Upcoming Events

Click here for the full Community Calendar.

Monday
Jan302012

Planning Minutes 9/27/04

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 27, 2004
Minutes

Members Present:   Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell, Jackie O'Keefe, Mark Parris (Chair), Tim Riffle
Members Absent: Carl Wilkenfeld (Vice Chair)
Visitors Present: Mark Clapsadle, Luke Bakus, Jerry Martin,
Tom McCullough, Sarah Green, Connie Westbrook, Miles Waggoner, Sandy Wilson, Ben Rader, Hughes, Rev. Steve Cramer, Jack Thornborough
Also Present:  Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Citizens Comments:  None
Minutes of September 13, 2004
MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO ACCEPT MINUTES AS PRESENTED; MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED
.Old Business:

Gerald Martin, 116 East Broadway - Renovations

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO TAKE THIS APPLICATION FROM THE TABLE.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
{Mr. Burriss recused himself from this application.}
 Mr. Strayer said that at the last meeting there was some confusion as to next steps because of the enclosed stairwell and the balcony being built on village property.  On Friday the Planning and Zoning Committee talked about these issues and it was determined that the Law Director would look into an agreement for use of the space.  They gave GPC approval to go ahead with design changes. 
 Tom McCullough, of the Methodist Church, stated that they have a letter for the file regarding architectural design and parking.  They have agreed to let the public use their parking lot, but they are concerned that people from Brew's will abuse the lot.  Children are often present for church activities, even at night, and are outside playing.  They are also afraid that excess noise will disturb their activities.
 Miles Waggoner from the church said that several years ago when they were going through their expansion, they attempted to provide access at various levels and for handicapped parking.  Several ideas incorporated stairwells and ramps, but GPC sent them back because of potential problems on Linden maintaining the public area.  They then drew up a better plan with staircase inside, and he encouraged Brew's to do the same in the best interests of the village.  Mr. Parris responded that GPC sent them to the drawing board because they were proposing further encroachment into the alley. 
 Ben Rader, who owns property east of the building, wondered whether Mr. Burriss' designs were considered.  Mr. Parris said Mr. Burriss has recused himself from this application.  We were going to address this in the final drawings about screening plans.  We have not yet looked at the design plans.  Mr. Rader is concerned about screening the second floor.
 Mr. Strayer said the Law Director will set up a lease arrangement between the applicant and the village.  At the next V.C. meeting there will be an ordinance and at the following meeting, a public hearing. He was told to tell GPC to go ahead with design detail.  They talked about trash, etc., but in no detail about how to structure an approval.  It will be as an enforcement issue rather than a design issue.
 Steve Kramer, Minister, was concerned about trash in the alley.  What will happen if the building is to be a restaurant? Sandy Wilson explained that the dumpster will be in an 8' high wooden structure and there will be water available for hosing down the alley.  They have a grease collection tank behind the building to suck grease out of a tank in the basement. 
 Regarding screening the front porch, Mr. Martin said he could look into it but it would be ugly.  And screening the second floor porch would be difficult.  People lean on screens, and it will take away from the wrought iron design. 
 Mr. Mitchell thought Ben Rader is asking for a visual barrier rather than an insert barrier.  It seems like a good idea but it will not be very pretty.  Mr. Rader said he is not talking about that.  A screen would be used to prevent people from throwing out beer bottles, etc., especially on the east.  Mr. Riffle thought something should be done; whatever you do will show, but you can come up with something that will not stand out as bad, and it should address citizens' concerns.    A lattice would impede vision and would be hard to maintain. 
 Mr. Martin said the first floor will remain as it is now.  The building is a little larger than the current Brew's.  He said he would be willing to put a screen up on the second floor.
 Mr. Wilson said they have tried to simplify the columns, and the lentils will remain as they are.   The stairwell is a fire escape, not an access.  They will have an elevator. 
 Mr. Strayer noted that alcohol sales would be part of the agreement, so if the ordinance does get passed, alcohol would be permitted on the balcony.
 Mr. Parris said GPC had reviewed the initial plans a couple of months ago and the old drive-through will be removed. The plan for the stairwell, even though enclosed, takes up less space than what exists there today. 

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-084 WITH THE STIPULATIONS THAT (1) THE EXISTING BASE AND WINDOWS WILL STAY ON FIRST FLOOR; (2) EXISTING LENTILS STAY ON SECOND FLOOR; (3) BRACKETS WILL MOVE IN; (4) DUMPSTER IN BACK; (5) ELIMINATION OF EXTERIOR GREASE TANK; (6) SCREENING ON SECOND FLOOR EAST; (7) WINDOW DESIGN WILL BE UP TO THE APPLICANT.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Gerald Martin, 116 East Broadway - Change of Ude

Mr. Strayer said the change of use will go from financial institution to food and drugs.  The code requires a restaurant of this size to provide 126 spaces and would require a variance.  The applicant has stated that there are 8 spaces behind the building, 5 in the alley, and 20-22 spaces in front of the building.  The Methodist Church is open for parking except Sunday mornings. 
Mr. Parris asked about site clean-up, asking whether that's part of a criminal code, and Mr. Strayer said it's an enforcement issue, but the neighbors would like us to note it.  The agreement between the village and Brew's does not tie in with the change of use; it only deals with property lines.   Sale of liquor would be in the document. 
Mr. Martin has 55 seats now and anticipates 95 or more, and the first floor is the same.  He has never had complaints about lack of parking spaces. 
Mr. Parris asked about activities taking place with the business change.  He assumes people are responsible for their own behavior and throw their trash in the proper bins. 
Steve Kramer said they have had trouble with trash in the alley before: bottles, cigarette butts, etc., and noise.   
Mr. Waggoner tried to find a record of an agreement between the church and the village for use of the alley, and the agreement was that the village would do the maintenance and the church would permit use as a public parking lot.  Mr. Parris wondered whether the church could authorize restrictions on public parking, and Mr. Strayer said he would ask Joe Hickman about that. 
Ben Rader wishes Jerry Martin well but is concerned about (1) the upstairs porch.  What will happen when he moves out?  (2) Employees taking a break in the back.  Mr. Martin said there will be a break room inside.
Mr. Parris noted a lot of concerns expressed here tonight are about being a good neighbor, and he is confident the applicant will talk to neighbors to be sure things get policed.  If concerns arise, people should talk to Mr. Martin.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-142 FOR CHANGE OF USE FROM A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TO A RESTAURANT BUILDING.  BZBA WILL HEAR THE VARIANCE FOR PARKING.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tim Hughes, 142 East Broadway l- Awning

 Mr. Strayer explained that the scarlet, gray, and white awning is for a new real estate office and meets all criteria.  It will replace the current blue and white awning and have no lettering

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-143 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mark Clapsadle, 329 Summit Street (For Mark & Sarah. Sween) _ - Demolition

 The garage is deteriorating and must be torn down and a new garage built.

