e
all right ready to
go I will call to order the
that's
show you have any
meting
operation
was
now
what
not
know
great
e
thank you
espe
or
not sure you really allow to repres
person
I think
than
e
for
e
e e
br
hope
well
AB
than and there
next part
fire
e e
than
back
Bo that
some
e
I
C
than
what
all
I
but I
right oh
1 e
what
so
than
order
y
all right
FR do
back
I'll
think
than for
I
what you're doing
I
hope for
f
fin
all right
second
for
e for
all
right all
right number
any questions coms
that
all right
you
oh oh okay yeah that's a variance from
12215 G1 okay and then this fence you're
looking at in front of it and the fence
along livon are the special permit
because that is I believe that's 40
inches or 42 either way we allow front
yard fences 42 Ines and below with a
special permit landscape plan Etc I
didn't make the applicant middle
landscape plan because it's obviously
vary Landscapes
um so is a special permit or a variance
though per our code you may have a front
yard fence between 24 and 42 inches with
a special permit from you all so that
it's not technically a variance but the
fence on the west property line and the
pergola require Vari variances that's a
six fo T West when was the pergola built
same time the house was built no the
pergola was built
in
20 hold on here
2018 okay and the
contractor
um we put a concrete slab in and the
contractor came to Bexley asking if we
needed a permit for that and they said
no so we didn't think anything was
wrong at that point okay so the
construction of the construction of the
pergalo was was approved by the city it
they said we didn't need any uh perance
does the pergola just sit on the
concrete it it's bolded in okay but it's
like almost like one of those Costco
okay that's what I was asking thank
you okay okay all right um should we
um question there there's some mention
of traffic and accidents and when I look
at one of the first pictures that were
up was up was the Landscaping along and
I think it was the live view
Karen you know one of the one of the
problems we've had with fences in the
past is how it screens from traffic and
creates an
issue uh I mean I I just the corner yeah
I'm I'm kind of just curious to look at
this I mean I see the Landscaping looks
very nice in the yard along Livingston
and again I don't not sure that's a
hazard necessarily that the same way
that it can be in other places um but
that sort of gives me a little bit of
pause on this sure we have asked um
every time there's an accident um I'm
usually the first one out there to uh
direct traffic in fact my neighbors have
purchased security vest and things like
me me out there because they're afraid I
get hit nice nice but every time that
we're out there uh and of course that is
Columbus Police yeah that deals with
that I always ask was this wreck in in
result of our property and the answer is
always no so it's not you know our
fencing and things of that nature is not
an issue when it comes to the
safety of the
traffic and if if I may we
I did send Dave heard lick Out There Our
code enforcement officer to measure he's
like it's very close but I don't know if
you if if you would make it a
recommendation or a condition uh but we
you know we would ask that just be
diligent about maintaining that corner
so the 30 foot sight triangle that's
what our code says 30 foot it's it's
close but he says it it's within code I
feel like if it was the if it was the
other side east of there it would be a
different ation but it's not and but but
it does look
like it's you know different perhaps
than the rest of the yard at least we we
have taken several situations where
people are exiting their driveway and
they build the fence right up to the
driveway and then there's sidewalk right
and we've had them take the fence
portions of the fence down so that they
could corner it off so that when they're
pulling out they can see whether there
are kids walking down the street right
so that's a little bit of a concern here
too and and I I'd like to maybe make it
a condition that you ensure that the
it's all uh greenage there right if
that's a word so it can be trimmed back
so that you you can ensure that we have
a good look down the street when they're
pulling out of uh of your street there
on
Roosevelt fair enough fair enough
okay yeah
provide triangle and I'm just curious
what is the cause of the accidents at
this if there's is it too long to is I
mean it's Livingston Avenue yeah Avenue
yeah well all right
then yeah it's it's you know at this
point that's an old picture you know now
that with the new design uh they're
using the Turning Lanes now as passing
lanes and speed um there's not enough
Columbus Police out there to check on
speed um you know the our house vibrates
with all the sounds and stuff yeah I'll
bet so uh that's one of the reasons why
it's so heavily um uh landscaped is
trying to cut down on some of the sound
there was a there was a dash cam video
the other day of somebody sitting at
Roosevelt turning on a Livingston the
light turned green in it was eight
seconds and then somebody blew through
the red light going across and I and and
during the Livingston Avenue project I
suggested like we have on Main Street
here in Bexley where there is a timed
light where five seconds or something of
that nature read both ways yeah and
please do that on
Livingston well that's an act of God
that has to happen
so but we try have you called 311 before
on that we have we
have oh yes yeah good luck good on yeah
all right thank you sure thank you all
right
uh Matt can you give us findings of fact
conclusions of law on I mean I
think do we feel like we can vote on
these simultaneously or do we need to
have two separate votes anybody feel
like we want to separate these no let's
go ahead and and do findings of flag
fact conclusions of law on both of the
requested variances and the special
permit as well can I read it I can read
it all together please
okay uh the findings and facts and
conclusions of the law for application
bcap 23-17 for property located at 1065
South Roosevelt based on the testimony
presented the board finds it appropriate
to Grant the variance variances and
special permit uh variances from Bexley
code section 12
64.2 uh to allow I'm sorry a 30inch
height variance in the front yard along
on the western property
line the board finds um it appropriate
the grant of variance from Bexley code
section 12521 15 G1 to allow a Pergola
covered deck as an accessory structure
in the front yard and the board finds um
it appropriate to Grant a special permit
uh for the South fence and the East
fence in the front yard to be 42 Ines
tall with the
condition that the hedges are trimmed
and maintained to provide the required
site triangle at the
intersection okay does that meet with
your approval absolutely thank you Mr
Williams uh do I hear a motion to
approve the findings of fact conclusions
of law please so moved Marsh thank you
Mr Marsh a second Mr shik thank you
sir Matt why don't you call the role
yes chairman Miss
leac yes Mr Marsh yes Mr Turner yes Mr
Rosenthal yes Mr schik yes Mr King yes
chairman
behall I want to say before I vote Yes
that the the U fencing the the stone
fencing around the property is one
reason that I'm voting yes and the other
one is the fact that this has been up
for a long time but that it's on
Livingston Avenue I think
uh the uh this this separates this
situation from lots of other situations
so those are my two reasons for voting
yes anyway your a variances and the
special permit are hereby approved by
the board good luck and thank you for
going through this process thank you all
very much for the opportunity thank
you as Mr Beall always says it's a nice
project good luck with
it good luck that it's already completed
[Laughter]
so fair enough
the next application is bz ap- 23-19
involving 733
Vernon the applicant is K Byron wori and
the owner is the Barbara wori
trust
apparently uh the applicant is Seeking a
variance for Beckley city code section
1252
point10 section two which requires
accessory uses and detached structures
to be located a minimum of 5T farther
back from the side yard property line
than the principal structure in order to
allow a 6 foot high screened garden
structure to be located 1 foot 2 in or
1.2 feet I can't tell for sure from the
north side property long line along East
Mount Street would the applicant please
come
forward careful there that chair jumped
out there and got you didn't it
theying everything you're knocking
everything over around here uh do you
swear or affirm that the testimony
you're give this evening will be the
truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth I do and your name for the
record Brian wari okay I said Byron
didn't I but it's Brian my mistake sorry
all
right Mr Kingler give us a little
background on this case if you would
please thank you chairman um our uh this
is in the r zoning District another
corner lot this requires a variance
because the garden structure is
considered an accessory structure for
this property the sidey yard setback is
20 feet uh on a corner lot and and I'm
sorry it's 20 feet and an additional
five feet on Corner lots for any
accessory uses or detached structures um
this would require this requirement
would put the temporary Greenhouse
structure in the middle of the rear yard
with that setback uh the applicant has
worked with staff over the past 18
months to reduce the height and change
the appearance of the structure the
history of the submissions was in your
packet um staff comments the applicant
would like to have a temporary
Greenhouse structure in order to grow
vegetables I believe and and no it's not
a greenhouse structure
okay it's strictly a
screen there's no glass and there never
will be
okay fair enough okay okay uh and would
like to have it not installed in the
middle of their rear
yard uh the applicant has committed to
keeping it covered for only a couple
months of year correct and the rest of
the year it will be uncovered the
particular corner lot is 1,400 square
feet smaller than a typical Corner Lot
in the r six District thus space is an
issue
okay I have some vague Recollections of
this
case
uh believe it has been a long time but I
believe it came to ARB first and they
just said go see what zoning says before
right yeah okay I don't think it's
required if you are happy with the
aesthetic that it go back there they
just felt like this was much more of a
zoning issue than an aesthetic issue
okay thank you
Karen all right so Mr W tell us that
because I remember this case but I don't
remember all the details but please tell
me what the the difference is between
what we're looking at now and what we
looked at last time please well you know
first of all it's shorter you know it
was 32 feet and now it's like 24 and
some
change I'd like it to be uh it's was 8
foot and now it's seven or six foot you
know at the
rail uh you know I say that again it's
