Granville Community Calendar

Planning Minutes 9/27/04

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 27, 2004
Minutes

Members Present:   Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell, Jackie O'Keefe, Mark Parris (Chair), Tim Riffle
Members Absent: Carl Wilkenfeld (Vice Chair)
Visitors Present: Mark Clapsadle, Luke Bakus, Jerry Martin,
Tom McCullough, Sarah Green, Connie Westbrook, Miles Waggoner, Sandy Wilson, Ben Rader, Hughes, Rev. Steve Cramer, Jack Thornborough
Also Present:  Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak.
Citizens Comments:  None
Minutes of September 13, 2004
MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO ACCEPT MINUTES AS PRESENTED; MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED
.Old Business:

Gerald Martin, 116 East Broadway - Renovations

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO TAKE THIS APPLICATION FROM THE TABLE.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
{Mr. Burriss recused himself from this application.}
 Mr. Strayer said that at the last meeting there was some confusion as to next steps because of the enclosed stairwell and the balcony being built on village property.  On Friday the Planning and Zoning Committee talked about these issues and it was determined that the Law Director would look into an agreement for use of the space.  They gave GPC approval to go ahead with design changes. 
 Tom McCullough, of the Methodist Church, stated that they have a letter for the file regarding architectural design and parking.  They have agreed to let the public use their parking lot, but they are concerned that people from Brew's will abuse the lot.  Children are often present for church activities, even at night, and are outside playing.  They are also afraid that excess noise will disturb their activities.
 Miles Waggoner from the church said that several years ago when they were going through their expansion, they attempted to provide access at various levels and for handicapped parking.  Several ideas incorporated stairwells and ramps, but GPC sent them back because of potential problems on Linden maintaining the public area.  They then drew up a better plan with staircase inside, and he encouraged Brew's to do the same in the best interests of the village.  Mr. Parris responded that GPC sent them to the drawing board because they were proposing further encroachment into the alley. 
 Ben Rader, who owns property east of the building, wondered whether Mr. Burriss' designs were considered.  Mr. Parris said Mr. Burriss has recused himself from this application.  We were going to address this in the final drawings about screening plans.  We have not yet looked at the design plans.  Mr. Rader is concerned about screening the second floor.
 Mr. Strayer said the Law Director will set up a lease arrangement between the applicant and the village.  At the next V.C. meeting there will be an ordinance and at the following meeting, a public hearing. He was told to tell GPC to go ahead with design detail.  They talked about trash, etc., but in no detail about how to structure an approval.  It will be as an enforcement issue rather than a design issue.
 Steve Kramer, Minister, was concerned about trash in the alley.  What will happen if the building is to be a restaurant? Sandy Wilson explained that the dumpster will be in an 8' high wooden structure and there will be water available for hosing down the alley.  They have a grease collection tank behind the building to suck grease out of a tank in the basement. 
 Regarding screening the front porch, Mr. Martin said he could look into it but it would be ugly.  And screening the second floor porch would be difficult.  People lean on screens, and it will take away from the wrought iron design. 
 Mr. Mitchell thought Ben Rader is asking for a visual barrier rather than an insert barrier.  It seems like a good idea but it will not be very pretty.  Mr. Rader said he is not talking about that.  A screen would be used to prevent people from throwing out beer bottles, etc., especially on the east.  Mr. Riffle thought something should be done; whatever you do will show, but you can come up with something that will not stand out as bad, and it should address citizens' concerns.    A lattice would impede vision and would be hard to maintain. 
 Mr. Martin said the first floor will remain as it is now.  The building is a little larger than the current Brew's.  He said he would be willing to put a screen up on the second floor.
 Mr. Wilson said they have tried to simplify the columns, and the lentils will remain as they are.   The stairwell is a fire escape, not an access.  They will have an elevator. 
 Mr. Strayer noted that alcohol sales would be part of the agreement, so if the ordinance does get passed, alcohol would be permitted on the balcony.
 Mr. Parris said GPC had reviewed the initial plans a couple of months ago and the old drive-through will be removed. The plan for the stairwell, even though enclosed, takes up less space than what exists there today. 

