GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION October 15, 2002 Amended Minutes
Members Present: Jack Burriss, Mark Parris (Vice Chair), Richard Salvage (Chair) Members Absent: Barb Lucier, Richard Main, Carl Wilkenfeld Also Present: Seth Dorman, Village Planner Visitors Present: Nick & Melanie Schott, Jerry Martin, Willis Troy, Tom Fuller, Carolyn Carter, Gill Miller, Jeff McInturf, Leon Habegger, Ned Roberts, Barb Hammond, Jim Siegel, Paul Swenson Citizens’ Comments: None
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Minutes of September 9 and September 23, 2002: Sept. 9, Page 3, Line 5, change “pond” to lot.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 9TH MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 23RD MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
New Day Spa, 1287 Cherry Valley Road – Sign Relocation/ Modification
Mr. Dorman said the application is to relocate the existing 16 sq.ft. free-standing sign at the edge of the pavement to a north/south orientation, 24’ from the pavement. The same sign will be used but the opposite side will also have text and graphics to match the existing side. Carolyn Carter said people cannot find their business and reorienting it will make the business easier to find. It will be externally lit on both sides and will be landscaped.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-132 AS PRESENTED. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Nick & Melanie Schott, 660 West Broadway – Fence in TCOD
Mr. Dorman said half of the proposed fence is in the TCOD and the exact property line was uncertain. The 6’ tall wooden fence would have beveled post caps and pickets would be dog-eared with no spaces between them. Mr. Schott said he has talked with neighbor Mr. Patterson and they will meet and review the line. There had been a fence survey done earlier. There are six trees with big root systems, and the applicant wanted to put the fence where it will go best. The property line is 1’ to the right of the driveway. He explained on the drawing exactly where the fence would go, starting at the second tree and running back 80’ but will not return to the house. The fence is for privacy and safety for the children. Mr. Burriss noted the bottom of the fence is 6” from the ground and he wondered whether that was enough room for lawnmowers, etc. The applicant may raise it if he wishes. Mr. Salvage suggested the applicant put some stakes in the ground and invite the Village Planner to view and accept the location.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-135 WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT WILL AGREE UPON THE EXACT LOCATION OF THE FENCE WITH THE NEIGHBOR AND REVIEW IT WITH THE VILLAGE PLANNER FOR FINAL APPORVAL. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Village Brewing Company, 128 East Broadway – Lot Split
Mr. Dorman said the lot split requested is for a portion of east and west neighbors’ lots to accommodate the recently approved kitchen addition. Neighbors have submitted letters of agreement with the split and it meets applicable code requirements. Jerry Martin said the surveyor would like to see this approved and the footers set before approving legal description because he is afraid that if it is a foot against the neighbor’s property, there may be trouble.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-061 AS PRESENTED. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Gill Miller, 213 North Granger Street – Fireplace
Mr. Dorman said the applicant wishes to add a 6.94 sq.ft. wood lap siding fireplace/chimney at the rear of the property. The protrusion into the yard would be 1.8 x 4.2’. Ned Roberts added construction details for the box chimney.
MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-136 AS PRESENTED. MR. PARRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Spring Hills Baptist Church, 1820 Newark-Granville Road – Site Plan Modification
Mr. Dorman said this modification to the previously submitted plan is in order to widen the entrance to increase safety. They are requesting 4 light fixtures, including one to light the entrance sign. Neighbor Willis Troy had a concern with lighting escaping onto his property, and Mr. Salvage explained our lighting requirements and said the lights will not bleed out. Willis Troy was also concerned about the kids playing so close to his yard and “missiles” flying into his yard. With the driveway expansion and lessening of the area, he does not want kids running into his expensive shrubs. Leon Habegger from the school said they will work together to do everything they can to ease the situation. Paul Swenson asked about the length of time the lights would be on and was told until 11 p.m. Mr. Parris requested that the supplier of lights provides the best product available and sets them up properly so they do what they are supposed to do.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MODIFICATION REQUESTED BY APPLICATION #02-119, AS MODIFIED BY A PREVIOUS MOTION THAT TH E APPLICATION WILL NOT ENCOMPASS ANY AREA OUTSIDE OF THE FRONT PARKING AREA. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Spring Hills Baptist Church, 1820 Newark-Granville Road – Freestanding Sign The church wishes to install a new 32 sq.ft. externally lit sign at the front entrance, mounted in stone with three lines of changeable copy. Variances are required for (1) 4 colors vs. 3 allowed in code, (2) changeable copy, which is not allowed in code, and (3) size of sign. Jeff McInturf showed the modified changeable copy sign with reduced size (from 40 to 32 sq.ft.), 6’ high, with 4 colors, mounted in red brick. The logo will be eliminated and the red lettering will be black. He said the lights would be on all night. The sign would be 40’ from the road, and the frontage is about 450’. Caps atop the wall are flat. They would no longer need their sidewalk signs.
