[00:00:02]
[CALL TO ORDER]
CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.I THINK WE GOT SIX 30 ON THE DOT.
SO, UM, UH, WELCOME TO THE CITY OF, UH, DUBLIN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEETING, BEING HELD AT 5 5 5 5 PERIMETER DRIVE.
UH, THE MEETING CAN BE ALSO A, A, UH, ASSESSED VIA THE LIVESTREAM VIDEO, UH, RECORDED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
WE WELCOME PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INCLUDING PUBLIC COMMENT ON ALL CASES.
UH, THE MEETING PROCEDURE FOR EACH CASE THIS EVENING WILL BEGIN WITH A STAFF PRESENTATION.
WE WILL ALSO CONFIRM THAT THE APPLICANT AGREES WITH ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
THE BOARD WILL THEN ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE STAFF.
THE BOARD WILL THEN HEAR PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE PODIUM.
EVERY SPEAKER MUST PROVIDE THEIR NAME, ADDRESS, NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD FOLLOWING PUBLIC COMMENT, INCLUDING THOSE SUBMITTED BY EMAIL.
THE BOARD WILL DELIBERATE ON THE CASES PRIOR TO RENDERING A DECISION.
AND AS WE DO EVERY, UH, BEFORE EACH MEETING, WE'LL START WITH, UH, THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, TO THE FLAG TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE OF LIBERTY AND JUSTICE OFF.
JUDY, COULD YOU CALL THE RULE MR. KOTTER? HERE, MS. DAMER, SHE IS ON HER WAY.
[ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS AND APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES]
SO, UH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS IN THE RECORD AND TO APPROVE THE A RB MEETING MINUTES FROM JULY 24TH, 2024.UH, THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION AND MODIFICATION OR ALTERATIONS TO ANY SITE IN THE AREA SUBJECT TO THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD UNDER, UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE ZONING CODE SECTION 1 53 1 7 0.
THE BOARD HAS THE DECISION MAKING RESPONSIBILITY ON THESE CASES, AND ANYONE WHO INTENDS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON THESE CASES MUST BE SWORN IN.
SO ANYBODY INTENDING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON THIS, UH, ON THESE CASES TONIGHT, COULD THEY PLEASE RAISE THEIR RIGHT HAND AND ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE? DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THIS BOARD? THANK YOU.
UM, JUST AS A, UH, CLARIFICATION, CASE NUMBER 24 1 0 4 MRP, UH, THE CASE ON 87 SOUTH HIGH STREET, INFORMAL REVIEW, INFORMAL, INFORMAL REVIEW PREVIOUSLY LISTED TONIGHT HAS BEEN POSTPONED.
SO WE WILL REMOVE THAT FROM THE AGENDA.
UH, AND JUST MAYBE ONE CALL OF ORDER THAT TONIGHT WE HAVE A, A, A GUEST FROM OUT OF TOWN WHO WILL BE WORKING, TALKING ABOUT THE CA UM, THE CODE REVIEW, AND IF MAYBE A LITTLE DISCUSSION, IF WE MIND IF WE ADAPT THE AGENDA, UH, SO MR. DALE CAN, SO HE CAN END UP BACK IN CINCINNATI A LITTLE EARLIER TONIGHT.
[Case #24-012ADMO]
WE CAN MOVE CASE NUMBER, UH, OKAY.SO 24 1 2 A DMO FROM THE LAST SESSION, AND WE MOVE IT TO THE, TO THE FRONT OF THE AGENDA.
DOES ANYBODY, ANYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? YEP, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
SHOULD WE MAKE AN, UH, A MOTION TO ADJUST, ADAPT THE, UH, UH, UM, THE PRINTED AGENDA? I MOVE THAT WE MODIFY THE PRINTED, PRINTED AGENDA TO CONSIDER CASE NUMBER 24 DASH 0 1 2 A DMO TO THE FIRST MATTER OF BUSINESS TONIGHT, AND THEN PROCEED WITH THE REST OF OUR AGENDA AFTERWARDS.
SARAH, TURN IT OVER TO YOU OR TO MR. DALE.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR AND GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS.
IT'S MY PLEASURE TO INTRODUCE GREG DALE FROM MCBRIDE, DALE CLARION TO SPEAK WITH YOU TONIGHT ABOUT THIS CODE AND GUIDELINE UPDATE PROJECT.
SO I WILL, WE WILL TURN IT OVER TO MR. DALE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SARAH, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR THAT CONSIDERATION.
YOU'LL SAVE ME A LATE NIGHT DRIVE BACK.
I I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, MY PRESENTATION WILL BE VERY SHORT.
WE REALLY JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES FOR THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, UH, BECAUSE WE, WE HOPE THAT WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, THAT YOU SEE NO SURPRISES
[00:05:01]
WITH IT.AND WE'VE WORKED VERY HARD WITH YOU AND WITH STAFF TO TRY TO WORK OUT ALL THE ISSUES ALONG, ALONG THE WAY.
UH, YOU MAY RECALL THAT WHEN LAST WE LEFT THIS BOARD, WE WERE GIVEN THE CHARGE TO GO FORTH AND DRAFT THE CHANGES.
AND, AND REALLY OUR, OUR, OUR TAKE FROM THAT WAS TO DRAFT WHAT YOU ALL DIRECTED US TO DO.
SO YOU HAVE, UM, A NUMBER OF THINGS INVOLVED IN THIS TONIGHT.
UH, SO FIRST OF ALL, YOU WILL RECALL THAT THIS IS PHASE TWO OF THE UPDATE WITH PHASE ONE, UH, BEING PRIMARILY RELATED TO THE NOMENCLATURE AND THE, AND THE REDEFINING OF, OF LANDMARK AND BACKGROUND BUILDINGS.
THAT WAS A, THAT WAS A BIG DEAL.
BUT DURING THE COURSE OF THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT, THERE CAME A WHOLE SERIES OF OTHER IDEAS ABOUT POTENTIAL OTHER IMPROVEMENTS AND REFINEMENTS TO THE SYSTEM.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE TODAY.
SO YOU HAVE FIVE THINGS IN FRONT OF YOU, UM, UH, WITHIN, WITHIN THE, THE, THE DRAFT REGULATIONS.
ONE IS TO, UH, BROADEN AND INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS.
THOSE ARE THINGS LIKE SIGNS AND HARDSCAPE AND LANDSCAPING AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WE CAN GO INTO IF YOU'D, IF YOU'D LIKE TO.
WE ALSO CLARIFIED AND PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE IN TERMS OF, OF THE BACKGROUND BUILDINGS, UM, TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WHEN REVIEWING BACKGROUND BUILDINGS, THAT THE EMPHASIS IS MORE ON SCALE AND, UH, SITE DESIGN AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
LESS ON ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, ALTHOUGH WE DID AS A NUANCE, I THINK, I THINK WE TRIED TO STRIKE A BALANCE THAT WHEN BACKGROUND BUILDINGS WERE ADJACENT TO OR ACROSS FROM, UH, LANDMARK BUILDINGS, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF REVIEW.
THE TIMEFRAME EXTENSION FOR THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A YEAR AND RIGHT NOW AND WITH THESE NEW REGULATIONS, STAFF WOULD BE ABLE TO APPROVE IT FOR ANOTHER EXTENDED FOR ANOTHER YEAR.
UM, AND THEN THERE WERE ALSO JUST A NUMBER OF WHAT WE'RE CALLING SCRIVENER'S ERRORS.
THOSE WERE THINGS LIKE CLEANING UP CROSS REFERENCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THAT'S A FANCY WORD FOR MISTAKES THAT HAD BEEN IN IT BEFORE.
AND THEN, UH, THE OTHER ISSUE IS THE CONSOLIDATION OF, OF WHAT IN THE CODE LANGUAGE WAS REFERRED TO AS VARIANCES AND MODIFICATIONS AND, AND ADJUSTMENTS AND SO FORTH.
REALLY JUST A CLEANUP OF, OF THE LANGUAGE THERE.
UH, THAT'S WHAT YOU HAD BEFORE US.
IN TERMS OF THE BACKGROUND ITSELF, UM, AGAIN, I, I MENTIONED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF DEALING WITH THE PHASE ONE ISSUES, WE ACTUALLY HAD THREE DIFFERENT PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND WE HEARD PRETTY CONSISTENTLY THROUGHOUT THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT IN ADDITION TO DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE OF REDEFINING WHAT REALLY, WHAT IT REALLY MEANS TO BE HISTORIC, THAT THERE WAS A DESIRE TO TRY TO IMPROVE THE PROCESS IN TERMS OF PREDICTABILITY AND SPEED AND EFFICIENCY.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE, UH, CONFIRM THAT WITH THIS BOARD.
WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF DISCUSSIONS WITH THIS BOARD.
UM, THE, UM, LAW OFFICE LAW DIRECTOR HAS, HAS REVIEWED THE, THE REJIGGERING OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OR THE, UM, VARIANCE AND WAIVER LANGUAGE.
UM, AND THEN I THINK YOU ALL HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE DRAFT AND MADE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS.
AND, AND, UH, THOSE WERE, UM, EITHER INCORPORATED OR WE HAD REASON TO, TO THINK THAT THEY WEREN'T NEEDED.
WE CAN GO INTO THAT IF YOU WANT.
SO ANYWAY, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WHAT WE HAVE.
UM, I, LIKE I SAID, I HOPE THERE'S NOT ANY SURPRISES IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU, UM, I WILL TELL YOU THAT IN ADDITION TO WHAT YOU'VE SEEN, WE'VE GONE THROUGH SARAH, PROBABLY AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT ROUNDS OF REVIEW WITH STAFF.
AND, AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE, UM, WE, WE DO A LOT OF THIS KIND OF WORK, AND WHEN WE SEND A DRAFT SET OF REGULATIONS TO THE CLIENT, THEN THEY GET BACK TO US AND THEY SAY, IT LOOKS GOOD, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.
IT ALWAYS WORRIES US A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE GROUND DOING THIS EVERY DAY, IF THEY TAKE THE TIME TO REVIEW THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE COMMENTS.
AND SARAH IN PARTICULAR HAS BEEN VERY DILIGENT IN GOING THROUGH THIS AT A PRETTY FINE TOOTH COMB LEVEL, UH, AND PICKING UP, YOU KNOW, INADVERTENT NEED FOR CROSS REFERENCES HERE AND THERE AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
SO IT'S GONE THROUGH A NUMBER OF LEVELS OF REVIEW WITH STAFF, EVEN OUTSIDE OF WHAT YOU'VE SEEN.
SO WITH THAT, I'LL STOP AND SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, I THINK THE STAFF IS ASKING THAT THIS BE REFERRED ON FOR CONSIDERATION BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL.
SO, UM, I'M NEW TO THE BOARD, RIGHT? SO I WASN'T PART OF THE EARLIER, UH, CONVERSATION, BUT CERTAINLY HAVE ATTENDED SOME OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
SO, UH, JUST ONE OF MY, THE ONLY CONCERN I WANNA BRING UP AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE FEEL IT'S, IT'S ADDRESSED, I THINK IT IS, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR THAT DIRECTLY, UM, IS ON PAGE 21, THERE'S, UH, SEVERAL PRINCIPLES THAT TALK ABOUT MASS AND SCALE.
AND, UH, I AM, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE CHARACTER, THE
[00:10:01]
HISTORIC CHARACTER OF SOUTH RIVER STREET, RIVERVIEW, RIVERVIEW STREET, I SHOULD KNOW THE NAME OF MY OWN STREET,AND WHEN I LOOK AT THOSE PRINCIPLES, YOU KNOW, BEING CONCERNED ABOUT MASS AND SCALE AND NUMBER, AND OF COURSE I, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL LOTS THAT CAN AND WILL BE DEVELOPED, BUT THAT IS A CONCERN, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT, THAT THIS WILL GIVE US THE ABILITY TO ADDRESS IT IN THE MANNER THAT WE MAY CHOOSE.
YES, SARAH, THANK YOU, MS. PAT MCDANIEL.
AND I, I DO WANNA ADDRESS THAT.
SO WE HAVE SOME VERY SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, ESPECIALLY FOR HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL THAT TALKS ABOUT, AND IT'S THE VERY LAST BULLET POINT, SPECIFICALLY PROMOTING PRESERVATION OF OPEN REAR YARDS, GREEN SPACE CORRIDORS AND RIVERVIEW THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WE FEEL THAT THAT IS A VERY OVERARCHING GOAL THAT APPLIES TO ALL OF THE HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
AND THEN WHEN WE HONE IN ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS AND WE SEE WHAT MIGHT BE PROPOSED, WE ARE GONNA LOOK AT THAT EVEN FURTHER.
WE WILL GET INTO ACTUAL DETAILS UNDER NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THIS CASE, SECTION FIVE, CHAPTER FIVE, THAT TALKS ABOUT, UM, SPECIFICALLY WHEN ADJACENT TO LANDMARK RESOURCES.
WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING FOR HEIGHT, MASSING, SETBACKS, FORM FENESTRATION.
UM, WE ALSO TALK ABOUT SITE DESIGN THAT TALKS ABOUT MAINTAINING CONSISTENT SETBACKS.
I THINK YOU ALSO ASKED ABOUT, UM, THE POTENTIAL FOR LOT SPLITS.
SO MINIMUM LOT SIZES HAVE NOT CHANGED.
UH, MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR LOT COVERAGE HAVE NOT CHANGED.
SO THIS IS VERY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WHAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN, IF YOU WILL.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE OTHER CLARIFYING QUESTIONS FOR NOPE, I'M GOOD.
I THOUGHT IT WAS, UH, REALLY WELL DONE.
I DID NOT SUBMIT ANY, UM, COMMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION OR INCLUSION IN ANY OF THE REVISIONS, BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS WELL DONE.
I GAVE IT ANOTHER THOROUGH LOOK WHEN THE LAST VERSION WAS SENT, KIND OF DOUBLE CHECKED IT AGAINST MY NOTES.
AND THAT AT THAT TIME, ONLY ONE THING CAME TO MIND.
THIS IS REALLY NOT A RECOMMENDATION PER SE, BUT IT WAS IN SECTION 1 53, UH, 1 7 6 M ABOUT ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
AND IT'S REALLY A VERY MINOR ONE.
BUT IN A ONE, A PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY, I WONDERED IF IT WOULD BE CLEARER TO SAY THAT THE DIRECTOR MAY AUTHORIZE AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL AA TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FDP OR MP.
I DON'T, THAT MAY BE MINUTIA, AND I AM WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT, YOU KNOW, FEEDBACK BACK, WHAT'S THE REFERENCE AGAIN? BUT I JUST, UM, JUST THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS KIND OF, UH, JUST A LITTLE, MAYBE UNCLEAR, AND I WAS LOOKING AT IT IN COM, CONJUNCTION WITH THAT B, WHERE IT SAYS, ANY APPROVED AA MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT.
I MEAN, IT'S JUST, JUST THE FACT THAT IT SAYS AA IS KIND OF, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONTEXT FOR THAT, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, CARS ON THE ROAD OR SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES OR WHATEVER.
BUT HAVING SAID THAT, I JUST SAID THAT, I JUST WONDERED IF WE NEEDED TO TIE IT TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FDP TO MAKE THAT CLEAR THAT IF YOU'RE COMING IN FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE, IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
AND THAT WAS JUST SOME FEEDBACK THAT I WANTED TO SHARE.
AND AGAIN, IT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED MINUTIA, BUT I JUST, THIS WAS ABOUT MY THIRD TIME GOING THROUGH IT, AND I JUST WAS LIKE, WELL, I'LL JUST BRING IT UP.
THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT, MS. COOPER.
UH, THAT WAS A COUPLE OF AREAS WHERE WE DID NOT MAKE ANY
[00:15:01]
LANGUAGE CHANGES, SO WE DIDN'T SEE THE NEED TO CHANGE IT.I THINK, UM, WITH THE, THE LANGUAGE OF APPROVED FDP OR MP, IT'S GONNA BE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
SO, AND, AND OF COURSE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT IN B WITH THE INTENT OF THE RELATED APPROVED.
SO I THINK IT DOES TIE IT TOGETHER.
WE, YOU KNOW, IF WE
NO, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR FEEDBACK AND I JUST, THAT WAS REALLY THE ONLY COMMENT I HAD AFTER LOOKING AT IT SEVERAL TIMES.
I WILL SAY THAT, UM, I'LL RELAY THAT YOUR MIC'S NOT ON, SO WE, I WILL RELAY THAT BACK TO MAX MERRI IN THE OFFICE.
YOU WILL REMEMBER HE WAS HERE, HE DID ALL THE HEAVY LIFTING IN TERMS OF THE DRAFTING WITH SARAH.
SO I APPRECIATE THOSE SENTIMENTS.
HILLARY, ANY NO, I HAVE NO COMMENTS.
I'D JUST LIKE TO REITERATE MS. COOPER'S COMMENTS THAT WE APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU WENT THROUGH TO DO A REALLY FINE DRAFT
AND I HAVE TO SAY, I'VE READ IT A FEW TIMES READING IT MORE THAN A FEW TIMES.
I KNOW IT CAN, MUST BE ARDUOUS, BUT I THINK IT DOES ADDRESS MANY OF THE PREVIOUS PUBLIC COMMENTS WE HAD IN THE PUBLIC, UH, SETTING ABOUT SOME OF THE MORE CHALLENGING PARTS ABOUT THAT CAN BE PERCEIVED, THAT COMING IN FRONT OF A BOARD AND, AND TRYING TO GET, UH, THINGS DONE.
AND I THINK WE TRY TO ADDRESS THAT IN A SENSITIVE WAY WHERE WE STILL WANT TO ENSURE THAT, I THINK, AS WE SAID, WE WANNA, SURE, IT'S, WE HAVE SENSITIVITY FOR THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT ALSO WE WANNA MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO DO WHAT THEY WANNA DO AND WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DO INSIDE OF THAT.
SO I THINK IT'S BEEN A, IT IS REALLY A GOOD JOB, I THINK BOTH FROM THE CITY, FROM FROM, UH, MR. D, FROM YOUR TEAM AND EVERYBODY.
UH, SARAH, PUBLIC COMMENTS? ANYBODY? ANYBODY? I'M JUST DOUBLE CHECKING MY PHONE TO SEE.
