e
e e
uh June 27th Bap meeting were circulated
does anyone have any comments uh or
questions on the
minutes do I hear a motion for
approval so moved do I hear a second
second Turner uh all in favor of
approving the minutes say I I uh all uh
oppose say
no um next item is uh public comments uh
this is for
uh the general working of the board not
any uh specific item on the agenda but
if there's anyone here that wish just to
comment on the working of the board now
would be your
time seeing uh no one in the audience
wishes to speak we'll close the public
comment section and move on um couple
announcements uh first of all tonight is
Kathy Rose's last Bap meeting and we
want to thank her for all her dedication
over the years um
and we want to Welcome Matt here tonight
Who's going to be taking over and
obviously he's got big uh shoes to fill
but we're sure he'll be uh able to do
that thank you and then uh we've got a
couple new members Andrew Rosenthal
who's uh back on the board he was on the
board previously Andrew welcome back
thank you and then uh Tiasha leack L
stack welcome to the board thank you
thank you um just some administrative
stuff I just wanted to remind the new
board members and I mean remind tell the
new board members and remind the old
ones that when you are speaking please
make sure your microphone is on green so
that it's on and when you're um voting
please say your vote and say your
name thank you perfect thank you um with
that we'll go into Old business I don't
see any old business on the agenda so
then we'll move into new business um the
first uh
application uh uh bcap
24-16 123 South Cassidy uh the applicant
is Taylor uh
Patterson
um do we have some background on this
and is the applicant here tonight if you
could come up and be sworn in
please wait
please raise your right hand and state
your name Taylor Patterson you somly
swear or affirm the testimony you're
about to give this evening is the truth
yes thank
you okay so the applicant is Seeking a
variance from beic code section
12521 A2 in residential districts
accessory uses and detach structure
shall be located minimum of 5 feet
farther back from the side street
property line then the proposed
structure is allowed in order to
construct an 8ft tall decorative arched
trellis over the Gate of a 48 inch high
fence along the Eastern side of the
property
line um staff would consider this8 foot
high Archway as an accessory structure
even though it is attached to a gate um
fences are limited to 48 inches in
height which the fence does meet the
height requirements uh but due to the
fact that it's located along the
property line and the arch is a part of
that it would typically be required to
be set back 20 feet from that side
property line because it's the street
side so in order for the applicant to be
allowed to construct this Arch over the
Gate entrance he would have to seek a
variance from Beckle code section
12521
A2 um looking through the site plan that
they had submitted um if the board finds
it appropriate to Grant the 20 foot
variance to allow these we've got
different measurements we have a s foot
measurement and an 8 foot measurement so
I do want to clarify which of those two
figures is correct it'll be no greater
than eight feet it's being built on site
okay so if if the board finds it
appropriate to Grant the variance to
allow the 8 foot arch um staff would
recommend that the East Side property
line be located uh with a survey and
verified by the zoning officer because
there was some discrepancies in what I
have on my right away compared to what
was shown on the survey so we just
wanted verify
that but it's a decorative feature and
it's we just want to make sure it's
addressed and it's not simply part of a
fence got it and this just to clarify
this is just for the arch the fence
correct the fence is doesn't need a
variance is that right that's right
that's actually an example of what it'll
look look like the fence is up currently
so he just installed the posts a little
bit higher so if he gets the variance
he'll complete that gotcha okay if you
do you have anything else you is any
like to add to that
oh no she got everything correct okay
any um does board have any questions I
is is the face the fence getting painted
or is it the customer said they're gonna
paint it later on yeah white I
believe is there is there anyone in the
audience that wishes to speak to this
application um any other board board
discussion F so be wood it is yep custom
built could we have the findings of
facts and conclusions of law the
findings of fact and decision of the
board for application number bc- 24-16
for property located at 123 South
Cassidy upon consideration of the
application proposed variance and
evidence and testimony before it the
board makes the following findings and
conclusions of law the applicant has
proven that the criteria to Grant an
area variance in meic code section 12261
c have been met and a variance from
Mexico section 1252 point10 A2 to allow
an 8 foot arch over an entry gate along
the Eastside property property line
should be
granted as submitted and does the
applicant understand the findings of
fact is read by m Rose yes anyone on the
board have any questions or do I hear a
motion so moved second so King and Rosen
second king or motion King second Rosen
though all right I will call the rooll
roll call please miss
leac uh yes Mr Turner yes Mr Rosenthal
yes Mr King yes chairman Marsh yes uh
thank you for coming in it's a very nice
project thank you appreciate it
uh next uh application is 24-9 this is
for 129 South cassingham the applicant
is Brenda
Parker is the applicant here tonight if
you could come up and be sworn in
please please raise your right hand and
state your name Brenda Parker you somly
swear or affirm the testimony you're
about to give this evening is the truth
I do thank you and is there any
background on this
one okay so the applicants seeking
approval of a certificate of
appropriateness to allow a second and
third floor addition as well as a single
story Edition at the south side of the
house the applicant is also seeking two
variances for Mexico section 122.0 n r
six zoning the first is a 1 foot 8 inch
variance to allow an addition to the
house to encroach into the required 8
foot side yard setback the second
variance is from the required 60%
overall lot coverage limit to allow for
the addition which would take the
overall lot coverage to 61% so that's a
1%
variance uh this application went before
the ARB during the April meeting um
after feedback from the architecture
review board it was then tabled for the
May meeting it was presented then at
June meeting and missing some details so
the applicant has
refined uh the drawings based on
recommendations from the architecture
review board
uh so if
the staff finds that the request is not
unreasonable given the very unique
nature of this house and the development
that this design has gone through uh and
to reduce the massing and develop the
details and I will defer to Karen if she
would like to talk about some of those
refinements that have been made um sure
I'm not going to walk through all of
them it was it was quite a process and
Brenda was a good sport she came before
the architecture review board I think
three times um the first time was with a
three-story you know facade and it it um
just didn't looked out of her portion
Brenda worked with me the board and we
came to pretty much this this model I
believe you're going to extend the
window correct yeah the window over the
bay on the right the only thing left is
the window on the second floor over the
bay on the right will extend down a
little have a better proportion to match
the rest of the windows but um the board
was very supportive of the final um
drawings which I'm happy to go through
but the front facade is what was the
sticking so they had a positive
recommendation got it thank you um if
you'd like to go ahead and just present
whatever you like to present for this
that'd be great so as you can see the
existing house is a single story
Bungalow and and the family was quickly
growing out of it so there you know
these lots are small so there wasn't
room to do an addition so the only
option was to add a second floor the
north wall sits 6'4 inch from the
property line which does not comply with
zoning so in order to add that second
floor we're making that sidey guard
setback you know we're extending that to
a higher
position and then um they had recently
constructed a garage and done a new
driveway so once we kind of added the
these this new addition component in um
it increases the lot coverage to 1% over
the
allowable any uh the board have any
comments or questions on
that so so the 1% is the only thing
we're voting on uh and the 1 foot 8 inch
side yards encing to build above the
existing structure it's non-conforming
structure so you're expanding a
non-conforming thank you is there anyone
in the audience that wishes to speak to
this
application seeing none we'll close
public comment for this
application uh any other board
discussion could we have the findings of
facts and decision of the
board yes
the findings in fact in decision of the
board for application number bcap
24-9 for property located at 129 South
cassingham upon consideration of the
application proposed variance and
evidence and testimony before it the
board
finds that the applicant has proven the
criteria to Grant an area variance in
beex code section 12261 c have been n
and a 1 foot 8 in variance to the
required sidey yard
setback and a 1% variance to the overall
coverage in accordance with 122.0 n R6
zoning should be granted to allow
additions to the principal structure as
proposed
uh and the board further motions that a
certificate of appropriateness should be
granted as recommended by the
Architectural Review
Board and does the applicant understand
the findings of the board as read by m
Rose yes any board discussion
here do I hear a motion so move
Turner do I hear a
second second
Rosenthal roll call
please Mr Turner
yes Mr Rosenthal yes Miss L stack yes Mr
King yes chairman Marsh yes thank you
it's a very nice project thank
you uh next we have uh application
24-20 2505 East Main
Street 2511 East Main Street Matthew
echel brener is the applicant if you
could come forward and be sworn in uh
not Matthew eel Brer but Mike Davis okay
please raise your right hand do you
somly swear or affirm the testimony
you're about to give this evening is the
truth yes thank
you is there any background on this I
will defer to Mr sui for this
case thank
you have a circumstance here that is a
little bit different than a lot of
things we see this is a special permit
request and I'll let the AL describe
completely how the operation is proposed
the short version is that there's truck
being that be going into a space that is
on Main Street uh a couple important
things to know with regard to the zoning
is that Tavern isn't allowable use so
we're not here to discuss that um what
we are talking about is whether or not
allow food truck which the applicant is
proposing as basically a permanent
location but potentially
rotating the reason this is a special is
uh there's really nothing that is being
varied from there is a provision in our
code that dictates some rules about
having what is called a mobile non
permanent food cart now we know that a
food truck and food cart might not be
exactly the same thing we don't have
definitions for either we about that was
pretty similar in the way it functions
and the kind of things that we would
consider and most of those regulations
have to do with running in a safe Manner
and uh specifically not having things
that cause additional pollution or
concerns for
noise so based on that what we have
proposed are a set of conditions for
you that would mirror what is both in
that section and in another section
about sale of outoor consumption and
that basically prohibits the sale of
foods between the hours at 11:30 p.m.
and 6: a.m. that would be intended to be
eat outside on the premis or de so all
those things are are basically trying to
avoid us having you know like middle of
the night food carts is what we're we're
trying not to do um it doesn't really
speak to what we're trying to do which
is allow this applicate to have um a
space that is in from M Street and in an
area that can service or
eating from the STA perspective we think
that's that's appropriate it's really a
matter of coming up with the uh the
conditions that make you feel
comfortable that it's okay so couple
other topics that I want to mention
since you might have questions about it
uh this will take a space this doesn't
affect overall parking to it's a very
small building um they are really only
required to have before uh the
reductions under five spaces and then
there's a whole Sol of reductions uh
include having alley access in the back
cross access EAS the opportunity to
share parking it basically gets down to
the fact that they really like space get
rid of all the Productions they parking
and the more practical aspect of that
that doesn't really have to do with code
is that since this is in one of the few
spots along the indry where we have a
large contigous lot that shared by a
whole bunch of different users that
actually functionally is a good spot for
this in that there's not many other
business
hours that just this being busy A whole
parking lot there sitting empty dur time
need
standpoint that though doesn't really
impact again as we said it doesn't so I
also went through if you care to look at
in the staff report we always go through
the Main Street design guidelines and
the standards this is an existing
building and they're really not changing
anything so it doesn't
um so to make a long story short the
staff recommendation is that we think
this is in conformance with the design
guidelines the overall Zone department
and it's really up to you to deter that
special permit for the operation of food
truck is is reasonable here and what we
would recommend is four four conditions
one that the location sh on the exhibit
today which is at the rear of the site
completely invisible from the main
street two that the applicant will
install and maintain a good operating
electric water of gas hookups is needed
for food track op which they
have that allows it to have no external
generators or other devices that create
noise or anent so we would ask that not
the last or the third one rather is that
no food would be sold for out
consumption on the site or Jon right
between 113m and 6 AM um again to try to
meet all the standards in our code and
then finally only one foot truck is
allowed on premises given time unless
addition temporary
and with that I will answer questions to
okay and um that's a great summary if if
um if if this is approved is it approved
forever or do we is there a is there a
time
limit and could I have the code section
that special permit isod sections are
8324 which is retail sale or food items
from mobile 9 food cards 820 7 which is
sale of out consumption prohibited and
then there's also 12623 which is
calculated number of
space
okay is there
um so who came up with the 1130 is that
code or is that just yeah specifically
in that section
8207 so you could request a different
set of hours we just wanted to make sure
that we were putting a stipulation in
this permit that would further put them
in compliance with that just kind
reiterate that St and then is there any
code I know that when we were looking at
doing something with that Istanbul at
one point there was some questions about
the apartment building that it backed up
to is there anything about restaurant
use up against the residential use or
anything like that that's great question
only when it's actually a buding and
there's between that doesn't apply here
the factor I should have mentioned which
I'm really glad you brought that up is
in this particular location is an alley
that is perpendicular to the existing
alley that that comes basically right
into this spot so right across there's
right and then the two residentials that
are
adjacentes that are facing that so yeah
you can see right there that luckily uh
dis placement of the stor front in front
of the building works out that in the
rear of bit they are right in a spot
that doesn't have really any visibility
from anybody's yard directly
and what's the business model is the
idea that guests are going out back and
placing an order like I'm thinking grain
and grape do it look like that or does
it look like QR codes and how how does
it work it doesn't um the model it's
going to look like a
restaurant um you know we'll have weight
staff uh who are going to be waiting on
folks that are sitting uh just like a
normal restaurant that way staff would
go through the back uh and gather the
food that would be um cooked back there
um through our point of sale system
we'll be transmitting those orders back
to the the food truck so if somebody
walks up to the food truck they're
instructed to go around front and have a
seat yeah this is uh it's it's Unique
because it's not your typical food truck
operation where you're going to see a
bunch of transient employee or customers
walking up and saying oh can I can I get
this can I get that here's my payment
there's going to be none of that the
food truck is dedicated to the cocktail
bar
only it's gonna be used more like a
mobile kitchen correct yeah yeah the
background here is there's you know with
the space limitations of 2511 East Main
Street um and to satisfy our
requirements for the liquor license to
have that food requirement um our best
solution was to have an exterior your
kitchen in you know for this purpose it
is a food truck or food cart or some
sort of mobile kitchen where it will be
attached to um the building itself
through a dedicated gas line water and
uh electric so that we don't uh we want
to be good neighbors that did you look
at I have two I have two questions one
um is the liquor
license what's the required hours that
you have to have in order to have the
liquor license I mean do you have to be
open till 11:30 at night uh we don't
have to be there are there aren't any
restrictions in terms of when we can be
open um the liquor license allows us to
be open at 5: in the morning and close
at 2:30 in the morning Monday through
Sunday that's a D5 and a
D6 um the food requirement is that you
have uh hot and cold food during the
full hours that your open um but being
that we're not going to be serving
anyone
outside um we are not uh out of
compliance with the 11:30 to 6:00 am.