eight foot from the rail to make sure I
understand what you're just saying here
I can see that it's not as tall from the
side by side there right but the the
peak uh was 8 foot and now okay now it's
going to be smaller and where the you
know the bottom of the the triangle down
here is six foot
okay thank you sorry actually it's going
to be lower than that you know it's
going to be 53 okay uh the peak you know
in those odd hour odd months would be 65
but it's really I can't get in there but
my wife still needs to be able to get in
there yeah
right um you know we've had nothing but
compliments about the the structure
since it's been
up
um
we you know it's it's really more of a
fence than it
is you know anything
else you're you're saying it's not
really an accessory structure correct
you know a Pera at most but you know and
that would only be if if the roof was on
it you know other than that it's going
to be a five three fence around a
garden the actual fence is a no more
than a 4ft fence either correct it's
like 42 or 42 inch 44 somewhere in
there okay is there anybody in the
audience that is for or against this
application
please let her have the microphone for a
couple minutes
there please state your name for the
record Lewis 663 Clair thank you do you
swear or affirm any testimony you're
about to give the the board this evening
the truth the whole truth is nothing but
the truth I do thank you my dear tell me
what you think I am in full um I I think
they should have this oreg it's
beautiful it was maybe a little taller I
liked it when it was
taller we drive by it's right there on
Mound Street you go by you see it uh
it's it's lovely they can plant their
vegetables and grow for their family and
probably have enough maybe for the
community so I am in full of in favor of
this project okay thank you
all
right that gives you an idea of where it
sits B your house got you yeah and I
would like to also add like you know
Fourth of July the pre goes by we swag
it it looks all beautiful you know in
the in the winter time or Christmas time
or whatever we'll swag it with Garland
and
whatnot no have you go ahead no please
have you made the modifications or
you're the proposed I'm just confused by
the drawings like picture showing 65 I
have not shortened it in height I have
shortened it in length Okay basically
I've shortened it by one section there
to the right
okay and if we go back to the site
plan so that's not correct or whatever
feels with that I guess so
I the descript As I understood how the
the code works it to be compliant it
would have to be five feet in Board of
the porch but where would it have to go
if it to be code comp I thought
originally it was it's so it's an
accessory structures on a corner lot for
this lot width 50 between 50 and 100
feet it shall be 20 feet from the sidey
yard Street side so this is the street
side mount Street down here down here so
it have to be 20 feet back and then plus
five feet farther back for an accessory
structure so it' be 25 feet off of the
Mound Street property line basically
dead center on the
lot well in this case let me ask you
this little math here 20 feet from the
Mountain Street property line would be
five
feet further back from the street than
the principal structure would it not you
follow that question
yeah it'll be about right
here
yeah we could look at the map there but
I can't really read those numbers too
well but looks like 3.9 plus 9.8 plus 11
I it's 20 it would be probably somewhere
yeah I mean they're close to the same
number yeah yeah we determined this last
time that if would follow the code it
would be yeah but if you would look at
an aerial view of that there's a huge
buckeye tree right there mhm in that
area and it's just not feasible to have
a garden in the middle of our yard you
know there's trees
lining
and I should know this probably but
maybe staff can help accessory accessory
structure uh is anything that's a I mean
so I you know there're more uh
agricultural versions of this youc where
it's just PVC tubes and manting and it's
just a basically a garden cover right I
mean those exist would that be
considered an accessory structure yeah
it's really anything that's over six
inches wow that's not considered that's
not considered a retaining wall a fence
or yeah we're I mean it's it's an issue
with you know raised garden beds
essentially and those kind of things
that are in that are in man-made
structures so we we have many groups
studying how to clean up the code some
of which I'm a part of and have been for
years
um
whoops yeah the what the problem the the
the problem I see is the biggest problem
here
is
if we let this structure go up I mean
basically have to let anybody that wants
to do this do it along the street and
I'm not sure of
the Aesthetics of every house along
Mountain Street having the same or it
would have to be a side street so any of
the other side streets or all the side
streets are about the
same that's a little bit of a of a
hurdle for me you know personally but
I'm only one vote here so it that
doesn't mean too much since we have
seven people here
tonight but that's just a thought I mean
I'd pick you back out that to say when I
imine this full of plants and vegetables
I think well that's pretty Charming uh
but you know we just had a case with
this you know six foot fence that well
it was already six foot fence so now I
imagined it full of big wheels and you
know old bikes uh and somebody saying
well I want to rebuild it it's always
been there we're going to put a little
more roof on it because the bikes are
getting wet and all of a sudden I think
well that does not sound so Charming I
know you're not proposing that but also
we don't have a lot of recourse uh in
those situations so that I mean Mr
Beall's Point does give me a little
pause just
to uh you know once it goes up it
becomes you know
okay so I could literally have a fence
around it without a roof well it
couldn't be a six foot fence right it
would only be allowed to be a 40 or 42
inch fence I can have a six foot if I
have a variance a variance yeah although
this right this is a variance too saying
isn't it is it is it possible to have to
to Grant this and have it conditional on
upon ownership so if the house transfers
that the the permit goes away and the
structure goes away
that's I'm perfectly fine with that you
can condition it on its you on that it's
used for the garden
only on
what
Garden not for storage not for
parties I've driven by it several times
on purpose and uh it's it's not as uh
hideous gargant it as it appears in a
picture you know the photographs I drove
by and I went wow that that's not nearly
as big a thing as the pictures made it
look like when I was sitting on this
board looking at those pictures right
and now it's even smaller because you
taken a section
down well chairman if I can just
interject to answer um Mr Turner's
question about the fence you would Grant
a special perit they would have to come
back it's not a variance it's a special
per permit for a 72-in fence and they
would have to have a landscaping plan on
the street side there's other things
that need to be done with a corner lot
Street side fence but not a variance of
special permit so the burd lower for
that but yeah yeah and what's the screen
screening strategy how will that
work so each section I don't know if you
can pull up a an area or whatever but
each section is uh its
own like screen literally and I'm going
to put screening in it that I can take
in and out so be frames yes I've got
frames within those sections as it
were are there frames on the roof yes so
it's screened on the roof yes and what's
the screen is like a house screen or is
it more like a chicken wire it's more
like a chicken wire but it you
know
right like hear what she said huh I
didn't hear what she said she said it
could be whatever you
wanted I wanted gold no
I'm well do we have any more questions
and or comments and I don't really see
much point in ticking this can down the
line I mean I think we should vote Yes
or no and get it over with I do have a
question one of the drawings in the the
file site mat b.pdf
Darren sitemap b-p PDF was pulled up and
you said that's not right that is
correct because I pulled it from the
wrong side okay I actually the the one
the the other one that she had up was
from my actual survey of the and and
that one that I did before I pulled from
the Auditor's website okay and they
didn't just for those of you who aren't
used to this we deal with that all the
time the Auditor's website gets
submitted as the site plan but those are
kind of like done by fly flyovers and
are approximate so we always required I
just didn't delete it I always keep
everything in the thank you thank
you all right well I think we should
call the question does anybody agree
with that chairman did you did you have
any conditions on that well I think what
we should say is I mean
that I don't
know Ed for garden
only I'll I'll make a motion to
condition it upon use for garden only
that the um retaining fence shall be
subject to staff approval you said that
it would be chicken wire um and that
it's use as I already said Garden only
and then um no exterior lighting or
anything to for the growth of the
vegetables yeah perfect
do we want does it make sense to
Kickback the type of screening to
ARB um rather than make that
determination is that something that
they would care about at all is that I
think they would be they'd probably be
fine with it just going through staff
okay because I don't know that anybody's
an expert on that board
either I think I think Mr Turner wanted
to pick out the screening didn't he but
I also think it's in your purview I mean
you know this board sits over the
architecture revieww board and we do
have at least a designer and myself here
we can kind of stipulate what it will be
I
think I mean I'm not sure chicken wire
might be just as efficient but probably
not as aesthetically pleasing as some
screening then can the Sun get through
the screen I guess it it does to some
extent but right have right I mean I'm
I'm very comfortable with them working
with staff to finalize any of those
details and then I'll fine with me to
buy one more it would just be that this
structure exists for this these home
owners
only well that's a different permit
right we can't um what's the question is
is it possible to restrict it to in
other words he's got to take it down if
he sells a house what yeah but I thought
Matt said that's a different application
right oh I thought you said okay I
misunderstood you well you know
generally variances go with the property
right and you grant a variance it's
granted for that property I I would
think
that just me speaking that as long as
it's stipulated it's a garden you know
it's pretty much going to be you know no
lighting and no no other
usage this whole project is called the
garden screen and that's what it
is I I guess
one of the issues here