MR. RIFFLE MOVED TO APPROVE 04-084 WITH THE STIPULATIONS THAT (1) THE EXISTING BASE AND WINDOWS WILL STAY ON FIRST FLOOR; (2) EXISTING LENTILS STAY ON SECOND FLOOR; (3) BRACKETS WILL MOVE IN; (4) DUMPSTER IN BACK; (5) ELIMINATION OF EXTERIOR GREASE TANK; (6) SCREENING ON SECOND FLOOR EAST; (7) WINDOW DESIGN WILL BE UP TO THE APPLICANT.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Gerald Martin, 116 East Broadway - Change of Ude

Mr. Strayer said the change of use will go from financial institution to food and drugs.  The code requires a restaurant of this size to provide 126 spaces and would require a variance.  The applicant has stated that there are 8 spaces behind the building, 5 in the alley, and 20-22 spaces in front of the building.  The Methodist Church is open for parking except Sunday mornings. 
Mr. Parris asked about site clean-up, asking whether that's part of a criminal code, and Mr. Strayer said it's an enforcement issue, but the neighbors would like us to note it.  The agreement between the village and Brew's does not tie in with the change of use; it only deals with property lines.   Sale of liquor would be in the document. 
Mr. Martin has 55 seats now and anticipates 95 or more, and the first floor is the same.  He has never had complaints about lack of parking spaces. 
Mr. Parris asked about activities taking place with the business change.  He assumes people are responsible for their own behavior and throw their trash in the proper bins. 
Steve Kramer said they have had trouble with trash in the alley before: bottles, cigarette butts, etc., and noise.   
Mr. Waggoner tried to find a record of an agreement between the church and the village for use of the alley, and the agreement was that the village would do the maintenance and the church would permit use as a public parking lot.  Mr. Parris wondered whether the church could authorize restrictions on public parking, and Mr. Strayer said he would ask Joe Hickman about that. 
Ben Rader wishes Jerry Martin well but is concerned about (1) the upstairs porch.  What will happen when he moves out?  (2) Employees taking a break in the back.  Mr. Martin said there will be a break room inside.
Mr. Parris noted a lot of concerns expressed here tonight are about being a good neighbor, and he is confident the applicant will talk to neighbors to be sure things get policed.  If concerns arise, people should talk to Mr. Martin.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-142 FOR CHANGE OF USE FROM A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TO A RESTAURANT BUILDING.  BZBA WILL HEAR THE VARIANCE FOR PARKING.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tim Hughes, 142 East Broadway l- Awning

 Mr. Strayer explained that the scarlet, gray, and white awning is for a new real estate office and meets all criteria.  It will replace the current blue and white awning and have no lettering

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-143 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mark Clapsadle, 329 Summit Street (For Mark & Sarah. Sween) _ - Demolition

 The garage is deteriorating and must be torn down and a new garage built.

MR. BURRIS MOVED TO RECOMMEND A DEMOLITION PERMIT.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mark Clapsadle, 329 Summit Street (For Mark & Sarah. Sween) _ - Additions

 Mr. Strayer explained that a new garage will be built on the site where the abovementioned demolition will take place.  It will be used as a retreat and have no plumbing. 
 Mr. Parris's concerns are that the house with shutters be architecturally distinct.  It's a beautiful home and it looks like you are stripping some elements from it.  Mr. Clapsadle said every detail of the existing house will remain.  Mr. Burriss noted that the additions must be appropriate for the house-windows, siding, shutters, fishscale.  Mr. Clapsadle said fishscales will be on every gable and he will keep it as historically accurate as possible.
 Mr. Riffle thought they are losing some detail of the original house with the porch wrapping around the side and the bay being obliterated.  This house will be massive.  Mr. Clapsadle said they are removing an unusable too small porch.   Only one neighbor has expressed anything negative, added Mr. Clapsadle.  They don't want to see property values decreased. 
 Mr. Clapsadle said the garage will be a one-story structure with few windows right on the property line.  The fence belongs to the neighbor. 
 He added that currently the roof sticks out 4' beyond flat plain of the house.  The bay juts out beyond the addition and becomes more pronounced by being two stories.  Mr. Riffle said we are losing this view of the house from the side.  Additions should not be stronger than the original house; the addition overshadows the existing house.  Mr. Parris added that we do try to preserve the look of the original house and additions should be complementary to it.  Mr. Clapsadle said they need the roofline as designed for balance.   They wanted to move the garage back but could not, so instead they will duplicate it and add entry element on the one side and the dormer.  They will lose one garage door.  Mr. Burriss said we do not have any issues with the garage.
 Mr. Mitchell thought it looked like an apartment stuck on the back of a house.  Mr. Clapsadle thought the multi element was stronger and the multiplicity of it breaks up the massiveness. 
 Talk ensued about the roof pitch
 Mr. Burris thought the design seems like an unhappy marriage and not complementary.
 Mr. Parris asked whether the applicant wants to table the application pending work on changes or take a vote.  A lot of the original elements of the house are being lost, and there are probably some solutions without losing more square footage.
 Mr. Clapsadle thinks a different solution would be less attractive.  This one is sensitive to the original structure. 
Mr. Parris said we have tried to be consistent with what we are looking for, such as incorporating the original house and being complementary or subordinate.  This plan is complementary but the scale between the new and the old elements is overwhelming.  Mr. Riffle said there is more than just the bay.  Mr. Clapsadle asked whether removing 2' would be better, saying he would run into more physical problems than architectural problems.   Mr. Burris thought that views of the house in walking by are different from looking at the house from the house on the east.  1930's houses were not built to suit large styles of today's dwellers.  
 Other details were discussed, and suggestions were given to the applicant. 
 Mr. Clapsadle wants to table this and go back to the homeowners with these comments.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO TABLE; MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Jack Thornborough, 233 South Mulberry - renovating