NO, THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UH, SO WE JUST NEED A MOTION AT THIS POINT.
WE JUST, I THINK FROM HERE, UNLESS ANYBODY HAS A FURTHER COMMENT, I THINK WE JUST NEED A MOTION.
UH, I CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE IT.
SO I'M MAKING A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL OF THE CODE AND GUIDELINE CHANGES AS PROVIDED HEREIN.
THAT'S, UH, ARDUOUS DOWN THE PATH, SO THAT'S GOOD.
THAT'S A NICE ONE TO CHECK OFF THE LIST.
SO, OKAY, NOW WE'LL REVERT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL ORDER THAT WE HAD.
[Case #24-066MPR]
MPR 36 AND 50 WEST BRIDGE.MINOR PROJECT REVIEW, UH, PROPO PROPOSAL FOR A BUILDING ADDITION DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR TWO PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DUBLIN.
THE 0.589 ACRE AND 0.293 ACRE SITES ARE ZONED HD HC HISTORIC CORE DISTRICT LOCATED AT THE NORTH, LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST BRIDGE STREET AND FRANKLIN STREET.
AND GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW FOR 38 AND 50 WEST BRIDGE STREET.
BOTH SITES ARE LOCATED NORTHEAST AT THE INTERSECTION OF WESTBRIDGE STREET AND FRANKLIN STREET, AND OUR ZONE HISTORIC COURT 50 WEST BRIDGE STREET IS THE JL RESTAURANT, AND 38 WEST BRIDGE STREET IS THE FOX AND THE SNOW CAFE.
AN EXISTING VEHICLE IS PARKED BEHIND THE JL RESTAURANT AND IS CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR STORAGE, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED PER THE CODE THEY PROPOSE.
RESTAURANT BUILDING ADDITION REPLACES THE VEHICLE STORAGE, WHICH WILL BE LOCATED ON THE EXISTING CONCRETE, UH, PAD, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE RIGHT IMAGE.
THE EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE AND WASTE CONTAINERS AT JL AND FOX IN THE SNOW ARE SHOWN IN THE IMAGES ON THE LEFT, WHICH DO NOT MEET SCREENING REQUIREMENTS.
THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE PROPOSED DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE LOCATION ARE SHOWN IN THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT.
WHILE FOX AND THE SNOWS, UH, BUILDING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS WERE BEING CONSTRUCTED, A LANDSCAPE BED WAS ADDED WITHOUT APPROVAL BELOW THE WINDOWS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
NOTE THAT THE LANDSCAPE BED DOES NOT EXCEED THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING SIDEWALK.
SO THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, UM, SHOWN THIS EVENING INCLUDE A BUILDING ADDITION AND FOUNDATION
[00:20:01]
PLANTINGS FOR THE JL RESTAURANT, A COMBINED DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE FOR BOTH BUSINESSES BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AND A LANDSCAPE BED, UM, BY FOX IN THE SNOW PARKING SIGNS FOR EACH RESTAURANT PER THE APPROVED SHARED PARKING PLAN AND MAINTENANCE ON SITE LIGHTING, BOTH BUILDINGS ARE GRANDFATHERED IN, AND WHEN A BUILDING ADDITION IS PROPOSED, FOUNDATION PLANTINGS MUST BE ADDRESSED TO MEET THE CURRENT CODE AND GUIDELINE REQUIREMENTS.WHILE FOUNDATION PLANTINGS ARE SHOWN, PLANTING DETAILS WERE NOT PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION, AND THE LANDSCAPE BED NEXT TO FOX IN THE SNOW NEEDS SMALLER AND MORE SUITABLE PLANTINGS AS WELL.
THESE ITEMS ARE ADDRESSED IN RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
STAFF COLLABORATED WITH THE APPLICANT ON THE ADDITION DESIGN TO ALIGN WITH THE FRONT PERLA, THE FLAT ROOF TUCKS UNDER THE EXISTING ROOF EVE, WHICH SIMPLIFIES THE ROOF CONNECTIONS.
SINCE THIS IS A BACKGROUND BUILDING, THE CODE AND GUIDELINE REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDITIONS, UM, TO BE SUBORDINATE AND LOCATED BEHIND THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE ARE LESS CRITICAL THAN THEY ARE FOR LANDMARK BUILDINGS.
THE FLAT ROOF FORM REQUIRES A WAIVER, WHICH STAFF SUPPORTS AS IT ENSURES THE QUALITY DESIGN THAT COMPLIMENTS THAT PERLA.
AND THERE ARE SEVERAL, UM, NEARBY EXAMPLES OF FLAT ROOF BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
THE NEW MASONRY DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE WILL BE SHARED BY BOTH BUSINESSES.
THIS ENCLOSURE FULFILLS AN OUTSTANDING SCREENING CONDITION FROM A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW FOR FOX IN THE SNOW A COUPLE YEARS AGO TO THE, UM, TO FULFILL THE NEEDS ON BOTH SITES IN A TIMELY MANNER.
THE ENCLOSURE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED, ALL ADDITIONAL OUTDOOR WASTE CONTAINERS AND VEHICLES NEED TO BE, EXCUSE ME, REMOVED FROM BOTH PROPERTIES WITHIN 60 DAYS, UM, OF A RB APPROVAL, WHICH IS ADDRESSED BY RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
THESE ARE THE PROPOSED MATERIALS FOR THE ADDITION AND THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, AND THEY MEET REQUIREMENTS, WAIVER CRITERIA FOR THE FLAT ROOF ARE MET, ARE NOT APPLICABLE.
MINOR PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA ARE MET, MET WITH A WAIVER OR WITH A WAIVER AND CONDITIONS OR NOT APPLICABLE.
AND PLANNING RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FLAT ROOF WAIVER AND APPROVAL OF THE MINOR PROJECT WITH, UH, FREE CONDITIONS.
WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS IN ATTENDANCE.
ANYBODY HAVE A INITIAL, UH, CLARIFYING QUESTION FROM STAFF? TAYLOR, DOES THIS INTERRUPT, NOT INTERRUPT, UM, PLAY WITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS OR DOES THE ELIMINATION OF THE TRUCK, IS IT EQUIVALENT
SO IT'S ALMOST A WASH FOR LIKE, FOR LIKE CONDITIONS CAN TELL.
JUST IT'S MORE A, IT'S MORE A BROADER QUESTION.
SO LIKE, THE FOUNDATION LANDSCAPE BED, SO IF I LOOK AT THE ONE ON FOX, UH, FOX IN THE SNOW, WHICH WAS, WHICH WAS EXISTING FROM THE BEGINNING, THE CODE AND THE GUIDELINES ARE PRETTY VAGUE ABOUT WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.
I MEAN, FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, IT EXISTS AND IT, AND WE SHOULD HAVE FOUNDATION PLANTINGS, BUT THERE'S NOT REALLY ANY GUIDE, THERE'S NOT REALLY MUCH GUIDANCE ON WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
I MEAN, FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, I MEAN, DO YOU SEE THIS AS SOMETHING TO BREAK UP THE FOUNDATION MASS OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT IT, IT TALKS ABOUT, CAN'T BE CLOSER TO 10 FEET FROM THE EDGES AND SOME OTHER THINGS, BUT FROM, FROM LIKE, FROM THIS ONE, I MEAN THE ONE ON JAY LUS A LITTLE DIFFERENT, BUT ON THIS ONE IS A FOUNDATION PLANTING, PLANTING NEAR A ACCESS AREA, JUST HOW DID, IN YOUR MIND, HOW DID YOU THINK THROUGH THAT AND SAYING, HEY, UH, YOU KNOW, IF WE WOULD'VE DONE THIS FROM SCRATCH, WOULD IT BE BIGGER OR SMALLER? AND I'M SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE FOX, SNOW, FOX AND SNOW? SNOW, YEP.
SO BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS GRANDFATHERED IN AND IS AN EXISTING SITE, UM, REALLY THIS IS AN IMPROVEMENT AND WE W WOULDN'T HAVE REQUIRED THEM TO GO BACK AND THEREFORE ADD ADDITIONAL FOUNDATION PLANTINGS.
UM, STAFFS, ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS JUST TO RECOMMEND SMALLER PLANTINGS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO, UM, AEDE THE DRY VIAL THAT'S ADJACENT TO IT.
UM, AND IN THE EXISTING CONDITIONS, PICTURES, UM, WE COULD SEE THAT THAT LANDSCAPE BED'S NOT ENCROACHING WITHIN THAT DRY VIAL EITHER.
I MEAN, SO 'CAUSE IT'S EXISTING, WE'RE REALLY SAYING, OKAY, WE SHOULD MAKE USE, IT'S IN THE CODE AND WE SHOULD MAKE USE OF IT.
IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, IT'S, IT'S IMPROVING
[00:25:02]
A NON, WHAT IS A NON-COMPLIANCE SITUATION.BUT OTHERWISE GRANDFATHERED IT.
CAN I JUST CLARIFY, I, I THINK TOO, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, IF IT WAS STARTING YOU, YOU INDICATED IT WAS THE SAME SIZE OF THE SIDEWALK AND LIKELY THAT WOULD'VE BEEN WHAT WE WANTED ANYWAYS.
IT NOT TO BE LARGER THAN THE SIDE, WIDER THAN THE SIDEWALK.
THE SIDEWALK WAS ALREADY EXISTING, RIGHT? JUST CORRECT.
THERE'S A LOT OF LIMITED SPACE WITHIN THAT AREA.
UM, IT'S IMPROVING THE IMPERVIOUS AREA OF THE SITE AND YEAH, IF THEY WERE TO ADD MORE PLANTINGS, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ARE SHOWN.
UH, IS THE APPLICANT WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK ABOUT THE, UH, ABOUT THE APPLICATION? YEAH.
AND IF YOU COULD, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, NAME AND ADDRESS.
MY ADDRESS IS, UH, MY OFFICE IS 36TH KING AVENUE, COLUMBUS, OHIO.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MR. LOU, THE OWNER OF, UH, BOTH PROPERTIES.
ANYTHING YOU WANT, I MEAN, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD? ANY, UH, COMMENTS? UH, NO, NOT REALLY.
UH, JUST A ONE MINOR CORRECTION TO THE RECORD.
UH, I SAW IN THE APPLICATION, UH, OR IN THE, THE STATEMENTS THAT THE, UH, ADDITION ON THE WEST WILL SIT ON THE CONCRETE PAD THAT'S THERE, UH, IT SITS IN THE AREA OF THE PAD.
SO WE CAN PUT FOOTINGS DOWN FOR THAT LITTLE BUILDING.
AND SO IT WON'T SIT ON IT, IT'LL SIT IN THAT AREA AND IT'S, UH, IT'S MAYBE TWO FEET LONGER TO THE NORTH THAN THAT PAD, BUT IT'S NO WIDER 'CAUSE WE HAVE A SEWER THERE.
AND THE, THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT WAS, UH, THERE'S A SCHEDULE CONDITION AND, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE FINE WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS.
THE ONLY CAVEAT THERE IS GETTING A PERMIT TO PROCEED WITH THE WORK AS LONG AS THE PERMIT GOES SMOOTHLY.
I THINK MR. LU'S WILLING TO BUILD IT AS SOON AS HE CAN.
YOU'RE SPEAKING TO THE 60 DAYS AFTER OUR MEETING TONIGHT, WHICH IS A CONDITION IN THE APPROVAL, PARDON ME, PROPO THE PROPOSED CONDITION.
IN OUR APPROVAL, OUR, OUR PROPOSED APPROVAL IS SIX TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN 60 DAYS.
AND YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT? ONLY IF THE, UH, PERMITTING PROCESS TAKES LONGER.
I MEAN, IT, IT COMPRESSED THE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE.
SO IF THE PERMITTING TAKES 45 DAYS, IT WON'T WORK.
SO WE, WE WILL MOVE AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.
WE'LL SUBMIT IT NEXT WEEK FOR PERMIT.
AND WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THE PERMITTING, UH, OR HAVE THE SCHEDULE BE WITHIN 60 DAYS OF PERMITTING? OH, THAT'D BE GREAT.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD CALL TOO, WITH HOLIDAYS COMING UP TOO WITH LABOR DAY AND STUFF, SO I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE TO GO AHEAD AND, AND PUT THAT VERBIAGE IN THAT WAY.
EVERYBODY OKAY THERE? MM-HMM?
MR. BAY, IF YOU JUST STAY THERE FOR THAT.
JUST FOR, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CONCERNS? ANY, ANY COMMENTS WE WANNA MAKE? ANYTHING? NOPE.
I THINK IT'S GREAT IMPROVEMENT.
YEAH, I THINK THERE'S NOTHING.
SO FOR YOU, YOU AGREE IF YOU, IF YOU JUST PUT THOSE CONDITIONS ONE LAST TIME JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON THE LAST ONE.
SO IT'S, SOUNDS GOOD TO ME, WHICHEVER YOU WANT.
IT'S GOOD FOR RESPECT, YOU'RE GOOD FOR YOU, CLEAR FOR YOU.
IS THERE ANY OR, UH, TAYLOR, ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ONE? WE'VE NOT GOTTEN ANY BEFORE THE HEARING AND I DON'T SEE ANY NOW, SO, NO.
UM, SO I DON'T THINK WE HAVE, SO I THINK WE HAVE A COUPLE.
SO WE HAVE A WAIVER THAT WE NEED TO, UH, SO I DON'T THINK NO ISSUES WITH THE WAIVER, SO IF THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH THE WAIVER, IF WE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE, UH, APPROVE THE WAIVER FOR THE FLAT ROOF ON THE ADDITION TO THE JL STRUCTURE AS PROPOSED.
[00:30:01]
YES.AND IF THERE'S OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT, IF WE CAN MAKE A, UH, MAKE A MOTION FOR THE, FOR THE MINOR PROJECT.
I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINOR PROJECT WITH THE THREE CONDITIONS AS PREVIOUSLY STATED.
IT'S A GOOD IMPROVEMENT FOR THAT.
OKAY, SO LET'S, UH, SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE.
SO IT'S UM, UH, CASE NUMBER 24 0 9 7,
[Case #24-097MPR]
UH, MPR 39 SOUTH HIGH STREET.UH, A PROPOSAL FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TWO SIGNS AND AN EXTERIOR MODIFICATION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING, HISTORIC DUBLIN.
THE, UH, 0.2 ACRE SITE IS ZONED HDHC, HISTORIC DISTRICT COR, HISTORIC DISTRICT CORE, AND IS LOCATED, UH, NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH HIGH AND SPRING HILL LANE.
ALRIGHT, AND MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M GONNA HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS CASE.
WE'LL CALL YOU WHEN THIS ONE'S DONE.
CONDO, THANK YOU TO THE CHAIR AND GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS.
THERE'S A REQUEST FOR A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW AT 39 SOUTH HIGH STREET, INCLUDING A WALL SIGN, A PROJECTING SIGN, AND THE INSTALLATION OF A HANDRAIL.
THE SITE IS ZONED HISTORIC DISTRICT, HISTORIC CORE, AND IS LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH HIGH STREET IN SPRING HILL LANE.
SHOWN HERE ARE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR THE SITE.
SO THERE'S THE, UH, FRONT FACADE AND THE REAR FACADE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PROJECTING SIGN ON THE EAST FACADE.
THE SIGN IS CENTERED ALONG THE FACADE AND WILL HANG FROM A BLACK METAL BRACKET.
STAFF HAS NO CONCERNS AND THE SIGN MEETS ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS.
THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROPOSING A WALL SIGN ABOVE THE REAR ENTRANCE, WHICH IS A PERMITTED SECONDARY SIGN TYPE PER CODE.
THE SIGN WILL ALSO READ VERNACULAR IN THE COMPANY'S STYLIZED FONT AND MEETS ALL OF THE CODES SIGN REQUIREMENTS.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES INSTALLING ONE STEEL HANDRAIL ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE EAST ENTRANCE.
THE DESIGN ALIGNS WITH THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES AND ALSO ALLOWS SAFER ACCESS TO THE BUILDING.
THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA ARE MET OR NOT APPLICABLE WITH THAT PLANNING RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW, AND I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.
ANYTHING CLARIFYING? I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION.
IT MIGHT BE FOR THE APPLICANT, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THE APP, THE APP, IF YOU COULD, UH, JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND, AND YOUR ADDRESS.
CHRISTOPHER KO 39 SOUTH HIGH STREET.
MY ONE QUE IS THE, I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT, BUT YOU'RE GONNA PUT THE HAND, HOW ARE YOU GONNA CONNECT IT TO THE, THE BOTTOM? HOW'S IT IT, BECAUSE IT, IT'S PAVERS ON THE BOTTOM.
SO HOW ARE YOU GONNA WELL, THEY'RE ACTUALLY, SO FORT AND IRONWORKS IS GONNA INSTALL IT AND THEY'RE GONNA GO INTO THE LIMESTONE.
UH, THEY THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS MUCH MORE STURDY THAN GOING INTO THE BREAK.
THAT WAS MY ONLY, ONLY QUESTION ON THAT, UNLESS ANYBODY HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE, FOR THE APPLICANT? NO.
UM, IS THERE ANY, ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ONE? NO.
UH, SO I DON'T THINK WE HAVE, THIS IS REALLY, I THINK, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
THEN I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW AS PROPOSED.
I SECOND MS. PAT MCDANIEL? YES.
[Case #24-081MPR]
TO THE NEXT CASE.24 0 24 DASH 81 MINOR PROJECT REVIEW 1 1 2 SOUTH RIVERVIEW, UM, PROPOSAL FOR MODIFICATIONS TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A VACANT LOT IN HISTORIC DUBLIN.
THE 0.26 ACRE LOT SITE ACRE SITE IS ZONED HDHR, HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND IS LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF PENNY HILL LANE AND SOUTH RIVERVIEW ING.
THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS.
TONIGHT WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR MODIFICATIONS TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MINOR PROJECT, THE PROPERTIES OUTLINED
[00:35:01]
BY A SOLID YELLOW LINE AND A OWN HISTORIC DISTRICT, HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL.IT IS SITUATED ON A WESTERN BANK OF THE SCIOTO RIVER, LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET AND PENNY HILL LANE.
