Granville Community Calendar

GPC Minutes 12/22/1995

The January 2nd meeting has been canceled due to a lack of applications.

Meeting Announcements:

Mark Shulman has been appointed to fill Larry Huey's seat and Maxine Montgomery has

been appointed the Council Representative to the GPC.

SuperAmerica has requested to be on the January 16th agenda for a work session.

We still need to schedule a meeting of the sub-committee to rewrite the Planned Development

District chapter. I suspect we will not meet until January. if you have any dates in mind please

contact me. Thank you.

Several items are beginning to stir up around Galway Drive. I expect a medical omce

building and a bank to begin the process in the near future.

Today,I met with a representative for a 50-unit motel wishing to be located behind Wendy's.

I have enclosed a copy of the type of building they will propose to you in a February work session.

The model will actually be a 2-story rather than a 3-story and the sign will be a ground sign rather

than a pole sign..They wish to hear your comments,changes and requirements before moving on to

the BZBA for a Conditional Use request.

Have a Meny Christmas and a Happy Ne, v Year and I ivill see you in January to begin

what looks like a busy 1996.

Tuesday,January 16,1996 -7:30 p.m. -Scheduled GPC meeting at the Village Offices.

Tuesday,February 54 1996 -7:30p.m. - Scheduled GPC meeting at the Village Offices.

GPC Minutes 12/4/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

Members Present: Richard Salvage, Maxine Montgomery, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Gary Stansbury, Doug Tailford, Jr.

Members Absent:

Also Present:

Visitors Present:

December 4,

Minutes

1995

Village Planner: Marc Shulman, Brian Law (346

Minutes: November 20: Page 2, Line 54 add in as great a detail

as required following "distances." Under Announcements, last

sentence should read: "Ms. Robertson had requested at the last

Village Council meeting that all legal opinions from Mr. Hurst be

in writing, and received assurances that this would happen."

Mr. Stansbury moved to approve minutes as corrected, Mr.

Myers seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments:

New Business:

None

Brian and Christine Law. 346 East College

Mr. Law has proceeded with plans for changing the porch and

the pitch of the roof. Ms. Robertson reprimanded him for neglecting

to gain GPC approval for the project, and he replied

that his neighbor stated that plans would not be necessary since

he had already been before GPC. Nevertheless, all changes need

approval.

MR. MYERS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION, MR. STANSBURY SECONDED,

AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Newark-Granville Road Improvement Project

Mr. Tailford presented a three-lane project for Newark-

Granville Road between Jones and Cherry Valley and how they came to the conclusion that it was needed. Village Council will

determine whether it should be added. The Master Plan stated

that a connector road should be built it*rp, but that will happen and not this seems to be an effective )substitute. It will

widen 6' out on either side with taperiGG· It will not set a

precedent because other areas do not euire a turn lane.

Mr. Shulman asked about trees, and Mr. Tailford assured him

that the situation has been addressed, as has the fire plug

status. Mr. Salvage and Mr. Myers feel that the big sycamore

will be damaged with the road so close. Mr. Salvage would prefer

seeing all the widening be taken from the north side, but Mr.

Tailford responded that the pump house is there, 40- back. Mr.

Tailford stated that the federal government will pay 80 per cent

and the Village will pay 20 per cent, and this is our only chance

to acquire these funds. In twenty years we might have a huge

problem with traffic and no money to provide a third lane. There

will be a new pathway, new storm drainage, and some curb and

gutters. Mr. Shulman expressed doubts about the need for a third

lane. Pedestrian useage is to be encouraged in this area, not

more traffic. He does not feel we owe the township a freer flow.

Ms. Montgomery feels it should be built because of the increase

in homes and businesses in the area, and Mr. Stansbury

agreed with her. Mr. Myers disagreed with the widening project.

Mr. Shulman offered the suggestion of having a traffic light or a

three-way stop sign at Jones and Cherry Valley. Ms. Robertson

stated that the charm of Granville lies in its slow pace, and if

people want to speed, they go over to Rt. 16. Mr. Tailford said

there will be marked crosswalks at Cherry Valley, Jones, and

Galway, but some members felt this would be dangerous for

children. Mr. Salvage thought it should be two lanes with

traffic lights during rush hours.

The results of the discussion appear to be: Positive:

Montgomery and Stansbury. Neeative: Robertson, Salvage, Myers.

Mr. Myers stated there are lots of· major roads in Columbus still

two lanes and traffic flows well.

Announcements:

Ms. Robertson brought in a letter to the editor of the

Advocate in which Mr. and Mrs. Pyle requested an apology and

reimbursement from GPC and Village Council for all the time and

money invested in the failed storage shed project. She stated

that this might be a good opportunity to educate the public

through the Sentinel and Advocate as to what our function is, and

she would be happy to draft such a letter. GFC is really quite

reasonable, albeit tough on given stands. Ms. Montgomery informed

the group that the letter to the editor will be on Village

Council agenda this week. The group felt badly about how the

Pyle situation was resolved, but they feel they came to the best

conclusion about the zoning and did not mislead the Pyles.

Consensus agreed that an informative published statement would be

preferable to a letter of apology. Mr. Myers stated that it is

up to applicants to read the information Mr. Tailford gives them

and proceed appropriately. 4 / 1,

4Jt.rs) 0 i *< L 7- ---/

2

3

Certified Oil Company

Mr. Tailford indicated that Mr. Hurst found that Certified' s

convenience store" is a conditional use under SBD. He believes

they had that de facto when they came in. GFC made some ·edi -

te2*4*-changes to the two questions GPC asked Mr. Hurst concerning

the conditional use of the property and parking spaces, to

read as follows:

1. Under SBD, considering current uses and operation of

this property, does Certified need to apply for a

conditional use permit for tht: add·i-tion of a convenience

store on the property?

2. Can the spaces located in front of the fuel pumps be

counted toward the parking space requirements of

Chapter 1183?

Adjournment: 9: 00 P. m.

Next Meeting: January 8 and 22

GPC Minutes 11/20/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

November 20, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Maxine Montgomery, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent: Keith Myers

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.

Visitors Present:

Minutes: November

Village Planner: Marc Shulman

r 6: Page 2, Line 6, add as a permitted or

11owing "convenience store." Line 5 from

es" to opinions. Page 3, the line before

to sentence but decided not to address this

Mr. Stansbury moved to approve minutes as corrected, Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments:

Mr. Shulman from Village Council asked whether citizen input

would be invited at the time when V. C. makes plans to add a third

lane from Jones to Cherry Valley on Newark-Granville Road. Mr.

Tailford stated that it would be in the Sentinel and agreed that

it would be hard to change plans once the approval goes to ODOT.

Mr. Tailford will present the plans to GPC at an upcoming

meeting.

New Business:

Mid-Ohio Development Corp.,Building #7, Offices at Erinwood

The signs applied for are consistent with sizes and locations

of the other signs within the office park and fit within

the BZBA-approved variances. They have already been installed

and match other signs in the complex. Mr. Salvage requested that

Mr. Tailford send Mid-Ohio a letter indicating that they should

have approval before they install signs, and this will be done.

MR. STANSBURY MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION, MR. SALVAGE

SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

N-4

2

Denison University, Beth Eden

Denison wishes to add a three-story wood framed addition

with a crawl space to Beth Eden. GPC has reviewing authority

over Denison for development. Drawings provided for the addition

to Beth Eden did not include measurements and setback distances; 4

however, Mr. Tailford assured the group that since there is

plenty of space at Beth Eden, it is not crucial to have detailed

plans. The addition will be no higher than what is already there

and is in the center of the property. Mr. Tailford added that it

meets all requirements for the institutional district.

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION; MR. STANSBURY

SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Announcements:

Ms. Robertson stated that it is important that all applications

arrive fully completed. The traffic plan for the

Granville Mill should be detailed when it comes in. Mr. Tailford

reported that Mr. Hurst found that Certified will be a conditional

use, requiring an appearance before BZBA. Mr. Hurst also

said that parking in front of the gas pumps constitutes legal

parking area and that the islands themselves can be calculated as

floor area; he will provide his response in writing. Ms.

Robirtson requested that all legal from Mr. Hurst be in writing.

Adjournment: 8: 00 p. m.

Next Meeting: December 4 and 18

GPC Minutes 11/8/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

November 6, 1995

Minutes:

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.

Visitors Present:

Village Planner: John Woods (Certified Oil)

Minutes: October 16: Page 2, Line 7, change to "that for front

vard residences a 42" fence is maximum."Paragraph 2, start with

Perhaps the fence would not be secure. Ms. Robertson thought

that people could slip between 9" spikes, but Mr. Nagy

Mr. Huey moved to approve minutes as corrected, Mr. Salvage

seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments:

New Business:

None

Joseph and Amy Rogers, 326 Spellman Street

The Rogerses wish to do some remodeling, including a 92

sq. ft. addition with foundation and new roofing on the rear of

the house. Mr. Rogers explained that they will add 4' to the

exterior and they will change doors and windows, but the visual

profile will be essentially the same. All materials and siding

will match existing house. MR. HUEY MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION,

MR. STANSBURY«SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session

Certified Oil Company, 466 South Main

Certified would like to redevelop the gas station and Mr.

Woods presented plans and asked for GPC input. He expects to

need several variances, i. e.,signage, floodplain, setbacks, parking. Lighting and landscaping should not present problems, but any GPC needs to provide architectural suggestions.

The diesel tanks need to be in front to accommodate tankers, and the existing tanks would come out and new ones installed. Mr.

Ross from IGA does not want Certified to remodel this way; the easement is on his property. Mr. Attebury did give them access from his land.

A

1/JD/r'

2 6/ 00,

4

Mr. Tailford stated that South Main will be widened to add a

turn lane in that area and it will take a 10' portion of Certified-

s land. Ms. Garrett stated that we need to view an exact

plan showing IGA s site also. A retail outlet is permitted under

SBD zoning. Mr. Salvage requested a legal opinion regarding

the use of a convenience store, Ms. Robertson did not think this

fulfills the "retail outlet" option. Mr. Huey thought a gas

station is traffic-oriented and that there should be a conditional

use. Mr. Myers thought we should be consistent with the

Marathon situation. Mr. Myers was concerned with the short

setback and that necessity of screening. Specific problems were

summarized:

1) _S_iln_ale. The group preferred a groundl-evel monument

sign and that it match the building. What we told Marathon would

be appropriate here.

2 ) A nchitanturn.

the Marathon building,

building with gable

3) Amnstan.

It' s hard to offer suggestionsb,.ut for

GPC recommended a simple, traditional

roof.

The dumpster needs sides to match the

building and be properly screened.

4) L _ilhlinK. GPC does not want additional lights, which

simply call attention to the merchandise. Canopy lighting can

get offensive.

5) _Disse1Eumps. Originally Certified wanted tankers

going around the building, but Mr. Tailford thought the turning

radius was insufficient, so diesel was put in the front.

6) Setbacks. Certified cannot fulfill the 100' setbacks

for TCOD with the tanks and canopy in the front. Mr. Huey stated

GPC could vary setbacks according to existing buildings in the

area. The Lumber Company and the station are close to the road,

and we do not want to place undue burden on Certified. Ms.

Robertson wanted to consider what would look best and work best

for Certified. An attractive building would be an improvement.

7) Parkine and Landscaping. Certified needs seven trees

and this would consume parking areas. They want to add pines at

the rear for screening. Parking is in front of the pumps. They

would also like to add more landscaping but feel Mr. Ross would

not let them.

8) ElnQdplain . Mr. Tailford stated that for less than a

half acre they can go under the floodplain. Mr. Woods stated

that the highest point on the property is 9. 11. 50, which puts

them 2 1/2- under the floodplain and they would need to raise the

building for sewer run-off. Mr. Tailford stated that they would

not need a variance if they can get the store over the floodplain

minimum.

Mr. Tailford stated that he will get together with Mr. Hurst about legal &a*ss. We should avoid variances where we can. Mr.

Tailford will also check to see what the requirements were under TCOD for the Murphy property. Our goal is to make the gas station more attractive. He will also ask Mr. Hurst whether pump parking is acceptable.

3

Mr. Tailford stated that

problem.

the shared driveway could present a

If the dotted line on the plan becomes right of way,

it' s a shared access easement, although it may need to go to

court since one curb cut will be

road. If the Rosses go to court

a second access to Certified.

scaping.

eliminated with widening of the

and say No, we have to consider

We might have to reduce some land-

Ms. Robertson summarized the next steps for Certified: (1)

Mr. Hurst' s decision on permitted or conditional use and whether

the current use is grandfathered. (2) Another work session should

be held. 3) To BZBA if a conditional use permit is required.

4) Decision on parking. 5) Decision on TCOD. Mr. Woods does

not need an architectural plan yet, but he should prepare a

rendering of how it will look.

Sign Code:

Mr. Tailford has been inundated with questions on size and

number of election signs and he requested GPC input. This year

was unusual with so many local candidates running for office.

Under existing code there are no limitations on number of signs,

and Mr. Tailford thinks· one sign per candidate/ issue per yard is

enough. Some people are saying he is interfering with their free

speech rights. Mr. Huey stated that this is a temporary, selfcorrecting

problem. The more signs he sees, the less likely he

is to vote for that candidate.

Mr. Tailford prefers 4 sq. ft. maximum signs behind sidewalks

or 10' from the paved road. Mr. Stansbury thinks signs should be

up no longer than thirty days prior to the election or five days

after the election and consensus agreed that these are valid

guidelines.S«ll

Announcements:

Mr. Huey announced that he is resigning from GPC because his

company has transferred him to South Carolina. He has enjoyed

his experience with the group despite the occasional problems.