MR. BURRIS MOVED TO RECOMMEND A DEMOLITION PERMIT.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mark Clapsadle, 329 Summit Street (For Mark & Sarah. Sween) _ - Additions

 Mr. Strayer explained that a new garage will be built on the site where the abovementioned demolition will take place.  It will be used as a retreat and have no plumbing. 
 Mr. Parris's concerns are that the house with shutters be architecturally distinct.  It's a beautiful home and it looks like you are stripping some elements from it.  Mr. Clapsadle said every detail of the existing house will remain.  Mr. Burriss noted that the additions must be appropriate for the house-windows, siding, shutters, fishscale.  Mr. Clapsadle said fishscales will be on every gable and he will keep it as historically accurate as possible.
 Mr. Riffle thought they are losing some detail of the original house with the porch wrapping around the side and the bay being obliterated.  This house will be massive.  Mr. Clapsadle said they are removing an unusable too small porch.   Only one neighbor has expressed anything negative, added Mr. Clapsadle.  They don't want to see property values decreased. 
 Mr. Clapsadle said the garage will be a one-story structure with few windows right on the property line.  The fence belongs to the neighbor. 
 He added that currently the roof sticks out 4' beyond flat plain of the house.  The bay juts out beyond the addition and becomes more pronounced by being two stories.  Mr. Riffle said we are losing this view of the house from the side.  Additions should not be stronger than the original house; the addition overshadows the existing house.  Mr. Parris added that we do try to preserve the look of the original house and additions should be complementary to it.  Mr. Clapsadle said they need the roofline as designed for balance.   They wanted to move the garage back but could not, so instead they will duplicate it and add entry element on the one side and the dormer.  They will lose one garage door.  Mr. Burriss said we do not have any issues with the garage.
 Mr. Mitchell thought it looked like an apartment stuck on the back of a house.  Mr. Clapsadle thought the multi element was stronger and the multiplicity of it breaks up the massiveness. 
 Talk ensued about the roof pitch
 Mr. Burris thought the design seems like an unhappy marriage and not complementary.
 Mr. Parris asked whether the applicant wants to table the application pending work on changes or take a vote.  A lot of the original elements of the house are being lost, and there are probably some solutions without losing more square footage.
 Mr. Clapsadle thinks a different solution would be less attractive.  This one is sensitive to the original structure. 
Mr. Parris said we have tried to be consistent with what we are looking for, such as incorporating the original house and being complementary or subordinate.  This plan is complementary but the scale between the new and the old elements is overwhelming.  Mr. Riffle said there is more than just the bay.  Mr. Clapsadle asked whether removing 2' would be better, saying he would run into more physical problems than architectural problems.   Mr. Burris thought that views of the house in walking by are different from looking at the house from the house on the east.  1930's houses were not built to suit large styles of today's dwellers.  
 Other details were discussed, and suggestions were given to the applicant. 
 Mr. Clapsadle wants to table this and go back to the homeowners with these comments.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO TABLE; MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Jack Thornborough, 233 South Mulberry - renovating

 Mr. Strayer said this application was brought up and received objections from neighbors.  A letter has been received from Lillian Merrick about landscaping and fence.
 Mr. Thornborough said the neighbor just wants to look at the open lot.  He has purchased 9' from the neighbor on the west to allow more room to plant hemlock trees. The neighbor complained about the fence, but it is just a low picket.  The applicant said the addition appears massive, but he needed the height because of the roof. 
 Mr. Burriss stated that when we looked at this before, there was a two-car garage; Mr. Thornborough said the front elevation looked better this way than in back.  This way we will remove a strong tree; there was no curbcut on the other plan. 
 Mr. Burriss noted we had extensive talk about the door, and the applicant said he might have to add a handrail.  It is clapboard except on the west, where its aluminum and it will be replaced by clapboard.
 Mr. Burriss envisions windows spaced better.  It's a garage and those windows are domestic windows.  They could have a row of three windows up high and take bottom half of windows off and leave three windows.  He is happy with windows on the second floor.  Mr. Thornborough originally wanted French doors.  The architect said it would be magnificent to have it this way or with French doors.   Mr. Parris replied that if he wanted to go back later to French doors, the applicant can come back and request a modification.  This is also true with the solarium.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED, AND HE HAS THE OPTION TO CHANGE WINDOW SIZES IN THE GARAGE.  HE WILL COME BACK TO US FOR ANY CHANGES IN SOLARIUM.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. 

First Federal S & L, 126 North Prospect Str5eet - Sign

 Mr. Strayer said the application for a freestanding sign meets all criteria, and the total sign package is OK with white and black colors.  Two floodlights are uplighted, and it will be landscaped.   Luke Backus said they do not encourage sand-blasted signs, but this is an HDUI foam vinyl sign only ½' thick.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-148 FOR A FREESTANDING SIGN WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IT IS NOT A SAND-BLASTED SIGN BUT A COMPOSITE VINYL FLAT PLANED SIGN.  APPROVAL INCLUDES UPLIGHTING ON EITHER SIDE OF THE SIGN.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:  MR. BURRISS  MOVED TO APPPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ITEM A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND ITEMS A,B,C,D,F  UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 24, 2004.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.


Work Session:
 JEDD.

 Mr. Strayer said GPC was asked to go through the proposal for a JEDD.  Mr. Parris said we are restricting this way too much, i.e., setbacks, height, square footage, amount of greenspace.  Potential businesses can get what they want in Newark and Heath.  If we are trying to attract business, we are competing with every other town.  We need jobs to (1) cut down on traffic and (2) if you live and work in the same community, you are more likely to act as a member of that community.  What's wrong with producing something?  Mr. Burriss added that some light manufacturing might be appropriate, and Ms. O'Keefe agreed only if it does not pollute. 