THE 0.26 ACRES SITE WAS CREATED IN 2021 WHEN A SINGLE LOT WAS DIVIDED INTO TWO.
THE OTHER LOT IS SEEN HERE IN DOLEY YELLOW LINE.
THE PHOTOS HERE SHOW THE EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS.
THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT GRAY CHANGE FROM WEST TO THE EAST AND A FLOODPLAIN IS ON THE EASTERN HALF OF THE LOT.
THE BOARD REVIEWED AND APPROVED THE MINOR PROJECT APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS AFTER MULTIPLE HEARINGS IN JULY, 2023.
TONIGHT'S REQUEST ADDRESSES THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND ADDITIONALLY, APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FACADES ALONG WITH SOME MATERIAL CHANGES.
IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT THE BOARD HAD EXTENSIVELY DISCUSSED THE MASSING WINDOW OPENING AND MADE CONSIDERABLE EFFORTS OVER FOUR HEARINGS TO ENSURE THAT THE CODE AND GUIDELINES WERE MET AT THE 2023 APPROVAL.
AS A PART OF FIRST REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A STAIRCASE ADDITION FROM THE BASEMENT LEVEL TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE REAR OF THE SITE TO ENSURE THAT THE BUILDING FOOT FOOTPRINT IS WITHIN THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED.
THE APPLICANT HAS REDUCED THE GARAGE TIP AND ADDITIONALLY REDUCED DECK SIZES.
THE PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS NOW UNDER 25% AND STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND THE ADDITION AS WELL.
APPLICANT WILL NEED TO PROVIDE STAKES WITH AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT.
AS PART OF THE SECOND REQUEST, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES CHANGES TO ALL FOUR FACADES.
SOME OF THE CHANGES ARE MATERIAL CHANGES WHILE SOME OF THE CHANGES ARE MODIFICATIONS TO THE APPROVED ELEVATIONS.
THE NEXT FEW SLIDE WE SHOW THE PROPOSED CHANGES WILL, SHOULD BE HIGHLIGHTED IN BOTH RED AND GREEN.
THE CHANGES IN SCREEN ARE SUPPORTED BY THE STAFF ON THE FRONT ELEVATION.
APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CHANGE THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FRONT DOOR WITH SIDELIGHTS TO A SINGLE FRONT DOOR WITH TRANSOM LIGHT, HARDI BIRD PANELS, AND ALONG WITH LENGTH FIXTURES ON THE EITHER SIDE.
THE REQUEST IS IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING CHARACTER WITHIN THE STARTED DISTRICT AND STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE CHANGE.
BOTH THE JULY, 2023 APPROVED ELEVATION AND THE PROPOSED ELEVATION ARE DISPLAYED HERE TO MEET THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
APPLICANT HAS REDUCED BOTH NORTH AND SOUTH DECKS AND STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THAT REDUCED DECK SIZES ON THE SOUTH DECK ON BOTH THE FLOORS.
THE APPLICANT IS NOW PROPOSING FIVE WINDOWS, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN RED AND GREEN INSTEAD OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DOOR AND WINDOW ARRANGEMENT.
STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE WINDOW ARRANGEMENT ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
SECTION 5.5 DC OF THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES RECOMMENDS THAT THE LAST SURFACES OF GLASS SHOULD BE AVOIDED AND PER SECTION 5.6 P OF THE GUIDELINES, THE WINDOW TO WALL RATIOS SHOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT.
THUS, STAFF RECOMMENDS RETAINING THE PREVIOUS APPROVED ELEVATION OF THE BASEMENT JUST TO MAINTAIN THE ANTICIPATED BALANCE BETWEEN THE MATERIALS AT THE MIDDLE WAY, THE APPLICANT HAS MADE INTERNAL CHANGES TO THE LAYOUT AND PROPOSES REMOVING TWO WINDOWS IN THE CENTER, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN RED WHILE LEAVING THE TWO WIDER WINDOWS ON THE EITHER SIDE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PREVIOUS WINDOW ARRANGEMENT, WHICH WERE PURPOSELY DESIGNED TO LOOK LIKE A SUNROOM AND IT IS INCLUDED AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL.
SHOULD THE BOARD DECIDE TO APPROVE THE NEWLY PROPOSED WINDOW ARRANGEMENT, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE TOP WINDOW SHOULD MATCH THE BOTTOM WINDOW TO ENSURE THAT ALL THE WINDOW SIZES ARE CONSISTENT ON THE NORTHERN TECH.
AT THE BASEMENT LEVEL, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A MIX OF WINDOWS AND DOORS INSTEAD OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ELEVATION, WHICH IS SHOWN ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE.
THE LAYOUT BASEMENT LAYOUT WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY PRO SHOWN AT THE FRONT OF THE STAFF AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
SO STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THIS REQUEST AND APPROVES THE ELEVATION, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN GREEN.
ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE APPROVED DOOR SIZES TO A WIDER ONE.
THE DOSE ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND THE SECOND FLOOR WERE APPROVED OF THE SAME SIZE TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE GUIDELINES AND MINIMIZE COMPLEXITY OF THEIR ELEVATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS MAINTAINING THE CONSISTENCY IN THE OPENING SIZES ON THE FACADE AND SUGGESTS THAT THE WIDTH OF THE DOORS BE CONSISTENT AT THESE CHANGES ARE NOT DUE TO ANY INTERNAL LAYOUT CHANGES AND WILL NOT IMPACT THE INTERIOR.
THIS IS AGAIN INCLUDED AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL ON
[00:40:01]
THE NORTH ELEVATION.THE APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSES TO MODIFY THE DOOR AND WINDOW DETAILS INSTEAD OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED GLASS DOOR ON THE FIRST FLOOR, A 10 FOOT WIDE FOUR PANEL BI PARTING SLIDERS AND WINDOWS ARE PROPOSED ON THE LOWER FLOOR.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A WINDOW AND A DOOR INSTEAD OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DOOR AS PROPOSED.
THE WINDOW OPENING HIGHLIGHTED IN RED ARE INCONSISTENT IN SIZE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS STICKING TO THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL TO MAINTAIN BALANCE AND PROPORTIONS OF THE MATERIALS.
SHOULD THE BOARD OPT TO APPROVE THE NEWLY APPROVED WINDOW ARRANGEMENT, THEN THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE TOP VENDOR PROPORTION MATCHES THE BOTTOM VENDOR PROPORTIONS.
THE APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSES SOME CHANGES ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION.
THE APPLICATION THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE THE LOWER LEVEL WINDOW, WHICH IS SHOWN HERE IN GREEN.
THIS IS DUE TO CONSTRUCTION LIMITATIONS AND STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THIS REQUEST SIMILAR TO THE LEFT ELEVATION.
INSTEAD OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DOORS AND WINDOWS OPENING AT THE DECK, APPLICANT NOW PROPOSES 10 FOOT WIDE PANEL.
THESE ARE BI PARTING PANELS ON BOTH THE FLOORS.
STAFFERS COMFORTABLE WITH THIS REQUEST AND STAFF SUPPOSE THESE SLIDERS, WHICH IS BECAUSE DUE TO LIMITED PUBLIC VISIBILITY AND IT CLOSELY MATCHES THE AMOUNT OF WINDOWS IN THE GLASS WHICH WAS APPROVED ON THE PREVIOUS EVALUATION.
THE BOARD PREVIOUSLY EXPRESSED CONCERNS WITH THE WINDOW PLACEMENTS AND OPENING SIZES THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS AND THE APPROVED DESIGN ENSURE THAT THE CODE AND THE GUIDELINES WERE MET.
MET STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND CHANGING THE PROPOSED WINDOW SIZES FOR CONTINUITY AND COMPATIBILITY.
THE WINDOW ON THE BASEMENT LEVEL NEAR THE DECK IS MUCH WIDER THAN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WINDOW, AND ALL OF THE FOUR HIGHLIGHTED WINDOWS ACTUALLY VARY IN SIZE.
FURTHERMORE, THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WINDOW SIZES DID NOT, WILL NOT IMPACT THE INTERNAL LAYOUT CHANGES AND THUS STAFF RECOMMEND STICKING TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WINDOW SIZES.
AND AS A PART OF LAST REQUEST, THERE ARE SOME, UH, MATERIAL CHANGES TO MEET THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL.
APPLICANT IS NOW PROPOSING PAC PACIFIC ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS ALONG WITH THE WINDOWS.
THEY ARE SIERRA PACIFIC BI PARTING SLIDING DOORS, AND ALL THE OTHER DOORS EXCEPT THE FIRST DOOR, UH, EXCEPT THE FRONT DOOR, SORRY.
ALL THE DOORS AND WINDOWS ARE IN SHELVIN.
WILLIAM SHOGI WHITE, A SAMPLE OF THE WINDOWS AND THE DOOR IS HERE TONIGHT.
STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE SELECTION AND THE PROPOSED WINDOW MEETS THE CODE AND WILL NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER.
THE APPLICANT REQUEST TO CHANGE THE DOUBLE FRONT DOOR FROM THERMA TWO FRONT DOOR TO THERMA TWO FIBERGLASS DOOR WITH SIMULATED DIVIDED GLASS MOUNTAINS, WHICH IS PAINTED IN SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE STAFF REPORT MENTIONED THE USE OF THERMA TWO SMOOTH STAR SHAKER STYLE DOUGH.
THE APPLICANT HAS CONFIRMED THAT ALL THE DS ARE SAME EXCEPT THE FRONT DOOR AND THUS NO THE CONDITION OF REMOVE THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL HAS BEEN REMOVED.
APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSES TO USE EIGHT INCH BY 18 INCH FOREST TAIL.
OUTDOOR COUCH LIGHTS WITH CLEAR SEATED GLASS.
TWO LIGHTS ARE IN THE FRONT AND FOUR RIGHT.
THE REAR STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THIS REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TAMCO HERITAGE ASPHALT SHINGLES TO CERTAIN TEETH, LANDMARK SHINGLES IN A WEATHERED VOTE CONDU COLOR.
AND LASTLY, THE AP APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE TIMBERTECH STAIRCASE IN A SANDY BIRCH COLOR, WHICH WILL MATCH THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED RAILING.
STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF ALL THE MATERIAL CHANGES LISTED.
HERE ARE THE WAIVER CRITERIA FOR FIBERGLASS DOORS.
ALL OF THESE CONDITIONS ARE EITHER MET OR THEY'RE NOT APPLICABLE.
THESE ARE THE WAIVER CRITERIA FOR COMPOSITE DECK.
THE CRITERIA ARE EITHER MET OR NOT APPLICABLE.
LISTED HERE ARE THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA, WHICH ARE EITHER MET WITH CONDITIONS AND WAIVERS, OR THEY'RE NOT APPLICABLE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING WAIVERS, USE OF TIMBER TECH STAIRS AND USE OF FIBERGLASS DOORS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF MINOR PROJECT REVIEW WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE APPLICANT SHALL REVERT BACK TO THE LEFT AND THE REAR ELEVATIONS AS APPROVED AT THE JULY, 2023 MEETING, EXCEPT THE FIRST FLOOR LEVEL SOUTH DECK BASEMENT AND THE BASEMENT LEVEL AT THE NORTH DECK.
THE WINDOWS ON THE RIGHT, THE RIGHT ELEVATION HIGHLIGHTED AND ROUTE SHALL BE STANDARDIZED.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE STAKE DIMENSIONS AT THE BUILDING PERMIT AND APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE UTILITY PLANS, WHICH HAS TO BE INSPECTED BY ENGINEERING AT BUILDING PERMIT.
SHOULD THE BOAT SUPPORT THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS AS PRESENTED, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE WINDOWS ON THE LEFT RIGHT AND REAR ELEVATIONS, WHICH WERE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED, THEY HAVE TO BE STANDARDIZED PRIOR TO
[00:45:01]
BUILDING PERMIT, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE STAIRCASE DIMENSIONS AT BUILDING PERMIT AND THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE UTILITY PLANS FOR ENGINEERING AT BUILDING PERMIT.WITH THIS, I'M HAPPY TO AN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON THERE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR STAFF BEFORE WE, NOTHING FOR STAFF AT THE MOMENT.
UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, IF THEY'RE HERE, IF THEY CAN WANNA COME UP AND MAKE A STATEMENT.
AND IF YOU BOTH COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR, AND YOUR ADDRESS.
SUSAN DS 180 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET.
I'M BOB DS 180 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET.
I I GUESS THE FIRST THING WE SHOULD DO IS APOLOGIZE FOR THE DEEP BREATH.
YOU PROBABLY ALL TOOK IN WHEN YOU SAW THIS ADDRESS POP BACK UP.
UM, ON, ON THE AGENDA, UM, THE, THE HOMEOWNERS WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD WORK THAT EVERYONE PUT IN TO ACHIEVE THE CURRENT APPROVED VERSION OF, OF THE BUILDING PLANS.
BOB AND I WERE NOT A PART OF THAT, UM, OF THE ORIGINAL TEAM, BUT WE CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHAT GOES INTO THAT AS WELL AT THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD.
ONE OF THE TASKS, UM, ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT HAD TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL WAS TO MINIMIZE, UH, REMOVE SOME OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
I THINK, UH, GARY'S WORDS MIGHT HAVE BEEN NIP AND TUCK.
UM, AND BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT A VERY CLEAR DIAL, YOU KNOW, DIRECTIVE, UM, IT DID FALL BACK ON THE ARCHITECT AND THE HOMEOWNER TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MINIMIZE THE, SOME SQUARE FOOTAGE, HOW TO REMOVE SOME SQUARE FOOTAGE.
AND OF COURSE, AS SOON AS YOU START TO DO THAT, THAT DOES START TO, UM, KIND OF START A DOMINO EFFECT OF SOME MINOR CHANGES TO WINDOWS AND DOORS.
UM, THE HOMEOWNER'S INTENT WAS NOT TO RECREATE THE WHEEL, EVEN THOUGH IT DOES FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TOUCHED AND, UM, AND, AND, AND ARE ADDRESSING ALL, ALL FOUR OF THE ELEVATIONS.
UM, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS THAT, UM, THAT THEY, THEY AGREE THAT THIS, WHAT WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS GOOD, BUT THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS TONIGHT THAT WE THINK COULD IMPROVE, UM, EVEN WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
UM, WE'RE HAPPY TO, I I, I KNOW IT'S GONNA BE A LITTLE TEDIOUS.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE BEST WAY IS TO ADDRESS ANY OF THESE ITEMS OR HOW YOU'D LIKE US TO PROCEED, BUT WE'LL BE HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND LET YOU GUYS.
NO, I THINK, UH, I MEAN FOR ME, I MEAN, AS YOU SAY, THERE'S A LOT OF, A LOT OF EFFORT WANTING TO GET IT IN THE RIGHT PLACE.
SO MAYBE IF YOU COULD JUST GO AND, AND FOR ME THE EASIEST AND MAYBE JUST GO FROM FRONT TO BACK AND GIVE US JUST, AND REALLY KIND OF THUMBNAIL WHAT, WHAT NECESSITATES THESE CHANGES, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT TO BE 'CAUSE FOR ME IS THEY NECESS SOME CHANGES.
AND THEN FROM A FORM AND FUNCTION, IT FEELS LIKE ALL OF THEM ARE THERE.
SO IF YOU CAN GIVE US, RIGHT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A THUMBNAIL OF WHAT YOU WERE THINKING, WHY YOU THINK IT'S IMPORTANT AND HOW, UH, HOW WE CAN TRY TO MOVE FORWARD.
THERE IS, UM, THERE IS NO DOUBT UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT SEVERAL OF THE CHANGES THAT THE HOMEOWNERS DID KIND OF MAKE AS THEY STARTED THIS PROCESS ARE ABSOLUTELY NOT NECESSARY.
AS THE, AS THE, AS THE STAFF DID MENTION, UM, AS A RESIDENT ON THE STREET, I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW HOW THEY GOT EXCITED ABOUT THE VIEWS AND TRYING TO CAPITALIZE ON THE VIEWS OF THE RIVER.
UM, SO, SO THAT, THAT IS REALLY HOW THIS, HOW THIS HAPPENED.
I, I GUESS I WOULD SAY, UM, AS, AS BUILDERS, WE UNDERSTAND HOW THAT PROCESS CAN KIND OF GET AWAY FROM SOMEONE.
UM, THE OVERALL, I I WOULD SAY THOUGH THAT WE WERE EXTREMELY PLEASED AND AGREEABLE WITH MAJORITY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STAFF.
THERE'S JUST A FEW LITTLE TWEAKS IN A COUPLE OF THEM.
I THINK THAT EVERYONE WOULD AGREE ARE EVEN AN IMPROVEMENT, AN IMPROVEMENT OVER WHAT THE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED.
IF IT WOULD BE EASIER TO THINK OF IT BY ELEVATION, I'LL BE HAPPY TO JUST TO RUN, RUN THROUGH A FEW.
I I, YEAH, I MEAN SOMEHOW WE HAVE TO KIND OF SORT THROUGH.
I MEAN 'CAUSE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDING FROM A CONDITION A CERTAIN THING.
ARE THERE THINGS IN THERE THAT YOU WANT TO KIND OF REOPEN AND SAY, HEY, I I, THERE'S SOMETHING IN HERE THAT I, WE SEE DIFFERENTLY AND THIS IS THE REASON WHY IT MEETS THE CODE BETTER MEETS THE GUIDELINE BETTER.
UM, WELL LET ME, LET ME TRY THIS.
LET ME, LEMME TRY THIS FIRST LITTLE AREA AND JUST SEE IF THIS SAW SOLVES ANY
[00:50:01]
QUESTIONS.SO ON THE REAR ELEVATION, THE ORIG, THE GREEN SQUARE YOU HAD ON THE SOUTH DECKS, UM, WE ARE A, AFTER LOOKING AT THIS AND LISTENING, YOU KNOW, READING SOME OF THE FEEDBACK, THE HOMEOWNERS ARE ABSOLUTELY COMFORTABLE REVERTING BACK TO THE BASEMENT LEVEL.
LEMME MAKE SURE I SAY IT RIGHT.
BASEMENT LEVEL, SOUTH DECK, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ELEVATION.
HOWEVER, THERE'S A TINY CAVEAT WITH THAT BECAUSE THAT IS ONE OF THE DECKS THAT CHANGED.
