VILLAGE OF GRANVILLE
July 16, 2008
CALL TO ORDER (by Mayor Hartfield at 7:31 pm)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Those responding to the roll call were Councilmembers Barsky, McGowan, Mershon, O’Keefe, Tegtmeyer, Vice Mayor Herman, Mayor Hartfield, Manager Holycross, Law Director Crites and Planner Terry.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Councilmember McGowan moved to approve the agenda as presented. Second by Councilmember Barsky. Motion carried (7-0).
CITIZENS COMMENTS (7:32 pm)
No one appeared to speak. Mayor Hartfield closed Citizens’ Comments at 7:33pm
Steve Schneider, Justin Lodge and Jim Patan representing the Granville Recreation Commission appeared to speak before Council regarding the formation of a join recreation district.
Steve Schneider thanked Council for the opportunity to present the joint recreation district proposal. He indicated that the Granville Rec Commission was the primary supplier of recreational programming since 1970. Mr. Schneider has been involved as a commission member for the past nine to ten years. He explained that the commission receives its funding from a Township recreation levy. The organization is run primarily on a volunteer basis serving the residents in the Granville School District. Mr. Schneider explained that more than 7,000 children and adults participated in recreation commission activities in 2007 with 350 volunteers. The Granville Rec Commission managed and maintained four recreation sites including Raccoon Park McPeek Lodge, Spring Valley and Wildwood Park. He cited that the 2008 budge will be $440,000, a 50% increase from five years ago.
Mr. Schneider explained that in 2007 the Rec Commission completed a Long Range Planning Report that assessed the strengths and weaknesses of GRC. The report highlighted five specific challenges faced by the Commission. Mr. Schneider outlined the challenges as:
- An organization led by volunteers can be inconsistently effective.
- The issue of coordinating and managing recreation activities and park facilities.
- Matching the taxing entity with the area served.
- The need for a credible, permanent, and independent recreation organization that could attract qualified professionals as staff to ensure future growth.
- The Rec Commission is unable to purchase or own facilities and must get approval from the Township Trustees to request additional tax funding.
Mr. Schneider indicated that following the completion of this report, the Rec Commission created a study team to make recommendations as to possible options for the future of the Rec Commission. The committee consisted of Rec Commission members as well as members from other local groups (The Teen Center and Senior Fellowship) were part of this committee. The committee recommended that the Village of Granville, Granville Township and the Granville Exempted Village School District form a joint recreation district that could serve the local community. It was also suggested that other outside organizations may also be interested in participating as part of the district.
Justin Lodge further explained that this new joint district would encompass the school district borders. The district would be managed by a Board with one member appointed by each of the following entities, Village of Granville, Granville Township Trustees and Granville Exempted Village School District, and two additional at-large members. Mr. Lodge indicated that he and Mr. Schneider would be speaking with Village Council, the Township Trustees and the School District seeking support and assistance with establishing a Board, setting up the district and seeking continued support of functions, funding or services currently received. The Village currently provides grounds maintenance services and office space. The committee would also request possible assistance with legal issues.
Mr. Schneider indicated that the proposed timeline for forming this new district was as follows:
- Seek resolutions of support from the three local entities and form a Board during the fall of 2008
- Complete a community-wide survey and determine funding source (which could include a levy on the ballot) in 2009
- Organization functioning including funding in 2010
Councilmember Barsky asked if there were any issues involved for the outside groups who were interested in participating in a joint recreation district. Mr. Schneider indicated that these groups could join the joint recreation district if their Broads made that decision or just collaborate with the district on a contractual level.
Councilmember Mershon asked if the joint recreation district passed a levy, the Township Trustees could roll-off their current levy. Mr. Lodge indicated in the affirmative.
