Crystal Report Viewer

1000 Rochester Hills Dr.

Rochester Hills, MI

48309

(248) 656-4600

Home Page:

www.rochesterhills.org

Rochester Hills

Minutes

Historic Districts Commission

Chairperson Brian R. Dunphy, Vice Chairperson Maria-Teresa L. Cozzolino

Members: John Dziurman, Nicole Franey, Micheal Kilpatrick, Melissa Luginski, Paul Miller,

Dr. Richard Stamps, Jason Thompson

7:30 PM

1000 Rochester Hills Drive

Thursday, January 8, 2009

MINUTES of the REGULAR ROCHESTER HILLS HISTORIC DISTRICTS COMMISSION

MEETING held at the Rochester Hills Municipal Building, 1000 Rochester Hills Drive,

Rochester Hills, Oakland County, Michigan.

CALL TO ORDER

1.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.

ROLL CALL

2.

John Dziurman, Brian Dunphy, Maria-Teresa Cozzolino, Paul Miller, Nicole

Franey and Melissa Luginski

Present

6 -

Richard Stamps, Micheal Kilpatrick and Jason Thompson

Absent

3 -

Also Present: Derek Delacourt, Deputy Director, Planning Department

Judy A. Bialk, Recording Secretary

DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM

3.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy announced a quorum was present.

STATEMENT OF STANDARDS

4.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy read the following Statement of Standards for the record:

All decisions made by the Historic Districts Commission follow the guidelines of the

Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, MLHDA Section 399.205, and local

Ordinance Section 118-164(a).

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

5.

5A.

2008-0681

Minutes of the November 13, 2008 Regular Meeting

Vice Chairperson Dunphy asked for any comments or corrections to the November

13, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes.

Page 31, 4th Paragraph, 3rd Sentence Change: he had meet Mrs. Luginski

To: he had met Mrs. Luginski

Vice Chairperson Dunphy called for any further comments or corrections to the

November 13, 2008 Regular Meeting Minutes. Upon hearing none, he called for a

motion to approve.

A motion was made by Miller, seconded by Cozzolino, that the Minutes be

Approved as Amended. The motion CARRIED by the

following vote:

Aye

Dziurman, Dunphy, Cozzolino, Miller, Franey and Luginski

6 -

Absent

Stamps, Kilpatrick and Thompson

3 -

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the November 13, 2008 Regular Historic Districts

Commission Meeting be approved as amended.

ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS

6.

A. Ordinance No. 527 - Amend Section 118-98 and Map 118-B

Vice Chairperson Dunphy called for any announcements or communications. He

stated the Commissioners had received a copy of Ordinance Amendment No. 527,

which specifically removed the property located at 56187 Dequindre from the

non-contiguous historic districts listed in the City Ordinance. He noted City Council

had agreed to delist the property, and the Ordinance Amendment was the final step in

the process.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy advised the Commissioners that the other Ordinance

Amendment would be heard at the January 12, 2009 City Council meeting. He

reminded the Commissioners that Ordinance Amendment would bring the City's

Preservation Ordinance in line with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)

standards in full compliance with P.A. 169, in preparation for the City being able to

attain Certified Local Government (CLG) status. He thought it would be appropriate

if the Commissioners attended the Council meeting to lend their support for the

Ordinance Amendment. He noted several Commissioners had attended and spoken

at previous Council meetings regarding the Amendment.

Mr. Miller asked for a recap on the Amendment, particularly since Council had

discussed the matter a couple of times.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy stated the Amendment had been before Council twice. It

was on the December 8, 2008 Council Agenda for a First Reading, and Council held

some discussion at that time. However, the City Attorney was not present at the

meeting and Council had some questions of a legal nature, particularly from a liability

standpoint, and tabled the discussion to the following meeting.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy stated that the Amendment was again discussed at the

December 15, 2008 Council meeting and was passed by a six to one margin for First

Reading. The Amendment must now come before Council for a Second Reading and

Adoption, which has been scheduled for the January 12, 2009 Regular Meeting. He

explained if a majority of Council voted to approve the Second Reading, the

Amendment would become effective, and the Commission could go forward to

complete the CLG Application.

