Upcoming Events

Click here for the full Community Calendar.

Thursday
Jun092016

GPC 09/13/99

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 13,1999
DRAFT
Members Present:Jack Burriss, Bernie Lukco,Richard Salvage,Carl Wilkenfeld
Acting Chair)
Members Absent: Keith Myers C( hair)B,ill Wernet
Also Present:Kathryn Wimberger,Village Planner
Visitors Present: Scott Rawden SentineD, Ned Roberts,Sara Lee,Brian Corbett,Mark
Julie Zarbaugh, Jed and Jill Levere
Citizens'Comments: none
The Acting Chair swore in all those who planned to speak)
Minutes:
Minutes of August 23,1999: Consideration ofMinutes was postponed until
more members are present. MR. LUKCO MOVED TO TABLE
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. MR.
BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
New Business:
Mark Zarbaugh,313 Spellman Street
The applicant is requesting (1)to replace existing rectangular window on east
elevation with octagon window. The new window will match an octagon window on the
west side. 2 ( )To install a carport to be attached to the garage for his boat. It will have a
canopy and the trim will match colors of the house. He wants to enlarge the driveway to
make it easier to get in and out, and the project will meet all specifications ofNewark's L
code. The carport will jut out 3' beyond the garage and will extend 26' toward the front.
The roofwill be slightly pitched. The aluminum posts would be 21' back and 7 1/2' from
each other
Mr. Burriss thought the project lacked aesthetics and the group worked with Mr.
Zarbaugh to come up with a more attractive style. The applicant said there are similar
carports in the village, and he would be happy to bring in photos of them. He thought a
new carport would lessen the impact of looking at a boat. Mr. Wilkenfeld would also like
to see photos of how the carport woyld look on the site.
r Il3, %DC-- *A- S»pe.-78a L*
The application will be considered in two phases.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE WINDOW AS
PROPOSED IN THE APPLICATION ( PHASE I).
HE ALSO MOVED TO TABLE ( PER APPLICANT'S REQUEST)THE
BALANCE OF THE APPLICATION PENDING RECEIPT OF FURTHER
2 -i
GPC Minutes, Monday,September 13, 1999
INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT. MR.BURRISS SECONDED,
AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Brian Corbett,211 East Elm Street
Mr. Corbett wishes to install a white picket fence with gates and arbor around the
perimeter ofthe yard. He provided pictures and stated that they will not be adding a gate,
and the fence stops 22'from the back ofthe yard. The area will be gravelled,not paved.
Landscaping could be added later. He was not certain whether to use arched or even
pickets in the arbor.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION SUBJECT TO (1)
THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION BEING SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE IN
THE DRAWINGS. 2 ( )MR. SALVAGE UNDERSTANDS THEREWILL BE
42"HIGH PICKETS. 3 ()THE ARBOR ENTRANCE TO BE REVIEWED BY
THE VILLAGE PLANNER UPON LEARNING EXACTLY WHAT STYLE
MR. CORBETT WILL SELECT. ( 4)FENCE ON EAST SIDE WILL STOP 22'
FROM THE NORTH LINE. MR. BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Sara-Lee, 124 South Cherry Street-
Mr. Wimberger stated that the applicant two years ago received permission to
build a similar addition but oriented differently. She never got around to building it,and
now she will shift it to create a private counyard in the back. Ned Roberts added that it
will be in the back and not very visible from the street. It will have the same pitch as
existing house and no windows will face neighbors. A.C. will be moved back behind the
addition.
MR. LUCKO MOVED THAT THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED AS
DEFINED IN THE APPLICATION. MR. SALVAGE SECONDED,AND IT
WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
OId Business:
James and Jill LeVere,216 North Granger Street
In order to adhere with BZBA requirements of 6' of landscaping,the LeVeres are
changing the elevations on their plans and replacing the garage door on north with
windows and changing other windows also. He wants to make the drivewa9 enter offthe
alley w(hich apparently is frequently used)and move it back,but GPC has no authority to
approve entrance offan alley. Village Council must approve this. He has concerns about
the neighbor's footers and erosion and will regrade the surface along garage to make it
even. The windows will be like those above the proposed windows. Landscaping will be
added.
2_
m / 4& ./
GPC Minutes, Monday,September 13, 1999
MR. LUKCO MOVED TO APPROVE MODIFICATIONS TO THE
APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS: ( 1)NORTH ELEVATION,
ELIMINATE GARAGE DOOR AND ADD WINDOWS SIM[ LAR TO C
STYLE WINDOWS; ( 2)ELIMINATE LIGHTS ON EITHER SIDE OF WHERE
GARAGE DOOR WAS TO BE;3 ()NORTH ELEVATION,ELIMINATE D
WINDOW AND CHANGE THE WINDOWS ON THE NORTH FROM A TO B
WINDOWS. ALSO,ELIMINATE BOTH J KITCHENWINDOWS;4 ()SOUTH
ELEVATION,ELIMINATE 3 K WINDOWS AND INSTALL 3 A WINDOWS.
MR. BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Village Of Granville,141 East Broadway
Ms. Wimberger presented the application for remodelling the building. Because
the leaking roof must be repaired as soon as possible,the Village wishes to remodel
exterior ofbuilding also. This can be done in two phases. The roofwill have something
like a 3 1/2' high widow's walk railing on rooftop,and a pediment with window will
enhance the entrance. Mr. Burriss likes aluminum or plastic to look like wood for the
railing. The shingles would be charcoal black with variation,and the pediment would be
stucco or painted brick. Some members did not like painted bricks.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE BUILDING ROOF AND
PEDIMENT AS PER EXHIBIT A WITH WIDOW'S WALK,FINIAL
RAILING,AND ORIEL WINDOW TO BE AS SPECIFIED PER AGREEMENT
WITH MR. BURRISS REPRESENTING GPC. THERE WILL BE CHARCOAL
BLACK SHINGLES AND THE RAILING TO BE UP TO 42"IN WHITE.
PEDIMENT TO BE BRICK TO MATCH THE BUILDING AS CLOSELY AS
POSSIBLE. MR. LUKCO SECONDED, AND PHASE I WAS
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
For Phase II, discussion ensued on windows and addition of a clock, bright
awnings, kiosk, etc. It's important to keep enough light,and members liked the fact that
passers-by can look into the office. Ms. Wimberger will take these comments under
advisement.
Work Session:
Certified Oil
Ms. Wimberger explained the changes which Certified has envisioned with changes
proposed for South Main. Sidewalk will be approximately where the ditch is located. The
IGA sign will have to come down. Certified would have two bays,and they want a
canopy over the existing kiosk. GPC had some concerns for their site plans:
3
GPC Minutes, Monday,September 13, 1999
Lighting needs to be low. Streetlights may be added.
Landscaping plan necessary
Monument sign with gas prices with spotlight,not internally lit (see Ordinances)
New shingles
Enclose posts with brick
Roofing color should be subtle
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO ADOPT THE FINDINGS FOR A (for the
windowsB), f(or the pedimentC),,and D UNDER NEW BUSINESSZ (arbaugh,
Village,Corbett,Lee)AND A (as modified)UNDER OLD BUSINESS ( LeVere)
AS FORMAL DECISION OF THE COMMISSION. MR. WILKENFELD
SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Next Meetings:
September 20 -Sign Ordinance
September 27 -Regular meetingM ( r. Lukco absent)
October 4 ir(regular dates because ofholiday) R -egularMeetingsM ( r. Lukco absent)
October 18 i(rregular)R -egular MeetingM ( r. Lukco and Mr.Wilkenfeld absent)
October 25 -Sign Ordinance
Adjournment: 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
43

Thursday
Jun092016

GPC 10/18/99

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
October 18,1999
Minutes
Members Present: Jack Burriss,Keith Myers C( hairR),ichard Salvage,Bill Wernet,
Members Absent: Bernie Lukco,Carl Wilkenfeld
Also Present:Kathryn Wimberger,Village Planner
Visitors Present: Scott Rawdon SentineD,Larry Miller,Jill Roberts,Larry Harer
Citizen's Comments: none
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak)
Minutes of August 16,1999:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED; MR.
BURRISS SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Minutes of October 4,1999:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED;MR.
BURRISS SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
New Business:
Everen Securities,527 NewarkG-ranville Road S-ign
Ms. Wimberger stated that this application will be considered a modification from an
incomplete one submitted in September. Because of a name change to First Union,Mr. Miller is
requesting a new sign incorporating the new name as well as that ofMoundbuilders Real Estate,a
new tenant. The sign will replace the existing ground sign. They request a second identical sign
to be hung on the deck at the rear of the building,between the floor and the railing. The one in
the rear will not be visible to the street.
Mr. Myers felt that the sign was too high and would rather see it lowered by 2'- 4'.
Procedurally,Mr. Myers stated,we have (1)one modified application. The original
application did have two signs on it,but was incomplete. 2 ( )Mr.Miller is not the owner of the
building;Bob Kent is,but he gave Mr.Miller approval to proceed with the sign applications.3 ()
Is this a major modification. 4 ( )There is no application for the wall sign in the rear.
Mr. Burriss questioned the style ofthe sign,saying the two businesses should be similar in
graphics. Mr. Miller will consult with his sign maker to coordinate the signs. Mr. Burriss prefers
both backgrounds to be green,and Mr. Wernet suggested elongating the word " Securities"for
consistency.
Mr. Salvage is willing to approve application as long as the Village Planner approves the
redesigned sign.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED THAT BOTH THIS APPLICATION,99113,AND THE ONE
SUBMITTED IN SEPTEMBER BE MERGED INTO A SINGLE APPLICATION
WITH CORRECTION NOTING ROBERT KENT AS OWNER AND THE NUMBER
GPC Minutes,October 18, 1999
OF SIGNS CHANGED TO TWO. MR.BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR.SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 99113 SUBJECT TO THE
FOLLOWINGCONDITIONS: 1 ()BACKGROUND COLORFORBOTH SIGNS TO
BE GREEN AS PRESENTED2; ()OVERALL HEIGHT OF FRONT YARD SIGNBE
LOWERED BY2'4-';3 )(THE SECOND SIGN TO BE MOUNTED ON THE DECK
RAILING ON THE BACK OF THE BUILDING;4 ()IF APPLICANTWISHES TO
MAKE A MINOR CHANGE IN GRAPHICS,THE VILLAGE PLANNER CAN
APPROVE IT. MR.BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
Jill Roberts and other tenants,110 East Elm -Signs
Ms.Wimberger explained that a sign package for the commercial buildings was approved
a few years ago which allowed three signs on one pole and two on the other. Plaques were to go
near the doors.There are three applications before us. Ms.Roberts added that these are new
designs and the additional sign is on her door. The sign that would go on the door is not going to
actually increase the overall signage for the building because some ofthe other signs are not being
used.
1)The first sign application,99123,is for a two-sided ground sign in the existing frame on the
east,including the Sentinel sign on the side wall. The Sentinel sign will be moved next to their
door. Mr.Myers preferred the background colors to be the same,but Ms.Roberts likes them as
the application shows,with muted colors. She will not try to match the old,worn out Curtis sign.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 99123 AS PRESENTED.
MR.BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2)Application 99127 is for a white-lettered door sign for Jill Roberts. She said it would be the
same logo but smaller letters, with address,phone number,and email added.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE 99127 AS SUBMITTED. MR. BURRISS
SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
3)Application 99128 is for a ground sign for Superior Land Title and wall signs
plaques)to be installed next to the second floor two doors for Superior Land Title S(. Main St.
buildinga)nd Ruth Garrett e(ast building).
Mr. Wernet does not get a sense ofconsistency among all the signs. While Ruth Garrett's
wall sign is appropriate,Superior Land Title has two quite different styles.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE 99128 WITH CONDITION THAT
APPROVAL ONLY RELATES TO RUTH GARRETT'S WALL PLAQUE SIGN. MR.
BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2
Granville Goodyear,Larry Harer,200 East Broadway
GPC Minutes, October 18, 1999
The applicant wishes an identical permanent sandwich board to replace the temporary one
previously granted for 60 days. The present sign is blue and white,whereas the approval was for
black lettering. GPC members walked over to look at the sign and determined it was acceptable.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED;MR.
BURRISS SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Old Business:
Granville Goodyear,Larry Harer,200 East Broadway
The applicant requests approval of different colors for the temporary banner sign,
Approval No. 99096. The sign exhibits not the red and white colors approved by the GPC but
yellow background with blue letters. The group must determine whether this is a minor change
for different colors.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO CONSIDER 99096-M AS A MINOR MODIFICATION.
MR. BURRISS SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE BANNER WITH THE CONDITION
THAT IT BE KEPT UP NO LONGER THAN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ( 60 DAYS).
MR. BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Myers added that the color situation is not a very good practice by the applicant and he hopes
it will not recur.
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO ADOPT THE FINDINGS FOR A,B, and C UNDER
NEW BUSINESS E(veren,Roberts,and Goodyeara),nd A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AS
FORMAL DECISION OF THE COMMISSION. MR. BURRISS SECONDED,AND
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Closing Comments:Mr. Wernet stated that with regard to PUD final plans, the Ohio Supreme
Court has ruled that the final plans are subject to referendum;this means that we may have to
treat them as legislative rather than administrative. Mr. Hurst,Village Law Director,is looking
into this.
Next Meetings: November 8 and 22
Sign Code Meetings: November 1 and 15
Adjournment: 8:43 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen

Thursday
Jun092016

GPC 10/04/99

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
October 4,1999
Minutes
Members Present: Keith Myers C( hair)R,ichard Salvage,Bill Wernet,Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent: Jack Burriss,Bernie Lukco
Also Present:Kathryn Wimberger,Village Planner
Visitors Present: Shirley Johnson,Dan Leavell
Citizen's Comments: none
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.)
Minutes of September 20,1999:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED;MR.
WILKENFELD SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Minutes of September 27,1999:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED; MR.
WILKENFELD SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
New Business:
The Murphy Group,Lot 11220 Wexford Drive -Lot Split
Ms. Wimberger stated that the applicant wishes to arrange a lot split without plat.
She told Shirley Johnson that this would make the lots too small ( zoning standards not
met)and suggested making them part of the adjoining properties on Trinity Court. The
lot split could be approved conditionally.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION WITH THE
CONDITION THAT THE PARCEL BEING SPLIT BE COMBINED WITH
LOTS 11219 AND 11218 TO MAKE TWO LARGE LOTS ( REMEDIAL LOT
COMBINATION).MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Dan Leaveil,234 West Elm Street -Shed
The applicant wishes to build a shed in a corner ofthe back yard 5' from side and
rear property lines. It does not need a variance because it is not permanent. Mr. Leavell
stated that he has a small back yard but needs a shed for storage because the garage is
small. The shed will be well hidden behind foliage and will tidy up the yard. It will be a
simple design with an overhang roof,with a little window and little door and T-111 siding.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS PRESENTED.
MR..WILKENFELD SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
GPC Minutes,October 6, 1999
Discussion: Ms.Wimberger brought up the issue ofaddressing criteria for approval,
saying that GPC should move to approve and then refer to the specific criteria,i.e.,is the
structure in keeping with the neighborhood;massing;materials. Some concerns raised
were as follows:
Mr. Salvage thought Ms. Wimberger could prepare the Finding ofFacts in advance
Could the standard Finding ofFact just refer to the relevant sections in the code?
This is on the form already}
Approve the Finding ofFact at the next meeting when our meeting is very busy at the
present time?
With a disapproval,GPC could prepare a more detailed Finding ofFact
For expediency,could we simply refer to the items on the Planner's agenda?
The secretary or somebody could write these things down at the meeting.
With no objections heard,little reference need be made
This will be addressed further at the next meeting.
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO ADOPT THE FINDINGS FOR A and B UNDER
NEW BUSINESSM (urphy and Leavell)AS FORMAL DECISION OF THE
COMMISSION. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED,AND IT WAS
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Next Meetings: i r r(egularM) onday,October 18
November 8 and 22
Sign Code Meetings: November 1 and 15
Adjournment: 7:56 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
2

Thursday
Jun092016

GPC 04/12/99

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 12, 1999
Minutes
Members Present: Bernie Lukco, Keith Myers, Richard Salvage, William Wernet, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent: Jack Burriss
Also Present: Kathryn Wimberger, Village Planner
Visitors Present: Susan Bruns, Scott Rawden (Sentinel),Patricia Egan, Ray and
Heather Titley, Bob and Ruth Lisle, Rob Drake, Rochelle Steinberg, Wayne Davison,
Eileen and Kim Schoenenberger, Robin Bartlett, Marci McCauley, Maxine Montgomery,
Barbara Franks, Stan W. Musler, Sally Hannahs, Eloise DeZwarte
Minutes of March 22, 1999: Page 3, fourth line under Rogers: c"onstruction
of the addition to the house up now." -
Page 4, Add before the motion, T"he applicant verbally agreed to table the application."
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MR. SALVAGE
SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLYAPPROVED.
Minutes of March 29: Page 1, Add to the first paragraph beginning with "Mr. Salvage."
He clarified that it was not his intention to make a recommendation but rather that that
Village Council should address the situation.
MR. LUKCO MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MR. SALVAGE
SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Salvage thought the agenda should state that the Legislative Hearing is a Public
Hearing where people may speak. In an Administrative Hearing, only those with
standing may speak.
Citizens Comments: Rochelle Steinberg spoke on behalf of the neighborhood
committee on the old Middle School building, who want to know that their concerns
about drainage will be addressed. Standing water in the empty lot will bring on health
problems, mosquitoes, and ground\ sinking. Foundations of the houses may crumble.
Mr. Salvage responded that the parking lot has not been built yet and neighbors must
be patient.
Sally Hannahs added that their patience is wearing out. For the first time there
is water in her garage. Trees are standing in water and will die when water-logged.
Marci McCaulay showed photos of the standing water. Wayne Davison added his
concerns about ground-sinking, which prevents him from mowing. Ms. Wimberger
stated that the storm-water policy has been followed.
9
Norm Kennedy, from the School Board, said they had to rebid because
estimates were higher than they could accept..Now they have to wait until conditions
are suitable to do grading.
Mr. Myers encouraged everyone to attend school board meetings, but they have
already done this.
Update on Rogers property: They are researching siding and will have an updated th
application by April 19 . They are planning to have fake windows.
New Business:
The Art Project,204 Munson Street
The applicants received approval for a sign in November but they wish to
change it at this time to an angled ground sign, less than 10 square feet. This
constitutes two signs, so they are requesting a variance. They want to hide utility
feeder lines with lattice brace posts with flowers.
MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION FOR THE SIGN AS
PRESENTED. MR. SALVAGE SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED BY VOICE VOTE.
Granville Exempted Village School District,Granger and East College Streets
All citizens who wished to speak were sworn in by the Chairman.
The School district wants to rezone from SRD-B to Village Residential District in
order to split the lot into three parcels for residential use. Norm Kennedy stated that
sizes of the three lots are compatible with the neighborhood, and the rezoning would be
contingent upon the lot split. The east side of Granger is SRD-B, while the west side
has VBD VRD, and SRD-B. Traffic would not significantly increase.
Rochelle Steinberg and the neighborhdod group discussed this and would
support a lot split only with contingentchayt-the drainage situation, water problems,
and grading be taken care of immediately. They are coming to GPC tonight to ask for
help rather than pursuing legal action.
Mr. Wilkenfeld is sympathetic to both sides and wants reassurance that
all codes be adhered with at the time of house construction. We have to be careful
about setting precedents.
Mr. Lukco has a problem with spot-zoning and thinks that the entire block
should be in the VBD, rather than SBD. Consistency is important.
2 1
Rob Drake added that historically a rezoning Salvage would be appropriate. Mr. added that changing to VRD places the area within Architectural Review.
Ms. Wimberger asked the Law Director whether the school could apply for
a lot split without plat, and he replied that it would be approved if it is rezoned. A lot split needs to be made contingent upon Village Council approval.
MR. LUKCO MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO VILLAGE COUNCIL THAT THE
PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF COLLEGE AND GRANGER (SITE OF GMS)
OWNED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD, BE CHANGED FROM SRD TO VRD. MR.
WILKENFE.D SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY VOICE VOTE.
Granville Exempted Village School District,East College at Granger Street
The School Board wishes to split a portion of their lot into three lots for
residential use. By deed restriction, access to the lots will be limited, and the proposal
would be appropriate for the neighborhood.
Robin Bartlett would like to see this proposal made contingent upon
immediate improvement in the drainage situation. Eloise Dezwarte added that given
the water problems, they will likely have trouble selling the lots.
Ms. Wimberger added that this is a request for subdivision without plat,
and the GPC has authority to request additional information.
Mr. Myers has a concern about drainage on the flat land, which occurred
after the demolition and would like to see a topologicall drawing of the lots to aid our
understanding,He wants to see engineering drawings of both pre-and postdevelopment
plans, preliminary grading study, and drainage solution with storm- water
routing,He would like to see a complete plat drawing and to learn how these matters
will affect neighbors. Mr. Salvage requested Ms. Wimberger to submit this request in
writing to the School Board.
Norm Kennedy requested that this application be tabled.
MR. LUKCO MOVED TO TABLE UNTIL WE GET THE REQUESTED INFORMATION.
MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED. AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY
ROLL CALL.
Other matters: Fee Schedule: Ms. Wimberger will seek to analyze and compare the
zoning fee schedules from neighboring communities
Sign code: Mr. Myers is working on a new Sign Code. The intent was a code for the
entire village and environs. He has been working on an easy way to compute sizes of
3
signs. He ran criteria for each zoning district. Members would like to study this
document in detail.
Finding of Fact: MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO ADOPT THE FINDING FOR A AND C
UNDER NEW BUSINESS (SCHOOL BOARD REZONING AND THE ART PROJECT)
AS FORMAL FINDING OF THE COMMISSION. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND
IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Adjournment: 9:15 p.m.
Next Meetings: April 26 and May 10, 1999
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
4

