Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Design Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Church of the Grove presents exterior samples; council told variances will be filed for metal panels and low windows
Summary
Church of the Grove representatives presented material samples, renderings and a floor plan and said they will submit variance requests to allow insulated metal panels and front-entry windows to extend to ground level.
Representatives for the Church of the Grove presented renderings and physical samples of exterior materials at the Walnut Grove work session and said they will file variance requests for exterior metal insulated metal panels (IMPs) and windows that extend to the ground at the front entry.
The most newsworthy detail: the church's presenter said the project team will submit variance paperwork to allow IMPs on substantial portions of the building's exterior and to allow the front-entry windows to reach the ground. The presenter described the IMP product as a long-lived, low-maintenance panel that hides fasteners, improves the building envelope and reduces insulation needs; he said the panels are typical in similar churches in the region.
Why it matters: Walnut Grove's zoning ordinance restricts extensive metal paneling to prevent low-cost metal boxes that can alter downtown character. The project team and staff discussed whether the variance should be routed through the planning commission or heard directly by council; staff said the ordinance language suggests council review is appropriate and noted past practice varies.
Design details presented included: a roughly 400-to-500-seat auditorium, a lobby and classroom layout, three primary exterior color schemes (stone, light stone, dark tone), sample IMP panels with hidden fasteners and color chips, and expanded classroom windows for natural light. The presenter said the rear elevation will use a cost-effective panel/color and that the front and left elevations will match with darker panels. The project's renderings showed stone accents, awnings and black window frames.
On procedure, staff said a variance filing will be submitted that night and that staff will scan and forward the paperwork to the attorney and council for review. Council discussion focused on meeting public-notice and advertisement requirements if a public hearing is needed. Staff and council agreed to provide the ordinance section numbers in the submission; staff cited section "6 13" and the downtown overlay district as relevant code sections.
Council and staff also discussed whether planning commission review would be redundant given prior reviews and the extent of community familiarity with the project. One council member said sending a variance to planning commission would add cost and time; staff said the city has followed different pathways on previous variance requests and that staff would review and advise on the correct procedural route.
Staff noted the variance needed to specify the ordinance sections relied on for the request. The presiding officer asked staff to scan and circulate the submittal and to advise on timeline and advertising requirements. The presenter said the team intended to proceed promptly and acknowledged there will be a public hearing if required.
Ending: Staff indicated they will circulate the variance paperwork and a timeline, and the item will appear before council for formal action if procedural requirements direct it there. No final procedural decision was made at the work session; staff will advise on plan and schedule.
