[A. Call to Order - 7:00 pm]
[1. Addition and Renovations – 605 Evening St. (David and Amy Yenkin) AR 17-2020]
[00:05:53]
TIME AS MANY WERE INCLUDED. IT WILL BE TO THE NORTH SIDE AND
[00:06:13]
WRAP AROUND THE REAR AND A BIT THAT COMES AROUND THE FRONT.THIS IS WHAT'S PROPOSED. THIS WOULD BE PART OF THE ADDITION THAT WOULD CONTINUE AROUND.
>> WE'RE GETTING BACK FEED. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S COMING
FROM. >> I DON'T HAVE THAT UP.
>> LOOKS LIKE MR. FOSTER. >> MR. FOSTER, PLEASE MUTE YOUR MIC. OKAY.
THE ADDITION IS MASSED APPROPRIATELY AND LOCATED APPROPRIATELY, WE THOUGHT. HOWEVER, WE FELT THAT SOME OF THE WINDOW FORMS AND THE MIX OF MATERIALS MADE IT LOOK LIKE IT NO LONGER BELONGS IN THIS AREA ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT A HISTORIC HOUSE, IT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM OTHER HISTORIC HOMES AND IN THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW DISTRICT SO WE JUST FELT THINGS LIKE CARRYING THE TRIM DOWN TO THE WINDOWS IN A COUPLE LOCATIONS AND CHANGING THE WINDOW AND ADDING WINDOWS THAT ARE NOT TRADITIONAL LOOKING MAY BE WITH YOU NOT THE WAY TO GO WITH THIS.
AS FAR AS THE SIZE AND LOCATION THOUGH WE DIDN'T FEEL THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE.
HERE'S HE EXISTING THIS IS ACTUALLY THE SIDE OF THE GARAGE.
AND THE EXISTING COVERED PORCH THAT WILL REMAIN BUT IS PER OPPOSED TO HAVE HARDY PLANK SIDING IN DARK GRAY.
THEN THE REST OF THE HOUSE WOULD BE SIDE WIN VINYL SIDING TO MATCH THE EXISTING ALTHOUGH THE WIDTH OF THIS IS WIDER THAN YOU MOSTLY SEE TODAY. SO I WASN'T SURE IF THE NEWSIDING WOULD -- NEW SIDING WOULD HAVE THE SAME WIDTH ON THAT WE NEED CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM. IT'S NOT IN ANY SETBACKS AND IT IS -- WE JUST HAD A FEW MINOR DESIGN DETAILS AND MATERIAL CLARIFICATION. BUT THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS.
>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS I'LL ASK FOR COMMENTS AND I'LL GO DOWN THE LIST.
FIRST UP MR. RICE. >> I AGREE WITH LINDA A BIT ON THE WINDOW PLACEMENT. NOT SO MUCH THE PLACEMENT BUT THE DESIGN. AND I'M NOT SURE HOW TO FIX IT OTHER THAN TO INCORPORATE SOME OF OF THE DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS THAT ARE ON THE REST OF THE STRUCTURE.
AS FAR AS THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS THE SIDING AND MRARNG I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. THE SCALE AND THE ADDITION IS FINE. MAYBE JUST SOME REFINEMENT ON THE WINDOWS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
[00:10:06]
>> ALL RIGHT. MS. HOLCOMB THE WINDOWS MAKE IT LOOK CONTEMPORARY. PART OF ME LIKES IT BUT IT DOESN'T PARTICULARLY FIT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK THE MATERIALS ARE FINE WITH WHAT THEY'RE USING AND ALSO
THINK THE SCALE IS FINE. >> PERHAPS I MISSED THE INTRODUCTION, WE WOULD NORMALLY HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
ARE WE DOING IT AFTER A COUPLE MINUTES, IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK THE MASSING IS WELL DONE AND OFF THE STREET AND THEY MAY BE ADJUSTING. I CAN SEE IT CONTEMPORARY.
>> THE SECOND THING THAT MAY HELP IMMENSELY.
>> I THINK I ECHO ON THE MASSING.
ON THE GARAGE WINDOW TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ADDITIONAL BRICK BEING ADDED AND I WOULD JUST BE SOMEWHAT CONCERNED ABOUT BEING ABLE TO MASS IT AND DRAW ATTENTION TO THAT AREA AS BEING MODIFIED IN A SMALL WAY. I THINK STRAIGHT UP SEEING THE WINDOW SHOWING TRIANGLES TO BE IN-FILLED POTENTIALLY.
>> COULD YOU BRING IN THE APPLICANT?
>> ARE THE HOME OWNERS SET, UNMUTED?
.>> BEFORE WE START WITH THE APPLICANT O YOU HAVE ANY
COMMENTS? >> I HAVE NO OMMENT.
>> OKAY. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
DO YOU SWEAR YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL?
[00:15:01]
>> YES, I DO. ARE THE HOMEOWNERS ON?
DO YOU HAVE YOURSELF UNMUTED? >> I DON'T KNOW THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE PARTICIPATING. THEY WERE TUNING IN TO LISTEN.
>> THAT'S FINE IF YOU CAN REPRESENT THE APPLICATION.
THAT'S FINE. >> MR. FOSTER DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS YOU WOULD CARE TO MAKE BASED ON WHAT YOU HEARD FROM THE BOARD? SURE, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS ALL THE COMMENTS IF I MAY, ANYWAY. THE GOAL OF THE CLIENT WAS TO GIVE THE HOUSE SOME NEWNESS. THE LOW PROFILE OF THE EXISTING GABLE ROOF ON THE GARAGE OBVIOUSLY SETS THE TONE FOR THE STREET. IN THE PLAN WE HAD THE SPACE TO GO TO THE ORTH AND SPACE TO COME O THE EAST AND SO THE SMALLER GABLE PIECE THAT COMES OUT TOWARDS THE TREET BEGAN TO GIVE US A NICE BOOK END, IF YOU WILL, ON EACH END OF THE PORCH WHICH THEY WERE HOPING FOR TO ALLOW FOR SOME PRIVACY AND TO ALLOW FOR A DIFFERENT COLOR TO HAPPEN WITHIN THAT PORCH AREA.
THE BRICK ON THE EXISTING GARAGE REMAINS OTHER THAN THE CENTER SECTION AND THEN WE HAVE A SMALL WATER TABLE PIECE THAT WE WERE GOING ADD TO THE FRONT TO TRY AND TIE IN THE OLD WITH THE NEW AS A MATERIAL. AND BRICK IS HARD TO MATCH ESPECIALLY THIS ERA BUT A LOT OF TIMES IF WE CLEAN, IT'S NOT THAT BAD. I DO A LOT OF WORK IN THE ARLINGTON AREA AS WELL AS THE VILLAGE AND THINK IF WE TAKE THE TIME AND CARE TO MATCH IT UP AND CLEAN IT UP WE CAN GET A DECENT MATCH AND AGAIN THAT AREA IS DOWN LOW AND WE MAY HAVE PLANTING THAT OCCURS DEPENDING ON HOW THE LANDSCAPE PLAN DEVELOPS. THAT SAID THE WINDOW IN THE GARAGE FACE IS THE SAME PROPORTION OF THAT WINDOW BUT GONE TO A CASEMENT WINDOW TO GO IN THE SAME DIRECTION AS THE CLIENT WAS HOPING TO BE A LITTLE MORE CONTEMPORARY AND THEN I WENT WITH A TRANS ABOVE THAT BECAUSE THAT WINDOW BEING A PUNCH OPENING IN THE BRICK GETS LOST IN THE FIELD OF BRICK.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO ADVERT CAT TO THE ELEVATION AS WELL AS ADD VERTICALITY TO THE ELEVATION AS WELL AS ADD MORE AND ONE WINDOW IS THINE AND ONE IS DIFFERENT AND SO THE DOOR AND THE FAR RIGHT WINDOW, THAT'S A THIN WINDOW. WHEN WE PUT THE ADDITION ON THE NORTH END I WENT TO A CASEMENT WINDOW BUT I MATCHED THE THINNER WINDOW SO WE HAVE SOME CONSISTENCY WITHIN THE PORCH.
