Architectural Board of Review

Architectural Board of Review Minutes Monday, August 18, 2025 8 A.M. Via Conference - Zoom Members Present: James Neville, Chair Hans Walter, Vice Chair David Berlekamp, Member Vincent Leskosky, Alternate Member Yulia Litvak, Landmark Commission Member Tom Starinsky, Landmark Commission Member Others Present: Daniel Feinstein, Senior Planner Kelly Beck, Planning Specialist The meeting was called to order by Daniel Feinstein, Senior Planner at 8:00 a.m. * * * * Approval of minutes from the August 4, 2025 meeting. Approved. * * * * Joint meeting with the Landmark Commission * * * * ABR25-000162 – 3400 Lee Road – Preliminary Review: City Hall Addition. Mr. Feinstein reviewed the comments from the previous preliminary review of the City Hall addition. David Thal, Weber Murphy Fox, described the project. This is a 1,900 square foot addition which maintains the north driveway access. There is minimum demolition on the interior of the building. Other portions of the interior program include a secure lobby, a meeting area for staff and visitors, and offices for Human Resources and Information Technology. He explained the location of the addition, which is not aligned with the current building. He showed the detail with the lowered jack arch detail as well as double recess options. The double recess option on the north facade alludes to the fire truck doors. He showed canopies on all sides, as well as associated options. He explained the final preferred design with the lowered jack arch, stone below the windows, and canopies on the north elevation only over the windows. Mr. Neville asked about the water table detail. Mr. Thal said the water table detail is different between the original City Hall building and the fire station addition. Mr. Neville said he likes the stone detail below the windows. The thanked the architect for the analysis and options presented. Mr. Walter said he agrees and appreciates the work. He said this proves the recommended scheme is best. He likes the lowered jack arch and detail. Mr. Berlekamp also thanked the architect for his thoroughness. He asked what led to the decision to not carry the canopies around to the east and west elevations. Mr. Thal said the main City Hall entry door and dome is very detailed. The east and west canopy option seems like too much and distracts from the building entry. He also hopes to salvage the existing copper canopy and they want to be sure to have enough material. Joyce Braverman, Planning Director, noted the panels below the windows on the nearest fire addition are brick. Mr. Starinsky commented that the north elevation fenestration presents an opportunity more strongly allude to the existing bay doors. He would suggest wider windows that are not separated and allows more light. This evokes the former use and creates more interest. The canopy brackets on the north elevation seem diminutive. He would like to see this detail have greater heft. He believes a conversation needs to happen regarding pedestrian access from the north Clayton Boulevard driveway to the front entry. This work presents an opportunity to strengthen that connection. Mr. Thal said it is worth looking at the option for larger windows on the north elevation. They have already been studying options for the awning supports. Because the annex building does not come down as part of this addition, the pedestrian access would likely happen in a separate phase of work. Continued with the following comments: 1) the preferred design includes the lowered jack arch; 2) investigate larger windows on the north elevation to allude to previous fire bay doors; 3) study a stronger bracket or support detail for the awnings; and 4) investigate pedestrian access from Clayton Boulevard. Joint review with the Landmark Commission continued to their August 27, 2025 meeting at 7:00 p.m. * * * * Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 2 of 11  Architectural Board of Review * * * * ABR25-000143 – 16619 Aldersyde Drive – Addition. James Karlovec, Karlovec & Co., explained this is a two-phase renovation to convert a first floor bathroom and den into a first floor bedroom suite. The work extends the left edge of the house wall further into the existing porch. There is a first floor cottage window at the existing restroom. They will replicate the stone band detail at the stoop. They are requesting the option for the side wall window to have either a double casement or double hung window. Mr. Neville asked for clarification of the windows. Mr. Karlovec said they are coordinating with Pella, who are replacing the second floor windows which were already approved by staff. Mr. Feinstein asked if there is a preferred window option, double hung versus casement. Mr. Karlovec said the main goal is ventilation and ease of use, which makes casement the best option, but the owner is undecided on the window style. Approved both window options. Confirmation of the final window detail to be submitted. Submit final plans for administrative review. * * * * ABR25-000187 – 2893 Huntington Road – Addition. Michael Langelier, Overhouse Studio, said they are proposing a screened porch near the existing patio area. The house has a stucco finish. This room does not affect the existing house details and is held below the existing belt band. Mr. Neville asked about the sizes of the screen openings. Mr. Langelier said they are kept relatively the same, with the exception of the center opening at the rear elevation. Mr. Berlekamp asked the color of the ship lap siding detail area. Mr. Langelier said it is the same as the paint on the stucco portion of the house. Mr. Neville said he has no issue with the siding area with the fireplace, but he does have a problem with the area on the existing house wall. Mr. Langelier said the are concerned with a match to the stucco texture as they have to rip out a portion of the wall to flash the roof correctly. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 3 of 11 Mr. Neville said they should research finding someone to match the stucco detail. Mr. Walter asked if the fireplace area could be stone or another material. Mr. Langelier said if the house wall is stucco the porch wall being stucco would also be helpful. Approved with the condition that the house wall and fireplace wall exterior will be stucco that matches the house wall stucco. Submit revised plans for administrative review. * * * * ABR25-000188 – 17616 Parkland Drive – Window and Door Alterations. Jessica Powell, architect, said they will be updating the kitchen/mudroom/laundry areas on the interior of the house. This work addresses doors and windows in this case. The door opening is made larger and the sink window is simplified. There is a large window on another wall that becomes a single door. Mr. Neville asked where the kitchen window lands inside the room. Ms. Powell said they have moved the sink to the island, so the window is just for ventilation. Approved. * * * * ABR25-000201 – 20040 Van Aken Boulevard – Strike Club Bowling Sign. Mr. Feinstein explained this tenant space was previously 1899 Golf. There is now a new tenant with golf and bowling. They already approved the golf portion of the sign. Mark Branovic, Advanced Installation and Sign, said they are proposing a similar mount, but new lettering on the awning. Mr. Feinstein said this awning sign is considered a secondary sign and the lettering is limited to 9 inches in height. This sign would require a zoning variance. Mr. Branovic said he has been directed by the tenant to come within zoning requirements so that a variance is not necessary. Mr. Walter said he likes the layout this way. The “bowling” lettering does get lost, though. There was discussion regarding the height of the lettering in a revised submission. Continued in order for the applicant to submit smaller lettering that meets zoning regulations. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 4 of 11 Submit revised plans for Board review. * * * * ABR25-000172 – 22132 Byron Road – New Siding. Cindy Amato, Josephs Home Improvement, said they are only installing the horizontal siding. There will be no window trim or vertical areas in their scope. The owner indicated they might not want shutters to be re-installed. Mr. Neville asked if the existing siding will be removed. Ms. Amato said the wood siding will not be removed. Mr. Walter said if the wood siding remains, the window trim needs to be built out. Approved with the following conditions: 1) the window and door trim be built out to be 5/8” proud of the new siding; 2) the rake trim must be wrapped; and 3) shutters must be reinstalled. Submit revised drawing for window trim details. * * * * ABR25-000191 – 3120 Belvoir Boulevard – Porch Columns. Lynn Gruber, homeowner, explained the current iron pillars on the front porch are fussy and they desire something simpler. They are proposing two 10 inch columns. Mark Freemont, architect, noted these columns will be painted white to match the other trim on the house. Mr. Neville said the existing detailing frames the width of the recess. He asked if they had considered pilasters at the ends of the opening. Mr. Freemont said they looked at both ways initially. It looked cluttered with the columns on both sides. It hides the entry door details. Having the two center posts allows the door trim to be more visible. Mr. Leskoskhy said the existing three arched openings ushers you into the entry space. Additional pilasters will help maintain that front entry form. Mr. Neville said additional pilasters could technically block a portion of the door trim, but the steps are also offset. This makes the entry experience. Mr. Freemont showed a drawing of two additional posts. The proposed posts have a small taper. He did not want to detract from the door. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 5 of 11 Mr. Leskosky noted there are already returns on the edge of the porch. Mr. Neville said it loses the context of the recess without the frame of half pilasters on each end. Mr. Leskosky suggested studying square columns and half pilasters on each end. Continued in order to study posts that are square and pilasters added to both sides of the porch opening. Submit revised plans for Board review. * * * * Mr. Walter left the meeting. * * * * ABR25-000193 – 22275 Byron Road – Roof Material. Ben Troyer, MK Roofing and Construction, said the owners desire a standing seam metal roof for energy efficiency and longevity of material. The standing seam roof makes reinstallation of the solar panels easier. He showed a darker color brown standing seam metal roof. Louis Salza, homeowner, said the house two doors down has a standing seam