[Music]
all right
i'm going to call to order the
august 2021 meeting of the bexley board
of zoning and planning
ms rose you want to call the role of the
members that are present please for the
record
here
i'm here as well
all right thank you very much
[Music]
this is there's an opportunity every
meeting for the general public to make
general comments about
the
board and its
activities and duties and
responsibilities and if anybody would
wish to
make
any kind of such statement now's the
time to let me know and we'll get you a
forum here
but you can't talk about any of the
cases that's one of the problems but
other than that you can talk about
anything that's relevant to the board of
zoning and planning
right i see no indication of such
so
let me ask if every member of the board
has had a chance to review the minutes
of the july 2021
session of the board of zoning and
planning
and if so
they were
um
does anybody have any additions
deletions modifications they'd like to
suggest
seeing none do i hear a motion to
approve the minutes of the july meeting
so moved thank you is there a second
second second thank you kurt
um
all in favor of approving the minutes
please say aye aye
all opposed
i abstain since i wasn't here before
you abstain okay so three votes
out of five
the
minutes are hereby approved
the
order of operation here on
do we have
yeah i was going to say so is that
because you we need to do it first or we
we're going to do it last week
okay
so there you go so this is application
number bzap 21-36
involving 2010 east broad street
the applicant is brent fulley
the owner of the property of st charles
preparatory school
the applicant is seeking planning review
and approval of a master plan for
construction of a convocation center
gymnasium edition
a learning resource center a performing
arts center
a parking lot relocation
and landscaping on the west side of st
charles and also a parking variance
so there's one variance request that is
among the uh requests
um
is somebody here on behalf is mr foley
here mr foley
um
would you
please raise your right hand to be sworn
you state your name frank foley you saw
me swear from the testimony you're about
to give this evening it's the truth i do
thank you thank you
all right um
who has the staff report oh okay jason
that would be makes sense wouldn't it so
they're trying to catch up to the ohio
state university here at st charles so
tell us what they're going to do and
what you think about it absolutely um
well i think it's a slightly smaller
scale than slightly smaller
at the same time i i think it's you know
it is uh i think an ambitious and
exciting project
what we're going to talk with you about
today are a few things this is an
opportunity in staff's opinion to look
at a site that has not really had um
sort of a comprehensive
future plan that was able to be reviewed
by these app and so what the applicants
here today and we've spoken about this
is to get your sense of how this
application can can move forward through
the process based on thinking about
holistically solving the problems and
the opportunities that arise when you
try to you know make a campus better
that inevitably come up with regard to
things like parking and access and all
that kind of stuff um we do actually
have three variances they requested i
apologize we only listed two in here the
the two that are most relevant
immediately to your site plan review
would be the number of parking spaces
and the location of parking spaces okay
so the number i think is
self-explanatory we'll get to that in a
minute the location um if you recall
when there was an application in a few
months ago that's right the smaller
parking lot on the other side of campus
uh we talked about this this one uh it's
much more clear uh the definition of
what is in front of a building in this
district is anything that's basically in
front of that front facade so um you
know you can see that there is parking
that would that they're asking to have
located there so that would require a
variance um also and i'll let the
applicant address this more specifically
in his comments there is um a request
for a height variance and that has to do
with the limitations in our code on
height and the overall approach that
they would like to take going forward
whether or not you want to tie that to
arb approvals going forward or do that
separately
that's a discussion we can have okay
forward um so before i get into anything
else any any questions from the board on
any of those items
is any of the parking that was to the
east as i recall the last uh have
anything to do with this
uh new request in a way yes because uh
what what we have asked the applicant to
do and i think is in the benefit of all
of us uh you know in on in the city on
the boards and staff is to understand
the overall parking needs of the entire
campus um this is a bit of an unusual
site in a couple ways and i'll describe
that right now
so essentially uh you know open space
district is what this is is in in the
code it doesn't have a whole lot of
specific standards as far as site
development they've met all those
standards it has to do with minimum size
setback
um you know really this is such a big
site those are almost irrelevant uh you
know 20 20 foot 30 foot setbacks they've
met all those things it's just this is a
big site so what we're really talking
about is how we're going to manage the
overall operations and and get this to
work
as far as what i think our uh before we
get into all the variants discussion uh
the overall site plan i do think that
they have come up with um you know a
very solid functional site plan in that
you can see there's an internal
circulation drive that would access all
the individual uses that they're trying
to um to add
currently they already have that front
that front circular drive that goes into
a parking lot that is on the side of the
building what they're adding is pretty
much everything you see from where it
says performing arts center not
everything but a chunk of that going to
um to the street what they are
requesting to do again is not get
approvals for these buildings today but
get approvals for the site plan that
would allow a future performing arts
center this new common lobby the new
convocation center new learning resource
center essentially adding a number of
new structures that would go into this
overall scheme that would all be
serviced by the same access parking and
pedestrian and non-motorized access so
today um you know this is sort of
beginning this discussion of how do we
make sure that this will function as
this campus evolves without them having
to go back and keep reiterating also
what we would you know advise against
which is you know why we're really happy
they've taken this approach is coming in
for a bunch of individual applications
without understanding the overall site
plan or else every time we're gonna have
to be dealing with a different version
of a parking variance or a different
version of whatever it is like basically
what our thought is let's try to settle
this completely so that as they evolve
this campus plan over the next who knows
three five ten years um there won't have
to be a series of additional variances
makes sense so with that um there's a
few things uh in addition to you know
the interior
interior circular drive the one thing i
did notice or note in the staff report
is i i do think they could have some
strengthened pedestrian and
non-uh motorized connections and that
will play a role into what i'm about to
talk about in parking
you can see there is an existing bridge
that goes over alum creek
right now it sort of unceremoniously
dumps into the parking lot and so what i
talked with the applicant about is
finding a way to make that a little more
formalized as far as how it gets through
the parking lot and why the reason
that's important is because there's some
parking out of the city on the other
side of the bridge and we'll get into
that as we talk about the variants
in addition i think there's there are
probably some ways that we can ensure
that people who are maybe
in the future using potential overflow
parking for really high uses across the
street in the park could have better
access with regard to both crossing
broad street and finding their way into
the campus
right now there's a central formalized
walk which is very nice and ceremonial
i think that there's an opportunity when
you get to the end of that walk to maybe
make pedestrian prioritization a little
stronger if there is an opportunity to
use some parking that may be off site to
accommodate those higher density
events
and that kind of brings us to the main
uh one of the main topics of today which
is is this parking issue
what we're trying to do i think
philosophically as we redid the code and
also just as a city is find the right
amount of parking um you know some codes
around the country and around the region
have completely done away with minimum
parking standards
we haven't done that we still have
minimum parking standards that being
said what i think is the ideal here is
not to cover every inch of the site with
pavement in order to you know try to
maximize parking is try to be reasonable
about the way that people are coming to
events can park so there's a couple
things one is that our standard is
admittedly a little ambiguous we redid
the code a couple years ago we opted to
not change it
it kind of was one of those if it's not
broke don't fix it kind of situations we
have a number of schools that have been
working within this parameter but the
specific standard and this is 126202h
is one seat per one space for five seats
in a public assembly area or one space
for 400 square feet of net floor area so
essentially what what we're saying in
our code is if you have a public
assembly area which would be a
performing arts center a convocation
center a meeting
area of the school for every five seats
you have to have one parking space
and then separately there is a standard
that's one for every 400 square feet of
other other space now what the applicant
did which i you know i appreciate is on
their application they sort of stack
those and they did the worst case
scenario according to our code and they
said if you have to have five for every
single one of these different things
that are built out and you have to have
one per 400 for every single square foot
at the same time you're going to have to
have just 1200 some parking spaces
that would effectively
cover every inch of the site and it
would probably extend well beyond that
also i don't think it would get used
very often and i think the applicant can
address that so what we are hoping to do
with you today is talk through this
process as what we think is a reasonable
amount what they have done is they have
provided um on-site on this this diagram
you have 341 spaces in addition
they have about 110 spaces um just over
the river right over the creek
that is technically not in the site or
in the city
so we can't actually technically
consider that as part of our parking
count because it is in a different city
that being said we can certainly
consider it in a variance request for
the master plan if that helps uh you
know make this work
i do believe that those 110 spaces are
very relevant to the uses that we're
talking about here for two reasons one
if you're talking about daily operations
they have a lot of control over where
their students park they can basically
tell them where to park because that's
they're in charge of their students and
they can do whatever they want um the
other thing is for special events it's
just pretty much common practice that
people are willing to walk a
significantly longer distance than they
would for convenience whereas someone is
unlikely to park across the river walk
across a bridge to say you know go get
their hair cut or you know buy a bagel
they certainly will do it if their kid
is performing in a play or if there's a
sporting event or if there's a
graduation and you know not to obviously
this is not ohio state but i think as
evidenced by the miles that people will
walk to go to events at ohio state for
games that's just a version of that this
is much smaller so what we're seeing
here overall is that
they would have about
451 spaces that would be immediately on
campus or accessible to campus
without using anything that wouldn't be
considered really you know uh st charles
ground
and that actually lines up pretty
closely to what the requirement is as
far as one per 400 which is 463. so they
have 451 instead of 463 so for what i
would consider sort of daily operation
now you know you can look at our code
and say well then also you have to stack
all these these different things when
you have um special circumstances in in
these gathering areas
the actual truth is i think that you're
much more and again the applicant can
address this more specifically
you're much more likely to have shared
parking in that the people who are using
the school during the day are either
going to leave or um will be replaced by
people who are then coming to special
events some of them will stay but as in
many cases you know things like
performing arts center and convocations
and um
sporting events they're going to happen
after regular school hours so you're
going to actually double use those
spaces and so it seems a bit you know
counterproductive for us as a city to
have twice as many of those spaces if
someone's going to use them twice so
again that goes to say what we're trying
to get to today is figuring out what you