Thursday
Jun092016

GPC 04/26/99

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
April 26, 1999
Minutes
Members Present: Jack Burriss, Bernie Lukco, Keith Myers, Richard Salvage, William Wernet, Carl Wilkenfeld
Also Present: Kathryn Wimberger,Village Planner Visitors Present: Scott Rawden S(entinel)R,obert Seith, John Klein, Barbara Franks and Dan BRroygaenrsL,aBwre,NttoFramraisn, Jules Steinberg, Jim Harf,Ann Watson, Robin Bartlett, Marci McCaulay, Kennedy
Informal Workshop:Rufus Hurst, Law Director -S "tanding"
Anyone may speak at a public hearing where people are expressing opinions on rezoning. They are not giving testimony. Regarding a lot split, that is an administrative action and only people with standing may speak. This is testimony. If an individual has standing for an administrative hearing, the only time he should speak is during the hearing process. The chair determines when an administrative process is no longer productive. The applicant needs fair opportunity to present without interruption, as well as those with standing opposed to it. Then the applicant may refute after which time the chair closes the hearing. People may not speak directly to the applicant. GPC may ask any questions at any portion in the process. Mr.Hurst said they are working on devising more helpful language. If a person without standing cannot speak, he can appeal to V.C. In administrative hearings,we will recommend a court reporter be present for the record. The language defining Standing will include:the applicant, the owner of the property if not the applicant, a contiguous neighbor, a person claiming an injury or prejudice or deprived right in case the application is approved or denied. You need to show a direct relationship between the person and the outcome, rather than an abstract interest everyone has sintaint.diInfga, pGePrsCon without standing speaks and the decision is influenced by this person without may be in trouble.
The regular meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Myers.
Minutes of April 12, 1999. MR. LUKCO MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Citizens Comments: None
NEW BUSINESS: All those who wanted to speak tonight were sworn in by the Chair en masse.
Robert Seith,116 Locust Place
Mr. Seith would like to change the siding on the house and reroof the porch, restore corner brackets and add gable returns, and enlarge the posts of the porch. Mr. Seith provided a helpful historical summary with pictures and said the current siding is too big and too plain. He will remove the old siding and reside with simulated cedar shingle. GPC approv6d his original application for posts but they are too small. He will dispose of the old asbestos properly. construcMtiorn. Lukco is comfortable and thought this a good time to undertake the project with the next door.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED; MR. LUKCO SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Brett and April Faris, 428 East College Street
The applicants wish to replace existing 40y-ear old slate roof with a new dimensional asphalt shingle roof. The porch roof will be shingled to match main roof. Mr. Faris showed a sample of shingle material.
GPC Minutes,April 26, 1299
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED; MR. LUKCO
SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Bryan Law,346 East College Street
Mr.Law wishes to add a second story onto the house, 8'x25',over the rear porch and
another section of the house, maintaining style of other porch. Pitch of the roof will match
existing roof.
MR.LUKCO MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED; MR.
WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Ann M. Watson,127 West Maple Street
Ms. Watson would like to add a 6' unpainted wood privacy fence in back of the house.
MR.WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED;MR.
SALVAGE SECONDED, AND IT WS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
OLD BUSINESS:
Granville Exempted Village School District,SE Comer of Granger and East College Streets
The application for lot split was tabled at the last meeting pending receipt of further
information on drainage. BZBA has approved the shared driveway conditional upon rezoning
approval.
Norman Kennedy stated that the School Board does not want to flood out the neighbors,
and their intention is to grade from SE to NE providing a gentle slope with catch basins. He
thinks a lot of water is flowing off East Broadway. He provided a grading plan, and it is attached
