a 1” by 6” top cap, 2” by 2”
spindles, and would be 3” tall with 5” spacing between spindles.
I move that the Commission issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for the application at
522 Detroit Street in the Old Fourth Ward Historic District to remove a non-original entry
door and related porch and stairs on the north elevation and replace them with a window;
and 2) substitute a wood railing for a metal one around the exterior stairwell approved in
December 2007, as proposed. The work is generally compatible in exterior design,
arrangement, texture, material and relationship to the rest of the building and the
surrounding area and meets The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
standards 2 and 9.
MOTION WORKSHEET:
For the work at 522 Detroit Street in the Old Fourth Ward Historic District
____ As proposed.
The work
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
ATTACHMENTS: application, description of work, drawings.

B-2
North elevation, non-original porch and door
South elevation, approved exterior stair area and rear deck

B-2

05-2008 HDC PACKET Short

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

05-2008 HDC PACKET Short

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

REGULAR SESSION OF THE ANN ARBOR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION

THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2008 AT 7:00 P.M. SECOND FLOOR, CITY COUNCIL

A-1 310-314 SECOND STREET – remove two garages – OWSHD

A-3 617 FIFTH STREET – remove and replace garage – OWSHD

C-1 Design Guidelines – discussion and recommendation to City Council

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION – GENERAL (Limited to 3 Minutes per Speaker)

D-1 Draft Minutes of the April 10, 2008 Regular Session

E- REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS

F-1 May 2008

G- STAFF ACTIVITIES REPORT

G-1 April 2008

ADDRESS: 310-314 Second Street, Application Number 08-049

DISTRICT: Old West Side Historic District

REPORT DATE: May 1, 2008

REPORTED BY: Jill Thacher, City Planner/Historic Preservation Coordinator

REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Name: 310-314 Second LLC Andrew Johncox

From the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation:

(2) The historic character of a

(5) Distinctive materials, features,

4. 310 and 314 Second Street are in common ownership.

5. More information on the condition of both structures has been requested.

I move that the Commission

____ Issue a Certificate of Appropriateness

____ Deny the Application

____ Provided the following condition(S) is (ARE) met: 1) CONDITION(s)

ATTACHMENTS: application, photos.

ANN ARBOR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION

ADDRESS: 713 West Liberty Street, Application Number 08-045

DISTRICT: Old West Side Historic District

REPORT DATE: May 1, 2008

REPORTED BY: Jill Thacher, City Planner/Historic Preservation Coordinator

REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Name: Michael Bielby Same

BACKGROUND: This two-and-a-half-story, gable-front house appears to have been

APPLICATION: The applicant seeks HDC approval to 1) remove an original knee-window on

From the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation:

(5) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or

historic relationships on the site.

Health and Safety Code Requirements

Not Recommended; Undertaking code-required alterations to a building or site before identifying

Designing and installing additional windows on rear or other non-character-defining elevations if

I move that the Commission

____ Issue a Certificate of Appropriateness

____ Deny the Application

____ Provided the following condition(S) is (ARE) met: 1) CONDITION(s)

ATTACHMENTS: application, proposed changes list, drawings and photos.

ANN ARBOR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION

ADDRESS: 617 Fifth Street, Application Number 08-048

DISTRICT: Old West Side Historic District

REPORT DATE: May 1, 2008 by Jill Thacher, Historic Preservation Coordinator

REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Name: Lisa Granger Marc Rueter

APPLICATION: The applicant requests HDC approval to demolish an existing single-car

From the Secretary of the

(2) The historic character of a

(9) New additions, exterior

I move that the Commission

____ Issue a Certificate of Appropriateness

____ Deny the Application

____ Provided the following condition(S) is (ARE) met: 1) CONDITION(s)

ATTACHMENTS: application, description of work, drawings, window and door information,

ANN ARBOR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION