okay it's live on youtube and it is
started
okay
i'm checking the attendees
for
board members
for larry basically yeah karen maybe did
you get larry larry had updated his
email recently
oh boy i wonder if i sent it to the no i
sent it to the one that he just sent to
me so okay zoom invite yeah i said i
responded directly to him so that should
have worked it wants an id number what
does he mean by that
oh perfect
okay larry do we have you now
so
all right i think we're set
i'm just looking for larry
you think he's here
well he was in the attendees room a
minute ago but
he
he's not let me just you can go ahead
and start with them
i added him
there he is i was can you hear me
i can hear you
yeah i was in i was put in a webinar
okay
gotcha
i think we have everyone then um let's
go ahead and call to order the january
4th
2021
meeting of the bexley architectural
review board
and i'm going to read just a little
description of what this board does that
will hopefully help some of the people
that might be attending
so this board here is applications for
exterior architectural changes to
residential and commercial properties
for new development alterations or
additions to the city of bexley
the board does not consider or make
recommendations upon a conditional use
variance or any proposed change in
zoning district
those matters are within the authority
of the board of zoning and planning not
this board
if you have concerns about the
application before arb that are not
related to the proposed architecture
they should be addressed at the boat at
the board of zoning and planning for any
application moving on to that board for
determination
unless tabled applications on today's
agenda moving forward to be zapp
will be before it and its meeting on
january on thursday january 28th at 6pm
hopefully that will help people
understand what this meeting is going to
be about
okay um so after that let's go ahead and
call a roll
um kathy's not here so i will do my best
um
mr bardwell
here
mr hellman
here
mr scott here
bill heyer mr heyer
here
uh did i say mr hellman i think you're
on here twice
um i can be here twice do i get the vote
twice
no we also have alternates ms um
strasser
here in miss krosky here
okay um so the next order then is the
approval of minutes from the november
12th of 2020
do i have any
changes or corrections or are we do i
have someone to approve those minutes
this is peter i move to approve
second
okay uh moving on then our next
you want me to call her
yeah call for a vote
okay um mr bardwell
yes
mr heyer
yes
mr hellman
yes mr scott yes
chairman tony yes okay
okay so the next our next um
thing here is for uh public comments
so this is an opportunity for any person
in the audience to provide comments to
the board on any item that is not on the
board's meeting agenda so any comments
relating to items on the agenda may be
made by those with standing when the
matter is before the board for
consideration is there anyone who wants
to speak on any matter that is not on
the board's agenda tonight
karen do you see any raised hands
you're muted karen
okay i do not see any hands raised
okay um so i think that we can proceed
with the applications on the agenda
so the first applications before us are
the consent for approval
and i will read down through the list of
those items on the consent agenda so
these are items that will not go before
bees app
the first is application number
arb-20-74
the applicant is gary alexander the
owner is aaron and joanne pickel
the second is application number arb
20-76 the applicant is dean wentz the
owner is amanda kennedy and luis perez
the third is application arb 20-45
the applicant is ryan brothers
landscaping and the owner is clifton
partners llc
i also wanted to just state for the
record that all of the board members
minor comments that have been made about
these applications were accepted by all
of the applicants so that everybody can
be comfortable that the um
what i consider very minor
recommendations have been made
okay
um do i have someone that would like to
move to approve
that list of consent items
this is peter i move to approve
and someone to second
all second
and karen can you call the role yes mr
heyer
yes
mr hellman
yes mr scott
yes mr bardwell
yes miss tony
yes
okay the next uh list of applicants are
consent agenda items that will be
recommended to the board of zoning and
planning
the first is application number b's app
dash 20-37 the applicant is scott baker
the owner is ryan and michelle o'donnell
the second
application is bzap 20-43
the applicant is pete foster the owner
is thomas hadley
the third is bzap 20-49 applicant is
pete foster the owner is lisa fleischer
and the last one is b zapp 20-51 the
applicant is christina penovska
the owner is matthew and abigail
grossman
once again i wanted to clarify the same
thing on these four applications for the
record that all minor recommendations or
conditions from the board members have
been accepted by the applicants
i got a question do we need to ask if
there's anyone in the weight room for
either
the first list of consent items of these
um yeah we can ask that i haven't i have
not seen any hands but we should
probably officially ask that as well
yeah so hopefully people in the audience
know that if they would like to comment
on any applicant that we're talking
about
um all they have to do is raise their
hand and that karen will
acknowledge them and bring them into the
conversation
so are you asking right are you asking
right now for anyone with standing on
those particular applications
that we've just discussed to raise their
hand so we can hear what they have to
say
yes
and this is peter absent any raised
hands i will move to approve
a second
call the roll
mr heyer
yes
mr helman
yes mr bardwell
yes mr scott
yes chairman tony
yes
okay
okay so the next uh is application
number arb-20-48
the applicant is mike shannon and the
owner is st charles preparatory school
um
chairman tony i'm going to ask that you
skip to the next item
on the agenda while we wait for kathy
rose to get here she's running late and
she's the staff for this project
with this report so if we could move to
the next item on the agenda first
that would be um
bzap 20-41
okay let's we'll move to that one
application bzap 20-41 the applicant is
john hamlet
the owner is james and kayla petkas
and if i mispronounce anyone's name i'm
very sorry
um do we have a staff report on that
karen yes bear with me i'm kind of
managing everything right now so um hold
on just a second
okay the staff report for this and i'll
try to put plans and
there we go
so this application is seeking an
architecture review and recommendation
for a certificate of appropriateness to
be zapped for a second flare floor
addition that is going to exist over an
existing family room a currently
existing structure at the rear of the
printable structure
the addition to this structure i think
is just a very simple volume it seems
massing is fine with i think it's fine
the only reason i didn't put this as
request as a consent agenda item it just
had too many things that i wanted the
board to talk
over a little bit with the applicant but
i do feel pretty strongly that this can
be
recommended to the board of zoning and
planning with the condition that the
applicant work with me on final design
details the things that i think need to
be worked on are the the windows on the
front um do exactly match what is on the
first floor so i think that is that's a
good that's a good thing but on the side
i really feel like that horizontal band
of windows is too elongated and i don't
see any need for either any of the
shutters um on the side elevation it
just it sets up some weird proportions
and i'd rather see the windows even if
it's going to be a transom on the side
match the proportions both in
the um
windows even if it's just the top
the top half of the window and the um
the grid patterns
um
additionally i personally don't have a
preference on the color they provided
two color samples for us
um
but i do feel pretty strongly and the
applicant has already agreed to all of
this
that there shouldn't be a portico over
this secondary door on the front that
looks just like the primary door because
it makes it look like
really a two-family home
so those are my comments i did have a
very nice discussion with the applicant
not the owner but the applicant and they
seem to agree on most of those points
but i will
go to the attendees room
and ask the applicant to raise their
hand because just to prepare you we have
78 attendees in the attendees room right
now
i know we have a lot of projects on the
agenda so it'll take me a minute
longer to a few seconds longer to do
things than normal
um so i'm gonna put robert raskin into
the panelist room
if there's anybody else that has
standing for this particular project and
would like to speak to it please raise
your hand and i'll put you in the
panelist room as well
but it's very important that you raise
your hand electronically because i can't
scroll down all the whole list
okay great so i think we're good
um
mr raskin are you there
yep i'm here i'm sorry i'm sorry i
didn't realize i was muted
um i guess i'll swear you in although
i'm not sure
oh there's kathy
kathy
hold on one second
kathy are you there
all right i'll just attempt to swear you
in mr asking can you raise your right
hand
do you swear to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth so help you god
yes
great and would you like to add anything
to that
um you know i think you did a great
representation of what we're trying to
achieve here um
the peckis family we're working with is
really excited about this project and
they've recently moved into the home and
they just need a little bit of extra
space for our for their family and
we've got a existing first floor uh
family room that we're going to be
building above
and the reason that we would then go
ahead and ask for that variance is just
to stay in conformant with that existing
space so
we did look at the possibility of moving
it over so that we wouldn't need to
apply for that variance but it just made
the overall look of that structure
seemed very odd it also limited our
ability for
some of the bathroom layouts we were
looking for
and we think that what we came up with
is very reasonable and
will be a great addition to this house
and the neighborhood
and as you mentioned we are and i've
talked with the homeowners and they are
in agreeance that we're okay with
changing uh some of the report
proportions of those windows that you
mentioned and we're not going to do any
kind of portico on the side over there
i do believe they like that darker blue
color if that is okay with everyone as
well
okay are there any board members that
would
like to
speak on this
applicant
i think it's a great house and it's a
great addition this is a just a little
charmer on the corner so um
i'm um i'm all in
thank you
will the uh
will the tree remain that's there i
assume that front that beautiful tree
that tree unfortunately already had to
be taken down oh it's already down yeah
it was dying
any other board members that would like
to
comments or questions on this
application
okay uh seeing none
do i have someone that would like to
make a motion on this
application
are there any folks
interested in this case i presume not
yeah do you have any raised hands karen
no i don't we can ask again if anybody
has standing that would like to testify
to this case please raise your hand and
i will put you into the panelist room
if there are not i move for approval of
the application
as you stated in your staff report
can we uh
can we clarify if that applies to the
color
and uh in our stat in the uh then we
have facts the color
the pork share and then was there any
resolution about the
windows um the toss horizontal windows
karen the wizard anything that was
i don't know
about we talked about making them
um
three of them instead of four so it
would not be as elongated and then
making them the same size as a sash as
the
as one of the existing windows whichever
one you know kind of fits what they want
to do with the interior space can we get
that stated then in the approval
sure
i don't know if kathy's here yet kathy
are you here
she's showing up on like a phone call
yeah
i see that
i would amend my motion to include those
comments perfect thank
you i would second that motion
can we call the roll
yeah is that okay catherine if we just
do that and i'll get the facts and
findings off of the tape
sorry
um as long as it's clear from the staff
report what the findings the facts and
conclusions are yes um along with mrs
scott's recommendation and they are in
writing before the board and available
for the public that's absolutely fine
okay sounds great that helps a lot
as we move forward i just want to be
clear we're looking at two options
and
as staff report has has offered the
opinion that the
uh portico over the
the new entrance is not appropriate and
i'm presuming
has recommended the option does not have
that
am i clear
am i correct that what we're voting to
approve
is the latter it is the one that does
not have the competing cortico over the
new door yes that's correct the
applicant has stated that their
preference as well
thank you
are you ready for a roll call
i'm ready
mr bardwell
yes
mr scott yes
mr hellman
yes mr heyer yes chairman tony
yes
karen
yes can you can you hear me
yes
yay
okay
um kathy are you ready for us to go back
to st
charles hang on karen i just want to
make sure that the applicant is uh
understands that
how how his application was approved
that it is
basically back to you okay i just want
to make sure you're comfortable with and
i'm aware that we'll need uh we'll just
work with karen moving forward to
get those items finalized yes okay thank
you thank you thank you very much and
thank you for working with me on this
it'll be a great project thank you
have a great evening guys thanks
okay so you can hear me karen yes
i apologize i don't know why none of my
equipment seems to be working i do have
a laptop on and i can see what's on the
screen so as long as you can hear me i
guess that's good yeah we can hear you
are you ready to move to on st charles
i am okay great
okay uh that application number is
arb-20-48 the applicant is mike shannon
the owner is saint charles preparatory
school and the address is 2010 east
broad street
so karen are you giving the staff report
or is kathy um kathy's going to give the
staff report
on this one
i'm going okay
so the applicant is seeking
architectural review
and approval to allow additional parking
on the east side of the building which
will include underground water detention
and i just want to give the board an
update uh
this is an existing non-conforming site
and it was previously before the board
of zoning and planning
for parking which required a variance
because the parking was in the front
yard
so
it was heard and tabled at that time
which is july of 2019
so the applicant has since
returned with a new application
without a variance request
and
what they simply plan to do is expand
the parking
which due to the fact that this is an
existing non-conforming site can only
make the situation better for parking it
is added on the east side of the
facility
and based on the concerns expressed at
the zoning meeting regarding the
drainage
concerns and landscaping screening
the applicant also proposes
underground water retention drawn by ep
fairs and then also they have a
landscape plan
which if the board finds what's proposed
appropriate i would defer the approval
of the landscape to the tree and public
garden commission
okay is the
is there someone that would like to
speak on behalf of this
application in the audience i think i
have a lot of hands raised so i'll go
ahead and put
um
everyone into the
well we need to determine um i'm going
to put mr shannon who's the applicant
into the room
and then we'll then we'll figure out who
has standing to um to be put into the
room
okay
mr shannon are you there
he is in the room but muted
okay goody
can you hear me i can hear you
uh good evening uh karen members of the
commission mike shannon on behalf of st
charles
kathy did a great job of a very
straightforward approach
suzanne should you have mike sworden
yes karen
or kathy whoever
please take your name
mike shannon
do you follow me for a firm the
testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth
i do
and also guys i want to i think i may
have figured out how to unmute get my
microphone to work on this laptop so
okay so can you hear me
yeah but you gotta turn the other one
off
okay so you can hear me now right
yes yes but you're echoing so make sure
the other one is completely now i can't
hear you
okay um
can we can we keep going while kathy
gets that figured out mr shannon would
you please um
continue with your explanation
madam chairman members of the commission
uh mike shannon again uh we are
attempting to add 29 parking spaces on
the east side
of
the facility on east broad street
um
we think it's a fairly benign request
kathy does point out that there was a
previous request they had a much larger
parking lot that went in front of the
building setback required a variance
we modified that
site plan so that there's no longer a
variance required
and
we actually just need these parking
spaces to address the day-to-day
activities of our students and staff
as cassie mentioned
we're non-conforming with the number of
spaces we have and this will help
augment the parking we do have
um we've tried to be sensitive to the
concerns that were raised at the
previous hearing um and oakland nursery
has put together
a robust landscape plan and matt ferris
our engineer
has done all the necessary
uh engineering work to ensure that uh
storm water runoff will not be a problem
here and for these reasons we
respectfully ask
for these reasons we would respectfully
ask for your approval also for the
record with me this evening is principal
st charles james lauer
matt ferriss is also here our engineer
to answer any questions
and jim negron from corda is also here
also here and also michael kelly
representing st charles is available
should you have any questions thank you
for your time
thank you mr shannon is there anyone
else in the audience with standing that
would like to speak on behalf of this
application we should probably define
standing one more time
so if you have standing on this
application you should have been sent a
letter from the city
telling you about this application
um and that is done by a radius of how
close you are to the property
so i would ask anyone who received a
letter
um saying that they have standing for
for them to raise their hand
okay i'm promoting every hand that's
being raised um
into
as a panelist
so give me a minute
second
um
okay i think that is everyone almost
see
two more
how many people are you adding in karen
okay hold on
okay i'm going to read the names of the
people that i um
have sworn in i mean have added in
clinton staller
amanda
arnold white
uh jeffrey i i don't have a last name
um
jonathan marshall
michael lou
and that should be everyone
before we before we hear from those
folks
uh we should ask whether any commission
members have any question of the
applicant
and then second uh could could somebody
clarify why
this application
is in front of arb it appears to be a
parking and a landscape
plan
i can speak to that
if you can hear me
okay uh
under the open space district
uh the architecture review board has
jurisdiction over review of any
structures
i'm considering this a structure
and there's no variance involved so this
is the only body that would review
such a change
by what do we mean by structure i mean
does that say we have the right to
fiddle with the parking or i'm just
curious what the uh what's the third
what's the third dimensional thing
that's structure
well it's the expansion of the parking
lot
which in in
in my view meets
the requirements or meets the location
of whether it's proposed
uh but
there's usually a board that provides
review of such changes
i get i'm i'm confused but that's okay i
see you know i mean that's why we have a
board of zone and planning
um
but uh again if it's in front of us it's
in front of us so well it's the
expansion of the parking and it does
meet code
as proposed
and they're providing screening
and drainage and
you know to
move this forward without a review i
feel it's it's this board who has
jurisdiction over changes in the open
space district
and does not need to go to the zoning
board because there are no variances
being requested they're simply making an
expansion of the existing parking and
it's subject to this board's review and
approval
uh well this is peter into mr hellman's
point uh in the third dimension that
includes lighting which is historically
a major issue for adjoining property
owners so can someone speak to what the
lighting
and the extension of that lighting
light shed would be on the adjoining
property owners
am i able to speak
yes mr shannon you're on
um
i'd state the obvious mr bardwell that
uh this this is down lighting uh but um
i don't know if matt ferris has more
specifics uh that could address your
question
so
i don't know if matt has to raise his
hand or how that works yeah we need to
swear him in
um
matt are you there
hold on i think he might be
still in the
panelist room i mean in the attendees
okay
matt should be in the panelist room now
good evening matt ferriss ferris
associates okay kathy's going to swear
you in
matt do you finally swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth
i do
thank you
yeah at this time the plans presented we
do not have any proposed
additional lighting
uh
no
additional lighting for this parking i
and can you help me with that because
i'm
presuming that you would want lighting
for
uh
for general safety
uh
what am i
overlooking on that
you know
jim lowers here representing uh st
charles as well but uh you know this
plan we have not shown uh any proposed
lighting at this time so uh i defer to
the owner to see if if that's something
that we want to add to this plan but no
we need to get
what's in front of you today does not
have does not show any proposed lighting
upstairs
amanda marshall if you can hear us you
might want to put your phone on mute
because we can hear your background
thanks thank you amanda
are there other board members that would
like to ask questions about this
application
again forgive me i i'm i i'm confused
because
uh
if if we are adding parking
i'm presuming that we would be adding
lighting
for personal safety and for general
illumination
uh
and i'm presuming that this board would
want to
understand what the extension of that
lighting would be
to
adjoining properties so
help me what am i overlooking on this
yep perhaps the applicant can explain
why no additional lighting is being
proposed is it because it'll be proposed
later or because there's sufficient
lighting as it currently exists
to illuminate the new space
that that sort of discussion would be
helpful
[Music]
i think if we could get mr lauer to
address that um
it would be helpful
mr lauer are you there
yes he is
mr lauer
uh i'm jim lower right here
from the testimony you're about to give
this evening is the truth
i do
thank you
again uh board i appreciate you hearing
our our request
the question about lighting is a good
one
presently on our building we have
lighting that is on the top of the
building
that provides
lighting for our current parking lot
i i don't know that we're going to need
additional lighting because we're not
adding addition
too many additional parking spaces
um
again the the
most northern part of the parking lot
is already a parking lot and again
there's there's no
lighting there
on the
south side of our chapel
the addition or new parking lot that
there is lighting on the part of the
building there
i i don't know uh that we would need
additional lighting i that that is where
i am at right now
thank you for your comments so i'm
presuming that
and i'm paraphrasing but you're saying
the current illumination is sufficient
and no
additional lighting is proposed
is correct
may i ask a question about that
to let everybody know that mr negron jim
negron is now on a panelist he might
actually be able to spread some light
also go ahead mister
i had a question for kathy um from a
zoning or or any other process
if um
if the applicant determined in six
months or a year that additional
lighting was necessary would that
require
any
review process
we do have minimum standards
as far as height cutoff fixtures and
zero candlelight at the property line so
i guess as a matter of procedure just to
verify
that it does meet those requirements
okay so there are standards that have to
be
complied with yeah
okay thank you
thank you
i have a question i just want to make
for for record and discussion um and
maybe mr negron or um
matt ferris can address it but uh the
head in parking that's facing the east
to the neighboring properties uh i think
in the one landscape plan i saw