okay and then did you look at or
consider doing any kind of more
permanent kitchen like even a drop
container kitchen or something like that
where you guys would have your own the
only thing I worry about is even though
you're not going to have a generator
food trucks still create noise I mean
between the hoods and everything else
there's definitely louder than a than a
you know a brick and mortar type type
kitchen so I just was wondering do have
you did you guys look into something a
little bit more permanent that you could
like tack on the back as opposed to just
different food trucks rolling up we we
did not as a solution now just due to
the space
limitations
thanks um I know we kind of jumped into
questions is there anything else from a
high level that you'd like to present no
I mean it's really the intent here is
just to be a good neighbor uh one thing
I will add is we did speak to um both
neighbors directly behind us just to let
them know what our intentions are um and
uh the back left seem very excited
enthusiastic back right we're still
waiting on that uh meeting hoping for
this week or next week so yeah is there
anyone in the audience that wishes to
speak to this
application uh seeing no one uh
responding we'll go ahead and close
public comment for this
application um any other board
discussion and every food truck can work
with remote power they all have that
capacity I guess I would really
understand I mean I understand how they
work but I don't know is that yeah yeah
there not gonna be a situ that you can
avoid an external generator all the time
um because there's the like the propane
tank consideration too and that's why we
have the gas hookup um just for safety
reasons um and then also with the
electrical hookup we are contemp lating
uh various uh
plug
uh uh different types of plugs that can
work with any type of food
truck so is I'm is this the same food
truck all the time or is this rotating
food trucks I'm I'm confused so it's
going to be rotating uh the the current
plan is that every three months we'll
have a different food truck that's going
to come in um that allows us to get
really C with our wine pairings and and
cocktail pairings and put out a new menu
uh every three months so is this a food
truck that will come and go or will it
be parked here for three months straight
it will be parked there for three months
yeah
um and so all of the food there there
was some mention of outdoor
consumption all the food will be
consumed in the tavern side correct yep
um I I am pausing I'm trying to get my
head around the idea that you do not
have letters or approvals from both of
the neighbors I I I find that to be sort
of consequential to this um we actually
sent notices to everyone within 300 feet
of the yeah I mean every yeah neighbors
maybe generally but right that uh that
is concerning to me well I mean if if
the neighbors had a concern they would
come come tonight or send a letter or
send an email to the city and you heard
and the city's heard
nothing and then so I have a question so
what are the scheduled hours I mean so
right now if the food truck ends at
11:30 that JS close at 11:30 the liquor
license the food truck does not have to
close at 11:30 that's only for um
outside consumption of food um which you
won't have which we will not have
there's no one in the back alley lining
up for food um there's no ordering back
there there's no
um there's going to be no one back there
other than our weight staff running the
food in and out so the what what are
your planned hours of operations the
food truck um as of right now uh we will
be open till 2 in the morning um
Thursday Friday and Saturday night now
that doesn't mean that the food truck's
going to be operating during those full
hours um we will have um potentially a
different smaller menu
inside um call it light snacks um you
know
mixnuts um Sherie that we will provide
for ourselves without having to utilize
the food truck
you I
mean I'm supportive of it my only
concern is the noise and and if and I
don't know how
we necessarily monitor that or whether
you have staff provide a an
update uh six months from now if there's
any concerns that the board could
perhaps revisit there's any additional
yeah I mean that that that's my only
thing is I mean I'm very much in favor
of this and and again I know you said
you talked to the neighbors nobody
showed up in support or or opposition
here but again if if if I lived there
and there was a food truck at 2 am and I
know maybe won't run that long but at
1:30 in the middle of the night running
that would be that would be a concern to
me and I know you you want to be a good
neighbor and all that I just think we
need to put something in here from from
my position that would give us some
ability to make sure that it it is a a
good scenario yeah I mean that that's
basically what I I was heading that same
direction like I don't want to I can't
say yes permanently because we just
don't it's not something we've run into
before so I mean if we have the ability
to do a revisit or something down the
road let's see how it's working out
because and then we can work with issues
at that point but to Grant it today
where it's just permanent we have no
recourse if it's not working to to the
to the neighbor but you know if all the
Neighbors come up in in six months and
say this is a problem and we have no
recourse then that's kind of where well
my thought process is on it I like the
idea I love the idea of the tavern I
think all the rest of it's great but I I
would like Katherine to chime in the
fact that the tavern requires to have
this food truck in order for it to meet
the
criteria so is it
dict
correct I me I
toonigh that's we have
to kind of them to determine how to
solve the problem the liquor license and
this is the solution
else want add to that yeah
this this really from this board's
perspective this is really about the use
of the the food truck at the rear of the
property um what Jason is suggesting is
that that you issue a special permit to
allow that use make sure that they're in
compliance with other code Provisions
relating to time and and um the food
truck operation because it's it's
because of its use in the alley which is
attached to the building in the rear
adjacent to an alley uh and it is in the
Main Street District so because of all
of those things and compliance with the
Main Street District he's suggesting
that you grant a special permit and put
any conditions that you have concerning
its use on the property and that's what
that's what the proposal is and that's
what the staff recommendations are about
are we are we allowed to put in there as
as one of
our um restrictions I guess that it it
needs to be reviewed again like in six
months or something like that can we
actually put that in there for a review
or is that not allowed well if you
typically if you're putting conditions
in there the conditions should be the
standards that you're intending them to
meet if they don't meet those standards
then it would be a zoning violation and
somebody would enforce but what
standards would you apply in six months
because really when you're talking about
a use neighbor complaints is not really
a consideration in terms of the use
Downstream unless you're violating
zoning so you would put you would have
to put your standards in now so that In
fairness the applicant knows what they
are and the neighbors who didn't come
today know what they are it could be a
noise violation could be a violation of
other things in the code not necessarily
zoning but to just say we're going to
review it in six months um without
having objective standards that that
you're judging that against I would not
recommend so so with it being a special
permit it it by definition is time
specific or it has the option to be time
specific it is not by definition time
specific but it can be I think that was
s years I would not recommend that it be
I recommend that you put the whatever
conditions you're going to put on it on
it now but so for example if the
business Chang his hands does a special
permit continue to exist oh I off the
top of my head I don't know it depends
on the nature of the special permit and
what it was for
typically I don't I don't know I can't
answer that with without looking I don't
want to Andrew I don't want to tell you
off the top of my head because I just
don't know the answer to that and I'd
like to add that the applicant actually
by allowing it to have direct electric
water and gas hookup that should
alleviate a lot of the noise concerns
that you would typically have with a
truck yeah that's the generator thing to
me is everything right that's yeah so
back a little bit to what you were
stating though like I understand putting
the restrictions on it now but we we'
never had this before so we how can we
put restrictions on something that we
don't I mean I'm not don't personal
they'll take this personal but okay so
we have to add that there won't be any
grease on the ground because six months
from now all the trucks are dumping
grease all over the ground and we so
there are already restrictions against
well but I'm just saying it could be
something that we don't have a
restriction against that we don't know
and that's why I'm asking if there's any
ability to revisit it then yeah sorry Mr
TR go ahead that's okay that's just the
reason I'd like to be able to revisit it
is
because because there it's not something
we've ever seen in the community and we
just there could be things that we don't
know there could be and typically the
solution to that would be a legislative
solution to have Council adopt an
ordinance with standards and you know to
the extent that they would not comply
with those standards they would be not
prior non-conforming for for a period of
time but not in perpetuity and then
those standards would apply to them they
would be grandfathered for a period of
time though could be depends those are
also facts specific but could be not
guaranteed to
be one thing I will say if makes
it more helpful I can just quickly give
you couple of the standards that are in
the code that apply to these that I
think may give you a little
more so basic
um clean
times
spill can't viol any safety regulation
laws so anyway the gist is that there's
like a set of business requirements that
are in32 I know it's not as
helpful thinking of everything there is
at least some of
things right through code enforcement
they
could post orders if there's a problem
or something like that
okay I I mean I and and maybe Katherine
will have to help me we this I mean I I
guess my thought on it would be that
we I'm okay with the use I'm okay with I
like the plan of the thing but I think
that I don't know whether there it'd be
a deciel level after 11 o'clock or
something like that that we we should
have something in there that we need
that we can come back to them and say
you know if the food truck's creating
too much noise after a certain certain
time they're in violation but I don't
know exactly what that decimal level
would be I don't know what that time
time would be um so it's a quiet food
truck
my opinion if it's a quiet food truck
it's not a problem it's
just so I mean I I kind of agree but I
also feel like with what what Jason said
about there's already code issue there's
already code there that protects people
um what what if what what about
approving it for a year and then have
have them come back in 12 months what I
was trying and Katherine said we
shouldn't shouldn't do and and and I
understand there's like a there's there
to me it's different than a straight
noise ordinance because I don't think
it's going to be a party noise I think
it's just going to be a constant humming
of the hoods or whatever or to your
point it could be something that we
don't even aren't even thinking about
that
right experience with issue folks in the
audience probably remember we went
through that with capital we tried that
pretty extensively and a number of us
stood out May many points around
leader and it's really hard to it's hard
to
get there's so much background
noise us it's just really hard so I
think it' be hard for us as a sort of La
that realm to come up with any kind with
legitimate standard even when we hard to
sound for that it was kind of it was
really hard to and we had it we really
had it twice too because before I think
Kath are probably the only ones the uh
skate park isues tried to measure that
also you be surprised how much you can
hear things like the freeway when you're
just standing out dead by neighborhood
with it's just you know it's weird it's
like it's different than you think and I
agree with you that the sound is
different and it's hard to put a
standard in to regulate that sound just
like the sound of like whistles on the
field were loud except they were so
short it was hard to like figure out how
fit into overall
so I would just
caution I mean my my thought is just
like my adjacent neighbor has a very old
AC and we open the windows at night and
you can just hear it and so if it was
louder than that it would be extremely
annoying which doesn't come near like
hitting the vi the code violation but
it's a very loud annoying thing for
somebody that's in a residential
property but in the location of the unit
I believe it's closer to where that
header alley meets the back Alle and
you've also got a garage there so it's
not sitting next to a house which is
which is good you could see this so you
have two garages they're also buffering
that noise okay if I can add a couple of
things um and Pat maybe this is a little
bit to your concern as well we do plan
on installing some like Greenery walls
some potted plants because there is
space behind the food truck along the
alley where we can kind of uh
participate in the beautification of the
valys um so we do plan on doing that so
that will buffer um any potential noise
and also add some uh some Greenery to
that space and the the other thing I'll
add to is when I'm speaking to the
neighbors on our back left um one thing
they mention is it's not going to be any
louder than the Jimmy John's that's
literally right next to them so um they
didn't have too many concerns about
where ours is going to be further down
the alley so
yeah so stipulation three is from
another part of the
code but we could it sounds like we
could add to that if we wanted and it
sounds like it's consistent with your
business model to say because I guess my
thought just again trying to anticipate
things that are hard to
anticipate I we could it'd be fine if if
I understand to say not only is it not
outdoor consumption on the site or in
the adjacent RightWay but it's not for
consumption essentially off the site I
mean I guess what I'm trying to avoid is
somebody say you know in six months of
one of your vendors saying well I want
to s i you know people come find me and
I want to be able to walk up have walk
UPS or or they're you know they're
working with Uber Eats or you know door
Dash and all a sudden there cars pull up
so I don't know how that gets worded
exactly because obviously somebody want
us to walk in the front door your
establishment order food to go they can
but I think what we're trying to avoid
is not serving them out of the alley uh
yeah there is no tog go food no delivery
um through our partnership with that uh
food truck operator um they have to sign
on for that as part of our contract so
food is so I mean that that could be
another restriction sold through
staff the food is sold through staff at
this location only inside yeah what I
really mean is go in and out the front
door I don't care yeah who's selling it
I don't care if they're eating it there
I just feel like it goes in it you don't
want it going just put out the back door
yeah put no direct no direct sales to
the public from the food truck so they
have to go through the
restaurant probably like that too
because you're not getting cut out of
getting cut out I mean I think so
Jason's comments have gotten me
comfortable approving it or voting for
to approve it with
either unlimited time or put a time
limit on it and then have them come back
but I would defer to the rest of the
board
on I mean is it so you're saying you
want the time limit or you do not I I
mean I I like I like a time limit just
again this is new and there could be
things so I think you know rather
than prove it forever I like the idea of
having some kind of a time limit on
there I I think I um I agree with the
time limit issue but I also think that
um noise for the noise aspect of it I
mean I I'm actually listening to you
Jason the that it's that's a rare
occurrence so it doesn't make um that
the noise would be you know within
reason of the the noise produced by
other businesses if it's so would be
similar to what Jimmy Johns or whatever
else anybody else in that does so
obviously if it's an an extreme excess
of that then it's an issue I'm I mean
I'm fine with that an excess noise
provision and this would go until 11:30
I'm not sure I'm clear on that I mean
you you can run it until 11:30 or you
can't run it from 11:30 to 6 is it your
intention to run it up to 11:30 we
currently have no plans to stop at 11:30
yeah he could run it all the time serve
F on site 11:30 for outdoor consumption
yeah the the time limit that's it's only
for out I'm sorry I'm sorry it's a
little it's a little confusion so you're
intending to do this until 2: in the
morning
that's the current plan but we do have
other options if that's not something
that the the board would
allow I mean that see that seems I mean
in light of being in discussions about
pickle ball stopping at 9:30 and you
know I mean now we're talking about food
trucks till a different different
situation uh yeah I mean I get Ball's
louder I get it I mean you know what I'm
saying uh you know now we're running
food trucks till two in the morning I
sort of paused there um
but
I yes yes yeah yes
yeah
yeah no direct sales to the public yeah
yeah that my concern is yeah selling out
of the food truck I want the food to go
through the pup and not out the back
door yeah because the reality is you can
put a hood on the roof of that building
that would be woud I mean if you wanted
to take the space to put a hood and so
that so to me the neighbors complaining
about noise gen yeah again the generator
worries me but the hood on our building
would be five feet away than the hood on
the yeah truck
I mean I think putting a one year relook
on it is good and if everything's goes
great then you come back in a year and
we could extend it for you know you
could make a
request is would that work for you yeah
and I mean we're happy to participate in
the collection of uh potential issues
from The Neighbors as well and you know
whatever the board deals that's right
you don't think we can do that how about
if staff provides you with an update a
year from now well I mean but at that
point there's nothing we can we can do
well we also have like violation of
noise ordinance I mean we have all kinds
of codes that if they violate that we
can find something that we can apply
okay I'm okay with
that how's the rest of the board feel
thought you had my back
so and so who are we giving a special
permit to are we giving it to the
operate to the owner the operator of
this business are we giving it to the
address does it go with the the business
property does it go with the the
applicant the business Matt echel
Brunner was the applicant Mike Davis
isn't the food truck is the food truck
the business well it there's different
food trucks but it's to the applicant
for his business this is what he's
requesting a special permit or a food
truck with the conditions that Mr sui
will
state yes
for as a business LLC yeahi
Hospitality
LLC yeah
yeah all right any other board
discussion so let's if you could read
the findings of facts and conclusions of
the or decision of the board as with our
modifications move that
application special and Tes makes the
83247 that one is f trck will be in the
location sh exh July
2 meeting that the inst maintainer
TR operations exors ores
