Plain City Council pushed back against a plan to eliminate the village’s Uptown Historic District and Design Review Board, voting to strike the proposal from its agenda.
“I could never support this,” Council member Frank Reed said. “It just looks like a big loophole to me for… staff and developers to do whatever they want to in Plain City.”
Village Planner Derek Hutchinson said, if approved, the proposed ordinance would delete Chapter 1327 from Plain City’s codified ordinances, which establishes and governs the Uptown Plain City Historic District.
Instead, a zoning overlay district would be created covering nearly the same boundaries.
Hutchinson said the overlay would aim to “keep the historic look and feel” of the area but remove the historic guidelines and review process.
“It will no longer be a true historic district,” Hutchinson said.
The proposal was unanimously approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on Nov. 15 but faced pushback from council and residents who spoke during the public hearing on Monday.
Council voted 3-2 to remove the first reading of an ordinance that would create the “Uptown Commercial Overlay District” and remove the historic design guidelines from the building code.
Reed, who motioned to remove the ordinance, said he did not feel it was “in good enough shape or represents the views of council.”
Along with Reed, Council members James Sintz and John Rucker voted in favor of removing the first reading, while Michael Terry and Kerri Ferguson dissented. Jim Eudaily was absent.
The vote follows months of discussion as to how to improve Plain City’s code and reduce the number of appeals filed regarding Design Review Board decisions.
Previously, council voiced support for keeping DRB in place but revising the code it enforces.
The proposed overlay includes a code that lays out design standards and guidelines to be followed within the area, detailing things ranging from the exterior walls to painted surfaces, to awnings and signs.
At the suggestion of council, the code is accompanied by a complementary “style guide” that includes photo examples of the types of building designs and features that have been approved by the village.
Hutchinson said the Uptown Commercial Overlay District dictates that buildings within it will reflect a “predominant theme,” including brick facades and the allowance of only paint listed on the Sherwin Williams historical palette.
DRB would no longer exist, though, and decisions would fall to another committee or the village’s zoning staff.
Hutchinson said major exterior modifications would go before the Planning and Zoning Commission to ensure they are compatible with surrounding buildings. Minor changes would be reviewed by staff and approved or denied administratively.
Any appeals would go before the Board of Zoning Appeals, then judges in the Madison County court system.
Reed said he felt the proposed plan is an attempt to cut council out of development.
“I can’t believe it’s by accident,” he said.
Reed told Hutchinson that he feels the goal of the proposed code is not to protect the historic district, but to “open it up to commercial.”
“Poof! Say goodbye to your historic district,” he said.
Several residents also shared concerns during the public hearing regarding the proposed changes.
Eric Medici, who owns a number of Uptown properties, said he feels the Historic District protects the character and history of the community, as well as property values in the village.
“Most communities would celebrate the day that they got a bona fide historic district and you guys are killing it – just killing it – today,” he said.
He also noted that council members have previously voiced support for keeping the Design Review Board in place.
“What (Hutchinson) is giving you tonight is what you guys said you didn’t want,” Medici said.
Ina Medici agreed, questioning “how we flip flopped” from opposing the elimination of DRB to considering an ordinance that would do so.
“I’m a little shocked that it has come to this,” she said.
Aside from voting on the removal of the ordinance, Reed was the only council member to comment on the proposal.
He said, if changes are made that he feels better reflect the views of the community, he feels the ordinance could then come before council for a first reading, though no concrete plans for moving forward were shared.