GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
April 13, 1998
Members Present: Bill Keith Myers, Richard Salvage, Gary Stansbury, Wernet, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent: Jack Burriss
Also Present: Reza Reyazi, Village Planner Visitors Present: Scott Rawdon (Sentinel),Bill Winton, Mike Davis, Roger Kessler, Patti from ReMax, Judith Thomas, Michael and FCaynritshia Menzer, Larry McAnally, Kent Staka, David Bussan, April
Minutes of March 23, 1997:
Page 2, No. 2, last line under Fackler' s, change to "an.d.. letting Village Council decide what they want to do on C.V. Road and, if necessary, request more ROW.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS CORRECTED AND MR. MYERS SECONDED. MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Minutes of March 30: MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED AND MR. SALVAGE SECONDED. MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
Citizens Comments: Dave Bussan is part of a neighborhood group around the old middle school who put together packets of informa- tion for GPC members regarding parking. They desire to keep the
parking to a minimum to keep the neighborhood residential.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO MOVE THAT WE ADJUST OUR AGENDA FOR THIS
EVENING TO ADDRESS A,B, C,D UNDER NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE OLD BUSINESS. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY
Art Pietrafess, 204 S. Pearl Street
The applicant wishes to replace two kitchen windows on the
south side with three windows in order to accommodate a new kitchen
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. MR.
MYERS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Brett and April Faris, 428 East College Street
The applicants wish to replace the chainlink fence with a 42"
cedar picket fence in the same location.
MR. MYERS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION; MR. WILKENFELD
SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Vincent and Mary Paumnier, 354 N. Granger Street
The new owners of this property want assurance that if the new
school needs the existing driveway for a new back entrance to the
oscf htohoel, they have permission to build a new one on the other side property. The neighbors to the south have no objection to this. A condition would have to be renewal of the old drive if tthheis cisurbg.ranted, for the school probably would not reseed and uncut standards. A new driveway would have to conform to Village
MR. MYERS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION WITH THE CONDITION THAT AT THE COMPLETION OF NEW DRIVEWAY, THE OLD DRIVEWAY WILL BE REMOVED AND RESTORED, AND BOTH AREAS ARE TO MEET STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE VILLAGE. MR. SALVAGE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Granville IGA, 484 South Main Street
April The applicant wishes to put up a 30 sq. ft. temporary sign for 20-24 for a special sale.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION; MR. WILKENFELD
SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
County Savings Bank, 143 East Broadway
This application was continued from the last meeting. Mr.
Kessler reported that they are willing to change the blue back- ground to the existing dark brown color and to reduce the size of the front fascia sign to 8 sq. ft and the size of the projecting sign to 8 sq. ft. The projecting sign will have an opaque back- ground and only the letters will be lit.
Mr. Stansbury reminded the group that our earlier discussion
was about how to measure the signs and we decided the entire sign
should be measured, but only one side of a two-sided sign should be measured. Any change in a nonconforming sign must bring it into compliance despite the fact that other signs violate this rule.
Since this is a pedestrian area rather than a thoroughfare, signs should be smaller. Mr. Hurst said measurement includes the entire
sign, which is 24 sq. ft. for the projecting sign, so the projecting sign would need a variance from the 8 sq. ft. maximum. Mr. Kessler
stated that they can reduce the wall sign to 4 sq. ft. Mr. Myers
then applied the criteria to the application:
A) That special circumstances or conditions exist which are
peculiar to the land or structure(s) involved and which are not
applicable to other lands or structures in the same zoning
district. The GPC feels the unique projecting sign is in character
with the buildingl ARO D 4; 6*- / 14'S(Y B) That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this
Zoning Ordinance would deprive the applicants of rights commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the
provisions of this Ordinance. Several VBD properties have
variances from the code.
C) That the special conditions and circumstances do not
result from the actions of the applicant. The name change was not
an action of the applicant. A change in sign requirements of the
zoning code created a need for a variance.
D) That the granting applicant of the variance will not confer on the other landsany undue privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to or structures in the same zoning district. Applicant is in overall compliance.
E) That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the vpearrsiaonnsce.resiNdoint gapoprlicwaobrlkei.ng within the vicinity of the proposed
MR. MYERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE AMENDED APPLICATION AND GRANT VARIANCE FOR SIGNAGE WITH COLOR CHANGE AS SUBMITTED ON THE PROJECTING SIGN. THE APPLICATION MEETS CRITERIA IN 1147. 03 AS DISCUSSED AND RECORDED IN THE MINUTES. THE CONDITION IS THAT FOR THE WALLM- OUNTED SIGN THE LETTERING AND GRAPHICS IN THE IMAGINARY RECTANGLE AROUND THE LETTERS WILL NOT EXCEED 4
SQ. FT. MR. SALVAGE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
George Fackler, 2362 Newark-Granville Road
The applicant wishes to change the use of a 2108 sq. ft. build- ing that was previously used as a residence to retail sale of home and hearth products. They recently purchased Berry Barn' s woodstove business and wish now to stay open year-round,
necessitating use of the house to the east.
Mr. Reyazi stated that Mr. Fackler must comply with all ordinances,
i.e.,on-site parking, as changing the use constitutes development. The building would be used in a different way, chang- ing one permitted use to another permitted use. Mr. Fackler said
the house is on a separate lot; under 1175. 03 he can make this a separate operation with its own requirements. There are parking
spaces behind the building. Mr. Wernet thinks the parking fulfills
the requirements. It' s a modest plan.
Mr. Myers said it' s a piece of ground that has been used
commercially for permitted uses continuously for ten years by one owner. He is not adding to the building nor adding signage. MR. MYERS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. MR.
SALVAGE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Michael Menzer, South Galway Drive
Bill Wince explained the preliminary plans for a 40, 000 sq. ft.
office for new corporate headquarters of a real estate office
currently in Erinwood which needs to expand and consolidate
Mr. McAnally said the three-story building will have a 10, 000
sq. ft. footprint. The building is designed for 120 people with
possible expansion to 150 people. Parking for 150 spaces is in the
rear with room for expansion. A retention pond will lead to a
storm drain, and greenspace is provided.
Mr. Myers asked about the triple curbcuts and how the circulation
fits with the future Fackler complex. He would like to see a
pislan of the entire area with Fackler' s included, even though this a "9 to 5" office area. He would like to see no more than two curbcuts.
the pTohrechp.orch is 8' deep and the build-to line goes to the edge of They can push the plan forward if they wish. The facade of the main building is 38' from Galway and the buildings to the sides are farther back, so they are in compliance. Mr. Reyazi said that the applicant needs to be aware that the scenario from Galway to C.V. may change someday, and he needs to icnotnesrisdeecrtiopnosss. ible changes in preparing for future growth at all
Discussion ensued on whether applicant must provide a traffic survey, and Mr. Salvage thought this should have been done by Mr. Murphy a long time ago in considering the entire area, and Mr. pWreorpneetrtys. tated that a traffic study does not concern only one Mr. Myers suggested that our traffic engineer look at Cth.eV. pRosoasdib. le scenarios as Village Council defines its position on All he is interested in is to quantify the uses in order to quantify the impact. Other studies did not consider the intersections and this should be addressed. Mr. Reyazi stated that wthoeuldVillage would pay for some of such a survey and the applicant pay for some of it. It' s up to the Village to update traffic
surveys. Mr. Salvage cautioned that a traffic study should not hold up applicant' s plans lest he take his plans elsewhere. Mr. Wince thought a traffic study would not be needed for an office for 50-75 working people. Mr. Reyazi said that ordinances do not require traffic studies, rather, a traffic and parking plan, public and private drives, and pedestrian traffic. He wants to know the
impact of 75 cars making a turn between 8 and 9 a. m. Mr. Myers
thought all that was needed was an aggregate theory memo showing ingress and egress and parking requirements. Mr. Wernet thought
maybe a new study could be made reapportioning the remaining parcels.
What the applicant needs to provide now are: 1) overall
regional plan including Fackler' s; (2) impact on traffic con- gestion at intersections; (3) internal traffic flow and access roads; (4) greenspace provision; (5) where Donegal lines up, and where is the left turn lane; 6) reduce curbcuts; 7)
landscaping and screening in parking areas; (8) build-to line
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO ADOPT THE FINDING FOR A UNDER OLD
BUSINESS AND A THROUGH E UNDER NEW BUSINESS AS FORMAL FINDING
OF FACT. MR. MYERS SECONDED, AND FINDING OF FACT WAS
Adjournment: 9: 56 p. m.
Next Meetings: April 27 and May 11.