Granville Community Calendar

Council Minutes June 18, 2008

  VILLAGE OF GRANVILLE

COUNCIL MINUTES

June 18, 2008

 

CALL TO ORDER (by Mayor Hartfield at 7:30 pm)

 

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

 

ROLL CALL

            Those responding to the roll call were Councilmembers Barsky, McGowan, Mershon, O’Keefe, Vice Mayor Herman, Mayor Hartfield, Manager Holycross, Law Director Crites and Planner Terry.

 

Vice Mayor Herman made a motion to excuse Councilmember Tegtmeyer.  Second by Councilmember Barsky.  Motion carried (6-0) 

 

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Councilmember McGowan moved to approve the agenda as presented.  Second by Councilmember Barsky.  Motion carried (6-0).   

 

CITIZENS COMMENTS (7:31 pm)

 

Dennis Cauchon, 327 East Broadway, advised Council that Section 1137.01 of the Village Code permitted Council to initiate an appeal as well as the Village Planner, Law Director and Village Manager.  He requested that Mr. Thornborough receive his $150 fee back for the cost of filing the Burke Hall exterior lighting plan appeal as Council could have initiated the appeal.

 

Sara Jean Wilhelm, 202 Thresher Street, indicated her opposition to drive-throughs as part of the newly proposed Gateway Zoning District.  She stated that drive-throughs would not benefit the Village or increase the Village tax base.  She also expressed her opinion regarding density levels.  She asked that the current level of density in other zoning districts be applied to this zoning area to preserve green space.  Ms. Wilhelm also asked that Council take into consideration ecological concerns regarding development in the Rive Road area.

 

Butch Curtis, 1942 Columbus Road, questioned the application of sand to the intersections during the repaving of Village streets.  He indicated that he had spoken with Village staff regarding the reason for the application of sand.  He asked if the sand would be cleaned up now that the street improvements were complete.  Manager Holycross indicated that the Service Department would be cleaning up the sand this week.

 

Mayor Hartfield closed Citizens’ Comments at 7:37pm

 

 

APPEAL HEARING

 

Mayor Hartfield called the appeal hearing of the decision by the Granville Planning Commission to approve a proposed exterior lighting plan for Denison University’s Burke Hall at 240 West Broadway, located in the Village Institutional District and in the Architectural Review Overlay District, to order.  Mayor Hartfield called the roll.  Those responding to the roll call were Councilmembers Barsky, McGowan, Mershon, O’Keefe, Vice Mayor Herman, and Mayor Hartfield.

 

Councilmember O’Keefe recused herself from the hearing as her husband taught at Denison University.

 

Law Director Crites advised Council that the Denison University attorney, as well as the appellant, requested that Council remand the application back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration.

 

Those wishing to speak during the hearing were sworn in.  Please note an official transcript of the June 18, 2008 Appeal Hearing for Denison University’s Burke Hall at 240 West Broadway will be attached to these minutes. 

 

Mayor Hartfield closed the evidence at 7:53pm.  Law Director Crites noted that pursuant to section 1137.01(j) of the Codified Ordinances of Granville, Council may affirm, reverse, revoke, modify, or remand for further proceedings the decision. 

 

Councilmember Mershon moved that the appeal be remanded to the Planning Commission to reconsider their decision in light of the changes in the application and to address the standing issue of anyone who appeared at that hearing. Second by Councilmember McGowan.  Roll call vote to remand the decision of the Planning Commission regarding the exterior lighting plan for Burke Hall: Barsky (yes), McGowan (yes), Mershon (yes), Herman (yes), Hartfield (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.  Mayor Hartfield announced that the decision of the Granville Planning Commission from May 12th would be remanded back to the Planning Commission. 

 

Law Director Crites advised that Council’s decision will need to be formalized in writing within 45 days.   Law Director Crites asked Council if they would like him to prepare the decision.  Council requested that Law Director Crites prepare the decision.

 

Mayor Hartfield called the regular Council meeting back to order at 8:00pm.  Councilmember O’Keefe returned to the meeting.

