Granville Community Calendar

CGP 11/20/95

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: S_enlin-21),
Minutes: Novembe
conditional use fo
bottom, change "us
Announcements, add
issue further.
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 legalo 'te--an--TE from Mr. Hurst
be in writing. 2£60.2»-CV7- \
Le 2/- /'
Adjournment: 8: 00 p. m.
1
Next Meeting: December 4 and 18
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
G/ Eu:»4,6_--(__* e 0 u__25

CGP 10/02/95

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:
Next Meetings:
10: 30 p. m.
October 16 and November 6
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen

CGP 11/06/95

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
November 6,
Minutes-
1995
Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn
Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury
Members Absent:
Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.
Visitors Present: S-enlin-el),
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:
Next Meeting:
8: 50 p. m.
November 20 (Mr. Myers will be absent)
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen i

GCP 05/15/95

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.
Sianage: 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.
4
5
57+ UQAdiacent
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)
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen

GCP 05/01/95

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.
Next Meetings:
19)
May 15, June 5 and 19. Mr. Huey to be absent on June
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
2
1

GCP 04/20/95

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
March 20, 1995
4 - - 4.--
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<ld be i-nside only. *.. prC',/-7//c*.-j/L-Z<el, 12' Salvge asked whether it would be appropriate for GPC to
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:
Next Meetings:
10: 30 p. m.
April 3 and April 17
Respectfully submitted
Betty Allen
6

GCP 04/06/95

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 farmersmarket.
GPC members agreed that this would be acceptable and
suggested setting them up at 8: 30 a. m. rather than 9 a. m.
Adjournment:
Next Meetings:
10: 15 p. m.
March 20 and April 3
r 330*3/0--E /
Respectfully submitted
Betty Allen
7 Werk Session -Subdivision and Development Regulations

GCP 06/19/95

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:
Adjournment: 8
Next Meeting:
None
40 p. m.
July 17
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
3

GCP 06/05/95

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)C, indy 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.)
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
1

GCP 1/23/95

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION 1995
41'1447s. #e:fuaPl*rpE:s:4<.155%22W* j6:4*%Fl.#".*'
48#441#ij0*SK#1#56.*,£'*.1/
e
1:
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<s?ch)ool that were
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:
Next Meeting:
inform us when
8: 10 p. m.
As February 23 is a holiday, Mr. Tailford will the next meeting will be.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
rj
l
l

GCP 01/09/95

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
January 9,1995
Minutes
Members Present: Jurgen Pape,Lyn Robertson,Gary Stansbury,Larry Huey,Pete Marshall
Absent: James Harf
Visitors: see attached list}
Minutes of December 19,1994:
Page 2,strike out the last sentence under Public Hearing for Cherry Valley South District -
Village Council will schedule another hearing".
Page 3, change the end of the last sentence under Work Session for St. Luke's Episcopal Church -
go ahead with its plans and prepare an official application".
Larry Huey moved to approve Minutes as corrected,Ms. Robertson seconded,AND THE
MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
New Business:
Welsh Hills School.2610 Newark-Granville Road -Temporary Contractor Sign:
Welsh Hills School wishes to replace the existing temporary sign with a new temporary sign that is contractor 16 square feet in area and will be placed on the existing posts. Mr. Huey explained that no landscape plan was needed for the TCOD since the sign was temporary. Ms. Robertson moved to
approve,Mr. Huey seconded,AND THE MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
Work Session:
Don DeSapri. 13 acres on Newark-Granville Road -Lot Split:
Mr. DeSapri wishes to split a 13 acre parcel into four lots ranging in size from 2.45 to 3. 9 acres in size. Mr. Pape believed that the instead of four driveways that they should be combined into two driveway cuts onto NewarkG- ranville Road. The other members agreed. Since the property was subject to the TCOD the plans for each house would need to come before the GPC for landscape plan approval. Street trees would also need to be provided along NewarkG- ranville Road in compliance with the Tree & Landscape Ordinance. Mr. Huey questioned Mr. Tailford on whether this lots-plit would change the demand for the pathway system to be expanded to the area. Mr. Tailford did not believe that this lots-plit changed the demand enough to require an extension of the system. Mr. Tailford was concerned with the drainage beneath the new driveway entrances. He believed the driveways will need to be approved by the Village Engineer. The GPC advised Mr.DeSapri to make the stated changes and submit an official application for the lot-split.
GPC 1995 Goals:
Mr. Pape believes that the zoning a parcel receives upon annexation should not necessarily be
PUD which increases the density automatically to 1 unit per 1.5 acres. The GPC requested Mr. Tailford
to find a way to change the ordinance to allow the GPC to zone the property similar to its Township
zoning and keep the density the same.
Mr. Huey and Ms. Robertson explained that it is important to educate township and Village
residents about the merger and how the study is what is being voted on in November and not an actual
merger.
Mr. Pape discussed parking in the Village and that a mechanism that should be designed to allow
an applicant to provided off-site parking or put money in escrow for the future construction of a satellite
parking lot. Mr. Pape believes the Village should secure land for a satellite parking lot.
Mr. Pape gave Mr. Tailford a plan for a new parking lot design for the parking lot behind the United Methodist Church.
Adjournment:
Next meetings:
8: 45 p.m.
January 23 and February 8.
Respectfully submitted,
Douglas Tailford Jr.

GCP 08/21/95

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
August 21, 1995
Minutes
Members Present: Dorothy Garrett, Larry Huey, Keith Myers, Lyn
Robertson, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury
Members Absent: none
Also Present: Doug Tailford, Jr.,Village Planner
Visitors Present: Sentinel),Jonathan A. Velay (36 N. 2d St.,
Newark),Rodger W. Asmus (St. Luke- s),Jack &Judi Pyle (1328 Cherry
Valley Rd),Kristin Pape (Pyles),Vince Paumier (354 N. Granger),Bruce
Westall (241 E. Maple)
Minutes: Audust 7: Page 1, Kevin Bennett was present, Mary Lee Van
Meter was a visitor. Page 3, line 7 change 'drive' to dirt road.
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
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen

GCP 04/17/95

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:
Next Meetings:
8: 40 p. m.
May 1 and May 15 (Mr. Huey to be absent on June 19)
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen

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.