Mr. Miller recalled the dissenting vote was not because of the liability issue, but rather

the question of legal authority lying within the Council as opposed to lying within the

Historic Districts Commission.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy stated a community member comment was made as to

whether the power should be taken from the elected body, the Council, and given to

the HDC. He thought with six Council members voting in favor of the Amendment, it

was a very positive sign that the Council was willing to accept the HDC's role in the

process and to see any potential issues as fairly remote possibilities.

Mr. Miller pointed out it would be no different than the Planning Commission, the

Zoning Board or a number of other commissions that are appointed by Council that

have their own authority.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy noted the Commission would see what happened at the

January 12, 2009 Council meeting, and encouraged any Commissioner who could do

so to attend the meeting.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy called for any other announcements or communications.

No other announcements or communications were presented.

PUBLIC COMMENT

7.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy asked if there were any public comments. There were no

public comments.

NEW BUSINESS

8.

8A.

2008-0682

Establish 2009 Regular Meeting Schedule

Vice Chairperson Dunphy stated that the Commissioners had received a proposed

schedule for the 2009 meetings in their packet materials, along with a draft resolution

to formalize the schedule and asked if there was any discussion regarding the

proposed schedule. Upon hearing none, he called for a motion to accept the

proposed meeting schedule.

A motion was made by Cozzolino, seconded by Miller, that the 2009 Meeting

Schedule be established as presented. The motion CARRIED

by the following vote:

RESOLVED that the Rochester Hills Historic Districts Commission establishes their 2009

Regular Meeting Schedule as follows:

The regular meetings will be held on the second Thursday of each month at the

Rochester Hills Municipal Offices, 1000 Rochester Hills Drive, Rochester Hills, Michigan,

beginning at 7:30 PM Michigan Time

2009 MEETING DATES

January 8, 2009 July 9, 2009

February 12, 2009 August 13, 2009

March 12, 2009 September 10, 2009

April 9, 2009 October 8, 2009

May 14, 2009 November 12, 2009

June 11, 2009 December 10, 2009

2008-0682

Vice Chairperson Dunphy stated for the record that the Meeting Schedule had been

approved, and noted that the next regular meeting was scheduled for February 12,

2009.

This matter was Discussed

8B.

2008-0683

Election of Officers

A. Chairperson

Vice Chairperson Dunphy stated that the Commissioner's had received an excerpt

from last years Minutes regarding the election of officers; could begin the process for

this year, and opened the floor for nominations.

Mr. Dziurman noted that several of the Commissioners were not at this meeting, and

questioned whether the election of officers should be postponed to the next meeting.

Mr. Miller asked if any Commissioners were willing to volunteer for the Chairperson

and Vice Chairperson positions.

Mr. Dunphy stated he would be willing to take on the Chairperson position if it was

the consensus of the group that it was appropriate.

Mr. Miller stated he would be delighted to nominate Mr. Dunphy and make that

motion, and asked if the only other officer position was the Vice Chairperson position.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy stated the Commission also needed a secretary, which was

filled by Mr. Thompson during 2008.

Mr. Delacourt stated that Mr. Thompson had left him a message indicating he would

be willing to serve again as secretary or any other nominated office.

Ms. Cozzolino stated she would be delighted to second Mr. Miller's motion to elect

Mr. Dunphy as Chairperson.

Vice Chairperson Dunphy asked if there were any other nominations. There being no

other nominations, Vice Chairperson Dunphy closed the floor for nominations. Brian

Dunphy was unanimously elected to the office of Chairperson.

Mr. Dunphy thanked the Commission for his nomination and election, and continued

the meeting serving as Chairperson.

B. Vice Chairperson

Chairperson Dunphy opened the floor for nominations for Vice Chairperson.

Mr. Dziurman nominated Ms. Cozzolino for the position of Vice Chairperson. Ms.

Cozzolino stated she would be happy to accept the nomination. Mr. Miller seconded

the nomination.

Chairperson Dunphy asked if there were any other nominations for Vice Chairperson.

There being no other nominations, Chairperson Dunphy closed the floor for

nominations. Maria-Teresa Cozzolino was unanimously elected to the office of

Vice Chairperson.

