Design Review wants more clout

by JILL MAHON

Enterprise reporter

The Wellington Design Review Committee came together with Village Council in a special meeting on June 23 to propose changes to an ordinance in the zoning code that could affect all current and future downtown business owners.

As it stands, the Design Review Board serves the purpose of advising business owners on the changes they decide to make to the exterior architecture of their storefronts with the goal of preserving historical aspects of design, material, style and color.

While helpful, the suggestions of the committee are simply suggestions. It is left to the individual owner to decide whether he or she wants to take the advice into consideration when making changes.

In that aspect Wellington is unique in comparison with surrounding communities such as Amherst, Oberlin and Elyria which all have mandatory design review procedures in place. In order to have greater authority in enforcing Design Review zoning, committee members said they would like to have their own process changed in the zoning code from advisory to mandatory. The change would also make Wellington eligible for additional state grant funds.

Design Review board member Larry Querin explained some of the struggles the committee has faced in recent months.

"We felt like we were wasting our time telling people what to do when some thumb their noses at us and walk away. It's unfair to the person who does what you ask them to do," Querin said. "We don't want to be the paint police, we want to be an advisory board who helps you through your process."

General discord prevailed throughout meeting discussions with some attendees naming the positive aspects of a mandatory rule and others set firmly against it. Part of the problem was caused by the varying viewpoints on what makes Wellington a historical village and exactly what that means for a thriving downtown.

Former library director Pat Lindley described Wellington's rich "character" as an important asset.

"Being historical and beautiful is what Wellington has to sell; it is what makes it a destination," she said. "By not having mandatory design review Wellington is losing something."

Main Street Wellington director Mike Eppley and council member Harold Sumpter also agreed about the profitability of the village's historical nature. Mandatory design review, they said, would help keep that history intact.

"Businesses who come to Wellington are going to be buying it for the way it is now, not for the way it would be if it were brought up to modern standards," Sumpter said.

However, the possibility of pushing away current business owners who may feel threatened if the rule is enacted is also quite high.

Council member Guy Wells brought a different side of the situation to light when he described mandatory design review as "an imposition of government power that they (business owners) didn't bargain for when they bought these places."

Remodeling buildings in a way appropriate for the time period in which they were constructed is not always possible for business owners, Wells said, and while it is nice to "preserve the feeling," repairing historically used materials is not always the safest option.

"We have what we have because people freely did what they've done here," Wells said. "The 'magic' is nice, but you can't force it. Things are the way they are because business owners made it that way."

Richard McHugh, chairman of the village planning commission agreed with Wells saying the nature of the committee was made advisory "under an assumption of the 'American Way' and business owners can do what they want with their property and bystanders cannot, do not have that right."

If the counseling procedures of the Design Review Committee are changed from advisory to mandatory any plans for exterior changes in the downtown area must be approved and deemed acceptable by the committee under Secretary of Interior standards before they are carried out. Any objections business owners have could be appealed in court, but if they choose to ignore committee advice under a mandatory rule altogether, penalties may be incurred including 30 days in jail and up to a $250 fine.