THE SIGN: Mr. Burriss reminded him that we like the light source to be landscaped so that the fixture cannot be seen Mr. Salvage believes the sign is appropriate for the intended use because: (1) it’s a dual-use facility and (2) the size of the facility is big and the code is really designed for smaller places. He wondered whether we could look at this as just a same size replacement where variances were previously granted. He is more comfortable saying the size has been previously granted, Mr. Dorman was more comfortable with a new variance because there is a new code in place and it’s a new sign. Members discussed other large signs and other church signs. Members wanted a permanent panel with the name of the school in 6” letters. The 32 sq.ft. sign will be 4 colors, black, white, green, and beige. The logo is gone. THE CHANGEABLE COPY: Jeff McInturf said that by looking at the total size of the sign, this is proportionate to other changeable signs. He does not think the church will reduce the size of the changeable copy area. Mr. Burriss said the primary concern of the sign was to inform people where the school and church are located; therefore why wouldn’t it make more sense to have the words larger and the changeable copy small? Mr. McInturf said they removed “Home of” to make it larger. Mr. Salvage suggested putting the names of the school at the top of the changeable copy. He would prefer the red lettering bigger and the changeable copy smaller. Mr. McInturf is willing to go to 5” letters. Mr. Burriss wanted them to find a more slender font for the changeable copy. Mr. Salvage suggested that Mr. Dorman and Mr. Burriss make final decision on lettering choice. There will be 3 lines of changeable copy.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCES FOR THIS PROPOSAL FROM THE MAXIMUM SIZE, NUMBER OF COLORS AND NO CHANGEABLE COPY STANDARDS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: (1) THIS IS A LARGE FACILITY OF APPROXIMATELY 30,000 SQUARE FEET ON A LARGE PROPERTY UNUSUALLY ZONED; (2) THERE ARE TWO USES FOR THIS FACILITY BOTH A CHURCH AND K-12 SCHOOL (WITH A 200+ STUDENT ENROLLMENT; AND (3) THERE ARE OTHER INSTITUTIONS THROUGHOUT THE VILLAGE BOTH CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS THAT HAVE SIGNS OF SIMILAR OR LARGER SIZES, HAVE CHANGEABLE COPY AND SOME ARE EVEN INTERNALLY LIT. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-120 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: (1) THAT THE MONUMENT HOLDING THE SIGN IS TO BE RED BRICK WITH TINTED MORTAR TO MATCH THE BUILDING; (2) THAT VEGETATION BE PLANTED AROUND THE ENTIRE SIGN; (3) THAT THE APPLICANT CONSULT MR. BURRISS AND THE VILLAGE PLANNER FOR FINAL APPORVAL OF THE FOLLOWING: (A) THE SEMI-PERMANENT PANEL TO HIGHLIGHT THE GRANVILLE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY AND SONSHINE SCHOOL, AND (B) THE COLOR, FONT AND SIZE OF THE CHANGEABLE COPY; AND (4) THAT THE CROSS LOGO BE REMOVED FROM THE DESIGN. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Barb Hammond, 123 East Broadway – Awning over Rear Door
Mr. Dorman introduced the application to modify the existing sign to permit a black awning with copper lettering, over the rear door to match the one in the front. Only one awning is allowed. There can be two awnings but not two signs. Ms. Hammond said it’s a shed type awning to protect people from the rain at the door with the little window. The name is on the 6” drop and has the same information as the one in the front. MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE FOR THE SECOND CANOPY SIGN FOR THE REASON THAT INCORPORATING THE SIGN ON THE CANOPY WOULD BE BETTER AND MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN A SEPARATE SIGN OVER OR AROUND THE DOOR WHICH WOULD BE ALLOWED AND BECAUSE IT PROVIDES FOR A CONSISTENCY OF THE PRESENTATION OF GRAPHICS WHICH HAS BEEN ONE OF OUR GOALS, AND FURTHERMORE GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT AFFECT THE HELATH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PERSONS LIVING AND WORKING IN THE AREA. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-124M WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT MATCHES THE GRAPHICS ON THE FRONT CANOPY FOR THIS PROPOSED CANOPY SIGN. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Village of Granville – Light Fixtures at Opera House Park
Jim Siegel from the Tree and Landscape Commission is requesting some lighting for the park. He explained the walkway system and said it is very dark and they propose placing lamp posts in three spots. Any light is blocked by the trees. He showed the proposed 75-watt styles with outlets and said others may tap into the electric unit for special occasions. Mr. Burriss encouraged him to match the lights on Broadway and Mr. Siegel said they do not want a street lamp, they want a park lightwith 7 ½’ post and 1 ½’ for the light. Mr. Burriss would like to explore the opportunity to go with lights in the same family that are downtown. Having an outlet is great, but who is to pay for it and who would own the meter? He suggested locking the outlets. Mr. Siegel said the Tree and Landscape Commission would pay for the fixtures if the Village would pay for the lighting. The light will not flood out. Mr. Salvage does not want them to look at the dollars but wants attractive lights.
Finding of Fact:
MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE FINDINGS FOR A,B,C, AND D UNDER NEW BUSINESS (New Day, Schott, Brews, Miller) AND ITEMS A,B, AND C UNDER OLD BUSINESS Spring Hills, Hammond), AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER’S MEMO OF OCTOBER 11. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Adjournment: 9:35 p.m. Next Meetings: October 28 and November 12
Respectfully submitted, Betty Allen