 

Mayor Hartfield directed a question to Law Director Crites regarding the discussion and a resolution to the issue of standing.  Law Director Crites advised Council that the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning and Building Appeals hearings were quasi-judicial hearings.  As these meetings were quasi-judicial hearings, anyone who appeared to speak before those commissions was required to be sworn in and describe their relationship to the application.  Individuals may be questioned and asked to establish standing in connection to applications.  The Commission decides if standing is appropriate and allows the party to speak.  If the Commission determined that the individual does not have standing, the individual may not provide testimony. 

 

Mayor Hartfield asked how the line was draw as to who had standing and who did not.  Law Director Crites responded that Village Code provided little guidance.  He indicated that the Commission and/or Legal Counsel does not seek to exclude individuals and tries to provide allowances; however, as the hearings were quasi-judicial in nature, there were limits and those limits were followed.  Councilmember Mershon asked who has the decision making power of determining standing.  Law Director Crites indicated that it was ultimately Council’s decision; however, the Law Director and Commission may make that determination at each hearing. 

 

Councilmember Barsky suggested that the hearings should be well advertised.  Councilmember O’Keefe indicated that perhaps a limit should be placed on adding or changing aspects of applications during a hearing.

 

PUBLIC HEARING

 

Mayor Hartfield recused herself from the hearing.  Vice Mayor Herman opened the public hearing at 8:10pm

 

  1. , An Ordinance Enacting Chapter 1173 and   Amending Chapter 1189 of the Codified Ordinance to Establish Zoning Regulations for the Village Gateway District

 

Comments:

Dan Bellman, 310 Summit Street, expressed his concerns about making changes to the zoning codes in the Suburban Business District.  He indicated that the proposed Gateway District zoning should only apply to the River Road area. He indicated that many community members spent a lot of time implementing the Suburban Business District and the zoning in that area has provided what was desired.  Council should be careful not to develop an area that could possibly cause a drain on the downtown business area.  He indicated that he had special concerns regarding the increase in density, the removal of the density incentive bonus, the increase from four to six dwelling units, and the increased tenant square footage size.  Mr. Bellman also recommended that Council contact Keith Meyers for his input and expertise.

 

Doug Wagner, 300 Pinehurst Drive, advised that he was a current property owner on River Road.  He indicated that the ordinance before Council was a diluted version of the zoning district that was originally presented to Council by the landowners.  He felt this current ordinance was too restrictive and, with the additional cost to property owners to install water and sewer, the overall costs to develop property along the River Road corridor would be too prohibitive.  He was hoping to see a more collaborative relationship between Village Council and the property owners.  Councilmember Barsky asked what Mr. Wagner found specifically restrictive.  Mr. Wagner indicated that the 10,000 square foot non-commercial building size would work for him, but he wanted 70% lot density.  He currently has three acres and hoped to subdivide his lot; however, the current restrictions would most likely prohibit that course of action.  Councilmember Mershon commented that he believed the current Township business zoning district may be more limited than the proposed Gateway Zoning District.

 