C. Secretary

Chairperson Dunphy opened the floor for nominations for Secretary.

Mr. Miller nominated Mr. Thompson for the position of Secretary. Mr. Dziurman

seconded the nomination.

Chairperson Dunphy asked if there were any other nominations. There being no other

nominations, Chairperson Dunphy closed the floor for nominations. Jason

Thompson was unanimously elected to the office of Secretary.

This matter was Approved

8C.

2008-0684

2009 Earl Borden Award

Chairperson Dunphy pointed out that a wealth of information was included in the

meeting packet, including a Memorandum from the Planning Department summarizing

the materials provided.

Chairperson Dunphy stated he wanted to call the Commission's attention to Item #3,

the selection criteria for the Earl Borden Award. He noted this was the same

document included with last year's award discussion, but wanted to be sure the

Commissioner's all agreed with the selection criteria. He pointed out the document

dated back to 1994, and from what he understood was a codification of the practices

of the Commission up to that time. He also understood that at one time there was a

standing sub-committee of the Commission that focused on the Earl Borden Award,

and the selection criteria was a codification of how that sub-committee had handled

the Award over a period of some years.

Chairperson Dunphy noted the document did not have any official standing as it was

not part of the Commission's By-Laws, but he thought it appropriate the Commission

review it to be sure they were all comfortable with it and they could look at any

nominations made for the Award with the understanding that the Commission was

clear on the criteria and in full agreement that was what the criteria should be.

Chairperson Dunphy stated he was not requesting any formal action from the

Commission, but suggested if the Commissioner's had any questions about the criteria,

or felt an area should be clarified or revised, this was the appropriate time to do so.

Then a clean, up to date copy of the criteria could be prepared. He stated he had

reviewed the criteria and thought they were in the ballpark.

Mr. Dziurman stated that from a historic perspective, the Award had never been given

to a standing member of any committee the Commission was associated with. He

thought that made sense or it might give the impression the Commission was just

taking care of its own. He did not know if the criteria indicated that specifically, but

that had always been the case.

Chairperson Dunphy agreed that had been the Commission's understanding, and

noted the Commission's concern about having either standing Commission or Study

Committee members nominated for the Award had been discussed at previous

Commission meetings.

Chairperson Dunphy noted the selection criteria contained repeated references to the

nominating committee and the work of the nominating committee, which was an area

that would have to be addressed when the criteria is updated. He commented the

Commission had moved away from a nominating committee, and he was not sure that

committee would be reinstated. He pointed out that for the last several years, the

responsibilities had been parceled out amongst the Commission members, and

everything seemed to be getting done and the Commission was finding quality

nominees and award recipients.

Chairperson Dunphy stated there were several potential individuals the Commission

may want to consider for the Award, as well as the property at 941 Runyon Road

owned by Mark and Miki Kowal that had been suggested by neighbors of the

Kowal’s for a historic preservation award. He noted there was information about two

City residents who had recently gained some prominence as supporters of local

history that might potentially be considered as recipients of the historic leadership

award.

Mr. Dziurman thought 941 Runyon Road was a good suggestion, noting the Kowal's

had done a great job restoring the home. He commented the Kowal's had appeared

before the Commission and seemed to be true preservationists and interested in

historic preservation.

Ms. Luginski agreed with that and noted the Kowal's had been working on their house

for about three years, down to reclaiming the woodwork and taking off a porch that

was not historically accurate. They also restored the porch with something the

Commission agreed with and had followed all the rules. She thought it would send a

good message to reward the Kowal's for that.

Mr. Miller concurred, noting he was particularly impressed when the Kowal's came

before the Commission with Mr. Kowal's desire to restore the home to its previous

appearance despite the extra expense and work. It certainly appeared they met all the

criteria and in his opinion would be the top nominee for the Award for a property.

Mr. Dziurman asked if the Commission should make their nominations at this time.

Chairperson Dunphy suggested the Commissioners discuss any nominations at this

time, and bring any suggestions forward for consideration. He commented that the

selection criteria provided a rough timeline for the process, which stated that the

nominating committee should make nominations by mid-February to go to the full

Commission for voting at the March meeting. He noted that the award presentations

were usually made at a Council meeting in May.

