so you guys are live just
assume we're live I gotta find my
agenda if you guys have any if you need
any like text support issues just shoot
me a text all
right than
you where you going oh my go sorry sorry
thought that was Christopher sorry okay
we are live with h an
audience
okay well let's see is it six yet it's
just exactly six we give people
exactly six and I am um just checking to
make sure any board members are not in
attendees
okay and I need to make a members
list Mr
[Music]
Levine I'm glad you mentioned Alicia
that you were on for that St Charles
that's
helpful
I sent the an email inquiry on that but
I think it went to um the wrong person
went to talking to Ben and he sent you a
link so the plans are on there and
they're different from what you had seen
the you know two years ago is that it is
that in that God it didn't seem like
it's been that long is that in that um
Dropbox or whatever
link uh he just sent you oh he just did
okay okay I'll look at it real quick
thank you
I can study that while you guys are on
the other two
cases
um and I'm texting you now with my phone
number so that you can save me
too there's new there's new plans for St
Charles after the after what was sent
out no okay no the same same plans I'm
just saying Alicia was there when we
heard it you know year before last yeah
yeah okay um we are live okay and what
members do I have you have Heidi Dorne
Alysa Mitchell Brian
Marsh Sean
Turner Jason
Fout
me
ehle
and and Rick line I could hear Rick
Rick are you on there one two three four
I don't see him am I missing
[Music]
someone that would be seven looking oh
here's Rick he's in the I'm putting him
in a panelist now thanks hold on I'm
trying
to okay and Ryan shik too Ryan shik
that's
who so on this
case
um let's see Mr Levine's on standby so
we'll have Alicia Sean Jason Brian Heidi
yourself and Ryan is he on yet I'm here
let let me ask um did everybody on the
seven member panel uh listen to
the
uh
434 uh 424 excuse me South Columbia case
last
time last
month yes Jason Shawn Brian no Brian
didn't uh Alicia did Heidi did Jason
Fout
did
so um if we're going to entertain a
motion maybe it would be
best
for those who actually heard the case to
vote on
it which would only knock
out Brian right Brian you didn't hear
that case did you I I didn't hear it
live but I've watched the video oh you
watched the video that's right thank you
I did get your and I apologize for not
calling you back but I did see that you
see the video thank you very much and
and that's the same for me Mr chairman
okay good thank you Jason very good I I
I would actually call it binge watching
because it was as you know it was seven
hours in uh and seven hours but it was
very enjoyable we live not not live yeah
no exactly thank yeah thank you yeah Mr
chairman just a quick point of order I
think that for the general public
they'll be able to tell who was here and
who was not because those of us who were
present have a thousand yards stare um
you know we've seen
things I got it all right is every body
if we have everybody and I believe we do
uh and it's now 604 so I think we're uh
members of the uh audience and citizens
of Bexley who want to to uh participate
are on are we getting a fair number of
uh attendees I see we have 51 attendees
so1 we do have a decent number of people
who they may come in here in a few
minutes we'll give them a couple another
minute or so to to get
in
um and I believe we're going to take the
agenda at at at the current order that
that is in is it you have it up here on
the
board yes yes can you can you all see
the screen and is it and I've I've
notified the applicants for the two
residential cases at the end 244 fair
and 46 North Park View and my best
estimate is those will probably not be
heard until around
8 so if anybody's you know planning to
attend for that there you go should we
continue with what we did uh in
particular on the Livingston on Item B
um and also item C what do we limit it
to what was my motion two minutes or
three minutes we had three minutes we
had three minutes at that time we later
changed it to 90 seconds for later
I'll go over uh some of those rules
because
um we're not going to hear new
evidence the the case just was tabled
and unless there's new evidence provided
by the uh applicants because they they
asked the table after we listen to all
of the uh members in the audience Pro or
con um and so they have the uh right to
to um put on the any rebuttal or new
information that they have come up with
in the
interim which would which would be open
to discussion by any uh of the members
of the audience that wish to comment on
the new or rebutted information
presented during the rebuttal I should
say all
right I'm Bob
behall this is the and I'm going to call
to order the uh
February
2021 meeting of the Beckley Board of
zoning and
planning um just to make sure we have
everybody on the seven me member panel
here would you call the rle uh Kathy
please miss Roose Miss Mitchell here Mr
Turner here Mr Turner Mr F here Mr Marsh
here miss Dorne here Mr schik here and
chairman Beal I am present as well all
right thank you very much I did you call
Mr Levine well Mr Levine I think is he
on he's an alternate and uh he has been
nice enough to agree to uh sit on the
two cases that M Mitchell has already
told us that she's going to have to
abstain
from as a result of a conflict of
interest what about the um South
Columbia case that I did participate in
whatever being under consideration today
who's talking please Mr line
okay um that one we have the seven
members already on the board all have
seen the
case so that's you're you're not sitting
on that one Mr Rine
all
right
um with that uh do we have any
uh public comments comments from anybody
in the general public that uh people
want to make about the board of zoning
and planning as opposed to comments
about any particular case which we are
not entertaining at this time we're just
entertaining comments
about the board and its General
business if you have any comments please
raise your virtual hand thank
you I do not see any ra okay thank you
Karen uh next we have uh old business
first and the first case that uh is uh
present on tonight's docket for old
business involves
application bz
ap-20
d63 and involves the property located at
424 South
Columbia the applicant was is Sullivan
was Sullivan Builders the owner
is I hope I get this name right but s
shalish
sha and uh there was an indication to
the uh staff that a board member wanted
to make a
motion uh to reconsider was that is that
a correct is that correct that is
correct and and the member was Mr
shik that is correct okay Mr shik uh
I'll entertain a motion from
you if you would like to make one thank
you Mr chairman yes um pursuant to rule
14 uh under the Privileges 4ed to board
members I would like to make a motion
that we reconsider um the matter at 424
South Columbia
okay uh is there a second to that motion
a second okay thanks
Alicia uh and Mr Beall if I could just
clarify for the record I think you
mentioned that the seven regular members
of the BF would be voting on this to the
members I think president at the last
meeting indicated that they had all
listened to the tape and had been uh
heard the entirety of the proceedings
and I just want to make make that clear
on the record and have themir that if if
they're voting it should also be pointed
out along those lines that uh Miss Dorne
who sat as an alternate last meeting for
Mr Papo I believe uh is also sitting as
an alternate this evening and she also
well she participated in that meeting
and so she was able to hear that entire
case correct is that correct Miss Dorne
that's correct yes okay thank you I'm
glad my memory is not that bad um all
right and the the regular members who
listened to the tape were Mr F and Mr
Marsh Mr F Mr Mr Marsh correct correct
is that correct that's correct that's
what they indicated earlier okay um the
uh does any member of the board wish to
uh make any comment or have any
questions about the motion that's
pending
Mr schik if you'd like to uh uh State
briefly the the basis that upon which
you've made your motion I think that
might be helpful for the uh for the
record here thank you Mr chairman
um for uh Mrs and Mr Shaw uh it was
there were a lot of questions
that I feel were not adequately um
pursued and answered and as I've also
informed this board uh I did have an
individual who reached out to me um and
made some comments before I could get
off but I just thought it would be
better for us to have um a conversation
on the record um I did tell that
individual that um it was not
appropriate for us to to have this
conversation that particular way but um
given what I've begun to understand
about this I just wanted to take the
opportunity to ask some additional
questions and also allow my colleagues
on this board to um to do the same um of
Mrs and Mr Shaw
okay it should also be pointed out I
think Mr uh shik and members of the
panel that there were only six members
of the board uh available to vote on
that issue for various reasons uh so we
did not have the full seven member panel
that's just a statement of fact whether
you consider that important or not is up
to each individual
voter any other questions say I forgot
to put my fourth forgot to say my fourth
B Point uh yes chairman be procedurally
for me I think it would be um helpful to
understand because you know 24 hours
later after the eyes have you know gone
back into the head as they should um you
know I came to a a point of well gez
what happens
next um you know we didn't give a clear
directive we just voted yes or no um and
then that leaves a a home
that is finished or not finished or what
do they do and and you know so I from a
procedure standpoint needed to better
understand like what bap's role should
be um in a case like that because and
particularly you had
voted opposite of everybody else and I
wanted to ask you but it was so late and
I didn't know if it was appropriate to
ask you then um so I'm glad that we're
able to have this discussion and and
potentially review things a little bit
more so that we can provide um proper
guidance so okay I treat this as a
learning opportunity for me all right
and I appreciate your comments and let
me uh dovetail with your comments
that and and probably this is because
I'm an attorney not that that's a good
or a bad thing necessarily I think a lot
of people think it's a bad thing but
nonetheless uh we have some other
lawyers on the board as well and and uh
when these matters are decided in the in
the quazi
judicial uh Forum that this is that the
board of zoning and planning
is um the we we State as you know
findings of fact conclusions of law
every time we vote on an affirmative
application in other words please uh
approve this application we vote Yes if
we or approve the application we vote no
if we don't and then the everybody in
the public is aware of what the findings
were a fact and what our conclusions
were regarding the law in the area and
we make sure that the that the law was
followed and that we voted in accordance
with the law when we have a negative
vote like that most of the time there
isn't any ground
stated and so I think in the future we
discuss this
uh about other cases as well mind you
because this is an issue that is true in
many many Administrative Hearings and in
quazi judicial hearings and that is that
when we vote negatively we would to to a
positive motion and other words a motion
to approve we would then in the future
make a motion to deny whereupon we would
State the grounds and findings of fact
and conclusions of law uh for the denial
and then we would vote on the denial and
that would either pass or not pass so uh
with those things in mind if anybody
else has any other questions or comments
on me uh members of the board we could
certainly entertain them if not I would
uh uh call the question here and ask for
a call of the role on whether we should
or should not reconsider this particular
case I do have another procedural
question okay so when we heard the case
the first
time
um the question of compliance with like
the zoning
code whatever was there you know you
know built different whatever but
whatever was there was compliant with
the zoning code what is the role of Bap
then at that point is it to say okay
you're still in compliance or is the
role of beap to say we gave
you a clear directive with our findings
and facts conclusions of law when you
your with your first application and
therefore expect compliance like what's
the well the question in this case was a
little different than it was in it is in
most cases and we can certainly ask
Catherine to comment but here we were
asked whether the board was willing to
amend a permit that was Grant previously
granted on the on grounds that would be
akin to a variance in other words
variances are granted when we think the
circumstances are such that that the
hard and fast rule should be given a a
uh some slack or or a deviation in
certain cases and here uh we were simply
U deciding whether to Grant an amended
permit uh due to the due to the factors
that were raised by both parties and
that was what was voted down the vote
was uh two to four according to the
minutes here so well I was not the only
person voted against it there was oh
sorry sorry like it's all running
together um Katherine do you have I just
ask Katherine if she has any additional
comments to make to mine no that's
correct this is not this was a the this
board had already granted a certificate
of appropriateness which is which is
related to architecture not necessarily
zoning code standards um it was in
compliance with zoning code standards in
a separate procedure you also granted a
variance for this property for uh the I
think the pool in the rear and denied a
variance for a driveway circular
driveway so that's that's sort of in one
bucket and then there's a separate
bucket for a certificate of
appropriateness which was a this board
granted which was the approval of the
architecture that the owner proposed for
that residence and it is it was
architectural elements that were not
being complied with uh which came back
before the board for consider ation
right thank you very much and I just
should say for the 50 or so people who
are not on the panel who are listening
to this meeting that uh that Miss
Cunningham is the is our outside zoning
Council and she uh represents uh the
city of Beckley and uh helping us with
zoning legal matters and other
Associated and related uh legal matters
so that's uh who I asked for an opinion
there thank you Catherine and chairman
beart Mr Marsh I just have yes sir Mr
Marsh in in order to uh rehear this and
and I should know this but I don't I
mean is that just at the board's board
members um wishes there doesn't have to
be any change of status or anything and
maybe Miss Cunningham wants to answer
that the the answer has to do with rule
14 which uh Ryan schik cited which just
says that any board member that feels
that a particular decision should be
reconsidered may make such a motion and
that the board would then vote on that
motion and majority rules on that motion
so in other words this evening there
would be no discussion of this case at
all uh this is strictly
procedural and we would decide do we
think this is the the type of case or
this decision should be
given a reconsideration which of course
doesn't mean anything about how the
ultimate vote would go but that's uh the
rule under which the motion was made
Katherine do you have any uh additional
comments for Mr Marsh no that's correct
and uh Mr Marsh it is part of the the
rules of the the Bap rules that you
adopted um that allow a member to move
for consideration and just it just takes
a majority vote of the board uh my
recommend ation to the board and and I
mentioned earlier to Mr Beall is if
should you choose to take it up on
reconsideration that you said it for
another date of the future all of your
hearings um to the extent that you have
one it require 14-day notice so I would
suggest to get set more than 14 days out
from today uh you may want to choose a
special meeting or not that's up to you
your agenda's have been so long I I I
hate to predict what they might be but
should you choose to reconsider then my
suggestion would be that you choose a
date on which the reconsideration will
be made whether it be a regular meeting
or a special meeting and that that at
least 14 days out perfect thank you I
just I didn't want to vote not knowing
you know if if we needed something else
that's good to know thank you right and
I just have one additional comment um um
I think uh it it would be a good thing
to provide some um detail as to why the
motion was denied if it if that's what
it ends up being again um either way
because um I mean having being a lawyer
and knowing how these things some tend
to progress you know city council would
have to know what we're looking at the
courts would have to know what we're
looking at and if there's no basis then
you know there's going to be a lot of
money spent to basically send it
backward it was so I think it's really
important legally to have a sound you
know basis for an explanation of our
decision either way that's what you were
saying chairman behall that we would
when we take another
motion once we if we reconsider it again
when we take another motion that's when
we would detail the findings and facts
and conclusions of law for the new
reconsideration e either direction in
this case either way right and really
any other case in the future as well but
this particular case now happens to be
in front of us
right correct thank you uh
Heidi uh any other comments questions or
iterations of any sort from members of
the
panel all right I hear none um there's
been a motion uh to reconsider case BZ
ap-20 d63 and a second uh Miss Rose will
you call the role
Please Mr
shik Mr sh Brian you're
muted quote of 2020 sorry yes okay Miss
Dorne yes Mr Marsh yes Mr
Fout yes Mr Turner yes Miss Mitchell yes
and and chairman behall I vote Yes as
well so that matter will be
reconsidered um if
we uh do reconsider it I think we need
to uh set it for a date that allows 14
days notice to the public and to the
applicant as well so it needs to be
pushed into the middle of uh
March we also have a
uh I know this just because I live close
to the school but we have a the school
break we try not to schedule hearings
during the Bexley
School uh spring break because too many
people are busy doing other things so it
kind of limits us a little bit on dates
but I would ask the uh board members to
check their calendars
for uh the March
uh B Bap meeting is the 25th Thursday
yes that's correct I would ask you to
check your calendars for the 23rd or
24th to see if there are possibility of
making a meeting one of those nights and
rather than take time now and go through
all this uh we'll establish the uh the
date if if we can for one of those dates
and if not perhaps we can put it on the
25th agenda to depending on how long it
is uh but I'd like today was the last
day for applications for the March VAP
uh session so I'd like to see what
everything looks like before we assign a
date and if we don't if you don't mind
members of the of the board I would just
ass soon pick the day for that
reconsideration and we'll let the
general public know as well as the
applicant and anybody that appeared uh
previously
and this matter of when that date and
time would be is that acceptable to the
board just from a Voice
vote anybody object to that me method of
choosing the
date okay thank
you um the next case on the agenda is
application bz
ap-2048 involving Community
Builders the only the owner is Sally
Woodyard the location is
2300 East Livingston
Avenue and uh let me ask uh who the
representatives will be representing the
applicant uh this evening please and uh
ask that you uh identify yourselves and
then we will swear you
in okay um we have Nicole berer Jeff
beam David
Hodge anybody that is raising their hand
I'm going to assume right now is part of
the project team and I'll put you in the
panelist room if you want to testify to
this case but you're not the applicant
that's this is not the same don't don't
raise your hand yet and this time is Mr
Hodge G to repres is Mr Hodge
representing the the
applicant yes okay I believe so and
chairman behal yes' I'd like to announce
that Miss Mitchell I believe she's
stepping down at this time and Mr Levine
will be placing
her okay Mr line thank you sir you're
now you can I guess change chairs and
moveed to another chair in your room
there
so you're official anyway um okay if
there's anybody that's an applicant that
did not get moved to the panelist room
please raise your hand think I got
everybody and Mr as well okay he Mr sui
here's Mr Su for the general public also
Mr sui is a a member of the city staff
for purposes of uh helping us get
through some of these cases and he will
be acting as such this evening Mr sui
how are
you well thank you good and so um
Mr dfus Wells Mr Green
Miss let's see here Mr Beam is gold
everybody going to be representing the
applicant
here yes okay yes sir uh Rachel cleat is
in the waiting room and also needs to be
admitted she's the final member of Our
Testimony Tes
okay yep just saw her yes
okay
and all right Sarah gold
Sarah
hello all right
uh who does Mr Hodge want want to take
the uh lead role here has everybody been
sworn in yet please raise your right
hands all of you and M Rose please swear
the well I tell you what I can swear the
Witnesses in because it's more efficient
possibly but do all of you that's Miss
Boer Miss gold I don't Mr hoder you
acting as an attorney this evening yes I
am okay uh Rachel clight I pronounce
that correct
Rachel and Jeff I gotta get the names
right
[Music]
here Jeff beam
Jeff did I get that one right all
right do you all swear or affirm that
the testimony you're going to give this
evening
will be the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth I do you okay
thank you very much
um Mr sui why don't you uh bring us
bring us up to sort of refresh our
recollection on because I know we've
heard a lot of uh evidence about this
but just sort of bring us up to date on
this case from the city uh staff's
perspective please I will thank you
I will just give a brief overview again
knowing some folks weren't here last
time to hear the uh the background and
I'll be happy to answer any questions
obviously so feel free to
interrupt um this case is Jason Jason
let me stop you for one second I believe
everybody on the panel has either was
here last month or has seen the tape I
wanted just to say that just for the
record and also but but nonetheless it's
important to say that for the uh members
of the citizens of Bexley who are also
listening to tonight's meeting so thank
you for your comment there I just wanted
to clarify that great uh this is a case
that is in the commercial Services
District on Livingston Avenue and there
are two requests one is the certificate
of appropriateness for construction
which is uh more focused around the
overall appropriateness of the site
design and and um
architecture that being said the
Architectural Review Board is also uh
looking at this and taking care of those
finer details the other thing is for
conditional use approvals due to the
fact that in the commercial Services
District it requires conditional use
approval to have residential on the
first floor and also residential on the
upper floors uh this is due to the fact
that historically the Commercial
Services District was just Commercial
Services and really Auto or oriented
commercial even though there has been
indication in some of our planning
documents that we want to look for
redevelopment and opportunities to to
broaden that it Still Remains a
conditional use because we want to make
sure that uh that use does fit in based
on the criteria for review that we have
in our code uh I did provide a staff
report and I'll just hit a couple
highlights of that and be happy to
answer any questions um the one thing
that I did not mention last month that I
did want to make sure to include was was
a um an excerpt from a recently adopted
plan one of the primary considerations
in considering a conditional use is
whether or not the conditional use at
this site would fit into adopted plans
of the city and if it would conform with
the overall intent of what the city is
trying to uh create through its land use
zoning and otherwise public policies
there's a very specific element in there
that I think speaks to this and that is
in goal number three of what was the
diversity equity and inclusion strategy
and that's very fresh that's just from
August of 2020 meaning that uh this
council is the council that adopted that
um and they said you can read in the um
in the staff report they want to create
an inclusive greater Bexley community
and one of those uh ways to do that is
you they want to form an open welcoming
Bexley working to combat racism and
discrimin in the city engaging people in
circumstances with fairness Justice
impartiality honesty balance compassion
decency reasonableness and an open mind
um with a set of action items and this
is what brings us to the case at hand
one of the action items the second one
under that goal is to encourage continue
to encourage the cic and their efforts
to identify affordable housing
opportunities for people with low
incomes as part of new development
including but not limited to rezoning
and rehabbing current and future
building and projects as well as on its
own um it's pretty significant as far as
language goes uh clearly it's a guiding
document as a strategic plan it's not a
code um that being said uh as a guiding
document um it Advocates as much as
resoning and typically uh it is
considered much lower bar of change uh a
conditional use rather than a rezoning
uh conditional use doesn't mean that
it's not allowed in the zoning it just
means that it is a use that is part of
the zoning that requires additional
review by whatever board is looking at
it in this case the Bap um so that's a a
much lower threshold than a change of
zoning and and think that's pretty
significant as far as conformance to
plans there's not a lot to say as far as
the district re uh site development
regulations because they do conform to
all of those um they conform to lot size
and width and front set back and rear
setback um and height uh so these are
all things that are contemplated in our
code
while I know there have been concerns
over things like the building height
that is allowable uh in this district
and we actually have a maximum height of
45 feet so I think it's important to
understand that it is has been for quite
some time and continues to be
contemplated in this commercial District
that is also becoming ideally a mixed
use District several story up to three
story buildings that's really part of
what the zoning code contemplates for
the future um
you can see in the also in the staff
report there are a number of District
design standards in the Cs District this
application has either already met all
of those or some remaining ones are to
be determined uh as part of the review
process that Still Remains uh as I
mentioned they will need to return but
well they don't need to but ideally we
recommend that you follow the arb's
recommendation to have them return to
the ARB for final review of the
architecture and also to go to the tree
and public gardens commission who would
do the final review on landscaping and
fencing and sort of all those other
apperences that go along with this so
other than those items that have not yet
been finalized like the landscaping and
fence design they have met everything
else um that are in the standards um
also I know there's a lot of discussion
on parking and again I'll be happy to
answer these questions again uh
afterward um we don't have specific
designated residential parking in this
District so the best Coral are we have
is another mixed use Corridor District
that allows um which is the MU District
which requires one space per unit and in
this case they have 27 units and 30
spaces so that meets the code so there
would be no variance requested um other
than that uh there aren't uh really any
specific comments to be made um with
regard to the site plan uh the overall
land use does seem to work and be in
conformance as a great transition from a
heavy Auto oriented use along this
Corridor into a more residential area uh
one other thing I did want to point out
just so uh that the board was was
refreshed of this because it kind of got
lost in all the discussion last week
there is currently a plan beginning
between the city of Bexley and the City
of Columbus along this portion of
Livingston Avenue to look at improving
the overall um livability
walkability safety performance uh of
this Corridor and again it's just
starting I'm not working on it so I
can't tell you where they stand or
what's happening uh but that is
something that is ongoing and uh is
anticipated to lead to some physical
changes in the roadway and streetscape
improving it as a more walkable and
mixed use Corridor going forward so with
that uh the only last thing I'll say is
that we do have at the very end some
recommended conditions that should you
act on this tonight um that one it would
return to the ARB for the certificate of
appropriateness review um that it would
go to the trium uh Public Gardens
commission and then just the boilerplate
language that everything would be in
conformance with the plan submitted
tonight with that I will end and turn it
over to you for questions thank you Mr
suudi I wanted to make one additional
comment I read in the paper this morning
that the this week Bexley dispatch
section an article about this these
cases this case in particular and
another case we have on the docket this
evening and the the headline was
something along the lines of uh housing
projects to receive final approval this
evening well first of all of course we
all understand that newspapers are
trying to sell newspapers and that they
don't write things with the same
Precision that lawyers do uh that the
concept that somehow now uh this matter
was simply going to be looked at for
final approval this evening was a fet a
comple was incorrect and nobody knows uh
how this vote is going to come out
members of the board have not discussed
their votes there hasn't been any uh
vote that has taken place thus far uh in
in some respects I'm still listening to
all the facts and I don't even know how
I'm going to vote yet so I just want to
make it clear that this is not some sort
of uh of a precon precons considered or
predetermined consideration before this
board the newspaper headline
notwithstanding so I wanted to make that
very very clear uh and U in fact I might
ask Kathy Rose to uh make a comment the
city director of zoning this is not
actually final approval of this entire
project other approvals must be obtained
as as Mr sui indicated this has got to
get through ARB again and but why don't
you indicate what other uh uh should
this be approved at the B app level what
other approvals are
necessary okay um well I I know based on
the uh architecture review board
recommendation was to return back to the
board for final design review um as well
as the tree and public garden commission
so those are two more reviews but I also
had an opportunity to read that same
article which further mentioned
something about Council having a final
review and that is not the case so it'll
go to the board is zoning and if this
board finds it appropriate
conceptually it then it can defer that
final design back to the ARB and the
final Landscaping back to the tree and
public garden
commission okay thank you and and Jason
do you have any other comments in that
regard just one very last thing I meant
to mention earlier um I think there was
a little confusion earlier or last time
when we mentioned that it was going to
go back to those other boards for final
approval on things like fencing that is
true for the design but the actual fence
is required in the zoning and they have
agreed to that so the entire back lot
line has to have an eight foot tall
opaque fence it's just the design of
that fence that's still getting worked
out but there's it's has it has to
happen it's in the zoning unless they
request a variance they cannot get away
from doing that so I just want to be
clear that that is that is part of this
and that would be the northern boundary
of this particular lot that's correct
okay very good thanks BR very helpful to
know the facts here uh all right uh Mr
hodj would you like to make some
comments let Mr Mr Beall before before
we go to the applicant this is Mr Marsh
I question for Mr sui and and that is
you know um there was a lot of talk
about
parking um and and you know none of us
well at least I'm not a traffic engineer
and so my my question is is is there a
way to either you know have the city's
traffic engineer or have someone review
that aspect so that instead of just us
trying to decide how the traffic's going
to work and the parking but but to have
a professional make a make a
recommendation and I know that I know
that when we did the um Giant Eagle you
know we had a traffic there was a
traffic engineer that reviewed it
reviewed the parking and made comments
about it so I'm just curious about your
opinion on that yeah I reviewed it
strictly for the zoning uh and I know
the applicant has some information
regarding the typical amount of volume
of individual cars that they tend to
attract um I'll have to defer to Kathy
you know as far as having someone else
take a look at it from the from the
traffic side
um that being said you know the a
residential use typically generates a
pretty um standard amount of In-N-Out
traffic based on the type of use it is
and is typically compatible with other
adjacent residential uses to one one
extent but even greater when it's on a
um commercial Corridor uh the one thing
I think we do need to remind um
ourselves of as we go through this is
that this is zoned for commercial use
and it has a pretty flexible set of
commercial uses that could be on there
almost all of not I shouldn't say almost
all many many of which would generate
higher traffic volumes as per the it
traffic generation manual that is used
to determine what the typical traffic
generation rates are um so I think
that's we're in in a situation where
this is a potential very high high
traffic generating site and residential
is generally much lower on the on the
scale of what could be here here based
on the existing zoning that that is
already in place but that being said
I'll turn over to Kathy about further
analysis well and and that that's a a
good comparison because the Giant Eagle
site uh shares other commercial sites
nearby and residential so that was
concerned because of the big change um
but in comparison to what is allowed on
this site I I concur with what Jason's
sharing with the board and perhaps the
uh applicant might want to add to that
uh concern and we can go from there okay
thank you all right Mr Hodge I called
any there earlier uh but are if you're
ready to present on behalf of the
applicant uh we'd certainly uh uh be
glad to hear from you great thank you uh
good evening chairman Beall uh members
of the board uh David hodj uh attorney
for the applicant uh also a Bexley
resident with an address at 211 South
Ardmore
Road
um great to see everybody uh great to
see Jason sui on here and you know one
of the great things about Bexley are all
of the great uh outside Consultants we
have uh also the internal people that
review these codes uh make these
recommendations uh to boards like this
and uh in my estimation Jason sui is one
of the best In The Biz
and that was an excellent uh excellent
staff report uh in some ways stole a
little bit of the Thunder of the things
uh that we were going to say but one of
my mentors said that when you do
hearings like this if you if you have
one point you want to hammer home you
say it six times so we'll see if we meet
that goal uh here
tonight I know that a lot of ground got
plowed at your last
meeting we come tonight to uh provide
some supplemental information uh
responsive to both both uh neighbor
input uh and board comments uh at that
last
meeting uh just to frame this up to talk
about again why we're here uh this is a
conditional use application under
12262 of the zoning
code uh I believe that the
information uh uh discussed the last
meeting uh provided as supplemental
tonight uh will be substantial reliable
uh and credible and it'll demonstrate uh
Beyond any uh reasonable doubt that uh
the eight criteria Under 12 26 12 are
are either met or exceeded by this
proposal
uh one of the things and I'm going to
reiterate something that Jason said uh
and and Nicole Boer and others after me
will probably reiterate it again but one
of the things I want the board to
consider as we dive into some of these
additional uh criteria here under 12
2612 uh are uh what we're looking at
here the the the intent of the code uh
the code talks a lot about purpose and
intent the intent of the code uh is
provided in
12402 and in general and it's a phrase
we've all heard a million
times uh the intent of the code is to uh
further policy in the interest of public
health safety convenience Comfort
prosperity and general
welfare when you pop over to criteria a
uh of 12 uh 20
12262 that criteria says the use is
consistent with the goals and policies
of any adopted plan any adopted plan of
the city of Bexley uh Mr sui made
reference to uh the city of Bexley
diversity uh equity and inclusion
strategy adopted by our current Council
last year uh among those criteria or
those goals stated in that strategy are
to continue to encourage the cic in
their efforts to identify affordable
housing opportunities for people with
low incomes as part of new development
that is precisely what the board has
before it the evening um I'm going to
stop there we'll kick it over to Nicole
Boer and others for some commentary
about not just criteria a but the
remainder under
12262 uh hopefully um once they conclude
and we hear uh testimony from uh
neighbors or others we'd like to come
back at the end and provide one cohesive
uh response and rebuttal uh to what they
have to say uh if if that's the board's
pleasure rather than address their
comments uh uh one at a time that would
be that would be perfectly fine and and
appropriate I Believe Miss Boer do you
want to take the floor I'm going to
yield the floor to Jeff beam first and I
will follow after him okay thank you Mr
Beam thank you chair uh and thank you to
the board I I am gonna be very brief um
it is good to be here again tonight um
I'm Jeff be with Community Builders or
TCB as we'll call ourselves um am based
here in Columbus I am a Bexley resident
at 2394 Sherwood um based on the
comments at the previous Bap hearing um
we're gonna we're gonna focus on the the
specific criteria that um David just
described um my very brief introduction
is to just give two pieces of context
briefly um and then Nicole will walk
through the specific zoning issue um TCB
will develop and manage the two proposed
developments both this and the item to
be considered after it um and we will be
the organization that is accountable for
their completion for the Financial Risk
and for the ongoing operation as mixed
income housing once it's
built if approved TCB manages as an
organization we manage approximately
10,000 apartments and hundreds of
thousands of square feet of commercial
space in a wide variety of
communities um we're accredited by The
Institute of Real Estate Management
which is a national designation for
organizations that have to fulfill
strict requirements for insurance
experience and integrity and financial
stability we're recognized as a national
leader in the development ownership and
management of affordable and mixed
income housing and we've done that
continuously for over 55 years now we
all know it's possible to go online and
find you know any negative comment about
anything but tcb's record our longevity
and and our continued success in
development and Property Management
evidences our ability to pull this off
our ability to accomplish what we're
committing to do in these projects and
to do it well in the communities where
we work we are valued long-term owners
and stakeholders invested in the success
of the neighborhood and their residents
and our residents um perhaps that's
because who we are um Community input
really is an important part of our
process um we didn't have the proposed
development
that we're now discussing confirmed
until December but since that time this
is what we've done we issued a joint
press release with the city in December
that was posted on the city's website we
appeared at the January 14th ARB meeting
purely to socialize the project and did
not ask for consideration or approval of
any kind we hand delivered written info
to 48 adjacent homes surrounding this
and the next subject properties sites um
that included our direct that included
information about the projects and our
direct contact information we've hosted
four different question and answer
sessions with uh beex residents ranging
from invitation only with direct
neighbors um around the properties to
broadly advertised and attended um
meetings hosted by
others we've also had dozens of other
sub substantive exchanges that I've now
totaled up to be with over a 100
different Bexley residents representing
over 65 households
this engagement is part of what we do
and we take it very seriously now
following what we hope is Bap approval
we'll continue to engage with Neighbors
in the coming months over other aspects
of design construction activities
Community safety and any other topic of
interest um but I wanted to set that
context to sort of state that for the
public record but then turn it over to
my colleague Nicole to present the
evidence um supporting our zoning
application thank
you okay Nicole Miss take the floor
please thank you so Karen um we will
muddle through this
together technology so if we could go to
um the fifth slide that would be greatly
appreciated um so this evening as um
David has mentioned and Jason and others
we are in front of you asking for
consideration for an approval for
permitted conditional use of residential
on the ground in the upper floors in um
the commercial service zoning District
in the city of Bexley um what we want to
do tonight and what I would like to
accomplish in the next um couple minutes
is just go through each of the
conditional use criterias outlined in
Bexley code section um
1226 12b and um just show you how we
feel that our proposed project um meets
the eight criteria for conditional use
um approval I will share as David has as
that Jason um has touched on a number of
these items so while um it may be
repetitive we do just want to make sure
that we continue to mention how we feel
we're compliant so um Karen if you can
move forward two slides that would be
greatly
appreciated um so there are eight
different requirements for a project to
meet conditional use um the first of
which is um that the the use must be
consistent with the goals and policies
of the adopted plans of any adopted plan
by the city of Bexley including but not
limited to the Main Street guidelines we
feel that the proposed residential use
and project that is um in front of you
cons for consideration aligns with
multiple Community goals to bring new
mixed income opportunities to the
community one of which is the city of
Beckley diversity equity and inclusion
strategy and um I know multiple people
have read through that but we do feel
that this project and its intent does
align with Goal three the creation of an
inclusive inclusive greater Bexley
Community through our partnership with
the cic to encourage the um development
of affordable housing we also feel that
the project aligns with the city of
Bexley strategic plan um it is listed in
the vision of the Strategic plan that
not only is Bexley a top tier Community
with extremely high quality and
Excellence but it's also a community
that wants to be centered on families of
all kind within the Strategic plan
there's also meaningful documentation
that talks about working towards
meaningful Redevelopment of Livingston
Avenue including um ensuring affordable
housing options continue to be available
for residents in the area that language
specifically is focused around the
Mayfield uh the Ferndale Mayfield
Redevelopment efforts but this project
while we've covered in um the previous
Bap or there were questions I should say
in the previous Bap meeting and we've
covered answers with community members
um there is an intent that while this is
not like for like housing that should um
people that live in the Ferndale
Mayfield area be eligible from an income
perspective to live in these communities
that they will be encouraged to apply
and that we are going to um make every
effort to try and figure out a way to
create a solution for that um and then
to the extent of the Main Street
guidelines we uh are committed to
continuing to work with the
Architectural Review Board and the
community to ensure that the project
that um the final design aligns with the
Vision that the community has for the
Main Street guidelines um next slide
please so um section number two is that
the use will not have a negative impact
on the neighboring land uses and that
the larger and the larger Community
because of the differences between the
proposed use and the existing uses in
the community as Jason touched on um in
his presentation this site has a unique
position on the Livingston corridor to
the west of this site is a predominantly
commercial vehicular um strong vehicular
traffic uh circulation pattern that is
um commercial in nature and has many
transportation and other um trip gen
High trip generating uses to the East
and to the north is a predominantly
single family community that is of lower
density our site is an opportunity for
the community to provide a transition
so the creation of the mixed income
Residential Building will provide an
opportunity to to um create more of a
seamless transition between commercial
use to the west and the residential uses
to the North and the South otherwise um
this site could be developed as Jason
mentioned to be something that's more
commercial in nature that doesn't
necessarily complement the adjacent
properties um and additionally just
wanted to point out that currently the
site does have a funeral home on it and
it does have a single family home so it
has a lower um gener a lower traffic
generating use on it compared to the
Auto Centers the uh fast food places and
other um permitted uses that could come
on site um so the next slide and a
couple of them thereafter so um item
number three is that the use will not be
hazardous to or have negative impact on
existing or future surrounding uses um
the proposed residential use is a
conditionally permitted use as Jason
touched on that means that it's a
condition that has to be approved by BAP
it's not a byright use but it is one
that is permitted to be in this District
um we've touched on um both Jason has
and actually um our traffic engineer
that's with us tonight is going to touch
on in just a minute that this um
residential use is less intense than and
other permitted uses within the Cs
District that could be built by right
both in terms of traffic and parking um
and just to P provide some clarification
we have completed an environmental um
assessment report uh of phase one and
will be completing any necessary
environment environmental remediation
work that um will be required if there
are contamination um issues on the site
with that I would like to introduce um
Drew Laurent he is with us this evening
from Carpenter Marty they are our
traffic engineer that we have engaged to
just take a look at the site and provide
some of their um industry expertise on
the um overall proposal compared to what
would be permitted under the Cs
District okay Mr Laurent did I swear you
