Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permits And Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landmarks commission approves several exterior‑work permits, tables two applications for more information
Summary
On June 22 the Canal Winchester Landmarks Commission approved routine exterior projects (roof replacements, two fences, a shed), and tabled CA‑26‑018 and CA‑26‑019 to allow applicants to supply additional documentation and contractor specifications.
The Canal Winchester Landmarks Commission approved a batch of routine applications at its June 22 meeting and tabled two items pending further documentation.
Approvals at a glance: commissioners unanimously approved four applications: - CA‑26‑020 (100 W. Columbus St.): approval to replace roof shingles on the house and detached outbuilding with a black dimensional shingle as presented. - CA‑26‑021 (19 E. Oak St.): approval for a new 4‑ft wood picket fence in the rear yard, including two gates and a double gate at the back; applicant proposed cedar, left natural. - CA‑26‑022 (15 E. Columbus St.): approval for a decorative front rod‑iron fence and to install previously authorized copper downspouts that were not installed earlier. - CA‑26‑024 (132 W. Columbus St.): approval to remove an old shed and install a new 12x12 structure using T1‑11 siding, recycled barn windows, cedar trim and either asphalt shingles or a standing‑seam roof.
Two items tabled for more details: the commission tabled CA‑26‑018 (74 N. High St.) at the applicant’s request so a landmarks review and outstanding materials can be finalized. The commission also tabled CA‑26‑019 (260 N. High St.) after staff and commissioners identified rot under the eaves and insufficient detail in the contractor's quote; the homeowner (Trish) asked to reach her contractor by phone. Trish told the commission she had been "on the phone with my contractor and they are pretty sure that they can do the tongue and groove" repairs but commissioners required contractor‑provided material specs and photos showing the replacement matches the existing tongue‑and‑groove before new shingles are installed.
Votes and procedure: each routine approval passed on unanimous roll call. Motions to table the two items also passed unanimously; staff will place the tabled items on a future agenda once applicants supply the requested contractor specs, material samples and/or updated applications.
What happens next: for the tabled roof application (CA‑26‑019) the commission asked that any repairs to historic rafter tails be made before roofing work that would prevent later access; the applicant must bring contractor specifications or samples to the next meeting or be placed back on the agenda. For CA‑26‑018 the applicant requested a one‑month table to complete Landmark Commission requested materials.