Rodger Kessler, 170 Pinehurst Drive, expressed his agreement with Mr. Bellman regarding his high opinion of Keith Meyers.  Mr. Kessler advised Council that he was not in agreement with all aspects of the current version of the Gateway Zoning District.  He disagreed with the number of units permitted, the reduction in tenant building square footage, and the reduced density percentage.  However, he believed these items were negotiable and not of major concern.  He expressed his greatest concern to be Council’s need to react to the proposed development along South Main Street.  Mr. Kessler believed an opportunity existed for the Village to approach all parties and reach an agreement that could provide a lasting return to the community.   He charged Council with seizing this opportunity and making it happen.  Vice Mayor Herman asked Mr. Kessler if indeed the specific numbers and restrictions of the proposed zoning plan were the main issue.  Mr. Kessler responded that those issues could be easily and quickly resolved with negotiation.  He indicated that the larger issue was to connect with the developer, who had already begun the development process, and seek their involvement in this process.  The Village needed to make this opportunity happen in order to maintain control of the development in that area.  Property owners have already waited for over four years for decisions to be made regarding the River Road area.  Mr. Kessler urged them not to miss this important opportunity.  Councilmember O’Keefe responded that Council was moving the process forward, but still needed to consider the costs to the Village regarding infrastructure and if the area would provide an increase to the Village tax base.  There were also serious issues to address regarding the sensitive ecological nature of that area and concerns regarding traffic patterns.  Vice Mayor Herman added that Council had to address the needs of the entire community, not individual property owners.  Councilmember Barsky stated that there was an advantage to extending discussions to ensure that decisions comply with the direction set by the Comprehensive Plan.  Councilmember Mershon indicated that the proposed zoning district was designed, generally, to meet the needs of the River Road area. Councilmember Mershon added, that although the issues mentioned by the other Councilmembers were important, it was time for Council to move forward and make a decision regarding the zoning code for that area and address the issue of providing water and sewer.  Councilmember Barsky stated that during the past twenty years, the residents, through their many survey responses, had provided significant comment regarding how the Village and surrounding Township should develop.  Councilmember Mershon asked if Council wanted to extend the public hearing one more meeting to allow Councilmember Tegtmeyer to hear testimony.  Vice Mayor Herman indicated that the public had been accorded adequate hearing time.  Councilmember O’Keefe indicated that she would like to more forward.  Councilmember Mershon added that there were only a limited number of issues that Council still needed to resolve. 

 

Mellissa Hartfield, 220 South Pearl Street, commented as an area property owner.  She indicated that developing this ordinance had been a long process with a lot of debate.  Ms. Hartfield acknowledged that there were a number of legitimate concerns regarding applying zoning to this area, but believed the process would provide a great opportunity for the community.  She indicated that she did have a few concerns.  She hoped Council would take traffic concerns into consideration and try to provide good options for future access.  Ms. Hartfield hoped that any development in this area would compliment the existing Village and Township development.  She expressed concern regarding the inclusion of three story buildings and the minimum width of sidewalks.  She felt larger sidewalks encouraged socialization and that very few buildings exceeded two and a half stories.  Ms. Hartfield ended her comments with the hope that a spirit of collaboration could permit the process to continue to move forward in a positive manner.

 

Councilmember O’Keefe asked if Council had agreed to the 60% density coverage.  Vice Mayor Herman responded that Council had agreed on the number 60% density to enable staff to provide an ordinance for Council to introduce. 

 

Vice Mayor Herman closed the public hearing for Ordinance No. 07-08 at 8:45pm. Mayor Hartfield returned to the meeting.

 

      Provide for Adjustments of the Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 2008 and to

      Revise Sums for Operating Expenses

 

Comments:

There were no comments for or against the ordinance.  Mayor Hartfield closed the public hearing at 8:47pm.

 

OLD BUSINESS

 

 

Mayor Hartfield recused herself from the Gateway Zoning District discussion.  Vice Mayor Herman suggested that the discussion of the Gateway Zoning District be limited to a forty-five minute period.  Council agreed.

 

Discussion:

Councilmember O’Keefe asked if the purpose and intent of the new district were to provide increased tax revenues to the school district.  Manager Holycross indicated in the affirmative and added that this language came directly from the Suburban Business District. 

 

Councilmember McGowan asked how the district would be applied to the Village zoning map.  Planner Terry indicated that it would initially be only a zoning classification on the map, but as new areas were annexed into the Village, Council could then assign whichever specific zoning district to those areas.   Planner Terry added that those areas were usually outlined by arterial roadways, property lines, or topographical boundaries. 

 

Councilmember Mershon suggested that, as there were a limited number of areas of disagreement, Council should perhaps begin by listing the items that needed further review and discussion.  Council agreed.