that
are that no direct sales to the from the
food truck will be allowed four only one
food truck is allowed on premises at any
given time per is received from
City the appc will provide a screening
some sort of screening of the truck
subject to
staff does the applicant understand the
what about the um noise will not exceed
vicinity
uses in place for that excessive noise
that actually the police could enforce
if there's an issue but does that
excessive the current excessive noise
doesn't have to above a certain
level Cent disturbance of the p
but I believe if there are complaints
that the city Poli Department could
intervene would it satisfy the board if
it was like no louder than what
currently exists in that strip mall yeah
that's what I was asking for that's what
they're saying they can't do it
do
it and and I'm sorry to keep harping on
this time I mean Jimmy Johns closes at
nine o'clock this is scheduled to close
five hours later you know that's I
understand that's a
different piece entirely I mean you have
cars on Main Street at nine o'clock at
night you don't have a lot of car
traffic or you know other noises at 1:45
in the morning one other thing is we
don't even know if Jimmy Johns has a
hood they may not make any
noise I mean if we're comparing it to
Jimmy Johns I don't want all a sudden
say you can't be louder than Jimmy Johns
Jimmy John doesn't make any
noises I I I think we just have to rely
on the the new the noise nuisance
statute uh does does the applicant
understand the findings of of fact and
decision of the board as read by Mr
suudi I do is there any additional
discussion by the board
do I hear a
motion uh so move frosen do I hear a
second second
Turner roll
call
yes
yes yes Mr
Turner yes CH Mar yes thank you thank
you uh next uh application is Bap 24-21
this is for 114 North Merkel uh Rihanna
Gart if you could come up please and be
sworn
in please state your name Ryan gabart
you saw swear from the testimony you're
about to give this evening is the truth
I do thank
you we have the background on this yes
this case
um let's so the applicant's requesting a
special permit and accordance with beic
Cod section 12 64.0 3B which limits a
fence or wall and a side yard setback as
it faces the street to 48 inches in
height to allow a six- foot fence along
the Southside yard property line along
Denver
so the background on this is the
applicant actually purchased this
property with a fence in place or
actually it's currently located and
along the city RightWay there are no
sidewalks so the city has been trying to
add sidewalks Within These Streets that
do not have sidewalks and it was found
that this fence is actually in City R of
way the applicant did not install the
fence it just happened to be there so
when we contacted them and explained
that they needed to remove their fence
um there was a little conf Fusion but uh
it's it's existed you know in the right
of way for over 30 years over 30 years
for at least three prior owners right so
the applicant would like to Simply
replace the fence with one of the same
height but put it on the property line
and she has submitted a landscape plan
and she would like the board to consider
her variance which It's actually an
improvement of what's there now but it
it meets code other than the height so
if the board wants to consider allowing
this new fence at a six foot height on
the property line the applicant would
appreciate got it thank you um if you'd
like to go ahead and present your
application yes so um I once I received
the we received the letter that the
fence needed to be moved I did some some
digging into the history of the current
fence that one was installed by the
Jonas's who um bought the property in
2010 they replaced um a fence that was
the same height at the same location
that was um they purchased the property
from the abenson in 2010 Unfortunately
they are deceased so I was not able to
contact them um to find out when they
installed the fence um but it has been
there for in that exact location for at
least since the turn of the century and
um for we're we are hoping that you all
will approve of a of basically a similar
fence to what's currently there but set
back um on the actual property
line or the for part of the reason we
bought the property is for the safety of
the our children in the backyard and um
the six foot fence rather than a 4-ot
fence would help ensure that safety of
our young children um the bottom picture
there that is an adjacent property off
of Denver um and that is also a six-
foot fence um for that are neighbors so
that they're just adjacent so that's
just an example of how it would comply
with the other other neighbors um I also
did I looked at the properties from
Cassidy to Gould um there
are 23 properties that have fences along
that stretch uh 13 of them have six-
foot fences and um 10 of them have four
foot fences along the properties uh
along Denver so it it would conform to
what that
Avenues kind of style is if you
will God thank you
uh is there anyone in the audience
wishes to speak to this
application seeing none we'll close
public comment any discussion by the
board so where so it'll be curb sidewalk
trees fence or it'll be curb sidewalk
fence
trees this the city has decided to cut
down those trees they're in the city
right away yeah so the got it so that'd
be beyond
that and is it is a sidewalk going to go
in there yes yes any other uh any other
questions could we have the findings of
facts and decision of the board read the
findings of fact and decision of the
board for application number bc-
24-21 for property located at 114 North
Merkel the board finds
that on consideration of the application
proposed variance evidence test
testimony before it that the applicant
has proven the criteria to Grant an area
variance in Mexico section 12261 c have
been met and a variance from beic Cod
section I'm sorry a special permit in
accordance with beic Cod section
12640 3B to allow a six foot fence on
the Southside property line be granted
with the following condition that the
landscape plan is subject to staff
review and approval and do you
understand the findings of fact is read
by Ms Rose yes sir any other discussion
from the board do I hear a motion to
vote on this so move Turner second king
roll call
please miss L yes Mr King yes Mr Turner
yes Mr rosenfall yes chairman Marsh yes
thank
you thank you uh next item is
24-22 this is 2474 Brent would uh the
applicant is Amy lowerhouse if you could
come up and be sworn
in he States your name Amy Lous do you s
me swear orir testimony you're about to
give this evening is the truth I do
thank
you and
the staff report on this one the
applicant is Seeking a certificate of
appropriateness for a screen porch
addition to the rear north side of the
house which meets code the applicant is
also seeking a variance from beex code
section 12521 15a which limits detach
garages to 18 feet in height to allow a
proposed new detach garage with a ridge
height of 19 feet to match the existing
house the applicant is also seeking a
variance for Mexico section 12521 15a
which limits accessory structures to 625
Square ft for this lot
size to allow a detached garage to be
691 square
feet so this house uh it's in the arc
zoning
district and it sits at the north east
corner of Cassidy and brenwood the
existing house is has a very steep
sloped roof and in order to align with
the architectural design of the house
and Flo with the proposed garage should
be steep as well the architect has
proposed the lowest slope possible
without the roof looking awkward but it
still puts the garage height at 19 ft um
this lot is actually 15 square feet
Less in size than what's required for
The Next Step Up regulations for the
different zoning
districts
so that the ARB unan unanimously
approved the
design um which is driving the variant
need
and the additional square footage of the
garage is not noticeable in the size of
this property and uh staff would find it
acceptable and also appropriate in
keeping with the design of the pitched
roof of the existing principal structure
here and if Karen I don't know if she
wants to chime in on any of this um yeah
the the architecture View Board was is
completely in favor of recommending this
to you we did go through some minor
changes
that one of them is on this elevation
but this one isn't really the Vari but
am's going to adjust some of the new
columns to have that more sendly look of
the
columns The Columns above plus most
importantly a lot of discussion on that
lot of discussion
about yes this little Medallion right
here oh yes that's
great and they're going to reuse that on
the new garage but um the variance is
only in foot and the airb was very much
in favor of maintaining the
pitch is it is gonna match it or it's
just going to be steep
so Karen if you can go to nope to the
right yep that one um so this shows the
new garage in relation to the house as
well as a site photo that shows the
Landscaping there the Landscaping is is
pretty robust uh I don't show it on the
drawing so we can actually see what's
behind it but it's uh the the site is
also sloping toward the alley um this is
bordered on three sides by roads in an
alley on to the north um so we felt like
it really mat matched was uh in keeping
with the consistent architecture of the
house the the slope of the of the garage
is slightly lower than the house but I
once I started going lower than that it
was really noticeable that it was
different from the
house Amy is there anything else you'd
like to tell us about this project oh
they they did a great
summary is there is there anyone in the
audience that wishes to speak to this
application seeing no one will close
public comment for this
application I just have one question is
there what's above the garage anything
or is it just storage it's just storage
y yeah to me i' I think it'd be sad if
the garage roof I mean I'd let you go
higher to match the house as far as I'm
that's why I asked actually to me it
seems like you should honor the house
and to me this the the square footage
thing because of the size the E I mean
the city right away there is huge it is
to me the lot functionally looks and
feels like that next size up so to me
the the square footage issue is a mood
Point any other
discussion could we have the findings of
facts and decision of the board read
then the findings of fact and decision
of the board for application number bz
ap-24 d22 for property located at 2474
Brentwood upon consideration of the
application proposed variance and
evidence and testimony before the board
make finds that the applicant has proven
the criteria to Grant an one foot
variance I'm sorry to Grant an area
variance in beic COD section 12261 c
have been met and a one foot variance
from Meo section 12521 15a to allow the
detached garage to be 19 ft in height
and also a 67 square foot variance from
beic code section 12215 a to allow the
garage to be 691 square feet be
granted um
as submitted and as further recommended
by the architecture review board for a
certificate of
appropriateness and does the applicant
understand those uh findings as read by
m Rose I do any uh any discussion by the
board or do I hear a
motion I'll make a motion
Turner second Rosen Paul roll
call Mr King yes Mr L Miss leat yes Mr
Turner yes Mr Rosenthal yes chairman
Marsh yes very nice project thank you
uh the next uh application is
24-23 which is
2557 East
Broad the applicant is Stephanie Haywood
if you could uh please be sworn
in please state your name Stephanie
Hayward do you somly swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth I do thank you and
the staff background on this one please
the applicant is requesting approval to
add an exterior cell door um and new
exterior stairs to the basement the
applicant is also seeking a variance
from Mexico section 12
5209 R six zoning which requires an 8ot
side yard setback for principal
structurers to allow a Cellar Door in
the east side yard to encroach 5 feet
one and a half inches into the 8 foot
required sidey yard
setback um the is requesting to install
the new seller door on the side of the
house at the existing basement window
the access to the basement inside the
home is too small uh to be able to move
any large items in and out of the
basement a furnace OFA Etc the new sun
room Edition is covering the existing
basement access installing new doors to
the west of the sunro would require the
relocation of gas lines meters and
creating a new opening in the wall the
owner will plant boxwoods in mulch and
area surrounding the door to further
conceal it from the street if the board
finds it appropriate to Grant a variant
City staff asks that the Bap remand this
back to Karen for approval of the design
of the Cellar Door and and
landscape and we didn't feel like we
felt like this was F to do a approval at
the door
if did not go got it won't be blue
that's sh it won't be
blue
good I already had that as a condition
yeah if if you'd like to go ahead and
present your project here that would be
great yeah so we um we already went
through the ARB for the sun room Edition
and we in the original design had like
this trap door because we were covering
up the existing seller door where
they're putting the sun room and they
only need the access for um occasional
use if they're going to like move a
couch down there or get have to replace
the furnace um the trapo option just
really wasn't working it's just
constructibility it was just caus cusing
a lot of hardship so um we chose that
window it's the furthest that that's
where the building is furthest back off
the setback I mean the building kind of
angles closer so anywhere else would be
a bigger variance to ask for it um and
then yeah as the uh summary said if we
did it right next to the sun room in the
back um that is where a gas line is
there is no existing opening so it was
just going to be
a a
bigger bigger project
um yeah so it would be a neutral colored
door they will screen it with
Landscaping
um okay uh is there any anyone in the
audience that wishes to speak to this
application seeing no one we'll close
the uh public comment or the comment on
this one uh any staff disc board
discussion I'll just say as a close
neighbor actually who has a BAS access
that's covered by an addition feel your
pains could we have the findings of
facts and decision of the board read the
findings of fact and decision of the
board for application number B z- 24-23
for property located at 2557 East Broad
Street upon consideration of the
application proposed variance and
evidence and testimony before it the
board finds that the applicant has
proven the criteria to Grant an area
variance in Mexico section 12261 C have
been met in a VAR a 5 foot
1 one and a half inch variance from bexy
code section 12 52.0
n be granted to allow
a basement Sellar access door to be
added on the east side of the principal
structure uh subject to further review
and approval by the design consultant
for the door and
landscape and does the applicant
understand those findings the facts as
read by m Rose I
do uh any discussion by the board or do
I hear a motion motion
King do I hear a second second
Rosenthal roll call Mr Rosenthal yes Mr
Turner yes Miss let stat yes Mr King yes
chairman Marsh yes thank you okay thank
you
um next item is
23-19 this is 733
Vernon uh K Brian wari is the
applicant is the applicant here actually
the applicant reached to staff
and no
problem okay do we need to table it or
anything this to a certain dat August
22nd okay we are motion to do that yeah
do I he a motion to table this to August
what was the date 22nd August 22nd so
move Rosenthal second king let's do a
roll call Mr Rosen yes Mr Turner yes
Miss L yes sister King yes chairman
Marsh
yes let's um let's take a five minute 10
minute break we'll take we're adjourn
for 10 minutes
oh no problem no problem you're okay
I just heard that that the new ball
there's a new it's like
Rob
I no complain good good you got a good
agenda for first meeting very exciting
stand
yeah for
un
e
e e
the uh next
application is Bap
24-14 this is 236 North Columbia the
applicant is John Beall
um um do we have some staff background
here this application is uh for property
located at 236 North Columbia and the
applicant requested demolition of the
existing home to allow construction of a
new home I don't believe there were any
variances involved so that was an ARB
application and the ARB
voted and it was not approved for
recommendation and the applicant has
filed an appeal to that decision and
it's this board's job to review the case
and
make a decision on the
appeal thank you um Miss Cunningham do
you want to give some background on the
process and sort of where where we are
sure um this is actually in my
memory uh the first appeal that this
board has actually had what you're used
to getting from ARB is
recommendations um the way that you the
Bexley codes code works is if there's a
in in a residential development if there
is a variance or conditional use then a
certificate of appropriateness comes to
you and you decide the whole thing or it
goes to a or b for a recommendation to
you first other than that A or B would
decide the whole thing for demolition of
property in a residential Zone
classification it is ARB who is actually
the decision maker on that you are not
so those don't come to you as a
recommendation they are actually decided
by ARB based on the demolition code um
and we did provide the board with uh
citations to the demolition code and the
same um Karen had at ARB the ARB kind of
looks at we had a up a flowchart that
helps you sort of just get yourself
through the code to make sure that you
understand the criteria in that that
happened at ARB ARB heard evidence in
two different meetings uh before before
uh the application
um and there was at least some testimony
and ARB ultimately decided to um deny
the application for for the demolition
it then comes to you at this point in
time it's an administrative appeal to
you there is also a right of appeal
which should not affect your decision
but there is also a right of appeal
under the mexic code from any decision
you make to council so it could also be
appealed to council and then to the
courts if it gets to that I'm not iting
that I'm just saying that's the next
step so when you hear it on appeal the
code provides that you have a hearing um
it does not have a lot of parameters
about that um typically the record comes
up to you and you have before you the
entire record everything that was filed
in that case all of the applications the
decisions uh you also got in your
packets I think links or in your
information links to the YouTube and so
you could review the hearings that that
were before you so it comes up to you on
a full record
um that is before you the applicant is
here it also it doesn't prohibit
additional evidence so typically you
would only look to any evidence that was
not previously presented if it was
already in the record before you you
don't rehear the case it's not a it's
not a
doover um but you can hear additional
evidence uh as provided in in the code
which is pretty General about it and in
your Bap rules I think it anticipates
that there could be additional evidence
it is a quasi judicial hearing um and as
you know from our many uh board meetings
and board retreats in the most recent
Retreat I think where um Mark bishell
did talk to the board about what quasi
judicial hearing means that means that
you are sitting in a judge likee
capacity and that you are to hear the
evidence and weigh and consider it and
make a decision based on the record and
the evidence before you you can't go out
and get other gather your own evidence
or or U make a case for or against
you're just supposed to decide u based
on the the um decision of ARB the record
everything that came up and any
additional evidence you might hear
because it is a quasi judicial hearing
it is not subject to the Sunshine Law in
the way that we think of the open
meetings act you can um adjourn to
deliberate privately if you choose you