in before or not yes okay I'm sorry I
you're fine I did so many people I
couldn't remember who I swore thank you
please uh give us some insight uh if you
would sure sure if you could go to the
next slide
please um thanks again Nicole again my
name is drwan I'm with Carpenter Marty
transportation and we were asked to to
take a look at this site and um you know
look evaluate the the trip and parking
expectations for this site and also
compared to um several other permitted
uses that would that would currently be
allowed on the site um some quick facts
for you guys um developments to provide
31 spaces on site um they'll be
eliminating two of the existing curb
cuts on Livingston
Avenue um and we'll be we use the The
Institute of Transportation Engineers uh
trip generation manual and parking
generation manual to come up with these
numbers um these are the industry
standard for when we're doing traffic
impact studies or or any sorts of uh
operations analysis for various
municipalities and things like that so
next slide
please so here's a little comparison
just to kind of show um some example
uses as well as the proposed use um we
used 5,000 square ft as the the general
sizing for what could be expected here
just because that's the size of the
existing funeral home um a convenience
market so say like a UDF or a 7-Eleven
without a gas station um an automobile
parts and service center which would be
like a pet boys or a Midas something
like that um a fast casual restaurant
which could be something like a Chipotle
or a Panera and then a a self-service
car wash which is pretty s explanatory
um and you can see from these numbers
here uh aside from the automobile
service center um you know the retail
and restaurant uses generate
significantly more traffic than than a
multif family development here um and
these are looking at the highest am peak
hour the highest PM peak hour and then a
total weekday um and a trip for anybody
that doesn't know is is someone entering
or exiting a development so if someone
enters a development and then leaves
that would be two trips so um next slide
please we'll look at some parking
numbers um just to provide some context
for parking demand um this this shows us
the Peak parking demand for these
various developments as well as the Peak
parking time frame um as you can see for
the proposed site um the Peak parking
demand would be 27 vehicles um relative
to the 27 dwelling units and that takes
place uh from 10 P.M to 5 5 a.m um and
then looking at several of the other
uses you can see that a fast casual
restaurant would require a lot more
parking spaces um the convenience market
shows 27 spaces but I did want to point
out that that is a small sample size
based on the data we had available um
and then obviously these other uses
would have Peak parking throughout the
day versus overnight um so that's that's
all I have here to share with you guys
thank you all right thank
you thank you drew so then I also um
Karen if you can go to the next slide so
we at um the Community Builders actually
we took one step further because um we
have presented that in our experience uh
we while Drew has shown that um the
it uh data supports a one:1 parking
ratio we have seen that well one to one
is the it suggestion that really the
utilization of those parking spaces
tends to be much lower so what you have
here is a boots on the ground initiative
that we've done over the past month we
have looked at a cross-section of
properties that we manage that are in
comparable markets within the Midwest as
well as Mar as as well as properties
that sit here in the city of Bexley and
so what we did was we went out and we
counted hand counted um the part the
cars that were in the Stalls at
different points of day including
morning midday and evening in the
weekend in the weekdays and on the
weekends um here in Bexley just in in
case people can't read the um the text
we went to Bexley house Mayfield Manor
and Cassidy North Apartments um the
average number of units across all of
these properties was about 71 the
average number of bedrooms was 109
bedrooms um the average parking space
that was provided per unit was
1.29 but the average parking space
utilization was
42% on average in our parking in TCB
operated buildings we have a utilization
of 0.51 cars per unit and 35 cars per
bedroom in the city of Bexley the
utilization is roughly 0.54 cars per
unit and three4 cars per bedroom we
thought that this was really interesting
um just a really interesting kind of
data point to share because it just
further shows that um the the need for
the one:1 parking ratio and the 1.11
ratio that we we are proposing is
actually above and beyond what the it
data suggests and it is well above what
the utilization rates are within the
city of Bexley in our current
projects um so next slide
please um so this one in the next one
I'm going to touch on briefly because I
don't want to harp on the same
information but from a conditional use
criteria section four requires that the
use meets or Sai satisfies um the lot
yard and height requirements of the code
as well as other General code Provisions
including Landscaping parking standards
storm drainage requirements and others
that um may be adopted as Jason has
touched on in the staff report and as is
shown on the plans we do comply with all
of the requirements that um are fall
within the Cs District this is solely a
request for a permitted conditional use
and then um Karen if you want to move to
the next slide we are in the process of
just kind of coming up with some ideas
that we want to share out in our next
iteration of community outreach around
building design um so we are looking at
that fence the fence requirement and
what a good 8ot fence could look like
aesthetically um both in terms of fence
imagery as well as what kind of
landscaping screening can we put on it
to just soften that edge and also
provide maybe another layer of privacy
and then um what I did not touch on and
I apologize Karen if you could go back
one slide because this is something that
um I really want to point out um
we heard loud and clear from the
community both in the comments in the
last Bap meeting as well as in all of
that Outreach that Jeff had mentioned um
the concern of what do we do for the
families that do have children that
would live in this community how do we
keep them um you know off of Livingston
because of the current day just traffic
concerns and so we um took a look at our
site plan and actually made some
adjustments to be able to bring in a top
lot in other Gathering areas in the back
area of our parking lot or in the back
area of our um property um and so we are
looking at ways that we can screen that
so that it's protected from the parking
lot I was getting ahead of myself and
then um the slide that I was on
previously just shows some some ideas of
what that space could look like um but
we really looked to our operations team
and we look to the community to help us
Define what is the best feature to go
into a top lot that's going to actually
be used and it doesn't just sit there
and and this is not a functional
piece um so the next requirement the
fifth requirement I'm getting there
thank you for your patience is that the
site or the project um the conditional
use request does not create an undue
burden on existing public facilities and
services such as Street utility school
or refug disposal um the pro the
proposed development we will utilize
existing Water and Sewer connections
were practical and feasible this is an
infill development um we will work with
the city Department as well as with the
city of Columbus to make sure that our
connections are appropriate for all
water and sewer connections we'll also
work with the necessary utility
companies to ensure that we have the
correct services for um electrical and
others the site has been designed as we
mentioned to maximize off street parking
our ratio is 1 .11 spaces per unit which
exceeds the um mu standards that are
being applied to the site and then we
just wanted to touch on that um there's
no anti no anticipated impact to the
school district capacity um we had some
preliminary conversations with the the
school district to say we're thinking
about building this project what are
your concerns about the number of units
in both locations and in those
preliminary discussions there was no
material um concern around the the
quantity of units that we were
proposing um the next one the sixth
point is um that the use is consistent
with Andor furthers the city's economic
goals and will not decrease property
values or have a negative um economic
impact so again we've talked about how
the residential use aligns with the city
goals for Equitable Housing Development
and Redevelopment of the Livingston
Avenue um this is a reinvestment into an
infill development this is an
opportunity to reposition a property
that has been a great contributor to the
neighborhood but is seeking
opportunities to sell um and so we feel
this is a really wonderful opportunity
to redevelop the site um Karen if you
want to go to the next side next slide
um speaking to the decrease of um the
impact the potential impact to property
values so there are some national
Publications that have and continue to
do extensive research on on this matter
and so what has been found in multiple
um articles and research both done and
referenced by the national low-income
housing tax uh Housing Coalition as well
as through um the Ferman Center for New
York University is that um tax credit
housing has lital negative impact or
positive impact little impact in General
on nearby home values the findings have
shown that it's not the type of
development when it comes to housing
what's more important is the quality of
the design the management and the
maintenance and Jeff spoke to our
reputation our history um we are a
longstanding highly regarded development
and operations um company and we look to
create a design that is going to be
something that the community can be
proud of so I wanted to share this
because I thought that this was a really
interesting data point that has been
supported by multiple um research
organizations and has been um shared
throughout uh the the research
Community um the seventh point is that
the uses in character and keeping and
keeping in compatible with the adjacent
structures and
uses so um as we mentioned this new
three-story building it's going to
engage the Livingston Corridor we've
pulled it so that it is um at a 10-ft
setback from the Livingston Corridor
this provides again that transition
between the dense commercial uses and
the single family homes it also compli
like it helps align with the Main Street
design guidelines which encourage
buildings to be closer to the street it
encourages the parking to be in the rear
so that way it's kind of hidden from the
main street view um but for the
conditional use again we meet all of the
requirements of the Cs district and we
will meet the city of Bexley
requirements for perimeter screening and
Landscaping as I've mentioned and then
we are working through the architectural
design um you know we want to complement
the mid-century and traditional homes
that are around us but we also want to
pull some of the the the conceptual
design ideas that sit in the Main Street
guidelines so we are still working on
that we appreciate all of the community
feedback that we've gotten to date and
we really look forward to continuing
those
discussions
right thank do you have more to add I
have one more okay this one's the
shortest one so the eighth item on the
conditional use criteria is that any
proposed construction will not result in
the destruction loss or damage of a
natural Scenic or historic feature of
major importance um presently there is a
single family home and the Woodyard
Funeral Home on the site neither of
which has any historic significance or
major importance with that
I am going to um hand it back over to
you chairman and I appreciate the
opportunity to present our our points
this evening all right thank you very
much Mr hodj anything you would like to
add as a summary or can we move on to
comments from either the board or the
general public we we have uh an expert
we'd like to bring on to discuss this
type of housing in general uh Rachel
cleat I believe on all right please hi
my name is Rachel cleat um I'm a
professor of city and Regional planning
at Ohio State I'm also a Bexley resident
I live at 2825 Elm Avenue um actually I
have a PhD in City Planning and I've
studied mixed income housing for maybe
20 years it was why I got into Academia
um so I was very very excited to hear
that the Community Builders were
proposing to work in these sites in
Bexley mainly because even when I was
first starting out in this field 20
years ago I had heard of the excellent
work that the Community Builders did in
this country the way in which we have
decided to build affordable housing is
by sponsoring nonprofit organizations
who are mission driven to preserve their
long-term affordability and to to in
many cases develop these units and so
the the community rebuilders is one of
the um most well-known and longlived of
these organizations in the United States
and if
the there's a I think the kinds of
common questions that are that are asked
about mixed income developments like
this have to do with property values
which they've already discussed there is
a lot of research that shows that
actually property values may even go up
near quality affordable housing and
having a well-known devel developer and
manager is so important because it is
the long-term maintenance in the
continuing relationship with the
community that matters in terms of the
viability um the other thing that
usually happens is that the housing the
affordable housing that we build today
is usually of higher quality than many
of the units around it because there's a
concern with long-term sustainability
and long-term
viability um I also want to um mention
that um
i i as a member of the I'm also on the
national advisory committee uh for the
national initiative on mixed income
communities at K West Pace Western
Reserve and that is a font of
information about mixed income
communities and how to do this right and
the Community Builders is one of those
organizations that's a
model um one of the other things that
comes up is uh what they keep calling
this affordable housing and what does
that mean what does affordable mean it
means that the people who are are the
the who have the highest incomes will
have incomes at 80% of the area meeting
income of Franklin County and for a
family of three um that's about $60,000
a
year they have the lowest incomes of any
of them for a family of three would be
$22,000 which is actually more than a
family working full-time at minimum wage
earns so people living here will be
working jobs unless they are also part
of the popul
of folks who live with disabilities or
seniors so affordable housing is not
only for families and it's certainly not
for people who aren't working because
one of the things the Community Builders
has to do is make sure the people they
put in these units can pay the rent
because they are despite being a
nonprofit and a mission-driven
organization they have a vested interest
in making sure that this is a successful
development and that's and because they
have a long-term interest they're going
to make sure that it's well run over
over the long the life of the
property so if we're looking for a way
to
uh to actually live up to the ideals
that we've put in place over the summer
in reaction to the protests that were
going on in this country this is perhaps
the best way we could possibly do it um
and so that's just based on my
experience I've lived all over the
country I've studied mixed income
housing all over the country and um I
just think this is a this is one of the
best we could do and I'm happy to answer
any questions you might have about this
and we may have some questions for you
but that certainly much appreciate
it Mr
Hodge thank you chairman behall I
believe we will rest there uh stay on
hand to uh respond to questions from the
board and uh have a discussion with the
neighbors and to the extent necessary uh
rebut some of the information that they
provide thank you very much Karen boor
could you tell me um how many people we
have in the audience right
now yes right now we have three people
with their hands raised I imagine that
more hands will go up okay if everybody
that was that would like to speak to
this could raise their hands uh the
virtual hand so I can get a good look at
the list that would be let me uh Karen
let me for a few seconds uh State a few
ground rules we have decided last a
meeting on these cases that there will
be a three minute time limit for each
person that is
commenting uh we also would prefer that
if you commented last meeting we we have
a record and of course all of the
members on this panel were either seated
at the last month's meeting or have
listen to all seven hours of the tape
God bless them and uh therefore uh we
would prefer not to have repetitious
testimony we we certainly understand uh
the issues and uh would uh on the other
hand encourage anybody that uh is has
standing in other words is affected
directly by this uh application uh we
certainly would be glad to afford them
the opportunity to
speak all right
uh I have 10 hands raised right now okay
um let's call the first um uh person who
put up their hands and we will try to
March through the uh comments uh paying
as as much heat as we can to each of the
individuals okay the first um hand that
was raised is Joel
GFF all right let me see Joel can you
hear
me y you're muted
okay did you want me to be at the
timekeeper chair uh I have a uh a
stopwatch here too so on my phone so I
I'll help you but yes if you don't mind
okay uh but I'm not getting Joel is
still
muted so let's go on to the next person
with their hand up
please uh that would be I just have
Larry and
Jenny
okay Larry I have now given Talking
Larry and Jenny you're also
muted there we go good Larry Larry Larry
and Jenny uh can you uh please State
your names for me please yes this is
Larry and Jenny Christopherson we live
at 885 Francis Avenue we've been
resident here for 44 years okay and how
close to u to Livingston Avenue are you
accidental
push sorry about that we're outside the
300 feet how far down are you about
middle of the street between Mound and
Livingston okay
my my determination last meeting was if
you live close enough to Livingston that
you use Livingston as the exit for your
daily uh comings and goings that I would
go ahead and recognize you as having
standing but please raise your right
hand then and be sworn in Larry and
Jenny do you solemly swear um or affirm
that you the testimony you give this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes
thank you very much tell us your comment
what I'm sorry to interrupt what is the
timing for speaking minutes start now
yes three
minutes thank proceed I was out I mean
we I noticed we had a car wash in the
possible uses and I appreciate that
we're not going to do one of those but
we do have a car wash down the street at
the Mumu Car Wash last year and already
this year the Livingston Avenue curbside
Lane has become a parking lot for people
turning into the car wash to use now I'm
sure the zoning committee approved that
car wash with absolutely no idea or at
least with no stated concern that uh
Livingston Avenue would become a parking
lot for access to the car wash so my
concern is how how do we let me let me
stop you right there is that car wash in
the city of Bexley
yes okay did did it get did it come
before the Bap uh Miss Rose it did okay
did all right thank you okay and my
other concern just came up tonight the
the trash removal I don't know how
they're going to get the trash generated
by 27 units out on Francis Avenue picked
up by rumy and with that parking lot
Arrangement and the and the vehicles
there I don't know how rumy can get in
there and get garbage and get out I I
don't know I guess I'd like to see how
that's going to be addressed that's all
I have thank you so very thank you very
much uh Larry and we will certainly
address that question thank you who's
the next speaker in fact it seemed like
uh the first person
uh that we we had came back to the mic
Joel greff Joel are you
there I show him is being muted
again you're not controlling that mute
are you uh Miss
Boker no I'm not he's he has talking
permitted and I've asked him to
unmute so next we would go to Jason
M I'm gonna okay
who now has talking permission
Jason uh can you uh please identify
yourself in your address yes sir uh
Jason McKay I'm at 980 College Avenue
College uhuh yeah how close to a
Livingston is that I am the second house
off Livingston I share a fence with the
proposed project thank you very much
would you raise your right hand to be
sworn yes sir you swear that testimony
you're going to give this panel this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth I do
thank you very much tell us what you
think about this proposal Mr McKay all
right I've been on record for two
meetings now so I'm not gonna beat the
dead horses that I've spoke about in
regards to density and massing from my
perspective from being looking at the
project so but I am going to touch some
points that Nicole brought up and I
thank her for the data that she showed
and unfortunately I think with the way
the market is today in the housing it's
kind of hard to I mean it's just crazy
but I'm not g I'm in the mortgage
industry so I understand that so I'd
like to touch on the point of them
saying quality of design I've talked to
several Realtors about a potential
project like this and they all came back
to me
saying you can't testify as to what
other people tell you you you have to
testify about your own observations or
or opinions please my my own
observations is the project won't impact
me unless it looks like a vinyl side
hotel which is what the current proposal
looks like so
my testimony is I have not seen any
updated renderings the PowerPoint here
is fantastic but I have not seen them
make any changes
to the renderings or any feedback that
you gave and you particularly gave them
feedback about Francis having large lots
and I don't see that in this project at
all yet and
that's what I want to touch points on is
I have concerns about the quality and
appearance of this project and I also
have concerns about the lighting and the
security not security the Privacy I have
of my backyard now having 20 some
windows facing it and also I like
someone to answer the question of what I
know the north side will have eight foot
fence what will the side faing my
property be so that is all I have for
you Mr chairman I thank you very much
for your time hey I appreciate your
coming this evening and giving us your
opinion we'll certainly address those
issues uh Mr Haj I'm sure is making
notes of an ASI and we'll address those
issues when uh uh the uh applicant has
some rebuttal
time who's the next speaker Karen the
next one is Robert
Burke okay Mr Burke uh can you please
give us your name and your you have to
unmute yourself there you go I believe
that's happened yes my name name is
Robert Burke I live at 9917 Pleasant
Ridge Avenue I am not an abutter to the
property um but I am very familiar with
this entire process having been a former
employee of a city planning agency back
in the
1970s all right executive officer of a
design review board in an large eastern
city okay so you live at 9917 Pleasant
Ridge yes sir so right where the street
right where the street begins to curve
toward Francis
right okay I've got you all right thank
you uh please raise your right hand and
be
sworn do you swear or affirm that any
testimony you give us this evening will
be the truth the whole truth and nothing
but truth I do so affirm thank you very
much I would like to speak very briefly
uh about the questions that I have
related to Traffic and parking those are
my main concerns thank you I do not I
find it very hard to believe and I say I
have a background around in this kind of
thing that there will be only nine
entrances and exits from this parking
lot during morning peak hours and that
there will only be a dozen during
evening peak hours are there really only
going to be a handful of folks in this
property who will be uh leaving during
what is the busy time of year and headed
toward an absurdly busy uh Street which
I know the two cities are going to be
getting together I find that's that I
find that hard to believe secondly
um I have a lot of skepticism about the
number of parking spaces in the property
given what I see as a prime market for
these units and that is less affluent
families wanting to get their kids into
our school system which is what which is
very good I am teaching for now my
second year teaching at one of our
schools good for you and I see the
emperical data that was shown on uh
parking utilization I would like to be
convinced that this that those other
properties compared to this one are a
real Apples to Apples comparison do they
really think do you really think that
there are only going to be a few
multiple vehicle residents with the
attractiveness of this uh of this um
these units to um to families that's
what I find hard to believe I'm uh yes
you show I I I saw the slide I'm a
skeptic I would like I would like to see
at some point I'd like to see more that
is my
comment I'd be happy to answer any
questions the uh The Bard anyone else
would have Mr Burke we appreciate you're
taking the time to listen and to give us
your your thoughts and and ideas as on
this matter thank you very
much all right uh um okay next we it we
have Dustin that's The Only Name that is
you got all right see if I find them
here
Dustin yes sir please gave us your name
and your residence address Dustin snow
990 Francis
Avenue okay so you're you're up there
pretty close to Livingston Avenue
correct all right and Dustin would you
raise your right hand to be sworn yes
you swear or affirm that any testimony
you give this panel this evening will
the truth the whole truth and nothing
but truth I do thank you very much tell
us what your thoughts are on this matter
please um I I submitted a document today
with over a dozen signatures from U
Neighbors in standing I sent this to
Kathy and Karen are we able to view
that uh I don't know but why don't you
tell us what you think uh first of all
because those folks will have to speak
for themselves anyway but tell us what
your position is on this
matter okay can we view the document
though I don't know I I can't uh I'm not
in control of it uh Kathy or Karen when
I called into the B app uh Department
you were who I was told to send this to
to be able to view tonight um so I sent
you guys an email Kathy I sent you a
couple um concerning this meeting I
didn't get a response from you but um
before I start my time I'd like to know
if I can even view this document to
review well your time's already started
I hate to tell you but number one number
two okay so I'll take that as a note um
since my time started um in this
document there is an image of the line
of sight at the end of Francis when you
are turning on to Livingston it shows a
leftand turn and it shows the limitation
of this line of sight that would create
a hazard um it would be best if we can
view it if we can't basically there is
I'm doing the best I can looking through
my emails for it
okay okay but I see what you're saying
when you pull you have seven seconds to
take a leftand turn if you were to draw
a line of sight all the way up against
the corner of that building this line of
sight goes right through a tree so that
tree is actually going to limit this
even more thank you um if you go to
page three so you're GNA have to scroll
down a bit the first several pages
are
signatures can can I request a
a Time increase here since I we'll give
you we'll give you an extra minute here
okay um two two more pages
down this image here if we can zoom in
on
that the Blue Line there shows at 35 mil
hour which is the speed limit a 7c
travel time U you can see at the end of
the line of sight there and if you're
taking a leftand turn you have 7even
seconds um this obviously is is not
enough if you look at traffic studies
and maybe the uh gentleman Drew can fill
in on a a time limit for a turn but they
recommend 7even to 10 seconds for a turn
depending on the intersection we're
going to be Crossing across two lanes
and taking a left-hand turn um that
means as we look left and right here
that you know we have 7 Seconds to make
a turn before a collision or a car has
to break and that's assuming they're
going the speed limit um as discussed in
previous meetings we all know about
Livingston and the issues we're having
with speeding um this is a clear Hazard
people are not going to be able to make
a left-hand turn this tree is going to
further block um this line of
view um parking's a big issue for me and
if I can really quickly touch on the
code um when we're using a mix use
Commercial Code the idea of mix use
commercial and in the code it talks
about commercial parking that's one
space per
250t foot so when you have commercial on
the first floor you already have a much
higher number of spaces on the lot so to
have residential which is approved above
the first FL spacing and they require
one space per unit for that it makes
sense you already have a plethora of
spaces due to the commercial
aspect this as you discussed is
basically a change of zoning it's going
to 100% residential and the code
specifically States for commercial
service when happening
at the border of the city which this is
thatman that's four minutes yeah I've
got four minutes also but go ahead and
finish your sentence thank you you
should uh take into consideration the
bordering um development standards and
Columbus States for units over four they
require
1.5 units or spaces per unit um so we're
you know it's right in our code if we
want to try to figure out a code to use
let's look at the neighboring as it
states let's look at the neighboring and
it it requires 1.5 spaces per unit thank
you all
right very good thank you I'm sure that
they will those issues will be
addressed but I appreciate you're taking
the time to come and talk to us and give
us your perspective and to gather the
information from the the the signatures
even for your neighbors as well thank
you thank you I would encourage the
board look at that doc thank you thank
you all right uh how many other
I have one two we get Joel GFF seven
seven seven left Joel GFF are you
there Karen I don't have any
answer yes I'm sorry it's it's Ryan I
hav when I accidentally had a uh a
hummos and land on my keyboard hold on
can you hold on one second Joel go ahead
Ryan I just I would it be possible could
you send us um that document that was
just shown
yes
like you when you have when you have the
time just before we vote okay hold on a
second take your
time why you do that okay thank you um
now we have Joel graph okay thanks Karen
Joel now Joel what I was just trying to
apologize for was a hummos and landed on
my keyboard and accidentally put my hand
up all right this is Dustin again youed
me instead of Joel can defer my five
minutes to Dustin like we're in the
house Chambers can I do that no that's
okay we'll we'll all right so you're not
you're not testifying correct no I want
to defer my time to the gentleman
further down the street okay let's let's
go down to the next speaker
please is that yes I have the time or
okay I'd like Joel to have his time back
then let's go to the next speaker we'll
see how we do here and then we'll come
back to uh to
Joel
AJ this is AJ Melissa garapati 981
Francis uh AJ uh did you say
981 correct okay thank you um please
raise your right hand to be sworn both
Melissa and I we'll be speaking so we
both will okay Melissa thank you do you
both swear or affirm that the testimony
you're going to give to this panel this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth I do I
do thank you very much please proceed hi
Bap members community and all attending
this meeting thank you for your time as
a resident on Francis Avenue many
residents have serious concerns and this
is causing a lot of public backlash and
beckling although the TCB does a good
job marketing and some have The Gift of
Gab I want to reiterate that the to the
Bap members that this project does does
not meet the code as well as meet the
needs of the actual tenants living there
with regard to diversity social
inequities and inclusivity in the
community Jason sui I'm actually
surprised to hear you state in your
introduction that it meets the codes
when in fact it does not Rachel as
passionate as you are with regard to
mixed housing this will not impact you
as you live in central Bexley I would
also recommend you not use the country's
climate as a reason to support TCB TCB
has never once stated how this project
will meet the American Disabilities Act
with that said I want the board to
really look at the intent of the code AS
D David Hodge stated Bap members I I
want you to encourage to hear the
following the Bexley code
12262 clearly states when a conditional
use request can be approved Bexley code
is clear on the circumstance that a
conditional use is to be approved by BAP
to reiterate phrases like if and only if
intent of the zoning District in which
the property is
located um har harmoniously with
adjacent uses and structures and finally
if the applicant proves the following
factors are met are used this TCB
project on Livingston does not meet
these requirements to be granted firstly
it states that in the Bexley code
12262 that c the use will not be
hazardous to or have a negative impact
on existing or future surrounding uses
however the TCB project will have a
negative impact on the Privacy for
residents and surrounding uses as the
height is not compatible with the
surrounding are areas the impra ability
also violates G that the uses in
character in keeping incompatible with
the adjacent structures and uses as non
none of the adjacent structures are
three stories and you only have one
maybe two homes that are even two
stories high the structure is so high as
compared to adjacent homes that will
Overlook into adjacent homes Five homes
down in all directions to include homes
on the other side of Livingston based on
the many meetings that have occurred
with TCB TCB is unwilling to change
amend or restructure the amount of units
as well as the height of the building
privacy Advocates have sometimes
struggled to demonstrate the harms of
lack of privacy to the general public
meaningful oversight of privacy and
surveillance cannot be designed with
only common conditions in mind there is
no sense in having a conversation about
privacy in America without taking
account of its profoundly unequal use we
cannot divorce privacy research or
policy from considerations of social
hierarchies when we do that as we often
do we fail the liberal conception of
privacy has no claim to Universal reach
if it fails to adapt to unequal
circumstance a three-story building with
residents looking down at current
residents would cause concerns for
privacy laws and surveillance as Bexley
residents we have the right to privacy
in our backyards the ttb project minutes
requirement keep go ahead go ahead
Melissa and finish your your sentence
there I have there's one more code this
violates on 1220 122
26.12 is B that the use will not have a
negative impact on the neighboring land
land uses in larger Community because of
the differences between the proposed use
and existing uses in the community this
is in regard to Green Space as we keep
bringing up as Corona virus restrictions
ease around the world many consider a
walk around the neighborhood for fres
fresh air
okay three questions not to consider but
I want you to ask yourselves and I want
the community to ask themselves is it
possible that just maybe this isn't the
right location due to the lack in size
and space is it possible that the
leadership is willing to consider
another practical location for this
project to better serve the incoming
Community is it possible as a unified
Community like beex to consider building
affordable housing in a better location
keeping inclusivity in mind while
following the codes in place and lastly
is there another Builder that is willing
to do so with respect to these concerns
I thank you for your time thank you guys
thank you thank
you all right uh thank you very much
Garla potties we appreciate your time
and
comments uh who's the next speaker
please
Karen um I have Ellen
Evans
okay Ms Evans thank you you unmuted
yourself can you introduce yourself and
your and tell us your address
please Miss
Evans Ellen Evans can you hear
me all right I see any issue on our end
we might have to go to the next speaker
and let Ellen
Evans get get it together there uh
Bridget let's see I'm not seeing that
person on my my
screen
she's she's here she's here okay could
you identify yourself and your address
please yes Bridget tupes and I live at
2316 Livingston
Avenue 316 and Bridget is how close are
you to Francis I am directly across
Francis Avenue from the property so you
live
in uh Columbus or in Bexley Bexley
directly across Francis
directly across Francis from oh I see on
the on the north side of Livingston
correct okay thank you very much uh
would you uh raise your right hand to be
sworn do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give the panel
this evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth I do
thank you very much please
proceed Mr chairman and members of the
board I will try to be as brief as
possible I just feel it's worth noting
that at the previous meeting there was
significant feedback from the members of
this board that there were concerns
about perking around the project I would
still argue that despite the earlier
testimony parking is not sufficient for
this location the updated application
does not reflect those concerns or
recommended changes I would also
Advocate that we apply the Southwest
Bexley master plan which shows this
property is clearly within the city's
outlined single family Zone as such that
is the standard which should be applied
to the parking requirements for this
site based on that standard there should
be a minimum of 41 spots for this 27
unit property in previous testimony I've
addressed additional concerns around the
setback and the safety of the residents
of the building as it relates to traffic
on Livingston Avenue and I do not feel
that those concerns have been addressed
as well thank you and I will yield back
the rest of my time as to respect
everyone's evening Briget tubes thank
you very much for your time and for
giving us a concise uh
issue that I think the uh applicants
will have to address here as well thank
you next speaker next we have Brian
Newman Mr Newman I see you unmuted
yourself can you please identify
yourself and your address yes I'm Brian
Newman I live at 953 Francis
Avenue okay so how far down from
Livingston are you I'm five houses down
from the proposed project okay thank you
very much would you raise your right
hand to be sworn yes you do you swear or
affirm that the testimony you're about
to give will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes I do
thank you very much please proceed thank
you thank you for giving me the time uh
members of the board I encourage you to
read Mr Snow's document this meeting has
been our only opportunity to have a
voice about this life-changing decision
at least until November my wife and I
moved to our house just Five Doors Down
from the proposed project 22 years ago
we moved here so that we can start and
raise our family in the urban Paradise
that my three College roommates Al Beck
the grads we're so proud of and it has
for the most part lived up to its lore
but I'm very concerned about our choice
now I'm asking the board of zoning to
Simply remove themselves from the
politics of the situation imagine for a
moment that the be app was not a board
appointed by the mayor deciding on a
project conceptualized and promoted by
the mayor brought to the table by the
cic on which the mayor and the members
Council sit with the failure to prove
all eight factors of code 12 26.12 be
considered differently I'm asking you to
put it all aside you're not lacking
empathy for the low-income families you
are simply applying bexley's strict code
AS written all eight factors of Bexley
code
12262 must be proven by the applicant
and I quote such uses shall only be
approved if the applic proves all of the
following factors are met not some of
the factors all of the factors the word
prove is used purposefully I look
forward to the rebuttal particularly
section F where he will prove that my
single family home Five Doors Down from
the project will not fall in value thank
you for allowing my testimony thank you
very much Mr Newman I appreciate your
taking the time and to raise the the
valid points that you do raise thank you
very
much
all right okay next we have Tim Madison
Tim Madison is just attorney Tim
Madison hello Mr Beall how are you sir
I'm good sir how about you good thank
you are you here as a citizen or as an
representative of others I am here um as
a representative of homeowner that is
within the 300 foot standing okay area
uh I also would encourage I I am one of
the neighbors that signed the document
um I encourage all of you to read it and
and review it I'm not going to rehash um
all the legal points um but I will say
that it's a glaring emission um that the
casting main development is not used as
an analogy and I'm just surprised that
excuse me excuse me excuse me I think
you need
to he's an attorney so he's representing
somebody else so no I'm not I'm I'm on
my own Bo
okay I'm
happy I'm glad to swear you in as long
as as you're going to offer testimony on
your own of your own opinion as
well but I'm only speaking I'm speaking
on my own behalf okay I didn't
understand I thought you said you
representing a no no no within 300 feet
okay then so where do where do you live
Tim I should I live I live at 956
Pleasant Ridge which is the fourth home
north of this development I'm on the
opposite side of pleasant rich but I'm
the fourth home from the proposed
development you live close to uh I see
where you are there okay very good would
you raise your right hand to be sworn
then yes you swear or affirm that any
testimony you give this board this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth I do
thank you very much please proceed thank
you chairman behall members of
Bap I'm here from a practical
perspective you've heard the legal
arguments and I fully agree ree with um
all of the fallowing factors must be met
of the eight and the word actually all
was introduced by the council last year
um the same Council that introduced the
diversity also also introduced the word
all all a have to meet but I'm here
really from a practical perspective I've
lived in seven different homes on seven
different streets in Bexley including
Broad Street and there is no comparison
to Livingston Avenue I drive on it
multiple times every every day I am I am
shocked that anyone would want to put
families residential units on Livingston
Avenue at this time it is literally a
racetrack I hear it I see it I see the
motorcycles
racing what we're saying is so these
these people are going to have kids
right it's 58 bedrooms so there's going
to be probably at a minimum 30 children
do we want our children our Bexley
residents to have their kids on
Livingston Avenue and walk down
Livingston Avenue where there could be a
sheets where there could be another gas
station that's going to be there at
least enlarged it makes no sense to me
it is such a dangerous Street why would
the city want to put residential on
Livingston Avenue it makes no sense to
me it is not what Beckley is about this
27 unit is being crammed into a teeny
little lot for one reason the developer
said he can can only make it work for 27
units it's not what we want to do it's
not what Bexley is about it's not where
we want residential to be at this time
in a couple years five years whatever it
may be when Livingston is safe then we
can look at it I I won't let my children
my five children I would not let them
walk on Livingston Avenue why are we
going to put people on Livingston Avenue
at this point it makes no sense to me
and I think you need to if you haven't
spent time on Livingston Avenue please
do especially during the summer the
noise the racing the crime the accidents
look at the accident reports it's just
no place for residential units thank you
very much for the time I appreciate it
thank you Mr Madison appreciate your
time and taking it tonight to come and
tell us your perspective since you live
nearby there it's interesting to hear
thank you very
much all right um Todd Kellner Todd
Kellner Mr Kelner you're muted there you
go Mr Kellner can you give me your name
and your resident address certainly my
name is Todd Kelner my address is 854
Francis so I am also about halfway
down between Mound and Livingston and we
access Livingston every
day all right I'm going to find that you
have standing please raise your right
hand and be horn you swear or affirm
that any testimony you give this panel
this evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth I do
thank you thank you very much tell us
your perspective on this
matter so my perspective is simply this
I think we've heard a lot of of feedback
I think the primary considerations here
has to be the residents the existing
residents of Bexley the existing
residence of Francis and Pleasant Ridge
we've heard numerous people speak and
not one person that has spoke on the
Livingston Avenue project has been
supportive of it in the fashion that
it's been presented we've talked a lot
about parking parking is only a result
of the problem the true problem here is
density no matter how you cut it whether
it's a three-story building a twostory
building a four-story building the
density is just too great for this site
not to mention the exhibit that was sent
out earlier with the line of sight and
the zero set back lines on the front
that was quite eye opening and should
really be considered further before any
decisions are made on this particular
project um so the density if they're not
willing to get away from the 27 units
the problem does not go
away um so really that's That's the
basis of what I wanted to bring to the
table today okay listen to the
homeowners listen to the people that are
impacted there is not
support well I appreciate your time and
your conciseness as well thank you very
much Mr kellerer thank
you um Ellen
Evans Miss Evans yes good evening good
evening can can you hear me yes can you
hear me this time yes I can I'm sorry
couldn't hear you last time that's all
right my speaker sometimes just decides
it doesn't want to be all right would
you uh stat your full name and your
residence address for us please my full
name is Ellen Sarah Evans uhuh I live at
965 Francis Avenue which is corner of
Francis and pleasant Rich okay so you're
right there I'm right there would you
raise your right hand to be sworn I
indeed would you do you swear or affirm
that any testimony you give the board
this evening will be the truth and
nothing but the truth yes sir thank you
very much tell us what your perspective
is on this uh
application um the the the uh advantage
or disadvantage of being one of the
latter speakers as opposed to the last
meeting where I was one of the first
speakers um my neighbors have I think
reiterated what most of us still feel
are issues okay I think one thing that
needs to be made clear and and my I I
I'm have not spoke to my neighbors but I
think the issue is not that this is
affordable housing I think we would be
having the same discussion and arguments
if this was million-dollar
condos
um the site just does not hold this kind
of of density the other thing is that
codes are guidelines and just because
something meets what was an intention at