 

The items Council determined needed further discussion and review were as follows:

 

  • Lot coverage
  • (b)(5) number of units
  • Single tenant size
  • Maximum building size
  • Tree lawn width
  • Sidewalk width
  • Open space – paragraph two
  • Detention/retention basins
  • Building style – story height
  • Materials (vinyl siding)
  • Drive-throughs
  • Lighting (too much, what is a foot-candle, how bright is a foot-candle)
  • Access management – road access points
  • Neon signs and sign types
  • Freestanding residential sign height

 

Council agreed to strike the language “including those used for retail display” under the Windows – Residential section at the end of the second paragraph.

 

Vice Mayor Herman suggested that Council correlate each of these issues with recommendations from the Comprehensive Plan.  Councilmember McGowan suggested that if Councilmembers had concerns, questions or need clarification on any issues, to contact Planner Terry so she can research the issue and provide any information or answers at the next Council meeting.

 

Councilmember Mershon moved to table Ordinance No. 07-08 until the next Council meeting.  Second by Councilmember Barsky.  Vote 5-0.  Motion passed.

 

Mayor Hartfield returned to the Council meeting.

 

      Provide for Adjustments of the Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 2008 and to

      Revise Sums for Operating Expenses was moved for adoption by

      Councilmember Barsky.  Second by Councilmember O’Keefe.

 

Discussion:

Mayor Hartfield noted that Sergeants Dudgeon and Blackledge were in the audience and available for questions.

 

Councilmember McGowan summarized the information provided to the Lights, Safety, Streets/Sidewalks, and Utilities Committee when the Granville Police Department originally presented there request for TASERs.  He advised that ten TASERs were to be purchased, one for each full-time officer.  He also indicated that the department currently had two TASERs, which the officers share.  Each officer would be fully trained in the use of a TASER.  He advised that Sergeant Blackledge described a specific incident where he could have used a TASER to apprehend a fleeing suspect.

 

Manager Holycross explained that the cost of the TASERs was expected to be $13,500. The Police Department received a total of $11,925 with an additional $500 pledged when the TASERs were ordered, leaving an estimated balance of $1,100.   Vice Mayor Herman and Councilmember Mershon asked if, in the original presentation, the Police Department indicated that all of the funds would be donated with no cost to the Village.  Manager Holycross indicated in the affirmative and added that the balance of the cost could be covered by the existing budget for the Police Department Materials & Supply Budget. 

 

Councilmember O’Keefe asked under what circumstances a TASER would be used.  Sergeant Dudgeon responded that a TASER could be used to gain quick and immediate control of a suspect, to help prevent injury to a suspect or officer, and to gain control of combative suspects.  He indicated that a TASER was an additional tool that could be available to officers.  Sergeant Dudgeon stated that a TASER had only been used two or three times in the course of Village law enforcement.  Councilmember Mershon added that a TASER was an immediate use alternative to other police tools. Councilmember O’Keefe asked if TASERs were lethal.  Sergeant Dudgeon reported that no deaths had been attributed to TASERs, based on court cases.  Councilmember McGowan added that people have died because of the use of a TASER, but underlying medical conditions were cited as the ultimate cause of death.   Mayor Hartfield indicated that the officers currently carry guns and use those weapons appropriately and judiciously.  Vice Mayor Herman added that the Police Department answered all of his concerns regarding the use, training, and handling of TASERs.

 

Council thanked the officers for compiling the information and bringing the request to council. 

 

NEW BUSINESS

 

Resolution No. 08-31, A Resolution to Express Appreciation to Bill Heim for Service on the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals was introduced by Councilmember McGowan.  Second by Councilmember Barsky. 

 

Discussion:

No discussion

Vote on Resolution No. 08-31. Motion carried 6-0.  Resolution No. 08-31 was adopted. 

 

REVIEW OF MINUTES

 

Regularly Scheduled Meeting of June 4, 2008

 

Councilmember O’Keefe made a motion to approve the minutes as amended.  Second by Vice Mayor Herman.   Motion carried 6-0.

 

MAYOR’S COURT REPORT – May

 

The Mayor’s Court Report for the month of May was presented for review.

