Architectural & Historic Board of Review

City of Hudson, Ohio Meeting Minutes - Final Architectural & Historic Board of Review John Caputo, Chair Allyn Marzulla, Vice Chair John Workley, Secretary Francoise Massardier-Kenney John Funyak William Ray Karl Wetzel Nicholas Sugar, City Planner Alicia Schrenk, Associate Planner Wednesday, February 8, 2023 7:30 PM Town Hall 27 East Main Street I. Call To Order Chair Caputo called to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Architectural & Historic Board of Review of the City of Hudson at 7:30 p.m., in accordance with the Sunshine Laws of the State of Ohio, O.R.C. Section 121.22. II. Roll Call Present: 5 - Mr. Caputo, Mr. Ray, Mr. Workley, Ms. Marzulla and Ms. Kenney Absent: 2 - Mr. Funyak and Mr. Wetzel III. Public Comment Chair Caputo opened the meeting to public comments for anyone wanting to address the Board. Mr. Sid Nelson, 52 Aurora Street, commented regarding the application for 64 Aurora Street . Mr. Nelson commended the applicants regarding the proposed second floor window and noted the proposed window on the first floor, by his interpretation, does not meet Hudson's LDC nor was it recommended by a licensed architect and AHBR is not bound to follow the recommendation. Mr. Nelson then stated his agreement with the applicants original January 25, 2023 proposal which did not have half-height windows and noted they were not typical of the time period. Chair Caputo noted three submitted communications received by the AHBR that are included on the Agenda. Seeing no one else coming desiring to speak, Chair Caputo closed public comment . A. AHBR-6479 Public comment received for agenda item 22-1100, 2425 Hudson Aurora Road. Attachments: 2425 Hudson Aurora Public Comments City of Hudson, Ohio Page 1 Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting Minutes - Final February 8, 2023 B. AHBR-6485 Public comment received from the Hudson Heritage Association. Attachments: Hudson Heritage Association Letter C. AHBR-6486 Public comment received for agenda item 23-67, 64 Aurora Street. Attachments: 64 Aurora Street Public Comment IV. Consent Applications A motion was made by Ms. Kenney, seconded by Mr. Ray, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Caputo, Mr. Ray, Mr. Workley, Ms. Marzulla and Ms. Kenney A. AHBR 23-63 119 Hudson Street (Historic District) Alterations (2nd Floor Balcony Railing) Attachments: 119 Hudson St AHBR Packet This AHBR application was approved on the Consent Agenda. V. Old Business A. AHBR 23-67 64 Aurora Street (Historic District) Alterations (Flat Roof Replacement, Window, Doors) Attachments: 64 Aurora Roof Alteration AHBR Packet 64 Aurora Facade Alteration AHBR Packet Ms. Davey introduced the application by noting two separate projects are taking place on the structure: 1) The redesign and installation of a flat roof. 2) A request to revise the garage door, the man doors and a window change. Mr. Sugar then reviewed the proposed changes. The Board, staff, Mr. Gale Wood, Campo Roofing, and Mr. Ackerman, general contractor, discussed the timing of this revised request and that public comments were received and forwarded to the applicant who submitted the redesigned elevation.The Board discussed the changes recommended at the last AHBR meeting by the Historic Preservation Consultant . The Board also discussed how an existing home in the Historic District may be treated differently from a new home or addition, if the proposed small window does or does not meet the LDC and that the small window is existing - only moved to a new position. A motion was made by Mr. Workley, seconded by Ms. Marzulla, that this AHBR application be approved with the condition that the window in question match the existing windows in style, size and appearance. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Caputo, Mr. Ray, Mr. Workley, Ms. Marzulla and Ms. Kenney City of Hudson, Ohio Page 2 Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting Minutes - Final February 8, 2023 B. AHBR 22-119311 South Main Street (Historic District) Alterations (Windows, Doors & Roof, Repair/Partial Log Replacements) Attachments: 11 S. Main AHBR Packet 2.8.23 Meeting 11 S. Main AHBR Packet 1.11.23 Meeting Historic Preservation Consultant Advisory Report Mr. Matt Schwarz, Peninsula Architects, described the log cabin's history and use through the years and that a structural engineer made recommendations for needed structural improvements and Peninsula Architect's plans for improving the cabin. Mr. Schwarz also discussed the site meeting with AHBR, changes to the previous plans and items for discussion. Mr. Sugar noted the City Arborist stated the logs used to build the cabin are common species to this area and that the proposed logs, after staining should match the existing logs . The Board, staff and applicant discussed the revised plan, the need for the proposed structural improvements, the desire to straighten the bowed logs if possible or replace if needed, that exterior logs will be repaired if possible or cut and replaced in part or in whole if needed, that a variety of log species were used on the cabin, some with bark left on which caused deterioration, the qualifications of the contractors, the source of the matching logs, the intention to retain existing materials when possible, the muttons being applied between the glass layers and on the exteriors - will use one piece of glass that will appear as multiple individual panes of glass. Mr. Schwartz stated the logs he anticipates being replaced, guided by the structural engineer's report, will result in approximately fifteen percent of the logs being replaced. A motion was made by Mr. Workley, seconded by Ms. Marzulla, that this AHBR Application be approved with the following conditions: Matching