a row of uh
landscaping can we can we discuss that
what that's going to be and the height
of that so we can make sure that the
the hidden parking is being blocked as
as they parking their parking facing the
the east neighboring property
which one of the panelists would like to
answer that question
yeah i think you know this is matt
ferris you know i can i can um if you
can scroll to the last sheet of that
plan set that's the
oakland nursery um landscape plan
and i think we can we can look at that
together um gary hughstead with oakland
nursing is unable to attend today's
meeting
but i can i can
do my best as a civil engineer to talk
you through plantings
so
you zoom in there i think we do have uh
i think 24 inch
we have a hedge row there
24 inch height
it's called out there 39
will this go before the uh tree and
public garden
yes
yes yes that would be my recommendation
i would suggest that would be a
condition of this approval
i i feel like they would be
better to look at this and decide what's
going to give a good
screen than what i would
madam sure we'd agree to that
condition it was our understanding that
they would have the review authority of
the landscaping when we met with staff
[Music]
so pete are you okay with that
yeah i think it's more just clarifying
and having the discussion for this
meeting i think
the overall parking layout in the in the
design looks looks great i think the my
only concern for the
the neighboring properties would be you
know headlights going into those those
properties i don't know if there's an
existing fence there or not uh but
that's that's all i don't i don't have a
problem with the and obviously don't
want to comment in or approve the
landscaping but um as it's not part of
our jurisdiction but just questions
that's all
thank you
i'd like to add on behalf of the tree
commission uh the tree commission has
worked with st charles
has a long-standing working relationship
with st charles
on landscaping
also along clifton there's been many
many improvements over the years
that required a pretty robust
landscape solution in order to make sure
that there was compatibility between
properties uh
well done edges and the like so um
uh that's we should expect the land the
tree and polygons commission to do a a a
good job in making sure that appropriate
screening is in place
okay
um so are there um people in the
audience that would like to speak about
this application
yes um if you are still in the attendees
room and have not raised your hand to be
put in a panelist room please raise your
hand now if not
um if i don't see any more which i don't
i'd like to ask anybody that would like
to testify that has standing in the
panelist room to raise their hand
the first person i see is denson parker
kathy could you swear dents and parker
in please
or if they could i'll give their names
and i can throw them all in okay anybody
that would like to testify please raise
your hand
your electronic hand
or your or your regular hand doesn't
matter
okay clinton staller jeffrey rosenberg
jonathan marshall
dents and parker
am i missing anybody
okay
you're right me michael lou
michael
sorry
all right
do you swear
raise your right hand
raise your right hand do you sell me
swear or firm the testimony you're about
to give this evening is the truth
i do yes i do
i do
madam chair with the number of um
of interested persons that wish to
participate or speak uh would it be
reasonable for the chairwoman to
request request a time yes just getting
to that awesome okay we would ask
because we have such a long meeting
ahead of us we would ask everyone to
keep their comments to three minutes
um so uh let's start i will i'll be the
timekeeper yes karen please pick one and
ask them to go first
okay we'll start with um denton parker
please
uh you need to unmute
okay can you hear me now yep
okay uh two points um i am looking out
at st charles now from my patio my
living room i should say uh sliding
glass door and there is not sufficient
lighting uh in fact there isn't
there's no lights on the east side of
the chapel it is completely the ground
is completely
uh dark okay and there is very little
lighting
that
illuminates the other grassy area to the
south and to the north of the chapel
that's number one
number two
is that our last meeting before the
zoning board
if we all left we the neighbors left
with understanding that the
the west side of the property was going
to be
explored for possible
parking lot location
uh has that
been negated
who on the panelists would like to
answer that question
um i can address that i was not
representing saint charles at the last
hearing but i reviewed the videos that
you so conveniently have online um a
number of times
um
we
are looking at various options for
additional parking um and
kathy can document the the parking that
we already have
done on west campus uh it's very
significant um but we we really need
these these spaces at this location
and that's why we've come forward with
this request
yeah for the record uh the parking that
they've added
out off the campus is 110 spaces
okay
um
aaron would you pick the next panelist
please i'm just going to go in the order
that they're showing on my screen so for
those of you that are um messaging me no
worries i will get to you um jonathan
marshall
hi uh thanks for your time um
i am new here i just moved to bexley uh
september
of last year and bought the house at 31
meadow park which is
um the second one up on the lot line
just just east of the chapel there
um i live here with uh three young boys
five and under who you heard uh my wife
when she unmuted uh i'm chattering he's
dealing with with bath time and bedtime
right now so
much like i'm sure you all want to get
on with this meeting so do i um
i would just really like to speak on uh
the the property value um having just
bought the home here uh
you know less than six months ago i
would say that
uh had i known a parking lot uh would be
directly behind my lot uh that would
have changed certainly my own valuation
of the property uh and and even my
willingness to buy it
all together uh with three children five
and under
um i have a lot of concerns but my
primary concern is safety and i think
any other family with young kids would
have a safety concern as well with a uh
with a driveway especially an unlit
driveway
uh directly off the property line
um so those are my that's my my primary
concern i also i do have questions about
drainage and
other things that i'm just not an expert
on
i received a notice about this uh just
last week um
it was kind of shocked to see the plans
were so close and obviously i wasn't
involved in
the meetings from 2019 i've done my best
to catch up on on what happened then but
um you know this is all these plans are
all new to me i just
um
uh so i just feel like it's it's awfully
close it's it's a strange place to try
to drive away i wouldn't walked in this
area yesterday
um it is going to be very tight to put
this 24 foot wide
driveway back there um
and i just i mean by just buying the
property and looking at it i just
wouldn't have thought that
that it's even under consideration to
put or build any sort of
lot or otherwise in that area
as i understand it this chapel was built
in
1937 and my home was built in 1929 so
for
80 some years this land has remained and
this has been the spacing between the
chapel and and meadow park and my home
is the closest to the chapel so
um
i think it's an odd plan personally i
think it affects our property value and
the tranquility of our backyard having
having a parking feature back there as
well as the safety
okay thank you
i didn't hear a question in your
comments though karen can you go to the
next
yes michael liu
hi um i live at 65 middle park um am i
able to share
a uh document i have
um
what is the document sir i've got a
presentation of
photos of the lack of screening that we
currently have
originally we had
agreed the previous agreement was that
there would be a 75
visual visual barrier between our yards
between the school and our yards and
clearly we are not there
um who was that agreement with
with the school that was from several
years ago an agreement that was actually
um
that there would be a 75 percent visual
barrier between our yards and
we had the property which the current
parking lot what's up to
and so we see the headlights we see
every single car beep and sound that
that occurs
exactly so we're also next to the uh
near the uh baseball field also the
athletic field
um so you know
in the absence of not being able to show
you those pictures
uh or can i
well i i'd like to give a little
perspective on that i mean this hedgerow
has been in place for several years and
i think much of it is overgrown and
maybe a little less it's more sparse so
with this plan they're implementing
additional landscaping i believe to try
to address the light issue and the
screening issue
i i agree kathy i i think you're correct
that the kirk the new plan does
accommodate for that because most of the
trees have died along the along that row
um one of the concerns i do have is that
the
hedgerow the the trees that they have
planted on on the plan
they're seven foot to eight foot uh
white pine i believe
uh they're sitting right on top of the
utility easement there also
there's the storm drain there is
electrical there is
um
uh
waste sewage waste and something else is
in there too if a gas line is in there
and so you'll be playing with the trees
right on top of that so there's any sort
of construction needs to
anything that needs to be repaired in
there you're gonna dig up all the trees
that you just planted
and that's the you know it'll be
important that those trees get taller in
order to block the light because right
now we get all the stadium light in our
bedroom
and
um everything else but um so it will be
important that those trees get
differently taller than they currently
are and the parking lot as the cars pull
in their headlights shine right into our
bedroom also oh even the ones in them
well they're at night there are eight
lights shining in one room yep exactly
there's a lot of light that comes into
our bedrooms at night
but um additionally uh one of the points
i wanted to make is that when i look at
the purpose of this ar people um
architectural board here
is to maintain a high character of
community development and to ensure the
compatibility of new development
it's also to
um to protect real estate within the
city from impairment or destruction of
value which i think is you know
i don't have to tell you this is your
purpose when i look at property values
i'm very concerned that
uh our property's already been damaged
by having a parking lot placed directly
behind
our
uh our home
and if we continue adding more parking
if we let them continue adding more
parking light it will create even a
bigger problem for the rest of our
neighbors down the street and
increase the amount of traffic that
we're seeing especially if they build a
road there also
um
so i
i am not a realtor by any sorts of
imagination but if i look at property
values on a square footage basis ours is
significantly lower than
the neighbors up the street
because
and i believe it's because we have a
parking lot and this baseball stadium
um
behind our backyards that's i i did put
on an extra minute because of the
confusion i checked to make sure that
it was appropriate not for me to share
the screen and have those
drawings submitted you to the city
i i can't share the screen with
everybody to do presentations because
it's just too complicated um
and also i i think it would need to have
been um submitted ahead of time so i did
put an extra minute on for you sorry
okay thank you
but i'm gonna go now to clinton's dollar
thank you
uh good evening members of the board uh
clinton staller i live at 44 meadow park
um a few things preliminary uh matters i
was an attendee and a participant uh in
the first hearing before
the board of zoning and planning
many of the concerns uh i have with the
project and that a lot of my neighbors
have with the project are probably not
going to sound appropriate
for architectural review
because i agree this is a zoning and
planning matter which is why it was
brought before that board the first time
when it was brought before the board the
zoning and planning board back in july
2019
the school was not seeking a variance so
that is not a distinction that warrants
it not going before that board now
in fact i pointed out um
to miss rose during that meeting that
the school's plan in fact needed a
variance that was discovered during the
meeting
so i hope uh that every member of this
board will uh take some time and go back
and review the video
uh or full transcripts
from that meeting
some other things occurred during that
meeting that i want to discuss
saint charles committed to us the
neighbors who were present
that it would table
its application at that time
and then engage in a continued dialogue
with us the neighbors to try to work out
a plan that was reasonable and worked
for everybody
um i would encourage you i know everyone
i assume everyone here is familiar with
the site uh you've probably looked at it
on google earth
but the engineering drawings
do not tell the story you really need to
look at a satellite aerial and see what
we're talking about
before the board of zoning and planning
several of the board members and you can
see this in
uh the video
several of the board members stated
unequivocally that they would not they
would never support the idea of putting
in driveways and parking lots on the
east side of the building and as i
believe one said i paraphrase
try to cram it in
between the building in the backs of
these uh backyards
so i understand why st charles would not
want this application to go back uh
before that board given given what
happened during that meeting but what we
had expected and what saint charles
committed to us and what that board
implored st charles to do was to engage
in a continued dialogue with us to try
to come up with a plan that worked we
had suggested a plan where saint charles
would
explore using the west side over here by
allen creek
several the board members supported uh
the further exploration of that idea
um they will determine that the
symmetrical character and green space
could be maintained if that i uh uh with
with the right plan in place
um and we don't see that that's ever
been explored uh and of course we've had
no dialogue with saint charles
when i found out that mr shannon was
representing st charles
i was glad
i've known mike shannon for years i have
a lot of respect for mike i know he's
great at what he does
i also know a few things about the
zoning practice i'm a i'm a property
thank you
so i'm i'm done
if you just go ahead and wrap up what
you're saying okay that's cool we we
have a lot of we have a lot of issues we
have issues with um with the long-term
uh plan uh that's that st charles has uh
for this for this property uh for what
the
the the use uh the
volume of usage for this driveway and
parking lot members of the public using
the driveway and parking lot as st
charles does conduct uh public
activities commercial activities in fact
on the property
and the screening is is an issue we have
not even had time we just got this plan
a week ago i know that it was submitted
to you in august but we just found out
about it we've not had time i've got a
landscape architect on retainer uh who i
have looking at this but we've not we've
not had a chance there are drainage
issues here there are engineering issues
that are going to be if you could wrap
it up we have three more people issues
that i believe should be before this
before the zoning board
uh as well as this by the way the letter
that was sent out to everyone who got
the letters on this it says right in the
letter that this is going to go before
the zoning and planning board
two weeks from today that's what the
order says we'll i'm sure the board will
consider all this if we could give
everybody else a chance right now
thank you for my time thank you for your
time and i also pulled up a google map i
think you can all see it so to your
point just to to show it in satellite
view
i appreciate that thank you
uh jeffrey rosenberg
uh unmute
thank you board for allowing me to talk
i'd like to put on the record that we
have not been notified by saint charles
or anyone at st charles if this was
happening even though the last board
asked them to do this for us our biggest
concern with this project is we're not
being inclusive or included in this
project i'd like to talk about the real
user
and academics
their
enrollment is down over the last three
years their need for parking is down as
the last meeting stated through ken
banter and the study that he did
comparing saint charles csg and all the
other universities or schools around
here
built and we're gonna have
a
driveway in our backyards
more consideration a wall an opec wall
that is supposed to be
built according to i think it's 16
points
12.6 uh 12.6408
and along with another statue in here
which we're not talking about we believe
that we're not talking about lighting
right now because those lights were
shining in the back of my house
i'm considering doing construction to my
house on the back side of my house which
is going to ruin
what i want to do
when they have games these lights shine
through our house when they have events
these lights
the question becomes
are you using this for academics if it's
commercial we would like to see this
wall built
furthermore but i'd like to make sure
happens
uh i'm going to respect that the board
and each of the members please maintain
all the records in relation to this
matter
including all your communications with
saint charles in any of its represents
representatives in relation to this
matter in the event this matter precedes
the litigation we can't come to common
ground
thank you for your time
thank you karen can you
yep
um the next person can you raise your
hand please if you have not testified
yet and want to testify
i believe arnold white wants to testify
but was not sworn in yet is that correct
mr white
that is correct
okay kathy can you square him in
do you tell me swear from the
testimonies you're about to give this
evening is the truth
i do
um first of all i i don't know if it's
been made clear but we would like for
the board to uh continue this hearing
because we have made efforts to contact
saint charles they have rebuffed our
efforts we have not had enough time to
look at this
uh adequately
so our first
thought was that the board would
continue this hearing until we have a
chance to work with them to see if we
could
accomplish a
agreement that we could all live with
does the
parking lot have a slope
can one of them
it can't be flat the water has to go
somewhere yeah this is matt ferris uh if
you want me to take the time i can
answer that what is the slope which what
first of all which way does it go
well we've placed catch basins so the
north portion
uh there's catch basins that'll be in
the center of the drive aisle so kind of
in the center of
the new pavement
and then the south parking field
we have curb and gutter inlets that will
be along the east edge of that
drive the private drive
that east edge will be a curbed edge
that will hold the water on the paved
surface and keep it from from shedding
out uh to the property line
why would you uh agree to slope the
water towards st charles instead of
towards our building
all the water will be captured within
the pavement that's being added
this is one of our problems
in the i live with susan white
susan and i live directly to the
east of the parking lot that was
supposed to have a drainage basin and
was supposed to catch the water and we
would not have any difficulties with the
water
since the time that's been created
my
property floods
to about
20 feet
to the east of my property line because
the representations of saint charles
were false that the water does
present a great problem it kills the
grass every year it probably killed the
trees which raises the next problem that
mr liu had spoken about we no longer
have the tree support to keep out the 75
percent of the lighting this was all
part of the problem
that was before and
having uh trees in an easement makes no
sense having the drainage with a catch
basin
on the east side instead of on the west
side let st charles worry about the
water not us we ask for a continuance
thank you
thank you mr white is there another
person that would like to speak on this
or have you gone through your list karen
um if there's anybody else can you
please
raise your hand
i do not see any more hands raised
um the only name
oh there uh well mr parker has already
testified i have denson parker
are we allowing more testimony or i
would prefer not to do that we have such
a long meeting tonight with so many
applications on it we um i'd like to go
back to the board at this point and see
if there are any board members that
would like to talk
yeah i'd like to cover a few points
um
this is an important issue and i do
think that this will not be in my
opinion uh resolvable tonight uh there's
a couple of suggestions i'd like to at
least put on the on the table
one
is regarding any additional parking on
the east side of saint charles
that that parking as opposed to being
north and south
which automatically gives a row of
headlights
going east into the property be looked
at as going east and west
number two i would suggest that if there
is a drive on that side that uh the
relationship is the parking is then next
to the building
there's a driveway and then between the
on the east side of the driveway is
nothing but landscaping
uh number three i would suggest that the
existing parking lots to the they need a
parking plan uh the existing lots to the
west all of the ones to the west uh
should be looked at to see if they can
be in any way reconfigured to become
more efficient uh maybe we maybe even
talk about the actual width of the space
to gain existing parking within their
existing paved area
um i think that's important and i guess
my last point would be i think uh
because of the sense we've been we've
been past this road before with the ball
field and everything else uh i think
with this application we'll need a
grading plan
uh tied to a drainage plan
so that we we are comfortable
uh both with the stormwater issue uh and
and how the grade then works in terms of
mitigating uh relationship and be a
screening between the two properties so
that would be my suggestion
uh and i'll add to what mr hellman has
said and and candidly i am not yet
satisfied
with what i've heard related to
lighting
uh
nighttime lighting
that is
very important for uh no fewer than a
couple of reasons one of which is
the the the
light shed to adjoining properties and
the other is
is personnel
movement and safety within the saint
charles property and i haven't yet
heard a satisfactory response on that
and i would want a very detailed plan
of what that lighting would be
that may be in
addition to what exists
and
what that lighting shed is on
to adjoining properties
thank you mr bardwell are there other
board members that would like to
yeah i'd like i'd like to ask
mr ferriss a question about the existing
grading i know we're looking at a it
looks like a maybe a potential grading
plan on screen
um
an existing catch basin that's there uh
to your knowledge and understanding of
that grading and the ex and the
mr
i guess i think it was mr white brought
up the existing flooding issues that
he's having in his yard
um
i mean looking at looking at the grading
of this if this is
actually representing that matt is is it
more of an issue of not of the grading
or more of a drainage
sizing for that existing catch basin or
potential clogging or you know other
things that are affecting that because
when i'm looking at the grading plane
here it doesn't look like it's shedding
to the east it looks like it's kind of
going into that existing catch basin
there
yeah so generally the grade falls away
from the main school building um and the
catch basin that you're referring to is
actually sitting down in a sump or a low
uh dry basin
i don't have enough history in the area
to tell you about to speak on the
flooding that takes place back there if
there is flooding back there um
you know what what i can speak to is
you know
you know we follow the city of of
bexley's drainage manual
uh and we're able to provide
um you know more
storm water detention though than what's
required in the manual
so what that means is you know for the
added impervious area
that we are proposing and we're required
to hold back
uh
a certain volume of water and release it
at a slower rate than what it currently
is today
and so with the design that we have in
front of you of these plans
uh we're able to exceed that minimum
requirement
and just so that everyone is clear on
that that is a kind of a standard
practice correct where you're
a parking lot and or area is is required
to hold back that water so that it
