on here well i'm going over to attendees
to see if
anybody is on the wrong let's see here's
mr belt mr levine
mr marsh i'm looking
no do not see any other board members
that are under attendees
but we are live
i do not see mr b hall yet
kathy do you want to text him or
maybe he needs another link in there
karen under robert b hall
where under attendees
oh he is he must have just gotten on yep
never mind he's there
my text promoting him
okay thanks mayor
okay i do not see any more board members
and as soon as
chairman b hall comes on we should be
good to go
hi there hi folks
whenever you're ready yes good
get rid of some of the sunlight
that's pretty sunny for a snow sore snow
snow day
that was our fourth snow since the first
sepia bloomed
by the way you did right that's a good
point
you see that snow at around 3 p.m yeah i
was walking dog minute
i couldn't believe it didn't expect it
it was like a blizzard all of a sudden
it lasted about three minutes though
yeah
all right
okay uh let's see here
uh do you say we do have
uh adequate participants
on them yes six members
okay and are we expecting more or not
no not okay mr turner could not be here
this evening
at the last minute okay we still have
six
um as long as mr marsh is here i see his
name
all right i see him as well
okay uh keeping in mind that on
one of the applications this evening
since it's
immediately across the street for me i'm
pro i'm probably uh
being going to be forced to recuse
myself
uh on that case so the one at the 25
something brentwood okay
so um that person will have to be
made aware of the fact there will only
be five voting members on that case
where is that one but we still have more
than a quorum
you do but they need to be notified they
have to get four
out of five votes as opposed to four out
of six or seven
so okay i believe that's the third case
so we'll make sure we remind them of
that
okay and then you have a way of taking
me out of the panel
for that uh i know that
or you can mute and blank the screen and
turn off your video
okay yeah
i prefer that if that's sounds okay to
you because um
i don't want to have any trouble getting
you back in
okay that's fine okay all right then if
we're
ready to roll it's 604 according to my
watch
so i will go ahead and call the
april 2021
meeting of the bexley board of zoning
and planning to order
and ask uh ms rose to call the role
of the members of the board who are
present
miss mitchell
here mr share here
mr levine here mr pout
here mr marsh you're
chairman b hall i'm president also thank
you
we have some other participants i see or
attendees
about 20 or so if anybody is
in the audience and wishes to make any
comments
about the process or the procedures
generally followed by the
b zap this is
the opportunity to do so comments
could not be made about any particular
case but rather
can be made about our processes
and actions in general
is anybody in the audience if you wish
to please raise your hand on the screen
and let uh uh us know that you would
like to make
a public comment um there is one
uh james burkhardt
mr burkhart can you hear me
i'm sorry he's our second case just
saying
he should be able he's muted
mr burkhart you need to unmute yourself
there you go mr burkhart can you hear me
can the rest of the panel hear me yes
yes
not you okay
well okay if you'd like to make a
comment now's the time to do so and if
not we will just move on to the next
agenda item okay when he might not
realize he has his hand up that's
another possible yeah
i think that's probably true okay so
we are uh at
a point again to thank you where we
need to uh review the minutes of the
last
two meetings i think in this case
because we had a meeting in march
and we also had a special meeting in
march has everyone
been able to review the minutes of those
two meetings
we'll take them one at a time the
meeting which was
on um monday or tuesday
wednesday wednesday march 24th was the
first meeting
does anybody have
any corrections or modifications
deletions that they believe are
appropriate to the minutes
as written
i see no indication of such whereupon i
would certainly uh
entertain a motion to approve the
minutes of the
march 24th meeting special meeting
is there such a motion so moved thank
you is there a second
second thank you mr marsh uh all
in favor of approval of approving the
minutes of the
march 24th meeting please say i
i i opposed please say nay
mr b hall i abstain having not been uh
present for the meeting on the 24th
okay so mr thought you want to uh
abstain from voting on that exactly i
can't approve it not having been here
okay thank you very much uh so
there were five positive votes and in
that case and the minutes are thereby
approved there was a subsequent meeting
on the thursday the 25th of march
does anybody have any uh suggested
deletions or modifications to those
minutes
i hear none i would entertain a motion
to
approve the minutes of the march 25th
regular meeting of the
bcap
thank you is there a second second thank
you mr shik
uh all i'm gonna do this way all opposed
to approving the minutes of the regular
meeting on
march the 25th please say nay
hearing none uh by by acclimation
the minutes are approved
um chairman b hall yes i have now
i don't really know what i'm supposed to
do with this but i have a
attendee who who has now raised their
hand
okay and is it is it someone other than
an
applicant it is okay
um carol and allen radnor
okay but if it's in reference to this
these a particular case that needs to
wait so um right
mr uh errol and alan radner can you hear
me
yes we can chairman are you uh
wishing to make a general public comment
about the board of zoning
and planning uh about the minute
approval
the minute approval i
i wish to confirm that all the members
of the um bees app had received our
request for reconsideration it's on the
agenda
pardon me yeah i believe it's on the
agenda on the agenda
was this uh the written request that was
submitted by attorney
jim arnold yes and and two other um
uh people with standing so far and it is
on the agenda
i did receive those uh requests i
responded to the
uh people who made the request and i uh
asked the staff to have each member of
the board
given those uh letters requesting
reconsideration and
we have that item on the agenda
uh to give
any member the opportunity to uh make
such a motion
thank you very much thank you mr ratner
all right um the
we have a staff report um
the uh
ms rose is that staff report uh
related to a particular case or is that
it's my step report for comments on each
case
as we don't okay i'm sorry i got you so
we'll
get the staff report on a case-by-case
basis yes
very good thank you so then i think we
can start with old business
old business the first old business
involves
uh a reconsideration i think this
matter was heard in
february a motion to reconsider was made
by a member of the board in march that
motion passed and so the matter is now
set for reconsideration its application
vzap dash
20-46 involves
2404 fair avenue
the applicant is brenda parker and the
owner
of the property is tyler and allison
chamblin
uh and uh i think it would be a good
idea
uh ms rose if you could give us a just a
quick re-capitulation of
the facts of that matter so that anybody
that might not recall it can be
refreshed
okay and karen feel free to bring up the
photo
in the staff report um the
this was a variance to mexico section
125209
to allow a detached garage to be
attached to the principal structure
with a two-story addition um
once you attach that structure the
detached garage to the house it it no
longer meets the septic requirements to
the rear or to the side which is a 25
yard setback and eight foot side yard
setback uh this was approved
by the board at the february 25th
meeting
and there was some concern about the
proximity of the structure
when you look at the neighboring
property it appears to
basically close off the their rear yard
so um i've been in contact with the
owner
we've discussed he's okay too mr
chamberlain is down i see him down at
the bottom
right it might be a good idea to have
him sworn in
yeah is there is uh let me ask the
question is
ms parker going to be uh speaking on
behalf
of the applicant or is mr chamblin
i know i will be all right uh mr
chamblin if you would
raise your right hand to be sworn do you
swear or affirm
that the testimony you give this board
this evening will be the truth and
nothing but the truth
thank you sir i appreciate that um kathy
please uh give us a little uh
uh refresh our recollections and
help us with this okay the owners
understand the concern of the neighbors
and they they had reached out to me to
ask if they could simply withdraw their
their application however it is on the
record
for a variance approval so this is their
opportunity if they wish to do so
they could do it at this time and then
it will be on the record and make it
official
i'll defer to the owners so mr chairman
if i can make a quick
just update on the project please sir
thank you
so um first we just want to say we we
certainly appreciate and agree with the
original
approval of the variants however for
reasons unrelated to why i think we're
back here in front of the board tonight
we've decided not to pursue the project
at this time
and would like to withdraw the
application um i was in contact with ms
rose to let her know that that was our
intention and she informed me that i did
need to come back in front of the board
to let you guys know
okay well we certainly appreciate
that um and uh your
uh your um
consideration here let me put it that
way of withdrawing the application
so with that in mind uh i don't think we
need to do
anything as a board but if the
application is being withdrawn
uh i think that's just the way it is
kathy you agree with that
i do agree okay mr chamberlain thank you
for appearing tonight and taking the
time to do so
and good luck with whatever project you
you eventually pursue there
thank you i appreciate it bob i do have
a question does the fact that the board
approved this application previously is
it by definition
uh reversed by this action
that's what i was about to ask thanks
it is well i'll let bob speak yeah i
mean i i think
there's an application pending it's been
set for
uh reconsideration and and i think the
applicant
certainly has the right to withdraw it
at this time
uh see withdrawing the reconsideration
or is he recon
withdrawing the original
all he can do is he made one application
so he can either withdraw it or let us
vote on it right
and so he what he's suggesting is mr
chamberlain is suggesting that he would
prefer to just withdraw it so that it's
not
reconsidered and in fact it would just
go away and
if he wishes to do something in the
future he would file for
and and it requires a variance he would
file for a new variance at that time
so i don't know what the board would do
we've already granted it but now it's
being
when it's up for reconsideration that
means it's a chance
there's a chance exists that it would
either be granted or not granted and
he's saying
i want to withdraw it at this time
because it's
it's before us again once it's once we
vote on reconsidering it
so i think that all that can be done is
they withdraw and we
acknowledge the withdrawal on the record
and we move on to the case number two
how about that making the approval melon
void
correct
right all right thank you mr chamblin
thank you uh the next case
on old business is application bzap
21-21 at 471 north parkview
the applicant mr jim furrow the owner mr
j
schottenstein and this case was
previously before the board but i
believe it was
tabled because
there was a lot of discussion between
the owner applicant
and neighbors and they wanted a chance
to work out
a a resolution so i think that's where
we are
today is that correct kathy that is
correct
okay is uh mr furrow or mr schoenstein
here
um i don't see any i have um
if you're if you're the applicant for
this case could you please raise your
hand
i have mr burkhart is that correct kathy
yes that's the applicant
if there's okay else i have two mr
burkhart's on here
so i will allow both of them in
mr burkhart can you hear me
but i've had i've been having
whoa did you finally get me yeah i
yeah i can hear you but you're
reverberating quite badly
you have um i am not able
to uh hear you through my computer i had
to call them on the phone
that's fine but you can keep your
computer on visual
for audi for visual but you need to mute
it for sound
and then we won't hear the echo okay but
if i need to talk
no you can still talk but that's it now
talk
can you are you on your phone
it's very soft i can barely hear him
i can't hear him at all
if i use my phone
let me try to meet the other one
well you can do this on your phone and
turn off your computer if that's the way
you can hear us
um but then i can't see
well looking at my face isn't going to
do you much good i can tell you that
[Music]
or you can turn the volume way down
can you put your video on so i can see
which one is your
um computer and which one's your phone
and then i can just try to mute you from
my end
yes can you talk now to see if
hmm
i think if we swear him in i have been
in contact with him
and i've got a lot of information that
um
i could share that might help okay
mr burkhart if you could hear me just
nod your head
okay would you raise your right hand to
be sworn in
do you swear or affirm that if the
testimony you're about to give this
board this evening will be the truth and
nothing but the truth
just nod your head please thank you
all right kathy give us the uh
refreshment uh here on this case as well
all right so code section 126403a no
fence shall exceed 72 inches in height
the applicant is seeking a two-foot
variance to allow an eight-foot high
vinyl-coated fence along the west and
north property line at this location
similar to what is in place just south
of this lot
both of which will back up to alum creek
the case was tabled at the march 25th
meeting due to the concerns brush
clearing repairing setbacks along the
proposed fence line and also the
floodway
the applicant has since resubmitted i
believe what we're looking at now
a new fence design with a breakaway
bottom to address floodway concerns in
meet what would be acceptable to dave
ruder
from franklin county soil and water the
applicant has also proposed a six foot
high
section of fence at the top of the slope
along
with plantings to screen that section of
fencing which is outside the riparian
setback and floodway
since our last meeting i've received
additional information from dave reuter
that suggests
what can be planted in certain areas if
the applicant
will need to replant and modifications
in the floodway
if the board finds defense variants
acceptable
staff would recommend as condition one
that the approval be in conformance with
the recommendation from dave reuter
regarding planting materials such as
bare soil can be appreciated with turf
or woodland species tolerant of shading
two exposed steep slope is more
problematic and should be
the focus of the erosion control
measures this might include erosion
control matting
and seating as well as silt fence along
the toe of the slope
for added protection until stabilized
hydro seeding may be a
viable option as well to get the fast
faster control
uh socks arranged on the contours and
seating are
also possible and subject to inspection
by city staff
so this approval is comp is in
conformance with the plan submitted by
jim burkhart dated april 14th
2021 which i have shared with dave
reuter of franklin county soil and water
and he's he's finds this plan acceptable
with the conditions that i've stated
okay um mr burkhart can you still hear
me
please nod uh
was that a reasonable rendition
of the goals that you are seeking on
behalf
of your client there
okay uh is that let's find out if
there's anybody's i believe there was a
written there's a dan sharp
sharp is mr sharp with us yes and i have
just allowed him talking
mr sharp uh would you raise your right
hand please
to be sworn do you swear or affirm that
