Granville Community Calendar

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

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.