windows, replacement of gutters and downspouts, verification of the accessibility pad outside the exterior door, and that the elevations be revised to depict the approximate log replacement areas for staff to verify the extent, as discussed at the AHBR meeting and previous site visit . The motion carried by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Caputo, Mr. Ray, Mr. Workley, Ms. Marzulla and Ms. Kenney VI. New Business City of Hudson, Ohio Page 3 Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting Minutes - Final February 8, 2023 A. AHBR 23-69 190 N. Main Street (Historic District) Alteration (Roof Replacement) Submitted by Bill Buehl, A&B Roofing a) Staff notes the proposal would replace an existing red tile roof with black dimensional shingles. b) The Secretary of Interior Standards states, the historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. c) The existing tile roof is a distinct historic feature that is reflective of the James Ellsworth era of Hudson. Per the Secretary of Interior Standards the applicant shall - 1. Document deterioration/need for replacement and 2. If replacement is necessary, propose a material that matches the original design, texture etc. Asphalt shingles would not be an appropriate replacement. d) Staff notes in 1997 a shingle replacement was brought before the AHBR and was denied. Attachments: 190 N Main St AHBR Packet No one was present for this application. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 4 Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting Minutes - Final February 8, 2023 B. AHBR 22-11002425 Hudson Aurora Road Alterations (Siding Replacement) Attachments: 2425 Hudson Aurora AHBR Packet Mr. Sugar introduced the application by displaying the site, displaying and explaining comparison photos of the existing and proposed elevations and reviewing the staff comments and concerns. The Board and staff discussed the existing non-conforming areas. The Board, staff , Mr. Jim Dombrowski, contractor, and Mr. Russ Gordyan, homeowner, discussed the front stone foundation which replaced the original brick foundation, the second story siding which replaced stone, the pitch of the garage roof, the lack of fenestration on the garage second floor, the contractor's misunderstanding regarding permitting, that all vertical siding and stone terminate at an inside corners and the height of the back wall . Mr. Workley made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ray, to approve the application with the following conditions: 1) The chimney and foundation stone remain as is. 2) That the stone on the front porch remain on the front facade and terminate at the inside corners with the stone on the wings removed and replaced with siding. 3) The siding on the dormer sides be vertical to match the front. 4) The vertical siding on the right side continue to the garage addition and terminate at an inside corner. 5) Steps be added in front of the door which are at a minimum the width of the door. And a recommendation that the dormer on the front gable elevation of the garage have additional fenestration as approved by staff. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: 5 - Mr. Caputo, Mr. Ray, Mr. Workley, Ms. Marzulla and Ms. Kenney VII. Other Business City of Hudson, Ohio Page 5 Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting Minutes - Final February 8, 2023 A. AHBR 23-6 35 South Oviatt Street New Construction (Hudson Community Living) Submitted by Nate Bailey, Peninsula Architects a) Staff notes the AHBR reviewed the proposal at the February 8th, 2023 meeting. The following suggestions and comments were made by the board members and staff: · Suggest varying the garage doors by building. · Revise buildings A/F and C/E to better meet the look-alike standards . Suggestions for look-alike standards included; introducing a hip roof, introducing variety in the gable ends, flipping the garage doors, introducing shed pitches with a metal roof or trellis. · Revise unit B to lower the ridge height, revise the clipped roof at the rear, and reduce the forward projecting mass. · Board acknowledged the applicant is requesting an exception from the garage orientation requirements. If the Board grants the exception, it would have to do so based on the criteria in Section II-1. · Ensure that all material changes would end at an inside corner · Suggest brick masonry at the clubhouse. · Add additional fenestration to ensure each building has no more than 12 feet without fenestration. · Revise Elevations to depict any venting, mechanical units, etc. b) Staff comments for the revised submittal: · The Architectural Design Standards state projections may only extend 5’ from the main mass. If more than 5’, they are treated as wings, which must be located a minimum 18” behind the main mass. Revise unit B to comply with these massing standards. · The Architectural Design Standards state a building must have a typical window used for most windows. Additional special windows are permitted on the front façade. Suggest adding window divides to the front and side fixed windows of unit F to meet this requirement. Windows on the rear elevation may be more informal in design. · If the Board were to make an exception to the garage orientation requirements, the Architectural Design Standards state the design shall meet the five principles enumerated in Section I-2 and shall meet one of the following conditions: ( 1) The project is an exceptional design, meaning that it is either especially creative or it is designed in response to unique situation, such as a very difficult site or an unusual program requirement.; (2) Exceptional and unique conditions exist that create a practical difficulty in complying with the requirements of these Standards. The AHBR should consider the