the time doesn't mean that it is truly
100%
applicable to uh to this situation
Livingston is not Main Street and I find
it a misnomer to say that we're
following the Main Street guidelines
when one has absolutely they're two
totally different types of
streets so I find that difficult
yeah um I find it difficult uh along
with the code I think that it's being
pushed
to to meet the situation I'm not saying
that it doesn't meet code but I think
it's
being it's all in how you interpret the
code and and that is something that I
deal with on a on a daily situation with
my work um and again the fact that that
building sits right on living
um I hope you're willing to give a
discount to those first floor units cuz
sitting 10 feet from all that traffic no
matter what improvements are made on
Livingston it's not going to change the
fact that this building sits 10 feet
from a major traffic thoroughfare in the
city of Columbus in the morning you've
got buses every 10 minutes they idle
they Park there's the smoke and all the
other stuff it it just doesn't it it's
just not a I can't see it being a
comfortable situation for someone and
again the fact that the building is
pushed to the corner that was the first
thing that I said the last time I spoke
was that you're going to have to pull
out pretty far uh to be able to get uh
visual site to uh to make your turns I
thank you for your time and I hope that
some people do some serious thinking um
about about this project wow I can
assure you that we appreciate your
coming because serious thinking is uh
only possible when we hear uh the
thoughts of the folks who live around
that neighborhood so it was very helpful
for you to come by and tell us your
thoughts thank you very
much um lastly I'm sorry the only thing
that it says is G
Meyer
okay M Mr Mrs Meyer whatever it is yes
hello yes sir could I I have your name
and address uh Greg Meyer 805
Francis okay Greg 805 how far down the
road is that we're probably two-thirds
of the way down um more so we use that
thorough Fair every day multiple times a
day I'll keep it very brief all right
thank you I'm I'm gonna find you have
standing please raise your right hand
you swear or affirm that any testimony
you give this board this evening will be
the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth I do thank you very much
please give us your uh concise
perspective uh well thanks everyone um I
I know there's a lot of concerns around
the whole whole whole subject uh I I
reiterate I don't necessarily have a a
an issue with a development um but the
density and for my perspective the
safety I I know that there was
discussions about the engaging Traffic
Engineers of Columbus and such on that
thoroughfare um I will reiterate from a
safety perspective we have four children
we don't go anywhere near that
thoroughfare or that intersection
because of the speed uh it may be 35 but
most times you see 4550 or more trying
to get through the light at that
intersection so um anyone that has
children in that area that's a very
serious concern um I don't know if that
is something being entertained in the
future of any traffic light I know that
slows traffic down that's up to the the
Traffic Engineers and and reviewing that
but putting uh the density there um that
that that that's a concern um I know
that it was mentioned that this
residential unit would have much less
traffic than Automotive convenience
stores Car Wash restaurant
um all of those are already existing and
I think we're adding it sounds like
sheets and maybe an expanded Speedway um
potential all in that same general
thoroughfare so there's going to be
plenty more traffic and and the speed is
the biggest concern that I have um and
somehow the overall development and I
understand that's not specific to this
project but adding more density um does
relate to that so all right thank you
thank you Mr Meer we appreciate you
taking the time to talk to us this
evening there are no more hands now
would be the time for anybody to raise
their hand wait there is another one
that just went up um fade Masson I'm
sorry if I pronounced your name
incorrectly go ahead that's that's
correct fed my uh good evening thank you
for giving us the opportunity to uh
connect with you this
evening can I have your address please
uh we are on 994 fences Avenue okay
thank you would you raise your right
hand please to be
sworn do you swear do you swear or
affirm that any testimony you give this
board this evening will be the truth and
nothing but the truth yes I do thank you
very much please tell us what you think
about this
application so um our main main focus is
the uh justification of the scale of the
the building size um right on uh at the
corner of Francis and Livingstone where
we see a lot of discrepancies in regards
to safety
accidents um and the fact that we bring
in more families uh to encounter such
unsafe uh um instances is very very wor
worrisome for those families as well so
this is the big concern um like like my
my neighbors were concerned about uh
traffic considered about safety we
concerned as well about parking um and
it seems that the building is definitely
way way more and poison than the rest of
the uh the buildings uh around us and
that's something that is kind of wear us
a lot um I would like to say that we are
very very excited to have um something
similar in the neighborhood that will be
able to give a slice of Bexley to more
residents but what what what what type
of Bexley experience are we given these
future residents with such density in
such a small space there isn't enough
room for um enough Greenery there isn't
enough room for everybody to park that
will be like living in those buildings
and we can't see um we can't see the
justification for a building this big in
on on that property and that will I
think that will summarize our point
this clear enough for you thank you very
much thank you for taking the time to
tell us your position we appreciate it
thank
you and I have one more hand up it's
Joel GFF okay he was the very first
gentleman and we
somehow missed
him Joel well he was muted okay okay
Joel uh please state your name and your
address Joel GFF uh 834 Francis Avenue
about halfway down I use the Livingston
Avenue Motor Speedway at least several
times a day okay so you're you're all
closer to
Mound uh right halfway almost yeah okay
well I'm since you use the street I'll
find that you have standing but please
raise your right hand to be sworn Okie
do 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 please tell us what you think
about this project okay I don't want to
necessarily beat the dead horse about
the horrific repetitive we we're getting
the ideas that everybody us if if I have
um if there was any way and I I was
joking when I was on for one second
about deferring my time to Dustin snow I
do want to talk about the report that he
presented okay and you you did indicate
that it was distributed to everybody on
the beap board so uh with that in mind I
I don't think it would be prudent to ask
and I know Ryan schik was outstanding in
the last meeting uh rais a motion to at
least table this until everybody gets a
chance to really review that uh document
I think there's a lot of debate as to
technically uh the eight points are
being passed um but there are nuances
that are being adjusted to uh you know
let's compare it to Main Street let's
compare it to this thing uh mixed use
commercial has that crazy word
commercial on it uh let's call it what
it is it's
residential um the traffic has been
talked about for a month and and no one
can get an engineer out to look at it I
just think there's a lot of obviously
resident Community feedback on this
issue and I think there's still quite a
bit of research that needs to be done uh
before this thing could even move
forward and uh you're hearing it loud
and clear from a lot of people and um
those are my comments for this evening
thank you very much we appreciate your
lasting because I know you were the
first speaker and I missed you there so
thank you for your patience and thanks
for your perspective thank
you all right um do the members of the I
I have one more hand but I believe
they've already
spoken
AJ yes he already spoke or his wife
spoke thank
you are you there yeah right here sorry
about that so I just want to I forgot to
add something in so I was want to say it
real quick um lastly the addition Mr
chairman additional code being violated
Mr
chairman he's had his time no his wife
had her time I don't think land uses in
the larger Community because of the
differences between the proposed use and
the existing uses in the community as
Corona um as Corona virus restrictions
ease around the world many will consider
a walk around their neighborhoods in
fresh air to be a welcome break from
confin
however socioeconomic status could
greatly affect the Landscapes people
find on these strolls particularly and
how much green they're likely to see
social Equity aims to achieve Fair
outcomes for all this can only happen by
recognizing that individuals and social
groups face unique challenges and
require different levels of support
based on the specific needs expanding
and protecting green spaces without
efforts to achieve social Equity can
worsen spatial and social inequalities
and reinforce marginalized communities
lack of access to the benefits that
Urban Parks provide TCB has not
identified the possibility of green
space for this project despite many
attempts to discuss it without
realistically having the space to do so
to the LA due to the lack of uh land in
this location without appropriate
foresight regulation lack of green
spaces can actually push out lowincome
residents for instance environmental re
revitalization in many Brooklyn
neighborhoods and the Highline in
Manhattan has displ longtime residents
residents when Urban green spaces are
unequally distributed so too are the
benefits they provide Urban green spaces
can be a Val valuable tool to the level
the playing field for communities across
a wide range of issues including health
and economic benefits improve safety and
disaster resilience to achieve this
projects that aim to enhance Urban Green
Space must be fair and at buying from
communities thank you so much I really
appreciate that thank you so much thank
you for your for your conciseness and we
understand your points thank you very
much okay uh that is it thank you um
members of the board I'm going to give
you all a chance to ask any questions
that you might have uh and then we'll
give the panel uh of applicants uh a
chance to rebut the uh information that
has been
uh raised the the points been raised and
the issues uh made by the uh speakers
and just to be clear I did email that
document to all the board members thank
you we did I did get it here so I hope
everybody else got it as well um thanks
Karen any comments or questions members
of the board not to say that you're not
free to ask questions and comments later
when the uh rebuttal is being made
but all right
uh Mr hodj why don't you uh take it upon
yourself and the appropriate person in
your entourage there to uh uh address
the issues raised by the various
speakers please thank you chairman
behall uh and uh others in the Entourage
May step in to to to do their part if
it's within their area of
expertise this rebuttal will jump around
a little bit because I took notes in the
order of of of the uh uh as folks spoke
so I'm going to to address them sort of
in that way uh preliminarily though I I
I I need to say and chairman behall I
hope you'll forgive me for this but I
like to think if you were in my shoes uh
you would uh do the same thing that I'm
about to do um I don't think that um it
is the Chairman's role to unilaterally
decide who does and who does not have
standing that is that is codified in the
city of ly uh and I think it's uh
codified pretty pretty uh liberally in
terms of who does and who does not have
standing our standing requirements in
the city of Bexley uh exceed uh really
that under the law which in in some
cases is adjacent to or across the
street from so in so far as folks
provided testimony that did not have
standing I I preserve the right to have
their testimony stricken uh for the
possibility of of of any appeal that
would move forward uh after a hearing
tonight or at a later hearing of the bza
your objections noted thank
you
um uh Drew lent from Carpenter Marty is
on he's going to come on after I finish
and talk about uh Clear Vision sight
distance General traffic issues at
Francis and Livingston Avenue uh that
was uh discussed U considerably and I'd
like to eventually bring on Drew to uh
address that he's a traffic engineer by
trade uh often I think uh serves as the
city of bexley's traffic engineer and
you know again Carpenter Marty is truly
one of the best Traffic Engineers in the
in the Columbus
Market um there was discussion about uh
one thing I am going to say though about
traffic and uh we we showed a slide
earlier that talked about the various
uses that are allowed in this CS
district and those uses whether it's a
car wash whether it's a fast food
restaurant whether it's a convenience
store whatever those uses are are far
greater traffic generators than the use
proposed here so in terms of concerns
about traffic uh counterbalance that
testimony with what could go here uh by
right uh under the existing code
there was an objection to the Aesthetics
of the
building uh as Mr sui said earlier in
his staff report uh and and also Miss
Rose there are later processes that are
necessary this project will and is
required to go forward to the
architectural re review board and
eventually get a certificate of
appropriateness uh for the Aesthetics
the design of the building so that's not
here
there were discussions about the the
project not meeting the code uh it is uh
staff's uh position uh it's our position
that we do meet the code and I'm not
talking about just
12262 and the eight criteria
uh that the board has to consider but
all of the other development standards
uh here whether it's setbacks Building
height number of parking spaces uh uh
refuse perimeters uh what have you this
project complies with the code in not
just all of those ways but it also
either meets or exceeds each of the
eight criteria Under 12
2612 there was a a reference to meeting
8 a uh every every project has to meet
Ada certainly all new projects have to
meet Ada that operates uh kind of
outside of the city's uh regulatory
framework it's the federal government
that dictates that and and new
development has to
comply uh there was a discussion about
um non-compliance with uh the Southwest
or the the the the South Beckley master
plan uh
and you know that that comment I think
is set aside by virtue of the fact that
we're meeting the code
um there were discussion about politics
and and a and a notion that we were
using uh certain politics uh in this
situation to to earn the board support
uh it's not true this is not about
politics at all it's about the law
uh this is a conditional use in the code
we have demonstrated that we meet that
code and that we meet the eight criteria
that the board uh considers with
reference to approval of a conditional
use there were some discussions about
density and
intensity
and to me when you're talking about
density you're talking about a project
that uh is 10 lb in a 5B bag something
that's asking to exceed the height
something that's asking to exceed the
setbacks these development standard
issues again we meet the code in all uh
respects uh uh here including
parking uh there was a comment about uh
codes being
guidelines codes are not guidelines
guidelines are guidelines codes are law
and and that's what we are following
here uh
tonight
um I think that in terms of uh Miss
boer's material earlier the PowerPoint
presentation uh the testimony of the of
the applicants here that we have brought
forward a thoughtful thorough
comprehensive set of materials for your
consideration uh we think that this
warrants approval in terms of each and
all of the eight criteria under
12262 and that the law supports uh your
approval of this conditional use request
uh I'll now kick it over to uh Drew lent
the traffic engineer from Carpenter
Marty uh to to discuss the traffic
related
issues thanks David um I'm just going to
touch on a couple of things that I that
I heard um from the various comments
from folks um the first being regarding
the the the trip generation for the site
and and the concern regarding uh the the
number of AM and PM Peak trips um I
think one thing to to make clear is that
that that's that's the the highest peak
hour of those times so say 7 to 8:00 am
or 5: to 6:00 pm um it's important to
know that not everybody goes to work at
the same time in the morning some people
go to work at 6:00 am some people go to
work at 10:00 a.m. likewise some people
get home by 4:00 some people get home by
8: so that's where this data comes from
we look at the highest peak hour not not
the entire you know the entire morning
or entire evening um secondly the the
line of sight issue that came up um the
the graphic that was that was brought up
showed the line of sight from the
stopbar of uh the the southbound
approach of that intersection of
Francis um and that is 31 feet from the
edge line of Livingston Avenue um the
standard in the city of Columbus for
Sight lines is 10 feet and for OD do it
is 14 feet so if you move that sight
line down a lot further south um 10 10
feet would be south of the crosswalk
there um the sight line is not an issue
um and then I I do site distance
exhibits every day so um the the
something we looked at initially um with
the build bu here in this site and sight
line is is certainly not an issue here
so um regarding the parking um you know
we're using hard data um the it data
supported by the um the information
provided by Nicole earlier um I know
there are some concerns about parking
and and things like that but um we're
using hard data here that that clearly
shows that there's going to be a surplus
of parking on this site um so that
that's all I have to address some of
those comments and I'll take it back off
to you David I have I have a question
for you Mr Laurent and that is U Can you
can you go back to the uh to the visual
there with the arrow uh pointing down
the sight line as you look to the south
from to the West I'm sorry from Francis
Avenue uh so that you come to Francis
you pull up to the to the thick line uh
and you look down to your right to see
if there's any cars that are eastbound
on living because you're going to make a
leftand turn can you take us through
that a little bit more in a little bit
more detail so that I could understand
better what your comment was sure sure
so um you know I guess to put it into to
layman's terms you pull up to an
intersection you stop at the stop bar
but that's that's not where you look for
oncoming traffic you stop at the stop
bar and you creep forward that's that's
the standard everywhere everybody does
it um you know you stop at the stop bar
to wait for pedestrians if there are and
then you move up so you can see as I
said the the right there what's the
standard for Sight line and site
distance to ensure acceptability is 10
feet from the edge line of what
Livingston Avenue is so if you if you
visualize an imaginary line going from
The Edge line of Livingston Avenue
across Francis 10 feet from that line
offset is where your sight line would be
and and I just measured on Google Maps
and it's just south of the crosswalk MH
um so when you're sitting waiting to
turn from Francis onto Livingston you'll
be your eye eye of your sight line will
be just south of where that crosswalk is
and as you can kind of eye out there as
you're looking at this there's not going
to be any visual obstructions to see
traffic on Livingston
Avenue okay now I I think I understand
isn't it true that the building is at a
10- foot setback from the street or is
that from another
point uh I'm
sorry isn't it true that didn't I hear
that the building is a 10- foot
setback I'm not I'm not sure about that
that wouldn't be your that wouldn't be
your area maybe David Hodge could uh
make a comment I believe it's from the
sidewalk this is Kathy Rose I believe
it's from that's from That's from the
right away from the property line and
then from the the same six feet of from
Curb to property
line okay all right so gotcha
all
right I think that helps me understand
your
position
better thank you
sure Mr Hodge who's your next
speaker we have no other speakers unless
Nicole or Sarah or or Nate or Jeff want
to jump on and have any last
remarks or to comment on any of the
issues that you you heard as
well I think we we just want to um
reiterate our thanks to um beap for
their consideration of this matter and
um just want to kind of touch on one
last thing um we here and we are
sensitive to the ongoing um concerns and
efforts that are going to be taken to
address the traffic issues along
Livingston Avenue we recognize that that
is not um that is not a problem that is
by our making nor is it something that
can be resolved by our project being um
constructed on this site um we do want
to be good neighbors and to the extent
that we can help plug into the
discussions as they are being framed we
would welcome the opportunity to do so
um we hear a lot of comments this
evening about concerns of residential
use being on this site but I would
kindly like to remind the Bap members
that to the east of this site is
predominantly residential use on both
the Bexley and the Columbus side of
Livingston so a resident a residential
use on this site is not a new use on the
Livingston
Corridor um that is that is what I would
like to to leave as The Parting
consideration unless Jeff beam has
anything else that he would like to add
I have one other question that was
raised by one of the speakers and that
has to do with trash removal He was
discussing trash removal could somebody
speak to that issue
please ni Uh Kevin is going to yeah
sorry okay um the trash in this building
will be handled by a a trash shoot that
takes the trash into a two cubic yard
container that's in the that corner of
the building and then there's an on-site
trash and closure that's remote but um
let's say we do many projects of much
much larger scales that are handled with
you know 50 60 70 units with the same
kind of trash compactor equipment um
this is well within the capacity of that
in terms of pickup it's a very
straightforward method by which the
truck comes in head on to that enclosure
at the far west side of the site picks
up the track fashion backs right out
it's actually a much more direct and
less convoluted pickup uh route than
many of our our projects have those two
yard containers are fairly light and can
be there they would come in from Francis
Avenue and go all the way down to the
west and of the lot go straight into the
dumpster dump the dumpster into their
into their vehicle and then goes place
the dumpster back down goes straight
back out the the uh toward the east to
the exit on Francis
Avenue yes yes that's
correct and I believe that's a private
service and not rum
key
correct okay will be picked up once a
week or does that how does that work we
will coordinate with our operations team
to make sure that the refuge service is
frequent enough that it is not a
nuisance um how they size that is based
on just how residents use the service at
the time so it's hard for us to speak to
it their estimate is that it would be
anywhere from two to three times a week
but again that just depends on use and
and
volume and what is protecting the
neighbor to the west I did want to touch
on that because I I appreciate you
asking that question because um while
it's not identified on the plan um we
would intend to to have the privacy
fence actually turn and go down the west
side as well at least until the dumpster
enclosure and we're happy to work with
beap and the tree and Landscape
Commission on where that should
terminate um that's for privacy for
adjacent um property owners and also
just best practices for screening um for
the site
itself Mr chair I I I'm sorry I have a I
was taking notes here um my internet got
a little garbled uh Miss Boer said how
many times a week I I I didn't hear it
was my internet I think so so we
anticipate it will be anywhere from two
to three times a week just depending on
the the
volume thank you very much sorry Mr
chairman all right thank
you do members of the board have any
other questions or um comments or um
issues they'd like to
raise I have a question this is Heidi
Dorne um a number of questions were
raised concerning home value and I know
we saw the the graphs and heard the
testimony of the expert about kind of
the generalization that the home values
don't seem to be affected by the tax
credit
housing I guess um I I can't remember
I'm sorry who's who mentioned it but
they someone said they spoke to a
realtor I was wondering if any members
or the cic did any research like with
local
Realtors um in the area is that
something that's considered or or not
for home
value Nicole do you want to talk to that
or do you want me to this is Nate green
the chair of the cic if you want to
speak to that Nate that would be greatly
appreciated my voice would appreciate a
break yeah um Heidi you know we uh the
question I think about is it about home
values and what the project does to home
values is that the question right yeah
so in investigating whether or not the
the project how the project affects the
home values um what is your measure is
it simply looking at the graph and the
the statistics Nationwide or do you
actually go into a community and seek
actual feedback from like a realtor as
to the change in the home value sure I
mean the cic hasn't hasn't done that for
these projects uh I don't think the TCB
has done that either we've we've done
that more um but with that information
you saw Heidi but you know we could I
mean we can certainly talk to realtors
in the area that's um you know there's
they're engaged I mean obviously on this
project and the Cassidy project there's
there are two local uh real estate
brokers that are engaged in that so we
certainly could Heidi um talk to them uh
and get you know their opinions and and
statistics from them about what it would
do for home values we we would we could
do that if I may if I may uh take a shot
at answering this too hi Heidi hey David
um you know I think you really have to
think of of that component of this in
the context of the
zoning and you have to think of this
from the perspective of what's being
proposed here and what potential impact
that'll have on real estate values
for those that have standing and and are
adjacent uh or what might happen uh by
right under the code uh and what impact
that would have on adjacent Property
Owners from a value perspective uh I'll
say that uh without the shadow of a
doubt that the intensity of the use
proposed here tonight is far uh below
the intensity of a car wash a
convenience store a fast food drive-thru
and so I believe that on that basis we
do meet uh the uh section F of
12262 so that one needs to be reviewed
in the context of of the other things
allowed under the
zoning Mr chair if I may um there's a
couple of us who have additional data
points to add quickly if we may please
um so we did research because we sort of
have spoken to our um our experience
anecdotally in past meetings and we
wanted to back that up we studied um
projects of Our Own in similar markets
um as well as projects in or
developments in
Columbus um and we measured from the
date they were built to now the home the
the we we looked at 10 houses the 10
closest houses to it and we looked at
the value of those houses as of the date
it was built and as of today then we
looked at the surrounding zip code AS of
the DAT it was built and and now in
every single case the houses immediately
adjacent to the development outperformed
the zip code in terms of the increase in
in homesale value um as we've said
quality development is quality
development and so that that is the
point we'd like to make um Dr cleat does
have a a piece to add to this if we may
okay yeah I want there so the of
research that Jeff talked about doing is
what's been done all over the country um
with very with lots of different kinds
of housing that's built with some sort
of a
subsidy and um in fact there have been
studies done with you have a house a
subsidized unit and you have a circle
drawn around it and the circle increases
in size from five 10 15 until you get to
a mile away and as that circle gets
larger before so then they measure
property values before the unit comes in
then for a long period
afterwards and what they find is that
the further away you get from the unit
the actually the lower the property
values so that that unit has an
immediate U it's like if you always want
to be the smallest house on the Block
when some when something comes in right
so this is going to come in and it's a
very it's a forward-looking project it's
responding to the the goals of the of
the city but
it and it's not it's um I don't I so the
kind of um property that we're we're
talking about is actually going to R
should should actually increase the
property values also because we're a hot
Market Al so in addition to the increase
in property values we will see because
our Market is actually hot this will
increase it more and the further away
you get from it the the less that that
price effect will be so um it's pretty
consistent
in a variety of situations then that's
all I wanted to add all right thank you
very
much Heidi does that answer your
question yes that does thank you okay
members of the uh board do you have any
other
questions or
comments I I have a a question um when
we when we discuss
density um you know you know apartment
that are built in the city of Columbus
the ratio is higher than one unit per
parking spot there's usually guest
considerations there's I think I think
uh some of Columbus is actually one unit
with an additional half unit per per
unit um most two bedrooms they usually
require two um of often they require two
um with 58 bedrooms
um I I forget the count on on two
bedroom um
but the problem I see with the density
is the fact that if the lot is full
there is no place to park if you're in
Short North you can kind of turn there's
might be a street there might be
something else but you can't park on
Livingston Avenue you have one block off
of Livingston to North where you have a
couple spots where there's already
people in the neighborhood that Park in
those streets all of a sudden you're
parking more than a block away up
Francis to the location um the project
at S I mean the principal behind the
project I have no issues with but I
don't I have a really hard time with the
density aspect of it and there's no Poss
there's really no plan for overflow
parking if it goes beyond that I mean
you have a lot of two better
Ms that doesn't necessarily mean a
parent and kids that can be two two
adult drivers I mean you have a three
bedroom unit it can be three adult
drivers um to say that you know with 27
units that there's going to be I mean
the ratio that she she threw out is
basically 10 cars because she said three
four per unit I just don't I don't I
mean I don't see that as
being even possible um 10 cars for 27
units so I the density is a major issue
with me um Francis like I said you can't
park on Livingston there's no place for
these cars to go if they can't get in
the parking
lot um I like the project if it was
smaller but I I I have a really hard
time with with the parking spot to unit
ratio let's let them address that point
Sean so I think it might be helpful to
maybe touch on some demographic
information um our average count on a
resident per unit in the in the data set
that we use to reference the parking
data so I'm trying to keep consistency
across what we're referencing our
average resident per unit is 1.5
residents per unit unit of that average
so uh across those three properties that
we showed um almost 56% of the occupied
units are occupied by a single occupant
even though these there's a
misconception sometimes when the word
family housing is presented because in
our industry and the funding that we are
competing for it is family or it is
senior it is General occupancy family or
senior um the apartment complexes that
are built downtown while they may serve
a different um demographic in terms of
the downtown resident demographic they
would be considered family because they
are not age restricted development in
our industry if it is a non AG
restricted development it is General
occupancy So to that extent of the
singles that live in our communities
roughly a third of them are older adults
that are over the age of 55 years old so
our projects are not just serving
families they are serving older adults
who maybe live in the community right
now but cannot stay in their home
because either for physical issues
maintenance issues or even economic
issues they serve opportunities for
singles that want to move into the
community and they do serve families but
it is not going to be a building that is
full of multiple kids in every single
unit and I just want to kind of clarify
that because that goes to the parking
demand if 60% of the units only have a
single occupant on average um the best
data point that I can point to is we
shared a project that we have it has 40
units with 56 bedrooms so there's a few
more um one bedroom uh one bedroom units
in it but the total bedroom count is the
same for 56 bedrooms the average parked
cars were
19 that is an existing property that we
have that is similar
demographics question well I'm just
saying it's hard to it's hard to compare
compare that without knowing what that
facility you can't really just say that
it's another un know complex we have so
this is what it is so it's going to be
here it's a different Community
different surrounding community it's on
a different Road there might be more
public transit I mean we don't have any
idea so so just throwing in other random
apartment complexes saying well they
don't have them that's like saying we've
got one in Manhattan that doesn't have
any parking I mean I mean you can't
really do that um and that I'm just
saying that to me that's not a fair
response to the question of the number
of units I mean based on based on a
general apartment complex in Columbus
that you develop by a decent Builder
who's looking for
spots who who can takes into
consideration spots for a single unit he
looks at one and a quarter spots per per
unit for a two-bedroom unit he looks at
two and for a three-bedroom unit he
looks at two plus so that's over 50
spots he he would take into
consideration for a unit this size
that's the way I mean based on the ratio
he builds bigger units but that's the
ratio he uses when he builds units and
so to come back and be a one unit per
two-bedroom one unit per or one car per
two-bedroom one car per three-bedroom
the other thing to consider too is
there's people that aren't going to be
be making that um that are going to
reach the salary level that are going to
be students at Capital so three capital
students could move into a three-bedroom
each with a car two Capital students
could move I I really don't believe that
the ratio of cars to units of one to one
is an accurate I I I mean I'm sorry I
just think it's and I don't don't I
don't I I don't think you're going to
I'll be honest I don't know how you can
sway me because I really don't I just
don't see
it okay any other comments or questions
I'll just I'll just if I if I might
quick response it's it's a it's a it is
a really uh good question Mr Turner uh
and absolutely a fair question and it it
raises in my mind a little bit of an
interesting issue
um
because we meet the
code the project meets the code we're
not asking for a parking reduction well
well you sort of meet the code because
in this District this is not a permitted
use you can't just come in and build a
three story residential unit so it
doesn't technically meet the code it
meets the code with the V with for this
use in this District this is not that's
why that's why you're here seeking a
variance is because it doesn't meet the
code if it did if it did meet the code
AS currently you wouldn't need to come
in N I just want to be real clear
because I this keeps coming up this is
not a rezoning and this is not a
variance this is a conditional use
request and that is a much lower bar
than either of those things like
exceptionally lower and so what we're
asking is
AAL not resoning you're right you're
right but it's a conditional use for
residential on the first floor which is
something that needs to be approved for
this District so to say automatic
approval because it's in the district is
not correct I didn't say it was
automatic what I'm trying to clarify
come up a number of times Mr Mr Hodge
said it meets the requirement and I'm
saying in in our opinion it does it does
meet the parking requirement yes the
parking requirement Mr Turner is what I
was speaking to it meets the parking
requirement we're not asking for a
parking variance right I just want to be
clear on what we're what what the
applicant has has asked for and what
we're saying as staff in our
interpretation so
if I may just introduce a data point
because um I think there was some a Mis
A a comparison that was not accurate
made there um to the point of law to the
point of code I'll defer to Mr hjj and
Mr sui who are the experts but on the
point of who will live here part of the
whole motivation for this project is
that new construction multif family
development in Columbus costs so much
money that households double up that
roommates double up that multiple adults
live in a household the point of incom
restricted housing which is what this is
is that a family a single- held head
head of household can afford an
apartment on their salary that is who
lives in our building and we're not
randomly selecting we're picking
similarly sized buildings in locations
that are not served by mass transit we
also have experts who have testified to
similar projects and I would invite
anyone to drive around to any of the
multif family communities already in
Bexley and count cars all of them
produce at any time you go way fewer
cars in the Lots than are there are
units in those buildings those are all
verifiable facts they're all data that
we've presented um both in the macro
sense from the industry and in the very
narrow very immediate examples right in
front of us um so the household
composition will not be multiple adults
it will not be multiple full-time
students that's actually prohibited um
it it the people who live in our
households are very often single head of
household with zero one or two
children so but you can't you're not
keeping multi- adult households out so
there it is possible that they live
there
right it is possible but you would need
multiple lease holders you you well we
have certain bedroom counts so we have
we actually are not allowed to sort of
overpopulate the building we are
actually unlike other landlords we're
required to adhere to certain people per
bedroom standards for these um and when
you have multiple adults you run very
likely is the case they start to exceed
the income um requirements for the
building and so you can't have uh
multiple you know multiple adults make
too much money to afford these
apartments the intent of this program
the intent of this design is for people
who want to have their family their
small family in Beckley um and be able
to afford to do that without having to
double up adults in their apartment and
that's a great clarifier Jeff is that we
have spoken to and I think maybe we
haven't been clear on the income
component it is looked at as an entire
household it is not looked at at as an
individual so when we when we were last
year we talked about the range the
average range that would be served and
what Rachel was referring to when she
spoke was about an entire household
income yeah I I understand that but a
working working parent with a
stay-at-home spouse can easily meet that
requirement yes they could I mean with
children
so so again more than two adults per
unit or two adults per unit
there could be two adults per unit I
don't think there's any question about
that and if if one is a s is a is a
stay-at-home parent you're certainly
within the r the the range of incomes
that you're allowed to rent to is that
true correct as long as they are within
the household income range and the
number of occupants in the unit does not
exceed what is permitted by the
regulating guidelines so it cannot be
two adults and two children in a
two-bedroom
apartment there are there are Income
restrictions on the units and there are
occupancy restrictions in terms of the
total number of household members that
can live in a unit based on bedroom size
who who establishes these
limitations the IRS the IRS yes we are a
highly regulated operation in order for
you to get tax credits yes
okay and I guess we also need to
consider the fact that there there is a
bus line that does pass this location
right
yeah chairman Beal Mr Marsh Please Mr
Marsh you know at the beginning I asked
about Traffic Engineers because you know
we we see this come up a lot and and you
know I I think it's um you know one
thing we could do is is and dur during
the conversation I was thinking about
the Cassidy Avenue Apartments uhuh the
Parkview Apartments and I I I walk by
those Parkview Apartments all the time
and I hardly ever see a car come in or
out but I I what what I would what I
think we should do is we should have
some traffic counts done at some of at
some of these projects or get get actual
traffic counts so that so that we can
get a better feel for you know what
because because again I I share Mr
Turner's concern about the parking and
the last thing anybody wants is to you
know have something that doesn't have
enough parking um but but I do think
that you know it's with without having
some real data it's it's you know we're
just all sort of guessing so so that's
that's a suggestion I would would throw
out is that we um you know take some
actual traffic counts for other Pro
projects um and and look at those and
compare them to what you know what we
think this is really going to generate
ju just a suggestion
okay do other members of the board have
questions or
comments I do Mr chairman Mr shik please
uh first and foremost with her
permission I'd like to um adopt and
restate everything that Mr Turner and Mr
Marsh have said I think they made some
very good points um to those in the
audience um I really um politics being
brought into this U it's very new to me
um that was news that um that I was sort
of hand and foot with the developers
here so um I take any word like that um
towards myself or any other members of
the staff um
not well so with that out of the way um
I do want to express the
concerns that I share with many others
and it gets down to
safety this is not a matter that I can
vote on with a clear conscience right
now because I drive my child to JCC
every single morning across Livingston
and just in the last three weeks I've
avoided people riding through red
lights we are talking about people
trying to chase a light that's less than
50 yards away from the front door of
some of these
residences and that is my primary
concern about this project I take
everything that the neighbors have said
specifically as I said with Mr Turner
and Mr Marsh the parking the density and
I would also add the
appropriateness but I think that a lot
of these have been satisfied but
establishing a um a record for um
however this may go forward I just want
to be abundantly clear that um my vote
tonight is going to revolve around the
safety of the residents and those who um
use the Livingston Avenue Corridor thank
you okay thank
you can I ask a follow up to that I this
is Heidi Dorne thanks Heidi I'm just
concerned I'm wondering if the problem
is Li Livingston Avenue and not the
development I mean I understand the
density part of it but let's say density
was lower let's say we got it down to 15
units would the problem still be there
because of Livingston Avenue or would
the problem be gone so that's that's
what I'm finding it to be a tough rub in
this
situation is Mr chairman can I answer
can I answer
Heidi just to clarify are you are you
done Heidi oh sure yeah oh no no I just
just I wanted to clarify that point um
yeah Heidi I think the project would be
good
elsewhere it's
Livingston okay so let me ask isn't it
true that two current curb cuts off of
Livingston which people go in and out of
the of the both the residential home and
the uh o Woodyard Funeral Home uh would
involve cars going in and
out uh on directly onto Livingston
Avenue as well as onto Francis isn't
that being alleviated here and we're
going to have no curb cuts on Livingston
but rather a larger cut on Francis is
that a factually correct
yes so if we're cutting off two two
entry and exit points where people have
to slow down to pull into a relatively
small driveway aren't we really kind of
relieving some of the pressure on
Livingston Avenue and I mean I guess the
issue here here is uh other than uh a
bowling alley or I I don't know what you
could put here if we're we're really
going to focus on Livingston Avenue and
the traffic situation which the city is
as I understand it is getting engaged
with the city of Columbus to do a
traffic a study of of how to handle
Livingston into the
future are
we are we missing the focus that need to
have as a board uh
here uh in voting because no matter what
we put here we got Livingston Avenue
yeah I I can speak to that a little bit
and then of course their traffic
engineer can speak to it further um you
know in good City Planning practices and
in uh you know improving both safety and
walkability of corridors particularly
long-standing commercial corridors that
are segueing into a residential area I
mean this is like the Prototype of this
kind of thing um and I think many of us
have worked on a whole lot of these
corridors in a lot of places Central
Ohio uh throughout the state throughout
the country they all share very similar
characteristics and the most dangerous
thing about these kind of corridors is
the preponderance of curb Cuts uh these
areas that were developed to be heavily
Automotive create an inherent conflict
between not just The Pedestrian and the
automotive or in the auto but also the
Autos that are pulling in and out of all
those spaces a very typical approach to
a corridor plan will be to uh
consolidate curb cuts and eliminate
those with the single goal of making
that safer for both the driver and The
Pedestrian and that is a huge advantage
of redeveloping this site without curb
Cuts uh that are on Livingston uh and
that is exactly what our planning and
our codes try to put forward in fact in
many of our site design code uh
requirements we have minimum amount of
the Frontage that can be covered in this
exact effort to try to alleviate the
maximum amount of curb cuts that we can
possibly get off of those main corridors
so yeah I think you're right on track
with that and it's exactly in keeping
with with good planning practices
locally region-wide and
Nationwide
okay Mr Beal Mr Marsh again I yeah I I
don't have any I mean Livingston Avenue
is what it is and this to me this
project isn't going to impact Livingston
Avenue uh negatively um it's less
intensive than a lot of the other uses
that could go in there and the fact that
the curb cut is now on
Francis um you know to me is an
improvement of that condition and my
only concern again is this is this
parking is the number of parking spaces
and you know I like Mr Turner I just
need to be convinced that we're not
going to create you know an an an
overflow parking situation uh and I know
with a lot of urban infill you know the
and and with ride sharing and public
transportation and uh other things that
the car count is you know hopefully
going down but but other other than the
other than the parking I I don't have a