is you can build this thing somewhere on
your lot I don't know about the buckeye
tree and all that
but the question is can you move it out
to the street so that it's right along
the street and why why is this situation
such that we should more or less say hey
this 20 foot setback rule is not going
to apply in this situation as opposed to
other situations that we're going to be
facing I I guess that's my biggest
problem there again you I think when we
first talked about this over a year ago
you've never seen anything like
this that's true is it a structure or is
it a or is it off
fence well you know we we have a lot of
this what is an accessory structure
we've had this argument with so many
different kinds of things you would even
believe some of the things seen here
right but and if I recall at the time
we we determined that a structure I
remember Karen saying correctly that the
structure was something that would be
load supported which this is with the
roof no either that no no Kathy sorry
Kathy sorry gone but not forgotten well
she apparently
[Laughter]
Isen
hi all right I'm I mean can I make sure
I got all those conditions
yeah so use for garden only do do you
want to clarify that on like use the
word maintained or something that if a
future owner because you can't you
cannot um true put this on for one owner
only I didn't think so you're an
attorney right I used to be make my St
you can make my but at least if we have
a qualifier like a maintained
Garden do get out of control at some
point in time we have something that a
zoning officer can go back to the
decision I mean it could be a flower
garden too could I mean I'm not that I
wanted to change it I don't get me wrong
but you could have a garden there with
no screen couldn't you well I guess that
a question are we saying it's a
vegetable garden just out of curiosity
or but primarily the primary reason is
the squirrels in the
neighborhood because they steal all of
the squirrel all its mat is that yeah
yeah yeah so what cuz to me that right
that the say it's primarily vegetable
garden is a little different because
again a garden is anything I decide a
garden is but you can disas objectively
say this is primarily vegetabl or to me
it applies a certain level of care and
attention and tending that someone's
saying it's wild flowers doesn't
necessarily that's what I'm looking for
it's some terminology that it's right
there on sidewalk it's right there on
Mound you want to make sure that we have
some meat to keep it maintain I'm not
suggesting that you won't I'm just
saying you never know your owners
because this will run with the land it's
not well to me it it you just I think
the purpose of naming it a garden is we
don't want it to be a storage shut and
when it comes to plants if the structure
wasn't there and he just had overgrown
Tomatoes we have we can't do anything
about it if it's behind his fence line
it's in his backyard he's got overgrown
tomatoes so I don't really think we can
relegate like his garden and say it has
to be well maintained I mean I know we
can but I'm just saying it seems a
little ridiculous that he could he could
let his garden go crazy and we go up and
say this is out of line and he just
drops the sides off of it and now it's
just a garden in his backyard and it's
and it's except that the fact that their
structure gives more potential to have
growth
upward well i' I've got an eight foot
tomato plant right now it's like I I
just I don't I don't I don't see I mean
that's just my opinion everybody can be
different but I just think trying to
maintain something that's in somebody's
within the fence line of someone's yard
the growth of plants within the fence
line of someone's yard seems a little
over overreach in my
opinion we don't want them to use it to
store his Machinery we don't want it to
be
covered uh with something that's opaque
right I mean those are where we're
headed with this and
and my own view is it's still
problematic terms of the location no
matter what it is but and we're setting
a bad precedent because we let this
happen I I think we have to let just
about anybody that wants to do this on a
sidey yard to do it and that's
problematic for me I'm just going to
tell you but that I'm one vote out of
seven chairman if I may yes it it
wouldn't have to go uh 25 feet into the
middle of the yard it could come six
feet off of or I'm sorry eight feet
setback off of the uh interior lot
side interior lot line yeah when you
mentioned before it's just it registered
my brain you said oh it has to go in the
middle of the backyard it over here I
mean it it could come eight feet off of
this I just want I didn't know if you
you all realize that yeah right okay all
right yeah we talked about that before
but that's totally shade I know I just
want to know it it doesn't have to go 20
we kept saying 25 he 25 I didn't know if
you realized that I just want to point
that out you're saying it's 25 from the
street 25 from the street side from M
Street yeah it's it's eight feet from
the other from the neighbor side is this
considered backyard or side yard this is
considered sidey
yard we have no
backyard if it was if it was backyard if
it was backyard what what would be the
sitb back be three
feet three feet the garage can be three
feet from either side corner
my problems with this project uh Miss
leack and Mr Rosenthal who wen't here um
this project was constructed it was
caught by code that it was brought
before us and
then this has taken a long time and to
get resolved but it hasn't resolved the
issue that I have with this that is to
one man's Garden is another man's
eyesore and I think that
this is an isore and I also think it
establishes a really bad precedent for
us to have to carry through with other
individuals now when we met we spoke
about this last time we did convey that
there would be the risk of having to
tear this down
and until we get to a vote I I just my
concerns are not assuaged by this so uh
did we went through this entire thing
didn't we didn't it go through and it
was a vote and what what happened can
you tell me that we never voted you
would never voted you never voted I
never voted I'm saying the board the
board didn't the board never voted it
was Ted Ted yeah that was a long time
ago 18
months
oh it was it was the 19th application in
2023 so it's early 2023 2020 2023 2023
beab 23 which is the year we to the year
and the 19 is the 19th application so
roughly probably February or March 2023
I
don't maybe I don't
know okay and I'm sorry this is a
variance or is this a yeah yes and
there's a and what is the state what
recapitulate the stated hardship the
stated hardship is there's just not
another Sunny Spot to do it where's the
buckeye tree oh I'm sorry hardship
really isn't in the statue that wording
the word hardship is not in the statute
wait what is the wording it's special
circum practical
yes right but we would consider the Dos
Factor not the doin factors we would
consider the hardship on a neighboring
properties oh yeah that's for sure
yeah but I don't think that's where
where's the buckeye tree in the backyard
you're GNA have to go to a plan but it's
basically where you see the uh bay
window on the house yeah this far from
the bay window okay yeah and it's
probably uh four foot diameter at the
base and what was the difficulty about
putting this up against your and your
neighbor's
property well the buckeye tree is the
shade well there's there's also plenty
of trees around this one too right there
is but there's still a you know a sliver
of sun and that's kind of where we're
at trees are
all right yes sir just just a suggestion
to you would it be helpful if I read the
seven we have some new members I don't
know would be help if I read the seven
criteria for an area non-use variance
would okay so number one whether the
property in question will yield a
reasonable return or whether there will
be any beneficial use of the property
without the
variance whether and number two whether
the variance is substantial number three
whether the essential character of the
neighborhood would be substantially
altered or whether adjoining properties
would suffer a substantial detriment as
a result of the variance number four
whether the variance would adversely
affect the delivery of governmental
Services examples water sewer garbage
number five whether the property owner
purchased the property with knowledge of
the zoning restriction number six
whether the property owner's predicament
feasibly can be obviated through some
other method through some method other
than a variance number seven whether the
spirit in and intent behind the zoning
requirement would be observed and
substantial Justice Done by granting the
variance the those factors shall be
considered and weighed by the board when
making a determination upon any area
non-use variance by preponderance of the
evidence
no one it's not like you have to meet
all seven factors it's those seven
things have to be considered by the
board in rendering a
decision that's pretty much how that
goes legally speaking that
is all right I think we could talk about
this for about another two three hours
so let's um have findings of fact
inclusions of law are you okay with
let's let's just get this and see how it
goes can can I ask one question I'm
sorry yes sir is this something that
could be taken down seasonally is it
something that you could
deconstruct in the fall and put up in
the spring well I guess and would that
be any consideration to anybody I mean
you know I think when I think about this
it's certainly more of an eyesore in
January when
it's uh probably not full of of
vegetables vegetables and and no leaves
on the trees so so yeah right and leaves
on the trees where you can see it and it
is there is that a possibility at all is
that something that that's been kicked
around and yes you know the roof could
definitely be taken down you know easily
yeah and you know this you know the
surrounding 5 foot three whatever would
still be there yeah I mean I'm not sure
that gets me you
know anywhere necessarily with
unfinished structure hanging out in the
middle yard but but then is fence or is
it a
structure well you
know you know the other thing is is you
know I can put then it's then it's 12
posts in the middle of your yard so
correct yeah which is I don't think
either but but it could also you know we
could take the the roof off ask for a
six- foot variance you know right there
around my
garden and then put Hoops over top of it
[Music]
well doesn't mean you'd get variance but
I'm sorry it doesn't mean you'd receive
the variance but
correct but you
know am I just asking for offense or am
I asking for a structure or am I asking
for you take could you take the
horizontal posts out yes seasonally yes
okay are you willing to do that as a
condition to try to get some votes here
I mean there again I'm I prefer not to
but if if that's what where we go then