Next Meetings:     October 13(?) (Betty will be absent and October 27
Adjournment:    11:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen Hullinger

Monday
Jan302012

Planning Minutes 9/13/04

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 13, 2004
Minutes

Members Present:  Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell, Jackie O'Keefe, Mark Parris (Chair), Tim Riffle, Carl Wilkenfeld (Vice Chair)
Members Absent: none
Visitors Present: John Minsker, Keith Keegan, Kevin Goudy, Nadine Rader, Brian Corbett, Mark Hannahs, John Noblick, Sharon Phelps
Also Present:  Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Citizens Comments:  None
Minutes of August 23, 2004:    Page 2, under Downtown Directional Signs, Line 1, change to "Mr. Parris said that we have seen so many sandwich boards that the idea….   "Mr. Strayer said one problem with the signs already in place is that we could not use those because it might be in violation of ODOT street standards and we would have to put the business related signs elsewhere." Page 3, 4th paragraph, third line, start with JEDD rather than "They."  "Mr. Parris said they were looking at things…."

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO ACCEPT MINUTES AS AMENDED; MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED
.
Old Business:

Gerald Martin, 116 East Broadway - Renovations

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TAKE THIS APPLICATION FROM THE TABLE.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

{Mr. Burriss recused himself from this application.}
 Mr. Strayer said neither the applicant nor the Village could determine exactly where the boundary lines were, so there was a meeting about next steps.  It was decided between Village Council and the Law Director to get an accurate survey.  The new survey indicated where the property lines were.  The face of the building lies on the line and the porch would be on village property, and the applicant is applying to build his new balcony on village property. The law director said it was OK for GPC to move ahead but final approval would wait until there was an agreement for the structure to be added onto.
 Mr. Parris said the last time we had decided to make the decision here.  Now that we know where the property lines are, there needs to be an agreement on approval of this application.  It will be approved through the GPC as a condition, but we need assurance from the Law Director.
 Gerald Martin said the Law Director had said they are not sure where the property lines were, but he told Mr. Strayer to tell GPC to act on the application.  He does not know where the change came in, since the survey does not change anything.  Mr. Strayer replied that when they met with the Law Director, he said since we really don't know where it is, the GPC should act on it and have the Village absolve itself of responsibility.   We told V.C. what we decided, and V.C. thought that was not the right way to go and asked for a survey. 
 Mr. Wilkenfeld said that since the building is already in the ROW, could it be grandfathered.  GPC could go ahead and work on design changes and hold final approval until the agreement is signed.  Ms. O'Keefe thought it would be a waste of time to go ahead prematurely. 
 Mr. Parris said GPC has pretty much boiled down the design elements, and tonight's update narrows down the plans we asked for.  He wants this application completed as expeditiously as possible. 

 MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION PENDING FURTHER REVIEW FROM THE LAW DIRECTOR AND THE AGREEMENT WITH VILLAGE COUNCIL.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 New Business:

Brian Corbett, 117 South Prospect Street - Signs

 Mr. Strayer said the application for change of use was approved, and now he is asking for two signs for the candy and home-made food business.  The (1) freestanding 8 ¾ sq.ft sign would be white with black lettering, 12' high and 2' from edge of pavement.  Mr. Corbett added that it would be designed like the Footloose sign next door.  The post from which the oval sign will be hung is white
 (2) The window sign is oval but applicant has no dimensions.  It cannot be more than 8 sq.ft.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE WITH PROVISION THAT THE WINDOW SIGN BE NO LARGER THAN 8 SQ.FT AND THE POST IS NO TALLER THAN 8'.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Licking Memorial Health Systems, 100 Galway Drive - sign

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes two temporary free-standing signs for their Tour of Homes, to be up for two weeks.  The sign has been used before but in a different location. 

 MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-135 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Keith Myers,  229 East College Street - Garage Modifications

 Mr. Myers needs to modify the application to cancel request for a studio, so this application is for the garage door only.    The metal carriage door will have panels and square windows and matches the photo provided with application.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 04-136 FOR GARAGE DOORS WITH STYLE THE SAME AS IN THE PICTURE PROVIDED AND THAT THE STUDIO ADDITION WILL NOT BE PART OF THIS APPLICATION.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Donna Lemmon Perkins, 222 South Main Street - Change of Use

  Mr. Strayer said this building is next to the Vet and the applicant seeks a change of use for a title insurance professional office from a residence with an office.  Bob Seaton said they are applying for grandfathering.
 Mr. Parris said they are going from a nonconforming use to a conforming use and any building issues will be addressed by the county.  This is not a business rezoning and we do not have any problem with the change of use. 
 Mr. Riffle reminded him that usually you have to upgrade if you change anything. 

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Sharon and Neil Phelps, 120 W. Broadway - Sign

 Mr. Strayer said GPC has granted approval for change of use from conforming to nonconforming at the former Callard Company site.  The applicant wishes to open a financial planning office.  They will use the free-standing sign but change the lettering with two-tone colors on white signboard.  Only three colors are allowed. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT (1) THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF COLORS IS THREE AND GRAY SCALE MAY BE USED  AND (2) FINAL LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY THE VILLAGE PLANNER.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APROVED.

John J. Noblick, 126 E Elm Street (For Dr. and Mrs. Mark Clemente) - Remodeling

 Mr. Noblick said the applicants wish to (1) remodel front porch from half wall to open railings with spindles; (2) add rear porch to support second-story room; (3) new second-story addition over sunroom and above new porch; (4) picket fence.  On (3) the enclosed level there will be a single floor with shed roof for a master suite and bath.  The (1) porch had a concrete floor.  This will keep all existing glass and doors intact. They are not changing the window area on the lower floor.  The footprint is just the porch area.  The previous owner (4) got approval for a larger fence, but that did not occur.  Because the owner saw a finish she liked better, Mr. Parris said we will exclude the fence from this application.  
 Mr. Riffle said it is not visible from the street. 
 Mr. Burriss noted that the details for the front porch are more  consistent with what was there and consistent with the neighborhood.  The addition is architecturally consistent with that of the existing property and does not impact the structure from the street.  The only thing he would want to look at is the proposed shingles.  Mr. Noblick said they are grey on top and green on the addition on the side, so they will try to get them all the same color.  Mr. Strayer could approve final shingle design.  Mr. Noblick said if the pitch is not sufficient for runoff, they will put in an ice shield.  Neighboring properties can't really see the second floor roof. 