are not required to do so you may deliv
deliberate openly if you choose to
that's really a decision of the board um
for you to to choose one way or the
other um and then a final decision
whatever decision you make should be in
writing so it wouldn't be final until
it's memorialized typically reviewed by
staff and the board and finalized in
writing happy to answer any questions if
there are any about about that since it
is a qu judicial judicial hearing sorry
you um have the opportunity to uh the
applicant Council would have the
opportunity to cross-examine any
witnesses that might testify for or
probably against because they would
present anybody for and the board always
has the ability to ask their own
questions and you can call on people who
testified um to ask answer questions for
you or when the testimony is finished
you can ask them questions to clarify
any anything that you
have is there any other questions or
does that kind of cover it for you does
I mean does anyone on the board have any
other questions for Miss
Cunningham okay I'm obviously I'm here
and available throughout the hearing
process so and we do have a court
reporter which is pretty typical when we
have an appeal uh that will be a record
in addition to the uh YouTube video that
should there be an appeal to council
that would be transcribed and sent up to
council too when Council here if an
appeal goes to council it would be based
solely on the record they would not hear
any additional evidence under the
ordinances of the city
got it and this is we're starting from
it's not a review of the procedure that
went before it's the entire body of
testimony and everything so we're we
we're making a decision about the merits
of what was of The Proposal the
demolition not evaluating what ARB did
you are evaluating what ARB did yes but
you can hear additional evidence and
then it's sort of a hybrid review of
putting it all in the pot and deciding
that doesn't have to be a procedural
mistake we can just say we think they
decided incorrectly based on what we
hear if we wish you can doesn't have to
be they made a mistake
procedurally you have to weigh and
consider the evidence and find whether a
preponderance of the evidence supports
the application that's the entirety the
whole
BX considering also their decision but
everything else
too does that make sense yes okay and I
think because we do have a number of
people in the audience I think can we
just swear everyone in at one time so if
if anyone plans to speak tonight if you
could stand up raise your right hand and
then we'll just we'll swear everyone in
at once and then we'll get a list I take
it from the court reporter of the names
or have them sign yeah we we'll we'll
we'll put a sheet out we'll have
everybody sign at the end but if anyone
plans on speaking now's your chance to
be sworn in we obviously we can swear
swear swear people in later if need be
but so you've all raised your right
hands uh do you somly swear or affirm
the testimony you're about to give this
evening is the
truth thank you all right if we could
have the uh applicant please come
up thank you good evening chairman Marsh
members of the board Joe Miller 52 East
Gay Street I would at the outset just
like to amplify and Echo uh the board's
gratitude to Miss Rose for her years of
service I've been fortunate to be before
this body and others in the city and
have always really benefited from her
expertise um thank you I'm joined this
evening uh by the applicant architect
John be Hall as well as the landowner Mr
yoaz SAR and my colleague Liz
Alexander uh we uh are also joined by uh
professional and expert architect uh Rob
livsey uh ma appraiser Sam and
we're fortunate to have with us the
intended purchasers of this property Dr
John and Lisa Warner if you just stand
uh so that board sees you Dr Warner is
the CEO of the wexer medical center uh
they've recently relocated to Central
Ohio and would intend to make their Home
in Bexley would intend as you'll hear to
make a substantial investment uh in this
community uh we also are joined by a
structural engineer from whom you'll
hear uh Bernard kuie uh and I appreciate
uh the board's uh time and attention and
even Indulgence this evening we have a
new presentation that was not given
before the ARB I'm mindful that you have
that record and we have the testimony of
live Witnesses who did not testify live
before uh the ARB um Mr rosenal I know
your Council has ay answered your
question but you do sit as the decision
makers a new tonight you can grant uh
the permit for demolition uh and
replacement home uh just as though the
ARB could have in the first instance and
so we appreciate appreciate your time
and attention tonight this is an
important matter to all of the people in
the room behind me and so if we uh Miss
boar are you working the presentation or
to okay if we could look at the next
slide please yes I appreciate it and so
I'm sure tracks what's in our book as
well yes thank you I apologize you thank
you uh Mr King you do have before you uh
a binder with uh this presentation uh as
well as what I believe will be referred
to is exhibits 1 through five over the
course of the evening uh thank you so
looking at that second slide you may be
well familiar with the site 236 North
Columbia it's uh large but consistent
with the other large Lots in the area
1.1 Acres the present condition I'm
going to talk about that first obviously
so you're well versed in the current uh
situation on the lot the existing home
which you'll see in a moment uh is
oriented to the very north of the site
in fact it's got a peculiar orientation
on the lot you know over an acre and yet
the home sits at the northernmost
boundary of the property uh as well as
there is a peculiar orientation of the
home on the lot that being that it does
not actually face on Colombia instead uh
its side elevation faces the street as
I'll show in a moment I think the
characterization of the tennis court and
garden as overgrown as charitable I
would describe it as uh neglected for
decades and decrepit at at this point if
we could look at the next slide
please so as I mentioned we are before
you uh looking for uh approval to
demolish the existing constru the
existing structure and construct the new
home uh depicted there ARB did deny the
certificate of appropriateness for
Demolition and replacement and we are
instead asking that you grant uh those
request this evening and we believe by
doing so you will uh you know even
improve this beautiful stretch of
Columbia ab and allow this uh area to
continue to thrive if we look at the
next slide
please if you're not familiar um with uh
the existing structure on site uh at 236
North Columbia these are fair
representations of it so top left and
this is slide four in the packet before
you top left is what you see from
Colombia it's overgrown uh while not I'm
not an architect I obviously believe
it's not a contributing structure uh to
Columbia being not really well seen uh
and contributing to the neighborhood
visually uh and in fact uh the bottom
left depicts what I said to you a moment
ago this is the orientation of the home
that faces the street it is respectfully
a kind of a mashup Edition that was done
later not part of the original home and
it's this brick lattice wall that
actually faces uh Columbia again I want
to be respectful and not be unkind or
uncharitable but I do agree uh with Mr
Beall the applicant who did say this is
somewhat reminiscent in the modern day
of a trash enclosure you might see at a
quick service restaurant so it is
unusual facade for facing the street uh
Miss boar if we could go to the next
slide I think it's worth you at least
knowing about the interior of uh the
structure not surprisingly given the
home's age and it's it's relative uh
neglect over the years on the left that
is the kitchen and yes that is the
washer and dryer uh next to the oven but
also uh the home presents some real
challenges for modern-day living you can
see some of the common space uh and the
bedroom there uh that's part of that
addition I mentioned not true to the
original part of the home the rooms are
very small they are very choppy they are
not suited to modern living in fact on
the right side you you get a feel for
the low ceilings and and the lack of
functionality uh as that person comes
down the staircase what somewh to
encounter it's very much a home from a
different time
um uh it's Mr star he is tall um
65 uh and so if we look at the next
slide uh this is the proposed home as
submitted this is what Dr and Mrs Warner
would like to build on the site and I
submit to you and hopefully after the
testimony and evidence this evening
you'll agree uh something that we
believe is much more befitting of the
street and of the neighborhood so uh if
we look at the next slide to move into
the standards that should guide you this
evening under Bexley city code um in
12:23.0 five of the city code it sets
forth these factors these three factors
for your consideration
um as to whether a demolition permit
should be issued the first is the
structure historically or
architecturally significant we submit
that it is not an intend to present
evidence on that exact question and then
it's very important uh to remember that
the code then says or number two will
denial the certificate cause substantial
economic hardship the code then goes on
to say yet again or
are there unusual and compelling
circumstances that justify the
demolition in other words if you agree
with any one of these factors you must
find for issuance of the demolition
permit in fact if you find that the
structure is not historically or
architecturally significant your inquiry
can end there uh you don't need to
consider factors two and three those
only come into play If you believe it is
historically or architecturally
significant but again if you find that
any of these fact factors uh could
justify the demolition permit then the
demolition permit U must issue now the
code goes further and I'm think you're
familiar with this it actually sets
forth specific considerations under each
of these factors and I'd like to talk
about each of the factors and the
considerations itemized for each of the
factors in the code in turn so that
means if we look at the next slide very
briefly we're first going to talk about
whether that structure uh is
historically or architect
significant and if we look at the next
slide these are in fact those
considerations I mentioned a moment ago
that
are available for your consideration in
determining whether the structure is
historically or architecturally
significant I think the ARB uh premised
the greater weight of its decision on
factors two and four uh but as you'll
hear from my colleague Liz Alexander and
expert architect professor of
architecture Rob livsey we believe that
the home does not uh warrant
satisfaction of that factor under these
considerations and thus is not worthy of
preservation so at this point I would
like to turn it over to uh Liz Alexander
and Rob lipy and we'll look at the next
slide
please good evening Liz
Alexander I'm Rob liy and I'll try to
stand close to the mic so it'll capture
both of us um can you uh please
introduce yourself to the members of the
board and uh explain to them your
profession uh I'm Robert liy I'm uh a
director of Meritus or Professor Meritus
and former director of the nton School
of Architecture at the Ohio State
University uh I'm a practicing architect
I've done um I've actually done some
residential projects in Bexley uh and
done other residential projects I've
done everything from residential
additions to $100 million um laboratory
buildings so I being primarily an
academic I worked with other firms to do
those sorts of things and did a wide
range of designs are you familiar with
the structure currently located at 236
North Columbia I am and have you been
asked to offer your expert opinions
regarding that existing structure as
well as the new proposed home I have
I'll ask you to turn briefly um in the
binder before you to exhibit
one that'll be just behind the tab one
so oh sorry have Sor there no no problem
yeah do you recognize exhibit one as an
affidavit that you executed in
connection with your retention as an
expert witness I do and does this app it
accurately set forth your expert
opinions in this matter it does
will the opinions you're going to offer
tonight be based on your over 50 years
of experience in
architecture hope
so and I'd like to walk through some of
those opinions what did you do to
formulate those opinions I oh sorry I uh
I visited the house and uh and looked at
the
neighborhood both inside I visited the
house both inside and
out and then attached to your affidavit
there uh is a collection of uh mid
country modern homes in beex did you
review those as well I did all right so
now I'm going to direct your attention
to the slide um and I'd like to start
with the first Factor under the code the
age and condition of the structure what
is your opinion regarding the current
condition of the
structure uh the current structure is
not in good condition I think anybody
who looked at it would recognize that
immediately uh for me on the inside of
the house there are a couple of problems
one is the um low ceiling height so I if
I understand properly this house the new
house is to be uh used for Dr Warner and
uh having had some experience at the
Ohio State University having run the
School of Architecture I know how much
how important it is to raise money and
to entertain potential donors and uh
with my experience it would not it would
be extremely difficult to do it in this
house um uh we could talk about the
entry the driveway the as you've been
told the house is at the very Northern
edge of the of the property there's a a
very narrow driveway to the front door
it's uh it's um a dead end situation and
by the way it's just across the Hedge
from a service drive to the ad adjoining
property so it is not a nice Prospect as
you come into the house uh it's not
elegant Prospect and if you are going to
entertain people you need to you you
should be able to entertain them in a
graceful way and that is certainly not
the condition of entering this house
once you come in there's a there's a a
funny flip in this house which is that
the ceilings on the ground floor are
very low they're let's say eight feet uh
the ceilings in the bedrooms on the on
the Upper Floor actually take advantage
of the roof now uh we may talk about
this later but um there's a discussion
about no musen who was a um who studied
with Frank Floyd Wright and Frank Floyd
Wright was only 5 foot4 and uh had very
low ceilings in his houses and so in in
his buildings but the but the he always
worked to sort of make the rooms grander
so you would come in on the edge of the
rooms and the ceiling would be low but
then it would open up uh and be be more
gracious so um that's not the case here
the case here is that the ceilings are
low throughout and on the ground floor
um and so I for me that's a problem
again in terms of the gracefulness of
the house and having to entertain people
and I presume sometimes a fair number of
people and so I think it I think that
the that that's an issue that you
wouldn't be able to correct easily I
also as mentions here um about the small
inaccessible bathrooms when I say
inaccessible I mean they're they they're
not the handicapped uh and again if
you're entertaining you need to have
handicapped uh bathrooms but anyway
they're very old they're from 19 the 50
53 and they're very small and very
cramped and they're not they're not what
would be expected today uh the
conditions of both bathrooms and
kitchens has changed a lot since then
the next issue is the kitchen which is
if you're going to be entertaining
people you need to be a able to have
Caterers there and that kitchen simply
could not handle uh uh Caterers coming
in and out and trying to serve a large
body of people so um anyway I I I think
there are other issues but can these
aspects some of these aspects you've
described of the home such as the low
ceiling height and small and
inaccessible bathrooms can those be
remedied through architectural design
not really I mean no I mean you could no
you I mean how are you gonna how are you
going to raise the ceiling on the ground
floor you can't you know move the Upper
Floor up no it's not possible really I
mean nobody would ever do it can we turn
to the next slide please
Karen and does this uh slide depict the
um entrance you were describing in the
service drive it does and can you
explain for the board what we're looking
at here so on the right hand slide
you're looking at the driveway as it
comes up to the house and as was
mentioned
before uh the side elevation of the H
house is what faces the street so the
house has absolutely no presence on the
street this is this is the way you can
see the house because the rest of the
property has trees in front but this is
the way you can see the house from the
street uh and then you have to come up
this driveway to uh to enter the house
and on the left is the entrance to the
house which is okay I mean it's it's
fine but it's when you go through that
front door that's uh that's a real
problem we could turn to the next slide
please so here we might talk about no
musen so in my letter um I said that no
mus brought um prairie style
architecture to Columbus and that's true
as a as a former student of Frank Floyd
Ry and he was here earlier there other
people Rich Miller was also studied with
them in came Etc but I want to point out
these two houses relative to the house
that we're talking about so these these
are real no musen houses the one on the
left is no musson's
original residence and the one on the
right is the Miller house that uh he did
on Parkview but look at these two houses
there the thing is is that that uh no
musen who by the way was a distinguished
alness of the School of
Architecture uh uh there's character to
these houses that there's that the the
one on the left his own house is a bit
um funny in the sense that he's taken a
pediment and turned it upside down but
it gives the house character these
houses have character the one on the
right you can see that the the Miller
house it's the idea that like he once
had a rectangular house and he opened it
up and you can see the big Windows under
the under the roof as part of that and
in both those cases uh he's working hard
to give the the houses character that's
not the case with the with the house on
Columbia Avenue in your opinion do you
believe the current structure at 236
North Columbia was one of NOA M's better
projects
I do not and by the way um I uh I don't
know if any of you know the AIA guide to
Columbus architecture but uh no ver
musen of course is in here the two
houses that are in here are the ones
that you see on the screen and notably
an absent is the one at 236 North
Columbia and so you talked about some of
the aspects that you like of these two
no musen homes on the screen um what
about the structure at 23 6 North
columia is less
desirable well I've already talked about
the sort of programmatic issues which
are which are less desirable the house
at uh 236 North Columbia it's a okay so
it's a prairie uh prairie style house
but there are many other prairie style
houses in Columbus that are better
or uh more suited to to uh the current
situation or current time
we could go to the next slide
please all right so I'd like to ask you
about the next factor which is the
importance of the structure to the
character and quality of the
neighborhood do you believe the current
structure fits with the character of the
neighborhood I do not and why not
because the if you if you visit that
street you'll see there are actually
rather large houses on that street so
the fact of the property the size of
this property is not not uh uncommon uh
in North uh
Columbia in that in that part of it so
there there are very big houses and very
Big Lots but they all they're
participating in a neighborhood they all
have big front Lawns they all face the
street they all have a presence this
