Granville Community Calendar

Planning Minutes 12/18/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
December 18, 2006
Minutes

Members Present:  Chip Blanchard, Jack Burriss, Jackie O'Keefe, Tom Mitchell, Tim Riffle
Members Absent: Carl Wilkenfeld
Visitors Present: Sharon Sellitto, Paul Jakob, Jessica Rettig, Kevin Kittle, Mary Alice
Minutes of October 23: Page 2, correct spelling of wolmanized and other.   MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS AMENDED.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Minutes of November 13:  MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Minutes of November 27:  MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Citizens Comments:    none
Swearing in of Witnesses:

Old Business:

 INT Business Company, 117 N. Prospect St., Window Sign
 Mr. Strayer said the application calls for an internally lit sign, and the owner has asked us to hold off making a decision until the revised sign is designed.  He would recommend denying this so the applicant can start over.

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

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO DENY THE APPLICATION.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Michael Novak, 204 Munson Street - freestanding sign
 This was tabled to get further clarification on the sign and post.  They are not here tonight, so the application is still on the table.

Sign Art (CVS) 200 East Broadway - Signage

 THE APPLICATION WAS TAKEN OFF THE TABLE BY CONSENSUS.

 Kevin Klack provided photos of CVS Pharmacies in New Albany and Westerville to compare with Granville, but nothing new was presented to us tonight, although several recommendations were mentioned at our last meeting.

Drive-Through Signs:   After much discussion, Mr. Klack wanted to omit Signs 7 and 8.  Though they are informational, they contain the CVS logo, thus making them signs. 

Freestanding Sign:    Again, much discussion ensued on the language to be put on the sign.  "CVS" will replace "Taylors."  The mortar and pestle will remain.  "Drugs" gets changed to "PHARMACY."  PHOTO CENTER" will replace PRESCRIPTIONS. The fonts and color will remain the same as the original sign and painted.  

Wall Signs:  Discussion centered on the number of signs, the font style, color, height of letters, and thickness.    Mr. Blanchard wants them to match the TAYLORS sign at top of building façade.  Mr. Klack defended the number of signs by saying CVS always wants a lot of signs.  CVS understood they could have what Taylors had.  The consensus was to have 1" thick block letters, flat black, 12" high.  Mr. Burriss said having CVS big and PHARMACY small is scale disproportionate. Consistency of height is important for all signs.   
 Mr. Riffle said we were happy to conform as long as CVS was willing to be flexible on font and size.  Now since you can't reproduce font and size, GPC is saying we would like to have fewer signs. The code allows one sign, but we are trying to be nice and give you more.   Consensus agreed to allow 2 signs, to be placed wherever CVS wishes.
 The TAYLOR sign at front façade will stay without DRUGS and be centered.

Directional Sign:   Sign No. 10 will be in block and match font on the building. 

Temporary Signs:  are to be removed.  Holes are to be filled.

Variance for 2 signs instead of 1:  Approval includes variances.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE THE SIGN PACKAGE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1) No 7 AND 8 TO BE OMITTED; (2)  FREESTANDING SIGN FONTS WILL BE SAME COLOR AND SAME FONT (AS EXISTING), PAINTED; (3) TWO WALL SIGNS, CVS TO SELECT LOCATION; (4) 12" HIGH LETTERS; (5) 1" BLOCK LOGO, PAINTED FLAT BLACK; (6) REMOVE "DRUGS" FROM FRONT FAÇADE AND CENTER "TAYLORS"; (7) ON #10, DIRECTIIONAL SIGN, MATCH BLOCK LETTERS; (8) TEMPORARYWINDOW SIGN TO BE REMOVED; AND (9) REPAIR HOLES.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 Members considered the criteria for variance for two signs:

A. That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land or structure(s) involved and which are not applicable to other lands or structures in the same zoning district.  True, Special circumstances are that it is the biggest building in the downtown area with more frontage, more wall space, on a corner lot.
B. That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the provisions of this Ordinance.  True, other buildings have two wall signs. 
C. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.  False.
D. That the granting of the variance will not confer on the applicant any undue privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands or structures in the same zoning district.  True, there are other structures with two wall signs.
E.  That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect the health, safety, and general welfare of the persons residing or working within the vicinity of the proposed variance.  True, it would not adversely affect others.
 
Finding of Fact:  MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE FINDINGS FOR A AND C UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN MR. STRAYER'S MEMO OF DECEMBER 18.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

226 South Mulberry Street - Shared Driveway

 Mr. Strayer said the neighbors with 222 want an access agreement to put in the driveway as proposed.  The closing is very soon, contingent upon GPC's approving the idea without vote on a formal application, which will be forthcoming at the next meeting.  The application did come in but while Mr. Strayer was on vacation, so there was insufficient time to notify neighbors.  Both homeowners are in agreement.  Mr. Strayer said the only thing that would put a fly in the ointment would be if 222 did not want to sign; then we could not approve it.  There is a curb cut there now but no driveway.  Consensus agreed there was no problem in the plan.

Jessica Rettig, 111 West College Street

 The owners want to remove the existing rotting garage and build a two-story addition over a two-car garage.  The structure will be raised a couple of inches to allow drainage underneath.  The in-laws are moving in, so they need another bedroom and bath.  It will be slightly larger than the current garage and there will be steps into the house.
 GPC discussed the windows and requested a drawing of the rear elevation.
 Mr. Riffle wants to see more consistency with the house. 
 A neighbor was present and approved of the plans, but requested that the color be consistent across the front. Ms. Rettig stated they will match the color as closely as possible.

Kevin Kittle, 224 East College Street

 Mr. Kittle described the process he is undergoing to continue the renovation of the house begun by Lisa McKivergin.  They took the front walls out and put in new ones, but new problems arise and he would like someone from GPC to meet him at the house to look at what's going on. 
 Mr. Riffle noted that all the original trim has been stripped off and it was to have been preserved in its historical integrity. Mr. Kittle said it was rotten and being unable to buy 16" boards, he will replace them with 12" boards. The neighbors were happy that he was repairing the house, and no one told him it needed to be historically preserved. Mr. Strayer said he can replicate the best way he can.     Mr. Riffle noted that stripped of its original characteristics, the house looks like any other house.
 Mr. Blanchard thought the amended elevation is better than what was in there before, but our concern is that the applicant must adhere to the approved permit given to Lisa McKivergin.
 Mr. Strayer said there were two conditions to the application:  (1) final window design and placement be approved by him and (2) the fence is approved by him also.
 Mr. Burris asked the applicant to be sure corner boards are as the original the proportions need to be as they were.
 Mr. Riffle said that now that the building has been stripped of all its elements, it is no longer a historic building.
 Mr. Kittle said what was there was cedar shake covering the entire building.  Flat board siding covered that up.  They were going to go back to the flat board.
 Mr. Riffle asked how they were going to replicate the window trim, and Mr. Kittle said it's 1x4 with back board.  Mr. Riffle stated that we need to consider what was originally there and the wings, which were added on later are of lesser importance.

Adjournment:  9:23 p.m.
Next Meetings:  January 8, and 22
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 11/27/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
 November 27, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Jack Burriss, Tim Riffle (Chair), Chip Blanchard, Debbie Tegtmeyer
Members Absent:  Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair),  Carl Wilkenfeld
Visitors Present:   Kevin Klack, Bill Heim, Tom Linzell, L. Hoirius, Matt McGowan
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair  swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none
Minutes of October 23 and November 13:  Postponed until more members are present.
New Business:

Michael Novak, 204 Munson Street - Exterior Modifications

 The applicant wishes to change doors and shutters, add front canopy, and prepare the parking area for paving.  GPC approved a change of use for a chiropractic office earlier, and Mr. Novak provided blueprints tonight.  He explained how the plans will be altered a bit; there will be a handicapped ramp, and the doors  are as in the picture he provided.  The sign will match the Granville Lumber sign, with dark green.  The existing siding will go all the way down, covering the cinder block,  and Mrs. Novak (?) described the half shutters on each side.  The new porch will be shingled as the existing roof.  She said she will work on parking lot lighting.
 Mr. Strayer added that we can handle the paving and other things in regard to the parking lot later, after the engineer takes a look at it.
 Mr. Burriss asked about the air conditioner unit, and Mr. Novak said it will be on the opposite side.  
 Mr. Riffle asked about the window and was told it will be double-hung.  He wants to see a quick sketch of how the windows will look on the back. They will not change the opening for the door.  He noted that the new siding will not match the existing color exactly, as over time the sun alters the color.  Mrs. Novak said they will do the best they can, and with landscaping it will not be so visible.  Mr. Burriss said to leave the other three sides alone or paint it all. 
 It appeared to Mr. Burriss that on the site plan the fence is removed, and Mr. Novak said the architect was wrong about that. 
 Mr. Blanchard thinks the improvements to the façade are much needed.
 The lighting of the parking lot should be toned down, and they are to bring in a lighting plan.
 MR.BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 06-160 FOR EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1) THE VILLAGE PLANNER WILL APPROVE THE REAR WINDOW LAYOUT AND (2) A CUTSHEET FOR THE FRONT LIGHTS IS TO BE PROVIDED.   MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Michael Novak, 204 Munson Street - sign

 For the above application, the applicant wishes a freestanding sign and showed a picture of  his proposed 2x5 sign.  It will have a small light shining from the ground, to be lit only during open hours, and he showed where the light will be located.  It will be nicely landscaped.
 Mr. Burriss asked about materials and Mr. Novak said it will be weathered cedar like Granville Lumber's sign with the same color.
 Mr. Novak said it will have finials on the posts, and since no drawing was provided, Mr. Burriss helped him design the sign.  We need to know the exact size, and Mr. Novak will provide more detail
 
 AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT, MR. BURRISS MOVED TO TABLE 06-161 FOR FREESTANDING SIGN PENDING RECEIPTOF DRAWING FOR MODIFICATION OF POSTS FROM SQUARE TO ROUND.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 UPON ADVICE OF THE LAW DIRECTOR THE MOTION NEEDED TO BE REOPENED AND AMENDED:

 MR. BURRISS MOVED TO REOPEN 06-161.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 MR. BURRISS MOVED TO AMEND OUR ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL APPROVAL AND REQUEST A CUT SHEET OF THE NEW COLUMN TO BE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE OTHER THINGS WE STATED EARLIER.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 MR. BURRISS MOVED THAT 06-161 BE ENDORSED AS AMENDED.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Lelia Hoiriis, 222 South Mulberry - fence

 The application is for a 42" picket fence in front  and a dog-ear style fence in the rear. The front fence is to be erected after the installation of the shared driveway.  There is no driveway there currently, but they will add one later.  She wants to complete the front fence now and the rear fence later. 
Ms. Hoiriis said the fence will be outside the porch and will be dog-eared with 1 x 4 clipped corners.
Mr. Burriss asked how close to the public sidewalk would it be and she said right on the sidewalk.  Mr. Burriss      said typically we want it 9" or so back for sidewalk issues. 
Mr. Blanchard asked Ms. Hoiriis to show on the drawing where the fence would go.  He said he would prefer to see the fence be more consistent with the existing architercture.  The dog does not require a 6' fence, and he would prefer 42" in the rear.  Ms. Tegtmeyer thought it would look pretty much like the neighbor's fence.
 Mr. Burriss asked about a gate in the front and was told it would be where the walk is with a post on either side with a hinge inward.  In the back the gate will be somewhere toward the garage.
 Mr. Blanchard would like to attach a stipulation on material and color.

 MR. BLANCHARD MOVED TO APPROVE 061-162 FOR INSTALLATION OF THE FENCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1) REAR FENCE TO MATCH FRONT FENCE IN HEIGHT AND DETAIL; (2) IT IS TO BE MADE OF NATURAL MATERIAL, CEDAR WOOD; (3) THE FRONT FENCE WILL BE HELD BACK 12" BEYOND THE EAST SIDE OF SIDEWALK.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

St. Edwards Church, 785 Newark Granville Road - Sign

 The freestanding sign is getting hard treatment and they want modifications to make it more readable.  They will use the same tag and same font.  Mr. Linzell, representative, said the letters will be slightly smaller.

MR. BURRISS MOVED THAT 06-163 BE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

INT Business Company, 117 N. Prospect Street
 This is to remain on the table.

CVS (Sign Art Co.), 200 East Broadway - Signage

 Mr. Strayer stated that we should address the fact that the application may require a variance for the number of signs.  The code allows 1 wall sign and 2 incidental signs; the proposal is for 5 walls signs and 4 incidental signs.  We thought it would be acceptable since Taylor's had that number of signs, but maybe a variance is needed.  We also need to provide an opportunity to discuss the freestanding sign and its language, and  Jim Gorey is here to help with legalities.  The Taylor's signs appear to be larger than the CVS signs and are within aesthetic reason and appear appropriate for the architecture.  For the pylon sign  CVS has 1½" deep aluminum faces painted GripGard semi-gloss white with black pressure sensitive vinyl, and Mr. Strayer does not feel this is appropriate.  He said we discussed what color Taylor's signs were (bronze), but we never made modification on color. 
 This evening we would have to approve variances for:
1. Number of wall signs
2. Size of incidental signs
3. Modifications to design

 Mr. Burriss had requested that letters be all one size, and we shrank it to the size of the Taylor signs.
He asked if they had looked at the possibility of "CVS Pharmacy" being in the same font as "Taylor's", and Kevin Klack said No. 
 Mr. Blanchard said upon reading the description for signage, he does not feel these were consistent with what we tried to get, and Mr. Burriss did not think the material CVS supplied was high glossy semi-gloss black. 
 Mr. Riffle said we are looking at signage for the business.  The building signage is something separate
 Mr. Blanchard appreciates "Taylor Drug" being on top of the building, but it seems to compete with CVS signage.  Mr. Riffle does not consider it part of CVS signage; "TAYLOR" advertises the building and "CVS" advertises the business.
 Matt McGowan noted that there was a freestanding sign at IGA and they wanted to change it and they were not allowed to do so and had to put in a monument sign. The sign in front of CVS is a historic sign and should not be altered. Village Council should limit signs.  Bob Evans and Arbys limited their signs.  When you tell someone that you have to limit signs, you have to limit CVS also.  Signage at Westerville is smaller, and GPC needs to look at other CVS stores.  No other drive-through has two signs on the wall. 
Kevin Klack said tonight's sign package includes improvements we talked about at the last meeting. 
Mr. Riffle reminded the group that we need to look at the number of signs.  One wall sign is allowed.  Should we grant a variance to allow more than one?
Mr. Strayer said under the code the total number of one per building, maximum size is 262 sq.ft and the proposed area is 65 sq.ft. 
Re incidental signage, the maximum number is two per lot and they ask for 4.  Where they are more in number, they are less in square footage. 
Mr. Burriss would like to see photographs for the New Albany CVS.  We thought these would be brought in earlier. 
Mr. Strayer wanted to move forward with temporary approval for the freestanding sign and allow them to remove the last "Taylors" from the west side.
Mr. Riffle does not mind if he takes the Taylor signs off.  This does not refer to the marquee.
Jim Gorey cited from the code that you may look at this application as a whole.  If you approve it, you automatically approve the variances.  You may do it one by one.
Ms. Tegtmeyer asked whether CVS really needs so many signs, and Mr. Klack said CVS wanted as many signs as would be allowed.  They wanted to use what was there before as site replacement.  Ms. Tegtmeyer thought that then there really is no compelling reason,
Mr. Burriss would be comfortable looking at the change of the name of the building and the free standing sign in the front and probably would not look at the proposed 4 signs for the building until we have photos for other CVS stores.
Mr. Blanchard noted the proposal of the gigantic block letters hurts the request to put in that many.  As prominent as they are, they are completely inappropriate.
The discussion centered upon changing the language on the pylon sign and the colors.  The sign would not be allowed today. 
Mr. McGowan stated that the Taylor's pylon sign could be moved as long as it was not modified. That sign counts as a building sign if you allow them to change it.    Mr. Blanchard noted they did not have vinyl letters when the sign was erected in 1906. 
Mr. Burriss suggested leaving the sign exactly as it was and omitting it from the CVS sign package. He would hate to see it torn down, as it is a piece of appropriate street literature history.   It becomes more of an element, like the clock, the drinking fountain, or the bell, and Mr. Blanchard agrees.  When you start removing things, you start losing your village character.
Jim Gorey noted that we need to consider issues on (1) whether we have control over the sign under historic preservation and (2) content of the sign.  Unless we can maintain some historic preservation of the character of the sign, we need to be careful about discussing the content of the sign.  If we can't maintain the antiquity, we have no right to let anyone change the face except for nonconforming the sign.  We could end up buying it. 
Mr. Klack said CVS was not enthusiastic about keeping the mortar and pestle.
Mr. Burriss reviewed the discussion so far:
1. He thinks GPC is in favor of what we discussed so far.
2. His understanding was that "Taylors" will stay on top of the building and "Drugs" will be removed.
3. Have only one drive-through sign.  Remove "CVS Pharmacy".
4. We are allowed 4 sq.ft per sign for incidental signs.
5. Remove signage above west window.
6. We are not comfortable with the thickness of the letters or the color of the material.
7. GPC likes the awning.

Mr. Strayer said if the incidental signs are part of the signage, then where would be7 wall signs instead of 5-two wall signs in the back and the parking sign and 2 12'  signs.
  Mr. Riffle noted that on the drive-through pharmacy sign, it says, "Let us know if you want anything else."  But cars are not supposed to sit there.  It does not say "drive-through pharmacy and other incidental items."
 Mr. Blanchard thought we could combine those two signs into one.  Mr. McGowan said drive-throughs are not permitted in Granville. 
   Mr. Blanchard asked from a legal standpoint is it more advantageous to table this and consider all the entities as one package, and Mr. Gorey said that is up to you.  You may take it piece by piece and construct a final decision or construct a single package. Mr. Burriss thought the package as proposed is not acceptable. 
 Mr. Riffle said when we approved it originally we thought it was a replacement.  Mr. Strayer wanted him to go back to CVS and design something similar to what was there before.  We need a similar font and more style in letters. 
1.We would like to see the store sign changed in the manner we talked about.
 2. We would like to see the masthead changed to TAYLOR as proposed.
3. Signage on building to be done in a one-foot-high consistent letters across entire sign  but in a font, material, and mounting consistent with the building.
4. The current incidental signs must be smaller
5. We want to look at New Albany signs.
6. Remove CVS from incidental signs
7. Combine 2 drive-through signs.  Remove possibility of purchasing additional items. 
8. Have all fonts and logos be consistent.
9. "Drive-through Pharmacy" needs to be consistent.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO TABLE 06-147.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:   MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,C, AND D  UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF NOVEMBER 27, 2006.  MR. BLANCHARD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 9:40 p.m.
Next Meetings:    December 18 and January 8

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 11/13/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
November 13, 2006
7:00pm
Minutes

Members Present: Carl Wilkenfeld, Tom Mitchell, Chip Blanchard, Tim Riffle (Chair).
Members Absent: Jack Burriss and Jackie OKeefe
Visitors Present: Deb Tegtmeyer, Leon Habbegger, Curt Komley, Jay Jenkins
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak. 
Citizen's Comments:  No one appeared to speak. 

Minutes of October 23, 2006 - Consideration of minutes was postponed until all members could be present for reviewal.

Mr. Strayer suggested postponing the review of the zoning code changes scheduled on the Agenda.
 
New Business:
1820 Newark-Granville Road, Spring Hills Church, #06-152
PUD, TCOD
Temporary Event Parking

Leon Habbegger stated that he was representing Spring Hills Baptist Church and they wish to use an open lot located in the rear of their property for special event parking. 

Mr. Strayer recommended approval of the application with the following conditions:
1) Only use when explicit permission is given by the Village Staff
2) When not in use, the area must be sectioned off from the parking lot by parking blocks, fence, etc….to ensure conformance.
3) If they plan on using the lot more than once a month, some type of screening is installed on the edge that borders the subdivision.  This could be fencing, earthen berm, evergreen trees, etc. 

Mr. Wilkenfeld indicated that he supported recommendation #3 and he would like to make a decision that is in balance with what the neighbors want.  He inquired if Mr. Strayer wanted the first recommendation so they can keep track of how often the parking lot is being used.  Mr. Strayer stated yes.  Mr. Mitchell asked if there was any reason that the applicant wasn't applying for a permanent parking permit.  Mr. Strayer explained that the current zoning code does not explicitly require the applicant to install fencing or trees as a barrier between the subdivision and the parking lot.  He went on to say that this is due to the current residential zoning.  Mr. Strayer indicated that only Council would have the authority to change the zoning from Residential to Institutional by way of Ordinance and he suggested that this should possibly be considered.  Mr. Mitchell stated that it seems cumbersome to him to have the church ask the Village each time they wish to allow parking on the lot. 

Mr. Riffle asked if the current drainage of water impedes flow to the drains.  Mr. Strayer stated that this problem has been fixed to the engineers satisfaction.  Mr. Blanchard also inquired about the problem that neighbors had with water drainage.  Mr. Strayer indicated that he has not heard any further complaints from the neighbors about water drainage. 

Curt Komley, 133 Wicklow Drive, stated that he lives near the parking lot.  He distributed a signed letter from several neighbors in his subdivision who would not like to see parking allowed on the lot.  He stated that originally the lot was never proposed or approved for parking.  He stated that trailers and equipment have been left to sit on the lot and there is a history of conflict regarding this area.  Mr. Komley stated that there is no screening and the lot if very close to several back yards in his neighborhood.  Mr. Komley suggested that the church use the ample parking below this lot on their property.  He stated that they currently experience problems from high noise levels and they question if their property values have decreased.  Mr. Komley stated that they would like to see the area left as green space because they were originally told that this is what it would be.  He stated that they would also like to have a permanent barrier, mounding or pine trees, and proper screening.  Mr. Komley suggested rezoning the area.  Mr. Wilkenfeld asked Mr. Komley if he would like to see a barrier similar to what is already located from the church to Newark-Granville Road.  Mr. Komley stated yes. 
Mr. Mitchell inquired on how many of the neighbors signed the letter.  Mr. Komley stated that he contacted five neighbors and only four were available to sign the letter.  He stated that the fifth neighbor is in agreement and he could provide his name and phone number for verification.  Mr. Strayer stated that he received an email from Mr. Mork indicating that he is in agreement with Mr. Komley.  Mr. Mitchell stated that given the objections by the neighbors he feels the application needs more consideration and perhaps permanent parking is what the applicant should be applying for.  Mr. Blanchard asked if the application called for green space.  Mr. Strayer stated that the current code does not specify gravel versus green grass - it just says open space.  Assistant Law Director Gorry stated that the code states that the Planning Commission can make minor modifications to a PUD, but if this Commission does not see this as minor they could request Council to rezone.  Mr. Gorry read aloud Section 1183.04.  The members of the Planning Commission discussed possible barriers that could be installed.  Mr. Riffle showed concern if mounds or berms were installed that it could pose potential drainage problems for the housing subdivision.  The parties involved reviewed pictures depicting the open lot and surrounding areas.  Mr. Habbegger stated that there is a history of problems with the neighbors regarding drainage problems.  He stated that the church was built before the subdivision and the problems are those of the homeowners.  Mr. Habbegger stated that they would allow the homeowners to run tile piping through the church property at the expense of the homeowner.  He stated that he does not see a solution to the matter and he believes nothing will please the neighbors. 

Mr. Habbegger stated that he will just not use the open lot and he will put up some railroad ties blocking it off.  Mr. Habbegger wished to withdraw his application.

Application #06-152 is WITHDRAWN.


464 South Main Street, #06-153
CSD, TCOD
Sidewalk Sign Modification

Mr. Jenkins stated that he wished to add four to six inches to the top of the sign to make it slightly larger than 2 ½ x 4 ft.  Mr. Strayer stated that the application was approved six months back and Mr. Jenkins is now back to extend the application for another six months.  Mr. Mitchell stated that he does not believe the Main Street Commerce sign is effective and he would like to see the largest part of the sign be changed so that you are able to read what businesses are located in the area.  Mr. Wilkenfeld agreed.  Mr. Riffle stated that the matter before the Commission is for a six month temporary sign and not the Main Street Commerce sign Mr. Mitchell is referring to.  Mr. Mitchell stated that perhaps Mr. Jenkins can let the owner, Fred Abraham, know that he is willing to approve this temporary sign, but he may not be willing to approve it in the future until the sign is fixed.  Mr. Strayer stated that he too could talk with Fred Abraham. 

Mr. Riffle stated that Mr. Jenkins would need to provide the sign dimensions to Mr. Strayer.  Mr. Jenkins stated that this would not be a problem and he would fax them over the following day. 

Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to approve Application #06-153 with the condition that the application only be good for six months.  Second by Mr. Blanchard. 

Roll Call Vote for Application #06-153
Mitchell, Riffle, Wilkenfeld, Blanchard.  Motion passed (4-0). 
The motion was unanimously approved. 


117 North Prospect Street, #06-154
VBD, AROD
Window Sign

Mr. Strayer stated that the applicant asked to have the application tabled because they are waiting on a new sign. 

Mr. Mitchell moved to table Application #06-154.  Second by Mr. Wilkenfeld. 


Finding of Fact Approvals
Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Item B on the Agenda, and he stated that we find them consistent with the relevant sections of the zoning code as outlined by the Village Planner.  Second by Mr. Mitchell.  The motion was unanimously approved. 


Work Session
The Planning Commission met with Assistant Law Director Jim Gorry.  Mr. Gorry briefly outlined the rules and procedures of the Planning Commission.

Next meetings:
November 27, 2006

December 11, 2006 (Mr. Strayer indicated that he will not be available to attend this meeting.  The committee discussed having just one meeting in December)

Adjournment: ______ pm. 


Submitted by:
Melanie Schott

Planning Minutes 10/23/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
 October 23, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Jack Burriss, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent: Jackie O'Keefe
Visitors Present:  Jeremiah Conkle, Kevin Kluck, Scott Rees, Jaimy Rees
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none
Minutes of September 11, September 25, and October 10:  On page 3 of September 25, No. (3) in Bussan motion, change to:   "THE COLOR WILL BE DARK GRAY."
MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE ALL THREE SETS OF MINUTES WITH CORRECTION NOTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
New Business:

Kathleen Raker, 204 South Main Street, Change of Use

 The applicant is seeking a change of use from Professional Office to Service and Recreation Business.   The use is permitted, and the parking is adequate. 
 Jeremiah Conkle said he wants to open a barber shop, and his wife is a RN completing her classes and will be working with doctors in the other side of the business.  Her portion is the skin care part of the job. They tried to keep the sign in context with other signs in the area.  The barber pole has a red stripe.

 MR.WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-145 FOR CHANGE OF USE AS SUBMITTED.  .   MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Kathleen Raker, 204 South Main Street, Change of Use

 In addition to the change of use, the applicant wishes a dry-erase two-sided plastic sign, and Mr. Conkle said the stripe on the barber pole will be red, but will not be a loud red.  [n.b. there is a typo on "holidays closed."]    The rest of the sign is black and white. 
 Mr. Mitchell asked about other signs and was told, No, that is why they want a sidewalk sign.  It's hard to see the front door.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld said sidewalk signs are permitted only when the business is open.
 Mr. Burris noted that traditionally we like to have sidewalk signs framed, and Mr. Conkle said the actual sign stands out and there is a ½" black edge frame.  There is a handle grip 2" above the letters. 

 MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-143 FOR SIDEWALK SIGN WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ONLY COLOR BESIDES BLACK IS THE RED STRIPES ON THE BARBER POLE AND THAT THE SIGN HAS A ½" BORDER. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Julia McNally, Westgate Drive - sign

 The application is for a womanized wooden directional sign on the corner of Westgate and Cherry Valley Road, directing people where the Dog Center business is.  In the future other directional signs might be added, but other owners did not sign on at this time.  Ms. McNally submitted three drawings.  For stability two posts will anchor the sign.  Mr. Strayer wants her to keep it a similar height to Stypula's. 
 Mr. Mitchell wanted approval contingent upon Mr. Strayer's final approval on height.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-146 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1) IT IS GOING TO BE THE SIGN THAT IS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF DRAWING, EXHIBIT A; (2) THE COLORS WILL COPY THE ORIGINAL; (3) SIGN IS TO HAVE TWO 2X4' WOMANIZED WHITE POSTS ANCHORED IN THE GROUND; (3) MR. STRAYER TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL ON HEIGHT; AND (4) SIGN IS TO BE 3X4'.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

CVS (Sign Art Co.), 200 East Broadway - Signage

 Kevin Klack presented the sign package and apologized for hanging signs before getting approval.  They are removing copy from the drive-through.  The awning is changed from the application.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether they could tone down the red a little bit and Mr. Riffle whether the awning in the back will match the one in the front.  Mr. Klack said, No, it's CVS red, and Mr. Riffle said we don't want three different awnings.  Greg Ream can tell you who made the awnings, and Mr. Klack said they will keep the same awnings.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld knows a large company wants their color and signage, but we have some exceptions here.  The pharmacy sign out front is a historical sign in a historical district, and we need to find a compromise here.  He would like to see us keep some flavor instead of plastering on new signs.
 Mr. Riffle said technically by code we could not keep that sign, but because it has historical significance we would rather see it different from CVS bright red.  The sign should stay as is, with the gray and put "CVS" at the top and match the colors there.   Mr. Klack said that is a copyright logo, but Mr. Riffle noted that he didn't think people will be confused as to which is CVS.  Mr. Klack is trying to work with us and wants to keep the historic part.  Mr. Burriss added that we want to see historical integrity maintained, but the sign would lose all of its historical significance as a red sign with the back changed.  He does not think it needs to say "pharmacy/ prescriptions."    The portion of the top currently saying "Taylor's" we are willing to see changed to CVS, but anything else we like to see remain as is, including color and graphics.  Remove "Photo Center" and put it where it says "prescriptions."
Mr. Klack wants a brand new sign, and Mr. Burriss said that is exactly what we do not want.
For other signs on the building, Mr. Burriss appreciates their willingness to go with material on previous signs, but make it more consistent with signage we have encouraged in the rest of the village.  Ideally he would like to see it all in the same font.
Mr. Riffle thought toning down the color would make it more tolerable.
Mr. Klack said the building is designed to have the signs displayed in this fashion.
Mr. Mitchell wants the letters proportional to the background.  Let "CVS" be the same height as "Taylor's" is now with same proportion and background.  Mr. Burriss wanted letters to be 12" high, and he thought 4 signs would be OK. The "CVS" is too big, but "pharmacy" can stay the same.   Mr. Klack noted that the signs are already painted.  
On the freestanding sign the colors are to match the existing ones.
Mr. Klack was unsure about the "Taylor's parking only" sign, and Mr. Strayer said it could be removed. 
They are to tone down the color to be more consistent with the red on the awning in the front.  The red will carry on to the other signs.  The background will be gray.
Regarding the "Media Yellow" noted on Sign No. 9, Mr. Klack said they are matching the building, but Mr. Burriss wants them to make it tan on gray background.
Mr. Burriss asked whether they will fill the holes and was told Yes. 

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-147 WITH CONDITIONS OUTLINED BELOW.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED:
(1) Awning color to match existing color.
(2) Maximum height is to match existing height with option to reduce "pharmacy" in proportion with reduced "CVS."  At no point will that signage be larger than 12".
(3) On freestanding sign, all language, designs, colors to remain the same.  "Taylor's" to be repeated with "CVS" colors to be maintained with existing sign.
(4) Drive-through wall signage to have red color to match awning with gray background.
(5) "Taylor's Parking Only" sign to be replaced with "CVS Parking only" colors to match design on 7, 8, and 9.
(6) Details of 7, 8, and 9 to match existing signs' background or darker.
(7) Sign No. 9 to have red to match 7 and 8 and background to be gray.
(8) Temporary sign is to be removed.

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 RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF OCTOBER 23, 2006.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:30 p.m.
Next Meetings:    November 13 (Betty will be absent Nov. 13) and November 27

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 10/10/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
 October 10, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Jack Burriss, Debbie Tegtmeyer for Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler
Members Absent: Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Carl Wilkenfeld

Visitors Present:  Paul Quinn, Gordon Glissman, Christine Beckman 
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none
Minutes of September 11 and September 25: Postponed until the absentees can be present. 

New Business:

Christine Beckman, 452 West Broadway, Fence

  For the new fencing in the rear, Ms. Beckman requests a 6' cedar privacy fence (neighbor friendly) and prefers the finish to be natural.  She has not yet talked to the neighbors, but she will soon.  
 Mr. Burriss noted that we require some sort of finish, stain or color, and frequently the color matches the house.   Mr. Tyler added that even a natural finish requires a stain or color. 
Mr. Burriss also noted that there is no gate pictured on the site plan but Ms. Beckman did not know where to put the gate although it would likely go along the driveway.  She wants the fence next to the neighbor's fence, but Mr. Burriss said she cannot have it one foot from the other; rather, she should have a minimum of 3 feet between.
 Ms. Beckman also wants a lattice over the driveway, and, lacking a picture, GPC agreed to defer approval to Mr. Strayer. 
 Of the sample fences pictured, GPC preferred No. 1, the white one pictured.