Ms. Robertson stated thanks on behalf of the Commission for the

many, many meetings he has attended and for the many hours he has

spent on zoning and signs. She for one has always appreciated

Mr. Huey' s attention to detail and how much he carries around in

his head about regulations.

Ms. Garrett will resign from Village Council, thus GPC, and

after the election Council will assign someone else to GPC. Ms.

Robertson thanked her also for her service to the group.

Adjournment: 8: 50 p. m.

Next Meeting: November 20 (Mr. Myers will be absent)

GPC Minutes 10/16/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

October 16, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr. Village Planner

Visitors Present: Andrai Nagy and Jim Gimeson, Ed Vance (Sensibilities)

Minutes: October 2: should be 2-3- rather than

20-30-. Delete "Mrs. Pyle will check on this." Paragraph 3,

line 3, delete "was told" and substitute Mr. Huev argued. Line

8, same paragraph, change to The Commission continues to reject

CSD as a gossibilitv because a new owner milht consider...Next

paragraph, it was moved that the building be moved back 100 and

the drive and parking 80'. Vote was 4 aye and 1 abstention.

Under Granville Milling, 6th line up, add some after "But."

Page 3, paragraph 3, change to "the group remembered. .

Paragraph 4, vote was 4 to 1.

Page 5, add adjacent before "residents." Mr. Huey moved to

approve minutes as corrected, Mr. Salvage seconded, AND MINUTES

WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: Ed Vance encouraged GPC to not allow or

recommend things that are not in conformance with village codes.

He said that he understood Village Council to have determined

SuperAmerica to be an allowable use, and he asked GPC to take a

close look at the application because a lot of citizens do not

think this should be allowable there.

Old Business:

David Longaberger, 537 Jones Road -Application change

Mr. Nagy brought to the group a revised 6- fence plan for

the polo field as a compromise to the previous plan. This fence

is lower than the former one but still needs to be 6' tall to

keep the horses in and to maintain balance with the rest of the

property. They also wanted to grant space for the bikepath to

the village. He showed the group a sample of fencing, which

would have spikes 9" apart and have a low wattage lamp on stone

piers. He thought a 4- wood fence would look inappropriate for

the property and be dangerous for bikers.

Mr. Stansbury asked whether Mr. Longaberger is considering

this type fence around the entire property, and the answer was

positive. Mr. Stansbury did not think a 4' wood fence would look

inappropriate; rather, a wrought iron fence around a field for

horses would look inappropriate. Ms. Garrett cautioned GPC about

precedent-setting with a wrought iron fence. Mr. Huey stated

that under 1448 a 42 fence is maximum. In the ordinance fences

.pbut

Mr. Huey said they are not enclosing horses. ,

8c,a/nnot have spikes or sharp points, so these spikes are not possible

because we cannot vary a prohibited use. Mr. Tailford

reminded the group that there are spike fences in the village,

9*4 -7 (/ 4 /1L,A.», 9-&

f b*fob/etcwiTeMens. 9R"osbpeirktseosn, tbhuotugMhr.t Nthaagty da. i_sca_hgsrlededcoaunldd gsaeidth-9ls"- whoeulrddsbt-eeck

more visually attractive than 4".Mr. Stansbury thought that

even though the chainlink is unattractive, a spike fence would

look like a prison.

Mr. Salvage stated that three of the four criteria for considering

applications would seem unsuitable for the fence in

addition to the question of appearance. Mr. Myers stated that

there is a polo field in Gahanna with a wooden fence 4- high.

Members agreed that the proposed fence would only be appropriate

surrounding the house for security reasons, not around the polo

field.

MR. HUEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION AND MR. STANSBURY

SECONDED. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUSLY OPPOSED TO THE APPLICATION

for the following reasons: 1) the fence with lights is too

high; (2) it is unsafe for horses and riders with the spikes and

unsafe for children who might get stuck in-between the spikes;

3) it is not compatible with surrounding area, nor is it appropriate

for a field of horses; and (4) spike fences are not allowed

in the village. The group would approve of the proposed

fencing just around the house.

New Business:

Sensibilities, 118 S. Main -Sign

Mr. Vance would like a tan and white unlit ground sign on

the Main Street side of the building in the right of way. It' s a

two-sided, 8 sq. ft. sign on a wooden post with a birdhouse on top

of the sign. The sign conforms with all regulations. MR. HUEY

MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION; MR. MYERS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Announcements:

Adjournment: 8: 15 p. m.

Next Meetings: November 6 and November 20

GPC Minutes 10/2/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

October 2, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Sentinel),Bruce &Lisa Westall (241 E. Maple),Ladd Michael (231 S. Prospect),Hal Attebury, Bill Watts (Granville Mill),Sue Barton (S. Prospect),Carmen MacLean (221 S. Pearl),George Moore (10 Willowview),Andrai Nagy (Longaberger), Rob Davis (4 Clover Ct),Chuck Hardy (1 Rees Rd),Matt Mauger (M. E. Engineers),Patty Hartlan (Broadway),Judi Pyle (1828 Cherry Valley Rd),Richard Miller (224 E. Broadway),Larry Sargent (907 Newark Rd.F),rank &Kay Murphy (368 Longford Dr.), Art &Corky Morrow (736 Mt. Parnassus),Jeff Mills (72 Pinehurst)

Minutes: September 19: Page 3, under Fire Department, change

huge" to the same banner as last vear.Un.de.r .Announcements,

add zoning regulations after "PUD." Mr. Stansbury moved

to approve minutes as corrected, Mr. Huey seconded, AND MINUTES

WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. The group commended the secretary for

minutes well done.

Citizens Comments: Rob Davis, from the Athletic Boosters Fund,

wants to erect a 3 x 10 banner announcing the "bag day" activity

to take place in front of the bank at the IGA lot as part of

their fund raising efforts. It will be up for a week. Mr. Huey

moved to approve the banner; Mr. Salvage seconded, AND IT WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Public Hearing:

Jack &Judi Pyle, 1328 Cherry Valley Road

The chair informed the group that tonight- s hearing is to

clear up some unfinished items on the Pyles- application for a

storage shed and that we would simply work through the listed

items one by one. Two of the items generated some discussion:

1) "Extend landscaping to screen south and east side of

building."Mr. Myers thought that replacing the malus "snowdrift"

with something like white pine would provide better winter

screening.

2) "Show drainage plan (drainage arrows)M."r. Myers

stated that along the west property line there needs to be some sort of storm water direction. The amount of new paving would

seem to call for a swale carrying water to the ditch at the rear of the property. This needs to be worked out to the satisfaction of the engineers. Mr. Tailford stated that the engineers recom-

L' -* .

eD

mended that any further building needs to be approved by them.

Mr. Huey suggested that the grade at the northwest be designed so

that water does not run off into the neighbor- s property.

In addition, Ms. Garrett suggested that the building be set

back farther from the road. Ms. Pyle stated grading considerations

as the reason for locating the building at that place and

relocating would require a lot of fill, which might run off into

the shop. Mr. Myers thought a swale of -2@Z- 30'

and recommended the building be moved back 20' 4

e-he-cir0-77th--rs«' 1-3 -

might be needed

ME=dl#e.-will-

Mr. Myers asked about the PCD zoning for storage units, ict,01 p since he was absent during the earlier discussion, and .w-a.31AG ld

that this will not be precedent-setting because of the uniqueness

of the location and the fact that there will be no lights, no

signs, and no fences, and that the screening in this case will

improve the visage of the buildings there now. The storage units

are not a primary use of the property; they will be attractive Q

and well built, and thus fit within PCD. Clinder CSD, a new owner C.462·

might plan a less appropriate business at that sit£ 3 Zoning *le

consideration for the entire Cherry Valley Road was reconsidered

at the time when the Pyles first applied for the storage units.

Mr. Huey would not support additional storage units in the

A,

future. 6/2 - 3

Mr. Myers moved that GPC approve the application with the

following conditions: 1) that the malus "snowdrift" along

Cherry Valley Road be replaced with white pine; (2) that the

9uilding,EaSphalt drive, and parking be moved back to 100' from

the center road right of way; (3) that a storm swale along

northwest property line be 'added to channel storm water to north

and south side without adversarily affecting neighbors; (4) add

landscaping to the front of the driveway apron and northwest of

the turnaround to complete screening; (5) {added by Mr. Tailford}

any further construction will require approval by the village

engineers. MR. HUEY SECONDED THE MOTION, AND THE MOTION CARRIED

3-1 WITH MR. STANSBURY ABSTAINING. Citizen comment was not

solicited. 6 no s 4

Granville Milling Co.,400 S. Main -Rezoning

The Mill owners wish to change zoning from OSD and SRD-B to

CSD in order to erect two buildings, described fully in the last

minutes. Considerable citizen opposition was discerned, and GPC

felt it important to protect neighbors' property as well as to

allow the applicant to add buildings to more effectively run his

business. There was a community meeting, and Mr. Attebury

owner} is willing to add screening and move the buildings. But 50» 1 e

people are still not satisfied.

Mr. Westall spoke for the neighbors, repeating much of what

was enumerated at the last meeting, adding (1) Additional large

warehouses are not in Granville' s best interest; (2) more

business means more truck traffic and noise; (3) GPC should

2

protect the neighbors because they have protected neighbors in

other areas from commercial expansion; (4) Granville needs a

buffer between commercial and residential areas; (5) the Mill

should be responsible for landscapings/creening. Mr. Westall

challenged the GPC to come up with a reasonable compromise. He

thought a complete plan is needed for the entire area, i. e.,

South Pearl extension.

Mr. Michael said there was still opposition to rezoning the

entire five-acre parcel. Also, the fill is dangerously close to

the trees. He preferred that all vehicles be under roof, but Mr.

Watts told him that such a building would be three times as large

as that proposed. Mr. Tailford thought that some things stored

outside could be cleaned up and that the pallets could be stored

indoors.

After more discussion, 1R=p*° ts-- 8 the group wasre-mtrrde-d- that this i

rezoning request, not a formal application for two buildings,

the concentration of discussion became exclusively rezoning. A

compromise was eventually forthcoming:

Mr. Huey moved that we recommend to Village Council that the

0SD portion in yellow on the zoning map be changed to CSD. He

moved also that the SRD-B portion be unchanged. Mr. Salvage

seconded, AND THE MOTION PASSED BY,TO* 1 (Mr. Myers).

Y *I. David Longaberger, 537 Jones Road -Application change

Mr. Nagy explained the reasons behind wanting to change from

the previously approved post and rail fence to a 6- 6" metal

picket fence with stone piers with' lights rising to 8- 10" because

they want to (1) match the existing gate and fence on Jones Road;

2) enhance security around the house; and (3) increase safety

for polo horses and riders.

sa

and

Mr. Huey was concerned about polo riders getting thrown and

impaled on the sharp piekets. It would b¢better if the spikee

had rounded top¤, but the fenee ig gtill too high for the allowed

height of 48" and the stone posts are too big. The proposed

fence is inconsistent with the village even though it matches the

house fencing. Ms. Garrett suggested running the fence just

around the house rather than around the polo field and having a

post and beam type fence around the polo field.

Consensus agreed that Mr. Nagy should consult with Mr.

Longaberger and return with a revised plan within the ordinance.

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION; MR. HUEY SECONDED, AND

APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY TABLED.

New Business:

Robert Parker, 136B South Main -Sign

Mr. Parker wants two signs, a wall sign and a ground sign,

white with maroon lettering, consistent with sizes and locations

3

1

previously determined by GPC as appropriate for the building.

MR. HUEY MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION; MR. SALVAGE SECONDED, AND

MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

The Murphy Group -Erinwood, The Glen, Phase II and III

The Group has decided to combine Phases II and III at this

time. A landscape plan will be reviewed by the Tree and

Landscape Commission before coming to GPC which is required

before Phase II/III house are built. The sidewalk on Jones

Road from Longford to Newark-Granville Road will need to be

installed with this phase.

MR. HUEY MOVED· TO AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THIS PLAT WITH

CONTINGENCIES THAT (1) SIDEWALKS ARE INSTALLED ALONG JONES ROAD

AND (2) LANDSCAPING BE SUBMITTED TO TREE AND LANDSCAPE

COMMISSION. MR. SALVAGE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

The Murphy Group, The Glen Temoorary Sign Application

Two temporary blue and white signs are requested: 1) at

intersection of Jones and Longford under Phase I and (2) near

intersection of Langford and North Galway under Phase II. 3) An

existing subdivision sign is located along Newark- Granville Road

under Phase III and needs to be renewed.

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE TWO NEW SIGNS (1 AND 2) AND

TO RENEW APPROVAL OF EXISTING SIGN (3).The existing sign is

larger than permitted size but was within the requirements at the

time of installation. Mr. Myers seconded AND MOTION WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Spring Hills Baptist Church

The representative showed a drawing of the original plan and

explained how they want to expand in their next phase of development.

They want to expand the sanctuary by 70- and add two wings

to the educational building. The back parking lot will be

changed slightly because of the topography, and there is a temporary

turnaround in the front. Mr. Huey asked how long temporary

is, because a longer duration will affect landscaping and appearance.

The representative thought it would be for a year or so.

The plan will need the engineers approval of the drainage

because it was not addressed in the first phase. Mr. Salvage

would like to see a drainage plan as part of what is presented

tonight. The representative said a large portion of the drive

will be gravelled. Their engineer needs to work with the village

engineer.

