North End-Huntington Heights Architectural Review Board

Minutes

August, 2005

Present:  Phil Shook, Bea Dahlen, Fred Whittaker, Anita Garner, Carolyn Hughes,  Steve Hudak.

Minutes were approved with minor modifications.

The hearing of each application was preceded by a reading the applicable ARB guidelines.

COA-05-137  5314 Huntington Avenue  

The application was unanimously approved as presented with out modifications or conditions.

Ms. Dahlen made the motion to approve, seconded by Ms. Garner. 

COA-05-138  318 69^th Street
This application was unanimously approved with the modification that the top of the fence would be level.

Ms. Dahlen made the motion to approve the application as amended, seconded by Mr. Hudak.

COA-05-139  338 52^nd Street
Mr. Benfield explained his desire to put vinyl siding over the original asbestos shingle siding.  The Board noted that boxing in the eaves would not be acceptable.  The character of the craftsman style must be preserved.

The character can be maintained by attaching, or replacing with, a beaded sheathing, plywood, or Royal Wood (synthetic pvc product).  Such application of material shall maintain the original profile. The Board requests a siding width of 5” to 8” in width with no bead.

Ms. Dahlen made the motion to approve the application as amended, seconded by Mr. Hudak.

The Board noted that the wrapped windows were installed prior to the existence of ARB guidelines.

COA-05-140  317 55^th Street
Mr. Shook read a two-page rebuttal to the letter included with the application and is attached to these minutes.

Mr. Biggs described the original side porch on the house and stated his reasons for building a larger porch.

The Board and applicant then spent approximately thirty minutes discussing the actions and procedural miscues of the past three years that lead to the current application.  The resulting consensus was that both the applicant and the Board were in agreement that the porch was not built in accordance with the design submitted in the original application. 

Dr. Biggs stated his belief that the finished product was attractive and an improvement to the structure.  During the public hearing a neighboring property owner, Mr. Ronald Humphries, voiced is support for Dr. Biggs and expressed his concern about his perception of the Board’s animosity towards Dr. Biggs. The Board stated their strong concern that changes were made in the approved design without prior approval of the ARB.  Mr. Shook stated that the finished product, though not built to the specifications of the approved plan, did not adversely impact the historical integrity of the structure or surrounding neighborhood.

Mr. Whittaker made a motion to accept the side porch as built.  Mr. Hudak seconded.  The motion passed 4-2.

COA-05-141  334 52^nd Street
The applicant, Mr. Allen Stambaugh, was not present.  This application is a request to renew COA-02-44 to allow the construction of a deck with no deviation from the original approved application.

The application was unanimously approved as presented with out modifications or conditions.  Ms. Dahlen made the motion to approve the application as presented, seconded by Mr. Hudak.

COA-05-142  318 72^nd Street
The applicant, Mr. Allen Stambaugh, was not present.  The applicant wishes to receive retroactive approval for the application of a stucco finish over cinder block.  This process is approximately half completed.  Also requested is the retroactive approval for the installation of a steel door with a glass oval.

The Board stated that the work completed is in compliance with the ARB Guidelines and further noted that the structure was not visible from the public right-of-way.  The Board also stated that Mr. Stambaugh would be allowed to complete the stucco process on the structure with this approved application. 

Ms. Dahlen asked staff to investigate if the proposed use of the structure was legal. (Editor’s note: The Codes Compliance Department has filed charges in this matter).

The application was unanimously approved as presented with out modifications or conditions.  Ms. Dahlen made the motion to approve the application as presented, seconded by Mr. Hudak.

New Business

Mr. Benfield discussed problems he has reported to Codes Compliance around his neighborhood and stated that he had not heard back concerning his complaints.  Staff was asked to follow up with Codes regarding Mr. Benfield’s complaints.

Ronald Humphreys of 323 55^th Street approached the Board to discuss the renovation of his house.  The primary areas of concern were the leaking gutters on the entire house and roof repair on the turret.  The Board discussed materials and procedures that Mr. Humphries might want to consider in his endeavors.

Adjourn