  MR.TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-141 FOR FENCING WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS :  (1)  GATE TO BE ON THE EAST SIDE OF FENCE ALONG DRIVEWAY, NEAR THE HOUSE; (2) GATE ON THE REAR; (3) ARBOR TO BE APPROVED BY THE VILLAGE PLANNER; (4) TEXTURE AND COLOR OF FENCE TO BE #1 IN THE PHOTOS SENT TO US; (5) FENCE TO BE TREATED WITH NATURAL CLEAR STAIN OR COLOR; (6) 3' SEPARATION TO BE BETWEEN THE EXISTING FENCE TO THE NORTH AND THIS ONE.   MR.BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

Angela Amos Barker, 204 South Main Street - Sign
 MR. BURRISS MOVED TO TAKE THE APPLICATION OFF THE TABLE.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 The application had been tabled pending picture of sign design, which Ms. Barker presented this evening.  The new wooden sign will hang on the existing signpost but will have new fonts, and the color is to be burgundy, white, and black.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 06-134 FOR FREESTANDING SIGN AS IN THE DRAWING SUBMITTED TONIGHT. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Wellert Corporation, Arby's, Speedway Drive - Development Plan

 Paul Quinn showed the site plan, which has not changed much.  They made the revisions GPC recommended. After a question about the engineering site plans, they were sent to the village engineer and the recommendations he made were completed. 
 Gordon Blissman showed the landscaping plans and has met with the Tree and Landscape Committee, who seemed comfortable with the plans.  He showed the rendering coming in off Speedway Drive.  They are landscaping both entrances and they will be compatible with Speedway.  The evergreens will be exactly alike
 Mr. Burriss said on the southwest side we talked about the placement of the tree on the lot so that the tree on the Arby lot and the Speedway tree will be staggered, and Mr. Blissman showed their location.
 Mr. Quinn said they will be using the same material for the base for the post lights. 
 Mr. Burriss asked about the awnings and was told they will be green and the roof the same green.  Speedway wanted us to use the same parking lot lighting, and ours is green.  The canopy has green posts.  He asked about the bollards around the gas meter which shows a yellow color but was told they will match the brick.
 Mr. Tyler thought the applicants have made a lot of alterations to Arby's typical cookie cutter design, and Mr. Gilbert said a lot of times a municipality wants changes. 
 There will be a hose for cleaning the dumpster.  The grease will go into a pit for a truck to pick up weekly. 
 Mr. Burriss said we prefer the green columns for lighting, and recommended picking up the color supporting the canopy lighting.  He suggested a fluted parking light post.  We need to be sure lighting does not escape.
 Regarding signage, Mr. Quinn showed material for the 24' monument sign.  The hat is 13.5 sq.ft. Mr. Strayer said the freestanding sign can be 18 sq.ft. They will match Speedway's monument sign.    Regarding signage on the building, Arby's wants 4, but the code says one per building, but it's up to GPC as to how to approve this.  Mr. Burriss wants to eliminate one sign on the building.  Mr. Quinn said they could probably go to 30" from the requested 36" and keep four of them, 5.5' long.
 Mr. Burriss asked what the menu board would look like and was told it is on the specs.  The red will be gone, and the canopy over the ordering window will be green.
 Next steps:  Need foot candle schematics
 Need material from the engineer
 Need any changes GPC makes tonight
 This will be a recommendation for approval with conditions to Village Council, who will use GPC's Finding of Fact with conditions.  They will have revised plans to look at.
 Mr. Burriss is comfortable and said they have done everything we asked for.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 04-024 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1), THE WALL SIGNS WILL BE DOWNSIZED TO 30"; (2) FOOT CANDLE DIAGRAM FOR LIGHTING IS TO BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED; (3) ALL OTHER GRANVILLE DEPARTMENT HEADS MUST APOPROVE DRAWINGS; (4) BOLLARDS WILL NOT BE YELLOW BUT PAINTED A COLOR TO COORDINATE WITH THE BRICK; AND (5) MONUMENT SIGN IS TO MATCH THE BRICK.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:   MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND A AND B UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF OCTOBER 1O, 2006.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:06 p.m.
Next Meetings:    October 23 and November 13 (Betty will be absent Nov. 13)

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 9/25/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 25, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Jack Burriss, Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent: Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Tym Tyler

 Visitors Present,  Sharon Sellitto, David Bussan,  Bill Heim, Doug Wagner, Gail McConnon, Michael E. Carey, Richard Downs, Steve (with Michael Novak), Michael and Kim Novak, Ann Watson, Shirley (329 Shannon)
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  Sharon Sellitto asked whether Mr. Strayer spoke to the workmen at the Library and was told he did speak to them and they are supposed to be parking at an off-site area.  He will remind them again.  Ms. O'Keefe asked whether they could be ticketed at leaf-pick-up time, and Mr. Strayer said probably not because it is a public road, and we are not sure which vehicles they are.  We have to handle it through the project manager.

Minutes of September 11: Postponed until the absentees can be present. 

New Business:

Betty Borishansky, 403 West Broadway - roof

 Since the flat roof installed over the addition to the house is leaking, the applicant wishes to improve the structure with a pitched roof.  Richard Downs described the project as being visually pleasing with a gable roof with skylights because it is dark inside. They will match all materials and it will have a shake appearance.  Nothing is changed except the roof.

  MR.WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-133 FOR ROOF MODIFICATION.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Angela Amos Barker, 204 South Main Street - sign

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes to replace the sign tag with new design and language to be hung on the same sign.  Ms. Barker could not be here tonight, and there is no picture of the sign, but it is exactly what is there already, with different colors and fonts.  It will be burgundy, white, and black.    Mr. Burriss would like to see the sign before it is approved, and Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether the colors would match the old sign.  He was told Yes, but with a green color instead.  Ms. Barker had told Mr. Strayer that tabling this would be fine with her.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TABLE 06-134 PENDING RECEIPT OF SIGN DESIGN. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Gail McConnon, 222 South Prospect Street - Fence

 There are a lot of fences around the property and the applicant would like to fill in the gaps and make them consistent. This is for the dog.  He wants to remove 2 post and rail fences and add a 42" vinyl fence to connect with all adjacent fences and neighboring garages.  It will go down the property next to the alleyway, across the front and to the far end of the yard.  It will connect his garage to the house. 
 
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-137 AS PROPOSED.   MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
   
Michael Novak, 204 Munson Street - Change of use

 The applicant wants to change the use from a retail store to a medical office.  Retail has not been used for over 2 years, and this is a less intense use.  It is a permitted use in the Community Service District, and it would meet the parking requirements. 
Mr. Novak said his plan is to improve the property.  He has been in practice on River Road for 5 years and had been looking for a place to own, but he wants to make sure he will be able to get approval first. 
Ann Watson would like to see the zoning turned back to residential because the building now houses the Granville Arts Center.  The entire street of West Maple is residential on that side.  On the other side of Munson it is commercial.  She feels the change of use back to residential would benefit the street.  Mr. Strayer said Residential is a conditional use, and if it were to be rezoned back to residential, the property owner or V.C. would have to initiate a change.
GPC members were hesitant to change the use.  Mr. Riffle stated that we understand the applicant's concerns, but we have to go by what is allowed to be there in that zoning district.  Mr. Novak does not want to buy the building only to have V.C. say he cannot use it. 
Mr. Strayer said if we were to approve a change of use and V.C. then changed the zoning, Mr. Novak would still have a grandfathered legal nonconforming use.  V.C. cannot overturn it except on appeal.
Kim Novak, a designer, said that the property is not in very good condition, and chances of a person buying it for personal use are not very good.  It would need a lot of work, since there is water damage. 
 
MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 06-138 FOR CHANGE OF USE. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Doug Wagner, 222 South Main Street - Exterior modifications
 
 The project includes a handicap ramp, and Dr. Wagner explained the plans, stating that with the recent change from residential to commercial, they can use it.  It will have a standard railing at standard height.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld thought we could give approval contingent upon Village Planner's approval.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITION THAT FINAL APPROVAL BE GIVEN BY THE VILLAGE PLANNER FOR THE RAILING DETAIL.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business: 

David Bussan, 420 East Broadway - fence

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO TAKE THIS FROM THE TABLE.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 The applicant wishes a 6' treated pine privacy fence with gate along the property line in the rear yard. 
Mr. Burriss noted that the plan brought in tonight is much better than what was proposed before.  The only question is, which side is out, and Mr. Bussan showed them.  He will try to match downspouts color with dark red stain.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1) THE APPROVAL IS FOR THE PICTURE BROUGHT IN TONIGHT; (2) FINISHED SIDE IS OUTSIDE; AND (3) THE COLOR WILL BE DARK GREY.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.  

Finding of Fact:   MR.WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,C,D, AND E UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND  A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2006.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

Michael Carey, 332 Granger Street -Carriage House

 Mr. Carey would like to buy this property but needs to know whether he is likely to gain approval for a carriage house from GPC first.  He would like to remove the existing two-story garage and put in a two-story carriage house with a little bigger footprint, but lot coverage would be less.  He wants to blend in with the architectural effect. He is a woodworker and this would give him the ability to do that in the village.
 Mr. Burriss asked whether he would remove the vinyl siding, but Mr. Carey does not know what's under there. Mr. Burriss noted that with the detailing on the side, it would have had a solid band around.  He appreciates the applicant's trying to match the house, but it would not have been done that way at the time the house was built.  There are multiple examples in the village to look at.   For a carriage house, the architectural elements are different materials.  It would have been less massive.  Mr. Carey thought if a gable roof were preferred, it would not be competing with the house.  Mr. Burriss noted that we approved one at Monomoy Place consistent with the house.  He suggested smaller windows on the second floor, and he showed him a possible design, lower than the house.  The big concern is massing.
 Mr. Riffle thought he could do something with gables and dormers. He is OK with Italianate, but a lot of carriage houses are different from the house because they were built on later. Books on the subject are available. He wants Mr. Carey to come in for another work session.
 Mr. Strayer said the height has to be consistent with structures on the block.

Adjournment: 8:12 p.m.
Next Meetings:    October 9 and 23

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 9/11/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 11, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair)
Tym Tyler
Members Absent:   Jack Burriss, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Visitors Present,  Sharon Sellitto, David Bussan, Scott Klingensmith,  Jeff MacInturf, Bill Heim, Doug Wagner, Nathan Jones, Gillian Jones, Jamey Jones, Jack Jones
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  Sharon Sellitto was concerned about the parking on Prospect Street.  Mr. Strayer said he talked to the project superintendent for the Library and he said it would be taken care of.

Minutes of August 28:  Page 3, 7th line up: Change "menace" to problem.   Same page, 2d line up, change to "…and we don't care….
MR.TYLER TO APPROVE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Doug Wagner, 222 South Main Street - Site Lighting

 The application is for 3 pole lights in the middle of the parking lot for safety.  Dr. Wagner said he has done some research at Holophane and found one central fixture (175 watts) will be sufficient, so they want to amend the application to one central light.  It will not shine upward. 
 Mr. Mitchell wondered whether any neighbors would be affected by the light and was told it is a metal halogen light, and Dr. Wagner showed how the light would not impact the neighbors.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked about regulations and Mr. Strayer said it cannot shine over one foot candle going over another.  Ms. O'Keefe asked what time the light would go off and Dr. Wagner said there is a photocell, so when it meets a certain amount of sunlight it will go off.  Ms. O'Keefe is still concerned about light being on all night, and Dr. Wagner said the Elms Pizza has a light on all night.
 Mr. Mitchell thought the glare from outside might be bright enough to affect people inside, and Dr. Wagner said the specifications were those given him by the experts.  Mr. Mitchell would be more comfortable with less light, and Dr. Wagner would agree to this.  Mr. Riffle would prefer 100 watts, which gives good floodlight out to the perimeter, and Dr. Wagner said they could put in flood lights. 

  MR.TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-131 FOR (1) A 100-WATT POLE LIGHT USING GRANVILLE HOLOPHANE LIGHTS AND (2) A 70-WATT WALL LIGHT.  MR.MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Doug Wagner, 222 South Main Street -Change of Use

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes to change the use from a single family residence to a retail store.  Since it has been out of use for so long, it would have to go back for a permit.  Technically it has no use since it was a nonconforming use, zoned for business.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-132 FOR CHANGE OF USE AS PROPOSED. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

David Bussan, 420 East Broadway -   Application was tabled at the request of the applicant.

New Building, South Galway and Newark-Granville Road

Jeff MacInturf presented a requested perspective and explained that the sidewalks were mistakenly put in there by the architects, but there will be one on the western side, which will end at the curb. 
Next Steps:  (1) Tree and Landscape Committee will look at it; (2) need lighting schematics; (3) need approval from BZBA for two variances; (4) final engineering plan; (5) signage; and (6) approval of the temporary driveway site that will be closed when the Donegal extension is constructed.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
   
Work Session: 

Shurtz Properties:

 Ken Myles presented to the group his real estate company's plan to develop a 5-acre tract next to Shurtz's office.  Their company has done a variety of projects in central Ohio and has been looking for an opportunity for a new development for the community, something separate and distinct from the downtown area but not conflicting with it.   Think of it as a Mill District, "Little House on the Prairie" consisting of a loose assortment of barn-like buildings where different activities randomly take place.  They started thinking more of a historic context of what a mill district might look like.  He showed many pictures with barn-like structures with simple architecture and materials.  They are not interested in "cutesy" thinking
 One design was for a central building with out-buildings and parking dispersed throughout, taking advantage of the topography.  They want art studios, crafts people, work spaces, etc.  They might redesign the Shurtz building to fit their plans and redesign the storage units.  They talked about adding an access point on the road.  The cut would be opposite from the cut across the street.  A village green would be next to the Shurtz building. A road would be along the rear.  They want to design a street that looks more rustic than a main street.  Allowing no fast food, they would consider things like a restaurant, bike shop, and ice cream parlor. 
 Mr. Riffle asked how the storage units would fit in with a pedestrian environment with u-hauls coming in and out, and Mr. Myles said people would enter the storage from the rear.  And Mr. Riffle noted that they will have to make the rear of the buildings attractive, including trash areas. Mr. Myles said they have handsome trash areas.
 Mr. Mitchell noted that they will have to check with ODOT for ingress and egress, and Mr. Myles thought there would be a dedicated left turn. 
 Ms. O'Keefe asked about walkways and was told there would be sidewalks throughout.  She added that that is a terrible intersection, and Mr. Myles said it might be turned into a right/ in/right/out someday. Mr. Strayer added that however the development turns out; we will need to know how the traffic pattern turns out.  Whether another signal would be added is unknown now.
 Mr. Strayer said we will have to work through the process of annexation.  GPC could be working with them on site plans because they are not in the village yet. 
 Mr. Mitchell said, "It's not residential; it's not fast food-go for it!"
 Mr. Tyler liked the idea of preserving green space.
 Jack Lux reported there are some real issues, and on January 1 they will decide whether to buy the property.   The big issue is the road around, and they want to make it all as attractive as possible.
 Mr. Strayer said we should take staff time to work with them about how it will work best and we can then go to ODOT. 
 Regarding the zoning, Mr. Strayer has a plan for a separate River Road Planning District.  GPC makes a recommendation and Village Council makes final decision. This is for everything between the creek and the highway.

Finding of Fact:   MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A AND B UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND  B UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2006.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:30 p.m.
Next Meetings:   September 25 and October 9

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 8/28/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
August 28, 2006
Minutes

Members Present: Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair)
Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent:  
 Visitors Present,   Scott Klingensmith,  Jeff MacInturf, Doug Plunkett, Brad Essick, Don Moxley, Betty Morrison, Sharon Sellitto, Carol Flomm, David Bussan, Kimberly Salvage, Richard Salvage, Rochelle Steinberg, Steve Mershon, Candy Moore, Steve Herb
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak

Citizens Comments: 

A. With regard to an item on the agenda, Sharon Sellitto was concerned about lack of parking on South Prospect.  She said the library construction workers are parking there, and it is already overcrowded.  Residents should be offered parking permits.
 At the request of the Streets and Sidewalks Committee, Mr. Strayer was asked to consult with the Library contractor about parking. They agreed to shuttle the workers from an out lot, and Ms. Sellitto thought that would be an improvement.

B. Rochelle Steinberg requested that when a property owner makes a request to GPC that will make a significant change, the neighbors should be notified.  We used to get notification.  The house behind hers now has a vaulted garage bigger than the house, and she feels the neighbors should have been given an opportunity to speak their minds.  Mr. Strayer said Village Council is working on this issue.  Now notification only occurs when a variance or zoning item is on the agenda at BZBA. 
She also was concerned with trucks speeding through East College Street. 