house does not have a presence even if
you were to take down the trees that
that um that Shield the open par part of
this lot that house will never have a
presence on this street it will never
participate in the neighborhood the way
the other houses do Mr Miller mentioned
that the house is situated on the
northern part of the parcel does that
create um a gap that's unusual compared
to the other houses in the neighborhood
it does and how so well the all the
other houses are basically facing the
street and so they have as I said they
have the big front Lawns and then
presumably
backyards uh but the but the houses the
houses are have a presence this house
does not have a presence and that's the
real issue and so you know the issue of
the Gap is just an addition in addition
to that in the sense that you get a no
presence and then a large gap and then
and then the rest of the houses on the
street on both sides of the street have
you reviewed the plans for the proposed
home I have in your opinion do does the
proposed structure better match the
character and quality of the
neighborhood absolutely and why is that
well it has a presence I mean if you
look at those drawings you're going to
see very clearly that that has has a
presence on the street and it's in the
scale and character of the other houses
on the street so when I say
character uh one of the things about
homes in America versus Europe or other
places is that they're always of
different styles so you go down the
street and you're going to get a tutor
house you're going to get a you know a a
French provincial house you're going to
get all sorts of different houses and
those houses are different so it's not a
problem to put a different style house
there it's a problem the issue is the to
make it the proper scale of the street
if we could go to the next slide
please so I'd like to ask you some
questions about the significance of the
design of the existing structure to the
city the central Ohio the state or the
nation um um in your opinion is there a
significance that this particular
structure was designed by new mus no I
don't think this is one of no's better
buildings as I tried to point out and
then if we can go to the next slide
please are there other examples of
mid-century modern designs throughout
Bexley there are and the and there are
on uh North Columbia too and we've
depicted a few of those up on the screen
are there many more examples attached to
your affidavit in exhibit one
yes based on your experience and
expertise in architecture do you believe
the structure located at 236 North
Columbia is historically or culturally
significant I do not and based on your
experience and expertise in architecture
do you believe the structure at 236
North Columbia is worthy of preservation
I I don't think it's worthy of
preservation and that's all we have if
the board has any questions
thank
you I have some questions for him if you
don't mind um when you say the ceilings
are low but you're saying they're eight
feet isn't eight feet kind of the
standard height for most homes ceilings
no not not not today okay um N9 feet
would be a minimum and it wouldn't be
and it wouldn't be a surprise if uh you
had some higher spaces as well okay and
then what's the size of the house
currently current square footage
yes 5,000
square okay and then lastly
um we talked about the lattice wall
facing the street yeah would the removal
of the lattice wall no give it a better
Street presence or would there be other
options to make it give it a better
Street presence on the side turning the
house 90
degrees besides that no but no but no
but seriously it's the the fact is that
there is no house there it's the side of
the house it's a it's a very narrow
house and it does have a piece further
back that projects a bit into the into
the garden but the but what you see from
the street is a very narrow uh it's it's
that one bedroom it's that bedroom that
you saw with the white brick wall that's
what that's what faces the street okay
thank you how many square feet is a
proposed house 6,500 uh close to
66
so uh Mr livsey is your opinion with an
a 16 or say 2,000 foot addition in the
hands of an architect could any of the
issues you raise be addressed for
example the lack of presence in the
neighborhood if if we say we need at
least 2,000 more square feet added to
this existing house we're not tearing it
down we're going to add to it could an
architect find a way to address the
issue of the Gap in the presence of on
the street yeah yeah uh no I don't
believe so so if the existing house is
5,000 500 square feet and you want a
6,000 square 6,600 square feet you got
1,000 feet to work with you know what a
th000 square feet is and it's not gonna
it's not it's not gonna it's not going
to fill that
site so so the answer to that is
no oh oh well and I can go on about
other issues I mean if you want I mean
the the the fact of the so the whole
ground floor of the existing house you
have to use in some way right what are
you going to use it for if you if you
say those spaces are not Grand enough
not gracious enough what are you going
to use the rest of that ground floor
space
for that becomes
problematic because I would imagine that
the entertaining spaces in this house
are rather large
well actually I know that the proposals
they're
large and and that's what they need they
need entertaining spaces they need
Living Spaces and they need entertaining
spaces but we all agree it's entirely
possible that this my house which is
very nice would not meet their needs but
that doesn't know that would qualify for
demolition necessarily I mean there are
other places they could live it's not as
if the requirements of this particular
homeowner has to dictate what we do with
this particular parcel is that fair to
say no but you no but you have to also
take again take into account the
neighborhood this neighborhood who's
living in this neighborhood and these
are people who entertain and have a
lifestyle that has certain expectations
in terms of graciousness and you're not
going to make it with this house and I
will just offer because we'll you'll see
it later uh Mr Rosenthal I agree with
you the particular needs of Dr Warner
and Mrs Warner don't guide you the city
code guides you and you'll see later the
lack of compatibility of this home with
the surrounding neighborhood and the
existing structure more on a scale and
of Greater compatibility with the uh
remainder of the neighborhood while we
have Dr
L uh urbanistic when you look at the
city of Bexley is The Eclectic nature of
the residential stock important or does
it does it mean anything relative to I
think it does I I I I I I think it's uh
I mean it's part of the quality of
Bexley I mean you know we I used to live
in Bexley drive up and down the streets
showing friends the the houses and part
of their quality is their
differences and do you feel that the
current house is typical Bexley house or
would you say it's a eclectic Bexley
house no I wouldn't I wouldn't say I'd
say that it doesn't fit the
neighborhood that it doesn't that is you
know well sty I'm saying sty
stylistically not not in terms of the
the language of the street but I'm just
saying stylistically stylistically I can
find other let's
for purpose of the discussion say
prairie style houses in Beckley and on
Columbia Avenue and they they present
themselves in the
neighborhood in a good way whereas this
house does not present itself in the
neighborhood in a good way so so you're
GNA have that problem no matter what
well I guess what what I'm driving at is
I think of this
as I call them 5% houses it's an
Eclectic it's atypical style in Bexley
the prairie style right and I guess my
question is do you think that the
proposed house falls into that same
category or would you say it's more
typical of exit more typical of beex I
would agree
I have a question um and perhaps
impossible to answer but you have a
architect of some
prominence in Mr musen you have a family
the Lazarus family of prominence in
Columbus
Ohio why
would this building this structure have
been built the way it was is there do
you have any insight into no I can only
I can only speculate and that I guess
I'm asking you to speculate if that's uh
appropriate because I don't understand
why you would have a family who has a
history in this city of building First
Rate uh mid-century modern
homes there are several other Lazarus
homes that are mid-century modern that
that this one would would by your
definition
be uh sub par when you know maybe this
was is is there a architectural intent
that that of the prairie style or
something that that deserves to be
mentioned or or I don't know I don't
know the other Lazarus houses in the in
Columbus and and um and if they're
prairie style I don't know them but I do
know the Miller house and the Miller
house which is uh one of was uh a good
house by no musen uh has much more
character has much more is is uh is has
much more
presence uh than this house does and uh
so you know you asked me to speculate on
what happened yeah I mean why why would
why would I would say value engineering
I mean I you know uh Lazarus had plenty
of money I don't know whether they would
want to spend it or not but this house
is very very
minimal uh in terms of it's it it's
graciousness it's very it doesn't have a
bunch graciousness so they would they I
I me forgive me I'm just trying to they
would spend the money on a premier
architect on a 1.1 acre lot in North
Columbia in Bexley Ohio and and value
engineer the house itself is the specul
okay I mean I I some of those are not
matching up for me I guess is what I'm
I'm trying to neither of us know what
the situation precisely yeah yeah right
so but but all I can tell you is about
the result and the result is that this
is a subpar house certainly for no ver
musin not to mention for other
architects who were doing uh R style
houses in Columbus at the
time uh all of the other homes provided
in the pictures are well capped this one
obviously is is that a factor not for me
I I can I can see through to the to the
bones of the of the
building but again we come back to this
issue about you know 8 foot ceilings
it's just not you know in the 50s that
was thought to be a cool thing but even
people like Frank Floyd Wright who did
it in the 30s and way before that for
for the important houses or for houses
that where the people had to entertain
there was a there was a uh a purp a tent
or whatever to make them more gracious
so in the frankly right has a uh one of
the build one of the rooms from uh one
of his houses in the Metropolitan Museum
in New York and it's a excellent example
or the Robi house in Chicago they're
both excellent examples of how he was
able to both compress space and expand
space at the same time and that does not
happen in this
house and so uh unless there's further
questions for address see I would simply
say Mr Rosal I think you'll see that we
will discuss certain considerations that
go to this uh namely this board is to
consider improvements to the tax base it
is to consider compatibility with the
remainder of the neighborhood and then
Mr King unless you have other questions
I was going to commend to the report of
of the city of bexley's own architect
who fully agrees with the opinions just
expressed who the city beex on so if I
may if we looked at the next
Slide the arv or the city retained
Joseph
kusman Mr kpen uh letter uh to the board
is actually at at uh page
98 excuse me 97 and 98 of the record uh
that you have available to you uh on uh
the city's website and a part of the
record for this proceeding I've
excerpted a few quotes here uh he says
uh as a someone who has restored homes
including by Mr musen uh that his
primary consideration would be uh the
foundation we're going to talk about the
structural problem with this home we're
just marching through the factors as
they appear in the code the first one is
architectural historical significant the
second one that we'll talk about are
practical difficulties uh with regard to
the home uh and economic hardship and
the third factor is compelling
circumstances you will hear for from a
structural engineer that that primary
consideration of the city's own retained
architect is a big problem on this site
and then also we've quoted there from
his letter directly he says I agree with
the statements by made by Rob Rob lipy
this house doesn't remotely compare in
quality with his own house he's
referring to Mr musson's House the one
that you've seen uh depicted he also
points to another house designed by Mr
Muson it's far superior in that next
quote to be transparent at page 98 of
the record where it says Stellar example
of his work the preceding sentence says
that this home as well as the Drake
Union at Ohio at Ohio State are not
Stellar examples of his work uh and in
fact these are uh Mr kpen the city's
retained architect uh words not mine he
actually refers to this house as having
a quote mediocre design unquote and
obviously he goes on to say that some of
the problems you'll hear about raising
the house lowering the grade uh seem
like difficult tax tasks he himself
would never do that as a prospective
purchaser of the home um so he also saw
obviously what's proposed as a
replacement and he thought a quick Point
Mr Miller certainly the letter from Mr
cusin doesn't as I read it correct me if
I'm wrong does not say that the Union at
Ohio State was subpar work it said it
theion be demolished because of the
flood wall he did say that the union was
being demolished uh because of the flood
wall and if I misspoke Mr King I
apologize but I know for certain uh that
he did refer to this home as not being
like the house in question that's what
he said about he was referring I think
to the
Drake Stone the house in question he
said was not the Drake union he did not
call Dustin Stone I guess I'm inferring
that because the proceeding senten is
about the Drake Union but certainly we
can agree this home he says is not a
example of his work and likewise calls
it of mediocre design and again these
are the words of the city's own retained
expert so
if we could turn to the next slide
please because I want to address a point
Mr King correctly made about uh the
prior owner of the home Charles
Lazarus I want to say this with all due
respect with complete respect to Charles
Lazarus who I have heard nothing but
good things about that he was a a true
gentleman in every sense of the word in
fact you'll hear from expert appraiser
Mr who was acquainted with Charles
Lazarus um but the fact of the matter is
there are other as Mr King said Lazarus
homes probably the most prominent of
which is on Town Street built by Fred
Lazarus senior uh the Lazarus department
store was founded by Simon Lazarus in
1851 and it was his sons Fred Lazarus
senior and Ralph Lazarus that ran the
department stores thereafter and this
home was built on Town Street by uh Fred
senior um in fact uh Charles was several
Generations removed from
raised on Brien Road his family later
moved to South Columbia and he lived in
this home for only a portion of his life
this case reminds me of something in
which I was involved in 2018 the ARB
approved and this respectfully I Believe
Miss Cunningham this bza allowed that
decision to stand after an appeal was
filed for the demolition of a home at
291 South Columbia that was previously
owned by Theodore Huntington son of
Huntington National Banks found ER PW
hunting that that that Nexus was much
closer obviously than we have here that
home was in Des disrepair like here I my
recollection is it did not have the
structural problems you'll hear about in
this home and so I would simply submit
with as much respect as I can convey to
Mr Lazarus a noteworthy family name does
not alone create a historic structure
you know frankly bexley's fortunate to
have many pro prominent citizens over
the decades its housing stock would be a
Prett prisoner to its former residents
and it would defeat a key consideration
for this board under
12230 5 that it is in the city code that
this board must consider quote in in
assessing demolition quote the benefits
of responsible renewal and Redevelopment
of the city's aging housing stock that
is an appropriate consideration for you
tonight yes Mr sorry the Huntington
house and this house were they both was
that Huntington house built by the
huntingtons or was did he just live
there do you know boy off the top of my
head I can't recall but the the appeal
that was filed extoled the virtues of
both the owner and The Bungalow style
home that was contended was rare in this
built this house I believe that's
correct was that Huntington was that
Huntington house was there a notable
architect associated with that to your
recollection I don't recall the
architect is my most honest answer for
Mr King obviously the the the style of
that perhap someone else in the audience
knows the answer to that John do you
recall okay so the Huntington's
apparently built that house I do recall
the Bungalow style of it being extolled
and yet demolition was allowed by the
ARB and this board and of course
obviously the code should be applied
evenly and equally uh we
are and and so I've been going through
these considerations of the first factor
and again I apologize for the length of
this presentation but the final in the
next Slide the final consideration under
that first factor is explicitly will
this new home improve bexley's tax base
um and so the property was valued at
approximately 1.25 million in 2023
however you'll hear in a moment about
the poor condition of the structure and
its foundation which was not considered
by the auditor as part of the valuation
we submit that the new home will be a
substantial Improvement to the
property's value that is absolutely as
appropriate consideration as anything
for you this evening um and we believe
that demolition of this existing home
and construction of new home will
contribute to the value of surrounding
properties as well so if we look at the
next slot remember this is an or or
analysis any of these you think greater
weight favors uh the landowner the
permit must issue uh the second Factor
goes directly to some of the problems
with the structure I've alluded to
denial of the certificate will cause
economic
hardship I'd like to as as promptly as I
can go through the three considerations
which are on the next slide that drive
that factor of whether substantial
economic hardship exists you need to
look at the denial of certificate
whether it will result in substantial
reduction in the economic value of the
property uh whether there is a
substantial economic burden from not
allowing uh demolition uh and whether
the denial of certificate will result in
substantial economic burden because of
the cost of preserving and restoring and
we're prepared to quantify uh for you
that that for you this evening first on
the structure of the home I would ask uh
Bernard kuie our structural engineer to
come forward
please introduce yourself to the board
my name is Bernie Coy and what do you do
for work I'm a structural engineer I'm
the owner and sole proprietor of coy LLC
and how long have you owned your own
engineering firm just over two years
I've been been been a practicing
structural engineer for over 16 what did
you I I can't quite hear you oh get
closer yeah uh I owned my own company
for over two years and been practicing
structural engineer for over 16 and what
did you do before you started your own
firm I worked at the uh the bigger firms
in town cord anoth Schaefer smbh and
Paul J Ford what lures do you currently
hold I'm a professional engineer and a
structural engineer and you were asked
to offer your expert opinions in this
matter that is correct if you could just
look briefly at tab two in the
binder do you recognize Tab 2 as an
affidavit that you executed in
connection with your retention as an
expert witness I do and does this
affidavit accurately set forth your
expert opinions it does what did you do
to formulate those
opinions I visited the site um in
May and as part of your structural