know what we think is reasonable and
what we think is appropriate and so what
we've done is asked the applicant for a
series of of things that they're going
to help
provide to us either today or as we go
forward to this this um review one is an
estimate of the number of spaces they
use for typical weekday demand like on a
usual school day how many spaces do you
need number of spaces to accommodate
regularly occurring high demand events
so when you have a football game when
you have a
if in the future you think you're going
to have a show at the performing arts
center how many people you really think
that's going to be number of spaces need
to accommodate unusual high demand
events such as like the annual
graduation
and it's okay in my opinion and
the the overall approach if they don't
all park on campus because we do have a
big park across the street i'm not
saying that should get used every day
but i think for a special event we've
got a public use it's right across the
street that probably makes sense to
capture that overflow and then what they
have is basically their daily use
strategy and their special event
strategy to accommodate that um
we
my opinions we probably won't get
through this today to a resolution
that's up to you as a bza or bzap that
being said those are all elements that
the applicant will talk through as we go
um into this
you also have to determine if you think
it's appropriate for them to locate that
in the front portion they have um
initially done some grading plans that
show where they would be willing to you
know change the grade in front of the
parking lot as it's adjacent to broad
street um that is
undetermined yet but we do know they
will need to screen that in some way
what we're recommending is that we let
the tree and public garden commission
who has been very good at dealing with
those kind of issues handle that
certainly with your recommendation we
recommend that it goes to them for a
full review and approval of a robust
landscape plan revolve involving
screening what is our hope is that we
could actually make kind of remake this
as a very um
successful and visually appealing entry
into the city not that it's not now
but it also you know it's kind of a
static landscape that's been there very
long time
i think a refresh of that would probably
be a real advantage for the city uh that
being said i understand that this is a
lot more pavement closer to the road so
we do need to talk through that
lighting
they will be providing a lighting plan
they do have to conform to some height
standards and you know overall screening
of the lighting those types of things
this plan does not address any type of
signage uh they do have the ability to
put internal way finding signage that
fits in our code with staff approval
that being said if they wanted any
changes to external signage out by the
road anything like that completely
different application has nothing to do
with what's going on now
you know they can speak to that um the
only other things that i specifically
noted in the staff report one was we may
consider some opportunities since
there's so much more paving to find ways
for pervious paving material to be
placed within the site
also you know as i mentioned better
access through the pedestrian linkages
but really today hopefully is about a
discussion with you to determine if
there are big issues if they're on the
right track and what else you need in
order to make the decision that you need
to for uh for the betterment of them and
for the city so with that i'll answer
any questions and turn it over to the
again and i apologize it's a long one no
it's just a lot of stuff going on a lot
going on here yeah absolutely no that
was perfect yeah and karen uh before
that karen you want to talk about the
arb meeting yeah i didn't write up
anything but i just because i know jason
covered a lot of it in his staff report
but um the architectural review board
did give this a positive recommendation
okay they were very pleased with the
placement of everything generally
the parking you know everything on
on the
west side
um the only thing that we had quite a
long conversation it was actually really
nice really productive conversation was
to beef up as jason already pointed out
the pedestrian
pathways within and how they might
create some really nice courtyards
keeping in mind that the illustrations
which i have carefully not shown you yet
and i will if you want me to sure really
emphasize buildings as objects and we
asked to please take a step back and
look at this as more of a master plan
which emphasizes how buildings how
students or or users of the performance
center convocation center would would
progress from one thing to another so
that you really would create some
exterior nice courtyard spaces
it really is a campus and not a um more
of a
home to some buildings that really
appear in some of these illustrations as
object pieces
and to think about how you could kind of
mold them to better fit a flow of the
whole campus yeah and i guess one last
thing is well i'll ask the applicant to
address they did meet with the
neighbors and so they have reached out
to them and they can explain to you what
happened because i wasn't there all
right
mr foley tell us what your relationship
is to this adventure and uh
give us your perspective on some of the
issues that have been raised by mr sudhi
and uh karen absolutely happy too let's
start if you need me to flip from one
image to another we'll start here
most of our conversation will be here we
can maybe go through some of the
character images
uh i'm brent foley i'm a principal of
triad architects i'm a proud graduate of
st charles oh
i went to waterson be careful okay we'll
be careful i'm also a proud citizen of
bexley i'm a fourth grader of maryland
uh and i'm a member of the bexley
education foundation so excited to be
here i've told my wife uh thursdays for
the next couple months between a r b and
b zap i'll be maybe late
uh with me as well mr shannon who you
know who is our attorney uh mr lauer who
is our principal jim negron from corner
cosine and mac matt i'm sorry chad from
ep ferris
who can address the technical parts of
the application um
what we're trying to do and we started
doing in 2018 is thinking through how to
take a
nearly 100 year old uh religious and
education institution that's been around
in bexley for a long time and
updated for 21st century learning and
also to be competitive with other other
schools
if you've been inside the gymnasium in
st charles you know that is antiquated
uh questionable if it's safe
and so part of this is providing those
spaces uh for a new gymnasium uh and
convocation center to provide those
athletic and other meeting activities as
well as providing a learning resource
center to provide the types of spaces
that education needs over the last 20
years education has changed more than it
has in the last 100 years so updated new
types of spaces small meeting spaces uh
those types of things would be in that
and then um to upgrade the um performing
arts center to be
on par with the level of performances
that are done there uh and and those
types of things so that's what st
charles's goal is
associated with that are those three
building components as well as obviously
the parking that comes along with it
um
we were here
a year and a half two years ago
and we learned at that time that we had
some work to do with the neighbors
and since that time we have done a lot
of work with the neighbors i believe the
last time we were in front of you we got
approval of the east parking lot which
is under construction now
a couple of the things we did
to make sure we address the neighbor's
concerns well the first thing we did was
we moved
the parking lot back behind what we did
determine was the front of the building
at that time
to make sure we didn't need that
variance
the second thing we did was we have
actually isolated all of the drainage um
from the existing system and created a
private system that saint charles has so
the existing drainage there's a swale
that goes along there and goes to the
the uh the north that's the city system
we have taken ours completely off that
system it comes to the south and then
goes to the west across the front is
going to alum creek directly
so
now all of the water that is not just
the new parking lot water but all the
water from the building etc that is on
that side of the building is taken
out of that system to help relieve that
system sun
mr parker there is a a
drain directly behind his house too that
is not part of our system that we did
tie into that system to help alleviate
some of that as well so we're we're
hoping that that
helps with some of the problems back
there uh we also put um there was some
lights on the building that we put uh
screens on to make sure that they were
shining on our site and none of the
neighbor sites that has been taken care
of as well
and then there is
landscape screening that's being put in
place
to help manage and try to make sure that
the sites are isolated and the parking
lot is not
having
headlights and things like that going
over there so we're very happy uh about
the uh the work we've done with the
neighbors over the last uh couple years
to get there uh we recently met with mr
white mr rosenberg we reached out to all
the neighbors and they came kind of as
representatives of the neighbors and
they gave us an endorsement to this plan
and in fact they were happy to see uh
how things have gone so what we learned
from those conversations with the
neighbors it likely made sense to do
things on the west side of the campus
rather than on the east side of the
campus
when we came to you uh for the parking
lot at that time we were actually
looking at relocating the baseball
fields off-site and building the uh the
gymnasium
basically where you see the uh the home
field i'm sorry the home plate and
dugouts right now we were going to wrap
it we were going to wrap that new
facility in in classroom spaces and
educational spaces uh
over time we learned that it made sense
to move it to the west so what we've
done
knowing that we didn't have many spaces
to put it we put the convocation and
gymnasium center to the west of the
existing gym
and so what that what that means is we
will build that first likely
so that we can free up and eventually um
tear down the gymnasium and we will put
the new learning resource center there
we would also then connect the
performing arts center building to the
main building
with a new common lobby that building is
not currently accessible uh there is a
chair lift when you go in but it's got a
kind of half light you have to go up on
that chairlift so that would allow us to
have full accessibility to that building
and then the two little wings you see
off coming off of that would be
basically to provide additional seating
so with that in mind what we learned is
the additional parking can only go one
place and that is in that southwest
corner there
with our initial conversations with mr
and staff we what we did is we
actually kind of you can see it kind of
kinks up and it's not directly parallel
with broad street in order to provide um
a view towards the green space and
provide more green space in the front of
the building
we will also be doing a beautif
beautification process uh project
landscape project our grotto which is an
important um religious part of the of
the uh institution and hasn't received
the love it needs to over the last
couple years um so we're going to be
putting some uh upgrades into that to
address uh some of the concerns and
conditions that jason specifically uh
brought out uh we have prepared a
detailed parking strategy i can speak to
a couple things that jason mentioned um
so typical school day we anticipate
current need at about 4 30
uh 430 that's 355 student vehicles and
75 staff vehicles um
430 total 355 student 75 feet staff
vehicles okay
uh we anticipate there might be some
growth in that number as we create the
uh the learning resource center but it's
supplemental education space it's not as
much educated classroom space so it
wouldn't necessarily drive enrollment as
much as it would enhance the existing
learning experience what's the current
enrollment um
if you know mr lower do you know the
current enrollment
540 540 is the current enrollment thank
you
but not all of them drive obviously
um hopefully
for uh kind of on the the higher end
special event so if we were having a
special event like graduation or our
evening with event in the convocation
center
we're anticipating um
625
and so the convocation center
we're going back and forth but it's
likely going to seat about 1200 or 11.50
so 11 50 guests and 50 people with two
people per guest per car of the guest
and one vehicle for the staff
comes to about 625
so we would anticipate 625 spaces on the
big end so that would be if we're going
kind of a typical day to all the way on
the big end we'd be at 6 25. so
obviously we're not going to have 625
spaces so what we do to accommodate that
in the past is we've hired a special
duty officer from bexley and we parked
at wolf park which there are 263 spaces
at wolf park which would put us at a
number of 669 which would give us
adequate space to hit 625
uh needs
in a very off event that we might need
more we've also worked with jeffrey park
mansion uh jeffrey uh jeffrey manchin
park across the street obviously we have
to accommodate there are
sometimes some simultaneous things going
on there that that won't work
[Music]
263.