to these minutes.
Mr. Burriss arrived at this point.}
Robin Bartlett fears that this plan will create a dam and not solve the problem. But Mr.
Kennedy assured her it will be graded and drained properly.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION FOR A LOT SPLIT SUBJECT TO THE
REVISED GRADING PLAN FOR ENTIRE LOT AS RECEIVED TONIGHT AND SUBJECT TO
APPROVAL OF REZONING BY VILLAGE COUNCIL. MR. LUKCO SECONDED, AND IT WAS
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Dan Rogers,210 East Maple Street
This application was tabled pending revised plans for the carriage house already built but
not according to approved plans. The applicant has submitted a pair of new elevation drawings
and prefers the one with fewer windows on the east side.
,§Lkn-
Mr. Salvage wanted to make a statement after giving this a lot of thought. He believes
that this situation crosses the line between administrative actionanu(nc*omfortable about 6
66 reconsiderinchgan.*ge* so substantially different from what was approved.aVfil*lage Council , needs to counser us. The applicant knew the buildingls not what was apprd< d.AAdr Myers said
this is a modification and whetheror not it has been built cannot enterourconsidlgrbtions. Wel1/1'
1eelt2:°1%1Z2*%St*tj'geanedshfoarpar2:n(ityudre.gr=
1%
ifti;)that. 0-f C
Mr. Lukco added that the Village Manager came to us seeking a solution so it is not necessary to h 01
return to V.C. Mr. Wernet stated that V.C. is aware of the fact that there is a modified U VCapplication
before GPC and V.C. anticipates GPC would apply the zoning ordinance for
guidance. If necessary, the applicant can appeal to V.C. Mr. Salvage concluded that if we are to
proceed, he is going to withdraw from consideration. If GPC wishes to make a motion to
recommend to V.C.to give us guidance, he will renain Consensus of the group was to continue, and Mr. Salvage withdrew.
Sl-Na =U
2
3
Barbara Franks stated that a fence to accommodate they are within variance requirements. She would like to add details of the siding the neighbors.The building will have electric heat,and she described about and of the wood pella windows. The lot is a slight slope so the house is 2' higher than the garage. Mr.Burriss asked for detail about corner boards and was told they will be there. He added that blind windows can be merely closed shutters although there are bnoalsahnuctete. rs on the house. The architectural style would allow them, but the windows should
Mr.Wilkenfeld thought the building was very massive and he asked about whether the tbhuoiuldginhgt tihsistoabveeuryseddifffiocrulat dbeucsiisnieosnssainncdewiat swotoullddNteon,dthtiossisethaispworrekschoepd.Mer.nLWt>ilk-e-*Pp«ufe4- ld-V z , . j ;4-v£--*,12 from wheMrer.wMeyebresgaagnr.eeTdheaybohuatvtehecodmiffpicroumlt issietudateiovneryaonndetowldhoaphpalsicpalnatysetdhibsywtahse arugleiasnat nledatpha t ' 40' #2.t- isnotfair,especiallytoneighbors. Theneighborsdidnotobjecttotheoriginalapprovedplans .I. JF but the situation is different now:He worries about precedents-etting and the massingrilihecUoh--,·** he recognizes the financial commitment of the applicant. He questiols whetherthis isf r*l 19 R>+= 3Ghemtehnindkmsetnhteoyrsahonuelwd raepvpieliwcaittioang.aiAn snienwceatphpeliycation would require new approval from BZBA and 2 i Barbara Franks stated are 2' from property line. she knows they did not build what was approved but Mr.Reyazi looked at it several times and expressed no disapproval. They did not try to hide the construction and she recognizes GPA's concerns about massing and the fact that it was not built as approved.
MR. LUKCO MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH STIPULATIONS THAT:1 () A BLIND WINDOW ADDED ON THE NORTH ELEVATION CENTERED OVER LOWER ONES;2 ()TWO BLIND WINDOWS ADDED TO EAST ON A LINE WITH PROPOSED SECOND STORY WINDOWS;3 ()THE CORNER BOARDS BE ADDED. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND THE ROLL CALL WAS A FOLLOWS: MR. BURRISSY- ES; MR. LUKCBO; *MR. WILKENFELDN- O; MR. MYERSN- O. A tie vote indicates a denial. YE3-
Finding of Fact:
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO ADOPE THE FINDING FOR A,B,C,D UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND A AND B UNDER OLD BUSINESS AS FORMAL FINDING OF FACT. Mr. LUKCO SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Adjournment: 9:10 p.m.
Next Meeting: May 10 and 24
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Alle