that's where we go are they in the
ground or are they just on top of the
ground I'm sorry what are they in the
ground or are they onp post are in the
ground okay they're literally part of
the fence the outside
fence I mean one thing that I I think
too though like I mean people are
worried about what it's going to look
like without plants I mean I don't know
how much you guys go around the city but
I'm sure you seen I mean there's a lot
of people now that are putting raised
garden boxes in their front yards so in
the winter they don't have plants in
them and it's a just Square railroad tie
box that's sitting in their front yard I
personally think that looks way worse
than this does or we have four
sailboats yeah yeah I'm I'm not I'm
talking more gardening I'm talking more
gardening but but yeah so I I mean like
I I don't know I just think I think us
trying to regulate it down to how it
looks each season like I mean there's a
lot of things that look ugly in the
winter I I I mean I I just I I don't I
don't know that's my personal opinion
again he could have a garden there with
no structure right that's possible well
but I think the question came up like
what's it going to look like in the
winter when there's no plants in it I
mean but if it were just a garden we
couldn't control how it looked right
right that was what I said that's what I
said earlier so AG that's why I'm saying
when we talked about I mean at one point
we said the stipulation that was when
the stipulation was that it needed to be
well maintained and that was my argument
against that so I don't think we can go
there either I agree with
you how much do you
um what's the word I'm looking for how
are squirrels with your tomato plants
how are squirrels with what you said you
have an eight a tomato
plant uh they eat some of them but thank
God I'm having a great year
so and they're they're grape tomatoes so
they're little tiny ones so if they eat
about if they eat about 50 of them I've
got probably another 5050 so I'm okay
yeah I mean they are problem for all of
us you know my wife quit growing
tomatoes because of that two of our
neighbor three of our neighbors in the
last year have gotten dogs too so we
have we do have fewer squirrels than we
than we used to and I did remove a
street flight sroll yesterday for my
front yards I'm all of more dogs and
Beckley you got me there yeah
anyway
okay I think we should call the question
so let us have a rendering of the
findings of fact conclusions of law
would sound like in this case that would
be proposed okay um chairman please
correct me if I get any conditions try
to keep track okay the findings and
facts and conclusions of law for
application number bcap
23-19 for property located at 733 Vernon
for the 6 foot tall garden structure
Greenhouse based on the testimony
presented the board finds it appropriate
to Grant the variance from Bexley code
section 1252
point10 parentheses 2 to
allow the temporary garden
structure to
to be located one foot I'm sorry 1.2
feet from the north side property line
along East Mound Street with the
following
conditions it be kept as a garden
only the uh screening be subject to
staff approval there shall be no
lighting and shall not be used for
storage okay with you can I add Brian
sorry can I add one thing that and that
it it never be enclosed except with
screening like they that's fine too
absolutely
yeah like a transparent screening never
be solidly en closed is that
okay never a green
house right not a green house right not
glass enclosed in other words as he put
it
okay does that mean with your approval
are you okay if that passes absolutely
okay is there anybody on the board that
is not okay with that reading of the
findings of fact inclusions of
law if not I would U entertain a motion
to approve the findings of fact and
conclusions of law so move Turner thank
you is there a
second second it lce stack thank you
very
much Mr clel please call the role Mr
shik
no Mr
King
yes sorry are you getting these Karen
yeah okay thanks Mr Marsh no Mr
Rosenthal no Miss
leack yes Mr Turner yes chairman Beall I
vote no also now I think when so what
was the vote there did you guys count
count five two one two three Ste four to
three okay so now when something like
this fails I think we need
to take the vote from the standpoint of
uh do you does the board wish to
deny the request as opposed to approve
the request and then you need to state
if you vote no you need to St or yes in
this case you need to state reasons why
you voted no so that the if he decides
to file an appeal they have some
understanding of what the basis of the
no votes were okay
so the proposition before the panel now
will be do
you agree that this application should
be
denied and if your answer is well just
go around the table here and go this way
and and we'll I I'll go first just
because I should go last but I'll go
first I I mean no you vote no and you
voted yes so can you state your reasons
why yeah say yes first yes and I guess I
go back to uh things that I've heard
from chairman behall and others you know
it's difficult in Bexley we can't give
everyone everything they want as much as
you'd like to and it P and it's I'm not
happy to vote the way I voted on the on
this particular application but I just
feel like you there ways to grow things
in this yard that don't require that
structure there's you know not every
yard supports every use unfortunately
that's just the reality of living in
Bexley especially South Bexley where I
live uh also and so you know there's
limitations and it's unfortunate but I I
feel like the issue about the precedent
of having that structure that close to
the property line is problematic in a
way that I'm not comfortable uh with so
thank
you you you're voting no this time go
ahead and say that into the mic though
I'm
sorry Mr King you vote no Mr Marsh uh
yes and I just think the size the
massing um and the other comments made
uh are my reasoning okay thank you Mr sh
you voted yes
I for the sake of um efficiency I'm just
going to adopt Mr Rosenthal and Mr
Marsha's concerns as
well and uh I also voted yes and and my
reasons are that I I just think it's
it's a it's a bad pres I think there's
too many Alternatives available to you I
think that in that particular place on a
corner got to be we have so many corner
lot issues in Bexley that I think this
one is not a not significant
uh of a practical Dilemma to Grant a
variance and uh for that reason I voted
yes
so there you go all right well I
appreciate you're coming down here and I
appreciate your your position I think we
all hate to vote uh this way on this
thing but I I think that's the way I'm
uncomfortable with the situation as well
thank you thank you all
right the next application is is
application bz
ap-24 d24 involving 2281 brighten Road
the applicant is AA Shankar and the
owner is Charles Hillman the applicant
is seeking approval from uh the board
for a certificate of appropriateness
convert a garage to a
bedroom addition of garage and bedroom
which requires a 158 and A4 inch
variance to encroach into the rear yard
setback would that applicant please come
forward thank you sir do you swear or
affirm any testimony you give the board
this evening be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth I do and
your name please David MCA I'm the
architect all right David good all
right
Mr Kingler give us a little staff report
on this if you would please
get ready it's another corner lot okay
so just say you
now this this corner lot located at 2281
Brien road is in the R3 zoning District
the corner lot minimum dimensions are
120 by 160 or
19,200 square feet in area this corner
lot is 149 and 10 in by
75t 10 1 12 in or
11,362 Square ft which is substantially
smaller for this zoning District this
project requires a variance because the
rear yard setback in the R3 zoning
district is 40
feet um could you bring up Google Maps
while when you get a chance Aon thank
you the project is a two-story Edition
in the rear yard that attaches to the
original House via a secondstory hallway
the area of the first floor which will
be the garage depart Vehicles is
approximately 640 Square ft the area of
the second floor in law Suite is
approximately 615 square feet the
addition is considered an in-law suite
per section 12
52.17% the structure must maintain a
single family residential appearance
appearance which blends with the
principal structure and the neighborhood
an architectural rendering and floor
plan must be provided and approved by
the bcap said plans shall include a
landscape plan which will be followed as
approved the in-law suite may be located
on the first or second floor the
property owner must live on site and the
in-law suite must be subservient to the
principal use of the property as a
dwelling the in-law suite shall be
occupied by by family of the owner of
the principal
residents staff comments uh the
Architectural Review Board recommended a
certificate of appropriateness for this
project at the August 8th 2024 meeting
uh no conditions were put on the project
officially however they did ask the
applicant to review and make changes to
a few details mainly concerning the
detailing of the Second Story hallway
Breezeway in the manner in which it ties
to the garage David did I get that right
okay there was a neighbor at the ARB who
was concerned about the Privacy for
their property because of the Dormer
windows that will be on the south side
of the addition the ARB took note of
this and suggested a landscape plan be
submitted to the B app to help alleviate
concerns uh alleviate those
concerns side note a landscape plan is
required per 12217 to be submitted to
the city per approval um so
this this property's um the addition is
going to go on this side of the property
there's a foot setback from the property
to the South they're encroaching
um where is it 15 feet eight 8.25 inches
into the rear yard so we're looking at
the side yard
here
that they so I do want to add and I
didn't put it in my staff comments I
apologize they don't need a variance
because um and this is the difference
between the last one one you heard on
this corner lot the set because of the
width the setback off of the side yard
is 20 feet period because this accessory
structure is not considered an accessory
structure because it's tied to the
principal structure so it's addition to
the house it's not there's no separation
there so it's only a 20 foot setback off
of this side yard from the south from
the rear part of the property there's a
40 foot setback they are encroaching
into that and that is the variance
before you
yeah I'm I'm sorry I did not have a
chance I we received the site plan today
I did not have a chance to upload it
into your
packet is there significance to the
in-law suite aspect of it I don't
understand I mean it doesn't have its
own it's not like it has a door or a
kitchen or a what's the significance of