mitigates uh that transfer of water into
a public waterways
yes and if there if there's backup or
issues with the capacity of the existing
system
that runs north and south
you know i don't have any experience or
knowledge of that
but that also too could be
an issue
madam chair
thank you madam chair this is mike
shannon
yeah
you know uh
st charles wants to be a good neighbor
and we're cognizant of the agenda that
you have this evening and
from my perspective having done this for
some time i think we got a little bit
off topic here this evening but i do
think their board members do have some
questions uh that we don't have finite
answers to that we should have um so i
don't want to give any credence to some
of the testimony because it was clearly
relating to a situation where we needed
a variance
but we would be willing
in the interest of time this evening to
table this to your next available
meeting
to give us time to
address questions we did not have
answers to
but the same time we want to make it
clear for the record that what we're
doing here complies with your code we
were quite surprised that we would have
to go through this review but we agreed
to do so so we'll be back and put our
best foot forward next month and we
would appreciate it if we could be at
the beginning of the agenda and with
that um i am authorized to uh request a
tabling
i appreciate that mr shannon do i have a
board member that will
move for a table
i i will move this is uh mr bard well i
will i will move for a table but i i do
want to inject into the conversation
that as it relates to
site lighting
that they're
as they as they return to us
in our prospective future hearing
that they commit to what
the
timing of that fight lighting would be
uh and specifically i would hope
that any
any
uh lighting that that
is evident to the adjoining property
owners
would be turned off at
10 or 11 pm in the evening and would not
come back on until
6 or 7 a.m in the morning
that is a very important part of being a
good neighbor so i again i will adhere
to mr shannon's request
for a table but i do want to insert that
into the proceedings
understood
and i would also suggest that um
i suppose it's debatable about
what existing rights are regarding the
parking uh but
uh a a specific layout is not
necessarily
totally
acceptable so
there are good layouts and there's maybe
not so good layouts and so
i think that's still on the table and
again i would hope that some of the
suggestions that have come up would be
uh revisited and in in the layouts thank
you
mr stayler's
earlier point is it possible that saint
charles would work with the neighbors
and keep us informed rather more in more
advanced than one week
[Music]
mr shannon can you answer that question
um
i'll have to reconnoiter with my clients
we reached out
prior to my involvement for the variance
hearing uh hand delivered notices to
every member on the street
got no responses back and
the
the hearing was full of vitriol uh but i
will check with my client on that i
can't commit to it right now thank you
okay so
go ahead kathy
we we can see asking your table to a
specific date
the next available meeting next month
okay
all right so the second that would be
the second
thursday um
also for the record the notice that did
go out it was a group notice and it is
under the section that is seeking design
approval from the for such a
certificate of appropriateness from the
architecture review board so it is not
on the zoning board agenda just wanted
to clarify that
okay
did i have a motion to table this
so move
well let me let me understand
because this goes on to be zap is that
correct no no it does not okay uh that
that being the case uh
again is this a table or a continuation
he's asked for a table
okay thank you
and i had mr hellman with the fur with a
move
do i have a second i i i had actually
moved originally
so now second
i'm presuming we have a move and a table
thank you
do i need to read the findings of facts
for this or do we just call the role no
there's other no we're just going to
call the role mr scott
yes
sister mr heyer is not here correct
yes he is here
oh okay quiet mr higher
you might be muted you're on mute
he said yes
thank you mr hellman
yes
mr
uh yes
i'm not i'm an alternate tonight so i
think i'm not voting
okay mr barbo
yes
madam chair
yes
thank you okay we will see you all next
month thank you for your consideration
thank you
okay the next application
is also be zap
20-46
the applicant is brenda parker
the owner is tyler and allison chamblin
and the address is 24 0 fair 2404
fair avenue
karen do you have a staff report on this
yes hold on a second
let me
pull a project
okay this application is um
for architectural review um
well it's actually seeking of you know
recommendation
to
the board of zoning and planning
for
a
two-story addition at the rear of the
principal structure
um i'm gonna pull some of these up first
for you
i have spoken um
a lot with the applicant this is the
first
iteration that was sent and just so that
all of you know
i'm gonna go through what was what
you've seen
i don't know if any of you have gone
online
today or maybe it was later in the day
yesterday but the applicant has
responded to some of my critique and
some of your critique
or actually my critique and given an
update plan which i know is late notice
and as does she but um i want to go
through it anyway
um this is the original plan it is a
two-story um addition that is only three
foot um 11 inches from the
the garage it's not our job to assess
the variance but it does create a kind
of an uncomfortable architectural space
in between those two structures so that
was one of the problems i have with it
this is a the elevation of the existing
front
there's the north elevation
you can see that the ridge line for the
proposed edition
is
taller than the existing house so
the height is also problematic as well
as the lack of materials that relate to
the original house
like i said i have discussed all of this
with the applicant
and here's the site plan
you can see the addition here
and the existing garage
photos of the home it has a really nice
stone base and a sighted second story
and today
or yesterday the applicant went ahead
and
kind of did a redesign i think it still
has some issues that need to be worked
out
um
to me the change in materials and the
reduction the change in the roof line
and the reduction the height um
could merit a recommendation
to board of zoning and planning now that
it matches better
the original house and isn't as
overpowering
um
in in terms of the roof line
uh the space in between the garage and
the home i'm still a little concerned
with from an architectural perspective
only three feet it would need a variance
and and building code issues as well
but um
if if the board does choose to go ahead
and send this
to bezap
for a zoning review i would request that
it be conditioned
on the project return to architecture
review board
for final certificate of appropriateness
thank you karen uh is the applicant
present would they like to speak on
behalf of this yes hold on let me get
brenda into the room
okay brenda parker is here if there's
anyone else that has standing or you're
the owner and would like to
um be put into the panelists room please
raise your hand as well
okay brenda if you um if kathy can
square you in
please state your name
brenda parker
do you solemnly swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth
yes
i think that the homeowner may want to
attend also
um did he raise his hand uh just now is
it tyler yes yes
got it
okay
he's now in the room as well
we need to swear him in also
yes
okay uh tyler do you
do you saw me swear from the testimony
you're about to give this evening is the
truth
you're on mute tyler
i do
thank you thank you
okay go ahead brenda
okay so this is a tricky property and
that it's a corner property the house is
pushed back pretty far from the street
and um it has an existing two-car garage
so with it being a corner property the
building the buildable area
is very limited basically the only
buildable areas between the
existing exterior rear face of the house
and the garage that's the only available
area
so um
the addition is it's ter it's serving
two purposes um
[Music]
first floor kind of enhancing the
kitchen with a
pantry
mudroom
bathroom and then the second floor
um obtaining the kind of the master
suite for the house
um
so there's only 17 feet 11 inches
between
the existing rear face and that garage
and so
in order to
you know obtain a decent size master
suite and functionality at the first
floor
we opted to kind of look at
the space we needed between the garage
and the addition to get lawn mowers and
equipment and things back and forth
and kind of that four feet is where we
landed leaving 14 feet for the edition
so i know it is um
it gets to be a little snug and
we can talk maybe about
you know do we connect it i'm not sure
what how bexley views
um adding kind of a covering
between the two structures so they're
tied together so they're not kind of
feeling like they're so close
um
so anyway that's where we landed with
the addition and then we we have come
back and kind of softened the roof line
by doing a hip rough instead of the
gable which which makes the transition a
little bit better from the existing
house to the garage
we looked at adding stone at that first
floor just to kind of tie tied in with
the house a little better and we
lowered the ridge line to make sure it
was lower than the other ridges
as far as connecting to the detached
garage if you did that you would still
be seeking a variance to the rear
rear yard and side yard setbacks because
that all would then become one principle
structure
even though it's not moving the garage
right it's encroaching on that
requirement for principal structures
just one to clarify
so we thought it would probably be best
to keep it as a detached garage and so
that's that's why we move forward in
that direction
thank you brenda tyler did you want to
speak on behalf of this
i think you know i think brenda touched
on the main headlines i think for us as
a family we have two young girls and a
large dog
and the rear of the house is extremely
cramped and so the mud room is just a
really important need for us as a family
and to her point about
just not having a lot of room on the
back end this was really the only
only space and the only configuration
that we could really come up with that
we felt like worked um
you know we're open to
to try and make some changes here but i
think you know we're hopeful that we can
figure something out
thank you very much do i have any board
members that would like to
speak on this application
there and
just for information there are no
attendees at this time that have raised
their hand if there is anybody in
attendance that would like to speak to
this and have standing please raise your
hand and i'll put you in
trying to
speak but is having trouble with this
microphone is that correct bill
what's that
i think mr heyer is trying to talk but i
think he's mike's not working so i was
wanting to see if there was an issue
with his oh
can you hear me
now now we can
yeah i have two speaker systems in my
software and just i don't know why it
switches back and forth but
um
my uh
my sense this is a corner lot and there
are a lot of corner lots in bexley that
are connected to their garages and i
think it would be architecturally
a better solution to connect to the
garage and make it one structure
that's my opinion i don't like this
arrangement i don't like the three feet
four feet you know three feet eleven
whatever separation i think this would
be a much better design architecturally
if they were connected
uh
this is peter i i respect uh what mr
heyer has said and
i i i won't speak immediately to what
the
uh
the requirements are for something that
is physically attached
uh relative to detached
i do understand the need to access
from
one yard to the other but i'll simply
observe
that
showing this in two dimensions works
uh to the great detriment of the
applicant because it makes it appear
that uh the
the garage immediately adjoins the new
addition in the house which is really
not the case
that there is only a very
uh minor overlap between the two
so
uh i am
amenable to approving this
uh but i do respect what mr heyer has
just said uh related to the fact that uh
from an architectural standpoint i think
connecting these
uh
is more architecturally appropriate than
separating them if that doesn't work to
the applicant's detriment from a
regulatory standpoint
uh i would also kind of agree with that
i think that the separation with the
proximity to the existing garage is a
detriment
and i'm not sure even with a
trellis connection or something i i
think it's that wouldn't be doing its
justice i think there's a there's a good
there's definitely a solution to tie
these two together to allow this to be
one massing
and i do also appreciate the hip roof i
think that definitely goes a long way
with not competing with the principal
structure because i believe those two
competed and you're losing character to
the home so the hip roof softens that
um
but i think that i think i would also
want to support this only with the
connection to the existing garage
uh i'd like to just mention i mean first
this is one
another absolutely beautiful home corner
lot sets up so well um and i'm also not
worried about the extended mass because
uh this slot uh is the dawson it has a
hundred foot right-of-way
so there's a twenty additional feet of
yard that appears to go with the house
that's actually right of way uh and so
it's on a big lot so and and i agree i
think tying the two masses together
on that lot would be the appropriate
answer
thank you
brenda do you um hear what the board
members are
talking about
i do i i kind of need to refer um
to tyler just because
once we attach the house to the garage
he has no connectivity
to that that large side yard you know
there's only three feet between the back
of the garage and the fence so he can't
go really go around the garage
comfortably it's off
and um and the garage is small
um it's only 18 feet wide so
we'll just have to work together to see
aren't we talking a trellis or something
like
that if we could do if we could do an
open structure and keep the space
between that would be great if we i'm
not sure he wants to extrude the edition
so it attaches but if we could come up
with a single story
you know kind of flat roof element that
works to tie the two together
that's that would be the goal i i'd
offer that we may be
uh drawing
distinctions between the visual and the
physical
i i understand the need to connect
to the backyard absolutely understand
that
but i i think what i'm hearing is that
there is a visual need to connect the
two more than what's currently shown
yeah and and my my question to you is
and the owner or the applicant is
if the issue is getting lawn equipment
to this to this side yard
because that seems to me the issue with
that three foot eleven and how tight it
is
why couldn't you have a new opening into
the garage
uh that would allow you to pass from the
driveway say for instance to this to the
side yard because
if you can come up with a way to use the
same language architecturally of the
house
to incorporate the garage
because they're all working in the same
language and not to think about this as
a connector but you know as one one
connection would the owner be amenable
to
you know that opening in the garage to
be the pass-through for equipment
uh
and again given given what mr heyer has
just said i i do support that
i would look to kathy to advise us
once
once a garage is physically attached
that changes relationships of side yards
and
rear yards and i don't want to make sure
that we're i want to make sure that
we're not
uh
pushing the applicant to something that
is
more complicated from a zoning
standpoint than we're intending
well it's
it's
attaching it to the garage would put the
garage
what is it
six feet from the rear property line
611 on the drawing
it would make it would make the garage
non-conforming i believe
well actually would make the
principle structure non-conforming
because that would become part of the
principle structure and a principle
structure requires a 25-foot setback
but
in reality
it's just a technicality because of the
connection
so you're not really encroaching on
anybody but it becomes the principle
structure once it's attached
yeah again i think this is a situation
where that kind of uh variance would be
acceptable being a corner lot and being
non-conforming once it's all part of the
principle structure
as opposed to this that's before us now
which i would be inclined not to vote
for
in its present
presentation
are we being clear about whether this is
to be enclosed space or open space or
does that matter
well it makes a difference on what the
variance is it's
totally different variance if but right
we have to work with what's presented in
front of us right now
which is the
the home
with the addition being three foot 11
inches
from the existing garage and if that
request
was granted by the
the build the sorry the board of zoning
and planning
would this design be acceptable to you
as a board
that's the question in front of you well
i i would suggest that we
table this
for further review between the city
design consultant
and the applicant
to come back with us
to come back to us with something that
achieves the goals that we're all
addressing
well just to remind everybody because
we've been through this a lot lately
um and catherine can correct me if i'm
wrong but um
for a zoning applicant for a zoning
recommendation it is up to the applicant
whether or not they wanted
that's correct yeah and that's what i
would request
so brenda and tyler what you can do is
either ask for us to give a positive or
negative recommendation
well vote on a positive recommendation
it will be either voted
yes or no and you go to bees app
no matter what if you ask for that
and ask for this variance or you can ask
for this application to be tabled come
back with another solution
um based on what you've heard tonight
does that make sense
yes so i'll i'll go first and then make
sure tyler agrees so because the
variance is going to change with
attaching the garage i think it's best
that we revise we table tonight
revise the solution and then come back
with the new variance request
tyler do you agree
yes
great that is what i would recommend
but it is totally up to you
it's coming back to us next month and
then it's going to be zap correct okay
cathy can we be clear on building code
so that the applicant is aware
and i'm sure they are but just just to
be sure that we're all aware
anything that touches so even if we do
even if the applicant decides to do a
trellis
but if it physically is attached to the
garage and the
principal structure they immediately get
tied together is that correct
that is correct
so the the structure would have to be
independent even by an inch
it would have to be abandoned um
in order to not take that variance
there may be a separation limit but for
what it's worth
it's it's you're not really
moving a structure closer to the
property line
you know the fact that it's already
there i don't think it's as big of a
deal when you're asking for that
variance if it makes it
you know look more appropriate
yeah okay i just want to be clear that
if you know if they're going to table
this and come back that if anything that
touches the
anything that connects the two uh with a
physical structure will tie them
together
even if you had
made them all interior space together so
uh just one and i'll double check if
there's a minimum
um
and karen and i will work work with the
applicant and let them know what their
options are
okay uh so do we understand the findings
of fact on that brenda are you clear as
to
it'll just be a table
are we just tabling
you're clear as to what you know what
you need to do in order to make the
changes and keep talking to kathy and
karen about what your options are yes
great okay
do i have a board member that will move
to table this i will move to table
a second
uh call the role please
mr scott
yes
mr heyer yes
mr hellman
yes
mr bardwell
yes
madam chair
yes
thank you thank you thank you very much
okay moving on to the next application
it is application number arb 20-47 the
applicant is todd parker the owner is
shyly grossman and the address is 50
north drexel avenue
karen can you please give us a staff
report yes
yes let me get
okay
okay this um application it was for the
addition of a pool house to the side to
the west
side yard
um it's a it's an unusual lot
and because of that i actually went
there today and took quite a few
pictures that i want to show
the board to understand the context of
it
um
the
it's important to see that i'm going to
open up these pictures and show you
first because
it's um important to see
hold on just a second i have to switch
the screen and karen i want to clarify
that this this property is the front
door faces
clifton avenue uh
but it is platted to
drexel
so technically that accessory
structure's in the front yard
okay
are these i'm hoping you can see these
pictures
um
i'm i'm saying it
are you saying it okay
keep them bigger but
um
it i want i wanted just to make sure
that you can see these pictures
of
both from the inside and the outside the
hedges along the outside perimeter are
huge and i want there there
you can see how much
of the house you can actually see from
drexel and i have the view from every
angle this is directly across the street
um
and if you can't see them please let me
know i'll try to figure out how to make
them bigger
um
this again is directly across the street
you can see in this corner here
how much you can't
you can't even see where the eve would
be above
um the edition which i'll go over in a
minute
um
more pictures of the hedges
that's a pretty good one you can see the
roof of the house there on drexel
and i'm sure most of you have driven
through this today but i wanted to make
sure that i also took some from the
interior
so you could see
that get a good idea of what the space
looks like holistically
that is from the nate from outside the
neighbors
this is a shot of looking at the hedge
from the back side of the pool i thought
it was important to kind of show you
pictures of the whole site so you can
see that there really aren't any other
options the space here on the other side
of the pool
is too narrow to put
a pool house and there's this vast
amount of green space i know it needs a
variance but architecturally
um i wanted to just kind of show you
that you can see that this is too narrow
of a space to put a pool house of any
kind
um i also wanted to make sure that i
took a lot of pictures of
the style of the house there are a lot
of
bays of windows just
existing in all kinds of different
patterns there's more of the hedge but i
wanted to show you that
that there's a combination of all
different kind of mid-century modern
window window bays or window walls
this is
where the pool house would actually
exist
so i was standing in the spot where the
pool house would be looking at the house
and this this is the pool i wanted to
show you the bay windows here or the
the um the glass walls
and this would be looking from the pool
house
into the pool
so i thought that was kind of important
oh there's more sorry
oh i wanted to show you this picture
because it's hard to see in any of the
pictures that were submitted that there
is wood paneling in a lot of the spots
which i actually didn't know until i
went there so when i first saw the
design i was kind of confused at the
different materials but there actually
is recessed wood paneling um throughout
the house
and you can see some more of it there
and this is the entire site where the
pool house would be
and
um here as well
okay thank you for allowing me to do
that i wanted you to make to make sure
that you had
the context
thank you karen is the app
back to the applications okay so here's
the site plan of the application
um
and
the
floor plans
this was my original concern was how it
appeared to be different than the the
language of the house
not so much where it's cited i think the
sighting is actually architecturally
appropriate
upon further review i do think that
and talking to the architect who i'm
going to hand it over to in a second
the color also was odd to me and the
renderings because it's vastly different
than the stone color and the boar
and the boards of the woodwork that's
used in the house but um todd can speak
to this i believe that they're
considering
painting the trim
anyway so i'm going to hand it off to
todd
um and hear some more of his pictures as
well
okay
todd
um
yeah please state your name
todd parker
do you solemnly swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth yes yes
thank you
so so basically you know that
karen did a great job of presenting the
site and
you know hopefully
it is an odd site with the the corner
lot and the the plating being drexel but