assessment did you create a
report I did I did and is that attached
to your um
affidavit it is
all right if we could go to the next
slide
please what were your initial
observations about the structure yeah
absolutely so initially when I got to
the site the first thing I caught my eye
was there was a lack of gutters uh
around the entire roof the upper roof
the lower roof um and the amount of
discoloration around the brick um from
the exterior I also noticed that the
first floor level seem barely level with
exterior of the grade there weren't very
big steps it was almost a maybe maybe a
half step up to get into the first
floor so specifically digging a little
deeper into the exterior Framing and
grade um did you see any issues with
water yes uh the discoloration over
there in the middle of the picture um
showed discoloration of the brick on the
exterior um that's what I saw at several
locations as there were no gutters
installed the
except for on the south side where they
collected it into a Downs spout that
pushed it off maybe two feet from the
structure but it wasn't properly drained
to go away from the site it had a splash
pad underneath it and right around it
was more water saturation and INF
infiltration and as you examined more
closely describe the relationship
between that brick facade and the grade
yeah uh the brick facade is a bit lower
uh it goes all the way down below grade
at the entire perimeter uh there is no
differential between grade and where the
brick starts um however that's not
necessarily the issue it is an issue
where the actual first floor starts uh
and that is actually relatively low to
the the grade as well is it typical to
have a brick facade lower than the grade
uh you could have it um however current
codes require a four to six inch offset
buffer between top of grade and the top
of foundation wall or bottom of uh wood
structure what were your observations
regarding the roof structure yeah roof
structure like I mentioned uh did not
have any gutters installed around the
top um there were some patches in the
ceiling on the second floor that I
noticed Patchwork unknown what it is it
looked it was right by a
window um and that the lower roofs there
on that picture on the left hand side
there there's water infiltration on the
North side from the low roof to the wall
uh there's not a lot of flashing proper
flashing at the the connections between
the elements of the wall and the roof
and a lot of the sighting
has deteriorated throughout what were
your observations with the floor
structure including the first floor
framing so the first floor uh we'll
start with the second floor framing as
you notice there again the low roof is
creating an issue where water's coming
in um the second floor there wasn't too
much more going on other than uh that
location over there the first floor is
where I saw the most problems the first
floor like I mentioned when you step up
into the building it was a half step up
so that means the top of sheathing top
finished floor is is a couple inches
above grade with that said the first
floor framing is 2 by10 framing and it
has a 2X soulle plate beneath that so uh
the first floor had a lot of perim
band board and rim boards touching grade
with brick in
between um when I was looking closely at
the perimeter I noticed there's a lot of
discoloration efflorescence that along
the wall along the beams the wood
flooring or sorry the wood uh members
the framing um discoloration where you
can see staining coming in throughout it
isn't in a specific location it is at
various locations uh some of it was
tough to get to uh due to the conditions
they kept the same motive keep it
everything low and uh keep grade high so
in the crawl spaces where you look up
and nobody really wants to go uh you
look up at in between all the floor Joys
and you see more water infiltration at
those locations um and so can you
describe what you saw in the basement
and I'll actually ask you to go to the
next slide
please yeah in the basement uh the
basement walls are comprised of uh CMU
walls and uh there is again more signs
of water infiltration coming in that
corner there um and throughout uh the
basement there was also a su pump
installed uh later in its life as if the
North End had more water coming in there
were remediation uh methods used with
metal decking as shown in the report to
try to mitigate it when I was there I
saw water coming in to the structure uh
somebody put a towel there to stop it um
and the Su pump was pumping the water
out but just the outside of the building
not properly mitigating it all the way
away from the structure it was
essentially in my opinion just
recirculating is the most significant
issue in this structure water damage it
is and where is the most significant
damage the most significant damage that
I noted was the band board or the rim
board um and the way I I look at it is
like it's like the ankle of the
structure so the the above grade
structure is the rest of your body the
below grade structure is your foot but
then you have the ankle that thing um if
not if if it is compromised due to water
or anything else it
will have adverse effects to the above
grade structure and um increase the risk
of failure and uh for those like me that
are not Engineers or Architects does
this band board run the entirety of the
exterior of the house house yeah it
does and did you see uh signs of such
water damage in various locations I did
yes uh I did the main structure I saw
there and also all the additions had it
as well or the the renovations I'll call
them the crawl spaces it are signs of
water infiltration to band board
relatively hidden to the average
person you have to go I have to go
crawling around and looking around for
them uh they if you look around in the
middle of the structure it's it's dry
it's it's fine in the middle of it but
once you get to the exterior that's
where you really see a lot of the issues
uh there were a big duck work also
hiding a lot of it um so crawling and
trying to get in there was was tight so
if you just walk in there and take a
look oh looks reasonable but you really
have to get a flashlight and look around
and oh there's the issue and that's
that's what I found throughout and so is
it fair to say that that water is
collecting between the exterior and
interior
wall uh water is coming in from the
exterior the grade um due to poor or
lack of water management water's going
to sit on the outside it's going to get
absorbed into the brick there likely is
a brick cavity per the uh original
documents there was a section is it on
the next line maybe see here there is a
section on
um in my document that has a snippet of
the grade being actually higher than the
sole plate and everything else so that
you see the brick it's going to zor
through brick maybe an air cavity but
it's going to sit and go right next to
Wood Wood will Decay over time if it's
wet um would you describe this damage as
substantial it is it's prevalent
throughout the entire structure in your
expert opinion what recommendations for
remediation do you have yeah uh as noted
in the report um there were three
permanent one one
temporary uh options that I addressed of
course there can there can be more
options these are ones that I came up
with uh first one is to raise a
structure um raise a structure to ensure
that you have proper um buffer between
the grade and the wood structure raise
it fix the entire band board um and then
provide New Foundation up higher to
create what we have in current codes um
to be more code compliant uh this would
require jacking up the entire structure
not just the entire perimeter but also
the interior with the big chimney and
all the load bearing walls and all the
the beams and everything else all this
has to be done simultaneously the brick
exterior brick has to be lifted up but
also the the wood framing so at the same
time um that was the first option that I
uh presented in my document and just so
the board's aware that um full report is
located at exhibit 2B
so it's attached to his affidavit if you
want to turn to that um one more thing
so generally when jacking houses you see
this in simple rectangular houses
um nice rectangular Earth Square lift
the whole thing up and um you address it
then this is not a simple rectangular
house it's incd comes in and out has
many bearing uh points and everything so
it is going to be tough to it's going to
be a very risky um fix it's possible but
it has to be done by a specialized
contractor who's confident that
everything will be okay and do we know
with certainty that lifting this
particular structure is
feasible
uh anything is feasible uh but it's
going to be very risky to do I don't
think you're going to have a good
outcome in the end it will adversely
impact a structure um and all we see
again from the inside of the band board
is water
discoloration and like we mentioned
earlier that other problem is only worse
on the other side so the other side of
the band board and where the brick is
and the stud wall up above can only be
will only be worse we see and can you
describe for the board the second um
remed remediation possibility of
lowering the grade yeah lowering the
grade was the second one so if we can't
raise the structure to see if we can
lower the grade based on my uh
observation it was a pretty flat sight
uh so lowering it would adverse impact I
think a lot of the uh the drainage of
the site um that could be dealt with but
then also you have the vegetation you
have the trees and everything else where
you could be compromising those as well
um yeah in your expert opinion what is
the most effective option moving forward
so both the two options I just stated
that are permanent uh remediation
methods um they are both possible but
there's a lot of risk and a lot of
um finding the the right contractor to
do it they even want to do it um the the
chance of other things going wrong
during those two measures is is high
from a structural perspective um and I
also want to touch base on the third one
the temporary one you can patch little
things here and there but like I said
you're only going to see the worst part
once you open it up you're going to
start peeling it all back it's it's if I
see a little bit here and a little bit
here and a little bit here it's the
whole thing is going to be uh in bad
shape so patching it is not recommended
at all as it will get worse um so to
answer your question my recommendation
is to um to remove the building and
build and construct a code compliance
structure that does not have this issue
with grade being too high with respect
to the first floor wood
framing and those are all the questions
we have at this time
real quick ju from watching some of the
previous testimony it just to to try to
characterize the situation is your
professional opinion that this house is
safe to occupy
currently I have not seen anything where
everything has failed now and that's
I'll speak a little bit more to that a
band board failure is not going to be a
um it's going to be a slow failure
initially as the structure wants to stay
up the structure is working together to
stay up as tall as possible kind like
your body but if your ankle gives at a
certain point it's gonna be quick and
there's not much you could do about it
so with that said I've not seen anything
where um it is not safe to occupy a lot
has to be done to remediate it and make
it safe for years to come and have you
either in the capacity doing evaluations
or in other work been in other houses of
this vintage I'm thinking about Rush
Creek Village for example as one okay I
I I don't just just curious how many
houses of this age have you been in in a
professional capacity yeah um I've
been 10 to 20 houses of this era well
I'll say of this era this is a different
style Than You'll normally see this is
the first time I've seen on documents
where grade is higher than uh top of
concrete wall or foundation wall I've
not seen that now of course people may
put mulch aside it and I've seen houses
like that where people put way too much
mulch up and it will rot the structure
from that point um so I have not seen
this in other houses of this era and
with the acception of the floor farming
degrade relationship which is curious to
be
sure if you had to characterize the
other things you saw versus the other
houses of a similar vintage was there
anything you saw here that for people
who aren't professionals aren't
Engineers aren't Architects that was
shocking that would you describe what
your discoveries as consistent with a
house of this age that's not been
particularly wellmaintained or would you
say these were surprising or shocking
discoveries based on what you would have
expected walking in these are surprising
I didn't know what I was walking into
but like I mentioned when I got to the
site I was surprised to see that there
isn't much uh of an elevation from grade
to stepping in there so that was my
first like this seems odd let's see
what's going on that one definitely
strange but in terms of the water
infiltration and stuff yeah
well and the detail for this this was 19
1953 we've learned a lot since then to
keep structur safe and keep them dry and
and protect the structure itself
um this could have been done better
initially it wasn't um and I think
that's essentially over time that water
is going to keep going in so to answer
your question I believe have I seen
anything like this of this era I have
not this is the one the first one I've
seen well I the framing I you know as an
architect I'll concede unusual but I'm
saying in terms of the other water
infiltration with the given the lack of
gutter I'll say to me as an architect
nothing you said I thought wow that's a
surprise you know the bricks the you
know staining on the brick some evidence
of water on framing my basement has some
you know so to me I'm just what I'm
trying to get a sense is to you
professionally you've thought wow this
is a remarkable condition in terms of
the found you know water infiltration
that sort of thing forgetting the
framing thing which I understand made so
water will find its way to the lowest
spot uh in the least amount of
resistance so you have the corner there
where there's a wall and water's coming
through there must be something that
water is pulling up behind it it's going
to come through the wall it's typical it
happens in many structures that is not
atypical um having a spot where there's
some uh water infiltration in the
structure maybe something happened in
the past and SL slow leak absolutely but
a uh
um a systemic issue of the entire
perimeter I've not seen so yeah the
other items like wall uh water
infiltration or uh trying to mitigate
the water with a sum pump definitely
seeing that yeah and then I guess my
last question I felt like reading your
report the uh the option to change grade
I felt like was a little bit differently
presented my understand is you're not a
civil engineer I am not no and it
sounded and then the report as I read it
you know it sounded like the that
description was you might be able to
change grade I don't know I'm not a
civil engineer I don't want to put words
in your mouth but the way I read it was
it looks like it might be hard as a
someone who's involved in construction
but I'm not a I'm not a civil engineer I
don't know about what's going to be
involved in actually reworking the grade
around this structure that is correct
yes um it is just I'll put as a Layman I
saw that the site was pretty flat
getting another two feet out of it it
would be tough but again it maybe I
don't know okay
thanks sorry on the um were so you saw
the moisture evidence around the Ed the
edges and on the base plate is was any
of that currently wet or could that be
years old could it be I mean was there I
know you said there was spots where
there was some moisture in the house but
now you're saying the entire thing had
the staining well was the entire thing
presently wet or could that be your old
um it was a mixture of some was wet to
touch and some was not uh so I I came in
in in May I don't remember the weather I
don't know how much rain we had or
whatnot but as like the last couple
weeks we've had a lot more rain influx
perhaps I would venture to say in a
longer rain period you would have more
wetness uh feel so to answer your
question some was wet some was not some
was still stained some has efflorescence
on it uh so those are all signs that
water has gotten in from a visual
perspective so there could be
moisture currently because the because
the down spouts and gutters are not
working effectively did you see anywhere
where the wood was actually compromised
where there was decay in the wood where
something was structurally going to
cause a problem
where I mean just yeah see anything
where there was actually because none of
the pictures really show compromise so
that's why I was asking understood
um I think the in my opinion the left
picture over there shows a beam and it's
it's tough to tell but it is digging
into the actual wall itself that to me
is a sign that water has gotten in it's
rotted out the wood and over time
constant pressure will keep sinking so
um other than select areas like that
it's tough again like I mentioned the
the inside phase is the pretty side
don't know what the other side looks
like at the moment that's where all the
water is coming through
okay that's it for
me you go to the next slide please Karen
and I thank you I promise no more
questions I'll ask one more does this
slide uh set forth the two remediation
options um that you describe to the
board it does thank you okay we go to
the next slide please
just to clarify for the record when
you're introducing these reports um from
both of your experts so far is that the
same report that was the report that was
before the ARB yes okay it's not a new
report they're looking at the same
report yes and then offering live
testimony am I allowed to ask uh with
all due respect to your professional
Consultants uh was Mr livsey who I I
think is great choice was he your first
architect you reached out to for opinion
about this residence I believe so and
did you no no I contacted the person you
used on your last demolition I can't
hear you sir I I I contacted the person
you used on your last uh demolition
Mitch acock and Mitch said he wasn't
familiar with no musin so he wasn't
comfortable so Mr Li was second I don't
mean to say second but he was he was the
next person he went to speak he's the
he's the next person I officially asked
yeah but I did I asked Mitch I asked
Mitch because you had just used him so I
thought he was familiar with the process
so you gave me the
idea can you please introduce yourself
to the board John Beall so you're gonna
have to get that okay okay okay so let's
do this I can project okay John Beall
what is your profession
architect can you please describe your
experience and training in the field of
custom home design and home
restoration okay I'll try to make this
short but I I I did my first Beckle
project in 1982 I think that's 42 years
ago and I've done a lot more projects in
Bexley since
1986 I think when we counted them at the
office
I think over a hundred projects we've
done it ballyy many and of course most
Renovations were considered renovation
experts I would say and we've I think I
think I counted about 10 new houses that
we've done in
Bas
uh I I also wanted to you know we're
also design build firm so I think
compared to most Architects we have a
lot more information about costs because
we uh have to deal directly with those
with our clients from the very initial
parts of the projects and uh and of
course we've not only all these projects
expect but we've worked extensively
through the whole Columbus Metro Area
how are you familiar with the property
at 236 North
Columbia um well I'm the I'm the
architect for I'm the architect who sort
of evaluated the did an initial
evaluation of the F of the original
house and then design the new house and
I'll ask you to briefly look at tab
three exhibit three in the
