Granville Community Calendar

Planning Minutes 9/9/02

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION September 9, 2002 Amended Minutes

Members Present: Barb Lucier, Richard Main, Mark Parris (Vice Chair), Richard Salvage (Chair) Members Absent: Jack Burriss, Carl Wilkenfeld Also Present: Seth Dorman, Village Planner Visitors Present: Dawn Powell, Barbara Hammond, Ted Handel, Robert Kshywonis, Steve Mershon, Jim Crates, Jeff McInturf, Leon Habegger, Ned Roberts, Walt Denny, Nadine Robson, Dick Hedge, Neal & Sue Hartfield, Brenda Heisey, Roger Kessler, Sue Zenko

Citizens’ Comments: None The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.

Minutes of August 12, 2002: MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Steve Mershon, 411 East College Street - Fence Mr. Dorman said the applicant requests a 42” decorative wrought iron fence, 10’ from the sidewalk at the vacant lot next door to his house. There will be no gate.

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-111 AS SUBMITTED. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Dorothy & Deloris Collins, 347 East Maple Street – Carport Enclosure

Mr. Dorman said they propose to enclose the carport and add two double-hung windows and a pedestrian door. It will match the existing structure as closely as possible. It is certain to enhance the appearance of the house. Ned Roberts the enclosure will make the room airtight and part of the building. This is for one side only; the other two sides are already enclosed. The walls will be unfinished stud walls.

MS. LUCIER MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-112 WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE SIDING AND WINDOWS MATCH THE EXISTING DWELLING AND THAT THE COLOR IS THE SAME. MR. PARRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Dawn Powell, 113 North Prospect Street – Sign Redesign

 Mr. Dorman said the new owner of Pippin Hill is requesting approval of a change for the projecting sign already in place. Ms. Powell said the only change is the graphics; the location and size will remain the same. She said they also wish to apply for a sidewalk sign with the same design on it.

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-113 WITH THE ADDITION THAT THE IMAGE ON THE PROJECTING SIGN BE ALSO INCLUDED ON THE SIDEWALK SIGN. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mindy and Bob Kshywonis, 232 North Granger Street – Garden Shed

 Mr. Dorman said the application is to put in an 8’x12’ garden shed near the end of the property in a planting bed approximately 8’ from property line. This will require variance approval for side yard setback. It will not be visible from the street. Mr. Kshywonis stated that they can’t move it farther from the setback minimum because of the lay of the land and the grade. The back of the shed would be 8’ from a 9’ tall concrete wall and the other side of the wall is the school. He asked whether he could build a moveable shed, and the answer was yes, but it is still a structure and over 3’ tall so will need approval. 

MS. LUCIER MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-117 WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO BZBA TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE. MR. PARRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

James Crates, 339 East Maple Street - Fence

 The applicant wishes to replace the existing fence with a 50” picket fence and Nantucket Arbor. Mr. Crates said this is his third fence application. This one will be behind the front porch. The back yard will not be changed, only the curbside. They will be in Nantucket and will check around to see how the fence should look. The standard is 4” or 6” white pickets, thicker than traditional 1”x6” pickets. The neighbor agrees with the proposed fence. Mr. Parris asked whether he would get the Village Planner’s approval for the color selected. MS. LUCIER MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-118 WITH THE PROVISION THAT THE APPLICANT CHECK WITH THE PLANNER BEFORE HE APPLIES THE FINAL COLOR. MR. PARRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Spring Hills Baptist Church, 1820 Newark-Granville Road – Site Plan Modifications

