GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
Members Present: Members Barbara Lucier,Keith Myers,Mark Parris,Richard Salvage, Carl Wilkenfeld Absent:Jack Burriss
Also Present:Seth Dorman,Village Planner
Visitors Present: Don Glenn and Andy Furr C( ertifiedE),ric Bull and Jim Reash Q( uandelJ)i,m Jenkins, Brian Sutliff
The Chair, Keith Myers,swore in all those who planned to speak.
Minutes of February 12, 2001: MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS
PRESENTED. MR. PARRIS SECONDED,AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Jim Jenkins.464 South Main Street - Projecting Sign
Mr. Dorman introduced the application stating that the request is for a projecting sign at 464
South Main Street. The sign will be installed over the door where an existing night-light is located.
The sign would be 25"x 46"m,ade of lexan, blue and red lettering. The cabinet would be 8"thick
extruded aluminum with internal fluorescent lighting. The sign will be installed approximately 9' above
the business door using a2"steel bracket with horizontal guy bracing. Added to the application is a 1'
x 1' sign on the rear entrance door that says J"enkins Automotive EmployeesD &eliveries Only."
Mr. Jenkins said I would like to make one change to Mr. Dorman's presentation; I really want
all the lettering to be blue. As to the sign on the rear, I put it up, not even thinking of it as a sign,
because people were coming in that way where the mechanics are and I don't want that going on.
Mr. Salvage said, I don't think we are allowing internally lit Signs anymore, and Mr. Myers
said no, and I think that is consistent with the sign code. Mr. Myers reiterated that this is a plastic sign
lit from behind and these are not typically received as favorably as other types of illumination (i.e.,
externally lit signs).We would be more comfortable if we did not have an internally lit sign, and Mr.
Jenkins said that is not a problem, so you would recommend just a board sign with lights shining on it,
and Mr. Myers said that is generally what we have approved in the past.
Mr. Parris asked Mr. Jenkins if he operates during very many hours where it would be dark,
and Mr. Jenkins said this time of year we are open until six o'clock, but the lighted sign would
basically serve as a door marker.
Mr. Myers asked if the existing light above the door is going to stay, and Mr. Jenkins said no.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION0 #1-008, SUBJECT TO THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: ( 1)THAT ALL THE LETTERING BE BLUE AS INDICATED ON
THE T"IRE AND ALIGNMENT"ON THE SUBMITrED COLOR RENDERING,2 ()THAT THE
SIGN BE EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED,WITH THE OPTION THAT THE APPLICANT CAN
CHANGE FROM THE LEXAN PANEL TO ANY SOLIDMATERIAL, AND (3)THAT WE ADD
TO THE APPLICATION, APPROVAL FOR THE EXISTING 1' X 1' EMPLOYEES AND
DELIVERIES ONLY SIGN ON THE BACK DOOR. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND IT
WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2/26/ 01-Granville Planning Commission -2 -,
Brian Sutliff.110 East ElmSt. T-enant Panel andWall Mounted Sign
Mr.Dorman introduced the project. The first proposed sign is a tenant panel sign to be placed
in an existing ground sign approved by Planning Commission in 1995. The sign will be 3.34 square
feet,wooden with a white background and gold and black lettering. The second sign would be a wall
sign to be placed next to the door on the second floor. The sign would be 18"wide x 6"tall,installed
4'6"offthe grounda (s measured from the second floor grade)I.t would be a plastic sign with a white
background and black lettering.
Mr. Wilkenfeld said he wanted Mr. Dorman to clarify the variance request;was there a
variance approved for the sign for the previous tenant. Mr. Dorman said he believed so,and that
because there are multiple tenants at all times,there must have been variances granted in the past. Mr.
Myers said he recalled that Planning Commission granted variances for those. Mr. Salvage said he
believed that the proposed signs are simply replacements.
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION0 #10-09 AS SUBMITTED. MR. PARRIS
SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Granville School District,248 New Burg Street T-emporary ContractorsIn'/formational Sign
Mr. Dorman introduced the application for several temporary contractors'/ informational signs
to be installed at the high school and middle school during the construction period. Sign # 1: A "i.
shaped"sign consisting of (2)32-square foot panels. Each panel will have a white background with a
black border and the blue Quandel logo in the center. The rest of the lettering will be black, and this
sign will be installed somewhere between the High School and Middle School. Sign 2#: A ground sign
to be 8' long x 2'tall with a white background and black border,Quandel logo on left and a black
arrow on the right. The sign will be installed on the west half of the High School front lawn. Sign # 3:
A ground sign to be 4'long x 3' tall with similar colors to the other signs, and will be installed next to
Sign # 2.
Mr. Reash explained that this signage package is what they usually do. The signs are all
important for safety reasons,and they are willing'to be flexible on sign measurements. There may be
other temporary signs for traffic and construction trucks and they will return to GPC for approval of
those later. There will be a temporary roadway for construction trucks next to the existing asphalt.
Mr. Salvage added that there will be a fence all the way to New Burg, and no pedestrian traffic
will be allowed. Signs will be behind the 6'- 8' chain link fence.
Ms. Lucier asked whether Sign # 1 could be (1)two-sided panel rather than V-shaped, and
consensus agreed with her. Mr. Reash said this would be fine.
Mr. Myers said he wanted to discuss Sign 2#and 3#. He said Sign 2#is too big for a
construction entrance,especially when combined with Sign # 3. Logos are not permitted in the code,
and the contractor thought they could eliminate the logos. These two are to separate construction traffic
from visitors' traffic. Mr. Myers thought it would be more appropriate to have directional arrows at a
point where the roads diverge, rather than together at the entrance. Mr. Reash thought the second sign
could be installed at a later date
A fourth sign not introduced by Mr. Dorman is a project identification sign to show general
information and to give contractors some publicity. Mr. Myers thought it was too big and would like to
see all these signs combined.
