GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
Members Present: Jack Burriss, Barb Lucier, Keith Myers, Mark Parris, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent: Richard Salvage
Also Present: Seth Dorman, Village Planner
Visitors Present: Evelyne Poelzing, Laura Andujar, Greg Ross, Mark Zarbaugh, Scottie Cochrane,
Louis Middleman, John Noblick
The Chair,Keith Myers,swore in all those who planned to speak.
Minutes of April 9,2001: MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.
MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mark J &ulie Zarbaugh.313 Spellman Street -New Garage
Mr. Dorman stated that the applicant is proposing to build a 26' x 26' garage, with a 6' x 12'
cutout that helps to break up some of the massing. The siding, trim and shutters are intended to match
the existing house. The garage will be replacing the existing 16' x 16' garage. The applicant is
proposing an octagon vent detail on both the front and back facades of the garage. Mr. Dorman pointed
out the octagon window on the applicant's house, which was approved by Planning Commission a
couple years ago, for which the vent details will simulate. The proposed garage will be 19';
approximately 5' taller than the existing garage and that is to account for the increased width of the new
Mr. Zarbaugh explained that a variance was needed for lot coverage and side and rear setbacks,
which he was approved for by the BZBA on April 12. He then stated that he would be utilizing two of '
the four footers from the existing garage,in fact he would be extending the south footer 10' to the east
and the west footer 10' to the north toward the street.
Mr. Burriss asked Mr. Zarbaugh to move the vent details down a little from where they are
proposed on the PowerPoint Presentation to give it a more comfortable fit.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION # 01-031 AS PRESENTED. MR.
BURRISS SECONDED,AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MarkJ u&lie Zarbaugh,313 Spellman StreetD -emolition
In order to build the proposed garage,the applicants need a demolition permit to tear down the
existing one-car garage.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION # 01-033 AS SUBMITTED. MR.
BURRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
IGA,484 South Main Street R-ear Addition
GPC,April 23,2001 2- »
Mr.Dorman explained that there are two options for the IGA to proceed with their plans: ( 1)a
twos-toryaddition where the first fioorwould house a bakeryd/elmi/eat preparation are,the second story
would be office space and a portap-ak mechanical room would be next to it onthe north end,and ( 2)a
one-story addition with same services and the porta-pak mechanical room on the roofofthe first story.
The resulting footprint would increase from 28,975 square feet to 35,242 square feet in either case. The
consensus ofthe group preferred the two-story option.
The density and lot coverage maximums will be exceeded and will require a variance as will the
maximum single tenant or single use. The parking situation at present will not be addressed until the front
faade is proposed.
Mr. Ross and Laura Andujar explained to the Commission the details oftheir plans,saying the
second floor will remain empty for now.
Mr. Parris asked about the appearance and height ofthe second story from the front ofthe store
and was told it would show from the front.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether Boxes and Bows had a second exit,and Mr.Ross said they would
be adding one.
Mr. Myers asked about the material ofthe addition and was told it is plain block. He also
wondered why they need the second-floor shell and was told it would be easier now since they will need
more space in the future. Ms. Andujar said that according to the code and regarding new construction and
substantial improvements the addition could not exceed 50%ofthe appraised value ofthe store for flood
insurance purposes. But this is the purview ofthe insurance company,not the GPC. Mr. Dorman thought
the IGA might be able to get a variance from our Flood Hazard Overlay District from BZBA,but we have
no control over FEMA.
Greg Ross said another option was to raise the fjoor level above fjood level,but that would not
work,and Mr.Dorman mentioned floodproofing one foot above flood level,which would also not work
for the IGA.
Mr. Myers thought it would be awkward for GPC to act on this application prior to its being
censidered by BZBA for the variances.
7 j„i*us,,Mr.20S :as*ked about whether the structure that looks like a trailer would be screened from the
>v- street. He wondered whether they could carry the front fagade across and wrap around the side without
having to cover up the whole side. This should be painted to match the building. This will be very
visible from Main Street. In this way the applicants would have a stronger presentation.
The applicant decided to go to BZBA and get variance first and asked the Planning Commission
to table the application.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION0 #1-034 AT THE REQUEST OF THE
APPLICANT. MR. PARRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY
The Jerry McLain Co.2,03 Cherry StreetW - indowA &ir Conditioner
Mr. Dorman stated that the applicant is proposing to install an additional second story window
that will match the other 2 that are already there, and the second part of the application is to install an
air conditioner unit on the south side of the house. Mr. Noblick was on hand to answer any questions.
Mr. Burriss asked about the relationship of the proposed window to the existing ones and Mr.