Minutes of August 14:  Page 2, Line 16, Ms. O'Keefe was concerned about the massing.  MR.MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

David Bussan, 420 East Broadway - Fence

 The applicant wishes to build a 6' shadow box fence along the property line.  Mr. Bussan said it is to keep the deer out and is on the side of the school building.  He is going to let it gray naturally.  His house is gray and he doesn't want the fence to fight with the color.  It is a treated pine, which will weather better than cedar.
 Ms. O'Keefe said she has that fence and hers gets pretty grungy and she has to wash it and reseal it.  We need to ensure architectural styles of the village.  Mr. Burris said we have not allowed untreated fences to be built, and this design needs detailing.  The applicant needs to articulate the beauty used on the house for the fence. It needs a finish of a semi-transparent stain, with color.  He is also concerned about the length of the fence and the style of gates. 
 Mr. Wilkenfeld thought deer would jump right over a 6' fence.  He asked whether the neighbors have been notified and Mr. Strayer said No, only in the newspaper.
Neighbor Steve Mershon's concern is that this is a fence in the middle of a field and what he would like is to see some screening and landscaping.  His own landscaping will not run the entire length of the new fence.  The fence will be visible from College and Granger as well as the parking lot.
 Mr. Mitchell thought it would be very visible and very high.   
 Mr. Tyler was concerned about the overall historical style, and we want the applicant to come up with a solid fence more palatable than this one.  Mr. Bussan asked what style would be more appropriate, and Mr. Tyler suggested he look at the Whitman house.
 To Ms. O'Keefe's question about adding landscaping, Mr. Riffle responded the applicant would have trouble maintaining the landscaping behind the fence. She stressed the need of plantings to buffer the fence from the neighbors, and she thought the fence could be moved in somewhat for maintenance.    Mr. Mitchell thought a lower fence would be better. 

 MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TABLE 06-120 AT APPLICANT'S REQUEST PENDING A MORE SUITABLE DESIGN.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Needling Yarn, 113 No. Prospect - Awning

 Kim Salvage stated that the front of the building needs a rain shield, and a nice awning would also improve the look of the building.  It will have no signage.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-121 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Prudential Integrity One, 120 South Prospect -Sign

 The request is for a sign for the lower level, above the front door, saying "An Independently Owned and Operated Member of the Prudential Real Estate Affiliates, Inc."  Patty Urbatis said that Prudential requested them to have this sign installed.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 06-123 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Tym Tyler, 205 S. Prospect St. - Change of Use

 [Mr. Tyler recused himself from this application.]
 The request is to change the use from residential to recreational business, a permitted use.  The parking requirements are up to GPC's discretion.  Don Moxley explained that they will never have more than 3 people there at a time, since the entire business is designed for people to come by appointment.  Three rooms on the first floor will be used for training help with individual exercise programs.  Mr. Tyler will live on the second floor. 
 It is similar to an office, but with a recreational component.   If it is an office, it would require two parking spaces.    They will make no changes to the exterior but will add a sign. 
 Considerable discussion ensued regarding parking spaces, and it was determined that 5 are available, with stacking. 
 
MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-125 FOR CHANGE OF USE.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED AND MOTION WAS APPROVED BY MAJORITY WITH ONE NAE VOTE (Mr. Wilkenfeld).

Tym Tyler, 205 S. Prospect St. - Sign

 [Mr. Tyler recused himself from this application.]
 For the above application, a 4-color wood and vinyl hanging sign is requested.   Mr. Moxley said the lavender background can be changed to white to avoid 4 colors.  It will not be lit.  It will say "LEMONADE NEIGHBORHOOD FITNESS."

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-126 FOR HANGING SIGN ON THE CONDITION THAT THE BACKGROUND IS WHITE.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED AND MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

Cherry Valley Professional Partners, Galway Drive - New Building

 Mr. Strayer has received the preliminary engineering and traffic reports the traffic Engineer said there should be 8 cars per acre and this is for 16 cars per acre because of the two-story building.  He gave his approval because this is a permitted use and is not a "peak hour" business.  The 8 units are for the entire development.  Landscaping needs to be added.  The density is required for 5,000 sq.ft. per acre and this doubles that because of the two floors.  They will need a variance from BZBA.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether there was a problem of approving this density before they receive variances, and Mr. Riffle feels the variances should come first. The problem arose when the August meeting was cancelled because of a lack of quorum. 
Mr. McInturf said the architect was ill so could not provide the requested perspective. 
Mr. Burriss said the windows were a concern, and the south elevation could be improved-to something that looks like an entry.  But Mr. Riffle does not want to confuse people with an entry in the back.   Mr. Burriss noted that all buildings on Newark-Granville have doors facing the road, and we are charged with keeping comfortable and consistent with the village.  People walk by there. Reorientation of the building is not sought; he likes the entrance on the parking lot, but the south elevation is very unfriendly. 
Mr. Tyler asked whether they could make a window look like a door, and Mr. McInturf asked if he would like a door in an examination room.  There will be lots of landscaping.  Mr. Riffle thought you would not see the door with a lot of landscaping.    Ms. O'Keefe asked about adding an architectural detail over the window.      
Scott Klingensmith stated that we are talking about a two-story building-a traditional colonial style building.  You are not going to notice it until you are on top of it.
Mr. Mitchell said we have talked to these people three times, and we have not made a big deal about this issue.  We have given up the notion of doing anything on the south elevation.  But Mr. Wilkenfeld still wants to see the drawing.
 Ms. O'Keefe thought the applicants would need to convince some of the neighbors that this is not going to be a problem.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TABLE APPLICATION PENDING RECEIPT OF PERSPECTIVE.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Village of Granville, 484 S. Main Street - Fence

 The fence at the ATM is rotten near the lift station and we don't care what kind of fence goes up, but a 6' plastic or vinyl privacy fence was suggested. 
 Mr. Wilkenfeld stated that it should be stained, and Ms. O'Keefe asked what will it cost? We need something that will last longer than 5 years.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-128 WITH THE CONDITION THAT IT GETS STAINED.
MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS B,  C,D,E,AND G UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND  WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF AUGUST 28, 2006.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:50
Next Meetings:   September 11 and September 25

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 8/14/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
August 14, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair)
Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent:   Jack Burriss
 Visitors Present,  Chris Mays, Debi Walker, Daren Ward, Linda Clark, John E Clark, Deane Cecedin, Scott Klingensmith, Kevin Reiner, Michele Walker, Jeff MacInturf
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of July 24:  Page 2, 10th line up: "this proposed setback would be 90…"
Page 2, 2d line up, "...thought more internal sidewalks…" MR.TYLER TO APPROVE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Brian Miller, 204 East College Street - Retaining Wall

 The applicant wishes to build a retaining wall with more landscaping, and he provided a sample of material tonight. 
 Deborah Walker spoke on behalf of the Millers with Darin Ward, contractor.
 Mr. Mitchell asked whether they are replacing the wall with this stone and Ms. Walker said the old barn stone will be used, and this will go from the sidewalk to the new front stairs.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld asked are the stones on the sidewalk and was told No, they are 18" in and they will push it back and it will function as a retaining wall. No trees are coming down.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked about the neighbor's sidewalk, and was told the sidewalk was partially the Millers' inspiration, and although this will run along the front property line, it will not abut the neighbor's fence.  There are several examples of this stone through the village, i.e., at the Fine Arts Quad.

 MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-116 FOR RETAINING WALL AND ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING.  MR.WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Day Spa- Freestanding Sign

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes to build an aluminum, yellow, purple and black sign of 18 sq.ft. to be located in front of the brick house, not the New Day Spa.  It will be set back from the roadway similar to the north side sign location.  It will not be lit.  An unidentified man said if it is lit, it will be externally.  The material is aluminum, textured to look like stone-like a big huge slab.  The sign is recessed back into it.  

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-119 FOR SIGN AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Christopher Mays, 404 West Broadway - Garage

 Mr. Strayer said the variance for the two-car garage was denied by BZBA and tonight they are submitting new drawings.  This falls within the confined of the code and will not require a variance.
Mr. Mitchell asked if he is adding a peak roof, and Mr. Mays said the section between the kitchen and garage will break the flat line. He thought the pitch would be 4 or 5.  The roof on the left did not get into the plan, but there is supposed to be a one-foot bump-out on the left side. He said the roof will be gray standing seam.
Brad Schneider, next-door neighbor, voiced his concern about appearance and size and felt Mr. Mays had address these somewhat.  It looks like the same dimension but moved 2' over.  The square footage has not changed.  Mr. Mays has done an excellent job as far as appearance lies, but it still is awfully big.  He wrote a position paper on the subject and fears the pleasure of his home will be negatively influenced.  A big window in the den and a kitchen window look to the south and their view would be greatly hindered.
Mr. Strayer noted the applicant reduced it by 2', and Mr. Mays said they lost 1½' in the garage, but can't reduce it further since they want to be able to use the upstairs.
Ms. O'Keefe asked whether this will increase the size by 40% and was told Yes.  Mr. Strayer said setback is not an issue.   The garage will adjoin a one-car garage already on site, but Mr. Mays said they will cut 5' off the old garage and use the structure for lawnmower and wheelbarrow.
Mr. Tyler asked if the garage sits on the same side as the neighbor's garage and Mr. Mays said it is right on the property line and about 40' from the street.
Mr. Tyler asked about the height restrictions and Mr. Strayer said it is 30'; however, in the AROD the restriction is that it be a height consistent with other heights in the area.  The highest it can be is 10% higher than the highest structure in the neighborhood.  This one is 28" high
Ms. O'Keefe asked if this would be consistent with other houses in the neighborhood as far as massing is concerned, since the intent of the massing ordinance is to have consistency within the neighborhood, and Mr. Strayer said there is a menagerie of different sizes in the neighborhood. 
Mr. Wilkenfeld would like to find a way to make the neighbor and the owner happy.
   An unidentified woman explained there are a huge tree and a big pine tree, so it would not be totally standing out there by itself.  Landscaping has been there for many years and softens the appearance a lot.  And the man added there is also a 10' tall hedge.
 Mr. Mitchell asked whether the garage floor is on the same elevation as the house floor and was told No, it is lower.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether all material will match, and Mr. Mays said the roof will not be the same material.  They originally planned a material to match the roof with it was not economical.  The siding and trim will match.  Battens and all will match.
 Mr. Mitchell asked about the windows and was told the window is already there and one will be relocated to the back of the addition, 6 over 6.  The new window will be at the front top of the garage
 The size could go over 25%, said Mr. Strayer, but this is already in the AROD so the maximum size is unrelated.
 Mr. Mitchell noted references to 1161.02 in the Staff Report which seeks to preserve and encourage good architectural styles:  A. It is not stylistically compatible with other structures; B. Does not contribute to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character; C. Does not protect and enhance physical surroundings in which past generations lived.
But Mr. Riffle noted any time you add to a building it cannot upgrade the historical character, and other houses in the area were compared.  In this case they are suffering the sins of previous additions
Mr. Mitchell thought you can match what is already there or they can contrast, by way of roofing, etc.  With a large mass at one end of this proposal, it is awkward. However, they have done an outstanding job of adopting it to fit within code.
Mr. Tyler thought aesthetically if they comply with all the rules they should be approved, but Mr. Strayer thought differently.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 06-118 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:
New Building, South Galway and Newark-Granville Road
Jeff MacInturf presented a revised sketch of a building they propose for a new 16,000 sq.ft. office/medical facility.  It's a 2 1/2 story building on a 1.8 acre site.  The small 21"windows have been replaced by larger 37" windows to break up the massing.
Mr. Burriss had provided his opinions earlier to Mr. Strayer and they largely had to do with making more interesting the south, or back, side facing the roadway.  Mr. MacInturf has talked to Mr. Burriss and explained the plan for the inside and they did not want a faux entrance in the back.  They don't want people walking back there.  With extensive landscaping it won't be a massive blank wall, and there will be shadow lines and bump-outs, you will see variations.
Mr. Mitchell said if we all had our way we would want that to be the front, but that is the back and the front door is off the parking lot, and for a doctor's office you need the entrance near the parking lot. 
Mr. Wilkenfeld liked the larger windows and asked whether there was anything else they could add.  Mr. MacInturf said Yes, but it would not conform to the design elements in the community. 
Mr. Mitchell asked them to come in with a prospective and was told they are working with the tenant and will get on CAD eventually.
Mr. Riffle wanted to see what people will se when they drive by.   

Finding of Fact:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,B, AND C. UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND  WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF AUGUST 12, 2006.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:20.
Next Meetings:  August 28 and September 11

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 7/24/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
July 24, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent:   Jack Burriss, Tim Riffle (Chair)
Visitors Present, Chris Mays, Scott Klingensmith, Mansfield, Sara and Jack Kirby, A. Whirle
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of July 10:  Page 2, last word should be perspective MR.TYLER TO APPROVE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Sara Kirby, 1049 Burg Street - Driveway

 The request is for an additional driveway since exiting the driveway is difficult.  The applicant has proposed building an additional driveway that would exit onto Joy Lane to avoid the necessity of backing into Burg Street.  She was told at the work session to bring in more pictures, and she did so and showed where the drive would be, between the trees.  One small tree would be replanted in the rear of the yard. 
Mr. Mitchell felt they are creating a larger gravel area than they need. It could be concentrated in a smaller area, but Mr. Tyler said the turnaround goes down the hill, and Ms. Kirby added there is a large retaining wall and an oak tree they want to preserve.  The contractor explained the problems with moving it back.   

 MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-107 FOR ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY.  MR.TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Phil Templeton, 405 1/2 West Maple St. - Deck and Fence

 Mr. Strayer said the applicant wishes to construct a new deck in the back and fence the back yard to match the existing picket fence. The house is not visible from the street.  The applicant could not be here tonight.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld asked if it would be painted, and Mr. Strayer thought it was stained. 

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-108 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Doug Wagner, 222 South Main Street - Parking lot

 Once the applicant receives the final permit for demolition of a garage, he wishes to add a parking lot for his business.  Village Council wants GPC to approve a plan on the parking lot before they make a decision on the demolition.  Where the existing garage is there would be a dumpster enclosure like that behind 1st Federal.  The trees will remain and landscaping will add a buffer on the south side.  Mr. Strayer talked to the engineer since GPC was concerned about drainage, and the engineer asked us to state that any excess water run-off causing damage to the property will be the expense of the owner, not the village.
The applicant will not change the direction of the flow.  Actually, this would be very difficult to accomplish.  Ms. O'Keefe asked if there was a problem with the existing water and was told No, it will be paved so the water will run off better. It will not be a problem.
 Mr. Strayer said the property owner to the north said there is a fence separating the properties, and he suggested making it angle parking so cars would not drive into his fence.  Dr. Wagner does not want it to be a permanent solution and wants any future owner to have the option to have it his way.  Ms. O'Keefe asked whether he needs approval to change the parking direction and was told No.  They will have 8 parking spaces.
 Mr. Tyler noted water will run over the cement and into a natural drain. 
 Mr. Strayer said they want two pedestal lights but does not know the type and will come back later for lighting.  Mr. Wilkenfeld does not think we should approve without the lighting plan.
 Mr. Mitchell asked whether this application applies to both properties and was told it was for 222 S. Main only. 
 Ms. O'Keefe asked about striping and Mr. Strayer said that our concern is appearance, not striping.  Mr. Strayer also said the signage will be handled administratively; it's a customer courtesy. 
 The dumpster was discussed and Mr. Strayer said it's a 6' tall dumpster enclosure with fencing, and is part of the application.  Mr. Tyler asked about the latches.
 
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 06-088 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1) IF EXCESS WATER RUN-OFF PROBLEMS ARISE, THEY WILL BE SOLVED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE APPLICANT; (2) THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE TO THE DIRECTION OF THE DRAINAGE FLOW OFF THE PROPERTY; (3) APPROVAL IS PREDICATED UPON VILLAGE COUNCIL'S APPROVAL; (4) WE ARE ADDING TO THE PACKAGE THE JOBES-HENDERSON AERIAL PHOTO OF THE DRAWING TO INDICATE THE PARKING SPACES; AND (5) WE ARE ALSO APPROVING A 12X12' STORAGE FENCE AROUND  THE DUMPSTER LIKE THE ONE AROUND THE 1ST FEDERAL.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:
New Building, South Galway and Newark-Granville Road
 Jeff McInturf presented a sketch of a building they propose for a new 16,000 sq.ft. office/medical facility.  It's a 2 1/2-story building on a 1.8 acre site.  In talking with the Law Director they will need a variance for setback in the TCOD.  This is handled by the GPC as an approval for the development plan.  The variances are (2) from two stories to 2 ½ stories because of the pitched roof and (2) density from 5,000 sq.ft. per acre to 8900 sq.ft.  BZBA will hear this on August 10.
.Mr. McInturf pointed out the changes made from the last work session.  Rather than the 100' setback required in TCOD, the proposed setback would be 90'. 
Mr. Wilkenfeld is concerned about the massiveness of the building. And he wants Mr. Burriss to look at it.  It might not be overbearing from the street.  The applicant said there are a number of angles so they won't have a long wall, and there are different rooflines.
Although welcoming the project, Mr. Mitchell would like to have it differently oriented, but we have resigned ourselves to this plan.  The applicant said they tried to reorient it in every possible way.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked about sidewalks and was told there is a sidewalk there currently, and Mr. Strayer thought more internal sidewalks would be unnecessary .Mr. Mitchell thought there should be access to other properties.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld felt it will be a well-built project and will bring revenue to the schools, rather than students.  This is the first project that addresses what the community asked for. 
 They would like to break ground in September.  To-Do List:
· Show plans to Mr. Burriss and Mr. Riffle
· Engineer to look at plans
· Tree and Landscape Committee
· Traffic Study
· Perspective Drawings
· Formal Application

 Ms. O'Keefe asked about parking and was told they lost two in the reorientation, so they have 75 spaces.   

Finding of Fact:   MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,B, AND C. UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND  WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF JULY 24, 2006.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:03.
Next Meetings:  August 14 and 28 [I will be on vacation between these dates, so minutes will be late.  Betty]

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 7/10/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
July 10, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
Members Absent:  
 Visitors Present,  Chris Mays, Jim Siegel, Lynn Kishler, Don Pheneger, Jeff MacInturf, Scott Klingensmith , Keith Koeban, Jerry Martin, Lola Clark, John Clark, Jim Fowler, Ben Rader, Lyn Robertson, Lisa Whitman, Brad Schneider, Amber Mitchell, Sara and Jack Kirby
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of June 26:  Page 2, middle of page, "Mr. Strayer said if Arby's is looking at 75% lot coverage, the maximum is 40%…."   MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Baptist Church, 115 West Broadway - sign

 The request is for a sidewalk sign to be placed close to the entrance of the church.  It was out previously during spring and did not have approval, so Mr. Strayer made them take it down.  It is in the Village Square District where signs are not permitted.  No other churches have special signs, but we have approved temporary signs.
 Lyn Robertson said the sign says, "We mourn the death of …. with numbers, not names, of those killed or wounded in Iraq from Ohio.   Close to the church, it will not be very visible
 Mr. Strayer said in its location it could be freestanding, but it is not permanently affixed to the ground.  They want it to be a permanent sign, and we could give it a time limit if we want to.  We would have to make it contingent upon the sign picture being provided.  It will not be on a public sidewalk.
 Mr. Tyler asked if we can approve it as temporary with timeline of one year. 
 MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-100 FOR WITH THE PROVISIONS THAT (1) IT BE A TEMPORARY SIGN; (2) MR. STRAYER APPROVES THE FINAL DESIGN. AND (3) IT IS PERMITTED FOR ONE YEAR.  MR.WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Chuck Whitman, 423 East College Street - Fence and Doors

 Mr. Strayer said in order to complete the fence, two more sections of the existing fence and one gate would be needed for entrance into the side yard.  New garage doors and front door are also needed.
 Mr. Whitman said there used to be hedges, and when they removed them, a large open area was left.  They removed the hedges because they could not get to the pump of the pond.   The new sections will match the old fence.  The garage door is rotting and needs to be replaced. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-104 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Jim Fowler, 214 South Cherry Street - Retaining Wall

 The applicant wishes to install a retaining wall in the front yard along the alley, and he brought a sample of rock tonight.  They are taking the concrete retaining wall out and replacing it with the stone.   He also showed a landscaping plan.
 
MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 06-105.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Keith Keegan, 342 East Elm Street - Hot Tub

 The applicant wishes permission to allow the stone and stainless steel sunken hot tub already in place.  A fence would need to be part of the approval. 
 Mr. Fowler said in order to keep the public from wandering in, they want a stone wall.  There are three points of entrance to the yard, the driveway, the side of the hill, and the carriage house.  They will have a gate and repeat the stone of the house and add timber frame gates.  It will have a cover and has a stone staircase and stone terrace.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked where the fence will be, and he showed her the red line on the drawing and where the points of entry are.  He showed what the neighbors would see. The walls are 5' to 25', and they just need a gate.
 Mr. Strayer said in the front yard the fence could not be more than 24", so he would need to go to BZBA for a variance for the fence which would go from the top of the wall.  
 Mr. Mitchell asked if he would have a secure perimeter for the yard rather than having it around the spa, and Mr. Strayer said somehow the pool area has to be enclosed and not allow access from off the property.  New gates would help.  
 Mr. Riffle said we could approve the design conditional on BZBA approval for height variance.
 Mr. Burriss asked about the spacing of the vertical elements and was told 6", and Mr. Burriss said we could specify the distances.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-106 FOR HOT TUB WITH THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS: (1) THAT BZBA APPROVES THE VARIANCE IF APPLICANT WANTS IT HIGHER THAN 42"; (2) VERTICALS ON THE MAIN GATE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CODE, 4" ON CENTER; (3) ENSURE THAT KIDS CANNOT OPEN THE COVER; (4) APPLICANT TO SUPPLY VILLAGE PLANNER SOME CHILD-PROOF GATE FOR THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

Brews, 116 East Broadway - Minor Modification

{Mr. Burriss and Mr. Riffle recused themselves from this application.}
 There is new detail for the balcony railing.  It will have metal inserts and square posts painted white.  The difference is there are two metal frames where the wire mesh was. The two frames would stay and new frames inserted.  Wire mesh would be gone.  Mr. Strayer thought it would be safer and would be similar to what we approved originally.
 Mr. Tyler asked about the dumpster and was told it will be as approved originally.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked about the drive-up window and Mr. Strayer said it was part of the original application to be removed as well as the A.C. units.  You can receive approval for doing something, but if you want to leave it as is, you can do so unless GPC makes it mandatory.  After modifications were made to the original application, removal of the A.C. and drive-up window were unnecessary.  Mr. Strayer spoke to the Law Director and he says the applicant must either do it as approved or do nothing.   Mr. Mitchell said since it was part of the original approval, it should be removed. Perhaps the code needs to be changed.  He asked whether we have the authority to ask that it be removed now, and Mr. Strayer said OK but he would check with the Law Director.
 Jerry Martin said he does not need the A/C units since the roof units are cooling the whole place.    He also said that it sits on Village property and if they want to remove it, they can do so.    Mr. Mitchell would like to require that it be removed by the applicant.
Mr. Wilkenfeld wants to make this application specific about the balcony and split this issue out as another discussion.  They shouldn't be tied together. 
Mr. Strayer said the way Mr. Mitchell expressed it is correct.  We could force him to do something.  If he does do anything, it has to be as approved.  If the balcony is not done according to our approval, it will have to be taken back to the original plan.     
 
MR.TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-065 FOR BALCONY MODIFICATION.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

Jack Kirby, 1049 Burg Street - Access
 The Kirbys have an awkward driveway onto Burg Street and visitors have difficulty driving out, so they want to move the access to Joy Lane.   This means they would have two entrances.  Ms. O'Keefe asked why they couldn't close off the Burg Street driveway, and Sarah Kirby said you cannot enter the garage from Joy Lane.  The property drops off sharply 3' down and drivers find the retaining wall in the way.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld and Mr. Mitchell asked for photos.  Ms. O'Keefe said the code does not allow two access points, but she thinks this is a hardship issue. 
 Mr. Burriss asked whether the Village Engineer needs to look at it and was told No.
 Mr. Mitchell asked the applicant what his intent is, and Mr. Kirby said it for other people to drive in and turn around. 

Christopher Mays, 404 West Broadway - Garage
 The BZBA denied the application for setback variance, and they wanted another work session. 
 Mr. Mays showed the plan for breaking up the massing by a roofline and added dormers.
 Mr. Riffle asked if they would be adding windows for light and Mr. Mays thought it would be nice but it would be quite hard with the other roof back in there.  It will be dark.  Ms. O'Keefe asked whether he could use a skylight and the applicant has thought of that. 
 Mr. Burriss thinks he has done a good job of reducing the massing.
 Mr. Mitchell wondered what will happen to the roofline when you reduce the garage, and Mr. Mays said they are not going to change the pitch, so the back will come down a bit.  Mr. Mitchell felt any reduction would be going in the right direction.  He would like to see a computer-generated perspective. 
 
 Brad Schneider, next door neighbor, came to see what's going on.  Mr. Strayer explained that the request for an 8' setback was denied, so they would have to adhere to the existing garage-that is grandfathered in.  It would be about 10' from the property line.  It also needs to be in proportion with other buildings in the neighborhood. 
Mr. Tyler thought the garage overwhelms the small house
Mr. Burriss asked for detail of relationship of the corner of the garage and the corner of the building.  You need differentiation between the old and the new.
Mr. Schneider said his garage goes right up to the property line and the proposed garage will obstruct the view from his window.
Mr. Riffle thought it looked better, but it still needs to be made smaller.  The space above the garage does not bother him.
Mr. Burriss asked whether he would keep the existing garage and how would it fit in with the new?   

New Building, South Galway and Newark-Granville Road
 Jeff MacInturf presented a sketch of a building they propose for a new 16,000 sq.ft. Office/medical facility.  It's a two-story building on a 1.8 acre site.  They have a substantial 100' setback requirement, and they are asking for a variance to 70', 30' on Galway.  They will have sufficient parking. To adhere to the code would reduce their ability to do what they want.
 Mr. Burriss wants to see an aerial photograph of the area.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked what will go in the building, and Mr. MacInturf said Cherry Westgate Family Practice will move into the entire first floor. They want to expand their space and offer additional services.  They have 6,000 sq.ft, and this would be 8,000 sq.ft.  The second floor is set up for 3-4 doctor offices.  The Village would like the entrance to line up with Galway, but it depends on where a new owner wants his entrance. 
 Mr. MacInturf said the materials will be bricks, or cultured stone, and the rear will be attractive enough for the neighbors.  There will be a sidewalk and a dumpster.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld thinks this is a good project but he is concerned about setbacks.  Mr. Tyler told them to stick with the 100' setback and we will relent a bit on the parking requirements.  Mr. Strayer said we could reduce the 80 required spaces to 64, but Mr. MacInturf thinks they will need many spaces.
 Mr. Burriss would like to see more consistent hedges in the parking lot.
 Mr. Riffle had some ideas about pushing the building to adhere to code without variances even if they reduce a few parking spaces, and the group provided many helpful site designs.
 The men will work some more on staying within code.

Finding of Fact:   MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A THROUGH D UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND ITEM A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF JULY 10, 2006.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 9:05 p.m.
Next Meetings:  July 24 (Mr. Riffle will be absent on the 24th) and August 14

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 6/26/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
June 26, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair),
Members Absent:   Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Visitors Present, Doug Wagner, Chris Mays, Mark Clapsadle, Jonathan Wocher, Laura Evans, Jerry Martin, Tom Clark, Ray and Sherry Paprocki, Judith Fisher, Richard Downs
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of June 12:  MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Doug Wagner, 222 South Main Street, Demolition

 Mr. Strayer said we had an informal work session last time because Dr. Wagner could not be present this evening.   Dr. Wagner is buying the house next door, and the property was approved for commercial use, 9/13/04, but was never utilized as commercial.  This is for demolition of the garage only, as a recommendation to Village Council, to be replaced with parking area to be shared by both lots. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-087 FOR DEMOLITION.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Judith Fisher, 844 Burg Street - Garage and Site Improvements

 Mr. Strayer said the variance for setback has been approved by BZBA.  The applicant has proposed to relocate the driveway to the south lot line and close the existing access point. 
 Ms. Fisher said it would be barely visible from the road, maybe just the corner of the building or the roofline.  It would have a slab foundation, and there was a need to work with the engineer about run-off.  She wants to preserve the front and back space for gardens, and they chose a spot on the east where a retaining wall would not be required. The roof material will be metal shingles.  The cottage will be restored to 1938 style, and it will have an identical roof.  The driveway is new and will be gravel. The drive to the cottage will be cut off to the left of the service drive to the barn, and they will require a parking pad.  They will only have one driveway.  She wanted to ask for an extension to the driveway request and keep this driveway open for access at least to the fall because a lot of material will need to be brought in and t would be hard to get it in there with the existing drive.  It would be only for deliveries and will have a chain across.
 Mr. Burriss asked whether the piers will be removed, and she said they will be relocated.  Landscaping will completely close off this stretch and you won't know there is anything back there.
In answer to a question by Mr. Riffle, she said November 1 is the completion date.  ADR will oversee the driveway and pad.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-092 WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY WILL BE PERMANENTLY CLOSED AS OF NOVEMBER 1.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Cheryl Paprocki, 311 East College Street - Deck

 Last year she received approval for a 12'x12' patio addition to the back but has decided to put in a deck instead.  Also they propose to install a porch stoop off the French doors on west side.
 Mr. Riffle asked whether the patio and deck will be the same size and was told Yes.
 Richard Downs explained the materials as composite for continuity, and all other railings will be cedar, painted or stained.  Roof will have shingles and gable ends.

MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE APPLICATION 06-093 MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Speedway - Lot Split

 The applicant wishes to split the reserve area into 3 separate areas, two of which would be combined into Lots 2 and 3 to increase their lot size in an effort to meet the 40% coverage requirement for any future development. The Law Director said this is of no legal significance as a subdivision without plat, and he should look over our Finding of Fact.  This application will simply change ownership.   The new parcels will not be buildable. 
 Mr. Strayer said Arby's is looking at 75% lot coverage, but the maximum is 40%, although in the PCD you can put in whatever you want.  Speedway thought they would be wiser to decrease the percentage of lot coverage in this manner.  The reserve area is marked in black on the plan along with the amount of acreage involved. 
 Mr. Burriss asked whether we need to say anything about maintenance, and Mr. Strayer said that would fall under our general maintenance codes.  It is not in the ROW-it is a private drive.
 Mr. Mitchell wanted to be sure there was mechanism in place to maintain that the area will never be built on. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-096 CONTINGENT UPON:  (1) THE LAW DIRECTOR WILL REVIEW AND APPROVE THE DOCUMENT BY WHICH WE ARE APPROVING THE LOT SPLIT AND (2) THE ACREAGE BEING ADDED TO LOTS 2 AND 3 WILL BE FOREVER FREE FROM DEVELOPMENT.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Richard Gallagher, 761 Burg Street - new residence

 Mr. Strayer said they received a variance from BZBA because they were building into the corner of the lot in the narrowest spot. 
A man (Mr. Clapsadle?) said the owners have subsequently purchased more land at the vacant lot next door, which was split between the Gallaghers and the other neighbor, so they are proceeding with the construction.  Earlier they received approval for construction, and this is for approval of the two-level house itself.  It will be vinyl shake siding, with a hand-sawn look. 
MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 06-097 FOR A NEW HOME.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Brews. 116 East Broadway - Signs

 The application is for two wall signs: (1) across the face of the balcony, 6' long by 6" high saying "Brew's Café" and (2) an internally lit customer convenience sign with hours of business and menu, located where the night drop used to be.  The code does not require approval unless it is more than 25% of the total signage, so this does require approval. 
 Mr. Burriss noted that in the past he has recused himself from considering Brews, but Mr. Strayer said it would not be required in case of a sign.
 The code does not allow internally lit signs.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-098 ON THE CONDITION THAT THE SIGN WILL NOT BE INTERNALLY LIT.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. 

Speedway, 1000 Cherry Valley Road - Sign

 The applicant wishes approval for the temporary construction sign already in place.  It would be up only during construction.  GPC has discretion for these types of signs and their timeline.  Opening day is to be October 9.
 Ms. O'Keefe asked how large the sign is and was told they want 32 sq.ft.  Permanent signs are limited to 18 sq.ft. 
 Jonathan Wocher said the contractor put in the sign before realizing he needed approval, so they are sorry about that.  He has also erected a safety sign saying hard hats are required, and Mr. Strayer said this is an exemption
 Mr. Mitchell noted that 32 sq.ft. is allowed by the Township, and he does not think it till look out of place. I must be removed when the permanent sign goes up.   Mr. Strayer said we have allowed such signs in the past, i.e., NorthStar and realty signs.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-099 ON THE CONDITION THAT THE TEMPORARY SIGN WILL BE REMOVED BEFORE THE PERMANENT SIGN IS ERECTED.  MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

Timothy Bartlett, 205 S. Prospect Street

 The applicant has asked that this be withdrawn for change of use.  No action required.

Brews, 116 East Broadway - Balcony Modification

 Since Mr. Burriss will have to recuse himself from consideration and we would lack a quorum, Jerry Martin requested tabling until next time.

Work Session:

Christopher Mays, 404 West Broadway - Garage

 The application will have to go before BZBA for side yard setback because of a notification error, so GPC cannot grant approval tonight.  This will be a work session. 
 Mr. Mays said at the last meeting GPC was concerned about the overall size, but he is at a loss to enable a smaller garage, and if GPC wants to talk about anything else, he is agreeable. The length of the house concerns Mr. Riffle with so many things being added onto the house.  It overwhelms the house and the surrounding areas.  He does not have a problem with the design itself, but when you add it to the house it does not flow together as well as it could.
 Mr. Mitchell agrees and suggests that it does not conform to A and B of section 1161.02 regarding stylistically compatible structures and contributing to upgrading of the historical character.  He does not think it is architecturally compatible with what this commission is mandated to oversee.
 Mr. Mays said he has lived in the township 19 years and are doing everything they can to bring this house back to what it was in 1850.  A two-car garage would be a necessity for their two cars, rather than street parking.  They can't push the plan farther back because there are two huge trees that would have to come down.  They want a showplace for Granville.  The roofs and trim will all be compatible.
 Mr. Burriss asked what they are proposing or hoping to use the second floor for and was told it is for the grandchildren.  Mr. Burriss suggested breaking up the front façade of the garage and step one door back to reduce the façade of the garage.   He sketched out how it could be improved.  He noted that the addition put on awhile ago was poor, and they removed the woodwork.  The interior shutters are the only authentic thing left.  It's a great house, but we are charged with maintaining integrity.
 Mr. Riffle thought Mr. Burriss' plan was better but it was still too big.  To give it a better feel, it shouldn't look like an attachment. 
 Mr. Mays said they are taking off 4' of the front of the existing garage and the rest will become his workshop.   There will be a courtyard.
 Mr. Burriss has received several calls concerned about the size, and he does not want the addition to overwhelm the original.  He recommended another work session. 
 Mr. Ruffle shows his sketch of possible improvement, separating garage from house, and Mr. Mitchell had a plan also, but it would require removal of a big tree. 

APPLICANT WILL RETURN FOR ANOTHER WORK SESSION.

Finding of Fact:   MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A THROUGH G UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF JUNE 26, 2006.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:30 p.m.
Next Meetings:  July 10 AND 24 (Mr. Riffle will be absent on the 24th)

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 6/12/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
June 12, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler
Members Absent:   Jack Burriss, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Visitors Present Betty Morrison, Sharon Sellitto, Doug Wagner, Chris Mays, Jon Wells, Ned Roberts, Art Chonko, Rich Cherry, Lisa McKivergin
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of May 22:    Page 2, before the motion, change "Hearty Pine" to Hardy plank. 
Page 3,  No. 3 in the motion, "He can use the restaurant and the balcony…."
In the Paragraph starting Mr. Mitchell, change to, Mr. Mitchell asked whether there was a hardship to the design we approved, and the applicant said no, it was changed because he wanted to." MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Jonathan Wells, 339 West Maple Street - Addition

 Mr. Strayer said the variance for the side yard setback was approved by the BZBA last week.
 Ned Roberts described the plans for the addition coming on the east side, with the same foot pitch on the shed roof.  It will have horizontal lap siding. It will have no windows on the east side but will have a front door and in the back a sliding glass door onto the deck.  All materials and details will match.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-072 FOR AN ADDITION.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Lisa McKivergin, 124 South Main Street - sign

 Mr. Strayer said the red and blue sidewalk sign will be similar to other signs there, and will be located between the tree lawn and the sidewalk.

 MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-078 FOR SIDEWALK SIGN. MR.MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Christopher Mays, 404 West Broadway - Addition

 The application is for new 1½ story, two-car garage with a connector to the existing one-car garage.  Mr. Riffle asked whether the siding and details will match and was told Yes.  The BZBA approved the variance last week for setback.
 Mr. Tyler asked about the windows, and there would be no window on the north. The dormer above is for aesthetics, and a window will be added on the side. 
 In answer to a question by Ms. O'Keefe about massing, Mr. Strayer said the size has to be consistent with other buildings in the neighborhood.
 Mr. Mays explained that the upper part of the garage is to be more of an entertainment area with bathroom.   
 Sharon Sellito expressed dissatisfaction that the neighbors were not notified about this application.  Mr. Strayer said they were notified by the BABA before their hearing.  In addition, it is in the newspaper and outside on the bulletin board.  Ms. Sellito wants to change the code with regard to notification.
 Mr. Tyler is leery of approving this because that house is one of the premier historic homes in the village.  He wants to be very careful about approving these big additions.   But Mr. Riffle added that the problem is you can't pass it based on personal opinion.  Mr. Strayer said it fits within the AROD requirements, and 1161 would apply to this.
 Mr. Mays said the original garage will stay for storage. The new one will have a wood door face on the steel door with a carriage door look.  and he showed pictures of the roof, the colors of which he hopes will match colors of the house.  The dormers will depend on the pitch of the roof.
 Mr. Tyler asked whether there would be an addition between the garage and the house and was told Yes.
 Mr. Mitchell thought this house is one of the architectural jewels and the proportion and the fact that the garage faces the street gives him pause.  He wondered whether the garage could open north, but he does not have a solution.  The size of it and the fact that it faces the street where we usually have porches concern him.  But Mr. Riffle reminded the group that the house is on a corner with two front yards and two side yards.
 Mr. Riffle is not thrilled about the design for the connection between this and the house.  The garage itself is not a problem, but he does not like the way it is attached to the house.
 Mr. Mitchell asked is there a way it could be done more in with the traditional Granville design? 
 Mr. Riffle said because of the lines of the house there is no easy way to do it, but he would prefer to keep it unattached.
 Mr. Tyler asked about the timeframe and was told it should start within the next 3 months.  Mr. Tyler said tonight we are missing the person who could be very helpful to us.
 Mr. Riffle asked whether he has looked at ways to do this so it is not attached, and Mr. Mays said the only other option would be a solid flat roof with a slope from east elevation between the house and the old carriage house. 
 Mr. Riffle asked when you just keep adding and adding, you get to the point where the rooflines get jumbled and it does not flow into what is there.  If you take out the other stuff and just look at the garage, then he likes it.  But he does not like the piece in the middle.
 Mr. Mays said the door is there.  Unfortunately, that's the area for the stairway that leads to the second floor.
 Mr. Riffle noted there has to be some way so that it does not look stuck on.
 Mr. Mitchell asked is there a way to do it without the connector?  If instead of trying to make the new building look like the original house, give up and make the garage a new design.  Keep the same shape of the other and remove the dormer and add a conventional dormer.  It should look like a 12-pitch house.  Couldn't you double the width of the existing garage by replacing it with a bigger one?  Mr. Mays said that did not come up in conversation with the home owner; he is the contractor.  That would put the laundry back in the basement and probably allow no powder room. 
 Mr. Mitchell said we are having trouble and will want to postpone our decision.  Mr. Tyler wanted to talk to the owner, and Mr. Strayer said we could go over there and talk with him.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO TABLE THE APPLICATION PENDING A PLANNING SESSION WITH THE OWNER AND MR. BURRISS.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Denison University, - Freestanding sign

 The application is for a double-face, black and white, non-illuminated sign identifying the Baseball and Softball Fields on the new entrance to parking lot off Pearl Street.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-083 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Denison University - Sidewalk Sign

 The Settlers ball team wishes to place a sidewalk sign downtown on game days at an undetermined location.
 It was agreed it should be in front of Taylor's because it has an extra wide sidewalk and no café tables.
 Ms. O'Keefe said didn't we object to off-site locations, and we rejected one at Mom and Me.
 Mr. Riffle has no problem if it gets taken in at the end of the day. This is temporary approval, just for game days and just for the 1006 season.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-084 FOR ONE BASEBALL SEASON, LOCATION TO BE UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE VILLAGE PLANNER.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Denison University, 204 West Broadway - Fence

 Art Chonko explained the location of the wrought-iron fence desired for Monomoy, the President's home.  The old gate will stay put.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-085 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Rich Cherry, 22 South Main Street - Fence and Porch

 The design is for a 42" fence around the front and side of a new screened-in porch, and there would be a privacy fence in the back.  Part of the fence is already there.  He said there was a hideous chain-link fence there.  There would be 13' between the new porch and the existing garage, and they want a trellis and you won't see the fence in a couple of years with all the landscaping.
 Mr. Riffle asked about the siding on the garage, and Mr. Cherry said it's Pattern 116 1 x 8 with repeated groove vertical.  He does not want to match the house siding because it is ugly and not available anymore.  There will be a door, probably in the second bay away from the driveway into the back yard. 

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE PORCH ADDITION.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Denison University - Press Box

 Denison wants to build a two-story block press box at the baseball field and a small storage addition to the home dugout.
 Art Chonko described the plans and said the roof will match the press building.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-090 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 
Old Business

Timothy Bartlett- Change of Use

 Mr. Strayer called the applicant but has not heard back from him, and they have not formally withdrawn the application.  We have 45 days to take action (from May 22).  After discussion about parking, the Commission left the application on the table.

Work Session:

Dr. Wagner, South Main Street - Demolition and parking

 Since Dr. Wagner will be unable to be present at the next meeting when his application will be considered, he wanted to give the group some input as to his plans.  He wants to (1) demolish the building south of his clinic and (2) put in additional parking. He wanted an idea of the timetable so he can put in the parking as soon as possible. Mr. Strayer noted that In order to demolish a building, the owner must indicate what he wants to do with the space.  Village Council has to make the final decision on demolishing buildings.   Dr. Wagner explained exactly where the parking would go. 
 M<r. Riffle asked whether he has to go to the County for permission, because he thinks there might be a water run-off problem, but Dr. Wagner said it's on a natural grade.    He also said he needs a change of use; the previous owner received one but never used it.
Mr. Strayer will have the village engineer look into the drainage. 

Finding of Fact:   MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,B,D,E,F,G,AND H  UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF JUNE 12, 2006.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:30 p.m.
Next Meetings:    June 26 (Mr. Tyler will be absent on the 26th) AND July 10

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 5/22/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
May 22, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Members Absent:   Jack Burriss
 Visitors Present Jerry Martin, Betty Morrison, Sharon Sellitto, Nancy and Rich Gallagher, Larry Grindle
Also Present: Mollie Roberts, Assistant Manager
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of May 8:     MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Timothy Bartlett, 205 S. Prospect - Change of Use

The applicant is not present tonight so questions could not be answered.
Ms. O'Keefe thought it was such a beautiful home it's a shame to put it to commercial uses.  It would change the character of the neighborhood.  More and more, houses are becoming professional and we already have commercial houses on the north side of Elm.
Mr. Tyler thought that someone made an offer to purchase and then rescinded, so this request might be moot.
Mr. Wilkenfeld said we have denied such applications in the past, and he wishes to have more information on the change of use. 
Next-door neighbor Betty Morrison expressed concern about traffic and parking, especially when Debbie McPeek has a funeral. 
Mr. Riffle acknowledged that parking would be a concern, but we cannot act until we know what kind of a business he is looking at.
The Optometrist next door is also concerned about the parking.  The subject property is no place for a business, and he wants to protect parking for residents and those who work nearby.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TABLE 06-068, PENDING FURTHER INFORMATION.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 
Sharon Sellitto thought changes of uses are important enough that all the immediate neighbors should be notified.

Larry Grindle, 221 A. Mulberry - Addition

Mr. Grindle said his goal is to retain the character of the house but update some features.  They will re-side the house with white dutch-lap double 5 vinyl siding, replace windows, add trim and grids (but not on large porch windows). The exit door and awning on alley side will be removed and double doors added to the back exiting onto the new covered porch.  A deck will wrap around the back of the house.  A French door will open out to the deck from the back bedroom.  A 22'x28' 1½ story carriage house type garage is planned with shingled roof.  Windows and siding will match the house.  The deck over the garage is not an addition; it will be open with a roof over it.  It is on the alley and not visible from the street.  There is a pad for a garage and they will shift it for easier access.  There is no bathroom planned for the garage.
Mr. Riffle did not think grids were necessary on all windows, much to the relief of the applicant.  Rear windows do not needs grids.       
 Mr. Wilkenfeld hoped for a correlation between the house and addition.
 Mr. Mitchell suggested substituting a cement-type siding, which is cheaper although you have to paint it.  Hardy Plank or other materials could be investigated.

 MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-075 FOR GARAGE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: (1) APPLICANT TO BRING IN ADDITIONAL DRAWINGS FOR THE DECK AREA TO THE VILLAGE PLANNER AND (2) ALLOW HIM TO CHANGE TO CEMENT BOARD OR WOOD IF HE SO DESIRES.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business
Brews, 116 East Broadway - Modification

 Tonight the application is for a modification of the balcony railing and relocation of the dumpster.   Mr. Strayer and Mr. Burriss had said temporary permission could be granted for a year or two but then the wooden spindles must be installed.  Also it was recommended that the applicant place flower boxes with ivy on the mesh and allow the plant to grow down and hide the mesh.  Tonight GPC members thought a year or two was much too long a term.
The application also includes a modification to the dumpster enclosure to relocate the position of the fencing.
Mr. Mitchell asked whether there was some way to put on the originally approved railing and Jerry Martin said No.  Mr. Mitchell asked whether there was a hardship to the design we approved, and the applicant said no, it was changed because he wanted to.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld noted the applicant is under pressure to get this done, for the restaurant will open soon.
 Mr. Riffle would approve putting off final approval but give temporary approval now and return to what was originally approved.  The approval was to achieve a certain look.  If the applicant had come in with a plan using mesh, he would not have approved it.  There are a lot of good durable materials that would give the same look, whether metal, wood or plastic, and the contractor can find something suitable.  He should not have changed the design we approved.  He thought Mr. Martin could put something behind the spindles that would blend in.
 Mr. Tyler wants to allow him to get through the summer with the current situation and not shut down operations.
 Mr. Mitchell suggested giving him until the end of October to redesign it back to the approved plan.
 Jerry Martin said the changes were for (1) safety and (2) durability. The 4" squares were not as safe as the 2" squares, and this matches the grating on the side door and the inside as well.   He said the Buxton and several other places have similar materials.
 Mr. Martin asked whether we could table the portion of the application dealing with the railing and proceed with the dumpster, and Mr. Riffle noted both are on the same application.
Mr. Mitchell thought we could grant him a temporary approval.
The applicant explained plans for the two dumpsters as 12'x14' opening to a 19' long gate, which would not hang well, so they want to use two 10' gates and screen the dumpster and make it more accessible to trucks. The units have to stick out 2' from the building.  More discussion ensued and the design was still uncertain.
Maybe we could allow him to open the restaurant but not to use the balcony until he returns and presents an acceptable design

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:  (1) IN 30 DAYS HE WILL BRING US DESIGNS FOR THE DUMPSTERS IN THE BACK  AND FOR ANOTHER SOLUTION TO THE RAILING ON THE BALCONY; (2) BY THE END OF OCTOBER THE RAILING IS TO BE REPLACED; (3) HE CAN USE THE RESTAURANT AND THE BALCONY FOR 30 DAYS AND WILL BE GRANTED A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY; (4) HE NEEDS TO INSTALL SCREENING ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BALCONY; (5) IN 60 DAYS THE DUMPSTERS MUST BE COMPLETED SATISFACTORILY.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 But the question arose, "How can we approve this without knowing what he will come up with?" and Mr. Riffle said that we can modify the original plan once it's approved, but when you do further modifications, you need approval.  We can give temporary approval and then if we do not have a solution within 30 days, occupancy will be revoked by the Village Planner.    
 
Finding of Fact:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS B  UNDER NEW BUSINESS AND A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF MAY 22, 2006.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 The new Village Manager, Don Holycross, was welcomed, and he said he wanted to see how the GPC operated.

Adjournment: 8:00 p.m.
Next Meetings:    June 12 and June 26 (Mr. Tyler will be absent on the 26th)

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 5/8/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
May 8, 2006
Minutes

Members Present, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Members Absent:   Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe
 Visitors Present:  Kay and Ed Vance, Julio Valenzuela, John Noblick, Flo Hoffman, Rob Drake, Jerry Martin, Brian Mills, Jon Lloyd
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of April 24:     MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Leslee O'Neill, 865 Newark-Granville Road - Fence addition

The applicant wishes to add spear-shaped finials to pickets and add pine-cone shapes to posts in cast iron to add to the authenticity and aesthetics of the fence.
Jon Lloyd brought in samples of finials and caps. This is a high fence so spiked finials would create no danger.  He showed triangle and circle examples and wanted to receive approval for either one.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-058, AND APPLICANT MAY SELECT WHICHEVER OPTION HE LIKES. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 
Granville Historical Society Cemetery

 The Historical Society wants to place a historical marker at the cemetery.  Mr. Strayer said there are no regulations for signs in the Open Space District, but we will have to grant a variance for design and location of the historical marker.  They have asked to place it in the tree lawn between the sidewalk and the curb because of the topography in the wall.  Having the sign back into the cemetery would look strange. 

Mr. Wilkenfeld applied the criteria to the application:

A.  That special circumstances or conditions exist which are peculiar to the land or structure(s) involved and which are not applicable to other lands or structures in the same zoning district.   That is the case here.
 B. That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Zoning Ordinance would deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the provisions of this Ordinance.  There are other historical markers nearby.
C. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.  True.
D. That the granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any undue privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands or structures in the same zoning district. True.
E. That the granting of the variance will in no other manner adversely affect the health, safety, and general welfare of the persons residing or working within the vicinity of the proposed variance.  This is true also. 

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCES FOR THE APPLICATION. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-062 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

PNB, 119 East Broadway - Sidewalk Sign

 Mr. Strayer said this sidewalk sign would have a changeable area for advertising special events.  It would be white with light blue, medium blue, and dark blue coloring with black highlights.  The ad would be covered with Plexiglas.  It would be similar to other two-sided sidewalk signs
 Brian Mills said the bank does not want to do anything unusual but wants to be able to advertise special events, perhaps manager's specials, once a month or so. 

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-064 WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE BANK WILL REMOVE THE SIGN AT NIGHT AND THAT THE VILLAGE MANAGER WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THE ADVERTISEMENT BEFORE IT IS INSTALLED. 