the front door facing
clifton um
and you know when you when you stand on
the site
and this is our reaction myself and and
the grossmans the owners
um that you know this is
the proper place to put this structure
um if we flip it to the other side of
the pool
it creates issues with some of the
mature existing trees and just doesn't
function as well as is kind of a pool
house would i guess in
the stereotypical pool house function um
and so as we looked at the the structure
you know what we really were trying to
mimic with the glass wall
you know we really want to make it open
to the pool
um and we're using a
folding door system
that would let that be an indoor outdoor
structure to the pool and then help
you know an additional buffer and
screening to the pool from
drexel avenue
but the architecture mimics the the
large glass bay
that's on the rear of the home and you
know the home is interesting because as
karen mentioned there are many many
different kind of stylistic components
there
um you have stone you have stucco you
have wood paneling you have
tile roof you know there's just a lot
going on in the house
and as we move forward um
a lot of the exterior trim on the home
is in need of repair
the roof is in need of repair so we're
looking at maybe replacing
the tile roof with a new tile that may
be
you know a similar tile but more of a
darker gray color
and so
that's where the darker color from the
pool house spawned from although the
decision hasn't been final um and so
you know we're willing to work
with you know if if the trim and the
stucco color on the house changes to
more of a gray color
and the pool house is a shade darker you
know that that would be okay um if the
commission really wants us to keep the
pool house in keeping with what's there
you know that's okay as well it's not a
deal breaker for us
because we've also explored using some
more natural wood tones on the pool
house structure um but in you know in
the view of cost
we thought a painted you know synthetic
material
would probably be a better long-term
solution
and the architecture with the flat
flattish roof was more in keeping with
that bay structure again
um
and you know the the big dormers
on the back of the house there and
picture label number five
you know those dormers are flat roof
structures and i'm assuming they were
added on
to the original house at some point i
don't know the exact history
but that's kind of where we were picking
up
some of our architecture from those cues
from the house
um
and you know it's a very simple
structure it's one storage room a
bathroom and then kind of a hangout
space with a little wet bar in it
thank you very much is there anyone else
on on behalf of the applicant that would
like to speak
um if you would like to speak and you're
in the panelists room i think um
uh shyly grossman if you want to speak
raise your hand if not we'll just
um go on to board members
and also are there any attendees and
anybody in the audience that would like
to speak to this case that has standing
i can put you into the panelist room
raise your hand
all right we're good
okay any board members that would like
to speak on this
yeah
let me open up um
this this is a tricky one
um we probably have
uh
this view up
drexel from our gem of the drexel circle
uh looking north uh is probably one of
our
you know great civic entryways into into
north bexley
and the only thing that
holds this thing together
is the fact that those bushes are in the
way and they contain it
no bushes around this thing
and it's going to look like something
that just kind of just just appeared in
the front yard be very very awkward
um
so there's some risk here in terms of
this location
uh at the very least we would want to
have uh in my mind a written
letter from the owner that says that for
the wrestler because plants die they get
planted they grow then they die these
things are pretty mature
that
in any case there would be eighty 80 or
90 opacity
at a certain height that would shield
this like it's shielded now so if we
would lose bushes over time they would
in fact be replaced or they'd all be
replaced so that the existing condition
continues out into time for me that
would be a minimum for my acceptance of
this i understand all the issues but
the streetscape is also really really
important
i i would have to agree with you mr
helman that if these if that shrub
was not there this would never i don't
think this would be even discussed i i
don't know how we would approve this
even though the front entry is on the
north side the this is a main main part
of the structure in the neighboring
houses front door so i'm really
concerned that the location is is uh
only okay because of a fairly dense
shrubbery shrubbery um
when i look at the architecture though
i'm really kind of confused
i'm guessing maybe it's a schematic but
i'm looking at a four by ten heavy
timber rafters
which i don't see
anywhere on the exterior the existing
home
but then those rafters are
have a in the rendering at least have a
flat plane
kind of floating above them but i'm
guessing the rafters are are supporting
potentially maybe only sheeting so i'd
like to activate to talk about what the
if they're using a sip panel or some
sort of payload above it and then in
these views especially
uh where they're calling out the 4x10
cedar rafters those rafters on the ends
on the left and right of the building
are basically suspended from that flat
panel because there's no structure below
them uh no beam or or wall that's going
to be supporting them so
i'm confused that the how those are
being uh articulated and how that uh
that details is done because i'm not
sure that's uh architecturally uh
accurate
thank you mr scott that that's that's a
that's a great point that's one of my
points that i was going to make
um i think that uh you know todd's a
very competent architect i think just
coming up with a a detail for the return
elevations where you know you either
have some kind of secondary rafters that
are going in the other direction or
something maybe you pull the the
overhang in
but something that makes more
architectural sense there would be
appropriate so thank you for bringing
that up mr scott
yeah and i think the the the floor plan
and the massing and the scale i think
the side elevation
also is is that the top cap feels just
to me just a little too heavy so
uh again not against the flat roof i
think you're tying that massing so uh
into the existing dormers is probably
applicable and uh and and the overall
layout of the design and then some of
the windows uh i think i just feels like
to me it just feels like the
presentation and maybe the thought is
not um
is further developed but i think what
we're seeing here is just not as
developed as it needs to be
this is joanne uh
strasser i
am concerned that over reliance on the
hedge is
a mistake
i don't
really uh
i'm not sure we could
count on that i don't believe there's a
legal way to tie an approval to a hedge
maintenance necessarily and certain
certainly enforcing that would be very
difficult so i think in concept it
sounds like a good idea because it's
appreciating the fact that it's not very
visible from the street but over
reliance on that i think would be a
mistake
i'm going to agree with you joanne on
that um
you know things happen and those hedges
even if they get replaced are going to
be shorter
there have been other pool houses in
bexley where the back of them have
literally faced the street and they have
been very successful
i think you just need to put a front
face
on the back of your pool house and i
think it can work um i personally would
like to see some of the stone mimicked
or something here
but i you know i think you can make it
work but i think you've got to really
look at putting a front face on it since
it sits so prominently on drexel
and i think one more comment i'd like to
add is the color uh you know looking at
the photographs of the existing
structure on the bottom of that bottom
page
i would want to blend the the colors of
the existing house or if that's being
updated then i think the two especially
in this location
um if this is something that does move
forward and they want to match that this
doesn't want to be an anomaly out in the
front like a
standing out it wants to really match
the house
i think more than
any other location because of where it
is how it's such
agreed uh
question as i'm sorry i'm sorry go ahead
karen
question as staff is
do do we go ahead and
put this through to
the zoning board
before more does well with more design
but
we need to see if this zoning is even
going to be accepted by a board of
zoning and planning that the whole the
crux of the whole design
depends on the placement on the site i
mean we could recommend to be that that
it gets remanded back to us
uh final determination so we would not
be giving it
a certificate of appropriateness or
saying anything negative about it
and then it would go to them here in two
weeks and then it would come back to us
next month
depending on if they went ahead and
approved the location of it and i do
completely agree
with i think it was you suzanne who said
imagine that if the hedges came down
what that pool house should look like
facing drexel to look
appropriate
um and design it that way
personally i believe that it would be in
the applicant's best interest to go in
strong with a better design because i
agree
yeah going going to
zoning now with this design
i believe there will be a greater
discomfort and less likelihood of
success for any variants
than something that
any zoning board member could appreciate
as
more visually compatible you know
something maybe with a wide hip roof for
um
more material consistency and front
facing that sort of thing
well
to echo joanne's point about consistency
that the
[Music]
the the two three-dimensional views
uh of the pool house are attractive but
they are completely out of context
and i would want to see those i would
think be zapp
and this board would want to see those
in the context
of the existing home and the existing
streetscape
and to me more importantly than even
that is
for um and and i've discussed this um at
length with todd um
to
oh it's not on here
um in the staff report i'm not going to
pull it up and in the staff report you
all have seen the
the um the quick sketch of the house
next to the pool house
um that i had asked todd to put together
i think that's even more important to
see the elevation
the context of it with the existing
house
i think simply put
the design uh should be done in such a
way if the hedges
aren't there
the design seems to fit and is
appropriate and somehow finds a reason
to exist in that location
what if the uh what if the west face was
stone and what if and given the
relatively low eave height of this pool
house
what if that stone
uh on the west face was
tied into what was a stone
garden wall of some kind that may be
extended
to the
you know along the south property and
maybe you know northwards to the house
or something that makes it feel like
it's if the hedges weren't there it was
something like a garden wall
yeah i mean we have we could design this
but we have um
we have
a really long agenda still and i guess
my question for the board is are you
comfortable to go ahead and give a
recommendation
to
the board of zoning and planning for the
with with the condition the absolute
condition that this come back to us to
you guys for final
um design review and and
and todd are you clear that between now
and zoning which is only two weeks there
needs to be some refinement or your
chances at zoning won't be very good
yeah i'm clear on that um i think if i'm
correct when the grossman's purchased
the home about 15 years ago
they asked to put up a garden wall and
we're denied
and so
i i don't know if there's record of that
or it's accessible but
it really wouldn't be relevant
to propose
okay but if we were trying to tie the
pool house to the house is that a
similar concept that
would be an issue with the border zoning
appeals
shouldn't be
okay
there's history of
uh
obviously this old cerak house that's on
the corner up there further on the left
facing the
um you know big stone wall um
so you know there there are ways of
doing this that would be fitting within
the street uh but i think unless there's
a tabling of this
um i think we'd almost have to turn it
down because we would
we we would have to say
if we didn't that we would approve this
design in that location and we can't pay
any attention to the hedges
i think you can easily make an argument
that a stonewall is much better
yeah
i would agree
so are we asking would you be asking for
a tabling then or would you or would we
be um
recommending to be zap that it just
remained back to us
i would
as a staff opinion but kathy or
you know board members it can support me
or not i would recommend that this
go that we give a recommendation to be
zap because the footprint is not going
to change it's about the it's about the
variance
with the can absolute condition
that the design returned to
architectural review for certificate of
appropriateness are we allowed to put a
condition on that or is it more of a
recommendation
it's a condition
yeah recommendations of the condition
recommendation
our
our recommendation would be conditioned
on return to the board
so we're we're recommending a design
that's going to change
before the in two weeks before it's
submitted to b zap so the recommendation
is going to be given on something that
we haven't seen but as we do that we'd
say that we are not giving approval or
disapproval of it we're just basically
letting them move forward
um i'm not voting tonight but i i will
open give my opinion that
i believe that
we are far enough from a resolution
that
uh
a denial would be more appropriate
or a table
um
i've got a little dilemma i we're
we've got five members
and joanna i know you're participating
as an alternate and i just want to reach
out to catherine if if that's
appropriate
if she's listening i'm listening sorry
um
the debate typically the debate should
be among the member the voting members
of the board that doesn't mean that a
panelist can't
express another panels can't express an
opinion an alternate but in terms of the
action of the board and participation in
that it really should be only the voting
board members
thank you for
explaining that absolutely
uh and given that i i will move for it
i will move i will ask
that the
uh applicant ask for a table
that would be completely up to the
applicant and the owner
correct i'm i am requesting that the
applicant ask for a table
todd are you there
yes i'm here
i'm thinking
i can't see the bubble above your head
so
oh the owner of the fighter
his options should i think
wait everybody time out for a second the
owner has raised her hand and she would
like to speak so
um
shyly can you i wait
are you on
okay and
can you please swear let's wear them in
kathy i think actually
it's it's andrew grossman
oh okay thanks andrew do you saw me
swear from the testimony you're about to
give this evening is the truth
i do
thank you
go ahead amber do i have the floor
thanks so much hi everybody uh we've
been listening uh patiently and quietly
um the
the design elements that todd has
uh presented
are
we are entirely flexible on
what we would prefer as opposed to
asking to have this table
is to have it go to the
uh bees app so that they can either
approve or deny
the location what i would prefer not to
do is
spend another ten thousand dollars
drawing up what you guys would approve
and then have
the board of zoning appeal say the
placement isn't good enough for us so
i like the idea i don't remember who
made it maybe it was karen about uh
asking or allowing us to move on to the
next step with a
an absolute condition
that we come back to you all
with
different slash better
drawings
that we can present and that you can
either approve or deny at that point i
don't think there's any prejudice to
this particular committee
uh or anything binding on this
particular committee if you allow us to
move forward with that particular
condition you can always say no to us
later
but it's uh january then it'll be
february and ideally if we get approval
we would like to be able to use this
before we close the pool next fall
uh so just from from from a timing
perspective only i'd ask that the
committee please consider
uh
affording us that opportunity to
determine whether the variance is going
to be granted first and then come back
to you with an appropriate drawing uh
just just a couple of of quick comments
on on the on the design element uh keep
in mind i know you guys know this
if the head first of all we spent
uh a hundred thousand dollars putting
this hedge up there's a 0.0 percent
chance that these owners are going to
let the hedge go
uh if we need to i understand things die
and i also understand that it might cost
a little bit more but if we need to
bring in some mature arborvities to
replace in fact it's already happened
once we had a storm and a couple of them
came down with a huge branch and we went
out and bought ones that were of the
same size of the hedge that was already
there because quite frankly we look at
this more than anybody else
and we want to be pleased with the look
of it and we're proud of our location
and how we've made this house look and
anybody who remembers what it looks like
looked like 15 years ago when we bought
it uh can see the the significant
improvement uh so we also would have no
problem with any kind of condition on
maintaining uh
maintaining the hedge the other thing i
wanted to point out is that if
hypothetically the hedge were to come
down
what you are looking at from drexel
uh
and this is
it's a bit of an eyesore and this is why
we put the hedge up to begin with is the
side of the house the side of the house
has
uh the west side of the house has
uh low a low stone wall as a planter
connected to the home
and then is mostly the stucco and the
wood board
and so
we were you know when i hear things like
front facing i totally understand where
you're also com where you're coming from
but
uh and look i'm just i'm just a divorce
lawyer i don't i'm not a designer
architect but uh at the end of the day
uh
i think that what we tried to accomplish
and certainly what we will accomplish in
the second uh go around with this board
is to
make it look more like an extension of
the house we don't intend it to have
uh divergent color schemes architecture
or anything like that the overhangs
match the overhangs of the flat roof
which actually were not additions uh
todd mentioned that he wasn't sure if
that was in addition the only thing that
was added with approval was the dormer
on the west side of the
uh of the house on drexel the rest of
the flat roof and the overhang was all
original
mid-century uh stuff built by the
schottensteins in 56 or eight
and so we're trying to be true to
uh
the architectural detail
um of the house
any of you who know my wife who's an
interior designer knows that
she's she's pretty particular as well so
so
no one over here wants this to uh
stand out as as being an afterthought i
appreciate the time
maybe a comment um
in terms of where we're at process-wise
uh mr grossman
one thing i think you might want to
think about because
um absent some sense of design solution
which is would be required
in in my mind about why this would fit
there
going to these app i'm just just
suggesting going to bezap
with kind of just the concept of a
building existing there but with no real
sense of what it might look like to help
the cause
that might not work as an answer either
so um
i think you have to make a decision
about which process leads you to
a potential
solution
uh i'm not altogether sure going to be
zap
in an abstract way and say i want to put
a building in that location and
hopefully we'll get it to look right uh
it will work at b zap maybe it will i
don't know
i i'm i'm certain that uh
if my if my opening comments uh were
confusing let me let me uh clarify them
to me it's more about the timing
as opposed to the the
process i'd like to move this forward so
i have no problem sitting down with todd
starting tomorrow to make sure that what
goes to bee's app is
more appropriate
um
[Music]
and and and more like what you guys
would look at when it came back to you
but again i mean i will in part defer to
todd only because
there's a lot of process and procedure
i'm familiar with this not being one of
them
and again this is mr bardwell and
i had offered the applicant an
opportunity
to request
a table
do i understand correctly that that is
declined
i would prefer to decline the
opportunity to table
if that enables us to go to the boarding
you know
the bza
yeah i'm gonna insert my staff opinion
here because i said it at the beginning
i think it was me that said i would be
most comfortable
taking this on to be zapp
knowing that todd's going to continue
the design
be closer to a design solution and
condition this
if it is approved for zoning
back to this board
for final certificate of appropriateness
we've done that a lot
and i i'm part of this process like i'm
going when i take this to zoning i give
them a whole summary of our discussion
here
and
everything about it and they know that
it's conditioned on going back now
technically do they have
the um authority to approve a design yes
on paper but i've never seen them do
that and they verbally committed and re
retreats and everything else that that
this is a this is a shared process they
they don't want to approve the design
they want to send it back to this board
so i don't think that's very helpful
karen that's very helpful and and i
think
um just to reiterate it wasn't that we
are worried about losing control it was
like we want them to be successful when
they go to the zone that's yeah that
that was the whole point yeah and and
you know some of this is pretty um
anecdotal and subjective i've worked
with a lot of designers over 22 years
and there are people who i would not and
there are situations that i would not be
comfortable with this design will
continue developing as it goes i am very
comfortable that this design will
continue developing on its way to be zap
in the next two weeks and then continue
more on its way back to us in four weeks
well and and again i i am amenable to
that and i do want to constructively
move the process forward
but i i i i do have great concerns
regarding
our body
remaining to be zapped things that are
left just totally amorphous
uh i don't think that that is helping
any party
i don't feel like this is amorphous i
feel like we've
oh joanne you're i'm sorry i'm immune
maybe if that's what the applicant wants
i mean that i guess that's their risk
that that
zoning might be uh
be uncomfortable knowing that the design
is
far from complete but it's possible they
can if they can get their zoning
approval and come back to bzap maybe
that's okay
and and tony could also table it and if
that happened then it could return back
to the arb yeah
listen this is the applicant's
prerogative you can vote no if you want
to
right then the majority of the votes
will either give a positive
recommendation or a negative
recommendation but either way it will go
to visa
so it would be a positive recommendation
for a bzf variant subject to uh that
that variance being conditioned on a
remand to
zone to um
to this board yeah um no no there's no
recommendation as it relates to the
variance the recommendation is only as
it relates to architecture out of this
board i was going to come back to the
staff notes where i put all of the
options for you okay i'll go pull that
up
the one that it would be
would be to recommend to the bzap a
remand back to the arb for final
determination of a certificate of
appropriateness
and in that case we're neither accepting
it nor denying it we've made no decision
whatsoever correct that's correct
the um if all of you have the staff
report in front of you for the last like
six months i've put the options
so this one is number four of the option
so
is that what the applicant is asking for
just
okay okay do i have a board member that
will move
i move that we recommend this to the
bzap
and for a remand back to the arb for
final determination of certificate of
appropriateness
is there a second
can the chair second
yes
yes you can
well either way or i'll second either
one
okay
mr scott
yes
mr hellman
no i'm afraid
mr hire
yes
mr bardwell
uh i stated earlier that i would move
this forward constructively
i do so very reluctantly yes
uh madam chair
yes
okay
um good luck with your application we
will hopefully see you back in a month
excellent thank you all very much stay
safe
okay where are we
we are on
application
number k
yes
231 north drexel
uh
no no that one is what's the consent
agenda item we're on number k we are on
um thank you
20-48
can we uh can we remove mr hellman's uh
awesome line work on the screen
[Laughter]
nervous fingers
how did you do that i wondered who was
doing that
amazing how his comments are the same