Mr. Wilkenfeld wanted all signs in one location, and Mr. Myers suggested making 1()and 2( )
smaller and pushing them together to make a square. Put the fourth sign out in the yard. Sign ( 3)will
go somewhere else when needed. Mr. Parris did not think the information about the school is
necessary on Sign ( 4).
Mr. Reash wanted to develop some new drawings, and agreed to table the application for the
2/ 26/ 01-Granville Planning Commission -3
MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION0 #1-011 PENDING THE RECEIPT OF
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Work Session on Certified Oil, 466 South Main St.
Andy Furr and Don Glenn presented their preliminary site layout for renovating the gas station and store in keeping with other improvements in the area. The first page of their packet is a preliminary site layout. The next pages are the elevations for the proposed brick building, similar to the building put up in the historic district of Wellington, Ohio. Certified would be flexible on the color
of the brick, the pediment on the front fagade would have a Certified sign. The canopy would have a faux roofline similar to the roofline on the building itself. Mr. Dorman showed the Commission
pictures from a Certified in Hilliard, and consensus seemed to like the look of that building better,
although Mr. Furr said unfortunately it is a bigger building than what would fit on the lot in Granville.
Mr. Myers suggested that Mr. Furr try to retrofit the style of the Hilliard building onto the proposed
footprint for the Granville site.
Some of the issues relative to variances from the code were addressed such as parking, which
Mr. Myers said that the previous law director had determined that each space at the pump constituted a
parking space. Mr. Salvage had been going through the Suburban Business District chapter of the
zoning code, which is the zoning district for the Certified property, and said that the code no longer
specifies a minimum parking requirement, only a maximum number of parking spaces. One issue
raised was lot coverage and it was determined that although a variance was needed the proposed plan
has less lot coverage than what currently exists on the lot.
The other sign proposed is a brick monument sign that would advertise pump prices for three
grades of gasoline. Mr. Myers made the following suggestions/ observations: ( 1)To install,a 3' hedge
along the entire front property line to cut the view of the cars on the lot, and submit a landscaping plan;
2)General cleanu-p is necessary;3 ()Lot coverage needs a variance;4 ()To remember the building
density maximum of 5,000 gross square, feet per acre;5 ()Parking goes on the side; 6 ()Roofline should
be a 8/12 minimum pitch;7 ()Lighting plan required;8 ()Sign to be externally lit.
Review of updated changes to zoning code to be discussed at the next meeting.
Mr. Dorman introduced this and explained that in November 2000 the Commission met to
discuss the proposed Ordinance to replace TCOD with the new Village Heritage Overlay District and
amend the Architectural Review Overlay District. As you look through the changes, the bolded items
are new and the items crossed out are being removed. There was a purpose statement the Commission
liked that I worked into Chapter 1133. In addition, as I went through the Chapters, I made some
grammatical and verbiage changes that I thought were appropriate and those are bolded as well.
Mr. Myers said to clarify; you are restating the purpose in Chapter 1133, and Mr. Dorman
replied that actually the Chapter calls for a Purpose In&terpretation section, which has the
interpretation statement but does not have the purpose statement.
Mr. Dorman noted that a newer version of the book " Buildings of Main Street"listed in the
ReferencesA &dvisors sections has been purchased. Mr. Salvage suggested putting these in the public
library, which Mr. Dorman said he intended to do. Also, he noted that the third reference was a
preservation brief he obtained from the National Park Service website.
Mr. Myers said that I object to nothing you have done here, in the interest of moving something
along, however there are other things here that we are sort of band-aiding right now. For example,
what we review and the criteria for our decisions, in 1161. 06 are real general. Particularly when you
handle things like building massing, for example the garage issue,we have trouble defining massing
and describing it to someone. Use of details is so generic. Mr. Wilkenfeld interjected, that is what he
means by the code having no teeth. Mr. Myers said you could look at this two ways. For this group
2/26/ 01-Granville Planning Commission - 4
the code we have now is fine,but we have to look into the future and develop a code that will be
clearer.The new code for all of Downtown Columbus is six pages,and it works because the
Commission works so well together. What I am saying is this is fine for now,but I would still like to
get into it and clarify some of this.
Mr. Salvage asked Mr. Dorman to get all Commission members a copy of the Architectural &
Design Standards for the City of Hudson.
Mr. Wilkenfeld mentioned that in some Chapters of the code,where the requirements are in
chart form that it is so much easier to read,and maybe that could be done for Chapter 1161.
Finally,Mr. Myers said that if we want to advance with this we should get Mr. Burriss'
comments especially on the architectural part,and he suggested holding this work session over into the
Welcome to Granville signs.
Mr. Myers showed the Commission the final drawings,and they instructed Mr. Dorman to get
a sign company to draw the final detailed drawings.
The group discussed the color of the signs, and Mr. Myers suggested green posts with a white
sign but Mr. Salvage likes white on green. The Beautification Committee has also has an opinion on
coloring. Mr. Parris noted that a white sign would get dirty fast. Finally,Mr. Myers reiterated that
the drawings should be done with both color scenarios and color can be determined later.
Finding of Fact: MR. SALVAGE MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDING OF FACT FOR ITEMS
A AND B Uenkins and Sutliff)UNDER NEW BUSINESS,AND GPC FINDS THAT THE
FINDINGS ARE CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS PRESENTED
IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF FEBRUARY 22, 2001. MR. WILKENFELD
SECONDED,AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Next Meetings: March 12 ( Ms. Lucier will be absent)and March 26,7:30 p.m.
Adjournment:8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted,
GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION