Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes March 10, 2008

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

March 10, 2008

7:00pm

Minutes

 

Members Present: Tom Mitchell, Gina Reeves, Tim Riffle, Tim Ryan (Chair), Jack Burriss, and Jackie O’Keefe (non-voting).

Members Absent: None.

Staff Present: Village Planner, Alison Terry

Visitors Present: Jim and Joy Jung, Kevin Reiner, Sherry Gardner, Flo Hoffman, Tina Lavender, Fred Abraham, Mark Alexandrunas, George Fackler.

 

Old Business:

SE Corner of South Main Street and East Broadway, Flo Hoffman,  Application #08-09

Village Square District (VSD), Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD)

The applicant is requesting approval of a historical sign for placement in Opera House Park.

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planner, Alison Terry, Jim Siegel, and Flo Hoffman.

 

Discussion regarding Application #08-09:

The application was previously approved pending the final location for the historical sign be approved by the Planning Commission.  Ms. Terry explained that she tried to locate a good set of plans for the Opera House Park area, but she was unable to find one.  She stated that she contacted Jim Siegel from the Tree and Landscape Committee and he too was unaware of a good set of plans for Opera House Park.  Mr. Siegel was present and able to explain the location of water and electrical lines to the Planning Commission.  Mr. Burriss suggested placing the sign as close to the light post as possible.  He suggested that it be located perpendicular to the street directly behind the bell.  Ms. Terry stated that a shrub may need to be removed to fit the sign in that location.  There were no objections to removing the shrub by any members of the Planning Commission or from Mr. Siegel – Tree and Landscape Commission.  Flo Hoffman stated that the Granville Historical Society would like to see the sign behind the shrubs and they want to ensure that people will be able to walk right up to read the sign without being impeded by the shrubbery. 

 

Mr. Mitchell made a motion to approve the location of the sign, for Application #08-09, to be placed directly behind the bell and between the light post, and that it be placed perpendicular to the street.

 

Seconded by Ms. Reeves.

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #08-09: Burriss (yes), Riffle (yes), Reeves (yes), Ryan (yes), Mitchell (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

The location for the sign previously approved for Application No. 08-09 is approved by the Planning Commission.

 

New Business:

464 South Main Street, Fred Abraham,  Application #08-14

Community Service District (CSD), Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD)

The applicant is requesting approval of a building sign, sandwich board sign, and a new tenant panel in the freestanding sign. 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planner, Alison Terry, and Fred Abraham.

 

Discussion regarding Application #08-14:

Fred Abraham stated that he would only like to use the sandwich board for a period of six months.  He explained that the sign would have a white background with red and black lettering.  Mr. Mitchell stated that he recalls there previously being a request for a sandwich board sign because the applicant felt that the permanent freestanding sign was not visible enough.  He questioned why the applicant is not making an attempt to make the freestanding sign more visible so people can see it.  Ms. Terry explained that any changes to the freestanding sign would result in it needing to be re-approved by the Planning Commission.   Mr. Mitchell stated that he would not be in favor of approving a sandwich board sign because the freestanding sign isn’t visible enough.  Mr. Ryan stated that the applicant isn’t asking for anything different than any other business up town has requested.  Mr. Riffle asked if the applicant is willing to bring the sandwich board sign in each night.  Mr. Abraham stated yes.  Mr. Riffle noted that this had not been adhered to in the past. 

 

Mr. Riffle made a motion to approve Application #08-14 as follows:

A building sign to be replaced size for size and color for color; master front commerce sign to be replaced size for size and color for color; a sandwich board sign approved under ‘Other Signs’ and submitted with red and black lettering to be set up for a six (6) month period (from the date of issuance of the permit) and to be taken in each night.  

 

Seconded by Mr. Burriss

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #08-14: Mitchell (No), Reeves (yes), Burriss (yes), Ryan (yes), Riffle (yes). Motion carried 4-1.

 

Application No. 08-14 is Approved with the above stated conditions.

 

 

57 Westgate Drive, Tina Lavender,  Application #08-15

CSD (Community Service District), Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD)

The applicant is requesting approval of a temporary real estate sign.

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planner, Alison Terry, and Tina Lavender.

 

Discussion regarding Application #08-15:

Ms. Terry stated that the applicant is requesting re-approval of a sign that was already in place.  Tina Lavender was available for any questions/comments. 

 

Ms. Reeves made a motion to approve Application #08-15 as submitted by the applicant.

 

Seconded by Mr. Riffle.