for every project can i erase it no
they're here
i did i got it
i'm not going to give anybody else
permission anymore
[Laughter]
okay
next project okay next application my
paperwork says it's arb 20-48 but i
believe it is b zap 20-48 is that
correct it's that is correct that's
correct the applicant is bexley cic the
owner is bexley cic oh no no is that all
right that's not right uh actually
columbia community builders
community builders is the one on
livingston we're doing bzap 20-48
yeah so i have uh so i have bexley so
the applicant is bexley cic
the owner no
no the applicant and this one is the
community builders um but you're if
you're looking at my staff report it was
incorrect on the website at the time
that i cut and pasted it so it's been
corrected now the applicant
is as the screen says that i'm sharing
with you the community builders
okay the community builders the address
is 2300 east livingston
thank you
okay
and the applicant
is seeking
architecture review and a recommendation
to the bordezonian planning to allow a
three-story structure with residential
use on the first second and third floors
if approved existing building will be
demolished
okay um before i give the staff report
and then hand it over to the
applicant um i wondered if maybe suzanne
you should uh madam chairman you should
go over
standing one more time so that
um
we can ask
attendees
that want to go into the room
to raise their hands but make sure that
they understand if they have standing or
not
okay um
for standing
you should have been sent a letter um or
been giving notice at your residence
that you are in close approximation to
the property
um i believe even in this in a typical
project is about 200 feet and i believe
we extended it closer to 300 feet in
this to give
more people a chance to um
weigh in
so
i would ask that you um not come forth
unless if you have standing on this
project
so at this time
well so i i'd like the project kind of
presented first karen before we let
people speak on it or the board members
talk about it so yeah
are you giving the
i'm gonna do an introduction and then um
we're gonna all the applicants also
going to
um first i want to start out by
reminding everybody that these are just
telling everybody that these projects
are for preliminary review only
to just to determine a recommendation to
be zapp
um if the zoning is approved that this
is and and the funding is awarded for
these projects the application will then
return to architecture review board for
design review and approval and a
certificate of appropriateness
this um this whole project is is multi
this goes for both of the next two
projects it's i want to be clear that
it's a multi-step project this is the
very beginning of the process there will
be a good amount of refinement of the
design
both building and landscape
when
when the funding is secured and if the
project moves forward
and that timing is after memorial day
additionally um
part of the whole funding process in
this is that final design review is is
demanded as well so that will assure
everybody that even if it does go for
zoning which we would love which i would
recommend that it go to the board of
zoning and planning
from this body it will absolutely come
back here for design review
um for the purpose of this
board meeting we are looking at
aesthetics and design review only
the design development will occur at a
later date the primary considerations
for both of these projects that we're
about to see were based on building
footprint
massing height
relationship to the neighboring
properties
uh proposed materials
and the creation and the potential
creation and use of public interface
and general landscape design and style
this staff
all the
more than me a lot of staff has worked
with the applicant for the past month or
so on a conceptual design and will
continue to collaborate with the design
team throughout the process
again i want to emphasize that this is
the first stage and the first
presentation of this project these
projects and there'll be more reviews
before
design approval
um
and the purpose of this recommendation
is to to get a recommendation of bees
app
based on some general principles
specific to this one 2300 east
livingston
and um
[Music]
i'm going to
i have some aerial views in addition
that if we need them i'll put them up
but basically i want to just go over
the building footprint the building
footprint of this structure adheres to
general planning principles that have
been applied to bexley's development
since the main street guidelines were
once adopted
pulling the building to the street and
the pa and the parking to the back of
the building is beneficial and a plus
for bexley
and emphasizes the pedestrian nature of
bexley the overall massing of the
building also seems appropriate for the
site um staff would like to see the mass
not so much the not the floors or number
of stories but the mass at the end of
the building reduced
or um or scaled back or softened to
better relate to the scale and mass of
neighboring properties perhaps the
current metal roof choice and tall
massing at the end of building seem kind
of foreign to the language of the local
architecture and could be reformed to
better tie the building into the
streetscape so tonight we'll look for
some general feedback but the overall
massing and placement on the site and
the height of the building is in
accordance what bexley is has been
building to for planning on main street
um livingston cassidy those main
thoroughfares the proposed materials
there are sample materials that were in
on the city's website in the board
packets
and those were simply to give
some basis for discussion they're not
final decisions but their thoughts and
should be discussed tonight
as staff i would encourage the use of
natural and durable materials that help
tie the project to the neighborhood
and and pay homage to the to the
beautiful architecture that we have
in the city of bexley
in general minimizing the number of
materials will also help unify the
building and fit more elegantly
elegantly into the streetscape
um the creation and use of public
interface of each property there's a
great opportunity here to create
pedestrian experiences on livingston and
francis and encourage future development
um in a
neighborhood
way in further landscape development
design there's i would suggest there's
opportunities and we work with tree and
public garden commission which would
also be
a
condition of a recommended condition of
approval
we would work to develop sitting spaces
gardens pathways etc
the general landscape including the
submission are examples of plant
materials and proposed plants but the
final landscape plans will go to the
bexley tree and public gardens
commission for review and as a condition
of approval and an issuation
certificate of appropriateness
so um the bottom line is as staff i
would support a recommendation to the
board of zoning and planning
uh with the condition that the applicant
returned to architecture review board
for a certificate of appropriateness and
that the application also be reviewed
and approved by the bexley tree and
public gardens commission
and now i'm going to hand it over to
nicole boyer who is representing
um community builders and uh to finish
up any presentation
um so karen can you also let jeff and
jeff beam i believe
and
kevin and meg
um are starting to raise their hands
and
can i also ask so the elevations that
are on the screen right now are not the
most recent ones yes i'm sorry i'm like
if we could put the pretty ones up
yeah hold on a second can i i
can't do
that many things at a time no worries no
worries
while karen's finding those can we swear
in all of the
people that would like to speak on
behalf of the project
sure um if you would like to speak on
behalf of the project and feel that you
are in have standing and we do have a
list of addresses so we'll check when
you when you do testify um
uh you know we'll have you give your ass
do you want to swear everybody in karen
or do you just want to do the
the applicants first
um
we can just swear everybody in what i'll
do is as i promote them to panelists
i'll read the names out loud
okay and then when everybody's in there
everybody can raise their hand
at the same time
ellen evans
leah turner
jason mckay
and i apologize if i pronounce any names
wrong
um
bridget
two-pace
fade mason
what was the first name
say it
thank you
julie collins
rick and carol goldhart
and those are all the hands that i
see raised
oh hold on bob gibson
and
aj
garlipotti i'm sure i tortured that name
but sorry about that
okay anyone else
okay that's everyone
okay everyone raise your right hand
you solemnly swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth
i do
and i'd also like to swear in the
applicants
yes so
who would be speaking in that group um
so it is myself nicole boyer
jeff beam
um kevin dreyfus and then meg and meg
i'm not even gonna try and say your name
because i butchered every single time
okay if you'd all raise your right hand
you saw me swear or affirm the testimony
you're about to give this evening is the
truth
i do i do
okay the applicant may proceed
so i will start us and thank you very
much to the board to the chair um to the
for consideration tonight on the sort of
limited preliminary basis that that
karen described
and to the cic for the partnership we've
been working on
um and especially to karen and staff for
the initial design feedback and the sort
of collaboration that we've started that
we're uh eager to sort of continue on
for for what we know will be an extended
period
um my name is jeff beam i'm the regional
vice president for the community
builders the the applicant um and
partner for both of the next two
projects
i will give a few minutes of non-design
context introducing the project and then
turn the project turn it over entirely
to
the arb appropriate discussion between
the architects and and the board
um
but just for that context um the
community builders have been working on
this effort with the cic for two years
we're really excited to see it move
closer to reality by beginning the
public process effectively tonight
um and through meetings engagement over
the next couple
because we know there's a lot of
interest in the project and we know the
scope tonight is limited to design i'm
just going to give a couple of sort of
facts and background for the project
just for your benefit for the benefit of
those in the audience
so the community builders the proponent
we are a 501c3 nonprofit that was
founded 50 years ago
we work in 15 states in the district of
columbia
and have an organizational mission to
build and sustain strong communities
where all people can thrive
we are a developer an owner a property
manager and then there's a division of
our company called community life that
focuses on resident and community
success
our organizational philosophy is to join
with local partners we don't have a a
product we build we join with local
partners to implement
housing and community development goals
that they have and then stay invested in
that community as a long-term owner
manager and stakeholder
um our work here in ohio is based out of
a columbus office on the near east side
um and uh for what it's worth i am a
bexley a eight-year bexley resident so
this is a project that is very personal
and dear to me
um
tcb's work on this effort um started two
years ago as i said when the cic issued
a request for interest for developers to
come help bexley implement several
related goals around increasing and
diversifying housing opportunities in
bexley
while at the same time strengthening
walkability and vitality through new
development
we actively pursued
several sites actually appropriate for
multi-family housing on livingston on
broad on maine on north cassidy on gould
and we did this on our own as an
organization but in consultation with
the cic
and we prioritize sites that were for
sale on the public market we were not
looking to use public uh influence to
acquire sites
tcb uh and the cic are going to partner
on both this and the other site that'll
be that's next on the agenda
um and that they will be grouped under a
single owner in a development as they
move forward
um but for the purposes of tonight for
livingston tcb is the owner or the will
be the owner of the site and is the
applicant
and then i believe the cic nate green
from the cic will will represent the
owner and applicant for the next site
the main driver of our process
are the schedule requirements of our
development funding sources um which
operate on a really strict calendar to
apply for and then be awarded project
funding
those project those funding requirements
also drive the program for the building
and they make the two developments
complementary the total number of
apartment units between the two
buildings is not particularly flexible
and both projects need to advance
through the process together because
they are linked in the funding and other
approvals processes
at the state level
so as karen said for these projects
we're initiating the process to get arb
and public feedback
through this meeting and meetings to
follow
and to incorporate that into our design
process
but after receiving a funding award in
late spring we absolutely commit to
return
um with a more developed design
requesting arv airway review
uh the soonest we would start
construction on this pro on this project
would be summer of 2022.
so with that
i know that we're not going to discuss
any of the sort of non-design pieces so
i will yield the floor to the design
team for discussion with the board thank
you very much
is there anyone else on the design team
that would like to speak
i think that we would like to hear
feedback you know we've we've spoke
we've we've shared the information karen
thank you so much for doing a great job
of helping to set the framework for
um where we're at in the design process
this is truly conceptual design
and um we have a lot of additional
hurdles that we need to go to go through
both with the city and with the
potential funding partners and so we
really are here today to
get the feedback on
where what we're at where we're at with
our concept and
here
are we on the right track are we not on
the right track around the architectural
components of this project we know
there's bees app um discussions but we
want to make sure that we honor
what the role of arb is tonight
and then address the other components
that are be
specific in those appropriate contexts
as well
having having said that fellow if it's
helpful we can certainly uh just give a
very brief synopsis as to what
what's been driving the design process
process and the issues that we're we're
looking at and
paying attention to
okay
well we'll certainly defer to jeff and
nicole in terms of
uh this is peter i'll jump in and simply
respond to nicole's uh request and say
that and this is consistent with what i
offered on the last application is it
all relates to context and that is
vitally important in a small community
such as bexley
and
your your elevations are certainly
very well crafted
but what i would look for is what is the
context of that
three dimensionally and that could be in
a very simple axonometric or or it could
be in something more sophisticated but
how does this fit into
the
francis livingston
streetscape
as we move forward that is the sort of
thing that i would look uh look to
be provided
um and just
i'd like to
build on that
um
and try to not to make a soliloquy out
of this but uh you know columbus is just
kind of on fire we see
like every week
you know three or four story uh
apartment building gets extruded up
somewhere in the city and it's great
it's energy and
it's vitality it shows we're growing
and as peter says this is
bexley and we think we're different and
so
what is it about this location
uh that we
should address and this and this
particular site really has two
identities it has uh it has its uh south
face which is livingston oriented but
then it has its east face which is
francis oriented francis is a delightful
residential street uh
mostly frame um
and uh you know clearly the side
elevation onto francis
shows some things that you well you're
not going to find on france's wouldn't
find them on bexley the the metal sloped
roofs and other kinds of things no
and i don't know if this is the same
group that's doing the buildings on long
street um some interesting approaches
there as well i'm not suggesting those
for years um but
and and i'll have some further comments
about cassidy because i have the
contextual relationship uh is different
there uh and requires a different
response uh but i i
would look for something that shows a
higher degree of reflection and
understanding of what might be
appropriate for bexley in this location
that may have something to do with
rhythm along uh francis it may have
something to do with the materiality
and but i i would seek something that
has a strong narrative to it that says
this is our response specifically for
here and this is what really works
specifically for this location
and just to make it to make sure
everybody is aware i'm taking notes on
all this
um for the for the team
and this is precisely the kind of
feedback we're looking for tonight we're
not here to discuss any zoning issues
but the more design comments and it
would be a good thing to affirm
the um the height and the
uh the sighting sighting
uh the general design concepts as well
um as it as it goes on for its zoning
and to confirm to that point karen we um
at this site we are not seeking any
variances around height
or around
any of the setbacks so the project and
the way we've cited it um and the way
we've
put the massing together all fall within
the current um cs zoning requirements
right so strictly speaking from a design
perspective but to confirm like that is
not one of the variances that is
included in the bees app
again this is peter and i i'll i'll be
brutally candid
uh to get to mr hellman's point about
context and and sensitivity to
bexley is what i'm looking at on screen
right now
could be in
grove city it could be in westerville it
could be anywhere else
i don't
see and would want to see something that
understands
the very nature of the context of
particularly francis avenue but also
livingston
that speaks to what we value in bexley
so
to that point i think what we would
welcome
is
um a chance to better understand
architecturally um
what kind of
building types what kind of typography
of design
um
would be a really good complement to
the francis avenue as we think about the
articulation um we would welcome
feedback around
images of houses or images of other
multi-family projects in the bexley area
that might be good examples for us to
consider
we we welcome the opportunity to
respond and put together a project that
that does
honor
um the the uniqueness of bexley we
recognize that there are some really
wonderful architectural
um you know accomplishments in the
community and by no means do we want to
have the project that everybody
looks at and goes uh
yeah to that end uh and again they're
they're up on this board
that are far more talented on the
architectural front than i uh but
from my vantage point
for example on the francis side there's
a question of whether the um whether the
banding
kind of a more horizontal approach than
with those three kind of odd metal roofs
uh ought to be on that side something
more vertical so it expresses at least
the house after house after house after
house character on francis uh and
reflects more of a singular unit
uh without the bandit
now conversely when we talk and we'll
get to there later on north cassidy uh
the banding of north cassidy probably
makes some sense because of
the one-story stucco apartment buildings
the big apartment building that's on the
west side we'll get to that later
but
something that starts to speak more
about the uh individuality if you will
of the units setting up certainly on
francis maybe also on uh on livingston
so that it feels a bit more residential
and a less more you know kind of like a
i don't know congregate care
are there other board members that would
like to speak on this
i would like to echo um
mr bardwell's and mr hellman's comments
and
i mean i think this is a wonderful
move for bexley and really appreciate
all the people that are involved in
making this happen
you know south bexley is filled with
houses that we would call two bay houses
you know there's there's two bays on the
front typically
and there's variations on that
but you know i i think that that
reflection should be here as well it's
not just materiality it's not just you
know gables uh and porches and and um
and proportions and floor plate heights
things like that that are paid attention
to in the in how you approach this
design what i what i don't want to see
is
um that some of that sort of
becomes caricaturish and it's it becomes
and it's done in the wrong proportions
and that francis avenue elevation as mr
hellman has pointed out i think is
problematic
because those proportions don't reflect
anything of south bexley
we don't have houses that are that
skinny um and and so i'm just looking
for more
more
rapport with the neighborhood in terms
of proportion
windows window materials um things like
that the vinyl windows
you know i have a problem with vinyl but
i suppose if they weren't white you know
to look at different colors at least
so that doesn't feel like something
cheap that's put up somewhere in another
neighborhood
things like that are very important also
you know there's so many projects around
columbus where the
pvc
and the hardy board just don't they
don't weather well and they look cheap
after a few years from all the rain we
get here
um so i think that's a major concern for
for me is is the materiality i know that
you have budgets and that can be very
difficult but the long-term effects for
bexley you know we we will continue to
live here and to deal with you know some
of these pvc panels that start to
weather and deteriorate within a few
years that's a major concern that i
would have but you know having said all
that i think you're on the right track
with a lot of the materials it's just
going to be proportions colors
and then how do we make this last how do
we make this appear to weather well over
time it's a major concern for me
before i lose the thought just one real
quick thing
the other things that that francis is
known for euclare some of the other
great streets in south bexley
are front porches
that kind of
mitigate between
a yard the street
and then the structure itself
a very friendly
approach
something we might want to consider on
on that facade as well
and i'll echo what mr hellman has said
and
board members and others have heard me
uh uh relate to this in recent
conversations but francis is
arguably i believe
uh the most recently developed street in
south bexley
and it has a very different character
than the remainder of south bexley the
lots are
wider and deeper than most others in
south bexley
and
i would only urge you as the design team
to reflect on that to do your research
on what makes francis different
than the others and to mr hellman's
earlier point about
the overall rhythm of this is that
francis has a much
again a much broader
uh
frontal approach to the street than
other other streets in south bexley and
i don't see that reflected in your east
elevation facing francis avenue
i would like to add that
i actually i think there's been an
attempt i think i think you mentioned mr
helm in context and i think with this
one
uh
one we don't have a lot of new
multi-family happening at this um
for this
uh for low-income housing or this type
of you know we have these these
higher-end condominiums projects that
the gateway project so this
this particular type of multi-family
project doesn't come uh through and it
certainly doesn't come on livingston
avenue very often if ever so i think the
challenge here for the architect is
going to be
how do you how do you detail in in
proportion of building along livingston
avenue which is a one of the busiest
corridors and one of the fastest uh
through uh the south side of our our
town and then immediately turn that
building towards onto a residential
street on francis and change that scale
and i think there's a there's there's a
challenge there uh i appreciate though i
don't think the the actual form is is
tying into the community i appreciate
the idea that there's some porches on
francis avenue i think that immediately
starts to
to create a little bit more of that
pedestrian front porch feel now
or townhouse feel even uh i i think
that's the that gestures is in the right
direction i don't think it's there yet
because i think we have some challenges
on
how do you how do you how do you change
proportion of a three-story building
without changing the three stories when
you wrap a corner and you start trying
to tie that building into the context of
the neighborhood
but that first move of those those
