Granville Community Calendar

GPC Minutes 5/16/1994

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 16, 1994

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, James Harf, Larry Huey, Lyn Robertson, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent: Jurgen Pape

Visitors: Pat and Toni Simonson (324 West Elm),Susan Diduk/ Kent Maynard (335 N. Granger), Ann and Rich Cherry 223 S. Main), Richard Downs 4174 Loudon Street), Jack Harmon (205 S. Fourth Street, Newark), Ashlin Caravana 209 East Elm),Steve Smith (331 Spellman),Dick Pinkerton (116 W. Broadway)

Minutes: May 2, corrections: Page 3, Paragraph 3, line 5,

sign, and She felt thal. signs may not carry advertising. Mr.

Harf moved to r.a.anind. the motion"...

Under Erinwood 2, the two nay votes were Harf and Robertson;

and Erinwood (3) and 4) carried the same voting tally in

abstention. Mr. Stansbury moved to approve minutes; Mr. Huey

seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

Old Business:

Erinwood:

1) Three signs on Erinwood Building #5

Mr. Harden announced that he will

Nationwide is on your side" from the sign.

remove the phrase

TWO of these signs are consistent with the signs on the

other buidlings. One is the ground sign discussed at the work

session at last meeting. The sign on the end is illuminated and approved by Mr. Tailford in accord with the code. BZBA said to

review illumination was not within their purview. Ms. Robertson

brought up the concern that some signs have illumination them and others upon are lit from inside. Mr. Harden showed a picture of an illuminated sign, and the sign appears to be very small, not visible to the main street. Mr. Huey asked whether this is different from what was approved before, and it is different

relative to the building, not relative to the road. By the

position of the building, the sign needs to be as described in

order to be effective.

Mr. Huey moved to approve the sign application; Mr. Stansbury seconded, and IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

2) Temporary Advertising Sign for Condominiums on Shannon Lane

This would be a one-year renewal. Mr.

the sign and found it to be in good repair.

to approve; Mr. Huey seconded,

Huey had inspected

Mr. Stansbury moved

and IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

3) Renewal of two temporary advertising signs

Signs are at the Officeso-n-e on North Galway and the other

on Newark-Granville Road. Mr. Huey moved to approve; Mr.

Stansbury seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Steve Smith, 331 Spellman

Application tabled from last meeting}

Mr. Smith wishes to construct a 40" fence, add a deck and

install patio doors. The deck is 30+fr'om property line. This

will not change the location of the driveway but will come 12"

into the drivewaya-nd- will fit, according to Mr. Smith. He

explained that the fence is behind the tree in order to match up

with the other side, and area will be landscaped.

Mr. Harf moved to approve, Mr. Huey seconded, AND MOTION WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Diduk/ Maynard, 335 N. Granger

The owners wish

back of their home.

May 26 at BZBA, and

successful

Stansbury

CONTINGENT

to construct a

It will need a v

tonight- s appr

variance approval. Mr.

seconded, AND MOTION

UPON VARIANCE.

Tom Simonson, 324 West Elm

n L shaped addition to the

ariance and is scheduled for

oval is contingent upon a

Huey moved to approve, Mr.

WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED

The Simonsons wish to install wood rails and baluster to the front porch. Mrs. Simonson shoed a picture of the spindles, presumably a copy of the original appearance, and explained that

they· wish to restore the house as much as possible. Mr. Huey

moved to approve installation of two side rails on the porch

similar to what has been done, an8 if the Simonsons wish to match the rail down the steps, that is their option. Mr. Stansbury

seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Bryan and Christine Law, 346 East College

with ThaeneLwaws wish to tear off the current carport and replace it and expanded carport. They also wish to build a storage garage to the back of the carport. This application will

2

3

need a variance and has been schedule

Laws were

questions,

seconded.

PRESENT.

not present tonight,

Mr. Harf moved to

MOTION

d for the May 26 BZBA. The

members had numerous

ication and Mr. Huey

UNTIL THE LAWS CAN BE

and since

table appl

WAS UNANIMOUSLY TABLED

Ashlin and Michael Caravana, 209 East Elm

The Caravanas with to remove the vinyl siding from the front

of their house and restore the original siding. The shingles

Will be painted white and new or restored shutters will be

installed and painted black or dark green. Ms. Caravana showed

pictures and explained that they want to restore wood siding

destroyed in a fire, but they need to remove the vinyl siding

before they can see what is underneath. Maybe they can make the

porch smaller. Mr. Huey moved to approve application; Mr.

Stansbury seconded, and IT, WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ann Sheffler Cherry, 223 South Main

The Cherrys wish to replace the front porch floor, put

up handrails, and move the steps from the front to the side of

the porch. Ms. Cherry showed pictures of their plans. Mr. Huey

moved to approve; Mr. Harf seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

Announcements:

Mr. Huey told the group that when he talked to Mr. Hurst,

they discussed the sign ordinance and reconsideration of

decisions. We would have been allowed to reconsider the motion

at the last meeting as long as the position does not materially

affect the process. We could change our mind at this point but

notafter 428£188h_a*b-ecn m - ade-. The motion to rescind was n

proper. 44---se_0-&,; 4«r-k-t1, IPX 4- D CEZ- e

According to Mr. Hurst, almost anything can go on a sign; it is not so much what goes on a sign but what it does-- to attract

attention. Almost anything can ·go on a sign, except obscene

wording, etc.; advertising is OK. This is a liberal interpretation;

what is in the code is a liberal interpretation of what a sign can be. We can regulate size, appearance, what it

looks like, style, but not much about content. In hindsight it would have been preferable to. table the motion last meeting.

Mr. Huey noticed that a house at 214 Cherry ha shutters removed and replaced with shutters

structure without, GPC approval. Only exact

possible in theaichitecrpt*1 review district.

a,

0£w< -enforre exact 8.*· 8*@*3%*7:iAe*l

its original

of a different

repted-uuti-0*s are

Mr. Tailford may

ut not when changes are proposed. Mcer.rtaSitnrulythers said that he did not wish to skirt the law and will come in the next time he has a project in mind. Consensus of the group approved retaining the new shutters.

Dick Pinkerton brought before the group an idea he had for

the Bennett Marathon property, and ahead he wanted a consenses of a go- before he marketed the property into a L shaped strip of

shops similar to existing shops on N. Prospect. Nothing specific

was in mind. Ms. Garrett wanted to eliminate some of the

driveways to make more parking spaces, and Mr. Pinkerton said

there would be some parking in the rear, but not enough to agree with the ordinance. There would be office space on the second

story. Setbacks would have to be considered. Consensus of the

group approved the idea but promised to be demanding on what it

will look like.

Ms. Garrett wondered whether the group could provide more

precise guidelines on what buildings may look like, especially in the Cherry Valley/ Rt. 16 area. What we have now is open to

subjective interpretation, i.e., s"imilar to what is there now."

Guidelines would help US enforce a negative response to a

request. Mr. Huey understood her concerns and said that was why

SBD was put into effect, to give us more control. Mr. Tailford

thought the word "compatible" was not strong enough. Mr. Huey

reminded the group that the aim is not a uniform style but,

rather, a collection of acceptable styles. A lot of towns have

Design Review Teams for new buildings, Mr. Tailford informed the

group, and Ms. Garrett wanted to act promptly, before the next

applicant comes in.

Mr. Tailford will gather some material from towns that have

design review teams and draw up some criteria for GPC to look at. Any strategy of this type would have to originate with GPC as recommendation for Village Council approval.

Adjournment: 8: 55 p. m.

Next Meetings: June 6 and June 20

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.