concern about this relative to uh
Livingston
okay Mr behall yes sir Mr F uh a couple
of points first of all I share people's
grave concerns about
Livingston but I it's not relevant to
this project simply because I have grave
concerns about everyone who's living
along Livingston and I'm delighted to
hear that there will be some serious
efforts taken to to remedy the problems
on
Livingston um my concern though and I'll
Echo I'll echo my colleagues on the
board here my concern is about the
parking
and so I don't need need to necessarily
reiterate their points but I I will ask
this I think this is a question for
Nicole and Jeff maybe Drew if I was
hearing you correctly um you did a some
survey of parking lots and parking usage
in uh multi-unit uh sites here in backl
and around Columbus and so forth and you
found that there was uh usage of less
than one space per unit now maybe I
didn't hear you correctly but if I did
I'm just I'm I don't I'm not necessarily
contesting your data but I am really
curious about what seems to be
profoundly counterintuitive data that
you found especially given what what
seem to be otherwise the uh typical Auto
ownership rates so I'd just like to hear
a little bit more about that to get a
perspective not necessarily contesting
that that is the case but I don't
understand how it's the case so do you
have some more information for me yeah
Karen can you go to um
slide where is my slide number 12 um so
that Drew can you speak to the it data
that around multif family and affordable
housing
parking um yeah I
mean speaking in general terms you know
the the the the affordable housing use
when it comes to the parking data
doesn't have a lot of data points the
multif family housing use has hundreds
of data points to use showing that you
know the Peak parking demand for
vehicles is overnight obviously when
people get home from work and before
they leave for work in the morning being
one one car per unit and that's for for
traditional M multif family housing
that's not affordable housing obviously
the affordable housing shows the same
amount of cars parked per unit but um
the data source is a lot more
significant and um you know as a I am a
traffic guy by trade but I'm also a
certified city planner and and in my
opinion the only thing worse than not
enough parking is too much parking um
you know nobody likes asphalt empty
asphalt sitting around when there could
be a tree or grass sitting there so um
you know you go to your local Walmart
and you see a giant giant field of
asphalt and nobody likes to see that so
you know I think we have an overp
parking problem in Columbus um you know
this this is not really related to to
this specific project but um I just
think that's something that needs to be
kept in mind as as new development
continues to happen in the city of
Bexley and then Karen if you can go to
the next slide um
so the next slide is the capture of our
boots on the ground analysis and so in
the city of Bexley we counted the
parking at five places uh Bexley house
Mayfield Manor Cassidy North Apartments
and then um those are the three that
reflected on here we also counted barlay
square and Bexley Heritage we opted not
to show um barklay Square because it's
306 units it's very large in terms of
the scale of the project um but that one
is parked at a ratio
of hold on of 78 based on our
averages um so again that's 36 units we
all know what that construction type is
like and then the Bexley Heritage we
felt really wasn't applicable because
it's a senior project it is age
restricted we did not want to bring that
in just because from a population but I
wanted to point out that our counts that
Jeff was um Jeff was the boots on the
ground Jeff was the one that was going
out and Counting these day after day and
um what we're showing you is what we
observed both within the city of Bexley
and then what our operations team
observed in the respective locations at
what time of day were your surveys taken
so um morning midday evening and
weekends for our operations team that
aligned with really the workday so 9:00
a.m. lunchtime and about 6:00 p.m. um
and then the weekends was a survey in
general during the time when their um
office hours might have been open and I
I'll I will say for the Bexley examples
they are evenings and weekends because I
got a day
job well that's all fine and I want to
be clear I'm not contesting your
analysis and I also do appreciate not
having uh too much parking because I
completely agree that that's a problem I
guess what I'm asking for is some
interpretation of the data what does
this mean that there's fewer than than
one car per unit per rental unit because
that's really counterintuitive how do we
explain that so Mr F from from um again
speaking from our experience but as
experienced you know property managers
and owners um you know from the frame of
reference of a single family homeowner
or even a luxury multif family renter it
does it intuitively feels low because
those are often multi multi-car
households those are also people whose
incomes can support you know $2,000 or
$1,800 in rent or or $2,500 mortgage or
rent um those are not the households who
rent here and I think if you take a
broader swath of multif family housing
and don't just think about new
construction luxury but you instead
think about the multif family
communities that are all over uh Central
Ohio and elsewhere
the the counts much more resemble what
we're talking about now at you know
Rental rent rates where we are and so
yes the lack of these are this is a
fairly well by Columbus standards served
by transit household but what we find is
that people make do with borrowing their
mom's car with using Uber with using
taxis with using public transit with you
know that there is um very frequently uh
people just make Doe when they are folks
who earn you know 20 40 $50,000 and have
uh you know their lives to maintain um
so so the data backs up I think at a
macro sense within the industry and then
within our sort of um um more local
counts uh and it's supported by what we
know about the households who reside in
our
departments yeah I you know I would just
piggy back on that and say you know
obviously Livingston Avenue is is just a
fantastic location for this type of
development being right on uh the
transit
line a lot of the people that live here
aren't going to have a car they're going
to they're going to be Reliant upon Kota
running up and down Livingston
Avenue the other thing I'll say is you
know this is a this is a an area of this
request that we were prepared for or at
least we thought we were prepared for
you know it's why page 13 of the
PowerPoint is in uh we have attempted to
be deliberate and thoughtful and go out
and do actual analysis to in our mind
prove that the parking provided was
going to meet the parking demand uh of
the development um you know if folks
think that we need to uh hit the pause
and go back and and and roll up our
sleeves and do some additional analysis
there then you know I suppose that's
what we we'll have to do obviously we we
want the votes but in terms of the
analysis that that Jeff and Nicole have
done uh as reflected in this power Point
uh number 13 the testimony of the staff
Jason sui uh also from Drew Drew Lorent
you know we we believe that this isn't
your standard one and a half per unit
multif family uh this is this is multif
family where uh the parking proposed
here is going to meet the
demand Mr chairman may I say one thing
thank you um Mr Ho I think you've made a
really awesome presentation tonight and
I actually on your behalf and that of
the clients I think it would be great to
to have a
resolution um there is one thing though
that while I talked about safety we keep
looking South we keep looking South at
Livingston at that Avenue and at that
Corridor but we're not looking North we
have a lot of people on this call who
are still attending who want to be
neighbors um I keep hearing U you know
Miss Boer talked about wanting to be in
inclusiveness I haven't heard any plans
nor have I heard any change in
bringing in neighbors and involving
those who have concerns in this since
our last meeting um If This Were to be
tabled or even if we were going to give
conditional approval on this tonight
what could you miss Boyers and you know
even Mr Green and Rachel who live in
this community what could you promise us
and assure the community tonight and
those who are listening that um you are
actually going to be a good neighbor and
not try to get into a marriage on the um
on like the spine specifics of being a
conditional use
so I think Jeff beam can speak to um the
amount of Outreach that we've done since
the last beat meeting that um I mean
like we've attended the South Bexley
neighborhood association and we um you
know we we presented a Q&A they they
allowed us to attend we asked them can
we attend um we would love to hear
questions and comments from not just the
the neighbors that have standing but the
neighbors that are in the South Beckley
area um I cannot speak to how many
people attended that I think Jeff
probably knows the information but it
was a really wonderful discussion I
think I personally thought so because it
opened up the dialogue for residents to
ask questions Beyond The Sticks and
Bricks of development and I agree with
you there is a longstanding partnership
that we are committing to and we have
spoken about the various ways that we
like to work with communities to build
uh a table of expectations as with any
other person that were to buy a home
inly or rent an apartment within the
city there is a standard of expectation
that is held to every property owner to
every renter to every resident our
residents would be held to those same
standards our projects would be held to
those same standards if our grass is too
long we're going to get the same letter
and we're going to get a fine like we
are going to be held to that but we also
like to have we have within our
operations plans and within our Le says
we have house ma uh management Jeff what
are they called um house rules term it's
Aisa adendum it's at least aend I think
I think you're missing the spirit of my
question you don't you're not a good
neighbor by
contract what are you going to do that
the people here who are concerned about
this project you have you have a
questionably permissible use here but
what are you going to do to be a good
neighbor that's what I'd like to
know like not attend meetings and stuff
affirmatively like what are the
neighbors going to be able to say that
gives them some buyin because I know
you're being sincere but we need
something actionable and we'd like to
hold you to that account if we can have
that
condition well we I do think the actions
we've taken to date um basically took
the last meeting that we had as a charge
to begin that and Mr be I'm going to be
I'm going to be respectful I don't get
that from the people who've called it
and spoken up
tonight well I I will say um that we
specifically told a great number of
supporters who were very interested in
speaking that we would respect the 300
foot standing Rule and so none of them
are here tonight to speak um what I will
say is whether you have voiced
opposition or voiced concern or voiced
questions or voiced vociferous support
we do want to engage so there are how
are you going to do that so we will con
we will happily um join neighborhood
meetings we'll happily
convene I don't care if you're doing it
angrly how are you going to do
it um I'm
sorry part of my hesitancy is because
when I speak on behalf of our intent or
our Goodwill I'm asked how am I going to
commit to it in writing and then if I
bring expert testimony I'm sort of asked
the opposite so let me answer let me try
to answer in the spirit of your question
I appre I do appreciate the spirit in
which it's asked so we very much commit
to public
meetings both with immediate Neighbors
about immediate con neighbor concerns
and with larger forums about Community
concerns that will
continue after this meeting before ARB
after ARB we would like to make them
topical we think that's a Ive way to do
it to talk about Community safety to
talk about living a to talk about design
um we would happily do those things uh
Bexley Dei which is a community
organization that hosts events has
offered to convene um another meeting
they've had one they've offered to
convene as many as necessary so that we
can have a good conversation about this
because they want to support the idea
that this project is a step in the
direction of inclusiveness and um of
building community and so we very much
embraced that and we had a great
conversation hosted by them that
included the people who will work on
this property as a built development and
who work directly with our residents in
building those kinds of uh Community
connections we welcome that we do it
before developments during developments
and after they built if that does that
answer your question I'm it it makes me
feel a lot better it really does um
because my concern is if you get
approved I want you to be accepted just
as much as a good neighbor to the
neighborhood you know as you know you
want the neighbors to accept you that's
that's really all I'm trying to do here
and and I I should say very clearly we
would happily accept as a condition of
approval you know the commitment to have
additional public meetings um during be
you know before during and after
construction and I would just I would
hope I can't do that but my personal
opinion is that there would be some
material out of that and that the
community would feel heard um we're
really hopeful too that um where we feel
there are opportunities to do better
engagement is the the Mis Connection in
the human
interaction it it is the pandemic has
been really great in some regards but in
some of the biggest challenges it has
been in building relationships and and
and having that communication if this
was any other Standard time we would
have had a meeting in the gym or
somewhere and we would have boards and
Post-it notes and interaction and you
know we would brought pizza in and and
all of that and that's just it's lost
and we recognize that and um the whole
industry I think is trying to just
figure out and it's not just ours I
think across the board everybody's
trying to figure out how do you build
the relationships how do you how do you
build um even just the personal
relationships so people can say yes I'm
not just talking to somebody on a screen
I know that person like I talked to them
I know they have a dog I know they have
a kid they live here they like to Garden
like those are the things that we're
missing that we want to fix and we're
not going to be able to fix them right
away but when it's possible we want to
find Opportunities For Those inperson
public engagements as
well I really sincerely appreciate that
that answer and I just want to close
with one thing on
when you're in the the sales Market of
emotional intelligence um I had a client
say that they Co has removed the
three-point line so I completely
understand where you're coming
from thank I really I sincerely
appreciate all of your answers thank you
yeah all right thank you Mr chairman
thank you Mr shik so let me cut to the
chase here Mr HJ because we have other
cases we have to move on tonight and
here are the Alternatives and I'm asking
you as the spokesman for the for the
group you can certainly huddle with your
clients uh if you'd like the
alternatives are we vote tonight yay or
nay you need four out of seven votes to
get a passage as you already know I'm
sure uh number two we table the matter
again to get additional information
about more subjects and I don't know
what that would be but that'll leave
that to your
imagination or see you say hey uh what
if we cut this down to 40 units or two
stories or or maybe do a traffic
triangle on the corner of Livingston in
Francis I mean you
know there's Myriad possibilities in
that realm and I don't
know what is economically feasible you
you all have economics that are driving
this project that have to do with
ability to raise money tax credits that
are available the kind of rents that you
can uh uh conjure up from the type of uh
tenants that you want to put into this
uh housing so those are very complicated
questions that I don't think we could
attack tonight as a board I don't think
it's our business frankly to attack them
but let me ask you if if what your
pleasure is number one and number two
would you like some time to talk to your
clients at all about any of those
various
Alternatives yes I would okay uh Karen
is there is there a way that you could
give them
privacy um we could take a
break we can take a break we definitely
need to take a break anyway for various
re we ALS I also just have a procedural
question
chairman I have three more hands raised
two of which have already spoken that
didn't I don't know if testimon is
closed but I asked our um zoning
attorney and she just said that it was
at your discretion okay well I'd like to
give the applicants a chance to talk I I
don't think we're going to uh hear new
information if we ask the people with
their hands up whether they're going to
to present new information or not use
their discretion to tell me whether
they're going to do so that would be
helpful to me if we're going to rehash
the issues we already I think are well
aware of the issues they've been not
only discussed by the
applicants so excuse me for interrupting
but now I've got all kinds of hands
going up okay we've got four cases yet
to hear and two of them are large as
well
right well
so we've been at this 3 hours and 15
minutes already we need a break so I'm
going to take a 10-minute break here
before we decide anything and I'm gonna
let Mr Hodge and his clients talk to
each other uh so I would ask uh uh if
there is a way to give them privacy here
I we can't ask 103 people to uh no I
think that they can go ahead and do
their own conference call separate from
this we we we we we can jump out and
just sign back in when we come back okay
let let us do that and let us say it is
9:16 uh we'll reconvene at 9:30 but I
mean
9:30 yes sir okay thank you very
much
for
you're muted
Bob can everybody hear me now I'm sorry
yep all
right
um is uh let's see
here it looks like a couple of our team
um accidentally closed out so they may
need to be brought back in back in yeah
I don't see oh okay hold on I will do
that right
now yeah we've been on so long my
headphones died so I had to go to
regular s so I think if David and Jeff
beam can raise their hands so that way
she can find
you I think those are the only
two that we are missing
from I have them now hold
David
whoops oh there's so many it's jumping
around all over the place hold on a
second no worries okay there we go Jeff
should be in there now and David should
be in
there okay Mr hodj uh we are back in
session uh because it is 9:32 so thank
you for that break I think everybody
needed a little leg stretching I did a
couple push-ups in I did a couple
chinups so I've got you beat okay um
what what are your what do you think uh
you would like to do Mr Hodge or your
clients would like to do sure and um
clearly this is a um a difficult case
and uh lots to consider we've right been
as comprehensive as we can be we've been
as as thorough as we can be uh you know
I wish as I sit here that that we had
done even more work than we did on on
the parking issue um because that feels
to us like like the one uh issue that
that could warrant some further
discussion uh our traffic engineer has
said that uh this is adequately parked
the city believes that it's adequately
parked it meets the code we went out and
did independent analysis of other units
uh that show that the parking provided
here is adequate it's on the bus line
some folks that live here are going to
to be Reliant upon that bus line and not
have a car so we we think we've
addressed that issue to the extent it is
addressable um we uh hope that folks
will uh remember the intent of the code
which is not to um restrict private
property rights is not to uh disallow
reasonable uses of property this is
Livingston Avenue but the use being
proposed here is uh going to address
some issues on Livingston Avenue and is
not going to generate as much traffic
anywhere near as much traffic as some of
those commercial uses would so all that
being said we are going to request that
the board call the question this evening
very good um members of the board
uh do you feel like we need to hear
additional comments from the uh citizens
of Beckley who have standing
here uh at this time uh Karen do you
have any indication from people that uh
they have additional comments to make
mean um I'm not sure how to tell I mean
I can just let them talk and they
can um do you just want me to go through
really quickly the hands that are raised
how many hands are raised one two three
four five six um two of which I have you
have not heard from and four you
have members of the board do you feel
like it would be uh helpful to have
additional uh questions or input I I
think we need to be a little stricter at
this
time uh about
standing and uh you know if you live at
Mound uh and uh Francis I I think that
we we'd want to restrict the because we
have other cases we have other
applicants and other citizens that are
waiting to talk about other cases here
as well tonight so we need to take
everybody into consideration and I keep
having more hands go up too yeah right
Mr chairman I I agree and especially
with Mrs uh mr's a comment earlier with
regards to standing I think it should be
limited to that with the time that we
provided members of the board do you
have any thoughts about additional
comments from the general
public
okay so I don't think if someone's
spoken they should get another three
minutes yeah I mean I I think I think we
need to have a time for the public Com
when public comments over public
comments over yeah people are gonna
always raise their hand and and and the
whole point is to have public comment
and to take that comment and then um and
move
on Mr chair so this this portion of the
session was was questions from members
of the board directed to the applicant
and the applicants rebuttal if members
of the board have questions for the
general public or for anybody who spoke
they could certainly ask them that now
too but um I don't know that you're
required to continue to allow sir
rebuttal to Sir rebuttal to right the
applicant is entitled to present their
reply to issues that were raised that's
what they asked for and much of what
they presented was in response to
questions from board members so I would
suggest if there are specific questions
from board members to direct that to
other people who participated but
otherwise um it's certainly within your
discretion to cut it
off I think in view of the I'd like I'd
like us to be fair Mr chairman if you
don't mind um can we give two minutes to
one individual that we know has standing
in this and that we also know has well
dly elected in this community first of
all I'd like to limit it to one minute
to each to anybody who gets to talk and
I think it should only be people who
have yet to
speak so let's do that as as a
compromise measure here and uh uh is
anybody object to that members of the
board Turner well the thought process is
the the conversation was open for
discussion and then we we let them reply
and then we discussed it now if this
member if someone from the public speaks
again we're going to have to give the
applicant the opportunity again and then
we're going to discuss it again so we're
opening it all from the beginning
and and I mean we're basically starting
at square one again so I the reason we
have structured the way we do is we give
the public the right to speak they've
spoken we take that into consideration
and we move forward and so I don't I I
believe the the public is done in my
opinion I I agree with Mr Turner it's Mr
Marsh okay I also agree Mr Dorne what Mr
shik are you uh convinced
otherwise they're they're absolutely
correct Mr F they really are I I was
just trying to be fair and but they're
correct no I'm I'm persuaded as well
okay thank you in that case um I think
we're ready to hear the findings of fact
and conclusions of law uh from a the
positive
perspective okay so the findings of fact
and conclusions of law for application
number bz
ap-2048 for property located at 2300
East Livingston Avenue upon
consideration of the application
proposed conditional use and evidence
and testimony before it the board finds
the applicant has proven that the
criteria to Grant a conditional use in
accordance with bexy code section 12
26.12 has been met and recommend
approval oh wait a minute I'm leing my
approval of the proposed three-story
building and demolition of the existing
structure
and substantial conformance of the plan
submitted for 1225
2021 with the condition that final
design review is remanded back to the
architecture review board and that
Landscaping is further reviewed by the
landscape the tree and public garden
commission that's it all right Mr Beall
yes sir sorry I recall uh a conversation
not that long ago between Mr schik and
the applicant in which Mr schik
suggested a possible condition and the
applicant seemed amendable to that cont
engagement with the
community
yes I debated whether to have that I can
add that continued engagement with the
community Mr sh is that Mr are are you
cool with that Absolutely I'll ask Mr
Hodge sorry absolutely continued
continued engagement with the community
an obligation that the Community
Builders has an active participation in
the in the South Bexley uh uh area
commission or whatever they formally
call themselves uh absolutely I think
it's a I think actually Mr schik it's a
it's a great uh it's a great way it's a
great company but it's a great way to
hold feet to the fire and to and to and
to mandate Community engagement to be on
hand to mitigate and address any issues
that would
arise in perpetuity okay and we'll add
that as a condition do we have any other
additions modifications suggestions from
the panel from the
board Mr chair I'm sorry Mr chair the
only thing I would say this is Katherine
the only thing I would say is um and I
think it's clear uh it wasn't
articulated in the motion but one thing
I want to make clear to the board is it
it's in the staff report it's been
mentioned by everybody here under
12262 there are the conditional use does
identify um eight different conditions
and the board must be finding that all
each and every one of those um
conditions is met so my expectation is
that your motion would either articulate
that or the board would affirmatively
State and understand that your standard
in this case is that it is a conditional
use permitted conditionally permitted in
the district if this board should
determine that that all of the factors
are met so I would suggest that the
motion read accordingly yeah so the
findings of fact conclusions of law I
think one of the conclusions of law
Kathy we could add is that uh and the
board finds that uh section 12
26.12 uh a through a through H A through
H have been proven by the applicant and
met all right I think that has to be in
there all right is that modification
okay with members of the panel
if not please not indicate by raising
your hand Mr hjge are you and your
clients satisfied with the um the
wording of the findings of fact and
conclusions of Law and is it acceptable
to you to uh vote on it as
read you might be muted there I'm
sorry yes sir okay thank you very
much all right do I have a motion to
approve the findings of fact conclusions
of law from any chairman Beal Mr Mr
Marsh one other comment and that is
about the
parking you know I think one resolution
to that would be a uh request that they
not they not rent to more than people
with 30
vehicles um or or and again I'm I I
don't know I mean the the data they
provided is great and and that's what we
ask for but again um I think the parking
issue is a concern I think you know I
would ask them if they're if if they
believe they're they're going to have
less than 30 cars then would they be
willing to you know set set up some type
of a a covenant for that Mr Hodge or Mr
Beam or whoever you'd like is that a
condition that Mr Marsh is suggesting
that that condition be attached to the
findings of fact and conclusions of
law
sorry David are you my client needs to
they need to respond to that one I have
to understand the Practical reality not
to not to um we commonly um have a lease
restriction on the amount of vehicles
that that renters um can have but we
only the only ability we have to enforce
that is parking in our lot by using
stickers or some other system that may
have you know I don't again as a
practical matter I don't think this is
an
issue because of the cars we expect but
if the problem were M to materialize as
um as has been questioned I don't know
if our sort of restriction on the number
of parking spaces that will be allowed
or number of vehicles they would be
allowed would be an improvement on that
or not we are absolutely willing to sort
of take it up as a management issue um I
just don't know legally what we're
allowed to do I know legally we can
restrict the number of cars they can
park but I don't know if legally a
landlord
can restrict how many cars someone may
own is is that something that could be
Revisited should the city receive
complaints a year after the project or
six months in after the Project's
wow I I would say that you know parking
and use of the parking lot and other
sort of Resident um sort of uh use uh
issues are common very very common um
not necessarily the overp parking issue
but just use of the parking lot we very
very commonly deal with these with
management issues and Covenants with
neighbors C and house rules uh and would
happily engage in that kind of continued
problem solving so that we don't create
a problem I just don't know to the
particular suggestion that was made
whether I'm whether that's a possibility
as
proposed Mr Marsh were you and I'm happy
go ahead was your was your condition
related to ownership or related to
number of cars on the premise
permitted by tenants yeah yeah yeah no
number of cars parked on the premises oh
yes yes absolutely sort of runs counter
to the issue though because the excess
if any would park on
Francis could we revisit the issue at
some point and if there are complaints
by the adjacent owners get them permits
Street permits or something to that
effect if that becomes an issue down the
line and could we ask for the developer
support in advance if the
neighbors determine that there is an
issue yes to both of those yes to both
of those things just just to clarify in
the permits really quickly that is a a
something that could the residents can
do any time that's a resident initiated
petition so that's actually something
the residents could do today if they
wanted to uh and that goes to the
mayor's office and requires 75% of of
the people that are in the
geographically defined area to um to
request it so that's something that
could happen
anytime and I'll state affirmatively
that if there's subject to I I live on a
permit Street and if there were
something where every household was
allowed one or maybe two permits or
whatever the the rules are we would
happily abide by that if the if the
street went by permit parking
only Mr be to that point um could could
you make a um
only one everybody wants to talk so
please call my name out so I can give
the person the appropriate uh floor
here Mr Turner you wanted the floor I
believe please yeah just because it was
a response to Jason's question so so
Jason if 75% of the community can say
they need permits wouldn't couldn't the
the residents at this property be
involved in that and just get permits to
park on the street as
well uh well it depends on what the
geographically defined area is so um you
again it's you're starting to get into
the the weeds of how that permitting
process would go that goes through the
mayor's office um but yeah if you
defined it as an area that didn't
necessarily contiguously touch this not
necessarily so um yeah I mean I think
there's a lot of opportunities to
address this um and I just didn't want
anyone to misunderstand that that was
tied into a zoning process any anybody
in the city can do it at any time that
is correct okay
so now what we're talking about is
adding a condition to the to the
findings of fact conclusions of law
here and that condition would be that
the
owner slash management company and that
would be both of
them would agree
to
restrict the
leasing to tenants who own fewer than
three cars fewer than three cars in
other words one or not not own that plan
to park them plan to park on the site
fewer than 30 30 cars or
less
30 yeah total of 30 for the whole
project that limits ownership of cars to
30 for the whole build it's not
ownership it's it's not an ownership
it's a question of number of cars using
the lot that are residing in their
facility I you word this the problem is
is is we're we're getting into some
serious weeds
here uh about about wording well the the
issue in zoning is use not who owns what
or how many what somebody who lives
somewhere might own so if you're going
to limit it relating to I think what Mr
Marsh is suggesting is that there needs
to be limitation or he would he's
talking about a potential condition
where the owner of the building or the
property manager would not per you know
you would have essentially permit
parking if you lived in the in the
building and they would not issue more
permits than they have parking spaces so
they could not have tenants permitted to
park in that lot which was um what Mr
Turner's concern is isn't that just
shoving them out into the neighborhood
if you do that because if they really
have more
cars then maybe it's a condition that
you have to revisit if they you find out
that they have more cars so that they
could arrange for an off street parking
lot or that or off-site parking
somewhere else or it could go to a
permit parking or whatever but it could
come back and be Revisited if it was a
specific
condition otherwise it would not
be we we'd like to we'd like to figure
out some language that's uh that's
acceptable to the board and incorporated
as a condition it's it's something that
we're absolutely willing to
do I I have Mr
chair go ahead Ryan thank you Mr
chairman I appreciate the floor um Mr HJ
I
I it would be it would be an expense um
for anybody in the local community to go
through the permitting process there are
Logistics doing so collecting signatures
Etc um expenses to the city
um is there a way that we could come to
an agreement because the the issue we
have here is like this multi-headed hydr
monster where parking is is like a full
cup of water it's going to flow over
wherever it can go like with the pass of
like with the path of Poli resistance um
and that's going to go to the
neighboring properties just north of
Livingston um I'm only concerned that we
try to address any of the economic
impact that some of these residents to
feel because they will fill this I mean
we know this is going to happen so can
we come to do you guys have a a proposal
to how you would support the community
in the effort to enforce parking on
their own properties in in front of
their own
properties we you know we we as as we
said uh previously Mr schik we will be
engaged with that uh area
commission
uh you know it's going to have to be a
collaboration between us the area
commission the city to to monitor that
on street parking uh I don't know I
don't I I can't sort of knee-jerk think
of anything else that would specifically
address that but you know we're
absolutely open to suggestions I mean
let's let's let's get to something
because we need to move on here yeah so
M Mr my I would my request would be that
they would put in place a management
practice that would limit parking on
site to 30 vehicles but aren't there
only 30 parking spaces Rick or
correct there that that's there's 30
there's 30 parking spaces and so they
put in place a management process so
they don't have more than 30 cars uh
when they when they as they rent their
Apartments they don't rent to more than
30 vehic people with 30 vehicles to park
them there and then that they would work
with the city if there's a parking
overflow issue yes absolutely agreed
agreed all right owner management
company agrees to restrict the leasing
to tenants that live in the building to
no more than 30 total
cars
okay good job Brian and uh Jeff and
David I I like the the collaboration
there now now we have to decide whether
this is going to pass or not so with the
findings of fact and conclusions of law
please read it again uh Miss Rose just
so we get things
straight okay finding back to
conclusions of law for number bz
ap-2048 for property located at 2300
East
Livingston upon consideration of the
application proposed conditional use and
evidence testimony before it the board
finds the applicant has proven that the
criteria to Grant a conditional use in
accordance with bexi code section
12261 12 a throughh have been
met
and recommend approval of the proposed
three-story building and demolition of
the existing
structure in substantial conformance
with the plan submitted on February 25th
2021 uh with the condition that the
final design review is remanded back to
the architecture review board and that
the landscape plan is remanded to the
tree and public garden commission both
of those for final design
approval and that
the property man agement company
continue to be engaged with the
community and that the property
management company agrees to restrict
the leasing to tenants that live in the
building to no more than 30 total
cars
okay any other thoughts or comments for
members of the
panel do I hear a motion to approve the
findings of fat and conclusions of law
as
conditioned
so moved motion by Mr Marsh as there a
second second second by Heidi Dorne uh
Mr Hodge are you satisfied with the
wording of the proposition before us yes
thank you sir Ms Rose please call the
role Mr Marsh yes Mr Fout
yes Mr V yes Miss
Dorne yes Mr
schik yes thank you Mr
Turner no and chairman
Beal I vote Yes also the matter
passes and the conditional use permit is
granted as conditioned thank you thank
thank you all very much thank you all
the next next case before the board this
evening is case is application number bz
ap-20
d52 the applicant is the Bexley cic
which stands for Community Improvement
Corporation the owner is 420 North
Cassidy Avenue
LLC and obviously the location of the
premises is also 420 North Cass I guess
that's not obvious but that just happens
to be the case the applicant is seeking
Architectural Review and approval to
allow a three-story structure with
commercial on the first floor and
residential on the second and third
floors if approved the existing
structure that is located at the
property would be demolished the
applicant is also seeking a parking
variance from Bexley city code section
12620 2 to allow 11 parking spaces for
this mixed use commercial building with
retail space on the first floor and
eight residential units on both the
second and third floors
uh who is here on behalf of the
applicants we have a
similar list or is it different it is
the same set of characters sir okay just
for the record I'd ask you all to raise
your right hands again and be sworn just
I know you've already been sworn but
since we have a new case here I'd like
to do that again you all swear or affirm
that the testimony you're about to give
this evening before this panel will be
the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth I do I I do thank you very
much
um
um staff Jason can you give us a a
rundown from the staff's perspective on
this case please yep I will and I'll
keep it brief uh and open it up for
questions uh this is a little bit
different of a case in that it's a
different zoning district and while it
is residential on the upper floors there
is commercial component on the first
floor so I'll just go over sort of the
highlights and then again open it up for
questions uh in this application they
are asking for a certificate of
appropriateness this has gone to the ARB
and the ARB has asked it to be sent back
to them for final design considerations
just like the last application also this
would need to go to the tree and public
garden commission uh just like the last
application as well uh this is also
requesting a variance for parking
because they are short of the parking
requirements necessary so they would
need to meet the variance criteria in
order to be uh granted approval this is
in the MU District which is primarily
the district that underlies Main Street
uh in this case it also underlies
Cassidy for a portion of it in the areas
that are commercial and intended for
mixed use that is a district that has a
lot of uh design standards which I'll
get to in just a second um in the staff
report you'll see I also did uh include
the same criteria from the uh the
diversity equity and inclusion strategy
as it is applicable here as well for um
for affordable housing and mixed income
housing in the MU District site
regulations there are a number of
Standards um that they have met the lot
requirement uh the the front setback the
rear setback there are no side setbacks
um the height here is uh is allowable it
is the code allows three stories in this
case I won't go through all those design
standards because they it's a mer list
that being said they have either met or
um seem to will meet those standards
once we go through the process with the
um with the train and public garden
commission should you prove since you uh
vote to approve uh there are a few
things that would have to be determined
in the future um with the ARB such
things as where the Mechanicals are they
if they're roof mounted and if they're
not how they'd be uh screened um a lot
of small details like that but in
general the the overall long set of
Standards have been met um as far as the
parking goes I know the applicant uh
talked they had contacted me earlier
today uh just in time for me to to add
some modifications in here with a
potentially slightly revised site plan
um and the previous plan that they had
showed you that one required uh that one
showed 14 spaces and it also had an
amount of res or sorry getting late I
have to learn to speak again uh it had
an amount of commercial that required uh
13 spaces according to the applicant
they have reduced their commercial and
actually even more than what I've
indicated in this uh report um so they
can talk to you about that but the uh
the indication is they've reduced the
commercial now still with that one per
250 square feet standard to be down to
10 spaces uh and that would bless you
and then that would lower their 25%
reduction to six spaces the upshot of
that being with their new site plan that
they want to introduce they would have
17 spaces and they would require 20 so
they would be asking for a variance of
four spaces as you're familiar with from
many many variance requests in the past
uh you need to go through the variance
criteria that's listed in
1226 and determine whether or not they
satisfy those criteria in order to make
that recommendation um overall the
project does meet the intent of the
district and the zoning code uh it is
not you know it's up to you to determine
whether it satisfies the variance
criteria but if you should choose to act
we recommend basically the same the same
recommended condition as the last time
that it go back to ARB and that it um
also go back to the train and public
garden commission and with that I'll
just stop since it's getting late and
ask or answer any
questions okay are there any questions
by board members of Mr suudi i' I've got
a quick question thank you so I haven't
seen the new site plan yet but there's a
big site plan I have there's a big space
in the middle that says proposed three
story mixed use building so what is that
space on the first floor if all the
apartments are on the second third
floors what's that additional space on
the first floor um I gonna have hold let
me call it up I'll have to it's a it's a
mixture of um now 2 200 square feet of
commercial space that will be owned and
operated by the cic and then the balance
of the space is um it's a mixture of
office fitness center community room and
other support space for the residential
operations okay so it's not it's not an
office or something for somebody
external it's all for yeah it's all it's
all for internal
operations okay any other questions of
Mr
sui if not um Mr hodj uh
why don't you proceed to um tell us from
your client's perspective uh about this
project and and U why should be
approved uh yes sir thank you chairman
behall David hodj again attorney for the
applicant uh I don't know whether I need
to State my address for the record if so
211 Southard Moore Beckley um I'm going
to attempt to be uh more brief this time
uh it is late um
little bit of a different process here
certainly uh not a conditional use but
rather a uh variance request where we
have seven criteria in the code which
are essentially the Duncan factors uh
from that
case uh we we have listened uh to the
community uh to the board and as Nicole
will uh discuss here after me uh modify
this to uh reduce the
request uh the other thing that you know
I think is kind of an overarching issue
here is that uh even though this is a
parking reduction uh we've got the
ability to park uh on Cassidy Avenue
we're also closing curb cuts and
creating some additional uh on street
parking to mitigate this very uh minor
request uh to me you take these Duncan
factors there are seven of them you
weigh what's being requested and decide
whether or not a literal application of
the of the parking requirement uh is
unreasonable uh here I believe it most
certainly is Cassidy uh at at this
stretch is decidedly mixed use the
property is developed with you know an
old auto repair place this is a
Redevelopment proposal in general that
is consistent with
uh our City's current policy uh for
redevelopment and uh I think we me or
exceed all seven of the Duncan Factor
criteria I'll leave it there and turn it
over to Nicole and the rest of the team
and and come back later for for
questions and some additional discussion
just real quickly I'm sorry before you
go Nicole I I did neglect to mention one
thing just because of the new site plan
that was a specific question from the
applicant you will see that they have um
the sort of the the double stacked
spaces for three those spaces and you
know in working with Kathy we did look
back at precedent on how we've
considered those in the past and we have
utilize those on Main Street before in
the MU District as long as which I
neglected to mention should be a
condition that there is a parking
management plan in place for those in
other words those would have to be
assigned to someone like the operator of
the business who would be able to then
maneuver in and out though certainly we
certainly wouldn't anticipate that
random members of the public who were
going into that business would then park
each other in because that certainly
wouldn't work um but we have utilized
this successfully in other locations
where we've been redeveloping along
corridors uh so I just wanted to mention
that and I apologize for not doing that
during my staff
report and so um Jeff Bean is going to
kick us off but before we get started we
do want to recognize that this is a
material change to our um application
and this is information that has not
been shared um with B app we literally
finished the plans um last night slash
this morning as we were brainstorming
around um different ways that we can
achieve more on-site parking and we're
considering the double parking spaces
and whether or not they were permitted
in the city so to that extent um we
recognize this is new information and if
we need to table this to follow the
necessary protocols for the Bap process
we are um open to that so I want to just
put that out there we um also will be