little entries on those units on the
east side i think is a really good step
towards that
i think you start to soften the building
i think there's other things that have
to happen on the main massing of the
building that would go along with that
but i think i would continue to look at
that
overall i think this is a fantastic
project for
for
livingston avenue uh one of the things
that i i looked into and really thought
through
uh um on this project was of course the
the density and the parking and you know
with with 30 spaces
and i think 27 units if i read it right
28 units
um
there's really not a you know that
sounds a lot and it sounds like you're
going to have a lot more traffic but i
think in the end the impact is not going
to be significant at all
and a lot of that traffic will be going
uh just a half a block into into
francis to get into the parking lot so
um i think overall as as my experience
over the years doing multi-family that
this that number of cars and the amount
of traffic uh is actually minimal impact
into the community so i know that
there's probably going to be some
concern on the community of that but i
think
uh the the amount of parking in
multi-family as it relates to these
number of units is a good ratio and um
there will not be a lot of overflow on
the uh the surrounding streets um
overall the massing i think is
appropriate for livingston avenue i
think the the cad drawing was more was a
little bit more interesting to me um and
i appreciate the the rendered elevations
at this stage i know
these are constant constantly updating
and moving but i think the the cat
elevations i think because of the the
color and the lack of material was a
little bit more interesting because i
appreciated the
the the way that you're trying to break
down the massing of the overall
structure i'm not convinced on your
um your rounded uh gambrel
rainbow style roofs i i get the gesture
on the francis side but i think that um
i'm not a big fan of that so i would
want to look at other options or have
you look at other options
um
and you can see that the front porch is
on the the little francis elevation
there karen thank you for moving that in
those little porches start to have this
little cottage feel though not directly
related to the architecture of south
texas
at all
there's a there's a there's a
direction that that's going that i think
that could be quite successful and you
can see even in this render in this view
the scale of those little elements that
you've put the porches on start to bring
the scale of the building down to the
remaining the surrounding properties um
again you have a three-story building uh
you're not going for any variances so
this is this this is allowed on this
property but you're you're you're making
efforts on that massing in the
the design of those elements to kind of
soften that scale and i appreciate those
efforts and i look forward to you
continuing them my only last comment
would be i'm not a fan
of how and if you went back to the color
rendering it's a little bit more obvious
i'm not a fan of that uh dropped down
cornice and how it kind of jogs around
and follows the
massing of the building i think um i i
don't think that's successful and i see
why you've done it
to at least for the transition between
the material types but i think it uh
i think if that was continued i feel
like it lessens the
quality of the of the building materials
i think you could be a little bit more
honest with your
uh you know just a simple cornice uh
simple
siding materials and and and let the let
the quality of the material stand out
and let it let that accentuate the
architecture so i appreciate the effort
and the work that goes into to this and
i think it's a great start i think it's
a fabulous first start for the first
public review um obviously there's a lot
more work to be done but uh i come in
the efforts today
one one other thought you may
uh you may explore maybe make some sense
uh is to
actually express the
francis elevation
as slightly
separated from just maybe some kind of a
recess then from the rest of the
livingston
in other words make the uh make that
seem like almost not like a separate
building but it has a stand-up character
to it it also would help with the very
very long uh facade on livingston to to
make a break there so if if that makes
sense something to where that particular
element on
living on on francis has it feels like
some um and it comes all the way to
livingston but then there's some kind of
a recess or a break and then the rest of
the building continues westward uh down
uh livingston that may help a lot of
things
i'm gonna um put my two cents in here um
so
i i think this is a a great start for
the project but what what i would love
to see here is something that looks more
like a row house um approach
and i'm a little bit concerned because
even though you're going to see
the the elevation on livingston a lot
you're also going to see
the north elevation because of that big
open parking lot and so i feel like
you're going to almost have to have two
faces to the building or maybe even
three or four faces because really
there's no back side to this building
and i think if you put porches on the
side that has the parking lot that those
would actually get used a lot
uh by the residents that are there and i
think this could be very interesting if
you looked at our sessions village and
tried to take some cues from what
sessions village does because
i think that could be a very interesting
application
in this in this location so
okay any other board members that want
to talk on this or would we like to go
to
the people in the audience
okay
um i i are we gonna stick with the
three-minute
time
yes please because we still have another
project after this
yes
um
again while karen while we're um getting
everyone in this i would ask everyone to
please keep your comments to the
architecture okay we really should not
be discussing
um
the the the traffic patterns and um
things like that that really is more for
bees app and so i would ask that
everyone please keep your comments to
architecture
okay i've made a list of everyone that
we've sworn in and when i call your name
if you could please give us your address
um jason mckay
yep i'm at 980 college
okay okay
go ahead
okay i'll thank you guys for the
opportunity to speak i want to echo what
suzanne was saying about the north
elevation
i'm on the northwest side so that would
be a side that i would be facing a lot
and
to me
it looks almost like a retirement home
the current architecture
and it doesn't
fit in much at all and i'm very nervous
about like some other people have echoed
about the
aging of the process i've seen what that
navajo beige looks like i
used to live in schumacher place i saw
them build those apartments on parsons
and that kind almost looks cheap and i
can always tell let's go like 10 years
from now
and i think some good influence
would be gay street neighborhood launch
that area those brownstones
i really like what larry was saying
about separating the pieces i think it
could really help with the masking
instead of looking at one big piece
really tie in i mean this is such a hard
to tie into the neighborhood because you
got
the tutor style multi-family on
livingston and then you've got single
family homes here so i think you almost
have to go with a completely unique
approach make it really stand out and
bexley is an old classic neighborhood
maybe tied into that old classic
brownstone style to really look good but
again thank you guys for opportunity
to speak and have some input
i'm available if you ever want any more
questions about things
i'm going to be facing this i share a
parking lot with it
so a lighting plan is also very
important to me because i want to know
what type of lighting you're going to do
in the future
but yeah i think this could be a
positive development and this could be a
catalyst for great things that come for
back sleep but needs to be done right
thank you
great comments
um i have next leah turner
if you could just state your address
993 um francis avenue
okay
all right
um my family has lived here we are 200
feet
uh we share
the
lot line with the funeral home right now
excuse me um so we are the closest
neighbor
and so that means we we shared two i'm
just gonna say it one more time 200 feet
the entire uh lot line we've been here
18 years
and um
we've seen a lot of change at this end
of francis
most of these houses i'm gonna say were
all rentals
and a lot of people coming and going and
i didn't like it nobody likes that but
that's the way it was now there are
families all involved all homeowners
down here
um
so i really wish that we could have been
involved earlier in this process
apparently you've been working on this
two years and i live right here
and i'm just finding out about it
that's very that's very disturbing so
it's very hard for me to prepare for you
uh any any comments because i've only
had three or four days
so that's
very disappointing on the other end on
the architectural part i think a flat
roof is not very attractive our house
um is the triangle with the square on
the bottom
and it's a 1922 home
so what you have suggested
is
doesn't look anything like our
neighborhood and does not fit in
three stories
i'm sure i don't have any input on that
but to tell you the truth
that's a a no-go
and i can tell you that's just
that's inappropriate so if you're gonna
go with three go ahead
but you don't have my blessing or
anybody around here
no blessing for three stories
now um on to the flat roof
two stories the multiple entrances that
you have designed
exactly how many entrances are there
it looks like a motel
do you want to live next to a motel
i certainly don't
um
you're talking all about the soft skate
my interest is in landscape architecture
and gardening i redid the whole property
it was a blank slate when we got here
so
if you're going to talk about landscape
and soft skate
you got to be serious about it because i
know what's what will work and what
won't work
and i know what will provide shade
what's an ornamental tree i know about
the height the shade
i know about you're saying you're going
to make a little garden area
is it really a walking place
i don't walk down there now
i don't walk down there now because
there's too many crashes
there's too many gunfight there's too
much gunfire there's too much violence
too many police
please listen to me
too many people down here is going to be
a problem i don't have a problem with
anyone from any socioeconomic class
i am a public school teacher my husband
is a public school teacher
that's why we live here
we can afford this
is that the time karen
uh 20 seconds
are you done
well does anybody have any questions for
me
um i hear a lot of good talk
but i haven't had a single person come
up to this door and knock and say what
do you think about this
i've known that sally woodard who has
not sold that property yet
is the owner
and i know
that she has been ill because of this
because of this change
thank you he's been a good neighbor i'm
gonna finish my thought like everybody
else
she has been a very good neighbor
but to be working on this for two years
and to find out and you wonder why
people are angry
you'd be angry too
i'm done
thank you um julie mosca
your address please 987 francis
okay
and um yeah i'm julie mosca good evening
um i live in the small one-story home uh
next to leah
that you can see in the plans i'm
speaking tonight really to voice my
apprehension regarding the height and
relationship of the building to my home
um
my husband and i built we purchased our
home six years ago
largely due to the large and very
private backyard the property offered
we have fence lines surrounding our
property large trees in the back of the
property
which went in bloom
afford us complete privacy which we love
since living here we have spent the
majority of our time and money creating
uh what we like to call a sanctuary in
our backyard
and uh
i guess that being said this is my
family's forever home so it's it's very
distressing to us
um
that we will lose the comfort of doing
our normal activities outside
because we have to worry about the gaze
of people on a third story
um so preserving the privacy of the
adjacent homes i feel like should be a
priority
um
so i guess my question is
what will be done to mitigate the loss
of privacy to the adjacent homes in the
neighborhood
is there a plan for that
one of one of the ways that we can
respond and one of the things we can
bring to future arb
um projects is i i understand your
concern um i
i would have similar sentiments if
i had created a beautiful backyard
especially in 2020 environment where our
home is even more so a sanctuary and a
place for us to find areas where we can
relax and step away but we can
share where those sight lines will be
because it does seem like it can seem
sometimes like the building is going to
sit on top and that there will be
sacrifices
but um
we can show kind of
how
the way the building is cited and where
it's at because it's not sitting right
up against the property line there's a
little bit of a buffer
we can share kind of what that looks
like in context and relationship to some
of the other
buildings
in the community so that way you can see
how other three-story buildings relate
to the adjacent properties around it
both either in bexley or within like the
columbus area um adjacent so we're i'm
we're happy to do some um drawings for
future arb meetings to show what the
context will look like compared to other
things that way you can go and look at
it and see
thank you yeah that's um i mean my we're
expecting a child and we have a little
boy and we want our privacy and it's
it's pretty much non-negotiable for us
um and we would not support it if it's
gonna
have it where people can again gaze into
our backyard so i look forward to
seeing those drawings
thank you very much
um the next person
um
i'm flipping
[Music]
is
bridgette and i'm apologizing
it's okay it's tubes
i was trying to be fancy okay uh and
your address
uh 23 16 livingston
okay
go ahead
um tonight has already gone late and i
want to respect everyone's time but i
also feel like i would be remiss if i
didn't take this moment to comment about
this property i think this property
could provide real value to an already
busy and congested area with some new
residential space um but only if done
with real community involvement and
engagement i would like to first
recommend this body that this issue
be tabled due to the lack of proper
notice regarding this property i'm a
neighbor of this property and no notice
was sent to me until the post was made
on a social media forum and then calls
for me into the building office to draw
attention to the slack notice i in fact
did not receive the mailing from the
city until today at close to 6 pm
second i've heard a lot of discussion
tonight about visual consistency across
properties and open green spaces and
it's my opinion that this property
provides neither of those priorities
which has been mentioned this property
is significantly higher than the
adjacent properties in fact taller than
all other structures in both directions
for multiple blocks
additionally the footprint of this
property would remove treescape and
greenery currently on the site and would
replace it with limited yard and green
space for the residents of the property
as well as the surrounding community
there was mention of a walking path and
garden
and i'm skeptical with the size of this
property on the footprint that it is
that any of these will ultimately happen
i would say that while main street is a
mixed-use roadway livingston has a clear
delineation between residential and
commercial and that line is currently my
home and francis avenue as a whole
though i appreciate the livingston as a
main thoroughfare is not a mixed-use
roadway and should not be in my opinion
treat it as such not the way that main
street or cassidy are in other places in
bexley i and many of my neighbors have
expressed additional concerns about this
property but first i would like to again
recommend this to many table lists and
ask this developer to go back and take
additional effort to better reflect the
current landscape surrounding this
property thank you
thank you bridget thank you bridget
um
ellen evans
yes
are your adjusties 965 francis we're
working our way down the street
um
i've lived here over 30 years
so i think i have a wealth of knowledge
that when it comes to the bza i'm
i have so many questions and issues that
i will
save for there
um
as far as the building itself this
rendering is a considerable considerable
improvement to what i saw before but
there is nothing that distinguishes this
building
from
some uh
some apartments that were have been
built up
uh further in livingston or not
livingston uh main street
or what's been was built behind
um
at at uh parsons in livingston there's a
whole big apartment complex that was
built in there
it's all the same materials it's all the
same shape it's all the same colors
there's nothing distinctive about this
that says oh we're in bexley now
um
as far as the actual design of the
building
i like the attempt to
give scale
on the francis avenue side
but i think
uh so i don't care for the way it's
arctic it's it's uh
the way it's developed the curved
answers which i think someone
else referred to um
that's not residential and it's not this
end of
of bexley i know that i think there is
one house down on francis that does have
a mansur uh one out of
400 houses
um it's it's not a style that's
conducive to this area
um i would not be opposed to having the
building step back to allow the more
human scale
to
to appear on
on the francis avenue side
i
on the livingston side i am
concerned about it being so close to the
street and to the corner
it is very difficult as it is now to try
and make a right turn
from francis on to livingston
and i feel that the positioning of the
building makes it just that much harder
to see
to be able to keep your eye on the
traffic so i question that i wonder
whether the building is oversized for
the for the property
again i don't expect to see the garden
and the walking path and all that
the site just doesn't do it
um
the building has no
entrance it it's an apartment building
but it just it's like the door is just
another
section in the building if there's
nothing that says
you know here i am like it grammarly
there there is an entrance
um that says welcome
uh this in no way says welcome let alone
welcome to bexley
um thank you
okay um
please help me on pronunciation fade map
karen can i just confirm one thing
because i've heard a couple people bring
it up and
i'm trying to figure out
maybe where this information came from
because it's not on any of the drawings
um we have not called out walking paths
on the site we recognize that the
ability to to put those in the site is
there could be paths like we're
proposing public sidewalks and
connectivity and landscaping to make the
pedestrian right-of-way a more
um a softer feel and to match the main
street requirements but there are no um
proposals for internal walking paths on
the site on anywhere and i i was going
to actually address that too i mean i've
just been taken from my referring to
public sidewalks that are danced with
a bench or two here or there or uh you
know and
this hasn't even been designed yet but
some of my staff report i just referred
to
walking paths
sidewalks as walking paths so i think
that i think it's my fault on that but i
do you know still think that while it's
not a sight that you're gonna have like
you know walking paths like like parks
but
um the idea of enhancing the landscape
to make it a more pleasant pedestrian
corridor is what that was referring to
okay i just wanted to know you did that
right i picked up on that too okay no
go ahead karen i'd also like to clarify
you know with the questions about the
height of the structure and such this is
the commercial service district
and the maximum height of a principal
structure on this property is three
stories and shall not exceed 45 feet
and as far as the setbacks which the
front this is livingston
front yard setback is 10 feet minimum 20
foot maximum rear yards 25 foot minimum
and the side there's no district
requirements so i just wanted to share
that with everybody
okay
um next we have um
fade madison did i say that
my name is anna massen and i'm here with
my husband fed okay um
it's quite all right
we live at 994 francis avenue
which is the east side of the street
just across from the apartment
um
i am under the impression that this is
not the forum to discuss traffic or
parking so i will skip that part of my
statement
and um i do want to make myself clear
that i'm not against increasing housing
density and i'm not against bringing
some
rather much needed improvement and
vibrancy
to the livingston and college
intersection
the proposal as it currently stands does
raise some concerns and i do thank the
board for their willingness to listen to
and consider what we are all saying and
i certainly hope
that the same consideration is given to
those who are concerned about lights at
st charles and things like that um
this
as i mentioned i will skip my my kind of
concerns on traffic um
i did have a question
regarding the parking spaces but i will
save that for the end
i do believe that the sight lines of the
current proposal would negatively impact
my neighbors on the west side of the
street in terms of privacy as has been
said
and i do believe it would negatively
impact myself and my neighbors on the
east side of the street in terms of
solar exposure
i realize the proposed development is
hardly a high rise but i do feel as
though three stories negatively affects
our ability to enjoy our properties and
i do hope the
board would reconsider the footprint and
the design of the building
i know that legally you can have three
and i'm sure
it will be three but i would be remiss
not to say something
again i'm not the type of person who
hopes to complain without providing
solutions i would hope that the board
could at least reconsider the
development of the property in question
to being a two-story apartment building
to alleviate some of our concerns
i feel as though this would go just as
far as adding some much needed vibrancy
to the livingston and college
intersection
while addressing the issues at ham and
i really truly appreciate the council's
time today
so my questions as i
as i end my statement
as i mentioned
would a two-story building be considered
or is it completely off the table is my
first question
and my second question is i believe it
is 30 parking spots that the gentleman
mentioned earlier
and it's for 27 units
um i do realize that we are pretty
fortunate to have two vehicles and not
all families do but i would say it's the
norm
and if we're looking at nearly 60
vehicles for 24 to 30 spots i'm just
curious on how
that was considered and decided upon
could you tell me your address like i
didn't get that for sure it's 994
francis avenue i'm sorry well
somebody else was speaking at the same
time
it's 994 francis
thank you
um and did somebody on the team want to
answer any of those questions i i'll
just speak to just a couple of things
because several of those um you know
thank you we're mostly in listening mode
tonight because this really is the first
public meeting
i do actually want to circle back to
that timing we have been working on this
effort for two years
but we've only recently you know come
into contact with this site and only
reached agreement uh to purchase the
site in december so this is this is the
beginning of a public engagement process
and we really do see it as a beginning
and expect to be able to do more of this
and directly engage folks and while you
know not everyone is going to have every
wish fulfilled we're going to work
really hard to be as accommodating and
and build community with what we hope
are our future uh neighbors
um to the direct question about parking
it is something that we are going to
work through the zoning process with
through the study process with the
market study process with i will tell
you we own and manage lots of
projects of similar
size and economic mix as this
and our
usual ratio is about
0.6 or 0.7 cars per household
so we are
by our historic usage under parked
on this site but we understand the
concern that there is not really an
outlet livingston is not a place where
you can park on streets so there's not
an overflow so we want to make sure that
if there is excess parking or visitors
they can be accommodated on site i think
any anything further than that will be
discussed in zoning but i wanted to at
least
say the rationale for our initial design
thank you for your height the only other
piece on height i think is um
i we studied actually a four-story
building to begin with um because we do
have a program
that we need to meet and we have a
charge in our work with the city to to
bring as many housing opportunities as
we can to the neighborhood
