Zionsville Architectural Review Committee (ZARC)

Zionsville Architectural Review Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, Nov 26th, 2013 Attendees: Chris Bucher Tom Casalini Eileen Davis Brad Johnson Dave Rausch Mike Zeller The meeting opened about 7:30am with President Dave Rausch opening the meeting in the Fireplace Room with review of the Agenda. Quorum was present th Motion by Mike Zeller to approve the Agenda, Approve the Minutes of November 12 , and table the th th Sept 24 Minutes until the regular meeting on Dec 17 . 2nd by Tom Casalini Agenda & Minutes and Table the Sept 24thMinutes approved unanimously. Old Business: -A Updates on Prior Minutes 1. 160 S. Main/Cobblestone a. Awaiting any construction to begin b. Tom Casalini offered to reach out and see what the status of the project is currently. c. There was a question about when the money needed to be spent, and it was confirmed that the project only needed to be finished within 1 year of approval and the funds from 2013 would be available for this if it gets done in 2014. 2. 40 S Main / Ciao a. This project will be starting very soon. b. There will be approximately only 10-12 days of construction c. The building owner and contractor want to have this finished in December. At 7:51 David Rausch recused himself from the committee and Brad Johnson was recognized as the Chair. Tom Casalini also recused himself from the committee. David Rausch introduced himself as the architect of the 10 ½ N Main/Casalini Project. 3. 10 ½ N Main / Casalini a. David Rausch said that they just got some thing from the Indiana State Dept of Homeland Security. b. It was explained that because there might be “public” on the balcony that additional bracing would be necessary. c. Additional bracing would probably mean additional expenses. d. Eileen Davis mentioned that any changes to the structure would need to be approved by the committee even if they were necessitated by the State.  e. It was also determined that the committee could rule on a change like that via an email chain query if necessary time-wise. Tom Casalini returned to the committee at this point. David Rausch continued as the Architect for the 20 E Cedar Project 4. 20 E Cedar St /Jennings a. The project has received approval on the Development Plan from the Plan Commission. b. The project has not yet received a building permit from the Planning Dept. c. The Plan Commission desired a curb cut removed from the Cedar St entrance to the parking lot and the Town will be re-installing new sidewalk in front of this building. d. The Plan Commission requested that the entire Cedar St Edge of the parking lot be soft or edged with grass. e. This project will probably begin in February or March 5. 305 S. Main St/ The Scoop a. This likely project has already met with ZARC subcommittee of Eileen Davis and Mike Zeller. Elizabeth Demaree is the applicant. While the discussion is still very preliminary, an application could be coming very soon. b. The project will entail new porch, paint, roof and matching siding. c. This would be a retail/restaurant type project. d. There are significant issues that the Architect is working on, such as ADA compliance. There are multiple entries available for that situation. e. Mike Zeller offered that he would reach out to Elizabeth Demaree and discuss whether she needed her timing to work around the committee’s schedule or would we need to schedule a special meeting. He also wanted to remind her that this was a project that the committee is very interested, but that the grant match was an “up to 50%” and we already have limited funds available for 2014. f. It was the general consensus that the committee was interested in the project and thought it to be a good project. Reports 1. Discussion on Rules subcomittee a. Brad Johnson who continued as chair asked about “clawback” clause. I don’t remember exactly what this was in regard to. Eileen Davis reminded that there was already a 2 year rule on any of our projects and that if people make unapproved changes before that time, that we could ask for the money back. b. Mike Zeller brought up the thought of both a cap of 50% and making the match a range of 30% to 50%. nd c. The subcommittee was also working on a definition of 2 story residential and how to continue to steer away from simple maintenance work. This would mean that we make sure that words like rehabilitation were not used, but enhancement was. d. Chris Bucher noted that he was against a cap per se. That the committee has the discretion to grant what is necessary, and that we already have the basis of a cap in that we only have a certain amount of money in the budget. e. David Rausch agreed about not needing a cap, and thought there was quite a level of subjectivity of a range of the match percentage that may be a question. f. Brad Johnson thought that perhaps it should be a performance based goal/range with bigger projects getting more money. There is a perception that the 50% grant match is a hard number. g. Eileen Davis noted that the Centerpoint project ended up being a larger project and subsequently a far lower percentage than 50%. She also thought that  perhaps the rules might say “…as funds allow” instead of cap. th The next meeting of the Zionsville Architectural Review Committee would be Dec 17 2013 if there are items to be discussed. This tentative date would be sent to Ed Mitro and Janice Stevanovic. Brad Johnson asks for a motion to adjourn Tom Casalini makes motion Eileen Davis seconds the motion Respectfully submitted Chris Bucher, Secretary