so we can share this with staff
for the record but those are the numbers
and the details to address the parking
strategy
to speak towards the pedestrian access
we did have ep ferris take a quick look
at that
if we were basically i have a exhibit
but basically if we were to take that
that double parking area there that you
see and provide kind of a walking space
down there very similar to the example
that jason included in the report we
would lose approximately seven parking
spaces so if we were to do it has to do
with how we're kind of reconfiguring
things a little bit so that would affect
the variance a little bit to make sure
we get the counts right um but we would
be we would be happy to include that in
the project
uh as part of the master plan we think
it would be a good thing ultimately to
do anyway um for people that you know
especially for guests who are less
less
familiar with the site to understand how
to get across and through there so um
that addresses i think that specific
thing uh i'd like to understand a little
bit better the the front entrance piece
before we address it because i'm not
sure i fully understand it
uh we do have a full landscape plan in
the works i saw a preliminary version of
it from oakland nursery yesterday uh
we've been going back and forth on that
uh we are hoping to actually have that
prepared
uh and part of a submission that we're
gonna be making for the arb
here on september 16th which would allow
us to probably have it for the next
meeting here if we needed to be here as
well um and obviously then we'll be
making sure that we get that to the land
we're very happy to go through that with
the land tree and garden commission
then lastly a detailed lighting plan is
also in the work st charles has several
several different fixtures out there
currently
the way we envision the lighting is that
the lighting should
primarily
reinforce the pedestrian experience
rather than light up the whole parking
lot so we'll be creating lighting paths
and we'll be looking to create fixtures
that are likely similar to the fixtures
that we are currently installing in the
east parking lot
so i would expect to see both those pole
and baller fixtures uh in that plan
uh and that's basically addressing
everything we have mr shannon is here to
address specifically any of the the the
nature of approving a variance i know
there are technical legal terms if
that's needed uh and i'm happy to answer
any specific questions before we go into
that part of it
members of the board any questions at
this stage
or any of the neighbors here
it was the
i don't know if any of the neighbors are
here um but we have we have uh we do
have ongoing correspondence we don't
have anything in writing we have email
correspondence going back and forth um
but they were notified and they could
have been here and i i think that
perhaps the indication that they're not
here in force like they were before
speaks to that i'd like to think
the other question i have
i mean i don't know whether anybody else
was this way i feel a little duped a
little bit because when we looked at the
east parking lot we specifically brought
up moving parking into the front
um to the west on the edge of the street
and we were told they wanted to keep the
field and that's why they were moving
that parking
they were told they didn't want to put
park from there and so i mean jason's
coming about doing little by little i
feel like we approved this little bit
and now all of a sudden they're coming
over to
the part that we had asked
previously for them to look at and they
said they weren't going to do it and
we're here
can i speak to i'm sorry
um
we would we would still prefer not to
have to take away that green space but
what we learned in the conversations
with the neighbor as we met neighbors as
we mentioned is that we likely should
not build the convocation center on that
east side and so the only place to put
it then is in an existing parking lot
and so because of that we've determined
now knowing what we know a year later
and having additional conversations with
the with the neighbors um that there is
really no other place to put it um and i
think it's important to note that the
east parking lot
was not for this additional work but it
was to accommodate the need for day to
day
which is being considered in these
numbers and in jason's report so
hopefully you feel less stooped after
that explanation but that's for you to
determine
maybe
and is the complication the location the
convocation center is there parking
under that right there is not so you're
not oh i'm sorry there's existing
parking yes that's coming out
because to me by putting the convocation
center there you're going to push
parking back
because if people are coming to a
football game or baseball game they're
going to park
on clifton as opposed to parking news
so
i i i'm just making a point i understand
all your traffic accounts yeah nobody's
talking about what will probably be
additional parking up lifting for events
because of the proximity to the sport
sports complex
yeah yeah
thank you for your questions
so let me ask a couple questions too so
obviously learning resource center
i'm trying to
you know i've been there many times and
i'm trying to figure out what
i'm looking at what exists now
the where the learning resource center
is that's a four-story
uh
edifice
that is
where the current gym is correct and
then the existing multi-purpose
is already there correct where the large
uh you know the
3 400 people weddings occur in the
existing multi-purpose space they're to
the south um
what would have been current so where it
says covered walkway there
directly below that on the plan is the
walter commons which was a atrium space
that was
previously a courthouse where you have
the big uh events and stuff like that
now is that going away or
what what is that that is staying that's
staying okay so where it says covered
walkway that walter atrium is going to
stay where it is with the kitchen back
there and all that correct all that's
right
okay so
then
the performing arts center is not in
existence currently there is an existing
theater building there okay that will be
expanded and connected to the main
building
okay
and is it now unattached correct so it
says new common lobby that would be a
new lobby to connect those to connect it
okay so got it
now
so i understand what a performing arts
center is i'm an existing multi-purpose
and natatoriums are but what is the
convocation center for what what would
happen in a convocation center at a high
school well it's the gymnasium as well
oh that's the gymnasium so it will it'll
be the gymnasium space it would be okay
um
exactly okay but it would also
potentially hold events that's why we're
calling it a convocation center yeah you
could have the graduation there or you
could have
uh masks or something like that for the
whole school that kind of thing
the baseball stadium stays where it is
correct or baseball field what about
uh seats for the baseball field does
that stay where it is currently they are
all staying where they are yeah the
bleachers are um behind uh kind of be
close to the dugouts there behind home
plate
okay
has anybody every home run on clifton
i don't know it's a long field it's a
long home run because of the outfield
being uh
the soccer field and football field
gotcha just anybody ever hit a home run
just curious
more competitive
maybe maybe an infield homer yeah right
other members of the
of the
board have any questions or comments
i'm curious with
540 students total
assuming they're
fairly evenly distributed how can you
have 355 students parking every day that
seems like an awful lot of cars
for
kids that are freshmen can't drive i
would assume
people that are sophomores might be on
the edge but juniors can probably drive
in seniors but that's a lot of cars for
that few number of students so you got
to remember that st charles's catchment
area is all of central ohio
it's not just a neighborhood so it's
less there are kids that don't have the
opportunity to carpool because they're
coming from as far as newark and places
like that to come to saint charles
that contributes to that okay
those are the actual parking numbers
based on this year yeah that's
interesting
and
is
so if you have a baseball game and
people park in the
spaces to the
toward the broad street side
how do they get back there
right now
if you build all of this if you build
well so we will have a pedestrian so
where the current drive through is right
now um that's between the what's called
new learning resource center and the the
walter commons if you recall if you've
been back there there's a space a tunnel
that goes underneath the building
that will be closed to um
vehicles the vehicle or vehicular
traffic but it will remain open and
actually we're looking at some kind of
interior courtyard spaces that you might
see when we come back with more detailed
stuff in that area okay so they would
travel through that space i see
provide some circulation exactly
all right anybody else have any
questions so you can't drive the covered
walkway is not a driveway it currently
is oh well the covered walkway is
actually
pointing actually to
you can't really tell but it's a covered
walkway that's similar to the covered
walkway that's going in that direction
now but you can currently drive through
there correct correct it will it'll be
turned to pedestrian in the future but
it currently is
that's the plan long term
the only only comment i would make i'm
not overly concerned about the parking
counts i think
with uh wolf park there and with
uh uber and lyft and
you know carpooling and p people will
figure that out uh and then and i do i
do like uh jason's comment about uh
making it more pedestrian friendly you
know there's
even even now there's obviously a lot
going on over there and i think aligning
some sidewalks and doing some things
just to make it more pedestrian friendly
so people feel like they can park park
and walk over or walk over to get get
through the campus i think would be a
would be a big benefit
we're happy to work through those those
items
all right maybe mr shannon wants to give
us some uh perspective from the sort of
the legal side thank you certainly thank
you
good evening uh mr chairman members of
the board it's a pleasure to be here we
just got to square again real fast
michael t shannon
i do
swearing in lawyers that's dangerous
dangerous business shannon
mr chairman i uh it's a pleasure to be
here this evening um
i'm from the class of 75 at st charles
that's 1975 before you asked i know i
was older i knew i was older than you
are yeah
um
and i should note that
coach lauer has been at st charles for
almost 40 years but
he actually knows my brother kevin much
better than me kevin is your magistrate
here and
he's known as the good son
as opposed to me
i have a unique fee agreement
with coach uh he did a little research
on me and uh found out that um
i was somewhat of a contrarian at st
charles so he's paying me not to speak
um so i'll try to be very brief all
right um
as you're aware mr chairman um these are
development standard variances that
we're seeking tonight and not a use
variance that's important legally
because the standard for use variants if
we want to do something other than
the permitted use here we'd have to
demonstrate a legal hardship under the
law and that cannot be a
an economic hardship but rather these
are development standard variances i.e
for parking heights
and
lot coverage um
so the uh
standard for that is the landmark
supreme court case called the duncan
case
and basically there are seven factors
none of them are dispositive you don't
need four out of seven or five out of
seven it's a balancing act and they're
not exclusive
and those standards are number one
whether the property in question would
yield a reasonable return on whether
there can be any beneficial use of the
property that's generally
in terms of the economics that you can
get into but you can't with a hardship
obviously our mission here is not
to create profit but
to create an environment where
young men can
continue their education and
go on to college
number two is whether the variance is
substantial um
taken out of context when you have a
variance for this many many spaces only
an art an attorney could argue that it's
not substantial
but i do believe given uh the nature of
the entire campus uh that it could be
characterized as not substantial
again it's my job to answer most of
these questions yes or no depending on
what they say
uh number three is whether the essential
character of the neighborhood would be
changed or adversely affected
st charles has been part of this
neighborhood i believe since 1925
i remember that because on
so 25 coach 1925.
yeah cause it's on the 50th anniversary
i did a cartwheel down the middle of the
church when the bishop said mass so mr
lauer got that out of my personnel file
this is true by the way i'm like
um number four is whether the proposed
project would adversely affect
governmental services and that clearly
is not the case here we believe
um number five is whether the property
was purchased uh with knowledge of the
zoning
again it was 1925 and there were no
restrictions
number six whether the property owner's
predicament can feasibly be alleviated
through some other means i know of no
other means under the code than to seek
the variances we're asking for
number seven is whether the spirit
intent behind the zoning requirement
would be observed and whether
substantial justice would be done by the
granting of the variants
the bottom line with the zoning code is
public safety health and welfare
it's protecting not only our property
values but not having an adverse effect
on our neighboring properties i do think
sir that uh
member turner that it speaks volumes
that our neighbors are not here this
evening they're well aware of this
hearing as they were the architectural
review board but um
sometimes you you know you learn the
hard way and the first time we went
through this it was a very rocky road um
but we were able to build consensus on
that project for the most part and then
we evolved into uh um
taking further steps to be a good
neighbor and they kind of glossed over
the
um stormwater issue but the fact of the
matter is is the investment we're making
is going to help alleviate the burden on
the bexley uh stormwater system that has
caused collateral damage to the
backyards of some of these properties
so we think that
we satisfy the the duncan standards
we'd respectfully ask your favorable
consideration
of the requested variances
i do acknowledge that the staff report
is written in such a way in the
connotation as such and some of the
present presentation indicated
tonight that uh some of the things
conditions uh would be forthcoming
uh obviously we'd love to call the
question this evening but um
having appeared in front of chair b hall
in different capacities for
my god over 20 years um i maybe 30 you
know yeah i didn't want to say that but
more than 30 years
um perhaps you would want to see some of
those conditions met
before you take action but we think
we've demonstrated that uh this project
obviously we're the gateway to bexley
when you come in broad street and we're
not going to do anything to diminish the
value that's already there
and i would be remiss if i didn't thank
the staff
particularly kathy karen and jason for
meeting with us on multiple occasions
to try to work this for the course of
least resistance for the mutual benefit
of both the city and saint charles and
with that i'd be happy to answer any
questions unless it's about my personnel
record at st journals
[Music]
all right i just have one quick return
um first of all i want to thank you i i
kind of want to say thanks i know i
asked a couple questions but just so you
know my list was six questions and four
of those were pertaining to the
neighbors and you guys answered those
before i even even got to ask them so i
appreciate that and i appreciate the
fact you guys met with the neighbors
this time and i will i will take your
word and everybody's word that they were
notified and if they're not here then
obviously they approve so i want to
thank you guys for doing it a little bit
differently than it was last time
because it was very uh
i wouldn't say hostile but it was it was
definitely yes so yeah so thank you so
thank you that's all i got to say thank
you
questions or comments from other board
members
all right thank you for your time and
considering thank you so chairman uh
bihar we recommend that you know we
would work with the applicant to sort of
button up all these further issues but
we would like to know if there's any
concerns that the bees app has today
based on the direction that this seems
to be heading to make sure that as a
staff we are giving you everything you
need
or if we've missed anything that you
think you need to make a decision to
keep this process moving
i mean the only
thing i mean it's almost like you're in
your own
campus over here and if
if you're okay
with the parking situation
with the understanding that they could
go across the street on certain
occasions that is going to be very often
that
probably
the board might be okay with that and i
can't speak for anybody else
the only question that i would have is
could there be spillover parking
on
meadow park or will people say well it's
full here we're going to the graduation
ceremony it's starting to get crowded
across the street and we're going to go
up meadow park and
park our cars or go to
the uh what's the street that is on the
east side of the park wolf park the park
along the street preston but um
park park lane yeah
it's important to be very candid and
straightforward
i believe that's an existing condition
right now um when you have uh athletic
events especially if it's
like like a powerhouse like watterson
you know football game
the parking on clifton the
parking on on meadow uh
as a metal park biologist um it occurs
um
uh we think that by
providing as much parking additional
parking as we will that it'll be more
convenient to park where we have the
spaces but obviously if wolf parks fall
and if our parking lots full they're
gonna park on clifton and um
uh
that's
that's an existing condition that we try
to monitor and we think this will help
alleviate it but i'm not going to stand
here and tell you that they won't park
there yeah because um
people do what's most convenient we're
trying to make it most convenient for
them to park there one of our ancillary
lots um on the west campus or at wolf
park and pedestrian connectivity that
they're looking to see i think will be
key to that
i mean to be fair i live near bexley
high school and if there's a huge event
at bexley
the parking exists on all the streets
surrounding the high school there as
well the the residential streets so
uh you're going to get some spillover
as it is at csg right exactly so i i
don't think that's a in any way a
prohibition against anything like this
i guess
it would be
equally absurd to have 1200 parking
places
on the campus there when
they're going to be used once every
three years and uh
and take up space that
i mean you're bounded by
meadow park the creek broad street isn't
going anywhere and i don't think
clifton's going anywhere either so
you're like uh
bound by
natural
things that are not going to change this
campus isn't getting any larger now
is there parking on the west side of the
of nelson road
yes there is
on the
west campus is how i refer to it
i'd have to defer uh to mr foley as to
the exact number of spaces i believe
it's 110 based on uh 110 staff report
that kathy did but
it's right yeah okay i think you did
tell us that now i'm looking at my notes
yeah um also kathy didn't remind us uh
remind me of a point of order that she
needed to share
i don't believe
in the neighbors
no i haven't known i will you know i was
going to give i don't know if anybody
else wants to speak from the saint
charles side but i figured let's get all
their speakers done and then we'll see
if there's anybody here in the audience
sure chad
yeah
elsewhere are you in do you swear or
affirm that you'll tell the truth and
the whole truth and nothing but the
truth yes i do thank you
tell us your name my name is jim negron
jim yeah i just i thought there was just
one point of clarity so for us to the
practical side of how we have to handle
graduation
or
the catholic men's conference
just as a normal course of the way you
operate we do have to bring in and we do
bring in
you know private police which is
especially police officers to help us
navigate not just where people are
parking just to control traffic and i
think just and and i've been to saint
charles i've been involved with st
charles since 2000 and i've been to
events each year and the the practical
side of how that's managed it's hand
managed by police officers that are
directed by
the staff sure but also it's just a
practical way you manage it i i've been
to a lot of events most of the time you
don't see that level of management but i
think
with saint charles trying to be a good
citizen but also the practical aspect of
how you're trying to manage a campus
with young men
you know it's just a it's a normal
course of business and it's so i think i
thought that was a point of clarity to
say hello it's not just by habit chance
where people are parking we're managing
that to the best of our ability and from
my perspective going up above than what
i've seen some you know other high
school events in the in in the area so
i thought that was important all right
okay thank you thank you yep
um
is there anybody in the audience that is
here to speak uh for or against this uh
proposal that has standing to do so
i don't see any in the indication of
such
we're not online are we then we have
people
we don't have to worry about that but
there's no
online interaction
thank god
all right
you know those meetings with 50 people