 Mr. Dorman said the applicants wish to (1) widen the entrance to improve traffic flow from the main road for safety reasons; (2) grade and extend rear gravel parking area and pave with asphalt to double amount of parking area and reduce erosion; and (3) add lighting. Fourteen parking spaces will be moved a little farther east. A landscape plan would be applied for later. Mr. Parris noted the PUD has already been approved and wondered if it is exactly what was proposed several years ago. We are to consider a considerable increase in parking areas. Normally under a PUD in phases one has to go with a plat. Mr. Dorman said there was an overall development plan approved, and he will attempt to locate it. Mr. Salvage said we are taking a two-acre parcel and making it impervious, so there are drainage issues. He is not sure we have the proper information to act on this tonight. This is a PUD, which means there are certain criteria we have to approve before we recommend this to Village Council. Jeff McInturf thought the original PUD just called for “future parking.” In order to reduce erosion, they want to grade around the lot this fall in preparation for paving later on. They want to move the soccer field to the east. The traffic flow would be much safer with the improvements they are applying for and school busses could move around easier. If they added 5’ on the side, they could have a double exit in the front. Mr. McInturf thought this could be considered a minor modification, but the Commission does not know what it would be a modification for without seeing the original plat. Since we cannot add parking in the front, we have to put it in the rear, but we will have to lose a few spaces. This probably should be institutional zoning, not a PUD. Mr. Parris thought it would not be a problem as long as the applicants did not expand the borders of the parking lot, but this should probably be examined all at once, not piecemeal with the traffic flow and lighting separate. Mr. Salvage wanted the applicants to schedule a work session, bringing in the original site plan with proposed amendments, and he asked Mr. Dorman to search for the plan. A drainage study needs to be done. Ms. Lucier does not feel comfortable with the new lighting, and Mr. McInturf said a lot of people walk around there at night and the lighting is insufficient. They want to add four lights and move the one in place now. Currently they have two double lights. Ms. Lucier said tripling the lighting does not seem to be minor. Mr. Dorman said on the site they are allowed up to 25 foot candles, and the amount of existing light is minimal. Having the applicants’ agreement:

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION #02-119 PENDING THE RECEIPT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Spring Hills Baptist Church, 1820 Newark-Granville Road – Freestanding Sign

 Mr. Dorman said they also want a new 8’x5’ externally lit sign in a stone wall with a fixed message at the top and changeable area beneath. The maximum is 18 sq.ft. requiring a variance. The sign would be 4 colors, which would require a variance from the maximum of 3. Although changeable signs are OK in the Village Square District, such a sign in PUD would require variance here. Mr. Parris said churches need to post upcoming events. Church signs downtown are bigger than the code allows, but the Village Square would allow changeable signs. Mr. Main stated that the new sign code was modified to adjust to the size of the signs downtown. Ms. Lucier thinks a changeable sign would be a mistake and would prefer 3 colors to 4 colors. She looked at church signs and no changeable copy signs were in the outlying churches and she thinks it’s a mistake to install one here. She would vote to table the application. Mr. McInturf said the reason for changeable copy is for the church and school to post all kinds of events, and they need a bigger sign since cars drive past faster than in the Village. Mr. Salvage said only three colors are allowed, and they are encouraged to go from 4 colors to 3. He thinks the size and the changeable sign is appropriate here, but we don’t have enough votes to pass this tonight.

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION #02-120. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Neal and Sue Hartfield, 324 East Elm Street – Exterior Modifications

The applicants wish to replace the side door with a French door and replace several windows on the south with double- hung windows. Mr. Hartfield provided additional detail on the windows and door. MS. LUCIER MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-121 AS SUBMITTED. MR. PARRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Dan Bellman, 310 Summit Street – Air Conditioner

Mr. Bellman wishes to put the air conditioner in the rear. There is an existing bush which could be used for screening. Since it is less than 10’ from the property line, ordinarily it would need a variance, but structures under 3’ are excluded. He talked to his neighbor and he had no objections. He would like the application in terms of screening with the option to replace the bush. 