Mr. Huey asked about screening, and the representative

thought they would be putting in shrubs and split rail fence,

4

1

5 *

ah,#tt·r,

rather than mounding. Mr. Huey also wanted to be assured that V

dfar residents are protected from noise and lights; he also wanted

to see a landscaping plan over the entire property.

MR. HUEY MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION CONTINGENT UPON

SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF ITEMS IN BIRD &BULL- S LETTER AND THAT

THE CHURCH PRESENTS GPC WITH A LANDSCAPING PLAN TO THE EAST AND

NORTH. MR. MYERS SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Bruce and Lisa Westall, 2451 E. Maple

The Westalls wish to build a new house on the lot gained

through the newly acquired lot split. He explained that it will

have cedar siding, not vinyl siding. There will be an attached

garage, and they will add fill to the slope.

GPC members were confused by the sketchy drawings which did

not match the photograph. Mr. Salvage thought that a 16- drop

would not be workable, and the owners need to show an accurate

footprint of the actual shape, designating configurations of the

lot, distances from each lot line, and exact elevations for each

side. GPC wants to know exactly how the house will fit within

the contours and to see house plans with placement of garage and

basement.

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION; MR. HUEY SECONDED,

AND APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY TABLED.

Announcements:

Adjournment: October 16 and November 6

Next Meetings: 10: 30 p. m.

GPC Minutes 9/19/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 19, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Keith Myers, Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Lisa Westall (241 E. Maple), Hope

Card (Prospect St.), and Evelyn Michael (231 S. Prospect), Steven G. Katz &Constance Barsky (221 E. Elm),Patty Hardane (666 W. Broadway), Barbara Franks (Maple St.), SaraJean & Clarke Wilhelm (A Place in History), Hal Attebury, Adrian Smith, Bill Watts (Granville Mill), Eloise DeZwarte, Sue Barton (S. Prospect), Ben Barton (338 W. Maple), Susan Hamann (312 S. Pearl), Linda Thomson (226 E. Maple),Carmen MacLean (221 S. Pearl),Jean A. Coombs (218 E. Maple)

Minutes: August 21: change "shortages" to variances. Mr. Huey moved to approve minutes as corrected, Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

Public Hearing: Granville Milling Co.,400 S. Main

The Mill owners wish to erect two buildings: 1) a 60'x120-

building to house various equipment and trucks in order to get

them indoors. Such a warehouse will improve the looks of the

area as well as securing the vehicles and protecting them from

the weather. 2) They hope to move the bulk fertilizer operation

from the south side of the bikepath to the rear of the store.

This will make the bikepath safer and add to storage area for the fertilizers.

This will require rezoning from OSD and SRD- B to CSD. Mr.

Attebury explained that they have received permission to fill in and level the swamp. Mr. Attebury showed the audience samples

plant or from standing water, which they are eliminating. Mr. Attebury said the fertilizer is the same substance in place for twenty years. It is monitored by the EPA and the Department of Agriculture.

Members of GPC had some concerns. Mr. Attebury and Mr. Watt explained that the land between the Mill and the bikepath will remain the same. They will route traffic north of the bikepath so that it would no longer cross the path. They cannot move. the path. Mr. Tailford stated that the buildings there now are

grandfathered, but any new structures require rezoning. Mr. Huey

stated that the plan seems to move the most noxious portion of

the business closest to the nearby residents. Mr. Attebury said

there would be oSer 200 between them and that there are trees as

a buffer. They are not planning to remove any trees.

Mr. Michael reported that the nearby residents met to talk

about their concerns:

amount of open space

1) Changing the zoning decreases the

in the village; (2) noise from trucks and

dryers and dust pollution with the operation moved closer to

houses; (3) filling in the wetland and floodplain is not a good

idea; (4) with rezoning, anything can go in there in the future;

5) the bikepath must be safe and protected from excess wear and

tear on the pavement; (6) The historic value of the village needs

to be protected; (7) The neighbors have been restoring their

property and wish their investment to be protected. Mr. Michael

suggested alternatives, i. e.,behind the IGA or near the water

treatment plant or enlarge the current building.

Mr. Attebury stated that they do not own the property behind

the IGA, and the small area that they do own is too small and too

near the bikepath, as well as being a floodplain. Mr. Watts did

not think the noise would be any worse than it is now.

One member of the audience suggested that the neighbors work

with the Mill owners and the bikepath owners to arrive at a compromise,

since they are at an impasse tonight. She suggested

helping him clean up the area and possibly painting murals along

the bikepath. Then the Mill can return with an application.

They should remember this is just a request for rezoning, and a

development plan has to be provided. Mr. Attebury will invite

interested people down to the Mill to view the operation and

plans.

Mr. Huey moved to table the application; Mr. Salvage

seconded, AND APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY TABLED.

New Business:

Clarke L. Wilhelm, 130 N. Prospect Street -Signs

Mr. Wilhelm wishes to install two wooden signs: 1) a sign

hanging from the awning, 18"x48,"and (2) a. 2- xd- sandwich board

on Prospect Street sidewalk. The signs are white with black

letters and green logo.

Mr. Salvage moved to approve both signs; Mr.H,uey seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Dave Longaberger, 537 Jones Road -Application Change

Mr. Longaberger has requested a change in the type of fence to be placed around the polo field. He wants to match existing

fence at the house with a wrought iron/ stone fence, 54' back from

2

1

r A

3

the right of way, allowing room for the path. A post and beam

fence had been approved previously.

Mr. Huey filt that this type of fence is not acceptable. It

would be extremely high, and since this is a polo field, there is

a danger of riders being thrown from horses onto the spike fence.

Mr. Huey moved to table application until a representative can be

present to answer questions. Mr. Stansbury seconded, and MOTION

WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

KPS/ NAPA, 458 South Main -Sign

NAPA wishes to install a vertical neon OPEN sign in the

window, similar to those at Aladdin and Subway. The old one wore

out and they replaced it without gaining permission. They need

the sign for dark winter mornings, especially.

Mr. Salvage moved to approve application; Mr. Stansbury

seconded, AND MOTION WAS APPROVED WITH ONE ABSTENTION (Mr. Huey).

Eloise DeZwarte and John Kessler, 338 E. College -Change

The applicants wish to change their application for

skylights. Due to interior structural design, the planned

skylight approved for the side roof will need to be moved to the

front roof. Mr. Roberts explained that they discovered that the

ceiling joists run perpendicular north and south so they cannot

take advantage of the existing framing of the house. The change

would parallel the pitch of the hip roof. The roof had been

pieced together and raised and changed a lot. A skylight does

not really detract from the roofline and won- t stick up past the

ridge lines. The roof is brown shingles and the framing of the

skylight will match the brown and you won- t see the glass. It

will fit between the joists in a 22" opening and will be welded

down. They will not remove joists or rafters. With this plan a

reconstruction in the future would be more amenable than in the

previous plan. Mr. Huey moved to approve application, Mr.

Stansbury seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Granville Volunteer Fire Department, 133 N. Prospect -Sign

The Fire Department wishes to put up .a- h,-ie£banner for the

week before Fire Prevention Week. Mr. Huey moved to approve; Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Announcements: Mr. Tailford requested volunteers to join the

committee to rewrite the PUD.A, Jurgen Pape, Keith Myers are on it

now, and Mr. Stansbury volunteered to join the team.

Adjournment: 9: 20 p. m.

Next Meetings: October 2 and October 16

GPC Minutes 8/21/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

August 21, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Jonathan A. Velay (36 N. 2d St. Newark),Rodger W. Asmus (St. Luke), Jack &Judi Pyle (1328 Cherry Valley Rd),Kristin Pape (Pyles),Vince Paumier (354 N. Granger),Bruce Westall (241 E. Maple)

Minutes: August 7: Page 1, Kevin Bennett was present, Mary Lee Van Meter was a visitor.

Delete -The existing units and the new ones will face each other.

nob' should be knob. Under SEM Partners, change 'BZA- to BZBA. Mr.

Stansbury moved to approve minutes as corrected, Mr. Huey seconded, AND

MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

Public Hearing:

Jack and Judi Pyle, 1328 Cherry Valley Road, PCD Development

Following a work session in June, the Pyles have submitted their

application to construct an 80- x30 storage unit on the property.

Kirsten Pape was present to discuss the landscape plan, one of the

required criteria for the project. There will be pines, sugar maples,

hydrangeas, dogwood, viburnum, etc.,and the plan is to hide the

building while not blocking visibility for the road. The Tree and

Landscape Commission has recommended approval for the plan.

Mr. Tailford stated that Cherry Valley Lodge had questioned

whether there would be landscaping on the north side, how would it look

in winter, and preferred plantings under or in front of the existing

pines. Mr. Stansbury agreed that planting should come further toward

the front straight across from the east side or even with the other

side.

Members reviewed the question of PCD vs. PID or CSD, which do

allow storage units per se. In view of the fact that the building will

have low traffic volume, no lights, no fences, and no signs, PCD would

be preferable because of the other permitted uses in the other zones.

At the previous meeting Ms. Robertson made it clear to the Pyles that

because only three GPC members were present, there may be tions in other ques- the future.

2

Ms. Pape replied negatively to a question about moving the

building back by saying there would be a drainage problem and because

of the body shop. Mr. Tailford recommended the driveway be at grade.

Mr. Myers stated that a serious consideration was difficult because

of the lack of a topographic map. It' s hard to see where the

floodplain exists and how the plans relate to it and to determine how

the building will sit on the knob without significantly affecting the

topography. Mr. Pyle grew discouraged by all the questions and

threatened to withdraw, but his wife stuck with it.}Ms. Robertson

reminded them that what they do will have a significant impact on the

entire area and that GPC is working to help achieve what each wants.

Mr. Huey asked how far back does the driveway have to go to be

level with Cherry Valley, and Mr. Tailford stated that it would be back

past the landscaping or the throat behind the planting, or two car

lengths. Ms. Pape felt that with the deep ditch there will be no

drainage problem.

Mr. Stansbury asked about materials for the building, and the

Pyles stated the sides would be vinyl and brick, compared to the steel

and brick in the application. The application needs to be corrected.

Ms. Robertson summarized the discussion as applied to the Tailford

recommendations:

1. Power lines and poles need to be labeled on plans.

2. A contour elevation/ topographical map is needed. Existing

contour lines and proposed spot rays. The village needs to know that

the plans will work.

3. Color, siding, other materials need to be specified.

4. Add garage door color and pattern.

5. Extend landscaping north to match up with other screen and

extend east to spruce trees.

6. Add screening beneath or in front of existing trees. Another

tree would help screen the building from the Lodge.

7. Specify no signs, no lights, and no fences.

8. State where the drainage will go via arrows. When you pave or

cover over a large area, you create a run-off problem.

Mr. Myers moved to table the application; Mr. Salvage seconded,

AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

Vincent and Mary Paumier, 354 N. Granger

The Paumiers wish to change some windows, as discussed at the previous meeting. Mr. Paumier provided more information on size and

elevation drawings of the 6-over-6 wood replacement windows. Mr.

Salvage moved to approve application; MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND APPROVED.

3

Bruce and Lisa Westall, 241 East Maple -Lot Split 1 21U. t/

The Westalls wish to split the SRD lot, which will need a variance

from BZBA for (1) the lot area shortfall, (2) front setback, and (3)

lot coverage. Mr. Westall feels that the CM€-orgte*s are appropriate for

the neighborhood. Mr. Huey felt that changing the zoning would seem

more sensible to eliminate need for variances. Mr. Huey moved to

approve a lot split contingent upon Village Council' s approval of a

zoning change on the two lots. Mr. Salvage seconded, AND MOTION WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Huey additionally moved to recommend to

Village Council that zoning be changed from SRD-B to VRD. Mr. Salvage

seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

St. Luke- s Episcopal Church, 107 E. Broadway

The church wishes to install a door for a handicap elevator and

install brick walk and planting. The walkway and plantings are

consistent with the February 15 recommendations of the Tree and

Landscape Commission. The church has responsibility for cleaning the

walk and shovelling snow. If the tree that is moved dies, they will

plant another one. Mr. Huey moved to approve application; Mr. Salvage

seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Announcements: Mr. Myers recommended that applicants be given specific

instructions as to what is required of them. Mr. Tailford assured him

this is being done (but not necessarily heeded).

Adjournment: 9: 00 p. m.

Next Meetings: September 18 and October 2

GPC Minutes 8/7/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

August 7, 1995

Minutes

Members Presentd'Larry Huey,Keith Myers,Lyn Robertson,Richard Salvage,Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Doug Tailford,Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Donna M. Alvarado,Dee Richards,Dave Richards

Minutes:

R. A. Van Meter, Mat Mauger, Vince Paumier, Frank B. Murphy, Ed Luker, Dave Lipphardt, Lisa McKinney,Stan Robinson.

July 17: Page 2,third paragraph,line 4. Change to read- S"he would also like an additional frees-tanding gray wood sign onElm,M"r.. Stansbury

moved to approve minutes as corrected,Mr. Salvage seconded, and MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

New Business:

Bruce and Lisa Westall,231 East Maple Street

Mr. and Mrs. Westall wish to install a standard picket fence 42"in height in the front yard with a gate,we assumeN).either Mr. or Mrs. Westall were present so that questions could be asked. Richard Salvage moved we approve their application subject to Doug Tailford's approval of specific details. Gary Stansbury seconded,and MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Vincent and Mary Paumier,354 North Granger Street

Mr. and Mrs. Paumier want to remove French doors on the side ofthe house and replace them with a picture window. They would like to install a door on the back ofthe house and replace windows. Replacement windows should be on a separate application.We need pictures of windows and elevation drawings showing picture window in proportion to the house.We need to ckhnaorwacitfewr ionfdtohewhsoizueseis. the same as existing windows or ifthe new windows would change

Mr. Huey moved that we approve the installation ofthe door P(art B ofthe application) and table the restP (arts A and C)until next meeting with the understanding that the Paumiers will UsuNpAplNy IdMraOwUinSgsLbYefore that time.Mr. Stansbury seconded,and MOTION WAS APPROVED.

Gerald Martin,Village Coffee Company,126 North Prospect Street Mr. Martin wishes to replace the existing white sign on the side ofthe building with a new

sign for his business. The sign will be white with black and red lettering. No variance is this needed for sign. The sign meets all technical qualifications. Mr. Stansbury moved that we approve the application. Mr. Huey seconded, and MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Richard and Mary Lee VanMeter,110 East Elm and 136 South Main Street

Mr. and N'Irs. VanMeter wish to receive approval for the number of signs and sign area for

their office buildings at the NE corner of South Main and East Elm Street. The total sign area is 26. 84 square feet,a variance of 2.84 square feet is needed. The new sign would be ten inches

higher than the old sign and the same width. The individual signs would measure 15"x33"a,nd there would be about 1M"between signs,for a total of'66%It w"a.s suggested that a blank sign be inserted during the time period that an office space is vacant. Mr. Huey moved we approve the application. Mr. Salvage seconded,and MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED

Dan Rogers,210 East Maple Street

Mr. Rogers wishes to install an exterior stairwell to the basement with an exterior cover on the side of the house.Mr.Huey moved that we approve the application subject to some shrub screening so it cannot easily be seen from the street. Mr.Myers seconded,and MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

The Murphy Group,The Glen at Erinwood

The Murphy Group has submitted the Final Plat for review and approval. The road between and the four lots south oflots 64 and 65 have been eliminated for stormwater detention since the preliminary plat. All items on Bird B&ull's review need to be addressed and resolved. Section 10 of'the protective convenience needs to be changed to have sidewalks after five years installed by the developer.The sidewalk on Jones Road from Longford Drive to Newark- Granville Road will be installed in Phase III of the Glen. A landscape plan in compliance with Chapter 1193 ofthe Codified Ordinances will be submitted for review and approval before any permits are issued for new houses.

Mr.Huey moved that we grant permission to the chair to sign the plat.Mr.Myers seconded,and MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Joseph Recchie & Co.,Hilenereen Condos

Joseph Recchie C&o. is seeking approval for the proposed changes to the Hilengreen Development Plan. An addendum was submitted. After much discussion,it was decided that we aervealnuoatteready to take this to a vote.Mr.Myers stated that there are a lot of issues we need to that we do not have information to handle. We need a certain base level of information. Mr.Huey stated that we need a scale drawing ofthe development to determine answers to many ofthe questions raised.Mr. Stansbury was concerned that we need to see relationships.Mr. Myers said that to properly evaluate the development plan items in 1174.4 we need sufficient information.We would like to see how the proposed buildings relate to existing units -- ofboth old and new. We want the old and the new to look the same. The building that baacdkrsawing Donald Ross Road is close to the road and to other units. Another onto emergency vehicle accessibility. Mr.Huey stated he would like to concern is driveways and see a rough sketch ofwhere

2

trees are presently located: how many will need to be removed. We want to maintain as many trees as possible in the buffer zone. He would like to see the Development Text and Addendum

pages reconciled into a single document.

The discussion was opened to current residents. They indicated that they would like to see

a scale drawing. Will the street be a city street?The company representative indicated that iI

would be a private drive,and the condo association will be responsible for it. The place where the

drie¥is now cut will be filled and treed. Ftie0- i*stingi.initq Mirl thp_newe- nesw- i#fa-cee-ach other.

The residents will really only see the one on the nob. Mr. Myers suggested that the company re- evaluate the location of that building. Mr. Myers moved that the plan be tabled until the next meeting. Mr. Huey seconded,and MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Announcements: Response to SEM Partners letter 2. GA

Anything new they build will have to meet current standards. It is impossible to do much for them without a plan. They should come in for a work session with„2@*Br.ing us a proposal. Tell us what you want to do and we will tell you if it is possible i-fy-ou can meet the

requirements or justify requesting variances.Mr. Salvage reminded us that this is a consultant asking for advice n-o-t the School Board. Doug stated he would send them a letter.

Adjournment: 9:00 P.m.

Next Meeting: August 21, 1995

GPC Minutes 6/19/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

June 19, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Kevin Bennett for Dorothy Garrett, Lyn Robertson,

Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present:

Larry Huey, Keith Myers

Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Michael Dager and Harvey

Shapiro (329 E. College),Judi &Jack Pyle (1328 Cherry Valley Road)

Minutes: May 15: Page 3, under architecture change "reddish color"

to gray with some red. Page 5, correct typo in line 1. Start second

paragraph with "Some." Mr. Stansbury moved to approve minutes as corrected,

Mr. Salvage seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

June 5: Page 3, line 7, for clarity Ms. Robertson wished to

change to "Diesel gas can be sold at the pump least accessible to semi

trucks."Mr. Stansbury moved to approve minutes as corrected, Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

New Business:

Michael Dager and Harvey Shapiro, 329 E. College

The owners wish to replace deteriorating concrete steps with sandstone.

Mr. Salvage moved to approve application; Mr. Stansbury

seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Michael Dager and Harvey Shapiro, 329 E. College

The owners wish to construct a concrete driveway with new sidewalk

in the front yard abutting the neighbor' s driveway. Mr. Dager explained

that there is little space to park in the road, especially when

there is a snow emergency. Mr. Stansbury moved to approve the

application, Mr. Salvage seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

James Hopson, 318 E. College

Mr. Hopson wishes to remodel the kitchen, with 2 baths, add fireplace brick chimney, refinish floors, remove shed in rear and replace with window, raise second floor bath window, remove first floor door and add new kitchen door and enlarge window. The contractor explained btheartepthlaecebdrick will be red<0+m-atch cxist-ing-h=etrsr. Existing door will with siding. Mr. Salvage moved to approve the applica- tion; Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

2

Work Session:

Jack and Judi Pyle, 1328 Cherry Valley Road

The work session was planned to address several outstanding items

on the application for a 16-unit storage building. Ms. Robertson

suggested running through the list of incomplete issues Mr. Tailford

had provided:

1. Site plan needs to show adjacent property owners, and the

Pyles will add the neighbor s name (Essman) on the plan.

2. The building is shown parallel to Cherry Valley, not perpendicular

as indicated by GPC earlier. Mr. Pyle explained the reasons

for repositioning the building: a) The lay of the land makes it not

feasible to align it perpendicular; (b) to enable screening to be

planted; (c) it will look better. It will be brickwith asphalt

shingles to match the house, and it will look like a garage; it will

not be out of place with other buildings on the property. If it is

perpendicular, one could see all the doors, rather than just the end.

The Pyles want it to look nice, for they live there too. The four

small, ailing trees will be removed, but the big pines will stay.

There is enough room for cars to drive to the storage sheds. Mr.

Stansbury questioned placing the shed on top of a mound, and Mr. Pyle

stated that it will be trimmed down.

3. They will need some elevation of the driveway so people will

not exit uphill.

4. Parking will be in front of the doors of the storage units.

5. There was some question as to paving right up to the next

property. Mr. Stansbury recommended a buffer of 8' to 10 of tree

line. It was suggested that Mr. Pyle move the storage unit just enough

to allow some landscaping without removing the big pines there.

6. The code requires asphalt or cement, a dustless material. Mr.

Tailford said that the entire drive and aprons are to be paved. This

was agreeable with the Pyles.

7. The Pyles have done a lot of landscaping without it a plan, doing not aslikteheylagteor,. lest they lock themselves into landscaping they might Since the code requires it, though, they will provide

one, which will be reviewed by the Tree and Landscape Committee. Mr.

Tailford will provide the Pyles with a copy of the code.

8. There will be no lighting or security lights. If lighting is

needed in the future, the Pyles will bring in application.

9. There will be no trash containers.

10. The Pyles will not be needing signs, and the big sign there

now will be removed. Advertising will be through the newspaper.

11. The storage unit will not be in front of the house, so

setbacks are within the code.

12. Sidewalks are not in the plans now, but will be addressed at

some time in the future when and if necessary. Eventually sidewalks

will be installed all the way down Cherry Valley Road.

13.

stories.

The building height of 16- is acceptable. The house is 1 1/2

14. Mr. Stansbury preferred that the ends as well as the length

of the building be brick rather than white galvanized vertical steel.

Mr. Pyle thought this would not match the house. Mr. Stansbury thought

brick halfway up would look better on the ends. The building will sit

in a prominent position, and landscaping is very important for screening.

The garage doors are white steel, and the brick is red. Mr.

Stansbury would like to see an off white color, but Mr. Pyle feels that

would attract more attention. The shingles will be a charcoal gray.

The items still missing from the application are: 1) to label

power lines and poles; (2) landscaping plan; (3) elevation/ topographic

map with elevation numbers and contour lines, showing how it affects

the neighbor- s lot. It can be affixed to the current application; (4)

add brick halfway up on the ends; (5) add to the site plan a change in

position of building to accommodate trees; (6) consider with contractor

a change in color schemes which will harmonize with the house.

Announcements: None

Adjournment: 8:40 p. m.

Next Meeting: July 17

GPC Minutes 6/5/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

June 5, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Kevin Bennett for Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Richard Salvage, Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Kim Zeune (Zeune Construction), Cindy Schumaker (Petro Ltd.)A,shlin Caravana (209 E. Elm),Dan Bellman (BZBA),Jim Gimeson (Dave Longaberger), J. Korey, Jim Bascam, Don Finn (325 N. Pearl),Denise Frey (31 Thornewood), Maxine Montgomery (2450 Newark- Granville Road),Kristen Pape (403 E. Broadway),Ron Sheldon (238 Llanberis)

Minutes: Since the May 15 minutes were not reproduced, they will be

approved at the next meeting.

Citizens Comments: Ron Sheldon, from Holophane, stated that his

company would be willing to work with GPC on lighting specifications.

They have done a lot of work in the area of canopy lighting, and there

is a professional lighting association to help write specs. GPC

members agreed that Holophane should be consulted on our new lighting

guidelines, and Mr. Sheldon will arrange a demonstration for GPC following

one of our regular meetings.

New Business:

Public Hearing:

Dave Longaberger, Bryn Du Mansion, 537 Jones Road

Mr. Gimeson was present on behalf of Mr. Longabarger, who wishes

to rezone his 18. 04 acres at the mansion from PCD to SRD- A in order to

use the home as his private residence. Mr. Andrai Nagy from

Longaberger had stated in a letter that "As a single family residential

use, a general welfare to the community would result in less traffic on and around the streets bordering the subject property, would result in

placing one more residence into the prevailing fabric of the neighborhood,

and would enhance the neighborhood by the care and maintenance of the property as a private residence."The polo field is already zoned residential. After a discussion on zoning, Mr. Huey moved to recommend

to Village Council to change the property from PUD to SRD-A. Mr.

Stansbury seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business

Dave Longaberger, Polo Field, Corner of Jones and Newark- Granville Rds.

Mr. Longaberger wishes t6 replace the chainlink fence with a 48" post and rail fence, which will be part of an overall landscaping plan.

It will be painted white with hunter green post caps and set back 54'

from the center of the road to allow for the future bike path. The

fence will feature a step down design from the 48" maximum toward the

trees to be incorporated into the general layout. Mr. Huey moved to

approve the application; Mr. Myers seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

James and JoAnn Morey, 326 East College

The Moreys wish to remove two first-floor windows on the side of

the house and replace with siding to match the rest of the house. Mr.

Huey moved to approve application; Mr. Myers seconded, AND MOTION WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ben Barton, 338 West Maple

Mr. Barton wishes to build a 42" and 60" wooden picket fence in

the back yard. There will be wire mesh at one point to restrain the

dog in the back, not visible from the street. Mr. Stansbury moved to

approve; Mr. Huey seconded, AND APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Michael and Ashlin Caravana, 209 East Elm

The Caravanas wish to build (1) a 72" privacy fence along the west

side, l' in from the property line. It will project into the side yard

approximately 3' and will screen an adjacent parking lot. They have

already removed the old fence. (2) A 42" white gothic or simple picket

fence will be installed along the rear of the the back yard. This

fence would intrude on the neighbor' s property by 4- and would be built

and maintained at Caravana' s expense. The neighbor is in full support

of this plan and has submitted a letter of understanding. 3) Another

white picket fence with gates will extend from the corner of the house

to the property line. 4) Later the Caravanas will install a temporary

wire fence or picket fence to enclose a play area for children. Mr.

Huey moved to approve the application; Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND IT

WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Donald and Marta Contini, 444 E. Broadway and 431 E. College

The Continis wish to remodel exteriors of the adjacent properties

by adding (to the first listed property) two gable dormers, trellis, windows a rose on both floors, and painting the house. The second

listed property is a nonconforming use and owners will change overhang

over side doors, replace shutters, install a porch railing, and stucco over the concrete blocks. There will be less of a pitch on the over- hang. Mr. Huey moved to approve application; Mr. Myers seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

2

3

Marathon Station

Cindy Schumaker and Kim Zeune returned with a revised site plan.