we self-edited that the
40 units and the four stories we had on
this site to begin with
was not appropriate
and so we're trying to balance between
the need to bring density the need to
address
um the fact that land is really
expensive and baxley with the need for
appropriate height and massing so we're
going to try to find that balance but we
believe that three stories is is
just to clarify you would say that um we
felt the site was underparked we feel
like the site is over parked at 1.1
um compared to our historic
um experience at the 0.06 or the 0.6
thank you nicole just confirming
okay are we ready to for the next
i'm hoping that addresses the questions
anna it did
okay great um next uh rick and carol
goldhart
and or carol goldheart
hi
yeah my address is 998 francis avenue so
we're adjacent to the current
driveway going into uh
the funeral home
okay great thank you
some of the pictures that we're taking
of the neighbors um they excluded ours
and
we are really impacted by
the funeral home and the traffic coming
off livingston
so i know that's a whole nother meeting
a whole another discussion um one of the
things that i love about
bexley are the trees the mature trees um
if you look at my property there's
you know obviously i'm not an arborist
but the tree's probably 100 years old
we sit on our front porch every night
along with leah we are avid gardeners
we have done all the work
to our house um
this is our home
so
i look at these renderings and as others
have spoken and said tonight
it is like a hotel um there's no
character at all to this
um
they've basically probably are going to
wipe down the whole existing lot
the funeral home sally's home and clear
it
and now we have you know
10-foot trees going in around when that
property is lined with six or seven huge
trees that are just beautiful
and that is you know something that
bexley is known for
um the city of trees
so we're starting fresh
with a clean slate
um i
does it look horrible
no it doesn't look horrible but it
doesn't look
like south bexley at all
um
i don't have the solutions i'm not an
architect but i i am concerned
with you know
you say this this theme is is bexley and
the north project the north end project
on cassidy and gramaci
all these other projects they've had
some form of
shopping or commercial on the bottom
the first level
coffee shop whatever they decide to put
in there well this project here facing
livingston there's none of that it's
just all
you know
residential
apartment buildings
i'm assuming that most of these are you
know there's a good a good bit of two
bedroom and three bedroom um
apartments
there's no grass for children to play
you're facing livingston avenue one of
the busiest roads
elise in bexley
and um
they people from livingston turned down
onto francis and pulling the parking lot
into the funeral home and and switch
directions and go back out
um
i just i don't see
how kids and and families can live there
you've got a hotel it's a hotel with a
parking lot
like i'm not even sure where people will
take their dogs
so
i guess those are some of my concerns
without addressing you know people
pulling in my driveway coming in and out
of the driveways
i i think it's just
i'm not sure how that's all going to
work out
okay thank you
thanks for listening
thank you for your testimony
um and lastly and if there's anybody
else that i'm missing please raise your
hand but i have
aj um garlipotti is that correct
yeah that's right
great and your address
981 francis
john
okay go right ahead
yeah so
i i really appreciate what everyone here
has been saying and everything it's good
stuff here's what it's coming down to
for me let me be very very very clear
about this um
thank you for the time by the way
so we talked first of all about the
architecture and so on leah who we
haven't been able to meet yet i hope you
get to meet soon we just moved in here
recently um mentioned about her garden
in the in her yard right
the height of the building could have
seriously have obviously a serious
impact on that with minimal sunlight
getting to her house julie's house will
his right lives right next to us and our
house was out three houses away from
this
um one of the gentlemen earlier on the
speech was talking about the values in
someone in bexley and other places
um why not grove city why not
westerville which is a great point
because those areas have quite a few
apartment complexes um great areas
obviously and this is a great area also
but it doesn't quite fit into the
architectural value of this area being
mostly single-family homes so this does
stand out quite a bit
um
which has a could have a very negative
impact on that and i'm gonna bring up
traffic anyway because
i remember who the woman was really
mentioned is very difficult to take a
left on livingston from francis so
that's about to get a lot worse makes it
much more dangerous to walk in the area
because once again the amount of crashes
that take place here so many crashes of
cars actually driving in to somebody's
house and it's not even to talk about
the crime just at my uh best you a
couple nights ago recently all of a
sudden here's several different gunshots
and there's a double murder
uh couple hundred feet from this house
at the exon station on uh you know on
livingston so
we haven't talked about
the crime yet
or the traffic and yes the architectural
value i mean i don't feel so good i just
don't like it because once again
gigantic building next to single family
homes
thank you very much
karen do we have anything is this my
wife melissa and she will speak also
okay sure go ahead you have uh one more
time
and um
i'll be completely honest i do
um
appreciate
the
i guess
the idea that this could work
however architecturally i think
i mean as
soon as i looked at it to me it looks
like section 8 homes
um and that's the first thing that i
thought about when i looked at it and i
do understand
that
um you guys want it to kind of mimic
south bexley but
at the end of the day the whole idea and
the whole project itself is not bexley
we just moved here in september
um and one of the we moved here from
powell we we sold our 4 000 square foot
home to move here and
um
you know the thing that attracted us to
bexley was the architecture was that you
know um old style
um
i'm just so i can't even come up with
words right now because i'm just so
disappointed
that um this could actually happen when
we just bought our home here and i think
like i said like i can appreciate the
idea and and
but
i just personally don't think it's gonna
work um there's enough issues up and
down livingston as it is i i don't want
to bring up the traffic but
if
i mean honestly like the traffic it's
going to be an impact because
architecturally how are you going to
address that without addressing traffic
so um like i said um you know i
appreciate the efforts and everything i
just don't understand why bexley is the
chosen city um when you know you've got
westerville grove city you've got so
many other
communities that
have apartments and i just feel like it
would be a better fit
than and and also in particular why
did you guys choose livingston and not
let's say
you know that was my main question is
like it was brought up that it was
choked like it was going to be in on
broad or maine or i don't know if it was
casting him or cassidy or one of those
streets um so what made you guys choose
right here on francis and livingston
is if it's appropriate for the chair to
answer that briefly okay
only that
the
this is a very desirable community in
which to live which is entirely why we
want to bring new housing opportunities
here and we've scoured the city for two
years looking for the right opportunity
where multi-family was zoned
appropriately and massed appropriately
and we would this is this is one of the
sites that that became an opportunity
for that
and as jeff mentioned when he started
talking about the project and framing it
this is an effort that isn't being done
solely by the community builders we're
doing this in collaboration with the
bexley cic
through an initiative that they
have been trying to drive to create more
housing opportunities for people
in the bexley community as well
so that's when you ask why
bexley we didn't just come in and say
hello we want to do this we responded to
an rfi that the city had issued for this
specific scope
thank you nicole
okay karen do we have anyone else um
i'll give everyone else one more chance
are there any attendees that have uh
standing that would like to speak and
i'll put you in the panelist room or
anyone in the panelist room that hasn't
spoken yet they would like to testify
i do not see any more that's it
okay let's go back to the board are
there any board members that would like
to
comment after hearing the public
comments
i thought the comments were good and i
thank the people for that i'm sure we
all do
there's some work to be done uh i think
they're
i've always believed
that um
there are good design answers for
everything uh and so i would hope that
we would go down a path looking
seriously some of these issues and what
we can do to
again go back some of the basic things
we talked about before
i think in concept
the idea of
of having something on livingston
that has some presence
is a positive
but it has to be done right
and i think turning the corner could be
done right but it's going to take some
serious work
thank you any more board members
one thing that i will say to the design
team is that if you can take this
project and as you are showing sight
lines and things like that if you can
compare them
to other projects that are in bexley
that make it really easy for people to
see
the gramercy building is a perfect
example of that it's a four-story
building it had some of these same
comments when it was being built
i think people feel much more fondly
about that project now that it's been
built as to how they felt as it was in
the planning stages
so
if you can go around and just do some
comparisons to some of the existing
projects here existing houses here um
that would be most helpful for people to
be able to
to view those in person
um okay so karen what are we asking for
then what's our next steps so what we
are asking for tonight
um
is
hold on i have it worded
um we're asking for a recommendation to
the board of zoning and planning with
the condition that the applicant
returned to architecture review board
for certificate of appropriateness and
that the application be reviewed and
approved by the bexley tree and guard
and public gardens commission
okay and so with that application or
with that recommendation
we are not saying that we approve this
or that we disapprove it it is basically
the same thing that we did on the last
application for the small pool house on
north drexel
that we would just be sending this on to
b zap to see how
all the other
issues iron out
right if they iron out then it comes
back to us um for uh
design and architecture review
and hopefully um the design team has
heard all the comments of what we're all
looking for in the next round so when it
comes back it will look substantially
different
yes
does that sound good
yes that's exactly
okay um do i have a board member that is
um that would like to move
this project alone i'm not exactly sure
what to do about this but i have
somebody new that's raising their hand
past the point
three more minutes
um
yeah i think you may have been calling
on me let me know
oh
lower your hand okay got it never mind
back to my last comment do i have a
board member that would like to move
make a motion to move this along to be
zap who moved
what what is the is it number four let's
spell out what it is it is number four
it is to recommend to be zapp a remand
back to the arb for final determination
of a certificate of appropriateness it
is not an approval or a disapproval
i second it
who who made the motion
that was me thank you
all right
would you like me to call the roll
yes please
mr scott
yes
mr heyer
yes
mr hellman
yes
mr bardwell
yes
and madam chair
yes and i would like to ask um that all
of the people who testified on um from
the neighborhood um please take all of
your concerns about parking and all
those other things that you were not
allowed to discuss here today
to the bzap meeting um
there that's the appropriate place to do
all that
thank you and that's on the 28th and
that's on the 28th at six o'clock and it
will be a zoom meeting
just like this and you can get the link
off the bexley uh website
thank
thank you very much
okay
the last project for the night
it is application uh bzap 20-52 the
applicant is
actually cic is this right gary yes that
is
okay the owner is bexley cic in the ca
and the address is 420 north cassidy
avenue
yes um
hold on a second let me get my drawings
um switched out here
okay
um i'm not going to repeat the general
comments again i'm going to
go to specific comments
to this site
and pull up something
so just to be clear to the public too i
know that the applicant has stated that
these two projects tie together but i
think from the arb's perspective these
are two individual projects and we
evaluate them on their own
so some of the things that we said about
the last project do not necessarily
pertain to this one and we will vote on
them um as an individual project not as
um
yeah not as one project but it's two
projects correct in fact it's a
completely different context too so
you'll find the staff comments to be
different but i'm just not gonna do the
synopsis of the whole
you know the time frame and the funding
and that kind of stuff
um i
just want to go over this one um is
seeking architecture review and a
recommendation to the board of zoning
and planning to allow a three-story
structure with commercial on the first
floor and residential on the second and
third floor
this is on cassidy if approved the
existing structure will be demolished
um
the staff comments that i have i'm going
to
use the same categories but the comments
are different because the citing is
obviously different the building
footprint on the proposed structure once
again adheres to the general planning
principles that have been applied to
bexley's development areas since the
main street guidelines were adopted
pulling the building to the street and
parking to the back is beneficial to the
pedestrian nature of bexley and cassidy
that additional retail space will be a
great addition to cassidy corridor and
will provide an opportunity to further
develop and encourage more development
on cassidy there's also a great benefit
to the streetscape being
by eliminating the vehicular access
improving the pedestrian corridor um the
mass overall massing of the building is
appropriate for the site and relates to
the retail commercial nature of the
streetscape as it is
developing the height of the building
which is encouraged for this building is
within the zoning code and
um main street design guidelines which
has been used as a design
guide
while we don't have specific as a
reference point for other bexley
corridors
the relationship to the neighboring
properties
is a driver in the development of this
design and this will be accomplished
through the use of materials massing
adjustments and landscape features there
is a a proposed landscape indoor out
like an an outdoor area for the retail
space which is a huge benefit for both
the um leasi and for the public
the proposed materials are included for
the board to give some in public to give
some feedback these are by no means
final materials are meant for discussion
only uh once again i would emphasize
that staff encourages the use of natural
and durable materials and colors that
help tie the project colors and
materials that help tie the project to
the neighborhood and in general
minimizing the number of materials will
only help unify the building and fit
more elegantly
into the streetscape
staff would also be in favor of
exploring i use other a material other
than cultured stone for the bottom maybe
brick or bringing down the siding as it
feels more urban to the building than to
do a cultured stone
um creation and use of public interface
it is very encouraging to see the
creation of retail space like this on
the ground floor and the implication of
an exterior public space as well this
will be a great opportunity to enhance
the pedestrian experience on cassidy
encourage more future development and
including in the submission once again
are also examples of plant materials and
proposed plans
the final landscape plans will go to the
bexley tree and public gardens
commission for review as a condition of
approval and issuance of certificate of
appropriateness
again i would recommend that this
receives a recommendation to the board
of zoning and planning with the
condition that the applicant returned to
the architecture review board for a
certificate of appropriateness and that
the application be reviewed and approved
by the bexley tree and public gardens
commission number four
on our list
thank you
i will hand it once again to the
applicants too
great
um hello uh my name is nate green and i
am the chair of the bexley community
improvement corporation i live at 377
south roosevelt
just to give my address so that you all
know that i live in bexley
um i have been uh i have been on
nate i'm sorry to interrupt you i think
we need to swear you in
oh you do you're exactly right i wasn't
sworn in before i'm more than happy to
please raise your right hand
please raise your right hand do you
solemnly swear or affirm the testimony
you're about to give this evening is the
truth
absolutely
yes thank you thank you sorry
and everything i said before was true
even though i wasn't sworn in okay
uh
so i'm the chair of the cic i've been on
the cic the community improvement
corporation um since it's beginning i
believe since 2012.
just a way of background and some of you
probably know this uh on the board and
then also for the citizens that are on
the on this as well uh this cic is the
economic development arm for the city um
we are we were engaged with and and i
guess i'll say responsible for
what is now the the giant eagle market
district uh and we also um own bexley
square and uh and are responsible for
that so
that is kind of the background of the
cic um
this project in particular uh
as jeff beam from um community builders
alluded to earlier
um you know we went uh the cic issued an
rfi a couple of years ago
to
[Music]
enhance or to bring more uh mixed income
multi-family uh units multi-family
living to the city of bexley which as
you all know we don't have much of uh in
the city and so uh the cic um with uh
you know determined that we wanted to go
out and we wanted to um try to seek more
mixed income multi-family units so this
uh so
we've been working with the community
builders for a couple years on that um
we have uh you know
this property itself the the 420 north
cassidy um the cic is in contract to
purchase this property um this is
similar to what jeff was talking about
in the livingston process property as
far as
um
when we started that the csc has been a
contract for probably
a month on this on this property um we
uh you know this this uh corridor
cassidy it's one of the areas in bexley
that we've really targeted
to try to bring more both mixed income
multi-family but also more retail uh to
this corridor um it's a great corridor
it's one of our entries in the corridor
you know search or entries into bexley
we have you know maine and broad but
cassidy is also an entry into into uh
into bexley so one of the cic's goals is
to
try to enhance the corridor uh we you
know we've been partnered with the with
the community builders on those we're
very excited about this project um the
cic will be
continually engaged in this project as
it goes on
we will um if this project is successful
and if we're able to get
um you know your approval and and um
zoning's approval and also city council
approval uh we would manage the retail
on the bottom floor which is very
similar to what uh we do at bexley
square today um so uh with that unless
any of you have any questions for me
i am going to turn it over to i believe
nicole boyer from the community builders
and also the architectural team
i'm sorry you
um so similar to the last one you know
we um i think
between nate's introduction of this
project and then jeff's introduction of
the overall um
just global
excuse me
picture of what we're asking for i i
really want to open the floor and
receive feedback from the board members
okay
uh any board members that would like to
speak on this sure
the um
again by way of of context uh this is an
interesting stretch of street because
uh beginning with this project then you
move to the um there are three buildings
each side are the one-story apartment
buildings of the stone and stucco
then you have the long um whatever color
brick that is uh for the residential
building on the
west side and then of course you have
the small apartment building up against
the railroad tracks
and so this is a great opportunity to
kind of create a
multi-family residential district uh and
to while well buildings will never look
the same
is to find enough characteristics that
they kind of speak to each other and
relate to each other or at least
reinforce each other in some light unity
as you go up and down cassidy so i think
it's a and then likewise who's to say
that the
uh the one story uh the six one story
three on each side uh might not be
candidates for future redevelopment and
uh and away we go with this corridor so
i think all that's good i don't have any
uh particular
issues with the facade i agree that
maybe brick would be a
a better option along the base i like
the horizontal nature of the base
obviously here it really works out
especially with its neighbors
uh i i maybe have some concerns although
i like the expression of the
ins and out of the facade um
i i i i don't want to be fooled by
attractive colors and forms in terms of
the materials and i if the materials are
all uh lap fighting i'll leave it to
others discuss how that might work and
how those edges come together
and how durable that might all be
but all in all uh i think this is a uh
this is on the right path
i i will follow on to mr hellman's
comments i i do think that this is on
the right path i'm very supportive of
this in concept
uh i i
again i could could be supportive of
colors and forms
but again i'm going to be
very critical of the fact that i see
nothing on screen
that would distinguish
this
if it were in bexley ohio or orange
county california or orange county
florida
i i see nothing here that reflects the
character that we value in bexley that's
not to say that
i'm advocating a dramatic change but
again i don't see anything that reflects
the community that surrounds it
thank you mr bardwell is there another
board member that would like to speak
i would like to um just
repeat my comments that i made for the
livingston project in terms of materials
and durability but also
i think mr bardwell made some comments i
think it was mr bardwell about
or mr scott about the changes in um
you know roof
heights
and i just wonder if this is um if if
this is going to be the first of many
uh mixed-use sort of form-based code
buildings that are going to be in this
district
does it really make sense to have
so much up and down in the facades for
these buildings i just feel it's a
little busy so you know i would consider
having some kind of horizontal
uh bands you know i see the first floor
uh
ties everything together but above that
i think it you know if this is going to
be
again in the future with other buildings
that are of similar proportion and use
um
it might be it might feel like we're
doing too much with with the ups and
downs and the ins and outs those are my
comments
i would agree uh
in that and well one i'll agree with mr
hellman's comment about brick i think i
think the stone
uh feels a little too hotely i think um
uh rhodes you know the motel or hotel or
the ec maybe that's the smaller size but
i think brick would go a long way if
that's an option for the owner um
i would agree with this scale of this
building because this building is not a
you know though it's three stories and
it's it's sitting adjacent to some
single story structures is not a huge
building um
and i think it seems a little bit
uh a lot of the activity in the massing
is in the center of the building on the
west facade
where i think when you start to try to
talk about
uh tying into a
neighborhood context maybe some of those
massing is more pulled out as bait
two-story bay windows that are on the
corners of a book ends maybe so you're
trying to bring down the scale of the
building but i think overall i think a
little bit more simplicity uh again i
really appreciate the
this project within the fabric of this
commercial district
um pulling it up to the street i know we
the project that the vet that had the
addition on the front
that's a two two and a half story
structure um this starts to kind of tie
into that and is going towards the
