Plain City officials are considering changes to the village ordinances that govern building designs in the Uptown Historic District.
During Wednesday’s council work session, Village Administrator Nathan Cahall said the ordinance that provides guidelines for the Design Review Board “could have more clarity and specificity.”
“It would be a good idea… that the ambiguity be eliminated,” Cahall said.
He noted that there are two sections of the ordinance that address building design.
One is titled “standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings,” which relies on criteria established by the U.S. Department of the Interior.
The other section, “design guidelines,” includes standards for appropriate materials, colors and signs.
Cahall said each section – Chapter 1327.08 and 1327.09 – was recently reviewed by the village’s legal counsel.
Before the review, Cahall said village staff was under the impression that the first section applied solely to historic buildings, mainly in the Uptown District, while the second section affected other buildings.
However, Solicitor Paul Lafayette said that is not the case.
Cahall said the second section uses the word “also,” which makes guidelines from the federal government applicable to all Uptown buildings.
He said it becomes a policy decision for council to determine whether the standards should apply to all properties in the Uptown district. Cahall noted that newer buildings, such as Mike’s Pit Stop, may not necessarily need to abide by historic preservation guidelines.
The administrator noted that the village is currently going through a zoning code rewrite, driven by a steering committee comprised of community stakeholders.
He said changes to the design guidelines could be incorporated through the rewrite.
Council member Shannon Pine said she feels it would be wise to develop design guidelines and a manual specific to Plain City. Along with historic buildings, she said it should address undeveloped properties.
Cahall said it would be possible to create a “Macy’s catalog” that details approved design items, such as window trim and doorway options.
While this could be helpful to property owners and developers, Cahall said council will face some challenges in establishing a definitive design guide.
He emphasized that Plain City is unlike some historic areas in that its buildings were constructed throughout different eras.
“We have pre-Civil War to pre-Depression buildings… there’s a lot of variation in the architecture,” Cahall said.
He said council may need to identify each historic building and create standards that require owners to maintain a specific era of that structure.
Regardless, Cahall said council members will have to ask themselves what “design aesthetic” the ordinances should uphold.
Council President John Rucker said the Design Review Board serves to fill in the gaps.
“If we were just going to set up a set of standards and rules, there’d be no need for DRB,” he said, adding that the board “is meant to interpret and compromise.”
Council member Frank Reed, though, said he does not feel DRB members can “go above the code.”
Pine countered that design guidelines are not codified. Instead, the code explicitly allows the board to grant deviations when in the public interest or warranted by special circumstances.
Reed said his “wish” is to “maintain the historic district as close as we can.”
He argued that changes to the area would detract from tourism in Plain City.
“Tourist buses will come to see an authentic historic district,” Reed said. “The way it’s going is going to take that away and not replace it.”
To preserve the area as is, Reed said council should have the option to review every decision made by the Design Review Board.
Pine and Rucker were adamantly opposed to his recommendation.
Pine noted that applicants already have an option to appeal DRB decisions to council.
Rucker said council intentionally delegates responsibility to DRB. He said he felt Reed’s distrust for DRB members was clouding his opinion.
“You have something going against the DRB and you won’t let it go,” Rucker said to Reed. “I think it’s time to let it go.”
Council member Michael Terry agreed that the design ordinances likely need to be revised.
However, he said he feels any “major changes” should wait until feedback is given from the zoning code rewrite steering committee.
“As important as it may be, we have to rely on the current code until the rewrite is done,” Terry said.
Cahall said village staff is aiming to bring items from the steering committee before council within the next 45 days. From there, he said they hope to host public hearings on proposed changes before the end of the year.