I DON'T MIND MOVING IT AROUND THOUGH IT'S A HIGHER WINDOW TO ALLOW FOR PRIVACY AS WELL AS WALL SPACE BENEATH IT IN THE CLOSET AREA, I DON'T KNOW THAT WOULD BE THE BEST LOCATION FROM THE FUNCTION OF THE INTERIOR. I WAS TRYING TO CREATE A NICE BALANCE AND POSITION -- COMPOSITION WITH THE SMALLER WINDOW. THE THING TO RECOGNIZE AS WELL IS THE NEW ADDITION AS IT WRAPS THE NORTH AND REAR THOSE ARE IN BEDROOMS AND CURRENTLY I DON'T KNOW HAVE YOU A PHOTOGRAPH YOU CAN SHARE OF THE REAR OF THE HOME THE WINDOWS CURRENTLY THERE ARE HIGH WINDOWS. BY NO MEANS DO THEY EGRESS FROM THE WINDOW. THE LARGER WINDOWS OCCURRING IN THE WINDOWS I HAVE KEPT THEM HIGH BUT ETHEY HAVE DIFFERENT EGRET REQUIREMENTS THAN WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BUILD.
WE CAN GO TO DOUBLE HUNGS AND CASEMENTS ON THE BACK.
I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF THAT. I THINK THE CONSISTENCY IS IMPORTANT. THE WINDOWS ARE A LITTLE BIT
[00:20:13]
HIGH BUT HAT'S THE REASON NOR DIFFERENT SCALE OF WINDOWS AS WE MARCH AROUND BECAUSE THOSE DON'T CURRENTLY MEET THE EGRESS REQUIREMENT. AND THE FAMILY ROOM SPACE WE'D LIKE TO BRING MORE OF THE OUTSIDE IN AS WE SIT THANE SPACE. THAT WAS THE REASONING FOR THE WINDOW CHANGE. THE MATERIAL DETAILS AGAIN WERE TRYING TO ADD CONTEMPORARINESS WHILE STILL UNDERSTANDING THE SCALE OF WHAT THIS IS, RESPECTING THE ROOF PITCH AND I WILL SAY IS THE BOARD IS AN EIGHT INCH EXPOSURE ND TRYING TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH THE SIDING OF THE HOUSE.>> WOULD THE SIDING MATCH THE SIDING THAT'S ALREADY ON THE HOUSE? THE HOUSE IS BEING RESIDED.
>> WHAT WILL THE MATERIAL BE? >> HARDY BOARD.
>> AROUND THE WHOLE HOUSE? >> YES.
>> I THINK 11 3/4. >> WON'T BE MIXING HARDY PLANK AND VINYL IT WILL ALL BE HARDY PLANK.
>> CORRECT. >> COULD I SAY SOMETHING, I'M AMY AND I'M THE HOME OWNER. SO THE HARDY BOARD IS JUST GOING TO BE IN THE FRONT PORCH AREA AND THAT'S THE DARK GRAY AND THEN IT'S GOING TO BE VINYL SIDING ON THE REST OF THE HOUSE.
WE'RE GETTING ALL NEW VINYL SIDING.
>> THAT'S NEWS TO ME. >> I'M SORRY.
>> WE WOULD STILL NEED TO GET A LARGE EXPOSURE THAT MATCHES HE EXPOSURE OF THE HARDY BOARD BUT I DIDN'T REALIZE WE WERE DOING A MIX. THAT MUST BE DUE TO BUDGET
NUMBERS THAT HAVE COME BACK? >> MM-HMM.
>> THE EAST ELEVATION WHERE THE MASTER BEDROOM IS THE SMALLER VERTICAL WINDOW IS THAT AN OPERABLE WINDOW?
IS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT? >> CORRECT.
>> I GUESS GOING BACK TO SOME OF THE ORIGINAL COMMENTS MADE, I THINK THE GENERAL SENSE WAS THE SMALL WINDOW IN THE MASTER CLOSET, I GUESS IT IS, SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE OUT OF SORTS.
I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO THE REST IF THERE'S A CONSENSUS THAT IT'S
OKAY. >> IT'S CERTAINLY NOT A BREAK OR BREAK ITEM BUT AGAIN WE WERE TRYING TO STABLISH SOME COMPOSITION ON THE WALL NOT JUST FIELD OF SIDING.
>> IT SEEMS ODD. >> I'M WONDERING IF SOME OF THE TECHNIQUE AND AGAIN I APPRECIATE BRINGING THE HOME INTO A BIT MORE OF A MODERN AESTHETIC AND I DON'T MIND THE MASSING OR THE DOUBLE GABLE FACING THE FRONT STREET.
I DO THINK THE REAK OF THE MATERIALITY OF THE FIELD OF THE SIDE ORG T-- SIDING OR THE BRIC IS CREATING THE PROBLEM FOR ME THE MORE I STUDIED IT AND I KNOW IT'S PART OF A CONTEMPORARY LOOK YOU'RE LOOKING FOR BUT ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IF YOU'D RECONSIDER THAT WHERE YOU'RE NOT BREAKING UP THE MATERIALITY AND MAY HELP THE FEEL OF THE HOUSE. I DON'T MIND THE PROPORTION OF THE WINDOWS AS THEY ARE, BUT IF WE WERE TO FILL BACK IN THOSE
BREAKS WITH THE TRIM -- >> OKAY.
>> THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL. AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO BE RESPECTFUL OF THE ECLECTIC NATURE OF THE STREET WITHOUT VEERING TOO FAR OUTSIDE THOSE LINES AND FOR ME THE BACK
[00:25:02]
ELEVATION, I'M VERY INTRIGUED BY AND LESS FUSSY ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT S PUBLIC UNLESS THERE'S NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE ISSUES ABOUT THAT BUT FROM MY POINT OF VIEW FROM A PUBLIC POINT OF VIEW IT'S JUST EAST ELEVATION.I THINK YOU EITHER HAVE THE CHOICE TO FILL THOSE BACK IN AND THAT WOULD HELP ME A BIT AND IN REGARD TO THE WINDOW FOR THE CLOSET, PERHAPS MR. FOUST'S RECOMMENDATION TO WHATEVER ELEVATION ESSENTIALLY GOES AROUND THE CORNER TO THE LEFT AND WOULD THAT ALLOW YOU TO PROPORTION THE MASTER BEDROOM WINDOW WITH MAYBE SYMMETRICAL CASEMENT ON THE LEFT AND RIDE EVEN IF IT'S A LITTLE OFF-CENTER FROM THE ELEVATION IT MAY SEEM LIKE SHUTTERS WITHOUT BEING SHUTTERS BECAUSE IT SEEMS YOU'RE TRYING TO AVOID THEIR USE, THAT MAY BE AN INTERESTING ADJUSTMENT
AS WELL. >> AGAIN, MY PROCESS WITH ALL OF MY CLIENTS IS TO COME IN WITH A WELL.
THOUGHT IDEA AND WE HAVE PRICING SO WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S REAL BUT WE'RE MALLEABLE AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED THAT WOULD WIN DER US OR WOULD BE A GAME CHANGER FOR US.
IF WE CAN PUT A SIMILAR WINDOW ON THE LEFT SIDE WHAT I CALL A SQUARE WINDOW OR SKINNY THAT UP A BIT AND MOVE THE WINDOW FOR THE MASTER SUITE CLOSET AROUND THE CORNER.
>> WOULD YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE WINDOW ELIMINATED FROM
EITHER ELEVATION? >> NO, NOT A PROBLEM.
>> I CAN TALK WEDGE THE CLIENTS OF COURSE.
I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND YOUR STANCE.
AT MINIMAL WE'D MOVE IT TO THE SOUTH.
>> WE HAVE NOT ECEIVED ANYTHING FROM THE PUBLIC EITHER VIA
E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE? >> AT THIS TIME WE DO NOT HAVE E-MAILS HOWEVER, WE HAVE ONE CALL IN THE LOBBY THAT MAY WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WANT TO UNMUTE THEMSELVES BY DOING THE STAR 6.
IT'S A 513 AREA CODE. >> I DO HAVE COMMENTS.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS I WANTED TO CLARIFY I MAY HAVE MISSED A LITTLE BIT BUT I THOUGHT THIS WAS ACROSS THE STREET AND IS THAT CORRECT?
>> IT IS IN THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW DISTRICT.
IT'S JUST NOT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IT'S NOT A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT BUT IT'S DEFINITELY IN THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW
AND AM I UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY THIS MEETS DESIGN GUIDELINES BUT WE JUST WANTED TO HAVE SOME CHANGES?
>> I THINK STAFF FELT IT DID NOT MEET THE DESIGN GUIDELINES IN EVERY WAY BECAUSE THE WINDOWS AND THE TRIM ON THE FRONT FACADE ARE NOT TRADITIONAL LOOKING AND CHANGE THE LOOK OF THE HOUSE.
THE GUIDELINES RECOMMEND KEEPING THE BASIC LOOK OF THE HOUSE AS
MUCH AS POSSIBLE. >> UNDERSTOOD.
MAYBE A BETTER WAY TO GET AT WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS THERE A SAFETY OR CONSTRUCTION PROBLEM WITH THE PARTICULAR ADDITION AS SUBMITTED? IT SEEMS LIKE THE ANSWER TO THAT WAS NO. I'M HEARING THAT CORRECTLY IT WAS JUST INTERPRETATION OF THE GUIDELINE AND THE OTHER THING I
[00:30:04]
HEARD IS THE WINDOW AND THE DESIGNS STAYS THE WAY IT WAS TRADITIONALLY DESPITE THE FACT IN 40 YEARS WE DECIDED IT'S [INDISCERNIBLE] IN CASE THERE WAS A FIRE OR SOMETHING IS THATANOTHER ITEM I HEARD CORRECTLY? >> WELL, I THINK YOU PROBABLY HEARD MOST OF THE BOARD SAY THAT THE WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE BEDROOMS ON THE REAR BEING BIGGER AND DESIGNED AS THEY ARE.
IS FINE. IT'S JUST THE FRONT FACADE THEY'RE CONCERNED WITH.
THE DESIGN LOOKED GOOD TO ME AND IN LISTENING TO MOST THE CONVERSATION I THINK THE LEVEL OF DETAIL WE WERE GETTING INTO TO REPRESENT WORTHINGTON WAS OVER FOR A RESIDENCE THAT HAS A GOOD LOOKING ADDITION BEING PROPOSED TO THE HOUSE.
I WOULD URGE APPROVAL. THAT'S ALL I GOT.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> MR. BROWN, ARE THERE ANY
OTHER COMMENTS OR PHONE CALLS? >> WE DID RECEIVE AN E-MAIL RELATED TO A NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET.
600 EVENING STREET. THEY STATED THEY LIKED THE DESIGN AS LAID OUT IN THE DRAWINGS BUT HAVE NO OBJECTIONS
THANK YOU. DO WE NEED TO HAVE OUR ONE MINUTES WAITING PERIOD FOR STREAMING TO CATCH UP?
I'LL START THE TIMER NOW. FOR WHO MAY BE WATCHING OR LISTENING IN ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS THE E-MAIL ADDRESS AND HOW TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS AS WELL AS THE PHONE NUMBER AND CONFERENCE I.D. OKAY.
THAT'S A MINUTE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS? IF NOT COULD I HAVE A MOTION,
PLEASE. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, A QUICK INTERRUPTION, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADDITIONAL E-MAILS AND/OR PHONE CALLS JUST FOR YOUR RECORD AS YOU START.
>> THANK YOU. >> MR. CHAIR, THIS IS TOM RICE I'D LIKE TO REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION AND RENOVATE AT 605 EVENING STREET AND THE EAST ELEVATION ADJUST THE MASTER BEDROOM WINDOW AND TO BE REVIEWED BY STAFF AND THAT THE SMALL WINDOW ON THE SAME ELEVATION MAY BE REMOVED OR RE-LOCATED TO THE SOUTH ELEVATION AS PER CASE NUMBER AR17-2020, AR 17-2020 DATED MARCH 2020 BE APPROVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE FACT AND EXCLUSIONS IN THE STAFF MEMO AND
PRESENTED AT THE MEETING. >> THANK YOU, IS THERE A SECOND?
>> I'LL SECOND IT. >> IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. RICE, SECONDED. COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> MR. SCHUSTER. >> I'M GOING TO VOTE NO.
THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY VIRTUALLY EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD ABOUT THE WINDOWS HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.
I ALSO THINK THE FRONT DESIGN IS A DEPARTURE FROM THE LOOK OF
THAT PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD. >> I'M ALSO GOING TO VOTE NO
[00:35:08]
WITH THE SAME REASONS AS MM MR. SCHUSSTER BUT A CHANGE COULD CHANGE IT IN THE FUTURE.>> I'LL VOTE YES. MS. HOLCOMB.
YOU'RE UTED, MIKE. >> THANK YOU WHY YOU VOTED.
WE FORGOT TO REMIND OURSELVES TO DO THAT THIS EVENING.
GOING TO THE NEXT APPLICATIONS. >> MR. COULTER WE DIDN'T GET
[2. Garage Modification – 100 W. South St. (Neil Toepfer) AR 18-2020]
THE NEXT APPLICATION IS AR18-2020 FOR A GARAGEAPPLICATION. >> THIS IS A INOR MODIFICATION TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED GARAGE WHICH IS MOSTLY CONSTRUCTED NOW. THIS WAS ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE A VENT AND NOW THEY'RE PROPOSING TO PUT A WINDOW IN THERE SIMILARLY STYLED TO THE OTHER WINDOWS ON THE HOUSE.
THEY DID GO TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS LAST WEEK AND AND RESO RESOURCED -- RECEIVED APPROVAL ON THEIR BUILDING PERMITS TO THE END OF THIS YEAR.
THEY'RE ORKING HARD NO GETTING IT DONE BUT IT'S JUST ABOUT
CHANGING THE VENT TO A WINDOW. >> THANK YOU.
DO ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
>> NO COMMENT. >> WE'LL GO DOWN THE LIST.
>> IT'S FINE. >> MR. SCHUSTER?
>> I THINK IT LOOKS GOOD. >> MS. HINZ.
>> I THINK IT LOOKS GOOD BUT WANT TO ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER
CHANGES. >> THE HOME OWNER CAN ANSWER
THAT QUESTION FOR US. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. I SHARE EVERYONE ELSE'S FEELINGS. PLEASE SWEAR IN THE APPLICANTS
AT THIS TIME. >> DO YOU SWEAR YOUR TESTIMONY
THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL? >> I DO.
>> THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU'D CARE TO ADD IN THE PRESENTATION?
>> NOT REALLY. JUST A COUPLE THINGS TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION ABOUT ADDITIONAL AESTHETIC CHANGES BECAUSE E'RE MOVING THE VENTS. THE REST OF THE STRUCTURE WILL LOOK THE SAME IN THE DESIGN. THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE ACTUALLY WAS THE GARAGE INTO A CONDITIONED SPACE.
THE OTHER COMMENT I WANTED TO ADD IS THE WINDOW THAT WILL BE PURCHASED WILL BE THE SAME MATERIAL AS WHAT ALREADY EXISTED ON THE GRADUATE AND BE AS LOSE TO THE WINDOWS AS WE CAN GET IT THERE'S A COUPLE WINDOW MANUFACTURERS BUT THE MANUFACTURER THAT WE HAD FOR THE WINDOWS SHUT DOWN IN THE MIDDLE OF 2019. SO THOSE WINDOWS ARE NO LONGER AVAILABLE. WE FOUND A COUPLE MANUFACTURERS THAT MAKE A WINDOW STYLE THAT IS VERY VERY CLOSE AND THE LOOK OF THE TRIM CLOSE TO THE WINDOW. FROM THE STREET MY FEELING IS YOU CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE. IT'S POSSIBLE BUT YOU'D HAVE TO BE REALLY CLOSE TO IT. .
[00:40:05]
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE TWO OPTIONS.
YOU CAN CALL 567-249-0063. WHEN CALL YOU'LL NEED CONFERENCE I.D. OF 462 30 9, 326. YOU'LL NEED TO UNMUTE YOURSELF AND WE'LL TAKE THE CALLS IN THE ORDER IN WHICH WERE RECEIVED.
WE'LL NOW TAKE A ONE-MINUTE BREAK WHILE STREAMING CATCHES
UP. >> THE ONE MINUTE TIME PERIOD IS UP. MR. BROWN ARE THERE E-MAILS OR
PHONE COMMENTS? >> MR. COULTER WE DO NOT HAVE ANY E-MAILS OR PHONE CALLS COME IN.