Chairperson Dunphy thought at this point it was a matter of making sure the

Commissioners were thinking about nominations for the award, either for preservation

leadership or for the preservation award. He wanted to be sure the Commissioners

were all in agreement that the selection criteria were the guidelines the Commission

wanted to use when they considered nominations.

Mr. Dziurman informed the Commissioners about Cecile Jensen, who is a retired art

instructor from Adams High School, and who is very much involved in a project at St.

Mary's of Orchard Lake called "Polonica Americana", which is a new research

institute. It is a phenomenal project using a tremendous resource of history from

Poland and throughout the United States. Ms. Jensen is part of the effort to put the

project together, which will become a national if not inter-national undertaking. The

Polish Government is involved in some of the funding for the project. He noted it was

located at St. Mary's of Orchard Lake, but Ms. Jensen is a Rochester Hills resident,

and has been very instrumental in initiating the project. She has also written two

books on Polonica, part of the Polish heritage.

Mr. Dziurman noted it was a much broader scope project and not so much local, but

being a resident, Ms. Jensen was eligible for the award. He wanted to mention this

project, but noted they were in the beginning stages of the project and it might be

more appropriate to wait another year to see how the project goes. He commented

that even the fact that she had written two history books that could be purchased at

the local bookstores was an interesting feature. He stated Ms. Jensen had a long

history in the community particularly since she taught in the area for most of her

professional career at Adams High School.

Chairperson Dunphy suggested Mr. Dziurman put some information together for the

Commission to review.

Ms. Cozzolino asked if Mr. LaVere Webster had received the award. Chairperson

Dunphy stated Mr. Webster was a member of the Study Committee. Mr. Dziurman

stated he had not received an award. He commented that Dr. Stamps had been

nominated and received the award during a period when he was not appointed to

either the Commission or the Study Committee due to some scheduling conflicts. Dr.

Stamps had since been reappointed to those committees.

Ms. Cozzolino asked if the Commission had any information about Bret Rasegan.

Mr. Dziurman stated Mr. Rasegan is a resident of the Stoney Creek Village. He is an

architect; is currently employed by Oakland County in their Planning and Economic

Development Department, and was very much involved on the City's Historic Districts

Commission at one time. He was very much involved in the study conducted

regarding the Brooklands clubhouse located near M-59, as well as a number of other

studies, including a property on Livernois, which was subsequently designated. He is

currently very involved in Oakland County's Mainstreet Program, which is a historic

preservation program. Mr. Rasegan's department is also becoming involved in the

Polish Mission project at Orchard Lake St. Mary's.

Chairperson Dunphy stated the Commission would give that some further

consideration and would discuss it again at the next meeting. He encouraged the

Commissioners to provide information on any other candidates they felt should be

considered.

Ms. Luginski asked if there was a particular number of awardees the Commission

targeted each year. Chairperson Dunphy stated there was not, and explained the

Commission was not obligated to give the award each year. He noted the

Commission had some flexibility in the matter.

Mr. Dziurman stated there were a lot of people who had done historic work in the

Community, and he thought the award should be really special and should be awarded

for a long-term commitment to preservation and for something very significant.

Otherwise, it diminished the award. He noted there were many good candidates

discussed, but he thought they really had to stand out. He thought that 941 Runyon

Road stood out and commented the Commission had not given out an award for a

residence in several years.

Mr. Dziurman referred to the preservation leadership award, and stated that last year

the award had been given to the committee that worked on the open space millage,

which was pretty special. He thought that should be kept in mind as the Commission

thought about the candidates.

Chairperson Dunphy stated the Commission would discuss the recipients at the next

meeting. He called for any further discussion regarding the Earl Borden Award.

There was no further discussion.

This matter was Discussed

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

9.

Chairperson Dunphy welcomed the new Commission members, Nicole Franey and

Melissa Luginski, and noted the Commissioners were looking forward to working with

them.

Chairperson Dunphy noted the next regular meeting date is February 12, 2009, and

called for any other business.

