e
e e
order the April 11th
2024 uh Bexley Architectural Review
board
meeting um can we call the
role Miss Jones
present Mr Scott here Madame Tony
here um and I just want to make a note
we only have three board members present
tonight and so um in order for something
to pass you will have to get two of the
three yes votes is that correct okay
that is correct one that everyone should
be aware yeah uh okay um approval of
meeting minutes from last week I did not
get a chance to review them did you I
did not I did not see them I didn't even
see them so can we push that to next
month and figure out why they weren't
posted I
guess to okay so this is the time that
we can have public comment so if you are
here and you would like to speak to the
board that is some about something that
is not on the agenda tonight um just
please raise your
hand okay seeing
nothing we will go to um I want to
announce that there are two
uh applications that have been tabled so
if you are here for either of these two
they will not be heard tonight the first
application is number Bap 23-23 and the
address is 22 East Maine the applicant
is Ryan Pearson and the owner is
Continental real estate companies 2200
I'm sorry 2200 East
Main the second application that has
been tabled is arb2 24-2 the address is
148 South Ardmore the applicant is Seth
Hamp and the owner SE H if those two
applications will not be heard tonight
they will be uh tabled to the May 9th
meeting
yep okay our next um agenda item is we
have um our consent agenda these are
applications that have been reviewed by
all the board members and have uh made
slight adjustments in anything that the
board members asked for so they are
application number ARB
23-36 addresses 217 North Stanwood the
applicant is Anthony
Pina the second one is ARB is I'm sorry
Bap
24-4 the address is 2498 Fair the
applicant is Amy
lowerhouse the next application number
Bap 24-5 the address is 2700 East Main
the applicant is Greg
margelis the next application number ARB
24-5 the address is 12 25 ashborne the
applicant is David
Marshall the next consent item is
application number ARB 24-6 the address
is 481 North Parkview the applicant is
Jamie
Parish uh next application ARB
24-10 address 155 South Drexel applicant
Amy
lowerhouse and that is it for consent
and I just want to note for the record
690 I think she read that did you read
690
Vernon no check the month as you went oh
that's bz ap-
24-3 that one add that one to the list
that by just by way of reminder is the
um Ryan brothers landscaping plan that's
already been before us they went to Bap
and then remanded back here for final
design review they did everything that
we asked them to do and for the record I
just wanted tell the board members that
all of your individual suggestions were
accepted by all of the applicants okay
is there anyone in the audience that
came to speak about any of those
applications please raise your
hand okay seeing that there is no one um
is there a board member that will make a
motion to approve those consent
items motion to approve second Scott
I will call the role Mr Scott yes Miss
Jones yes madame Tony
yes okay so those items are
approved so we are then going to new
business and we will start with
application number arb2
24-7 the address is 2688 East Broad the
applicant is Bennett Tepper the owner is
Bennett and Martha teer the applicant is
seeking architecture review and approval
and a certificate of appropriateness to
replace a slate roof with asphalt
shingles is the applicant present okay
I'm gonna let Karen give us a little bit
of background and then we'll you can
come up and we'll swear you
in okay um this application as chairman
Tony has told us is to replace a slate
roof with asphalt Jingles um just by way
of reminder for everyone that is a roof
replacement that cannot be done by staff
her ordinance
it's in your staff notes um that all
slate um removal needs to be approved by
this board um there is a list that I've
given you in staff report of items that
we request be addressed um I believe
that almost all of those have been
addressed by the applicant and he can
either one of you can or both can come
up and and answer questions from the
board but
um the the only thing I would note is
that it does appear by professional
opinion I didn't get up there and look
at it to be the thin Pennsylvania slate
um on the other hand it you know it's a
significant house on Broad so this is
just one that we um need to kind of talk
through with the applicant and find a
solution I would say as staff that if um
we do allow this to be P slate
replacement to asphalt shingles that all
the details be very meticulously carried
out you know like Ridge caps and um
flashing that they'd be done at a level
that would be done with slate and we've
had that before especially with the
toret that you really want to make sure
that it's done right or it's going to
look
bad um okay you come forward and we can
swear you
in and I can bring up whatever the board
or the applicant wants from the file
please raise your right hands and state
your name starting with you ma'am Martha
terer Ben terer you somly swear or from
the testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth yes thank
you okay can you give us a little brief
history of uh your roof issues and uh
and why you're asking to replace it with
asphalt well I mean we had no plan to
replace that roof this really begins uh
last summer when the insurance on our
home was canceled because of the age of
our roof and for no other reason than
the age of our roof and we at that time
we didn't realize this this was a
problem but we tried to find insurance
and it turned out to be more complicated
than we thought simply because our roof
is old it's the original the Slate is
the original slate from when the house
was built 94 years
ago um we eventually found some
insurance it wasn't good that was enough
to get the mortgage company off our back
um and since that time we've been trying
to find better insurance we actually
found it as of just last week so we have
what we believe to be good insurance on
the house but in the mean time this
whole process got us a little concerned
and um we started talking to roofers um
uh one slate company came out and looked
at our roof and you have their
assessment as far as they're
concerned the Slate part of our roof has
reached the end of its useful life we've
got estimates on what it would take to
replace it with slate
it's exorbitant um just the Slate part
would be 160,000 or thereabouts and so
we contracted with a company to replace
our roof the whole thing with uh
shingles and we didn't know that this
was a thing at the time so um anyway
it's it's still pricey but it's
something we can afford to do
well we appreciate you coming before us
today um I hope you understand that it
is
a a one of the things that this board is
trying to do is preserve some of the old
architecture that is in the city and
we're trying to not lose as many slate
roofs as possible so we appreciate you
being here
today okay uh is there a board member
maybe that will go
first thank
you um I think first some questions to
staff so
um you know there's obviously a process
and and you weren't aware of the process
so you've been kind of caught and are
now coming here and we I respect that
you weren't aware of that
um in the submittal process is there
anything that they're lacking based on
our requirements from what they submit
not that I can see I mean we we it's
very hard to talk in documents to
maintenance that you've done along the
way so you know that's why one of the
things that we can ask you know about
the maintenance that's been done um in
the interim but that that's probably the
only thing we have included some the
last few years of receips from durable
slate it's hard to understand the the
longterm you know um and durable slate
never mentioned to you that your roof
was
failing is your roof failing or was it
just a matter of
insurance well what got us thinking
about this was the insurance company and
then finding that it's I don't know if
you guys are hearing this but it's
becoming more and more difficult to
ensure homes with older roofs that's
just a trend I I'll be honest that's a
first time I've ever heard that so oh
but we believe you I believe you I got
the insurance Pap we believe you I tell
you we we went with a an insurance
broker to because you know they can look
at lots of companies at once um I have
an email from him we've got five
companies that he contacted three said
no one said yes but not in your price
range and one said that they would do it
and that's the one we contracted and
they all understood it was slate not
that it was that you know a 50-year old
asphalt roof yeah but I think that just
in general it's becoming a thing with
older roofs period so I'm I think that's
kind of off topic the the um the thing
you're asking about is you know what got
us going on this it started with um
concerns about insurance but then when
you know we had company out and tell us
that you know it's at the end of its
useful life that's when we decided not
to fool around anymore and that was
durable no it's uh
DeMarco okay and so durable has been
maintaining it over the years yeah we we
bring them out once a year and you know
our instruction to them is
the minimal you know like like what's
the worst the worst slate replace the
worst slate and they usually do that and
then there'll be a few more
that they'll find right and so did you
ask them to come back and and tell you
what they thought the roof light was so
here's another thing that we've
discovered we we've actually tried to
get several slate companies out to help
us with this um they're slow to respond
I think they're overworked uh it took
durable quite a while to come out they
did come out and they they haven't
written up an estimate yet they gave us
a verbal over the phone for them it'd be
200,000 so I didn't even include it in
this in this because it's more than the
other two that we were able to get and
was that to replace or repair to replace
it to replace would that replacement
include the as current asphalt shingles
in the house would you no I didn't I
didn't ask I didn't ask about replacing
the shingle with slate just it's just a
slate
yeah this is the estimate from Precision
slate and tile normally with these
applications we have a lot of
photographs that show us how the state
that that the Slate is falling apart so
DeMarco took a bunch of pictures and
that's part of the DeMarco PDF that's I
don't think that's
it is part of your roof already asphalt
yes the B part is there was a um
extension built on this house 25 years
ago that needs to be replaced too which
we've that's part of the shot and
stained on so that is part of the
asphalt cost is the replace of this roof
as well the um so the uh estimate you
have from shottenstein is just for the
Slate part this is another 10,000 that
we're going to I mean we're going to do
this anyway not from shot it is
shottenstein slate no no the Mark I
think your shottenstein uh estimate it
says shottenstein uh Roofing yeah is for
the
asphalt some thousand not the it's it
would be 40 for the entire property it
would
yeah the so you should have pictures
from I'm I I I see them now I I did not
see them as part of the original review
that I did of it um I apologize I the
first part of their document is all
writing and so I read some of the
writing and didn't realize that there
were photographs to follow so I'm
looking at those
now yeah I can see you're missing some
and it looks like you have had
um a lot of uh mold and or algae or
whatever growing on the roof too that
that's right probably need to be needed
to be cleaned over the years and it's
too bad the durable didn't tell you that
but we've actually worked on that when
we first bought the house there was a
huge patch of mold and um I worked on it
they worked on
it
yeah well so uh based on those photos
the
Slate one does appear to be you know
again I have to go off the professional
opinion of the inspect inspectors but
the a thinner our slate and possibly the
Pennsylvania which we have seen a lot of
in this neighborhood uh which doesn't
hold up uh but based on the photographic
evidence it looks like it's in Fairly
bad shape um it has not held up over the
years so um well it's almost a hundred
years old no and that's why slate is
fantastic is because it lasts a hundred
years but we're almost there and with
asphalt shingles you know every 10 years
you might be replacing it at 40,000 and
you know in the same time frame you
spend maybe more on asphalt but uh it is
big price tag and and based on these
estimates the the Delta between the two
different roofs is is close to
$110,000 difference 150
versus plus or minus it's actually a
little more than that because the Slate
