Minutes

July 6, 2006

North End - Huntington Heights Architectural Review Board.

The meeting was called to order at 6:20 pm.

The minutes were approved with modifications.

Motion: Dahlen

Second: Hudak

Unanimous

COA-06-165  Charles Singleton;  5200 Huntington Avenue

Mr. Shook read the application, noting that it was for the installation of a wooden privacy fence with a lattice top.  Mr. Shook compared the application with the ARB Guidelines and found the application consistent with the guidelines.  Mr. Whittaker asked if the applicant had considered a fence made from pvc material.  The applicant stated a preference for a wood fence and that he intended to paint the fence after installation.

Mr. Hudak made a motion to approve application as presented.

Mr. Whittaker provided a second.

Mr. Hudak, Ms. Stodghill, Mr. Whittaker, and Mr. Shook voted for approval.

After the vote, Larry Stippich asked to make a statement regarding the application.  He voiced concerns regarding lighting and ventilation issues that might be caused by the installation of the fence.  The Board noted that they did not have the authority in the guidelines or zoning ordinance to address these issues. 

COA-06-166  Frank Vargas;  6921 Warwick Boulevard

Mr. Shook read the application and the related section of the guidelines.

The Board noted that all window trim has been removed on all the windows and asked what type of trim would be installed in its place.  The applicant was unsure.  The Board recommended the use of cellular pvc trim because of durability of the product and because it would negate the need for wrapping the trim.  It was also noted that the trim should be of similar style to the surrounding structures.

Mr. Shook noted that in the back of the structure three windows had been removed and replaced with one window.    He also noted that the siding that had been carried out was not mentioned on the application and would have to be addressed separately on a future application.

Ms. Dahlen made a motion to approve the application as presented

Ms. Stodghill provided a second

Ms. Dahlen, Mr. Whittaker, and Mr. Shook voted against approval.

Ms. Stodghill voted for approval (Ms. Stodghill later stated that she misunderstood the motion and agreed that the application should not be approved).

The applicant was encouraged to resubmit an application stating in detail the work proposed, the materials to be used, and provide samples of the trim and siding to be used.

At this time, Mr. Hudak excused himself from the meeting.

COA-06-167  James Griffin;  5215 Huntington Avenue.

Mr. Shook read the application and the appropriate section of the guidelines.

The Board noted that this application was nearly identical to COA-06-165 except that this proposal was for a pvc privacy fence with a lattice top.  Mr. Shook noted that the plan called for a single gate and asked the applicant if this was his intent.  He stated that a single gate was all that was needed.

Ms. Dahlen made a motion for approval

Mr. Whittaker provided a second.

Ms. Dahlen, Ms. Stodghill, Mr. Whittaker, Mr. Shook voted for approval of the application.

Old Business

The Board discussed issues that it would like to address in this year’s guideline update.  These issues include:

1. Review corner property and fence height
2. Require that all porch flooring be tongue and groove unless an historic precedent showing another style can be determined.
3. The painting of unpainted masonry will need Board approval.
4. Update the application.

New Business