Granville Community Calendar

GPC 06/12/00

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
June 12,2000
Minutes
Members Present: Jack Burriss,Barbara Lucier,Bernie Lukco,Keith Myers,Richard
Salvage,Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent:
Also Present: Kathryn Wimberger,Village Planner,Lindsey Royce,Planning Intern
Visitors Present: Scott Rawson ( SentineD,Robert Seith,Richard Pinkerton,Ron Kendle Ray
Riska and Joe Smiley M( cDonaldsD),on Contini,Norm Ingle,Phil Pavlovitz Speedway),
Constance Barsky,Martha Tavener,Jon Raymond,Rich Cherry,Scott Brand
Citizens' Comments: The Chair stated that the GPC is in receipt of a letter from Tracee
Karaffa in opposition to Kendal at Granville's locating on Burg Street.
Mr. Salvage noted that the Presbyterian Church is not on the agenda tonight. Later in
the meeting it was decided that Ms. Wimberger would type up the Finding of Fact utilizing
the Minutes of May 8.
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Minutes of May 8:MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE MAY 8 MINUTES AS
REVISED. MR. LUKCO SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
Minutes of May 22: MR. LUKCO MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS
PRESENTED. MR BURRISS SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROLVED.
New Business
Martha Tavener,112West Elm StreetE -nclose Porch
Ms. Tavener wishes to glass- in the screen porch in the rear with customized
windows. The new windows willlook much the same as the screening does,with the same
dividers. She will not be changing any dimensions.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS PRESENTED.
MR. SALVAGE SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
Don Contini,315 North Pearl Street G-arage
Ms. Wimberger stated that the proposed detached garage is 1' wider than on the
application. Mr. Contini now proposes the garage to be 22'x 22' 4(84 SF).The applicant
already has a variance. Access to the garage would be from Summit Street via a shared
driveway.
Mr. Contini stated he was somewhat uncertain as to the exact boundary line, since the
two neighbor's surveys were different,with a discrepancy of 3'.Ifthey use the Karaffa
survey,the Contini garage will be 12' offthe lot line and variance will not be needed. The
barn siding color will match arbors ( natural weathered)in rear yard and the roof shingles will
match those on the house. The other change from the application is that he prefers two 9'
doors to the one 16'door. He wants it to look more like a barn. The garage is barely ( if at all)
visible from Pearl Street. There will be a side door and two rear windows.
Mr. Burriss noted that the application specifies horizontal siding and he asked for
Af.
v
A
5%
GPC Minutes, June 12,2000
further particulars. Mr. Contini said he is not talking about vinyl or board he and batten;rather, wants tongue and groove plywood horizontal sheeting. He may install vertical sheeting on the eave. The Commission believes vertical siding on the upper portion ( eave area)ofthe
garage would be appropriate. There will be cornice trim boards with a weathered look.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION SUBJECT TO THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: ( 1)WIDTH OF GARAGE BE EXPANDED TO 22';
2)DOUBLE DOOR BE REPLACED BY TWO 9'SINGLE DOORS;3 ()SIDING
ABOVE DOORS TO BE VERTICAL. MR. LUKCQ SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Pippin Hill General Store,113 NorthProspectS -igns
Norm Ingle,Owner,wishes to place a sandwich board on the corner of Broadway
and North Prospect. It would be 40'from the edge ofthe pavement on Broadway,since there
is insufficient space for a sandwich board in front ofthe store. He said there has been
precedent for an off- premises sign,but GPC said the other one was a temporary sign. Ifthis
application is to be approved,GPC must grant a variance. Criteria in Section 1189.10 do not
allow sandwich boards at any other location than the front of the building.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether there could be a combined identification sign for those
businesses on Prospect Street. Mr. Lukco is concerned about setting a precedent with the
proposed sandwich board. There could eventually be two or three ofthem on the same
corner. Mr. Salvage would have no problem with a temporary sign in place until such time as
the Village enacts a joint directional sign. He thought the applicant might try a joint
directional sign with the neighboring businesses as a new application. Mr. Ingle has no
problem with this. He has talked with GBPA about standardizing sandwich boards.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION FOR SANDWICH BOARDS.
MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY DENIED,
The Commission suggested Mr. Ingle talk with neighboring businesses and come up with a
joint directional sign to propose as a new application.
126 North Prospect Street;Village Coffee Company,Jon Raymond- Two signs
Ms. Wimberger stated there are two signs desired: ( 1)a sandwich board in front of
the business ( 8 square feet)and (2)a wall sign same size and color as the existing sign ( 8
square feet)T.he sandwich board will require a variance from GPC (1189.06)because it is in
the ROW.
The Commission thought that in view ofthe fact that signs on Broadway are larger,it
would be inconsistent to deny the applicant these signs where there is plenty of space
available.
Mr. Burriss asked about the red color,and Mr. Raymond agreed to use a subtler paint
color. The Village Planner or the Village Manager will approve final color.
The variance criteria under 1147.03 were applied to the application:
A. That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land
or structure involved and which are not applicable to other lands or
structures in the same zoning districts. There is sufficient space in front of the
front door for the sign.
B. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the
same zoning district under the provisions of this ordinance. Yes,it would
2
GPC Minutes,June 12, 2000
deprive him of these rights.
C That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions
of the applicant.N/A
D. That the grant ofthe variance will not confer on the applicant any undue
privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands or structures in the
same zoning district. There would be no undue privilege.
E That the granting ofthe variance will in no other manner adversely affect
the health,safety and general welfare ofthe persons residing or working
within the vicinity ofthe proposed variance. No adverse effects would occur.
Pinkerton RealtyR/ealmMortgage,Ron Kendle,116 West BroadwayS -ign
The applicants wish to add a hanging wood sign a(pproximately 1 square foot=18"x