the the estimate for the Slate part is
just the Slate part of the just slate
that's correct you mentioned that so it'
be uh 120,000 Del Delta so that's
something to take into account here is
that there's a significant cost
difference between them yeah did you
submit what the asphalt you want to
replace it
with well we submitted the um estimate
from shottenstein that's
got I'm not more familiar with the
details of it than what's there and did
they just give you a price or did you
actually pick a
shingle we picked one together so
there's there's a section of our house
that had shingle when we moved in that
um started leaking after we got there we
replaced that
section and so the shingle that we
selected matches that part that's the
newer shingle on the house so the the
old asphalt you are not going to be
replacing we are we are you are okay
okay but you just like the look of it
what it was before so we wanted it all
to match yeah okay gotcha and usually in
the past when we have had these um we
always um condition it on a shing
asphalt shingle review
you know with dimensional architectural
dimensional shingles to be approved by
staff okay well I think it's not too
late to change it if you know I don't
have any issue with what you've picked I
just um just so you know like that's if
you wanted something that looked a
little more dimensional I can help you
with that or you know
whatever a great resource for some of
this if you wanted to do a ridge cap or
just you know anything that just makes
your roof seem a little bit more
authentic to to what the Slate used to
be she can help you um with some of
those details and you're you're going to
spend a little bit more on it but it
could really make the house look a lot
better so if you um as we move forward
work with Karen and and she can help you
you know make the best choice of of the
asphalt products because they're not all
made the same either some of those um do
not have very long lives so from from
this you can't really tell what would
what would from which from this
that I don't see a color listed there
though is that oh right this is the
manufacturer Timberline the Gaff shingle
is a is an architectural shingle is a
dimensional characteristic to it so it
we'll give a similar pattern and Shadow
line it it is a I would say an up upper
scale but not the top end type of of
shingle that you can get um but I think
some of those upper end are look fake
because they start to try to recreate
shingle or slate when they really don't
so it's I think it's a solid uh quality
product I just don't know the color
which I think is integral to what we
picked replacement we we picked one but
I think we could unpick it if we
want I mean my recommendation in the way
I would direct you is that to match the
color of the of the Slate you know to do
a gray a gray tone that kind
blends with what's there
but you have a
card we're in touch think your
information I think you have everything
of my
information cell phone email I think I
forgot to bring cards tonight but um you
have all my information
yes okay anything else you want to add
no I think all the points that were
brought up are good totally understand
the position that you're in um and I
think you know to Karen's
point just making sure that color is on
point with what's there so that tonally
you know you're really tying it in with
with's with what has been on a primary
Street and I think based on you know the
color selection I would trust that staff
would be able to work with that I think
that the hardship of the the price
difference between the two
uh is is an extreme ask for the sport to
do uh and I think looking at the photos
of the existing shingle that the um the
long-term the longevity of that shingle
is is could be easily questioned because
of the shape that it's in um you know it
is a beautiful home uh the the the Slate
is a strong characteristic for this
house uh and it will it will
dramatically change um but um you know
it's a reality that we have to deal with
especially with this um the
deterioration of the Pennsylvania slate
uh that unfortunately was used years has
lasted quite a long time um but it
doesn't seem to have much life left in
it um and I think at this point it would
be just duct taping you know broken roof
so the kind of details that I would like
to work with your contractor and you or
are things like the cap right here that
I'm pointing to for the you know the top
of the turret that's that's a detail
that is a little bit trickier we just
want to make sure that these ridge vents
these Ridge covers the ridge vent I
think is GNA be fairly standard but the
the where the the hit the the Gable end
meets uh you know how that's detailed is
going to be important um because it you
can do it really simply or you can build
build it up a little bit more and then
it gives that a little bit more that
Dimension articulation to the the lines
of the roof which is more reminiscent of
the Slate
time okay is there a board member that
will make a
motion or wait we I'm sorry we need
finding a fact and or is there anyone
else in the audience that would like to
speak about this
application seeing no one uh is we have
the findings of fact
Kathy the findings of fact and decision
of the architecture review board for
application number
ar-247 for property located at 2688 East
Broad
Street uh with a proposed Improvement to
replace slate with
asphalt uh based on the fact that the
Pennsylvania slate has reached
its end of life end of
life uh the board finds it appropriate
to allow the replacement with a
condition that the applicant work with
the staff design consultant on a final
color and uh any details she
recommends do you understand the
findings of
fact I think so okay awesome is there a
board member then that will make a
motion so moved Scott second
Jones Kathy will call the roll Miss
Jones yes
Mr Scott yes Adam Tony
yes you are approved good luck
sorry thank you thank you thank
you okay our next application is 505
North Drexel the applicant is Brenda
Parker the owner is John and Abby Mali
the applicant is seeking architecture
review and approval and a certificate of
appropriateness for the construction of
a new second floor Dormer at the front
and rear of the house to add a third
bedroom bath and laundry and a new front
porch an office addition to the South
and a mudroom Edition at the
North I did not see Brenda is anyone
here to represent this
project I do not see Brenda okay we will
to the end yes we can table it to the
end we'll table it till the end of the
meeting yeah
that's
everybody I mean where's John
John keep going hang on I'm gonna read
it okay our next application is arb2
24-9 the address is 236 North Columbia
the applicant is John Beall the owner is
yoaz SAR the applicant is seeking
architecture review and approval and a
certificate of appropriateness to
demolish an existing home and replace
with a new home is the applicant present
for this
application all right everybody's
okay okay the next application is
another Brenda
Parker
wow
okay can I ask which application you all
are here
for next to the one
just are you on your
way the one that the demolish the one
that's here for the the behall one to be
to be de demolished
okay okay
um should we take a
break John just texted me and said I
need five
minutes okay
can we can we just take a really short
break and let's contact Brenda Parker
too I did yeah because we've never had
her not show up either and
um so we can give them another minute or
two to show up I guess there's Brenda
she's walking
in and now she's walking away
we were this
class I literally had the hammer in my
hand your call I mean I posted I
posted and the signs are
out Rend are you ready your application
is up are you kidding wow good timing
right I I fig I just go to the end no
you almost Miss we were just about to y
all right okay I'm going to read that
one again it is ARB 24-8 the address is
505 North Drexel the applicant is Brenda
Parker the owner is John and Abby Mali
the applicant is seeking architecture
review and approval and a certificate of
appropriateness for the construction of
a new second floor Dormer at the front
and rear of the house to add a third
floor bedroom bath and laundry and new
front porch an office addition to the
South and a mudroom addition at the
North okay um um give us some background
and this application is before the board
for the first time tonight um I did
speak to Brenda earlier I can't remember
if it was yesterday or today my days are
all born yesterday um but express my
concern about um not so much the
addition I mean it's a it's a very cute
very small little house um I totally
understand I'm sure the board will too
the need for more space um but given the
Simplicity of the existing house and I
say that in a very positive way the
Simplicity um I think that some of the
elements in the addition uh proposed
addition are a little fussy so we did
talk about that and perhaps making the
two Gables just a shed in the front to
match the shed in the back I don't think
there's a need for the double columns um
a variety of things that probably too
many to solve tonight but with some
comments from the board um uh probably
an easy table next month for approval
okay can we swear Miss
Parker please state your name Renda
Parker do somly swear from the testimony
you're about to give this evening is the
truth I do thank you okay will you give
us a short synopsis of your project
please
um so obviously you know project is to
gain space get a little bit of front
living room with the front porch you can
see in the existing front elevation they
just have awkward steps up to just a
door um so after uh we kind of received
the comments I went back with the
homeowners and we started to look at
kind of other houses in Bexley that did
have the simple shed Dormer all the way
across with uh just a center Gable and
then the flat roofs on the side for the
porch and they were on board with those
modifications so I didn't have enough
time to kind of redesign this you know
and come with a tailor more tailored
elevation so um I'll go ahead and kind
of make some refinements to simplify the
design and then we'll
resubmit and go from there okay awesome
um would you all do do you want to make
any comments
sure there's no one in the audience no
one else in the audience that wants to
speak about this application is
there okay Mr Scott uh I agree with
staff um I think the front the overall
concept is is fine the size of the front
porch seems adequate um it sounds like
you're working with staff to update uh
so I'll be interested to see that but my
my notes here that I I wrote uh were
that the front was a little too busy um
and there's too many competing elements
right such a simple existing house um
kind of lacks any real hierarchy except
the very simple door trim right that's
that's the porch and um but when it's
when a house is kind of this simple
that's stands out uh so I think the
porch is a great addition to this house
and I appreciate that you pulled it in
from the sides um I understand that the
reason for the flat porch I think it's
the it's the double gables on the second
floor um that compete with the single
Gable and the flat roof so going to a
second floor more shed style roof
simplifying that massing is very common
in Bexley um and and then I think you
might even have a little opportunity to
do a shed on the on the porch or explore
that it doesn't right because now now
yeah be flat and I probably would prefer
that but and again if it even if it's
coming up into your windows you know my
my house on gasing I used to have they
pull down that Ro that front porch roof
and flatten out that yeah kind of the
reverse all of that is is subtle ways to
balance the overall masing of that front
and then you can have you know a Gable
at your front at the front or not right
I think the front porch in itself
becomes the entire entryway you don't
necessarily need another Gable there so
I would I would look at really kind of
doing a an editing job on the front here
yeah I think the homeowners are gonna
want some sort of element you know I
think they're gonna think that it might
be a little bit I think just looking
balancing it out yeah yeah make sure
that it's it's it's not it's it's just
hierarch hierarchical in in its overall
design concept so I do have a question
about how you guys feel about the
guardrail being ated on the flat roof if
that's an appropriate
addition or will it be accessible
no just decorative it's there's a window
in that Gable but that's
it I I personally don't have a problem
with it it was something that was on my
list of like of objection uh they have
to be done right I don't like the thin
little rot iron style railings I think
there's needs to be a little bit of
substance to it okay timeliness to it um
you know if you were looking at that