why are we referring to it that way why
is it not no it has a
kitchen so it does have a kitchen yeah
if you look at um looks like just a
bathroom and a closet no right right
here there a kitchen right
there bathroom chairman that's all I
have for the board okay thank you very
much and
um Karen do you have Architectural
Review report for this one well Matt did
a great job thank you architecture
review report um I would only add to it
that it was a pretty extensive
conversation I mean at the end of the
day the board pretty enthusiastically
you know recommended it um under the
understanding that this design is very
um acceptable to them and they liked it
a lot if the variance is granted yeah
right we did have within our design
discussion other than things that Matt
had already pointed out some very minor
architectural things that were not
conditions at all so they they're really
relevant to the conversation um they're
kind of Architects going talking with
Architects but we did have some
discussion about you know if you kind of
started with the clean slate and put a
detached garage the back of the property
within with no
variances and architecturally because
that's not the perview of ARB straight
it's slippery slope gray area but it
does have um Merit in its architectural
discussion because it's a unique site
that wraps the corner on a very
prominent Street and the board tended to
think that one solid unit you know was a
nicer solution but we did talk through
what if you did it as a
detached
architectural it's the corner
also Rex okay that's right
yeah okay Mr Mika tell us a little bit
about in other words sounds like the
architecture viiew board said this is a
great looking place you've done a great
job and our question is why should we
let you into the set I guess right all
right so again the criteria from the
client was he wanted a a ground floor
Master Suite so um the easiest way to do
that was to actually take the existing
garage and manipulate that into the new
Master Suite so so he can excuse me age
in place so that meant he needed a
garage he also wanted to have an in-law
suite so to do that they had to be
attached um according to the codes we
held with the setback along um
Drexel which is that 20 foot setback
which actually does align with an
existing porch that is on the existing
house so we aren't setting back from the
existing struct
or uh forward of that existing structure
at all it really aligns with it the
other key uh thing was we were trying to
maintain that existing curb cut um so in
order to get that 30 foot turning radius
that you need to get into a side load
garage and that's sort of set the
placement of where the face of the
garage needed to be I see so it's sort
of kind of geometrically set where the
corner of it should be set up and then
the second part was how do I connect it
into the second floor uh there's an
existing window in that second floor um
that we're using as a connector into the
existing house so we know where those
pieces kind of came together um it gives
them again a two-car garage on the
ground floor with a staircase that
basically Bally leads up to this in-law
suite um we're using the existing
pitches of the existing house so um the
only other alternative again as uh Karen
sort of mentioned was that we could have
a just a freestanding garage which we
could do without the in-law suite which
could be three foot off the property
line but it have to be set I think 25
foot back as opposed to the 20 um and
again with the criteria from the owners
to do the in-law suite we thought this
was the best
solution interesting I think the other
thing that kind of comes to mind is you
know when you look at some of the the
variance factors on this you know one of
the things that they ask you is that how
substantial is it I mean the reality is
the the house next door which should be
set back off the property line 12 feet
um is only about three feet off the
property line so normally when you look
at sidey yards you look at them as a
combined unit U theirs is exceptionally
close to our so normally you would think
that this would be fairly minor ask it
it seems probably more extreme just
because of that
issue this is a new couple right huh
this is a new family right a new what a
new family that moved there no I thought
they were no existing sorry that was not
related no subject
better that's a pretty good 3D so I
gotta ask again it look just like a
better in a bathroom in a closet why
what makes it an in-law suite that's
just what it's literally defined by your
code as an in-law suite when it's above
a garage but I thought as long as it
doesn't have cooking it's it's just does
it doesn't have
cooking right I mean that I thought you
can have two attached so it's really but
I'm saying if it were to unattach
the argument that well if we detach it
we can't have the bedroom but I think
there's no reason you could have a
bedroom above that garage is there
detached as long as it doesn't have
cooking bathing and sleeping it it
followed all the other things like area
variance height variance and didn't only
had two of the three things yes which it
does right it only I mean I'm just
making sure I'm not missing some it only
has two of the three things there's no
cooking in that there's no cooking got
it
correct and if I yeah okay
yeah I guess I kind of the same thing as
him like why I don't understand why it's
an in-law suite as opposed to just an
additional bedroom house that's that's
how 12 5217 defines it you read that
yeah in-law suites an independent an
independent dwelling unit in conjunction
with and clearly subordinate to a
primary dwelling unit for the habitation
of family members as described below
shall be permitted or conditional use in
designated residential districts as
described in section 12 52.8 provided
that the following requirements are met
the in-law suite must be located within
the principal structure which includes
attached garages or areas over attached
garages no more than one in-law suite is
permitted per principal structure
maximum I I already read all yeah but
but but going back it's not an
independent there's nothing independent
about it doesn't have a front door it
doesn't have a kitchen it's not it's
just a bedroom I mean I guess I guess
from reading it it meets the
qualifications of an in-law suite but
doesn't it all also meet the
qualifications of being a
bedroom my understanding is an in-law
suite the whole notion is is that it's
you could live in it independently I
mean it's a it's a independent that's
the word it's an you don't need anything
from the house you could rent it I mean
I think that's the real fear or the
issue that drives the that section of
the code is that the idea is potentially
you can put a mailbox out there and
somebody could a student could live
there from cap and never come in your
house that would be we would consider
that an accessory dwelling unit which
the land strategy commission as you know
is looking into code revisions to that
um if there's if there's if there's a
person independent of the family living
within the structure but but that but
what you just read that that was the
first sense right it says it's an
independent dwelling unit in conjunction
with and clearly subordinate to a
primary dwelling unit but I would say
this is not an independent dwelling
unit right I mean I don't know what
makes it I'm not sure why this matters
but I guess it just the fact that it
comes up it just seems like it's worth
trying to understand it because it just
could be looked at as an
addition that's what I'm yeah to me it's
like the whole the whole issue about a
in-law suite it's it's basic I mean
that's the way it's always I've always
understood it is the idea was this is a
thing you could rent but you're not
going to rent because it's for family
and so we want to you know enable people
to have that but in this case I'm like
well if you rent this to somebody they
can walk up into your bedroom I mean
they share you know I go out the door
and turn right and I'm on the second
floor of your house that's not an
independent you you are you are correct
the definition dwelling unit uh having
all the following permanent components
cooking bathing and toilet facilities
this does not
have uh cooking then it's not considered
an in-law suite in that with that
definition of a dwelling unit I don't
think it is an in yes I I mean the only
reason I like glad you brought it up the
only reason to me that that's relevant
is because we get a lot of major
discussions about in-law suites and
trying to clarify what they are so if we
can look at this one and not call it an
endla Suite I think we're better off I
agree Mr turn okay thank you that's
that's just I think so and really the
question here is whether it is or isn't
an in-law suite it's still into the
setback right yes and and just how how
far into the setback is it 15 feet eight
and a quarter inches how far would the
neighbor's house like should it have
been because they said it was only three
feet 20 12T 12tc I think that the 3T
came um if this was an accessory
structure that was separate from the
house so if it was a garage it could be
three feet from the rear property line
we see the Google map of this question
is how far there there was a mention of
the neighbor house is much closer so
that is causing this to be seemingly
close to the property line
right it's I guess what I would argue
say is that we look at when I look at
sidey guards it's really a combined
thing it's it's about your neighbor's
sidey as well as yours and how much room
between two homes so their existing
house is uh
non-conformant we can't see the house
right now because of those trees is that
correct if you look at s we just learned
it's not
accurate I would I would I would say in
this zoning District I mentioned at the
beginning this is a small a small lot
for the zoning District it's
approximately 8,000 square feet smaller
than what a typical lot is in R3 zoning
so may maybe that's why it seems a
little closer to the neighbor's property
I will say the one distinction well the
one main distinction between whether
it's an in-law suite or not which I'm
thankful you're not cons we look that up
thank you Mr Rosenthal for clarifying
that we're not going to call it inlaw
Suite um was the landscape plan because
if you did an addition you don't
necessarily have to have a landscape
plan but with the with the privacy
concerns of it being closer to the
neighbors because it's a smaller lot ARB
you know did ask that there there be
one submitted but but but so if this if
we just cut the second floor connector
and they could come back with this more
I mean there's maybe some height issues
but essentially this you could build the
garage five feet off that South property
oh um I'm sorry three feet off the south
I mean that to me seems pretty relevant
that that this structure something
similar to it could exist three feet off