SO WHILE WE LIKE TO BE ABLE TO JUST HAVE THAT TRIPLE WINDOW INSTEAD OF ALL OF THE WINDOWS YOU SEE ON THE DECK, WE WERE HOPING TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THE WINDOW TO THE LEFT.
THAT'S ON, THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE DECK STRUCTURE.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE THOUGHT MIGHT BE AGREEABLE TO EVERYONE WAS IF WE DUPLICATED THAT ON THE ABOVE LEVEL AS WELL, THE, THE STAFF WAS IN AGREEMENT TO THE FIVE WINDOWS ON THE UPPER LEVEL.
BUT BECAUSE WE DO REALIZE THAT WE'VE CREATED A LOT OF MORE GLASS IN GENERAL, UM, WE'D, WE'D BE HAPPY TO REMOVE SOME OF THAT AS WELL, IF THAT HELPS WITH ANY OF THE CONSISTENCY AND GETS US A LITTLE CLOSER BACK TO THE CODE.
WE HAVE NOT SEEN DRAWINGS FOR THIS E EXACTLY.
AND IT'S NEW INFORMATION THAT CANNOT BE PRESENTED E EXACTLY FOR, FOR ME, AS YOU SAY THAT I, I CAN'T MAKE SENSE OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
WITHOUT A DRAWING, WITHOUT SOMETHING THERE.
YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT WE'RE GONNA MOVE ONE WINDOW HERE AND THERE.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS FOR ME.
I I CANNOT, FOR ME IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO FOLLOW.
YOU'RE, WE'RE GONNA CHANGE EVERY ELEVATION IF YOU CHANGE ONE WINDOW AND WE'RE GONNA TRY TO CHANGE EVERY ELEVATION.
I WE STRUGGLE TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT THAT OKAY.
THE STAFF IS KIND OF PRE, THEY PRESENTED A CERTAIN YEAH, CERTAIN WAY IN A CERTAIN ORDER FOR ME.
YOU HAVE TO FIND INSIDE THOSE.
THERE ARE THINGS INSIDE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY'VE GIVEN YOU THAT, THAT YOU, THAT YOU DON'T AGREE WITH AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO MODIFY.
BECAUSE I DON'T, WE DON'T WANT TO RE TRY TO REDESIGN THE, THE WHOLE HOUSE.
NO, OTHERWISE WE'LL, WE'LL NEVER.
UH, WELL WE WON'T, WE GET THROUGH AND I'VE, AND I'VE PROBABLY JUST CONFUSED THE ISSUE BECAUSE, UH, THE WAY THE, I MEAN THERE, THERE ARE, SO THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, I GUESS, I MEAN I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO ADDRESS THEM WITHOUT KNOWING, UM, WHAT THE BOARD'S OVERALL PERSPECTIVE WOULD BE.
BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT ALL OF THE DOORS AND WINDOWS IN RED ABSOLUTELY WILL CHANGE ALL OF THOSE BACK AND, AND, AND BE CONSISTENT IN THE SIZE WITH SOME OF THOSE THINGS.
I MEAN, I I IS THAT HOW YOU, I THINK MAYBE WE, FROM A BOARD, MAYBE WE MIGHT HAVE TO TALK THROUGH WHERE WE THINK THAT THE TOUCH POINTS ARE.
DOES THAT MEAN YOU AGREEMENT WITH ALL OF STAFF'S CONDITIONS? YES.
UM, WHAT'S THE SECOND, WHAT'S THE SECOND PART? WELL, THERE'S, I MEAN THERE'S THE APPROVAL FOR THE MINOR PROJECT WITH THE, THE STAFF HAS MADE TWO POTENTIAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHAT DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATIONS HERE, RODDY? WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT NOW? SO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW IF AND RECOMMENDS THAT THEY REVERT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL ELEVATIONS.
AND THEN WHEREVER IT WAS HIGHLIGHTED, READ THEY STANDARDIZED THOSE ELEVATIONS OR THE STANDARDIZED THOSE WINDOWS AND OPENING SIZE.
SHOULD THE BOARD DECIDE THAT THE PRESENTED OBLIGATIONS ARE FINE.
THEN STAFF HAS THIS SET OF RECOMMENDATIONS WHERE THEY, AGAIN, WE AGAIN MENTION ABOUT STANDARDIZING THE DOORS AND WINDOWS.
THIS IS WHEN SHOULD THE BOARD APPROVE OKAY.
THE ELEVATIONS AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT.
SO LET'S GO BACK TO THE PRIOR PAGE.
WITH ALL OF THE CONDITIONS ON THIS PAGE, IT'D BE THE FOUR THAT'S LISTED UP THERE.
'CAUSE ONE'S BEEN CROSSED OUT.
SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT, UM, FOR THIS RECOMMENDATION, OKAY, THEY'LL REVERT ON THE LEFT AND THE REAR WE'RE LIKE AT DIFFERENT PLACES.
[00:55:01]
THE FIRST FLOOR LEVEL SOUTH DECK AND THE BASEMENT LEVEL, NORTH DECK, UH, THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD BE OKAY.'CAUSE YOU HAD THOSE IN GREEN.
AND THAT'S THE ACCESS FROM THE BASEMENT.
UM, THE LAYOUT WAS NOT PROVIDED AND THEY WANT TO, BASED ON THE INTERNAL LAYOUT, THEY WANT TO ADD SOME DOORS AND WINDOWS AND STUFF IS OKAY WITH THAT.
AND THE WINDOWS ON THE RIGHT, THE RED ESSENTIALLY IT'S GONNA BE THE, IT'LL BE THE GREEN.
IT'LL BE THE GREEN AND NOT THE RED.
AND THEN THE RED WOULD BE STANDARDIZED.
AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING.
CAN WE GO BACK TO THE DRAWING SO THAT SURE.
WE CAN SEE WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT'S CLEAR.
UH, YEAH, BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT SLIDE TO SHOW HER I WANT.
THE ONE MORE WHERE IT SAYS YOU HAVE THE NEXT ONE, IT JUST GIVES YOU KIND OF GOING THROUGH THAT, UH, RED, LIKE YOU SAY THERE.
IT'S WHAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE IS, IS THE CONDITION IS WE REVERT TO THE LEFT FIRST TO SAY SOUTH SIDE BASEMENT LEVEL.
THE WINDOWS WERE REVERT TO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL.
SECOND ONE, THE ALTERNATIVE, IF YOU'RE NOT PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT, THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO ASK US TO TABLE THIS AND THEN YOU'LL COME WITH NEW DRAWINGS.
I JUST DON'T KNOW SCHEDULE WISE WHEN THAT COULD BE FITTED IN BECAUSE THE, THE THE THE QUESTION GO.
UH, BILL RAISER 68, 57 HOLBEIN DRIVE, DUBLIN, OHIO.
YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY, I MEAN I THINK THE, UH, THE COMMENTS FROM THE STAFF GAME EARLY THIS WEEK.
SO, UH, WE HAD SOME THOUGHTS AND IDEAS TO MAYBE, UH, YOU KNOW, COME, COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR, WHAT THEIR SUGGESTIONS WERE WITHOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY REVERTING BACK TO THE OTHER ONE.
BUT MAYBE, UH, SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALSO MEET THE, MEET WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, ADDRESS THERE.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? OR SO ARE YOU ASKING US TO TABLE THIS? I I THINK THE BEST MOVE WOULD PROBABLY BE TABLE IT AND COME BACK.
WITH THE CORRECT DRAWINGS SO WE CAN CLEARLY COMMUNICATE.
OBVIOUSLY I GUESS WE, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS NEED THE ACTUAL DRAWING OF WHAT WE ACTUALLY WANT TO DO, NOT US SPEAKING ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.
SO MAYBE THAT WOULD BE EASIER TO COMMUNICATE.
YEAH, THAT'D BE HELPFUL FOR US TOO.
SO IS THAT ALL RIGHT WITH STAFF? YEAH.
WELL, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW YOUR SCHEDULE, WHAT YOU'VE GOT COMING, SO IT MAY NOT BE FOR ANOTHER COUPLE MONTHS THAT IT GETS BACK ON OUR AGENDA.
SO IT'S NOT POSSIBLE FOR SEPTEMBER HEARING.
SO THE EARLIEST THAT WE ARE LOOKING IS THE OCTOBER HEARING, BUT THAT WILL TOTALLY DEPEND UPON WHAT WE HAVE IN US FOR NOW.
AND ALREADY SCHEDULED FOR I UNDERSTAND.
I IT'S, YEAH, THAT, THAT'S FINE.
IS THERE ANY OTHER, UM, THOUGHTS THAT YOU COULD GIVE US REAL QUICK? I MEAN,
I THINK I, I THINK WE HAVE A LOT, WE'VE GIVEN A LOT OF THOUGHTS ON HOW WE SAW THE SYMMETRY OF THE WINDOWS AND HOW WE SEE HOW THE GLASS INTERACTS WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, WITH THE FACADE.
AND SO I THINK IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE MIN, THERE'S A LOT OF NOTES INSIDE OF THERE OF THE THINGS THAT WE, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
CAN I ASK THAT? SO I WOULDN'T WANNA, I WOULDN'T WANNA GO BACK AND REHASH 'EM 'CAUSE JUST NOT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T GET THEM BIT OUTTA ORDER.
BUT I THINK THE STAFF COULD CERTAINLY, I MEAN WE CAN TALK THROUGH EXACTLY WHAT WAS BROUGHT UP.
'CAUSE THE ONE ON THE LEFT APPROVED IS THE COMPILATION OF ALL THAT.
I, I GUESS ONE QUESTION I WOULD ASK IS THAT, JUST, JUST TO ONE DETAIL TO GIVE US A BETTER IDEA, IS THAT THAT CENTER WINDOW THAT'S IN RED RIGHT NOW, WHERE OR THE WAY WE REMOVE THAT WINDOW? I, I WOULD ASK ABOUT THAT.
I, I THINK YOU NEED TO COME BACK WITH KIND OF HOLISTICALLY WHAT IT IS.
'CAUSE IF YOU LOOK, I MEAN STAFF SAY IT'S UNSYMMETRIC SYMMETRIC, IT'S NOT SYMMETRIC ANYMORE.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THAT SYMMETRIC, WHATEVER THE WORD WOULD BE, BUT IF YOU DO IT LIKE THAT, SO YOU GOTTA GO BACK AND LOOK AT WHAT WE SAID, HOW WE WANTED THE SYMMETRY OF THE WINDOWS, HOW THAT WAS.
'CAUSE IF YOU JUST CHANGE ONE THING, IT CHANGES THE MIDDLE SECTION.
SO I DON'T THINK IN, IN, IN, IN ABSENCE OF OTHER THINGS, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO SAY WHETHER IT WOULD WORK OR NOT.
SO YOU MR. CHAIR, YOU HAVE NO COMMENT, GOOD OR BAD ON THAT? NO, I, I HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE I WASN'T PART OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND ALTHOUGH I DID KINDA SKIMM THAT I DIDN'T, I JUST HAVE, I'M JUST CURIOUS.
I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY YOU WERE PROPOSING TO TAKE THAT WINDOW OUT AND YEAH, IT'S MORE OF LIKE A DESIGN FOCAL POINT IN THAT, UH, SUNROOM WE'RE PUTTING A FIREPLACE IN THERE SO IT UH, KIND OF, KIND OF CREATES ONE, YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK THE FIREPLACE IS I UNDERSTAND.
SO IT WAS, IT'S BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING, WHAT YOU'RE DOING ON THE INTERIOR IS WHY THAT, THAT'S CORRECT.
YEAH, I JUST WAS CURIOUS AS TO WHAT THAT WAS.
SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS YOU'RE ASKING TO TABLE THIS UNTIL
[01:00:01]
YOU COME BACK WITH A, UM, LET'S SAY A DIFFERENT DRAW, A NEW DRAWING THAT KIND OF, UH, KIND OF REFLECTS WHAT YOUR NEW DESIRE OF THE, OF THE DESIGN BE.YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THINK IT'S PROBABLY THE BEST MOVE.
I THINK THE GET GET EVERYBODY THE RIGHT PLACE.
BUT SO YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS GOOD OR BAD ON THAT, UH, RED WINDOW THERE? UH, WITHOUT, WITHOUT IT LOOKING AT IT AND HOW THE OTHER WINDOWS COME IN.
IT'S HARD TO, IT'S HARD TO SAY.
I, THAT'S WHY WE DON'T WANNA TRY TO DESIGN IT FROM HERE BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO SAY HOW YOU'RE GONNA MOVE ALL THE REST OF THE WINDOWS.
RIGHT? COULD IT WORK? IT COULD PROBABLY, BUT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO FIT IT IN WITH THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE IN THE PAST.
SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE, UH, TO, UH, TO TABLE THIS TO APPLICATION PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST? I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THE CASE NUMBER.
WE HAVE TWO ACTIONS, RIGHT? THERE WAS A WAIVER ALSO FOR THE DOOR.
WOULD YOU LIKE US TO TABLE THAT AS WELL OR DO YOU WANT US TO GET TO THAT TODAY? WHATEVER'S THE EASIEST FOR YOU.
I MEAN, IF IT COULD CHANGE WHAT THE WINDOW, I MEAN FOR ME IT COULD CHANGE WHAT? EVERYTHING COULD BE ALL.
WE JUST TABLE THE WHOLE THING THING.
THEN THATS, THINK THAT MAKES IT CLEANER.
AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT, I MOVE THAT WE, UH, TABLE CASE NUMBER 24 DASH 0 8 1 CONCERNING ONE 12 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET.
DO KEEP IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE STAFF AS YOU'RE GOING FORWARD.
THAT WOULD BE THE MOST HELPFUL.
SO NOW WE MOVE ON TO, UM, 40 YEAH.
[Case #24-022INF]
NUMBER 24 0 2 2 INFORMAL REVIEW.UH, 40 EAST BRIDGE, BRIDGE STREET, UH, INFORMAL REVIEW AND FEEDBACK FOR THE REMODEL AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION OF AN EXISTING HOME IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE 0.32 ACRE SITE IS ZONED HDHR, HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND IS LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH BLACKSMITH LANE AND EAST BRIDGE STREET THERE.
THANK YOU AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN AND, AND GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS.
SO THIS IS INDEED 40 EAST BRIDGE STREET.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAS RETURNED FOR ANOTHER INFORMAL REVIEW.
THE PROJECT LOCATION IS ADJACENT TO BRIDGE STREET BETWEEN NORTH BLACKSMITH AND NORTH RIVERVIEW.
IT'S ADJACENT TO THE TWO OTHER AUCTION HOUSES THAT THE CITY SOLD LAST YEAR, AND IT'S ALSO ACROSS FROM THE 1622 NORTH HIGH PROJECT.
YOU'LL REMEMBER THE CONTEXT FROM THE PREVIOUS INFORMAL, UH, 17 AND 27 NORTH RIVERVIEW, JUST TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY.
HAVE THEIR APPROVALS NOW, UM, THIS IS PART OF THE RIVERVIEW VILLAGE PROJECT, THE SORT OF THE GREATER PROJECT AND, UM, HAS, AGAIN, THESE HOUSES HAVE BEEN AUCTIONED OFF TO PRIVATE OWNERS AT THAT AUCTION.
THERE WAS SOME SPECIFIC DISCLOSURE LANGUAGE, UH, JUST TO SERVE AS A BIT OF A REMINDER OF THAT.
THIS IS FROM PAGE FOUR OF THAT DOCUMENT.
THERE ARE IMPORTANT GOALS TO NOTE.
THE FIRST IS PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC NATURE AND MASS ALONG NORTH RIVERVIEW.
RESPECT THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT.
AND EVEN THOUGH THE CITY SOLD THE PROPERTIES, UH, THE INTENT IS FOR THOSE NEW OWNERS TO BE, UM, AN IMPORTANT PARTNER IN PRESERVING THAT, THAT, UH, CHARACTER.
SO MOVING ON TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE ACTUAL PROPERTY.
THE PHOTO ON THE LEFT SHOWS THE CURRENT RIVERVIEW ELEVATION AND THE BOARD PREVIOUSLY DETERMINED THAT THIS WAS GONNA BE THE FRONT ELEVATION.
THE ORIGINAL HOUSE DATED AROUND 1850.
AND THE ADDITION, UH, ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTO IS OF UNKNOWN AGE.
AND THEN PORCH MODIFICATIONS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PHOTO, UM, HAVE ALSO BEEN MADE, WE SUSPECT AROUND THE 1930S WHEN THE NEW BRIDGE WAS BUILT.
THE DETAIL ON THE RIGHT INDICATES THAT THE BRICK PORCH FOUNDATION IS LIKELY UNORIGINAL.
THERE'S A LACK OF CONTINUITY BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL STONE FOUNDATION AND THE NEW BRICK.
SO IT'S THE STONE THAT IS THE IMPORTANT FEATURE TO PLAY UP WITH THE FOUNDATION.
LOOKING AT THE EAST BRIDGE FACADE,
[01:05:02]
UH, THE RIGHT PHOTO SHOWS DETAILS OF THE PORCH AND THE MATERIALS.AGAIN, NOTE THAT NEW NEWER BRICK FOUNDATION.
AND THERE'S, UM, SOME SIMPLE COLUMNS AND TWO DIFFERENT STYLES, AGAIN, SUGGESTING THAT THERE WAS A BIT OF A, AN ADDITION OVER THE YEARS.
YOU'LL ALSO NOTE SCALLOP SHINGLES ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
AND MODERN SHINGLES COVER THE ORIGINAL LOWER SIDING.
THERE'S ALSO A HORIZONTAL TRIM BAND BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT SIDING TYPES.
LOOKING AT THE NORTH BLACKSMITH FACADE, THE PHOTO ON THE LEFT, UH, SHOWS THE ADDITIONS NOW ON THE LEFT SIDE AND THE SAME SCALLOP SHINGLES.
AND THEN THE RIGHT PHOTO SHOWS THE LANDMARK DUPLEX PRIVY AND THE HISTORIC STAIRS ADJACENT TO BLACKSMITH.
SO UNUSUALLY, THIS SITE HAS THREE PUBLIC VANTAGE POINTS.