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #08-15: Burriss (yes), Mitchell (yes), Riffle (yes), Reeves (yes), Ryan (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application No. 08-15 is Approved as submitted.

 

134 ½ East Broadway, Dr. Mark Alexandrunas,  Application #08-16

Village Business District (VBD) and Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD)

The applicant is requesting approval of a building wall sign.

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planner, Alison Terry, and Dr. Mark Alexandrunas.

 

Discussion regarding Application #08-16:

Dr. Mark Alexandrunas stated that he is located in the office where Dr. Cartnal’s dentistry practice was previously located for 44 years.  He explained that he submitted approximately four examples of a sign and location to the building landlord, Lisa McKivergin, and each of them was rejected.  Dr. Alexandrunas stated that Ms. McKivergin approved the sign before the Planning Commission this evening and suggested the placement.  Mr. Mitchell inquired if the Village would need something in writing from Ms. McKivergin authorizing her approval of the sign.  Ms. Terry stated that she phoned Ms. McKivergin several times and left two messages and Ms. McKivergin then left two messages with her stating that she approved of the proposed sign and location.  Dr. Alexandrunas stated that he would also like to have approval for a door sign.  Ms. Terry explained that Dr. Alexandrunas would need to re-submit his application if he wished to add this.  Dr. Alexandrunas stated that he is in need of having a sign in place as soon as possible so his patients know how to find his practice.  Mr. Burriss stated that all of the members of the Planning Commission have a problem with the proposed placement of the sign, but they do like the proposed sign itself.  Mr. Burriss went on to explain that historically, especially in Granville, first floor businesses have used flat signs, while second floor businesses have used signs perpendicular to the street.  Mr. Riffle agreed that the proposed placement of the sign is in an odd location.  Councilmember O’Keefe stated that the proposed placement of the sign would cover up some of the trim/molding of the building.  Mr. Burriss suggested that the placement of the sign be worked out with the owner of the building since no one on the Planning Commission would be willing to approve the application as presented this evening.  He stated that they would like to have a sign that is architecturally and historically correct.  Mr. Burriss stated (and other members of the Planning Commission agreed) that the sign might be appropriately located in the middle of the top four windows of the building – perpendicular to the street.  Dr. Alexandrunas stated that he originally proposed having the sign located above his door between the two awnings, but this was not approved by the owner of the building.  Councilmember O’Keefe inquired on the reason for not allowing this and Dr. Alexandrunas was uncertain as to the reason.  Mr. Burriss also suggested that a perpendicular sign could be a bit larger than what was submitted.  Dr. Alexandrunas stated that he would agree to table the application to work out a different location for the sign with the landlord.  Ms. Terry explained that tabling the application would result in it not being heard until the next Planning Commission meeting.  

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to Table Application #08-16.

 

Seconded by Ms. Reeves.

 

Roll Call Vote to Table Application #08-16: Riffle (yes), Reeves (yes), Mitchell (yes), Burriss (yes), Ryan (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application No. 08-16 is Tabled.

 

219 West Broadway, Kevin Reiner, Application #08-17

Village Residential District (VRD) and Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD)

The applicant is requesting architectural review and approval of a covered front porch area, removal of a rear attached shed and modifications to the existing rear and eastern facades. 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planner, Alison Terry, Kevin Reiner, Jim and Joy Jung, and Sherry Gardner.

 

Discussion regarding Application #08-17:

Kevin Reiner, explained the changes he intends to do.  Mr. Burris asked if the columns will be plain or fluted.  Mr. Reiner stated that they will be plain.  Mr. Burriss inquired on the proposed type of hanging light.  Mr. Reiner stated that he has not yet picked this out, but he guesses it will be a metal hanging light.  Mr. Burriss questioned what type of roofing material would be used.  Mr. Reiner stated that he is using a metal roof and he is leaning towards a charcoal gray color.  Mr. Burriss stated that everything in the application appears fine, but they do have to ensure that the materials that are used are consistent.  He stated that the neighbors on each side of this home have done a wonderful job with their renovations and this includes a home formerly renovated by Mr. Reiner.  Mr. Mitchell stated that he does not see anything within the application that he does not like.  Ms. Terry stated that she is in the process of finding out if a demolition permit is needed to take down the shed.  Councilmember O’Keefe stated that she does not believe the demolition permits are required for instances when a new structure will be put in its place.  Mr. Reiner stated that part of the shed has already come down and it was a matter of safety to remove more of the structure.  Sherry Gardner, Elm Street, stated that she is Mr. Reiner’s neighbor in the back and she does not believe that there could be a better person picked to respect the historical value of the home located at 219 West Broadway.  She stated that she would whole-heartedly support whatever plans Mr. Reiner has with the home because he always does a good job in any project he undertakes.  Catherine Joy Jung, 221 West Broadway, stated that she is Mr. Reiner’s neighbor to the west.  She stated that whatever plans Mr. Reiner has for the home will be a distinct improvement to what is currently in place because there is considerable deterioration that has taken place.  Mrs. Jung stated that she supports Mr. Reiner’s efforts in improving the home.  Jim Jung, 221 West Broadway, stated that in most communities the home located at 219 West Broadway would be torn down.  He stated that he has seen work done by Mr. Reiner in the past and it has always had charm and class and he also whole heartedly supports whatever plans he has to improve the home. 