They moved the building forward, eliminating a lot of blacktop, and )

removed the red from the building, moved the canopy to the side and A. a

moved the car wash forward. They added the word -Marathon- to the VAK

canopy and showed a picture of the ground sign showing Marathon and

Blimpie names and gas prices. Diesel gas can be sold at anyAone pump,07 1

and canopy posts will be brick to match building. An easement is

provided for Wendy- s traffic to the service road. Mr. Zeune assured

the group that the traffic will flow smoothly around the property and

in and out of it.

Mr. Myers reminded the applicants that any discussion tonight will

not be considered recommendation for endorsement. We are dealing

strictly with site issues. This plan looks better than the former one,

but a landscaping plan is still missing. The ground sign, small but

adequate, is more in character with neighboring ground sign. Mr. Myers

feels that the brick sample shown could be more of a terracotta color.

GPC members stated that a 35' flagpole could fly the American flag

but not the Marathon flag, for that is considered a sign. Some internal

direction signs will be necessary, and signs for the pick-up window

will need to conform. All lighting will need to conform to lighting

guidelines.

If Village Council approves, the applicants will need to make

formal application for the building, sidewalks, road improvements, etc.

Mr. Huey would prefer sidewalks on the side rather than in the back

and probably not along the alley. GPC members discussed parking,

landscaping, and positioning of the building.

Announcements:

Mr. Huey showed a picture of a map in Southern Pines showing index

of stores and what they sell. It might be an idea for Granville, to

encourage downtown business. There is already a Denison map at Burke Hall.)

Adjournment: 8: 50 p. m.

Next Meetings: June 19, July 10 and July 24. Mr. Huey and Mr. Myers to be absent on June 19. Betty will be on vacation July 10.)

GPC Minutes 5/15/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 15, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Kevin Bennett for Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Lyn Robertson, Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Dave Woerner (GBPA), Larry Wills (Bob Evans), Kim Zeune (Marathon), Cindy Schumaker (Marathon), Ed Vance (248 Thornewood), Gil Krone (BZBA; 3262 Milner), Ashlin Caravana (BZBA),Dan Bellman (BZBA)

Minutes: May 1 Page 1, under Granville Coop. Nursery School mural,

clarify to read "Mr. Huey stated that since the sole purpose was

decorative, not attention-getting, the mural is not to be considered a

sig."Mr. Huey moved to approve minutes as corrected. Mr. Myers

seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AS CORRECTED.

Citizens Comments: Ed Vance brought before the group his concerns and

questions about proposed development at Cherry Valley Road at 16:

1. Have all required traffic studies been completed; if so, what

are the results and could we have a copy? The response was Yes. 3

2. Have environmental studies been made as to the possible

environments of each proposal, i. e.:air quality and air pollution,

odor pollution, noise pollution, light pollution at night, solid

waste/ garbage pollution, trash pollution from blowing papers, safety

considerations due to increased traffic, signage pollution, aesthetic

and visual pollution, increased incidents of crime and its increased

load on police department, increase of fire and emergency runs,

increase in infrastructure requirements and loadings on existing

treatments plants, including water, sewage, electricity, trash

collection, water quality pollution and hazards from buried fuel tanks,

oil and fuel spills, considerations for spill prevention control

countermeasures to protect environment and infrastructure from

hazardous wastes, requirements for providing recycling centers for used

oil and other contaminants, earthen embankments other to screen parking and eyesores.

3. Have all requirments of the village codes been met in regard to: signage limitations, permitted usage limitations, color require- ments, parking requirements, architectural compatibility?

4. If not, which requirements are being relaxeed, are anticipated to be relaxed, and for which such requirements have variances/ exceptions been granted, are anticipated to be granted, are now under review, or are anticipated to be requested?

5. If such facilities are actually approved, is the village re-

1

quiring or negotiating for appropriate color and architectural schemes

such as used by these companies on other locations?

6. Have these companies submitted plans for mitigating measures

to offset and control the environmental impacts caused, or having

potential to be caused, by their construction and operation?

In regard to the proposed Marathon station, is there any justification

to grant a conditional use in this situation when another such

facility is proposed for the same immediate area? Isn't the purpose of

the ordinances presently in effect to prevent such overcrowding,

proliferation of similar facilities, and facilities with similar

environmental and other impacts, from locating in the same area?

It is strongly suggested that all of the proposed developments be

required to address these environmental and other impacts on the area,

both immediate and surrounding, both short and long term, and be

required to conform to and abide by all existing codes, ordinances, and

requirements of the village without exception, variance, relaxation or

the granting of conditional usages. To do otherwise is to violate the

purpose, intent and, in some instances, perhaps the letter of the law.

Your careful consideration and attention to these matters and

concerns will be appreciated by the citizens of this community, both

now and in the future. What we do now will determine the future of

this community, will ensure that our heritage is passed to future

generations, and will either preserve or destroy the unique

characteristics and quality of Granville and the surrounding areas.

New Business:

Granville Historical Society, 115 East Broadway -Sandwich Board

The white sandwich board with black lettering is to say "Museum

Open" and will be placed inside the fence. Mr. Salvage moved to

approve application; Mr. Myers seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

Mary Tuominen, 452 N. Granger Street

Ms. Tuominen needs space for her dogs to run, and her neighbors

at least those whom she could locate) are in support of her application

for a backyard fence, which will be 4- inside the Mr. property line. Huey was concerned about the wire, and Ms. Tuominen explained that she wanted something attractive; it is called field fencing, 48" tall green dipped welded woven wire which won' t rust. There are trees,

outside the fence, on the south side and evergreens that cover half the width on the north. GPC only received this application tonight and has not had opportunity to examine the site. Mr. Stansbury moved to

approve application, Mr. Myers seconded, AND IT WAS APPROVED WITH ONE ABSTENTION (Mr. Huey).

2

1

3

Work Sessions:

Marathon Station

Cindy Schumaker and Kim Zeune explained that the station will be

next to Wendy's on Cherry Valley Road. They have gone to great lengths

to adhere to Granville' s zoning ordinances. There will be three pumps,

a convenience store, gazebo, bike racks, a carwash, and landscaping.

The plan is to accommodate cars and small trucks, not semis. A driveway

will be shared with Wendy's, and Mr. Tailford explained other proposed

traffic directional patterns. GPC expressed several concerns:

Parking: Parking toward the rear and sides should be encouraged,

as well as sufficient screening via mounding and landscaping. Mr.

Myers suggested possible site designs to achieve a reduction of asphalt

and to shield gaspumps from the road.

Setbacks: Ms. Schumaker explained that the setback is determined

by the height of the carwash, and to make it look good, they felt that

with landscaping it should not be a real problem since this is just an

alley. The variance would provide the best traffic flow there. Mr.

Tailford suggested that if approved, this variance should be offset by

an increase in landscaping. The dumpster should be moved away from

back property line one foot for each foot of height (approx. 16-).

Land sca_Ring: Mr. Tailford felt that landscaping is necessary to

screen parking and dumpster, carwash, and air and water pumps. According

to Ms. Schumaker, the plan is not ready yet but will include

mounding with trees. 61/

Architecture: With the carwash so close to the road, A articulation is needed. Mr. Zeune stated that the so-called white A-ed

bricks are not really white, but more a light reddish e* ire*.They are

not planning outdoor storage at this time. Mr. Myers suggested a

return to rectangular windows, rather than the half dormers in the

plan. Ms. Schumaker stated that this is not the typical gas canopy and

that they are emphasizing the convenience- store items rather than

gasoline. Mr. Salvage liked the design as presented, but others

disagreed and wanted strict adherence to the code concerning orientation

and felt that Marathon should be required to provide good reasons for requesting derivations from the code for the variances. The posts

holding up the canopy should not be a shiny steel; maybe they could be bricked in. Some GPC members objected to the blue and white striping

around the building and canopya -b- right color not subdued and there- fore might be construed as signage.

Sidewalks: Ms. Schumaker explained that there will be sidewalks in front and a bikerack in the rear. Mr. Tailford had suggested that

access to bikeracks is necessary. A 5- sidewalk needs to be provided along Cherry Valley road from north property line to the entrance with access to Marathon added.

Access: There will be a connection between the alley (which is owned by the Murphys) and South Galway. Mr. Tailford would like it as a requirement that Wendy- s traffic can use the access road. Signage: Applicant wishes to erect the internally illuminated ground sign as pictured and similar to Wendy-s sign. Mr. Salvage would

1

encourage more signage to invite customers. But under SBD there are

restrictions on what we can allow, and there will also be a sign

stating the gas prices. The goal is to plan something that looks good,

fits the law, and encourages Marathon to make a profit. A sign similar

to Wendy' s would be appropriate.

Lighting: Marathon has been advised to design a plan to meet

proposed lighting guidelines as a minimum while GPC considers final

lighting guidelines.

Bob Evans Restaurant

Larry Wills presented a revision to earlier plans conforming to

GPC recommendations. Only the restaurant, not the motel, is under

consideration tonight. Mr. Wills referred to previously noted

concerns:

Rufus Hurst has determined that a motel is a germitted use.

Lighting: The Bob Evans people will address the new proposed

lighting guidelines. They believe there should be no problem.

Landscaning: The plan will be submitted at the time of

application.

The architects have moved and screened the dumpster. They have

also reduced the heiaht of the flaanole from 70- to 30-.

Sign: They have designed a brick sign similar to Wendy's, with

bright yellow letters on a red background. Members considered both the

yellow and the red to be not subdued.

Pathwav Plan: They have a sidewalk along Cherry Valley with

crosswalk signage and they will plan a pedestrian crossing. Once the

motel goes in, they will consider a sidewalk connecting Bob Evans to

the motel. They could arrange to plan for the landscaping now so that

sidewalks could be added later.

Greenspace; They have moved the parking to the rear.

Red Colo_r_: The color needs to be darker, more subtle. Mr. Wills

stated that this required corporate vote. Mr. Huey felt that the roof

was so well lit with 13 lights that the whole building is like a sign.

Move the buildina closer to the corner: This was adjusted, but

not very much.

Additional concerns expressed by Mr. Tailford include:

Sidewalks: Sidewalks will be within the right of Bob Evans does not want way. to consider a connection to Dropertv to

the south until they know who is to move in there. Mr. Myers would

rather see a plan now, which is actually required under PCD.

Proposed location of motel should be adjusted to limit Darking

along SR 16. Motel location and development plan should all be marked proposed" and not considered approved with the development plan. SuperTAmraefrfiicca. studv: Mr. Tailford stated that concerns are mostly with Our engineers think that the study is fine as far as Bob Evans is concerned.

Signage: Bob Evans proposed two signs on the building, one on the front and one on the side facing Cherry Valley Road, in addition to the ground sign.

oropertv owner- s name andte *t-uctures will be indicated

on the plans.

P3.2._ _

50' -GPC members thought the red should be reduced; the red roof does

not need so much lighting. They suggested other means of lighting to

reduce the intensity and to subdue the lighting away from the main

entrance.

Adjournment: 10:05 p. m.

Next Meetings: June 5 and 19. Mr. Huey to be absent on June 19)

GPC Minutes 5/1/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 1, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Peter Marshall for Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith

Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Diane Kintner (Granville

Cooperative Nursery School; 228 S. Granger),Don and Anne Russell (205

S. Prospect),Dave Woerner (GBPA),Ron Sheler (278 Llanberis)

Minutes: April 17 Page 1, add unfortunatelv to "Mr. Myers stated

that.t.o.p"aragraph 2 under Murphy. End of same paragraph,

capitalize Village Green. Delete next to last line on Page 1. Page 2,

Line 5, change "lot" to "let."Paragraph 2, switch the streets under

Item (3).Mr. Huey moved to approve minutes as presented. Mr. Myers

seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AS CORRECTED.

Citizens Comments: None

Comment from the Chair: Ms. Robertson received an invitation to GPC

from GBPA to attend a luncheon meeting on May 11 to encourage open

communication and to have a dialog on matters of common concern. They

also invited GPC to attend an executive session on June 8.

New Business:

Diane Kintner, Granville Cooperative Nursery School

Ms. Kintner explained the mural to be placed on the back wall of

the educational building at the Baptist Church. Mr. Tailford explained

that the height should be kept at a minimum and they should limit its

view from off-site. M.r. Huey stated that h-e*0--n- tyw-ay- t--h-irse·-e·u-1d- --

considere- da-s--g*n was if t+rprrFCX- Err-w·oedso_n4- *h+·er-E-fu*re, sinueh--e*e*

a]Q_no- werci-s-rE-Fieschool does not require consen- from GPC.

David Kintner, 228 S. Granger

Mr. Kintner wishes to place green vinyl siding on the garage to

match the color of the house. Mr. Stansbury moved to approve

application, Mr. Huey seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Don &Anne Russell, 205 South Prospect

The Russells wish to install fencing, gates, and handrails at

their home. Mr. Huey stated that front-corner-lot fences may not

exceed 42" but that the rest of the application seemed appropriate.

Ms. Russell explained that only the posts will exceed 48",and the

fence is concave. Mr. Huey moved to grant approval subject to the

restriction that the fence height for No. 3 (front-yard fence) on the

application does not exceed 42".Mr. Salvage seconded, AND MOTION WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: At 7: 50 p. m. the meeting was adjourned so that members

could take a field trip to view exterior lighting conditions in nearby

communities.

GPC Minutes 4/17/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

April 17, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage

Members Absent: Gary Stansbury

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Mat Mauger (M-E Civil

Eng.F)r,ank and Kay Murphy (100 Galway Drive)

Minutes:

ADril 3: Mr. Huey moved to approve minutes as presented. Mr.