on zoom they really got to me after a
while that was hard to manage yeah right
you think about your your situation too
jason
from the
staff's perspective and from the
planning perspective
are there
enough other things
that are
say undetermined
from a detailed perspective
such as tree and and
landscape lighting
signage
that
that you feel like the staff would like
to have some more information
or do you think that at this stage the
ball game this being sort of a
a general blueprint if you will
that
you're okay if we were to move forward
and say
let's vote on these variances on the
condition that
um
anything that has that that they do get
passage of any details with the tree
uh commission or the lighting yeah it's
um there's really two tracks so one is
the certificate of appropriateness for
the overall site plan
i do feel like there are a lot of
details that they're still going to be
providing to us
and i think that would probably be just
a little bit easier if we kind of could
button all those up because that's a lot
of conditions that we'd be placing on
that as far as the variance goes that's
really up to the board
as to whether you think you have enough
information to move forward through that
process you know as mr shannon pointed
out there are seven criteria those are
listed in your staff report those are
directly from our code
basically and they're not just from our
code those are from the code the way
variances you know work throughout
cities based on that that court decision
so
it's really up to you if you feel like
you know enough based on what they
shared with you that you can act on you
know the and again we didn't even get
into the height variance today really at
all you know i think that probably is
something that we'd at least want to
wait
until that was a further discussion at
least more robustly at this board if not
also tied in with arb
but if you feel like you have enough
information to
act on the variants for the number and
the location that is up to you um again
that's really uh you you as a
deliberative
quasi-judicial body make that
determination as staff we really can't
do that so okay that's up to you but i
would recommend for the certificate of
appropriateness that we table that till
the next regularly scheduled meeting and
hopefully we'll have most of those
things buttoned up and we can move
forward so members of the board do you
feel that
you have enough information to make a
decision about
a variance
on the space
number number of spaces being less than
then required under the one one space
per five seats and one space per 400
square foot
uh requirements and also the location
being
uh on the west side of the campus there
near the broad street uh portion of the
uh
campus
let me
kind of hear your perspective i'm fine
voting on it tonight are you okay
uh rick do you have any thoughts
are you
same here i'm fine with moving those and
those issues
sean
no
all right i think we have consensus that
we're
good to to vote in order that we have
enough information
um
so
with
that uh
can we have findings of fact conclusions
of law
uh
jason or kathy on the
location and
amount of parking spaces please give it
a shot uh it is i i think it'd be easier
uh if you're okay to do two separate
ones just i think so too over code
sections so
um let's do the first one so for
application bzap dash 21-36 for property
located at 2010 east broad street
upon considering the application
proposed variance and evidence testimony
before it the board finds that the
applicant has proven that the criteria
grant and area variants impacts the code
section 1226.11 c have been met and
variants from bexley code section and
this will be 1262.04
b
for
parking in the front or side yard in
accordance uh with that section
is allowed with the following conditions
that i i mean i think basically this
would be the same conditions for both of
them but i'll just give it a try here um
that the parking spaces as shown on the
uh site plans submitted for the august
26 2021 meeting uh be in conformance or
uh
closely in conformance as modified by
staff
due to the fact that they were talking
about potentially losing a few in order
to make those pedestrian connections so
if you're comfortable with that um the
other thing and honestly i'm not exactly
sure if we can do this but the one thing
we were um interested in is if we could
also at least note that they have 110
approximate parking spaces outside of
the jurisdiction of the city that they
are intending to use to service this um
i don't know if we can require that they
keep those based on
a different city that's a legal question
i think i would at least like to note
that um just i don't think there's any
intention for those to not be there uh
but just so that we were aware that that
was a consideration as part of this
deliberation as immediately adjacent
spaces that are just for them and not by
anybody else uh so with that i think
that's what we
how about uh something that uh says we
also
uh need for them to get approval of uh
any from the tree commission along broad
street there to to maybe uh shield the
parking lot from from broad street yeah
i think the easiest thing would be to
say it's also based on approval of the
certificate of appropriateness for the
overall site plan which would include
tree and public garden approval for the
landscape plan
overall lighting
any other site improvements that are
necessary in order for this to work from
a technical aspect so if you're
comfortable with that it's kind of a
nebulous but it captures everything okay
into one and and so that's a few
conditions that that that
he's read into that uh
findings in fact conclusions of law all
right thank you very much does uh
anybody on the
uh
board
uh wish to
modify the findings of fact and
conclusions of law as
just iterated by mr
um
if not i would entertain a motion to
uh
prove the findings of fact conclusions
of law
so move thank you is there a second
second thank you
kathy please call the role
second by mr marsh i should have said
that i'm sorry
mr marsh yes
yes mr turner yes mr wesley yes
i vote yes as well
so the first
variance is granted with regard to
location
and then jason would you give us the
next finding effect yeah for the second
one again application b's f2136 properly
located at 20 east broad uh again same
language consideration application for
proposed variants and evidence testimony
before it board finds that the applicant
has proven the criteria to grant area
variants and mexico section 1226 11 c
has been met and a variance from code
section 1220 or 1262.02
h and this is for the number of on-site
parking spaces be allowed as per the
following conditions and if it's okay
with the board i would like to make
those the same conditions as the
previous conditions without necessarily
reiterating them right now i think that
that works anybody have any objection to
that um are there any modifications to
the findings of fact
i should ask mr foley to step to back to
the podium
are the findings in fact conclusions of
law as
they have been stated
uh meet with your approval yes okay mr
shannon
okay thank you
um
is there a motion to approve
motion
thank you kurt
second second
second mr turner
kathy please call the roll
mr ryan yes mr marsh yes mr wesley yes
mr turner yes
i vote yes as well so that variances are
granted on the conditions that were
stated
good luck just you got a little bit more
work to do because i think that we
probably need to decide whether we're
going to table the certificate of
appropriateness also uh it is up to the
applicant whether they want to call the
question on the height we really haven't
discussed it i i my recommendation
that we have we have well there is
actually a variance request for height
um i feel like we certainly need a lot
more information discussed tonight
before you were able to do that but
again that would be up to you so it's up
to the applicant if they want to pursue
that okay let's talk about those two
we'd be happy to continue those items as
we discussed we'll be in for arv soon
not for that part of it but we'll so
we'll we're happy to continue the rest
of the app okay you understand that's
height and certificate of appropriate
press very good all right mr shannon
thank you
all right um then do i hear a motion to
table
i hate to say we have to take those
separately i'm not sure we do table the
motion for or the
application for a certificate of
appropriateness
let's do it one at a time
well um
probably we ought to say
the height variance is going to is that
going to be something still to be
discussed at the arb
i i would recommend that we table it to
the next to a certain date which would
be september
the arb is september 9th and then
is september 23rd september 23rd i mean
it would be good to have that before i
think the intention is to have an
october
i can't remember what the date is arb
which is the second week in october um
so it'll be good to have that discussion
here before that so should we table to
october
this is august september what i would
what i would offer is that the
certificate of appropriateness i think
we could table to the next meeting the
height one can be tabled to a date to be
determined because that building is not
likely the building we're going to be
coming in first
that makes sense
okay
and do you think one month is adequate
yes because we've got most of those
items for the certificate of
appropriateness already in the works
okay
then
in that case
so the motion regarding the height
variance would
extend out 100 years extend out one year
or whatever it is so
so
let's deal with the what the height
variance then first
do we do i hear a motion to table the
height variance to
uh
indefinitely
so moved is there a second second second
mr marsh thank you um all in favor
aye aye
all opposed
okay that motion passes unanimously
uh now we'll do uh see if there is a
appetite for a motion to
continue the
application for a certificate of
appropriateness
uh until the september
2021 meeting of the b z ap
september what 23rd 23rd
so move thank you second thank you mr
marsh
all in favor of tabling uh until the
next meeting the
request for certificate of
appropriateness please say aye aye
the motion passes unanimously
and those matters are hereby tabled
gentlemen thank you for everybody
attending and for the nice presentation
and jason thank you as well that was a
nice place i'm gonna excuse myself and
go to a wedding rehearsal dinner so
thanks you are excused
all right
now let's see
so we're back to the top
uh kathy is that correct
okay
the next case before the board is
application number bzap
21-32
involving 328 south merkel
the applicant is steve graham the owner
is mark hollander
and the applicant is seeking a special
permit to allow a wall in the front yard
just beyond the front facade of the
principal structure mr
graham are you here
please step forward
mr graham do you swear or affirm that
any testimony you give the board this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do