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-139 WITH THE STIPULATION THAT (1) THE ROOF SAMPLES BE BROUGHT IN TO THE VILLAGE PLANNER AND (2) THE FENCE IS NO LONGER PART OF THIS APPLICATION.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.


John J. Noblick, 126 E Elm Street (For Dr. and Mrs. Mark Clemente) - Fence

 For the abovementioned application, they are thinking of dropping the scale of the fence so that the height of the new fence would be of less proportion than the wooden fence that was there.  There is no fence there now. They want to put the lower rail up higher out of the dirt. It's close to 4'. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-140 AS AN APPLICATION, NOT A MODIFICATION.  (1)  THIS IS FOR THE FENCE ONLY; (2) FENCE IS TO BE WOOD PAINTED WHITE; (3) THE OWNER HAS THE OPTION OF SCALING DOWN THE FENCE SOMEWHAT AND INTENDS TO RAISE THE BOTTOM RAIL.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVE.

Keith Keegan, 324 East Elm Street - Remodeling

 The applicant is restoring the historic structure on Mt. Parnasses.   They found it unsound and unfinished and have removed the rotting wood.  They are applying to make it look like the pictures provided.  They will add a balcony railing.  The sloping roof obscured the original architucture of the house.
 Mr. Burriss asked about the footprint and was told it was the same.  They will add two windows, and the other problem is there is no way to get anything into the second floor, so they want to add 5' wood white treated windows and French door.  One window will be covered when they cover the steps on the basement level.  They will replace the vinyl on the fire-damaged window with wood, the same size. 
 He said the original English Tudor house was built around the farmhouse, and it is odd in proportion. 
 Mr. Burriss applauds the efforts to restore all the unfinished elements of the house, but he would like to see drawings of how it will look and to see window detail.  Mr. Parris, however, is satisfied with these pictures, saying they give him more of a living picture than a line drawing would.  The description provided does a good job of spelling out materials and changes. 

 Mr. Keegan said the cinder-block garage was never finished, and he has taken out the  windows.  They want to cover the house with board and batten, and it will all match.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 04-131 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:  MR. WILKENFELD  MOVED TO APPPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ITEMS A THROUGH H UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 8, 2004.  MR. RIFFLE  SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Next Meetings:     September 27 AND October 6 {Betty will be absent}
Adjournment:    9:02 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen Hullinger

Monday
Jan302012

Planning Minutes 8/23/04

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
August 23, 2004
Minutes

Members Present:  Tom Mitchell, Jackie O'Keefe, Mark Parris (Chair), Tim Riffle, Carl Wilkenfeld (Vice Chair)
Members Absent: Jack Burriss 
Visitors Present:  Barb Hammond, Constance Barsky, Pat Moller, Mary Bibee, Lisa & Jim Green, Dena McKinley, Don Carr, Nick & Melanie Schott, Tod Darfus
Also Present:  Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Citizens Comments:  None
Minutes of July 26, 2004:    MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO ACCEPT MINUTES AS PRESENTED; MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED
Minutes of August 9:  Page 2, Line 10, Change to Ms. O'Keefe asked if the old sign frame could be compared at all to the new frame.   
MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE AS AMENDED; MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
New Business:

James Green, 221 North Pearl Street - Door removal

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes to restore the multi-family house to single-family status and remove all the extra outside doors.
 Mr. Green said the four doors to be removed would be replaced withh exterior wall siding which matches the existing.  Door No. 4 on the drawing will be turned into a stained-glass window and placed in the opening created by door No. 2.
 Mr. Parris asked whether he could match the dropped siding, and Mr. Green said if he cannot match it, he knows of a mill that can custom make it for him.   
 Mr. Wilkenfeld asked what is going to replace Window No. 2 and suggested the applicant have the Village Planner look at the final design to make sure it is visually carried along.

     MR. WILKENFELD  MOVED TO APPROVE 04-123 WITH THE STIPULATION THAT ON DOOR No. 2, PRIOR TO FINALIZING THE WINDOW GOING IN, THE APPLICANT SHOW IT TO THE VILLAGE PLANNER FOR HIS OK.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Elizabeth Carr, 130 East Broadway - Change of Use

Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes to turn the title company space into a retail store next to the coffeehouse.   It meets all sections of the code.
Ms. Carr noted that it is going to be a French Boutique.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE #04-125 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Elizabeth Carr, 130 East Broadway - Sign

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant is requesting a gold-lettered window sign above the door, and the Mom & Me Vintage General sign will be where the title company name was.  The Number 130 does not count in the measuring, so the sign will be 25"x34".

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 04-126 FOR WINDOW SIGN, APPROXIMATELY 25"X34" WITH GOLD LETTERING. MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tod Darfus, 132 North Prospect Street - sign

 Mr. Strayer said the application is for a 3'x4' gold sign in the front window for his tanning company.  The maximum size allowed is 8 sq.ft.
 Mr. Darfus said he is requesting no other signs.

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-129 WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IT BE NO LARGER THAN 8 SQ.FT.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:  MR. WILKENFELD  MOVED TO APPPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ITEMS A THROUGH D UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF AUGUST 20, 2004.  MR. RIFFLE  SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

Melanie and Nick Schott - Car Wash
 The applicants wish to open a one- or two-bay car wash which would require rezoning for Village Services.  Mr. Schott, 660 West Broadway, said the owner of the existing car wash was not interested in selling, so they looked around for a possible perfect location at an affordable price.  They would like to install the completely automatic car wash at 303 South Main Street with the entrance on Munson Street.  There are three lots, each about 50'x150'.  They would buy the house and lots and rent out the house.  Mrs. Schott noted that there are no other affordable village lots available with water and sewer.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld noted that the GPC tends not to approve a business in a residential district, and that would be a good lot for a house.  A car wash outside the village would be a better idea, but Mrs. Schott said that would be too expensive.   Mr. Schott said they could buffer it with landscaping. 
Mr. Wilkenfeld also asked whether they have talked to the owners of the IGA, but Mrs. Schott said there is no city water there, and Mr. Strayer said they need to be more on a main road for a car wash. 
 Ms. O'Keefe asked whether they have talked to the neighbors yet, and they said No, they wanted GPC feedback first.
 Mr. Parris said the trouble with spot zoning is that nobody knows what business would go in there in the future.  Many businesses are acceptable under the code. If the contiguous owners are in favor of this, he would be more inclined to approve it.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld felt it would be difficult for GPC to approve this venture.
 Mr. Parris summarized the discussion:  (1) Rezoning, (2) Approval of the neighbors; (3) A car wash is a destination business and could be off the road; (4) increased traffic and disruption for cars turning left to a car wash; (5) Talk to the Chamber of Commerce for another possible location.