 

Standards and Criteria for Application #08-17:

a)      Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District.  The Planning Commission concluded that their previous discussion confirms that they believe the proposed changes are compatible.

b)      Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  The Planning Commission concluded that the closest neighbors approved and endorsed the proposed changes and they believe the historical character of the village is enhanced by the improvements. 

c)      Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  The Planning Commission concluded that the changes improve a dilapidated home.

d)      Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  The Planning Commission concluded that it is protected by keeping the home from falling down.

 

 

Standards and Criteria (Section 1161.05):

a)      Height: The Planning Commission concluded that the overall height did not change. 

b)      Building Massing:  The Planning Commission concluded that the building massing does not substantially change and the historical and architectural nature is consistent. 

c)      Roof Shape:  The Planning Commission concluded that the historical and architectural nature of the roof shape is consistent.

d)      Materials and Texture:  The Planning Commission concluded that the materials and textures presented by the applicant are historically acceptable. 

e)      Use of  Details:  The Planning Commission concluded that the use of details seem to be consistent with the existing style of the home.  

 

Mr. Mitchell made a motion to approve Application #08-17 as submitted. 

Seconded by Mr. Burriss

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #08-17: Reeves (yes), Burriss (yes), Mitchell (yes), Riffle (yes), Ryan (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application No. 08-17 is approved as submitted.

 

Proposed Zoning Code Revisions

A public hearing is set for April 7th – a special scheduled Planning Commission meeting.

 

Planning Commission Work Session

George Fackler approached the Planning Commission to discuss lighting, landscape, shutters, and signage regarding a new building for Fackler Country Gardens.  He presented examples of shutters.  The Planning Commission ultimately recommended a raised panel shutter in a satin black.  Mr. Fackler presented examples of the security lights he would like to install.  He stated that he would be installing a reflector on the east side light so it does not bother his neighbor.  He proposed placing the lights under the windows for maintenance reasons.  Mr. Burriss suggested that the wall pack lighting be centered under the windows.  Mr. Fackler presented an example of Holophane lights.  He would like to use four of these lights on each side of two doorways.  Mr. Fackler was told that his sign approval would have to be done with a separate application.  Mr. Fackler inquired on placing his vendor signs on his building, but not illuminating them.  The Planning Commission ultimately suggested looking at a sign that could have his logo, as well as removable slots listing his vendors.  Mr. Fackler was told that he could have a total of 120 square feet for his sign (10x20) and only one sign per building is permitted.  He stated that he wished to have two signs and he was made aware that he would need to make a request for a variance. 

 

Mr. Mitchell excused himself from the Planning Commission meeting half way through the Work Session with Mr. Fackler

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

Finding of Fact Approvals for Application #08-09, Flo Hoffman: 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Finding of Facts for Application #08-09. Seconded by Ms. Reeves.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals for Application #08-14, Fred Abraham: 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Finding of Facts for Application #08-14. Seconded by Ms. Reeves.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals for Application #08-15, Tina Lavender: 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Finding of Facts for Application #08-15. Seconded by Ms. Reeves.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals for Application #08-17, Kevin Reiner: 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Finding of Facts for Application #08-17. Seconded by Ms. Reeves.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Citizen’s Comments:

No one appeared to speak under Citizen’s Comments.

 

Other Matters:

Ms. Reeves noted that she will not be able to attend the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for April 28th

 

Minutes of February 25, 2008 – Ms. Reeves moved to approve the minutes as amended by Ms. Terry.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  The motion passed 4-0.  The minutes of February 25, 2008 are approved as amended.

 

Adjournment: 9:30 PM. 

Mr. Riffle moved to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting, seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Next meetings:

March 24, 2008

April 7, 2008

April 14, 2008

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.