just on the existing building I think it
would have to be very very simple uh but
since you're bringing a little bit more
detail now to the massing of this front
I think the way you have that seems
proportionate okay I would be interested
working with staff on the exact details
of those you know the columns and the
caps and and the railings and the and
how your your new post I guess would all
be looking so it would be good just to
do a detail of a couple rails you know
like a pull out um detail just to have
on the drawing and I think for the scale
of this house because the house is not
uh very wide um I think your you know
your elevations are proportionate but I
think I felt like there was just too
many
columns yeah that was that was one of my
as well no no go ahead and then I think
I would based on what I'm seeing in in
the elevations uh the change between the
porch and the grade seems above um you
know kind of a approaching Hazard or
code so I don't know if it's more than
30 inches or not uh it's one two three
yeah I need to check that we may need to
add that guard rail component which then
brings tie potentially ties your two
railings together which be really well
done and of course then handrail so if
those are posted I think that's going to
bring even more character but also a
little bit more busyness so you have to
balance that right so right all that
together I think if you continue to
really think through those I think those
can really work and really dress up and
transform the front of this
house sounds good okay that's all I have
to say yeah Mr Scott I think no you're
good I think we had a lot of the same
comments and thoughts um simplifying
columns I have no problem at all with
the railing I think um you know just
defining the details a bit further would
be
helpful I agree totally and I think you
could also look at other things if you
wanted to add charm to it like adding
flower boxes and things like that but
this is such a beautiful simple house
that I think to add all this fussy stuff
to it just doesn't fit it so I keep it
simple and add fun things like flower
boxes and or shutters or like that I
think to make it cute
so okay good so it sounds like we will
be tabled then until next month correct
to May 9th May
9th okay to make that a we need a motion
from a board member so moved shot nope
so moved Scott second
Jones we'll call the role uh Mr Scott
yes Miss Jones yes madame Tony yes okay
we'll see you back next month hear her
next case first are you sure that's not
on the order that
way schedule got messed up so I think
it's probably could be polite because
yeah um yeah can we is if it's okay
we're just gonna go to your next one
Parker are you trying to say the
complicated ones for last well well
there's only there's only one more
there's only one more okay okay so this
is application B2 24-9 the address is 29
South cassingham the applicant is Brenda
Parker the owner is John and Stacy uh
Barnard the applicant is Seeking a
recommendation to beap for a certificate
of appropriateness to allow a second and
third floor editions as well as a single
story Edition at the
South okay Karen can you give us a
little bit so I'm gonna kind of sound
like I'm a broken record it's a
different style a different house but
same kind of comments um I think it's
very doable to put a second story on
this house I'm not sure about a third
it' be tricky um but this style The
Bungalow style is um strong in this
house and the proposed addition kind of
is anti- Bungalow I don't know what the
right way to put it is um but I think
that by doing I mean we're not we what
we're not going to do is you know sit
here and design it but using tools like
maybe a hip roof or um spreading out
wide rather than going up I think it
would be much more appropriate I also
talked to brend about this project and
she also agreed that hearing a few board
comments but um generally speaking this
just this piece in the front yeah is
just not really in keeping with the
Bungalow style so I think it needs to go
back and work on that um I did not want
you to come because I wanted you to hear
either agreement or not from board
members but we talked through it so I I
I think you understand the the comments
yeah so this was a tough one uh you know
the homeowner comes to you and they're
like oh we want to blow this up and out
of second and third floor and I'm like
really do we have to um but they really
they really wanted that third floor but
I've um after my conversation yesterday
I convinced them they're they're
agreeing to give up that third floor
which gives us a lot more flexibility on
bringing the height down a little bit
and doing different reforms I'm going to
stop you right there and I know there's
some some concern in the third floor
there is third floor attic conversions
all over the city I think it's how it's
done and and with
your the challenge I have is and I won't
I'll wait until you're done um is that
it's how it's done so you just have this
third floor inside the Gable um if you
were to do a hip roof and that was a
dormer for that then I I would be okay
with with that yeah I see that all the
time so yeah they might be able to still
get a little bit of space up there I
think that's important to understand
that I'm not against the third floor
it's just how it's treated in the
massing yeah yeah so anyway now now that
he's willing to give it up I have some
flexibility and reducing its size and
reconfiguring the rough less pressure
less pressure
yes um so and then I think the other
comment was kind of
this this Bay at the front was also
extruded up to the second floor and so
it kind of creates an odd sort of
element so I'm going to do kind of some
a series of studies to see if kind of
keeping that maybe as a first floor
component and just bringing the second
floor kind of box up if that works
better aesthetically so I'm because
really it it gets in the way of the
porch and the kind of the main rof
element so I I do think the math thing
of the addition is the biggest issue and
so I think to Mr Scott's point and and
your own you know kind of bringing
omitting that Tower element on the front
elevation and then just bringing down
the overall height would go a long
way officially go around is there
anything else you want to add well do
you wantan you want to talk about
anything else yeah I I think I'm okay so
I agree
um you have the elevation has three very
strong the front elevation has three
very strong elements again competing
yeah against each other so my note was
you know there's a there's a very strong
front porch that kind of wraps the
corner so even though it's one story it
still has a very strong element on the
the street facade um so the rest of the
house should be subservient to that so I
know even going to the two stories and
I'll talk about the bump out the bay
it's second um the Second Story wants to
not be Gable wasn't doesn't want to have
a strong front wants to soften that roof
you can bring that Dormer up if you need
to do the ad if you lose that argument
outside of the space but and I think
that's okay I think you're gonna be
limited to scale because a lot of times
those are like double windows and
they're trying to get more ceiling
volume there and when you go to a hip
you're gonna lose that but um and then I
think the tower the tower is just is
throwing all of that relationship out of
wax so I think going to a one story I
think you're still going to compete with
this porch I think the porch and and
that I think you're having trouble now
because they're trying to align a second
shed or something over that bay window
on the first floor so you have a bay on
a bay on the tower right that's that's
even if you want to get rid of the lower
Bay I think it would start to simplify
that mass and if that then became just a
shed roof that that kind of went up
below the the kind of hip roof that may
work um but I would really look at that
I think okay softening in in trying to
to emphasize the front porch and and
kind of make the the main Mass which is
going to be larger and dominant anyway
more secondary and subservient to the
front porch
details
okay okay I I really don't have anything
else to add the the one thing I will
make a note because it's one of my
Champion items here is that though your
drawings are very very well done I have
no idea what the size of things are what
material call outs so your elevations
don't have any other than the dimension
which is thank you for adding one
dimension uh we we love having some
notes in the drawing so that we can
understand the proportions the slope of
roofs and things like that so yeah I
think I got a little bit lazy on this
one please do your best to include that
your plants have Dimensions it is in the
sections if you got that far better I I
we I prefer them on the elevations
because you're calling out and even if
it's calling out siding to match then we
have a record written record of that
yeah and usually I do a material list
but again I think I just if you're doing
you know rush you know so just please I
know you submit a lot
um so we see you a lot but that's
something I'm going to continue to push
for as a board members some consistency
uh not only in how we communicate those
requirements to to people that are
applying but also um on our applications
so that we're fair to everybody yeah
don't let things slide too much so thank
you sounds good um I do have a couple
well one question
this project is going for a couple
variances so I just kind of like to get
a general feel for maybe how you guys
are uh thinking about those so the north
side which is kind of the right side of
the elevation where the the tower
element is um it's too close to the
property line the existing condition and
so now we're adding a second floor so um
so this board has nothing to do with the
variances oh okay I didn't know if you
said yes we recommend or no we don't
having said that when you apply for a
project with a variance it the final
decision is for Bap so we're not
approving anything we're giving a
recommendation positive or not yeah okay
um but you're at the point where it
should come back here before you go
there okay to determine you know in your
design you may say if I really don't
want to go up that much I may need a two
foot variance or something like that um
that's your call to you know it to prove
that it is a practical difficulty okay
um we will just say that design looks
good okay and recommend it they'll say
whether or not you get the
zoning did I do a good job of explaining
yes so I'm I'm getting the feel that
this board is would think that she may
be best to table her case and bring it
back to the board bring it back bring
and then go to bza and then and then
maybe maybe not have to come back for
another round we'll see how I mean right
so they can't table it but you can table
it based on what they're telling you
yeah so and you probably want to table
both this meeting and the zoning board
meeting correct yeah it's your decision
because the applicant has to ask to have
it tabled you could ask for a vote but I
think you can see where no we'll ask to
table both meetings that way we come
back and get the design approved before
we go to zoning great let's table it to
the main nth meeting you'd like to do
that
okay and do
we want need a
motion so moved second
Scott uh no call Miss Jones yes Mr Scott
yes Madam Tony yes thank you we'll see
you back next month thank
you okay uh our last application for the
evening is application number ARB 24-9
the address is 236 North Columbia the
applicant is John behall the owner is
yoaz SAR the applicant is seeking
architecture review and approval and a
certificate of appropriateness to
demolish an existing home and replace it
with a new
home okay I'm gonna do a brief
introduction and hand it to you to speak
I have
great oh great it's so cute the way you
thank you
um so I've included in the staff notes
and I can bring them up at any time if
we want to refer to them in this meeting
the demolition ordinance um uh you know
John and um his firm has done have done
a good job of going through all those
things which I will let him lead you
through um in the staff report that I
sent out to all of you and posted on
online I just kind of put in italic I
italicized the ones that I think are
talking you know more heavily um
pertinent to this particular project
things like you know who the architect
was and the the on both sides like whe
irrelevant to whether it's supporting or
not supporting the demolition just
things that I think are more per into
the discussion but you know I'll leave
that to you all to lead but I'm going to
go ahead and um let John do his
presentation explanation of the project
and I have a lot of stuff here that I
can bring up at any time for reference