binder do you recognize exhibit three as
an affidavit you executed in this matter
yes and does that affidavit accurately
set forth your opinions in this matter
yes okay I'd like to ask you about those
okay um and you can keep this out okay
because I will be referring to it um so
you understand that one of the
remediation measures identified by Mr K
is lifting the home to repair the damage
structure correct yeah and then can you
turn to Exhibit C of your
affidavit and for the board members this
is um tab three Exhibit C if you would
like to have it
open there's too many numbers yeah okay
now I yeah I got it here yeah
okay give everyone a moment to get there
what is Exhibit C uh Exhibit C is the
cost breakdown that we prepared that my
staff my my staff uh especially Mark
Randolph who's been estimating for us
for 35
years uh put together to evaluate to try
to evaluate the costs involved in the
two
remediation uh methods that uh
uh uh Bernie
coup uh recommended in his
report and so what was the process um
with you and your staff and coming up
with exhibit seed so the first thing we
did is is you know I think the tricky
thing about the idea of lifting a house
or lowering the grade is really to
understand all the illary costs those
ancillary costs are astounding right so
we did contact a company and I don't
know if you guys know this but there are
companies in the United States that lift
houses there's very few in this area
there's one in Indiana that would come
to
Columbus uh so we did talk to them about
what they would do of course that that
that cost was basically the tip of the
iceberg because uh they told us also
what they were not going to do so they
would come in and and put steel beam on
the entire structure and lift it let us
do any further work and then drop it
back down that's what they would do uh
but I mean I hope you can I mean we just
had to do something similar to house in
German Village and and it is an amazing
kind of project and that was a small
squarehouse this is a very complex house
and I'll ask you to touch on how you got
there but I'm GNA jump you first to the
ultimate conclusion what is the total
cost for lifting the home so lifting the
home we our budgets lowend
93,94 High
$1,235
531 and I won't ask you to go through
the individual line items the board has
it in front of them but at a high level
can you describe some of the categories
Beyond as you said just lifting the home
that uh go into that range well okay
this in a in a nutshell first of all
you're going to need a precise design
you're needing drawings because these
any of these things are going to require
a building permit uh then you start by
demo in in the let's let me start with
the uh the lifting the house there's two
parts of the house that are slab on
grade so our sense of it was most be
most okay I'll talk am I talking to you
fast you are okay put that
microphone I know maybe
maybe okay so um the first thing is to
come up with that precise design the
second thing is that we need to demo
portions of the house that are slab on
grade because we don't think the most
cost effective way to to handle those
projects is to those parts of the house
are to lift it so that's the garage and
the whole L-shaped sun room in the back
uh then of the course there's all the
disconnections of all the uh Electrical
Plumbing uh piping sewer duct work that
would have to be done then the actual
house lifting the act that we bring that
sub that contractor in to actually lift
the house and then uh then uh I'm not
sure what order you do it in but then
then you have to add to the foundations
to bring them up probably two courses of
block then you have to structurally
tie those two courses of block to the
other courses of block so that you don't
create a a weak Pivot Point at that
point and then then you start to repair
the floor joist the floor joist damage
the band board damage all the rot of the
wood which if you can think about that
how do you get to that well you're
pretty much going to have to rip out a
lot of interior finishes in the house to
even get to or I guess you could do it
from the outside but that means you're
taking off the brick and putting it back
I mean either way we assumed it would be
more cost effective to do it from the
inside but still you'd have to take all
that off put it back and then uh and
then clearly when they lift this house
they're going to ruin the site and the
driveway if you I could show you some
slides of what this takes to do this so
new new new
Landscaping uh new uh
driveway and then of course reconnect
all the Mechanicals electrical that you
disconnected now in in uh lowering the
site you know I know the site seems
pretty flat actually there is a little
drop to the street there's a couple uh
there is a a couple feet to the street
so you could actually you'd have to go
all the way to the sidewalk but you
could actually trim the lot down all the
way the sidewalk can I pause before we
get to lowering okay um still talking
about raising the house oh okay I'm
sorry that's okay um in some respects is
the range you provided for raising the
house actually
conservative well I don't know I'll ask
everybody else here have you ever seen a
pre cost estimate that was that that was
uh too too high usually the pring cost
met is too low because because I we
identified all these things what are the
hidden things that you that that we
haven't yet identified and and
especially since we don't have precise
drawings to actually show the extent of
every part of what you'd have to do so I
I would say my staff my staff felt like
some of these numbers could go up
substantially especially on the repair
of existing conditions all right I'd ask
you to turn to exhibit D of your
affidavit okay
is this one
D oh oh lowering grade okay I see
okay okay lowering
grade uh again I mean some of these
things are repetitive so a lowering
grade you still need a design and
permits you still then you have this
massive amount of site work to haul to
uh and taking and taking pretty much all
the V all the vegetation down including
Big Trees and regrading the whole lot to
the front of the property then you can
then you can go in and do the structural
repair this that's similar to the uh
lifting
scenario uh and then you replace the
finished materials similar to the other
scenario
uh the the the probably the two most
problematic uh issues are okay once
you've lowered this house and and there
was the irony is there's evidence on the
original drawing that there was a lot of
uh of uh value engineering towards the
end of the project because this house
was originally designed with a lot of
basements there's only a very small
basement they were all converted to
cross space and I think I see Charles
lazarus's out out out on the on the on
the drawings everything that he took out
of the project obviously for cost very
probably for cost reason
so um the here's the thing assuming that
this is draw uh this is built according
to the original plans which seems likely
since everything else is very much exact
like exactly like those plant the F the
foundations and all the crawl space once
we lower the lot are going to be too too
high they're going to be subject to
frost and
heave so that means we would have to go
in and
underpin uh and I forget if I have the
the length of underpin how many linear
feet of foundation I don't know if
anyone's ever underpinned a foundation
before I have and you do it in 4 foot
increments and you're Excavating three
or four feet below the bottom of the
existing
footing to reinforce that and of course
all your gravel from the inside pours
out I mean it's a very complic licated
and expensive procedure so we have that
we also then haven't solved if we if we
expose all that concrete block I think
one of the questions is have we ruined
the Integrity of the house I mean this
house was designed purposely and I think
problematically to be very low but now
that you say you know you're trying to
if you think you're trying to save a
historical structure but let's just make
it look ridiculous that's to me what you
you would be doing with this and uh and
then of course you have all the repair
obviously in that case an entire new
landscape for the property and what is
the total cost for lifting the home okay
let me
look 738,000
738,000 to a,
48,4
65 and in some respects is that range
also conservative
again as as I've talked through this I
think everybody can see that there's a
lot of complic potential complications
so I again I can't I can't imagine it
going below that low number for sure
based on your experience and expertise
in the field of Designing constructing
and remodeling homes what's the best
method to remediate this existing
structure's
damage
well uh it seems pretty clear to to me
that to require someone to take on this
kind of task is just unfair and so for
me demolition
is I mean you can like if if you like
the house it might be a sad thing but I
think demolition is really the only
solution I have just a few more
questions for you I understand that you
have some higher resolution copies of uh
the proposed home for the board
the the the I wanted to show you what
this house really looks like I
think really
like John if you're gonna talking talk
okay I'll Just sh John why don't you let
me
pass I'm gonna make everybody mad
especially this lady right
here uh okay so
so I wanted to show you know on the
screen that rendering kind of darkens
out I wanted to really show you a nice
rendering of the house we
proposed can you give the board a high
level overview of this proposed home so
this is a two-story home it uses the
width of the lot and I very purposfully
made it purposely made it as high as
tall as the other adjacent houses uh you
know we have a 40 foot Max but you know
these other these are both very large
houses on either side of this so I'm
showing going up to the 40 feet I'm
showing a 1412 roof slope which I think
is uh more typical of historic Bexley
house is kind of a expensive roof to
roof slope to
build uh it has a stone stucco and with
and wood
exterior uh it's a traditional house I
would say it's the the concept of the
design is to more towards a Charming
house less towards a uh formal
house there are some similarities the
house we just recently built on South uh
South Columbia
which I mean a number of people have
asked me
was that a renovation or is that a new
house that's our goal is to kind of make
it feel like it really belongs in the
neighborhood uh so I just think that's
very much this is very much in the
Bexley tradition in your professional
opinion is this proposed home superior
to the existing structure
yes and those are all the questions we
have for right now so so the proposed
house is 6600 Square F feet here's
here's a big difference in this house
yeah it's around 6600 square feet it
does have a very tall basement which
allows a a lot of other a couple
thousand more feet of potential a family
especially family entertainment space
and just for context since we're talking
Investments is this a $500 square foot
house is it a
six okay yeah yeah I are
we 4 455
so we end up at
3.3 million something or more with the
basement maybe huh well I don't know you
know the a lot of people don't a lot of
people don't use that basement on those
on those raw numbers so
uh uh I don't think we know the final
price yet you know so far we're stopped
in this yeah yeah I I'm just trying to
put the the
restoration math in some context so yeah
just so somewhere in a three to4 million
kind of house is what we're talking
about yeah
so I guess what I and one thing to talk
about the previous numbers I just gave
since you asked me that question is you
realize that those numbers those million
dollar numbers that that house that's to
get the house to zero it's no renovation
no no renovations at all to the interior
of that house and I'm not sure who would
ever want to live in that house without
another million dollars for sure at
least at least another million dollars
right so uh that shows you that that
shows you the economics that was my next
question
thanks chairman Marsh you you have
honored my request that the the board uh
in indulge us we are on the final
consideration of the second Factor the
third Factor goes quite promptly I'm
confident of that but if we went back to
the presentation the final consideration
under that second factor for you to
consider is will the denial of the
certificate result in a uh substantial
reduction in economic value of the
property we submit that with an
investment on the order of magnitude
that Mr Beall has described uh that the
property cannot absorb the cost of
repair uh to the current structure uh
let alone no aesthetic improvements in
fact Mr kpen the city's own retained
architecture or call said I wouldn't
undertake these restoration costs I
wouldn't undertake restoration of this
structure um so to that end we would
also for the record present the expert
uh testimony of Sam if I could ask
Mr to come
forward could you please uh
introduce yourself to the members of the
Visa uh Sam 141 East Town Street
Columbus
43215 what is your profession sir I am
in the real estate State business and in
fact are you a appraiser as well yes if
we looked at uh exhibit four in the
binder is this an affidavit uh that you
executed setting forth sworn testimony
in this matter yes and specifically if
we looked at exhibit a to Tab 4 is that
your curriculum viter sets forth some of
your professional qualifications
yes could you describe those briefly to
the
absolutely I have an undergraduate
degree from the Ohio State University
with uh a major in finance and real
estate it was a dual major I went back
to school got my MBA at Ohio State have
ad depth of field in real estate I got
my real estate license when I was 19
I've been selling property for almost 50
years I uh have an appraisal business
that has been running over 45 years we
do Consulting work and uh got a broker
company got a development company and uh
we solve problems and the opinions
you're offering tonight are based upon
those Decades of experience in the Real
Estate Field absolutely um are you
familiar with the neighborhood in and
around 236 North Columbia yes uh how
would you describe that neighborhood
it's an iconic neighborhood what do you
mean by that sir it's one of Columbus's
finest neighborhoods it's uh the stretch
on Fairway Boulevard Parkway Columbia
Drexel uh you go to to uh uh areas in
Arlington this is just one of the finest
neighborhoods we have in the city of
Columbus you visited the uh property
that's at at issue tonight 236 North
Columbia I did um how does that
structure the existing structure at that
address compare to the surrounding
properties it is a uh unique uh
midcentury
modern uh home which is in uh terrible
disrepair it does not compare favorably
to the character of the neighborhood at
all could you describe why you hold that
opinion I walked through the house I saw
it does it need extensive repairs as
well as aesthetic and cosmetic
improvements yes you just heard Mr Beall
testify that uh raising the home could
cost between approximately 900,000 and
1.2 million or lowering the grade could
cost somewhere between 738,000 and
almost a million 50 in your opinion are
those osed repairs economically feasible
no instead in your opinion are those
unreasonable yes and I think what
disturbs me more than anything as a real
estate operative is that even if you
spend a million dollars on the house on
one of the two options there is no real
guarantee what you've got when you're
through and then you've still got as
John behall just said probably a million
dollars to put in it on top of that
because it's functionally obsolete right
now and it doesn't meet Market standards
you appraise based upon what a
reasonable Market buyer or seller would
anticipate correct that's correct um
first in your Decades of experience how
many homes have you encountered in need
of very substantial six figure or even
seven figure repairs just to make the
shell of the home solid well the high
six figure 27 figure I don't think I've
ever seen anything that's bad just to
make a structure ready to rehab so
in your opinion would a reasonable
Market uh buyer actually undertake that
I don't think so I what's going to
happen you put this house in the market
somebody is going to this is going to
have to be disclosed and you've got a
structural engineer you've got a
renowned contractor who have said you've
got problems you've got a million-dollar
problem as a buyer they're going to look
at that and say even if I want to take
it on it's going to cost me a million
dollars and I've got a structural
engineer who's scratching his head
saying
maybe you get it done maybe it's okay I
don't think the market would take that
risk and if they would they're going to
subtract a million and they're going to
listen to Beall and he's going to say
you better make it a million too so
what's the highest best use for this
property as it sits today uh to tear
down the existing structure and build a
new one and you're aware of the
applicant's plans for a new home on this
property yes
uh because it is a relevant
consideration for this board as comp
compared to the existing structure do
you believe the new home as proposed
would increase bexley's tax base
absolutely uh in your opinion is the
proposed structure Superior to that
existing on-site absolutely um will the
proposed structure increase the value of
the property
yes will it have an positive impact on
surrounding property values absolutely I
think it's good for the entire city I
mentioned a moment ago uh or earlier
this evening that you had made the
acquaintance of Charles laus yes your
opinion is that a reason for
preservation of this
he oh I don't no I I don't think so I I
I think uh historical significance can
be uh ambiguous and arbitrary it's uh
Beauties in the eye of the beholder you
like it I don't the first uh one of the
first houses I sold was to a couple I
drove around for showed them 12 houses
I'm going frustrated I'm going to drop
them as a client and they looked they
said can we look at that house
said' it's a buy
level he said we like that I said what
they made a full price offer boom sold I
wouldn't have bought that house for
$10,000 less so does somebody like this
house and want to buy it step up and put
your money on the table and buy it and
renovate it I think you're
putting lipstick on a
pig so given the current state of the
home given the potential cost for
repairs of existing damage given the
lack of any aesthetic improvements is
there a reasonable Market buyer for this
property I think the reasonable Market
buyer once this problem is disclosed is
someone who wants to raise it and build
a new home because the values in the
land that's absolutely right the million
four that was paid for this home in an
arms length transaction or paid for this
property 60 90 days ago is a reasonable
reflection of land value it's about $29
per square of land area we see sales in
the Bexley area from 17 to low 40s the
17 18 2122 range was six seven years ago
uh this uh value at $29 per square foot
is reflective of land value and only
land yes is there anything else you'd
like the board to know this evening
about your professional
opinions I think I've said it I'm happy
to answer questions it's getting late
and everybody's tired
I just have a quick question
so let's just say they put they raised
the building and put $2 million into
into rehabbing the house what would the
value of the property in the house be at
that point I mean they they've corrected
the engineering issues they corrected
the you know the structural issues that
have come up and now we're putting $2
million into
it it's a 5,000 square foot house after
youve finished renovating it
maybe maybe it's worth $500 a square
foot more likely 400 because of the
layout the lack of ceiling clearance uh
you cannot fix pieces of this house it's
functionally
obsolete
uh so $400 per square foot you've got a
$2 million house but with a very limited
buyer pool given its Unique Look yeah