OBVIOUSLY NORTH RIVERVIEW AND NORTH BLACKSMITH, BUT ALSO FROM BRIDGE STREET.
AND AS YOU'RE TRAVELING ALONG BRIDGE STREET, YOU ARE ABLE TO LOOK RIGHT AT THE ADDITION AREA.
EVEN THOUGH THE SITE SITS BELOW THE ROAD, IT IS HIGHLY VISIBLE.
TAKING A LOOK AT THE PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT, THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE IN DARK GRAY, UH, INCLUDING THE PRIVY AND THE STAIRS AT THE REAR.
THE ADDITIONS ARE IN LIGHT GRAY AND THE DRIVEWAYS ALONG THE TOP.
THE REQUIRED REAR SETBACK LINE IS SHOWN HERE IN BLUE.
LOOKING AT CODE REQUIREMENTS, LOT COVERAGE WOULD CURRENTLY REQUIRE A WAIVER.
THE PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS PER CODE.
THE REAR SETBACK WOULD NOT CURRENTLY BE PERMITTED WITH A WAIVER THAT WOULD REQUIRE A VARIANCE TODAY.
HOWEVER, WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU ALL RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR WITH THE CODE UPDATES, UH, A WAIVER COULD BE CONSIDERED BEFORE THIS BOARD AFTER FINAL ADOPTION OF THOSE DOCUMENTS.
IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THAT, UH, THE BUILDING AS PROPOSED IS BEYOND THE HEIGHT LIMIT THAT'S PERMITTED AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE A WAIVER.
SO HERE TAKING A LOOK AT THE EAST ELEVATION OR THE FRONT FACADE, THE HISTORIC HOUSES IN THE HEAVIER LINE WEIGHT, THE WIDTH OF THE ADDITION IS THE SAME AS THE HISTORIC PLUS THE PORCH EDITION ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE.
AND AGAIN, HERE'S THAT ADDITION AND WE TALKED IN THE REPORT ABOUT MAYBE DIFFERENT WAYS TO TREAT THAT DIFFERENTLY.
AGAIN, THE HEIGHT IS MUCH TALLER THAN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE A WAIVER.
THERE ARE SOME DISTRACTING ROOF ANGLES HERE AND A CHIMNEY THAT'S NOTED ON THE FLOOR PLAN BUT NOT SHOWN HERE WOULD ALSO PRESUMABLY EXTEND UP BEHIND THE HOUSE.
THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, THE MAIN ENTRY IS CENTERED UNDER THE NEW PORCH HERE.
AND THE ROOF WOULD REQUIRE A ROOF PITCH WAIVER.
THE ORIGINAL STONE FOUNDATION HERE SHOULD BE EMPHASIZED RATHER THAN THE BRICK.
AND HERE JUST TO POINT OUT, THE SQUARE WINDOWS DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT THAT ARE NOT TRADITIONAL TO THE HOUSE OR THE DISTRICT.
GOING TO THE NORTH BLACKSMITH SIDE, THE PRIVY IS IN THE BOTTOM LEFT AND AGAIN IS PRESERVED.
A PORCH WAS ADDED HERE WITH A LOW ROOF.
IT'S NOT HIGHLY VISIBLE FROM BLACKSMITH DUE TO THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE WALL.
AND I'LL HAVE A GRAPHIC THAT KIND OF HELPS ILLUSTRATE THAT IN A SECOND, STAFF WAS ACTUALLY SEEKING A GREATER HOLISTIC DESIGN, UM, MITIGATION TO JUST HELP ADDRESS THE MASSING ON THIS ELEVATION.
UM, FOR THIS LITTLE PORCH AREA, THE ROOF PITCH WOULD REQUIRE A WAIVER AND THE APPLICANT IS SHOWING HORIZONTAL SIDING AND DETAILS TO HELP MINIMIZE THE APPEARANCE OF THE VERTICALITY.
LOOKING AT THE NORTH ELEVATION, AGAIN, WE SEE THE HEIGHT DIFFERENCE WITH, UH, THE HISTORIC IN BLUE, THE ADDITION IN ORANGE.
[01:10:01]
WE SEE SOME ROOF FORMS THAT ARE NOT TRADITIONAL AND THIS ACTUALLY ADDS BULK TO THE ADDITION AND IT FILLS IN THE DISCERNIBLE L SHAPE THAT WE HAD RECOMMENDED TO MIRROR THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC HOUSE.WE DO SEE APPROPRIATE HYPHEN, UM, BETWEEN THE TWO WINGS.
AND WE ALSO NOTE THE HORIZONTAL BANKS OF WINDOWS AND THE CONTINUOUS GARAGE DOORS THAT DON'T QUITE ADDRESS THE GUIDELINES YET.
THE SOUTH ELEVATION HAS MANY OF THE SAME CONCERNS AS THE NORTH SIDE WITH, AGAIN, HEIGHT AND BULK.
AND HERE WE HAVE A DIFFERENT NON-TRADITIONAL FORM THAT COULD BE BETTER MAYBE AS A SINGLE STORY OR A TRUE SHED ROOF INSTEAD OF SORT OF A PARAMETAL ROOF.
UM, AND AGAIN, WE'RE FILLING IN THAT L-SHAPED THAT WAS MEANT TO REPLICATE THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
WE ALSO SEE THE HORIZONTAL BANKS OF WINDOWS.
THIS IS A LITTLE COMPARISON OF THE FACADES ALONG NORTH RIVERVIEW.
UH, THIS IS A VERY APPROXIMATE, BASED ON SOME GUESSTIMATIONS BASED ON, UM, FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS.
IT'S JUST A COMPARISON OF SCALE AND MASSING AND FORMS. AND YOU'LL REMEMBER THAT 17 AND 20 SEVEN'S TOPOGRAPHY ACTUALLY SLOPES UP BEHIND THE LOT.
SO IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE, UH, NOT QUITE AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON, BUT, UM, IT, IT MAY BE USEFUL FOR YOU.
I THINK THE MORE INTERESTING FACADE COMPARISON IS ALONG NORTH BLACKSMITH.
UM, THE BLUE BLOCK ON THIS PROPERTY REPRESENTS THE RETAINING WALL IN ITS APPROXIMATE LOCATION.
SO AS YOU'RE TRAVELING DOWN BLACKSMITH AND KIND OF COMING OFF OF THE HEIGHT OF BRIDGE STREET, YOU'RE GONNA SEE, WELL, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE THE BLUE AREA BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY BEHIND THAT WALL.
AND THEN AS THE TOPOGRAPHY CHANGES AND THE ROAD BECOMES MORE EVEN WITH THE BACKYARDS AT 17 AND 27, THEN YOU'LL SEE RIGHT AT GRADE.
SO THAT'S WHAT THAT IS MEANT TO SHOW.
UM, IT'S ALSO A GOOD COMPARISON TO SHOW THE CHARACTER AND THE MASSING OF THE REAR OF THESE STRUCTURES.
SO WE HAVE SOME DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR YOU TONIGHT ABOUT, UH, THE SUPPORT FOR THE VARIOUS WAIVERS THAT ARE NEEDED, INCLUDING THAT HEIGHT WAIVER.
UM, THE SUBORDINATE NATURE OF THE ADDITION, THE RESPONSE TO THE CODE AND GUIDELINES, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PROPOSED ROOF LINES.
AND THEN, UM, THE ROOF PITCH WAIVERS ON THE NEW PORCHES.
SO ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AS WELL.
AND WITH THAT, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.
ANYBODY HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR SARAH? ANY NOT FOR NOTES? NOT THIS POINT.
SO, UH, JUST SO JUST ON THE REAR YARD SETBACK, SO JUST IF WE LOOK AT 17 AND 22, 'CAUSE THIS ONE WAS UH, APRIL, I FORGET THE NUMBER, BUT IS IT MORE OR LESS IN LINE WITH THOSE OTHER ONE? SO THAT SETBACK WILL BE SOMEHOW, AS I RECALL, WILL BE CLOSE TO THE SAME AS THE OTHER ONES, IS THAT CORRECT? 20, AROUND 20 SOME FEET? THAT IS CORRECT.
YEAH, I, UM, HAVEN'T MEASURED IT EXACTLY, BUT I EXPECT THAT IT'S, IT WAS IN THE 20, QUITE SIMILAR, YES.
AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TO, THAT'LL NEED TO GO TO BZA TODAY AS DEPENDING ON WHEN THIS APPLICATION COMES IN, IN, DEPENDING ON THE TIMING, YES.
SO RIGHT NOW, WE, I MEAN THE CODE TALKS ABOUT TWO, TWO SPOTS.
SO THE TWO, TWO A TWO CAR GARAGE.
ARE THERE OTHER PLACES? I THINK THERE'S ONE OTHER SPOT.
WE HAVE A, WE HAVE DONE A THREE CAR GARAGE IN ANOTHER, ON ANOTHER, ON ANOTHER HOME.
WE HAVE, UM, THE MOST RECENT ONE THAT I CAN THINK OF IS 55 SOUTH RIVERVIEW.
UM, WE DID NOT DO THREE CAR GARAGES FOR 17 AND 27.
THOSE ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT SITUATION BECAUSE THEY ARE BACKING OUT DIRECTLY ONTO BLACKSMITH.
UM, AND THEN JUST, UM, FROM A LOT COVERAGE STANDPOINT, HOW MUCH IS THE DRIVEWAY? BECAUSE CERTAINLY ON THIS ONE, I MEAN YOU HAVE A, THERE'S A LOT COVERAGE.
THE, THE FOOTPRINT IS CORRECT.
[01:15:01]
AND IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE DRIVEWAY, THE DRIVEWAY IS TAKING A BIG PROPORTION OF THAT.AND CONVERSELY WITH THAT, HOW MUCH LOCK COVERAGE WERE THE OTHER ONES? 'CAUSE WE ON THAT AT, AT THIS EARLY STAGE, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, UH, THE DRIVEWAY COULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
AND THEN HERE, 'CAUSE IT, I WOULD SAY FROM A WAIVER STANDPOINT ON THE LOT COVERAGE, IT, IT WOULD BE VERY, I THINK THAT'S EVEN LOWER THAN WHAT WE HAD ON THE OTHER ONES.
IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE A FAIR STATEMENT? I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK, BUT I THINK THAT THAT IS TRUE THAT THEY WERE MORE IN THE TEENS.
UH, AND THEN WHERE'S THE CHIMNEY SIDE? THAT, WE'LL, WE'LL GET TO THAT LATER.
SO THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTIONS.
YEAH, SEAN, WAS YOUR STATEMENT JUST NOW THAT YOU THOUGHT THE HEIGHT OF THIS PROJECT PROPOSED IS ACTUALLY, UH, AS PROPOSED LOWER THAN THE ONES AT 17 AND 27? WHICH, SORRY, THE, ARE YOU, WERE YOU ASKING, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WERE YOU ASKING WHETHER THE HEIGHT PROPOSED ON THIS PROJECT? NO, I WAS TALKING ABOUT LOT COVERAGE.
BUT THEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE HEIGHT.
I THOUGHT YOU TALKED ABOUT THE HEIGHT WAIVER.
NO, WASN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW HEIGHT.
SO UNLESS I DID SAY BACK, I HAVE THAT QUESTION THEN
ABOUT WHERE THIS HEIGHT FITS WITH THE OTHER TWO.
SO I WENT BACK THROUGH AND DID SOME COMPARISON.
SO THE HEIGHT OF THE ADDITION ON THIS PROJECT IS 26 FEET, EIGHT INCHES AT MIDPOINT.
UM, WHICH AGAIN WOULD REQUIRE A WAIVER 17 AND 27.
AND REMEMBER THAT THAT TOPOGRAPHY GOES UP.
SO WE'RE MEASURING FROM THE NATURAL GRADE.
27 IS ACTUALLY THREE FEET LOWER THAN THE HISTORIC HOUSE, ALTHOUGH IT, YOU SEE IT BECAUSE OF THE GRADE.
SO, UM, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY TALLER THAN THE ADDITION FOR 17 AND 27 OR NOT FOR 27.
UH, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME.
YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD GUESS THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, BECAUSE THE GRADE GOES UP, SO YOU'RE GIVING US THE HEIGHT FROM THE GROUND, BUT BECAUSE THE GRADE GOES UP, IT, AND I'M THINKING ABOUT HOW IT LOOKS FROM THE BRIDGE AND ALL.
SO IT ACTUALLY IS HIGHER BECAUSE OF THE GRADE GOING UP.
THIS IS FROM THE FLOOR TO THE TOP.
IT WILL LOOK EVEN HIGHER THAN THE MEASUREMENT OF THE TWO HOUSES NEXT TO, EXCEPT THAT ON 40 THERE IS NO GRADE INCREASE.
THERE WAS 17, I DIDN'T THINK ANY GRADE ISSUE.
THE ONES THAT ARE NORTH OF 40 ARE LOWER GRADE THOUGH? NO, HIGHER GRADE.
OH, THEY'RE, OH, IT'S GOING DOWN.
SO YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE PICTURE SHE'S DISPLAYING NOW.
YEAH, IT WAS, I SHOULD KNOW, I WANT PRETTY FLAT BECAUSE THEY'RE ACCESSING THE OTHER TWO FROM BLACKSTONE.
THIS ONE'S HOUSE SITS KIND OF DOWN, DOWN INTO THAT VALLEY AND THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO ACCESS.
BUT IT'S A POINT THAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO WAS THAT THE ADDITION IS HIGHER, IS GOING TO BE, UH, APPEARS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND THAT AFFECTS, IN MY OPINION, THE MASSING ISSUE.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION.
AND SARAH, YOU HAD THAT PICTURE SHOWING THE THREE NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
CAN YOU FLIP TO THAT? AND SARAH, YOU THINK YOU, YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE THOSE TO SCALE B***H, RIGHT? YOU'RE TRYING TO MOVE THE PICTURE AROUND TO GIVE A RELATIVE VIEW.
I, I CANNOT PROMISE THAT IT'S EXACTLY ACCURATE BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE.
ON THIS PICTURE, I KNOW IT'S, IT'S APPROXIMATE, BUT 40 EAST BRIDGE STREET SITS AT A HIGHER ELEVATION THAN 17 AND 27.
THAT'S WHAT THIS PICTURE SHOWS? OR IS THAT NOT NO, IT IS APPROXIMATELY THE SAME.
AND WHAT I USED WAS THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION, WHICH I HAD TO GUESS AT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE OF ALL WE HAVE ARE THE TOPO MM-HMM
SO IF IT'S APPROXIMATELY THE SAME
[01:20:01]
RIGHT, EXACTLY.AND THE ROOF'S HEIGHTS, I THINK THE GRAY LOWER GRAY SHADED AREA IS THE GROUND LEVEL.
SO THAT COULD ALMOST BE ELIMINATED.
I MEAN, YOU KIND OF GET TO IGNORE ON THOSE TWO, THAT GRAY BAR LOOK AT THE FLOOR.
WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT IS THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION, WHICH IS FLOOR LEVEL.
SHE TRYING THE TOP OF THE PORCHES.
YEAH, THE FLOOR IS THE, THE BASELINE.
SO IF YOU LOOK FLOOR, EVEN THEN HOW THOSE HAVE, RIGHT.
SO THE HEIGHT BASE, THE HEIGHT BASICALLY MEASURED FROM THE FOUNDATION OR THE FLOOR OF THE PORCHES TO THE TOP OF THE ROOF.
AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS UNDERSTANDING IT TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER AT 26.8 INCHES, 26 FEET, EIGHT INCHES.
THE COMPARISON WAS DONE AT FINISH FLOOR LEVEL, WHICH IS THE HEIGHT OF THE PORCHES.
I WANNA BE VERY CLEAR THAT THIS, AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A SURVEY, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT, UM, CAN BE TAKEN AS GOSPEL TRUTH.
WHERE WE MEASURE BUILDING HEIGHT FROM IS THE ACTUAL GROUND.
I ONLY HAD TO USE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE INFORMATION THAT I HAD.
IS YOUR RELATIVE INDICATION THAT THAT HEIGHT OF THAT ROOF WILL LOOK LIKE IT WILL BE HIGHER? WELL, EXCEPT THAT WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE TO THE NAKED EYE OR THE UNEDUCATED EYE IS NOT BASED ON WHERE THE GROUND IS OR WHERE THE FLOOR IS.
SO IF 17 AND 27 SIT LOWER MM-HMM,
IF 40 SITS LOWER THAN 17 AND 27, THEN THEY COULD HAVE AN ASTRONOMICALLY HIGH ROOF AND IT WOULDN'T LOOK THAT HIGH.
THE FRONT OF THE HOUSES ARE ALL AT A APPROXIMATELY THE SAME, THE SAME ELEVATION BASED ON DUB DISCOVERY.
AND THEN THEY'RE FLAT AND THE OTHER ONES ARE GOING UP.
NOW HAVING OVERANALYZED ROOF LINES
SO IF, UH, IF, IF YOU WANNA MAKE, IF YOU GET OR NAME AND UH, YOUR ADDRESS.
UH, HOME ADDRESS IS 4 3 8 9 HUNTERS BEND, POWELL, OHIO 4 3 0 6 5.
SO FROM, OKAY, YOU'VE STARTED TO HEAR WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE WE'RE THINKING ABOUT UP HERE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY, ANY, UM, PRESENTATION YOU WANNA GIVE YOU JUST WANNA GIVE SOME BACKGROUND? 'CAUSE YOU, THIS IS CERTAINLY THE SECOND TIME WE'VE MET AND CERTAINLY I THINK YOU'VE MADE SOME STEPS, UH, TO WHAT WE, UH, ASKED FOR ON THE LA, UH, THE LAST TIME.
UM, AND I'M, MY ARCHITECT IS A NORTHERN MICHIGAN RESIDENT, SO I'M KIND OF COMMUNICATING WITH HIM SLOWLY BUT SURELY HERE.
UM, ONE THING, THE STONE IS ACTUALLY WHAT WE WOULD PREFER FOR THE FOUNDATION ALL THE WAY AROUND.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT LOOKED LIKE BRICKS IN SOME OF HIS, I THINK HE, HE, UH, CALLED OUT LIMESTONE, BUT YEAH, THE, THE LESS BRICK THE BETTER IN OUR OPINION.
