Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic district commission approves porch repairs on North Van Buren with conditions
Summary
The Bay City Historic District Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness for case HDC 25-34 (2534920 North Van Buren) with conditions requiring wooden spindles and porch decking board widths limited to 3.5–4.5 inches; the applicant cited safety needs for his incapacitated wife.
The Bay City Historic District Commission on an evening meeting approved a certificate of appropriateness for work at 2534920 North Van Buren, imposing conditions that the porch balustrade use wooden turned spindles and that porch decking boards be between 3.5 and 4.5 inches wide, consistent with the commission's historic practice.
The decision follows an extended exchange between the applicant, Michael Daley, and commission members about which porch to approve and what materials are historically appropriate. Daley told the commission he wanted to proceed on the driveway-side (rear, East elevation) porch first because of a safety need for his incapacitated wife and cited difficulty finding narrower decking: "I just wanna finish the deck, the stairs, and the rail, and then we can move forward," he said.
Commission members said corner lots are treated like fronts and noted the commission typically approves decking in the nominal 1-by-4 range (roughly 3.5 inches actual width) rather than the 6-inch boards the applicant proposed. Board members said approving a 6-inch top board would be "unprecedented" in the district and recommended either locating narrower boards or ripping wider boards to match historical proportions. Staff and commissioners clarified that the commission's role is aesthetic review while the building department enforces structural and safety code requirements: the commission confirmed it would require a wooden spindle balustrade and a decking width within the 3.5–4.5 inch range, and the building inspector would decide thickness and safety matters.
During the hearing staff noted there had been a stop-work order earlier when work began without a building permit; staff said the applicant had since submitted an application and should follow up with the planning staff and the building department on permit details. The commission approved the certificate of appropriateness with the stated conditions; the motion passed by voice vote with all commissioners present in favor.
The commission advised the applicant to follow up with staff (Terry or Adam in the planning office) for next steps and building-department guidance.