Councilmember McGowan asked if staff was investigating methods to reduce or control fuel consumption.  Manager Holycross indicated that no measures were currently in effect, but could be researched.

 

Councilmember McGowan moved to accept the May Mayor’s Court report.  Second by Vice Mayor Herman.  Motion carried 6-0.

 

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 – May

 

The Manager’s Report for the month of May was presented for review.           

 

Mayor Hartfield noted that the number of patrol hours had increased.  Manager Holycross indicated that he would discuss the increase with Chief Mason.

 

Councilmember McGowan asked about the increase in the number of unsecured buildings.  Manager Holycross indicated that he also noted the increase and would check with the schools as to any potential issues.

 

Councilmember O’Keefe asked why the sewer fund amount was negative.  Manager Holycross indicated that the fund balance was negative due to encumbered sums for repairs yet to be funded.  He indicated that receipts for the current month should bring the balance more in line.

 

Councilmember Barsky noted the increase in the number of shut-off notices.

 

Councilmember McGowan moved to accept the May Monthly Manager’s Report   Second by Vice Mayor Herman.  Motion carried 6-0.

 

Mayor Hartfield instructed the report be filed with the Clerk.  A copy of said report will be included as part of these minutes

 

COMMITTEE REPORTS   

 

Economic, Finance, Personnel Committee (EFP) – (Hartfield, Herman, Tegtmeyer) 

Mayor Hartfield reported that the EFP Committee met June 9th.  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, June 23rd at 7:00am.

 

Granville Foundation – (Tegtmeyer)

No Report.

 

Light, Safety, Sts/Sidewalks, Utility Committee (LSSU) – (Herman, McGowan, O’Keefe)

The Committee’s next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 24th at 5:30pm.

 

Planning Commission – (O’Keefe)

Councilmember O’Keefe reported that the Planning Commission approved the applications for signage and a change of use.  The vote, regarding the application for the already installed solar panels, was tied, 2-2, as there were only four Commission members present.  No action was taken on that application.  The application will be reviewed again at the next Commission meeting.  Also, included in Council’s packet, were minutes from the Special Planning Commission hearing, which reviewed the new zoning code amendments.  The Commission will continue their review at their next meeting.   

 

Planning & Zoning Committee – (Barsky, Hartfield, O’Keefe)

Councilmember O’Keefe reported that the P & Z Committee met June 17th.  The minutes of that meeting were included in Council’s folder if anyone had any questions.  The Committee reviewed the changes made to the temporary sign and the property maintenance codes.  The Committee recommended that both codes be presented to the Planning Commission and Council for review.  The Committee’s next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 22nd at 5:30pm.

 

 

Recreation Commission – (McGowan)

Councilmember McGowan reported that the June Rec Commission meeting was cancelled.  Manager Holycross indicated that the Commission would be coming before Council during their July 16th meeting to make a presentation regarding the proposed joint recreational district.  Mayor Hartfield asked Manager Holycross if the presentation could be early in the meeting, as the next meeting had a full agenda.

 

Councilmember O’Keefe reminded Council to be sure to attend the Box Lunch Bingo for individuals fifty-five and older on July 5th

 

Tree & Landscape Commission (Barsky)

No Report.

 

Union Cemetery (Mershon)

No Report.

 

OTHER COUNCIL MATTERS

 

Mayor Hartfield asked Manager Holycross if a Council response was needed for the information provided in Council’s packet regarding Time Warner.  Manager Holycross indicated that Council should hold onto the information as staff will review the proposed changes, confer with the Law Director and advise Council as to any necessary action.

 

 

ADJOURNMENT (9:57pm PM)

            Councilmember McGowan moved to adjourn the meeting.  Second by Vice Mayor Herman.  Motion carried 5-0.  Meeting adjourned.

 

Employee Payroll / Compensation

The Village has thirty-six (36) full-time employees, 16 regular part-time employees and seaonal employees. Village Personnel Policy

Go to My Pay Stub and login.