Architectural Board of Review

VILLAGE OF CHAGRIN FALLS ARCHITECTURARL BOARD OF REVIEW SEPTEMBER 17, 2024 Meeting Called to Order 8:30 A.M. Members Present: Bill Childs, George Clemens, Mike Corkran, Eric Kaminski, Steve King, Phil Koepf, Wendy Naylor. Also Present: Dominic Cribari, Joan Andersen APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by King, seconded by Naylor to approve the minutes of the August 20, 2024, meeting. Roll Call: Childs-abstain, Corkran-abstain, Kaminski-abstain, King-yea, Naylor-yea. Motion passed. Motion by Naylor, seconded by Kaminski to approve the minutes from the September 3, 2024, meeting. Roll Call: Childs-abstain, Corkran-yea, King-abstain, Kaminski-yea, Naylor-yea. Motion passed. 1. McClintock 40 Tartan Ct. Exterior Alteration-Preliminary Tony Macj (Architect) presented these plans. He said that they are adding a front porch addition. He said they are looking at timber or wooden beams and his client hadn’t decided the finish or colors yet. Naylor said that there is a Colonial Revival character to Senlac Hills and thought the stained timber beams would be a little jarring on the front porch. Childs agreed. Clemens said he thinks it’s a stylistic trend and would look fine. Tony said he thought that it was a complimentary accent. Childs said they should side the back wall. Clemens said that he thought it was nice ornamental look and thinks it balances the house. Naylor said she doesn’t have a problem with the massing or scale of the porch related to the house. Summation-motion by Naylor, seconded by King for preliminary approval of plans with the following comments: Restudy of timber frame at porch gable and selection of materials; Addition at porch of 3 mill posts and architrave to line up with columns and pilaster at sides. Roll Call: Childs-yea, Corkran-yea, King- yea, Kaminski-yea, Naylor-yea. Motion passed. 2. BRW LLC 49 West Orange Exterior Alteration-Siding King read the Historical Significance Report and said that the proposed change #1 has an adverse effect on the design and historical significance of the structure. By removing the historic materials from the site, it does not follow the “guidelines” for “preservation of features”, “replacement of features”, and compatibility”. Change #1-Azek is not an appropriate solution to replace siding in a historically significant structure. This is based on the National Park Service Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, Standard #6. As stated in #6 when a historic feature is missing or too deteriorated to repair, “the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials.” Wood siding is the preferred choice material; an alternate material to consider is fiber cement siding in the same texture, shape, profile, lap and detailing for its ability to more closely match historic profiles and its affordability. It is their qualified professional opinion that the wood siding is in overall good condition with select areas warranting replacement. The select areas of deteriorated wood siding that require replacement should incorporate in-kind materials matching the adjacent siding materials (the historic wood or existing replacement fiber cement siding). Motion by King, seconded by Naylor to receive the HSR report. Roll Call: Childs-yea, Corkran-yea, Kaminski-yea, King-yea, Naylor-yea. Paul Seegott (Owner) and Al Steplight (Contractor) presented these plans. Paul said that they were replacing all the siding on the buildings with an Azek material that has similar characteristics of real wood. Paul said that they are replacing all the windows on the portion of the building that was moved from the paper mill. Clemens said he agrees with the HSR report that they need to use a smooth siding and to match the alignment with the sills. He said that the front façade was the most important and wouldn’t replace it. Childs said since there is so much difference in siding characteristics on the building, he would use the one that would stand out. Kaminski said to replace it with wood clapboard like it originally was. Al said that they were replacing the wood trim with Azek. Koepf said he needs to see what it all will look like with a siding plan and that the middle building needs to be maintained. Kaminski said to replace the sash with an aluminum clad sash and leave the trim. He said to use a Hardie board or cedar siding. He said they need to keep the historic building. Naylor requested photographic evidence of significant deterioration of the historic siding which is required by the Code before a full replacement of siding throughout the building I permitted. Summation-motion by Naylor, seconded by King to table this submission for the following reasons: Plans and materials presented are not appropriate for use as replacement material compatible with existing wood siding: Recommend repairing and patching with smooth cedar wood siding compatible with existing; Request for drawing of a siding plan and window selection and further evidence of deterioration with photographic details of the deterioration. Kaminski suggested using Jel-Wen sash Pak for windows. Roll Call: Corkran-yea, Kaminski-yea, Childs-yea, Naylor-yea, King-yea. Motion passed. 