the property line if it weren't
connected to the house yeah if it were
not connected to the house it would have
to be a 10 foot separation from the
house but it could go as far back as
three feet
correct right and we don't have a lot
coverage issue in any of that we do not
yeah all right let me um see if there's
anybody here that's Pro or con this
application and wishes to speak
please would you raise your right hand
you swear or affirm that the testimony
you give the board this evening will be
the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the grth truth rather excuse me I do
all right and your name please Jenny
Hoffman and Jenny where do you live uh
we on the building at 513 which is south
of this property South across the street
from Brighton to it oh
next yeah I got you now I'm I'm going
the wrong direction was built in
1927 so long before me so I have nothing
to do with the placement right yes we
figured that right uh we we um are
lifelong residents of Bexley both my
husband and I and appreciate our special
community so first I want to commend all
of you for your service and your
dedication to the city thank you very
important function that is important to
Our Ambiance go
forward um we attended the meeting a few
weeks ago and are pleased with the
overall design of the proposed plan and
how well it works with the property the
existing structure I will challenge that
I don't believe that the garage is equal
to the distance of the house I think it
protrudes personally if you look at the
plans I mean it's not called out in
square footage but it does not
look uh flat to the existing structure
of the house I think it protrudes
towards Drexel my concern is and we all
know and after sitting here I feel sorry
for you a lot of corner Lots in Bexley
this is a corner lot there are 34 homes
on Drexel on the West Side between Maine
and Broad 33 face Drexel this one face
is bright we therefore are looking at
Drexel as the sidey yard thus the 20
foot setback but 33 other homes are set
back 40 so therefore it already looks
non-conforming by granting a garage 20
feet off
drexal um if you're going to grant that
I would at least say it should be flat
to the existing structure to be in good
Ambiance tonight however
um we obviously know the the conundrum
that a corner lot presents but um
tonight we are discussing the placement
of the property the subject property um
like I said is a corner lot um it
faces brighten thus Drexel becomes its
sidey
yard
uh is Drexel the front yard or the sidey
yard according to approving the plans
the 20 foot setback is allowed from
Drexel because it's the sidey yard so
therefore I say what is the
backyard why should we Grant a variant
to the backyard I don't think this
committee can give both sides you got to
call it this is our job is it the sidey
yard is it the front yard is it the
backyard or is it the sidey yard but one
or the other you got to stick to code
because if we give and give and give we
know what will happen to the city
plans
um I ask the board to think about the
positioning I think there's
opportunities to rework the plans so
that they're within conforming to Drexel
like I said 33 other homes are set back
40 I'm not asking them to go back 40 but
one I think the the garage should be
pulled back to be coherent with the
front of the house or that side of the
house I also don't know why we need to
Grant 15 ft in the backyard because
we're following
code okay and if we want to challenge
the placement of our house we'll have to
go back to
1927 so I just ask you to you know pick
your poison are we front or side and
stick to it I appreciate thanks for
coming and telling us what you think we
appreciate it very
much oh Sor pleas
absolutely but just as a clarification
the the the 20 foot setback off of
Drexel is not for us to discuss we have
no say over that as right that's not on
the table correct right that that's
compliant
with yeah I
just yeah all right sir you raise your
right hand Fred Hoffman Fred do you
swear or affirm that any testimony you
give the board this evening be the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the
truth I do thank you sir tell us what
you think about the situation so there
were just two other items that were
brought up in ARB which it didn't seems
like it made to the findings and
conclusions because it was ruled it
wasn't perview to their rulings but um
prior to this being announced to us we
had been having you someone commented on
the overgrown trees and we had brought
up the tree issue and um some of the
trees on the neighbors property line are
growing onto our property and we have
written letters and tried to uh initiate
communication we were there last week we
handed a letter that we sent to him we
have not heard one thing from the
neighbor um one of the board members
said I will put a condition to be
neighborly to you know this is prior to
the addition okay and uh we still have
not heard of I know this is not your
jurisdiction but I have a question as to
the tree that we have a dispute with are
they keeping that that that's one
question okay and then two the garage
that they keep referencing saying well
they have the right to build within you
know 5T of the property line that is if
you don't connect so that is that would
be an in-law suite you know you'd have
Plumbing you'd have a bath you know
above the garage it didn't have cooking
it could have the same features this has
and still not count as it but you
couldn't connect the house you couldn't
connect with a three foot to the
property line correct but it could still
have the same function this but then you
couldn't connect the house yes right
yeah so I just want to make that clear
so you know if if we're going to say
they can come out to 20 feet onto drexal
it will be the only home on 34 homes
that is 20 feet on a Drexel so it's
already it is not for me I know that's
part of code but then what's adhere to
code you know the code's put in place
for a reason I'll just ask if we don't
why do we have the
code we have that question every month
every case almost so I appreciate it
would be nice I mean when your neighbors
trying we're trying to get a hold the
architect it'd be really nice if they
would communicate with us can I ask you
where you live uh 268 Bri road so are
you next door uh we own this property
next door okay
yeah thank you so is this this is a rent
somebody live here correct there's two
units there they two unit duplex you
don't live here I partial owner my
parents are family truss owns but you
don't live here I do not live there we
live in Bexley and own
it
yes uh We've owned it prior to the
previous owner he already put an
addition in um you know this home
obviously P he bought this house less
than five years ago so this is the
second time he's in front of your board
okay thank you all right thank you very
much we appreciate you're coming down
telling us what you
think all right M Rea you want to
respond to some of those issues that
were oh I'm sorry sir I didn't see your
hand up there my
fault okay do you swear or affirm that
any testimony you give the board this
evening be the truth whole truth and
nothing but the truth they do and your
name please uh herb Hoffman I grew up on
Drexel I've been in be almost 70 years
um I have two properties in the uh in
the pocket area we're talking about okay
and I fixed them both up to you know so
I'm very very concerned with with
Drexel having grown up there I actually
raised the money to to get the trees on
Main Street really okay back in 69 but
anyway my point being
um the reason I'm here is that garage
um we talk about Aesthetics right I mean
this is a major thoroughfare it was big
for the islands it was you know we we
we've taken a lot of time to fix up that
area and uh and my point is is is that I
think the house alone is close to Drexel
you know the side here and I know the
law um but when I found out that the
garage is now coming out even further I
think the Aesthetics of the is just not
going to conform with all of Drexel when
you come down Drexel you're going to be
able to see it you know 20 feet in front
of our house um I went over to Three
Corner Lots before this meeting um
Brentwood and
Roosevelt that that aligns with the
house Sherwood and
Cassidy uh that aligns with the
house uh Boston and Drexel which is my
old neighborhood that is is aligns
perfectly with the house the old the old
FAL house M um so I guess my point is is
I
mean what what is Aesthetics play into
this I mean Drexel is a main Thorofare
so you're playing with some a corner lot
that's very visual I think we ought to
take that into consideration even though
you know I knew know the law so I just
want to make my point thanks very much
we appreciate your uh comment
reason you
brought okay you talk into did you talk
into the mic we can get you on yeah
you're on the record here see
everything's on record those three
addresses up is because they were all on
front of this exact board and they're
all new builds so like on the corner of
Roosevelt and um Brentwood Brentwood
that's a new build that garage is in
line so the other ones that's why he
cited this so they're all currently
under construction yeah MH I drive by it
every
day okay
um is there Mr M why don't you come up
and respond to some of the uh comments
that were made please if you
would okay um I guess regarding Drexel I
think as you're aware the 20 foot
setback is set it's based on the sidey
yard setback for an corner unit so we're
not asking for any variance there it's
nothing illegal
there's the comment was made that what
you're building Jets Out further toward
Drexel than the main structure is that
true or not true well that I would
consider well again the main structure
has a porch on it that is at the same
alignment that 20 foot alignment the
porch is okay porch is so I whatever
you're considering the main part of the
house I see I was wondering why what
what the comment was but now I
understand it better because yeah
they're saying the actual house is
further but you're telling me that it's
comes out to the same distance that the
porch correct group does second problem
is everybody's got to be on the record
here so but you can come up and make
another comment after we're done well
he's done go ahead
please I see I see okay there you go I
didn't understand what that structure
was to the right of the top building but
now I I get it you can see it in the
site plan as well how it's
positioned but your point is there is no
variance required to to build out that
far correct but we're we're worried
about this direction it's all about the
rear the rear yard which would be the
you know the let's get mixed up West um
South South thank
you so that's been that's the big
question uh I think the other question
that came up was about this uh there's a
tree that uh they've been concerned
about um my understanding is that's
being taken down next week