if you'd like or the board would like I
have one question uh the Warners who
aren't in contract for the house or here
should if they want to speak should we
get all get sworn in at the same time
sure you want to come up and get in go
as just as I had thought we would be
hours from that so he's not here yet
either
but what oh there you are oh I see I see
okay come why don't you come up and SKS
one in two I think it's probably
depending okay so just and um everyone
raise their right hands and state your
name starting with you ma'am War John
Warner John be Hall do you somly swear
or from the testimony you're going about
to give this evening is the truth yes
yes thank you
go ahead ready for me to start we're
ready for you okay so I'm gonna start
about 10,000 feet okay and just a a just
a big picture question that I have sort
rhetorical question probably like why is
there a demolition ordinance in Bexley
like why why does a city think they
should control what people should do on
their private properties as far as a
building down or leaving it up and I
think the answer is probably pretty
clear it's to protect the neighborhood
because everything you do on your
property potentially affects your
neighbors around you and so you know uh
that is sort of the Crux
of of our case here in that
uh we we don't think this particular
house
no matter what the house itself looks
like really contributes to the
neighborhood and in fact we we uh have
talked to every neighbor on the
Block and they all agree demolition of
the house and our new proposed house
would be the thing that would actually
enhance their neighborhood more than the
retention of this house so that's just
uh sort of my starting point about how
we we feel about it and how we've taken
the time to talk to each neighbor that's
on this particular block and it was a
pretty much well it was 100%
consensus so let's start with the scale
drawings maybe can we look at the can we
look at the existing first you tell me
what you want to look at see so there's
two scale drawings
one showing the existing scale and one
sh that's the new
proposed okay so so what I think
is look at that look at that I here's
here's the only thing I can think of
when we drew that to scale is if I
brought that little that little existing
house into to you guys today say we want
to put this house there you you'd laugh
me out of the room you'd say that's
ridiculous it is so it's half the size
half the height and well it's 24 feet to
the peak the other houses are at
40 and uh off way off center of the lot
really very awkward the the other part
of that is that I just mentioned to you
don't see it here is it's virtually impo
it's virtually invisible from the street
because the side which is that pierce
brick wall that you see at the on the
first floor that side faces the street
and is very much closer to the street
and as I put in my notes I don't mean to
make a big joke about it but it looks
like the front of the house is like a
trash enclosure that's what it looks
like on this on the street with these
fabulous pieces of
architecture so you know there's there's
our
you know
first uh that that's one of one of the
first issues I want to make I I guess
the other thing too is the your code
reads very
specifically to uh that for you to
prohibit
demolition it needs to be historically
or architecturally significant right
that's your wording you've actually
created a very high standard
and I look at that and I think
significant might be if you were living
in the house it might be significant to
you but as a resident of Bexley and and
a resident of this neighborhood pretty
insignificant so there's uh the first my
my first point then I want to go through
a couple things so
the your criteria for demolition is
pretty clearly
stated in your ordinance right first the
first criteria is the age and the
condition of the
structure so it's
1953 it's not especially old it's not
especially new uh some of you walk
through the house I mean I'm not I don't
want to overemphasize it's I you saw it
it's uh those those two saw but I guess
the condition is okay
it but I would say it's not
significantly good we want to keep using
the words that Bexley uses in the
ordinance it's not a significantly good
condition and it's certainly dated as
far as all the kitchens
bathrooms and
uh the the kinds of spaces the current
uh bexy residents
expect the quality of the design the
details and use of materials well it's
brick has woodsiding has an asphalt
roof quality of the materials are
okay the design you could you can you
can be the judge on the design I think
it's more interesting than some houses
and Bexley less interesting than others
I'd say as far as no's work goes and as
Rob Livy put in his letter I don't think
it's one of no's masterpieces I think
some of his other houses are quite more
interesting and as I put in my notes we
know that some of the original details
that that no proposed were not
implemented and some of the materials
that he proposed like uh clay tile roof
clay tile roof would have significantly
changed the look at this
house
uh the importance of the structure to
the character and quality of the
neighbor this is probably one of the
strongest points to allow for demolition
of this house because first of all it's
practically hidden from the
street uh it's grossly out of scale and
actually some you know what some of the
neighbors that we talked to on this
block called it an ice work that is what
some of the PE some of the neighbors
feel that have lived with this house on
their block for many
years uh the significance of the design
or the structure to the historical or
architectural culture development of the
city your
state I mean I don't know that's a very
sort of esoteric kind of discussion but
uh I think especially since Bexley has
other no ver musen homes that are much
more interesting I don't see it as a big
detriment to lose this
house and the the fifth of the important
issues that you that are in your code is
the impact on the city's real estate
base and clearly this is the new house
is clearly to the advantage of the city
right this is a 1.1 acre lot it can
support a much more valuable house than
this and certainly the house that we're
proposing is more will be more
valuable so the the basically one more
thing I I want to point out because I
found in the past people a little bit
confused about demolition
in Beckley as opposed to let's say
German
Village so let's just go German Village
is a designated historic district it was
studied every building was was
designated as uh as either um adding to
the adding to the historic district or
not you know Bexley is a city Bexley is
not a historic district be as a city no
study has ever been done about what
houses are add to add to the character
or don't add to the character add to the
historical significance of the city so
it your your so in in that vein your
code is written very
specifically
to create a very difficult way for the
city to deny a homeowner the ability to
do
what they propos to do with their
property I mean architecturally or
historically significant it's not like
it's Charming it's a pretty good house
it's a it it it it looks nice the
neighborhood none of that that is not
the criteria to deny a demolition it has
to be historically or or uh
architecturally significant so that is
an extremely high standard that Bexley
has set and I think a lot of people that
think about uh preservation kind of lose
that difference between a historic
district and Bexley as an entire
city um let's see if I have
another and as far as like the sort of
the impact on the neighborhood here's
here's my sense
that
we if
if as far as the significance to Bexley
if this house were
demolished and the new house uh the
construction was started on the new
house
house very few people are going to know
something's gone is it hard to it's hard
to see this house very few people are
know something's gone and when the new
house is built I bet you people start
saying wonder what was there before
because it has no because it had no
Street
PR and and so I these comments are
really just based on the demolition
issue we can talk about the new house uh
but I figure we should deal with this
first before we go on to the discussions
of the new house
okay so you want so now I'm I don't know
you have more questions or if you want
me to talk about anything else it's up
to you but typically what we would do
now is have anyone else from your team
who wants to speak about the house speak
about it and then we go to public
comment yes and then when you all are
done then we go to board members okay so
we have a neighbor here too okay speak
or uh can are they speaking in this time
period now too would typically speak
before the board um but you know I have
another neighbor coming in too okay um
but I don't know Julie do you want to
speak
for
yeah um
hello uh a neat thing about this house
is that when I was a child I lived down
the street and I would go with my mom to
hit tennis in the backyard and it was
glorious as a little kid and what is so
interesting is that 50 years later when
I've come back to live in the area um to
have gotten the chance
to really access this house we we've
bought it first before the interested
clients have been uh going to purchase
it from us and it was just kind of a
throwback to go through the home uh what
is notable as John mentioned is that I
think it was exactly the same as it was
except that it hasn't been kept up
inside which is fixable I'm just taller
so my husband uh who you may have met
before yoas he's a person who can touch
every ceiling and has to duck at every
doorway and you know he the way he
builds he usually goes for the light
he's worked with John before so to
us it's it could happen that it would be
worked with but it's just not appealing
to us and so we feel that strongly about
it and that's um why the effort was made
to reach out to the neighbors and check
out their sentiments about it uh so that
was sort of an interesting Journey um in
terms of yoaz um he's really had a great
experience uh working here in Bexley and
I think that he's really excited to get
into it that shouldn't be the reason but
I think um he's excited to uh do what we
think is is an appropriate and right
thing for the community there so are
there any questions for me did you buy
the house intending to have it
demolished we were up for the adventure
so we bought it intending to see what
would happen and we we've worked with
John uh we approached him just because
we appreciated his experience and sort
of thought of what the possibilities
were and can I ask how long have you
owned it um we've been in contract over
the past three months and we just closed
in the past 10 days I think it was the
actual date so very recent
yeah and they let as soon as we got in
contract I mean before we were been
signed um you know the person had passed
away who was in the home so it was all
through a lawyer an State someone handly
State and we got in touch with them uh
before it went to the market and
everything and and they were very warm
and let us in and uh just kind of
thought of the possibilities so so did
the house ever go on the market not
officially no
okay okay okay thank
you you go
next but you
hav happy would like to swear you in
please raise your right hand and state
your name sir ronal Kaufman do you somly
swear from the testimony you're about to
give this evening is the truth I do
thank you and what's your address sir
I'm sorry what's your address 200 North
Columbia uh next door to the lazarus's
house and uh the reason I'm speaking
today is we're very excited about having
uh first a neighbor uh with such stature
and secondly to have a house um and
we've seen the plans how wonderful it
could be to have that kind of house
um um my wife and I uh uh have a
daughter that lives in New Albany and um
uh she's got a nice house there but she
wants to come back to uh The Roots we
grew up that both of our kids uh grew up
in 200 North Colombia uh so she wants to
move back and her daughter wants to go
to Bexley uh uh school so uh that's very
nice too
um but the point that I'm want to make
here is um I knew Mrs Lazarus uh I used
to go over there often because she had
wild trees uh growing uh on the fence
line and U they would come visit on our
side and uh so I would go over to Mrs
laas and she was a kind lady and she
said uh Mr very form
uh Mr Kaufman I am just so sorry I'm too
old to go out and help you cut the vines
down uh so anyway um but she showed uh
uh us through the house um you know the
last three or four years and um even
though we really wanted a house for our
daughter and how great it would be to
have her next door um uh I know know
that it was just unaffordable for us to
do what was needed to that house uh um
uh I think that um um Julie said that uh