any testimony you give to the board this
evening will be the truth
and nothing but the truth i do thank you
sir i appreciate that
did you were you able to hear um ms
rose's rendition
of the uh sort of the new parameters of
this
application i was indeed and i'm uh most
appreciative of the work that was done
in the interim
uh with a plan with much greater detail
thoughtfulness and i'm
grateful to the applicant and their
representative for
agreeing to implement a reduction of the
fence height to six
feet a setback from the property line
and the planting of deciduous
plant material as a visual screen at the
area where it would have the greatest
impact to
my home so that's all in the positive
and i would like for the record to show
and it's fitting on on earth day that i
look forward to seeing in that
recommendation and agreement to
compliance from
toilet water because i found the
documentation in advance of this meeting
to be quite general about erosion
control
nothing of great specificity to this
site plan or
uh this application good
and i appreciate your reference to earth
day today because i've forgotten about
that
but let me ask you this um are there
any aspects of it that you feel are uh
unacceptable from your perspective
uh no one figure that is
unclear to me from the site plan is the
exact setback of the six
foot fence um and i can see a three foot
gate so i i presume that the fence
in the most pro close proximity to my
home will be no more than three feet
away from
the structure at 471 so that's
an area that potentially could be
unsatisfactory
and then if mr burkhart could elaborate
on the fencing material when we were to
altogether last there was a reference to
a potential of a
decorative fence in the six foot height
versus the chain link material
in that green inset area and i wondered
if the applicant was open to that
decorative fence rather than the chain
link material
okay my only two outstanding questions
mr chair very good
thank you mr sharp i appreciate your
taking the time to uh
bring us your perspective on this uh
request
mr burkhart are we having any better
luck hearing you or
maybe the volume on your phone is turned
down who knows
i would like to comment okay ms rose
the the riparian setback deals with
plantings and and the structures are a
concern
in the in the floodway so
the proposed fence at the top of this
hill i don't believe is an issue as
far as blocking any floodway
and i'm not sure why that
would not be allowed to be placed on the
property line the applicant has simply
opted to set it back from the property
line
well if you'll recall uh miss rose the
first application was for a fence
variance
seeking eight foot in height and that
was my chief
objection the first time around uh so i
very much acknowledged
the applicant's prerogative to lower
that height and set back and that
from a neighborly perspective is what
i'm most grateful for
um and i understand that that material
more just asking since it was offered by
the
representative at the last meeting as an
option wanted to follow through and see
where they landed on that
but i do know full and what fencing
material running the remainder of the
property line
will be if this variance is approved the
eight foot
chain link material with a breakaway
bottom that
is prescribed by franklin soil and water
prescribed or proscribed
i believe prescribed okay thank you
again
i i wasn't sure i heard you and i want
to make sure those two words sort of
have
different meanings yeah opposite impact
here uh
mr burkhart with the maybe a knot in the
head if we can't hear you
uh is the fencing material near the in
the in the green
area going to be a decorative material
or
is it and i i i guess i should just ask
you yes or no questions
you might be able to hear him now can
you try to talk can you hear me
can you hear me yeah it's it's
reverberating but we can hear you so
why don't you just answer the questions
we'll deal with the reverberation
okay karen what happens if you mute one
of the two devices
i i did i think i it seems to me that
maybe
you could turn your phone off because i
i did that
there there is i put
i put the phone back into the panel to
the attendees room
and muted them so i'm not quite sure
um maybe if you just
let me see if i can put my phone away
but i could not hear you without
i bet it's because he's too close to
that computer with his phone microphone
if he just stepped away it might yeah
see i i cannot i cannot hear you
okay we can hear you if you
just step away and take your phone with
you
he can you try that today uh
i see just not that far i don't know how
he's got to go get this phone back there
oh okay maybe like right there right
there it's still reverberating
it's not as bad okay well let's just dig
just go just try to try to answer the
questions here and we'll get to it as
quickly as we can
i had looked looked at uh
more of a decorative fence and talked
with three different fence companies
and because of the steepness and you can
see with the profile
that it is impossible to
purchase a fence with that kind of angle
with a chain-link fence they can
cut it to the angle so
i apologize but it's just
as feasible and i believe
with the plant material that we will
negotiate
that it should conceal the sense
okay uh mr sharp do you have any
additional
questions or comments based upon that
response
i do not okay and then the other issue
was
uh is the is the setback
uh at that same point three feet mr
burkhart do you know
uh well mr sharp would prefer to have
the fence go all the way the corner
but we really don't need that much room
for planting
and if i don't have a gate then my
client can
access his yard from that side
okay so so
i'm not sure i understand the impact
that has on the three feet mr sharp do
you understand
i i do understand uh what he's
describing and my curiosity would be
there right now that the gate is running
northbound
from the edge of the home and i'm
wondering why it couldn't run
parallel to the northern boundary of the
house
so it would be parallel to the
fence line direction rather than its
current
abutment which makes it perpendicular
so instead of having a right angle for
the gate could be
exactly where the cursor is run flat for
the north side of the house which would
gain
three feet further set back which would
remediate the the height as and i
understand what you're saying mr
burkhart about the the screening visual
would obviously block it regardless of
that three feet but the physical
presence
again to our back patio and living area
as much
as we could gain of a setback would be
appreciated and i certainly want to
honor your need for a gate cut
mr burkhart do you have any uh thoughts
or uh
uh suggestions and and or
concepts that we need to consider in
this regard
i i just i i couldn't figure out another
way
to locate a gate
so that's that was my option i believe
like i said i believe that the landscape
planting
and the setback from the property line
should be an adequate stream
okay did you see the way the cursor was
moving on the screen
with regard to where that how that gate
would swing
you see that cursor up there yes is
there a reason
that uh movement
uh in that area
is not uh feasible
well i if we moved it west
and then north uh i guess we could still
get in
you know i think we're willing to
to work with uh mr sharp which is that
we need access
yeah i don't think mr sharp is trying to
deny
you a point of access uh
and and frankly mr sharp isn't
denying anything here he's just giving
us facts support so that we can decide
what to do
but uh let me uh once again ask mr
sharp um is is
if we put a condition that he that the
applicant
is to work with our
uh and i don't know karen whether this
is in your bailiwick or this would be
because it's attached to the house and
it's a gate or whether
that would be a in someone else's uh
ballpark ballpark i mean it's really
cathy
yeah i'm not gonna have code enforcement
uh because i i
had a conversation with him today about
you know even monitoring and witnessing
you know how they prepare the bank as
well to make sure
that you know we're following up on
what's required
we'll be happy to work with him on that
as well all right so mr burkhart what if
we
add as a condition to the application
that
that you your client and you would work
with the uh
code enforcement folks to
try to come up with the best
accommodation for that gate
that that works for you and for the
neighbors
okay very good mr sharp does that sound
like a reasonable way to proceed
most certainly mr burkhardt thank you
for your flexibility and chairman and
the rest of the committee
for your thoughtfulness thank you and
thanks for your
input and involvement here as well
all right um
are there any questions or comments from
members of the board
i guess i should check is there anybody
else in the audience that is pro or con
this application karen do you see
anybody
um please raise your virtual hand if you
would like to speak
i'm sorry i do not see anybody else okay
thank you very much
uh if uh
there are no questions or comments from
members of the board
uh i would ask kathy to give us the
findings of fact conclusions the law and
the conditions
uh related to this application please
finding the fact that conclusions of law
for application number bzap
21-21 for property located at 471 north
parkview
upon consideration of the application
proposed
the proposed two foot variants and
evidence and testimony before it the
board finds the applicant has proven the
criteria to grant an area of variance of
mexico
section 12 26 11 c have been met
in a variance from vexy code section
1264.03 a
to allow an eight foot chain link fence
on the north
and west property line with the
breakaway bottom
in the floodway and modifications in the
riparian setbacks
with the following conditions that one
that the applicant meet the
recommendations of dave ruder
regarding plant material
erosion control measures silk fencing
along the toe of the slope
and subject to inspection by city staff
and approved in conformance with the
plant submit submitted by
james burkhart dated april 14 2021
and that the applicant work in
collaboration with the neighbor
and the city code enforcement officer
on a landscaping and fence plan
at the top of the slope
all right mr burkhart does that sound
like a findings back
conclusion of law with the conditions
that is acceptable to the applicant
okay thank you do i hear
a motion to accept the findings of
patent conclusions of law
as conditioned as read by ms rose
so moved thank you ms mitchell is there
a second
thank you mr marsh uh mrs rose please
call the roll
miss mitchell yes
mr sick
yes mr levine yes
mr powell yes mr marsh
yes chairman b hall i vote yes as well
the application is granted thank you for
the
very helpful and cooperative work mr
burkhart
and uh mr sharp as well
thank you thank you good evening
to you all thank you well
the next application
is under is it under new business no
no this one is okay i think this is the
case that i have to recuse myself from
uh yes my address is 2531 brentwood's as
you can all see i live
directly across the street so i i don't
think it's appropriate and the
our policy has been in the past that
if a board member's residence is
uh immediately adjacent to or affected
by
uh directly affected by an application
they should recuse themselves so i am
going to do so and uh
mr marsh if you would be so kind as to
take over the
chairmanship of this uh on this matter
i would appreciate it thank you happy to
do so
um uh kathy do we have any background on
this okay so
uh the applicant is seeking a variance
from mexican section 1252.15 g
accessory structures and use uses shall
be permitted only in the rear yard and
shall be at least three feet from all
property and right-of-way lines
to allow a swim spa in the west side
yard
so at our march 25th meeting
we found that the neighboring property
owner did not receive a notice on this
variance
request and the applicant
uh was nice enough to choose to table at
that time in order to allow the
neighbors adequate
uh time to review their application and
the request
this is a corner lot with an attached
garage that is accessed from the alley
the driveway is centered at the back of
the lot and splits the rear yard space
the living space portion of the house
sits closer to the side street
which is south cassingham and creates an
area on the west side
yard currently occupied by a deck part
of which
is non-conforming being constructed up
to the west side property line
the applicant is proposing to remove the
existing decks and construct a brick
patio and would like to locate the swim
spa
in the same area the swimming pools are
required to be
an additional five feet than the typical
three foot setback for an accessory
structure
so that's eight feet but the and the
proposed spa is actually 10 feet from
the west side
property line if the board finds it
appropriate to grant a variance
to mexico section 1252.15 g to allow us
one spot in the west side yard
staff finds that the
location allows the swim spa to meet the
eight-foot setback
required from the property line the
proposed patio will eliminate the
existing
conform non-conforming deck the existing
three foot high white picket fence
to the
south facing
[Music]
rent wood yes
uh
it's a picket fence and does not meet
the minimum four foot height fence
required
for a pool in accordance with mexico
section 126404
so the fence would be replaced in this
plan with a four foot
high wrought iron fence that meets code
and new landscaping to screen and
enhance
the brentwood side of the fence the
board may want to
also want to also consider landscape
screening on the interior
of the existing west property line fence
to further screen the spa from the
neighbor to the
west
got it um do do um
could we have the applicant and then i
guess anyone that's here to speak on
this topic
we haven't sworn in
um the applicant is already i believe
the only
valor is valerie that's you correct i
don't have any last name but
i assumed that was you um is there
anyone else here to represent or
are the two of you here to represent no
just miles and myself
okay great kathy can swear you in and
then we'll
um we'll do the attendees
any neighbors separately okay please
state your names and raise your right
hand
valerie kiefer miles hoover you saw me
swear
firm the testimony you're about to give
this evening is the truth
we do we do thank you
and do you want to just go ahead and
give us um just kind of walk us through
your application and what you'd like to
accomplish
sure i think um what might be
really beneficial is to go to the
drawing
um thanks so i think the bird's eye view
is a good way to kind of get an idea of
um
what is our backyard because from what i
understand that's the area behind the
garage
that's to the right so um we don't
have a lot of a backyard right
so and the area where the cursor is
right now is
um cassingham goes there so it's it's a
it's the exterior portion of the house
and you know it
um there's not a lot private about it so
what we're interested in is that um west
side yard area and placing the spa
there's an access to the house um
and placing it um down
on the brick patio and um a couple of
things the
this was submitted you know prior to the
meeting
um last month and so it is a little bit
different so the fence
line that we would like to do would go
from
the the house to the neighbor's
property the neighbor's privacy fence so
it wouldn't
extend in the drawing past the porch
um so we have talked to neighbors
um they all got the notice and we talked
to them with regards to the plan and
um you know any concerns that they might
have so i think the
the plan is morphed a little bit but the
the footprint of the swim spa would
remain the same on that west side yard
yeah and and so this is miles i guess
the changes were
it was very good i feel like feedback
from our neighbors and so it was
part of that was based off of the
feedback from our neighbors um
and so the fence would change as well it
would be a privacy fence that is