 Downtown Directional Signs

 Mr. Parris said that we have seen so many sandwich boards that the idea of posted business signs is an alternative. He feels that off-street businesses need to be promoted
 Mr. Strayer said one problem with the signs already in place is that we could not use those because it might be in violation of ODOT street standards and we would have to put the business related signs elsewhere.  These are good for cars but not pedestrians and are not specific to businesses. 
 Mr. Wilkenfeld thought it was a great idea but consistency is important.
 Barbara Hammond from the Chamber of Commerce said people want to be directed to more specific shops.  She thought removable signs with arrows would be easy to replace, and could be put at least on the corners of (1) Broadway and Prospect, (2) Broadway and Main, (3) Cherry Street, (4) Elm and Maple Streets.  She suggested that if such signs get put up, businesses should remove their sidewalk signs.  This is a do-or-die holiday season, and she would like to see billboards.
 Other ideas presented were a kiosk in Alltel Park, bulletin boards, a glass display map like the one at Burke Hall, and paper maps to be handed out. A street clock is under consideration. Mr. Strayer said he would check for designs with Keith Meyers and with the Village. 
 Next steps are to (1) plan another work session with GPC; (2) finalize a design; (3) work with C of C and come back with application to get approval for location and number of signs; (4) remove sidewalk signs; (5) talk with Streets and Landscape Committee.

Jedd

 Constance.Barsky said her committee wanted to (1) pass their ideas along to the Granville Township Zoning Commission as the Township did and (2) look over the zoning portion.  Mr. Strayer summarized information both from the Township and from GPC.  The number of businesses could be expanded, but they have centered on office-type businesses, two- or three-story buildings in an office park.  They looked at the Master Plan and looked at what would be the best for the Township and the Village.  She said the Township Trustees have been looking at sites, and the Village has sat down with them.
 Mr. Parris said we would want to know what land they are interested in, and Ms. Barsky listed the Dow and Owens properties.  Light manufacturing has to be research-related and production has to be prototype related.  JEDD are not offering anyone to have light manufacturing.  Mr. Parris said they were looking at things good for the Village and staying away from retail, but if they get too fussy, fewer businesses will come in.
 Mr. Strayer said they tried to mimic the Research Triangle in North Carolina.  An industrial park would be attractive to potential businesses.  For more than one company in a complex, this will be like a PUD.  People will be looking for a location where it is already supported in the town.  Mr. Wilkenfeld felt we need to concentrate on one thing.  We have an educated population, so bringing in research triangle types and computer things would create white-collar jobs.  JEDD is a big picture with synergy among all participants.  He thought JEDD should include more than two areas.
 Ms. Barsky said one thing to keep in mind is in discussions with the Township, there should be flexibility about certain jobs and certain areas.    There should be water/sewer/zoning/charter set up.  Village Council has promised water and sewer.  It's apparent that the income from the JEDD is ten years out before the money starts coming in.
 For the next meeting Ms. Barsky will bring in a more specific outline.

Next Meetings:     September 13 and September 27
Adjournment:    9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen Hullinger

Monday
Jan302012

Planning Minutes 8/9/04

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
August 9, 2004
Minutes

Members Present:   Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell, Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle
Members Absent:  Mark Parris (Chair),  Carl Wilkenfeld (Vice Chair)
Visitors Present:  Barb Hammond, Richard Salvage, Kim Salvage, Dick Daly, Tim Hughes, Cindy Griesse, Kent Morgan, Jim Siegel, Chris and Sherry Campbell, Tod Darfus, Tom from Meleca, David Meleca
Also Present:  Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Citizens Comments:  Barbara Hammond stated that signage is needed at corners to direct people to retail shops on side streets, and she wants some signs up within three months.  It would benefit the shops and eliminate sandwich signs.    She volunteered her help with this project.  It was decided to have some casual discussion following the meeting.
Minutes of July 26, 2004:   Minutes were postponed until the next meeting.

New Business:

Tim Hughes, 142 East Broadway - wall sign

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes two signs for his new business: (1) wall sign over the awning and (2) wall sign on the side.  The size of the existing sign will not change, but words will change to new company name, "Keller Williams Greater Columbus Realty."  It will be dark red background with gray lettering.  There was some discussion on who has rightful lease on that building, and Mr. Hughes said he has the proper documents to give him rightful leasehold. He leases verbally from Dave Klauder and has four months left on the current lease.  Coldwell Barker bought the building and will take possession September 1, so Mr. Hughes needs permission for his new sign.  They will put up a new, color-coordinated awning later.  When they paint the sign, they will repaint the borders.  The (2) wall sign on the side will be a panel covering the words.
 
     MR. RIFFLE  MOVED TO APPROVE 04-107 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Chris Campbell, 215 North Pearl Street - Fence

Mr. Strayer said all criteria are met for this application for a fence along north side of driveway from garage to the house and to install a fence along west and north sides of lot.  Mr. Campbell said they will eventually fence in the entire property and the treatment along the drive will be the same as in the picture-a privacy fence in the back along the garage. It stops there and does not turn the corner.  It will be the same as in the north property line. There will be no fence in the front; there is landscaping there and a retaining wall. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE #04-109 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tod Darfus, 132 N. Prospect St. - Change of Use
 Mr. Strayer said the applicant is requesting a change of use from restaurant to an upscale 4-bed tanning salon.  Ms. O'Keefe asked about utilities and Mr. Darfus said he has everything on board for licensing and electricity as well as insurance.