it was uh uh so um that hadn't been kept
up at all um and
um um um and she's right it just
nothing's the this the same same light
bulbs are out the same carpet that was
worn out years ago was still there the
basement is
deplorable uh the walls are all stained
where uh the Water had leaked in and um
uh so I am hopeful that uh in your
wisdom that uh you would uh allow this
new project to enhance
Bexley um so that's what I want to say
tonight thank you very
much is there another Resident that
would like to
speak C are you in please state your
name John W chansy you saw Le sar from
the testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth I do thank you I
had not expected to speak tonight
members of the board thank you for
hearing me I'm probably a future
resident of Bexley I'm in contract on
the house to the left oh you are in
contract currently living at 7010
Industrial Parkway Plain City Ohio okay
I don't believe you have standing then
right well he's in contract for the so
does that give him standing I think I
think I think it's okay I think it's
appropriate is your
call right yes yes yeah typically just
so that you know typically if you don't
have standing which means you're within
200 feet 200 feet of the property you
don't have standing which means you
cannot speak speak about it um but
because you are in contract we hope your
contract goes through because we're
going to let you
talk hopefully he hears that
too uh I did also know Dorothy Lazarus
for many years so I'm not new to this
area I certainly agree with the scale of
this new project the appropriateness of
it for the neighborhood um John Beall
does a great job I look forward to being
in this neighborhood seeing an
appropriate house for this area uh
unfortunately Mrs lazarus's house is
greatly diminished over the years and is
not a contributing factor in my view to
the area and on a personal note I look
forward to working with you all as I try
to rehabilitate and restore
and and bring up todate and add uh
features and uh Landscaping to what I
consider one of the most beautiful
historic houses in Bexley at 260 North
Columbia
yeah thank you thank
you
everybody okay would you like to go
ahead then and present your design for
your for for the new house okay you guys
have you know the rendering came out a
little dark on these when we fax it over
your soite and you know jury in my
office is such an artist I I couldn't
resist giving you those beautiful
drawings did but uh we may frame them so
yeah I know I know I know de and herar
have their ring frame yeah uh so a a
couple things to a couple a couple
General things to talk
about especially since the existing
house was so short and seemed so out of
scale I and actually that the uh that
John wy's new house is so
large and Kaufman's not quite as large
but still a large house uh I felt like
we really needed to get some scale to
balance out that neighborhood and also
to me uh like fix the one big problem
with that with the existing house and
that is it doesn't face the street every
other house on the Block faces the
street that has a street presence I
think Rob Livy noted in his notes
there's sort of a Cadence down the
street and when you have the houses uh
fa uh facing front there are quite a few
you know this is a little bit more than
two original Lots some of the houses on
the Block on one original lot others are
on multiple Lots but every house that's
on multiple Lots fills the majority of
its Frontage on on those multiple Lots
so this does the same thing the uh we
are maintaining one curb cut so we don't
have to do another one and adding a
second on the uh on the South Side so
that you know it's definitely long
enough to do a circular Drive
uh and we took the height up to just to
40 feet I think a couple other things I
did you know this is a 1412 slope not
too many people do 1412 but I think that
if you look around Beckley one the
giveaways is for for the for an infill
house is they're a little shallow
they're a little less steep than the
historic houses so that's that's the uh
the idea here uh the materials are Stone
and
stucco uh
the I mean you
know I you know I I I I don't know
exactly I think the uh back of the house
is also beautiful as well I think we
worked hard to give the na neighbors
privacy you can see this end this little
piece at the end here faces the confin
we didn't put any Windows facing their
yard we tried to be sympathetic to even
though we're going wider sympathetic to
the neighbors um the we kept the garages
in basically the the same location as
the uh as the existing I I we will build
the house a little bit up higher from
grade because currently it is actually
really low to grade so we will build it
up a little bit but the over I looked at
all the overall grading of all the
adjoining properties and we're a little
bit on
we I w't say a hill because there's no
Hills but it's just a tiny bit higher
and the drain we really won't change the
draining drainage pattern one thing is
two two sides of this yard are
completely filled with stone walls so
there is no drainage going that are was
really going to go into neighbors
properties
um the you know the size of the house is
larger we put the the tallest part of
the house in the middle to try and then
let it kind of ease Cascade towards the
end the
side I don't know you know I was
thinking about this IO this is
like I used to be on this board right to
me this would be the Dream House someone
would bring me to approve because it's
pretty much the kind of thing you would
love to see in Bexley right I don't know
I I don't you know I realize I design it
myself but it is but it is it is the
kind of thing that you hope people would
kind of stretch and do you know in this
neighborhood and
clearly increase property values I think
it's certainly not going to hurt any
neighbors property
values okay is that it I and I mean I'm
happy to answer more questions if you
have specific questions but I think kind
of speaks for
itself all right Mr Scott will you do us
the honor
please turn your microphone up what else
I would love
to uh well first of all thank you for
inviting us to the house and giving us a
tour I think that's
um significant impact in being able to
see the house from the inside in the
state of of of the structure and
finishes which is always fun to see uh
some original some that had been updated
uh so appreciate that effort and taking
the time to do that for the board
um I do not want to talk about the sexy
rendering yet um beautiful but I'm gonna
wait um so let's go to the process of
demolition I know you've touched on that
in in your opening remarks um so for for
the application there's a statement
which you actually submitted two one
from Mr livsey uh and one from your own
office and I'm G to kind of address
those first um and just kind of go
through and review those uh so have a
discussion about that potentially so I
would open it up to other board members
I think as we go through this since we
don't go through each of those I don't
know what your plan was but that sounds
great free to um to chime in so um
obviously a statement as whether uh such
structure is or is not historically or
architecturally significant I know
you've touched on those the definitions
of those and how uh potentially vague or
not vague those can be uh and worthy of
preservation um and that's one that I'm
I'm interested in in in exploring here
tonight uh together with relevant
supporting information so uh to touch on
that first I'm going to go through Mr
Livy's um um letter um that he provided
to u to the board uh to miss and Miss
Rose um I know Mr liy well uh he
actually was an instructor uh when I was
in school uh maybe one of the toughest
critics uh as a students so I respect
that and he's had much involvement in
the in the local community as well as
nationally
um in his assessments of some of the the
the items here I'd like to address some
of those so uh his F first item on his
his letter um addresses the age and
condition of the structure um the
structure was built in
1953 um by by the Lazarus family uh by a
I think locally renowned architect um as
we know we've talked about um it is the
first house to that was a prairie style
that I know of that entered in Columbus
but not the only one obviously the
architect had done a couple but uh
there's also significant development as
you know in Worthington rush I think
Rush Creek is it yeah but did he do did
not not do but again it it tells to me
the
overall this house in its style groups
that into all of them together the
significance of that and I looked at
some of that history I know that those
properties well um and there is a there
is a a strong commitment to
preservation sure sorry I'll bring this
closer there is a strong effort in that
Community to to preserve that those
those Architects those uh
I would call Frank Lord Wright's
influenced homes that the architect
there was uh came out of that office and
um though they're not all prairie style
they're obviously all Frank Lord Wright
style so uh so that that that is to me
is interesting that that Community is is
pushing and and and having a pretty
strong commitment to preservation of
that Community uh though very different
than this house and its location and its
sighting too um so in continuing on U Mr
livsey addresses the low ceilings and
the tiny bathroom within the house um
being able to tore that and being 6'2 uh
actually I found the ceilings
surprisingly not too bad uh and there
were some vaulted ceilings especially in
the upper bedrooms every bedroom was Ved
uh the bathrooms were unique uh though
only the half bath I thought was
extremely small uh the master suite uh
with the mirror ceilings was just
interesting in that it had mirrors uh so
I I don't necessarily agree that the the
the existing structure it is appropriate
to the the style and the timing of the
home um which again is not our modern
standards I understand that uh it is a
very different uh type of living but it
is an existing house and was built in
that eror uh the Quality quality of the
architectural design design the details
and use some materials um I think there
has been um discussion in Mr lib's
article he or letter he he addresses it
that it's not one of the Architects
better projects I think that's
subjective if you know the the Miller
house or the house on Clifton um
and maybe the Miller house could be
argued but this this his own house is
unique enough and and maybe in its
uniqueness is better uh but I'm not
necessarily sure it's it's better in
overall design
um but he makes a statement that it
doesn't measure up and and I and I think
that's just a subjective designs uh
approach to to this house and an
argument of that Mr livsey feels it's
it's not doesn't since it doesn't
measure up to the other houses that this
architect has has completed that it then
does not deserve to be saved and I don't
buy that AR
I don't think that's appropriate um or
appropriate type of position to take um
so I just don't feel that that's a
Justified comment um and then at the end
of that number two he he States the fact
that the fact that no one must duck to
get up and down the main stairs uh is
not acceptable again I only had the duct
going duck down without hitting my
forward on the basement stairs which is
pretty typical in this neighborhood uh
so that doesn't necessarily Bo bother me
though I will mention that if I get step
on my tippy toes I could hit the door
headers on the second floor bedroom so
uh quite unique uh but those could be
fixed
um this house the importance of the
structural number three would be the
importance of the structure of the
character and quality of the
neighborhood uh we have heard your uh
arguments and discussion tonight and
some of which I strongly agree that the
house is uniquely situated on the site
it does not boast its strong elevation
to the the street it is almost it turns
its shoulder maybe it's better to the
street uh and then in its only kind of
opening from the bedroom it's put up a
kind of a screen wall that looks more
like a trash enclosure uh and it's not
the most successful orientation um but
again I don't think there are many
houses in Bexley that are um what I
would call side entered uh especially in
North Bexley on unique Lots so uh I
don't think justification of demolition
is is adequate here because of its
orientation on the site compared to the
proposed design obviously uh there's a
much better impact to the street but
driving up and down the street
specifically a lot of homes sit back and
are very private from the street through
Landscaping uh to protect those homes
privacy so I I just don't buy that the
orientation of the house is is
justification for uh the I guess the
check box in the demo column because of
its it's its ability to be unique and be