SO KIND OF TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE MORE LIKE THE HISTORIC, UH, FOUNDATION.
I THINK YOU HAD ASKED TOO, AND I, I NOTICED WE ABORTED THE CHIMNEY IDEA, SO THE HYPHEN DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT WOULD STICK.
WE WERE GONNA HAVE A CHIMNEY IN THE HYPHEN THAT WOULD'VE BEEN NOTICEABLE FROM WHAT IS NOW THE FRONT RIVERVIEW.
UM, SO I THINK MAYBE IF YOU JUST THINK ABOUT, IF YOU PUT THE QUESTIONS UP A LITTLE BIT, MAYBE TALK, I MEAN THAT'LL HELP MAYBE FRAME YOUR, JUST SO WE DON'T JUMP AROUND TOO MUCH JUST TO TRY TO, BECAUSE CERTAINLY I THINK SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT, THAT THAT STAFF WILL ASK US IN.
BUT, UM, UH, I MEAN CERTAINLY I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LONG CONVERSATION ABOUT IS, IS MASS AND FORM AND HOW IT SITS ON THE LOT.
AND I THINK AS THE STAFF HAS COME UP, UH, CERTAINLY ROOF LINES AND OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ENSURE ARE SENSITIVE TO THE, THE RIVERVIEW TO THE 1 61 TO BLACKSMITH.
UM, AND JUST KIND OF MAYBE SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT THE STAFF MADE IN THE REPORT FOR YOU.
I MEAN, HOW DO YOU SEE THAT, HOW DO YOU THINK THAT, UH, THE REAR TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE? I FEEL LIKE WE'RE KIND OF STUCK BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, MAKING IT LOOK LIKE A SECONDARY, YOU KNOW, NOT A SUBORDINATE STRUCTURE, BUT, AND NOT DRESS IT UP TOO MUCH IS KIND OF AT ODDS WITH, WELL THE, THE BACK LOOKS KIND OF BORING AND FLAT NOW.
I MEAN, WE'D DEFINITELY BE OPEN TO DRESSING UP THAT BACK.
I'D LOVE SUGGESTIONS, YOU KNOW, IS IT DORMERS ON THE ROOF? IS IT PULLING THAT PATIO OR KIND OF AWNING ALL THE WAY ACROSS TO BREAK IT
[01:25:01]
UP A LITTLE BIT? IT, IT'S JUST SO FUNKY HOW YOU LOOK AT THAT LOT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE LIKE WALKING ON THE ALLEY.IT'S KIND OF DOWN IN A FISHBOWL.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU CAN MAKE THIS BEAUTIFUL STUFF IN THE FIRST THREE OR FOUR FEET OR EIGHT FEET, BUT IT'S, YOU'RE NOT EVEN REALLY GONNA SEE IT, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE IN A CAR DRIVING BY.
UM, SO WE'RE OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS ON THAT.
UM, IDEALLY LIKE, THIS IS WHERE I'M GONNA RETIRE HOPEFULLY.
SO THE, YOU KNOW, DROPPING, IF WE'RE GONNA KEEP THE CEILING HEIGHTS, WHICH ARE I THINK NINE ON EACH FLOOR, DROPPING THE ADDITION, YOU KNOW, TWO FEET OR THREE FEET TO TRY TO KIND OF FIT IT IN THERE AND PULL THE ROOF LINE DOWN.
I DON'T WANNA HAVE STEPS IN THIS HOUSE REALLY TO GET TO THE FRONT.
AND THE FRONT'S GONNA END UP JUST BEING AN OPEN, UM, WE'RE GETTING RID OF THE SECOND FLOOR COMPLETELY.
SO, UM, OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS ON THAT TOO AS FAR AS, I MEAN, WE COULD GIVE UP MAYBE A FOOT AND STILL MAKE THE INTERIOR LAYOUT WORK TO SOME DEGREE.
I MEAN, I, I DEFINITELY THINK THAT, THAT YOU HAD TALKED ABOUT THIS TOO.
THE, THE DRIVEWAY IS TO, TO GET IT AROUND TO THE BACK JUST TAKES UP A LOT OF THAT LOT COVERAGE RATIO.
BUT WHAT ELSE CAN I HELP ADD? I DON'T, I I'M WHERE YOU THINK YOU CAN ADDRESS THE POINT.
'CAUSE THEN WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION HERE AND WE'LL TRY TO COME UP AND WE'LL KIND OF DISCUSS THIS AND YOU CAN HEAR KIND OF HOW THE BOARD VIEWS, UH, THE, WHAT YOU HAVE AS PROPOSED AND, AND WHERE WE THINK IT EITHER MEETS OR DOESN'T MEET.
I THINK IT WAS AT THE A DU ORIGINALLY IT WAS GOING TO BE, THAT'S NOW THE MASTER BEDROOM BEHIND THE GARAGE.
I THINK THAT ORIGINALLY WAS GOING TO BE LIKE AN A DU OR AN ADDITION, BUT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S THE MASTER BEDROOM RIGHT BEHIND THE GARAGE.
UM, ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE ADDITION.
THE YEAH, YEAH, THE BACK LEFT CORNER I GUESS.
SO WHAT DROVE THE SIZE OF THE MASTER BEDROOM? WAS IT BECAUSE YOU WANTED A THREE CAR GARAGE OR BECAUSE YOU HAD A THREE CAR GARAGE? IT, I MEAN, IT'S LIKE THE CHICKEN AND THE EGG, WHICH WHAT DROVE THE SIZE OF THE GARAGE OR WHAT DROVE THE SIZE OF THE MASTER BEDROOM? I MEAN IT'S, I THINK IT'S MORE ABOUT THE SECOND STORY.
MY WIFE LOVES HAVING COMPANY LOVE, WOULD LOVE OUR KIDS TO COME HOME ALL THE TIME.
SO THE HAVING THREE EXTRA BEDROOMS UPSTAIRS WAS IDEAL OR I THINK FOUR.
UM, I JUST LIKE CARS IS ANOTHER PART OF IT.
AND THAT'S BEING HONEST, IT ALL KIND OF FIT TOGETHER.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF IF WE, IF WE HAD TO GO TO TWO AND A HALF, I DON'T THINK IT'D BE THE END OF THE WORLD THAT WE DID A SAME JUST LIVING AREA WISE TOO, BECAUSE THE FRONT IS LOSING A WHOLE HALF OF ITS SQUARE FOOTAGE WITH THE SECOND FLOOR GOING AWAY.
UM, YEAH, MOSTLY JUST TO MAKE IT FUNCTION.
AND MAYBE JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION FOR ME, JUST SO, AND, UH, I DON'T REMEMBER IF MS. SARAH FROM THAT, FROM ON YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO RESTORE THE EXISTING, UH, FACADE OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING.
SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THE LAP, BUT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THE DROP.
I FORGET WHAT KIND OF THE TOP WAS SOME SORT, THERE'S SCALLOP SHAPES, SCALLOP SHS, AND THEN, UH, YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO THE LAP SIDING.
THE LAP SIDING WE SAID IS NOT, WAS NOT ORIGINAL.
IS THAT WHAT WE THINK? OR THE LAP SIDING'S ORIGINAL UNDERNEATH SOME MODERN, IT COULD BE ASBESTOS SHINGLES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND YOU'RE PLANNING ON TRYING, TRYING TO MAKE THE FRONT LOOK AS MUCH, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY WE'RE, WE'RE MAKING THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, SO IT HAS TO CHANGE TO SOME DEGREE AND I THINK, UM, AS MUCH OF IT AS WE CAN RESTORE THE BETTER.
AND IT'S DEFINITELY GONNA BE A DIFFERENT COLOR THAN ANYTHING THAT'S AN ADDITION.
UM, THE ROOF LINE, I KNOW THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP A COUPLE TIMES WITH LIKE THE, THE FLAT-ISH ROOF ABOVE THE FRONT PATIO.
UM, REALLY JUST, I MEAN THE, THE MORE PITCH WE HAVE THERE, THE MORE THAT FRONT WHAT IS NOW THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS BEING HIDDEN WAS KIND OF THE MOTIVATION THERE.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE QUESTIONS? WE START DISCUSSING THINGS.
SO I MEAN NOW MAYBE IF EVERYBODY'S AGREEING, MAYBE WE'LL START TO GO DOWN THE QUESTIONS AND TRY TO SORT THROUGH WHAT, WHERE DO WE THINK WE ARE? SO, UH, IF WE JUST START AT THE TOP.
SO HOW, HOW DO WE FEEL ABOUT LOT COVERAGE? WE SETBACK HEIGHT WAIVERS? SO MAYBE IF WE JUST START ONE AT A TIME.
HOW, I MEAN FROM A LOT COVERAGE STANDPOINT, UH, IT'S GONNA REQUIRE AN 8% WAIVERS, I THINK IS WHAT IT SAID.
SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHICH IS IN LINE WITH WHAT WE DID ON THE OTHER PROPERTIES AS, AS I RECALL.
YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY HAVE SUCH A LONG DRIVEWAY.
AND WE ALREADY KNEW THERE WAS GONNA BE A SETBACK ISSUE, WHICH WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER TWO PROPERTIES.
SO I THINK ONE, I THINK FROM THAT STANDPOINT, UH, REAR YARD IT WAS THEN THE SECOND ONE WAS REAR YARD, I THINK ON THAT ONE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, DO WE WANNA TALK ABOUT THE HEIGHT WAIVER? UH, WELL, WE'LL COME TO, I WAS JUST GONNA DO 'EM IN ORDER, BUT YEAH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT HEIGHT NOW, BUT, UH, WELL DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THE REAR SETBACK? I WAS GONNA JUST DO 'EM IN THE ORDER THAT YOU HAD THEN.
I WAS JUST DOING 'EM IN ORDER.
SO I WAS JUST DOING 'EM ON, ON THE
[01:30:01]
REAR SETBACK.BUT DOES ANYBODY HAVE AN ISSUE? KIND OF, BUT BEING IF IT'S COMMON TO, WE CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER TWO PROPERLY ON, SO YEAH, WE'VE ALREADY, AND THAT'S HOW WE DECIDED THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER ONE.
THINK WE'RE GOOD ON THAT ONE? YEP.
HEIGHT I THINK WAS THE NEXT ONE.
SO HEIGHT, HOW DO WE FEEL ABOUT HEIGHT? SARAH, CAN YOU BRING UP THAT, UM, DRAWING WITH THE, WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE, THE RIVER RIVERVIEW RIVERVIEW DRIVE, UM, ELEVATION.
AND SO, UM, I MEAN I APPRECIATE, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE THIS HOUSE AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S THE SIZE AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, BUT IT, THAT BACK AND THE WAY THAT THE, UM, THE PITCH SHOWS, IT JUST, IT KIND OF OVERPOWERS THE HOUSE AND THE CHARACTER OF IT, I GUESS.
BUT I'M TRYING TO THINK WHAT WOULD, CAN WE SHOW THE, UM, BACK VIEW THE ONE FROM BLACKSTONE
I MEANT THE ONE THAT SHOWED JUST OUR, HIS HOUSE NOT IN COMPARISON.
WELL, I, I COULD TALK ABOUT IT I GUESS IN COMPARISON, BUT YES.
SO I THINK ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS THIS, YOU HAVE THESE, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOW THE WINDOWS HERE ON THE, UH, BACKSIDE OF THE BEDROOMS THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR THAT ADDITION SECOND FLOOR.
BUT IF I CAN ASK, WHY DO YOU HAVE THE, UH, ROOF SO MASSIVE THERE ABOVE THE WINDOWS? IT, TO ME THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE BLACK STANDING METAL ROOF IS REALLY GOING TO BE THE FEATURE.
THAT REQUIRED BY THE ROOF PITCH REQUIREMENTS.
NO, THERE'S A LOT MORE ROOM TO, UH, MAKE A FLATTER ROOF AND HUNKER THAT DOWN.
I MEAN, IF WE START TO THINK ABOUT HEIGHT, I MEAN WE CAN TRY TO COME BACK.
I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE JUST, I THINK WE'RE THINKING THAT WE, WE, WE HAVE SOME CHALLENGES WITH HEIGHT.
AND SO MY, MY POINT WAS, OR ASKING YOU IS THAT, COULD YOU, COULD YOU SEE A CONCEPT THAT WOULD MAYBE BRING THAT HEIGHT DOWN SO THAT IT'S NOT SO OVERPOWERING BOTH FROM THE FRONT OF THE OLD HOUSE AND FROM THE VIEWS AROUND? I, I REALIZE YOU ARE IN A CHALLENGE.
YOU ACCURATELY DESCRIBED IT LIKE A FISHBOWL.
YOU'RE DOWN IN THE GULLY THERE.
BUT I, IT JUST, I THINK THAT ALMOST IS TAKING AWAY FROM THE ENTIRE HOUSE THE WAY THAT ROOF LINE LOOKS.
AND I, IF IT WERE LOWER AND MAYBE MORE PERHAPS GABLED, UH, IT WOULD PROVIDE MORE INTEREST.
SO I THINK, I THINK JUST CONSENSUS WISE, THE MAP IS THAT WE THINK THAT THE HEIGHT, CERTAINLY A HEIGHT WAIVER IS GONNA BE, COULD BE NEEDED.
BUT I THINK WE, WE SEE THAT AS A PROBLEM, AT LEAST RIGHT NOW.
'CAUSE I THINK AS EVERYBODY'S SAYING IT, YOU'RE GONNA SEE IT FROM MULTIPLE ANGLES AND IT REALLY DO NOT THINK THAT IF WE, IF THE LOWER IT GETS, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY IF, IF THE BACK IS THE REAL CONCERN HERE AS YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN BRIDGE STREET OR WALKING ON BLACKSMITH, WHATEVER ISN'T, I MEAN IF WE LOWER IT, ALL YOU'LL SEE IS A ROOF BECAUSE OF WHERE THIS, I MEAN YOU CAN'T SEE THIS, UM, RETAINING WALL THERE, BUT NOBODY WILL SEE THIS UNLESS THEY'RE IN MY BACKYARD.
IF YOU DROP IT, IT'S ALL RUDE BECAUSE YOU'RE GONNA SEE IT FROM 1 61 IN OTHER AREAS.
I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT DOWN THERE ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
YEAH, NO, I MEAN UP ABOVE, I MEAN ON THE, SOME MORE INTEREST IN THE, TO BREAK UP THE MASSING ON THE SECOND OH, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
I, IT SEEMED LIKE DORMERS WERE KIND OF FROWNED UPON THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH THE CITY.
I MEAN I, THE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BACK OF THE OTHER TWO, IT LOOKED LIKE SOME DORMERS WERE POPPING OUT.
UM, OR LIKE THOSE WINDOWS THAT ARE KIND OF UP
[01:35:01]
IN THE MIDDLE ONE, WE'D BE OPEN TO BOTH OF THOSE.I THINK WHERE WE'RE SEEING IT IS LOOKING EAST TO WEST FROM SOUTH RIVERVIEW AND HOW THAT ROOF GOES OVER THE EXISTING HOUSE, WHICH THEN KIND OF ISN'T REALLY SUBORDINATE AT THAT POINT.
SO I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT THAT EAST ELEVATION OR LOOKING EAST TO WEST.
UM, 'CAUSE I, I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT THAT'S NOT GONNA FIX THAT PERCEPTION OF WHAT THAT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE GOING EAST TO WEST.
YEAH, THAT'S PER, THAT'S THE PICTURE THERE.
I MEAN, I JUST, HOW DO YOU DO THAT AND KEEP A SECOND FLOOR? I THINK HERE IS WE'RE WORKING WITH THE ARCHITECT TO LOOK AT ROOF PITCH, HOW YOU MANAGE, UH, OTHER WEIGHT.
SO IS IT THE RAW HEIGHT OR IS IT PITCH? WHAT'S THAT? IS IT RAW HEIGHT OF THE IT'S HEIGHT.
AND THEN YOU CAN MANAGE IT BY, WITH YOUR ARCHITECT TO FIND OTHER WAYS TO, AND WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM WITH LOCK COVERAGE.
WELL, I KNOW ABOVE THE GARAGE IS YOU'VE GOT OR STRUCTURE SIZE, IS THERE LIKE FOUR BEDROOMS ABOVE THE GARAGE? YEAH.
THE, THE FLOOR PLAN IN THE DRAWING.
SO MAINLY THAT'S GONNA BE FAMILY ROOM, LIVING ROOM, COMMON AREA, COMMON AREAS.
ISN'T THE, UH, THERE'S STILL ALSO A BEDROOM ON THE FIRST FLOOR IN ADDITION TO THE MASTER SUITE.
THAT'S REALLY MORE OF AN OFFICE
BUT I MEAN, I THINK THOUGH WHAT YOU'RE DOING IN THAT MAIN HOUSE IS FINE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANNA PUT THE BEDROOMS, YOU WANT AN UPSTAIRS SO YOU HAVE EXTRA BEDROOMS AND THERE'S NOT, YOU DON'T REALLY DO THAT ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR.
I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM IS, OR THE CHALLENGE WOULD BE TO TRY TO MANAGE JUST THE MASS OF HOW THAT ROOF LOOKS.
APPEARS BEHIND THE HISTORIC, RIGHT BEHIND THAT HISTORIC, THE HISTORIC PIECE.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW FROM VARIOUS UH, VIEWS, IT'S TOO BROAD.
IT, IT OVERPOWERS THE HISTORIC KOMEN.
SO WE WANT IT IF THAT, IF THERE'S A WAY TO PLAY, IF THERE'S A WAY TO PLAY WITH THE PITCH OR THE ROOFING OR, OR, OR GABLE.
I THINK THAT IS WHAT I KNOW I WOULD LIKE TO SEE TO MAKE IT MORE COMPATIBLE.
SO YEAH, I FROM THE SAME THING BUT NOT, NOT ELIMINATED OR ANY WAY WHAT YOU YEAH.
SO YOU DRESS IT UP TO BREAK, NOT, NOT MAKE IT SO BROAD BEHIND THERE BASICALLY.
NO, IT'S, IT'S NOT THE BREATH, WELL IT'S THE BREATH ON THE REAR ELEVATION, BUT IT'S THE HEIGHT ON THE FRONT ELEVATION, THE EAST ELEVATION.
SO PLAYING WITH YOUR, HAVING YOUR ARCHITECT PLAY WITH DORMERS, DORMERS CAN GIVE YOU THAT HEIGHT WITHOUT THE ROOF HEIGHT.
YOU KNOW, YOU GET THE YEAH, I WOULD PREFER THAT ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, WITH DORMERS OR WITH PITCH.
SARAH JUST SAID THAT YOU'RE AT A, A STEEPER PITCH THAN THE CODE REQUIRES, SO YOU COULD FLATTEN IT A LITTLE BIT.
THERE'S A WAY TO GET IT, YOU KNOW, AND WE CAN'T DESIGN IT FOR YOU.
AND IT WOULD GIVE YOU THE INTEREST AND THE BREAKING UP ON THE REAR ELEVATION WHERE IT JUST LOOKS LIKE ONE SOLID WAREHOUSE AND YOU COULD OPEN THOSE CEILINGS UP IN THOSE BEDROOMS. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO THEY'RE NOT YEAH.
I SO YOU COULD OPEN THE CEILINGS UP AND MAKE 'EM STILL FEEL LIKE THE BEDROOMS ARE GOT SOME SIZE.
YOU JUST GOTTA BRING IN THE ROOF LIKE THIS AND THEN PUT SOME YEAH.
LIKE KEEP 'EM OPEN THE ROOF MORE OPEN.
AND WITH DORMERS YOU GET THE, THE HEIGHT EVEN THOUGH THE, THE ORIGINAL ROOF IS BELOW IT.
SO FIGURING THAT OUT NOT TO DESIGN THE HOUSE, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE QUESTION I CONCEPT.
SO, 'CAUSE I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THE LOT COVERAGE, THE REAR SETBACK, I THINK WE ALL CAN AGREE.
I THINK WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, SO WE GOTTA FIND A WAY TO FIND THE, I THINK ALL OF US ARE GONNA HAVE AN ISSUE WITH A HEIGHT WAFER.
IT COULD BE YOU COME AND YOU NEED, IT'S 24 FEET SARAH.
IS THAT WHAT THE HEIGHT IS? 24 FEET IS THE MAXIMUM AND THAT'S MEASURED TO THE MIDPOINT.
AND THE OTHER ONES MEET THAT AND THOSE, THE OTHER TWO, WHAT WAS 27 AT SARAH? WHAT WAS 27? THE HEIGHT YOU'RE AT? 26.
I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
OH, I THOUGHT YOU HAD ON THE OTHER, EVERYBODY MET THOSE HEIGHTS.
SO I WOULD SAY ON THAT SIDE, MM-HMM
'CAUSE I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING THEN IN TWO IS THAT WE DON'T FEEL THAT THE, THAT THE, THE NEW ADDITION IS SUBORDINATE TO THE, TO THE ORIGINAL BUILDING.
YOU CAN SEE THE, ON THE NORTH SIDE YOU SEE STRAIGHT THROUGH TO THE, TO THE BACK OVER THE, THE SECONDARY
[01:40:01]
PORCH FROM THE OTHER SIDE.IT'S REALLY MASSIVE IN THE BACK.
AND I THINK THERE'S WAYS TO BREAK THAT UP.
BUT I THINK, UH, I THINK WE ALL ARE LOOKING AT THAT, THAT, OKAY.
A COUPLE OF THINGS FROM A SUBORDINATE STANDPOINT, IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM ALL THREE ANGLES ON THE STREETS, IT'S, IT'S QUITE MASSIVE.
AND I THINK AS SARAH AND THE STAFF POINTED OUT, THE ROOF PITCHES ON ONE SIDE MAKE THAT THE UH, WHAT DO YOU CALL THAT? WHERE WE PUT THE PYRAMIDED KIND OF ROOF PITCHES IN BETWEEN THE, WHAT WOULD LOOK LIKE A GABLE L ADDS BULK TO THE WHOLE WHOLE THING.
SO I THINK IF YOU CAN TRY TO WORK AND YOU SEE THE PICTURES OF THE OTHER ONES, HOW THEY WERE TRYING TO SOFTEN WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM RIVERVIEW.
BUT THEN CERTAINLY, UH, BLACKSMITH EVENTUALLY BECOMES A MORE PEDESTRIAN AREA SO PEOPLE THERE'S GONNA BE A MUCH MORE TRAFFIC THROUGH THERE.
SO HAVING THAT, WHEN YOU SAY BACK, BACK MASS, BACK BULK SOMEHOW SOFTENED WITH LOOK MORE LIKE A HOUSE THAN A VARIETY OF WAYS THAT YOU COULD DO THAT.
SO I THINK THAT'S, UH, ANY QUE ANY MORE SUBORDINATE ON THAT SIDE? I THINK, I THINK THAT'S COVERED.
SO I THINK A LOT OF THINGS ON ROOF AND MASKS WE'RE THINKING ABOUT LOOKING INTO, UM, IT'S KIND OF A CRAWL.
I THINK IT'S A CRAWL SPACE IN THE ORIGINAL, LIKE TRYING TO GET THAT DOWN TO GRADE.
POSSIBLY I WOULD'VE TO EXCAVATE INSIDE.
BUT THAT COULD HELP WITH, I MEAN WE'D BE TO 24 8 AT THAT POINT PROBABLY.
I THINK THAT'S, WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT.
UH, CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION ABOUT GOING BACK TO LOCK COVERAGE? SO YOU DON'T KNOW FOR SURE SARAH, BUT YOU THINK THAT THE LOT COVERAGE IS INCLUDING THAT DRIVEWAY IS WHAT MIGHT BE CAUSING LOT COVERAGE TO BE HIGH? THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT TELLS US ON THE SUBMITTED MATERIALS, BUT THEY DID NOT BREAK DOWN, TO MY RECOLLECTION, DRIVEWAY VERSUS HOUSE.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE YET WITH THAT AMOUNT OF DETAIL AT AN INFORMAL, BUT CERTAINLY THAT WOULD BE A PLACE TO LOOK.
AND SO I GUESS SINCE WE'RE GIVING FEEDBACK, IF THAT, HAVING THAT DRIVEWAY UP ALONG THE SIDE, I WOULD WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH ANY OF THAT, HOW IT LOOKS THAT WE GIVE HIM THAT KIND OF FEEDBACK.
NOW, IS THERE, I I MEAN I, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD, THE WAY YOU'VE DESIGNED THE HOUSE, YOU CAN'T REALLY COME FROM THE BACK AND WE, WE'VE GOT THE WALL.
WE DON'T WANNA REMOVE THE WALL.
I'M JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GIVING FEEDBACK ON THAT, IF THAT'S A CONCERN OR NOT.
ON WHAT THE LOT COVERAGE ON LOT COVERAGE.
IF THAT'S GONNA BE A CONCERN FOR ANYONE.
IF IT'S THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S CALLED.
I THOUGHT WE ALL SAID THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE A CONCERN WITH IT.
YEAH, I'M SORRY THAT WAS EARLIER.
YEAH, WE HAD BUT I DON'T IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN WITH IT THEN I DO.
I THOUGHT WE SAID THAT, BUT I WASN'T REALLY SURE.
AND SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY SO THAT HE HAD THE DIRECTION, IF THE WHOLE LOT COVERAGE IS DRIVEN BY THE FACT THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS NECESSITATED TO BE SO LONG, I DON'T THINK THE WAIVER BECOMES A PROBLEM ON THAT FOR LOT COVERAGE IN MY OPINION.
AND THERE'S REALLY NO WAY TO GET AROUND THAT.
YOU, YOU ARE GONNA HAVE THE LONG DRIVEWAY BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE HOUSE SITS.
KEEPING IT AS KEEPING THE HISTORIC PART AS YOU KNOW, UNLESS YOU'RE GONNA PUT THE GARAGE UP FRONT AND THAT WOULD JUST, YOU CAN'T DO THAT RUIN.
SO I, I APPRECIATE THAT PART OF IT.
THAT DOESN'T CONCERN ME, BUT JUST MAKING THE MASSING A LITTLE MORE, SARAH, CAN YOU REDUCED A LITTLE REDUCED AND I THINK THAT OPPORTUNITY IS IN THE HEIGHT.
I THINK IT'S IN THE HEIGHT, IN THE, IN THE ROOF PITCHES.
AND I THINK THERE'S A FEW THINGS IN THERE THAT I THINK YOUR OKAY.
DETECT, I THINK CAN FIND A WAY TO, UH, TO MANAGE, UM, THE FORM ON THE CODE CODING GUIDELINES.
I THINK WE'VE TALKED A BIT ABOUT THAT.
UM, YEAH, I AGREE WITH SARAH SYNOPSIS OF STAFF'S CONCERNS ABOUT, IF THIS IS THE QUESTION THAT YOU'RE GETTING AT IS THE WEIRD MORE MODERN ROOF LINES IN THERE, THE, THE PYRAMID ROOF AT SOME PLACES AND, AND THAT ALSO BLOCK THE, OR NOT BLOCK, BUT LESSEN THAT L SHAPE THAT YOU'RE TRYING THAT STAFF WOULD LIKE TO SEE IMITATED.
UM, SO IF YOU CAN BRING IT DOWN TO MORE TRADITIONAL ROOF LINES AND HAVE LESS BREAKUPS, I, I WOULD PREFER THAT.
I THINK IT WAS MORE MATT TRYING TO SOMEWHAT MIMIC THE FRONT.
OBVIOUSLY IT JUST BECOMES TOO NOTICEABLE.
BUT THAT, THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE SOMETHING HARD TO PLAY.
THERE'S TOO MUCH IN THE, THE NEWS SECTION, UM, ON THE CODE AND THE ONLY ONE OTHER ONE, I MEAN WE HAVE THE THREE CAR GARAGE THAT WILL REQUIRE A WAIVER ALSO.
I THINK SARAH, IF WE HA IF WE WILL THAT NOT OR WILL THAT
[01:45:01]
THE LANGUAGE IN THE CODE IS THAT TWO, TWO VEHICLES FOR THE GARAGE ARE REQUIRED UNLESS APPROVED BY THE BOARD.SO IT'S NOT, WE COULD APPROVE THAT.
SO THE BOARD HAS THE ABILITY WITHOUT A WAIVER TO APPROVE THREE OR FOUR CARS.
IN FACT, ONE 12 SOUTH RIVERVIEW HAS THE FOUR CAR GARAGE.
BUT IT ONLY HAD ONE BUT IT WAS SHAPED DIFFERENTLY, RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT.
SO MAYBE JUST TO GIVE SOME FEEDBACK, WHAT DO PEOPLE THINK ABOUT GARAGES? 'CAUSE THIS, THIS MAKES IT, THIS WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE ON, UH, HOW THEY DESIGN THE HOUSE AS A, AS A, AS A COAT.
'CAUSE ESPECIALLY IF YOU LOOK AT THE MASTER BEDROOM AND THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT, IT JUST KIND OF MAKES SENSE.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS TALKING IS CHICKEN OR THE EGG, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE YOU'RE GONNA HAVE EVERYTHING YOU NEED IN THAT MASTER BED BATHROOM.
AND THE GARAGE JUST NATURALLY FITS THAT FORM SO WELL.
AND ALSO SINCE IT DOESN'T FACE ON EITHER STREET, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
IF IT WERE THREE CAR GARAGE FACING BLACK MYTH OR FACING RIVERVIEW, I MIGHT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
BUT SINCE IT'S A SIDE LOAD GARAGE, IT'S NOT AS OKAY.
THERE'S SOME FEEDBACK THERE THAT IF THREE CARS COULD BE OKAY WITH THE BOARD, I THINK THERE IS A STAFF COMMENT THAT THAT UH, NORTH ELEVATION NEEDS TO BE SOFTENED A LITTLE BIT.
YOU HAVE BIG GARAGE DOORS, YOU HAVE A, THEN A BIG WALL, I THINK WITH LIMITED WINDOWS.
I THINK AGAIN, AS WE TALK ABOUT MASSING, YOU END UP WITH A BIG MASS ON THE NORTH SIDE ALSO THAT YOU COULD SOFTEN WITH OTHER, OTHER, OTHER MEANS.
BREAK THE DOORS UP A LITTLE MORE.
PUT ADD WINDOWS COULD BE DORMERS.
IT'S ON THE END OF THE L BUT I THINK THERE'S WAYS IN THERE, THERE ABOVE THE GARAGE, RIGHT? CORRECT.
'CAUSE THAT WHOLE WALL THEN ENDS UP BEING, OR THAT WHOLE UH, UH, NORTH SIDE ENDS UP BEING VERY, I WOULD SAY VERY, A PRETTY MASSIVE WALL THAT FACES YOUR NEIGHBOR THAT WE WANT TO TRY TO BREAK UP IN A WAY THAT, AND MORE WINDOWS IS A STEP IN THAT DIRECTION.
YOU'D SAY, I'M SORRY, MORE WINDOWS WOULD BE A STEP IN THAT SOFTENING WITHOUT TOO MANY WINDOWS.
IF YOU HEARD THE TALK THAT WE HAD BEFORE.
I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S, I SOMEONE THAT WAS IMPROVED, LOOKED LIKE IT HAD A TON OF WINDOWS ALREADY.
SO I THAT'S I'D RATHER HAVE MORE LIGHT.
BUT I THINK THERE'S ARCHITECTURAL RELIEF, RIGHT? YOU CAN CHANGE A BIT IF YOU THE ANGLES, THERE'S THINGS YOU CAN THINK YOU CAN DO INSIDE OF THAT YOU TRYING TO TRY.
I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE SURE YOU FIND A WAY TO SOFTEN THAT, THAT THAT WALL THAT THAT REALLY IS GONNA FACE YOUR NEIGHBOR.
IT IT CONNECTS WITH WHAT, WHAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO BE DOING IN THE BACK TOO.
AND WELL THE NEXT QUESTION IS THE ROOF PITCH WAIVERS ON THE NEW PORCHES.
THAT'S THE FRONT PORCH AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE AND THE REAR PORCH REAR.
OH, A LOT OF THAT WAS THE, THERE'S NOT A LOT TO THE, WHAT IS NOW THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE THE FRONT DOOR THERE AND HAVE SOME COVER OVER IT.
UH, WE WERE TRYING TO MINIMIZE HOW MUCH OF THE HOUSE WE'RE KIND OF COVERING UP THERE.
I'LL SAY THOSE ALMOST REPLICATE WHAT IS WHAT IS ON THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
SO IT BASICALLY LOOKS LIKE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, SO YEAH.
NO, I DON'T, I REQUIRE A WAIVER.
IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S THE ENTIRE SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
THAT'S I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH.
WE STAFF WITH, AS LONG AS THEY'RE KEPT MINIMAL.
AND I THINK HERE IF WE TRY TO, I THINK, I MEAN I THINK WE'RE HEARING THAT IF SOFTENING THE MASS REQUIRES SOME ROOF PITCHES THAT, THAT WE NEED TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND BETTER.
I THINK WE COULD BE OPEN ON SOME PORCHES AND THINGS THAT SOFTEN THE MASS WITH, WITH INTERESTING FEATURES.
THAT PUSH THE MASS FORWARD AND BACKWARD ALONG THE, ALONG THE STREETSCAPE LESS FLAT.
THERE COULD BE, THERE COULD BE THINGS IN THERE THAT I THINK WOULD BE INTERESTING.
AND THEN HOW YOU MANAGE THE WINDOWS WITH, UM, WITH DIFFERENT DIFFERENT LOOKS.
NOW IF WE DON'T, I HAVE SOMETHING UNDER OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.
I JUST WANNA UM, REITERATE WHAT STAFF SAID ABOUT THE SQUARE WINDOWS.
I THINK THOSE WERE IN THE FRONT.
THE RIVERVIEW SIDE SQUARE WINDOWS YEAH.
ARE NOT, UM, APPROPRIATE FOR THAT AREA AND THAT TIME PERIOD THEY JUST DIDN'T DO SQUARE AND IT LOOKS STRANGE.
WELL IT'S NOT A SECOND FLOOR EAST, IS IT THE EAST ELEVATION? YES, IT'S THE EAST ELEVATION.
IT'S THE, SO IF THOSE ARE, YOU KNOW, SAME, I MEAN, THERE'S NOT A HEIGHT WISE, THERE'S NOT A TON YOU COULD FIT IN THAT SCALLOPED AREA.
JUST GO WIDER WITH THEM OR I DON'T, UH, I I DON'T THINK A TRADITION A A HISTORIC WINDOW FITS WELL IN THAT SPACE.
I MEAN, AT LEAST HOW WE SEE IT.
SO IT, IT'S UM, IT'S KIND OF HARD WITH, I MEAN THIS WAS THE, IF YOU COULD SHOW THE EXISTING WHAT IS THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, I MEAN IT'S, THERE'S
[01:50:01]
NO WINDOWS ON THE SIDE.WELL, I'M JUST SAYING WE WE'RE MAKING THE SIDE, THE FRONT, IT KIND OF, THEY HAVE ANY LIGHT COMING.
I, I WOULD SAY I WOULD AGREE WITH HIM.
I MEAN,
AND SO I THINK WE'VE GOT TO ALLOW, ALLOW IT TO BE MADE TO LOOK LIKE A FRONT AND THERE ISN'T A LOT OF SPACE.
AND THE SCALLOP, HE'S RIGHT ABOUT THAT.
AND SO LONGER WINDOWS WOULD NOT LOOK APPROPRIATE, RIGHT? NO.
I MEAN, WIDER WINDOWS WOULD NOT LOOK APPROPRIATE.
AND WHILE I AGREE IT'S NOT OPTIMAL.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IF WE'RE FORCING THE FRONT TO BE THE, THE SIDE TO BE THE FRONT, NOW WE HAVE TO, I THINK YOU HAVE, WE HAVE TO LET THAT HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE'LL BE NO LIGHT AND IT WON'T LOOK LIKE A FRONT EITHER WITHOUT WINDOWS.
BUT THE EXISTING OR THE FIRST FLOOR WINDOWS COULD BE, I MEAN, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO KEEP THEM EXACTLY AS THEY ARE ANYWAY BECAUSE YOU'RE ADDING THE DOOR AND THE PORCH THERE.
SO THEY COULD BE MORE AND TALLER, WIDER.