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-110 AS SUBMITTED. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

St, Edwards Catholic Church, 785 Newark-Granville Road - sign

 The application is for a new 48 sq.ft. ground sign to be illuminated by floodlights.  The representative said it will be the same limestone base and cap as the church.  Lettering is to be solid brass and letters with lights on either side.  He was under the impression the sign maximum was the area enclosing the letters, rather than the entire structure.  It will be in the same location as the existing sign.
 Mr. Burriss asked about landscaping, and Mr. Meleca said they have nothing formal yet. Mr. Burriss added that in other applications the lighting has been hidden in landscaping, and Mr. Meleca said they will be adding subtle planting.    The new sign will be 8" wider than the existing but the same height.  Text is smaller.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked if the old sign frame could be compared at all to the new frame.
 Mr. Strayer said that for free-standing signs we have used the entire sign, not just the portion with letters.  The only exception is a post sign underneath a hanging sign.
 From the audience Richard Salvage said in similar situations for other churches and schools the GPC found it appropriate to grant larger signs, in view of the larger buildings.  In the case of such precedent, he would recommend approving this sign. 

 Mr. Burriss read the criteria for variances, and it appeared that No. E. would be appropriate:

D.  That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the persons residing or working within the vicinity of the proposed variance.

He thinks the new sign is more attractive and more in keeping with the signage we have encouraged within the village.  It will be more subtle and going away from being internally lit. It is architecturally consistent and complementary with the new church being built.

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-111 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Barbara Hammond, 115 North Prospect St. - Awning

 Mr. Strayer said this application matches the sign application we approved
at the last meeting.
 Ms. Hammond said it will be a plain purple awning, matching color of the sign.  It will be just over the door and cover the A.C. unit and offer protection for walkers.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-115 FOR AWNING AS SUBMITTED.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Kim Salvage, 130 North Prospect Street - Change of Use

 Ms. Salvage wants to open a knitting shop in the space where the bookstore was.  She said her product will use natural fibers, and she will teach knitting classes.

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-121 FOR CHANGE OF USE.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED

Kim Salvage, 130 North Prospect Street - Signs
 
 Ms. Salvage also wishes signage for the abovementioned application.  She wants (1) a wall sign, (2) a projecting sign, and (3) a sidewalk sign. The projecting sign will be on the corner of the building, rather than at the storefront and will have two chains hanging from a wrought iron bracket.  The wood signs will be pale cream with dark red text.  The sidewalk sign will be taken in at day's end. Tod Darfus, the landlord has no problem with the project.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE SIGNAGE FOR 04-118 AS SUMITTED.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Kent Morgan, 228 N. Pearl Street - Porch

 Mr. Strayer said the application is for construction of a front porch over the existing concrete patio. 
 Mr. Morgan added that he wants to add some design element to the front.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked if the old sign frame could be compared at all to the new frame.
Mr. Riffle asked whether the overhang on the porch will cover the windows, and Mr. Morgan stated it will stop above the window and be below the lower window.  There may be a trim piece along bottom and top and there may be a railing on the porch.
Mr. Burriss asked about the dimensions and was told the front to corner goes off at a 45º angle and they will hold the posts as close to that as possible.  When asked about lighting fixtures, Mr. Morgan said the light would not be visible from the street.
They will try to get the same porch roof pitch as the house, and any railing would be attached to the wood siding.
Mr. Burriss is comfortable with the concept but less comfortable with the railings.  One thought might be to pass this with final details to be submitted to the Village Planner.  North Pearl contains a number of significant houses, and we have worked hard to maintain that.  When something is submitted to us to be built, we need to have it tied down as much as possible in detail for the permanent record.  Overhangs on roof, scale of posts, relationship of posts to existing porch and how far they are inset are some details missing. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-117 FOR PORCH CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENT UPON SATISFYING THE VILLAGE PLANNER WITH DETAILS INCLUDING (1) SCALE OF POSTS, (2) SIDE RAILINGS, (3) ROOF PITCH AND OVERHANG WIDTH OF PORCH AND WHERE THEY INTERSECT WITH THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, CONSIDERING WINDOW LOCATION.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 
Finding of Fact:  MR. RIFFLE  MOVED TO APPPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ITEMS A THROUGH H UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF AUGUST 5, 2004.  MR. MITCHELL  SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

Opera House Park Gazebo

 Norm Engle and Dick Daly made a proposal to V.C. about the possibility of Kiwanis's placing a gazebo in the park for the Bicentennial, and they requested we come before GPC for advice regarding appropriateness of this structure.  Mr. Strayer added that V.C. wanted our thoughts on concept as a legacy from Kiwanis and scale and design option.

 Ms. O'Keefe asked about their timeline, and Mr. Engle thought this fall would be best or next spring.  They have not appropriated money yet. 
 Mr. Burriss had hoped for such a structure for a long time, and this would be historically appropriate, but his concerns were not about concept so much as that we get a tasteful structure.  He likes the ones in Bellville and Newark because they are elevated for dignity and presence.  But Mr. Daly said they did not want to give GPC any predisposed ideas.  Mr. Engle said this would be an open space rather than with seating.

 Jim Siegel had opposing opinions.  He worked on the original design, which was for greenspace to be used by various groups and churches.  A gazebo would destroy the ambiance and openness of the park.  Utilities are underground.  He has been caretaker of the park since it began and made a lot of improvements.  A gazebo is a nice gift but this is the wrong place.  Also, it would require much maintenance.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked whether Kiwanis has gotten feedback from others, and Mr. Engle said they have not sought feedback yet.
 Mr. Burriss asked whether a fountain was requested, and the answer was No. 
 Mr. Siegel had proposed a vets' memorial with flagpole, since there is no veterans' recognition in Granville.  The trees in the southeast are dedicated memorial trees, and putting a gazebo in the southwest would involve removal of several trees and having to redo the sidewalks.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked about a work of art.
 Mr. Daly said the last thing we need is something that would cause friction.
 Mr. Burriss asked about using the bell. It could be used for special occasions, and could be elevated with an arch underneath.  He asked whether a proposal could go ahead in theory and then get public input and was told Yes.
 Mr. Burriss likes the gazebo idea but feels the need to explore the various user groups and learn whether it would actually be used.  He suggested contacting the Village Beautification Society and the Recreational Commission. 
 Mr. Riffle thought that done correctly it can only enhance the park, but put it farther back  to allow openness in the front.
 Mr. Burriss asked what is going on in St. Luke's back yard, for at one time that was a nice little garden.  Could the gazebo straddle it and not eat up open space. 
 Mr. Burriss suggested placing the gazebo in front of Stone Hall to replace the Concert on the Green stage. 
 Mr. Strayer will talk to some of the users of the park about how they feel about the idea.
 
