GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
November 28, 2005
Members Present: Tom Mitchell Tim Riffle (Chair), Carl Wilkenfeld, Tym Tyler
Members Absent: Jack Burriss (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe
Visitors Present: Sharon Sellito, Lee & Kathy Cecil, Renie Baker, Jeff Clark, Ed Lowry ,Alyssa Lowry, Gil Krone, Omar Whisman, David White, Jeff Carr, Lee & Kathy Cecil, Mia and Mark Law, Andy English, Jim Silone, Caryl & Ken Kenyon, Kevin Goudy, Gil & Merilyn Pitcher, Julio Valenzuela
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments: none
Minutes of October 24: Page 1, in the motion under White and in the last paragraph, change Mr. Riffle to Mr. Tyler. The same on Page 2 in the first two motions. MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Village Baker, 212 South Main Street, - Sign
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO UNTABLE THE APPLICATION. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Strayer said the sidewalk sign was tabled because of the design. Tonight we have a re-design with the top two lines saying "Village Baker" and the rest to remain. Changeable copy would need a variance.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked about the color and was told it would have green words. He noted that changeable copy only comes in bold.
Mr. Riffle said we talked about changeable copy in town, but this is different. Mr. Tyler added that if we agree that most of the signs with changeable copy are OK, we won't need a variance. They also want to advertise special events going on, but we are troubled by cheap-looking signs. If they can come up with something classier but still readable, that would be better.
Mr. Mitchell noted what we are trying to avoid is the portable generic changeable signs.
Mr. Strayer said there is no definition in the code book, but any time you can change words, they are changeable. In the AROD we have the governing power over what materials are used.
MR. TYLER MOVED TO TABLE 05-172 PENDING A NEW DESIGN. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Strayer was asked to make clear to the applicants what we want--something more appealing but still readable, possibly with a border.
Whit's, 138 East Broadway - Sign
The left hand window sign requested would say "The Soup Loft, homemade soups to go" and would be 2.5 sq.ft., burgundy, white and grey, made of plastic stencil.
Members had no questions regarding the application.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. MR. TYLER SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Granville Golf Course, Trinity Court
In speaking with the Law Director, Mr. Strayer said the County Auditor found it necessary to get approval from the village for the lot split of 36 acres from the total 90 in the parcel. The Law Director said there is nothing in our code on which to make an opinion. Ohio Revised Code says anything over 5 acres is not a subdivision. We should make a motion saying we don't object to splitting off the lot as proposed. It's in front of us because the Auditor would not allow them to file it until they had a reading from GPC.
Mr. Wilkenfeld would feel more comfortable if the village considers this. Mr. Strayer would have to get the Law Director's opinion.
He added that there is no language to not approve in the code. If we object, it could be that they approve it anyway.
Jim Silone, neighbor, stated that if this project goes through, the only access would have to go through his street. If there is a traffic problem, they could take it up the road, but he does not want 100 cars driving through his neighborhood.
Mr. Strayer said if this does get split by the County Auditor and Engineer and we do not approve, then the property would have 35 acres on the top and 60 acres on the bottom.
Mr. Tyler asked what happened since our last meeting, and Mr. Strayer said talks are continuing with the Engineer and others. He does not have the traffic report yet.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether this lot split application arose since the last meeting, and Mr. Strayer said automatically it would just be approved by the Auditor and Engineer, but for some reason they wanted a read from GPC.
Omar Whisman felt this was an "end run." The only reason for doing this is that this is the only way to get out. If you do grant such a lot split, then he would suggest you put a 40' easement through the lower section so the traffic can go to Newark-Granville Road. The road would have to be built before they start building on the hill. All those cement trucks going up that road would not be able to get out once that goes in.
Mr. Strayer said the County can override us. Anything over 5 acres is not a subdivision and they can approve it.
Mr. Tyler wondered whether it would come back here if we do not approve it, and the answer is yes, we would make a decision on the plat.
Again Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether this was known at the last meeting, and the answer this time was No.
Ed Lowry stated that this is a peaceful area with a lot of children. There's only one way to Newark-Granville. They built three houses recently and the traffic increased greatly. He is not opposed to an addition but is opposed to having only one access road
Mike Law said there is a master plan, and you should probably push the Golf Course company to find out about the plan. You should prove that until there is a development, it should be like Fern Hill with its own road. The other thing is we asked for no decision to be made last time, but also asked for a traffic study and what impact it would have. He added that the County must have some issues if they want GPC to consider it before they approve it. Mr. Strayer said we ran into this access situation on Milner Road, and it was considered a connector road by Village Council. We have no criteria on which to make a decision on this project.
Mr. Mitchell said we should not approve a lot split that needs access. We need to see a plat.
Gil Krone said since we have a new application, he will comment on the lot split of 94 acres. In order for you to do the proper plan, you need to consider the entire parcel under the village ordinances and then present it to the GPC. They filed an application for a lot split in order to eliminate the obligation for a plan for the entire project. In the area related to the Milner Road situation, the village was obligated to approve access for the 50-acre subdivision because it did not have authority to not approve. Now you are being asked to vote on something you don't have any authority to vote on. If you are going to vote on something, you should have the authority beforehand.
Mr. Wilkenfeld said this is inside the village so why is the County involved? Mr. Strayer said it's over 50 acres and is not a subdivision. You can wait for the plan, but you must realize the county can split it anyway since we have no authority to approve or not approve.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED THAT THE VILLAGE OF GRANVILLE STRONGLY OBJECTS TO A LOT SPLIT. MR. TYLER SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Dave White, 204 South Main - Sign
This application is for a 2'x4' sidewalk sign and is the same sign we suggested they hang from the existing posts at the last meeting.
Mr. Wilkenfeld reminded the group that we recommended a border. The other sign was green and blue. Both signs should look the same.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: (1) THAT THE SIGN BE SIMILAR TO THE HANGING SIGN; (2) THE RED BE TONED DOWN TO BURGUNDY; (3) ADD A BORDER; (4) FINAL APPROVAL WILL INCLUDE A LOOK BY MR. STRAYER AND MR. BURRISS. MR. TYLER APPROVED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Kevin Goudy, 288 S. Granger Street - Addition
Mr. Strayer said the original house was in bad shape. They want to extend the main two-story house 8' to the east, raise the roof on the house, remove brick chimney, remove cement asbestos siding and replace with 4" exposure bevel siding. They will also paint the house and add a new roof and gutters.
Mr. Goudy said they found a barn with vertical board and batten and a layer of paper when they removed the siding. He showed a sample of the new siding and pictures of the roof. He was just going to replace the front siding and then he found carpenter ants and a leaky roof, so he knew he had to enlarge the project. The house is 1 ½ stories and they want to raise the roof and push it out 8' to make two rooms and bathroom upstairs. He explained where the windows would go.
Mr. Wilkenfeld wanted to see more drawings.
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: APLICANT IS TO BRING THE VILLAGE PLANNER SOME KIND OF DRAWING OF THE NORTH ELEVATION. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Fifth Third Bank, Cherry Valley Road.
The architect said they are not going any further until they know final plans for the intersection. At the last meeting we talked about exterior forms, door treatments, lighting. It will be brick exterior. She left a copy of the plans for Mr. Burriss to study.
Andy English explained how the landscaping would look, with street trees, screening of headlights, etc. Fifth Third Bank always has nice landscaping. They would make sidewalk connections.
Julio Valenzuela, 331 Spellman Street - Renovation
Bob Schilling (father-in-law) said they have done a lot of work in preserving historical renovations in German Village, Italian Village, etc. They are building a home in Bryn Du Woods, and he showed pictures of some of the work they have done. In this house the previous owner glossed over the problems found by the inspectors, and the applicants would not buy it until they dropped the price far enough.
Mr. Valenzuela said the lot is 75x182 and they would split it down the middle for two houses with a shared driveway. They will need a variance for setbacks.
Mr. Mitchell would like to see the reactions of the neighbors on making two lots out of one. Mr. Wilkenfeld suggested tearing it down and building a bigger house. He would like to see written statements from the neighbors that this is OK with them.
Finding of Fact: MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A, B, C, and D 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 NOVEMBER 28, 2005. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Next Meetings: December 19 (Mr. Riffle will be absent) and January 9