Brews, 116 East Broadway - fencing

 Jerry Martin wants to modify the existing approval to change from wood railings with spindles to a wire mesh façade. 
 Mr. Martin said they gave consideration to Village Council's and citizens' concerns about safety with 4" gap between slats and this one gives a 2" square to prevent things from falling off the deck.  It's more durable, made of steel.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld noted that for aesthetic reasons he would rather see the original design and asked whether the original design could be made of more durable material, like plastic.
 Mr. Riffle asked why he couldn't have the railing down to 4" off the deck.  He asked whether there are other buildings in the village with this type of railing, and Mr. Martin did not know.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld said GPC is charged to maintain a certain historic look in the Village and to him this does not look historic, although he thinks highly of the whole project.
 Mr. Riffle said when he looks at the building, there are aesthetic details, and this wire mesh does not look like the details.  The applicant is introducing something that would not have been around earlier.
 Mr. Martin said that people say the balcony looks good, and Mr. Riffle said the deck is OK, but it is just the railing.  The original plan fit together as a whole.  He suggested going back to the original plan and putting something behind it that would fade in.  Mr. Martin said he could probably do something.  Mr. Riffle thought that was the only way to make it fit into the historical character of the building.
 Mr. Tyler said he could either take the new design down and replace it with what we approved, or he could get approval for this design.
Mr. Wilkenfeld suggested getting something white in the front, maybe do a mock-up on one end and show us how it looks.  We can try to compromise to break up those tiny little squares and make it look like a normal railing.
 Mr. Martin asked to table this application until the next meeting.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO TABLE AT APPLICANT'S REQUEST.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Ed and Kay Vance, 233 East Broadway - fencing

 The applicant wishes to install a 6' privacy fence to continue the one already in place.  There was one there before, but the neighbor took it down.    Kay Vance said they will enclose the yard using the same materials, color, and design as the rest of the fence.  Mr. Vance added that they will put in a gate.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether they are putting it pretty much where it was before, and the answer was yes, it will go right up to the property line.

MR. WILKENFLD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-066 AND ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO REPLACE THE OLD FENCE RIGHT AT THE PROPERTY LINE.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Julio Valenzuela, 410 North Granger Street - Fence

The applicant wishes a 6' standard dog-ear privacy fence along the north lot line between the house and the garage.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld added that it will have to be painted or stained, and he would like to see an overhead photo or drawing of where the fence will be.  Mr. Strayer will provide an aerial photo.
 Mr. Riffle would prefer to see samples of fence provided

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-067 WITH THE PROVISION THAT THE APPLICANT WILL SUBMIT A SAMPLE OF FENCE.  HE IS TO SUBMIT A COLOR SAMPLE AND SAY WHETHER IT WILL BE PAINTED OR STAINED.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 
Work Session:

Scott Hickey, 211 South Main Street - Porch replacement

 John Noblick explained that the porch is wearing out and slanted and Mr. Hickey wants to level it and add some fiberglass style columns, and widen the porch to 3' wider. He will add a composite deck, panel-ize under the porch, and close it off. Mr. Hickey submitted a plan several years ago.  The South Main Street ROW jogs into the yards, and on the tax map the street is wide until you get to the next street, so it's 12' into the yard.  In a photograph the ROW is only 6 1/2' in front of the porch, where the property line really is.  Thus, how close the ROW is to the property line is an issue.
 The other issue is the front porch is 18' from the sidewalk, and the Academy building is 23-25' from the sidewalk.  Other properties vary in depth from the sidewalk, but the Hickey house is closer than all of them, and all of them are over the property line.   The line spreads as you go down the street.  The Hickey house is on a knoll and stands alone.  They want 3' to widen the porch.
 Mr. Strayer said we do not need to give him a variance because the line is set by established building lines of the existing houses, so it's the front point in that stretch that is in the setback.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld said one of the things that may help is if we could see a drawing.  Mr. Noblick said it will look a lot like the house next door. 
 Mr. Strayer said the porch is considered part of the structure, and the house is in the setback.  He can take a picture and look down the block; even 2' can shove this out of line.
Mr. Wilkenfeld is not opposed to the material but would like to see a visual of "down the street."  He will keep an open mind but would like to see more.
 Mr. Riffle said this house has a delicate feel to it, and he would not want heavier fencing and posts.
 Mr. Noblick will come back with 2 1/2' extension for an 8' porch and he will keep the posts delicate.  He said the roof may gain some thickness, and he might be able to mock-up something on the photo or he will draw something up.  
 
 
Finding of Fact:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,B,C,E AND F  UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF MAY 8, 2006.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:00 p.m.
Next Meetings:     May 27 (may be rescheduled) and June 12

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 4/24/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
April 24, 2006
Minutes

Members Present:   Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Members Absent
 Visitors Present:  Art Chonko, Brian Barkett, Scott Hickey
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of April 10:  On Page 1, the second line under Denison, Mr. Strayer asked to change to "The silo will be 20' taller…"   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE WITH CORRECTION. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Denison University Track - Remodeling 

 Art Chonko explained the renovations planned to the football field and track, with new lighting, support buildings, sod, and outbuildings around the track.  They are not changing anything at the parking lot. 
 Ms. O'Keefe asked how long night games will go on, and Mr. Chonko said around 10 p.m., similar to games now and games at the high school.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether the new lighting will affect neighboring houses, and Mr. Chonko said probably it would not.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-049 AS SUBMITTED. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 
Scott Hickey, 211 South Main Street - Driveway Replacement

 Four years ago Mr. Hickey asked for and received approval to renovate his driveway, but financial issues precluded completing the project at that time.  Tonight the exact same application is before you because the permit expired.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-055 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Work Session:

Brian Barkett, 120 W. Broadway - Awning

 The owner of a business behind Pinkerton's on Linden wishes to add a strip on the awning rather than replace the entire awning.  It will be a solid metal.
 Mr. Strayer said in the past we have had signs painted on the drop or top of the awning. The applicant realizes that but for economic considerations, he is requesting this design.  The awning is dark forest green and the lettering can be black on white or vice versa.
 Members had no problems with this project.


Finding of Fact:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A AND B  UNDER NEW BUSINESS, AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF APRIL 24, 2006.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 7:12 p.m.
Next Meetings:    May 8 (Mr. Mitchell will be absent) and May 27 (may be rescheduled)

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 4/10/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
April 10, 2006
Minutes

Members Present:  Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Members Absent:  Jack Burriss
 Visitors Present:  Darcy Grossett, Gale Cady Williams, Mark Kaiser, Art Chonko
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none

Minutes of March 27:  Ms. O'Keefe questioned the designation of trees on Page 3, and it was agreed that the architect will be consulting with Speedway to stagger the pear trees and the maple trees. They will also consult with the Tree and Landscape Commission. 
MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE WITH CORRECTIONS. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Bernie Williams, 119 East Elm Street (Granville Gift Basket) - Signage 
 Darcy Grossett wishes to erect a pair of 46" x 46" window signs, a wall sign-9.25"x96"-- and a 25"x45" plastic sidewalk sign with purple letters.  All fit within the code.
 She said the sidewalk sign will go between her shop and the Subway, similar to the Elm sign.  The owner before the previous owner had a sidewalk sign.  So Mr. Wilkenfeid said this basically repeats what has been here before.

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-045 AS SUBMITTED. MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
  
.Denison University, South Main Street - Steam Plant upgrading

 Art Chonko explained the college's desire to add onto the southwest side of the building at the rear.  The addition the silo will be 20' taller and covered within the frame.  They will remove some portions of the back section.  It will not show much from the front because of the trees.  The ash silo will remain but will be boxed in with sheet metal, similar to what's there now.  They will keep the same color and make no changes to the front.  They are trying to reduce the pollution.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE 06-046 FOR ADDITION TO THE STEAM PLANT. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Chase Bank, 136 East Broadway - Signs

Mr. Strayer noted we denied this application last time, so this is a re-application with modifications.  The problems were with the canopy sign and wall sign above the canopy.  It has been reduced in size.  Also on Page 6 they have changed the wall sign.  They will remove the travel agency sign and will remove the old canopy and put smaller white lettering on the new blue canopy.  They will change the bank name on the night deposit.
 Mr. Riffle noted that they have done what we wanted them to do.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE 06-047 AS SUBMITTED.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 
Old Business:

Jay Jenkins, 464 South Main Street - Temporary sign

 Mr. Tyler explained that he met with the applicant, who has an aluminum 8 sq.ft. two-sided sign that he wishes to install.   He would stick it in the ground in front of the Twig.  Mr. Tyler suggested that he make a sidewalk sign to be taken in after hours. 
 Mr. Jenkins said that he purchased some 1x4's and will make an A-frame standing sign which will sit about 8"-10" off the ground.  It will be painted with black letters on white background with a checkerboard border and red accents.  The legs will be white.  He will apply for a permanent sign later, but for the joint sign he wants a permanent designation.
 Mr. Strayer said that for a temporary sign, GPC has discretion to approve what they choose.  Mr. Wilkenfeld wanted a time limit stipulated. 
 Mr. Mitchell cautioned not to allow more big signs, but Mr. Tyler said the way Mr. Jenkins' business is located in the rear, he needs a sign to identify his shop.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE TEMPORARY WHITE SIGN.  06-034, FOR SIX MONTHS, 8"-10" OFF THE GROUND.  MR.MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Newark Cleaners, 474 South Main  - Signage
 The applicant is not prepared to present this item tonight and it will remain on the table... 

120 West Broadway - Signage
 The applicant is not present tonight so it will not be discussed. 

Finding of Fact for April 10:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,B, and C  UNDER NEW BUSINES AND A UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF APRIL 10, 2006.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact for March 27:  MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE FINDINGS FOR THE MARCH 27 MEETING, WHICH INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING APPROVALS:  06-032, 06-037, 06-040, 06-041, AND ONE DENIAL, No. 06-038

Adjournment: 7:25.
Next Meetings:    April 10 and April 24

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 3/27/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
March 27, 2006
Minutes

Roll Call: Jack Burriss, Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Members Absent:  Tom Mitchell
 Visitors Present:  Judy Fisher, Wayne Malliconte, Ken Letz, Gordon Glissman, Paul Quinn, Gale Williams, Carol Whitt, Brian Miller, Tracee Karaffa, Julio Valenzuela
Also Present:  Chris Strayer, Village Planner

Minutes of March 13, 2006:
 Mr. Tyler moved to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Burriss seconded.   Motion unanimously approved.

Citizens Comments:
None

Chairman Riffle swore in all those who planned to speak.

New Business:

06-032  Julio Valenzuela, 331 Spellman St. - Remodeling 
 Mr. Valenzuela noted that he intends to use smooth hearty pine siding with a 6" exposure.  Board and batten style will be used on the back addition.  He intends to use 1 x 4 boards around the windows with square butt corners and the head of window the same as sides, stepping up to the next size for the window heads if he finds that the casings are slightly bigger.  The arched topped windows will be saved.  He suggested that 8x8 square posts will replace porch posts.  He will remove the brick chimney as it has no historic value and does not contribute in any way.   Gables will remain the same, only replacing rotted wood.   Vents will be removed.  The roof is not to change.  Aluminum storm windows will be removed, possibly using vinyl instead.

 Mr. Burriss would like further consideration given to the porch posts and requested that Mr. Valenzuela review these details with the Village Planner and a Planning Commission member.
    
 Conditions:   In addition to corner boards there will be window trim on all windows and a detail of the proposed porch posts is to be submitted to the Village Planner for further review with a Planning Commission member.  The two manners of siding as proposed are approved.

 Mr. Burris moved to approve the application for 06-032 with conditions.  Mr. Tyler seconded.   Motion unanimously approved.


06-034 Jay Jenkins, 464 S. Main Street - Temporary Sign
 Temporary 2x4 sign to sit between the stone wall and sidewalk.  There was discussion of consistency since as proposed this sign is a sideways sign.  There was concern with colors used, the length of time the sign would be needed, and the "sideway's" vs. sandwich board style.  


 Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to table the temporary sign application 06-034.  Mr. Tyler seconded.  Motion was unanimously approved to table.  Mr. Tyler will approach the applicant to discuss specifics.

06-037 Chase Bank, 136 E. Broadway - Awning
 Application to replace awning with duplicate awning, different logo (under next application).

 Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to approve the application for 06-037.  Mr. Tyler                  seconded.  Motion was unanimously approved.


06-038 Chase Bank, 136 E. Broadway - Miscellaneous Signs
 Application is for signs; awning, window, door window, wall (above awning), two temporary signs in window and one customer convenience sign (nighttime deposit).  The deposit sign does not require approval, as it is a customer convenience sign.  There was discussion of the letter sizes (bigger) although the sign area is the same.  It is noted that although there are no letter size requirements within the sign code, the Architectural Review Overlay District section references design of signs in keeping with the character of the community (discreet and minimal, small scale, color subdued, etc.).   The Commission feels the current lettering is too large and would agree to authorize lettering that is equivalent to the size of the previous signage (Bank One). 
 
 Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to approve the miscellaneous signage for 06-038.  Mr. Burriss seconded.  Application was unanimously denied.

 Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to deny the application for 06-038.  Mr. Tyler seconded.  Motion was unanimously approved to deny. 

06-039, Newark Cleaners, 474 South Main Street - Miscellaneous Signs
 Applicant requests this application be tabled at this time.

 Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to table application 06-039.  Mr. Tyler seconded.  Motion unanimously approved to table.

06-040, Carol Whitt, 139 W. Maple Street - Roof and Deck Repair
 Roof under second floor deck is leaking.  Applicant requests to remove decking, repair roof and replace decking to conform to newer decking on property.  The same corner posts and side rails as existing will be used. 
 
 Mr. Tyler moved to approve 06-040 for roof and deck repair.  Mr. Wilkenfeld seconded.  Motion was unanimously approved.


06-041, Tracee Karaffa, 311 N. Pearl Street - Roof Repair
 Applicant is removing roof and proposes to replace with a standing seem metal roof.  The applicant is only currently applying for replacement of the front porch but will eventually request replacement of the entire roof.  It is the Village Planner's recommendation to approve all roofing within this application.

 Conditions:   Entire roof replacement to be medium bronze metal roof.

 Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to approve 06-041 for roof repair.  Mr. Tyler seconded.  Motion was unanimously approved.


Old Business:

06-019, Northstar Realty, Galway Dr - New Commercial Buildings
 Remained Tabled.


04-024, Wellert Corporation, South Cherry Valley Road  - New Commercial Buildings
 Mr. Wilkenfeld moved to remove application 04-024 from the table.  Second by Mr. Burriss.   Motion was unanimously approved.
 
WORK SESSION:
 Paul Quinn, with Arby's Restaurant Group brought redesigned site and landscape plans.   He noted, as previously suggested, a front yard increase to 25ft., a re-layout of the site to encourage one way traffic around the building, 6 degree parking (allowing for 41 parking spaces), and 36.8% of lot coverage with impervious area.  He recognized the advantage of angled parking provided more room around the building which increased greenspace between the sidewalk and the building.   They have changed the symbols for the light poles and will get a lighting layout from a local lighting manufacture.   A stamped concrete type of material is proposed, which will serve as a different texture surface at the entrance to the location.
 
 Mr. Burriss complimented the applicant for recognizing what was requested during the last meeting and incorporating those requests into these revisions.  The Commission is pleased with the revised site plan.

 Gorden Glisman, Landscape Architect recognized his goal of working with two fronts (SR16 and Speedway Drive) in an attempt to hide the parking lots and concrete.   The dumpster will be disguised with heavy evergreens, Arborvitae and lower spiria shrubbery.  He noted that about 80-90% of the material is evergreen, with those plants that flower to be pink and white.   The building will be framed with upright trees and suggested using Pear trees (flowering in spring) noting the Pear as one of the trees wherein the leaf remains on the longest.   Long term, the width of the pear tree will be about 20 ft.  Although maple trees have been suggested, Mr. Glisman advised that the spread of a maple could be 40-45 ft.  The Architect will be consulting with Speedway to stagger the pear trees and maple trees. He did note that another suggestion was the Ivory Silk Lilac Tree, which would grow to about 20 ft. tall.    He noted the evergreen landscaping around the drive through canopy, and ornamental grasses which is a more attractive way of disguising the canopy/sandwich board.  The property will be irrigated.  He showed the Commission a sample of the mulch and noted that stone river rock will be used in


the area of the canopy/sandwich board.

 There was discussion and agreement that the perimeter plantings be consistent in specie and/or staggered with that of the Speedway development.   The canopy post will be painted to match the light posts (green).

 Building design (colors and materials) was discussed in length with recommendations and suggestions shared.  Consistency is to be used following the green on awnings, lamp posts, roof, etc.  It was noted that signage in the Planned District only allows one wall sign with a maximum of 60 sq. ft.; freestanding sign would require a maximum size of 18 sq. ft. - one per lot w/ 12 ft. height.   Monument signs could be approved and would be preferred.  Variances may be required.