WE MAY WANT TO WAIT ANOTHER 20 SECONDS BECAUSE AFTER WE START THE THROUGH THE ROLL CALL FOR THE PREVIOUS CASE WE DID GET AN E-MAIL CONCERNING THE 605 EVENING STREET FROM A KAREN MADDEN SAYING SHE SUPPORT THE LOOK F WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED SO I DID WANT TO READ THAT IN BUT IT DID COME IN RIGHT AT THE END WHEN WE WERE DOING THE ROLL CALL VOLT -- VOTE MAYBE WE WANT TO DO A 1:30 BUT ME AMBLING ON HAS PROBABLY BEEN 1:30.
>> ALL RIGHT. BOARD MEMBERS, ARE THERE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? IF NOT COULD I HAVE A MOTION,
PLEASE? >> YES, YOU CAN, TOM REIS.
I MOVE THE REQUEST BY NEIL TOEPFER FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO INSTALL A WINDOW AS PER CASE AR18-2020 DRAWINGS DATED APRIL 6, 2020 BE APPROVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND INCLUDED IN THE STAFF MEM BOW AND -- MEMO AND
>> CAN SOMEBODY SECOND THE MOTION, PLEASE.
>> THIS IS DAVE FOUST. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.
>> COULD YOU PLEASE CALL HE ROLL?
>> AND MR. COULTER. >> YES, IT'S PASSED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT
[3. Deck Replacement – 615 Oxford St. (Lynn A. Bird) AR 19-2020]
APPLICATION, T'S A DECK REPLACEMENT AT 615 OXFORD STREETAPPLICATION AR19-2020. >> HIS WAS BEFORE THE BOARD LAST YEAR FOR A REMAKE OF THE YARD.
THE ADDITION OF HARD SCAPE AND ALL THE PLANT MATERIAL AND THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE AND WAS APPROVED.
THE DECK WAS THERE AND IS ABOUT 19 YEARS OLD.
[00:45:04]
IT'S DE TTERIORATING THE DECK A THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE BLACK METAL SPINDLES. YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE WOOD'S GONE BAD AND THE DECKING MATERIAL IS CURRENTLY TRACKS DECKING BUT IT IS IT HAS STAINS AND IT'S NOT LOOKING AS GOOD AFTER 19 YEARS AND THE HOME OWNER IS PROPOSING THE SAME MATERIAL IN THE SAME EDAR LIKE MATERIAL THIS IS THE RENDERING AND THIS IS BEFORE ND HERE IT IS NOW AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY LOVELY. HAVING A BRAND NEW ECK TO O ALONG WITH IT WILL JUST BE WONDERFUL TOO.IT'S BASICALLY IN THE SAME LOCATION, SAME SIZE AND SHAPE.
THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU.
>> WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND SWEAR IN THE APPLICANT AND SEE IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WOULD CARE TO ADD.
DO YOU SWEAR YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL?
>> IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D CARE TO ADD TO THE PRESENTATION?
>> OKAY DOWN TO BOARD MEMBERS, MR. HOFFMAN.
>> NO COMMENT. I THINK IT WILL BE A GREAT
>> I THINK EVERYTHING DONE TO THE PROPERTY IS WELL THOUGHT OUT AND TURNED OUT BEAUTIFULLY. I'M IN FAVOR OF IT.
>> MR. REIS. >> EVERYTHING LOOKS GREAT.
OUTSTANDING DESIGN JOB. DECK LOOKS FINE.
>> MS. HOLCOMBE. >> LOOKS LIKE A PLACE I'D LIKE
TO HANG OUT. >> CAN WE DO THE NEXT MEETING
>> MR. MEIERS. >> NO COMMENT, THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHTY. I'LL ECHO EVERYTHING EVERYBODY ELSE SAID SO FAR. AGAIN, WE HAVE TWO OPTIONS FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC COMMENT THIS EVENING.
FIRST YOU CAN E-MAIL YOUR COMMENT TO CITY STAFF AT PLANNING@WORTHINGTON.ORG AND COMMENTS WILL BE READ DURING THE MEETING. ANOTHER OPTION IS TO CALL AT 1-567-249-0063. WHEN YOU CALL YOU NEED THE CONFERENCE I.D. OF 462039326 AND PRESS POUND AND UMUTE YOURSELF AND WE'LL GO ON A MINUTE AND A HALF PAUSE.
IF YOU WANT TO CALL OR E-MAIL THE INFORMATION'S ON YOUR
SCREEN.>> MR. BROWN WE PASSED T MINUTE AND A HALF POINT.
[00:50:53]
HAVE WE HAD PHONE CALLS OR E-MAILS?>> WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY E-MAILS AND/OR RECEIVED ANY
PHONE CALLS INTO THE LOBBY. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.
COULD I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE. >> MR. CHAIR, THIS IS TOM REIS.
I REQUEST FOR SCERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS FOR CASE AR19-2020 DRAWINGS AR19-2020 DATED APRIL 13, 2020 BE APPROVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS IN THE STAFF MEMO AND PRESENTED AT THE MEETING.
>> THANK YOU. CAN I HAVE A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> RICK SCHUSTER, SECOND. >> COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE
>> AND MR. COULTER. >> YES, IT'S PASSED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH.
ENJOY JUR DECK. >> THANK YOU, I WILL.
[4. Replace Fire Escape – 41 Short St. (New England Construction) AR 20-2020]
THE NEXT IS TO REPLACE FIRE ESCAPE AT 41 SHORT STREET.IT THE APPLICATION AR20-2020. >> AS WAS SAID IN THE MEMO, THIS IS THE REAR FOURPLEX WE HAVE IN OLD REMINGTON AND I'M NOT SURE IF THE FIRE ESCAPE THAT'S THERE WAS ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING BUT IT'S ALL METAL AND ON THE REAR AND IT HAS RUSTED QUITE A BIT.
THE BUILDING OWNERS WOULD LIKE TO REPLACE IT AND THEIR PROPOSING TO PUT ONE IN ON THE UPPER FLOOR HAS MORE AREA FOR THE RESIDENTS TO USE AND THEY'RE GOING TO USE PRODUCT TIMBER TECH PRODUCT THAT LOOKS LIKE WOOD. IT WILL GIVE IT A DIFFERENT LOOK THAN IT DOES NOW. IT WILL EXTEND FURTHER FROM THE BUILDING TO PROVIDE THAT AREA AND ALSO THERE ARE STEPS THAT GO DOWN TO THE BASEMENTS OF THE BUILDING.
AND IT WOULD COVER OVER THE TOP OF THOSE STEPS AND THEN THE STAIRS ARE BEYOND THE DECKING WOULD BE MAHOGANY AND THE RAILINGS ARE PROPOSED TO BE BLACK.
THEY'RE GOING TO USE COLUMNS THAT ARE FIBER GLASS BUT SIMILAR TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING THOUGH I THINK A SMALLER COLUMN IS PROPOSED. AND IT WILL EXTEND OUT AND THAT WILL HAVE A RUBBER ROOF ON IT. THOUGH THE GUIDELINES RECOMMEND NOT CHANGING ORIGINAL FEATURES THE FEATURE IS SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE LIES BEEN MATERIALS THAT LOOK LIKE WOOD OR WOOD INSTEAD OF THE METAL THAT WAS ON HERE FOR THE FIRE ESCAPE.
SO STAFF HAD NO CONCERNS. >> I'M HERE IN THE DARK NOW.
[00:55:15]
>> HAVE YOU LOST POWER? >> DO YOU SWEAR YOUR TESTIMONY
THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. >> YES.
>> IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CARE TO ADD?
>> NO. THE DECK IS PRETTY RUSTED.
THE PREVIOUS OWNER DID REPLACE THE DECKING, THE LANDING A WHILE AGO. IT'S KIND OF AN EYE SCORE AT THIS POINT AFTER YEARS OF NEGLECT.
>> WE'LL GO TO MEMBER COMMENTS. MR. FOUST.
>> I THINK IT'S FINE. >> R. SCHUSTER.
>> NO COMMENT. I THINK IT LOOKS NICE.
>> MS. HOLCOMBE. >> I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY WELL DONE AND LIKE IT A LOT AND LIKE THE FACT THE CHAIRS AND ABLE
MATCH AS WELL. >> THEY'RE A GIFT FROM A FORMER
RESTAURANT IN TOWN. >> MR. HOFMANN.
>> A QUICK COMMENT AND FORGIVE ME IF IT WAS ALREADY STATED THE CONCRETE CURB AND STEPS YOU SEE IN THE VIEW WILL THAT BE
ACTUALLY, IT'S NOT DETAILED VERY WELL THERE BUT THAT VIEW IS EXCELLENT. THE FIRST STEP THERE OF CONCRETE WILL PROBABLY GET DEMOED. WE'LL TRY TO MAKE IT GO AWAY
WITH SOME STAINING. >> VERY GOOD.