8"to)the metal awning to replace the existing sign. R "ealm Mortgagew"ould be written in
burgundy with a gray background.
This would require a variance approval. Signs are ordinarily painted on cloth
awnings. Criteria from 1147.03 were applied:
A. That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land
or structure involved and which are not applicable to other lands or
structures in the same zoning districts. The existing awning was installed
before the ordinances went into effect.
B. A.literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the
same zoning district under the provisions of this ordinance. Yes,it would
deprive him ofthese rights.
C That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions
of the applicant.N/A. Mr. Kendle leases the building.
D. That the grant of the variance will not confer on the applicant any undue
privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands or structures in the
same zoning district. There would be no undue privilege.
E That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect
the health,safety and general welfare of the persons residing or working
within the vicinity of the proposed variance. No adverse effects would occur.
MR.WILKENFELD MOVED THAT APPLICATION FOR SIGN BE APPROVED
AS SUBMITTED. GPC FINDS THAT APPLICATION MEETS CRITERIA FOR
VARIANCE. MR BURRISS SECONDED AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
Old Business:
Rich Cherry, 223 SouthMain StreetF -ence
Mr. Cherry explained that with regard to the previously approved fence application,
the brochure he received from Lowe's was quite different from the fence available when he
went to buy it. It has very wide spaces,poorly made and is not appropriate,so he decided to
make his own fencing with doge- ars s(ame cut as the stockade fence in the rear yard)It. is
treated lumber and later he will submit a color sample for approval. He is seeking a
modification at this time. He showed a color picture and sample of fencing he wishes to use.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED THAT THIS IS A MINOR MODIFICATION TO THE
2
GPC Minutes, June 12, 2000
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED APPLICATION. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED,
AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE REDESIGNED FENCE AS
PRESENTED IN THE MODIFIED APPLICATION THIS EVENING. MR.
WILKENFELD SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Work Sessions:
Speedway and McDonald's,Southwest Corner ofCherry Valley and Rt.16
Representatives from both companies were present to discuss their proposed
buildings, the front of each would face Rt. 16,and most ofthe activity would be in the rear.
There is a proposed drive- through at the fast- food restaurant. There is a third lot,which has
no designated tenant at this time. The out lot a(t*the corner ofthe Speedway and Super
America Way)has no building plans shown on the site plan. The representatives feel this is a
service definitely needed. Super America applied for a business several years ago ( in the,
courts)a,nd this is a fresh new approach and they want to work through the community.
Mr. Myers reviewed the fact that there were long and controversial discussions at that
time,and everyone did their best to integrate the codes with the business. We felt the
application was consistent with the code but now the codes have been changed and to be fair
we need to apply the PCD code as it is today. Mr. Myers would encourage them to follow the
PCD development standards code very carefully rather than to have GPC tell them what to do
tonight. He sees as one concern the lot on the corner with the undetermined tenant. He does
not want to play games with the applicants. It would appear that the lot might be intended to
locate a car wash.
Mr. Wilkenfeld reminded them that these are conditional uses and must be approved
by BZBA first.
Mr. Lukco is concerned about the aesthetic integrity. Take a look at our downtown
aretahe-architecture,landscaping,and signs,etca.-nd- get a feel for it. Replicate it the best
you can. He felt the applicants would have a lot of mountains to push in order to please those
discontents from the previous application.
Mr. Salvage stated that Section 1171. 02 specifies no drive-throughs. Mr. Smiley
McDonalds)thought this property came under exemptions to that rule,but he was told this
now comes under the new PCD. McDonald's would require a drive- through.
Legal Counsel is required here,and Mr. Smiley will submit a formal question to Mr.
Hurst via Ms. Wimberger.
Also,a detailed site plan,a lighting design,a landscape plan,and proposed signage
would all be required. Hours of operation,pop machines and mulch piles outside might be a
problem.
Reports:
A. Mr. Lukco reported on his and Ms. Wimberger's trip to Hudson,Ohio,to study their
planning process. { Please see his memo presented with the agenda tonight. }
B. Ms. Wimberger has submitted her resignation and will pursue graduate studies at OSU.
GPC members expressed their regret at her leaving and gave thanks for all her work.
2
GPC Minutes,June 12,2000
Other matters:
Fackler's mixed use development;1920 NewarkG-ranville Road
Ms. Wimberger stated in her memo that Mr. Fackler has requested an extension of
the expired zoning permit for his proposed development. Village Council would like a
recommendation from GPC and BZBA before they consider this request. Mr.Fackler is not
present tonight h(e was here briefly,but is no longer).
The deadline for construction and conditional use has expired and Mr.Fackler was
expected to be present this evening. Ms. Wimberger has talked to the Law Director and there
are three possibilities for Mr. Fackler to pursue with this project: 1 ()IfMr.Fackler wants to
execute what was proposed,he must present to Village Council some extenuating
circumstances that show he was not alloweda/ble to proceed2; ()ifthings have changed with
the project,Mr.Fackler must submit a new application to GPCB/ ZBA; 3 ()Ifconditional uses
went away it would be a new application to GPC ( unless variances are involved,which
requires BZBA reviewt)h;erefore,he would either go to GPCB/ZBA or to Village Council
for extension with extreme circumstances.
Ms. Lucier will report GPC's discussion to Village Council.
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDING OF FACT FOR A,B,C,D,E
UNDERNEW BUSINESS AND A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND FIND THAT OUR
FINDINGS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROPRIATE SECTIONS OF THE CODE
AS LISTED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF AGENDA. MR. BURRISS
SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Next meeting: Monday,June 26 and July 10
Adjourned: 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
2

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.