Councilmember O’Keefe asked what the financial commitment would be from the various entities. Mr. Lodge indicated that there would be no financial commitment. The JRD was asking that the Village, for example, continue with their current contribution. Councilmember Barsky indicated that an $8,000 figure was indicated for the first year as the Village’s contribution. She asked if that dollar amount would be an on-going contribution. Mr. Schneider indicated that the $8,000 figure was a value assigned to what the Village currently funds for the cost of mowing Wildwood, maintenance services and office space.
Councilmember Barsky asked if there would be a conflict of interest with both the School Board and Village providing legal counsel. Law Director Crites indicated that each entity that would be part of the district would be entitled to have their own representation. There can be an agreement made where specific individuals were charged with handling specific tasks. Law Director Crites indicated that he could research the issue further and check with the Attorney General’s office. He did not anticipate a problem.
Vice Mayor Herman commented that the resolution did not reference what responsibilities or expectations there were for the district. He suggested including the Rec Commission’s existing responsibilities or an exhibit that outlines the proposal provided Council detailing the proposal and plan. This exhibit would provide an outline of what each entity was responsible for and the district’s purpose. Councilmember Tegtmeyer agreed that the resolution should outline a definitive function and purpose of the joint recreation district. Mr. Lodge indicated that this committee was hesitant to set any parameters as they felt that would be the roll of the new Board to make those decisions. Councilmember Mershon indicated that, in reviewing the current contract between the GRC and the Township Trustees, the agreement was not specific. The Trustees have the option to make adjustments to the GRC contract annually should services not be provided as expected, and the voters would have the same option to renew levies based on the district’s job performance. Vice Mayor Herman asked if the proposed timeline could be attached as an exhibit to the resolution. Mr. Schneider indicated in the affirmative. Councilmember Mershon suggested that, if the JRD’s responsibilities were not outlined in the statute, the suggestions being made by Council were to include some description of the purpose, tasks or goals of this entity. Vice Mayor Herman agreed.
Councilmember Barsky asked if the GRC would be become part of the joint recreation district. Mr. Lodge indicated that the JRD Board would decide whether to roll the Rec Commission into this new organization, contract work to the GRC or have no connection. He and Mr. Schneider were not able to address what decisions the new JRD Board would make. The joint recreation Board would determine how best to utilize the GRC. Councilmember O’Keefe commented that the purpose of the JRD would be to bring in all different age groups under one umbrella to more efficiently coordinate recreational activities. Mr. Lodge added that the JRD would also match up the boundaries of the entity with the people served, create a leadership board and develop a funding authority.
Councilmember Barsky asked if a resolution to create a Board with directives outlining operations, governance and goals or objectives could be created that would answer a number of these questions. This type of resolution would provide each entity with more direction and information. Law Director Crites agreed. Mr. Schneider indicated that the JRD would not be dependent on other groups joining. Councilmember Barsky suggested that the entities could provide letters of intent indicating their support.
Vice Mayor Herman asked if the GRC would be willing to provide additional information outlining the JRD’s goals, principles and/or anticipated outcomes. Mr. Schneider indicated that the GRC could make those modifications. Mr. Schneider indicated that the GRC would also appreciate the Village identifying any additional contributions that were typically made to the GRC.
Mr. Schneider indicated that the GRC would review and revise the information and submit a finalized resolution to Council as soon as possible.
Councilmember O’Keefe asked if this resolution would legalize Council’s decision. Law Director Crites responded that the Village’s Charter and Code requires Council’s decision to be affirmed within forty-five days and acted upon by this body.
Vote on Resolution No. 08-32. Motion carried 6-1. Resolution No. 08-32 was adopted.
Councilmember O’Keefe recused herself for the reason set forth during the original appeal hearing.
Vote on Resolution No. 08-33. Motion carried 6-0. Resolution No. 08-33 was adopted.
Mayor Hartfield recused herself from the Gateway Zoning District discussion. Vice Mayor Herman suggested that the discussion of the Gateway Zoning District last until 10:00pm. Council agreed
Ordinance No. 07-08, An Ordinance Enacting Chapter 1173 and Amending Chapter 1189 of the Codified Ordinances to Establish Zoning Regulations for the Village Gateway District was motioned to be removed from the table by
Councilmember Mershon. Second by Councilmember O’Keefe.