GPC,April 23,2001 3
Noblick, draftsmen, said they tried to center it under one bracket whereas the other two brackets. Ms. Cochrane, two are centered on owner, added that the existing windows on the first floor do not necessarily match up either. Mr. Noblick was asked about screening the air conditioner and he mentioned that John Klauder would add landscaping later.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION # 01-038 WITH THE CONDITION
THAT THE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT BE SCREENED BY APPROPRIATE VEGETATION.
MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Helmut E &velyne Poelzing, 126 West Elm Street A-dditions
This application was tabled at the last meeting.
MR. PARISS MOVED TO TAKE APPLICATION # 01-028 OFF THE TABLE FOR
CONSIDERATION. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS
In review, Mr. Dorman explained the revised project, consisting of a number of additions:
1) Eliminate screen porch and expand sunroom on north side of the house
2) Expand dining room including a bay window on west side of the house
3) Add a detached one-car garage on east side of the house farther to the rear
4) Expand front porch to full width of the house
5) Build a small arbor on west side of the house
Mrs. Poelzing stated that two pine trees and a stump would have to be removed if garage is
located 43' from the sidewalk, but only moving it 38' from the sidewalk would result in losing only one
tree. Mr. Myers thought the trees would probably die anyway from the excavating and construction.
On April 12, the applicant received a variance from the BZBA, for the side yard setback.
Mr. Burriss added some suggestions for the roof, gable vs. hip, in order to gain greater
difference from garage; it would also define the front elevation in a stronger way. The separation needs
to be strong. It also breaks up the roof'line. He said to extend the overhang out. He asked for details
on bay window roof and Mrs. Poelzing said they are yet to be defined. He said in order for GPC to
approve design elements, we need details about roofing materials and style. ·She thought it would be
relatively flat, mot likely a 45 ° angle.
Ms. Lucier asked about the windows on the rear and is there anything to be gained by having
them match the others, and Mrs. Poelzing said they are just old windows.
Mr. Burris asked about the bay window, and Mrs. Poelzing said it was not original to the house.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked about plantings between the two driveways, and Mrs. Poelzing said it
would be done in flowers. Mr. Myers recommended oak leaf hydrangea. The garage door will be
wood with panels. The applicant described the latticed arbor in detail. It will have no fencing.
Mr. Burriss thanked the applicant for her hard work on redesigning the project following our
last meeting, and Mrs. Poelzing said she appreciated GPC's suggestions.
GPC,April 23,2001 44- '
MR.WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION0 #10-28 WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS: 1)THAT THE GARAGE BE LOCATED AS IN OPTION1 #,40+FEET FROM
THE SIDEWALK WITH PERMISSION TO REMOVE THE STUMP AND UP TO ( 2)WHITE PINE
TREES;2)THE ARBOR WILL HAVE SQUARE LATI'ICE WORK AND THERE WILL BE NO
GATE ON THE ARBOR ENTRANCE;3)THE PORCH ROOF WILL HAVE A HIP ON THE
RIGHT SIDE AS YOU FACE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE;4)THE BAY WINDOW WILL
HAVE A PEAK ROOF;5)THE GARAGE DOOR WILL BE MADE OF WOOD PANELS;AND 6)
THE PORCH RAIL WILL HAVE SQUARE BALLASTERS WITH A CAP AND BASE,AND A
ROUNDED HANDRAIL. MR. BURRISS SECONDED,AND THE MOTION WAS
Zoning Code 1-Village Heritage Overlay District.
Mr. Myers thought the Purpose might be too narrow for the entire code,although it is good for
architectural review. Mr. Wilkenfeld would like to see us put as much legal teeth into this as possible
Translate this into zoning code issues. We need to look at doing something ofreal significance here. He
reported that Rob Drake had said we have a right as a community to put in the toughest laws we can. Mr.
Wilkenfeld wanted to make this as good as possible. He does not think we are going to accomplish that
tonight,but we could strive for these things.
Mr. Parris thought the Purpose statement has to be rather broad based and the law has to be in the
rest of the code
Mr. Myers wondered how tough the code should be. Will we different opinions than the
community. We have to be careful about architectural statements and adding things about planning.
Members only had time to review the Purpose statement tonight,and another session will be
devoted to more ofthe code.
Finding of Fact:
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR A, B, AND D
UNDER NEW BUSINESSZ (arbaugh, Zarbaugh,McClain)AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT
WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS PRESENTED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S
MEMO OF APRIL 19, 2001. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS
Comments for the Good of the Order: It was determined that it is the responsibility of Mr. Dorman,
the Village Planner, to set the agenda for meetings. When members are approached about being placed
on the agenda, they should be referred to the Village Planner. If a hardship occurs in a time crunch,
Mr. Dorman can tell the applicant that he will have to poll GPC members to see whether the applicant
should be added to the agenda.
Adjournment: 9:20 p.m.
Next Meetings: May 14