Discussion on Signs:

 In regard to the signs suggested by Barbara Hammond earlier, Mr. Burriss asked who would pay for such signs?  He would like one for his business too, farther out on Route 16.  He is not in favor of more sandwich boards and suggested little signs on chains hanging from lampposts.  Signs now are too high and don't help the merchants very much.  Put them lower and they interfere with traffic and pedestrians.  At the Elms they have a nice sign.  Could we come up with a bracket on corners of buildings? He suggested maps listing all businesses to be given away freely.   Our businesses cannot survive with local clientele; we are becoming more and more a destination town, and we need to offer visitors help finding businesses. 
 Mr. Strayer reminded the group that plans for a kiosk are underway for Alltel Park.  We have the informational signs now, and with sandwich boards, signs are everywhere. 
 Could the Chamber of Commerce negotiate removal of sandwich boards in exchange for a way-finding sign?  Ms. O'Keefe thought it was up to them to suggest a proposal.  But Mr. Strayer said they are looking at us to do it and give them suggestions. 
 Mr. Mitchell suggested getting a proposal from Rodger Kessler, and consensus agreed. 
 Mr. Burriss said the sign code would have to be rewritten. We do not allow off-premises signs now. Would we allow them to have logos?   He would like to schedule a work session with the Chamber of Commerce at our next meeting.   
 Mr. Mitchell wants to severely restrict sandwich boards.

Next Meetings:    August 23 and September 6 (Labor Day)
Adjournment:    9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen Hullinger

Monday
Jan302012

Planning Minutes 7/26/04

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
July 26, 2004
Minutes

Members Present:   Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell, Jackie O'Keefe, Mark Parris (Chair),  Tim Riffle
Members Absent:  Carl Wilkenfeld
Visitors Present:  Gerald Martin,   Barb Hammond, Patty Urbatis, Ben Rader, Tom McCullough
Also Present:  Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Citizens Comments:  none
Minutes of July 12, 2004:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS AMENDED; MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

Gerald Martin, 116 East Broadway - Renovations
IT WAS MOVED AND SECONDED TO REMOVE THIS APPLICATION FROM THE TABLE.

 Mr. Strayer said the last time there were concerns:  (1) signs and (2) building on the shared wall along the side of the building.  We went back to the Village and looked but were unable to find the resolution so he will get that to you at another time.  He asked the Law Director for his advice. The applicant has waived the 45-day time limit for our decision. 
Mr. Parris thought it would be a question of whether the Village entered into agreement with the person who owns the land or to the deed itself.  Mr. Strayer will check records from 1979 to find it.  Mr. Martin has no such record in his deed.
 Mr. Parris did not want to make architectural recommendations, but any recommendations we have made should be considered.   This is a unique business district and we need to consider not just this building but how all the building get tied together. 
 We should review the criteria for AROD:

(a) Is it stylistically compatible  with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?

Mr. Burriss said this area has been less reflective of other buildings downtown. In the early 1900's much of the detail was removed from that building, and some of the efforts proposed here bring back some of that richness of detail.  We have a ways to go to discuss the details, but this does enrich the building and make it more in historical character.  He had concerns of some of the uses of the balcony; historically, there have been several second-floor balconies in Granville and they have been good spaces.  There needs to be great effort toward monitoring the use of that space. 
Mr. Parris could find two other examples, above the jeweler's and the Buxton Inn, and this plan adds details to a big mass, and he wants to be sure it blends with the rest of the block. Not knowing what the usage will be, we cannot make a decision on a zoning matter with an eye toward what might happen in the future.   Mr. Burriss said some of the issues of usage could be handled appropriately with good architectural planning.  There was a large gallery area on the Opera House, and that was a positive element.    The building located where Taylor's now is had a gallery, and on the Avery-Downer House until its current restoration there was a gallery on the second floor. 
 Mr. Riffle said because of the height, the second-floor balcony does fit it. 
 Ms. O'Keefe said there is a balcony in the back, and  Mr. Burris said we discussed that last week. We wanted clarification of detailing and the applicant said he would continue that discussion.  We wanted to detail what is on the building itself rather than what is on the church next door.  Mr. Burriss added that what we are trying to achieve tonight is approval of concept.  Mr. Parris said the first thing is to look at the criteria.  This is probably the largest commercial renovation since the new Taylor's, so it deserves careful evaluation first and then we will look at detail.  Until the question of gaining access to the alley gets answered, we cannot render a decision on the application.     Mr. Parris feels it would be important to get our thoughts on record for each point. 
 Mr. Mitchell has no problem with this item.  Uses should be regulated eventually.   
 Mr. Riffle said the uses will be regulated by code.  The building lends itself to second-floor balcony just from the sheer size of it.
 
(b) Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.
Mr.  Burris stated that this item is the first commercial building that starts our downtown and some of the improvements would improve the character of the building.  It does refer back to things that were part of our history downtown, such as an active second floor. 

(c) Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.
 Mr. Parris said having a second floor lends symmetry to the building that wasn't there before.  Having it fully occupied will contribute to the district.  Mr. Burris said adding a second-floor dining space is unique, and any time we can offer a variety we are improving the draw of Granville. 
 Mr Riffle said anything that leaves space to expand should be encouraged.

(d) Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.
 Mr. Parris thought this echoed what we have noted in No. c.
Mr. Burriss said we probably should look at things like dumpster location, screening of ACs,  fans, etc.  In the final drawings it will be helpful to locate these items. 
 Mr. Martin asked what are the next steps, and Mr. Parris said the Village needs to give permission for the encroachment on their property.  Does this go to the person or to the property?  The applicant must talk with the Village for the concept, and Mr. Strayer said this will not change with ownership or physical configuration.  Mr. Strayer will continue his research on this question.  Mr. Martin found nothing at the courthouse.
 Mr. Parris opened the discussion for this public meeting to the public.  There were no comments.
 Mr. Martin's architect said there were no issues of great concern. We will wait for the pending resolution before making more drawings.
 Mr. Parris recommended getting specific materials, etc., to show us, particularly those expressed at the last meeting. 

