Denison Defies Judge Spahr: Cleveland Hall Construction Resumes

Construction workers are back in Cleveland Hall in defiance of Judge Jon Spahr’s order that construction stop. Activity continues, but Denison says it’s only receiving deliveries of electrical equipment.

Denison appears to have resumed construction without the knowledge of the Village. Allison Terry, Granville Village Planner said today, “They were told to do nothing in there.” She did not know why workers were present on the site, but said the Village would investigate.

Lights were on in the building, doors were open and workers could be seen going in and out wearing their hardhats. Several worker’s trucks were parked on College Street near the open gates to the construction site. It could not be determined what the workers were doing, but the sound of pounding could be heard.

The Granville Sentinel reports that Seth Patton, Denison Vice President, said, “We are about to file an application for a new permit to be able to work on things not requiring architectural review,” said Patton on Monday. “There is some question if it is necessary. It could be that the existing permit (granted by the village when it approved the project) allows us to go ahead.”

According to Section 1161.02 of the Village Planning and Zoning Code, “…all applications for Zoning and Architectural Permits in the Architectural Review Overlay District which propose new construction, exterior modification and/or structural alteration shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission to determine that the proposed new construction, exterior modification or structural alteration…”

“Structural alteration” is defined in the Code’s Section 1135.01, Definitions, as: “(103) “Structural alteration” means any change in the structural members of a building, such as walls, columns, beams or girders.” As a consequence, since they are performing “structural alterations,” Denison must submit its plans for continuation of work within the old building to the Planning Commision for a public hearing.

It is unlikely that the citizen appellants in this matter will oppose the continuation of renovation within Cleveland Hall. In their contra memorandum responding to Denison’s motion to modify Judge Spahr’s decision, appellants wrote they “…continue to desire that Cleveland Hall be preserved and renovated, and have no objection to continued work on the interior of the original building or any work necessary for safety and security of the site. Appellants do not wish to see Denison University suffer unnecessary costs and delays.”

On March 10, Judge Spahr ruled that Denison did not have a valid construction permit for the Cleveland Hall restoration and additions. In response, on March 25, Denison asked for a partial modification of that ruling that would permit continued work on the interior of the old building. Denison also asked to continue construction of two of the three modern additions.

In his decision, Judge Spahr wrote “Insofar as appellees request the Court to modify the judgment to allow Denison to proceed with construction according to the architectural plans for which Denison no longer has a valid permit, the motion is DENIED.”

Click here to view Judge Spahr’s decision.

See previous stories on the Cleveland Hall Issue: