GRANVILLE PLANNING -COMMISSION
Minutes of February 24, 1997:
Rick Clark wherever
Montgomery, Lyn Robertson, Richard Wilkenfeld
Sentinel),Dale Gilreath, Bill
Darfus, Dale and Barb McCoy, Sara
Pages 1 and 2, change Rick Cole to it appears. Page 1, last paragraph, line 1, to Holophane. Page 2 before last line, add Mr.
to implementation of new guidelines without
elementary school building. Page 2, 6th paraagree.
Mr. Salvage moved to approve Wilkenfeld seconded. Minutes were
exempting the new
graph, change "agreed" to
minutes as corrected and Mr.
Citizens Commonts : None
Mr. Salvage contacted Holophane about their recommendations
for lighting parking lots, and neither of the fixtures in our guidelines are recommended. They weulrdpr-efer shoebox lights. He
felt it casts doubt on whether we should approve the guidelines without more clarification. The guidelines we accepted did not
include parking lots, and he thinks we should not try to apply
these guidelines to parking lots. Mr. Reyazi said Holophane was to
have contacted him before this, and he will take this question to
the Holophane engineers.
Ms. Montgomery stated that the Streetlight Committee looked at
lots of different fixtures and chose one based on aesthetics. The
group knew that the chosen light was not total cut-off and
Holophane recommends shoebox lights for parking lots. She felt
there were techniques to minimize the light going behind the
GranVille style light. Mr. Reyazi said that because it is glass
or prisms, the light can be directed, but not as well as metal cutoff
Salvage stated that Holophane may recommend showbox for
but it should be clarified that GranVille can be used
The GranVille and Esplanade exceed light trespass
guidelines on edges of lot. Can we allow people to light lots from
the outside in or add more lights?
Mr. Reyazi said that the Esplanade can be used in parking
lots.,b.ut_c.ost. is a-factor..H .e..a..dded. that.w. e..are. not.i.n..a. position . to impose these lighting guidelines on the school. Adoption by GPC is not the authority for the school; GPC' s authority is more in terms of architectural review.
Ms. Robertson stated that in order to light a parking lot, one pharsevtoenptuh t-a&t.light,0 around the edgeso „butth-esega-tdeflrimews-e-iM, - Were the guidelines«*S-w-r-itten to take care of lighting a lot adequately? Mr. Reyazi stated that these guidelines were taken from Dublin' s, and they have different fixtures. Mr.
Salvage added that more fixtures may be required to fulfill our guidelines if we cannot use shoeboxes, and they are more expensive. Mr. Wilkenfeld stated that a developer would be required to install lights, but a school is on a tighter budget. Mr. Reyazi
said these guidelines cannot be imposed on the school before being accepted by Village Council.
Mr. Reyazi needs more information and will include possible scenarios regarding lighting a commercial area.
Cooperative Nursery School, 115 West Broadway -AROD
Kobunski stated that the school wishes to build a 48" green vinyl
chainlink fence in the back with steel posts, to enclose the play area. She showed a sample of the fence, and while chainlink is
discouraged, it may be appropriate for a schoolyard. One neighbor,
who has not stated an opinion on the fence, would be affected. The
fence will not be visible from the street.
MS. ROBERTSON MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION PENDING WRITTEN
APPROVAL OF THE NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST; MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED,
AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Maryan and Irving Burton, 224 East Broadway -Demolition Permit
Mr. Burton explained in the application that the cement block
garage is leaning and the footer is deteriorated. A carpenter and
masonry man said they could not do anything to save it.
MS. ROBERTSON MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION; MR. SALVAGE
SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Granville' Elementary School, North Granger Street
Mr. Reyazi explained that part of the existing school is in
AROD; thus the addition is also subject to AROD review. Lighting
guidelines are not imposed on the applicant.
Dale Gilreath, from SEM Partners, showed the architectural
drawings for the school and the elevation and the landscaping plan.
It is a 40, 000 sq. ft. split face brick and concrete block building
with a band on the side. It will connect with the existing school
at one point, and the one-story addition will front onto Sunrise
Street. The budget limits builders to $75 per sq. ft. The
is..d .esigneda.s... . .lowm..a.intenance, m_o_s-tly_ a. t t.h.e The Tree and Landscaping Committee has looked at the A dumpster is surrounded by a 6' brick wall. There will be
a new playground as well as the existing ones.
Regarding the lighting plan, Mr. Gilreath said that 5 shoebox fixtures were planned for the parking lot, totalling $3400. If ltihgehytsre. placed them with Esplanade, the cost would be $19, 500 for 5 cost of $The GranVille design would require 12 lights at a total 14, 450. Neighbors would see a white light on a pole; the shoebox sheds light more directly downward. They do not have to be sounggaetstendigchhtanwghinegn tthheereexiisstinngo basrcehoboul lbfsu-nic=tion*. MsR-eb-e-rtsurl Salvage said he would take this es-heebexes, and Mr. Neighbors present seemed to like utphew i@D,hhoebthoexess,chaonodl tbhoeardG.PC
recognized the budgetary constraints. 1--k-ss- »Z'lz«02'./ +4-*
Mr. Gilreath will ask the engineer to rework the plan, incor- porating wall fixtures and directing the lights to shine with maximum light away from neighbors. Ms. Montgomery thought it would be nice to have GranVille fixtures close to the entrance.
An engineering report is still needed, and there is a question of whether there are enough parking spaces, an issue for BZBA.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO BUILD AN ADDITION TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AS PRESENTED WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LANDSCAPING WILL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WISHES OF THE TREE AND LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE AND
SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER AND STAFF AND THAT THE
LIGHTING IS SITUATED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO MINIMIZE TRESPASS ONTO NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. MS. ROBERTSON SECONDED, AND MOTION
WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Bob Malarky, 104 Kildare Street
4- - urphy represented Mr.
house on Lot 15 along the TCOD.
Malarky, who wants to build a
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE
Mr. Reyazi stated that the only issue GPC must address is that
any setback in TCOD less than 100' requires GPC approval. The 70'
setback for the subdivision was approved in 1993. The developer
has mounded the corridor and planted some trees. There will
eventually be four lots adj acent and will naljl line up.
1Po/2-p--4£a.-_ Ms. Robertson would like to see a landscaping plan and felt
this could be approved pending Tree and Landscape Committee
approval. Her interpretation of the zoning code is to look it over
for appearance including landscaping. Mr. Wilkenfeld also wants
answers to the landscaping issue. Mr. Salvage said there is a
landscaping provision on the plat, and he doesn' t think we should
ask for more information. He added that GPC only has review under
50' from ROW. Mr. Murphy stated that the plan they submitted was
70'.from ROW on. each. side of. the road...
Mr. Reyazi Mr. Salvage will consult with the Tree and Landscape Committee. thought this could be approved with Mr. Malarky tshuebmcoitdtien.g a landscape plan around the house in conformance with MR. SALVAGE WITHDREW HIS EARLIER MOTION.
MS. ROBERTSON MOVED FOR APPROVAL PENDING EVIDENCE OF
SUBMISSION OF LANDSCAPING PLAN TO TREE AND LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE AS MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF TCOD. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND IT WAS ACCEPTED BY ACCLIMATION.
Mr. Reyazi will check to be sure any future applications are approved by him with Tree and Landscaping Committee.
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO ADOPT THE FOUR APPLICATIONS APPROVED TONIGHT; MR. WILKENFIELD SECONDED, AND FINDINGS OF FACT WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Adjournment: 9: 40 p. m.
Next Meeting: March 17, 7: 30 p. m. and April 7