Myers seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

Citizens Comments: None

New Business:

The Murphy Group, The Glen at Erinwood -Phases II &III

Mr. Murphy reported two changes from the development plan: Since

Lots 68 and 69 were changed from four lots to two, there are two fewer

lots, and there is one fewer cul de sac. Lots 68 and 69 will be served

by a long driveway. The lots are ca. one-acre lots. Mr. Tailford

explained that everything on Bird &Bull' s April 10 letter has been

addressed but that GPC approval should be contingent upon these

details, which will not affect the layout. Any significant changes

would have had to get GPC approval. The Murphys wish to preserve as

many trees as possible, and Mr. Mauger stated that there is a no-build

area to maintain the beauty of the property, and all streets will have

sidewalks or paths. The developers wished to decrease Longford from

31' to 28' driveable to allow for sidewalks and tree lawns because if

they need to put in 5' sidewalks, that would leave insufficient tree

lawn. Ns. Garrett preferred wider street widths, but others want wider

tree lawns. Sidewalks are to be put in within five years.

Mr. Myers stated thatAft-has become common to have backs of units

facing public streets. People put up fences to reclaim their private

space. Trees do not hide the second stories of houses. He made

several suggestions, i. e.,extending cul de sacs or increasing back

setbacks, or having extensive landscaping plans to present a forest

visage with a sense of depth rather than a row of trees. Mr. Huey

stated that we gave the developers a reduction in TCOD so they could

put in the village green.

The Murphys will move the fence back 20' to allow for a pathway

and they will deed this space in the right of way to the village as

dedicated space. There will be a sidewalk from Galway to the bikepath.

The developers will add a no-build section to the covenants and plan.

dera- 100 ' e=M+ae: lrfromh-ee*-ent-ber- u-f Llie ruad.

Mr. Huey would suggest a 30- no-build line parallel to Newark- Granville

2

Road beyond setbacks and 50 along Jones Road. Ms. Robertson would

encourage people to build closer to cul de sacs.

After a discussion of the Tree and Landscape ordinance requirements

and tree spacing, which should go along with the earlier landscaping

plan throughout the development, it was decided to the law

director make a decision regarding when tree spacing requirements go

into effect. Mr. Murphy stated that trees too close together make

driveway installation difficult and that trees should be planted as

soon as possible to allow for more growth time.

This Preliminary Plat can be approved contingent upon the engineers'

conditions, staff concerns, and the law director s concerns,

street widths, and building setbacks. Ms. Robertson summarized the

group- s concerns: (1) fire hydrant for Lot 68 needs to be accessible

engineers to resolve)2, )(there seems to be a consensus among this

body, except Ms. Garrett, to narrow street widths from 31 to 28-,3 ()

50' nob-uild line along Newarkr=sm(*rtite Road and 30' nob-uild from

@

setback on Je-n-esR-oad and encourage building close to front setbacks,

4) ask Mr. Hurst about timing for new tree requirements every 40',5 ()

5' sidewalks along Jones Road and between Longford and Newark-Granville

Mr. Murphy would prefer doing this later).

Mr. Huey moved to approve preliminary Plat Phases II and III

subject to the following contingencies: 1) all concerns of the

villake engineers are met, (2) Langford Drive be decreased from 31' to

28' face to face curb, (3) Jones Road to have 50' no-build line extending

from village right of way and Newark-Granville Road to have 30' nobuild

extending from 100' setback, (4) sidewalks according to plan

along Longford to Newark- Granville, (5) feeder and cul de sac be 27

curb to curb. Mr. Salvage seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8: 40 p. m.

Next Meetings: May 1 and May 15 (Mr. Huey to be absent on June 19)

GPC Minutes 4/3/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

April 3, 1995

Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent:

Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Amanda Hudgens (124 W.

Maple),Lawrence Luther (233 E. Broadway), Jim &Ellen Cooper (334 W.

Maple)

Minutes:

February 27: Mr. Salvage moved to approve minutes as revised.

Mr. Huey seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

March 20: Page 3, Paragraph 5 starts with "A" rather than "The."

Page 4, Line 8 "but there is a requirement for a lighting plan."Page

4, Paragraph 6, "9)(air pollution."Page 5, delete sentence about

flagpole in Paragraph 1. Under Neon signs, change sentence about Neons

to read: "There was some discussion whether or not neons should be

turned off at the close of the dav."Page 6, Line 4 should read: "Mr.

Huev suggested that the allowable time limit for temgorarv signs in

section 1189. 04(i) be chanaed. . . ." Mr. Huey moved to approve

minutes as corrected. Mr. Stansbury seconded, and MINUTES WERE

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

New Business:

Robert &Teresa Allen, Brew s, 128 E. Broadway -Outdoor Cafe Renewal

The Allens are not present tonight to answer questions; our conclusion

tonight is a recommendation to Village Council. Mr. Tailford

read the drafted criteria for outdoor cafes. To the criteria, members

thought there should be a required corridor between the building and

the tables, and Mr. Tailford will add this statement to the draft.

There was a request from Willowood (upstairs) that they be granted

sufficient access (8')to their door, and Mr. Tailford will measure the

space to be sure there is sufficient access. Mr. Salvage moved to

grant permission for renewal of the sidewalk cafe at Brew' s. The question

then arose whether umbrellas with words are considered signs.

According to the ordinance, words on umbrellas fall under the sign code

and need approval; Brew s needs to be told this. Mr. Salvage added to

his motion the conditions that (1) appropriate access is provided between

the building and the tables and (2) advertising on umbrellas must

have approval as a sign. Mr. Huey seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

2

Hal Jackson, Victoria s, 134 E. Broadway -Outdoor Cafe Renewal

Mr. Jackson is under the impression that umbrella advertising is

not a sign, and Mr. Tailford will provide him a copy of the criteria.

Mr. Huey thought that Mr. Jackson should move the large planters out of

the sidewalk during the winter, but Mr. Jackson thought that their age

precludes removal without destroying them. Members determined that

even if he has to replace them, they should be moved out of the way.

October 31 is the last day for outdoor cafes, and he needs to move them

by that date. It was suggested that new planters be made smaller to

move them easier. Mr. Huey moved to approve application under the

stipulations that (1) appropriate access is provided between the

building and the tables and (2) advertising on umbrellas must have

approval as a sign. Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

James &Amanda Hudgens, 124 West Maple

The Hudgenses wish to construct a screened porch and a deck on

side and back of the house. The sideyard setback requirement is 10'

and they request 10'9".The screen porch is a replacement. Paint and

siding and roof will match existing house. Mr. Salvage moved to

approve application, Mr. Myers seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

Brenda Sparks, Under The Elms, 212 S. Main -Sandwich Board

The sandwich board will be on the north side of the driveway. It

will be a nonchangeable sign with dark hunter green and black letters

with beige or off-white background and is the same on both sides. Mr.

Huey moved to approve application. Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND IT WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ellen Cooper, 334 W. Maple

Ms. Cooper wishes to rebuild the original porch on the front of

the house, remove asbestos siding, build a brick or stone walkway, and

extend fence to match existing fence. Setback is determined by existing

setbacks on the street, and although this would be 2' shorter than

the shortest setback, members determined that this would be acceptable

for this neighborhood. Mr. Salvage moved to approve application, Mr.

Myers seconded, AND APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Sessions

Subdivision and Development Regulations

Mr. Tailford explained the latest draft of Codified Granville, Ordinances of Part XI, into which he incorporated the recommendations by GPC and those which he received from Mr. Hurst, mostly in the environ- mental section. Definitions are always difficult to spell out, and Mr.

Myers explained that subdivision regulations let the developer know

what we are looking for and merely govern the planning process, providing

for the developer an incentive to do a good job and should be left

flexible.

Mr. Huey feels that sidewalk widths should be determined by the

locale. Different areas may invite different widths or materials.

This document will be delivered to Village Council for their

deliberation.

Exterior Lighting Guidelines

It behooves GPC to expedite the discussion of lighting criteria in

view of the upcoming new businesses, and Mr. Tailford provided a draft

for consideration. Mr. Myers suggested that specific maximum lighting

is crucial to the guidelines, and suggested 8 or 9 footcandles as

maximum. Mr. Tailford thought we could specify 8 and then people could

apply for variances if they thought this was insufficient.

Adjournment: 9: 00 P. m.

Next Meetings: April 17 and May 1

GPC Minutes 3/20/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

March 20, 1995

Members Present: Larry Huey, Peter Marshall substituting for Dorothy Garrett, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage,

Members Absent: Gary Stansbury

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Eloise DeZwarte

338 E. College),Doug Lake (First Federal S &L),John

Thornborough (Borough Co),James Thornborough (150 Thresher),

Andy Spriele (McDonald s),Ray Fisher (McDonald' s),John Thaxton

Super America),Cathy Neiheart (4500 Granview),Flo Hoffman (508

W. College, Dan Havener (Bob Evans),Richard Fuson (103

Shepardson Ct),Pat Kelley (Kelley &Assoc, 671 McKinley,

Newark),Dan Bellman (320 N. Pearl),Jurgen Pape (403 E.

Broadway),Don Neifer (331 E. Elm)

Minutes:

The Minutes for February 27 had numerous changes, so the

secretary provided a revised copy of the minutes; to be reviewed

at the next meeting.

The Minutes of March 9 require the following changes: Page

2: under Broadway Blooms, Line 10, add "Based onlv on Item 3.

consideration tonight is strictly on legal grounds

Line 4 under Larry Brown, "but. in Mr. Tailford- s Mudgment.

a violation of 9" is not substantial enough to reguire. . . ."

Page 3, Line 5, add "Upon completion of GPC review, Mr.

Tailford will update. . . ."

Mr. Huey moved to approve minutes as corrected. Mr. Salvage

seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

New Business:

Granville Business &Professional Association

The Association wishes to set up two temporary signs

designating times for the Farmers' Market this summer. Mr. Huey

moved to grant permission for these signs in the public interest

to be set up from 8: 30 a. m. to 12: 30 p. m. Saturdays in August and

September. Mr. Salvage seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

John and Carole Sue McCluskey, 128 South Cherry Street

The McCluskeys wish to remove a back window and replace it

with siding to match existing siding. This will not be visible

from the street. Mr. Huey moved to approve application; Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

1

2

Borough Company, Shepardson Court -Replatting Application

The Borough Company wishes to replat from six lots to three

larger ones. Mr. Thornborough reported that the old house on

Shepardson is currently being renovated. There is an easement

on the north side of Lot A for access to properties facing West

Broadway and an easement in Lot B for the sewer. The pond will

be landscaped, and there will be a serpentine walk in the front.

The lot line between lots A& B will be moved to the north about

4' to meet 12' setback requirement for garage. Also, all side

setback notes will be 12' rather than 7. 5' or 15' as shown on

plat. Driveway access will be shared by Lots A &B. Lot C will

have new driveway access. Mr. Huey moved to approve application,

Mr. Salvage seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

First Federal Savings &Loan, 116 East Broadway -Sandwich Board

The Sandwich board will be on the porch, where it should

remain because it is only one-sided. Mr. Myers moved to approve

application with the condition that it remain on the porch. Mr.

Huey seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Don and Karen Neifer, 331 East Elm

Mr. Neifer explained that they are revising previously

approved plans because of cost factors. The back side of the

house is visible to Mt. Parnassus but not to East Elm. The

addition will be a four-season sunroom of insulated aluminum

panels with brown exterior walls and white roof. Mr. Salvage

moved to approve application, Mr. Huey seconded, AND APPLICATION

WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Knoll Group Management Co.,80 Westgate Drive

The Knoll Group wishes to construct an addition to the east

side of the building for additional file room space and a one-car

garage. They also wish to change driveway and add 7 new parking

spaces, which will be ample under the requirements. No one was

present to represent the group, but GPC determined that the

existing walls are brick and the addition will be vinyl siding.

Mr. Myers moved to approve application, Mr. Salvage seconded, AND

IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Sessions

SuperAmerica Group, SW Corner of Cherry Valley Road and SR 16

Ms. Robertson explained that plans for this corner are not

final, rather, this is the beginning stage. It is necessary to

move slowly and carefully with this development. The most

important questions to consider are How does whatever is proposed

contribute to life in Granville and How can we be sure that

everybody who wants to talk has a chance to be heard. Mr. Huey

would hope that people who have comments will talk beforehand,

rather than after the fact.

Mr. Thaxton, from SuperAmerica, asked for questions/ comments

from the audience, and Mr. Bellman began by questioning whether

this is one of the permitted uses in the area. Assuming that it

is, the gas station should have a unique character, appropriate

for Granville, with few lights, no parking lot facing the road,

and no outside storage. Mr. Bellman would prefer brick with

attractive windows, less metal and more wood, shielding of the

gas pumps, more green space with lawn, and a facility smaller

than traditional S/As. The usual S/A colors are too gaudy. Mr.

Thaxton stated that the company would listen to suggestions but

within the standard S/A plans.

Mr. Pape addressed the traffic situation, stating there are

three entrances and exits, which is dangerous and unnecessary.

Mr. Thaxton stated that the traffic engineer recommended this as

a safety zone for turning traffic. Landscaping needs also to be

emphasized, and Mr. Thaxton said that some of the land along the

creek is floodplain and will remain greenspace. He has read the

PUD guidelines and has tried to interpret them and recognizes

that some variances may be necessary.

Ms. Robertson reminded him that parking should be in the

rear, and display of goods for sale shall be discouraged. Mr.

Thaxton said you do not want the back of the building facing the

road and stated that there will be plantings. GPC reminded him

that he needs to be aware of Granville's desires regarding

architecture and shielding of cars from the road.

4 -Theln-ajor problem, according to Mr. Huey, is that there is no overall site plan provided. Under PUD we go by subdivision

regulations; we need to look at the overall density and dedicated

land, and we would probably not be in favor of piecemeal approval.