open to um calling for a vote but um we
will look to you chairman to let us know
what the correct um processes would be
because this is a new set of
information okay thank
you great uh so Nicole I'm gonna
chairman behall if it's okay this is
Nate green I'm the chair of the Bexley
cic who is the applicant for this
project so I'm gonna I'm gonna kick
things off uh please and then uh we'll
we'll send it back to we're going to
have Jeff beam talk and Nicole talk um
the Bexley cic the Bexley Community
Improvement Corporation we talked about
in our last meeting uh what we are and
what we do uh but we're the economic
development agent uh for the city of
Bexley um we are in contract to purchase
this property um and we are going to
partner with TCB uh on this project for
the uh the mixed juice um you know with
commercial being on the first floor and
then uh residential being on the second
and third floors um I I think uh David
said it but I think it's just worth
repeating we really heard last time uh
at this meeting you know a month ago the
main concern here was I mean this is a
parking variance but I think just the
the number of spaces there was a concern
um so we we we listened and uh we worked
with uh you know we worked together as a
team at the cic and worked with uh with
TCB and others to to um to reduce our
requests so you know when we when we uh
and again this is new information but
when we came before you all a month ago
we were asking for a variance that
essentially would allow us eight spaces
less than what was required by the code
uh what we're asking for now uh is
really a variance to allow us uh three
spaces less than what is allowed by the
code we've done that through uh reducing
the amount of commercial on the first
floor uh we had originally proposed 3500
F feet we we've reduced that to 2500
square fet uh which as Jason said on the
calculations that's reduced the variance
we need we also um as David said we will
have we will stripe uh 10 parking spaces
on the street uh they aren't there today
which is probably the reason a lot of
people don't park on Cassidy um but with
uh you know with those uh spaces striped
on the street we hope that people will
use those spaces as well and that'll
provide some additional uh parking uh
for for uh this space
um I we I I just also want to note that
the Bexley cic we are we are part of
this project um and the big piece of the
piece of the reason we're involved in
this project is um because this uh you
know we uh have a goal uh to follow the
city's mixed uh mixed income guidelines
and provide more mixed income housing in
the city uh we also um are going to be
the uh The Entity that will uh be
charged with the commercial space on the
first floor
renting that space leasing that space
taking care of those tenants uh that's
very similar to what we do today at
Bexley Square the cic uh owns uh Beckley
Square um and we have owned that uh for
a number of years you know ever since uh
really since the the Giant Eagle was
next door so um with that chairman I'm
gonna uh turn it over I believe well
actually I want to if Sarah gold has
anything to say she's the uh I'm the
chair Sarah is the secretary of the cic
Sarah if there's anything you want to
add before we move to J I just wanted to
throw that out
there I think you said it we've reduced
the request and we're um you know happy
with the 2500 square feet of leasable
commercial space we think we can find
really great new tenants to bring um to
cassid Avenue to um you know improve the
commercial Corridor which is key to you
know the cic's um strategic plan and um
what we want to do and accomplish along
Cassidy um so
everybody else can take it away thanks
Sir
Jeff thank you to the chair you know
thank you in recognition of the time I
will just say thank you and that um all
the testimony I provided about our
Outreach um and tcb's sort of
qualifications for the previous um
project I just ask that it be entered as
testimony here and to that I will add
you know the conditions that were
applied uh as to providing sort of
parking restriction in the residential
lease and a commitment by TCB for
continued Community engagement um Beyond
any Bap approval we may receive and any
uh subsequent ARB approval we we will
happily uh also entertain here
okay very good thank you very much
um with that we're going to see if my
voice can uh hold up this is a lot of a
lot of speaking and I apologize so
you're doing fine I really just want to
quickly touch B touch on and I know
Jason covered it but I wanted to share
so the slide in front of you is what the
current Bap application reflects this is
the current plan that um was included in
the packet that was shared out so we
it's a three-story development 16
apartment units um I call out 32 um we
sized it to 3500 square feet because we
were thinking there could be an
additional one-story Edition um put on
depending on Resident or be depending on
Commercial need but 3200 sare F feet and
we were proposing 14 off Street spaces
Karen if you want to quickly just go to
the next one the way that that um
calculated was that we were going to be
asking for an eight space reduction um
by those standards we were going to be
required to put 22 spaces on site and um
we were at that time only able to
provide 14 um the next slide shows what
our modified request is so our modified
request is it's still a three-story
building there are still 16 units the
fundamental changes we have as Sarah and
Nate mentioned we have gone back to the
drawing board and we've looked at the
commercial space and specifically um one
functionality of the commercial space it
was a little it was a little awkward
there were some um elbows in the space
that weren't necessarily um a strong
leasable perspective and we also looked
at um space that we might need for our
residents because this site has 12
one-bedroom units
and um storage is a very large request
it's a very common request that we get
from our residents and so the extra um
square footage will allow for us to
potentially provide some additional
storage lockers and other things for our
residents addressing a need that we hear
pretty com pretty frequently um this
reduction in the commercial space um one
that reduced the overall number but then
two we started thinking creatively about
how this site is going to be used how a
mixed use development tends to be
utilized based on the shared
relationships of commercial use and
residential use the peak times of the
average commercial retail use are
complimentary in nature for the peak
times of residential uses and so to the
extent that we can provide parking that
is dedicated either for our day-to-day
employee operations which will be there
from 99: to5 and then um also for the
commercial operations that will be
within their business hours and having
them located in a spot that isn't
necessarily accessible enough for the
public to just zip in so we've
strategically put the spaces if you
notice down towards the dumpster they're
not seeing like they're not the first
space when somebody turns in the
alleyway to jump into we also as Jeff
mentioned um we are going to have a
robust plan around this we spoke with
our Management Group about how we can
collaborate with the cic on creating um
policies and a long-term manag
management plan so um the next slide
just shows where this modified
application sits So based on 2500 square
feet of ground floor retail um and the
16 commercial units we are required by
code to provide 20 spaces and today the
modified request is for 17 so that's 17
um off street parking spaces and then in
addition to that we are committing to
working with the city to appropriately
stripe to the city standard
um the on street parking spaces that
would be adjacent to our parcel lines on
Cassidy and
Columbus um as David mentioned you I I
am the one that gets the pleasure of
talking with everyone about the Duncan
factors and um the variance itself so we
are asking for this parking variance and
I will try to quickly go through the
seven points and how we feel that our
request um does meet those so Karen if
we actually want to jump forward two
slides that would be great so the first
question in a Duncan factor is whether
the property in question will yield a
reasonable return or whether there can
be any benef beneficial use of the
property without the variance we we feel
that yes the property does yield a
reasonable return but without the
variance the size of this property makes
it really difficult for any sort of
development um the city of Bexley reone
this site to be mixed use commercial and
the mixed use program is in line with
the Mi use commercial District as well
as in line with the goals that the city
has both in the city of um beex
diversity equity and inclusion strategy
which was referenced in the last um
presentation which um to the extent of
creating an inclusive Greater beex
Community encourage continuing to
encourage the cic in their eff efforts
to identify affordable housing
opportunities for people with low
incomes as part of new development
including but not limited to rezoning
and rehabbing current and future
buildings and projects as well as on its
own um the requested variance is
influenced by the necessary scale of
commercial and residential uses that
make a financially viable development on
um just within the economics of a
project and completed in conjunction
with the 2300 East Livingston Avenue
project that has previously been
discussed and as I mentioned the size of
the site um limits the feasible
development options that can achieve and
appropriate scale of mixed use
development without having to um require
parking variants and part of that leans
to just overall cost of construction and
um the ability to achieve even like a
parking structure or something like that
and getting in any sort of necessary
turns and and other sorts of um use so
if we can go to the next
Slide the second criteria is whether or
not the variance will be substantial and
we do not feel that this variance is
substantial this is where we took a step
back and we looked at this question and
we said an8 unit reduction that's a big
number eight units that's a substantial
request three units looking at the
broader scope of us providing some
removing three curb cuts which will
allow us to maximize off Street park or
on street parking excuse me so removing
three curb cuts and maximizing on street
parking we feel that these three units
are not a substantial request
um and as I mentioned the mixed use
development has complimentary uses so
the peak times will not necessarily
overlap the way that it would be if it
was 100% of one use or the other and
it's anticipated that because of where
the commercial is located it's located
on that corner of Cassidy and Columbus
that V visitors that are coming to the
commercial component are going to park
on the street because by Nature we are
um as human beings means we look for the
path of least resistance and so to the
extent that you can park in front rather
than having to park behind and walk
around we all do it and so we recognize
that the on Street spaces are most
likely going to service our commercial
visitors and there may be some residents
that want to park on the street but um
we feel it's going to be more of the
commercial use itself and as I mentioned
the project is eliminating three curve
Cuts so the next criteria is whether the
essential character of the neighborhood
will be substantially altered or whether
a joining prop prop will suffer a
substantial detriment as a result of the
variance um we do not feel that the
requested variance will substantially
alter or cause detriment because this
site was recently um was recently
reasoned for mixed use commercial and
has been identified in the broader like
the broader North Cassidy um uh Corridor
has been identified as one of the areas
of reinvestment within the city of
Bexley strategic plan and again it it
leans into and further supports the
diversity Equity inclusion strategy of
creating and preserving um mixed income
housing in Bexley property in Bexley
proper excuse me number four um focuses
on the delivery of governmental services
and whether the variance will adversely
affect them um this this variance will
not have any impact on the delivery of
governmental Services it's an infill
development it will take advantage of
existing infrastructure to the extent
that it's practical and feasible um we
are providing one dumpster that will be
shared between the 16 residential units
and the 2500t of commercial we have
experience in managing both property
types as well as mixed use developments
and in speaking with our operations team
we think that um the dumpster will be
serviced up to three times a week and if
we need to increase that we will but um
that is their projection as of right now
and as I mentioned we eliminated curb
cuts which aligns to some best planning
practices and we are going to work with
the city on striping which is an
initiative that's just above and
beyond number five is whether the
property owner purchased the property
without knowing of the zoning
restriction so the cic has an option to
purchase the site with the goal of
redeveloping the program as it's been
developed today was not necessarily the
program that was in place when they went
into the contract but the proposed uses
the retail and the commercial were a
concept the variance is influenced by
that larger scale that we've been
talking about there's an initiative to
do lowincome housing how do we how we
effectively deliver that in part is um
dependent upon hitting a unit density
requirement 43 units across both sites
is the smallest project that we are able
to do and still be competitive in our
funding applications and so that is part
of what drove the unit count on this
site specifically
um number six is whether the property
owner's predicament feasibly can be um
obviated through some um method other
than the variants and as I've indicated
you know this is a small site and this
site limits feasible development options
that achieve the appropriate mix of uses
without um requiring a parking variance
we're going to be providing 17 spaces as
uh offsite as well as the 10 so they're
um creating if you think about removing
the curb Cuts really 20 spaces and we'll
um assume that some of those on Street
spaces that are being strike will
actually be utilized um because I I
don't know um like most people this is
where I put my Personal Touch in but I
am not a great parallel Parker so I rely
on the lines when I have to park on the
streets um but we hope that that will
further encourage people to use the
street parking that is there currently
but isn't being utilized um and yeah we
will remove three carb cuts in our
effort to do
so and then the last piece and I
apologize I've gone through these
quickly but um I want to be mindful of
time is whether the spirit and intent
behind the requirement would be um
observed in substantial Justice Done by
granting the variance so the variance
allows for a proposed mixed use project
that will be a viable project and
provide street level engagement along
the north Cassidy Corridor as well as
providing housing for
uh families and individuals it aligns
with the city goals outlined in the
Strategic plan and in the Dei strategy
around engaging living or sorry excuse
me deal merge um engaging the Cassidy
Corridor and bringing new housing
options the building placement at the
street reinforces some of these concepts
of the Main Street design guidelines to
start to build a consistent Frontage
well putting the parking and the
circulation in the back but for the
parking variants we meet all of the
requirements for the MU zoning
consideration and again the request of
variance is influenced by the necessary
scale to have a successful development
in this Pro in this site specifically
that will have long-term benefits for
both our residents as well as for the
community in the terms of new retail
space along the Cassidy Corridor and
with that I just want to throw up um
once again so you guys can see because
again this is new information what the
chart is of the variance that's being
requested so what the required parking
is and um what the proposed spaces are
so that's the next
slide okay I apologize I went quick but
I'm I'm trying to be mindful of time no
you're doing fine thank you
okay
okay Mr chairman can we just
ask I'm sorry can we just ask that you
the updated floor plan up again since I
I tried find it on the computer and I
think I've got an old one so I just like
to see that again because okay I think
it would be helpful for me too so Karen
it is slide number seven of the
deck
thank
you you know I think what we might do is
um have the members of the panel ask
questions if they have questions first
and then go to the general public and uh
ask the general public if they have any
questions or comments they'd like to
make on this application once again uh I
would state that uh for the record that
the article in this morning's colus
dispatch that indicated that uh these
two buildings including this one that
we're looking at now uh were on tap to
receive approval this evening well of
course none of us know how this vote is
going to go until the vote occurs and uh
uh there is no inside track to getting
these things
done uh so uh the board is all uh
listening to this evidence tonight for
the first time we haven't spoken to each
other about these cases nor have we
spoken to anybody uh that is politically
uh active about uh how to vote or what
the the the city's uh DRS are in this
situation there is no political pressure
the pressure is that uh you're going to
serve on this board for no money till 1
in the morning uh that ought to be
adequate indication that there's
no huge benefit to serving on the board
other than we're trying to uh serve our
communities the best we can on a
volunteer basis here so once we get
appointed there isn't much Pol politics
involved and I think uh every member of
the ward would uh Echo that uh sensation
so with that in mind
um are there any other questions from
members of the
board Mr chairman this is Sean I have a
question yes sir Mr so so you stated
that the retail use will uh time
TimeWise will be offset with the
residential parking um do you have a I
mean what's your plan for the retail use
is it are you looking at a restaurant or
is I mean obviously if you're going to
build do a restaurant you probably need
to add infrastructure to the basic
building so You' probably know that
ahead of time I mean is the intention
for a restaurant or is it more of just a
retail hey Sean because obviously
restaurant will have different hours
yeah so this is this is date green we we
don't you know we don't have tenants in
mind right now it um I mean it could be
a restaurant it could be just another
retail use we don't really I would say
that we don't have um intended uses
right now you know what we have on
Beckley square is probably
i' would say close to that although you
know Bexley square is a little different
because of the the profile is different
but yeah we don't have any I wouldn't
say we have any we don't have anybody in
mind we don't have any tenants right now
that we're talking to so um it will
probably be smaller retailers I think at
restaurant would be tough but um that
that's just that's just kind of our
thoughts today I'd be I just so you know
I'd be careful using Bexley Square
because our board meets during orange
the evening thing and we can never get
be we're never able to park there
so parking s I'd be care Y no I I I
agree with you Sean and we have the same
hey I you know the cic meets at the city
and you know that's the uh normally when
we meet in person we haven't done that
for a long time but we understand that
and that's something we deal with all
the time at Bexley square with our
property managers and making sure that
um you know that that issue is is always
addressed okay
okay uh any
other Mr Beall I have a question for
Jason sui if he's still
around
Jason just looking he's probably muted
oh there he is Jason thanks for uh
calling your attention to the um the
double stacked spaces and that um it's
not unique here but it's also been done
in the Main Street Corridor I'm
wondering if you can call me attention
to just where those are I've been trying
to picture them and I I'm afraid I can't
you know I know you're gonna ask premere
20 2525 East Main Street in the rear
which were mostly used for uh employee
parking but if they had they did meet
the calculations for the requirements of
parking spaces yeah and I think uh again
that the first one I was thinking of I a
long time ago Kathy there was one on the
North side that was way further down
close to Johnson's and I can't remember
what it was Myers yeah I apologize we
should have I I was thinking that exact
thing here but uh I just didn't have
time to to kind of assemble that list
after we got this changed
today example and sort of how it works
but but those are a couple examples
anyway thank
you
okay
um I think this would be an appropriate
time to to uh hear if are any people in
the audience that are pro or con this
case that would that U have standing and
once again we're going to make some
determinations on the fly on that uh
based upon facts um Karen can you get
some idea if we folks that are uh
participating whether you uh would like
to speak to this
issue uh the limitations are three
minutes
and we'd ask that you not be repetitive
of what prior people say but maybe
simply say you agree with them and then
move on to the next subject matter so
that we can move this case along we have
other cases to hear yet tonight and uh
so we uh would uh respectfully request
your brevity in your commentary thank
you okay at this time I
see five hands if anybody that's in
attendance tonight that would like to
speak to this case could raise your
hand all right I think we're pretty much
set on five right now okay let's try to
get those five folks uh on board here uh
now we're six um first we have Jeremy
J Jeremy can you hear me yes can you
hear me I can thank you very much uh
Jeremy please give me your uh
address it is uh 421 North cidy Avenue
it's directly across the street on the
corner of Stanberry and Cassidy from
this property okay thank you very much
uh would you raise your right hand to be
sworn yes I would thank you do you swear
or affirm that any testimony you're
about to give this board this evening
will be the truth and the whole truth
nothing but the
truth absolutely thank you very much
tell us your perspective on this case
okay thank you I first I just want to
thank you guys for what you do because
last time it was really late and I
appreciate the uh time that you guys put
in on this and uh also to the property
people um I'd like to start with the
fact that um the parking and again we've
touched on it and they've touched on it
um I do not see that this is
feasible um just from the standpoint
with the street parking um you have we
have said that there's fire trucks that
come up and down this street is constant
if you would come sit in my yard I'd
volunteer you can come up here anytime
you want TCB cic you guys City officials
whoever wants to come sit at my house
you're more than welcome to come sit on
my porch my dog will sit with you and
you guys can watch fire trucks all day
long up and down the street on our
street on we have police and fire that
respond on Columbus Stanberry they're
they're cutting through so um you know I
I'm not opposed um as much as I was
before I would like to say though the
street parking if the city could cut in
to the curb towards the sidewalk and get
those parking spots off of the street a
little bit more that would be helpful
when I talked to TCB on Tuesday we had a
nice it was a great question and answer
again thank you Jeff for that um and
Nicole um you know they talked about
having a traffic study done by an
outside company I would suggest that
that be done before you approve a
variance I understand now we're down to
three- spot variance it doesn't sound
like a lot but it is a lot when you're
going to have retail spaces that people
are going to come visit stacked parking
behind it would work if it was a
restaurant and you're going have workers
parking there or if you have retail
people parking there but then all those
double stacked spots should be for
retail only and not allow apartment what
are you going to do if you have um staff
park in the front of those spots and
then apartment people come and they Park
in there they go up to their room to
take and go to bed or something and or
you know they might work nights who
knows they're home and then you gon go
knock on their door and say hey I got
you gotta come down here and move your
car so that the staff can get out I I
don't see how that's feasible in a mix
use building so I I don't want to take
up a lot of time on this I just want
that's where I was at and I also would
like to say one more thing about this uh
and I brought it up at the question and
answer safety I would like to know what
the city of Bexley would like to doing
the street you know they say they want
people to walk to these businesses that
might they're going to have to cross the
street somewhere we only can cross
safely at Maryland there's no traffic
signals there's no um flashing lights at
any crosswalks at Caroline in front of
the crosswalk in front of uh Cassidy
North departments or at Rule and cassid
so I think that stuff should be
addressed before we just start graning
variances and saying because they
obviously don't meet the variants and
they knew when they going to buy this
property and build here they know that
what the VAR what what was required and
they're still not going to meet it even
if it's one spot they're not meeting it
right now so that's where I stand thank
you for your time guys I don't want to
keep you any longer than you have to be
than you very much appreciate it Mr
Jes I have Katie I have Katie
J
okay uh ma'am give me your full name
please and your
address
hello KY
J you hear
me I I hear some very very distance very
distant we can come back yeah let's come
back to her uh Maria
Fanning Maria can you hear me uh yes I
can can you hear me yes I can this is
Bob behle
I'm the chairman so I'm trying to make
sure that everybody is uh uh able to be
heard here uh tell me your full name and
your resident's address uh my name is
Maria Fanning I'm at 2684 Columbus
Avenue and where is that inject the
position to Cassidy please oh about five
houses down I think okay so Maria would
you raise your right hand and be sworn
yes do you swear or affirm that any
testimony you'll about to of the board
this evening will be the truth and the
whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes I do thank you very much please tell
us what you think about this project
well I just wanted to make the comment
that uh Nicole and Jeff have reached out
to me and other neighbors of standing on
several occasions and set up Zoom
meetings just for us and have made
changes to their plans because of
neighbors concerns and that I appreciate
what they're doing and I actually am
optimistic about this project and I just
wanted to throw that out there because I
haven't heard a lot of that
tonight I I understand that you haven't
and I appreciate the fact that you uh
have taken the time here to tell us what
you think because it's important that we
hear all sides of the of the uh
situation so thanks very much for your
patience to wait this long well thank
you all for your patience I appreciate
you too thanks all right
Maria
okay do we have um Katie
J all right can you hear me any better
yes
uhuh Katie tell me your full name and
your address please uh my full name is
Katie J and I also live at 421 North
Cassidy Avenue directly across from the
apartments or from the
projected all right I cut
out there we go all right am I back I
don't know what's you are back okay so
um I on Tuesday sent a video in to be
shared of when cars park on both sides
of
Cassidy and if that can be pulled up
that would be wonderful and what you'll
see in it is that in order for cars to
pass safely they actually have to cross
the double yellow line so when cars are
parked out here it becomes a on Lane
Street and then we're going to add the
emergency um
personnel and honestly I know it's been
said before this is a cut through from
Fifth Avenue to Broad and back we have
cars racing down our street all the
time they're not paying any attention
the closest crosswalk isn't that far
away but we've been hit nearly hit
multiple times because people aren't
paying attention and then we're going to
add more traffic and more more people to
this so I just I really want us to step
back and not just look at oh this would
be a great thing but how are we going to
keep everybody
safe is parking on Cassidy the best
option and I just don't think that it is
with everything that goes on here like
my husband said come sit on my porch
there's plenty of chairs you can even
pull them out in the yard and social
distance
and you'll see we are very busy there
are times some evenings that we've been
out that ambulance fire officers go
racing through here with their lights on
five six seven
times so adding street parking also then
makes it harder for cars to get over out
of the
way um as far as I want to touch real
quick on the um property
values if cars don't have a place to
park people aren't going to want to come
to these businesses and then these
businesses are going to leave empty
businesses and empty Apartments lower
our property value not to mention three
stories is going to drastically affect
how the Sun hits our house we've done a
lot on our landscaping and we've done it
based on full sun from the east in the
morning you put a three-story building
there all of a sudden that's gone so
let's not just look at oh this is a
great idea let's actually look at how
each and every property is going to
truly be affected from the rising of the
Sun to the setting of the same so that's
all I have to say thank you very much
thanks for taking your time to talk to
us all right uh
Karen yes uh we have Sabrina Reynolds
Wing okay okay Sabrina can you hear me I
can can you hear me okay yes we can hear
you just fine perfect give me your full
name and your residence address if you
would be so kind um I'm Sabrina Reynolds
wing and I live at 2671 Columbus
Avenue okay and uh so you're live close
to Maria Fanning there across the street
looks like I do I don't know Maria but
hello all right there you go uh you
might know her after tonight yeah yeah
um would you raise your right hand to be
sworn sure you swear or affirm that any
testimony you give this board this
evening will be the truth and the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes
thank you tell us what you think about
this
proposal okay um so I'm a really bad
public speaker so tonight I decided to
type something out um so firstly thank
you for your time um thank thank you Mr
Green for sending the phase 1 and two
reports this evening even though I have
only briefly scanned the documents um so
let me begin with a little bit of a
backstory when we first moved into
Bexley we lived at 851 Sheridan as
Runners close to where now Schneider
athletic fields are we were never made
aware of the site history but there was
limited signage posted in regards to
what was being created at the time we
had two children and encouraged outdoor
play frequently using the Alum Creek
Trail playing in mud puddles or simply
mucking about I clearly remember the
Reconstruction of that landscape
watching the heavy equipment work from
not only our sidey yard but also the
north parking lot of Bexley Village the
boys loved it as I now re recollect on
these memories I cannot help but to have
a pit in my stomach now knowing what was
buried under that field and multiple
months of possible exposure to my
children
um so fast forward now we own our home
at 2671 Columbus Avenue we've been here
for a little over two years I knew the
property in concern was a former fueling
station and there would be limitations
of use for our own lot but never gave
much concern to any future developments
um if this application is approved my
main concern is the surrounding
neighbors are made aware of the risks
involved with the excavation of the site
and all precautions are taken to ensure
minimal exposure to the various
contaminants that have been found there
should be a community representative
regularly monitoring the processes and
ensuring exposure is minimal to the
neighbors there should be a direct
contact available for the neighbors to
report any abnormal issues that should
arise like soil Vapor smells excessive
dust or what not um the company hired to
perform the work should be thoroughly
vetted with special focus on previous
site remediation experience and safety
um I will also just reiterate what Mr
and Miss Jay mentioned in regards to
Crossing Cassidy and what safety
measures has the city
considered um there's no current Coda
route on Cassidy so that is going to
change the Dynamics of what's available
to Future residents of this property um
and yeah that's it thank you guys thank
you for your time and stay up with us
and for your comments they're very good
comments we'll take certainly take them
all into consideration thank you thank
you and uh La the last hand that I see
up is Aaron
Herbert Aaron Herbert can you hear
me yes I can hear you okay Mr Herbert uh
give us give us your full name and your
residence address please uh my name is
Aaron AB bear I live at 2661 Columbus
Avenue which is the property directly to
the east of 420 okay good I've got where
you are there would you raise your right
hand to be sworn yes sir would you swear
or affirm that any testimony you give
this board this evening will be the
truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth I do thank you very much tell
us I think we we spoke to you during the
last meeting did we not you did yes um I
just wanted to read reiterate some of
the things I've said since some people
may not have heard them but uh you know
my biggest concern is that my garage
faces that property
um that alley gets a lot of traffic and
I have to be very very careful pulling
out of my driveway uh and pulling into
the alley and that's with you know when
art was with Anna was there um and even
then and she only had business you know
once in a while right um so that that is
one of my main concerns um another is
just the the parking in general now when
art with Ana had events it would fill
the street with cars but it was
tolerable because it was only once in a
while this building there's going to be
20 to probably 30 cars on the street um
already there's apartment to the West
which is there's a duplex at
427 and then there's three apartment
buildings to the north of that those res
will park on Columbus
Avenue um so I just don't think the the
parking is
appropriate um what they're proposing
and I mean that's why they're here you
know there there's a rule in place and
they're asking for an an exception um I
I don't think that they should get that
exception I think they should have those
uh parking spots on site uh another
issue I have is the Privacy that there's
a three-story building um um that's
going to be looking into my backyard my
kitchen my living room face the property
probably not going to want to have my
blinds open and I really feel like at
that point how am I going to enjoy my
property without privacy with the extra
congestion and you know to be honest
I'll probably move and honestly I'm kind
of heartbroken by that I've lived here
for 13 years honestly thought I would
never leave um but I just don't see how
how I can stay and enjoy my property so
I just want people to consider that and
thank you for your time Mr a thank you
for your comments and uh you're a the
very contiguous property owner there so
we're we take your comments quite
seriously I do have one more hand uh
Linda
Jay okay is that that seems like that's
quite a j Clan we've got going there uh
no it's not it's not a not the same last
name why last
name Linda can you hear me think so
Linda can you hear
me can you hear me uh now we can yes
uhuh C can you give us your full name
and your address please my name is Linda
J um my husband and I own the property
at 421 North Cassidy okay um my husband
grew up in Cassidy uh grew up in Beckley
in that address on Cassidy his father
helped build that Community build those
houses um so we feel we have a real um
interest in the future of that
neighborhood sure but we do have a
concern about the three-story building
we have from the beginning we're not
really against the affordable housing
but we are I agree with my son and
daughter-in-law about the safety I sent
um email to Kathy Rose is that's her
first name right is K Rose I sent an
email to her and I have um several
pictures and I took them at five o'clock
in the afternoon on Columbus Avenue so
you could see how tight the parking is
and if you have people living in these
apartments or even coming to the
business parking along that street it's
it's already congested as it is it's
going to be much more congested and
Aaron had touched on that too about
people parking there um I don't know if
you saw the video my daughter-in-law
posted but cast is worse but um Linda
let me ask you a question did I swear
you in um no I'm sorry I I'm getting uh
fatigue here but please raise your right
hand let me swear you in okay do you
swear or affirm that any testimony you
give this board this evening will be the
truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth I do thank you very much so
summarize what you've said already if
you would that you've lived there your
family lived there for
Generations yeah my my yes my husband
and so anyway I I sent her pictures of
the side street the very fir I don't
know if she can pull those up to show I
asked her I sent it early enough I
figured she could share with the board
before the meeting so you could see but
the very first picture is the alleyway
that Aaron is talking about so can see
how close his property is going to be to
that um I just wanted to have you share
the pictures that's why I called in I'm
not very good at public speak I'm
working on it I'm working on it I I
don't not very good at public speaking
so I'm not very good at this but I just
I told her that anyone living on any of
the side streets off the Cassidy they
all have this TI of a street and that's
why there's a concern about having
additional parking on the streets uh
so and that's that's just my main
concern because I it's it is tight for
me to get down those side streets with
my just my regular vehicle so uh if you
had any emergency vehicles that needed
to go down those side streets with
additional parking it would just be a
nightmare but like I said those pictures
were taken at 5:00
pm so I just I I just wanted you to take
into consideration because um I just
felt as with the previous project Jay uh
Jason and Sean had some very good points
about parking there and I think same and
I think the same thing applies to the
North Cassidy too as far as the parking
they're not going to be able to
guarantee only one car they don't even
have a spot for one car per apartment
much less if you take into consideration
the business that they're wanting to put
in there but that that's basically what
I wanted to say okay Linda thank you
very much for staying with us this late
and for for giving us your perspective
on this situation all right thank you
for listening thank
you Mr chairman real quick uh the people
who have said that they are not good
public speakers um I'd like to commit
them they've all been
fantastic yeah they have been good you
know they're self-deprecating you know
they are all right
um do you see any other uh members of
the general public Karen that would like
to speak or neighbors that withstanding
should say he hold on yes um nope no
more that is everybody thank you
um um I think
that I should give the uh applicant a
chance to unless any members of the
board have any questions you know I have
one question and I'm not sure it's
whether it's directed to the applicant
or not but the question
is who is in control of the traffic
control devices whether they be flashing
lights
crosswalks traffic lights who's in
control of casting the city of
Bexley yes okay and so uh is the city of
Bexley involved in
saying uh look we're going to build this
three story we're going to have it 16
units we're going to have a some
commercial here um we we're not going to
have an uh we're going to cut out some
curb cuts on on Cassidy but we have
looked at the traffic situation here and
we are okay with this proposal has
anybody done that from the Bexley
perspective well I I was looking on
Google Earth and I believe there's
currently even spaces alongside the east
side of Cassidy just north of this
location so it's not unheard of to have
have parking
spaces along the east side of
Cassidy uhhuh but what about crosswalks
or something to once you get over the
track the track we we have provided um
devices within the pedestrian walkways
to get the attention of traffic we've
done that on Drexel
um and I think it's maybe South
capity but I mean we do look at these
situations when when we receive comments
and investigate to find out if there's
you know a better way of you know
pedestrian throughways and making sure
they're in the proper
locations okay
um Mr O do you have uh any uh rebuttal
information or do any of your your uh
clients wish to uh rebut any of the
comments made by the uh people that
spoke with standing here yeah thank you
chairman behall I think I'm gonna pass
it over to um Drew Lorent from Carpenter
Marty the traffic engineer to okay kind
of stay on this topic we're on now very
good hey thanks everybody um real quick
Drew Karen can you go to slide 19 thank
you I forgot to put it in the chat
sorry oh that's
okay okay it ends at 17 try well keep
going so we want to go into the
additional
documentation oh got it got it I thought
that was thought that was the first
slide no worries thank
you so um this is a quick graphic this
is this is a program we use in in the
civil engineering world called autoturn
um which which helps us outline uh
travel Paths of emergency vehicles any
type of vehicle you could ever imagine
show so um we have shown right now um
large Vans SL SUVs or you know any any
large regular passenger vehicle parked
along Columbus Avenue along with Cassidy
Avenue and then a a fire Tru turning
onto uh Columbus Avenue from Cassidy
Avenue just to show that um you know
emergency vehicles can still access the
roadway and and there there's
double-sided parking on Columbus Avenue
south of the site or sorry east of the
site here um anyway but just showing
that um you know entering entering uh
Columbus Avenue from Cassidy Avenue um
though tight you know no doubt about it
it is a tight fit but um it is still
possible with with the street parking
provided and I guess to to to just uh
address a couple other oh
sorry somebody just needs to mute
themselves probably yeah I think
somebody just needs to mute oh go ahead
keep keep
going did everybody hear what I heard
then or what I said already Yes we heard
what you said yes good deal um so so
that that kind of uh hopes to help
address some of the uh the issues
concerning emergency vehicles turning
onto Columbus Avenue um something else I
wanted to address is that the the the
current city of Bexley code does not
account for the overlap of mixed uses on
a site so the the parking requirements
for the development are essentially
assuming full fully parked retail and
fully parked residential which is is
certainly not the case here um unless by
some slim chance there's a retail retail
development that's open 24 hours a day
um you know you're going to have heavy
retail parking during the day and heavy
retail par or heavy residential parking
during the evening there's typically a
lot of agencies account for a 50%
reduction in that type of um parking
requirement because of that overlap um
so that I think that's something that
should be considered as well when it
comes to the parking requirements um
another thing last thing I wanted to add
is um street parking is permitted on
Cassidy Avenue on the east side
currently um the road is about 33 feet
in width which does permit parking on
one side as well as um two-way vehicle
travel um you know there's enough width
for parking on one side and two-way
vehicle travel through on the rest of
the roadway width um and then of course
wanted to show this this graphic here
similar to to the last case where we
look at the Peak parking demand for for
these residential units and the the Peak
parking time frame which is obviously
overnight when when people are are home
from work or wherever they may be as
they uh go to sleep so uh that that's
all I have on my
end
okay all right
um Mr
hog any other issues you'd like
to uh
address Nicole Jeff anything you'd like
to uh mention about these additional
exhibits um we would like to have our
architect speak to the questions about
the um Alleyway access and also um we
we've done some Shadow studies we heard
resident concerns and so let them kind
present the findings of the Shadow
studies um so with that I would like to
open it up to our architect and um
slides would
be I think the best slide to show for
this one I apologize we're jumping
around would be um number seven which
has the site plan let's start with that
one and we can talk about um what we've
done in the alleyway as it relates to
the parking spaces and the proximity of
them to the alley and I'll check T I'll
let you know Karen um which slides I
need for the the um Shadow studies thank
you very good I say I I think after this
one maybe slide 22 is a good
comparison of the the alleyway
but right now that
existing
building
um has parking just right up against the
property line so we we certainly
appreciate the the comment from the next
the The adjacent uh resident of across
the alley and wanted to to accommodate
some more breathing room for them so the
we've added an additional 5 foot setback
so rather than having the back of those
parking
spaces against the property line we've
we've added that they've push them
towards
the uh building West another five feet
so there's there's more maneuvering room
uh and just generally more space than
the the current condition you can kind
of see that if you move to that slide
slide number 22 I think the comparison
between what's existing
and yeah there's a good kind of side by
side comparison that it's say
approximately 15 ft maybe maybe a little
bit more to the alley but we really did
want to increase
that um and then we can move on to the
shadow studies
which believe those are 25
25 so we've what we've done is
we've through um through our software
we've modeled the mass of the existing
building and we've modeled
um the the surrounding houses so
we've we've looked at what the Shadows
would be based on the actual height of
the building cast at different times of
day um as as you can imagine the the
most extreme conditions are those very
early morning hours or very late
afternoon hours and those are getting
close to the time of day when the sun is
is almost at the Horizon there's a
general glow in the sky but there's not
a lot of intense light but there's um
looking in March on this slide just at
the very early hours just after Daybreak
that shadow is is there across the
street but very quickly as the sun gets
a little higher in the sky it's only
casting into the about the middle of the
street and you can kind of Follow that
around through the day and then lay at
the
afternoon um and again this is March 20
20th September 22nd those Equinox times
if we go to the the next slide I think
we can
see summer conditions
so there there you can see those again
so the the Sun starts a little
further um in the
summer starts actually a little
bit north of of East in the morning and
then ends up a little bit north of West
again you can see that you know after
shortly after sunrise by 9:00 a.m.