>> ALL RIGHT. AND I WILL ALSO ADD MS. HOLCOMBE'S COMMENT. IT MAKES IT SAFER AND ACHIEVE WHAT THE DIED -- GUIDELINES ARE TRYING TO DO.
WITH THAT WE'LL START OUR MINUTE AND A HALF.
TO REMIND EVERYBODY, IF YOU ARE WANTING TO MAKE A COMMENT THE INFORMATION IS ON THE SCREEN AS TO HOW TO DO THAT.
IF YOU'RE E-MAILING IT'S PLANNING@WORTHINGTON.ORG AND IF YOU'RE CALLING IN IT'S 1-567-249-0063 AND THAT CONFERENCE I.D. NUMBER IS 462039326 POUND AND YOU'LL NEED TO HIT THE STAR 6 KEYS TO UNMUTE YOUR PHONE.
>> MR. BROWN WE HIT THE MINUTE AND A HALF MARK.
HAVE WE RECEIVED E-MAILS OR PHONE CALLS?
WITH THAT CAN I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE.
>> MR. REIS. PROPOSE THE CASE NUMBER
[01:00:11]
AR20-2020 DRAWINGS AR20-2020 DATED APRIL 14, 2020 BE APPROVED BASED ON CONCLUSIONS AND STAFF MEMO AND PRESENTED AT THEMEETING. >> CAN I HAVE A SECOND.
>> KATHY HOLCOMBE. I'M SECOND IT.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. REIS, SECONDED BY MS. HOLCOMBE. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> AND MR. COULTER. >> YES, IT'S PASSED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING
[5. Hot Tub – 6452 Bellbrook Pl. (Mark & Ashley Davis) AR 21-2020]
IS A HOT TUB AT 6452 BELLBROOK PLACE APPLICATION AR21-2020.>> THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN THE LATE 1980S AND THE WHOLE STREET REALLY HAS BEEN VERY WELL MAINTAINED.
THE OWNERS HAVE A DECK THAT WAS REPLACED OR REPLACED JUST A FEW YEARS AGO AND IT WAS ENLARGED AND NOW THEY'D LIKE TO ADD A HOT TUB TO THE REAR. AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S THE SECOND PROPERTY IN SO THERE'S NOT REALLY MUCH A VIEW FROM DUBLIN/GRANDVILLE ROAD. IT'S NOT IN THE REQUIRED SETBACKS. IT'S 7 X 7 AND THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND THE YARD IS FENCED IN.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SEEN BY ANYONE AND STAFF HAD NO
CONCERNS. >> THANK YOU, DO WE HAVE AN
APPLICANT THIS EVENING? >> YES.
COULD YOU PLEASE BE SWORN IN. >> DO YOU SWEAR THAT YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL?
>> IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CARE TO ADD TO THE PRESENTATION?
WE'LL GO TO THE BOARD MEMBERS. MR. SCHUSTER?
>> NO COMMENT. >> MS. HOLCOMBE.
>> NO COMMENT. >> MR. HOFMANN.
>> I'LL HAVING A HARD TIME FINDING YOU BUT NO COMMENT.
ALL RIGHTY. I HAVE NO COMMENTS EITHER.
WITH THAT WE'LL START OUR TIME CLOCK.
A MINUTE AND A HALF AND FOR THOSE WHO MAY BE LISTENING IN OR WATCHING, YOU CAN REACH US BY E-MAIL AT PLANNING AT PLANNING@WORTHINGTON.ORG OR CALL 1-567-249-0063 AND ENTERING THE CONFERENCE CODE I.D. 462039326 POUND AND YOU'LL NEED TO DO STAR 6 KEYS TO UNMUTE YOUR PHONE.
[01:05:06]
E >> WE REACHED THE ONE MINUTE AND 30 SECOND TIME PERIOD. MR. BROWN HAVE WE RECEIVED
E-MAILS OR PHONE CALLS. >> WE ARE GOOD FOR THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU, DO I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE?
>> TOM REIS, MR. CHAIR. I MOVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ADD A HOT TUB AT 6452 BELLBROOK PLACE AT PER CASE AR21-2020. DRAWINGS AR21-2020 DATED APRIL 24, 2020 BE APPROVED BASED ON THE FINDING AND STAFF CONCLUSION
AND PRESENTED AT THE MEETING. >> DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> MR. HOFMANN SECONDS. >> THANK YOU.
MOVED BY MR. REIS, SECONDED BY MR. HOFMANN.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> MR. SCHUSTER.
>> YES. >> MS. HELLO -- HELLO --
>> AND MR. COULTER. >> YES, IT'S PASSED.
THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT
[6. Front Porch – 661 Seabury Dr. (Famiglia Homes/Piche) AR 22-2020]
APPLICATION A FRONT PORCH AT 661 SEABURY DRIVE.APPLICATION AR22-2020. >> THIS IS A TWO-STORY HOUSE ACROSS FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL. THE APPLICANTS WOULD LIKE TO CONSTRUCT A RONT PORCH THE FULL WIDTH OF THE HOUSE.
DUE TO THE EXTRA LARGE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR DUBLIN GRANDVILLE ROAD THERE WILL BE VARIANCES NEEDED FOR A SIDE YARD SETBACK BUT DOES NOT ENCROACH VERY MUCH INTO THE SETBACK.
IT'S AN EIGHT-FOOT FRONT PORCH THAT IS PROPOSED AND SUPPORTED BY COLUMNS IT'S A SHED ROOM BUT DOES HAVE THAT GABLE OVER THE FRONT ENTRANCE. MAYBE THE HOUSE WILL BE PAINTED OR NOT. I THINK WE NEED CLARIFICATION ON
THAT. >> IS THE APPLICANT WITH US.
>> I'LL BE REPRESENTING THE HOME OWNERS TODAY.
>> PLEASE SWEAR HER IN. >> DO YOU SWEAR YOUR TESTIMONY
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU CARE TO ADD?
>> THE POST WILL BE WHITE AND THE PEAKS WILL BE WHITE TO PULL IN THE WHITE GARAGE DOOR ALREADY THERE AND THE WHITE TRIM OF THE
WINDOWS. >> WE'LL GO TO THE BOARD MEMBERS? ANY COMMENTS?
>> MS. HOLCOMBE. >> LOOKS GREAT.
>> MR. FOUST. >> I DROVE THROUGH THEAGE -- THE VILLAGE AND THE PORCH MATCHES AND LOOK LIKE IT COULD HAVE BEEN THERE. IT'S DONE VERY WELL.
>> I WOULD ECHO MR. FOUST'S COMMENTS.
WE'LL NOW START THE CLOCK. AGAIN, IF YOU'RE LISTENING OR
[01:10:04]
WATCHING US ON VIDEO YOU CAN CONTACT US AT E-MAIL AT PLANNING AT PLANNING@WORTHINGTON.ORG OR CALL 1-567-249-0063 AND YOU'LL NEED TO ENTER THE CONFERENCE I.D. 462039326# AND HIT STAR 6TO UNMUTE YOUR PHONE. >> MR. BROWN WE HIT THE ONE MINUTE 30 SECOND TIME PERIOD. HAVE WE RECEIVED PHONE CALLS OR
WE'RE GOOD TO GO FOR A MOTION. >> THANK YOU, DO I HAVE A
MOTION, PLEASE. >> THIS IS TOM REIS.
I MOVE THE REQUEST BY COMMITTEE OF PHONES ON -- TO ADD A FRONT PORCH AT 661 SEABURY DRIVE CASE AR22-2020.
DRAWINGS AR22-2020 DATED APRIL 30, 2020 BE APPROVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS FROM THE STAFF MEMO
AND PRESENTED AT THE MEETING. >> THANK YOU, DO I HAVE A SECOND, PLEASE.
>> DAVE FOUST 'LL OFFER THE SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. REIS.
SECONDED BY MR. FOUST. COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
>> AND MR. COULTER. >> YES, IT'S PASSED.
THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR BUSINESS FOR THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD.