metal roof. Mr. Feinstein noted that house did not have the appropriate approvals. The only standing seam metal main roof approved in Shaker Heights was on a new build modern style house. Ms. Salza said they have travelled in New England and there is metal on many styles of homes. They are asking for adaptations for sustainability. The metal roof can be recycled when it has reached the end of its life. Mr. Feinstein said the Architectural Board of Review responsibility is for the aesthetics. Original materials for this house was a tile roof. He explained historic houses in Shaker Heights typically have a darker natural material original roof and there are design standards in the Architectural Board of Review Design Guidelines pertaining to roof materials and colors. Ms. Salza said they are willing to do a darker brown, but really want the standing seam metal roof material. Dell Salza, homeowner, said this type of metal roof allows for fasteners for their solar panels that do not have to pierce the roof. The solar panels also make the metal roof less visible. There was discussion regarding standing seam or metal shingle type roofs, how the solar panels could be installed on both and if the two metal roofs could be combined. Mr. Neville noted it is their job to protect the architectural integrity of the historic houses in relation to the city. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 6 of 11 Continued for the applicant to investigate other materials and styles of roofing with suggestions including: 1) metal roof that replicates a shingle look; 2) standing seam roofing only under the solar panels; and 3) other larger warranted roofing materials. Submit revised plans for Board review. * * * * ABR25-000090 – 3219 Somerset Road – Resubmission: Entry Alterations. Mr. Feinstein explained the siding portion of this request had been approved. The front entry alteration is under discussion today. Jane Corteville, homeowner, said 21026 Almar is directly across the street and has this type of detailed entry installed several years ago. They revised their entry design and relocated the dentil detail on the fascia board like the others in the sample photos. Approved the revised design. * * * * Mr. Walter returned to the meeting. * * * * ABR25-000195 – 3668 Riedham Road – Roof Material. Gary Hromi, Distinctive Metal Roofing, said this request is for a Kasselwood cedar metal shingle. The shingles are 41 inches wide and 8 to 9 inches deep. This mimics a slate roof. The shingles interlock on all 4 sides and the fasteners are concealed. Snow blocks are being installed and the proposed color is Slate Rock. It has not been installed nearby, but the overhead views are of this color. An asphalt roof averages 300 pounds a square foot, but the metal is 90 pounds. Mr. Feinstein noted this house originally had a wood shake roof. Mr. Neville asked about the reflectivity of the metal. Mr. Hromi said it has a kynar paint. Mr. Berlekamp said he is concerned about reflection. Asphalt or slate is much duller in color. Mr. Neville said his concern is visibility from the street. The sun glare is a concern. Mr. Hromi said after one season this material weathers and some of the sheen is lost. All colors have the same paint application and reflectivity. Mr. Berlekamp said it does mimic slate, which has a smooth finish. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 7 of 11 Mr. Leskosky said it looks like wet natural slate. Continued in order for the applicant to provide photos of the material from the ground. Submit additional information for Board review. * * * * ABR25-000135 – 3706 Lee Road – Resubmission: Exterior Alterations. Mr. Feinstein summarized the comments from the last meeting. Eliot Sims, LAS Contracting, said they now propose this infill from brick to brick. The windows are centered for as much lighting as possible on the inside. Mr. Feinstein asked the size of the siding. Mr. Sims said the right hand edge has a 4 inch siding right now so they are matching that detail. Mr. Feinstein noted this is going away, so there is no need to match that size. Mr. Neville asked if they can have a concrete curb that is rubbed out instead of exposed concrete block. Mr. Leskosky said because this infill wall is different, the height of the new windows is appropriate. Approved with the condition that the foundation curb is concrete, rubbed smooth while green or is brick matching the building. Submit revised plan for administrative review. * * * * ABR25-000200 – 3377 Warrensville Center Road – Monument Sign: Shaker Rocks. Jeff Gibbon, Gibbon Architecture, said this is a monument sign for the front yard of this business. It is not illuminated and is proposed to have a ground-mounted light. It is a flat panel with ¼” relief for the lettering. The owner wants to increase visibility due to the new development adjacent to them on Warrensville Center Road. Mr. Feinstein noted this is the third primary sign for the business. A variance is required. The height size and location of this monument sign meet code. Mr. Neville asked if the bottom edge is on a post or at grade. Mr. Gibbon confirmed the bottom edge of the sign is proposed at grade. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 8 of 11 Approved. * * * * ABR25-000202 – 3270 Glencairn Road – Solar Panels. Justin Scharfeld, Yellowlite, said this is a 20 panel system with 18 panels on the front roof and two on the rear roof. This will provide a 67 percent offset of their electricity. The equipment goes down to the back corner of the house. Mr. Berlekamp asked why it is not centered on the front roof. Mr. Scharfeld said the panels cannot always be centered based on access requirements. Approved with the condition that the front panels are centered on the roof. Submit revised plans for administrative review. * * * * ABR25-000170 – 3110 Keswick Road – Resubmission: Façade Alteration. Mr. Feinstein reviewed the comments from the previous meeting. Kris, Daiso Construction, said they are proposing to re-use the brick from the previous chimney in order to infill the first floor wall. The window stone detail is there. They propose stucco and ½ timbering on the second floor. Mr. Neville suggested they remove one of the vertical timbers. Mr. Berlekamp agreed that would mirror what is on the opposite of the nearby windows to the left. Approved with the condition that one vertical timber trim piece is removed from the second floor design and another vertical trim timber moved to just below the roof valley. Submit revised plans for Board review. * * * * ABR25-000205 – 17713 Fernway Road – New Garage. John D’Amico, Great Garage Company, said they will be replacing an 18 by 20 foot reverse gable garage with a 22 by 21 foot reverse gable garage in the same location. They proposed GAF pewter color asphalt shingles with double 5 inch lap siding in maple color and white trim. The doors will also be white. Approved. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 9 of 11  * * * * ABR25-000155 – 23500 Laureldale Road – Resubmission: Landscape Elements. Anthony Angelotta, Angelotta Landscape, said the rear wall and pillars will be painted brick. The wing walls will be stone. Mr. Neville asked about the detail on the posts for the pergola. Mr. Angelotta said the posts will be wrapped with azek and the trim is noted. Mr. Neville said he would like to see the detail and how it intersects with the louvered roof. Mr. Angelotta said the manufacturer will not make drawings until they order, and he cannot order until the details are approved. It was generally agreed that just the post detail could be submitted without the rest of pergola and louvered roof final plans needing to be submitted for design review. Approved with the condition that final pergola details are submitted. Submit revised plans for administrative review. * * * * ABR25-000203 – 3671 Traynham Road – Preliminary Review: Shingle Color. Alexander Steeb, homeowner, explained his roof is failing. He identified a preferred color for his new roof shingle. He has been informed the original material for his house was wood shake. He showed how this shingle looks next to his house wall and photos of it installed in Cleveland Heights. Mr. Feinstein said the Architectural Board of Review Design Guidelines for roof are meant to replicate an original material, typically slate, tile or wood shake. * * * * Mr. Berlekamp left the meeting. * * * * Mr. Feinstein noted he is not aware if this color had ever been proposed to the Board before. Mr. Walter said he thinks for this house the roof color is generally acceptable, but he does not want to set a precedent for all homes. This approval is for this particular home with white trim and the simplicity of the roofline, as well as the tone of the red brick. Approved due to the house roof pitch, roof style, and house trim color. Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 10 of 11  * * * * ABR25-000157 – 3131 Warrington Road – Preliminary Review: Addition. Jill Brandt, Brandt Architecture, explained this proposal is for a two story addition at the rear of the house. The screened porch would be removed and replaced with the new construction. The siding is a straight edge cedar shake to match the house. The windows also match the original house. Melissa Westbrook, owner, said they have lived here for 16 years. They are happy with the design and it is a better use for this space. The neighbors are generally supportive. Mr. Neville said he sees why there are no windows on the rear elevation. This comes together well. Mr. Leskosky asked if the windows toward the driveway could be more symmetrical or at least more deliberate. Approved with the condition that the windows on the second floor of the driveway side are shifted to better align with the first floor elements. Submit revised plans for Board review. * * * * ABR25-000194 – 22175 Byron Road – New Siding. Kyle Jansen, Lindsey Construction and Design, representing Charles McCandlish, homeowner. Applicant not present. Item not reviewed. * * * * Other Business 21500 Shelburne Road—Window Color. Approved with the condition that the painting of the existing windows, sided portions of the home and trim are painted as proposed within 12 months. 16105 Fernway Road—Chimney Color. Approved painting the stucco portion of the chimney to match the body color of the house. * * * * There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:30 p.m. The next meeting will be February 2, 2025. _________________________________ _________________________________ James Neville, Chair Hans Walter, Vice Chair Architectural Board of Review Architectural Board of Review Architectural Board of Review 08/18/2025 Page 11 of 11