Vote to remove Ordinance No. 07-08 from the table. Motion carried 6-0. Ordinance No. 07-08 was removed from the table.
Vice Mayor Herman asked Councilmembers if there were any items listed in the previous meeting minutes that member would like to remove or add to the discussion. No items were suggested.
Councilmember Tegtmeyer suggested beginning the discussion with concerns about density and the six (6) units per acre limit. She expressed concerns about the section requiring 1,800 square foot unit minimums. She indicated her concerns that housing this large would be cost prohibitive to many residents, especially seniors. Councilmember Tegtmeyer provided the Council members with data showing housing square footage at much lower levels. She asked that Council to reconsider, at least, the minimum square footage requirement. Planner Terry indicated that, earlier in the process, it was suggested that units could be at specific size such as 700 square feet for a one bedroom, eleven hundred square feet for a two bedroom and thirteen hundred square feet for a three bedroom. This type of mixed units usually results in about a ten unit per acre density.
Councilmember Mershon moved to amend 1173.03(a) Residential Density to change 6 units per acre to 8 units per acre and delete the last two added provisions. The description would read Maximum of 8 dwelling units per acre. Second by Councilmember Tegtmeyer. Councilmember Mershon felt this language would help preserve the option of affordable housing and provided a compromise to the six units per acre and the Granville Planning Commission recommendation of ten units per acre. Planner Terry advised that the Granville Planning Commission recommendation was six units per acre. Councilmember Mershon moved to amend his motion to reduce units per acre to six. Second by Councilmember McGowan. Councilmember O’Keefe stated that six units per acre would encourage less density and reduce traffic. Vice Mayor Herman expressed his concern that increased units could impact the school system. Planner Terry indicated that the difference between six and eight units would be difficult to assess as the variety of potential plans and designs have a greater impact. Planner Terry pointed out that currently under section 1173.02(b)(5) buildings were restricted to no more than six dwelling units per building. Council indicated their support for maintaining the six units per building portion of the Code. Councilmember Mershon indicated that he would withdraw one of his motions.
Councilmember Mershon reaffirmed his motion to amend 1173.03(a) Residential Density to change 6 units per acre to 8 units per acre and delete the last two added provisions. The description would read Maximum of 8 dwelling units per acre. Second by Councilmember Tegtmeyer.
Roll call vote: Barsky (no), McGowan (yes), Mershon (yes), O’Keefe (no), Tegtmeyer (yes), Herman (yes). Motion carried 4-2.
Vice Mayor Herman suggested discussing the Building Style section. Councilmember Barsky moved to change the language under Building Style Residential to read “Buildings shall be a minimum of one (1) story and a maximum of two (2) stories. The number of stories shall be measured from the front elevation.” Second by Councilmember Mershon. Due to further discussion regarding the direction that stories should be measured, Councilmember Barsky amended her motion to read “Buildings shall be a minimum of one (1) story and a maximum of two (2) stories. The number of stories shall be measured from the street facing elevation.” Second by Councilmember Tegtmeyer.
Roll call vote: Barsky (yes), McGowan (yes), Mershon (yes), O’Keefe (yes), Tegtmeyer (yes), Herman (yes). Motion carried 6-0.
Councilmember Barsky asked the effective difference between 50% lot coverage and 60% lot coverage. Planner Terry indicated that in the SBD, lot coverage was set at 50% with possible expansion to 70% using the density bonus. However, she indicated that many of the buildings currently in that district were at or about 60% lot coverage. She further indicated that the density bonus and open space dedication had not been implemented in the way intended. Councilmember Mershon indicated that as most of the development has been at 60% lot coverage, he suggested maintaining the 60% lot coverage. The Council members agreed to leave the lot coverage maximum at 60%.
Maximum Single Tenant
Vice Mayor Herman asked were the 8,000 square feet single tenant size originated. Councilmember Barsky indicated that Metropolitan Partners suggested that as an appropriate restaurant size. Planner Terry advised that the Comprehensive Plan recommended a maximum tenant size of 5,000 square feet. The SBD district allows for a maximum 4,000 square feet single tenant. Vice Mayor Herman asked how mixed usage would be accommodated. Planner Terry indicated that a plan including residential or office space and a retail facility could evade this portion of the Code. She recommended that Council could place a limit on retail use specifically. She suggested possible language restricting the maximum retail square footage in a mixed use building would be limited to 10,000 square feet. Council asked staff to work on developing language to resolve this issue.
Councilmember O’Keefe indicated that she was willing to withdraw her objection to vinyl siding and maintain the current language.
Councilmember Barsky indicated her concern with the six foot width for a tree lawn as the Village trees were struggling due to the tree lawn width. Councilmember Mershon suggested checking with the Tree & Landscape Commission to determine if they have completed a comprehensive proposal with recommended changes to the existing zoning code. Manager Holycross indicated that currently the Tree & Landscape code section specifically outlines tree lawn width based on tree size and species. Councilmember O’Keefe moved to remove the first paragraph in 1173.03(a) section Street Trees in both Non Residential and Residential and reference the Codified Ordinances for the Village of Granville Chapter 1193. Second by Councilmember Mershon.
Vote to amend the Street Trees section. Motion carried 6-0.
Councilmember Barsky explained that in the previous meeting a question was raised regarding the minimum six foot width of sidewalks in this area and if it would accommodate adequate sitting, etc. Councilmember O’Keefe indicated that the minimum of six feet would be a sufficient option. Councilmember Mershon indicated that larger sidewalks could encourage greater social interaction and the larger sidewalks were encouraged. Vice Mayor Herman suggested that sidewalk width could be a staff function to encourage wider sidewalks where appropriate. Council agreed to maintain the existing language.
Vice Mayor Herman indicated that as lot coverage was to remain at 60%, the Open Space lot coverage at 60% would remain the same.
Detention Basins and Retention Ponds
Councilmember O’Keefe indicated that Planner Terry discussed that possible use of bio-retention drainage. Planner Terry indicated that these basins used vegetation to allow for better drainage and a more green method of development. Councilmember O’Keefe moved to add the following language at the end of both the Non Residential and Residential section “The use of low impact design systems shall be strongly encouraged.” Second by Councilmember Tegtmeyer.
Vote to amend the Detention Basins and Retention Ponds section. Motion carried 6-0.
Manager Holycross indicated that Council wanted to address section 1173.04(c)(2) “Access points and expected movement through and between separate parking areas.” Councilmember Barsky questioned if the issue was concerning the number of curb cuts onto Main Street. Manager Holycross indicated that this issue was covered elsewhere in the Code. Council determined that this section would remain the same.
Vice Mayor Herman indicated that the remaining issues were:
- Retail issue
- Drive Throughs
Vice Mayor Herman suggested that the ordinance be tabled again and addressed at the next meeting. Councilmember Barsky moved to table Ordinance 07-8 until Council’s next meeting. Second by Councilmember Tegtmeyer
Vote to table Ordinance 07-8. Motion carried 6-0.
Mayor Hartfield returned to the Council meeting.
Ordinance No. 09-08, An Ordinance Authorizing the Village Manager to Provide Water Service for the New Maintenance Building to be Constructed by Granville Township on Columbus Road was introduced by Vice Mayor Herman. Second by Councilmember O’Keefe.
Mayor Hartfield set a public hearing for Ordinance 09-08 for August 6, 2008.
Ordinance No. 10-08, An Ordinance Authorizing the Village Manager to Provide Sanitary Sewer Service for the New Maintenance Building to be Constructed by Granville Township on Columbus Road was introduced by Councilmember O’Keefe. Second by Vice Mayor Herman.
Mayor Hartfield set a public hearing for Ordinance 10-08 for August 6, 2008.
Ordinance No. 11-08, An Ordinance Authorizing the Village of Granville to Extend Sanitary Sewer Services to the Owens Corning Property, 2790 Columbus Road, for the Purpose of Supporting the Development of the Granville Science and Technology Complex was introduced by Councilmember Barsky. Second by Councilmember O’Keefe.
Mayor Hartfield set a public hearing for Ordinance 11-08 for August 6, 2008.
REVIEW OF MINUTES
Regularly Scheduled Meeting of June 4, 2008
Councilmember McGowan made a motion to approve the minutes. Second by Councilmember Tegtmeyer. Motion carried 7-0.
MAYOR’S COURT REPORT – June
The Mayor’s Court Report for the month of June was presented for review.
Councilmember McGowan moved to accept the June Mayor’s Court report. Second by Councilmember Barsky. Motion carried 7-0.
Mayor Hartfield instructed the report be filed with the Clerk. A copy of the report will be included as part of these minutes.
MANAGER’S REPORT – June
The Manager’s Report for the month of June was presented for review.
Councilmember O’Keefe asked if the 4% increase in tax receipts should be in black font instead of red font. Manager Holycross indicated the record would be changed.
Councilmember O’Keefe moved to accept the June Monthly Manager’s Report Second by Councilmember McGowan. Motion carried 7-0.
Mayor Hartfield instructed the report be filed with the Clerk. A copy of said report will be included as part of these minutes
Economic, Finance, Personnel Committee (EFP) – (Hartfield, Herman, Tegtmeyer)
Mayor Hartfield reported that the EFP Committee met on July 21st. The minutes of that meeting were included in Council’s packet if anyone had any questions. The Committee’s next meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 21st at 7:00am.
Granville Foundation – (Tegtmeyer)
Councilmember Tegtmeyer reported that the Foundation members would be holding a Retreat on August 9th.
Light, Safety, Sts/Sidewalks, Utility Committee (LSSU) – (Herman, McGowan, O’Keefe)
The Committee’s next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 29th at 5:30pm.
Planning Commission – (O’Keefe)
Councilmember O’Keefe reported that the Planning Commission approved all but on application at the last meeting. The minutes of that meeting on included in Council’s packet. The application that was denied was for the expansion of the parking area for Spring Hills Baptist Church. The Planning Commission will be forwarding their recommendation to Council for review.
Planning & Zoning Committee – (Barsky, Hartfield, O’Keefe)
Councilmember O’Keefe reported that the Committee’s July meeting will be rescheduled.
Recreation Commission – (McGowan)
Councilmember McGowan reported that the July meeting was cancelled.
Tree & Landscape Commission (Barsky)
Union Cemetery (Mershon)
OTHER COUNCIL MATTERS
Councilmember Barsky asked about the changes mentioned in the information provided by Time Warner several weeks ago. Manager Holycross indicated that Law Director Crites reviewed the information and advised that no Council action would be necessary.
Councilmember McGowan asked if the police department would be utilizing more foot patrols due to the high cost of fuel.
Councilmember McGowan also asked if the mulch on East Broadway closest to North Prospect could be swept back into the beds as the rain washed it out during the last storm.
Councilmember Barsky questioned if the steps onto Sugar Loaf off South Plum Street should be addressed as they were deteriorated.
Manager Holycross expressed Law Director Crites’ apologies as he had to leave.
Councilmember O’Keefe asked if someone could attend the August 11th and 25th Granville Planning Commission meetings as she would be out-of-town. Councilmember Barsky indicated that she thought she could cover those meetings. Mayor Hartfield also indicated that she would be able to cover those meetings.
Councilmember McGowan moved to adjourn the meeting. Second by Councilmember Tegtmeyer. Motion carried 7-0. Meeting adjourned.