3. Hamid 231 Hawthorne Windows King read the Historical Significance report and said that the structure does not meet the standards of a “Historically Significant Property.” Consider using aluminum clad wood windows because these windows are more durable with a longer estimated service life. Motion by King, seconded by Naylor to receive the HSR report. Roll Call: Childs-yea, Corkran-yea, Kaminski-yea, King-yea, Naylor-yea. Becky and Youssef Hamid (Homeowners) presented these plans. They said they are replacing the windows in their home with vinyl windows. King said vinyl windows are cheaper and fail. Clemens suggested using Andersen replacement windows or Pella windows. He said using either a fibrex or fiberglass window would be a good choice, not as expensive as aluminum clad. Becky said they are putting double hung windows with grids. She said it will match the houses in the neighborhood. She said they are 6 over 6 windows. Naylor pointed out that these are recommendations. The Code does not prevent them from using vinyl windows on a house that is not historically significant. Summation-motion by Naylor, seconded by Childs to approve plans as presented with vinyl 6 over 6 windows. Roll Call: King-yea, Childs-yea, Kaminski-yea, Corkran-yea, Naylor-yea. Motion passed. 4. Occhionero 194 Willow Lane Windows King read the Historical Significance Report and said that the structure does not meet the standards of a “Historically Significant Property.” Motion by King, seconded by Naylor to receive the HSR report. Roll Call: King-yea, Childs-yea, Kaminski-yea, Corkran-yea, Naylor-yea. Becky Pantuso (Architect) presented these plans. She said they are adding an enclosed sunroom. Clemens said it looks nice. He said it’s an improvement to the existing home. Summation-motion by King, seconded by Naylor to approve plans as presented. Roll Call: Corkran-yea, Childs-yea, Kaminski-yea, Naylor-yea, King-yea. Motion passed. 5. Schindler 442 Walters Exterior Alteration-Preliminary King read the Historical Significance Report and said that because the house is only two years shy of being 100 years old the subject property meets the standards of a “Historically Significant Property”. Proposed change #1 has an adverse effect on the design and historical significance of the house. Enclosing the front porch does not follow the guidelines for “preservation of features” and “compatibility. Motion by King, seconded by Childs to receive the HSR report. Roll Call: Naylor-yea, Kaminski-yea, Corkran-yea, King-yea, Childs-yea. Contractor Jim Dunphy (Great Day Improvements) presented these plans. Building and Zoning Inspector Dominic Cribari said that they need to get a variance for alteration to a non-conforming front porch which already sits in front of the 30’ setback. Clemens said that the character of the glass is inconsistent with the house and an enclosed front porch doesn’t work on this house. He asked what kind of glass they were using, and Jim said clear tempered glass. He said the goal is to have a clean and dry porch. Childs said that it’s totally out of character and foreign to the composition of the house. Naylor said that the house is an American Four Square which is included in the Design Guidelines and that an open porch is a character defining feature. The Design Guidelines further point out that front porches of historic houses should not be enclosed King said if the porch is repaired, it must be the same as it was originally built. Summation-motion by Naylor, seconded by King to approve plans as presented. Roll Call: Naylor-nay for the following reasons: Enclosing porches are removing an historic feature of the house and is not consistent with Chagrin Falls Design Guidelines, Porches and entry features which states is not appropriate to enclose a front porch. The Board recommends not approving the variance. Roll Call: Childs-nay, Corkran-nay, Kaminski-nay, King-nay. Motion failed. Dominic told Jim he had ten days to appeal the decision to the BZA. 6. Two Foundation 177 E. Washington Signage Lisa Herchek (Two Foundation) presented these plans. She said they are proposing 3 signs. One monument ground sign and two building wall signs. One on the front of the building and the other on the rear of the building. She said the wall signs would match. Summation-motion by King, seconded by Naylor to approve the signs as presented. Roll Call: Corkran- yea, Kaminski-yea, Childs-yea, Naylor-yea, King-yea. Motion passed. 7. Sines 55 Carriage Stone Exterior Alteration-Final Megan Sines (Homeowner) and Heather Davies (Architect) presented these plans. Heather said they are adding an outdoor covered porch and brought new photos of the neighbors that are closest to the new outdoor covered porch. Heather said that its very hard to see from the front. Childs said to use nickel cap siding on the back instead of stone. Summation-motion by King, seconded by Kaminski to approve plans as presented. Roll Call: Naylor-yea, Childs-yea, Corkran-yea, Kaminski-yea, King-yea. Motion passed. 8. Agency 14 ½ North Main Field Change-Signage David Ayers said that they want to change the sign to be all red with white lettering. Summation-motion by King, seconded by Naylor to approve the field change as presented. Roll Call: Kaminski-yea, Childs-yea, Corkran-yea, King-yea, Naylor-yea. Motion passed. Walk-In 106 Church Street Becky Pantuso (Architect) said that they are in the process of cutting the tiles and said that they know there is not going to have enough for the entire foundation and asked if it would be better to just use something else. The Board said that they approved using the tiles and filling in with another material where its inconspicuous. She reported a need to address a finding of wet clay under the entirety of the foundation of the house. Meeting Adjourned 9:45 A.M. 10-1-24 ______________________________________ Steve King (Chairman) Date