that's fully off the
neighboring property and really not
quite even in the early morning hours
quite getting to that
adjacent
house um but we were we were pleasantly
surprised to see that the the impact
on neighboring properties is is fairly
minimal and again that that last slide
is getting towards the end of the day
but frankly after the the heat of the
summer a little bit is um going across
the alley
so of course we can we can look at the
the winter conditions we we know the
winter is the sun is low and it's it's
low all the time and so even one story
houses in at some of these times of day
are casting Shadows far across the
street but um for for most of the day
those Shadows are
still um cast on yards across the street
but usually not the adjacent houses
thanks Kevin I hope that that uh we hope
that that was helpful we did that study
um because for both sides actually we
have this information that we can share
for the other side as well if anybody's
interested um because we heard resident
concerns about the three-story building
and its impact um I do really just want
to touch on a couple other things that
were brought up um there was a question
about environmental remediation and I
really appreciate the backstory and the
passion behind that and understanding
where the question and the comment was
coming from um we will be doing
environmental remediation of the site
the contamination has been identified in
the soil so um we will be hiring a
qualified contractor that is licensed in
the state of Ohio to complete all of
that work they will be held to the
standards set forth by the EPA and other
state and federal guidelines to complete
the work in a manner that um complies
with all regulations not just around
what work has to be done to make the
site considered um clean but also around
what um conditions are allowed to um
happen during the remediation process so
that includes limitation of those new
those yeah those um nuisances sorry
words um nuisances and U making sure
that there's there's no additional
contamination that happens so we will be
doing that in general we will have a
robust construction management plan and
we spoke to this with the community
members earlier this week um we plan to
as part of that ongoing public Outreach
come back to the community and have a
conversation with them once we have a
contractor selected because the success
of the the project the success of the
construction is is also heavily relying
upon us being good neighbors from before
we even start construction and making
sure that there's a line of
communication so in that um in that
forum and in that opportunity there will
be a chance to ask questions and get
contact and get an understanding of what
is going to happen and when so I wanted
to to speak to that
I I also wanted to just mention that the
environmental remediation on site the
environmental concerns on site are very
limited there's some dirt that we need
to clean up uh the tanks have been that
were on the site for years uh are no
longer on the site um and the testing
that we've done has shown that there may
have been some just literally some
spilling that happened when those tanks
were taken out um so we we will as as
you said Nicole uh we're going to hire a
firm that's going to have to follow all
EPA regulations uh but we did all I I
did just want to note that it's it's
it's very small remediation that has to
be done it's not a it's not a large uh
large issue or or it's not something
where tanks have to be taken or anything
like that I just want to make that
clear okay thank you and I think based
on my notes I think I touched on
everything but I want to look to my team
and and Jeff and David is there anything
else that we need to to respond
to only that obviously the public safety
concerns are Paramount we're you know we
won't get a building permit until we
satisfy the city's sort of Public Safety
reviews and and we certainly aren't
dedicated to any sort of specific
alignment of Cassidy's curb line or the
or crosswalk locations so we would look
to be active sort of partners with the
city and Neighbors about what's the what
are the any Safety Solutions that might
be
desired
okay members of the uh board do you have
any
um questions or comments uh about the
proposal Mr chairman I've got a
couple um just I'll try to be quick um
did I hear the funding that you are
requesting is not guaranteed yet is it
is that what you said yeah as we shared
in the last meeting um there's a bit of
a a reverse order that is required in
the funding process we are required to
secure zoning before the funding will be
awarded they want to ensure that they
are awarding projects that have the
ability to proceed um we submitted a
competitive application it was submitted
on February 11th and as we shared in the
last presentation the timeline for us to
find out um an announcement of funding
Awards is in miday but is um partially
contingent or fully contingent upon the
ability to secure
zoning um okay and then two other thing
things one um I I would like if this
gets approved I'd like something in
there to state that you guys are going
to work with the neighbors on timing of
the dumpster empting especially since
it's adjacent to a property absolutely I
know places that tend to do that at 6:00
am or 7 AM um and then the last the last
thing we actually have hours that that
they have to stay within those hours so
that they aren't they too early there
are regulations okay and then the last
thing was um I'm not going to go into my
whole Spiel again I still think that
this is a density issue I mean we don't
even have the number of parking for the
number of rental units and then we've
got retail on top of that and not
knowing what the retail is I mean we we
looked at the numbers based on you know
retail during the day housing at night
but we don't know what the retail is if
it's a restaurant then you've got
housing at night and Retail at night so
um I I I'm just very again very
tentative with I think the density is
too heavy I I mean I just think I think
it's just too dense but that's all I'll
say because I've already you've already
heard my Spiel
so any other members of the
board I mean I I think that I have a
little problem with saying hey we're
gonna we're
gonna dump parking out onto a street I I
don't really have much problem with
dumping parking onto the portion of
Columbus between Cassidy and The Avenue
and the alley pardon me
but Cassidy is so
highly
traveled that I I I'm not
sure
that I'm not sure how well that works
there I'm a little have a little
trepidation
about uh that being the solution just to
get to the number of parking spaces that
we say we need let alone how many we
might need in under certain
circumstances uh and where that's where
that's going to go now I could go
further up Columbus as well but the
neighbors park on the street as we have
already heard going up Columbus on both
sides of the
street M Mr Beall th you know this is if
I may jump in here and kind of discuss
this issue a little bit and I drive
Cassidy every day to and
from
uh and it's uh not evident because
nobody's doing it but you can park on
the east side of Cassidy now yeah and
Nobody Does it right so uh they're
proposing to come in and stripe it make
it abundantly clear that you can do it
and we think that that is uh at least in
some way a mitigating factor to the
three space parking reduction being
requested I think it shows that there's
not a parking need right now if there's
nobody parking there now obviously
there's current it's currently
accommodated elsewhere so just another
point there because maybe maybe Drew
maybe Drew and David could uh back this
up because I I think they're making a a
much better point to safety when cars
are present on Cassidy um I find that
people seem to be paying more attention
and not using it um as a two-lane road
um have you all ever experienced people
trying to pass you on Cassidy like that
concerns me more than cars in the
street I I haven't personally
experienced that Mr schik but I but I do
think and I'm and I'm gonna I'm GNA say
something here and I I hope I'm right
but Drew Lorent can come in and and
reply I got to believe that when you are
on a street that has on street parking
that that uh um has the effect of
slowing motorists and uh certainly you
know there was a it's probably still out
there there was a time that the city was
trying to slow people down by having the
you know the flashing uh light out there
your speeds exceeding so I think if
anything striping this space these
spaces defining these spaces encouraging
people to park on the street is going to
have the desired effect of of slowing
people as they drive up and down Cassidy
Avenue I'll Echo that by
saying Lane width reductions and street
parking is a natural way to reduce
vehicle speeds when you have wide Lane
widths that's what encourages high
speeds so um you know this this could
effectively act as a as a speed
deterrent um to to this
area I just have this is Heidi Dorne I
just have a quick comment to that I I
agree that it slows down traffic the
only concern then I think that I would
have would be the crossing of the street
street because people would be blocked
by The Cars like and if people AR
naturally looking for pedestrians
Crossing on Cassidy that would be a
concern maybe we could factor into this
I don't know how but something of that
sort that would be I think a a wise
thing to consider we are fully committed
to partnering with the city to find
solutions to
create yeah Miss Boer does that age
actually this would be better for Mr
rant but um would that
be have and I'm sorry if I I missed this
have we actually done a traffic
study like a specific traffic study on
this to my knowledge it's not required
by the city and I I I I haven't heard
anything about that so no the reason the
reason I bring that up it may not be
required by the city um but the
individuals that you're going to want to
Patron your location you're going to
want them to feel as safe as possible
and it's also going to make you again
going back to the living ston
conversation a great neighbor
um it it just just to consider that Ryan
let me just address it I think what
we'll I think what we'll commit to doing
is doing a crosswalk there with with
lights I mean I think that that would
address it right so let's just commit to
doing that and and you know I think that
helps really helps address
it it just for for the record um there's
a blue house across the street from the
bexi yoga and my son um that's where he
lived for basically four years his
sitter was there and I pulled out backed
out of that drive every single day and
it's very dangerous right there so I
think having some light having some
signage there yeah solves many more
problems that already existed previous
to your project so Mr Mr Shake we're
we're committed to to working with the
city service department City traffic
engineer to make whatever the
appropriate accommodation is for a
Crossing there you know subject to
review and approval of the city's
engineer thank you yep I appreciate it
gentlemen yeah I I think that um I think
we all have the same sort of feeling
that one of the reasons that nobody
parks there is because all those former
gas stations or whatever they all were
but they were all pretty much former gas
stations had a the the lot of curb cuts
and parking all over the place so nobody
why would you park on the street when
you can just pull five more feet into
the a safe drive way and be in the uh uh
gas station parking lot right or now
they event areas or yoga studios but
whatever it is they they are more
natural and now we're going to change
really change the whole way that Cassidy
works there where it's going to become
you
know zero lot line building right to the
street which is unheard of on on that
street it's going to look like
it's going to look very different than
it does now because you don't have
anything that is zero lot line on
Cassidy I don't think all the way to
Broad Street do you from the tracks on
the east side of the road no so I mean
it's going to be kind of like wow where
did this come from all of a sudden
that's not that's bades it's an
interesting observation Mr Beall and
you're absolutely right and you know
that's uh what the city's plan and the
and the city's zoning uh requirements
say is that you know now is the time to
to bring it back out to the to the edge
and you know create kind of the urban
Corridor and so you know I guess it's
one of those things where you got to
start someplace and and here's where
we're going to start no I I I don't
think that in any way disqualifies the
the the project uh at all uh I once
again just have this sort of I mean I
think the concept of of what we did on
Main Street is let people Park other
than 4 to 6 p.m. or 9 7:00 to 900 a. on
the on the particular side of the street
that's relevant and uh put the traffic
put the trees in the middle of the road
to create sort of a boulevard look and
all those things tend to slow traffic
down right and that's that's kind of uh
where we're going now I'm not sure we're
going to get quite to to making Cassidy
of Boulevard here but uh anyway I I have
some just
general feelings that this might be too
much for the for the space that we
have I I just have to be honest I think
it's close very close but
anyway uh have do members of the board
have any other questions or comments
because I think we do need to move on we
have other applicants that are patiently
waiting for us and uh uh once again Mr
Hodge do you feel like calling the
question tonight is the is the right way
to go on this
application yes sir we do with the with
the uh revised plan that only has 2500
square feet of
retail a a a three- space reduction with
the Stacked parking right those will
either be assigned to a tandem
two-bedroom unit or or be used for
employees of the retail uh with a
commitment to
uh work with the city to do the
crosswalk to stripe some spaces on the
street to encourage on street parking uh
other conditions the board deems
appropriate okay um if if no member of
the board has any objection I'd like
Kathy to read us a proposed finding a
fact conclusions of law for our
consideration the findings effect and
conclusions of law for application
number bcap d205 2 for property located
at 420 North
Cassidy upon consideration of the
application proposed variance and
evidence and testimony before it the
board finds the applicant has proven
that the criteria to testimony be
criteria to Grant an area variance in
beic COD section
12261 c
1-7
uh have been met and a variance from
beex code section 12620 2 to allow a
three parking space
reduction in the required number of
parking spaces be granted an approval of
a three-story mixed use development and
demolition of the existing structure be
granted with the following conditions
final design review is remanded back to
the architecture review board and tree
and public garden commission for final
design
sign approval and certificate of
appropriateness and final landscape
approval two a parking management
planner for double stacked spaces be a
part of
that this
approval three continued Community
engagement four the site shall be
developed in substantial conformance
with the renderings and plans dated
22521 subject to the certificate
appropriateness and five that the
management company worked with the city
on crosswalk research to find an
appropriate
location
okay members of the board do you have
any additions you'd like to suggest or
deletions for that matter I
guess I hear it stands I hear none
uh Mr
uh hjj are you uh and your clients
satisfied with the uh reading of the
findings of fact conclusions of law that
we'll be considering with the conditions
that are that were stated by m Rose yes
sir we are
okay in that case I would entertain a
motion to approve the findings of fact
and conclusions of
law
so moved motion made by Mr schik is
there a second please second that's Mr
oh second Mr
Marsh all right
um Kathy please call the
role okay Mr shik
absolutely uh Mr LaVine
yes Miss
Dorne yes Mr Fout yes
Mr Marsh yes Mr
Turner
no chairman Beal I vote no also but the
matter passes and uh the variance is
granted as well as the conditional use
permit so um thank you very much all of
you who lasted with us all this time all
the presenters and the applicants we
very much appreciate itk you all so
thank you to the
board you
David all
right uh the next case on the docket do
we need a break or can
we weather through
this anybody on the board have to have a
break I'm good not let's call the next
case which
is
uh and Miss Mitchell would be joining us
so Mr Levine if he wants
to go to
[Laughter]
bed sorry I had I glad I put the um
alert on my pH on my phone did you get a
nap yeah well I got my second vaccine so
I'm starting to feel like kind of
tired Mr thank you for your uh time
tonight we very much appreciate it thank
you my pleasure good night everyone good
night good night night M Mr Beall this
is Miss Cunningham yes um I do have a
conflict um on the next case so Mr
fishell will be the
um the city the official city law
director will be taking the case this
case and I will be back after this one
is over before the next one okay thank
you Miss Cunningham I appreciate that
thank you Mr official appreciate all of
you
Mr official welcome thank you and I I
need for um anyone who's representing
this case not to testify but just that
is gonna present to raise their
hands okay thank
you uh let me call the case it's case
bz-1
19-10 the owner of the property is St
Charles Preparatory School the applicant
is Mr Mike Shannon attorney at law the
location is 20110 East Broad Street and
the applicant is seeking planning review
and approval of a parking lot expansion
and Landscaping on the east side of St
Charles Preparatory School which will
include underground water
detention the applicant is also seeking
a variance for parking in the front
slide yard depending on which it is in
accordance with Bexley code section
12624
B Mr shanon are you with us yes Mr
chairman all right sir nice to see you
would you uh do you have any other
presenters that will be uh
testifying yes uh chairman behall um
I'll be turning it over to Jim Negron um
and we also have some Consultants here
who will be testifying as well as H the
principal Mr low is available okay very
good would the rest of those gentlemen
Mr Negron Ferris low fley Raise Your
Right hands and be sworn
please gentlemen do you all swear or
affirm that the testimony you will give
us tonight will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth do so
say I do I do do thank you very much all
right um Mr fishell do would can you
give us some uh perspective hear from
the city's P standpoint sure I I just
want to before before you dive into the
merits of this case I just want to um
make clear to anybody who where there
may still be confusion that um this case
um and the confusion is due to no fault
of the applicant I should say that that
this case is properly before the board
of zoning appeals this evening I know
that had been before Bap a while ago or
another version of the
application um and that it had then been
before ARB um for some I guess
discussion um nothing ever was decided
but the bottom line is pursuant to city
ordinances this case it should have been
and is now properly before Bap on this
application okay very good that's a nice
uh reorientation for us there I
appreciate that very much
um do you have any uh comments about the
or does Jason does anybody have comment
from the city's perspective on this
request Jason thank you I'll run you
through the application very quickly um
the this is going to require a little
bit of interpretation from from Bap for
those of you who hadn't have time to to
read the staff report uh so bear with me
while I just quickly run through this um
the one thing that is necessary on this
application is a certificate of
appropriateness uh due to the request to
expand parking the one thing that is in
question is the variance and we'll talk
that through with you real quickly now
um this is an OS District the open space
district and sort of one of the quirks
of um our interrelated land use and
Zoning code in Bexley is that we don't
have a separate institutional use
category uh our institutions are grouped
into the open space category um and as
such there are um there are things that
are done in the open space category such
as driveways and parking lots that don't
really have criteria that you would have
in say a commercial District or an
Institutional District they're sort of
glommed over into the standards of
residential districts which makes it a
little tough to sometimes interpret some
of those things so there are two
interpretation questions and I can tell
you the way we thought of them as staff
and then it's up to you as the board to
decide um so the first thing I will say
is really the lot requirements are very
general here they've met all those um
but when it comes to parking and access
which is specifically what they're
asking for uh there are two things one
is an entry drive that would Veer off
from the current drive and head around
the side of the school on the east side
so it would go around the chapel and
then it would access a parking area that
is behind the
chapel so one of the questions uh that
and I can tell you how we've we've
addressed it uh from a staff perspective
is that we have um a a clarification our
recently updated zoning code that
basically said that uh no spaces blah
blah blah aisles or
driveways could go through basically
this area unless they were accessing a
rear yard parking space garage area um
and that's primarily for residential
districts um because what we're trying
to avoid is somebody just having a sort
of a deadend parking lot or parking
driveway rather and making a parking lot
at their house uh but also the OS
District falls into that so our feeling
as staff is that that lot that's behind
the
chapel is a rear parking area even
though it's not all the way at the rear
of the site it's an unusual site and it
functions like a rear parking lot would
some of it is behind that primary
building some of it is to the side and
while there is more building behind it
it's sort of a separate building that
you can drive through but it's sort of
attached you can start to see where the
confusion comes in there's a lot of sort
ofes on the site so what we've decided
from a staff perspective is it is
reasonable to allow them access to that
it it we can't assume that they'll
always be able to drive through that
building you know a variety of reasons
that you know different things could
occur where that might not always be
accessible
and this does sort of function as a rear
lot so we think that's an okay um
interpret or that's an okay U
installation by our interpretation of
the code and that is just something
approvable by you as C certificate of
appropriateness no variance is needed
now the other question is the parking
area that they want to put on the south
side of the chapel so I included the
definitions in there for front yard um
well and rear yard but the for the front
yard we have to determine if that is in
fact in the front yard if it is then
they would need a variance because
there's no parking allowed in the front
yard if you determine it's a sidey yard
then it's okay and they can do it
depending you know whatever criteria you
place on that regarding screening and
all those other things so you can see in
there the front yard definition says a
yard extending between the side lot
lines across the front of a lot and the
front lot line to the front of the
principal building now you could argue
that the front of that building is the
front front like the frontmost part that
being said it's a fairly Wide building
that is all on uh sort of an open space
now so our question is whether we want
to interpret that as the front of the
chapel also defines the front of the
building as it extends to the west or to
the east rather toward the lot line um
that's kind of a judgment call that you
know you'll have to make as the Bap uh
as staff I I think we can interpret it
either way way um and I know the last
thing you want after two extremely
lengthy cases is a pile of ambiguity so
we apologize for that um but that is a
little bit where we are in an open space
district and I will say that you know
the open space District also includes uh
all of our schools so it includes High
School it includes uh middle school and
it includes St Charles and none of them
function like Parks which is really what
open space is intended for so it's a
little bit of unusual situation that we
really only encounter when we deal with
one of the schools that come in so with
that um you know the the big thing here
is that we think that the overall site
development approach is appropriate
pending your interpretation of of sort
of those elements um they do have a few
other small complications one there is a
city easement that runs all the way down
the property line so one of the
conditions would be that any
improvements or Landscaping in inside
that easement would be the
responsibility of the applicant to
repair and replace if the city had to do
any future work there based on any kind
of Maintenance that we'd have to do um
another um concern is um you know just
because they're adding this much Paving
and I know they're doing underground
storage and and all that type of thing
you know one of the things that we
thought might be um a way to sort of
mitigate that area in front of the
chapel is to consider pervious parking
uh that would be using uh you know paper
that were a little more decorative and
that would allow the water to percolate
through um other than that though we
really don't have any specific
recommendations um this does have to go
back to the tree and public garden
commission so when it goes there then
they would have the opportunity to deal
more specifically with the elements of
landscaping and screening uh that would
be required as part of the overall
approval so that's all I have for you
today I'll happy to answer any questions
um and sorry for a bit of a brain
twister at 11:36 at
night Jason that wasn't too bad but I
appreciate that though uh all right um
Mr Shannon if you're still awake over
there uh why don't you uh give us a
little rendition of uh from the
applicant's perspective here okay uh
good morning Mr chairman uh members of
the commission um I was going to save uh
the legal argument for the end uh but I
think based on Jason's uh presentation
we'd be well served to address it
briefly now the majority of our
presentation Mr chairman is an attempt
to address the concerns of our neighbors
and the concerns raised by uh your
commission as well as the Architectural
Review commission and that would be uh
the lighting landscaping and storm
waterer issues associated with the new
27 space parking lot uh but if you look
at the uh subject slide that's uh there
right now what Jason properly focused in
on is the east side side of our campus
and I I'd like to State for the record
that you all know that St Charles opened
in
1929 and as such it existed before the
zoning code did uh and as such it is a
non-conforming use uh the chapel was uh
built several years later and is clearly
um in our opinion an ancillary structure
to the primary structure of the school
so all zonings that have been
Incorporated and passed uh since the
original construction of uh the school
in the chapel um they have increased the
non-conformity of St Charles uh in terms
of complying with codes that did not
exist at the T time St Charles was built
so you fast forward to the most recent
changes in
2017 uh we were put into the open space
category for reasons uh Jason explained
and that's why there's some ambiguity on
a case of first impression uh for a
parking lot like this in the open space
District that's actually serving not
open space but a full-fledged
school so I think Jason's interpretation
of the code is correct that the drive is
clearly allowed under your code because
it does access existing parking uh in
the rear yard um um as said by Jason
really the only issue is uh the parking
spaces that we would provide on the
south side of the chapel which obviously
would still be on the east side of the
building uh there is enough ambiguity to
give staff cause for pause uh whether
the front yard should be measured uh
from the chapel going south to Broad
Street or from the primary structure uh
we feel very strongly that uh the front
yard is established by the primary
building structure and the uh that that
area south of the chapel should be
considered sidey yard and we should be
able and not considered front yard and
we should therefore be able to to add
the 27 spaces that we want to add um but
I would point out that uh if you feel
strongly that it it is a variance
because it's technically not
ascertainable if this is the front yard
uh we're comfortable with that approach
to the extent we meet the Duncan
standards our non-conformity helps us
check off the list with a lot of those
Duncan standards uh but we truly believe
that the variance is not required in any
event under the new code Provisions your
approval would still be required if
there is no variance because anytime you
modify your off street parking in the
open space District it must go in front
of Bap for formal approval so having
said that the legal argument uh we feel
it should booil us down to where the
front line uh front building setback
line is if you agree with us uh that it
it would be the front building setback
of the primary building then no variance
would be requ required for the small
portion of parking that's south of the
chapel um if uh you agree that it's
ambiguous enough that you're not sure
that that area south of the Chapel to
the east of the school um is uh is uh if
you feel the chapel sets the front
building setback line uh then the
variance would be required and we do
meet those standards which I can go
through to the extent necessary but
really the most important thing here uh
the basis of any Community uh is
communication uh we've met diligently
with staff and we've also met with our
neighbors and again the three issues
that have come to the Forefront are are
the appropriateness of the lighting the
landscaping and any issues with storm
water so with that I'd like to turn turn
over to Jim Negron who has some
institutional knowledge for all
improvements made at St Charles for the
last three decades and he can uh tell
you how we are addressing the park
working lighting and Landscaping uh as
well as the storm water Mr Negron thank
you Mike Mr chair good seeing you again
that's for sure it's been a while so I
didn't think I didn't think I'd see you
this late at night but that's
okay I hear you yeah so um as as uh Mr
Shannon had indicated I I've been
involved with St Charles since we
started to redevelop the campus and kind
of re
reinvigorate um how the institution
represents itself to the community so I
have a vast history and knowledge of all
of the work that we did to put the
master plan together get the front entry
cut in um you know put um rework parking
on the east side and then the Walters
Commons and the athletic fields and then
the west campus and the west west campus
so um it's nice having that
institutional knowledge because I
personally have been involved with the
project all the way through and I know
um all the due diligence and and work
that was done to be good members of the
community so with that said um just as a
quick reminder you know what we're
trying to do is we have an existing
parking lot on the east side of the
building which currently has 58 spaces
we're looking to expand that by adding
22 27 New spaces but also provide access
around the back access around the back
does multiple things provide us provides
us access around the back with without
having to go under our building but it
also is a life safety issue because
emergency vehicles are able to access
that side of the
building I also would be Miss if I
didn't remind you that this will be the
third time that we're in front of
Beckley uh for this parking and in the
process us coming to the third time we
have um acquiesced and taken care of
things that have been brought
up um and a few things that we we've had
we've reduced the parking we've pulled
the parking back to the front of the
primary
structure um we clarified some of the
drainage um we um better clearly
identified the landscape buffering so
it's easily more easily interpreted by
the
neighbors we also
um took into consideration the questions
about lighting and in in our application
you'll see a lighting plan that that is
uh very sensitive to the neighbors and
we also um have agreed we have parking
uh we have Lighting on the East
Elevation that the lighting source is
exposed to the neighbors and we're going
to Shield that lighting as a condition
of this approval um for the um to to
take care of what the neighbors's uh
concerns were um there are three
neighbors that I would like to point out
specifically because we were able to
meet with them Jeff brenberg Dennis and
parka and Arie white um we had a very
cordial meeting with them um I think
that it was very productive meeting but
just like anything else there were items
that we agreed with and items that we
had to leave where we agreed to
disagree um you know the biggest issue
is they they do have a water problem on
their property um and you know it's
property that is not owned by St Charles
so um our Engineers that are here you
know designed uh our um drainage system
to take care of any of the storm water
runoff that we are going to have Matt
Ferris is here uh if we need to talk
about that anymore um the landscape uh
design is is such that um if you could
see the Landscaping will be in the
easement we um as a condition of
approval we will agree that if if Bexley
has to do
maintenance inside the eement we will
replace anything that is destroyed by by
that and
um I guess um with that I kind of
summarize we just appreciate your
consideration I think that we've done
our due diligence we've been good
citizens we listened but just like any
everything else there's no way that
everyone's going to agree on everything
but we have um and will remain good
citizens and committed to the betterment
of uh relationships here in city of
Bexley with that I'll I'll turn it back
over to to you unless Mr low wants to
say anything
Mr Mr
Shannon uh Mr chairman this is Jim laow
the principal of St Charles okay Mr Mr L
please yeah thank you all again for your
uh commitment to to the city of Bexley I
just like simp be like to Echo Mr shann
and Mr negron's comments again St
Charles wants to be a good neighbor we
want want to be a a great part of a
great
Community uh we think that this parking
Edition is an important part of our
campus uh for the the
the reasons that Mr neger and
outlined again I I do want to say
publicly thank you to Mr White Mr Parker
Mr Rosenberg for meeting with this this
past week again as Jim said it was
productive but uh like I say we want to
be a valuable asset to the city of
Beckley and we really value the input
and uh deliberation of this zoning board
so thank you thank you for the
opportunity thank you
sir all right Mr Shannon should we do
you have anything else you think would
be helpful to the panel or should we go
ahead and see if there's anybody in the
audience that would like to speak to
this what where whereupon you would
certainly have some rebuttal yeah I have
no further comments at this time Mr
chairman thank you all right uh Karen uh
uh let me ask ask you to see if there's
anybody in the audience that is Pro or
con this application
please at this time I
see five hands
raised okay um uh why don't you take the
first one that you saw we'll try to take
him in the order of okay I start with
Arnold
white
okay Mr
White can you hear me yes I can hello
this is Arnold white Arnold can you give
us your H full name and address Arnold
white 55 Meadow Park Avenue thank you
sir will you certainly have standing and
uh would you raise your are you are you
representing somebody AR or are you
speaking on your own behalf on my own
behalf all right would you raise your
right hand to be sworn
please do you swear or affirm that any
testimony you give this evening will be
the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth I do thank you sir please
tell us your perspective on this
application first to start out the
property under the name Susan
white uh you will see that we will be
facing 10
parking spaces of parking of of
automobiles facing our
house th that driveway if you will
look uh I'm sorry the the parking lot
that they are creating the paving that
they will be doing is in partly in the
easement the those two lines that you
see from Broad Street going north is an
easement of
40t in that 40 feet area is where they
plan to put the
trees that are supposed to block off the
area and they can be torn down by not
only the city but anybody uh who has an
easement across that area and that
includes I think both Water and
Sewer um I would ask that this be uh
sent back to the uh ARB now and allow
them to continue the work that they had
been doing on this project uh because
they could be recommending to you what
they may do as you heard from Mr uh uh
Drew Levant I guess it is a
Laurent the second worst thing to have
in parking besides in over uh under uh
supply of parking is an over
Supply in this case this is an over
Supply the school has more parking than
nearly any school public or private in
the entire
County they already have more parking
spaces than any other
school uh uh in in the
county not only that they are facing a
decreasing po ation of students which
makes the need even less
existent um the um we ask that to go
back to the to the uh ARB and let them
be looking at this to provide it is very
complicated because they're putting both
the black top and the protection for my
house and my
neighbors on in the easement
secondly the the uh vegetation is only s
to nine feet high and when we spoke with
the uh gentleman from uh Oakland
Nurseries he says that they'll probably
be about six feet high these are just
scrub uh trees that will take years
before they would be able to protect our
property the second thing is that the
U um the the property uh the the trees
that they're putting in are white pine
these are exactly the trees they put in
before and those trees died because this
whole area floods now you have seen the
pictures that we have provided to you
and someone else will will review that
with you but those pictures show this
area so flooded that the trees they
already have there
died they are so flooded that on my side
of the property
I am flooded to uh perhaps a foot a foot
and a half for maybe 15 20 feet uh of my
back
property the uh uh now they want to put
that in and it could very well be that
as you could see the this is a Mr that's
a 31 I'm at
55 if you could look at that you will
see there is my house where that water
is is not a lake that that's water that
is coming from that parking lot we were
told at the time that they had all their
fancy uh uh people uh Engineers to tell
us that they had a water plan that was
foolproof and we would not have any
problems uh Mr Negron I had the pleasure
of meeting the other day I'm there
before he was there I've been there
since
1981 and I can tell you before that lot
we never had a flooded property like
that we never had any problems like that
we can't keep grass growing as you could
see every year we try and walk try and
put seed in and every year it dies just
as the trees died because of the water
problem uh there's no reason to approve
this there's no need for it we spoke
with them at the meeting and asked what
what are you going to do with this
continuing declining population and they
said we don't have any plans we just
hope that we can do better in trying to
get more students to come recognizing
that they're facing the problems of New
Albany and uh and uh also Columbus
Academy and and columus School uh well
columus academy uh who are taking and
gobbling up those kids they want to
spend all of this money for some parking
spaces that had they had no need for and
they certainly could never accomplish
the purposes of the variance we do
believe that a variance is required and
there's no way that they could match the
requirements that are needed under the
uh code because
uh if they would go through it one by
one you will see that they don't that
they don't work uh that they simply
can't meet this
criteria uh you're not required to
approve this there's no need for it and
in fact it is actually harmful to the
community it would uh lastly um there is
a requirement that there be Shi um
shielding of the uh southide of the uh
parking lot to uh from Broad Street that
has not been uh provided either Under 12
12621
I okay are my comments um and my U
neighbors will be speaking we are
unanimously against this idea okay we'll
let them speak for themselves but thank
you very much we appreciate you're
staying up so late with us and your
patience here but thank you for your
comments Mr chairman yes ma'am this is
Idi Dorne are we still having the three
minute limit on you know I didn't think
we would need one for this case but I
think in view of the other people that
are waiting to have their cases heard
that we should uh enforce that uh rule
for the rest of the speakers and now
that we've gotten such a nice rendition
of the issues from Mr White I'm not sure
the other speakers are going to have to
go into the same details so uh if the
panel does not mind I would uh uh like
to enforce that three minute rule on the
remainder of the
speakers I hear no no objection to
saying
all right who's The Speaker Jeffrey
Rosenberg next Mr Rosenberg you're muted
there you go thank you board thank you
Mr low Mr Shannon Mr Negron it was a
great Mr renberg can you can you give me
your a full name and your residence
address please Jeffrey Michael Rosenberg
51 Meadow Park okay would you raise your
right hand to be
sworn you swear or affirm that any
testimony you give the board this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth of nothing but the truth I
do do you hear
me I'm not I'm not hearing
you hear me now I can hear you yeah okay
get closer I guess uh Mr Lara Mr Shannon
Mr Negra on board I appreciate your time
and staying up with me tonight um we had
a very nice meeting earlier in the week
on Monday I'd just like to reiterate we
did have some positive feedback back and
forth talking about um you know the the
noise we didn't address but we did talk
about the lights we did talk about um
the security of the bushes and what they
would put in there uh we did talk about
some drainage issues I would like to
bring to the attention of the city that
this may or may not be a St Charles
issue that this needs to be addressed
that there could be drainage pipes that
are broken um the thing that we didn't
discuss though is I am concerned that
the trees and the bushes may not be
enough giving access to a driveway in
bringing traffic behind our homes uh and
I request that we get a wall of some
typee built in addition to trees and
bushes blocking the light Our concern is
that you know the security that this
may not generate could be an issue where
it's pretty dark back there and pretty
obviously swampy and you know people
really don't walk back there uh a
driveway and parking lot will bring
traffic to these areas and bring
attention to the back of our homes that
is not there currently I do appreciate
everyone's time and uh that's all I have
to add thank you very much Mr renberg we
appreciate it very much thanks for your
patience as well staying up this
late Karen you have any other um Clinton
Clinton
staller Mr
staller can you give me your your full
name and address please thank you Mr
chairman attorney Clint or excuse me
resident Clint staller Force habit 44
Meadow Park okay and Clint are you U
speaking on behalf of a client or on
behalf of yourself this evening on
behalf of myself this evening for all
right would you raise your right hand so
I could swear you in yes sir you swear
or affirm that the testimony you're
about to give the board this evening
will be the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth I do thank you sir
tell us your perspective thank you I
oppose the project in its current form
uh as you know the purpose of these
boards and the zoning code is generally
to establish and maintain the quality of
residential neighborhoods promote and
improve the quality of neighborhoods
protect and preserve property values
maintain a High character of Community
Development and to ensure the
compatibility of new development protect
public health safety convenience and
Welfare protect real estate within the
city from impairment or destruction of
value I believe this project is contary
to all of these I want to discuss the
concerns of and I'm flying because of my
three minutes I want to discuss the
concerns of privacy noise safety
security and additional burdensome
lighting Beyond what's already imposed
by the property but now resulting from a
vehicular thorough far and parking lots
immediately contiguous to our
residential district this goes to
interference with the quiet enjoyment of
our properties degr degradation to the
existing character of our property and
neighborhood and reduction in our
property values the commercial and other
public activity currently conducted on
the St Charles property in addition to
the school activities has members of the
general public not just students and
faculty on the property more days of the
year and at more times than just regular
school times this burden on our adjacent
Residential Properties will be further
exacerbated by the installation of this
new 24 foot wide commercial grade Road
and two new parking lots directly abing
our residential
district uh Road and park uh Road and
parking lots squeezed in against our
properties to serve these ever
increasing activities if you pull up a
Google aerial or walk the area you'll
see why the board denied this
application before with certain board
members stating that they would never
approve of jamming this project into the
space I paraphrase furthermore if this
plan is approved there will be no way to
regulate how much future traffic and
what types of vehicles and the full
extent of the burdens it will impose on
us to that point we know St Charles has
bigger plans for the future of its
property including a large Convocation
Center St Charles would have to produce
its master plan should have to produce
its master plan and provide estimates of
future vehicular traffic to be generated
by these proposed future improvements
before any incremental project
application such as here should be
considered so that the true burdens of
such incremental projects can be fully
and accurately evaluated for potential
greater s in the context of a master
plan it's hard for me to believe that a
school with approximately 700 parking
spaces on site is building a commercial
grade road to serve a mere additional 27
spaces with no other future plans for
that road but if the school is willing
to obligate itself to no further
increased use of the road beyond that
Beyond what's shown in this plan we
could visit that as far as emergency
vehicles go this has come up before and
the board has already pointed out that
grass papers would suffice it would not
require a commercial Road in some I
request that this plan be denied
outright or at least be tabled until St
Charles produces a comprehensive master
plan with supporting traffic data for
the public for the Public's and the
board's consideration or that if this
project is approved in addition to a
vegetative screening that might be torn
out at any time by the city of Bexley or
the other two or three Public Utilities
who have easements in that same Corridor
and take years to regrow include the
addition of an eight foot high noise and
privacy wall to protect our abing
residential from the activities on the
property which might already be required
by code section 12645 although we've not
yet pursued it lastly with regard to
being a good neighbor I hope the board
and applicant are sensitive to the
obvious fact that nobody here speaking
on behalf of the project has to live
next to it thank you for your time in
your consideration I appreciate it
that's frequently the case thank you Mr
staler I appreciate your comments thanks
for staying up so late and um going
going at it here with
us all right uh any anybody else you see
uh Karen wishes to speak um Jonathan
Marshall okay seems like there's a few
lawyers on that
street uh Mr
Marshall am I right that you are an
attorney no okay there is a Jonathan
Marshall that's an attorney but that's
not you yeah it's a famous famous lawyer
name but I'm not one you're not one of
them all right well we won't hold that
against you so um uh would you please ra
what tell me your your uh address please
um 31 Meadow Park okay so uh would you
raise your right hand to be sworn in
please yes thank you would do you swear
or affirm that uh the testimony you're
about to give this evening to this board
will be the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes thank you sir
tell us your perspective on this
matter uh well first thanks for staying
up so late I wish this was a Saturday I
often struggle to stay up for Saturday
Night Live so next time I'll watch an
old beap video to keep myself up
um I'm I'm very new to the the
neighborhood I moved in in September so
this is all pretty new and I wasn't
involved in uh the Bap meeting last year
um so my concerns are really around
safety mostly uh obviously everything
else my my neighbors mentioned but
safety is a primary concern I'm right
behind the chapel if you see the the the
photo um so the the new parking lot in
the driveway would be directly behind my
property um I've got three small boys
five and under uh so if you can imagine
they're pretty wild and running around
so I'm a bit worried uh with having a
roadway back there it wasn't uh
certainly something that I ever
contemplated uh when I bought the
property just in September that there
would be construction there I I
obviously didn't know about this this uh
this plan uh prior to that I I I most
likely wouldn't have bought the property
had I known that because of the safety
concern so um you know for me it feels
like it is being jammed into a small
space as Mr Shannon mentioned uh the
school was built in 1929 so it was my my
home uh the chapel was built as I
understand it shortly after that um it
feels to me like you know they would
have built the chapel bigger at that
point had they wanted to encroach more
onto the properties uh on Meadow Park
but they didn't that's where they ended
it and it feels like that spacing is how
it's you know was laid out 80 years ago
and and should remain um and I agree
with uh my my neighbor Jeff uh that you
know a fence or or something along those
lines would at least help with the
safety concerns um I'd also ask that uh
somebody if if uh on the rebuttal if you
don't mind explaining what uh sort of
screening would exist during um
construction if it does go forward uh
for safety concerns because if all right
now really the only thing that that
separates the properties is is the brush
that's back there and if that's all
pulled out to put new uh Landscaping in
uh you know what sort of screening goes
up during the construction process
especially for the
safety um and I only have probably a
minute left but Kathy if you don't mind
just scrolling through this the deck you
have
opened um 27 seconds yeah which slide
would you like this is the back of my
lot here this is in the daytime so
that's where the lot would be just to to
see how wide open it is right now at
this time of
year um you don't mind go to the next
picture this is at 6:30 in the morning
this is basically how the school looks
all night those lights are shining
against our house so I it it's funny
because I have two concerns at one one
inside it's too bright more lights at
the same time there clearly needs more
lights for safety back there it's very
dark okay stop there Mr Marshall thank
you sir for your comments and thank you
for keeping them to the three minutes we
appreciate it very
much all right Karen do you see any
other speakers yes Michael I think it's
Lou not sure if I pronounce okay we'll
we'll find out in a second Mr Lou you
can you hear
me I think
you're can you hear me now yeah we can
hear you now thank you how about if you
would be so kind to give me your name
and and residence address Michael Lou I
live at 65 Meadow Park Avenue okay Mr
Lou would you raise your right hand to
be sworn yes do you swear or affirm that
any testimony you give this evening will
be the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth
yes thank you very much tell us what you
think about this application I too am
opposed to this development um my house
is the house that sits directly behind
the existing parking lot that's there
right now okay and I will tell you right
now the noise is never ending from that
parking lot whether it's cars who have
their alarms going off the just last
week we had someone's car alarm go off
for like five minutes in the middle of
the night I'm like really come on and
then um with the with the recent
snows uh I understand from the school
safety standpoint you want to plow your
your parking lot I completely get that
for your employees and for your students
but they're doing it at four o'clock in
the morning and it woke me up I'm a very
sound sleeper my wife is
insomniac and it wakes her up single
time um at 4 in the morning um and as
other people have said the fence would
be a great idea I've got I've got girls
three girls and I would assume not have
a bunch of guys running through my
backyard which they currently do
fetching lacrosse balls or whatever uh
I'd love to have a an8 foot fence there
um also with concerning the lights we
have issues with the lights because as
the cars come in to that parking lot
they shine right into our
bedroom every night that's what happens
um also in our last uh meeting a year
ago there was discussion around
investigating the west side of the
building of of the west side of that
property to put the parking lots over
there I have not seen any plans or any
investigation into putting the parking
lots on the left side of the building
where they have ample space over there I
know there's a some statues over there
but it's not this isn't uh Stonehenge or
Easter Island these are a bunch of
statues you can move and you could
actually move them to our side if you
want if you wanted to move over to the
east side of the building you fine you
can move them over there easy to do and
you could at least when people are
standing there they're usually quiet and
contemplative um versus having all the
noise on on the neighbors's side of the
property uh I think there's plenty of
space over there they could have ample
space more parking lot if they wanted um
but to uh an earlier point there isn't
we don't have an idea what their grand
plan is and we know they have one they
just have not shared it with anyone at
this
point um other than that that's it I'm
thanks thanks for staying up so late for
to hear our concerns thank you very much
for doing the same and to tell us your
perspective which we appreciate very
much all right um I have one more Denon
Parker
okay Mr Parker if there is anyone else
please raise your hand Mr Parker if you
would state your name and your address
for us please my name is densen Parker
my address is 17 Meadow Park Avenue I uh
reside at the first of the southernmost
home on the on meal park on the west
side of the street all right if you
would raise your right hand and be sworn
in i' appreciate do you swear or affirm
that any testimony you give this board
this evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth I do
thank you sir please tell us your uh
perspective from 17 Meadow Park there
okay okay the uh about five or so years
ago four or five years ago St Charles
built up the grade of the soil
immediately behind my house by about
four to five feet and as a result it it
increased the flooding of my backyard to
the extent that I've over the years had
to bring in or have hauled in three sem
or not semi but dump truck loads of of
soil uh just to to hold the water back
uh in addition I have over the last year
and a half made it a point to go over
and and count the number of vacant
parking spaces on the four lots and
they've averaged over 60 vacant uh uh
parking spaces during the the school uh
week and half of those roughly are on
the main
campus uh I guess I'm curious as to as
to as a point of clarification occasion
is this an event venue or not uh but
lastly uh I request that that uh this
board and each of its members please
maintain all of your records in relation
to this matter including all of your
communication with each member of this
board in relation to this application
and all of your Communications with St
Charles and any of its representatives
in relation to this application as these
are evidentiate materials in the event
of future administrative or judicial
proceedings in relation to this
application by St Charles thank you okay
thank you Mr Parker we appreciate it
very much thanks for staying up so late
with us thank
you Karen any other
um I uh will just give everyone one last
chance in the audience to raise your
hand as we will not hear any more
testimony based on the case before okay
okay thank you um I think the right way
to go about this is Mr shanon why don't
you take this opportunity to uh
rebut uh any of the uh isssues raised or
comments made
please yeah very briefly Mr chairman um
uh I think uh Mr Negron might do better
on the rebuttal for some of the specific
issues particularly storm water he won't
may want Matt Ferris uh but uh the staff
uh report obviously recommends approvals
and in their conditions which I believe
were read into the record there's a
provisor there for maintaining the
Integrity of the easements um also um I
did not stress uh perhaps enough that in
addition to the additional parking
spaces uh this um road that provides
access to the rear parking lot will be
the sole means of emergency access for
the east side of our campus and so not
only is it um un necessary for the
parking lot but it's necessary from a
public safety Health and Welfare
standard and uh Mr chairman at at any
time uh you feel appropriate I could go
through the Duncan factors and that that
hinges on the issue of whether or not
you think these parking spaces south of
the chapel or in in the front yard uh
and therefore constituting a variance
it's our Pro position that they're
they're clearly in the side yard and no
variance is required but having said
that um if you so desire Mr chairman I
could go through the Duncan factors and
uh as you know that's a balancing test
you don't have to meet all the factors
but we clearly meet the vast majority of
them and it's the chair's prerogative
whether you want me to address that now
or whether you want me to turn it over
uh to Mr Negron who could respond to
some of the other comments about
historical developments storm water
issues things of that nature I I think
we should go to Mr Negron and hear his
uh his response to some of the comments
that the neighbors made uh and then we
can come back and we can talk to the
board and find out whether we need to go
over the Duncan issues or not thank you
Mr chairman thank you sir Mr Negron yes
Mr chair thank you for H turning it back
over to me and and first and foremost we
definitely appreciate the neighbors
comments and and and their questions um
and you know I think that I did a very
um effective job articulating exactly
what we did to get to this point and how
um this being the third time that we're
in front of Bexley and each time we've
of we've kind of stepped back on what
our development plans were we've
Incorporated things that the neighbors
had requested we've gone above and
beyond um the request
and um you know to even to the fact of
the lights on the east side we've agreed
to Shield them so that they wouldn't be
an issue so from my perspective um our
application stands um as is stands very
strong we um we're going to be good
neighbors uh for for the rest of the
time we're here like we've been in the
past and um you know I don't I at this
point I feel it not necessary to rebut
anything specific unless there's
something specific spefic that the
commission would want me to answer and I
will clearly do that without
hesitation okay we'll we'll certainly
give them the uh opportunity to ask you
questions
um Mr Shannon anything anybody else you
think should speak first or would you
like me to go to the panel and ask them
if they have questions or comments uh
directed to any of your Witnesses the
latter okay uh members of the pan
U of the board here do any of you have
questions or comments for the
applicants chairman behall I have
several so if there's someone that has
less than several maybe they should go
first Mr Turner do
you well mine I I have a couple
questions just to where things used to
be so maybe I should ask because it
might apply to I so okay um I just had a
couple questions when you guys were here
a couple years ago um I don't was I
don't remember the lot being in front of
the chapel so is that added on and then
the two other questions I had was I
thought you were going to leave last
time and review putting a lot to the
west of the entrance ways on that lot up
there and I again as one of the
neighbors I didn't see any hear any talk
of that or why you looked at it and why
you didn't end up doing it
and then I also thought that the access
drive going back and around the chapel
was going to be installed but it was
going to have a row of plants there and
it was going to be a emergency access
only and that the D the parking lot was
still going to be accessed from the back
but this was going to provide access for
emergency vehicles only um a limited
access drive going around the building
so I I apologize because it's been a
while but those are my those are the
things I recall and if you can clarify
my memory on those I'd appreciate
it Mike if I may since I did that
application it might make sense for me
to jump in here thank you okay I'm Brent
Foley I'm a principal architect with
Triad Architects graduate of St Charles
uh 694 grandon Avenue South Beckley and
hey Alicia good to see you off the
Bexley Education Foundation board
um um we we did to answer the specific
questions Mr Turner we did have the
parking lot was on the front side of the
chapel but it ex Ed further to the South
um and actually we thought at that time
that was right around the time of the
rewriting of the zoning Cathy I believe
and we thought at that time we didn't
catch that that was actually going to be
a
variance um and that was so moving it
back uh behind the main structure was
actually the change that we made um
correct the park the parking um the
drive was always intended to serve both
parking lots uh but we did also show at
that time uh a study for the fact that
we were going to provide um a drive that
could provide um access to a fir Tru as
well um the new design doesn't require
some of those things we had to do
because there's not as much parking in
the front um I can't speak perhaps Jim
or others uh on the call could speak to
why we're not looking at the other side
of the campus right now but that at
least answers the first half of your
question Mr Turner
okay um Mr Turner any other did did that
answer your question or yeah I mean yes
except for the question about the lot to
the left because I thought when we I
thought when we ended our last meeting
that was one of the things they were
going to look at because I think pretty
much most members of the board had
said that we felt that it would be
easier to get it approved if it was on
the west side of the property and so
they said that they were going to look
at that and come back and then we this
the first one I've seen him come back
from what I what I remember
so Mr chairman my recollection too Mr
Turner if if I could respond briefly um
I was not representing uh St Charles at
that time uh I think it was July of last
year but I reviewed the uh tape uh
probably a half a dozen times and what
um uh and believe me I can't remember
what I had for breakfast so I I
understand the deal fog on this but what
was before you at that time uh the
parking lot uh was not isolated right
there just south of the chapel it
extended all the way into the front yard
in front of the main School building and
that's what we were told uh dictated the
request for a variance and that's why we
were in front of the uh Board of uh
zoning and planning because of that
variance uh we were told at that time uh
in subsequent meetings with staff and
legal Council for the city uh that I'm
sorry just with staff at that particular
Junction that if we move the parking
back behind the primary building line uh
that there would therefore be no
variance required um and uh then we
would go to the Architectural Review
Board so that explains how we left that
meeting eliminated the parking in front
of the building we're told we no longer
needed a variance but we're told we
needed architecture review so that's
where we went um just last month um and
got the laundry list of uh lighting
landscaping and storm water to follow up
on in the meantime we were contacted by
staff as well as a City attorney uh that
they wanted to reconnoiter uh and send
us back to the board of zoning and
planning due to the potential for uh the
variant if uh they redefined front yard
to be that area in front of the chapel
um and again the emphasis on the east
side is uh the proximity of those SP
parking spaces to the chapel itself
there are events there that are done at
the chapel where it's easier to access
it uh from the parking lot north of the
uh Chapel or to the South but again the
Lynch pin to this was the emergency
access on the east side uh putting the
uh the drive on the west side or the
parking on the West Side would not have
enabled us to address the emergency
access concern so that's why from my
perspective it's on the east
side
okay uh Miss Mitchell do you want to um
ask some questions were you there for
the last for the meeting in somehow I I
think I missed that July meeting yes you
did I I did too okay um I remember the
meeting from two from it was my first
one that I heard so um so some of the
questions that I have Mr
um you just acknowledged um something
that is different from what St Charles
uh folks acknowledged when they first
came before us I don't know what they
said in July but that um this um parking
was supposed to be for student parking
but now you're acknowledging it is in
fact for um event space parking correct
it in all honesty it's for both I I just
wanted to highlight the fact that it's
proximity that Chapel made it much more
convenient for those Chapel events but
it is student and faculty parking and
again if you weren't there in July uh
I'm not aware of any other hearings in
front of this board involving this
project so you there was a hearing in
2018 okay I was not so I does St Charles
still have about 700 students grades uh
9 through
12 I I'll jump in here Mike Excuse Me
Miss Mitchell this is Jim L the
principal uh respectfully our student
enrollment right now is 540 students but
we also have 80 faculty staff employees
on a daily
basis uh directly right after school if
we have any type of practices athletic
events we have additional people that
can be coming and going Mr Shannon's
comments about the use of this parking
lots are accurate it would be used for
student use on the daily basis
teacher use on a daily
basis we we are a school of faith and so
we use that Chapel
frequently so having access to that on a
frequent basis is part of what we
do having also safety on the east side
of that property is very important to us
and so that's why we want to have this
parking lot uh some of the comments that
were made earlier tonight about us
having 7 and half parking spaces on our
parking on our property those are
inaccurate on our what is your what is
your total um count because I I remember
you I think it was you that presented
your total space count on the other side
of on the west side I was at that
meeting that was in July 2019 yes
ma'am on our main campus on our main
campus where we're talking about we call
it the main campus that's where we do
most of our academic work there's a
total of 280 parking
spots that
in 225 for our students and
approximately 55 for our faculty west
of our main campus on our West Campus we
have an additional I'll say 110 spots so
that 700 number that was proposed
earlier in this meeting tonight those
are inaccurate numbers so you you are
saying that you roughly on a regular
basis need to
accommodate for your Monday through
Friday operations of like students and
and um faculty and staff about a little
less than 400 spaces and you're saying
you have how many spaces on your on your
main campus right now I said on our main
campus right now we have about
280 total spes Miss Mitchell again I I
would say on a weekly basis again
because of our religious nature we
actually have religious events on our
campus weekly presently even during this
covid crisis our students are
celebrating Mass every
Friday and because of the covid
challenges we we've had to reduce the
number but when we open school up in the
fall and we anticipate open we like to
have other people come in that's that's
when we have trouble with parking is
when we have again um a school MTH and I
know you guys have been open since
August correct with students yes ma'am
yeah um so I am one of the other
questions that I have and Mr or chairman
behal this might be a question that
because it's just from my understanding
um when a building is built
before code is implemented and it it is
then now becoming non it's now
considered a non-conforming structure
does that mean that any new construction
that happens after
should and would be acceptable to be
non-conforming thereafter or is there an
expectation that when something is built
new to the best that it can be be cons
be built to a conforming status does
that question makes sense right yeah uh
Kathy why don't you answer that question
I think answer but I unfortunately I
don't have my staff report from from the
last meeting but but I'd like to give a
little history the the parking requires
for this structure is is not currently
met and and and over the period of time
you know since they've had their last
Improvement they've purchased property
outside of bexy across the street over
there on the west side of Nelson they've
added additional parking over there to
help with some of this overflow that
they felt that that this was necessary
for the school and I do think I remember
that I do think I remember that when
there were like not enough Park so so
the calculations they still aren't where
they really need to be based on the
square footage of the facility but
instead of just expanding on this site
they did go off site they you know
they've maxed out what they could there
and make that work so now they're still
looking of areas where they can make
this work and it's you know if it's
necessary or
required I do understand I I do
understand that I'm just trying to wrap
my head around this whole whole thing
because no those are great questions
when we talked about the 27 spaces or I
remember it was about the same amount of
spaces they're proposing 27 spaces now
on this east side but there was a pro a
suggestion of the West Side
being more than enough ample space to
add those spaces and we're still talking
about front and side yard like we're
talking about the same kind
of you know Cod restriction correct so
yes so they were trying to avoid the
front yard area so this is why they
pulled it back behind the front face of
the building even though it is still in
front of that Chapel so that's really up
to this to board to decide well I think
the reason they're pulling it back by
the chapel is to make it convenient
because they use that space for event
space which is neither here nor there I
really I can clarify there is no space
I'm sorry to jump in but there is no
space uh on the West Side to put parking
that is not in front of the front front
of the original structure right so the
intent was to not our understanding if
we put it back there and this is what
the debate is that it would not be a
variance uh if we would put it back
behind that line and that is the the um
the point of that is needs to be debated
ultimately I'm sorry Mike to jump in if
that's what you're gonna say yeah real
quickly to clarify Miss Mitchell it
really whether or not this is conforming
or not from a parking standpoint is
isn't really specifically relevant to
this because the way our code works is
we don't have a maximum um that may be
something in the future some codes have
instilled maximum parking ratios but for
these kind of uses we don't have a mar
maximum so it's really just up to you
whether you think it's an appropriate
way to develop the site um there's
really no limit to how many spaces
they're quote unquote allowed to do as
long as it fits within you consider the
constraints of the site then that to
that point of the question that I have
now then I guess is a question of
appropriateness because I know that St
Charles when we first heard this case
had struggled with the mitigation of
maintaining the tree lines there was um
uh complaints of trash we saw pictures
of that and so I'd like to hear kind of
what St Charles has done in the two
years since first bringing that those
hearing those issues what mitigation
steps they've done to take care of some
of the issues that um apparently are
still ongoing because some folks talked
about that that tonight so I'd like to
hear what St Charles believes or asserts
that they have done to mitigate some of
the
issues some of those being the tree the
trees um the Dead uh plant tree material
um the access of students I believe
they're students because it sounds like
they're athletes coming on to property
lines um all that kind of stuff so I'd
like to hear what sort of mitigation
they they've done since then to address
those
issues Miss Mitchell I'd like Matt
Ferris of EP Ferris to give you uh and
the board again some description about
the uh water issues we also have Mr Gary
Houston from Oakland
Nursery that can describe the
landscaping and then I I can talk a
little bit about the student Behavior as
well as I can so does this land Mr lard
does this landscape include new
Landscaping that you've already
installed I'm going to have Mr Mr uh
Houston describe again what he feels has
been the problem and then how we're
going to mitigate that and improve that
if we could please could Mr talk a
little bit about the water issues please
sure good morning Matt Ferris EP Ferris
and Associates 880 King Avenue uh civil
engineer surveyor for the project we
we've prepared uh the set of plans
you're seeing now uh and and designed a
a storm water management system that uh
meets and actually slightly exceeds the
city code as far as storm water
management these plans have not yet been
submitted to the city uh or back checked
by the city
engineer uh but we're confident that you
know that this design or tweaks that the
city engineer uh will ask us to make if
any um you know will be taken care of
the the storm water
system um so along the east edge of the
uh Drive aisle will be a curbed uh
curbed Edge so all the surface water uh
that is is on the parking lot will find
its way to the curbs and then find their
way into curb inlet that will be
conveyed into a a underground storm
water system system which is presented
there with those rectangles with lighter
colors we we have them labeled as field
a b and c those are underground systems
that you will not be able to see uh but
it's basically a stoned based system
with uh plastic arches creating voids
for storage the down spouts uh along the
chapel and the East face of the main
campus will be tied into that system uh
this system uh will not add to the
current uh flooding problems that the
neighbors are seeing um you know it will
not fix the flooding problem that the
neighbors are seeing you know that that
problem needs to be investigated further
we're tying into a city system you know
we we we don't know what the condition
of that line is um Downstream to see if
there's any obstructions or if it's
flowing as
designed uh but we are handling the
storm water that's being um created by
the increase and runoff uh according to
the code and like I said slightly uh
slightly better than what the code's
requiring um but uh but uh that's that's
what we
have um Mr Ferris do you not feel it
would be prudent to understand what's
causing the the flooding um in that
particular area before you were to start
this work because what you've described
is future mitigation not current
mitigation and my question was
specifically what has St Charles done to
mitigate some of the issues that was in
that were infringing upon the the
residents along that that property line
over the last couple of years so what
you're described to me is the same stuff
that was described the first time um and
it was over and
above then um so and what you said is
that what you what you proposed isn't
going to fix the problem right
now um so my question is I'm less
interested in what's above above and
beyond that's not even going to fix the
problem if we haven't even identified
what the problem is and you're going to
tie into a faulty City system and stress
it more I'm just
curious how that works yeah we're not
gonna we're not going to release any
more water than what's being released
today or I should say more specific
we're not going to be releasing at the
rate uh any more than what's being
released today um so so my point it
won't fix the problem correct yeah it's
not gonna fix the problem uh we saw the
photographs earlier this week when the
neighbors uh presented those to us um
that was the first time that I saw the
situation they've been dealing with uh
so they they brought that to our
attention you know we we have not looked
into uh what that you know what the
downstream system what the condition is
or what's going on uh but we will not be
releasing any more water uh any quicker
than what's being released
today so Matt I have a question is is
there any retention tanks under the
existing
parking uh there's not but there is a
detention system um that is just east of
the parking field that's north of the
chapel so if look on our exhibit there
we have a labeled field C and B there's
a a dry detention Basin that's out there
today that just it's you know merely
looks like a depression in the in the
ground but the water yeah so the water
today sheet drains off of the existing
pavement and goes into that that
depression uh and then it's choked by a
an Orphus plate that's in that in that
catch Basin that that um you know stores
the water in that detention Basin that
and the filling up and looks like a a
retention Basin so there is there is
storm water controls on the site
today can I have a followup question to
that if you don't mind please um are
those two the field C and the field B
are those two retention
areas um sufficient for the size of that
parking
lot
yes so if that's the case then there
shouldn't be any runoff from the parking
lot that those two two retention basins
aren't catching
correct
correct so then the water is coming from
somewhere else is your
thought yeah to be honest with you I we
have not studied what's going on um you
know what what I can speak to our design
for this Improvement and and I can tell
you that that we will hold back the
water according to what the drainage
manual asks us to um the the existing
conditions that they're experiencing
their backyard I don't have any
information for you tonight to tell you
what's going on uh but I you know like I
said we're you know this Improvement is
not going to fix it but it's not going
to make it any worse Mr Ferris wouldn't
your normal Civil Engineering Process
though involve studying the existing
infrastructure that's there to build a
design in the first
place you know understanding the
capacity of the system that we're tying
into um you know not like I said we
found out about the issues on Monday
when we met with the neighbors but we
heard about the flooding two years ago
you didn't you didn't hear about that
two years ago or you weren't part of
that project
then um I I was not at the meeting to
two years ago um but
uh but you know we do need to look into
what's going on and I don't know if
that's you know working with the city
engineer just to figure out you know
what information they have I don't know
if they've done you know any analysis or
any inspection of their system to see if
there's any blockages or any you know
broken pipes but um I it's definitely
something we need to look into in your
um sort of professional opinion and
don't feel like I'm holding you to it
I'm just I'm not a civil engineer um I
have an aspiring one growing up here in
the house but I am not
um when you see that level
of water
collection
um where a drain the drains just don't
seem to be able to handle the volume of
water um does that do you do you find
that that is like a broken system
somewhere do like what what sorts of
things because you you know that you
would think would be causing the problem
yeah it's either going to be you know an
obstruction either debris in the
line uh broken pipe or the system could
be um you know underd designed for the
drainage area that it's
accepting well that's been my my
experience and my professional uh
experience that you know there's how it
was built and intended initially and
then there's the the growth that that
space that they're trying to grow um
wasn't designed to accommodate so um I
am curious Mr low if you just one last
question does St Charles receive
citations from Columbus fire department
for failure to um have adequate exit and
egress areas for to that east side of
the property are they currently being
cited for
that uh to my knowledge we have not not
Reed any type of citation about that no
because it's grandfathered because of
I'm sorry I said we do have U uh yearly
annually fire inspections but but I'm
not I'm not aware of any citation re
we've received because of that drive now
it it's a pretty fat F so if you've got
if you were getting them you would know
um so you're so since you're not
receiving citations
but you are citing that as a concern
for um being able to have access so that
tells me that the fire department has
already assessed that they can access
the east side of the building safely or
else you'd be
cited I don't know again i' I've never
been approached by anybody in the fire
department about that but again I don't
I don't know again the the the safety
issue on the east side well over our
entire campus is always a top priority
to what we do oh sure no absolutely um I
think I had most of my questions
answered um some of the resident um
points had sort of addressed some of my
questions um the only thing Miss
Mitchell this is Jimmy nagron I heard
you say was um St Charles there was some
questions about the last time when we
were here and the debris and some of the
the cleanup and and uh we took care of
the yeah thank you yeah yep no problem I
was listening to you well I'm an active
listener so we did go ahead and clean
everything up um and then to be honest
with you we um it's something that's
done fairly often so when the neighbors
pointed out you know Mr low sent over
people to to clean it up and and we'll
continue to do so so we did clean the
debris up and then in the process of our
landscape plan we're going to be
replacing um landscaping and and and
some of the plantings that were um that
are dead so we just been holding off
waiting to get the parking lot approved
so I think those were the two areas that
I heard you say that that didn't come
back up in the Q&A and and that
mitigation on the cleanup is ongoing or
was that just the one time one off
because it was a very public
complaint yeah
sure I I think we take great pride in
keeping our campus pretty clean it's a
gorgeous campus yeah our our our uh
maintenance team and grounds crew uh
they're always picking up things and
Mowing and weeding I know I know uh Mr
Parker has a relationship with our our
grounds groundsmen and they talk a lot
so we we really try to take care of our
entire property so as as Mr Negron said
we when we hear of a dress it right away
we don't we don't put it on
yes that's correct yeah I just didn't
want to miss those um Miss Mitchell I
just uh remember I was writing down what
you had asked so thank
you I think those are all the questions
that I
had is your c one more oh go ahead sorry
Sean go ahead Sean go right ahead please
I just had a quick question for you um
it sounded to me like several of the um
neighbors would prefer off fence over a
landscape screening
uh to the backyard I I don't want to
speak for them as a whole but several of
them it sounded to me like that would be
a solution to keep kids out of the
backyard to keep the lights from shining
in their bedroom
um I didn't know whether that was some I
was just curious if that was something
you did consider and if not why didn't
you why is it a cost factor or what I
mean what's the reason behind not
considering a fence I guess yeah so um
if you remember when I spoke in the
beginning we voluntarily said we were
going to Shield the light Source on the
east side of the
building so and then in the landscape
buffer if you look at the plans that
were designed by um OA Nursery it's it's
a very thick
adequate
barrier So when you say Shield the light
source because currently um I I don't
have the ability to manipulate this
screen but the picture that we saw of
the night lighting that's coming off of
the building I'm assuming that's you
would not see the source of the light
anymore on the on the the we have Wall
packs on the east side of the building
we will put Shields over the um those
lights so that the light source is no
longer seen so it just it will Shine the
Light down it'll go downward well the
lights the lights are going to remain
the same we're just going to put a
shield so that the light does not
pollute to the neighbor's property the
light
source and do you I can't see because
it's small and I'm old here um but do
you have proposed lighting to go along
this drive yes yes we have and where
would that be could you put we we've
submitted a lighting plan with
photometrics for it sorry I'm looking
for it that's okay I was looking too but
can barely see when it's this small well
there
are yeah there are um there there are
seven light Po and three
ballards um to um light the parking lot
all of the the light poles are not
there're No taller than 14 feet the
light source it's it's directly down so
there's no um the light source is not
visible it's it meets the current
code and the reason we installed the
ballards it's just around the chap
we were we had to put lower lighting so
that we wouldn't have light pollution on
the adjacent
property I didn't see a lighting plan in
this
packet
okay well but that would be
required a
condition and the the concern I heard
Lodge from the residence though was not
so much the uh the facility lighting but
the lighting of the cars driving around
the access road parking and so forth
right the Landscaping takes care of that
if you look at the landscape plan you
could see the multi-layer um
Landscaping I I have a concern about the
Landscaping am I I'm muted yeah
um I believe a number of the residents
testified that all the Landscaping keeps
dying because of the the flooding and
from what the civil engineer testified
to it doesn't sound like any of the
water will be any less so my concern is
are they just going to keep planting and
pulling things out and it's it I I don't
understand why a fence is not an option
as some of the residents
requested is a fence an option
gentlemen uh excuse me m Mr chairman if
Gary Houston is still on here he's from
Oakland nursing I'd like him to talk a
little bit about the Landscaping
and then I I'll talk about the fence if
I could but okay is Gary Gary's got yeah
I I just need to put him into the panel
he's got kicked off a couple times here
tonight um just he excuse me he he'll
have to be sworn in as well go ahead
Gary are you
there he needs to unmute yeah all right
Gary yes sir uh would you give me your
full name and uh uh what your
relationship to this Enterprise is uh my
full name is Gary Allen Houston and I am
the designer working for Oakland Nursery
and I have been part of the development
process for St Charles for the last 30
years okay thank you would you raise
your right hand to be Warren
please do you swear or affirm that any
testimony you give this board this
evening will be the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes sir
thank you very much please go go on did
you you understand the question that's
been asked of you um could you repeat
the question yeah it has to do with the
plannings on the side in in the
partially in the easement but that guard
the easternmost boundary of St Charles
they seem to be dying the question is
are they dying because of the wetness in
the soil that that seems to be uh uh
unavoidable there at this point and if
so what how are you dealing with that
issue well there's a a small group of
trees that are on the far north side of
that existing parking lot that runs uh
directly out from the the driveway
through the building and I would say
there's I'm guessing seven eight trees
and they are white pines that have been
there for quite a long time um I think I
put those in
right when that parking lot was first
built um but uh I'm not necessarily
saying it's because of water problems
that they died there are many other
problems with Evergreens going on right
now and it could be any number of things
okay
um now as far as what we're doing here
in the future we're putting a a nice
full row of Evergreens I
believe I've got 64
Evergreens going down that side um what
what size six to eight
foot 68 I'm
sorry um and with that also I've I'm
including 17 shade trees around a chapel
on Entry drive and along that side also
along with the six ornamental trees and
uh hedge R ATT Taxas wherever
the lights would shine through when car
is pulling
up which would screen uh screen Broad
Street and also the neighboring yards
there in the
rear
okay Mr low how about that versus
offense or in addition to
offense uh yeah again I I've I've been
at St Charles a long time and again I I
try to listen to some of our neighbors
as I remember again many many years ago
there there was a fence that was on that
East property line that was really I
think in disrepair and and again maybe
it was just sections of fence certain
neighbors that has since been removed so
again the barrier between our properties
and theirs right now is just
Landscaping uh the landscaping again
that's part of this plan that Mr Houston
o Nursery is preparing to install I
think number one it will create a
barrier and also let's be honest it'll
also be an improvement to the beauty of
the property uh the the it's not just
that the trees are dead there's there's
a lot of things that are sort of
overgrown and again I'll say this it's I
think it's on both of our properties not
just on ours and not just on theirs so
anything we can do to make that property
line better improve that I'm all in
favor of it if our neighbors say look we
would like to have a fence some type of
fence with some type of U barrier I
understand the gentleman who has young
children again we we want to make sure
that people are say I'm willing to
discuss that I we have fencing on a lot
of our property I know that sometimes
though neighbors don't want fencing
because again it's not as attractive and
it takes away little bit from I'll say
the Grandeur of the property but I'd be
willing to discuss that but I think also
want to talk to all the neighbors I'm
not sure all of them would want some
type of fence in their backyard but I'd
be willing to discuss that I think again
we want to improve our property we want
to make sure that we're good neighbors
with our
neighbors so at a stone wall like a
stone um sort of barrier
wall um that would be cost prohibitive