long-term goals that the city has
proposed for this area so i think that's
a that's definitely a plus and of course
not part of our our discussion today but
um
i think it's a great first step i know
it's a first step so
uh i i think um you know parking issues
and and how that gets resolved is that
will be discussed at bzas
will have to be done there but i i think
you know maybe it might be it feels it
does feel a little bit busy and i think
it's
in its modernness i think we have to be
very careful
to um
make sure that we do tie in some of that
character to bexley uh you know
obviously
you're never
in this type of a project at the at the
the rental uh
areas that you're going to be the price
points you're going to be at you're not
going to be you know gramercy kind of
quality of architecture it's just not
possible but i think there's got to be
some moments and things that can be done
that uh start to give some character to
the elements of the building that's uh
above the first floor that help tie it
into the neighborhood better
but i think it's a great first start
thank you mr scott
um i think that that leaves me i i'm not
going to just copy everything that
everyone just said i i agree with all
comments that were given
i'm very happy about the project itself
but i i think it needs
a lot more character added to it so
um
karen are there
people in the audience that would like
to speak on behalf of this project okay
at this time i would ask anybody that's
an attendee that wants to testify to
this case that has standing
to please raise your hand and i will put
you into the panelist room
so that will take i'm going to read off
the names like i did last time
uh and then we'll swear them in taylor
stewart
tom wing
kdj
yeah
i have an aaron i don't know last name
and gary
okay we need to swear in those five
people once you get them in
yeah hold on to her
adam lee it is
that's an additional one
no that's the last name he added his
last name i just need oh no adam lee is
an additional one yes i need aaron and
gary to please state your last names
this is aaron my last name is a bear
and gary
this is gary and my last name is jay
okay
kathy did you want to swear them in
uh yes if you had all raised your right
hands
do you solemnly swear or affirm the
testimony you're about to give this
evening is the truth
i do i do
thank you
okay again we're going i'm going to do
the three minute timer
and
i'm just going to
go in the order that you're on my screen
first we'll start with
a taylor stewart
you could give us your address
you're muted
there we go can you hear me now yes yep
your address
uh 2700 columbus
okay go ride it
i
am very much in support of this project
i think like some of the others have
said in regards to the east livingston
project um
maybe a different style roof other than
a flat roof
um
i
i think would maybe fit in with the
neighborhood a little bit better
but i also just wanted to say i really
support the idea of mixed income housing
in bexley
i reluctantly moved here from southern
orchards
um
and one of the things i was really
bummed about was the fact that it was
mostly
at
moore it was a different neighborhood
than i had moved from
and i'm really looking forward to
diversifying the
housing options here
and i have personally benefited
from these type of grants i think the
builder is referring to
i think they're a
fantastic opportunity from the state and
actually would be
um
making a great decision to take
advantage of these grants sort of in
whatever form that happens to look like
thank you
thank you great thank you very much
um
tom wing
hello your address please
uh 2671 columbus
okay
go ahead
so i'm sabrina tom's wife and i have i
like the idea of having affordable homes
in our area but looking at the um plans
for the inside there's only four
two bedroom units
which
i feel kind of negatively impacts what
bexley is trying to accomplish by
bringing families in
um
the other thing i would say
is
um
for this site it's going to be used to
transmission transition the people from
the mayfield
and ferndale apartments
um
has a environmental assessment been
completed on this site and if so
is that available
and as far as the architecture structure
i don't really think it fits in with
a lot of the homes that you find on
columbus avenue which are just you know
small little single story cape cods
um
tom
yeah
saying that there's only
four
two bedroom apartments available in this
uh structure
also
with environmental i realized that was
an old fuel service station and
i don't know if it was before they took
the lead out of gasoline for the service
station then of the lead contaminants on
the site
uh
and like
it doesn't really match
i don't i would like to see some changes
to some of the designs of it trying to
blend in more with the surrounding
structures that are on
uh
cassidy and columbus and
some of the other
local housing that's here
yeah because in like comparison to the
yoga studio which is just a one-story
building it's you know quite a bit of
height difference
so
some way to kind of ease that transition
would probably be good especially
comparative to us
you know down columbus as well
so i'm going to let me speak to where
the cic is at in the process for the
environmental reports because we are
required
to do robust um research it's more aware
of the community's aware
of the past use of the site so nate if
you could maybe give an update on where
the cic is at and the discoveries that
have been made to date
yeah absolutely so
uh we are performing a phase one and
phase two environmental site assessment
um we are in the process of uh
completing that report um actually we're
in the phase two part of that report
which is actually doing physical testing
on the site
we've hired a firm called pande
environmental to do that work
they're uh
in the process of that and they will
they'll be done with that i think here
later this month
so so that we are doing that and you are
correct tom that this was a former gas
station it was uh
a gas station i believe until the
1970s i believe it was taken out of
commission in 1977. i could be wrong but
i don't know some something around there
um but yeah so we are in the process of
doing that um i also want to address i
think um
and i didn't catch her name but
mrs wing i'll call her because i
couldn't remember what her first name
was karen
um
she mentioned the ferndale mayfield so
this is not a replacement for
the par the units
or people that live on ferndale mayfield
they they may or may not be eligible the
people that live there to live in these
units we don't know that they'll be like
anybody else
to be able to live there but this is not
a replacement for this unit so i just
wanted to uh point that out so this is
not you know taking fringo mayfield and
putting them here that's that's that's
not the intent of these this is just to
give more mixed use i'm sorry not mixed
use mixed income
um
housing in in the city
i also want to speak to the
environmental um work so
because of the fact that we knew that
there could be
potential environmental contaminants on
this right and yes the cic is going
through the process
that is part of the reason why we
elected to not put any residential units
on the ground floor
of this building
so
if for some reason there are
environmental contaminants that would be
identified
the team would be working to do the
appropriate remediation work to clear
the land
but we would also be constructing
uses that are permitted that are not
residential in nature on the ground
floor therefore providing a barrier for
those residential units to be healthy
and safe so just want to kind of share
that as well
good point nicole
okay thank you guys
okay
next
um
we have uh katie jay
hello
can you hear us
yes
uh my name is jeremy j and this is my
wife katie we both live at 421 north
cassidy avenue directly across from this
property
we have many concerns uh
about half of them we'll have to bring
up into zoning
but
concerns that we have that we can
address here today is that this property
does not fit in
with the surrounding area i understand
that this is a lead-in to
further this corridor and that you guys
have other plans
that could be 5 10 20 years down the
road that might eventually tie this
building in
and i know that the north bexley
apartments will be doing some remodeling
and maybe that will eventually tie in as
well
main concern is that this is a
three-story building
and the building the yoga studio is a
one-story building the buildings across
from it to the north are also single
story buildings our house is a one and a
half story building directly across the
house behind us is only a two story
building and yet we're proposing a
three-story building that's going to
take up almost the entire property with
very little parking to behind it so the
entire building is going to be on this
property and out to the street
the facade doesn't look appealing at all
and for us to sit on our porch and to
stare at this building i would like them
to consider
to at least maybe reduce the size of the
building
or change the aesthetics on the outside
other concerns i have with the building
itself is if it does go in um i know ms
wang attested to this
four two
uh bedroom apartments is all you have
it's like once one bedroom apartments
are mostly what you have here so bexley
is trying to
encourage single families to move in to
bexley into an apartment i don't see
very many families being able to use a
one bedroom apartment so i'm trying kind
of curious why the cic or the architects
or whoever decided that you were gonna
have more one bedrooms and two bedrooms
and i don't think there was any three
bedrooms even on there
i don't understand that at all and the
last thing i'd like to say that i just
added to what we wanted to say to you
guys
um it goes back to the to the
environmental thing that you guys are
talking about you're talking about put
the two stories above the retail so that
the people who live there in case
there's environmental issues there's a
barrier but you have retail on the lower
level which are going to have employees
and patrons and customers uh some most
of which might be from bexley outside of
bexley are going to be visiting there
wouldn't the environmental risks
impact people visiting these retail
locations and working at them
so those those are some of the issues we
have
do you have anything else to have well
to kind of piggyback on what they said
about livingston is you know
we as families have built up our homes
and then you're going to bring this in
and now gardens are going to get
sheltered honestly electric bills may go
up because natural sunlight is reduced
and they have to use more energy to heat
their home or to cool their home
it's not just
how it looks it's how it's affecting all
of the neighbors around us right and
it just as it is it's not going to work
and frankly
you guys have to consider the culture of
bexley
right or are we wanting to shift to
become a columbus or do we want to keep
our again i believe one of your board
members did mention that and i agree
with him i don't feel that the building
the way it sits right now fits in
bexley i don't think it screams bexley
and i think he said you could put this
building in california you can put it in
new york and detroit and i 100 agree it
is very much cookie cutter cutter modern
building that's all this is and i know
we have some
really brilliant creative people in this
town
that should be able to come up with
something that screams
excellent and and one more thing i just
want i know we're probably close to time
but i just want to mention
we're okay well this is cassidy this is
not main street bexley so i would like
you to take that in consideration when
you guys are talking about this thank
you for your time thank you thank you
okay
um
next we'll go um aaron and i'm sorry
what is your last name
my last name is hebert
uh i'm sorry it's a bear but it's
spelled hebert h-e-b-e-r-t
um i live at 2661 columbus avenue i am
directly behind the property
okay
go right now
you know i'm also greatly concerned with
the aesthetic of this and i don't think
it's appropriate to put a three-story
building i do agree with your mission
and i think everyone's heart is in the
right place
i just don't think that the way it's
proposed
reflects bexley
some of my personal concerns
um is loss of light
my living room and my kitchen face that
property so loss of privacy
loss of privacy in my
it backyard
impact my gardening
additionally my garage faces that
property i have a
small one car garage that sits inside of
my fence so it doesn't look like
i have a driveway but i do
um
and with you know all the increased
traffic i don't know if i'll be able to
safely
park in my garage which is problematic
because i have a electric plug-in car
you know i moved to bexley because it
has character because it has a rich
history
and because it has a sense of community
and that community is different than
you're going to find in new albany then
you're going to find a gahanna
grove city or any other municipality
around here and i think it's very
special
and i think as a member of the community
the neighbors
need to be involved and considered
so i would really like it to be scaled
back to a two-story building
i'm also concerned with the
the fact that retail space is going to
be facing
uh my living room my kitchen
um you know i moved to north bexley i
didn't move to south bexley i chose
north bexley for a reason and you're
bringing main street to my front door
and i just don't think that's right i
don't think this is the right site
and i i hope there's more you know
engagement with the neighbors that that
this is going to impact
erin what was your address again
2661
columbus
okay thank you very much
um karen karen or i'm sorry the chair of
students um can i can i just i want to
make a point about the environmental
again i just want to clear that up so
that everybody's aware
um
so if there are environmental concerns
that come up in the vet in a phase two
we will remediate uh all of that uh and
that will include i mean we will have to
by law we have to remediate there or
anything really we'd have to uh
remediate if anything's uh gone beyond
the site
the other point i wanted to make is that
these are done
to vap standards voluntary action
program standards by the ohio epa so we
have to do remediate and make the site
safe for both commercial and residential
uses
so that is something we will have to do
in order to actually put anything on
this site so i just want to make that
clear
that if there are any environmental
concerns
we will have to remediate those in order
to put anything on the site so i just
want to make sure everybody understood
that so that the site's safe from that
perspective i'm sorry to jump in i just
wanted to
make that point thank you
it's the third generation um gary
and i don't have you i'm sorry could you
repeat your last name
jay
oh gary j okay
i i own the property at 421 north
cassidy
uh i wasn't sure if my
daughter-in-law and son would get a
chance to talk so that's why i i raised
my hand but
i do want to so
i agree with everything they say about
the aesthetics that the building
even though it's a commercial property
is way down where you start having
one and two-story family homes
it's not down in the bellwood area
or
off of allegheny in that area
where there's already commercial
property
and there's uh
basically an apartment building across
from that that's
a lot different than
single family homes
uh but
the one thing i i would decide my father
was part of the construction team that
built that home and built that
neighborhood and built that neighborhood
actually
he he was part of that whole
construction group that built that
stanbury drive neighborhood
uh
so
i moved there when i was five so i've
either been lived in that home or
known the families and owned the home
for 58 years
the one thing i can tell you i guess i
want to emphasize is just to keep the
family feel
of bexley
i grew up there as i said i was five and
and grew up there with the capital
university
there there is nothing like that
atmosphere there that whole community
whether you're talking from the railroad
tracks in north bexley all the way to
livingston on south bexley it's a family
it truly
is a family
and i
can't
thank god enough
that i was raised in bexley
and i think you need to kind of make
sure that you can keep that family feel
because what i'm hearing is
this is going to be the start
possibly
of this type of multi-family unit
and going all the way down towards
delmar
on cassidy
so i
just would say
keep the family feel
and keep the aesthetics of the of the
neighborhood
and attract good families in there
thank you
is there anyone else karen yes there's
one more
um adam lee
your address please
hi sorry
that's okay your address our address is
2654
rule avenue
we are
uh diagonal to the building
immediately right after the alley
okay
uh i mean there really isn't much more
that we can say that hasn't already been
said uh the building is
pretty
large compared to everything around us
uh the yogurt we moved here next to
what was at the time an abandoned gas
station five years ago
uh hoping that it would turn into a park
which is what we were told by our
realtor
and that's our fault for believing that
but uh
the yoga studio ended up being a
blessing and it's it's a great little
building and a nice little business
but uh to stick a three-story building
right right next to it right in its
backyard and right in my backyard
uh just doesn't seem like it's gonna fit
in our neighborhood at all we just had a
baby
and we're trying to uh
play around in the alley and
on the sidewalk
and you know there's
all the traffic now is gonna be
you know
triple what it is now i see her on
facebook every once in a while um
hi my name is hannah um i'm adam's wife
and i guess i
a comment that i heard is that i really
would like to see the care and quality
and durability that was given to the
gramercy building for north bexley i
think we deserve that
um i disagree with comments that this is
a reasonable size
we have small cape cod style homes we're
surrounded by other small 1950s era
cottages basically so to me the
materials are very relevant
and lasting ability is relevant and
frankly i'm sad to see the unique
vintage building that art with anna was
in
be torn down
um because of its character and its
quality
i'm also really concerned about the
third story it's gonna block out our sun
completely tower over our houses and i
think there's gonna be a lot of privacy
issues as well for our backyards
so i really hope that you'll consider
scaling the size down significantly it
just takes up that entire lot
um it's just gonna black out the sun so
um but i really appreciate you taking
the time to hear us and consider our uh
feelings on this project so thank you
yeah and we live it our house is a 1300
square foot house and i think that's a
pretty medium-sized house compared to
just about everything around us this
isn't
you know
central bexley where everything's double
that size
of this building's gonna just dwarf us
so
and then we have all the parking
concerns so i guess we're done but uh
we'll see you in a couple weeks
thank you very much thanks um before i
close out the testimony is there anybody
in the audience that in the attendees
room that
has not had the opportunity and has
standing
please raise your hand
or in the panelist room
okay
that's it
okay thank you all for keeping your
comments um pretty short we appreciate
that
um and so uh what we are looking for or
what karen or the applicant is looking
for
is the same thing that they were looking
for on um livingston is to recommend
this to the bee zap
that it be remanded back to the arb for
a final determination
um for a certificate of appropriateness
we would not be giving it approval or
disapproval at this point
does anyone on the board want to speak
to that
i i would like to bring one thing i know
it's late um
okay and i i really respect uh all of
the comments that we've heard
um
but you know also speaking for someone
who's been in bexley for 45 years
getting up in his years
i'd like to stay in bexley and
we may end up at bexley arm apartment
i'm glad that project existed i'm sure
it's at one point in time it was
probably a real zoning hassle because
it's big building um but i'd like to be
able to stay in this community and and
yet i can't stay in a 2 800 square foot
house
i can't i won't um so we we maybe need
to think about options for folks so that
uh we don't have to move out of the
community and we can stay in um that has
nothing to do with the architecture i'm
just saying it uh regarding uh people's
own future their direction
and uh you know where their hearts at my
heart's with this community
thank you
so with that do we have any board
members that would like to make a motion
on this project i'd like to say just one
one thing just in general over the last
two projects and i know it is late but i
think
i i think this is the start of the
process and uh i appreciate when a
developer and
an owner and an architect take the time
and effort to present their concepts and
ideas to the community uh and i i feel
like this owner
um an architect are listening and will
address these comments so i'm interested
to see how this progresses and of course
we'll all be watching
and uh following it
back here but
you know this this this is this is an
important aspect to our community
um they're the developer if they didn't
go for any zoning variances and
um followed followed everything that
they needed to do somebody could come in
and not even you know
they'd have to go through the
arb of course but uh
they don't have to listen to the
community so i really appreciate that
i think we should uh continue that
dialogue and uh appreciate all the
efforts tonight in the comments from the
surrounding homeowners
that's a very important point pete thank
you
and we will remind everyone
these projects if they'd go to bzap and
if they do well there they will be back
here and we would welcome all of you to
come back
and stay with us as these projects
develop
okay board members
how would you like to move forward with
this project
would you like me to read that's the
stated recommendation like for the last
one
i i moved for number four
that's perfect
[Laughter]
thank you is there a second
a second
we probably should state what number
four is i suppose yeah i'm just gonna
say i should probably read it for the
first record
um thanks karen the board recommends to
the board
supports the recommendation to the board
of zoning and planning with the
condition that the applicant returned to
the architecture review board for a
certificate of appropriateness and that
the application be reviewed and approved
by the bexley tree and public gardens
commission
thank you
okay mr hellman motioned and mr scott
seconded it would you like me to call
the roll
please uh
mr heyer
yes
mr scott yes
mr helman
yes
mr bardwell
yes
and madam chair
yes
thank you
okay
that is our agenda um karen do you have
anything else
um i would only like to say
that um
great job to suzanne tony who it is her
very first
media hearing
and that was a challenging meeting to
chair for your first meeting and it is
was a pleasure working with you and also
a pleasure working with cic and the
community builders too because it's just
been a quite a teamwork project and it's
it's a good feeling to work on this
whatever the outcome is it's a it's a
good team feeling
but compliment goes both ways we really
appreciate you um karen being the
liaison
oh it's my pleasure
um thank you all very much for having me
listen to us and presenting absolutely
absolutely really appreciate it
other than that i just would update you
all to let you know that bill heyer and
his team are now
um on board with me with design
guidelines as some doing some
illustrations to accompany it and so
while i have
40 some plus pages of text written now
we can start inserting the what i think
is the most important part the diagrams
and hopefully have some drafts to show
you very soon
great
and karen do we have our um
uh meeting
on the schedule
i have not scheduled can we just do a
straw vote who who do you want to do a
workshop this month or just one because
of the length of this meeting
just to
do one in february i i don't care i'm
happy to do one but i i think we should
gavel this meeting and then have a
discussion
tonight well either tonight or just by
email but i think this should just be
uh we should gavel the end of our agenda
yeah i i think a doodle poll after this
would be appropriate okay so yes the
answer is yes let's do a meeting next
week uh uh workshop now he must end the
meeting and then decide after
after let everyone else go i think is
what he's saying so do i have someone
that wants to move to end the meeting
yes
second
that would be mr hellman and mr
scott
and do i want to call the role for
adjourning the meeting
believe it or not
that is within your power you can gavel
the meeting to a close whenever you like