Granville Community Calendar

GPC 10/23/00

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
October 23,2000
Minutes
DRAFT
Members Present:Jack Burriss, Richard Salvage, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent:Keith Myers, Barbara Lucier
Also Present:Seth Dorman, Village Planner
Visitors Present:Linda Schwartz, Suzy Murr,Tim Snider,Ed Vance, C.K. Barsky, Bill and Lois
Wernet,Doug and Mistie Berschet
Citizens' Comments:None
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Minutes of October 10, 2000: MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS
PRESENTED. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
New Business:
Bill and Lois Fonnan Wernet. 134 S. Mulberry Street - Storm Doors
Mr. Dorman stated that applicant proposes to add white custom-made storm doors to the double
doors and the single door on the front porch Mr. Wernet added that there will be two solid glass
panels for the double doors. The glass is entirely plain, a tempered safety glass.
Mr. Wilkenfeld questioned if the doors would cover the transom, and he was told it would not.
Mr. Burriss mentioned that he has found that some protective doors aren't protecting the wood,because
the fit is so tight that the varnish is peeling off,and Mr. Wernet said that he would be concerned about
that but the doors are very porous. Mr. Burriss asked if handles would be installed on both of the
storm doors over the double door and he was told they would. Mr. Wilkenfeld commented that the
wood doors do not lose as much character with the chosen storm doors, and Mr. Wernet said that was
one of their goals.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 00-142 AS SUBMITTED. MR. BURRISS
SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Douglas and Mistie Berschet.326 W. Maple Street -Addition
Mr. Dorman explained that the applicants wish to make a two-story addition to the rear of the
house. He also mentioned that the applicant proposes to change the dimensions that were proposed on
the application from 18' x 19' to 20'x 19'.The addition would line up with the existing home at 4.3'
from the western property line and will require a variance from BZBA, which they will hear on
October 26, 2000.
Mr. Berschet talked about the materials to be used, and that the addition will be made to match
the color and trim of the existing home, the rooffine will match the existing, the chimney will have
siding, and there will some exposed foundation with landscaping around that. The applicant also
mentioned that an air conditioner will need to be installed.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 00-137 SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL
OF THE BZBA FOR THE SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND IT
WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
r
1
l
4%
Greg Ream Taylor Drugs)2.00 E.BroadwayT e-mporary sign
Mr. Dorman stated the applicant proposes to install a temporary contractor's sign towards the
front ofthe property at 200 East Broadway at the site where the construction ofTaylors Drugs will take
place. One note is that the proposed sign is 32 square feet,which will require a variance.
Mr. Snider said that the sign will be angled so it is facing both the Prospect and Broadway
frontages. It will be professionally done and the colors will be color matched to the old sign in front of
the existing store.
The members discussed how the Presbyterian Church was allowed multiple signs for their
addition project. Mr. Burriss said he thought the way they approved the church signs is that they are
on two frontages.
Mr. Burriss asked where on the property would the sign be and Mr. Snider said where the
existing light pole was. Mr. Burriss asked if it would be inside the construction fence and he was told
it would be.
Mr. Salvage said he felt like this was really 2 different signs;the announcement of Taylors
Drugs moving and the contractors sign.
Mr. Burriss asked how high is the construction fence and Mr. Snider told him 6 feet. Mr.
Burriss mentioned that the sign is 10 feet. Mr. Snider said that some of the sign will be screened by the
fence.
Mr. Wilkenfeld said that clearly this is two signs,and the contractors sign on the right is the
proper size.
Mr. Burriss asked where the posts would be located,and Mr. Snider told him behind the sign
using 4"square posts.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE ALLOWING THE COMBINATION OF THE
CONTRACTOR'S SIGN ALONG WITH THE INFORMATION SIGN,ABOUT THE MOVING OF
A BUSINESS, INTO A SINGLE SIGN,WHICH MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TWO
SIGNS,ON A TEMPORARY BASIS NOT TO EXCEED 9 MONTHS. MR. BURRISS SECONDED,
AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Work Session
A)Welcome to Granville Signs
Ms. Barsky showed the group examples of fan-styled curvatures in some of the Village homes.
The Beautification Committee representatives still like the simplicity of the fanlight for the center
graphic.
One idea presented by Linda Schwartz is the reflection of a tree in the fanlight.
Ms. Murr voiced a concern with the political correctness of Mr. Meyer's sketch of the steeples
at the four corners as the main focus of the center graphic.
Mr. Burriss reiterated that everyone seemed to be in agreement regarding the sign's shape and
materials to be used.
Ms. Murr discussed her travels in the last couple weeks to several design firms in Columbus,
Ohio,to get their opinion on the original proposal, and they saw nothing wrong with it and stated that it
was a nice simple design.
Mr. Burriss asked Ms. Murr if the fanlight would be a stock item and she replied that because
Mr. Meyers came up with the graphic, the Beautification Committee was lead to believe it was
available.
Mr. Burriss reiterated that all were in agreement about the date.
Mr. Burriss began a discussion about which example had the most appropriate f"igure ground."
A short discussion ensued about the proper posts for the signs, and Mr. Burriss wished Mr.
Meyers was there to show some examples of posts.
Mr. Dorman retrieved examples of the Village of Granville stationery to show Ms. Barsky.
Ms. Barsky decided the stationery's fanlight was not what she remembered.
2
Mr. Burriss talked some more to Ms. Murr about the availability of the fanlight graphic the Beautification Committee liked so much.
Mr. Burriss asked the Beautification Committee representatives if they liked the spread version
of the fanlight more than the original version, and that possibly the spread version would be more readily available.
Mr. Dorman said he would like through his files to see if he could find a better version of the
fanlight graphic.
Mr. Burriss discussed the type of finish the group would like the sign to have. Ms. Murr asked
if a high sheen would create visibility concerns at night, and Mr. Burriss said you would not want a high sheen.
The group decided to conclude the meeting until the next Planning Commission Meeting, at
which they would start up the discussion again at 7:00 p.m.
Finding of Fact:
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE ITEMS A, B, AND C 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 23. MR.
BURRISS SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Next Meeting: October 23, 2000, 7:30 a.m. {Heritage Overlay District}
Adjournment: 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen
3
3

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.