Commission member Tyler left the meeting - 8:40pm

 Mr. Quinn requested authorization to release Arby's architect's to proceed with modifying the plans as suggested this evening.  He will return to the Commission with the architect's renderings for further review.  He noted that Arby's would like to begin construction in August '06.      

 Arby's has agreed to return with building elevations, an Engineer's site plan, sign package, landscaping plan, and site lighting schematic based on this evenings discussions.


Other:

844 Burg Street.  Additional Driveway

WORK SESSION:
 The property owner has requested a Work Session with the Commission to discuss alternative options for the proposed location of an additional driveway.   Site distance measurements were taken (Per Engineer, a driveway on a 25MPH road should have a minimum of 280 ft. of site distance).  Neither the original driveway nor the proposed driveway meets this requirement.

 Ms. Fisher discussed her plans for the property with the Commission.  She would like a second driveway to be used only for servicing the back side of the property and the barn/garage (also to be located on the back side of the property).

 It was recommended that another work session be conducted to include Ms. Fisher, the Harvey's (neighboring property owner) and several Commission members at the property location.

Commission member Wilkenfeld left the meeting - 9:35pm.



Finding of Fact:
 Tabled until next meeting due to lack of quorum.


Adjournment:  9:47 p.m.


Next Meetings:  April 10 and April 24, 2006

Respectfully submitted,
Beverly Adzic
 Village Clerk

Planning Minutes 3/13/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
March 13, 2006
Minutes

Members Present: Jack Burriss, Tom Mitchell (Vice Chair), Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Tym Tyler, Carl Wilkenfeld
 Members Absent:
 Visitors Present:  Shelley Morgan, Russel Lee Ringler, Carolyn Carter, George Barton, Tom Harvey
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none
Election of Officers:  MR. WILKENFELD NOMINATED TIM RIFFLE AS CHAIRMAN, MR. BURRISS SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
 MR. WILKENFELD NOMINATED MR. MITCHELL AS VICE CHAIRMAN, MR. BURRISS SECONDED AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APROVED.
Minutes of February 27:  Page 1, line 6, change "Alice" to Amber.
Page 1, 5th line under Shelley Morgan, change to "Mr. Morgan said the extended addition will…."
Page 2, 2d paragraph under Wellert:  delete the word "not."
MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE WITH CORRECTIONS. MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

New Day Spa II, 1285 Cherry Valley Road - Change of Use 
 The applicant wishes to change use of the building from a residence to a beauty salon, a permitted use.  All requirements are met.  The handicap ramp will be handled administratively. 
 
 MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHANGE OF USE FOR 06-025.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Cherry Westgate Family Clinic, Cherry Valley Road - Temporary Sign

 The applicant wishes approval for a temporary sign advertising a play at the Midland Theater this weekend.  Mr. Wilkenfeld noted that since changeable-copy signs are not allowed, if we approve this, it should be with the condition that they will not use this sign again.  Admittedly this is for a charitable intent rather than self-gain, but we are leery of setting a precedent. 
 Ms. O'Keefe said in theory a temporary sign could be in place for a year, and if we approve this one, someone else will come back and use this as precedent.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED WE DENY THIS SIGN 06-026 BECAUSE (1) THEY DID NOT COME WITH AN APPLICATION BEFORE PUTTING IT UP; (2) THIS TYPE OF SIGN IS NOT ACCEPTABLE IN THE VILLAGE; AND (3) THE GARISH COLORS.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED TO DENY.
 
Judith Fisher, 844 Burg Street - Driveway

 Mr. Strayer said this is for an additional driveway. In the village we only allow one curb cut, and this would require a variance.  The applicant was not aware of this requirement when she put in the application.  The drive was for future uses and landscaping.
 Tom Harvey owns the house down the hill on the east side of the proposed application.  He commended his new neighbor for cleaning up her lot, but he opposes this application because of:  (1) safety issues: Her existing drive is on the crest of Burg where visibility is poor, and Burg is getting more traffic and more speeders.  It's tricky getting out of his own driveway, and the new drive would be between their houses to make it worse.  (2) For aesthetic reasons: he has a narrow lot and his patio has glass doors on that side.  Because of the elevation of those two lots, her house is 10' higher than his.  It's 25' from the property line, but now he has to look eye-level right up to her driveway.  His family wants GPC to deny this application.
 Ms. O'Keefe stated that the law is clear in saying 'only one curb cut.'  Also, that part of Burg is dangerous, especially for people coming up from Thornwood.
 Mr. Strayer said there was some desire to get to the back of the property for construction and landscaping.  Would it be OK as a temporary access point for landscaping, etc., knowing that they would return it to a natural state afterwards?
Mr. Mitchell said that if you are asking construction equipment to come through, they necessarily drive slowly and would need to drive up Burg Street.  It would be difficult for them.  The applicant's existing driveway allows her to access the rear now.  For safety reasons, he could not vote to approve a driveway 100' off the crest of the hill.  If it were difficult to turn around, that would be different.  It seems like we are being asked to do something that would be dangerous.
Mr. Wilkenfeld noted it would be cheaper just to circumvent trees.  For the extra curb cut, site-line distances, the width of Burg Street, objections from the neighbor, and lack of hardship, it should be denied.
  Mr. Mitchell stated that if we approve this, the applicant should be required to return the site to its natural state.  It should not be used as a turn-around.  Put the soil back and eliminate the curb cut.
 Mr. Strayer noted that when you start construction without approval, you are taking a risk, so the applicant is required to put it back in the state it was before construction began.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO DENY THE APPLICATION.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED TO DENY

Tod Darfus, 130 North Prospect Street - Sign

 The new restaurant is changing its name to 'Greek Eats,' but the owner is the same man.

MR. TYLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE WINDOW SIGN FOR 06-028.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

INT, 117 North Prospect Street - Sidewalk Sign

 Mr. Strayer explained that in the last meeting we approved all the other signs on this property and now they want replace the former Town and Gown sidewalk sign with the new one.  It will have three colors and the reds of all signs will match.  A blackboard is on the open section for weekly notices to be posted. 
 George Barton said they had a sidewalk sign before, and his would be in the same place.
 Mr. Burriss asked whether we have to approve a variance for the blackboard, and Mr. Strayer said we did the one for the Village Baker and Readers Garden, but denied one for Whit's and the Coffee Shop.
 Mr. Barton noted that it does appear that a sidewalk sign does attract business.  He will match the other signs and add a border but will reverse the colors of the other sign.
 Mr. Wilkenfeld asked whether it is necessary to have two "dot.coms" on the sign and was told that the name was approved with the .com. 

MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE 06-030 FOR SIDEWALK SIGN WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE BORDER BE CONTINUED UP AND AROUND THE SIGN.  MR. RIFFLE SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

 Old Business:

Wellert Corporation, South Cherry Valley Road (Arby's)
Northstar Realty, Galway Drive

Both agenda items were tabled.

Shelly Morgan, 416 North Granger Street - Addition

 Mr. Strayer stated that we approved the bump-out last time, and now the application has detailed drawings.
 Mr. Morgan said he tried to label everything in the drawings.  They tried to simulate other houses in the area.  They are adding a garage on the bottom level with 2 bedrooms over it.  Windows and trim are exactly the same, and the roof will be as close as possible to the original.
 Mr. Mitchell wanted assurance that all materials will match. 
 Mr. Burriss thought it would be appropriate to include the vent on the gable.  It should appear on both sections to make it more consistent.

MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE COMPLETE APPLICATION WITH THE ADDITION OF THE ROUND GABLE VENT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE OF ADDITION; (2) MATERIAL DETAIL WILL MATCH THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE; (3) APPLICANT MAY ADD SHUTTERS WHICH, WILL MATCH.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEMS A,B,C,D,E  UNDER NEW BUSINES AND C UNDER OLD BUSINESS AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF MARCH 13, 2006.  MR. TYLER SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:20 p.m.
Next Meetings:   March 27 (Betty will be absent) and April 10

Respectfully submitted,
Betty Hullinger

Planning Minutes 2/27/06

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
February 27, 2006
Minutes

Members Present: Jack Burriss (Vice Chair),  Tom Mitchell, Jackie O'Keefe, Tim Riffle (Chair), Carl Wilkenfeld
 Members Absent:  Tym Tyler
 Visitors Present:  Mark Clapsadle, Shelley Morgan, Earl Hawkins, Virginia Hanni, Nellene Legg, Cecelia Pretzman, Russ Griffith, Paul W. Quinn, Ken Ler-Wallert Corp, Russ Reyler, Tabassum Zalotrwala, Amber Mitchell, Brian Miller, Rose Wingert, Deborah Snyder
Also Present: Chris Strayer, Village Planner
The Chair swore in all those who planned to speak
Citizens Comments:  none
Election of Officers:  Postponed until next meeting.
Minutes of February 13:  Page 1, 6th line up, change to "about the massing,"
Page 3, 2d line up, change "emulate the graphics" to "copy the soffits"
Page 3, 7th line from top, change "SOUTH" to "CENTER"
 MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO APPROVE WITH CORRECTIONS. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

New Business:

Shelley Morgan, 416 North Granger Street - Addition
 
 The applicant, a policeman, wishes to add a 28'x28' two-car, two-story garage with two bedrooms, bath and laundry upstairs
 Mr. Mitchell notes there are no elevation drawings, and Ms. O'Keefe added there are no dimensions either.  Mr. Morgan said the extended addition will be over the garage, and everything will follow the contour of the house itself and will not impact any closer to the property line.  They are taking out the concrete raised patio.
 When asked by Mr. Burriss about the windows, he replied they will not be able to do windows in front, but he showed where the 6' French doors and 3 other windows will be.    Mr. Burriss wants to see the relationship of windows on upper level to windows on lower story.  Mr. Morgan showed where door to the house and the windows will be as well as the plan for the roofline.    He said they will use the materials of the existing house. 
 Mr. Wilkenfeld did not think the group had a problem with the general idea but we need to cover our bases.  The applicant requested tabling, but they are anxious to get started.  He said they will be doing a bump-out for the kitchen window.  Mr. Mitchell said to the policeman, "You can get started.  We will not arrest you."  
  The applicant said there will be a 6'x10' area closed in for a porch with railing. 

MR.WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:  (1) APPLICANT CAN START ON THE FRONT PART OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS THE BUMP-OUT; (2) GET DRAWINGS TO THE VILLAGE PLANNER SO HE AND JACK BURRISS CAN LOOK AT THEM; (3) WINDOW ON FRONT BUMP-OUT WILL BE EXACTLY AS IT IS NOW; (4) APPLICANT WILL BRING TO THE NEXT MEETING THE FINAL DRAWINGS FOR THE REST OF THE ADDITION FOR FINAL APPROVAL.. MR. BURRISS SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED

Mark Clapsadle, 908 Newark-Granville Road - Addition

 The applicant wishes a one-story deck/terrace with porch roof, a second floor addition and side porch addition
 Mr. Mitchell asked about windows on the second floor and was told there will be a window behind the bed wall.  Because of the roofline, they must avoid a flashing problem.  The addition could be seen from the road just a little bit since this is two stories.
 Mr. Riffle asked about the porch roofline and was told it will create a cover for the side door.  He described the surface of the addition. The trim will match the existing trim.  The original house was built in 1812 of brick, but from the 1960s it has been all siding, and the addition will match that siding.
 
MR. BURRISS MOVED TO APPROVE 06-016 BE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Mr. Burriss noted that this was a good set of drawings.

Northstar Realty, Galway Drive -     Per applicant's request,
MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO TABLE 06-019. MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Old Business:

Wellert Corporation, South Cherry Valley Road (Arby's)

Paul A. Quinn, Vice President for Construction, stated that this application came before you two years ago.  At that time there were different representatives from Arby's, and this is a whole new group here today.  What we have here is a proposal to bring Arby's in as part of the Speedway project,  It will be all brick, 32,000 sq.ft., on a 3.2 acre lot with ample parking  The driveway will go all the way around, and have a drive-through.  The dumpster will be enclosed.  They are seeking architectural approval of the site plan so they can go to their engineer, after which they will bring in a landscaping plan and signage plan.
Mr. Wilkenfeld asked about a traffic study and was told it was not necessary, but Mr. Wilkenfeld thought a traffic study was not included for Speedway. Mr. Strayer said in the subdivision approval for the three lots that went with the gas station, a traffic study was done.  He talked to the Law Director and agreed it was in the approval for Speedway.  Mr. Wilkenfeld said yes, but they said they would come back later and that the traffic impact study was for themselves only.  
Mr. Quinn said they want to start construction in August, and they hope to get through this without going for any variances.
Mr. Strayer said because it's in the Planning District, we cannot give them site plan approval; they must go through V.C.  We cannot pick this apart-it has to be one full project and we need to see whether we like this and then grant temporary approval.  The only variance might be lot coverage, depending upon how much land they get upon the lot split in the reserve.
Mr. Burriss summarized items needed:  the restaurant should be a little farther back on the center section.  There is a lot of landscaping space in the back and very little in the front….  Sidewalks are to tie the area together….  Need to see cut sheets on lighting.  Speedway was cooperative on lighting and location of poles, and Mr. Quinn will check with Speedway about lighting. 
 Mr. Burriss said they have done a great job on signage.  We tend not to approve internally lit signs, and we need more signs externally lit.
 Regarding the building, Mr. Burriss does not think any of us were in favor of the huge center glass piece, and we talked about carrying the brick across that window.  We discussed the awning being repeated on the element and being striped.  We like a standing metal roof, and we liked the color variation in the brick.
Mr. Quinn said sidewalks will be put in.  Mr. Burriss added there should be a tree lawn between the street and sidewalks, and sidewalks should go all the way around.  Different paving material could distinguish crosswalks….  Maybe outdoor seating could be planned….  We don't want to drive in and feel we are entering the back.  Mr. Quinn sad Arby's customers do not like outdoor seating.  He said they want the building as close to the road as they can, but they need to leave room for the drive-through.  To move the building back pushes the drive-through too far back.  Their designer will work on entering the back of the building. 
Ms. O'Keefe feels the building itself is a sign.  She thought we had asked for it to be toned down.  Mr. Burriss stated it's still a significant building but it has been toned down, i.e., the name.  When we get to discussion of menu board and other things, we will address that.  Mr. Riffle said they need some of that for their business identification.  Mr. Quinn said the menu board will have a canopy over the drive-through. It will also serve as a height reminder. 
Mr. Burriss thought we could use a more articulated lamppost, and we would be in favor of discussion about the gravel.  Mr. Quinn replied that it's here because people throw their cigarette butts here instead of in back.  Mr. Burriss said that will be part of the discussion of the site plan.
Tabassum Zalotrwala, designer, showed the group photo=graphics.  She tried to work Arby's around what downtown Granville looks like, and they want a warm, friendly aura.  She showed how she changed the building to make it more like Granville, i.e., the awning and stone with earthy feel….   Pediment does not need to be clapboard.  A band of mulleins will be used for the clapboard, but we could substitute anything.  They could repeat the lower material in the pedestal . . . articulated stucco . . . repeat the blocks . . . round window. 
Mr. Burriss asked about the side elevation, saying we have encouraged islands to have live flowers….  When you are looking at the back, work in islands.  Maybe have a blind window on doors to break up the massing. If they use stucco, install stucco inserts in the windows….  The use of these lights on the side of the building helps break it up.  It would add a 3-D element.
Mr. Quinn said what if they put a fake window on the back of spandrel glass to repeat this element.  Mr. Burriss wants to see positive architecture and make the sign fit the building but would not necessarily repeat all the elements…..  Make the back have a reference to the front….  Maybe a backdrop for the sign.  Soften the menu board and make it less generic….  Keep the dumpster area clean and provide a hose to wash the concrete. 
Mr. Burriss said you are good designers, and we are moving in a good direction.  Our goal is for you to tell people you are in the Granville area and that you are not just anywhere in the USA. You have reduced the Arby's logo a lot but some more work needs to be done….  Add some shape to the apron; some aprons are articulated on the edge….  He wants the Arby's logo color as part of the package….  The dumpster will match building materials….    He wants to see a sample of the gravel color.
The designer will work on these suggestions, add round window in the pediment, color to match color at the bottom.  They will add inserts to pediment, like a single window with scale and spacing consistent.  She will improve the back but with no pediment.  The painted sign in the rear saying "Arby's," a nice articulated painted sign, lit from outside.  
 
MR. MITCHELL MOVED TO TABLE 04-024.  MR. WILKENFELD SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Finding of Fact:   MR. WILKENFELD MOVED TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR ITEM B  UNDER NEW BUSINES AND WE FIND THEM CONSISTENT WITH RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CODE AS OUTLINED IN THE VILLAGE PLANNER'S MEMO OF FEBRUARY 27, 2006.  MR. MITCHELL SECONDED, AND MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Adjournment: 8:40p.m.

Next Meetings:  March 13 and March 27 (Betty will be absent March 27)

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.