okay chairman be if I may yes just to
add a couple things in um just just a
quick um math the structure will stick
one foot one and a quarter inches out
from the porch so if you you know to the
east it'll be one foot and from the
house it'll be seven feet 10 and a qu
Ines from the edge of the house MH so
just wanted to give some insight thank
you m what are the dimensions of the
porch how far off the main structure
does the porch extend uh give me one
second 6 foot
n you're gaining 20 fo what's the
feasibility of moving the garage
structure back six feet towards the back
line
away from Drexel away from
Drexel
um the problem is the turning radius now
to get into the garage I'm not going to
be able to get into the part of the
garage from that if I want to get two
cars in because I'm sliding the garage
doors past the the face of the existing
garage I mean even as it isn't it's
tight tight yes it's going to take a
threep point Andrew I didn't I didn't
hear your comment I'm sor oh I'm was
just saying I mean if you look at the
sheet sorry a 101b I mean the if the you
know the West edge of the garage door
opening to
me curiously close to it's it look to me
like if it's not as far west as it could
possibly be or maybe a little more uh
you know it's very it's inches you you
just wouldn't be able to get a second
you know use that second bag the West
bag if it went that structure goes any
farther that direction
okay any
other
uh comments that you like to make in
response or let me ask uh and and this
of if you want to come up and make
another comment you're certainly free to
do so
here um I just was asking I'm sorry to
be yelling from the back worry I'm into
retail meetings we can we talk wherever
um but the um I think Matt answered it
it it is one foot six inches beyond the
porch which is not really a porch it's
kind of like a I don't know what it is I
don't know how it Ed but at any rate I
wondered the same question could it not
be set back more and also the square
footage of the garage the two-car garage
is bigger than a average I mean you only
need 400 square F feet so I don't know
what you know I'm not an architect but
at all the numbers there may be a
different way to skin this cat and
follow code
okay um members of the board you have
questions or comments
please well my comment on this is
Aesthetics alone this is the internal
struggle I'm going up I just want to get
on the record Aesthetics alone did not
permit us
to deny something that is legally
permissible but I just also wanted to
put on the record that I absolutely hear
the Hoffman's concerns on this so thank
you
okay in that case is everyone feel like
they're positioned to
vote okay so can we have findings of
fact conclusions of law Mr
cler so you're going to have to help me
through this because this is my first
one with a certificate of
appropriateness from the architecture
reboard so see how this
goes uh let's see yeah I mean I don't
think the issue is the appropriateness
of the design I think the issue here is
the encroachment into the setback does
is is any is everybody okay with doing
the certificate of at at the same time I
mean
I think we should do them separate yeah
pardon me I think we should do them
separate do you okay yeah because
whether I I think you might be
right okay um the finding in facts and
conclusions of law for application bcap
24-24 the board finds that a certificate
of appropriateness should be issued for
the property located at 2281 brighten
road for the rear addition to the
property shall be approved as
recommended okay so this has to do with
the design the appropriateness of the
design uh which we have to approve what
the ARB has approved it now we have to
approve what the ARB
approved Ken that's pretty much accurate
statement I understand
yeah there's some there's some to that
as well issue of certificate of
appropriateness if there's a variance
involved they can only make a
recommendation they only made a
recommendation but to me it doesn't
really make sense to do the certificate
of appropriate first other words let's
vote on the variance first if they get
the variance then we have to vote on the
CER appropri sounds good I I think
that's the proper order of operation so
my fault there Matt that's okay I'm
learning is I'm learning well apparently
I still am too so don't worry def
finding some facts inclusions law for
application bcap
24-24 for the property located at 2281
brighten Road based on the testimony
presented the board finds it
appropriateness to Grant the the board
finds it appropriate to Grant um the
variance from Bexley code section 12520
n to allow a 15 foot 8 and A4 inch
encroachment into the 40 foot rear yard
setback
okay do I hear a motion to approve the
findings of fact conclusions of law with
regard to the variance so move Marsh
thank you Mr Marsh second please second
Rosen Paul thank you Mr
rosenfall Matt you can call the rule
take your
time got it thanks Mr
Turner um
sorry I I vote
Yes Miss L I vote Yes Mr
shik am I allowed to make a comment
associated with my
vote I vote with a capital H very
hesitantly yes
I absolutely hear the Hoffman's concerns
unfortunately it's a conforming project
under our
code Mr King yes Mr Marsh
yes Mr uh Rosenthal yes and chairman
vhall I vote no however the variance is
granted now let's hear the findings
effect on certificate of appropriateness
sta staff would make a recommendation
that we put a condition of a landscape
plan if approved on this is that
acceptable
uh to provide St to provide staff with a
landscape plan from the applicant for
the property yeah I think there needs to
be a landscap landscape plan well just
in regards to the Landscaping between
this and the neighbor is that what
you're referencing and Drexel it would
be for the whole the whole
so but in particular for the Hopkins
yeah and the ARB did not condition it
but did recommend it to you all yeah
right I think we want to adhere to that
recommendation I'll move I'll make a
motion for that well he just gonna add
it to Lang I can withdraw my motion appr
you okay with adding the landscape yep
no problem is is that to be approved by
staff well or the
I think it's appropriate to be approved
by an landscape um staff I think Tre and
public gens commission is the right
place okay all right we'll take your
word for that one I think that makes
sense okay uh the findings and facts and
conclusion of law for bcap 24-24 the
board finds that a certificate of
appropriateness should be issued for the
property located at 2281 brighten Road
as
recommended with the
conditions that um for the rear rear
addition um that the landscape plan be
submitted and approved by City staff and
the project is compatible with the
existing architecture in the
neighborhood and I just want to make one
comment that means that if the
landscape architect or landscape staff
has a concern that their prerogative to
take it to train public guardion
okay just want to make sure oh I'm
saying that only because we're dealing
with Drax yeah yeah
right I think the tree and guard
commission would appreciate
addition okay do I hear a motion to
approve the finding findings of fact
conclusions of law regarding the
certificate of
appropriateness so move Rosenthal thank
you Mr Rosenthal is there a second
second Marsh thank you Mr Marsh
Matt please call the
role Mr
King yes Mr Marsh yes Mr Rosenthal yes
Mr schik yes Mr Turner
yes chairman be oh miss L yes chairman
Beall I vote Yes
also certificate appropriateness is
granted thank you thank you for your
time folks that came thank you very much
as
well the next case is application bz ap-
24-27 226 South doson the applicant is
Kyle gerlock who also happens to be the
owner the applicant is Seeking a
variance to Bexley city code section
12642 c for a 12 in height variance to
allow a 54 inch tall black aluminum
fence in the front yard and a special
permit to allow a 54in tall fence in the
side yard of a corner lot in accordance
spey city code section 12640 3B this is
corner lot
night Sir would you raise your right
hand do you swear or affirm that any
testimony you give this evening will be
the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth you get this I do and your
name is Kyle klock thank you
Kyle all right Mr Kingler give us the
staff report if you'd be so kind thank
you thank you chairman um this one is is
much like the 106 a little like the 1065
South Rosevelt we just had earlier the
night where there's a variance for one
part of the property and a special
permit for the other part of the part of
the property because of the varying
Heights
um
uh this is in the r six zoning District
uh it's a corner lot which the minimum
dimensions are um 70 by 120 for 8,400
square fet uh this is slightly smaller
this corner lot is 54 by 135 for
approximately
7,400 feet and what's the corner of what
and what this is the corner of Elm and
Dawson okay so the um applicant Mr
gerlocks front door faces Dawson to um
in my opinion to any uh person walking
down the street you would think Mr
garlock's front door is Dawson and his
front yard is Dawson um this property is
platted to Elm with the other Elm
addresses so his front yard is Elm um
uh there's a large city right of way
along Dawson which makes this home
that's what makes the front yard look
like Dawson because there's a large it's
like 20 feet up into his property that
is the city right of way along Dawson
it's kind of that way all the way down
Dawson if you ever walked that route
staff has reviewed the site plan site
and plan and finds this project to be
appropriate applicant applicant has uh
committed to working with City staff to
come up with a landscape plan that was
not submitted U prior to so it wasn't in
your packet but um that is a requirement
for front yard and side yard fences uh
the white lines on the application will
be four and a half foot tall black
aluminum so sort of like that transp you
know that you see throughout Bexley and
the yellow n the yellow line neighboring
uh adjacent to the property to the east
uh will be a six foot tall wood fence
there you go right
there and that is all that I have sir
okay
so Mr gerlock tell me uh what you're
whining to do and and why sure do I need
to push the button near I on you're good
okay um so just by way of a little bit
of background so we um in
June um bought well I guess the end of
May um bought this house um and I mean
kind of just as Mr Clinger alluded to um
would never have guessed would never
have guessed that our front yard was not
really our front yard or our side yard
was our front yard as it may be um we um
desired to have a fence in what would
otherwise appear to be the sidey yard
but it's not um in order we have a dog I
know dog people here right um as well as
two small children with with one on the
way and and by the way that's my wife
Lucy if if she's waving just note I'm
doing something wrong and everyone flag
me down and I'll correct I'll correct
myself some of us are married too we