[1. Conditional Use Permit a. Recreational Facility in I-1 – 7086 Huntley Rd. (M Lab Ohio LLC) CU 03-2020]
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO THE MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION PART OF THE MEETING. WE HAVE ONE AGENDA ITEM A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. IT'S A RECREATIONAL FACILITY IN THE I1 DISTRICT AT 7086 HUNTLEY ROAD APPLICATION CU03-2020.>> THE RECREATIONAL FACILITY WILL CONSISTENT OF A GYM THAT FOCUSES ON PROFESSIONAL TRAINING ON OBSTACLE COURSES.
THEY WILL HAVE ACTIVITIES AND CLASSES FOR ALL AGES THOUGH AND ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF CLASSES. THIS S THE BUILDING.
IT'S A 22 SQUARE FEET BUILDING AND THEY'RE PLANNING TO LOCATE IN THE NORTH HALF OF IT. THIS IS THE SITE.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S PLENTY OF PARKING AROUND THE SITE.
THEIR HOURS WILL MAINLY BE AFTER 4:00 P.M.
THERE'S A MISTAKE IN THE MEMO THAT SAID 4:00 A.M. BUT IT'S MAINLY AFTER 4:00 P.M. THEY MAY HAVE DAYTIME HOURS AT SOME POINT BUT 4:00 TO 10:00 IS THEIR PRIMARY HOURS OF USE AND SO THE PARKING WILL E OPPOSITE OF WHAT THE USE TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING IS. THIS SAY GENERAL LAYOUT OF -- IS A GENERAL LAYOUT OF THE ITEMS THEY'LL HAVE IN THE GYM.
>> THE YM OWNER IS CURRENTLY UP ON GLASSEL ROAD IN COLUMBUS AND I KNOW HAS BEEN LOOK FOR A SPACE IN WORTHINGTON FOR SOME TIME AND WE'RE VERY HAPPY SHE HAS FINALLY FOUND SOMETHING IN WORTHINGTON AND IT WILL BE A NICE ADDITION FOR US.
[01:15:07]
>> THANK YOU, IS OUR APPLICANT WITH US THIS EVENING?
>> YES, I'M HERE. >> COULD YOU PLEASE SWEAR HER
IN. >> DO YOU SWEAR YOUR TESTIMONY
THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL? >> I DO.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CARE TO
ADD TO THE PRESENTATION? >> NO, THE SPACE LOOKS AU TOM AND WE'D LOVE TO BE IN WORTHINGTON AND HAVE OUR SPACE
THERE. >> WE HAVE A FEWER MEMBERS ON THE COLLISION. WE'LL NOW TAKE A PAUSE FOR A MINUTE AND A HALF TO GIVE ANYBODY A CHANCE TO CALL IN IF THAT'S WHAT THEY SO DESIRE. AND ON YOUR SCREEN IF YOU CHOOSE TO E-MAIL YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE E-MAIL US TO PLANNING AT PLANNING@WORTHINGTON.ORG OR CALL 1-567-249-0063 AND ENTER THE CONFERENCE I.D. 462039326 # AND YOU'LL NEED TO PRESS STAR 6 TO
UNMUTE YOUR TELEPHONE. >> MR. COULTER WHILE WE'RE WAITING THE MINUTE AND A HALF WE RECEIVED AN E-MAIL FROM TOM BURNS 1006 KILL BORNE DRIVE. THE GENTLEMAN WHO PREVIOUSLY SPOKE FOR THE HOUSE ON EVENING STREET.
HE DID WANT TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS BEFORE YOU AND GIVEN WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE ECONOMY, SMALL BUSINESSES ARE THE LIFE BLOOD OF OUR ECONOMY AND WE SHOULD DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO DO BUSINESS. WE RECEIVED THAT E-MAIL.
THAT CAME IN AFTER HE JUMPED OFF THE CALL FOR THE EVENING STREET APPLICATION. I DID WANT TO READ THAT INTO HE
>> MR. BROWN WE HIT THE ONE MINUTE 30 SECOND MARK HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY ADDITIONAL PHONE CALLS OR E-MAILS?
>> NO, SIR, WE HAVE NOT. >> I'D LIKE TO REMIND EVERYBODY IT WILL BE JUST THE FIVE MEMBERS OF THE MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION. WITH THAT CAN HAVE A MOTION,
PLEASE. >> MR. CHAIR, TOM REIS.
I MOVE THE REQUEST BY M LAB OHIO LLC FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A RECREATIONAL FACILITY HUNTLEY ROAD CASE CU03-2020 DRAWINGS CU30-2020 BE APPROVED BASED ON THE PLANNING GOALS OF THE CITY AS REFERENCED IN THE LAND USE PLANS AND FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS IN THE STAFF MEMO AND PRESENTED
AT THE MEETING. >> DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> MR. HOFMANN SECONDS. >> THANK YOU.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MR. REIS, SECONDED BY MR. HOFMANN.
COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? >> MS. HOLCOMBE.
THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR BUSINESS FOR THE MUNICIPAL PLANNING COMMISSION.
MR. BROWN UNDER OTHER YOU WANTED TO DISCUSS THE TREE CALIBER FEE.
>> SURE, THANK YOU, SIR. AS YOU ALL MIGHT REMEMBER AT OUR MARCH 12 MEETING THE ACTUAL LAST ONE WE HAD THAT WAS LIVE AND TOGETHER NOT THAT THIS ISN'T LIVE BUT YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN, WE DISCUSSED A COUPLE TEXT AMENDMENTS WE WERE GOING TO SEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PLANNING CODE AND ONE RELATING
[01:20:01]
TO TOURIST CODES AND DEFINITIONS AND THE OTHER WAS TO CHANGE THE P.U.D. REPLACEMENT FEE FROM WHAT WAS IN THE CURRENT CODE AT 450 CHANGING TO THE 150 PER CAL PER TO MATCH UP WHAT WAS FOUND WITH THE CORRIDOR GUIDELINES THAT WE WORKED ON SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND WAS ADOPTED BY ITY COUNCIL. IT'S KIND OF CREATED A COUPLE HICCUPS OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS AND S WE SAW WITH WHAT WENT BEFORE FOR STAFFORD VILLAGE THERE'S THE RECOMMENDATION AND WHAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL WAS A REDUCTION FROM THE 450 DOWN TO THE 150 WHAT WE BROUGHT TO YOU WAS A CHANGE IN THAT FEE TO LEGALLY CHANGE THE TEXT.ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THAT MEETING I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. HOFMANN, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I'M CONFUSING MY MPC MEMBERS BUT I BELIEVE MR. HOFMANN OR MR. REIS, WE DISCUSSED THE TREE FEE AS IT IS TODAY AND RELATED TO IF YOU WERE PARTICIPATING IN THE STREET TREE PROGRAM AS A RESIDENT WITHIN THE CITY. AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING WAS IN THE PARTICIPATION WITH THE TREE FEE IT CAME OUT TO ABOUT $145, $150 TO PARTICIPATE.
IN DISCUSSIONS AFTER THE MEETING WITH ONE OF THE CITY ARBORISTS, WE LEARNED WE LEARNED THAT'S JUST THE RESIDENTS' PARTICIPATION SIDE THERE'S A FEE ON THE CITY SIDE THAT BRINGS THE FEE UP TO $240, $250 IF WE WERE TO PURCHASE A ONE AND A HALF CAL PER INCH TREE AND PLANT IT. IN DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND WHAT WAS GOING TO GO ON TO CITY COUNCIL, WE WERE GOING TO TAKE FORWARD TO COUNCIL THE RECOMMENDATION YOU ORIGINALLY HAD FOR THE REDUCTION TO $150 BUT IN DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY MANAGER WE RAISED THAT TO THE $250 TO ACCURATELY REFLECT THE COST IF THE CITY WERE TO GO OUT AND REPLACE A TREE. WE FELT BEFORE THAT WENT ON TO CITY COUNCIL I NEEDED TO BRING IT BACK FOR A DISCUSSION.
I KNOW IT WAS A HUGE JUMP GOING FROM THE $450 TO $150 AND THE INTENTION WAS NOT TO MAKE MONEY OFF THAT BUT LOOK AT SIGNIFICANT TREE STANDS AND GET A DESIGN WITH SAVING TREES ON SITE AND WHAT I THINK WE SAW FOR WHAT YOU RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL WITH THE $150 I THOUGHT I NEEDED TO AT LEAST GO ON RECORD TO ACCURATELY REFLECT WHAT THE TRUE COST WAS.
