Granville Community Calendar

GPC Minutes 6/22/1998

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

June 22, 1998

Minutes

Members Present: Jack Burriss, Richard Wilkenfeldlid ,/- Salvage, Bill Wernet, Carl

Members Absent: Keith Myers

Also Present: Reza Reyazi, Village Planner

Visitors Present: Scott Rawden (Sentinel)B, ernie Lukco, Sally Hannahs, Steve Miller, Bill Acklin, Joyce Munro, Lindsay O' Leary, Matt McGowan, Bob Kent, Dave Bussan, Bob Erhard, Rochelle and Jules Steinberg, Jim Harf, Mark Nicholas, Bill Prenosil, Garry McAnally, Maxine Montgomery, Dan Bellman, Phil Wince

Minutes of June 8: Page 1, Paragraph starting with Mr. Darfus, tchheange to "Mr. Darfus said they cleaned up the place and removed neon

Page 3, under Traffic Impact. Change first word to The. At end of paragraph add, "We decided we had adequate information to make a decision on the site plan, and this question is beyond the scope of this body."

Page 4, first line change to "Memo of Understanding is not needed."Last line change to "They will consider limiting access to workdays only."

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MR.

BURRISS SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Citizens Comments: None. Mr. Reyazi stated that the sign on the

telephone at the new bookstore was put up by a private company, and he has left messages regarding the phone. We will remove it if

they don' t call back. Also, Callender' s has a big sign that is on Mr. Reyazi' s list.

Old Business:

Dan and Fran Bellman, 320 North Pearl

The Bellmans wish to remove existing crank-out windows at the east side and replace with 6' French doors. Mr. Bellman said this

would look better and bring in more light. Sometime later the

applicant will deal with side windows of a similar size and look.

It is not a true French door, but it is close.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. MR.

SALVAGE SECONDED, AND IT WAS UMANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

First Presbyterian Church, 110 West Broadway

Mr. Burriss recused himself because of his involvement with

this applicant}

The applicant has obtained all necessary approvals for Phase I

from Village Council and BZBA following GPC approval several months

ago. Tonight they seek final approval of site plan and elevations.

The engineeer has submitted a letter of suggestions, and there are

some outstanding issues to be settled before the engineer gives

final approval. Two issues, according to Mr. Miller, are outstanding,

Item 2 and Item 14, neither of which is insurmountable {see

4'r--

letter of June 19 from Mr. Reyazi Jobes Henderson to Reza Reyazi}. reminded the group that final approval is required from Tree and Landscape Committee. Applicant was to relocate a tree and also screen the parking lot on Main Street. Drawing No. SU-1 is not correct insofar as the jog on the east is concerned.

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

1. APPLICANT REQUIRED TO SATISFY ALL CONCERN OF VILLAGE ENGINEER AS OUTLINED IN HIS LETTER OF JUNE 19

2. IF NO. 1 REQUIRES SITE PLAN CHANGES, APPLICANT IS TO COME BACK TO THIS GROUP

3. LANDSCAPE PLAN IS TO BE APPROVED BY TREE AND LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE

4. FOOTPRINT OF THE PLAN TO BE AS SHOWN ON NO. 4 OF THE PLAN RATHER THAN SU-1

MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Granville Exempted Village School District, 130 N. Granger St.

Bernard Lukco thought Mr. Salvage should be recused from consideration because he represents the School Board.

But Mr. Salvage stated that the Village allows a member

to be appointed to this body and he would be wrong to

excuse himself when the school has an issue before it.

Mr. Reyazi stated that when this issue was raised

before, the Law Director, after being consulted, said

Mr. Salvage was not required to recuse himself.}

Mr. Harf stated that in response to concerns from the last

meeting, the School Board has revisited the plan and has requested new ideas from the architects. They talked about limiting access

to daytime use. There may be a sign saying, "Restricted to people

using the building,"or put up a chain after work hours. Cost is a

primary factor, so a keycard system is prohibitive. The School

Board has only approved Scheme C.

In addition to other Scheme Drawings, Bill Prenisol showed new

drawing Scheme D to the group as a suggestion to incorporate concerns

from the last meeting, i. e.,to plan more buffer areas. This

would be more costly and require two storm drains and more asphalt.

There will be no diagonal parking on Granger Street. Mr. Reyazi

stated that Scheme E would not go past the west face of the building,

but Scheme C would do so. Scheme C has no west buffer and no

setback but more space to the east.

Mr. Burriss suggested a Scheme D-1 with parking flipped to the

other side of the parking lot so headlights would face empty lots.

Mr. Prenisol thought this could be done.

Mr. Lukco said the neighbors prefer Scheme E and strongly

object to the plan (D) with 13 slots in a straight line. Ms.

Steinberg said the group compromised on Scheme C, but they want to

know the future use of the empty space.

Bob Erhard presented ideas for Robin Bartlett and Marci

McCauley, who could not be present tonight. They would find Scheme

2

tCheornDeigahcbcoerpstable with the right screening, but would go along with on Scheme E. They want a fence or wall. Maybe a wooden or brick wall could be erected and wrapped around the sccorreneenri,nganwd otuhledy might be willing to share in the cost. Too much cut off the light source. Mr. Wlkenfeld reminded the group of the fencing at the Lutheran Church, which effectively ameliorates noise and head- lights; this might work at the scho.];to protect residents. Also, 64 he is concerned about the dumpster ln the lot. esurctyh afrofmenctheesshcohuoldolb. eMorn. Hthaerfpprorepfeerrtryedline so asMrn.oSt atlovagtaekethporoup ght*, 6 and landscaping rather than an appearance of openness a costly fence. Mr. Werner cautioned

that a too high fence would eliminate light, but there needs to be a buffer. Mr. Burriss thought a fence behind the school, headed eeaffsetcttoives.outheast, landscaped and curved toward the north would be Mr. Prenisol did not think that was unreasonable, and Mr. Lukco said that would be agreeable with the neighbors.

Whether a dumpster is really necessary for so few employees

was discussed, and consensus thought a couple of carts or cans behind the building would be adequate.

Mr. Burris summed up the discussion: Scheme E is the preferred plan with 9' x20' spaces. Plan a combination fence/landscaping screen with wall headed east and north on southeast corner of the lot. There needs to be deciduous and evergreen landscaping on both sides of the fence. Mr. Harf would support that if cost is not 3 #0 prohibitive. Reestablish tree lawn, and plant evergreen hedge along Granger Street. One light fixture will be above the door,

asnigdnawnyilol thseary, lighting should be unobtrusiveA Mr. Harf added that F . Violators will be towed, "addia pair of posts in- stalled for holding a chain which could be put up at night. This

can be done under GPC provisions for safety and general welfare. A

Eliminate dumpster and use cans or carts.

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION UNDER SCHEME E, SUBJECT TO FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

1. REDUCE SLOTS TO 9' WIDE

2. NO DUMPSTER PAD, BUT ADD SCREENED, ASPHALTED TRASH CAN AREA tL likel/119/ r-EmjUiSfrfaRG

4.2.,--

3. PLACE SCREENING FROM NE CORNER OF BUILDING EASTWARD AND U61- CURVED TO NORTH AND PLACE 6' HIGH FENCE TO MINIMIZE LIGHT

PROBLEM WITH NEIGHBORS AS PART OF LANDSCAPING PLAN

4. LANDSCAPING PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED TO GPC FOR FINAL APPROVAL

5. SIGNS TO SAY "PARKING LOT IS ONLY FOR OFFICIALS OF THE

BUILDING AND VIOLATORS WILL BE TOWED."

6. HIDE TWO POSTS IN LANDSCAPING TO HLD POSSIBLE CHAIN AT

ENIRANCE,

*

114-4/3'(

7. REPLACE SID* WALK WITH TREE LAWN; VILLAGE TO ADD TREES

8. LIGHTING OK AS IS

9. DRAINAGE PLANS NEED APPROVAL OF ENGINEER

10. NO LANDSCAPING ON COLLEGE STREET AT THIS TIME

11. GENERAL DIRECTION OF LANDSCAPING ON SCHEME D IS GOOD

12. HEDGE AT ENTRANCE

13. SHOW SAMPLES OF FENCING MATERIALS; FINISHED SIDE OF FENCE

TO FACE OUTWARD

3

MR.APBPURRORVIESDS. SECONDED THE MOTION, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY

Mr. Lukco complimented the GPC and the Board of Education for allowing citizen input and public participation in this process.

Paramount Companies and Michael Menzer, South Galway Drive

Mr. McAnally updated the group on the lighting plan, which will meet code and has been submitted to the engineers. He supplied percentage of permeable area per gross building area. The plan now shows the shared driveway on the east. The detention area is not a retention except when it rains a lot. Dedicated land was pointed out on the drawing. Mr. Reyazi said the dedicated land needs to be specified in writing in terms of location and use.

A problem arose with the landscaping, said Mr. McAnally,

because 42" bushes cannot be purchased and it is necessary to have 42" from the start. Mr. McAnally suggested a 6" build-up of earth to raise the height of 30" bushes, which, in addition to the 6" curb, will bring it to 42".

Mr. Reyazi said the lighting will have to be consistent with

street lighting plan, and Paramount is to provide street lighting. The developer (Mr. Murphy or Paramount?p)uts in street lights. Mr. Wince wants to listen to tapes from previous meetings on this subject.

For parking, the applicant does not want to go for variances.

Mr. Salvage suggested expanding building' s footprint to fit the ordinances.

For the joint access, when the south property develops, this

private drive will join with Fackler' s and this needs to be in

writing.

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION WITH FOLLOWING

MODIFICATIONS:

2a.- I 1. SHARED CURBCUT ON EAST AND CLOSE WEST DRIVE WHEN THAT

BECOMES AVAILABLE

2. HEDGE HEIGHT

3. LIGHTING PLAN WITH STREET LIGHTING

4. PROPERTY OWNERSHIP ISSUE; APPROVAL CONTINGENT UPON

PARAMOUNT' S ACQUIRING THE LAND FROM MR. MURPHY 1, . A )

7. PROVIDE A NOTE ABOUT DEDICATION FOR PUBLIC USE

8. SCREENING OF PARKING LOT

9 INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES NEED APPROVAL OF VILLAGE COUNCIL

MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO PROPOSE A FORMAL THANK YOU TO REZA

REYAZI. I HAVE APPRECIATED HIS PROFESSIONALISM AND COOL

HEADEDNESS AND WANT OUR THANKS FORMALLY RECORDED IN THE

RECORD."MR. WILKENFELD STATED THAT MR. REYAZI HAS MADE

THIS EXPERIENCE DOABLE. THE PACKETS WE RECEIVE ALLOW US TO

DO A BETTER JOB, AND HE WILL BE SORELY MISSED.

PROFESSIONALLY AND PERSONALLY, HE IS A FINE MAN. MR. WERNET

s ADDED THAT HE HAS INTEGRITY, CONSISTENTLY. MR. STANSBURY

GAVE SPECIAL THANKS. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION A

WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:

MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO ADOPT THE FINDING FOR A UNDER NEW

BUSINESS (BELLMAN) AND A AND B UNDER OLD BUSINESS (CHURCH

AND SCHOOL) AS FORMAL FINDING OF FACT. MR. WILKENFELD

SECONDED, AND FINDING OF FACT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 11: 10 p. m.

Next Meetings: July 13 and July 27

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.