Granville Community Calendar

GPC 10/10/00

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
October 10,2000
Minutes
DRAFT
MMeemmbbeerrss APbresseennt:t:CJaacrlk Burriss,Keith Myers,Richard Salvage,Barbara Lucier Wilkenfeld
Also Present:Seth Dorman,Village Planner,Joe Hickman,Village Manager Visitors Present:Mike Frazier,Connie Barsky,Steve Mershon,John Noblick,Rebecca Pierce,Susie Murr,Ruth Owen
Citizens'Comments:None
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
New Business:
Rebecca Pierce. 116 East Broadwayr (ears)i-gn application buildingMr. Dorman stated that applicant proposes to put a 7-foot sandwich board sign at the rear ofthe as shown in the photographs.
applicanMt ssta.tLeudctiheartqiutewstiilol ned whether the sign will be placed where it is shown in the picture and the be as shown.
Mr. Myers questioned the dimensions ofthe sidewalk as shown. The applicant replied that there is little room currently available on the sidewalk but it is the only location option. Ms. Pierce stated that the sign will not be seen by a majority ofpeople but will be seen by the customers. replied thMatr.thSealvage questioned whether the black trees will show up on the red sun. The applicant sun would show.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 00-133 AS SUBMITTED. MR. BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
John Noblick,405 East College StreetA- C/Compressors
Mr.Dorman explained that the applicant proposes to locate two air conditioner compressor units soonutthheerenast side ofthe home. The northern most unit will be four feet from the property line and the most unit will be five feet from the property line. John Noblick added that the compressors will be less than three feet in height and the HVAC contractor does not guarantee efficient operation ifthe units are placed any further from the house. The best operation for the units is where shown. Mr. Burris questioned how close landscaping can get to the units and still have efficient performance. Eighteen inches from the home seems an acceptable distance. It would be problematic for the homeowner to have the units any closer to the home.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 00-134 AS SUBMITTED.MR. BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Old Business:
None
Work Sessions
A)W "elcome to Granville"Signs
Mr.Myers displayed his W" elcome to Granville"sign changes to Ruth Owen,Connie Barsky, Mike Frazier,Joe Hickman and the Planning Commission. This work session is continued from the September 25th Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. Myers does not like the sign application presented by the sign shop. Mr.Myers mentioned the fanlight issue,the significance ofthe fanlight,and the lack of examples on homes in the Village.Mr. Myers suggests using a circle or a more rounder shape. He stated that it is difficult to design a logo on a committee. Mr. Myers stated that the sign needs an appropriately styled G.
Ms. Owen likes the proposed picture because it exemplifies the rural character ofthe Village. She suggests letting someone else design the oval.
Mr. Salvage suggestedthat a date be added. The shape ofthe posts are acceptable. An oval and
color decision are needed.
Mr. Burriss raised the issue ofthe steeples. He likes the trees but not as many as proposed. He
suggests showing rural character in the foreground and steeples inthe background. The fences should be
kept to imply agriculture. He suggests keeping consistencywiththe oval. Mr.Burriss likes the strong
border ofthe oval rather than lines that simply stop.
Mr. Burriss mentioned that the less that is put on the sign,the stronger it will be. Mr.Burriss
stated that it would be helpful to establish strong precedent with the detail in the welcome sign which
would then establish future sign foundations. Consistency is necessary.
Ms.Owen questioned the size ofthe sign and asked how much ofthe oval will be seen.
Mr.Burriss suggested that ifthe oval is cleaner,it will serve to clear up the landscape.
Ms. Barsky does not prefer to separate the village and township. Therefore,both can be included
ifthe steeples and landscape are combined. The signs are proposed to be placed on township land. This
necessitates going to township trustees.
Ms. Owen questioned that ifsigns are placed along the Village line,people on the other side of
the sign to(wnship)will feel left out. It is important to look at whether the township wants the signs.
Mr. Burris likes the logo because it combines the Village and Township.
Mr. Hickman stated that there is value in having a smaller sign at corporation limits. This
produces a hierarchy in signs. One example is the sign Denison has on North Main. All agree it is
attractive.