different and sit on a site that is
private and more internally faced so I
think that's not a very strong argument
uh one of the comments in number four Mr
Livy States uh there's better examples
of his work uh the architect's work
which he had referenced earlier in his
letter um but the significance of this
design of this house is is more is is
beyond design there's a history of this
house um and it's not necessarily the
original owner uh but it's to the
community and and and the style of
architecture uh and this specific style
of architecture is is unique and there's
not very many examples as we know in
Bexley now we have had a recent case
where we have demolished or approved
demolition of a of a um semi prairy or
mid-century modern style house in
central Beckley uh and that is moving
forward uh but that project was in in
much more dire shape uh and and much
more challenged for its uh its lower
level garages and and ways that house
could be utilized within the site
um where this project I don't think has
those same
challenges and then I think the final
and I and I understand it of course uh
the benefits of the city on the tax
basis uh we from my experience and and
my position is the decisions on this
board uh don't take tax implications as
a deciding factor for demolition
specifically uh we obviously want to
maintain the fabric of our community and
want to can always improve that that
fabric but at what cost is what we have
to balance that out so that's that part
of the discussion here tonight uh but I
think the fact that there would be a
improve increased tax benefits to the
city should shouldn't be a driving
factor for
demolitions so in summary of Mr uh
Livy's letter uh I do feel the house is
a major contributor to the architectural
character and the heritage of Bexley um
in the fabric of the neighborhood though
it is a very
different contributing factor than what
you would typically see in this these
neighborhoods uh but I think that
uniqueness is what makes it unique you
know not to be redundant there the
quirkiness uh of the sighting the entry
and interior spaces are consistent with
the architectural style of the period
and adds to that overall character
um I found no in my investigation not
being a structural engineer but being a
licensed Architect no significant
structural concerns house it seemed
fairly solid I found the basement walls
and and and everything seemed to be um
intact I have not seen any documents
from you as a evaluations from a
structal engineer that there was
significant uh challenges and concerns
with if the house was to be renovated so
um if you have that or there's things
that you you can you know contribute to
that I would love to hear that and then
I think finally on on on this list and
I'm jumping around a little bit because
it's complicated uh ordinance we have is
is uh I didn't see any documents related
to um financial hardship for the
existing house so we've had many cases
here uh where there was Demolition
involved where there was a fire or that
this property had been internally
entirely gutted uh and there was just
studs uh where there was significant
hardship of of of improvement to that or
inability to either to structural damage
or sight conditions uh I don't see any
documents from you on that there has
been some discussion about um you know
obviously the the ceiling Heights and
and other things and and I appreciate
that but uh I don't see an argument here
that that checks that box that this
project meets that financial hardship
requirement the second letter that was
submitted was from your office
um and I think you know goes into a
little bit more detail about the
specific home um and I appreciate
there's some history there and I won't
get into all of that um but will make a
a comment on the first bullet point I'll
just read what I wrote here the
determination to demolish an existing
building should not be based on the
design successfulness of a project
compared to other work that that
architect has performed uh if we if we
did that we would Dem demoing probably
half the work of Architects in the
community so uh I just don't see that as
a justifiable uh
reason
um number two I think deals with if I
not if I'm not incorrect about the value
engineering that may have happened on
the project during either during right
before construction or during
construction but the omitted Design
Elements could easily be added to the
project in the renovation to bring that
back to the true intent of the design uh
which would improve the existing
property and its value so I I don't
think that's a valuable argument for
demolition the third bullet point uh the
interior of the main entrance as well as
the stairway feel awkward and very
modest for this type of home I would
agree that in this style of home uh this
home particular the entry is extremely
modest one because it's off to the side
of the house off the street but also
that it's very diminished in its
Grandeur uh but that's part of the the
charm and the and the design of this
house for its uh by the architect but
the interior spaces can easily be
redesigned or improved um to to make
more successful and I don't see that
being a challenge um the low ceilings
throughout the first floor uh again I
personally didn't feel like the the
property was overpowering and and being
taller uh I thought they were actually
was quite comfortable and with the
amount of glazing really kind of float
to the exterior so I did not feel like
the ceiling conditions on the first
floor or in the bedrooms on the second
floor was a big
issue I do agree with you that the the
1986 Edition uh was poorly done or
poorly constructed with foundations and
seems to have some challenges with the
connection of the brick and might be
even settling a little bit uh so I think
that is a a problem on the existing
project that would need to be addressed
uh I also agree with the next bullet
point that the enclosure is not
desirable and is but is not a designing
fact factor for demolition so you the
brick pierced face wall so the end cap
that's off the bedroom that faces the
street is uh definitely not a desirable
situation for a house especially facing
the street um but again I don't believe
that it can't
be as evidenced by the street View From
the Block the home is grossy out of
scale I I think in that can you bring up
that street existing Street elevation
that they put together which thank you
very much I appreciate uh the before and
after uh I agree this this house doesn't
fit at all uh in this site but if you
took this house and rotated it though
the height would be grossly below the
neighboring houses uh the length would
be in in in in conjunction in
appropriate so yes the house is is short
but that is also due to the
architectural style uh that it was
designed in so um its Grandeur is much
more in its horizontality than the
verticality uh but then again it ties
back to the ceiling Heights and other
conditions that you've you've expressed
um the kitchen is is horrible I agree uh
but that doesn't mean the interior
finishes and cabinets and uh things
can't be remodeled uh though I don't
believe based on our conversations of
some of the history uh that she shared
with with us is that we would want to
take it back to the original design uh
because it was more of a separated
two-part kitchen but again I don't think
the kitchen space uh could not be
improved and and modernized to to be an
adequate kitchen for today's standards
uh so your comment about Charles Lazarus
prominent Columbus businessman there's
many homes and I would agree that in
Bexley that have a huge history of of
different owners which is is fascinating
and interesting but shouldn't be a
deciding factor to keep or or demolish
homes
um so I I I don't argue with that at all
um I think you're that's a debatable
point uh the home lacks many interesting
features and details distinguish the
high quality mid-century homes I would
agree with that that that the
home based on the higher-end quality
mid-century modern home even at those
time periods this home is lacking of
that but it doesn't not have interesting
details there's quirky things all over
uh that make this home very unique and
actually very well connected to its
landscape that the fact that this house
sits almost at grade is a challenge for
today's construction it's something that
we wouldn't do but it does have a
benefit in that you're able to kind of
blend right from interior to exterior
and it has a much better connection to
the ground
plane as I stated earlier uh I don't
believe tax revenue is something that we
should consider uh personally as as a
board uh it's something that obviously
plays into it and in property values and
neighboring property values is something
that we're always concerned with and
want to protect uh Integrity of the
architecture but uh is not a basis for
either demoing or not
demoing uh there's a I think I next one
page is there one yeah that one uh I
acknowledge the cost of renovation of
the existing structure um you know
there's going to be significant uh cost
to do so to bring it up to kind of a
modern standards but you know when you
look at a cost for Demolition and then
also the new home um I I don't see that
as being a hardship it's more of a
desirable which which is more
desirable so I I call that as
debatable uh are there unusual
compelling circumstances supported
Demolition and replacement the larger
proposed home is more to scale with ad
Jason Homes I if you go to the new
proposed elevations it's hard to argue
um but I think inly um and and maybe
this streak is this street or one of
other couple of streets are unique um it
shouldn't be the the major deciding
factor is we we should demolish all the
smaller homes so that all homes could be
equal size I think for me it's it's it's
it's it's much more about the the
history and the pr preserving the that
that Unique fabric in the community um
and this house I think has that though
dated in in need of repair um larger
doesn't necessarily mean better it's
just
larger uh you make a p the next bll
point a proposed new home presents a far
more appropriate street view and
complements enhances the value of the
joining properties I agree with that
totally I think that the proposed design
and I will now touch on that is
fantastic it's It's a Wonderful design
uh the renderings are very uh seductive
uh and I think this would be a be this
on a empty lot would be a beautiful
addition and a no-brainer yes for me to
support your design uh we are very
familiar with the quality of your work
and uh you know and respect that greatly
um this this is not really about the new
design um because if you had brought a
would the would the would the the
decision be different for the board if
it was a terrible design that that that
could come out of your office but if
let's say an architect brought a
terrible design uh one of the deciding
factors we have here is
that the new house has to be better
right then there has to be an
improvement to the site or at least
equal um the challenge is we can't
compete the existing house can't compete
with this at all at any scale uh because
this is is is much more modern much more
uh Grand much more presence on the
street uh and I think that's an unfair
fight um but I agree with you that that
is a much better presence
uh the condition of the existing house
is poor I I agree uh that doesn't but
the bones are very strong and very
intact uh for somebody who potentially
would love to renovate a house like that
uh and had the money the means to do so
so uh I don't think the interior
finishes is an argument for
demolition uh great the kitchen does not
meet current standards and needs a major
overhaul um the bathrooms are dated and
need renovation I totally agree with
that uh the closet spaces are all very
unique and small in this house I agree
with that as well but again not
something that can't be addressed the
windows and the door uh the windows and
doors in the house uh Des desperately
need to be replaced um so I agree with
your statement there and the basement is
unusable as a finished basement there
are there are means to remedy that but
they're expensive and uh you know it's
not something that we're discussing but
uh I at this point see the basement as
unusable uh there's one comment here I
think I was looking for you to maybe
give us some more information the
renovation the renov a renovation
project that corrects the inherent
problems of the existing house would
almost certainly require demolition of a
few architectural elements to give
existing house its character so can you
explain that comment please yeah well I
think sort of ties into one of Rob's
comments too and that is
uh uh we uh yoaz and I felt that the
house was so low
that and really impossible to lower the
grade around the house that the to