very similar to what our neighbors have
that it would join with we would just
have
ad lattice or something in the upper 12
to 18 inches to
try to provide an ornamental aspect and
then there would be landscaping
as we depict in that picture but as as
valerie mentioned
that patio area just adjacent to the
porch on the west
side where you see the patio extending
to be
kind of parallel with that front porch
that part would go away as well that was
part of what we'd agree to with our
neighbors
where's the lattice that you're speaking
of i'm sorry so that would just go
on the um so there would be a fence that
runs from that
corner of the residence that um kind of
on the west side so where the porch
meets the residence there
um right there the back of the porch
okay now you just run straight across
just go
up with your cursor and then there is
a privacy fence that that would
kind of connect with on the other side
and so it would just be
you know this would be a fence that
would be identical essentially to that
fence other than
just given there's more visibility there
we'd make it
kind of an ornamental aspect if you will
like with gladys or some type of
decorative top to it and then with
landscaping in front
as well so that it's appealing from the
street
so would the picket then still go away
correct correct correct that would be
correct okay and that's that's probably
a good idea to move that fence back
because typically fences
are required to line up with the living
space of the house and not an open porch
so that fence will now become conforming
yes correct isn't lined up with the home
so um this will definitely be an
improvement
okay um do we have um anyone
from anyone that was uh given notice
that's here to speak on this topic
tonight
if um anyone wants to testify to this
case
okay i have one um david lackey
now has permission to talk if you could
be sworn in
okay please state your name and raise
your right hand
david lackey your family swear or affirm
the testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth
i do thank you
uh mr lackey where do you where do you
live
we live uh next door to the applicant
got it
okay go ahead uh well first i want to
thank uh
thank the applicant uh for for tabling
this from last month we
were not aware of it um did not receive
any notice
um we did have uh the opportunity to
speak to the neighbors
ask them various questions our main
concern
really surrounds the swim spa
the noise associated with it
particularly
the way that sound reverberates off of
solid structures
we asked for some additional information
in regards to the swim spa
and we received that from the applicant
this morning
after a further discussion
and consideration we are very concerned
about the additional noise
happening in the side yard between the
two houses
and we are not supportive
of the request to put the swim spot in
the side yard
um i certainly understand the
uh the design of a lot i think there are
some other
opportunities to relocate the swim spa
it may not be the first choice
but i think that there are some
possibilities within the backyard
where it could be placed and reduce
the noise between the two houses the
other thing is on the west side of the
house is kind of
that's where our living space is our
living room is there
um our our bedrooms are up on that top
level
above the side yard and we're just
concerned about the additional noise and
the reverberation between
two solid structures
thank you um is there anyone else here
to speak on this uh
topic well so this is my i guess this is
miles and i mean
we're we'd be glad to table it this is
news to us i know we've met um
with our neighbor obviously and so and
so we told you
uh and we were aware of the concern and
clearly i guess the the information
i did wasn't sufficient in terms of
addressing that concern so
i mean i'd be glad to table it at the
end of the day you know we love the
neighborhood we want to be
we want um you know we want to have a
solution that works for everyone i don't
want to try to force something through
that isn't
you know that it doesn't meet the needs
of our neighbor as well um
so we'd be glad to look at this um you
know and we can get more data
i guess with regards to like one of the
things that they'd asked that
we've got to request into the
manufacturer but we've not received that
kind of
that information and trying to
understand like the decibel level
relative to
you know the ac units and heat pumps we
both homes have you know two units
um that are in those areas as well and
so we just
i think that kind of information will be
helpful for all of us um
and it was a fair request from our
neighbors um to understand that and we
don't
we haven't uh received that
those data points yet so i'd be glad to
table this and again i want to find
um a solution that works for everyone um
and not
try to force something through or create
animosity
thank you for that is there a member of
the board that wants to make a motion to
a table this
i'll move that i moved second
um all in favor of tabling it and then
uh cathy do we need to set do we need to
table it for the next meeting or give us
a specific date uh
we we could table it um if they feel
that
we'll be ready for the may 27th meeting
we could table it to may 27th and and if
if they decide to wait longer then we'll
re-notice
yeah that that's fine let's so let's
let's say we'll table it
uh until then and they're not ready
we'll just
wait and then we'll re-notice um
all in favor of tabling it say aye
aye all opposed say no
let the record reflect that it was
approved unanimously
uh thank you uh both the neighbor and
the applicant thank you
um with that i'll hand it back over to
mr b hall
uh for the next uh application
thank you mr marsh that was nicely done
i appreciate it
uh the next application is uh
involves uh
254 stanberry
if i see if i'm seeing that correct is
that correct yes
that's correct that's a case number b z
ap
21-11
the applicant is dean wentz the owner
is phillip and elisa kessler
and the address as i said earlier was
254 stanbury
the applicant is seeking a certificate
of appropriateness
for a new rear entrance porch
and also a variance which requires a 40
foot
rear yard setback to allow rear porch
addition to be
constructed 34 feet 11 inches
from the near from the rear property
line
along ashborn
is the applicant here
yes i have um dean wentz to represent
the applicant
i don't see the applicant the owner in
the attendees room but if you are please
raise your hand
if not i think it's dean representing
all right
where and can you hear me
you're muted probably
there you go yes i can hear you mr wentz
uh
if you would raise your right hand
please to be sworn do you swear or
affirm that the testimony you're about
to give the board this evening will be
the truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you very much uh
kathy why don't you give us the staff
report on this request please
all right this so this is a porch
addition to the east and a five-foot
variance to the 40-foot
rear yard setback uh this is an
irregular-shaped lot
in that it is located along stanbury
avenue but has a
side and rear yards that front on
ashborn road
so there's a 40 foot rear yard setback
required under code section 1252.09
r3 zoning and only a portion
of the proposed porch encroaches five
feet into that setback
and episode would be considered
would be constructed 34 feet 11 inches
from the rear property line along
ashborn
staff finds that due to the unusual
shape of this lot and the existing
sighting of the home the proposed
edition is compatible
and a best attempt to keep the
encroachment to a minimum
the setback is also not out of character
with the setbacks found along ashborn
roads
other homes that have ashborn road as a
front yard
okay um i can add to that
okay please this this project came
before the architecture review board and
it was voted unanimously as a consent
agenda item for the
for an approval for a certificate of
appropriateness
thank you karen mr wentz why don't you
give us uh a little rundown on why it is
that uh this request is being made
uh actually it's uh a little bit unusual
that we're
asking for a variance on on a kitchen
addition but
in this case the rear door needed to
move in order for the
uh for the kitchen plan to work
in in a better manner the door was right
in the middle of the
existing kitchen space and so
one of the things that we were trying to
do was just uh
reorganize the porch in such a way that
that the door made sense
at the same time the owners noted that
there was the
well to the basement entry that was
uncovered
so our decision was to try to excuse me
try to
extend the porch all the way across the
back of that facade
and in this case the one thing that i
don't think was mentioned is that
there's another portion of the house
if you stay on that site plan for a
moment there's another portion of the
house that is already
within 27 feet of the rear property line
so and then the second portion
you know just to the right of that that
is already non-conforming and we are
tucked well behind that i i think this
is the kind of case that
is essentially made for an appeals board
it's not a regular lot it's not the kind
of uh
property that all all of the typical
uh kind of setbacks work on and you can
see
how small the actual buildable area
is on a rather large slot
so i think it's a reasonable request i
don't think that we're asking
anything that is going to impact the
neighborhood in a in a poor manner and
it definitely is a hardship given the
fact that the
buildable area is so very small here
now there's no question this is quite an
odd shaped lot
thank you mr wentz uh karen
is there would you ask first well first
of all let me ask is there anybody in
the audience that is
pro or con this application if so please
raise your hand on the screen
by
i see no one okay thank you very much
members of the board
do you have any questions uh mr wentz or
any comments
about the application
i see no indication of such kathy can
you
give us a rendition of findings of fact
conclusions of law
regarding this matter finding some fact
in conclusions of law for application
number bzap
21-11 for property located at 254
stanbury upon consideration of the
application proposed variants and
evidence and testimony before it the
board finds the applicant has proven
that the criteria to grant in area
variants indexing code section
12 2611 c have been met and that
a five foot variance from vexi code
section 1252.09
r3 zoning should be granted to allow a
rear porch addition
on the east side of the principal
structure on this irregular
shaped lot as submitted
the board further finds that a
certificate of appropriateness
in accordance with the approval granted
approval recommended by the architecture
review board on april 8
2021 also be granted
okay um
mr lentz do you
agree with the findings of fat
conclusions of law
and the conditions associated there with
as read by ms rose from the applicant's
perspective
i do okay
do i hear a motion to approve the
findings of fact conclusions of law
still moved mr marsh thank you sir a
second
second second mr schick thank you
ms rose please call the role mr schick
yes mr powell
yes mr marsh
yes miss mitchell yes
mr levine yes
chairman b help i also vote yes the
variance break is granted and that looks
like a nice project good luck with it
thank you very much thank you thanks
dean
uh the next case is case bzap-21-12
involving 705 euclair avenue
the applicant and the owner is amanda
hussein uh the applicant is seeking a
special permit
in accordance with bexley city code uh
section 126403b which limits a fence
on the street side of a corner lot to 48
inches in height to allow a six foot
high fence
along the north side yard along mound
street
um news hussein are you
available yes i am
okay thank you um can you hear me
yes i can hear you all right would you
raise your right hand to be sworn
square or affirm that the testimony
you're about to give this evening will
be the truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you very much kathy give us a
little run down on this uh
case this is a corner lot right it is
uh side yard fence and a variance for a
corner lodge
uh fences along the street side of a
corner lot are limited to 48 inches in
height
this property has an existing 42 inch
chain link fence
they would like to replace with a six
foot high white vinyl fence with lattice
in the upper 18 inch portion of the
fence
their existing trees are working around
and have additionally provided a
landscape plan
along the mount street side of the fence
mexico section allows the board to grant
a special permit and
to allow a six foot fence after
considering
the following criteria um
a if the fence is compatible with other
properties
that it shall not exceed 72 inches in
height
that it includes transparency in the
upper 12 to 18 inches
and a landscape plan must be filed and
should not create visibility
or safety concerns for vehicular or
pedestrian movement
and no chain link fences so we're
actually getting rid of a chain link
fence
and
the applicant is
appears to meet the criteria and we
replace the chain link fence
with i believe it's a white vinyl so the
city right-of-way
extends approximately four and a half
feet beyond the sidewalk along mound
street
which leads me to believe that the
existing chain-link fence
is on city property the new fence would
need to meet the four and a half foot
setback and the proposed landscape plan
provided being it would then be in city
right-of-way would be subject to review
and approval by the tree and public
garden commission
the new location is far enough from the
corner to prevent a bill
visibility or safety concerns however we
may want to look at the section closest
to the alley
to provide proper visibility whether the
fence be
angled or stopped at the northeast
corner of the detached
garage and can you show us where that is
on the
on the side bottom right hand corner
right so there's an alley here
the alley runs south to well yeah from
top to bottom
is south to north got it on the
right-hand side
okay so uh let's uh
talk to uh mrs husain and ask
her uh about uh her perspective on this
and maybe uh you could address the
the issue that was raised about the
corner there
uh yeah at the alley and mound
yep perfect thank you mr chairman and
board so um
just wanted to share part of the reason
that we're looking to actually ask for
the special permit and variance is
really for the safety of our two young
children
we have a six and a three-year-old both
boys
who have lots of energy and um
are looking to close in the fence but
also um
the fence right now as it stands as mrs
rose mentioned
is non-conforming it was in place prior
to when we purchased our house
and so we're looking to put the vinyl
fence in
i actually think from a visibility
standpoint even if it's placed where it
is we would be cutting down the hedges
that are there that are
overgrown and would still provide enough
visibility to the
to the alleyway but we're definitely
open and flexible as our number one
goal is really to to enclose the yard in
and
to um to make sure that the safety of
our
kids are number one okay
would you just uh just to address the
issue straight on
at the corner of the alley and mound
would you be willing to
angle the fence
so that it were i don't know maybe 45
degrees
and give a little bit better visibility
to cars coming down the alley yeah that
seems like an
um incredibly fair request so yes okay
uh is there anybody in the audience uh
karen if anybody is in the audience
please raise your hand if you wish to
speak and karen let me know what you
see on the monitor um i have one person
it just says susan sorry there is no
last name but i'll allow to talk and
then
be sworn in susan susan can you hear me
yes can you hear me yes i can okay
would you would you raise your right
hand and uh be sworn
sure do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give
the board this evening will be the truth
and nothing but the truth
yes please state your full name uh