Mr. Frazier suggested that a designer create a design and then present to the Planning
Commission.The Village is the applicant and should hire a designer. Ms. Murr feels all could agree on
someone to do it. One idea is to consolidate signs by combining with other organizations such as
Kiwanis.
Mr. Salvage recommends that the signs not be too cluttered. It is important to be cautious and not
to block vision with signs.
All agree that the sign vocabulary is acceptable. The post caps should be peaked and in copper
for a nice finish detail. A color( s)ofthe sign needs to be agreed on. Mr. Myers prefers blue and white in
the Village. Black on white is harder to read. Dark color with black lettering is a suggestion. Mr.
Salvage prefers not to get too much blachke w-ants to create a warmer feeling. Mr.Burriss stated that
complementary colors are important. Mr. Salvage wants varying options printed out.
Beautification Committee reasons on why particular sign was chosen:
1-Historically based
2-Not as redundant as what is going on in any suburb,etc.m (ainly cream and green colors)
3-Trying to keep consistent in color. This helps with directional information.
Ms. Barsky proposes that the Village design signs with different colors and come back for a
meeting. All plan to meet October 23 at 7 pm to have further discussion.
B)Discussion between Planner and Commission regarding Certified Oil,466 South Main Street.
Joe Hickman and Seth Dorman met with Andy Furr,the project manager for Certified last week. Mr.
Dorman requests ideas from the Planning Commission as to what the members like and do not like. Mr.
Dorman showed materials contributed by Mr.Furr.
Mr. Furr took pictures of a gas station in Hilliard,Ohio as an example. Certified proposes to put the
logo on the top ofthe store. All sign proposals would probably not meet the requirements ofthe code.
Mr. Furr prefers to go the brick route similar to the Hilliard store. Mr. Salvage prefers a gable roof
line for the building and canopy. Mr. Salvage stated that there should be no signage on the canopy.
Mr. Myers stated that Certified needs to design a smaller building and needs to take out the red color
shown. All agree with the logo but not in the red color shown.
Mr. Salvage stated that one problem in the past was applying to place a sign in the right ofway.
Certified has approached the Commission three to four times in the past. Mr. Salvage stated that at one
time,is'sues of parking spaces was a question. The positions at gas pumps count as parking spaces.
Mr. Burriss said he does not want to see neon signs in the windows. Mr. Dorman agreed that these
will not be allowed.
Other issues include necessary screening from the public right of for wall and hedge border which corresponds way. The Commission is looking with neighbor Fred Abraham's work. Another issue is the inability to build within the TCOD. This should not be a concern because the area has plenty of advertising as is. The Commission is encouraging monument signs on South Main.
C)Proposed Heritage Overlay District t(o replace TCOD)and amendment to Architectural Review Overlay District.
Mr. Myers suggests a separate meeting with nothing else on the agenda. Agreed meeting time is
Wednesday,October 25th at 7:30 a.m. Mr. Salvage mentioned that this should be advertised like any other meeting.
Other Business
An issue was raised by Mr. Myers regarding the sandwich board signs advertising Greystone
Antiques. The Commission had approved the sign at the time of South Main construction. Mr. Burriss
stated that the terms of the approval have not been met. The sign is up all the time and not solely for
mandated hours of operation. The signs are currently located in front of Park National Bank and one is
located on the corner of South Main Street and Broadway. Mr. Salvage suggested that the planner send a
letter to the owner mandating that the signs be removed. All were in agreement that the sign presence
creates a problem for the commission because the owner is taking a special privilege.
Mr. Myers raised the issue of drafting a resolution commending Bernie Lukco. Ms. Lucier stated
that a proclamation was completed at the last meeting. Mr. Salvage would like to have a thank you card
for all members to sign. Members questioned how to replace Lukco. Ms. Lucier replied that the opening
is advertised. The Council asks candidates to speak ifthey want to and then Village Council makes a
decision.
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE ITEMS A AND B UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND
FOUND THAT THE FINDINGS ARE CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE
AS PRESENTED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF OCTOBER 10. MR. BURRISS
SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Minutes of September 25: Moved to last on agenda. Page 4,McDonald's Investment Hearing. Add 'of
the top ofthe sign' to condition 2 so that it reads:T "hat the front ofthe sign be mounted with the flat part
of the top of the sign no more than 6'..."
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MR. MYERS
SECONDED,AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Next Meeting: October 23,2000
Adjournment: 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lindsey Royce
Memorandum
To: Granville Planning Commission
From: Seth T.Donnan, Village Planner
Date:
Re:
October 19,2000
GPC Regular Meeting on Monday,October 23, 2000, 7:30 p.m.
New Business
Administrative Actions:
A) Application: 001- 42Z -oning and Architectural Permit ApplicationS -torm doors.
Location: 134 S. Mulberry St.
Applicant: Bill and Lois Foreman-Wernet
Zoning: VRD, AROD
Use: Residential
Request:
To add storm doors to the three front doors. The three front doors include; a set of double doors
and one single door around the side of the porch
Relevant Sections:
Facts:
1159.01
1159.03
1161.01
1161.05
Village DistrictP -urpose and Intent
Village DistrictP -erformance or Development Standards
Architectural Review Overlay DistrictP -urpose and Boundaries
Architectural Review Overlay District -Standards and Criteria
The applicants propose to add storm doors to the three front doors on the house. The storm doors
will be white and will be custom made by Larson Storm Doors and are on order from Granville Lumber.
Please note that the storm doors will cover,not replace, the existing doors for added protection against
the elements.
Analvsis:
Section 1161.05 -Standards and Criteria.
a)Height. Not app# cab/ e.
b) Building massing. Not applicable.
c) Roof Shape. Not app#cab/ e.
d) Materials and texture: How do they relate to the surrounding buildings?Is this compatible
with the surrounding buildings?Not apphcab/ e.
Page 1
Planning
Commission
101/920/00 Planning Commission Memorandum
e) Use ofDetails: Are the details and materials appropriate?What is the overall design concept?
Thewhite storm doorsthat are proposedwouldclosely matchthewhitetrim oftheexisting
structure.
0 Use of Live Plant Material. Planting materials should be evaluated on their use for
accentuating and highlighting the architectural details ofscreening undesirable areas such as
vacant lots,parking and mechanical equipment. Not app# cab/ e.
g) Use of Landscape Design. Other elements of exterior design that may give the
projecst/tructure additional character.Lighting is particularly important. Not appc#abe/.
tv Enhancement of Pedestrian Environment. Where possible,elements,which can contribute
to the quality ofthe pedestrian environment and other public amenities, should be promoted.
Such items as benches,fountains,awnings,seating areas,arcades,)Pedestrian routes are
particularly important. Not applicable.
i) Signage. Important to communicate the character of the building and orientated to the
pedestrian. Not applicable.
Application:
Location:
Applicant:
Zoning:
Use:
Request:
001- 37Z -oning and Architedural Permit ApplicationR -ear addition
326 W.Maple St.
Douglas and Misty Berschet
VRD, AROD
Residential
To build an addition to the rear of the home.
Relevant Sections:
1159.01
1159.03
1161.01
1161.05
Village DistrictP -urpose and Intent
Village DistrictP -erformance or Development Standards
Architectural Review Overlay DistrictP -urpose and Boundaries
Architectural Review Overlay District -Standards and Criteria
Facts:
The applicant proposes to install a 342 sci. ft. addition to the rear of the home. The addition would
line up with the existing structure at 4.3ft. from the western property line.
Please note: The application requires a variance from the side setback. The applicant has applied for
a variance and will go before the BZBA on October 26, 2000.