and I'm not sure you get there it's uh
hard
I you know if you look at the the
economic difficulties of this you put
14.4 million into a a place and you're
told you can't tear it down and you got
to spend another million you're at 2.4
and then you've got to put whatever else
into it to fix it up so that it's
livable and you still got a functionally
obsolete home with low ceilings and sits
at the wrong place on the lot and at the
risk of repeating myself but to make
sure we address Mr Turner's very good
question do you see any rational Market
actor undertaking that no absolutely
not thank you Mr
yes if we look at the next
slide this is that third factor I
mentioned a moment ago the unusual and
compelling circumstances that justify
the demo demolition we think this does
uh again weigh in favor of Demolition
and approval of the new structure uh as
we have in the other slides let's look
at the
considerations uh for that particular
factor that are codified for your
consideration um I'll go through each of
these four factors in the subsequent
slides uh quickly uh the next slide
these restoration options may not be
feasible you heard that lifting the
structure would require a specialized
contractor this is not just a square box
it's anything but and obviously it could
severely D damage the facade uh because
uh every loadbearing component would
have to be short and jacked
simultaneously if that can even be done
and likewise there was testimony by Mr
kuie about lowering the grade and the
problems that that may cause as well as
those articulated by Mr Beall uh for
this same fix the second uh
consideration under this factor is
explicitly in the next slide
is the replacement plan superior to the
existing
structure again the city's own architect
said this was quote meteoric or excuse
me mediocre design the existing
structure mediocre design not his best
work you've heard that uh Amplified by
Mr livsey here this evening and that
same uh architect Mr kpen said he as Mr
told you under oath would never
undertake the typ type of restoration it
might need here and
so we do submit that this home as
proposed uh is super is superior uh and
Dr and Mrs uh we Warner are fortunate to
have the support of all of the
neighborhood uh Mr Beall Mr SAR have
talked to the neighbors uh Dr and Mrs
Warner have become acquainted with many
of their neighbors they uniformly
support this we know of no opposition to
this what ever I very very much
appreciate some of the neighbors that
are here tonight as they were at the two
meetings of the ARB and some couldn't be
here tonight and frankly many have spent
hours waiting to tell officials of this
city what they want to see happen in
this neighborhood you will hear from
them shortly we are very grateful for
their support and we submit to you that
that perhaps is the best evidence of
whether this structure uh is superior to
that of the existing structure and the
next consideration is in the next slide
slide the replacement plan is it more
compatible with the
neighborhood as you know these are some
of the Grand Homes on North Columbia
these residents both those here tonight
and those who couldn't be here I submit
to you respectfully do deserve a
neighboring home that is more befitting
of its surroundings the next slide is on
the same consideration and I think it
goes directly to Mr rosenthal's
questions earlier he asked good
questions about aren't there eclectic
homes in uh the housing stock of Bexley
and Mr Professor liy agreed
absolutely and if you value that that's
great I don't think demolition of this
home will take away from that because of
its mediocre design because it's not
true to the real good work of Mr musen
but here if anything shows you the
problem that Professor Libby was
articulating to you
if you could pick up this home and
rotate it
90° maybe
perhaps it should stay on the property
but even then it is not compatible it is
not of a scale and of course I'm sure Mr
Rosenthal would agree design is not the
only element that determines uh
neighborhood compatibility it's got to
be scale as well and this is so
dissimilar creates such disharmony on
this block
that the replacement plan I submit to
you is more compatible uh finally uh or
nearly finally another consideration
is is demolition necessary to eliminate
a condition with a material adverse
effect on the
neighborhood uh lifting the structure
and lowering the grade can adversely
affect the neighborhood it'll result in
the change of landscaping trees that are
a fixture of the neighborhood it may
negatively impact drainage it may do
damage to uh the neighboring properties
you know and I I submit to you a
material adverse effect is the house
remaining at all I'm not trying to be
flippant I'm not trying to be unkind but
you're going to hear from the neighbors
that this neglected home is an isore I
say that respectfully um but that it
does not represent the best work of of
its architect uh and instead is that
mashup I described earlier and they want
to see the Improvement uh that this new
structure would provide and as you heard
Mr testify no one's going to uh do
what it may take uh for this property to
come up to the current age and safe
condition uh and that this new structure
will in fact Elevate property values uh
in the
area before I rest in the next slide you
have AEL Council here tonight in Miss
Cunningham but I just do want to point
out to you Ohio is very clear and very
uniform uh that it promotes the free use
of property and when considering
application of the zoning resolution to
private property it must be con strictly
construed it must be construed in favor
of the private property owner and the
free use of land what does that mean any
doubt must be re resolved in favor of
this owner and private property rights
if any of these considerations or any of
these three factors are a close call for
you any of them if it's a jump ball all
doubt must be resolved in favor of the
landowner and issuance of this
permit in closing I just want to say
I've been fortunate to appear before
this board many times over the years
including as I mentioned uh demolitions
as well as before the ARB I've also not
appeared before the ARB or this board on
demolitions where I've counseled clients
this isn't the one I submit to you this
case is different we do think it's
compelling that it is appropriate in
this instance um with better examples of
Mr Bon's work within the city of Bexley
itself let alone all around the greater
region uh with the Architects agreeing
that it is not of historical uh
significance with both of the other
factors weighing in favor of demolition
I've always known this board to make
levelheaded practical real world
decisions we believe that issuance of
this permit is warranted not only under
the city code but it's simply the right
thing to do for the city the tax base
and the housing stock you'll hear in a
moment hopefully it's What the residents
the neighbors themselves wants we know
of no articulated opposition to this and
we would therefore ask that you approve
this request this evening with that I'm
happy to answer any questions
questions I just have one question how
long has it been vacant you said it was
you open with being
vacant a year for about a year thank
you I I only have one question I
guess so if I'm not mistaken I thought
isn't the full text the structure is not
as historically architecturally signif
significant and worthy of preservation
it's I'm surprised it's not on the thing
because I thought the way I read it we
would talk a lot about that I I think
the phrase worthy of
preservation is part of the text of the
code it is it's at uh
12235 C1 and we're not trying to
whitewash that that was actually
directly asked of Mr livsey uh yeah I
mean honestly to me that's the hardest
that the best argument I thought for its
demolition I was surprised it never got
said well it actually did by professor
livsey and by Mr kpen if you read Mr
kpen letter and Mr livsey was asked onir
and therefore is it worthy of
preservation uh we submit to you that it
is not that's only underscored by the
cost estimates and what it would take
for preservation and then Mr Coon's
statement that no rational actor would
actually undertake to do so so I
apologize if if we didn't appropriately
kind of bring that out more forcefully
but it is absolutely part of the
consideration and the uniform test
testimony by our architect the city's
Architect by Mr Beall an architect and
by uh a residential real estate
appraiser is that it is not worthy of
preservation great
thanks uh there's been a lot of
testimony tonight does the board feel uh
have any other questions do we we were
provided the opportunity to
deliberate uh I don't know if if members
of the board I wondered if you were G to
take the comments from the neighbors who
have appeared I was just going to ask I
mean
if they were already we had the
ARB testimony is this the same testimony
from ARB and if it if it is is it is it
should we they I'm sorry to interrupt
shair Marsh they are prepared to make
fresh points to you about where we are
and their views upon it and they do as
I'm I'm sure Miss Cunningham would agree
have standing given their proximity okay
to the residents um all all we mean it's
it's on the twoh hour mark all I would
ask is we I'd like to limit it and I
don't know how many minutes we want to
give each person but I just think in the
interest of time if we could limit and
again if if people made made comments at
the air B if they want to make different
comments tonight that's fine so uh with
with that we'll go ahead and and anyone
that wants to come up could come on up
and uh do we want to do two
minutes
okay yeah three minutes there you
go hi my name is Holly
Casten oh sure my name is Holly Casten
I've lived in Beckley um almost all my
all my adult life on my CH on my growing
up um I lived on Caroline which is a
couple blocks away I lived on Drexel and
now I'm fortunate enough to live uh in
the neighborhood of the home right
across the street um I did testify
before but I spoke on behalf of myself
and my husband we live at 225 North
Columbia I wanted to add that um I have
since spoken with all the adjacent
neighbors uh on each side uh I'm happy
to Rattle off the names if you want but
I assume you can look up I've I've
hosted them at my home every single
person who has a property uh adjacent or
across the street uh is aware of the
project is supportive of the
Demolition and is very uh very
supportive of the new build so there is
unanimous uh and wholehearted support by
all the neighbors uh for this uh for
moving forward with this project and
with the Demolition I love Beckley I
love everything about it I appreciate
the differences that we have in our
architecture but uh this is not um this
is not something uh a part of our
neighborhood that we're proud of and we
would uh really appreciate the
opportunity to have uh a new home that's
uh that's uh fits in with the rest of
the character of the neighborhood thank
you thank
you any anybody else wish to
speak okay thank you um so again uh Miss
Cunningham said that if we'd like to
deliberate we can if people don't feel
the need for deliberation we can forgo
that
and if I understood we also have the
option to go into executive session and
deliberate in that manner we that that's
what that's what I meant oh got it yeah
got it got
it I think we should go I I would like
to go into executive session at least
for a brief conversation and we'll see
how long that takes but okay do we need
to make a motion to do
that sorry technically it's not exact a
session you would adjourn the public
meeting one thing I might suggest you
just is there you have one more thing on
the agenda right after this oh nothing
yeah May oh the mayor is going to okay
whenever when we're done okay I'm I'm
not less worried about his
time well if there was somebody here who
had waited all night and was on the
agenda after that he's going to suggest
that maybe you go ahead and call that
first my suggest would be that you just
recess the the public meeting if you
want to
deliberate and
um I don't know whether you'll make a
decision tonight or not make a decision
tonight but maybe if we're in recess and
there's sort of a consensus about what's
happening we can come back and sort of
if you're not going to make a decision
tonight Le least let people know so
they're not sticking around sure that'
just be my only suggestion
yeah okay then we will at this uh what
is it 9:14 we'll uh end the public
meeting and go into
deliberation where do we go to do that
the confence back in the kitchen or
the
usually right you don't have to I go you
guys no yeah you should you can
leave oh unless bet you have to be here
for Ben's
thing well you can go by her one it is
her last
meeting maybe we'll see I gotta go now I
gotta go
now yes thank
you yeah
than there
you
e
e e
um Miss Cunningham make sure I State
this correctly we
um have decided we will issue a decision
at our next meeting which is August
22nd and do we need to take any other
action
tonight till the and we'll table it
until the
22nd CL there won't be
any sorry
there won't be any additional evidence
the hearing is closed and the board will
continue their deliberations and issue a
decision at the next meeting and vote on
it then and then do we need to do we
need to make a motion to table make a
motion to table go ahead so so we'll
we'll make a motion to table this until
the August 22nd
meeting so I move to make a motion so
I did you move to to do that did you
suggest to do that were you looking for
a motion to do that's a motion but you
can I'll second it or make a motion you
can make you can make the motion I'll
make
the I'll second it I
don't and roll call you 30 just in case
just Mr Rosenthal yes please Mr Turner
yes Miss L stack thank you yes Mr and
chairman Marsh yes
um and then we have got one more thing
on the agenda my uh iPad is dead so can
someone tell me what that
last item is actually it is the Beckley
commercial Rehabilitation grant program
application and I see Megan Meers here
yes um M Meyer sent me in herstead
yes I was merciful yeah I had a feeling
this meeting would go late yeah um but
we do have a a commercial uh facade
sorry commercial Rehabilitation grant
program
application and for seasoned beap
members you'll kind of know this stick
although we don't do it that frequently
so I'm gonna run through it Mr chair if
I can real quickly kind of how this
works Y and I do want to welcome Tiasha
to beap welcome and Mr Rosenthal welcome
to the bab I believe you're a former
planning Comm commission member were you
ever just ARB you
sure yeah you you were on Planning
Commission Brian thinks you work yeah
yeah we're going with that so welcome
back yeah Tasha
welcome uh and of course welcome to Mr
Kingler and you all should have received
an invitation to a gigantic party next
week for Kathy Rose
so good if you didn't let me know oh we
I'll cheer here in a second that's that
was a precursor to that so the
commercial facade Rehabilitation grant
program um is something the City offers
uh to properties on currently Main
Street and Cassidy and we're going to
try to expand it to Livingston uh but
the ordinance specifies that the grant
to be
approved by at the time it was the main
street commission but essentially it's
Bap um and what it means to approve the
grant is not to say that there's funding
available for it because Council takes
care of that or the amount of funding
because that is again through the
budgetary process but it's rather that
that you are okay with the grant funds
that exist being applied towards a
project that's being proposed in this
instance it's um Catal Catalin and
Bexley um do we have a exterior like an
elevation I know you guys have already
looked at it
before but if we
have we have like the yeah one of the
pretty looking
ones sure that's great um the facade
Grant goes to as you would imagine the
facade improvements it covers up to 35%
of facade improvements up to $10,000 the
maximum amount um the applicant has
applied for $10,000 we have not yet
figured out whether or not that's
actually available this year um probably
we'll be somewhere near that but they
they have well more than their match uh
to apply towards that so would be
eligible for up to
$10,000 the exterior improvements that
they are proposing
include uh metal metal Patio railings um
window lentils stucco improvements uh
stucco repairs new wind new storm
storefront windows exterior painting
signage exterior lighting patio clearing
Landscaping um the demolition of the
Boston Market
sign just sad um and uh obviously you
know we believe this is a great
Improvement for Main Street and are
wholeheartedly supportive of the grant
being applied in this way but Bap would
need to vote that this is a
suitable um recipient of Grant funds and
happy to answering questions it's the
best of my ability even though my name
is not Megan Meer what address is that
this is 2741 East Main
Street and it doesn't need a record of
DEC decision like a it's not like the
same as one of their normal decisions I
just need a vote and it's if it's on the
record we don't need like a a it's kind
of a yes or no this is the motion would
be that the board approves the
application of Grant funds to this uh
commercial Rehabilitation uh
project it's pretty
straightforward and I think that's a
it's kind of a protection that like you
know so so what are you looking for I
mean that you feel that you feel that
this is a worthy project of receiving
Grant funds and the administration feels
that it is but um this is part of the
process the the Bap reviews it and
agrees and an example of where you might
not agree is for
example I don't we haven't come across
it yet but
uh I don't want to pick on a project but
let's say somebody was doing a project
that was
just really not great just say the
Donado it's outside of
s an AOS just I think this looks I think
this looks you know let's say like
Lion's Den wanted to put a sign up and
we wanted to put a motion and support
that depending on what that was and it's
not in lie this wasn't picked out of a
pool of options no that's correct a
great point
so it is open and notorious that anyone
could apply for this it's on our website
anytime a new business comes into town
if they meet with us or if we have the
opportunity to talk to them we make sure
they know about this program it's not
exclusive and in the in in the current
instance we don't have any other
applicants this is not competing against
anything else at the
moment all right we'll we'll make a
motion to approve support of the grant
for this project it's good motion moved
a second second second all in favor say
I I
opposed it was voted unanimously
approved unanimously tonight thank you
and and Mr chair I appreciate that Mr
chair if I could have a moment yes
privilege so when I came on as mayor in
2012 Kathy Rose was up the stairs and to
the
left and The
Outpost I know the Outpost of the
building department where at the time
she was the building department
manager having
survived multiple changes to the
structure of the department she was she
was an Institutional and is an
Institutional uh Workhorse and a
veritable Encyclopedia of information
running the building department on her
own the Chief Building official had
left uh Kathy Rose had
been initially an assistant in the
building department hermit clerk hermit
clerk at the age of
12 and Rose to the ranks and through
grit and
determination knowhow Street smarts
Street
smarts is the word that defines Kathy
rose
and a big heart and a super strong work
ethic and it's been a privilege and an
honor to serve with you and so I want to
thank you for that time you've got big
shoes to fill
Clinger and uh it's going to take a long
time for him to catch up he's off to a
good start so I want to thank you for
the time and the service you've given
the city and we'll have many more toasts
to come but until then as is our want in
City Hall two claps for Kathy
Rose thank you it's been a pleasure
serving with all of
you here you go and we are adjourned
this