susan playstat i live at 718 francis so
i'm across the alley
from the applicant okay good so you're
right right there near mound right and
um
often i've come out the alley to turn uh
on to mound street and it's very
difficult to see around the corner so
the request that kathy made
sounds good to me it gives better
visibility
right now i think there's only three
feet between the
existing fence and the garage wall so
it's
i think it would help maintenance wise
for the
painting the garage and maintenance of
the landscape to
move the fence to that north east corner
of the garage
um but the height of the fence i have no
problem with that i think that's
i think it's good for their privacy so
i don't have a problem with the hype
so you're suggesting uh susan
um to instead of the fence being located
at the
alley and almost the end of the lot
near the alley that it'd be and we were
just talking about
placing it there but placing it at an
angle a 45 degree angle
that would great create greater
visibility excuse me
to moving it to the uh see
east end of the of the
garage is that what you're suggesting
right i i
you know that's a suggestion i just
think
it's it's very difficult to see it's
easy to see
cars on mound street but it's difficult
to see pedestrians and
people on bicycles on the sidewalk until
you kind of edge out and i think it's
about half the time myself and i've
noticed my next door neighbors come out
the alley you have to really
double check so i it's just a suggestion
whatever you can get it's like the 45
degree angle is
actually even better than what's shown
okay would you be
supportive of the application
if the fence remained where it is
currently
shown except built at a 45 degree angle
at that point
yeah i think that
helps to improve the line of sight there
just a safety issue yeah it might be
something that the applicant can just
be conditioned to work with kathy on on
site to make sure that the visibility is
is appropriate and yeah if there's that
i'm i'm sorry
if the um if the right-of-way is closer
even
to the garage wall that means the space
between the fence
and garage is very tiny so if kathy
could work with the applicant i think
that would be
best to see what it really looks like
sorry kathy
no that's okay i knew there was concern
and and i first thought maybe the
concern
was the fact that they thought this
fence was going exactly where the
existing chain link is when in fact
that's going to get pushed back so
i mean i'm more than happy to work with
the applicant on site
you know should they decide they want to
end it at the garage or if they
feel it's enough space worthwhile and
work with an angle
to make sure that we've got a good
visual clearance so let me ask
uh amanda are you okay with the concept
of uh take taking this idea that i think
we're all
happier if there's an angle in working
with the
uh staff and ms rose about exactly where
you would put it or
you know what the angle might be maybe
50 degrees makes more sense than 45
degrees i have no idea but
but you understand the concept would you
be willing to make a condition that you
will work with ms rose on the exact
placement
yes we definitely will and i i
completely agree with the angle piece of
it to be honest the fence was
the fence we have now is placed by a
previous owner
um and it is too close to the sidewalk
like we can see that
okay very good well we certainly
appreciate your uh open-mindedness on
this issue and
your cooperation all right um
i have one more hand that just actually
two two more hands but they're the same
person okay well then let's call this
same person with two hands and it
doesn't have a name
i don't think this is a real name moto
g7
play okay moto g7 play would you uh
can you hear me
i'm not hearing anybody because are they
muted
yes but i've asked them not to okay
claire avenue okay hold on moto g7 play
excuse me sir can you hear me
yes i can okay yes i can
can you give me oh there's two of you
okay can you give me your names please
i'm connie lewis connie
john lewis don lewis all right
i think i know where you live but you
might as well state it for the record
please
663 euclid
and you both live in the same location
at least she hasn't kicked you out yet
dawn
right that's the good news now let me
ask you
um if you would both raise your right
hands and be sworn please
do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you give the board this
evening will be the truth and nothing
but the truth
yes yes thank you very much what is your
perspective on this application folks
i i want to go through this problem with
this i do
yes i i like like this is fine
i agree with the angle in the garage my
only complaint is we didn't receive any
notice about this whatsoever
663 nuclear you might be
outside of the footage on this one
it's going to be close 705
we're five houses away
that's probably too far yeah it probably
is just outside of the uh
required uh notifications but but you
could see the sign in front of the house
no okay no but i'll walk out and see
yeah it's there no i don't see a sign in
front of their house
i can i do have a sign in front of my
house um
i'm sure kathy knows the exact date it
was placed
um oh maybe we haven't moved the wrong
angle
maybe i'm looking at the wrong angle i
see it did you just come out of your
house
my husband may have but i'm upstairs
we're trying to contain the children so
you don't hear them
or keep them occupied you're doing a
great job
he's he's uh he's waving south and i'm
north
so oh anyway
i see um the only thing i have to say is
i think susan placed it had some
wonderful suggestions
and uh and i think that they really need
to have a new fence
um i think that would help yeah that's
right
um we're all in favor very good
great those are a comment thank you
thank you don thank you connie we
appreciate your uh
attention to the these cases
all right anybody
on the board have any questions or
comments please
having lived almost directly next door
to them
um six years ago when she said her son
was six i was like oh my god time flies
um that's an enhancement to that corner
in the community so
um you know it's it's rare that a fence
brings that much of an enhancement but
they've done beautiful
improvements to the property and i think
this is just an addition to that
nice okay very good thank you very much
kathy can we have findings of fact
conclusions of law regarding this matter
please
the findings of fact and conclusions of
law for application number bzap dash
21-12
for property located at 705 euclair
upon consideration of the application
the proposed variance and evidence and
testimony before the board finds the
applicant has proven the criteria to
grant an area variants
in bexley code section 122611c have been
met
any two-foot variants from mexico
section 1264-03b
shall be granted to allow a six-foot
fence along the north side
property line with the following
conditions that the landscape
is subject to further review and
approval by the trio public garden
commission
and two that the applicant worked with
staff on the
fence being placed at an angle
at the alley and the north
west corner of the property
north west right that's right okay
any uh suggested changes
uh for members of the board or is that
reading okay
um mr b also mr marsh the only other
thing i would i'd like to add is
either at an angle or bring the fence
to the corner of the garage
as an alternative yeah as an alternative
i mean i looked at it on google earth
and i mean that that garage is like
there's not a lot of room between the
garage and that sidewalk
yeah yeah yeah so
uh and and so they would work in other
words the condition would be that the
apache would work with the city staff
on the on various alternatives one of
which would be an angle the other one
would be to move the
position of the end of the fence the the
westernmost portion of the fence
uh uh to another location that's
satisfactory to the applicant and uh
also to the city staff so 90 degree or
45 degrees
yeah 990 degrees here 45
50 55 we don't care what the angles are
but something that that makes sense
there and increases visibility
okay i think that's a good addition mr
march
and uh with that uh i would ask the
applicant
uh uh amanda are you um
uh accepting the reading of the findings
of fact conclusions law
as conditioned from your perspective
yes thank you mr chairman thank you very
much all right
do i hear a motion from the board to
approve the fighting effect and
conclusions of law as conditioned
moved mr pfau thank you sir is there a
second
second second thank you alicia
uh with that uh kathy would you please
call the role
mr pout yes
miss mitchell yes mr schick
yes mr levine
yes mr marsh yes
chairman b hall i vote yes as well
the variance is granted
uh and the all the approvals necessary
are also granted thank you very much
thank you mrs hussein and thank you uh
to the audience members who
the neighbors that took the time to
give us better insight into the case
the next case
is a rb21-30
bzap-21-15
how am i doing that's a long one we'll
explain that in a minute yeah i will
okay that's involving the
address of 2467
sherwood road the applicant is daryl
rodgers
and the owners are chris and kimberly
rankin
the applicant is seeking architectural
review and a certificate of
appropriateness
for a new detached garage the applicant
is also seeking a variance from
the benchley city code to allow a second
floor of the detached garage to exceed
10 feet and total cubic feet of the
second floor to be more than
two-thirds cubic feet of the first floor
all right i think i got that right uh is
mr rogers or the uh rankins available
um they are both now in the attendee and
the panelists room so
all right why don't all three of you
raise your right hand if you would and
be sworn
do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give this
evening will be the truth and the whole
truth
if so please say i do i do i do
all right i got two i do's is there a
third one i do
all right thank you all right
um miss
let's see the city uh
kathy you probably need to give us a
little background on this one and
explain that uh
case number to me all right so initially
this was submitted by the applicant as
an arb
um and then you know once you start
crunching the numbers on the cubic
feet for space over an interior
stairwell
and then floor to top of truss on the
second floor
i determined that it actually exceeded
that height limit on the second floor by
one foot
so the applicant is seeking a one foot
variance to the second floor
10 foot height limit an attempt to
provide space for a second floor art
studio
the overall footprint meets code but the
cubic volume
to accommodate an interior staircase
makes us more of a second floor
this application has received a positive
recommendation
on the overall design from the
architecture review board
staff would like to point out that the
location of the garage
is at the rear of the property which
also borders the commercial district
along main street
and has less of an impact on the overall
neighborhood based on that fact
the trellis attached to the garage is
not considered additional square footage
if it remains
open on the top and sides as proposed
staff would recommend if approved to be
conditioned upon the trellis remaining
as an open trellis in the attempt to
enclose the trellis or add a roof in
place of the
open trellis would be subject to a
variance request
okay mr rogers are you going to be the
uh
presenter may i insert a little
story that's okay there's so many of
them that actually didn't have to come
to arb
oh sorry about that arb this time that
um
i think this is the only the only other
one um
there there really isn't much to say
other than the um architects review
board
did put this on the consent agenda items
which means it was just
not discussed and improved unanimously
okay to not true this became a bees app
recommended to be zapp for a certificate
of appropriateness
okay thank you very good thank you very
much does your dog approve
she must hear somebody at the door i
will now mute
all right uh she does she approves
a vote sorry daryl all right daryl
can you give us a little run down from
the owner's perspective there or mr
rankin how whoever wants to speak
i'll uh start off and if chris wants to
speak he can definitely do that
uh this is a great project uh
we've got clients chris and kim rankin
who are
very serious about they have a
commitment to design they're both
art school graduates designers
themselves
and uh chris is an accomplished painter
he actually created a painting that's in
our columbus convention center
in the existing garage that's
unfortunately
ready to collapse but
what we've got is
basically four goals for this project
they wanted to replace their dilapidated
garage
it's pretty un distinguished and
it's really quite tight to fit two cars
in it so they were committed to
replacing the garage
chris has been painting in that garage
they have to move their cars out
to do that we talked about creating an
attic space for him to create a studio
for his encaustic painting that he does
so that was another goal was to try to
create space within the attic
of the garage and then they wanted to
relate the garage to the architectural
character of the house
which i think we've done a pretty good
job of doing and then create some
outdoor living spaces
kind of tie everything together give
them these really nice
spaces outside between the garage and
house
and really tie it all together
architecturally we work with foreground
studio from the very beginning
and it was just quite a positive process
so
when it comes to the variances um
the two issues we have which are the
exceeding 10 foot for the second floor
and the cubic footage of the second
floor
what i can say to that i think that's
already been said but i want to stress
this
is this garage could be built without a
variance the
reason we have to go for the variances
is because we're trying to do the second
floor
the height of the garage does not exceed
the 20-foot height restriction for
accessory structures
and the footprint of the garage is
actually just slightly under
i think by a fraction of a foot a square
foot under
the allowable footprint for a detached
garage or accessory structure so
we fit this second floor into the attic
space
without popping up and creating tall
knee walls and
really making this a bulky structure
it's a garage
that could be approved without any
variances
we just chose to design the attic space
so it's occupiable
and the owner's commitment to spending
the extra money to create a stair
and some limited finishes on the second
floor to
allow chris to have his uh well it's
more than a hobby
uh it's his craft that he does at home
uh doing the encaustic painting on the
second floor so
um the volume we created
we feel we basically started with a
eight foot garage ceiling
and then put a roof pitch on it that
matches the roof pitch of the existing
house so
it's a pretty straightforward design but
it's got some nice quirks
and detailing to it that ties it to the
existing house
and so architecturally we feel that
we're not asking for a lot here because
it is a
structure that could be approved as a
detached garage
okay mr rankin would you like to add
anything
i think daryl summed it up pretty well
okay
great uh is there anybody in the
audience that
is uh for or against this uh
application please please raise your
hand
on the screen
i see no one okay
members of the board you have any
questions or comments about the
proposal here karen keep that screen up
one of the things that i found
interesting about this garage
is i thought how in the world are they
going to get into that second bay from
their driveway well they actually have
one entrance
off of the alley on the south side and
then another entrance on the north that
you access from the drought right here
yeah i see it there you know and that's
the valley that's the alley toward
maine correct yes yeah so
that has been a common
i mean i know we don't give variances
based on precedent they're individually