Mr. Dziurman referred to the Lorna Stone Development at 3681 N. Adams, and

stated he had driven past that house and noticed boards on the windows. However,

the windows were not entirely covered, and commented that if the house had been

mothballed, it had to be ventilated. He asked if Staff could contact the developer to

discuss that. He stated if the developer was going to board up the house to help

preserve it, it had to be vented. If it was not vented, it would deteriorate and rot from

the inside out. He suspected that most times boards were just put on the windows,

which was not proper mothballing and could cause problems. He suggested some

type of vent be installed, as just venting the house would be helpful. He understood

there had been some vandalism at the house and asked how bad the vandalism had

been.

Mr. Delacourt stated it had been a constant issue with multiple houses around the

City, and that house was no exception.

Mr. Dziurman assumed the project had not moved forward due to the current

economy. Mr. Delacourt thought that was a safe assumption.

Mr. Dziurman stated it seemed as if the project had been stalled longer than the

economy had been stalled. Mr. Delacourt stated it was a very ambitious project, and

explained the developer had been working hard to assemble land when the bottom fell

out. He did not think there would be any movement on the project for quite some

time.

Mr. Dziurman asked if the developer had come back for a renewal of their Certificate

of Appropriateness. Mr. Delacourt stated they had not.

Mr. Dziurman questioned whether the Certificate of Appropriateness had expired

after a year. Mr. Delacourt stated the Certificate of Appropriateness did expire, but

the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement did not. He explained the

developer never received full site plan approval, so there were no other approvals

outstanding.

Mr. Dziurman clarified the developer owned the property and owned the house. Mr.

Delacourt confirmed that was correct.

Mr. Dziurman stated that at a minimum, as part of the Commission's responsibility to

preserve the resource, the Commission should be discussing the resource with the

developer. Particularly about properly maintaining the building, even if the developer

wanted to mothball the resource. Mr. Delacourt agreed, and stated he would contact

the developer; provide them with a copy of the mothball standards, and let them know

the Commission was concerned. He commented it had always been a grey area as to

whether or not they were required to meet the mothball standards. He commented

the Commission did not know if occupied resources were properly ventilated.

Mr. Dziurman pointed out if the resource was occupied, it was a different issue. Mr.

Delacourt agreed, but noted it was a question of what had to be established first

before the Commission could require any work, although they had a duty to maintain

the home. Mr. Dziurman stated it was often a lack of understanding of what they had

to do to maintain the home. It was the responsibility of the Commission to inform

property owners about that.

Mr. Delacourt stated he would pass along the mothball standards. Mr. Dziurman

stated that the ventilation was the most important issue, unless the roof was leaking.

He was not sure they would understand what the mothball standards entailed. He

pointed out the developer could decide not to complete the project, or could sell the

property.

Mr. Delacourt stated he would contact the developer to find out what their

understanding of the situation was; what they had done, and what they were willing to

do. Mr. Dziurman suggested the contact be more proactive, including the fact the

Commission was concerned and there was a correct way to preserve the house to

prevent deterioration. The house needed to be waterproofed and ventilated, which

was within the Commission’s right to request.

Mr. Delacourt agreed but noted he was not sure if there was not a finding of

demolition by neglect or if the Commission could not establish a loss of integrity,

whether the Commission was in a position to demand any work. He thought that

finding would have to be established before the City could require work to be done.

Mr. Dziurman suggested that depending on the response of the developer, Staff ask if

the City could be given permission to enter the property to see if there has been any

loss of integrity. Mr. Delacourt agreed he could ask that question.

Mr. Dziurman stated that a former Chairperson of the Commission owned that house

at one time many years ago. Mr. Delacourt commented it was one of the oldest of

that style of home in Oakland County. He stated he would contact the developer and

find out if the developer was willing to meet at the site and talk about what might need

to be done.

Chairperson Dunphy stated that the historic house north of Bordine's on Rochester

Road was also part of a PUD Agreement, and recalled that the Commission did issue

a finding of demolition by neglect because of mold concerns and other issues. He

asked about the current status of that property.