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-122 WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT (1) THE EXISTING SHRUBS WILL SERVE AS SCREENING FOR THE AIR CONDITIONER. IF SCREENING IS CHANGED, THE APPLICANT WILL CONSULT WITH THE PLANNER. (2) THE UNIT WILL BE 3’ HIGH OR LESS. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Barbara Hammond, 123 East Broadway – Exterior Modifications

 Ms. Hammond is moving her furniture store into the old Granville Electric and wishes to replace the two front doors with an ADA compliant double-door entrance. She wants to remove the existing picture windows and replace with aluminum storefront framing. Transoms will be darkened to block the view of the canopy framework.

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-123 AS SUBMITTED. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Barbara Hammond, 123 East Broadway – Awning

 Ms. Hammond also wishes to replace the awning with a black and copper one, 35’ long and 9.3’ tall with a valance and sign on the extended awning. The awning is to be black and the sign (3.5 sq.ft.) in copper. It would be taller than the canopy next door. Ted Handel explained more details to the group. 

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-124 AS SUBMITTED. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Brenda Heisey, 1007 Newark-Granville Road – Fence

 Ms. Heisey wishes to erect a 4’ wrought iron fence, between the shed and primary structure. There will be 70’ of fencing and two gates

MS. LUCIER MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-125 AS SUBMITTED. MR. PARRIS SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Judy Guenther, 138 East Broadway – Awning/ Sidewalk Sign

 The proposal is to redesign the awning with new lettering on the scalloped drop and to put out a sidewalk sign. The sandwich board will have the name Hare Hollow at the top with cork section in the middle and a dry erase section at bottom. Roger Kessler, sign maker, said just the lettering will change, not the awning. It will be the same size and the same color. Originally planned for 2.5’x4’, the sandwich board size can be reduced to 2’x4’.

MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION #02-126 WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK SIGN MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENT OF 2’X4’ MAXIMUM. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session: 

Granville Public Library - Addition

 Jack Hedge, Architect, and Library Board members wished to update the GPC on their plans. They have 13,000 sq.ft. now and wish to increase to 23,000 sq.ft. by expanding to the rear. To improve security they want to open up the old front door and have meeting rooms just inside with a lockable door dividing meeting space from library space in order to enable groups to meet after closing hours. The existing entry door will remain. A grand staircase is envisioned, covering all three floors. The structure will be 7’ from the property line. The children’s section will be in the basement looking out into a sunken garden The first floor would have audio-visual materials, computers, magazines; the upper level would have reference and teenage books. Mr. Hedge showed slides of the exterior elevations. Parking and deliveries will be in the rear, where the Pyle house is now and a 6’ wall will be built at the North Prospect Street entrance. Fencing will be installed as buffers on the south side and on the north to screen the post office. They tried to limit the massing by adding a hip roof and make it the same pitch as original building. Little jutting-out sections will reduce massing. Air conditioning units will be on the roof. They will remove stained glass windows and add skylights. Ms. Lucier regretted their having to remove two houses. She hates to give up houses for parking lots. She recommended that the group return when Jack Burris can be present. Walt Denny wanted to be sure the Granville Fellowship latitude to move the building or move out of the building. They have given the Fellowship until September 1, 2002, to convey whether or not it is viable for them to pursue that. The library has no plans for the Pyle House. It will be either razed or sold and moved. If it does not sell, the library will ask for demolition again. Mr. Parris wondered whether it wouldn’t be better to have the service entrance on the west to ease delivery of books. Mr. Salvage summed up: (1) You should make the structure as attractive as possible. (2) He does not have a problem with the parking plan. (3) Make good use of the Sinnett House. Mr. Parris said they might have to break up the back roof massing more. The original structure is such a wonderful building; he thinks they should continue some of the old details into the new section. The old building should remain distinct. He would be willing to violate setbacks for a beautiful building. 

Finding of Fact: MR. PARRIS MOVED TO APPROVE FINDINGS FOR A,B,C,D,E,H,I,J,K,L,M UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER’S MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2002. MS. LUCIER SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 9:47 P.M. Next Meetings: September 23, and October 14, 2002. Respectfully submitted, Betty Allen 

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.