unique but it is an iss you know i think
kathy already said that
but it does back up to sure to me yeah
interesting yeah they they want to do
that for a couple reasons one is the
flexibility of you know
how they get in and out but also to kind
of
ungarage the garage from the backyard
viewpoint of not having two garage doors
as the backdrop to all this beautiful
new outdoor living space
yeah the primary reason for that was the
aesthetics of it of the garage
looking more like a little house and
less like an ugly garage
yes uh-huh one thing i went one thing i
wanted to add just
so that um everyone's aware um all of
our neighbors have been well informed as
to our our project
especially the ones that we share the
driveway with
we're very close with them everyone is
an understanding of what's going on
they've seen
all our drawings all our proposed
ideas and everyone seems to be excited
about what we're doing i just wanted to
add that especially because the fact
that we share space so
intimately with our neighbors uh
directly next to us that we share
the driveway that we are also going to
be uh
completely redoing together gotcha
but i think that's important factor too
yes
all right let our support from that
neighbor in the uh
application package okay beautiful thank
you for pointing that out
uh any additional questions
about it i know we're going to be
talking about
the general city policy toward garages
here
later in the meeting but
anybody have any difficulties or
questions or
comments regarding this application on
the board now
okay kathy uh
can you give us the findings of fact
conclusions law on this matter please
okay and i'll read the certificate of
appropriateness separately
okay good thank you first we have the
findings of conclusions of law for
application number
bzap dash 21-15
for property located at 2467
sherwood road upon consideration of the
application
proposed variants and evidence and
testimony before it
the board finds the applicant has proven
that the criteria to grant an area
variants in mexico
section 122611c has been met
and a variance from mexico section
1252.15 e
and f to allow a
10 foot a one foot variance to the
second floor height
and area variance to the second floor
of an of a detached garage
on a lot that backs up to a commercial
district
shall be granted with the following
condition
that the proposed attached trellis
is not to be enclosed on top or side
without a further variance request
okay
mr rogers does that reading
comport with your request and your
understanding
uh and is it acceptable to your clients
yes yes we never intended to enclose uh
the trellis that's perfectly fine
okay great um members
of the board do i hear a motion to
approve the findings of fact conclusions
law
as read by ms rose thank you
mr marsh is there a second second
thank you alicia
uh kathy would you please call the role
mr marsh
yes mr schick yes
mr levine yes
mr fout yes
miss mitchell yes chairman b hall
i also vote yes uh now can we have
findings of bank conclusions the law
regarding the
uh the certificate of appropriateness
yes finally the findings and decision of
the board for application number bzap
dash 21-15 also represented as
arb-21-30 at the architecture review
board
for property located at 2467 sherwood
the board finds that a certificate of
appropriateness should be granted
in accordance with the recommendation
from the architecture review boards
april 8th 2021 meeting
as submitted
okay very good mr rogers that
sound uh reasonable to you and
acceptable to your client
yes
i was going to say your client could
certainly agree with that as well
if you'd like thank you yes sir mr
rankin thank you sir
uh all right um
do i hear a motion to approve the
findings of fact conclusions all
regarded certificate of appropriateness
so moved
thank you mr marsh is there a second
a second thank you mr fowle kathy please
call the roll
um mr levine yes
mr powell yes miss mitchell
yes mr sheik yes
marsh yes chairman b hall
i also vote yes the certificate of
appropriateness is approved
thank you very much for a very
interesting and uh
good project and good luck with it thank
you very much
greatly appreciate it
all right the next case is application
bzap 21-9
at and the properties involved is at 10
75 grand in the applicant and owner
is paige webb and the applicant is
seeking a special permit
uh in accordance with code section
126402
which prevents a person from erecting
any fence or wall in any residential
zoning district between the front yard
setback line
and the street with the following
exceptions decorative landscaping walls
and fences which exceed 24 inches in
height above the ground level but not
more than 22 inches above the ground
level
be allowed with a special permit from
the board of zoning and planning
to allow the advocate to install a three
foot five
inch high white picket fence
in the front yard along grandin and
livingston
sides the brandon and livingston have
any sides of the property
uh ms webb
are you available can you hear me
yes we're here can you hear me yes
would uh can i have both of your names
since i
only see i see two people yeah
paige webb and marcus lack the other
owner
all right good just would the two of you
raise your right hand to be sworn please
do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're going to give the board
this evening will be the truth and
nothing but the truth i do
yes thank you very much i appreciate
that us
kathy can you give us the uh staff
report please
sure uh this is for a front yard fence
the applicant is seeking a special
permit to allow
3.5 foot high white vinyl or wood or
black
iron fence in the front yard on the
south side
and along livingston avenue side of the
lot i would like to share that it can be
easily misunderstood when someone is
asking for a fence in the side yard of
their property
they may not be aware that what the
owners believe to be the side yard is
really a front yard this
location is addressed to grandin has a
front door facing grand
and it would appear granted to be the
front yard but it is platted to
livingston avenue so the
board has the ability to grant a special
permit if they find that the fence is
compatible with other properties
uh it integrates with the existing front
yard landscaping
it's not chain link which it is not
uh defense and walsh will have a minimum
50
transparency which it does and
a lot exhibits unique characteristics
that support increased defense height
well
it's a corner lot so corner lots are
[Music]
typically have two front yards but in
this case france
livingston avenue however it's used as a
side yard
the epic would like to place the fence
along livingston
avenue side of their lot uh
fence isn't solid and they have existing
and proposed landscaping
staff would point out that the house on
the slot sits to the north and the only
usable yard is in the front
south side the property on the opposite
side of grandin has
thick hedge along livingston avenue side
of the property
and the angled landscaping that they
currently have at 10
75 grand respects this availability
visibility requirements
for corner lots
okay is there an alley behind this
property yes yes
okay all right
um ms webb
you want to give us a render or or
marcus either one of you want to give us
a
rendition of your uh perspective on
your request here why you're doing this
yeah so um when
so we moved here about three years ago
and um yeah we did misunderstand that
this
uh was our side yard because it's our
only yard
our back our back is just our driveway
um and garage like there's no grass in
our backyard
um and we have a dog and a kid and
so we had always planned to build a
fence like before we moved in
um and then found out that it's actually
the front yard
um and have been sort of trying to
figure out a way
um for both privacy uh because you know
livingston
um and then also but primarily safety
um for especially our dog
who i think um our kid is now old enough
that
he's not a toddler anymore but um the
dog
the dog will run um and so it's it's
just hard to
always have her on a leash
right right well it is confusing as to
what is a side yard and what is a front
yard that's for sure
okay um
let me see if there's anybody in the
audience that is
a pro or con if you are please raise
your hand on the screen
so that karen boker can find you
any any uh buddy pop up there
karen nope sorry i was muted so that you
couldn't hear my dog
um no there are no hands at this time
and do you have any uh comments from the
arb on this one
no this one didn't come to airbnb
but i would i would ask for karen's
opinion on you know they proposed three
different styles of fences
and based on the style of the home karen
might want to comment on what might be
most appropriate
i have no problem at all with the
condition that i review the design of
the fence
um i i would like to reserve that to
just going out and seeing it you know i
can meet you out there but
i'm hap i'm perfectly happy that that be
a condition of approval
and and uh
paige are you okay with making it as a
condition that whatever you
choose would get uh karen's
uh review and approval
yeah absolutely we were thinking about a
white
vinyl picket fence um just to match our
existing structure
um but i put on three different kinds
just to be flexible
which okay we're okay with whatever um
you know karen thinks is appropriate
and our we forgot to mention our
neighbors we spoke to them and they're
they're in support and um okay so we're
all good
on those those friends too good
absolutely i mean
i want to make this clear you would make
the choice
but karen would just have the ability to
approve or make suggestions
to you that will be designed suggestions
in in nature
you know so now she would not choose it
or
impose her feelings on you but just as
long as you pick something that
she believes doesn't doesn't have any
negative aspects to it i think is what
we're really trying to avoid
yeah i'm fine with that it's your choice
but i'll just tell you if it's a bad one
i got you hey one question i have
is um is there any
uh issue with and maybe i'm confused
about where the fence is going to
but because i might be confused about
front and side yard here but
with the visibility uh coming out of the
alley
into grandin
as a car turns right off of livingston
and goes into grandin and somebody's
coming down the alley is there any
problem with visibility on that corner
um so i don't know if you're able to go
back to the sort of like
google map aerial view that i saw in our
packet
um it's in my staff report karen
okay um or or there's so many things
i know i'm sorry that's okay i just bear
with me while i look for it and
so i can i can just mention while you
look so
the fence is going um on the lot where
our shrubs are
on the south side yeah so it won't um
even come near the alley it's it's gonna
stop
um like where our porch area nope keep
going
um not this one nope keep going
keep oh keep going
oh sorry i didn't get to it yet wrong
house yo
keep going there it is there we go
yeah so see that alley is behind our
right north part i should say um and
then our shrubs
are in the area that's where the fence
would go on the inside of the shrubs
okay
and where does that end where the fence
end on the grand inside
um at the house yeah right there
porch there yep okay beautiful all right
okay so you're making more or less
making livingston avenue
your backyard got it
okay
well um
did i ask whether there's anybody in the
audience on this case or not i think
yes you did there is no one okay
so members of this of the board do you
have any
questions about this is a rather unusual
situation here
with livingston avenue what any
questions or comments you have about
this request
only comment that i would have just
because i'm a livingston avenue resident
also with a front yard
and a small dog that likes to run i
think
this will really help and even enhance
that property
so
i you know i don't have any opposition
to it i think it would be a good
addition
okay all right
are those two-year plans that are around
the yard uh
page i'm sorry
are those that are planted there what
are those plants
those are um uh the shrubs are are
i came over yeah and then like the
flower bed is
uh lavender and some lilies and um
peonies on the corner yeah and you
angled that on purpose to help with
visibility
yeah my husband is really good at math
from the corner yeah well that's very
much appreciated
and i think uh quite helpful
for safety purposes yes our officer
would agree
yeah okay um
does anybody uh on the
commission have any additional questions
or comments
if not uh kathy can we have uh
the findings of fact conclusions of law
on this matter please
find these effects at conclusions of law
for application number bzap dash 21-9
or property located at 1075 grandin
upon consideration of the application
proposed variants and evidence and
testimony before it the board finds the
applicant has proven that the criteria
to grant an area of variance
in mexico section 122611c have been met
and a variance from mexico section 12
64.02 to allow a 3.5
high fence in the front south
yard of this corner lot platitude
livingston avenue
be granted with the condition that the
applicant work with
the staff design consultant on defense
material
and style okay i think
that's correct any additions for members
of the staff
are members of the uh panel
if not uh uh
marcus and paige do you have uh any
problem with the reading of the findings
of factor
is it uh acceptable to you
that sounds great thank you thank you
all right do i hear a motion
to approve the findings of fact
conclusions of law
as read by ms rose
so moved thank you is there a second
a second thank you mr marsh
or mr fat whoever beat whoever beat you
there mr fountain
all right mr fout uh kathy would you
please call the roll on this
application yes
miss mitchell yes mr scheck
yes mr levine
yes mr powell yes
and chairman yeah i vote yes also the
variance is granted and uh good nice
project good luck with it folks and
thanks for
your patience here waiting uh for your
turn
thank you all right
next case on the agenda i
need to look down at here oh sorry
i'm sorry i i should have one printed
out in front of me no i was just going
sorry about that i was all right just
going back to the staff report
okay there we go all right so this one
is application b-z-a-p-21-17
2699 east main street the applicant is
kurt lake and the owners are
aaron carroll and carol dental
and let's see here
um the applicant is seeking
architectural review and approval to
allow modifications to the building
for the new tenant carroll dental the
modifications include windows
roofing slate
which is there currently to be
maintained change in building color
new awnings light fixtures and landscape
improvements
all right um is mr
late or aaron carroll available
i have mr late is that yes
all right mr lake you intend to testify
would you raise your right hand please
to be sworn you swear or affirmed
the testimony which you are about to
give the board will be the truth and
nothing but the truth
i do i should i think i should point out
that
uh mr carroll dr carroll happens to be
my dentist
i didn't realize he was before us this
evening but i don't think the fact that
he's my dentist
that necessarily makes me recuse myself
from the case
and i don't think so i'm
not going to do that he he hasn't caused
me enough pain
that i would vote against him
mr chairman is your self-appointed
counselor of law with uh
all right um kathy talk to us about this
one from the staff perspective please
so these are exterior modifications and
the applicant had originally submitted
a minor review application for changes
to the roof and windows
and then although staff found the
upgrade to the windows
were appropriate it was further
determined that the applicant
additionally wished to change the color
of the brick and the stucco
facade and awnings and all of which are
subject to review and approval by the
board of zoning and planning
being it's in the main street district