 MR. BURRISS MOVED TO TABLE THE APPLICATION AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.  MR. RIFFLE  SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:
Sharon Joseph, 115 North Prospect - signs

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes several signs for the new business:  (1) sidewalk sign, (2) wall sign, (3) window sign, and (4) projecting sign.  She has withdrawn application for (1) sidewalk sign, with anticipation that better signage will be placed at the corner for several businesses.  Barb Hammond explained the application in more detail.  The color is pretty close to what is in our packets. 
 Mr. Burriss asked about the wall sign border and Ms. Hammond said they will all be consistent in borders.
     MR. BURRISS  MOVED TO APPROVE 04-098 WITH CONDITION THAT THE SIDEWALK SIGN BE REMOVED FROM THE APPLICATION.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tim Ryan, 136 South Main Street - freestanding wall sign

Mr. Strayer said this one sign will be transferred to South Main Street.  The wall signs are really identification signs, so a variance will not be needed.  These are consistent with other tenants of the building. 
Mr. Parriss asked about the multiple business sign and Mr. Strayer said there is another sign for the other building.  Mr. Burriss asked whether the sign would match that of Steve Mershon and was told, Yes, it would be the same size.  The hanging sign will be 12"x36".  The colors are dark blue letters on white background with blue border.  Mr. Parris thought the motion should state the sign should be same size and shape as the one on the wall, and specify colors.

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE #04-099 WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE WALL SIGN MATCH THE EXISTING WALL SIGN IN SIZE AND SHAPE AND THAT THE HANGING SIGN BE BLUE WITH WHITE BACKGROUND.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ben Rader (Patty Urbatis), 120 ½ East Broadway, Canopy, 04-100
 Mr. Strayer said this is between Aladdin and Home Pleasures.  Mr. Parriss can understand the dilemma based on what's there now, surrounded by other, green, signs.    Patty Urbatis said there will be different levels as well.  Mr. Parris asked why it can't be brought down with less steep a pitch to just above the transom to be more consistent with Home Pleasures height.
 Mr. Burriss had less concern with the color differences but wants to bring down the top to expose the transom and add more light. Mr. Mitchell doesn't think we need consistency.  Mr. Riffle noted that this specifies a separate entry.   Mr. Burrriss asked about lighting and was told No, it would not be lit.  Although he doesn't like to cover the transom, he feels it is justified and he's thankful for the improvement to the Home Pleasures transoms.  Mr. Burriss asked whether there could be a white edge on the scallop, and Ms. Hammond agreed.  Mr. Burriss said a sign on the window was historic, and this is neat and clean and wondered whether we could consider this, but Mr. Parris was reluctant to do so.
 Regarding just the canopy, the sheets provided tonight were not part of the original application.

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE WITH DRAWINGS SUBMITTED TONIGHT, AND THE CANOPY WILL HAVE A WHITE EDGING ON IT. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ben Rader (Patty Urbatis),_120 ½ East Broadway, sign, 04-101

 The application is for the sign with white lettering for the abovementioned canopy

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-101 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ben Rader (Patty Urbatis),_120 ½ East Broadway, wall sign 04-103

 The applicant wants an 8'x24" wall sign, and Mr. Strayer said this meets all criteria.  Mr. Parriss was concerned about the placement and even if it hangs below the fascia it shouldn't cover the detail. It could go above, but we aren't sure where.  Mr. Burriss wondered whether the sign could have a blue border to have an edge to make it feel more finished.  Patty Urbatis was concerned about going over the maximum size.  Mr. Riffle thought it seemed big and that the mounting would look better below the dentil. She would have to work on the overall size of the board without changing the graphics. Members discussed the location in detail, and  Mr. Parriss asked whether Patty Urbatis could work with the Village Planner and she said Yes.
 
MR. BURRISS MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF 04-103 FOR THE WALL SIGN TO BE LOCATED AT 120 ½ E. BROADWAY, DETAILS OF WHICH ARE TO BE WORKED OUT AND APPROVED BY THE VILLAGE PLANNER.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ben Rader (Patty Urbatis),_120 ½ East Broadway, window sign 04-108

 The sign will be on the front door, there is no graphic included with application, but members saw a photo.  It will include her name, in white lettering.
 Mr. Parris said we could approve the application as long as we can agree on a color and the font being consistent with other signage, with final approval of layout by Village Planner.  Once she has the complete design made, she is to show it to him.  The font can be the same with different sized fonts.  It must conform with criteria for window signs.

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-108 WITH THE STIPULATION THAT WHEN THE SIGNAGE IS DESIGNED, FONT STYLE AND COLOR  WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER SIGNAGE, WITH FINAL APPROVAL TO BE GRANTED BY MR. STRAYER.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ben Rader (Patty Urbatis),_120 ½ East Broadway, sandwich board 04-102

 Mr. Strayer said the application is for a sidewalk sign outside the entrance door.  This would be the second sidewalk sign for the building and would require a variance.  There is no graphic provided with the application but a photo was shown. It would be blue with white lettering.
 Mr. Parris would have to see a very well done representation before he would consider this.    Ms. Urbatis does not feel she really will need this ultimately and will use it as a temporary sign.  Mr. Burriss asked how long it would be up and suggested 40 days, but may remain until canopy and other signage is complete.  The location was discussed, and it should be closer to the building, away from main walkway.  It may only be displayed when office is opened. 

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-102, WITH CONDITIONS:  (1) A TEMPORARY SANDWICH SIGN TO BE ERECTED (2) FOR A MAXIMUM OF 40 DAYS; (3)  IT WILL  COME DOWN WHEN PERMANENT SIGNAGE IS ERECTED, AND (4) WILL BE DISPLAYED ONLY DURING HOURS OF OPERATION.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Constance Barsky, 221 East Elm St. - roof replacement

The applicant wishes to replace an asphalt roof with a standing seam metal roof.  She states that the metal roof is historically accurate with the original house.  It is over the dining room extension.  Mr. Strayer thought it might be a tan/brown color.  Mr. Burriss would be willing to approve as long as Mr. Strayer approved the color.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE VILLAGE PLANNER WILL APPROVE FINAL COLOR.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:  MR. RIFFLE  MOVED TO APPPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ITEMS A THROUGH H UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF JULY 23, 2004.  MR. BURRISS  SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Next Meetings:    August 23 and September 6 (Labor Day)
Adjournment:    p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen from tape