 Mr. Strayer said this application was brought up and received objections from neighbors.  A letter has been received from Lillian Merrick about landscaping and fence.
 Mr. Thornborough said the neighbor just wants to look at the open lot.  He has purchased 9' from the neighbor on the west to allow more room to plant hemlock trees. The neighbor complained about the fence, but it is just a low picket.  The applicant said the addition appears massive, but he needed the height because of the roof. 
 Mr. Burriss stated that when we looked at this before, there was a two-car garage; Mr. Thornborough said the front elevation looked better this way than in back.  This way we will remove a strong tree; there was no curbcut on the other plan. 
 Mr. Burriss noted we had extensive talk about the door, and the applicant said he might have to add a handrail.  It is clapboard except on the west, where its aluminum and it will be replaced by clapboard.
 Mr. Burriss envisions windows spaced better.  It's a garage and those windows are domestic windows.  They could have a row of three windows up high and take bottom half of windows off and leave three windows.  He is happy with windows on the second floor.  Mr. Thornborough originally wanted French doors.  The architect said it would be magnificent to have it this way or with French doors.   Mr. Parris replied that if he wanted to go back later to French doors, the applicant can come back and request a modification.  This is also true with the solarium.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED, AND HE HAS THE OPTION TO CHANGE WINDOW SIZES IN THE GARAGE.  HE WILL COME BACK TO US FOR ANY CHANGES IN SOLARIUM.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. 

First Federal S & L, 126 North Prospect Str5eet - Sign

 Mr. Strayer said the application for a freestanding sign meets all criteria, and the total sign package is OK with white and black colors.  Two floodlights are uplighted, and it will be landscaped.   Luke Backus said they do not encourage sand-blasted signs, but this is an HDUI foam vinyl sign only ½' thick.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 04-148 FOR A FREESTANDING SIGN WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IT IS NOT A SAND-BLASTED SIGN BUT A COMPOSITE VINYL FLAT PLANED SIGN.  APPROVAL INCLUDES UPLIGHTING ON EITHER SIDE OF THE SIGN.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:  MR. BURRISS  MOVED TO APPPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ITEM A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND ITEMS A,B,C,D,F  UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 24, 2004.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED, AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.


Work Session:
 JEDD.

 Mr. Strayer said GPC was asked to go through the proposal for a JEDD.  Mr. Parris said we are restricting this way too much, i.e., setbacks, height, square footage, amount of greenspace.  Potential businesses can get what they want in Newark and Heath.  If we are trying to attract business, we are competing with every other town.  We need jobs to (1) cut down on traffic and (2) if you live and work in the same community, you are more likely to act as a member of that community.  What's wrong with producing something?  Mr. Burriss added that some light manufacturing might be appropriate, and Ms. O'Keefe agreed only if it does not pollute. 

Next Meetings:     October 13(?) (Betty will be absent and October 27
Adjournment:    11:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Allen Hullinger

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.