DRC approves exterior modifications for 130 Mill Street with split-face masonry condition

The Grass Valley Development Review Committee approved exterior modifications proposed for 130 Mill Street on Jan. 28, conditionally requiring split-face masonry at the rear and expressing a preference for the gable (A2) canopy option.

Miranda from planning presented the project for the structure originally built about 1859 and listed as a Priority 3 building in the Grass Valley historical inventory. The applicant proposes to remove the existing front facade below the canopy, set the new façade back about 9 feet to create an outdoor patio, relocate the front door to the left, and install a four-panel, vertically sliding window that can collapse to open the interior to the patio. The rear canopy crosses the neighboring property line in its current form; the applicant proposed two rear-canopy options (A2 with a gable roof and B2 with a shed roof). Planning staff noted that if the rear canopy is reconstructed in a way that rebuilds a legal nonconforming encroachment, the applicant must apply for a minor use permit — that requirement is included as a condition in the recommended approval.

Gary Burke, the project architect, told the committee he prefers the A2 gable elevation because it "breaks up that facade" and that he considered durability and operational needs when evaluating materials. Committee members and the architect discussed materials for a new enclosure between the indoor space and the patio; the historical commission had earlier expressed a preference for a painted concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall over corrugated metal. Several DRC members expressed concern about painted CMU weathering and recommended a more durable, textured finish. The committee ultimately conditioned approval on a split-face CMU at the rear, with a preference that the applicant explore a 4-inch split-face unit or a true brick veneer as alternatives.

Committee members also raised mechanical and code considerations: the applicant noted that a steeper canopy pitch would raise required exhaust-hood height under the mechanical code (the hood must be a set distance above the roof high point), which would create technical and visual impacts; that constraint factored in the applicant’s preference for the selected roof form. Members discussed trash handling (shared dumpsters in a common area), the potential need for full-height side walls where the new structure abuts property lines, and security measures for the recessed display area. The DRC found the project acceptable for a Priority 3 structure and voted to approve the minor development review with the masonry condition and the listed findings and conditions; the motion included the CEQA categorical exemption (Section 15301, Class 1) noted in the staff report.

The project approval includes the requirement that the applicant obtain any building-department clearances regarding fire-separation or side-wall ratings and obtain a minor use permit if required for the rear canopy reconstruction. The committee indicated staff should work with the applicant to confirm final materials and any code-driven changes prior to permit issuance.