factors enumerated in as defined in the Land Development Code in determining "practical difficulty". · Staff notes the proposal is for an institutional residential use requiring unique programming and building design (ADA requirements). The institutional residential use is also deliberately designed with a centrally located communal space to serve the needs of its residents. The overall site plan and orientation of the buildings has been designed to minimize sightlines of multiple garage doors . The visual impact of the garage doors have been further minimized with the proposed massing and overall quality of design and materials. City of Hudson, Ohio Page 6 Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting Minutes - Final February 8, 2023 Attachments: 35 S. Oviatt AHBR Packet - Hudson Community Living Material Packet Hudson Community Living - Staff memo from 9.28.22 Informal Mr. Sugar introduced the informal discussion by displaying renderings of the structures, which have received Planning Commission approval and will go before BZBA regarding a variance for wetlands. Mr. Nate Bailey, Peninsula Architects, and Mr. Chris Gurreri, Hudson Community Living representative, noted the revised plans now have 16 units as opposed to the original 19 . Mr. Bailey displayed the original and proposed site plans, described the .2 acre wetlands, noted the project is within the code regarding impervious surface requirements, described the single direction loop road, noted the units will have rear access to a communal green space to foster a sense of community, displayed and described the community house which will fit the mixed use surrounding neighborhood, explained the materials to be used and the variety of exterior colors. Mr. Bailey noted the foundations will be close to grade concrete for ADA compliance and the structures will have high grade vinyl windows. The Board, staff and applicant discussed the features of the community house which will be designed as a residential building with Hardie siding for maintenance purposes, the pull off areas for deliveries and garbage, the nature of the community being a Supportive Living Environment which does not provide care services for individual residents, discussed other similar communities in the area, how the community will develop with small groups of residents moving in, the potential use of solar panels, the HVAC and commercial kitchen venting being on the side of the building, the possibility of having a variety of garage door styles, that tri-units A and F have similar characteristics in an effort to have commonality and the applicants openness for ideas to differentiate the two units. The Board expressed concern with the look alike characteristics of units A and F and encouraged the applicant to further study differentiations. Mr. Sugar reviewed the look-alike standards and how they might be met. The Board also discussed units C and E having look-alike issues and other units with a lack of fenestration. Mr. Gurreri described unit B which will house four residents and four resident assistants with two front doors and a wing that projects forward, following discussion the applicant and staff will work together to meet the LDC requirements regarding the projecting wing. Discussion also took place regarding making the main mass more dominate. The Board requested site line studies be included on the final application. Mr. Sugar reviewed the LDC and Architectural Design Standards as applicable to the front facing garage doors noting the requirement that one of two standards be met for approval and that this is a Residential Institutional Use with a unique design. Mr. Bailey also noted that in a previous AHBR meeting the Board stated allowing front facing garage doors would not be precedent setting. This matter was discussed. B. AHBR 1-25-23 Minutes of Previous Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting: January 25, 2023. Attachments: AHBR Minutes January 25, 2023 - DRAFT A motion was made by Mr. Workley, seconded by Mr. Ray, that the Minutes be approved as amended. The motion carried by the following vote: City of Hudson, Ohio Page 7 Architectural & Historic Board of Review Meeting Minutes - Final February 8, 2023 Aye: 4 - Mr. Caputo, Mr. Ray, Mr. Workley and Ms. Marzulla Abstain: 1 - Ms. Kenney VIII. Staff Update Mr. Sugar noted a letter from Hudson Heritage regarding the use of roof materials and the need for building out the requirements for work done in the Historic District. The Board and staff discussed: 1) The LDC requirement that consultants be a licensed architect and how it relates to the current Historic Preservation Consultants. 2) How enforcement of the LDC and standards may be clarified and consistently applied which may necessitate a special meeting. 3) The need for more information being in the written minutes and that AHBR is not a Public Hearing that is required to receive Public Comments . This matter was discussed IX. Adjournment A motion was made by Ms. Marzulla, seconded by Mr. Workley, that the meeting be adjourned at 9:51 p.m.. The motion carried by an unanimous vote. ___________________________________________ John Caputo, Chair ___________________________________________ John Workley, Secretary ___________________________________________ Joe Campbell, Executive Assistant Upon approval by the Architectural & Historic Board of Review, this official written summary of the meeting minutes shall become a permanent record, and the official minutes shall also consist of a permanent audio and video recording, excluding executive sessions, in accordance with Codified Ordinances, Section 252.04, Minutes of Architectural and Historic Board of Review, Board of Zoning and Building Appeals, and Planning Commission . * * * City of Hudson, Ohio Page 8