Mr. Tailford reminded the group that an overall plan is

not necessary for a work session, but members still would like to

see what is planned for the property.)

Ms. Robertson questioned whether Granville needs five or ten

more gas pumps and is aware that S/A is appealing to through

traffic, thus detracting from our community. Mr. Marshall

suggested that the taxes would help the school tax base. Ms.

Robertson stated that when we convert residential or farmland to

commercial, we need to ask questions about tax benefits to determine the worth to Granville. She asked Mr. Thaxton if he

would be willing to provide an estimate of how such a business

would benefit the schools, and he agreed to do so.

3

Mr. Myers would like to see more landscaping and greenspace

between the highway and the parking areas and also between S/A

and McDonalds.

regulation. In

He wondered whether setbacks were within

addition, pedestrian access needs to show a

connection to the overall system and to the bikepath and a

crossing over Cherry Valley Road. Illumination seems excessive

and Mr. Thaxton asked whether we have a candlefoot requirement.

We do not, but there is a lighting plan.

AA»-4t.»-. More discussion ensued bout traf le, turn lanes, traffic

cuts, road widening, and the culdesac for turning.

Ms. DeZwarte asked whether a marketing study has been made,

and the answer was yes, the business will come from a two-mile

radius.

Ole Kyderick(q?ue)stioned the necessity for more gas pumps

and the sale of merchandise easily available elsewhere. He also

did not see how the architecture of S/A and McDonalds could be

made appropriate to Granville styles. There will be light

pollution, especially at night, congestion, vapor pollution, and

crime.

Janice Remmelem(?ov)ed to Granville to escape urban sprawl

and stated that more people should be here to express their views

and fears that the proposed businesses will set a precedent.

Mr. Thornborough added that other McDonalds have altered their

style to

so also.

adjust to local conditions, and S/A should be able to do

Mr. Huey recognized that cookie-cutting businesses is

cheaper but they can improve their design here.

Ms. Robertson summarized the points of discussion: 1)

design needs to be altered, (2) aesthetics need improvement, (3)

size is too big, (4) need site plan with dedicated greenspace,

5) what' s the payoff for us, (6) landscaping seems inadequate

and cars need to be shielded, (7) too much lighting, (8) light

pollution, (9)Apollution of cars and pumps, (10) detraction of

g> qsueattliitnygo,f (life, i. e.,crime, traffic congestion, precedent 11) the legality of a gas station here, (12) pathway

connection and safety of pedestrians, (13) too much signage

piles of mulch are a sign, and so is the facia canopy which is

designed to attract business).

Mr. Salvage thought that what is proposed might be an upgrade to what is on the corner now, and the group provided

input to the Granville character, especially via the Master Plan guidelines.

Mr. Thaxton was requested to avoid excessive commerciali- zation and improve the aesthetics by putting the parking to the rear. He will provide an overall plan. Mr. Tailford will look

up for him the drawings for the businesses on Galway Drive.

4

5

Bob Evans:

Dan Havener, Project Designer, stated Bob Evans' desire to

build a 5900 sq. ft. brick restaurant seating 167 and a 60-unit

motel. The motel is not under discussion at the present time.

There will be a red canvas awning and a metal roof on the

restaurant, and it will have lights pointed upwards. Mr. Myers

questioned the parking arrangement (which should be in the rear)

and the overabundance of lighting. Mr. Havener would consider

landscaping islands, and they are seeking a better spot for the

dumpster. 7433-4L-S.1a: itpee *1,1 Llic fruiil-of thc buitd-irrg-w- ou b]e*

eensde*i ed' a. 32940M.r.. Pape asked whether Bob Evans and the

motel could plan joint parking lots.

Ms. Robertson stated that there needs to be a pedestrian

crossing across Cherry Valley and a 5 pathway. This can be on

the easement or on Bob Evans property and end at the south

boundary.

Mr. Bellman stated that motels are not included in the

ordinance.

Ms. Robertson summarized the discussion: 1) is a motel a

permitted use?2, )(too much lighting, (3) landscaping needs to

be reviewed by Tree &Landscape Committee, (4) move the storage

facility, (5) flagpole is too high, (6) consider a monument sign,

7) pathway plan needed, (9) screen the dumpster, (10) more

greenspace, (11) subdue the red, (12) move the building closer to

the corner, (13) need a pedestrian crossing.

Neon Signs:

Mr. Huey explained the draft he wrote to amend the sign code

to reflect changes in neon signs: 1) Amend Section 1189. 05(c)

to add the word tempora-ry, (2) list the restrictions enumerated

at previous meetings to try to subdue neon signs. He feels they

should refer to services only, but there are already four brandname

signs in place. A three-color sign probably would not be

subdued, but a business could apply for a variance. N,--e-0T- rssi-g-ould

1 Ltur-n-ede-ff L bhee-losc of theL-U=1-1 f-eSSd-a- y , I#antt-*e-sv*eta-hemor-rel 1 LLe-L i, 7 - -H-i. Robertsobnut feme-er-lcstt)4h4£a1st*· p

rilybrL an/dM-n-ra.-mue-signs sh ou

recommend to Village Council to grandfather existing signs. But

the only grandfathered signs are those put in before the ordi- nance.

Village Council needs to be informed that GPC members were not able to come to consensus about this amendment but were trying to arrive at a compromise.

Mr. Huey moved that we send this amendment to Village

Council for their consideration. Mr. Myers seconded, and MOTION

WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

134

Mr. Huey/hat he-3«0 c&tr=Irrgetbt-he a lZowable time limit for temporary signs in Section 1189. 04(j)fr/om 14 to 90

days per year and to restrict temporary window signs to

businesses in order to make the ordinance more enforceable.

Adjournment: 10: 30 p. m.

Next Meetings: April 3 and April 17

GPC Minutes 3/6/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

March 6, 1995

Minutes

Larry Huey, Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage,

Members Absent: Dorothy Garrett, Keith Myers

Visitors Present: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Betty Morrison

127 E. Elm),Joellen &Larry Brown (2160 Welsh Hills),Mark

Zarbaugh, Don Snelling (Aladdin),Tim Klingler (218 E. Elm)

Minutes:

The Minutes for February 27 had numerous changes, so the

secretary provided a revised copy of the minutes.

Citizens Comments: None

Old Business:

Aladdin Restaurant, 122 East Broadway -Sandwich Board

The main concerns with this sign, stated Mr. Huey, were that

it is in poor repair and Mr. Snelling needs to find a way to

affix daily menu sheets so that they will be protected from the

weather, i. e.,chalkboard, plexiglas panel, laminated paper. Mr.

Snelling stated that the sandwich board is about fifteen years old and needs repair and that he will probably do a chalkboard.

Mr. Salvage stated that Village Council does not want any un- painted signs.

Mr. Huey moved to grant temporary approval for the current

sandwich board subject to improving the sign and weather protect- ing it within 90 days, at which time the permanent sign will be

approved. Any changes will require a new application. Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND APPLICATION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

Our Place Antiques, 121 S. Prospect -Sandwich Board

Betty Morrison has two different sign sandwich boards, or one cut in half. She stated that they use the "barn" sign only when they have a special sale in the barn. Mr. Huey asked

whether it might be possible to approve storing the sign behind the bushes because Ms. Morrison cannot lift it into the building. She stated that a "barn" sign could be temporarily added to the regular sandwich board when she is having a sale. Or she might

move the sign closer to the barn so that only her customers would see it. Members agreed these would be acceptable options.

i

Mr. Huey moved to approve application as applied for with

the provision that any temporary attachments to the regular

sandwich board be weather protected and that applicant be allowed

a variance for storage outside, behind the bushes, and out of

sight. Mr. Stansbury seconded, and APPLICATION WAS APPROVED

UNANIMOUSLY.

Broadway Blooms, 120 West Broadway -Sandwich Board

Members had several concerns, and Ms. Damron was not present

to answer questions. The sandwich board (1) is not in very good

condition. The owner attaches removable signs, which are not

weather protected, <2) members questioned whether she really

needs two adjacent signs, (3) according to the sign code, the

sandwich board is not in legal compliance for signs in a nonconforming

business in a residential district. Mr. Salvage feels 41

that Ms. Damron needs the sign, and Mr. Huey suggested that GPC 40 turn the application down and allow applicant to appeal to

Village Council. The consideration tonight is €trictly one -PU<34

legal grounds( if Village Council overturns our decision, the

application Meeds to return to GPC for architectural review. Mr. 3

Salvage felt that since it was not signed, it should not be

considered.

Mr. Salvage moved to approve the application, since it is

needed and since it has been there for a long time. Mr. Huey

seconded. THE MOTION WAS REJECTED BY A VOTE OF 1 TO 3. Mr.

Salvage voted for approval and the other members voted against

because they did not feel the sandwich board was in legal

compliance.

New Business:

Larry Brown, 348 N. Granger

Mr. Brown will remove existing back porch and replace it

with a new 14- x20' two-story addition and pressure treated wooden 41

deck. The new larger addition will be 11'3" from the north19--Lf foLU/ line, but a violation, of 9" is not substantial enough ,o#f- a varlL-/-

ance. Ne1·u--uf liric-7 roofing and siding materials will match &

existing house. Mr. Huey stated that the addition should be

continuous so that it does not look like an obvious addition.

Mr. Salvage moved to approve application, Mr. Huey seconded, AND

APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tim &Cathy Klingler, 218 E. Elm

The Klinglers have found it necessary to install 8"x12" eve

vents around the house, painted to match the surrounding siding.

This will be an addendum to their previous permit issued last week. Mr. Stansbury moved to approve this modification, Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED:

2

3

Changes in the regulations requested by GPC and Mr. Hurst

have been added to the sub-regs draft prepared by Mr. Tailford

and Mr. Zarbaugh. Members proceeded through the regulations one

by one and took notes. 1Mr. Tailford. will update his master_list,

which includes all suggested changes and provide a revised

version to be presented to a committee who will update once more

and hand it over to Village Council.

Announcements:

The GBPA has submitted a letter to continue the placement of

two directional signs in the public interest on Saturdays, 9 a. m.

to 12: 30 p. m.,during August and September for the farmers market.

GPC members agreed that this would be acceptable and

suggested setting them up at 8: 30 a. m. rather than 9 a. m.

Adjournment: 10: 15 p. m.

Next Meetings: March 20 and April 3

GPC Minutes 2/27/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

February 27, 1995

Minutes

Members Present: Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn Robertson,

Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury

Members Absent: Dorothy Garrett

Village Council members present for joint meeting: Kevin

Bennett, Arnie Eisenberg, Dan Freytag, Peter Marshall, Maxine

Montgomery, Marc Shulman

Visitors Present: Dave Woerner (GBPA),Brian Lindamood

SEnt_in_el),Mary Bline (128 S. Main),Whit Tussing (Glenford,

Ohio),Fran Scorio (313 Beechwood),George Fackler (323 Parker

Drive)P, hil Wince (2350 Broadway, Wes.J)o,hn Ghiloni (1864

Dayton Road)

Joint Meeting with Village Council

Neon SiMns

Mr. Eisenberg stated that the pendulum has been swinging

back and forth, and the last proposal was to ban neon signs. At

the public meeting many GBPA members stated their case for

certain types of neon, particularly those in existence for a long

time. We are trying to find a middle ground, and tonight' s

meeting is to explore long-term issues.

Mr. Shulman reported that the ordinance has been in existence

since August, and the new sign code bans neon signs. Mr.

Bennett' s proposed revision of the ordinance allows 8 sq. ft.

inside neon signs that take up no more than 15 per cent of window

space.

Considerable discussion ensued regarding grandfathered

signs; maximum sizes; signs at Cherry Valley/ Rt. 16, which need

to be larger; history of neon in the village. Greg Ream spoke

for the necessity of some businesses having neon signs, but gift

shop type stores probably will not desire them.

Mr. Huey volunteered to draft a statement regarding neon

signs in the architectural review district, to include the

following: 1) size restrictions, (2) these are permanent signs

requiring a permit, (3) the signs are to let people know the

businesses are open and what they are offering, (4) the issue of

long-standing signs and repair/ replacement of same, (5) they will

be inside the window, (6) cannot be on the second floor, (7) one

per business in the window. This statement will be reviewed by

GPC and then sent on to Village Council for action.

L

SandHichBaards.

Criteria emerging from the discussion include: They need to

8 sq. ft, must be taken inside every

must be within 15' of face of building, must not impede

be of good appearance,

evening,

pedestrian traffic,

weather protected. Mr.

and those. with, changeable letters. must. be

Eisenberg completely trusts GPC to

develop these guidelines.

Minutes of February 6, 1995:

Page 1, under Bernard Williams, change "neglected to" to did

nat. Page 2 Paragraph 1, rather than unanimous approval, Mr.

Salvage voted for tabling the James Store application. Please

correct spelling of Mr. Stansbury's name. Under Mary Lee Van

Meter, add It needs to be located so as not to impede Dedestrian

traffic, Mr. Huey moved to approve minutes as corrected, Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None

Old Business:

Bernard Williams, Elm's Pizza &Yogurt, 113 S. Main -Sandwich

Board

Members viewed the photograph of the

found it satisfactory. Mr. Huey moved to

Mr. Stansbury seconded,

sandwich board and

approve application,

and MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Nancy Graham, The James Store, 124 E. Broadway -Sandwich Board

Ms. Graham is designing a new sandwich board, and it was

recommended that she bring in a drawing. Mr. Huey moved to

approve application as a temporary sign for 90 days. Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Apparently quite a few merchants have

questions about sandwich boards and other

items, and it was recommended that Mr.