Mr. Delacourt stated the outside repairs had been completed, such as fixing the pillars,

and shoring up holes in the foundation and the roof. He did not know whether or not

the house was properly ventilated, as that was hard for the City to ascertain. He

commented the City and Commission was aware there was a mold issue, but the City

had not entered the house to ascertain whether that situation had gotten better, worse

or remained the same. The outside concerns had been rectified.

Ms. Cozzolino asked if that property owner had been willing to allow the City access

to the inside of the home. Mr. Delacourt stated that the Building Department was

unwilling to go inside due to the mold situation. He noted it was difficult to ascertain if

a home had been property ventilated. In this instance, it appeared that the outside

issues and exposure to the elements had been completed. He did not know if the

property owner had done anything to resolve the mold issues inside the house.

Mr. Miller asked for some clarification on ventilation. Mr. Dziurman stated ventilation

could be obtained by use of a louver and did not need to be mechanical. Air just

needed to be brought through the house. Mr. Miller stated in his familiarity with old

houses that was usually not a problem. Mr. Dziurman stated that what usually

happened was that the windows were just covered. A louver vent could be put at the

bottom of the window, which would allow some air to move through the house, while

still protecting it from vandalism.

Mr. Miller clarified that would be more air than what would come through the crooks

and crannies of the house. Mr. Dziurman stated it would and noted he assumed the

home had been fixed up a little, but could not be sure.

Ms. Luginski asked if there would be a louver per window or just set randomly. Mr.

Dziurman stated it depended on the size of the house and the situation. A few could

be put on the first floor; a few on the second floor, or to open up the attic. It was just

a way to get air into the structure. He commented that was good for the structure all

year round.

Ms. Luginski stated there had been a change in the Prewitt House located on Tienken

Road. She advised the Commission there had been significant vandalism in the last

two or three months. Specifically, the realtor's lock boxes were removed and a

number of windows in the front and back were broken. The home has been boarded

up, and she expressed some concern that blue tarps had been nailed down on the

roof.

Mr. Dziurman stated that was okay because it was one way of keeping the house

from leaking without going through a lot of cost. He noted he did not know how the

work had been done, but that was one way to keep the water out.

Ms. Luginski asked if that allowed ventilation to the home. Mr. Dziurman stated it did

not, but that was where the windows were important.

Mr. Miller noted it had been mentioned that vandalism was a problem with many

properties in the City and asked for some elaboration. Mr. Delacourt stated that

vandalism was an issue with any vacant property in any community.

Mr. Miller asked if there had been any significant damage done inside a property that

had been reported. Mr. Delacourt referred to the house on Rochester Road north of

Bordine's, and noted the issue that caused the mold was that vandals broke into the

house and broke some water lines before the water had been shut off. He understood

a serious amount of water damage occurred inside the home.

Mr. Miller asked if copper was being stolen from the vacant properties. Mr.

Delacourt was not aware of any reported incidents, but agreed that seemed to be

happening all over.

Chairperson Dunphy assumed the City would keep tabs on the situation and would

keep the Commission apprised of any changes they needed to be aware of. Mr.

Delacourt stated the City did their best, but with some properties, the ownership

changed quickly. Just as soon as the City brought one owner up to date, another

owner took over and the process started over again. In some instances, the

properties are owned by development companies that are more worried about what

they consider to be significant other problems than a project they have not begun. He

noted many were vacant, and some might be better off if they were rental properties

because they would be occupied. He stated the Ordinance Enforcement Officers

were aware of the various properties, and the Sheriff's Department was aware of

those properties that had experienced vandalism.

Chairperson Dunphy called for any other business.

Mr. Miller suggested the Commission send a letter to Melinda Hill thanking her for her

service and in chairing the Commission the last couple of years. Chairperson Dunphy

stated that a Certificate of Appreciation was being prepared.

Chairperson Dunphy called for any other business. No other business was presented.

ADJOURNMENT

10.

Upon motion duly made and seconded, Chairperson Dunphy adjourned the meeting at

8:19 PM.

________________________________

Brian Dunphy, Chairperson

City of Rochester Hills

Historic Districts Commission

________________________________

Judy A. Bialk, Recording Secretary

Approved as presented at the March 12, 2009 Regular Historic Districts Commission

Meeting