so staff would defer to karen volker to
speak to
the proposed changes very good karen
please
um so i did approve the windows already
on this
project because they came in separately
and it they
were a nice addition to it they match
what's existing and
they're an improvement the um the
additional
um what are those new ones in this
picture i
i don't remember if they're already put
in or not but
they're black and they match the the
kind of motif of the
um of the entire thing the only thing
that's different is the front which
still has the original brick and i
believe the applicant can speak to this
but
they would like to change the color to
all white
um to make it uniform all the way around
um but you know i'm always iffy about
changing real brick to painting it
because
you can't really go back once you do
that without you know it not looking
ever the same
but in this case the whole building is
already white
so i i kind of think it would make
a more uniform and you know who wants
who wouldn't want to go to a dentist
office that has an all-white building to
go
you're all white teeth i mean i i'm very
mixed on it but
i think that the fact that they're
keeping the slate roof
the new very nice black windows and the
rest of the building being
all white already um makes sense
so comment i have a question i have for
you is well
i've been sitting on the board long
enough now that i heard
i've learned things from you of course
many things but
one of them is that these long
stretches a wall that have no
contrast or or division is something
that you generally
do not care for and the question here is
why don't you feel that the contrast
at least breaks up that real long white
wall actually on both sides of the
building
well that's an excellent question okay
thank you
a very good question but when we're when
we
as designers are typically talking about
breaking up the facade
it's not so much in color it's it's what
this already does
that separates the the height is
different it has a little protrusion
with the brick work that brickwork will
still
be be prevalent and a differentiator
between the front
and the back um where it has like the
brick lentils here
let's see if you can see yeah so that
will
still be in fact it will probably be
shadowed even nicer in the white because
it'll be a big contrast between
um so i it's a great question but i
think that given the differential
between the heights
and the roof line and the detail of the
brickwork you'll still get that
i i do i think in this case it will
probably clean it up a lot
well let's let's let's let mr lake
comment on that and
other things as well uh mr lape uh i
just asked that question
from listening to many many and yet
listening to a lot of architects i
happen to have a close relatives in our
architect so i've got to listen to his
jazz
occasionally too so i just thought i'd
ask but i'm curious to hear your and
your clients perspective on it
yeah and and mostly i was just um going
to circle back around i apologize i
didn't speak up earlier but um
to clarify the the stucco portion or
once it changes from material from brick
to stucco we were hoping to paint the
stucco portion actually a
shade of gray and and i apologize if
that didn't come through
i was hoping on the plans that it was
shown but the elevations caught and then
there's a a rendering uh that's on
uh eight sheet a0.1 i don't know if you
have the full
submittal there and it's hard to believe
that it's a color rendering because it's
all grayscale but
it's it's all whites blacks and grays
yeah so if you kind of scroll up that
sheet there
that she's going to is actually a a
color scale rendering of what it is and
it's hard to say because
the stucco is a shade of gray the stone
the brick is white and then the windows
are black with
what the hope was was white trim around
the outside of the windows
so um that that is actually a color
so i apologize that didn't make it
through the conversation somewhere but
it was
different than the white brick on the
front so okay
that's actually i think i actually kind
of like that because
that does give some differential you
know some depth and then
the trim work that's white around the
black windows will tie it in
with the white on the front that's yeah
that's exactly what we were hoping or
thinking yeah oh yeah i think that's
a lot more attractive from
a lay person like me who doesn't know
he's talking about perspective you know
i think you hit the nail on the head you
said you shouldn't be all white all the
way across you were right
there's um a good there's the color oh
okay
beautiful yeah all right
uh and uh kurt i mean i think they gave
us a pretty good rendition of what
you're trying to do here you're you're
keeping
a lot of things the same but if you're
keeping a lot of the
upgraded materials those lovely awnings
are probably going to come down i would
assume
yes and and i want to send apologies
with that we um
we have started some work already which
i i was mistaken that we
had approval through that minor approval
so i apologize i
in no way meant to circumvent the
process but those uh those old metal
awnings that were on the previous
pictures are actually down already
well it couldn't come down fast enough
as far as i'm concerned so
but yeah they that was the key and then
the one piece that uh just to bring up
is that the sheet that she's on there
is the front window um that that's
something else you guys probably would
want to discuss in addition to those
awnings but the front window right now
is kind of the left
side of this elevation here it's kind of
a large storefront
you know window with a small brick ledge
at the bottom of it
and the dock had hoped that's going to
be where the
lobby chairs will be sitting and people
will actually be sitting with their back
to main street so he had hoped to
raise that solid solid area a little bit
so you can kind of see on the version on
the right
where there was a little bit of wood
trim going in between that brick and
then kind of making the windows a little
smaller vertically
um either way the windows need to
replace because they've got a bolt they
actually have a bullet hole in them and
so yeah i was that was an interesting
find but uh they have a bull hole in
them and they've actually let water in
so one way the windows need repaired but
then the hope was that
um we could raise it so that the backs
of the chairs aren't visible
you know from the outside uh from main
street
so right miss mr lape what's the
material that you're going to use when
you raise that
uh i was going to use a cementitious
board so something
in the in the arena of hardy plank but
not hardy plank they have panels
and they have shoe mold trim and things
like that to kind of
create that box in box in a box kind of
look
um the thought was the trim that returns
right now
that window kind of sets back in from
the front facade
um that wood is all kind of rotten as
well so our thought was to try to
replace that yeah you can kind of see
the
the sides of it there kind of showing up
in that picture
um yep so and it's kind of got that box
and box look kind of off to the side
there you can kind of see so
we were hoping to replace those rotten
sides and
do the new raised portion out of out of
hardy material that was painted
you know uh similar to that is that bay
currently rounded
it's a three segment it's straight but
it's three segments yeah
so the bullet hole's about right where
your cursor is right now
there you go yeah the uh but it's three
street segments that are on a kind of an
arc and then i just had one other
question will the arms be like a vinyl
or canvas material
the arms are proposed to be a canvas
material okay
well this is certainly a nice project
for right on main street it's going to
improve
the main street uh uh
area there quite a bit so
i'm glad that they're doing well enough
to move
because their current location is a
little small yeah they're busting at the
scene so they're excited to
decide to get on main street i think all
right is there anybody in the audience
that
is pro or con if so please raise your
hand
on the screen
don't see anyone all right thank you
very much members of the board
uh have any other questions or comments
all right uh kathy
uh i guess you could do all of these at
once right
sir please read the findings of fact
conclusions of law that you've prepared
the findings and decision of the board
for application number bzap
21-17 for property located at 2699 east
main street
the board finds that a certificate of
appropriateness should be granted for
the proposed modifications
as submitted and in accordance with the
rendering reviewed at the april 22
2021 meeting of the board
okay uh mr late does that reading
uh comport with your understanding and
have the approval of your
clients yes that would be wonderful all
right thank you very much
um members of the board do i hear a
motion to approve the findings about
conclusions of law
thank you sir i hear a second already
thank you
kathy please call the roll uh mr schick
yes miss mitchell
yes mr powell
yes mr levine yes
mr marsh yes and chairman b hall
i vote yes as well and the
uh application is granted thank you mr
light for your time and the nice uh
renderings there thank you and again i
apologize for any uh misunderstanding on
starting a little early so thank you
thank you
all right uh let's see
i think that we're going to take a five
minute recess
before we have the garage code reform
but let me ask you this do we have
yeah i think we might i think we might
change the order uh if there's no
objection from members of the board to
consider the uh several requests that we
had
on 424 south columbia and then we'll go
to the garage code but i like still like
to take a
minute recess please so it is now
803 will reconvene at 8 10.
thank you thank you
[Music]
stupid
uh
hello hello hold on
hmm
karen our um my son's bathroom is like
directly off there
and so like right when that testimony
was happening with the webs
he was getting out of the bath i was
like oh you're gonna like
holding the foot like like the door
closed but i was like is that why you
sent me that chat
that message in the chat got it
just like i've got to turn this off hold
on one second
okay it is
8 10 and
it looks like we're all back i think
i'm all back all right beautiful
uh i think i'd like to go in the
opposite order here
just because i think one will go more
rapid than the other
and that is a case number
this interest is small
uh how's that bzap
thank you dash 20-63
involving 424 south columbia
the applicant is sullivan builders and
the owners
are uh the shahs
and this case
was brought before the board on a
request for
certificate of appropriateness and after
a long hearing uh
was defeated the
matter was then um
brought up at the next meeting where a
board member
made a motion to reconsider the case
for several reasons and that motion
passed
so the matter was reconsidered then at
the following meeting
and at that meeting the with some
conditions
the certificate of appropriateness was
approved
and i think the vote was five to one yes
i can see it here it was five to one
subsequent to that passage um there have
been
several letters written from uh
an attorney for some neighbors
and some of the neighbors
asking the board to consider
another reconsideration and
i was requested that the
letters so requesting would be presented
to the board so you would have it
and of course
i acknowledged the receipt of the letter
from everybody who sent me one
i indicated to them i would make sure
the board got them
and i pointed out to them that the only
people that can ask for reconsideration
are members of the board
and that uh i would give everybody at
the
board meeting and i put her on the
agenda and i would give members of the
board
uh the a a right to uh
or the opportunity i should say to uh
make a motion to reconsider the case
again if somebody on the board
felt that was appropriate and that there
was a second
of that motion uh then a vote could be
taken
of course there has to be a motion made
first before a vote would be taken there
has to be a second
but nonetheless uh
there it was was some uh
reference to uh measurements
even though i'm not sure that there were
actually any
direct measurements uh that were
once again who knows
how accurate the measurements are i
don't know but i'm not sure that we have
any
uh additional concrete
uh information about the these sizes and
these
heights nonetheless uh kathy do you have
any uh
additional comment about the reasons
that people
are requesting uh the variance did
everybody get a chance to read or
let me ask you this does anybody not
have had a chance to read some of the
letters requesting
that there be reconsideration has anyone
not had that opportunity
okay they have been posted to the city's
website for the
for anyone to see since i received a
copy of them
okay thank you i appreciate you doing
that my only
comment after looking through the
information
provided is i find it a little confusing
because some information is taken out of
context with
the height given of
37 feet 7 inches from a curb height
when in fact the city uses the height at
the
average grade at the building line and
all but but also in that same
application
the the average or the grade at the
building line
in that same case indicated the ridge
height to be
33 feet so you know that's
more foot discrepancy so i find that a
little confusing
trying to call curb height
and you know 37 feet 7 inches when in
fact it's the grade height
which in this application is proposed at
33
okay and when you run that line down the
road in the streetscape
you've also got to take into
consideration the
grade change because every you know i've
got on franklin county auditor's website
and they'll
show and i know that our city storm
lines all flow from east to west
but in fact we had water draining from
that site at 424
to the catch basin which is three lots
north of 424
so it definitely shows that there is a
grade change from
south to north and i just felt that was
important to point out
okay i mean you're just commenting on
the facts
uh that were iterated in some of the
letters yeah right
okay uh i mean i guess
at this stage the ball game i i don't
think this is the kind of thing that
deserves a great deal of discussion i
think either it should or should not be
reconsidered based upon
the factors that have been raised by the
various
uh parties uh in interest here which
include the neighbors
so uh if
uh anybody wishes to make a motion to
reconsider
uh now is the time to do so and
we'll see if there's a second and we'll
see if the if it passes if there is such
emotion
is it possible to hear the viewpoints
concerning this
massive height discrepancy that's
claimed
by jim arnold's letter
from whom uh you know i don't know is it
is it something that that merits
investigation i'm not saying that it
does
right well
i i think that and i would say just
simply because
there was such such um ambiguity around
that ridge height in the grade
from the first time we heard the case to
the second
um you know and i know it was because
the house wasn't finished or the grade
wasn't done
i mean there were different reasons but
i i i don't know that i'd 100
agree that we have examined
an actual submission from a contractor
homeowner or whatever
that says we have measured we've
conducted this study and here is the
you know kathy did you receive something
that supports
that compliance well that that's
at the meeting i believe they use the
grade of the garage because that had not
changed and when you're
building a house and this house is not
complete you remove
grade from around the house and until
that finished grade level is put back
can you determine you know where is that
garage floor but but what i wanted to
note is the
37 feet seven inches that was from a
curb height and a curb is lower
than the grade of where we're looking at
for these house height references
so that that's it's comparing apples to
oranges
i believe well right now i appreciate
you refreshing my memory on that