correct which we felt was that problem
what would require a lot of well almost
an impossible task of of changing the
way the house looked and so that was one
of the main concerns I'm trying to think
uh I wrote that a while ago so I'm
trying to think what else I had in my
mind at the time I wrote that note but
uh there's there's I mean we we you
discussed this the challenges with the
existing house with you know Water
Maintenance and and and management I
think I would agree with that there's
duct taping and has happened over the
years
yeah you're kind of through the end on
my list can I respond can I respond now
to some of your comments that since he
there was a lot there sorry had so many
yeah the one main thing I want to start
with is you know be if I read your
ordinance correctly you have a two
tiered you have a two-tiered evaluation
system here right you first determine is
a house architecturally or uh or
architex or historically significant
right and uh so that's that's one
decision the Board needs to make the
second decision then after that is your
code allows to tear down a significant
historically significant house if it
meets the if you have these this other
criteria but to to go back to the first
point of whether it is actually
historically
significant the fact that you could
remodel it doesn't enter into the
picture right those that that has
nothing to do with is it historically
significant now it does have something
to do with the second tier of decision
making that you have to do so I just
want to make that clear uh because I
when I've been through the board before
I think a lot of the board members have
said well the house is in good condition
you shouldn't tear it that you shouldn't
tear it down
well being in good condition does not
mean it's historically or architectually
significant so that's the first thing I
kind of want to just clarify so I think
I was basing my comments earlier today
on on the definition of historically
significant in the context of this block
in Bexley so that's probably the most
important point and it has to do with
orientation it has to do with size it
has to do with scale has to do and some
of these other points I totally agree
with you you wanted to remodel that
someone wanted to remodel that house but
you know this is the United States of
America right I mean people the owner
the owner of the house has to want to do
that right the owner doesn't want to do
that then that's not that's not on the
table for discussion right so just to
clarify that point a little bit um and a
couple things you said uh just on design
I want to mention so Rush Creek I agree
Rush Creek I don't know how many houses
what there 30 houses up there something
like that okay there's something
significant about those houses being in
that Community with all those other all
those other similar houses to me that's
a that is not a good comparison to me to
this situation it's not and I Tred to
separate that once I made that no I
understand it is it is it is an
appropriate because it's an similar
architectural style that is where
Community is trying to preserve that is
my only reference
um
the if we if we need to prove me I think
if we need to prove the issue with cost
is this not so much that you couldn't do
all these things that you mentioned in
your when you were doing your review
fine all all those things are possible
the problem that the the and again we're
going to the economic hardship the
economic hardship has to do more with it
with this you do all those things to
that house you know we're talking
millions of dollars not hundreds of
thousands we're talking
millions
and what are you left with are you left
with a house that has the value of what
you need to put into it so to me that's
the economic hardship issue that we ha
that we have to address not that you
could that you could remodel it fine you
could remodel it but by the time you
actually brought it up to to uh what I
call some something like today's
standards you're
you're you would have a hard time
selling it for that price I mean as
everyone knows the value right now is
the lot right that lot is very valuable
so you might get some money out of it if
you because of the lot but but the uh
and location
right so those those are my those those
are things I I you know I had some other
little details here but mainly I covered
the issu I'd love to hear from that the
board board members I do want to make a
point and again it just just to point uh
that in 1976 the house and I think you I
know you know this uh was featured in
the uh architecture Columbus which was a
publication a book published by the AIA
American Institute of Architects
Columbus chapter with u uh Rob Sam Sam
was said Robert
yeah again it wasn't it's it's not
listing historic properties but it it is
showing significant architectural
contributions within the community okay
but then this book laor
yes two hous and not this one not this
I'm assuming and I don't know for sure
was the other two built after 76
5
51 Miller House
interesting got the got the things going
yeah thank you for sharing and again I I
I this is not an argument for historic
it's just that it was considered in 1976
by local architectural design committee
as a significant contribution to the
community do you think everything else
in that book
is is good A lot of them have been torn
down yeah I know right so but that's
part of the discussion it's like you
know and this is demolition in general
is you know we we are we are quick
to you know and part of that is the the
constructibility of things and maybe
it's more modered than than the than the
50s but you know tear down and build new
it's a pretty pretty quick reaction uh
because the new is so much better but
you know there's an argument that it's
maybe not so and I'm not making a
determination on your design but it's
more of a general statement in our
community in the practice that we we
work
in okay yeah I I can go next I apologize
I wasn't able to make the walkthrough
yesterday my two-year-old decided it
would be a good time to require a trip
to urgent care so um I was able to drive
by the house and walk around a bit
today and um I think the points that Mr
Scott made are excellent um um I will
come at it in a little bit of a
different perspective I think the
conversation for me is really a balance
between historic preservation and
neighborhood
Improvement um and I've gone a little
bit back and forth um in reviewing the
documents as well as the design that
Beal Samson and Deets has brought
forth um I think the decision would be
much more clear cut were coming from a
lesser known architect one with fewer
credentials um I think what you guys
bring to the table is
thoughtful um as well as you know it's a
beautiful design so I
think I think the biggest decision that
we have before us is not you know is it
a fabulous design but
really where do we strike that balance
bance between you know preserving the
history and is that history worthy of
being preserved I think your points are
well made that the other two homes that
um musen has in the area are potentially
more
architecturally significant um and so
personally I am I think leaning more
towards the new design and
um yeah I think I think it's it's an
interesting and very important point
that needs to be
solved I just want to clarify that there
are actually three homes four homes
three other homes okay three other the
other little house on Clifton you know
the other one that is also one that he
did yeah probably the most
unique wise I've not been yeah no well
it was a great companion little it was
like the opposite yeah was very I just
want to and I'm probably without
Catherine here Kathy can help me out I
just want to confirm process-wise what
you said John because you're you're
correct our job is first to talk about
what is there currently is it
architecturally
significant historically or
architecturally significant worthy of
preservation period the all the other
things are if it is determined to be
that then because we've Kathy and I have
done flowcharts at nauseum about this
and it's really difficult we can't get
one that we feel comfortable enough with
to like put it out there but then it is
then if it is historically significant
in your eyes then we go to the
discussion sure about you know economic
hardship may have absolutely nothing to
do with it it doesn't really need to be
addressed but any of those other
criteria could
single single handedly be a reason to
allow demolition demolition of a
historically
significant property right I'm not to I
no vote in this I'm just giving the
history of because because Cathy and I
says something about our longevity we
here 25 years ago when we wrote this
demolition ordinance or 20 years ago
after a moratorium on demolition
yeah yeah yeah but it was very
deliberately Dorthy years the Dorthy the
Dorothy
years I remember that do you remember
that poster board Dorothy made of the of
some of the bad things that were were
coming in yeah bad new homes not new
homes like this
right I just you know I gotta make my
points def make a few points here I'm
not advocating one the other I just want
to be clear that we're looking at the
demolition ordinance the correct way
because that is critical that we're
doing one thing first and that is
determining if this house is
architecturally sign significant or and
worthy of preservation if it is that
doesn't mean we end the conversation and
you can't do it it means that then we
move on to the other criteria to
determine if any of any of those Trump
the for La a better term the the
other you know
whether enough of those conditions that
would that would say that yeah that's
you it's really important because we've
had we spent hours hashing through this
with other demolition projects with the
city attorney that that we understand
that is the process that needs to be
followed and you know if you're in my
position you're you're reading that very
carefully and you're trying to you're
trying to think through your analysis in
that exact way
right a different this
next um well we already had public com
and I'm sorry so we're yeah we're now
going through the board so um okay so
we're we're up to me yeah
um if if this didn't have a a wellknown
architect's name to it we wouldn't be
having this discussion that's honestly
how I feel about it I don't believe I
have ever voted no on a demolition in
the city yet this one gives me pause
um and it's because of the name that's
attached to it I don't think you can
evaluate the house in the condition that
it's in and um and say that that's any
reason that it can be torn down that you
know whether you are going to preserve
it um or just upgrade it it can be done
um it will be so much better when it is
done and so I I really don't I really
don't look at the lack of maintenance um
I I really honestly have a problem with
the lack of Maintenance because now it
becomes an excuse well let's just tear
them all down because we didn't maintain
them well we are trying to encourage
people to maintain their slate Roes and
all the beautiful things that there are
in this city and so when when the
argument comes of lack of Maintenance it
it really upsets me because I feel like
that is um that really should not be on
the
table um the style of the house um the
prairie style we don't have very many in
Bexley and Bexley is known for its
eclectic
architecture and I hate to lose one um
you know especially with with a famous
architect's name added to it I I would
hate to lose that prairie style and I
know it doesn't meet today's standards
but Bing water doesn't meet today's
standards you know would we tear that
down no um the roof Heights the size of
the bathrooms all honestly a lot lot of
that you can fix you can change the size
of the bathrooms you can you know you
can take out some of the Second Story
and create some two-story spaces within
it you can add a whole addition to the
front of the house and put a whole new
front on it that all can come before the
board and we will help you do something
that's amazing to it um we can't we
can't stop you from doing that so we
aren saying you have to preserve this
house but what we're asking you to do is
not tear it
down um
I also I you know I I did think that
this house had really good bones when I
walked through it and there have there
have been a lot of other tear Downs that
I walked through and said you know no
this one has a steel beam running at 7
foot across the you know the structure
that you can't just work around that I
didn't really see anything in this house
that couldn't be fixed that couldn't be
worked around in order to save a prairie
style home when we only have what a half
a dozen of them in the city that are
that
are especially with a famous name
attached to them
um I I don't know I your design is