TONIGHT I WANTED TO GO ON RECORD AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH CITY COUNCIL BUT YOU APPROVED THE $450 TO THE $150 AND WHAT WAS GOING TO GO BEFORE COUNCIL WAS YOUR RECOMMENDATION WITH THE IDEA THE MORE ACCURATE COST MAY BE CLOSER TO THE $250.
WE WANTED TO GET YOUR COMMENTS AND THOUGHTS TONIGHT TO MOVE
THIS ALONG TO CITY COUNCIL. >> WHY DON'T WE GO DOWN THE SAME ORDER. MR. REIS?
>> NO, I AGREE WITH THE $250. I THINK IT'S REASONABLE.
LET'S MOVE ON. >> MS. HOLCOMBE.
>> I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD. I WAS THINKING $150 PER CAL PER INCH. ARE WE ONLY DOING IT FOR A
ONE-INCH TREE IS THAT IT? >> IF THE CITY WERE TO PLANT A NEW TREE THE TREES THE CITY COULD PURCHASE ANDIAN STALL, THE COST -- AND INSTALL THE COST IS THE ONE INCH TO ONE AND A HALF INCH BUT I SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING NOW THAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT OUT LOUD. YOU ACTUALLY WOULD GET MORE BANG FOR YOUR BUCK STILL. HEARING YOU SAY THAT OUT LOUD AND HEARING YOU ASK THE QUESTION BACK MAKES ME HEAR WE'RE TRYING
TO REPLACE A TREE >> A FOUR-INCH TREE, FOR
EXAMPLE. >> ONCE THEY GET TOO LARGE IT'S TOO OST PROHIBITIVE TO DO ANYTHING.
IN THAT CONTEXT WE REALIZED WHAT WE WERE LISTENING TO WITH THE
[01:25:06]
REPLACEMENT FEED WITH WHAT WE HAVE GOING TO COUNCIL.MAYBE I'M THINKING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
JUST BECAUSE OF YOU. SO THANK YOU.
I DID WANT TO GET IT ON RECORD BECAUSE I KNOW AT LEAST IN OUR DISCUSSION WE TIED IT AROUND TO THE $150 AND THE PARTICIPATE IN THE STREET TREE PROGRAM WAS AND DID WANT TO RELATE IT TO A TREE BUT I THINK LIKE WHAT YOU SAID, THAT FEE IS ASSOCIATED WITH ANY TREE SIX CAL PER INCHES OR LARGER.
THAT'S WHEN THAT START TO KICK IN.
I BACK OFF THAT COMMENT. >> SO IT'S MORE INLINE?
>> I THINK IT MIGHT BE BUT I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT THE REST OF THE BOARD AND I THINK MR. MEIER WAS JUMPING IN TO HAT
HE THOUGHT ALSO. >> MR. HOFMANN.
>> LET ME TAKE A CRACK AND I THINK MS. HOLCOMBE ASKED THE RIGHT QUESTION. I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. ONE IS A FEE WE CAN APPLY TO A DEVELOPER LET'S SAY WHO WANTS TO CUT DOWN A NUMBER OF CAL PER INCHES MAYBE ON SITE. LET'S CALL IT 10.
THAT'S A FEE THAT GETS MULTIPLIED ACROSS THE 10 INCHES.
MAYBE IT'S TWO FIVE-INCH TREES. THEN THERE'S A COST FOR US TO GO OUT AND REPLACE TWO TREES THAT ARE BRAND NEW AND ONLY AN INCH OR SO IN CAL PER. THAT OST IS A COST WHICH IN THIS CASE SOUNDS LIKE ABOUT $250 TO DO THAT.
IF WE'RE CHARGING A DEVELOPER AT $150 AN INCH, THEN THAT'S A
>> OF THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PLANT $500 WORTH F TREE AT TWO NEW TREES IF WE WANTED TO DO IT THAT WAY AT $150 EACH IF WE'RE TRYING TO DO A ONE FOR ONE.
>> CORRECT. >> THERE'S A $1,000 SPREAD THERE. I THINK THE IDEA OF THE FEE IS TO TRY TO BE A DETERRENT FROM TAKING DOWN SWATHS OF FEE WHICH I HAVE A PASSIONATE POINT OF VIEW ABOUT BUT NOT SO PASSIONATE IT SHOULD COST $450 AN INCH OR THE TAXPAYERS MAY FOR THAT BUT IF I UNDERSTOOD KATHY'S QUESTION RIGHT, IT'S A DECENT DETERRENT UNLESS SOMEBODY WERE TO CUT A ONE INCH CAL PER TREE THAT'S THE
ONLY RISK. >> AND ONE OF THE THINGS WITH THAT IS IT DOES NOT START UNTIL THE TREE GETS TO ABOUT SIX CAL PER INCHES IN SIZE. I THINK IT WAS TO HEAR KATHY REPEAT IT BACK IT MADE MORE SENSE HEARING HER REPEAT IT BACK BUT I AT LEAST WANTED TO GET YOU THE CORRECT INFORMATION WE LAST TALKED ON SO THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR.
>> THAT'S GREAT. THAT'S CLEARER FOR ME.
>> MR. FOUST. >> KATHY CLARIFIED MY QUESTION AND I'M COMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING BETWEEN $150 AND $250.
>> MR. MEIER. >> I THINK MY QUESTION IN THE PAST THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEGOTIATED WITH THE DEVELOPER.
DEPENDING ON THE LOT, THIS COULD BE AN ASTRONOMICAL FEE.
I KNOW THAT WILL BE THE DEBATE THAT YOU CHARGE THE FEE AND THROW IT AWAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE IN THE UNDERSTANDING WHILE WE ANT TO ENCOURAGE TREES REMAIN, WE HAVE TO STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN THE TREES REMAINING AND DRACONIAN
COSTS. >> A RECENT GOOD EXAMPLE IS
[INDISCERNIBLE] ON RIDGE ROAD. >> CORRECT.
>> THEY HAD SO MUCH THEY NEEDED TO REMOVE TO BUILD THAT PROJECT AND IT WAS EVEN TO THE POINT WHERE WE WERE OING TO TRY TO ENFORCE THE NUMBER WE HAD AT THE TIME AND THEY WERE GOING TO WALK AWAY FROM THE DEAL. I THINK WITH COMING BACK WITH A MORE REASONABLE APPROACH AND ECHO MR. HOFMANN'S COMMENTS, WE WANT TO MAKE IT REASONABLE NOT DRACONIAN.
I CAN DEAL WITH THE $150 MYSELF. >> IF IT DOESN'T KICK IN UNTIL SIX NCHES IT'S ESSENTIALLY KICKING IN AT THAT POINT AT $900
[01:30:08]
AND STILL LEAVES ROOM FOR NEGOTIATION FOR IT OT TO BECOME BURDENSOME BUT ENOUGH IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BEDISCUSSED. >> WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE HAPPEN IS SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE CORNER WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THERE AND PRETTY MUCH LEVELED EVERYTHING ON THAT ENTIRE LOT BEFORE IT CAME BEFORE US SO WE IDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO
DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. >> RIGHT.
THE ONE THING I'LL BRING UP WITH SHE SHROCK AND WE HAD THE CONVERSATION AT THE MARCH 12 MEETING WITH THE CORRIDOR FEE OF THE $150 AND THE FEE THE AREA ON SHROCK OR 61 OR PROPRIETARY IS WHERE WE HAD THE DISCUSSION OF THE MARCH 12 MEETING.
AS I STANDS TODAY WHAT WE'LL TAKE TO COUNCIL WILL REFLECT JUST WHAT'S BEING CHANGED WITHIN THE PUD.
THEY'LL GET THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 12 DISCUSSION AND FROM THIS DISCUSSION WITH THEIR MATERIALS ALSO.
THAT'S WHY I'M GLAD SCOTT'S ON THE CALL TONIGHT BECAUSE IN MY MIND ORIGINALLY AFTER MR. HOFMANN MADE THE CONVERSATION ON THE MARCH 12 MEETING RELATED TO ASKING ABOUT THE STREET TREE PROGRAM AND I WAS TYING IT BACK TO THE FEE, IT SEEMED MORE TO LEVATE THE FEE AND HEARING MS. HOLCOMBE ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN WILL HELP CLARIFY TO CITY COUNCIL WA THE DISCUSSION WAS BECAUSE THERE IS THAT CONFUSION CITY WIDE, PARCEL BY PARCEL, WHEN DOES THIS ACTUALLY KICK IN.