but he but jim arnold is saying 44 feet
in the letter kathy why are you saying
37
because he's because because that's
showing that the bridge height
of the house proposed at 394 so from the
curb
height it's 37 and then he shows another
seven feet
trying to draw a line a straight line
across to
4 24 south columbia
which i mean i'm not sure if this is
done by an architect it's certainly not
sealed by
a surveyor so
you know and and like i say in a perfect
world is
if everything's on the same grade it
could possibly work out to that but i
know for a fact it's not the same grade
because you can get on the franklin
county auditor's website and see
there's a there's a four-foot difference
on on one side alone
from front to back and then they do tend
to
you know slope towards alum creek
because this all connects into our storm
system
but in this case it also slopes from
south to north because that's where
you're going to find the catch basin so
when water comes off these sites
it funnels north so this is not a
perfectly
level grade comparison
and when we we require the grade to be
measured
at the site so the existing site and
then they make their modifications they
put their final grade back
those should match up and then that's
when we're going to get that proper
height
i i asked about this this drawing is
showing here
and i found out that
this was done by the company
that is doing the next house over
they didn't they aren't working on this
house they're working on the house
that's
next to it there to the north yes
but once again i mean to answer your
question rick
um it's up to the
proponent and opponents to bring us
evidence
it's not up to us to go out and get
evidence
so you know you have cases uh that you
handled over the years there where one
side brings in a lot of great evidence
and the other side does not
and even though sometimes who brings in
the best evidence is
the is the victor in the case and i
in this situation they had both had
as you know two serious opportunities to
bring us information
and the hearings were certainly long
enough to allow them to
to allow anybody to uh
give us their perspective on things so
the question is not if is there some new
evidence that's out there
i mean you see the differential of all
these houses up and down that street
there's significant differential
quite a bit you you don't see the house
to the right which is also smaller
well and they're not flat but it's i
mean this
looks like it's a flat even grade all
the way down the street and that isn't
the case
right also true
so i do think that that's a reasonable
point bob that
not like this is a new issue it was it
was
front and center in the first time so
right and certainly again the second
time
well i can tell you right now i can get
on my bike be there in
30 seconds and show you that this is not
a true to form graphic
not at all well whether it is or isn't
i think what we have to have is does any
member of the board
feel like whatever issues
are raised that this is right for
reconsideration again
that person is the one who has to make
the motion and then it has to be
seconded so
we've already gone through this exercise
once on this case and there was a motion
it was second and it did pass
and then we heard the case again and uh
it was the outcome was different
so let's let's not i mean i don't think
we can say hey
can we go out and can the city hire
somebody to give us a definitive number
here
i don't think that that's what we're
supposed to do
no i mean we based our decision on the
the builder said that from the floor of
the garage to the top of the roof
they used a laser the surveyor gave him
a laser and they put a number on and
that's the number they told us
that's what we predicated our decision
on and unless there's
information that says that that isn't
the case
i don't see any reason to discuss it
anymore
okay so let me give everybody
a few moments here to make a motion is
there
do i hear a motion to reconsider this
case
i i don't hear emotions so uh
then we'll move on to the next
uh issue on our docket which involves
discussion of the
findings by the garage commission
which were printed out did everybody get
those today
so you all have seen these on the google
doc that i set up for everybody
and i did have comments back from
several of you
okay i'm going to pull it up as well we
tried to do that
so that we could be proactive and having
too much of a working session here
but please know that i took too hard
everyone's comments
not everyone had commented but those
that did we have incorporated all the
changes whether they were grammatical
spelling or substantive in terms of
um you know changes to the
the proposed um garage code reform
i'm happy and so is kathy to answer any
questions
um it's been a team effort between we
had a
work just by background there has been a
work group um which
included um ryan schick and mike paplow
um and bill heyer and larry hellman
from arb we then expanded it for your
review which is the google doc
um invitation that you all got and
kathy and i and the mayor had
kind of rolled up our sleeves and just
dug through everything last week and
incorporated all those changes so um
i certainly want to hear everything and
anything you want to add to it we're on
the
is it the public reading as next tuesday
at city council which i will be there
kathy will be on vacation but
i'm i'm gonna represent kathy and i at
that meeting
um so i'm very happy to answer any
um questions change you know talk about
any
changes that you might want to see or
clarify anything
um by the way a background this is a
very much needed
reform that's come as you all know
um by way of so many garages that have
just become
out of out of um control so to speak
so um how would this have applied to
tonight's
uh uh garage uh
case that we had can you um i can't
think of
kathy might be able to cite the
measurements more than me but i
i can't think of what the exact eve
height was but i think i think one of
the things that is most significant
about this change
um is this chart um which
matches up it matches up completely
um it's parallel to the residential
district measurements that we have in
another part of the code
so that there is so it's clear um
the biggest change that you'll see is in
the eave height um and what that does
by having a maximum eave height it
prevents a garage
and this is not specific to any case i
know it's going to feel like it because
we do have some cases right now but
it prevents somebody from putting a flat
roof all the way at 20 feet
and it also brings down the height of
the first
the first floor so that we don't have
you know um
garages that architecturally are out of
proportion
now obviously when you get into the
bigger districts they do go up
to to a maximum eave height of 10 feet
and 14
feet um building height as well
yes okay under the lot size
are we going to plug in like whether
that's r6
r1 r2 r3 sure we can easily do that
that that that just helps me out when
i'm reviewing these things
but but also you you've got that domino
effect like for instance
in our height regulations you know when
you're dealing with the gable roofs
did we figure out if we needed to change
that because currently i mean if you do
your mean height between an
even a ridge that mean height is
actually the height limit
on a gable roof yeah we need to talk
that's something that kathy and i okay
so
i'm gonna pull that drawing up for you
to see
kathy and i just got um well kathy
already knew it but
today i did some sketching let me
go to it this is gonna be an issue and i
think um
we should talk to ben about a little bit
before
um we finalize what we're gonna present
for tuesday but
um let me pull this up sorry i've also
reached
out here to jason sudy just to have him
take a peek at this being that
and i were so involved in rewriting the
code years ago
yep absolutely but so
this um that i'm now sharing with you
can everybody see that
um that is the true
um what we have in the code i'm trying
to blow it up sorry
it or shrink it yeah yeah can you see
that okay
right so
so if you're looking at that 40 foot
maximum height
look where it actually is on the
structure according to our code
the mean height between the ridge and
the e
we don't practice it like that um you
know we haven't been
because they always give us a ridge
height that they're they're planning to
abide by
so technically if you want to apply this
somewhere
who's going to argue with you
yeah i mean um
it's an interesting thing because we we
probably need to couple
a redefinition of this of building
height
um it it i didn't draw them answered
roof part because i only had so much
time but at least with the
um it's very prescriptive it says that
the mean
height between the eaves and the ridges
for gable hip and gambrel roofs which
you know that would be the ridge in the
eve that is
40 feet there and for
flat roofs it is the top of the flat
roof to the
to the bottom
so we need to we need to
um talk talk about that too
right because having that set ridge
height and a set eave height
then then those are just at least
they're in place and anything higher or
modified has to get a variance
for this you could wind up with
something even a little
taller than what we've been getting
so we might want to say on the for
accessory structures we might want to
change the title of this
to saying maximum ridge height instead
of maximum building height
because we've defined building height
differently
right that might be the way around
that but we still have to deal with this
for like like
you know this would allow much higher
than 40 feet to be the ridge on
on primary structures
if is there a um a limit to how
how tall a story can be 10 feet
is standard and that's why with with
all i had was a definition of a story so
we we started getting these taller
garages that were under 20 feet
then they in a house you normally two
thirds or less of the floor
immediately below if it's more than
two-thirds it's considered another story
so certain districts are allowed
two and a half stories in height and if
it
becomes a full-blown third story then
they're probably going to be before the
board requesting a variance to put a
third story
full but i don't think anyone's
proposing to have more than two stories
with an accessory structure or am i
wrong
i hope not so far
i mean i'm just suggesting this might be
the way around this
exactly when it comes to accessory
structures to say it can only be
two stories which means you can only
have a total of 20 feet essentially to
the ridge height
you know from grade
well it probably just to cover um for
clarity
uh for user ease i think it would
probably be good to change this to
maximum ridge height
on this particular chart which is about
accessory structure
but also i feel much more comfortable
that you pointed out
the story um you know part of it because
that
that's like kathy always tells me
there's so many cross
double rules that eliminate the ability
it it doesn't change the fact that we
could have that problem on
a primary structure and we've also
noted for under the definition story
that it does not
no longer apply to accessory structure
so
that's why we want these hard
measurements for these accessory
structures
the idea is kind of that for accessories
for garages
we really give the applicants kind of a
box within
to build whatever their residential
district is
um almost like a template this is what
you can do if you're in
this district i'm going to go back to
um
and it looks to me like we're giving
them
a percentage of attic floor
to base floor plate uh
[Music]
but not volume so so we
so we're not concerned now about volume
but rather about the
the actual uh the floor itself in
relation
to my volume's been volume's been very
difficult kathy can speak to that much
better than i can
i mean and and a lot of times they're
they're leaving out like the knee walls
or they're leaving out anything they
possibly can
like in this case that the garage we had
this evening they left out the area
above the
stairwell well when i'm looking at it
i'm looking at it
from a perspective of here's a mass and
here's a mass
so regardless of what's going on inside
there this mass if it's two-thirds
or greater than this mass that tells me
it's a second floor i mean
i i'm not anti-second floor but i don't
want to split hairs
and argue that you know
where it's not meeting code you know
we've got these good hard lines
and if they want to ask for a variant at
least it's clear
of how they got to where they are and
and you're not calculating with some cad
program that
you know they're throwing a figure at me
how'd they get that
yeah i mean that's the problem is that
now we have um and and in fairness to
applicants they're just trying to get
the most space they can
under the rules we have but they're
trying to eliminate counter tops from
counting as cubic square feet
or stairwells from counting as cubic
square feet and then
you know now it's not like everybody
uses autocad like 20 years ago we have
sketchup in this program in that program
and
we asked people how you calculated your
space and they'll say
i i didn't the program did it so right
i like to see the work yeah
i'm old school
yeah it just makes it cleaner this way
we're trying to um
believe it or not simplify it as much as
we can for
for our evaluations my reading of it is
that they still would have needed to
request a variance tonight
most likely tonight it was more than 50
and it was higher than 18 feet to the
ridge
not quite funny right yeah and i agree
and i was actually not even referring to
that case
or any case specifically um
yeah no i mean it i i think there are
obviously going to be variances um but
we want to eliminate the extent of
variances that we've had
right and and narrow it down to making
some of these structures work better in
certain areas than others
i mean but you could have a different
size lot that's unusually large
in an r6 and maybe it's appropriate for
that lot so
breaking it down with a square foot that
seems to make sense
yes are there any other questions and i
know that
um
there was a question exactly about i
mean i think it was actually
um sean that had a question about that
height
but i think the differentiate the
differentiation between
the different heights depending on what
you know what district you're in but i
think that is
pretty self-explanatory like a bigger
you know obviously a bigger lot it's
gonna be able to accommodate
a taller garage
right
i i i want this when we go to city
council next week
you know i wanted to incorporate
everything so i mean i still have it up
there on google docs and if you have any
comments
please still feel free to make any or
call me or call kathy
um you know we'll be discussing it
before we go in there again on tuesday
night so i'm happy to
you know i don't mind weekend calls
either so i know it's short
i feel like i'm sure the 624 is that the
current square footage that we're
using it is maximum without 35
of the footprint of the principal
structure uh
but if but you automatically are allowed
624 square feet
if you have a bigger house you can have
a bigger footprint but if you locate
your house
why no differentiation between uh
less than six thousand square feet i'm
trying to figure out what is a six
thousand square feet
square foot lock it's let's say there's
a fifty right that's why i need my r
ours on there yeah yeah it's our six
i can it might be helpful kathy if i
pull up that drawing that i did
well actually
minimum lot requirements i really
thought we had those
i mean 24 000 square feet
these are just simply the same oh wait
yeah our six is six thousand
so uh r3 is 14
400 and then the smaller
r2 and r1 those are the 24 000 square
feet
and 36 000 square feet r1
i mean it seems like a lot of the
requests were at the 784 feet or
something like that
so a 5 000 square foot lock and a 14 000
square foot lot are all 624 square feet
minimum um maximums it seems like
the difference between r12 which is
multi-family
and three or six are the ones that allow
what we currently allow 624.