gorgeous I love it I mean I you know I
love everything you do and I love your
quality of materials um and when I first
clicked on the at the application I
clicked on the rendering and I was like
oh this is beautiful and then I started
reading the rest of the
application and it just gives me pause
it just it
literally I I feel like stress about it
because I I feel like somebody who buys
this house and then wants to flip it and
tear it down like can't we see if
there's somebody that wants to save it
first I mean isn't there someone out
there that would take this house and
renovate it and make it gorgeous and
take the trash area off the front and
you know put Gardens out there and
renovate it to what this house deserves
rather than just giving up on it so
quickly and
so I don't I haven't made up my mind
honestly I I don't I I definitely would
not vote Yes for it tonight um that that
you could tear it down
um but I I guess I I would like more
time to think about it and I would like
to um you know kind of
just see what some of the other options
are are out there for it because I I
just don't feel good about saying yeah
that piece of architecture will go and
this one will replace it and we'll lose
that pray that one of the few Prairie
houses that we have in
Bexley um I I I part of this might be my
mentor is George AA who just passed away
and um I look at all the things that you
do and I just feel like we're so quick
to just say oh well the bathrooms aren't
big enough and the Headroom isn't big
enough and so let's just throw it all
away but uh I I don't think that this
house deserves such a quick
dismissal
so well I understand and again we're
getting
into what we're getting
into yes I you know I don't think in my
statements I ever said it could not be
remod mod right so I'm not making that
I'm not trying to make that statement
I'm just
saying uh we feel there's other CR you
know I'm focus on the other criteria
that it that it's to me hard to make the
case that it's architecturally
significant
enough right it may have some
significance but is it architecturally
significant enough to uh to deny the
homeowner the right to demolish it so
that's that's my Cas if you look at
Bexley as a whole you look at all the
houses in Bexley how many of them should
we are are are we are we ready to just
say Okay tear it down we
because and that's what we have to
decide like every month that that we get
a demolition we have to figure that out
where is our threshold where is our line
and for me there's at least 10% 20% of
the stocks in of the houses in the city
that should not be torn down they are
amazing the way they are whether they're
quirky or perfect or quality materials
whatever it is at least 10 to 20% of the
houses should not be torn down this one
happens for me happens to be one of them
so well I was going to make a I was as
I've been driving around last month or
so I've been looking at try I've been
noticing other mid-century houses I
thought maybe I make a list how many do
we have because I think there's more
than you think unless you're really
looking for them you know so there's
more around than you that you might
guess but but I I don't know where we
should go from here the one thing I'm
thinking is I would like to ask for a
tabling of this and uh let us uh and I I
think for the board it's it's gonna be
difficult thank you I was gonna make a
comment
to
quantify architectural significance it's
not if it was on a historic register I
think okay done somebody somebody else
has made that decision or a different
group that is is is specialized in that
I would argue and I actually I would
agree with you that at what levels does
this house fall you know as an architect
I'm sure you appreciate the prairie
style house and and and the efforts that
we're we're tempted to do in this house
and there are some great successes on
the interior design of this house there
are some also not good successes um or
failures um so for us what is how do you
grade that how do you how do you
subjective and I think it comes down to
I think really youve summed it up quite
well that you know it's it's there's a
there's a overall feeling for this house
because we've seen some significant
homes with significant styles that we
have approved for demolition because was
it architecturally significant it didn't
necessarily check those boxes this one
comes as close as possible that I have
served on this board this is so much
closer than anything else I have
evaluated yeah and I and and I and I see
the ches that that that you have and you
know I especially when it's up against
uh this thing uh it's it's it's it's
hard to argue for the the the old house
so um for us it's a it's a discussion
point and I also agree I think I would
like more time because this is a this is
a hard decision um but I think we need
to you know find a way to quantify that
um and qualify that decision and what
are we basing it truly on to be
architecturally significant I think
there's some clear checkboxes the
architect the history of of the house
has does play in a part and I would
argue that the quirkiness of it on the
street plays in the part uh it's not
ideal and it's not strong doesn't but
it's it's subtle and that's just to the
right homeowner that is a that is
desirable is not the be the the the
house that's showing on the street it's
the one that's more tucked
away and and I appreciate you telling us
the history of that garden and showing
us because though it is in in not a
desirable State and an isore I think
I've heard that from the community
totally agree uh but what it could be or
what it was designed for is spectacular
uh so with with the right improvements
could be and still could be with this
house yeah uh yeah so that that those
are those are benefits so and I think we
should discuss that as as we can move
forward is the landscaping and what what
the site improvements are because
there's there's a lot of history on that
that I also think is a strong argument
uh for for either either
direction well we proposed to save that
back just so just I got that I think you
mentioned that but I want to put it's
fantastic it's a beautiful and that
little those little sheds you know you
just don't see that so you know if those
were coming down I think that maybe be
an easier uh decision for me um so it'd
be good to good to know all of that and
maybe through I don't think we have a
landscape plan submitted yet there's
some landscape information on the on the
site PL
just a
basic that so maybe a little bit more
time to develop that I don't know what's
your agreement is on all of this but um
you know I think that'd be interesting
to hear that as well I I also just want
to again at the risk of repeating myself
remember that from what I'm hearing from
all of you I don't think there is a
question at all and I bet John you'd
agree with this that this is a
historically significant architecturally
significant house that's done
the next thing then is if if it was not
historically architectur significant
we'd be done because it is then we need
to go through meticulously kind of the
points that you went to but but it was
the wrong order like sorry that's okay
but I I feel like it's my fault for
not but that reason alone can be enough
to to say it move to the next it will
not be torn down yes but then you have
to no that is that reason alone is is
what moves you into going through each
point point by point if none of those
points are enough to change to to so
you're saying you think that we only
have to have one of those points to vote
for it well you have the vote but you go
through the points and depend so every
single one of you has a vote based on
your comments tonight and maybe uh Mr
Jones you could you could debate that uh
with what you your position was uh we
were pretty agreement that it feels like
this this property is ific it is an
impact on the community though it's
Corky it it has history and enough of
that that it's just a significant house
so if that box is checked we just moved
to phase two of the review right which
has all of the criteria which I freely
shared my opinion on the night of all of
those right I am curious how many of the
neighbors knew that this was a
significant house and that it has um I'm
I'm seeing head shaking no did you know
that it was
Sir you did but
but um I it it was it was a l house many
years ago but wasn't
maintained yeah okay
but shouldn't you be asking if they
think it's significant you're like
assuming that you're you're you're
you're telling them it's
significant ask if they even knew that
there was a an architect's name attached
to it like a John behall will be in 50
years you're just going to ruin my
legacy by not
building that legacy's already esta you
know if you want to speak we need to
swear you in so if you want to speak
come up to the thing and and we can
swear you in yeah please thank
you and Kath will swear you
in
C and and Holly what's your address 225
North Columbia directly across the
street okay okay go ahead no what I'm
saying is that I do know the history and
I did appreciate I know the other homes
in the neighborhood that um that were
done by the architect and in Bexley but
um so I again I think that that was
important and it it was significant at
that time but I have seen all the plans
and um
I think that um I don't think that the
the house in its current condition or
even improved will really be the highest
and best use for property and as a
neighbor I I want to see that happen
I've seen the the plans by the Warners
and very excited about them and I think
they'll be a beautiful addition to our
community I think they will too thank
you anybody
yeah please come yeah and Kathy will
swear you
in
yeah Rene conf do you somly swear from
the testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth yes thank you and
your
address I have an interesting your
address oh 200 North Columbia thank you
uh I've watched this house rot for the
last 30 years and I had occasion because
we considered it for our daughter to go
through it we thought the price was
about a
million6 when we walk through it we saw
that it was going to be closer to three
million and she would still have this
house my background is uh undergraduate
degree in art history and history of
architecture graduate degree in history
of architecture and art history and then
I taught at Ohio State art history uh
for a while and then I went to law
school because I didn't like art history
that much but
anyway this is this is strictly a local
architect this is not a known architect
this ma'am this is a this is this is a
man who who went to the school with
Frank Lord r he went and studied with
him what I was going to say I'm from
Chicago so I studied all the Frankl
right buildings and as many in Chicago I
studied Louis Sullivan who was one of
the teachers of Frank Lord Wright and
then later M vandero who did all the
modern buildings this is not a
historical building in any way shape or
form I've been to Falling Waters seen
the Frankl R house there everything is
caner lever this is a rotting piece of
home and anyone who buys it is going to
have a not terribly exciting home a
kitchen that is from there to there and
this wide the upstairs bedroom the
bathroom what are you going to do you're
going to you're talking about keeping
the building but they can put a new
front on they can do this they that's
not your historical building that you
want to save to save that building you
still have a mediocre house granny and
Chuck Lazarus who built it were very
under key people they wanted a small
doorway this fit their lifestyle they
weren't showed when she passed away he
lived there alone did nothing then he
married this woman from New York and
they got divorced in the last 30 years
nothing has been done to that house so
what I was thinking when you were
talking is if that house looked like a
teapot not the house it is everything
you said preserve it it's different it's
Unique we have diversity yeah but it's a
teapot and that's the same with this
house this house no one is going to put
$2 million into it no one and we're
going to watch it rot and rot and rot
because nobody's going to buy it that's
not today's living no one wants you know
your Podium there whatever it is that's
the size of the bathroom
we live in different times so that's all
I have to say thank you for listening
thank you thank
you okay so can I just uh ask I would I
would actually like you not to vote on
anything and I just would like to ask a
tabling if that's all right that's fine
of course
yep so I need a board member to make a
motion so moved Jones
second
Scott Mr Scott yes Miss Jones yes mam
Tony yes okay thank you thank you thank
you thank you do you want to table to
May 9th or just well for yeah for now
let's do that yeah
sure we are
Jed for