Granville Community Calendar

Planning Minutes 9/12/05

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 12, 2005
Minutes

Members Present:  Jack Burriss (Vice Chair), Tym Tyler, Tim Riffle (Chair), Jackie O'Keefe
 Members Absent: Tom Mitchell, Carl Wilkenfeld
Visitors Present:  Barbara Franks, Dan Rogers,  Sharon Sellitto, Kevin Reiner, David Robbins, Barbara Burdett, Mildred Moss, R. Adams, Dan Dobbelaer, Bernadita Llanos, Leon Habegger, Marc Brockman, Richard Cherry, Amit Kumar Siani, Frank Bernini
 Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none
Minutes of August 22:  MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS DISTRIBUTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

Dan Rogers - 210 East  Maple Street - Spa

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO TAKE APPLICATION OFF THE TABLE; MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mr. Strayer said the applicant has submitted a new site plan.  Also, there are letters from the neighbors in our packets.  Considering the strong objections of the neighbors, Mr. Strayer recommends that "Only through agreement of all the property owners should this be approved."
 Mr. Riffle noted that the BZBA has approved the lot coverage for 56% but with recommendation that more fencing or covering be added for privacy. 
 Ms. Franks reported that the spa would have a cover on it.  It would be impossible to completely buffer the yard from the second story of neighboring houses.  On being asked what kind of bushes or flowers she would plant, she noted that one corner plant that was cut down is coming back and will block one neighbor's view. They don't want to plant evergreens. She does not know what kind of flowers will be grown in the planters, but "it will be lovely." 
 Ms. O'Keefe asked why they did not site the spa closer to the house and Ms. Franks said they were told it was too close to the property line.  Mr. Rogers added that they were told the fence would have to be right up to the house to adhere to property lines, so they took it out.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked what the purpose of the spa is, and Ms. Franks said it is an in-the-ground spa and it will make us feel better.  It is for their own personal use. 
 Mr. Burriss asked whether it will be brick pavers or grass, and Ms. Franks said originally they wanted a patio but the lot coverage was too much and they reduced it to 14 sq.ft, which ousted the patio.  It is a spa with tile trim around it. 
 One of Mr. Burriss' concerns is that even though the applicants have done a beautiful job on restoring the house and porch, he is not seeing any screening from the street.  Ms. Franks said they will put up a wrought iron fence along the second layer of stone.  From the street you will see picnic tables.  Mr. Burriss then asked how they will transition from the picket fence to the wrought iron fence, and extensive discussion took place about the fences.    Mr. Strayer said a fence is required;  even with a lock-in spa cover for safety, the code requires a fence, either around the entire property or just around the spa. Without a fence, they would have to go to BZBA for a variance.  Ms. Franks thought with a lock-in cover they would not need a fence, and a fence with gate would be a detriment for the children playing in the yard having to open the gate frequently. 
 Discussion ensued about other pools or spas in the same zoning area, and Bernardita Llanos, neighbor, asked what is the distance from the pool to the lot line.  It is 10' instead of 12'; the code requires 10'. 
 Ms. Llanos' two concerns were privacy and safety.  She said the applicants keep the fence door open most of the time.  With a spa, more people would be attracted to the yard.
 Sharon Sellitto, neighbor, said a spa does not fit with the architecture in the AROD.  The plantings should be evergreens for year-round buffering.  More discussion took place on tree removal and drainage.
 Mr. Cherry thought it was funny that the people who are going to be looking into the others' yard are the ones concerned about privacy.  "If you don't want to see, don't look."   Nothing can block everything out.
 Mr. Tyler suggested tabling this until we get a good look at the fence and where it would be sited and what will work for everybody.  Without a fence it would have to go to BZBA.  He said that in order to protect the applicant as well as the village, any plans must be in detail.  Ms. Franks said they will not put in the spa until the fence is up.  Ms. O'Keefe said that based on the history of that property, she would like to see a detailed plan.  But Ms. Franks said she did not know what else GPC wanted.  She could bring in an estimate of what the wrought iron fence would look like.   Mr. Burriss would like to see a sample of the fence and posts and exact location of fencing. 

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION 05-061 PENDING RECEIPT OF FENCE DESIGN AND DETAILED SITE PLAN.  MR. TYLER SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.


AAATH, Inc., 109 N. Prospect St. - site work
 The applicant wishes to (1) replace the deteriorating steps with three 13" steps, with the top layer consisting of a solid brick-width layer of white Indiana Limestone; (2) replace existing front door with a similar one and replace side panes with leaded and beveled glass; (3) the banister will be replaced when the rest of the work is done.
 Russ Adams said rain falls off the awning onto the bricks.  They will bring the two planters together.  He said they should weather and get darker and look natural.
 Mr. Riffle asked whether he has checked the code requirements for railing and step size, and Mr. Adams said the contractor told him the ratio would be 7/13.
 Mr. Burriss wondered whether there should be handrails on both sides, and this needs to be determined. 