um i'm going to show you these two
hold on
what what's the width in order to have a
two-car garage what width
is the minimum width you need well
parking space is nine by 18 so you
figure the room around your car when you
park
[Music]
so eighteen twenty twenty two
twenty four twenty five yeah these are
done
so twenty twenty four is the six
twenty four twenty six by twenty four
yeah
it used to be 22 by 24.
and we saw so many variances in that
size we just thought you know
because it used to be back in the day
people would put those little blowouts
on the
end of the garage for the nose of the
car to get into those were
lovely oh lovely yeah but that's why we
want now to put their lawn mowers and
stuff in the garage
in the in the four or five feet between
where the cars are and the back wall
right right right so how many square
feet do i need
to get to that point where
you add four feet in depth
to the 24 feet in width
or you have 24 feet in width
what's that number well
you're you're suggesting how much
smaller can we go
on an r6 lot to
make it different than
the r3 lot okay is that
fair i like that question the old
the old size was uh 528 square feet
okay so that would be a 22 by 24.
okay in the old code it was 528 and then
in 2016 when we abducted
the new code that's when we went to 624
because it would seem to have a lot of
requests for variances
and we're still getting a lot of
requests yeah and i i can tell you and
ryan you might want to
um you might want to say something i
don't remember
if you were at the meetings that we
discussed this but this was a huge
discussion in the small work group
because um there are there were
probably half the work group that really
do think that
there should be a smaller footprint for
r6 now what that does now
is put a whole lot of garages out of
conformance because
they've now been done in the r6 with
what we've had for the last few years
um that that's not a bad thing i mean we
can do
there are some people who are proponent
of that anyway
but i think what we're gonna have happen
is we're gonna have a lot of people
coming for
variances because of the way people use
their garages now so i think
we as a committee we were just trying to
be a little bit more generous
to the r6 lots because um
because of exactly that you just can't
get a lot
in a smaller garage the way people use
their garages these days
and we're gonna get end up having a lot
of people come for
variances and this this is the this is
the sketch i don't know if you can see
this is the r6
so it's not really
this is a 120 by 50 foot lot
what i did was pick you know i tried to
match it up with the chart but also
try to pick a true average of what our
r6 lots
were and this really is if you look at
the auditor's website
so you can in the blue window
and but you have to have your separation
between the garage and the house of 10
feet
and then and then the total lot coverage
for building footprint you know i think
that helps keep these garages from going
too crazy
get rid of that i'm taking out the green
thing that didn't go over well
so yeah what was that that was larry
hellman of uh originally wanted to also
require a certain amount of green space
in the rear yard
but there's just no way to measure that
there's no way to
i'd be i'd be going crazy
we can't do that we just can't there's
no way to do it and he agreed you know
once we talked it through but i hadn't
taken that off of the drawing yet
but you can kind of see that like this
is the proportion
it's not unreasonable i think from a
massing standpoint
um it truly is a better size
garage for for this size lot which is
the r3
sorry i'm jumping around but i don't
think it's unreasonable to allow the r6
to do
this as well
i i mean we want to hear your opinion
though
but we are going to have a lot of
pushback from
already have from architects designers
um residents owners because
people use their garages differently
than they did in you know
1920. yeah i mean i
i think we got to give people a little
more
square footage because ev you know it's
it's it's just what
um karen said i mean you know people
i mean you look at the way these things
were designed in the 20s
you know i don't know you know what they
put in there
but you know they obviously didn't have
a lawn mower or a bicycle or
you know all the other stuff so i just
i just think if we don't if we don't
give a little more square footage then
we're just gonna keep seeing
you know half agenda filled up with
garage garage variances
yeah also if if you know
it's charming to have these detached
garages
but you know the workaround might be
everyone starts doing these attached
garages
and you know so that kind of takes away
from the characters so we do want to
do what we can do to encourage the
detached garages
yeah but that was our that was our
reasoning i mean
um mike pablo is not here but ryan is
if you want to you know talk about it at
all but um
that that's my best recollection of
where the conversation went
and you know for us as staff it's very
difficult to
to try to keep people from doing huge
additions
like like kathy said attached garages as
the work around
the concern that did come up was um uh
it if you spend time in like evanston
illinois
turning the detached into carriage
houses
and having second residents on uh plots
that was
a concern that came up in the group
multiple times so
tried to address that
we also tried to address it with some
dormer let's see if i can find that
section yeah
limits we we this this will really help
also because
um we put some rules together
you know suggestions together for the
dormers
which um i think will really help us
in terms of diminishing those
huge second floor um dormers
and and making sure that you're
comfortable that you know when somebody
submits one of these garages and it
meets all the code requirements
you know that can be a staff approval me
as far as zoning and karen as far as
design
so you know we want to make sure that
you are comfortable with what you're
seeing here
if this is allowed and needs code
so everything that you see in bold are
changes um
and like i said this is the current
version that's on google docs right now
so um i can resend the link if anybody
can't find that email or if you don't
have it
you know as on your google docs but um
all of you are invited and you're
welcome to make comments
you know like i said we're taking
tuesday night is the
finally is the hearing the public
hearing on it so
um i'd like to have them over the
weekend if it's possible but
we did incorporate everything that we
already have
from you all okay
all right i mean do you think you've got
enough feedback from us
uh tonight yeah i i do have
an audience member that has their hand
raised really okay
yeah i think they should be able to make
a comment sure
yes there
is talking permitted to five nine
four two four oh isn't that a steady
number
kathy oh that's our mayor isn't it
i think so
did we lock him out we're in trouble
nope
his hand is just up i bet he doesn't
know his hands up yeah
we're too far oh he's in my office
oh gosh all right folks um
with that i appreciate all the work that
the committee on this did
uh ryan and karen and
uh everybody else that uh worked hard on
this thing
that's a that's a big improvement
i i think we should consider what brian
said earlier and that is you know a few
extra feet
at the end will eliminate a lot of
of variance requests and frankly
is not unreasonable i mean three or four
feet at the end
of a 24 foot wide is
75 additional square feet i guess so
i don't know if
624 could become 700 but then
that's something you need to take into
consideration i think that the 624 is
generous
i think what we're trying to avoid is
yeah i do i just think what we're
because it goes
up for the bigger one i see that i just
think we're trying to avoid going down
to
five something for the our six
right here right okay one of the things
that we really
oh i'm sorry karen sorry no no go ahead
what again one of the things that it may
have been repeated and again
i've got a son trying to tell me titanic
facts all night long
um one of the things we really were
trying to
yeah it's like titanic season with the
eight-year-old right now so
yeah um one of the things that we were
also really trying to plan for was
what our future styles and modality
gonna be
um you know i heard brian talk about
that earlier tonight
and again getting back to what's going
to be the minimum watt size
what are people going to require both if
they're going to be using um
rechargeable cars um also um
you know bike storage things like that
but at the same time try to protect
what we have at existing and not make
people non-compliant
so it was a really good balance but i
really really have to give
you know you gave credit to me but it
really goes to karen please
and gaffy this was a total joint effort
between
kathy and i thank you kathy
yeah kathy too
all right i just draw the pretty
pictures yeah and i just need some help
uh
keeping these garages from getting out
of control and wearing out my calculator
absolutely
yeah i mean we're trying if we could
simplify it we will
because you know it got out of control
with the details so we're
cat we're trying to reign it in and
throw any ideas
over the weekend if you even come across
something that you might suggest
feel free to email us okay yeah cool but
the very quick the very quick dick talk
um our second meeting
um karen had very very good renderings
and she was using like
placement and proportional drawings and
it was very very helpful to the group so
if any of you have any questions about
how we came to
any of these decisions please ask her
she's biting her lip no i'm not i'm
actually
remembering that i was supposed to put
those drawings on the google doc and i
will do that tonight
so that you can at least reference them
because they're just
they're not any additional information
but kind of like
i showed you what i did kathy asked me
today to put that building height
mean together we're going to just start
inserting these kind of
graphics in all over the place and the
design guidelines
you know as addendums to the code
because um what ryan's referring to
isn't anything different than what kathy
does every day with the zoning but it's
an illustration
so it works very well together and it
makes it very easy to understand that
way
and helpful for the highly visual yeah
helpful for the non-architect people out
that are out there trying to design
garages
yeah yeah so yeah i apologize i was
supposed to do that
but i will do that tonight i'll put them
up there and then you can kind of see
the corollary
with all the verbiage thank you ryan for
that i appreciate it oh i
appreciate that you apologize for your
compliment so thank you
all right do i hear a motion to adjourn
no we need to wait wait wait wait we
have one more thing
do i miss one yes we it's a quick one we
have a facade grant for 26.99 east
maine i didn't see that one i should
have just tacked it on the case itself
well i was actually told we shouldn't do
that but that's okay
okay yep so this is the dental office
here
yes okay but now that it's approved it's
just a matter of uh approving the grant
yeah it's kind of a no-brainer yeah if
you recognize
it can we do a consent okay so explain
what you mean the the city of bexley is
giving
a grant to the dentists to
redo the facade as per their request
tonight every year
go ahead sorry cathy every year there's
funds put aside for facade grants to
encourage improvements along main street
so you know as they come in people check
with the mayor to find out if there's
funds available and when they are we'd
like to put it on the record so
this has gone before the board and it's
been approved so if you could confirm
you agreed that it should be eligible
for a facade grant for a portion of what
it ever is they're going to improve
yeah it's not a whole grant it doesn't
pay for the whole thing it's a portion
of it
okay um and they have all kinds of
commitments
there's federal subsidies as well i'm
correct it's like
like uh transit
sorry caddy i i believe it is and has
tracked through the
you know the administration of the
municipality
so so what we're doing is we're saying
the city council is the appropriates
these funds what we're saying is
that we approve this uh
situation or this application for a
grant
as being an appropriate recipient of a
grant
yes correct okay so is can i have a
motion to that effect
awesome okay second thank you
second thank you jason uh there's
nothing to do we have nothing to say
about the amount of the grant is that
correct no we don't no
yeah yeah it's limited
[Music]
but it's something right all right so
the question is
do we the b zap approve this
particular situation as being the
recipient of a grant
in the amount that is appropriate based
upon the city's
policies and regulations and
restrictions and
etc well and so i understood to be
eligible to receive a grant
correct well the eligibility would not
be something that we could vote on
could it i mean how would we know if
they're eligible
that's a major question i mean they they
there's there's actually guidelines in
the application that i'm happy to
go over with all of you um it's
literally called the bexley commercial
rehabilitation grant program
um and there the the award is for this
particular project is one-fifth of the
cost it's not the whole cost at all
um and i'm sure it's a public document
so i can tell you the cost of few i mean
the
award i'm sure um but basically what
you're doing
is saying that we agree that um
this grant is appropriate as long as
they do the they do what we have
approved in other words if this
if we didn't approve what they applied
for today
we would have taken this off the agenda
okay
that's their stipulation for the
main street redevelopment district
commercial rehab rehabilitation program
grant
that stipulation is that they must do
what was approved
by by you guys by visa it would almost
be nonsensical to
to not approve this exactly and it would
be nonsensical
to approve it if we would have denied it
so it's it is
it is really a administrative kind of
thing good corn i mean you're not an
administrative board but it's a
it's it's um kind of a no-brainer yeah
they go hand in correct
they go hand in hand okay and this city
has set this fund up or
you know has this fun so that we can
have better improvements along main
street
so it's beneficial to all okay
so do i hear any
negative vote on this map
so i would say that this matter is
passed by acclimation
unanimously and uh then i can
entertain a motion to adjourn motion
motion mr schick
thank you sir thank you
the uh this session of the bexley board
of zoning
and planning for april of 2021 is
hereby adjourned thank you thanks for a
great meeting everybody yeah thank you
very much patience
yeah thank you guys yeah my staff those
are good staff reports tonight too i
appreciate the staff reports
good job thank you we're getting the
hang of the technology too
yeah karen's got that thank goodness
she's very technical all right everybody
thanks so much
all right have a good night everyone
hopefully it doesn't snow tonight