Jim yeah that that would be pretty cost
prohibitive also so again uh something
of that height because I think the
gentleman asked for an 8ot fence um I'm
not sure that that would really be
appropriate an8 foot Stone
Fence well I wasn't necessarily
proposing A8 foot Stone Fence I mean you
can do lots of different Heights and
then you can add in shrubbery and then
you can also add in trees um I think
probably if your fence was in disrepair
all of that dead brush was a result of
you butting up to an old fence that
didn't get taken care of that was
probably 50 years ago though they no I
understand but it just kind of got left
there and that you know that to is one
of the things that I recall about
previously was the um and I don't think
that that particular resident spoke
tonight but they showed a picture of the
headlights that shine into their home
into their backyards from the um the
neighboring parking lot currently um and
so that I mean you know I I think you
have to look at multi layered in mult
different types of material in terms of
barrier potentially not just the fence
and not just the wall I can tell who
Among Us is taking a
nap I took a nap yes because you have a
quite a bit more energy than the rest of
us do but let's let's U let me ask one
crank it out I'm sorry I'm so
sorry with
with 400 parking spaces how many parking
spaces and why do you need that many
parking spaces I'm going to give you
take you to 30,000 feet here now right
you have 500 students they don't all
drive to the to school every day
obviously uh you have weddings uh we
used to have the com aali Club annual U
uh event there and there'd be 300 400
people there for that event you know I
so I understand what you do there but
how often do you need 400
spaces uh me Mr chairman again this year
is really a challenge because of covid
you know we haven't been able to have an
event in our
Commons like you mentioned before all
year right my hope is that those times
will return but but it is a challenge I
mean one of the things is again I say
this we we're we're more than a school
we're a community and so when we have an
event during the school day I'm not
talking about a a dinner in the evening
I'm talking about an event where we want
to have our families come onto our
campus to celebrate Mass to go to Ash
Wednesday celebration and we do that
that's the nature of our school we do
not have enough parking it's a challenge
when we have an event and we've had a
few where whether they're weddings or
dinners or you know the beex the
Education Association has a fundraiser
there whatever those parking spaces are
critical and again I I think again we're
asking to have something that provides
for our day-to-day it provides for
safety it provides access to again an
important part of our school and what
we're all about that
Chapel that that's what we're asking
for
all right um members of thank you Mr B
you're welcome folks U
Mr U Mr Shannon do you have anything to
add or should I ask whether there's any
more questions from members of the
board I guess um let me the lad
again summarize yes members members of
the board other than Alicia you have any
questions about this
issue or comments this is Heidi Dorne
sorry I just have one more that new
driveway and all the new um the new
proposed parking area is there has there
been uh drainage established for all of
that
too yes yeah yes that I mean the system
that we've we have designed incorporates
the existing drainage and uh all the
trainers coming off of the new
asphalt
okay okay do we have here a couple
questions uh Kathy
Rose we need to vote separately or do we
vote let me see here we I'll get punch
drunk this time and
Kathy she might be
on We Lost Kathy Kathy you're on
mute I'm sorry so we are are we
addressing 12620
4B regarding a front yard variance or
does the board believe
that I should we well let's let's
approach that issue with the
board because and just take me through
it let's say we say that we need to make
a a a determination of whether we need a
FR a a
variance or not then what becomes the
issue let's say we decide we do not need
a variance in that situation then what
what do we need to vote on at that point
in time a parking lot expansion on the
east side of the school complex with
conditions okay and if they do need a
variance then they then we need to vote
on the variance
first right yes or do they go hand inand
with each
other I'm got to think my way through
that or Mr Shannon if you have any
thoughts yeah um Mr chairman um I'm not
going to belabor any point but I'm going
to try to be direct um we believe that
the space south of the chapel where we
show parking is not in our front yard we
believe the front building setb as in
all other jurisdictions have been in for
38 years is measured from the principal
building which would be the school
building itself so we honestly believe
that our proposed parking south of the
chapel is not in the front yard
however staff has been willing to
support us under either interpretation
subject to the board's decision if you
feel um that although it's behind our
front building primary front building
setback it's still somehow ends up in
the front yard because the chapel was
built later as an ancillary structure
and it somehow moved our building front
line back uh because that Chapel was
built uh then it would be a variant
and the criteria for the variance uh Mr
chair you know better than I the Duncan
factors but just uh out of an abundance
of caution to go through them number one
is whether the property in question will
yield a reasonable return uh without the
variance the answer that's probably yes
it will whether the variance is
substantial I feel that this is a d
Minimus variance it's even questionable
whether it's appropriate but if it is
appropriate uh having these uh 27
parking spaces in front of the chapel
there yet behind the main building seems
uh not to be a substantial request
whether the essential character of the
neighborhood would be substantially
altered by our 27 Pace parking lot um I
don't believe that is the case whether
the variance would adversely affect the
delivery of government services in this
case it would augment the public safety
delivery of services by providing us a
much needed access to the east side of
our campus whether the property owner
purchased the property without the
knowledge of the zoning restriction well
when the Catholic dicese purchased this
property um this zoning restriction
didn't exist so the answer there is no
whether the property owner predicament
feasibly can be obviated through some
other method other than a variance again
we don't feel the Varian is necessary to
begin with the front building setback is
of the principal structure and whether
the spirit and intent behind the zoning
requirement would be observed uh and a
substantial Justice Done by the granting
of the variants parking is necessary and
uh appropriate for the institutional use
even though you've categorize us as an
open space um you know um I'm from the
class of 76 uh for the record that's
1976 Mr Beall not 1876 you're a young
kid compared to me
and uh and the number 400 got floated
but the actual number on our site on the
main campus is closer to
276 the Surplus parking above the 276 is
all on the west campus so you look at
the actual parking per and and one last
point and I'll leave it at this when
this code was Rewritten and um the uh
schools were put in the open space
District based on my inquiries uh with
staff uh in the legal department there
um I asked them point blank is there any
other school in the open space District
that is similarly affected by this
requirement um that all off street
parking in the open space district has
to be reviewed by the um B Bap the
answer was no no other school that was
put in the open uh space District be
they public or private is confronted
with this issue so this overlay this
reite of the zoning code as it relates
to the open space and as it relates to
the parking in the in the front yard it
was intended for the residential
districts to keep the driveways that
went to Nowhere that had the circular
driveways in front of your houses so
they they didn't really access the
garages in the rear that's what it was
about and we got lumped into into the
open space district and this provision
was uh applied to us but it uh its
applicability is solely to us us and we
feel that that's desperate in nature uh
you know I don't want to Rattle Sabers
Mr chairman uh our relationship with the
city has been uh too good and too strong
but the bottom line is that this is a
reasonable request uh we are augmenting
um all the things we can in terms of the
buffer um we with the fine toothcomb U
have determined what our storm water
runoff needs are we by law cannot
increase the storm water runoff poose
development to what it is right now and
what it is right now was regulated uh
the first time when that first parking
lot was put in so there is a problem in
our neighbors yards uh we don't want to
say it's their problem we want to be
helpful if we can and through our due
diligence we might discover uh what is
impeding the storm water from
effectively being discharged on their
property but it is not storm water that
is coming from our property Point Blank
um so with that I would respectfully
asked for your uh favorable
recommendation of this um we've been to
the Bap then we've been to the
architecture review commission and now
we've been back to beap uh we've done
our due diligence we've met with our
neighbors and I respectfully submit um
that this Merit your favorable
consideration without a variance and
then the alternative if you feel a
variance is necessary because the chapel
somehow establishes the front building
line uh we meet the standards for the
Practical difficulty as outlined um in
your code and in the Kissle
case Mr thank you um um wait a second
chairman who's speaking please Karen oh
Karen yes ma'am I have um audience
members who are like I can't even see my
screen because they keep putting their
hands
up time and time again yes so can you
clarify whether we're to them whether
we're going to hear any more testimony
or whether it's closed no we're we're
not going to hear any more testimony as
we decided in the earlier case we have
other cases we have to hear tonight as
well and uh so we've had the public
input already and we I think we all
understand the
issues um Mr let me let me uh take a
poll of the board and do we do you
believe that the par lot is in the front
yard and therefore requires variance the
question not whether you would Grant the
variance do you think a variance is
necessary so let me uh uh hear your
positions on that uh and I'll just go
down the list here you can tell me what
you think
there uh Mr uh uh
Turner um I I generally don't believe
it's in the front yard but m uh Mr
fishal wanted to say something I just
want to make sure something to do so no
actually I was just going to suggest
that Mr Beall that that's exactly where
you should start what you're doing
thanks Sean no keep going thank
you uh Sean how do you feel about
whether a variance should be decided
upon you think it requires a
variance I believe it sits sits behind
the the front of the building so I
consider it more side yard than a front
yard side yard okay uh Mr
Marsh I I agree with Mr Turner okay
thank you Miss
Mitchell I
agree uh Mr
F I agree as
well
um let's see Brian
shik is Ryan oh he's probably
muted
Heidi Dorne what do you think I agree as
well okay I also agree so regardless of
which way Ryan goes I think we have
enough votes that says do you do not
need a variance that is doesn't sit in
the front
yard
so that takes us where
then Miss
Rose would you like me to read the
findings please
before we do this this Mr Marsh I just
have a question for Mr Shannon you you
made a comment that you know that the
storm water is not coming from your
property how how do you know
that well uh the federal law is called
the npdes the national pollutant
discharge elimination system codified by
the state of Ohio EPA and codified uh in
your local ordinances no I I I
understand that I'm just talking about
the the pictures that we saw showed
water there and and your comment was
that that water isn't coming from your
property I I should have I should have
qualified that unless there's a breach
in the city's uh system um but we had to
uh we had to uh at the time the first
parking lot was done and certainly at
the time this one was done you know you
have those orange fences that go around
the perimeter Brian you know this very
well um and uh we cannot allow the flow
of storm water uh to increase uh
post-development from pre-development
and those regulations were followed the
first time so um obviously if there's a
breach in the system or something that
I'm not aware of uh but I do know from
an engineering standpoint we have
adequate capacity uh for what was
already built and there's adequate
capacity uh for the 27 additional spaces
now the fly and the ointment is why are
they having a problem on on their
property um and uh it could be again uh
I guess it's it's it's fathomable it
could be from our property if there's a
breach in the system that's causing our
storm water to go onto their property
but we've had no indication of that so
it is regulated during the construction
process so that's why I had a high
confidence level that it would not come
from uh our property but that does uh
that does does not acknowledge the
possib ility that there's a breach in
the system which then it could be coming
from anywhere Downstream okay thank you
thank
you all right uh Kathy Rose
uh of fact conclusions of law please
thank you findings of and conclusions of
law for application number bz-1 19-10
for property located at 20110 East Broad
Street upon consideration of the
application evidence and testimony
before the board
finds the proposed parking lot expansion
on the east side of the school and north
side of the chapel addition should be
granted with the following conditions
any damage to plantings during the
utility utility line repairs to city
lines will be replaced by St
Charles and final design review and
approval of the landscape by the tree
and public garden Commission
will also be
required Mr Mr uh Shannon does that
rendition of finding the fact conclution
all meet with your approval yes Mr
chairman uh members of the board do you
have any additions or amendments to that
reading that you feel are
appropriate can we this is Sean can we
add that they need to at least meet with
the city to try to figure out what's
going on with the water I I'm a little
uncomfortable proving proving I
understand the storm system and that
underwater detention but there's
obviously an issue there and it's either
theirs or it's the cities or it's the
neighbors I don't I don't feel build the
lot and then without anybody looking at
trying to figure out what's going on
over there we would agree to that
condition Mr chairman okay like say
camera the line that this is all
connected to but the the com the the
condition would be that that they would
actively work with the city and the
neighbors
to find resolution to the water problem
that exists whether they're the cause of
it or not I think is what we're
saying um I think um Mr Beal I think
what we would I think the thing would be
to say we would work with the city's
engineer because well yeah the city is
is to me just you know the whole
shooting match but the city engineer
would certainly be the person that would
be involved with it I would
think um so sure I don't there's a I
have no problem with
that thank
you likewise Mr behall I heard St
Charles was open to Consulting further
with the neighbors about screening not
necessarily having one solution in mind
but certainly seeing that as a part of
being a good neighbor with this
expansion yes similar to the be for for
for a condition all right Mr F what Mr
Mr U Shannon what if we added that as a
condition that that the
applicant um engage actively engage in
discussions with
the um with the neighbors regarding the
screening the the most appropriate
screening that's similar Mr Shannon I
think that's I mean where we have to be
really careful I mean if one neighbor
wants it and another neighbor doesn't it
puts in a really tough position here
what this says is that you're going to
actively engage in conversation with
them about it okay that's fine we accept
that okay so the the two additional is
work with the city and neighbors to find
resolution to the drainage
issue and number four engage in
discussion on
screening with the neighbors to the east
correct board members are you satisfied
with that
verbiage or someone is not please say so
please at this moment hearing none Mr
Shannon are you okay with the additional
wording yes Mr chairman all right thank
you sir all right um with that reading
of the findings of fact and conclusions
of law I would entertain a motion to
approve the findings of fact conclusions
of
law so moved thank you Mr Marsh do I
hear a
second second second second thank you uh
Heidi um Miss Rose please call the
role uh Mr
Fout
yes Mr Marsh
yes Miss
Dorne
yes Mr
shik
we were having trouble getting him to
say anything earlier too Mr sh all right
he's muted Miss Mitchell I vote
no Mr
Turner
yes and Mr schik is he muted still
Yes uh chairman
Beall um I vote no but the matter passes
four to two with one either exstension
or I don't know what to call Mr shik
there right now he can't be we'll call
it an exstension thank you Mr chairman
and members of the board thank you gent
thank you very much we appreciate it
thanks for your presentation and and
thanks for your patience staying up this
right with us thanks to all thank you
for your uh commitment to this right all
right thank you ladies and gentlemen I
am turning back to Miss
Cunningham okay thank you B you a do I'm
glad I didn't have to do too much and
you guys handled it as well handled it
well so thank you for your participation
yep have a good have a good night you
have one more case don't you two more
two so let us get on to them by uh
application number bz
a-211 involves 46 North Park View the
owner is George O Ruck and the applicant
is Robert Miller the request is that the
applicant is seeking Architectural
Review and approval for an addition
connecting the principal structure to
the detached garage the applicant is
also seeking a variance from bexy code
section 12 52.0 n this is R3 zoning
which requires a 40ft setback from the
rear yard property line and a 12-ft
setback from the side yard property line
to allow a one-story Edition will
connect the principal structure to the
detached garage
uh is Mr
Miller available or who is here on
behalf of the
applicant um sorry hold on
um is I just to put um somebody named
Brent into the room yes that's correct
okay Brent is there anybody else in the
audience that is here here to represent
this
case
okay Brent would you identify yourself
please yes this is Brent racer with new
Avenue Architects and
Engineers BR spell your last name for me
racer R A CE R oh that was what I was
gonna do so I that was not much help uh
would you uh raise your right hand and
be sworn
please do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give the board
this evening will be the truth and
nothing but the truth I will thank you
very much
um Kathy do you have this case yes Karen
would you mind putting up the site
plan this this is an existing principal
structure with a detached garage and the
applicant proposed to do a connector
piece and once you do that connector
piece this all becomes principal
structure there there therefore the need
for the very to the rear and side yard
setbacks because the garage now being
attached to the principal structure does
not meet that setback requirement so
it's not getting any closer but just the
fact that it's being attached to the
principal structure with this connector
piece uh is the variance now this has
gone before the architecture review
board and they had concerns about the
initial design submitted and they made
some suggestions that Karen can discuss
and the applicant has actually made the
revisions to discussed and you know in
hopes that that you know this board if
they want to remand it back to ARB for
final design review but I'll let Karen
speak to that portion of this thank you
Karen hi um I think this this P this
little perspective drawing at the at the
bottom is the best example of where we
were um at the architecture review board
the board was not um was not in favor of
this design
however they indicated that they could
support here's the original design you
can see that it it was very kind of
chaotic with lots of dis different parts
and board suggested that um that before
they delve deeper into a dis a a lot of
details in a design that they go on to
the board of zoning and planning which
is now here to see um what the feeling
was for the
variants at the same time they did go
ahead and take some of the direction I'm
looking for it um of the board this is
the the current back of the house where
it attaches to the
garage
um that is as Cathy said the site plan
the old
plan the old drawing and here is a a new
sketch of an attempt to make it a more
uniform connector piece and that's very
strongly that they could only approve
this if um and this is looking from
inside the property correct um the the
board felt very strongly they could only
approve this it if it was greatly
simplified with and that you all um and
would ask that you all if you're going
to give it the variance that you approve
it only with the condition that it comes
back to architecture review board for
final um design reproval approval and
certificate of appropriateness sorry I'm
so tired I'm slurring my words right
believe me I hear you all right uh Mr
racer can you uh do we have enough
detail now or or do you think that
whatever we do if we approve the the
concept that this got to go back to ARB
yes we plan for it to go back to ARB and
just since everyone has been up a very
long time um if I am more than willing
to answer any questions but as mentioned
we are within the the line of the um uh
we're effectively attaching the existing
garage to the existing home and okay
again as mentioned the reason it we're
coming in front of you is because now
it's making the
garage part of the main structure so
okay willing to answer any questions and
this is uh the reason that you're uh can
can we see a site plan why is there a
problem with the 12 foot setback and the
40 foot
setbacks
it's the um it's actually it's because
of the garage I see now that now that
we're attached garage the garage the
existing garage has basically a zero lot
line on the rear of the building I see
and then the sidey yard as well we're
technically the the garage is too close
for the 12 feet which is required
okay right so you're you're not really
doing anything worse than the garage is
already doing no yeah we're well within
that okay um members of the board you
you have any questions or
comments the only question this is Mr
Marsh who who would see this just the
one
neighbor most likely yes to the north
and are there anybody in the any people
in the audience that here to make
comments Pro or con this
request if uh anybody in the attendees
room would like to testify to this case
can you please raise your virtual
hand
I do not see anyone okay um members of
the board you have any questions or
comments obviously I think a condition
is this has to go back to ARB there
there which which is of course okay with
the applicant yes any other questions or
comments from board
members okay I hear none uh cath Kathy
can you give us findings of fact and
conclusions of law on this matter the
findings of fact and and conclusions of
law for application number bz
a-211 for property located at 46 North
Parkview uh based on the evidence and
testimony presented the board
finds
the appropriate to Grant a variance to
bexy code section 12520
n for the R3 zoning District to allow a
one-story addition that connects the
principal structure to the garage with
the condition that the final design is
remanded back to ARB for final review
and
approval all right uh any members of the
board wish to make any modifications to
the findings of fact conclusions of law
if you do wish to do so please speak
up hearing none Mr racer are you okay
with the reading of the findings of fact
inclusions of law yes you just heard yes
okay thank you sir uh do I hear a motion
to approve the findings of p and
conclusion moved is there a second
second thank you Miss Rose please call
the
rooll uh Miss
Dorne yes Mr shik
yes uh Mr
Turner yes Mr Fout
yes Mr Marsh
yes uh is Miss Mitchell still with us we
are yes great okay and chairman Beal I
vote Yes also the U the variances are
granted and the approvals are also
granted so good luck with your project
there Mr Racer thank you and good luck
with the last case and I hope you all
have a good night's sleep tonight thank
you very much thanks the next case is
case bz ap-20
d46 involving 2404 Fair Avenue the
applicant is Brenda Parker the owners of
the property are Tyler and Allison
chamblin the applicant is seeking
Architectural Review and approval to
allow a two-story addition to the rear
of the principal structure that connect
to the detached garage the applicant is
also seeking a variance from Bexley city
code section
12529 in the R6 District which requires
a 25t setback from the rear yard
property line and an 8ft setback from
the side yard property to allow the
addition in addition that attaches the
principal structure to the detached
garage sounds
familiar sounds similar all right um who
is here on
behalf I believe that just Tyler
chamblain is here but if um I'm looking
for Brenda Parker the the um architect
but
um if anyone else is here Tyler Brenda
went to bed so it's just me okay okay
this is Bob behall the chairman would
you uh raise your right hand and be
sworn please yes you swear or affirm
that the testimony you're going to give
this board this evening will be the
truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth I do thank you very much and
you're the owner one of the owners of
this property correct correct all right
sir uh Kathy tell us a little bit about
this one uh if you would be so kind same
situation but this is a different zoning
District this went to the architecture
review board actually seeking a variance
to build like
within a little more than three feet
away from the detached garage the uh
architecture review board felt that it
might look more appropriate actually
attaching it to the garage so the
architect chose to uh pursue modify
modifying the design and
she has brought it went back to the
architecture review board for a
recommendation on that design
which Karen can comment on and that is
what you are now reviewing the modified
Clan very good uh Kathy or Karen please
tell us a little bit about this design
situation here so this is a um a fairly
large addition to a house um on Fair
Avenue that the board the architecture
review board felt very strongly that the
addition as big as it is and needing a
variance in and of itself um left a very
awkward 4-foot
space um so they encouraged the
applicant to either look at attaching
the garage or putting a covered walkway
over it to make it less of an awkward um
Gap in between the house and um the
addition having said that um it is a
very large addition so I I don't want to
I don't want to
um confuse the issue of where where we
were yes leading them to look at a
covered attachment to the garage but we
are also looking at a the addition as
whether or not it it um suffices in
terms of the
variance so you don't have a problem
with the size of it the problem was that
it just sort of I drove by I I tend to
agree that it looked a little awkward
not being attached it would look awkward
yeah no I that's that's the point I want
to make is that I'm not making a comment
on the size of it the architecture
review board looks at this looks at
every case as if if the variance was
approved what architecture would be
acceptable so they they're I'm I'm not
saying that the board doesn't have a
problem with the size or that I don't
have a problem with the size I just want
to be clear that it's the architecture
if this
board does approve the variance then
this architecture
uh and they came back twice is much more
acceptable than the original application
and okay matches the existing structure
so this is another situation that needs
to look at the variants okay but this is
another situation where the variants
that are requested are no worse than the
garage that's already there and built
right let's look at the site plan what's
the distance there
Karen well I don't think that's true
because this is the whole new addition
right here I don't think it's the same
case it's not a one story connector
piece it's a it's a twostory Edition
right it's not the same case at all and
it's on a it's in a smaller zoning I'm
not arguing against the addition at all
but I just want to be clear that to me
this is not at all the same case as one
that we just saw in Parkview that's only
a one-story connector piece as opposed
to a twostory addition in a
smaller
um in a smaller zoning District
and and the addition having said that
the
architecture is very appropriate for the
existing
house okay so they need a variance it
says it requires a 25 foot setback how
far how close are they getting how far
they AR they aren't encroaching on the
rear yard setback for the principal
structure what they are encroaching on
is typically you're requireed to have a
10- foot separation between a detach
structure right and here and a principal
structure
right and what about the 8 foot sidey
yard
setback right looks they're not they're
not 8 feet they're 14 feet 10 inches I I
don't see where the 8 foot sidey yard
problem exists by attaching the garage
to the house so once again it's the
garage that's causing the8 foot yes so
we're no worse off other than the garage
is already too close to the side
yard okay and the same thing is
true with regard to the 25 foot it looks
to me like the garage is within 25t of
the rear yard setback and now that it's
part of the house now the house is needs
the
variance yes okay thank you you got it
all right Tyler or can you tell us
anything about this case that we don't
we haven't already heard no I think you
covered it okay
that's much appreciated uh members of
the board do you have any questions or
comments about this
request all right I hear none uh Kathy
can you give us findings of fact
conclusions of law no no no we have we
have um we have audience members that
would like we do oh I'm sorry I thought
this late we wouldn't have any so I
didn't even ask my my mistake please
who's here on be uh to to speak Pro or
con this request um this is Joyce
Adelman all right Joyce can you hear
me uh yes we can hear you okay uh would
you please give us your full name and
your
address okay I'm gonna let my husband do
that oh that's fine his name yes uh I am
Neil
Hoffman okay Neil and you have my wife's
name Joyce Edelman I got it and your
address is what the address is
2414 Fair Avenue we are we are right
next door directly east of got it
the okay tell us what you think about
this application well first of all let
me swear you in Neil okay if youd raise
your right hand if Joyce is going to
testify she can also raise her right
hand okay do you Joyce and Neil um swear
or affirm that you are going to give
testimony to this board tonight that is
the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth I do thank you very much
all right tell us what you think about
this application please okay um we
received the mailed notice uh on
February 11th okay and at that time we
attempted to view the proposal online
but uh at that point it was not
accessible on the beex website so um
consequently what I did was uh to
contact Tyler um and uh wanted to get
more details about this project because
uh you know it was it was big news we
looked at it um I met briefly with him
um he agreed to meet uh at his property
and um we discussed it uh at that time
but uh I wanted more details and also I
wanted some uh visual uh representation
of what was going on so he did send me
uh the architectural drawings and one
rendering which I believe was from the
north okay so it was not it was a
rendering from another neighbor's
Vantage Point not from our vantage point
however um once my wife and I reviewed
uh
reviewed them from our vantage point we
really became very upset and very
disturbed by the the height of this
project and the sheer volume of what was
being proposed so um really before
addressing you know the specific reasons
and concerns um I you know I would say
to the board we clearly object to this
proposal and we will ask you to reject
this
application um the important factors for
us are that uh first of all we spend a
majority of our time in our kitchen and
outside on our patio um and it is a
refurbished kitchen and and also a patio
that we've invested uh a great deal of
money in because we do enjoy both of
those elements of our house greatly uh
it's a it's it's it's something that uh
we spend a lot of time um socially and
uh and
otherwise in part of our lifestyle okay
the twostory height and the width of
this uh which had been discussed of 14
feet would essentially fill the entire
space the open space um to the west of
us and um it it complet completely
blocks our
view um it is it eliminates most of our
light from the West uh it significantly
reduces or
removes most of the air flow also coming
from the West which uh which is
important in any season but especially
in the spring and
summer we have um uh no window coverings
on any of our three kitchen windows and
door leading to our patio simply because
we enjoy that light so much I mean it
adds a great deal to to our kitchen
which I think most people can appreciate
you spend a lot of time there and
obviously we spend a lot of time on our
outside patio as well um we
enjoy the uh the light the outward view
um with this added structure and again
when you look at it
and I don't know that it was up on the
screen looking at the our vantage point
the Eastward view or the westward view
um when you're when you're looking West
you're facing a solid wall and and
perhaps um I know that Joyce recently
tonight sent the uh or emailed five
pictures uh taken from our kitchen and
our backyard to Kathy Rose and Karen
Boker and uh that might give you some
idea thank you um and I you know this
again is during our inclement weather
but you can have some idea of uh
straight on on the top left there that's
that's the space that when you look at
that tree which is another factor in
this where this this project um from my
understanding uh in my conversation with
Tyler would also uh require them to
eliminate this very attractive and
mature tree okay um we're replacing that
when you see almost at the top of that
original structure of the house on the
left from the gutter uh up at the top
left there yeah you got
it the um the addition was extend from
that
point practically over to the garage
we've got what a 3 foot 11 inch narrow
passageway and this picture is taken if
you're standing in the middle of our
backyard if you're in our kitchen that
that narrow Corridor or whatever they
call it where there's going to be a
structure over it um we could we would
hardly be able to see that anyway so
there 's really not going to be any
opening visually for US unless we're
standing in the middle of the backyard
and that would have limited impact uh on
on the aesthetic from our
standpoint
timer excuse me do we have some a timer
no we don't I I don't think we did
because there's just one person I
okay I think we're getting the idea that
that it's going to block your view so
let let me ask a couple questions here
um and then we'll let you addition make
additional comments but to the staff
uh if if this garage is already in
existence if they were to build an
addition to the back of the house the
applicant uh what's to prevent them from
building an addition to the back if they
stay they they can absolutely build an
addition to the back just has to be 10
feet from the existing garage okay so if
they if they were to build it and stay
10 feet from the garage they could build
it two stories though could they not yes
yes it would be to like
here to to I don't see where your
pointer is okay yeah uhuh right I'm just
kind of estimating if this is but we get
the idea that and and and they could
come and try to get a variance to say
hey can we build it four feet from our
garage
right uh well that's what they initially
did that's what they're and be and and
and the uh ARB said no we don't like the
way that looks well I I just want to
clarify something it wasn't just the
connector piece was not the reason that
ARB tabled the case it was the original
Edition did not match the primary
structure as part of that as part of the
request to go back and refine the design
which didn't match the stone didn't
match the it it just was a box on the
back this is a much better addition but
an additional just kind of comment was
that's a bad space too that sliver of
four feet maybe you we should look at
the possibility of connecting it to the
garage okay but but let me stop you
there let's say they let's say they had
come in with a beautiful design that
went within four feet of the garage they
wouldn't be able to do that would they
not without a variant not without a
variant and the variance would have to
be because they're building it within 5
feet or 10 feet of the garage pardon me
10 feet right and this is also a corner
lot which is probably the reason why the
principal structure is actually kind of
pushed more towards the east and more
towards this this neighbor that we're
talking to right now yeah can I add
something yes okay um you know
essentially the this twostory structure
that would practically adjoin the garage
it it almost when you're putting that
all together it it presents one long
solid Mass to our West and it it removes
any uh any view any visual of a natural
surrounding or otherwise it it's almost
like we would be enclosed in a
fortress and you know the other thing
that I even heard previously is that I
mean we realize that we're facing the
side of their house as it exists now but
adding this addition and this this Mass
it's like we would don't we have a right
to you know some privacy in our own
backyard as
well I mean this is a this would be a
living situation not a garage no one
really lives in a garage yeah and and
and the height of it when you look at it
from the East
is is almost equivalent to the
three-story house okay the roof is maybe
a couple feet below that we can see all
that but isn't isn't aren't those
windows looking into your backyard
already uh the windows are directly
looking to the side of our house yeah
and an angle the addition would be
directly across from our backyard and I
just sent an overview from the Auditor's
website to Karen I don't know if she
could display that or not but it shows
what he what he's talking about his back
corner of his yard is simply surrounded
by structures that all butt up to his
property line correct thank you yeah
here here it is and this would be the
final connection the highlighted lot is
the lot in question and they want to
infill between those two
structures this space right here yes
right
I
mean I'd like to add we've we've lived
in the house for almost 20
years
um our property value will be greatly
reduced if you approve of this twostory
addition um and and we're really upset
about that to have the value of our
property diminished so greatly by being
boxed in as well as the law L of our
enjoyment of our
property question um yes that's exactly
where I was going that side um area is
still with the addition if it's not
connected to the garage within code
right right because it's 10 separation
between the two no no no I don't between
the garage I mean the side of the house
and the lot line isn't that within code
8 feet is what's required it's within
the8 feet right without connection to
the garage is that correct doesn't look
like
it you'd have to go back to the original
site I believe that's the case yes so
they could build that and not connect it
to the garage and just put it within 10
feet in other words if if the garage
wasn't there right corre and I'd be
curious what the existing distance is
between the existing house and
garage
can we tell do you know any of these
answers I think if you go back to one of
the first I think I think it says 14
feet yeah I think around 14 feet I think
it's 14 feet so they could put a four
foot addition on without without coming
to zoning I think it's actually 17 feet
the addition is 14 and then there's
three feet between the addition and the
garage oh you're right you're right
sorry Karen can you can you pull the
site can you pull that site plan up that
had all the
dimensions you could
take you could take the whole addition
and slide it to the west to the the
northwest corner of the house and then
it would meet all the requirements yeah
exactly if you chop that off and move it
to the to all the way to the Western
corner of the house then they'd be 10
feet from the garage and they'd have the
same size
addition this is Katherine I just want
Kathy did you do um um lot coverage
calculations on that because I didn't
see that on the application are they
okay with that they a corner lot they
might meet them I I believe yes I
believe they do I didn't find an issue
with that I don't see the I don't see
the numbers on the application so I
didn't know if you looked at it's
actually probably on this plan that that
Karen's got up right now a lot of times
they'll put it on the drawing right it
says Total Building coverage
20% yeah meet zoning requirement and
they're allowed uh 35% building
footprint and uh
60%
overall so they are under
that but the problem is this house is
shifted to the east side of that lot
because of the setback required for a
corner lot and Dawson Avenue is a deep
ride of way so those Lawns look fairly
deep and a lot of that is ride of way
but still they're required to have that
extra set back off
that
so
Tyler if you could move that to the West
does that help you or make it
impossible yeah that that that wouldn't
work for us because part of part of what
we're trying to solve here is pantry and
storage space for the kitchen which is
that bottom right
corner and what I just drew in yeah what
I just drew in blue is about what they
could do without a variance I it's not
exactly the scale but I'm just guessing
that's that would be about 10 feet from
the existing
garage and then they've got four feet or
maybe even five feet before they get to
the side eight foot side yard set back
to the right oh that's true yeah here I
can redo
that if if the if the issue Tyler is the
entry and storage
space why is it that you need a twostory
addition I I think we're getting off the
point I think we should vote on this
yeah agreed okay I I mean I think the
issue here is uh do we Grant the the the
variances for 8 foot and 25 foot rear
yard setbacks I mean it's his property
if he wants to build a two story he
doesn't have to give his neighbors
excuses for why he wants to do it it's
just a question of whether the variances
are appropriate or not you agree with
that so that so so let's find out and
put it to a
vote is all right any other questions
for members of the board though no okay
um Kathy please call the or please uh
give us findings of fact conclusions of
law the findings of fact and conclusions
of offer application number
bc-20 d46 for property located at 2404
Fair
Avenue based on the testimony presented
the board finds it appropriate to Grant
a variance to bexy code section 122.0 n
R6 zoning to allow an addition that
attaches
the principal structure to the detach
garage did I say that
correctly
okay and no Kathy you need to um
identify the variances the this the
variance isn't just to attach it it's
because you need to identify the side
yard and rear yard setback variances
that are going to be granted with that
yeah to to by attaching the addition
which would then allow the principal
structure to encroach into the 25 rear
yard setback and
the and
encroach fet into the 8 foot side yard
setback right and how much into the rear
yard
setback is it three feet off the rear
there Karen yes what it look like
so uh 22 22 foot variance to the rear
yard setback and a five foot variance to
the side yard setback by allowing an
addition that connects the principal
structure to the detach garage there you
go it's it's a twostory structure and
we'd like the record to be very clear on
this
uhar in accordance with the plan
submitted 225
2021 yeah so the the plans that are
submitted indicate that it's two stories
Joyce so that would definitely be in the
record um okay um members of the of the
board you have any problem with the
rendition of findings of fact
conclusions of law
uh Ty Tyler do you have any problem with
the rendition of facts and that Kathy
Rose just iterated
no okay um I at this time would uh
entertain a motion to approve the
findings of fact and conclusions of Law
and we'll take it to a
vote second we have a move we have a
motion we have a motion by Mr Marsh a
second by Mr schik I believe y uh so uh
with that uh please call the
role Kathy uh Miss
Mitchell sorry
yes uh Miss Dorne
yes Mr shik
yes Mr
Turner
yes Mr
vout I'll say consultation with
neighbors is actually really vital and
these sorts of things but the Bap isn't
the place for it um on the on the basis
of the merits of this case I'll vote
Yes Mr Marsh
no chairman
behal I vote Yes as well and the matter
uh passes and the variances are
granted thank you for everybody for
waiting this long and Miss Edelman Mr
Hoffman for waiting this long to express
your position which we very much
appreciate and same to you Tyler for
waiting this long for us to get to your
case um thank you at this time I'd
entertain a motion to
adjourn Why Stop Now Mr shik that was a
motion you probably don't realize you
made one but you just did by opening
your mouth course this this uh session
of the board of zoning and planning is
hereby
adjourned
oh good night everybody