totally
understand and so our our intent would
be to fence in the elm side extending um
there's an existing um backyard fence as
as Mr crer stated there kind of in
yellow the yellow would be the extended
portion of it or I'm sorry yes um would
be the extended portion of it which
would then transition to a black
aluminum pining in that part of elm
making it essentially a fenced in yard
such that the dog the kids um could
could play and not have to worry about
Escape or traffic or um anything in in
that area um as as Mr quer also stated
there's a large um ride of way on the
Dawson side such that a fence even if we
wanted to calling that a sidey yard um
even if we wanted to put in a fence
there that would be
prohibitive um as as we would similarly
be stuck into that large Dawson right of
way as well so this Elm side is really
um our only opportune area for for a
fenced in yard um we have discussed um
with the elm neighbors there the
Jets um this this fence say it would go
along their driveway appropriately set
back per code and had they they were um
expressed no well they I guess they
didn't want us to take down those pine
trees which we have no intention of
doing um but that was their only concern
and otherwise we're in agreement with
the appropriateness of the project okay
good all right is there anybody here Pro
or con obviously your wife is
pro we'll just assume that then
and actually one thing that I'm thinking
about now that Mr quer alluded to it so
on the Dawson side um we would intend to
put a a softscape um along the along
that fence where you would otherwise be
coming down to aw you see it um a box
wood of sorts um appropriate size and
um you know aesthetic on the where the
number 15 is located or the number
correct where the number 15 is located
we would have box Woods lining that side
of the fence so you're going to again
retain an aesthetic quality kind of
hiding that um part of the fence we
would welcome um we had not originally
envisioned along the 50 side which um
goes along Elm but we would welcome
input and thought thoughts as to what
what an appropriate
softscape um plan would look like I I
nodded yard designer I don't I I don't
claim to know exactly what could work
what would work in that area but as I
said if it's something that um there's
particular concerns about or that is
even required um we are certainly open
to looking at possibilities okay
chairman if I may to respond to that
just to let you guys know the land skape
plans are just to break up the wall
effect that fences create especially
when they're really visible on Corner
Lots so that's the require that's why
the requirements are in the code and we
certainly work with Mr gerlock to come
up with something um
reasonable for that area and and can he
consult with the staff regarding that
Landscaping yes okay thank you so so if
this house was in fact plotted to
plotted ploted to thought awesome would
this fencing be totally
compliant or would there be
issues I guess I'm totally on board with
that because we run by it all the time
it definitely feels like it's there I'm
just curious are we if it really that
really were the front of door I can
answer that that's a good question so do
you see where the fence juts out right I
turned my thing off the five like where
the five right there where it juts out
that would have to we do not allow a
fences to come out so if this was the
front we don't allow fences to come out
past the front facade of the building
not including porches so it's the front
living space in the building the front
corner so it would have to maintain that
corner if that's the front lot and if it
does come within 10 feet of the front of
the house again a landscape plan is
required because we don't want that wall
effect when you're driving down the
street so Landscaping in front of the
fence would be require required
regardless um that jut would be a would
be a variance uh but to answer your
question um it would be again a special
permit as well
because for a front yard fence um I know
that would be a sidey yard that would be
that would be okay the height would be
okay all right no fear to ask
hypothetical questions Mr Clinger you
know concerning that that I apologize
concerning that bump out there is an
existing off the um front of the house
there is an existing kind of stone um
Garden
Wall um and that is the reason that we
extend past the edge of the house is to
connect to that existing to that
existing front view or if you're looking
North you're going to be able to look
and it will be seamless that's the
that's the intention um with that
existing stone wall yeah makes
sense all
right any other questions or comments
from members of the
board I guess we have
a
variance a height
variance for the front yard and a
special permit for the uh side yard
which is just the opposite of what you
would think it would be right
so I sort of get the feeling we could
probably vote on these together any
problem with
that okay can we have findings effect
conclusions of law Matt yes sir the
findings and facts and conclusion of law
for application bcap
24-27 for property located at 226 South
Dawson based on the testimony presented
the board finds it appropriate to Grant
the special permit to allow a 54 inch
tall fence in the side yard of this
corner lot and Grant a 12 oh that was in
accordance with Bexley code section 12
64.0
3B and to Grant a uh 12 inch height
variance to allow a 54 inch tall black
aluminum
fence um in the front yard um from beex
Bexley code section 12 64.0
2C okay okay I think I got that right
guess I have one question is the fence
in the sidey yard a different
construction than the fence in the front
yard when you say the sidey yard I
mean 15 and 25 I know we're gonna play
this game right um that the elm side is
is what you're referring to or the but
looks to be like the 52 54 inch tall
black aluminum fence is in the front
yard so that would be the the front yard
is Elm right 50
correct so is what kind of fence is it
that faces Dawson is it a black aluminum
fence also the the 25 and the 15 that
you're referring to that would be the
same material the black same black
aluminum okay good that helps me which
is which is itself thin strips so again
the the see-through nature of it I
standard nothing nothing unusual about
the fence itself I'm I'm sorry can you
tell me get why why five foot bump out
from the there's a fence at the house
next door and it's even with the front
of the house so that's why sure again
the five foot there's a existing stone
wall that comes off of the facade of the
house off the off the front of the house
this would connect this would connect to
make it seamless you're not going to be
able to see with the tree there but it
would make it a seamless connection as
opposed to you're actually going to if
you made it consistent with the facade
of the house you oh maybe we are going
to be able to see anyways it's going to
connect directly to that
stone um garden bed um such that they
they are in sync that's the intent um in
the rationale for the extension beyond
the
facade so you're talking that stone
stone
yes yeah I see so it's a bum because
you're bump it's really a bump in for a
gate is that right into the so okay so
the it's going to stay in line all the
way to the north with the fence in the
stone wall and then the yeah but I'm
just looking if you look at the house to
the left of this on the other corner it
has fence on both sides that are just
even with the front of the house so yeah
okay all right
um I forget where we are do we have
finding fact yet we do chairman okay it
uh landscape plans implied in that we
need to add that as a condition uh
condition yeah yep to add in the okay
condition that the staff approve the
landscape plan can we also have staff
approve the uh aluminum fence design
because there's no image of the design
we are now doing that aren't
we we we are yes yes yes I want to make
sure that's implemented before I say
that we are but that that is an
initiative that um Matt took on is that
I will now review all fence design okay
good and that that was submitted with
our somewhere somewhere in our materials
there should be pictures of the of the
aluminum fence as well as the the wood
it should have been in your packet yeah
packet shows the wood fence but I don't
see the aluminum fence so that's okay
we're fine as long as it's going to get
reviewed that's fine
yeah that's not what's going up in your
front yard no no no that's the wood
fence that that's going on along the 20
where you see the 27 Oh different spot
East
Side corre yellow 27 up there yeah yeah
yeah that side actually not 27 sorry 49
is is where the wood would go yeah that
that map
best illustrates it got it
yeah and we're asking for landscape plan
on West and North yes or we can correct
it's it's required by
Club what we're really doing here we're
fencing in your sidey
yard really far as the way the world
would look at it that doesn't know
anything about zoney we were we were
surprised to find out that that wasn't
what we were actually doing so yes that
but that is of course the this is one of
the real examples of where it really
looks like the front of your house
there's no much question about it yeah
all right so do I have a motion to
approve the findings of fact conclusions
of law regarding the variance request
and the special permit request so move
Marsh thank you Mr
Marsh second second L thank you
L all right Mr Kingler please call the
RO Mr King yes Mr schik yes Mr Marsh yes
Miss leac yes Mr Turner yes Mr Rosenthal
yes chairman be I vote Yes also your
variance is granted and your special
permit as well congratulations good
project good luck with the new
baby thank you so much good luck with
the dogs and your
wife there I mean because obviously what
happened as Architects the stuff was
planted and then some dumb architect
came along like you know what would be
cool has there ever been like some it
would save a lot of boards a lot of time
if there was some ma opportunity to mass
re you could apply in some window of
time to say I would like my front yard
to be based on the house I mean you
couldn't just I couldn't make the my
side of my house the front but to give h
properties like this the opportunity to
change their platting yeah we've done
that before we we've done we've done
that before that's a process that can be
you have to go through so individuals
can do it but we've never yeah but it's
never been like some Mass this is just
ridiculous there's 50 houses that are
obviously that happened on 81 um Drexel
81 North Drexel yeah the Huntington
house
because it actually
faes so from my experience now working
in other communities this is easy
because we have a very orthagonal grid
yeah yeah some of them are unreal what
you come up with shap do we have any
additional new business Mr chair can I
make a motion to adjourn I hear a motion
to adjourn is it second all in favor