thank you sir
are you here
oh mark hollander mr hollander thank you
would you also raise your right hand you
swear affirm that any testimony you give
this evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do
thank you very much
all right um
kathy
yes tell us what the staff thinks about
this
this is a two-part application
30 to um inch high wall and front yard
which is subject to a special permit
from the board designing planning and
the second part of course is the
expansion of an existing 20 foot wide
driveway actually 16 feet wide driveway
now this block is located on the corner
of
dale and merkel and is platted to dale
however it's one of those formulas that
the front area
appears to be on merkel oh yeah
there's a wall that's parallel with the
face of that garage
and they're simply bumping that out by
feet from the front side which places it
in the front yard and also adding a
fireplace feature that does not have a
chimney but just a place to do a fire
behind the wall
so
as far as uh
you know the criteria for
front yard you know it technically
matches what's there now it follows the
water table of the house
it's not out of character it's simply
bumping it forward
um
whether the board finds landscape that's
necessary
for this type of wall it's not more it's
not a landscape feature while it's hard
just a short wall
[Music]
okay
very good
so
okay
mr graham mr hollander which which of
you would like to speak and let us know
exactly what your
plans are and why you want to do it the
way that you're suggesting
yeah so mark reached out to
outdoor space design to help him
create
a little bit of a bigger area to
entertain in
obviously with the orientation of the
house the backyard actually looks like
that very skinny area that you see there
so we really can't build out that way
so the only way to build out would be
into what is considered the or what is
planted as a front yard
visually it doesn't look like the front
yard
but
really just
working off of the elements that are
already there to give him a little bit
more space
as well as
um you know that fire feature to
entertain with
okay
members of the board you have any
questions
about this
request just a couple so
you're changing the height of the
existing wall
only in one area where the fire feature
sits we raise up a little bit there but
the rest of the wall will maintain at
the current height and then there's two
drawings on here one with the chimney
and one without i think she said she's
off the table jimmy's off the table yeah
so the fireplace looks like it's only a
foot higher than the wall yes okay
that's all i have
okay any other questions
is there anybody in the audience that is
for or against this application please
okay
without swearing you in we'll duly note
that you're for it
you're closely related to the applicant
sir right i got you
okay
um
anybody uh
kathy you want to talk about the second
aspect so uh yes so there's a special
permit here
uh
they're also seeking a variance to
mexico section 1262
101 e which limits the driveway to 12
and a half feet in width
which which i was a little concerned
about
regardless if it's in the front yard or
side yard
the fact that we're dealing with an
existing 16 foot wide driveway because
it accesses a double garage door
i believe the owner would like the extra
two feet on both sides of this drive so
that when you're stepping out of the car
you're stepping on a hard surface
my concern is
the percentage of
hardscape in that front yard i mean
typically if you're limited to 25 or
less and i believe with the current
width of that lot and the existing
driveway they're already at if not
slightly above that 25
also if if the board
felt it appropriate to grant a variance
to allow the expansion of the extra
extra hardscape or concrete on both
sides of that drive
i would suggest that they may want to
consider a different material so it's a
different color and doesn't just simply
look like a cd of concrete
okay
gentlemen
i don't know if this is your area are
you doing this as well or i'll let you
speak to mr hollander
i didn't realize that there was that was
going to be a factor here uh yeah our
our rationale for doing that again so we
can have two cars parked next to each
other and get in and out as you know um
yeah as long as we can make something
the idea of a contrast i have no problem
with as long as we can design that so it
doesn't sink over there as compared to
the concrete right no of course yeah
but it doesn't have to do like a stamped
concrete of a different color it doesn't
need to be okay because i don't think
that i don't speak for kathy i don't
think it was about a
pervious surface i think it was just
about a different even a color right oh
okay so you know there are concrete so
you don't have to worry about the papers
so we can make something work there yeah
you can do a stamped concrete that looks
like pavers there's all kinds of options
but i do think it would be really nice
detail not to have the
hue
like the appearance of a very extra wide
no problem with that and and
do you believe you absolutely need two
feet on both sides
that was another concern
two feet's not that much
well you know i'm just laughing because
you know they give you two foot putts
and you always think that wow that's not
two feet but the two feet isn't very big
this is my point but again with two cars
parked next to each other
that additional two feet i like that
idea if i can get it okay
well i think
i i know the house because i drive back
down merkel and it's it's definitely
an unusual
corner problem you know where
you're on dale but you're really on
merkle
to the naked eye of somebody like me who
doesn't know what he's talking about
i think that
and as a result i don't think there's a
whole lot of green but you do have the
big lawn you're going to take two the
lawn to the east
i'm getting this right here
it seems to me if you take two feet away
from that that's two feet of pretty much
your space
taking two feet to the other side so
people coming down miracle coming down
dale they'll see that lawn at the corner
at the very corner
but
i mean
i think you have an unusual situation
here which is one of the
criteria for variants
members of the board you have any
thoughts
or comments about this particular issue
is anybody in the audience that wishes
to speak to this issue i should ask
same same one person who's in favor of
it
yeah vocal very vocal member of the
audience is in favor of it i mean i mean
i'm not a huge fan of
exceeding the
the coverage
and
and just aesthetically i agree i'd
almost like to see and i would defer to
karen but instead of running it all the
way to the cur to the sidewalk
leave
you know four feet of grass and then you
know i've even seen where people where
the concrete goes and then it tapers out
and comes back so that you can get out
of your car
uh you know you're not supposed to be
parking your car overnight on the
driveway anyway so
in their front yard
yeah so
yeah so i don't know it just i just
think if everybody
you know we if we grant one for them
then we've got to grant everybody a four
foot
uh total paving variance and then you
know
then then pretty soon you know it's a 16
foot wide restriction instead of a 12
foot wide restriction or any landscape
screening that might
make it a better situation i think that
color i think making it a different
color or pattern
the darker one
would totally make the difference
if you did a reddish
stamped concrete that looks like pavers
would you be
willing to consider
say
the first
10 feet
from the street from
dale
not being
four feet wider
but at getting four feet wide as you get
closer to the garage
now i could i'd look at all kinds of
stuff i mean i'd want to just go out
with the tape and just see what it looks
like run some line and look at that
you could condition it on
our landscape consulting
yeah we could do that
i personally wouldn't really want to
take on that because
and i can i can work with her so 10 feet
beyond the property line
yeah 10 feet yeah
okay so so that you have it looks to me
now i don't i don't know the length of
it here i can't see that i believe
that's is it 30. it's 30 feet to the
back of the wall that we're pushing out
and the walls pushing
you got 30 feet out to the street or to
the sidewalk
so
if you if it gets me 20 feet that gives
you 20 feet which is enough more than a
car length and at least gets you where
you're going and preserves as much green
space as possible and keeps us from you
know i we're very sensitive to creating
precedent here because
we can't treat one
citizen different than others and now of
course there are different circumstances
to each case and we have to look at each
circumstance i think you have
an unusual circumstance with the way
your lot is configured on the corner but
i think that if we are
conditioning
the vote on this particular aspect of
your request
to
[Music]
trying to
plan for something that takes as little
green space away as possible and yet
still accomplishes your goal and that
would be achieved by having the
landscape uh uh
what
were do i want to use chairman or
consultant consultant thank you
uh
work with you on that and approve
whatever it is that you that is
ultimately decided upon is that through
the city of bexley it is okay
is that okay with you yeah i
consider all this sure okay
uh with those
conditions um
uh can we call the question on this
on this issue
okay
all right the findings of fact and
decision of the board for application
number bzap
21-32 for property located at 328 south
merkel
upon consideration of the application
provided
proposed variance in the evidence and
testimony before the board finds the
applicant has proven the criteria to
grant an area of variance to mexico
section 12 26 11 c have been met and it
varies from vexy code section
1264.02 c
to allow 42 inch wall in the front yard
as submitted and mexico section
1262.01 e
to allow an expansion of the existing
drive on the dale avenue side of the
property
with the following conditions that would
be
different color material for the
additional walk
the walk is to start 10 feet beyond the
property line along dale
and further subject to final review and
approval by the zoning and landscape
consultants
okay
does that meet with your approval mr
hollander and mr rooney so
okay
um members of the board any
modifications that you would like to
make to the findings of patent
conclusion of the law if not
i would entertain a motion to
approve the findings of fact conclusions
of all
so
thank you mr man
second second thank you
kathy please call the roll
uh mr west select
yes mr turner yes mr levine yes mr marsh
yes chairman b hall
i vote yes on the basis that your lock
is a is a
unusually configured lot on a corner and
uh that's the reason i'm voting yes on
those two issues thank you and uh it's a
nice project good luck with it yeah
thank you can't wait good thanks for all
your help you're welcome
all right the next
case is uh
pzap-21-33