Tailford set up a joint meeting between GPC

and GPBA.

Mid-Ohio Development -Signs

Erinwood wishes to erect 2' 6"x2' 6" wall signs at the Office

Park, building 4, brown with ivory letters, similar to those on

other buildings: 1) single faced illuminated directory signs,

type D-1; (2) individual nonilluminated tenant signs, type C.

Mr. Huey moved to approve, Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND IT WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

2

3

Mary Bline, Greystone Country House, 128 S. Main -Arch. Review

Ms. Bline is building a 2-story cedar, colonial style

structure to relocate the existing Greystone business in the rear

of the lot. The colors will match the house, and the sign, "Shop

in Rear.1,'.will be: 10.cated. where people. come_betw.een.t_heh_ouses,-

and it will be attractively landscaped. Ms. Bline will inquire

of Ms. McKivergin as to the possibility of a picket fence on

north side resembling that in front of the shop to screen the air

conditioner. The parking area is to be paved with textured brick

or architectural concrete. Shutters are vinyl and there will be

wood siding to achieve a carriage house effect.

Mr. Huey moved to approve application subject to restrictions

listed above, Mr. Myers seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

Crosswalk Cards &Gifts, 127 E. Broadway -Sandwich Board

The sign is white plywood with green letters, a picture

frame type with screw-in notices for changeable messages. Mr.

Huey moved to approve application with a new removable area

covered with plexiglass. Mr. Stansbury seconded, and IT WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Taylor' s, 132 E. Broadway -Sandwich Board

Mr. Huey moved to approve application in its current location or

within 15' of building and that the variance is granted for width

and heighth. Mr. Salvage seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY

APPROVED.

Fackler Work Session

Phil Wince, attorney, reported that Mr. Fackler wishes to

erect a commercial building on the southwest corner of Newark-

Granville Road and Cherry Valley. It will be a small shopping

center for such businesses as a bank with drive-through, beer/

wine carry-out with drive-through, pizza shop, and later a

restaurant. The front will be New EnglandW/ illiamsburg type

appearance attractively designed and landscaped. Members were

primarily concerned about traffic problems and also blending this

shopping area in with that of the Murphy development. Mr.

Fackler must do a traffic study, and the village will possibly

add a turn lane in 1996. Adequate parking is planned (GPC

prefers most of the parking to be in the rear),and there will be

sufficient green space around building. The applicant has done

some feasibility studies, and Ms. Robertson requested that he

bring them in to show the group. We should hold Mr. Fackler to

the same restrictions that Mr. Murphy has been held to. Village

Council should be consulted about curb cuts on Newark- Granville

Road and whether adding a turn lane changes their feelings.

Victoria's, 134 E. Broadway

4

Sandwich Board

This board is a chalkboard with a cork section below, which

is not used. Whatever notice goes up should be enclosed or

laminated. The sandwich board needs some aint. Mr. Salvage

moved to approve as a 90-day sandwich board during which time_it

must be reconditioned and weather protected for changeable

notices. Mr. Huey seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mr. Plunkett will tell Hal Jackson to move the planters

out of the pedestrial pathway.

Blackstone' s, 126 East Broadway -Sandwich Board

This sign needs to be repainted and weather protected. Mr.

Huey moved to approve application subject to its being repainted

and weather protected for any temporary notices within 90 days.

Mr. Salvage seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Catherine- s, 119 E. Elm -Sandwich Board

Mr. Huey moved to approve this attractive sign, Mr. Myers

seconded, and IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Broadway Blooms, 120 West Broadway -Sandwich Board

GPC members had a number of questions to ask Ms. Damron

regarding the condition of the sign, the necessity of it, the

positioning of the ground sign next to it. If she is not present

at the next meeting, we can reject it. Application is not

signed. APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY TABLED.

Studio 37, 224 East Broadway -Sandwich Board

The sign needs repainting. Mr. Salvage moved to approve a

permanent sign and to allow 90 days for repainting. Mr. Huey

seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Book Cellar -Sandwich Board

Mr. Huey moved to approve this sandwich board. Mr.

Stansbury seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Aladdin Restaurant, 122 East Broadway -Sandwich Board

GPC members had a number of questions to ask Mr. Snelling

and Mr. Stansbury moved to table application until he could be

present. Mr. Huey seconded, AND APPLICATION WAS TABLED

UNANIMOUSLY.

5

Our Place Antiques, 121 S. Prospect -Sandwich Board

Betty Morrison has two different sandwich boards. Mr. Huey

moved to table application until Ms. Morrison could be present to

answer questions. Mr. Stansbury seconded, and APPLICATION WAS

TABLEDU_N- ANIMOUSLY1..._._..-..

New Friends Coop, 140 N. Prospect -Sandwich Board

Mr. Salvage moved to approve application subject to its

being weather protected. Mr. Huey seconded, AND IT WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Brian &Leslie Newkirk, 132 N. Prospect -Sandwich Board

Mr. Huey moved to approve application, Mr. Myers seconded,

and IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 9:45 p. m.

Next Meeting: March 6 and March 20, 7: 30 p. m.

GPC Minutes 2/6/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

February 6, 1995

Members Present: Larry Huey, Dorothy Garrett, Keith Myers (new

member replacing Jurgen Pape),Lyn Robertson, Richard Salvage

new member replacing James Harf),Gary Stansbury

Election of Officers: Members moved, seconded and unanimnously

approved Lvn Robertson for Chair and Garv Stansburv for Vice

Chair.

Visitors: Brian Lindamood (Sentinel),Dudley Wright and Greg

Coyle (Granville Fire Department),Tim Klingler (218 East Elm),

Ned Roberts (representing Rod Struthers, 214 S. Cherry)

Minutes of January 23, 1995:

Under Citizen Comments, change "brick red" to "faux brick"

in the next to last line. Under Sandwich Board Discussion, about

in the middle, delete sentence starting with "Permanent sandwich

boards.... Mr. Huey moved to approve Minutes as corrected, Mr.

Stansbury seconded, AND MINUTES WERE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

Citizen Comments: None

Sandwich Board Discussion:

Ms. Garrett brought up the fact that that the regulations

merely state that signs must be 2'x4';perhaps other standards

should be in place also. Mr. Huey proposed that we suggest

guidelines against which applicants may apply for permits; this

would also simplify GPC judgments for these applications. Mr.

Huey volunteered to put in writing some guidelines regarding

appearance, maintenancer/epair, location, and the best way to

handle changeable letters. These guidelines would not necessarily

be codified.

New Business:

Bernard Williams, Elm' s Pizza &Yogurt, 113 S. Main -Sandwich

Board

Because Mr. Williams neglected to include an appropriate

drawing with his application, Mr. Huey moved to table application

until a suitable drawing is submitted. Mr. Stansbury seconded,

and MOTION TO TABLE WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Nancy Graham, The James Store, 124 E. Broadway -Sandwich Board

Mr. Huey stated that the current law says that sandwich

boards should be classified as permanent signs and should be in

Ce

good repair. Because the objective is for the sandwich boards

to look attractive, it was recommended that Ms. Graham be present

when discussion of her sandwich board is on the agenda. Mr. Huey

moved to table application, Mr. Standbury seconded AND MOTION TO

TABLE WAS APPROVED. r,t**1,4-*2,, 110£1< «*

Mary Lee Van Meter, Welsh Hills Travel, 126 E. Broadway -

Sandwich Board

As this sandwich board is neat and attractive, Mr. Huey

moved to approve application, but Ms. Van Meter needs to be

remindedCio locate her ,sign within 15' of the building. Mr.

Salvage seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Kate Disch, Primrose Artisans, 120 1/2 E. Broadway -

Sandwich Board

This sign is attractively lettered and in good repair. It

needs to be located so as not to impede pedestrian traffic and

within 15' of the building. Mr. Stansbury moved to approve

sign, Mr. Huey seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Granville Fire Department, 135 East College Street

The Fire Department wishes to have their previous application

amended to allow for the addition of a handicap ramp. Mr.

Dudley Wright explained how the ramp will look and noted that

attractive landscaping will be added. Mr. Huey moved to approve

amendment, Mr. Salvage seconded, and IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Robert Struthers, 214 South Cherry Street

Mr. Struthers wishes to amend his previous application to

replace wood sashes with replacement sashes in the attic. Ned

Roberts explained that they will be double hung with white vinyl

finish on the outside and will match the other double hung

windows on the house. Mr. Salvage moved to approve amendment,

Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tim and Cathy Klinger, 218 East Elm

The Klingers wish to construct a small, historically accur- ate picket fence with posts in the front yard. Mr. Klinger

explained that they want to plant a perennial garden, and he will

not know just how high the fence will be but it will be between

36" and 40".Mr. Klinger wants to make certain that the fence

does not detract from the house. The fence will be a light

color, i. e.,cream or white, and match the trim of the house.

Mr. Huey moved to approve application, Mr. Stansbury seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

3-

2

3

Announcements

Mr. Tailford showed pictures of a possible new sign to be

placed at all entrances to the village. Signs at other villages

were discussed, and members had some suggestions for the

designer, Mr. Kessler. The signs should provide information

easily read in the smallest possible size and should be in a

muted color. Ms. Robertson thought the words "established 1805"

could be added.

Mr. Huey reported that he had seen informational arrows

added to roads to point out fire hydrants in a town where he

visited and thought it was a good idea.

Adjournment: 8: 50 p. m.

Next Meeting: February 27, 7 p. m. -joint meeting between

Village Council and GPC to discuss neon signs.

GPC Minutes 1/23/1995

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION 1995

January 23,

Members Present: James Harf, Larry Huey, Jurgen Pape, Lyn

Robertson, Peter Marshall (substuting for Dorothy Garrett)

Absent: Gary Stansbury

Visitors: Davelyn Ross-Smail, Brian Lindamood (S_entinel)

Minutes of January 9, 1995:

Ms. Robertson moved to approve Minutes as distributed, Mr.

Huey seconded: AND MINUTES WERE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

Citizen Comments: Ms. Ross-Smail from the Licking County Board

of Education asked the GPC for approval of modifications to two

temporary outdoor structures at the middle

made for safety precautions. One is a barrier that can only be

seen from the back of a garage and was cut down from 7'. The

other, 8',sits over a well. Mr. Huey stated that in a situation

where safety is clearly involved, the Village Manager can approve

measures to solve the problem quickly. The structures will be

as soon as possible. The GPC had no problem

J painted brick Ld

3<6»3 with th@situation.

A

New Business:

Sandwich Board Discussion

Because of the fact that under the new ordinance, new and

existing sandwich boards will need a permit from GPC, Mr. informing them of this fact.

Tailford sent a letter to merchants

Four of them responded with requests for

emphasized criteria for sandwich boards:

be removed every day, and must be 2' x4'.

in addition to

signs. Discussion

they must be portable,

P e.nm.an.n@j- u' nRj-1h>

other signs at t.hestandards

as

and

look

bnandes-lr-o**t8-1-1e--pon**

b.ur*res*-s. Sandwich boards are subject to the same

permanent signs. Merchants must keep them neat and clean,

they must take them in at night. Signs should be on-site,

appropriate, match the building, and not obstruct pedestrian

traffic. They should not be over 15' from the building, and

cafes should place them within the table area. Village Council

has decided sandwich boards may be in addition to total signage.

For applications of a routine nature, the applicant will not need

to be present, and Mr. Tailford can write a follow-up letter of

conditions, if any.

J. A. K. S Place, 116 East Broadway, rear -Sandwich Board

For Sherry Koklich- s sandwich board application, Mr. Huey' s

suggestion was to add an arrow to the sign, back and front, to

more easily identify the location. Mr. Huey moved to approve

application with-two restrictions: She must take the sign in at night, and it needs to be within 15 of the building. Ms.

Robertson seconded, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Village Coffee Company, 126 N. Prospect -Sandwich Board

Ms. Robertson moved to approve application as long as sandwich

board remains in same position as in the photograph and does not restrict pedestrian traffic. Mr. Harf seconded, AND IT WAS

UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Bennett' s, 200 East Broadway -Sandwich Board

The "Valvolene" sign on feet is removed each evening. Mr.

Huey moved to UNANIMOUSLY APPaRpOpVroEvDe. sign, Ms. Robertson seconded, AND IT WAS

NAPA, 458 S. Main -Sandwich Board

This particular sign 1

not get taken in at night.

whether it is grandfathered

Main area is reconfigured,

moved to disapprove applica

board. Ms. Robertson second

DISAPPROVED.

s not a sandwich board because it does

It s a nonconforming ground sign, and

is uncertain. When the entire South

signs will be reconsidered. Mr. Huey

tion because it is not a sandwich

ed, and APPLICATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY

Announcements

Mr. Pape announced that the Tree and Landscape Committee has looked at plans for the elevator at St. Luke- s Church and appre- ciates being consulted. Their suggestion was to keep the walkway straight, rather than curving it around. Mr. Tailford will

inform Mr. Bolton of this suggestion.

Mr. Marshall stated that there have been complaints about the planters at Victoria' s. The cafe permit has expired, and the pthlaenters should be removed, rather than shoving them up against building. Approval for the cafep/lanters needs to be renewed each year.

The group thanked Mr. Pape for his leadership and service Aover the past few years, and a letter of thanks was given to him. new chairperson will be chosen at next meeting. A new member should also be selected by then.

Adjournment: 8: 10 p. m.

Next Meeting: As February 23 is a holiday, Mr. Tailford will inform us when the next meeting will be.

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.