I DON'T, I, IN MY OPINION, I DON'T THINK THE THE PORTAL TYPE WINDOWS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE, FOR THE DISTRICT.
BUT MAKING THE WINDOWS THAT EXIST IN THOSE AREAS THAT THEY EXIST LARGER MIGHT BE OKAY.
EXCEPT IT, AND I THINK THERE'S LIMITATIONS WITH THE CODE WITH SIZE.
AND THEN IF YOU DO THAT CODE ALREADY, YOU'RE NOW TAKING AWAY FROM WHATEVER WAS LEFT OF THIS HISTORIC HOUSE.
YOU KNOW, THE WINDOWS ARE REALLY, SO I THINK THE, MAYBE YOU NEED TO GO BACK SIDING AND THAT'S, I WOULD SAY HERE THERE'S PROBABLY, THERE'S SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.
'CAUSE YOU'RE GONNA, YOU'RE GONNA INTERRUPT THE FABRIC OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.
SO I THINK YOU NEED TO GO BACK AND LOOK.
'CAUSE NOW YOU DON'T HAVE A, THERE'S NO FLOOR UP THERE.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE OPENING THE WHOLE INSIDE.
SO I THINK, UM, AS YOU SAY, YOU'RE GONNA ADD THE PORCH ON THE FRONT, WHICH SHOULD BE SENSITIVE TO WHAT THE PAST LOOKED LIKE, ADDING THE WINDOWS.
AND YOU COME BACK TO THE ARCHITECT AND SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
'CAUSE I THINK I, I SEE THE POINT OF THE LIGHT, BUT I THINK IF WE INTER INTERVENE MORE ONTO THE FRONT, THEN WE REALLY ARE, WE'RE REALLY MM-HMM.
SO COULD WE PUT, IS THAT, CAN, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT LOOKS AT IT FROM NORTH TOWARDS THE BRIDGE? DOES I, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THAT WINDOW IS ON THE TOP FLOOR.
I'M JUST FIGURING OUT OTHER WAYS TO TRY TO GET LIGHT INTO THAT AREA.
YEAH, I GOT A PICTURE OF IT, BUT I MEAN, FOR ME, WE'RE, WE, WE'RE NOT GONNA DESIGN IT HERE FOR YOU, BUT I THINK TAKE THE, TAKE THE COME, THERE IS A WINDOW IN THE GI THINK, RIGHT? YEAH.
I I DON'T KNOW IF I UNDERSTAND THE COMMENT COMPLETELY.
IS IT NO WINDOWS UP THERE BECAUSE IT SEEMS CONFLICTING FROM A FEW MEMBERS.
NO, THERE IS A WINDOW UP THERE, RIGHT? NO, HE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE RIVERVIEW SIDE.
DO WE WANT WINDOWS AT ALL? DO WE WANT SQUARE WINDOWS? I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WANT TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH.
I JUST NO, BUT I THINK THEY NEED TO BE WITH, IF YOU'RE WORKING WITH STAFF, THEY NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO THE TIME TO, TO WHAT A HISTORIC WINDOW WOULD LOOK LIKE.
AND I HAVE TO ADMIT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
STAFF CAN CERTAINLY HELP YOU, YOUR ARCHITECT AND STAFF CAN HELP YOU FIGURE OUT KIND OF WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS A HISTORIC CONTEXT THAT COULD FIT IN THERE.
BECAUSE I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT STYLE WINDOW PROBABLY DOES NOT THAT'S FINE.
SO, SO YOU NEED TO COME BACK AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
UM, I WONDER WHAT COULD FIT IN THERE.
AND THEN THE LAST ONE ON THE PORCH, AND THEN I THINK THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT THE PORCH DETAILING THAT THE, THE, THE PORCH YOU HAVE ON THERE, AT LEAST IN THE RENDERING LOOKS A BIT, UH, UNDER, UH, DOESN'T LOOK AS ROBUST AS THE ONE ON THE OTHER SIDE.
SO I THINK THERE WAS SOME THINGS ABOUT THE SPINDLES AND A FEW THINGS ON THE PORCH.
THE NEW, THE NEW PORCH YOU'RE GONNA PUT ON THE FRONT.
DO WE SO YOU WANT IT TO MATCH WHAT'S, NO, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO TELL BECAUSE IT'S CLOSED IN.
NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE NEW PORCH, THE NEW FRONT ENTRANCE.
THE NEW PORCH IS NOT AS SUBSTANTIAL AS THE OLD FRONT PORCH.
I THINK THE COMMENT WAS, IT DOESN'T LOOK, IT, IT, IT, UH, IT LOOKS, UH, UH, THE SPINDLES AND A FEW OTHER THINGS LOOK, UH, UNDERSIZED, LET'S SAY FOR WHAT A FRONT PORCH TO A HISTORIC BUILDING WOULD LOOK LIKE.
I, I THOUGHT THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HEAD TO MINIMIZE IT.
BUT YEAH, I MEAN IF IT NEEDS TO BE BULKED UP WITH WALLS ON THE, I DON'T THINK IT'S WALLS.
IT'S TRYING TO SAY WHAT DO THE COLUMNS LOOK LIKE AND WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE WHEN YOU COME UP TO IT.
I THINK IT'S MORE ON THE, ON THE, ON THE AESTHETIC PART OF THAT.
AND BECAUSE THIS IS PART OF THE, WHAT WILL BE THE HISTORIC PORTION, IT NEEDS TO LOOK A LITTLE MORE LIKE THE, IT NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE, IT NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE THE FRONT.
SO IT NEEDS TO LOOK, IT NEEDS TO MAKE A STATEMENT THAT THIS IS THE FRONT AND THIS IS YEAH.
THAT'S, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
[01:55:02]
UH, CODING GUIDELINE.SARAH, DID WE MISS ANY OF YOUR COMMENTS IN THERE? I I, I CHECKED OFF ALL, ALL OF MY, UH, ALL THE ONES THAT I HAD ON MY LIST HERE FROM THE, FROM THE CODING GUIDELINES.
ANY LAST ONE YOU HAD ON FROM THERE THAT WE MIGHT'VE MISSED THAT WE WENT THROUGH THERE? ANYTHING YOU, NO, I THINK, I THINK YOU'VE GOT EVERYTHING.
SO I THINK THEN WE BOARD, I THINK PITCH ROOF, PITCH WAIVERS.
I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE GOOD ON THAT ONE.
UH, AND ANYTHING ELSE FROM US THAT WE WANT TO TRY TO GIVE THE, THE OWNER SOME INSIGHT THAT HOW THEY, UH, CAN TRY TO MOVE FORWARD.
I KNOW YOUR ARCHITECT WAS, WAS HE ON THE PHONE WHILE WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS CONVERSATION? WE'RE TEXTING BACK AND FORTH.
WE, WE TALKED A LOT BEFOREHAND, BUT, OKAY.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, BUT HE'S WATCHING.
YOU KIND OF HAD A GOOD UNDER UNDERSTANDING.
THIS IS VIDEO RECORDED SO HE CAN OH, HE'S TEXTING ME ALL THROUGH THIS.
BUT LIKE I SAY, THESE ARE RECORDED SO HE CAN GO LOOK, WATCH THIS TAKE AND HE CAN WATCH IT ONLINE.
SO ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE WANT TO KIND OF TRY TO GIVE THE, GIVE THE APPLICANT AS A, AS SOME GUIDANCE HERE.
SARAH, DO YOU WANT US TO SUMMARIZE FOR, DO YOU WANT US TO TRY TO, DO YOU THINK WE SUMMARIZED IT AND DID, DID YOU GET A SUMMARY OF ALL THE THINGS WE SAID OR DO YOU WANT US TO I THINK I'VE GOT A GOOD, YOU GOT A, OKAY.
IT'S KIND OF BEAUTIFYING AND SOFTENING THE BACK FROM ALL ANGLES.
TRY TRYING WHAT WE CAN TO GET THE HEIGHT DOWN.
UM, I DID HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRIVY.
IT'S A LITTLE OFF, OFF TOPIC, BUT WHAT, WHAT CAN WE DO WITH THAT? I MEAN, DOES IT, I KNOW IT NEEDS TO BE RESTORED.
DO YOU KNOW, DO ALL THREE DOORS NEED TO BE THERE? LIKE WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE GOAL FOR THAT TO LOOK LIKE? CAN I TURN IT INTO A STORAGE SHED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER? I MEAN, AT LEAST MAKE IT FUNCTIONAL.
I, I DON'T, DON'T PLAN ON USING OUTHOUSE.
IF YOU WANNA USE THE OUTHOUSE, BUT I THINK WE WANNA RESTORE, WELL YOU HAVE A GORGEOUS BATHROOM IN THE HOUSE.
MAYBE YOU SHOULD JUST, I THINK WE WANNA TRY TO RESTORE IT TO WHAT IT WAS.
I MEAN, WHAT WE HAVE INSIDE OF IT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S THE, I HAVE TO ADMIT FROM A, I DON'T KNOW WHAT A CODE WOULD SAY ABOUT THAT.
UM, HOWEVER, WE'VE, UH, THE APPLICANT AND I HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE ON THE EXTERIOR, WE WANT IT TO LOOK THE WAY IT DID.
THE INTERIOR, AS WITH ANY HISTORIC STRUCTURE IN THE DISTRICT, THE OWNER CAN DO WITH AS THEY PLEASE.
SO IT CAN BE USED FOR STORAGE AS WE'VE CONFIRMED BEFORE.
SO IT NEEDS TO LOOK HISTORIC, BUT TO WHERE, YEAH, SPEAKING FOR THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY TOO, THAT'S CRITICAL US.
'CAUSE THAT ALSO IS IDENTIFIED AS ONE OF OUR ITEMS THAT WE LIKE TO HAVE PEOPLE GO FIND.
SO THE EXTERIOR'S REALLY OUR CONCERN THAT IT LOOKS, 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT GONNA GO IN AND USE THE RUBY.
SO SARAH AND MIKE, UM, SARAH, YOU USED THE PHRASING LOOK AS IT DID.
IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE THAT IT'S THE X EXTERIOR HAS CHANGED OVER THE YEARS? I'M NOT SURE THAT WE HAVE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF IT.
UM, I'M SURE WE COULD FIND THEM, BUT I YEAH, MAYBE THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY COULD HELP US AND A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, INVESTIGATIVE WORK WITH A, YOU KNOW, GENTLY WITH A CROWBAR COULD HELP DISCERN HAS IT BEEN COVERED? IS IT ORIGINAL? OKAY.
SO THAT'S ANOTHER THING TO WORK.
IT'S EASY TO WORK WITH YOUR ARCHITECT ON IS TRY TO DO SOME HISTORICAL RESEARCH.
BOTH LITERALLY DIGGING AND ALSO DIGGING IN THE ARCHIVES.
AND YOU CAN WORK WITH US AT THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
I THINK WE COVERED EVERYTHING BUT ONE, ONE THING I'LL JUST SAY IS, IS, IS LOOK IN THE GUIDELINE AGAIN.
THERE'S, THERE'S PICTURES IN THE GUIDE THAT SHOW A BIT, UH, WHAT ADDITIONS LOOK LIKE IN 4.12.
I THINK IT'S 4.12 IN THE GUIDELINE.
SO I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S THINGS INSIDE OF THE GUIDELINES THAT WILL HELP YOU.
UH, AS YOU SAY, WE'RE NOT, WHEN YOU SAID MAKE IT LOOK SOFTER AND PRETTIER, WE'RE TRYING, WE WANNA MAKE SURE YOU'RE FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINE.
AND INSIDE OF THAT IS HOW IT, HOW IT VERBALLY WILL LOOK INSIDE OF THAT.
SO REALLY AS YOU SAY, IT'S, IT'S ABOUT THE MASSING THE ROOF AND HOW THE MASSING LOOKS FROM ALL DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS AND THEN SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT ON THE, KIND OF, ON THE FORM.
OH, UM, I ASSUME, I MEAN NEXT STEP, ARE YOU THINKING THIS IS ANOTHER INFORMAL OR ARE WE FAR ENOUGH ALONG TO REALLY TRY TO SWING FOR IT? THAT'S UP TO YOU.
YOU CAN SUBMIT A MINOR PROJECT.
UH, IF YOU FEEL CONFIDENT, YOU CAN CERTAINLY COME BACK FOR ANOTHER INFORMAL IF YOU WISH.
AND TIMELINE WISE, COULD THOSE BOTH HAPPEN IN OCTOBER OR IS ONE FURTHER OUT THAN THE OTHER?
[02:00:02]
UH, THEY COULD BOTH POTENTIALLY HAPPEN IN OCTOBER.UM, IT DEPENDS ON WHEN YOU SUBMIT YOUR APPLICATION AND HOW COMPLETE IT IS AND WHAT THE COMMENTS ARE.
AND SARAH, I FORGOT TO ASK, WERE THERE PUBLIC COMMENTS? UH, LET ME JUST DOUBLE CHECK.
AND AS YOU SAY, AND IF YOU NEED TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER INFORMAL, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO MAKE SURE WE GET IT IN THE RIGHT PLACE.
ANY DISCUSSION POINTS? NO DISCUSSION POINTS, BUT A LOT OF
[COMMUNICATIONS]
COMMUNICATIONS.THE SEPTEMBER TRAINING, UM, WITH CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN POSTPONED AND THE NEW DATE IS TENTATIVELY SET FOR THE 16TH OF OCTOBER, WHICH COINCIDES WITH OUR ANNUAL SITE TOUR.
SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHICH IS IT GOING TO BE.
OF COURSE, CITY COUNCIL IS GONNA TRUMP OUR SITE TOUR.
UM, WE WILL LET YOU KNOW ONCE THAT DATE IS FIRMED UP, BUT I HOPE SINCE WE ALL AGREED TO THE 16TH OF OCTOBER FOR THE TOUR, IT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR EVERYBODY.
DO YOU KNOW TIMES? UH, WE DO NOT BEFORE.
BEFORE WAS AT 6:00 PM ON THE THIRD? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
CAN YOU THAT WITH ME? 'CAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANY, SORRY, I CAN YOU SHARE ALL THAT WITH ME BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANY OF THAT? OH, SURE.
AND WE WILL SEND OUT INFORMATION AS SOON AS WE HAVE IT CONFIRMED.
THE NEXT THING WE WANNA TALK ABOUT IS THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS ANALYSIS.
WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT AT THE WORK SESSION, THE JOINT WORK SESSION THE OTHER NIGHT.
UM, AS YOU HEARD, THAT IS UNDERWAY AT DIRECTION OF CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY MANAGER.
AND WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT A STAFF REPORT SURVEY IS GONNA BE COMING YOUR WAY TO SEE WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE LENGTH, THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION, TOO MUCH, TOO LITTLE.
DO YOU WANT MORE TABLES? DO YOU WANT MORE GRAPHICS? YOU KNOW, JUST TO KIND OF GET A SENSE FOR WHERE WE ARE.
AN IMPORTANT ITEM YOU WILL SEE ON YOUR CORNERSTONE.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL TRAINING THAT IS STATE MANDATED.
UM, THIS IS REGARDING FRAUD, SO EVERYBODY IS REQUIRED TO TAKE IT.
YES, IT'S ONLY 15 MINUTES LONG, BUT IT IS REQUIRED.
AND THEN A COUPLE OF PROJECT UPDATES.
81 WEST BRIDGE, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY CHURCH THAT RECENTLY GOT A FACADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT.
THEY ARE GOING TO REPAIR THEIR WINDOWS, NOT REPLACE, BUT REPAIR AND REPAIR THEIR HISTORIC LIGHTING SO THAT IT WORKS AGAIN.
SO YOU WILL SEE SOME MAINTENANCE ON THAT PROPERTY, BUT WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT IT'S ALL MAINTENANCE.
IT DOES NOT NEED TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD.
SO THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT PROPERTY.
AND, UM, FOR 17 NORTH RIVERVIEW, WE'VE FINALIZED ALL OF THE MATERIALS AS REQUIRED BY THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL.
SO WE JUST RECEIVED REVISED DRAWINGS TODAY, SO THAT SHOULD GET APPROVED AND ONTO BUILDING STANDARDS VERY QUICKLY.
DO WE WANNA RESET A TOUR DATE? LET'S WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE WORKSHOP COMES BACK AS.
UM, I'M A LITTLE, WE WILL ADJUST BASED ON THE WORKSHOP DATE.
UM, OUR OTHER OPTION WAS THE 30TH OF OCTOBER.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE CHOICE FROM THIS BOARD WAS TO GO WITH THE 16TH.
I'M A LITTLE RELUCTANT TO GET TOO FARTHER OUT 'CAUSE IT'S GONNA START GETTING DARK AND SICK.
WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SEE AS MUCH.
[02:05:01]
UM, LET'S WAIT AND SEE WHAT CITY COUNCIL AGREES TO, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU A HEADS UP.I GUESS SOMETHING WILL BE HAPPENING THAT NIGHT.
I GUESS MAYBE I WAS THINKING YOU WOULD MOVE IT UP TO THE THIRD WHERE WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE TRAINING.
THAT WAS SEPTEMBER, RIGHT? YEAH, WE'RE THAT'S NEXT WEEK.
WELL THAT'S LIKE NEXT WEDNESDAY THERE.
AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE A DRIVER OR A VAN BY THEN.
UM, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE TO, UM, MAYBE LATER IN SEPTEMBER WE MIGHT LOOK AT THAT AS AN OPTION.
I'M JUST GONNA HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT SOME, SOME SCHEDULING.
IF IT, IF IT'S GONNA BE LATER IN SEPTEMBER, START GETTING IT TOGETHER NOW BECAUSE OF ALL OF OUR SCHEDULES ARE GONNA, IF THEY'RE NOT ALREADY FILLED.
I JUST, I'M THINKING OF MY OWN SCHEDULE TOWARDS THE END OF SEPTEMBER.
AND TRAVEL ALSO IN THE EARLY PART OF OCTOBER, SO, MM-HMM.
SO WE'LL WAIT, WE'LL WAIT AND SEE WHAT COUNCIL DOES AND IN THE MEANTIME I'LL BE FINDING SOME OTHER DATE POSSIBILITIES.
SOMEBODY WANNA SECOND IT THAT YOU, YOU JUST SAY WE'RE ADJOURNED.
YOU, I THINK YOU SAID YES A SECOND.