the address is 270 south dawson
the applicant is juliette bullock there
she is
and the owner is ashley pitts there she
is
and the applicant is seeking a variance
to allow a swimming pool in the east
side yard
ladies would you raise your right hands
to be sworn do you swear or affirm that
the testimony you're about to give this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do
thank you very much
kathy what do you think here
well this originally was submitted
um as an arb application and i reached
out to george to let her know that
it's a corner lot that
the front yard's platted to
dale i believe it is
uh however dawson appears to be the
front yard the address is the front door
is dawson it's another one of those
similar situations sounds familiar yeah
uh
so technically the open porch edition
which was also a part of that original
application arb
is included in with this however there's
no variance regarding that it's it was
given a positive recommendation from the
architectural review board
however the swimming pool
is in technically in the side yard
now the staff believes that if it was
placed in the rear yard it would
actually be
behind the garage that's attached to the
house and wouldn't be visible from the
rear yard living space or house
so
this really makes more sense to have it
in this location and seems
very appropriate because of this
configured lot to locate it in in this
position
the arv's recommendation
also provided that landscape be provided
which the applicant had already
submitted an application
and if the board finds it appropriate we
certainly could
attach that as a requirement as they're
planning to
landscape it anyways
karen
do you have any thoughts on the bza um
the architectural review board didn't
discuss the poll um
but
um the cover porch they immediately
approved it in fact said that they would
have even done it as a consensus of the
item but
now we're in person and they're a little
weary to do zoning applications like
that but there was a little a
little discussion and no textures
okay
so
um
ms bond why don't you give us your
perspective and why we've got things the
way they are here and why we should
approve it
i mean essentially the um east of the
house has pretty much always been their
rear yard the house faces dawson the
front yard faces dawson and actually
they show me this on here so i can see
i've got a different site plan maybe
just because it doesn't zoom out sorry
sorry it just shows more of the
yeah
yeah that's the front from dawson yeah
that's the side yeah the side yard
yeah
so so essentially you know the the house
is pretty much always faced dawson i
think you saw in the landscape plan
actually longdale it's heavily
landscaped as if it's a a side yard so
um
you know behind the garage like she said
would not be visible from the house as
you can see
the interior spaces
all face this rare property um she has
small children so we definitely would
not want to place the pool behind the
house no
no
no definitely not no so
yeah we think it's more of a technical
kind of variance than anything else just
because the house was planted on dale
that's the front even though that's
really never been the front of the house
and
would the pool
area
be fenced off easily how does that go
and if you go to the landscape plan
she's got a pretty good
um sorry i'm making you proud no i can
speak to any any of those details so
um
on the back side where there's look like
the big plants those are horn beams
behind there would be a six foot or with
eight foot six foot six foot um solid
with just the lattice not the lattice
that they called spindle just from like
the top 12 inches and then all of that
privacy planting in front
and then on that other side of course i
wish i had that little laser thing here
right along here would be a four foot
fence
and what i'm discussing the defense
company right now is something i think
they call an estate style so it's
wood top wood bottom and then some sort
of a mesh because i don't i would like
to be able to see from this area over
here
this is going to be a porch
fire pit area we don't want to block the
view to the pool but because i have
young children i want to be able to
close it off at times when maybe we're
entertaining over here we just don't
want the pool in addition the pool is
going to have one of those
hard automatic pool covers so that it
can be
walkable
and then existing fence is here
and we wouldn't necessarily replace that
at this time unless we needed to
so show me with your laser
where the fence goes that completely
surrounds the pull on all four sides so
that i can see where you're because i'm
having trouble
discerning everything on
here
then there's fence all along there
there's um this is kind of like there's
a fence piece there in the side of our
neighbor's garage that goes like this
all the way around here and there and
then this is the back of the house
okay
let's go back to the start there yeah
and a minimum four foot fence is what's
required by code and that has the
defense prior to being filled
say that again minimum four foot height
is what's required for a pull and it has
to be properly fenced before the pole is
filled
okay
right with water
yes
concrete i guess does
okay so you have a fence on the south
side of the garage
here yes there's a fence here
it is scalloped
like this
so
it might not qualify
i think it's four feet at the top of the
scallops
so you'll have to build it up you'll
have to recover and and i know this is
different
by township and whatnot but the pool
company we're working with says that
some
municipalities and countries
consider that
cover yeah
minimum our minimum height is 48 and so
that's lower than that
yeah
that case has come before us before and
you know the question is
you don't have the cover on and you went
into the restroom and here we go when
some kid comes up that's one of my
issues
i was
in a personal conversation this was a
debate and i said nope i want becky that
fifth there
right right right you can cut that fence
down and then add a piece across the top
yeah you could and you won't have to
rebuild it and you could match the
detail that you're doing
on the other side yard it should be
pretty easy to
yeah so i would think that anything
would be conditioned on you're making
sure the fence is four feet i mean i
don't think we have any choice that's
the law so
we want you to
we can't give you a variance for the
four foot fence height i don't think i i
don't think there's any appetite for
that here is there yeah
she wouldn't want that either she's no
you don't want other kids and
you've got kids that are taller than
four feet tall maybe i wouldn't even
consider this pool if it wasn't for that
just for that yeah yeah
yeah yeah we can come up with something
yeah okay is there anybody in the
audience that is for or against this
case please i don't see any indication
of such
there's no
your neighbor
is
is let me see if i get this right now
it's your neighbor's garage in the upper
right hand corner here right
is there a neighbor that's contiguous
contiguous in other words their property
butts up directly to yours
yes
have you
uh made them aware of your plans
and have you received any
negativity
okay
and and you want privacy as well so the
horn beams and the and the stuff on the
top of the photo here are designed to
give you privacy as well
which which also
concomitantly shields your neighbor from
having to
see everything how close is your house
is it away from the garage it's just a
driveway
no the the uh the neighbor's house so
their driveway is here okay and then
their house
line is so it's got to be at least the
width of the
okay
so so at least 10
15 feet
from the property line all right so
there could be some
noise issues for a neighbor possibly
she's also got a row of horn beams in
addition
i'm just trying to make sure
think about all aspects of this from the
neighbors perspective as well
this these here uh
this
little section here those are going to
be english worlds which i think get up
to about
12 feet
of course the trees don't do much to
muffle sound and a bunch of kids playing
might create some noise for the neighbor
but
technically she could shift that pull
third
put the whole pole just next to where
it's at and it would meet code
[Music]
okay so it's not good to know yeah
and yeah the neighbors are noticed i'm
sure that yeah
okay
members of the board any further
questions or comments
no kathy can you give us some findings
of fact and conclusions of law all
regarding this matter please
and
shall i also include the certificate of
appropriateness oh yes right i mean i
think we can do them all once on this
case all right that's what i was asking
all right so the findings of fact it
conclusions applause for application
number vzap
21.33 for property located at 270 dawson
based on the evidence and testimony
before the board finds it appropriate to
grant a variance from bexley code
section 1252.15
to allow a swimming pool in the east
side yard as submitted and to include
the proposed landscape plan
uh the board also finds it appropriate
to grant a certificate of
appropriateness for the
open porch edition on the east side of
the principal structure as submitted
okay
are those findings of fact including the
law acceptable to you ms baldwin yes
okay thank you
uh members of the board do i hear a
motion to approve the fighting the fact
conclusion of the law someone moved
thank you second there's a second over
here mr turner
thank you
ms rose please call the roll mr turner
yes mr westlake
yes
mr marsh yes mr levine yes chairman
bihar i vote yes as well the certificate
of appropriateness is granted and the
uh
as well as the variance thank you very
much good luck it's a nice project
good luck with it i love going by your
house it's like chaos
there's kids everywhere there's stuff in
the yard it is it's a blast
this will this will reduce the chaos
it'll move it to the side yeah yeah
exactly great i enjoyed it it's fun
driving up back
the next case before the board is case
bzap 21-34
involving 2859 powell
the applicant is michelle mullins
and the owner is casey welch
do we have
either of those persons here
hold on is that the right case
she just gave it to me tonight
well i may have printed it a while ago
oh that made 2013 pal
28 13 pounds no 20 59 powell this says
skip that okay that cases oh
oh wait that is old sorry that's okay
okay i fixed it on the
website oh okay
it's up on it's up on the screen bob if
you want to just read it off of it i've
got it
uh this is uh case b z ap dash 21-35
involving 2813 powell road the applicant
is
uh mark a scheiber and the owner is dr
seth cantor the applicant is seeking a
variance to allow a deck and fence to
encroach into the west side yard
good evening good evening sir how are
you would you raise your right hand
state your name mark shiber mark sorry i
got your name wrong i should have gotten
it right i apologize i have an
opportunity do you swear or affirm that
uh your testimony tonight will be the
truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do people get my last name
wrong a lot too so i i'm sympathetic
instead mr b hall
all right um
kathy
why don't you give us the staff's uh
uh preview here so the applicant is
seeking special permit in accordance
with bexicode section 12643 which
restricts fences on a corner lot to 48
inches in height to allow proposed six
foot high wood fence to be constructed
one foot six inches from the west side
property line that'll be along south
merkle road
the applicant is also seeking a variance
from mexico section 125209
r6 zoning to allow an on-grade deck to
be constructed one foot 10 inches from
the west side property line along merkle
road which will be immediately behind
the fence
so i'd like to point out that the grade
of this property
its slopes however it is being
maintained it's always a concern when
you're putting in a retaining wall and
then adding a fence on top of that where
in this case the applicant is actually
digging into that slope to set the
retaining wall
on existing slope
and then the
fence is located
that's it a foot and a half further back
he i actually have been working with the
applicant because initially he had
proposed this retaining wall right at
the sidewalk
so
the city does not like
hardscape walls abutting the sidewalk so
when future when you need to replace the
sidewalk square it interferes with
trying to frame that in so the applicant
has
set that retaining wall into the bank
then
so just beyond that there is a landscape
plan
of hydrangea which is on the property
and will be in front of this proposed
six foot
high fence and
the criteria as far as corner let's go
for fencing
the applicant has met
all of that criteria
if the board finds it appropriate to
grant a special permit they may want to
condition it upon the landscape wall
being subject to review and approval by
the tree and public garden commission
because it is still in the city
right-of-way
specified that the landscape wall is not
considered in the fence height being
that they are cutting into the existing
grade
and the landscape should meet
should meet the plan submitted to
maintain
the clearance at the driveway so
they've actually angled it so that when
you're backing out of that garage it
shouldn't
uh interfere with being able to see
pedestrian or vehicular traffic
right now there's an existing overgrown
landscaping that's along the street that
they're planning to replace with what's
proposed in this packet
which you can see on the elevation on
the existing site plan
let me know what drawing you want it's
probably l1 l
uh it's l3
so you can see it up the top there's the
existing site and along there once again
this is apparently you scheduled all of
these corner lots to be the same right
now the other quarter lot merkel we're
on powell but
the action is on south purple
yeah
right
got it
it's merkel tonight it's
all night yes
okay
so actually the corner will be improved
because right now they have a number of
large arborvitaes right on that corner
edge as you come out of the garage
it's probably hard to pull out of there
and so uh
well you're going to create a little
triangle there
a visibility triangle right wedge both
ways
okay
uh also there's a
that
there are a few examples this has been
done in a variety of locations and
actually so that
the sheet number
four
i think i put in there
[Music]
uh
is a series of examples throughout
bexley with address and information
relative to both their setbacks and the
heights of the fences as you go through
there
almost every one of them is six feet
with a variance of anywhere from 18
inches higher than the sidewalk to
30 inches higher than sidewalk
which six foot fences
with a variance and set back from
i think the smallest one was 28 or 30
inches to
six feet
okay
do you have
any issue with the with us conditioning
this on
getting approval from the
tree and public garden commission
i don't other than from a standpoint of
timing is all uh but
um how much time are we adding actually
i mean you could go forward with the six
foot fence and the deck it's just that
retaining wall
uh in the landscaping that anything
that's interfering with the city right
of ways i don't think yeah i think
that's not gonna impact us
okay
when is that meeting though you
mentioned october i think we're like the
third wednesday of each month
so september
september right now
does it need to open that or can it go
to the consultant
we could ask her because she's in the
similar situation that karen is where if
she's not comfortable with signing off
on something she would defer it to the
board but if she's comfortable signing
off on this and that's why i thought it
was important to stress the fact that
he's cutting into that bank he's not
raising the grade putting in a retaining
wall and and then adding a six foot
fence it's all existing grade he's
simply putting us in the defense but
pushing that
that
wall back from the sidewalk you wouldn't
have any problem with talking to the
consultant no i i would welcome that i
think that'd be a good move
if she's not comfortable she would
take that's fine
just like i would to you guys
just she'll have to make sure she's got
the authority to sign off on that being
it is in the city right of way right it
could be a technicality but we could
certainly start with her are the walls
actually in the right way
yes
he actually first proposed it at the
sidewalk and then i explained to him
that we don't want
you'll find a few of these walls
throughout the city at the sidewalk it's
become a problem when would they have to
replace a sidewalk square
you can't bring that in
it's in the way
there's no place to frame that sidewalk
when you have to re-pour it and those
are all ones that have been built by the
individual homeowners bexley itself
put in a series of walls throughout the
city and those were all built next to
the sidewalk so
you still have those in existence so
this change has come about because of
the difficulties obviously right
replacing sidewalks
is there
i mean is there a liability issue with
having
a wall in the
in the right of way well that's what's
also helpful when you push that back not
to mention sometimes when you've got a
landscape bed that comes right up to the
sidewalk it's messy you've got mulch
that falls out of there so you know just
having that six inch buffer makes a big
difference so that's pretty much the
standard going forward
okay
and that is a good point it can i
thought there was
a homeowner that i know that actually
has a wall that they said they have a
signed liability sheet with the city or
something because it's in the right of
way that they had that they put it in
and then the city came and told me that
could be the case because so i don't
know it makes sense
if they have a carriage or something
they're they're not
they're not ideal yeah i don't know
whether it's a liability like the
liability but they have some kind of
paperwork between them and the city they
told me at one point so right
anyway just making sure pieces are
covered
all right
there's anybody in the audience that's
pro icon in this case that that i can
see
i suspect you two are not
you're the last of the mohicans back
there so
any
additional questions from members of the
board about this uh request looks like a
nice project in general and uh
safety has been taken into consideration
obviously mr schubert knows what he's
doing here so
um
cathy why don't you give us the findings
of fact and conclusion law on this
matter please
the findings of factory conclusions of
law for application number bcap-21-35
for property located at 2813 pal
based on the evidence provided and
testimony given the board finds it
appropriate to grant a variance
excuse me from bexicode section 1264.03
to allow six foot high fence along
berkel avenue as submitted
and
bexie code section
1252.09 to allow an on-grade deck on the
side property line along merkel avenue
with the condition that the retaining
wall in the right-of-way is subject to
further review and approval by the
landscape consultant and or tree and
public garden commission
all right i think that
accurately reflects
what we discussed she were you okay with
those conditions and with this
presentation of the findings of fact
conclusions
yes sir
members of the board are you satisfied
with the what the reading and findings
and if so
i would entertain a motion to
approve the findings of fact and
conclusions of law so moved thank you
sir for the second second thank you
mrs rose
please call the role mr marsh
yes
mr levine yes mr westlake yes mr turner
yes chairman b hall i vote yes as well
the variances are granted and
this looks like a nice project thank you
for the work on this project thank you
chairman b hall and members of the board
thank you
is there any
uh
new business before the board
or other business
uh i just approved a sign permit today
for a
restaurant that's replacing
at the corner casting have in maine it's
called
crack claw
cajun
really
food yep okay
if somebody's moving into that space
it's a it's a
tomb
of restaurants
he's out of new orleans and he put his
first restaurant in new york and
columbus was his second choice well now
see a franchisee or is the actual do you
know
it's it's his own business oh cool well
franchises
i think it looks great
yeah it looks spectacular and it was
raining hard the other night when i
drove by and there were still people uh
eating underneath there so oh it does
look great this is the right size been
struggling for so long this is great is
anybody wondering we actually i let them
change the direction without further ado
i notice it
not what you're saying because i think
it looks better because you can see the
sign better than everything else but yes
yeah you change it and i say
awesome i'm not even going to make you
come back because it looks better that
way yeah it does look very good yeah i
think it looks very good hey the one in
dublin's still up though because i
thought the original plan was to move
the one from dublin to here
and i went by it like after this one was
up and i'm like wait a minute that that
roof is supposed to be gone but that but
there's it's still up not that i i don't
really care but i think it looks great
yeah you're not on the double and bga
yet no
i got a job up there and i got a long
drive now so oh yeah but they had two
other awnings approved prior to this one
and this one is the best of all three so
i'm glad they finally built one no it
does look going up main street it
actually adds to the streetscape there
you know it's very very uh very good and
they're very thrilled about it i know
the landscaping is always nice yeah the
landscaping is nice yeah
so we get some right so yeah we've been
getting plenty of rain for them
we get them right then karen changes it
to make it better so there we go
is there any other business before the
board
i think then i would entertain a motion
to adjourn the
august 2021 meeting at the bexley board
of zoning in