Analysis:
Section 1161.05 -Standards and Criteria.
a) Height. The height of the building should be measured at the ridgeline of the parapet. All new
construction shall be at the average height of the existing adjacent buildings. The proposed
addition to the rear ofthe home will be slightly shorterthan the existing structure and should
adequately blend into the existing structure.
b) Building massing. In evaluating building massing, such characteristics as the relationship of
Page 2
B
101/92/000 Planning Commission Memorandum
the building width to the building height, the buildings relationship to surrounding setbacks, the relationship to the surrounding buildings, and the spaces which are created by the building and the scale relationship are to be evaluated. 77ie height ofthe building,as stated earlier,is slightly shorter than the existing structure. The addition will line up with the existing structure at 4.3 feet from the westem property line. The scale of the new addition is proportionate to the existing structure.
c) Roof Shape. Roof shape is particularly significant in low buildings or buildings which will be seen from a distance or from above. The roofline of the proposed addition will be slightly below that ofthe existing structure,thereby not visible from the roadway,however the shape of the roof is consistentwith the existing structure and should nicely blend into the existing rooflines. d) Materials and texture: How do they relate to the surrounding buildings?Is this compatible with the surrounding buildings?77}e materials and texture to be used on the rear addition will
closely match that ofthe existing structure. The look and feel of the existing building will be duplicated with the new addition.
e) Use of Details: Are the details and materials appropriate?What is the overall design
concept?In evaluating building details, the primary concern is for appropriateness to scale and the overall design concept of the building and its environment. Once again,the rear addition
will closely match that of the existing structure,thereby constituting a good use of details used to maintain the integrity of the existing architecture..
f) Use of Live Plant Material. Planting materials should be evaluated on their use for
accentuating and highlighting the architectural details of screening undesirable areas such as vacant lots, parking and mechanical equipment. Not applicable.
g) Use of Landscape Design. Other elements of exterior design that may give the
projects/tructure additional character. Lighting is particularly important. Not applicable.
h) Enhancement of Pedestrian Environment. Where possible, elements, which can contribute
to the quality of the pedestrian environment and other public amenities, should be promoted.
Such items as benches, fountains, awnings, seating areas, arcades,)Pedestrian routes are particularly important. Not applicable.
i) Signage. Important to communicate the character of the building and orientated to the
pedestdan. Not applicable.
Application: 001- 49 S-ign Permit ApplicationT -emporary Contractors sign.
Location: 200 E. Broadway
Applicant: Greg Ream (Taylor Drug)
Zoning: VBD, AROD
Use: Commercial
Request:
To install a temporary contractors sign towards the front of the 200 E. Broadway site
where the construction of Taylor Drug will take place.
Relevant Sections:
1189.01
1189.05
1189.07
SignsP -urpose and intent
SignsG -eneral requirements
SignsT -emporary signs
Page 3
A.
C
101/920/00 Planning Commission Memorandum
Facts:
The applicant proposes to install a 32sq.ft.temporary contractors sign at the location ofthe new
Taylor Drug at 200 E. Broadway. The dimensions ofthe sign are 4 x 8ft.,with a height of 10ftfrom the
average grade. The distance from the edge of the pavement to the sign will be 15ft. The sign itselfwill
be %plyw"ood with 4x4"wood posts, all painted. The sign will have a black and white background,with
black and white lettering. A color example of the sign is in your packet.
Analvsis:
Section 1189.01 -Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of the sign regulations is to accomplish the following.
a) To protect the general safety and welfare.
W Provide for attractive and orderly appearance.
c) Encourage compatible and well planned graphics.
Section 1189.05 - General Requirements.
Signs shall not be placed or may not extend within 10ft.from the edge of the existing pavement or
in streets or rides of way,which ever is greater. The proposed temporary contracMrsign sha#s#
15ft.off the edge of Broadway' s pavement.
Section 1189.07 - Temporary Signs.
b) Contractor signs. One sign announcing the names of the contractors,sub contractors and
material suppliers participating in the construction ofthe building may be permitted during the
actual construction period. Provided that such sign shall be located only on the parcel of land
being developed and that such sign shall be limited to 16 sci. ft. in sign area, be no more than
10ft. high and a minimum of 15ft. from the established rights of way. 771e proposed sign is to
be 32sq.ft.and as such will need avariance from the sign regulation. It is proposedto be 10ft.
so the height is not an issue and shall be placed 15ft.from the edge ofthe pavementon
Broadway.
Page 4
l

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.