WHAT WE SAW WITH THE STAFFORD VILLAGE THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY THE $150. THE WILSON BRIDGE ROAD ONE THAT FEE WAS ALMOST $200,000 SO IT WAS TRULY NOTHING EVER HAPPENED WITH THAT. IT WAS NEVER GOING GET BUILT.
I THINK WE HAVE A BETTER PRODUCT AND LAYOUT IN THE END.
>> MR. REIS, WITH COMMENTS ARE YOU MORE INCLOIND -- INCLINED TO GO WITH THE $150 NOW OR UNDERSTAND BETTER?
>> I'LL GO WITH THE MAJORITY. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION. >> MR. FOUST, WHEN YOU GO TO COUNCIL AND PRESENT THIS IT'S MAYBE A GOOD THING FOR YOU TO STATE IN FACT IF WE HAVE A NON-COMPLIANT APPLICANT YOU AVE THE HAMMER AND COULD BACK OFF WHATEVER IS APPROPRIATE NOR
-- FOR THE SITE. >> THANK YOU.
THAT'S WHY I GRANT THE FLEXIBILITY.
I THINK THE SHROCK ROAD AND THE APARTMENT THE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN. SHROCK ROAD WE SHOULD PENALIZE THE PROPERTY OWNER. THAT'S A GOOD OINT.
>> THE ONE THING I WILL ADD TO THAT, I KNOW THE SHROCK ROAD THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT ONE WAS DURING THE WHOLE TREE GATE DISCUSSION THERE AS THE DISCUSSION I THINK AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL OF DO DO -- WE WANT TO INSTITUTE A TREE FEE CITY WIDE.
IT SPARK A FEAR IF WE'RE GOING CHARGE $200,000 AND I SPOKE TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS ABOUT NOTHING WAS IN THE BOOKS TO PENALIZE THEM FROM REMOVING THE TREES FROM THE SITE AND I THINK THEY HEARD THAT DISCUSSION WITH DIFFERENT MEMBERS AND I THINK THAT KICKED THAT ONE IN THE ABOUT IT TO GET IT MOVING TO REMOVE THE TREES. THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BACK
[01:35:03]
DO E NEED TO MAKE A MOTION OR IS THE GENERAL DISCUSSION GOODENOUGH. >> IF YOU DON'T MIND AND GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO AT LEAST I GET THIS ON RECORD.
>> MR. REIS WOULD YOU PLEASE MAKE A MOTION.
>> I'LL REFER TO DAVID FOUST HE HAS THE FACTS IN FRONT OF HIM.
>> MR. FOUST. >> IF I CAN FIND THE FACTS HERE.
JUST A SECOND. >> YOU DON'T NEED TO GO INTO THE WHOLE MOTION. JUST A MOTION THAT OUR DISCUSSION REFLECTS ACCURATELY OUR CONVERSATION WE CAN MOVE
THAT FORWARD. >> SO OUR RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT TO CITY COUNCIL IS THAT THE CITY CHARGE A FEE OF $150 PER CALIPER INCH FOR REMOVAL OF ANY TREE OVER SIX INCHES.
>> ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION'S BEEN MADE.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND, TOM REIS.
>> MOVED BY MR. FOUST AND SECONDED BY MR. REIS.
CAN WE DO A VOICE VOTE OR INDIVIDUAL?
>> CAN I JUMP IN, I WANT TO CLARIFY, YOU SAID FOR ANY TREE OVER SIX INCHES AND I THOUGHT I HEARD LEE SAY IT STARTS AT SIX INCHES AND WONDERING IF WE NEED TO CLARIFY AND SAY SIX INCHES OR
LARGER. >> I THINK YOU'RE CORRECT UNLESS I'M WRONG. LET'S MAKE THAT SIX INCHES OR
THANK YOU, MR. SCHUSTER. >> CAN WE VOTE BY AFFIRMATION OR
INDIVIDUAL. >> AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE, HANK
IT IS GOING TO BE RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL ANY TREE SIX INCHES OR LARGER IN CALIPER WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE $150 FEE.
-- FEE PER INCH. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR IN DULL -- INDULGING ME AND I APPRECIATE THAT AND YOUR COMMENTS SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANY OTHER ISSUES WE
[D. Other]
NEED TO REVIEW TONIGHT? >> THERE'S ALWAYS ISSUES BUT
NOTHING TO REVIEW. >> I THINK THE MEETING WENT EXCEPTIONALLY WELL. THANKS TO EVERYBODY WHO PUT IT
TOGETHER. >> AND FOR WRITING THE SCRIPT.
>> FOR THIS TYPE OF AGENDA, I THINK IT'S A GOOD WAY TO DO IT.
MY FEAR IS IF WE GET ANYTHING IF IT WAS A HOLIDAY INN OR STANFORD VILLAGE OR ANTHEM OR SOMETHING, IT MAY BE INTERESTING TO FIGURE OUT THAT NAVIGATION OF WHO'S POPPING IN AND MAKING COMMENTS AND VOICING OPINIONS. I THINK WITH THE CRUISE DIRECTOR HAT AND MIC ON I MAY PULL MY HAIR OUT AT THAT POINT BUT AT LEAST FOR NOW I THINK IT'S THE WAY WE NEED TO DO BUSINESS TO KEEP THINGS MOVING. BUT WE'LL KEEP YOU POSTED ON ANY ADJUSTMENTS OR CHANGES AND WHEN WE CAN MEET BACK IN PERSON.
>> MR. BROWN, KNOW MICROSOFT TEAMS ALLOWS A CALL-IN NUMBER AS WELL. THAT MAY BE AN APPROACH FOR A LARGER MEETING AND/OR HAVING PEOPLE SIMPLY JOIN.
I'M IN THE SURE IF THERE'S A LIMIT BUT THAT MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY SO PEOPLE CAN BE JUST IN THE MEETING.
>> WE TALKED ABOUT DOING IT THAT WAY.
THAT IS A GOOD POSSIBILITY FOR THE FUTURE.
>> MAYBE TEST THAT AND SEE. >> YEAH.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE EVER EVOLVING.
THE WAY DID EZA AND SET IT UP TO BE SET UP IN A SIMILAR WAY AND LINDA AND I TALKED ABOUT LESSONS LEARNED FROM BZA AND TONIGHT AND BZA WAS MORE OF A CLUSTER AND NOT GETTING APPLICANTS ON AND YOU JUMPING ON AND DOING TEST ROUNDS WITH EVERYONE WAS HELPFUL TO HELP THINGS RUN A LITTLE BIT SMOOTHER.
>> I THINK AT COUNCIL ALSO WE'RE MANAGING OUR DOCKET A LITTLE BIT
[01:40:05]
DIFFERENTLY THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST.IF WE CAN PUT A CONTENTIOUS LARGE ISSUE OFF, WE ARE DOING IT. BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IF HEAVEN FORBID A UMCH COME UP, A VIRTUAL MEETING IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THAT KIND OF WE'LL JUST HAVE TO WAIT.
>> THE ONLY ITEMS I KNOW THAT MAY BE COMING UP IN THE COMING MONTHS IS SOMETHING WITH THE HOLIDAY INN SITE AND THE REFERENDUM PERIOD HAS PASSED FOR STA FORD VILLAGE.
THEY CAN BE MAKING AN APPLICATION.
THAT MAY BE EASIER TO HANDLE IF WE HAVE TO DO IT THIS WAY.
I THINK IF IT WAS SOMETHING GREATER AS COTT MENTIONED, I THINK ONE WE RETURN TO COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND SIZE AND SPACING, WE'LL KEEP YOU POSTED. I THINK COUNCIL GOT TO BE THE FIRST GUINEA PIG ON HOW TO USE THE TECHNOLOGY AND THEN IT WENT TO BZA FOR LINDA AND I TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO USE IT AND HOPEFULLY BY OUR NEXT MEETING IN TWO WEEKS YOU'LL SEE ADJUSTMENTS AND
CHANGES ALSO S WE MOVE FORWARD. >> ALREADY.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO SAY THIS EVENING? IF NOT CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>> THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL RIGHT.
>> CAN I ASK REAL QUICK WHO SECONDED THE MOTION.
I KNOW MR. REIS MADE THE MOTION. >> ED HOFMANN.
>> EVERYBODY HAVE A GOOD TWO WEEKS.
WE'LL SEE YOU ON TV THEN.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.