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 05-129 WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT CHECK WITH LICKING COU TY CODE DEPARTMENT TO SEE WHETHER  AN ADDITIONAL HANDRAIL IS NEEDED TO BRING IT UP TO CODE. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

First Baptist Church, 115 West Broadway - sign
 Mr. Strayer said the church wants a 12 sq.ft. freestanding sign in front of the Education Building to identify the Cooperative Daycare space.  Dan Dabbelaer said It would have wood rather than aluminum posts and would be on two posts (instead of the one listed in the application. There will be a flowerbed at its base.
 Mr. Burriss would like them to consider more decorative posts.  The church is one of our architectural jewels and we have to think about this on Broadway.  We are trying to establish consistency in signage. They might take a look at other signs in town.  The proposed sign is generic and not much in keeping with some of the things we have tried to encourage. He suggested adding a border and matching fonts with other signage at the church.  Add some detail and the applicant was willing to do so. 

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 05-131 WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:  (1) THAT THE STYLE BE CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING FONT STYLE THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY; (2) ADD BORDER; (3) ADD ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL TO POSTS; (4) SUBMIT FINAL DRAWING TO VILLAGE PLANNER.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Kristin Darfus, 130 N. Prospect Street - sign
 Mr. Strayer said there are two signs requested for the new Indian restaurant, Masala Casa and Smoothie Shop, one in front and one on the side.  The overall signage for the building is OK.  The hours of operation will be added to the door. 

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 05-132 FOR SIGNAGE.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

David Robbins, 324 West Elm Street - garage addition
 Mr. Robbins said the garage will be a 12'x9" pole barn style with five holes for posts. The magnolia tree would not have to be removed. The overhead door will be 2' above the door of the house.  There are hydrangeas and hostas, which they will move to the new exterior.   They will match trim and scroll detail.  Driveway would change from gravel to concrete. 
 Mr. Burriss was concerned with the overall street landscape; most homes have separate garages behind the houses. He feels that the 2' setback is not enough to maintain integrity of the house.  Mr. Robbins thought the garage in the plan balanced the tower on the other side. In his letter he said, "We have tried to prepare a building plan that enhances the street façade of our home and is stylistically compatible with other existing structures, while providing us with an integrated modern garage addition to suit our needs."  Mr. Burriss was concerned about setting a precedent here. An attached garage is a suburban detail. 
 Mr. Tyler asked whether the garage could be set back a little bit, and Mr. Robbins thought they could go back 4' from the front of the house but would need a variance.  But Mrs. Robbins said if they go back, they would no longer have a window for the den.  She added that the entire back yard is occupied.  
 Mr. Robbins said attaching the garage to the house is not set in stone.  They are not planning an entry from the house.  Along the west side there is an old stone wall. 
 Mr. Burriss was concerned about the scale of the front elevation, and Mr. Robbins said it is 12/4 pitch on roof and a 9' high wall.  He said they need room for two cars.
 Mr. Riffle wants it 2' farther back. 
 Mr. Burriss said the house has a vertical emphasis and he is concerned about adding a garage door at the front view of the house.  He likes the architectural detail and would expect it if the garage moves back.   He said it's a difficult house to not ruin the proportion and scale of. 

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 05-135 WITH THE PROVISION THAT (1) THE SETBACK WILL BE 4' FROM FRONT PLANE OF THE HOUSE AND (2) GARAGE DOORS MEET WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE VILLAGE PLANNER.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Spring Hills Baptist Church, 1820- Newark-Granville Road - relocation of playground
 Mr. Strayer said the church wants to move the playground from the west side to the south side.  It will be the same style.
 Leon Habegger sand they will move it to the back of the new Sunshine School addition, and explained exactly where it will be located.  It will be fenced in.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 05-138 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Frank Bernini, 338 West Elm Street l- site work
 Because of the tight turnaround for driveway and the one-way road on South Plum, the applicant is requesting driveway expansion with landscaping.  They would have room for more parking, but would need to remove the sidewalk in front.  They will take down the hedge and railroad tiles.  The tree will stay.  They want a 3' wide exposed aggregate wall and grass.  Steps will be added for the 3 ½' slope, and plantings will be added.   
MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 05-139 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. TYLER SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Kevin Reiner, 540 West Broadway - Modification
 The plan is to change the plans from a greenhouse to a standard addition for a family room.  They would use the same foundation, same siding and detailing.  The greenhouse was to be 25'x18' and the modification would be 22'x19'
 
MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 05-140 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

Brian Craig, 226 East Maple
 Mr. Craig said we talked about this before.  On the east elevation they want to put a bay on second floor.  Its 7', existing.  The bay would go 2' over.
 Consensus had no problems with the plans.

Finding of Fact:  MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A THROUGH G UNDER OLD BUSINESS,  AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 12, 2005.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment:  9:17 p.m.

Next Meetings:   September 26 (Mr. Tyler will be absent) and October 10

Respectfully submitted,
Betty 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.