Minutes
September 6, 2007
North End - Huntington Heights Architectural Review Board

The meeting was called to order at 6:05

Members present:

Stephen Hudak, Carolyn Hughes, Phil Shook,  Fred Whittaker

Members Absent:  Mary Kayaselcuk notified staff that she would be out of town.  Deirdre Wells notified staff that she needed to attend a meeting at her children’s’  school and would not be able to attend. One position is vacant.

Staff present:
David Watson

Review of the Minutes of the August 2, 2007.
The following modifications made.

The third paragraph of the third page:

Staff asked for clarification regarding the terminus of 6 foot tall fencing.  The Board agreed for proposed guideline modifications that that a 6 foot height would be allowed to extend to the midpoint of the house.  From that point forward to the property line, a 42” fence would be permissible.

Sixth paragraph of the third page:

Or, that is when it is appropriate to restore your windows instead of replacing them.

Seventh paragraph of the third page:

The Board consensus was to propose modifications to state replacement windows must have muntins that are permanently adhered to the outside of window pane.

The minutes were unanimously approved with modifications.

CU-07-196   5208 Huntington Avenue.  Lawrence and Robin Stippich.
This is a three part application.  Chairman Shook ordered according to complexity.  The sections heard as fence, shed, then sun porch addition.

Fence.
Chairman Shook compared the application to the relevant guidelines, and noted that the guideline criteria were met.  Mr. Whittaker noted that the PVC fence was a good choice.

Mr. Whittaker made a motion to approve the fence section of the application as presented.

Second: Mr. Hudak
Roll call:
Aye: Hudak, Hughes, Whittaker, Shook.
Nay: none

Shed.
This part of the application was for an 8x8 square foot vinyl shed with a 3/12 pitch roof.

Chairman Shook read the relevant guidelines and compared them to the application.  The Board noted a long term policy of requiring a minimum roof pitch of 6/12, noting that there have been past denials based on this criterion.  The proposed pitch was nearly flat and is not in harmony with the surrounding structures.

The applicants noted that the front and rear porches of their house were flat and that they desired a low profile shed so that it would not be visible outside of the yard. 

Mr. Whittaker noted that the siding on the proposed shed was simulated vertical slats.  He stated that the siding should be horizontal and of similar relief as the siding on the primary structure.

The applicants noted that it would be nearly impossible to find a pre-manufactured low maintenance garden shed with the required pitch roof.  Mr. Whittaker noted that it might well be possible for a truss manufacturer to provide a suitable framed shed that could have not only an adequate pitch, but appropriate siding as well.

Mr. Whittaker made a motion to reject the application as it applies to the shed.
Mr. Hudak provided a second.

Roll call:
Aye (to reject):  Hudak, Hughes, Whittaker, Shook
Nay:  None

Mr. Shook restated that the rejection of the shed was based on the following criteria:

The shallow pitch of the roof and the siding are not compatible with the adjoining structures.  He also noted that if the new shed design was greater than 8x10 feet, a window would be required.

Porch.
Chairman Shook reviewed the application and compared it to the guidelines.  He noted that the submitted materials provided to the applicant by the contractor were not an adequate representation of the work.  Staff was requested to ensure that future applications contained a detailed elevation of the work in question.

The Board and applicant discussion confirmed the following:
The columns will remain intact.
The transom will remain intact.
The tongue and groove flooring will remain intact.
The windows will be installed as shown in the application.

Mr. Whittaker made a motion to accept the application as it applies to the rear porch sunroom as submitted.

Mr. Hudak provided a second.

Aye:  Hudak, Hughes, Whittaker, Shook
Nay:  None.

COA-07-197  316 62^nd Street.  Christopher White and Inez Jenkins.
This is an application to replace twenty-five six over six double-hung windows with twenty-five vinyl thermal six over six double-hung windows.

Mr. Shook compared the application to the relevant section of the guidelines.  It was noted that the trim was flat and therefore wrapping of the trim would be permitted with the exception of the drip cap on top of the window frame.

A review of a picture of the house showed a fixed window.  The applicants stated that this window would be replaced with a like styled single pane window.

The Board asked if the existing shutters would remain.  The applicants answered that they would.  Chairman Shook stated that operating shutters are a wonderful feature, but that the applicant was free to fix them in place.  With either choice, they should be mounted as they are now where the shutter edge covers the side of the window frame.

Mr. Whittaker made a motion to accept the application as submitted with the provision that the shutters remain either as operational or attached.

Mr. Hudak provided a second.

Role call:
Aye:  Hudak, Hughes, Whittaker, Shook
Nay:  None.

COA-07-194  5400 Huntington Avenue.  Mary Kayaselcuk
This is a modification to a previously approved application to change material choice from brick to stone, and to extend the size of a terraced area.

Chairman Shook reviewed the application and noted the modifications in comparison to the approved application.

Mr. Whittaker then make a motion to accept the application as submitted.
Mr. Hudak provided a second.

Roll Call:
Aye:  Hudak, Hughes, Whittaker, Shook
Nay:  None.

Old Business
Chairman Shook asked the Board if everyone was comfortable with the ad for the annual guidelines meeting as written.  There were no objections.

The Board set a meeting date for October 16^th, 2007.

New Business
The Board currently has one vacancy and will have two more vacancies in the November.  Mr. Ruble was to be appointed by Council on September 25^th, 2007.  However, he has returned to Iraq on short notice where he will remain for at least six months.

The Board was encouraged to work the neighborhood for volunteers to serve on the Board.

Attendance Policy Review.
Chairman  Shook noted that City Council passed a policy noting that two or more unexcused absences would be cause for reprimand or removal from the Board.

Staff stated that the definition of excused was at the discretion of the Chairman.  Chairman Shook asked how the determination of an excused absence should be made.  Mr. Whittaker stated that the policy should be fairly liberal as we are all adults here.  Mr. Watson stated that based on his experience serving boards and serving on boards that giving advance notice is usually sufficient, as it allows measures to be taken to ensure a quorum.  The Board concurred.

Chairman Shook asked Mr. Watson to review the absences this year and notify the City Clerk regarding any member exceeding two or more unexcused absences.

Guideline Cover.
Mr. Whittaker stated that the current cover of the guidelines should retain with its current illustration with the Post House.  The Board concurred, noting that renovations on the house have resumed in earnest.

 The meeting adjourned.