Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes September 8, 2008

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 8, 2008

7:00pm

Minutes

 

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

Members Absent: Lyle McClow

Staff Present: Village Planner, Alison Terry, and Assistant Law Director Allison Crites.

Visitors Present: Susan Schmidt, and Mr. and Mrs. Sam Sangaria

 

Citizen’s Comments:

No one appeared to speak under Citizen’s Comments.

 

New Business:

232 East Elm Street – David Schmidt, Application #08-114

VID (Village Institutional District) – AROD (Architectural Review Overlay District)

The application was submitted by David Schmidt and the request is for architectural review and approval of the following items:

1)                  Removal of screens from porch enclosure; and

2)                  Removal of handicap ramp, leaving concrete step underneath.   

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planner, Alison Terry, and Susan Schmidt.

 

Discussion regarding Application #08-114:

Ms. Terry indicated that the exterior concrete step will remain once the handicap ramp is removed.  Mr. Mitchell stated that this is a familiar application/request.  He stated that he had a similar request in an application at the previous Planning Commission meeting.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #08-114:

 

a)      Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District.  The Planning Commission concluded yes. Mr. Burriss stated that the structure will be taken back to the way it was originally.

b)      Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  The Planning Commission concluded yes.  Mr. Burriss stated that the removal of the ramp is more in keeping with the original period of the house.

c)      Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  The Planning Commission concluded yes.  Mr. Burriss added that the historical character of the home will be made more correct.

d)      Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  The Planning Commission concluded yes, and that restoring the home to its original condition protects and enhances.

e)      Materials and Texture:  The Planning Commission concluded that the applicant indicated that they would like to remove the following items:

  1. a.      Removal of screens from enclosure;
  2. b.      Removal of handicap ramp – leaving concrete step underneath

f)        Use of Details: The Planning Commission concluded that the applicant indicated that they would like to remove the following items:

  1. a.      Removal of screens from enclosure;
  2. b.      Removal of handicap ramp – leaving concrete step underneath

 

Mr. Mitchell made a motion that Application #08-114 be approved as submitted.  Seconded by Ms. Reeves. 

 

Roll Call Vote: Burriss, Mitchell, Reeves, Ryan.  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Application #08-114 is approved as submitted. 

 

Old Business:

Review of the Zoning Code Revisions:

The Planning Commission resumed discussion of the Zoning Code Revisions at Section 1159.03.  Mr. Mitchell asked what will become of the suggested changes.  Ms. Terry stated that after the Planning Commission makes their changes/recommendations she will go through and thoroughly address all of the questions raised by the Granville Planning Commission.  The text will then go to Allison Crites’ office for review. 

 

Jack Burris asked if there has been any clarification regarding permeable material for driveways.  He also asked if there is a definition for ‘driveway.’  Ms. Terry stated yes.  Ms. Terry added that Brandy Mass (with the Crites Law Office) had previously determined that impervious gravel could be counted as a driveway – and therefore lot coverage.  Assistant Law Director Crites indicated that she could also review the memo provided by Brandy Mass. 

 

Mr. Burris stated that the Site Plan Requirements listed on page 34 should indicate that a - to scale plot plan is required. 

 

Mr. Mitchell and later Mr. Ryan stated that they like the language added to page 35 regarding the Architectural Review Overlay District. 

            “The purpose of the Architectural Review Overlay District is to preserve and encourage good architectural styles within the Village, reflecting the distinct phases of the Village’s history.”

 

Gina Reeves stated that she would suggest further review of the Criteria listed on page 36.  Mr. Burriss stated that Criteria (d) in particular needs to be addressed.  Alison Crites suggested that the best way to address the criteria is to spell out how the Planning Commission decision specifically meets these criteria.  Ms. Terry stated that she would pull the criteria and language used by German Village and Victorian Village for comparison with other criteria.  Mr. Burriss stated that he believes our current language is borrowed from Hudson, Ohio.  Ms. Reeves stressed that she would like to send the information back to Council, recommending that the language for the Criteria be changed – and this ultimately makes the work of the Planning Commission purposeful.  Mr. Mitchell stated that he feels the Criteria should be less black and white.  Ms. Crites stated that she sees the Criteria as less ambiguous.  Mr. Ryan agreed. 

 

The Planning Commission discussed the last sentence on page 35:

            “The purpose of the Architectural Review Overlay District is to preserve and encourage good architectural styles within the Village, reflecting the distinct phases of the Village’s history.”

 

Mr. Burriss questioned if the words “distinct phases” should be changed to “distinctive” & add in the word “complimentary.”  Ms. Reeves stated that she would like to see a different word used in place of “phases.”  Ms. Terry and Ms. Crites indicated that they would further research this language.  Mr. Ryan suggested reviewing the language for the Criteria and then come back and review the language listing the purpose of the Architectural Review Overlay District. 

 

Ms. Terry noted that on page 41, “Planning Director” should be changed to “Village Planner” so the document is consistent throughout. 

 

On page 43, Mr. Ryan and Mr. Mitchell questioned the language regarding ‘drive-through.’  A recommendation to allow particular drive-through restaurants in particular areas of the Village was previously presented to Council.  Ms. Terry stated that Council has indicated that they would prefer to leave this language as is and allow no drive-through restaurants anywhere in the Village.  She added that this is due to the feedback from the Comprehensive Plan and Surveys.  Mr. Mitchell stated that he would not be against a drive-through restaurant on Cherry Valley Road.  Councilmember O’Keefe stated that another reason Council does not want to allow drive-through restaurants is due to traffic congestion. 

Mr. Ryan asked if Ms. Terry feels the language regarding parking is sufficient.  Ms. Terry stated that the language is somewhat antiquated and she does need to address some areas, but perhaps not in this go around.  Mr. Burriss suggested that the language surrounding Parking – one per sleeping room – Fraternities ought to be eliminated.  Mr. Ryan questioned parking requirements for drive-in restaurants.  

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

Application #08-114:

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1159, Village District and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District and hereby gives their approval of the application #08-114.

 

Mr. Mitchell moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #08-41.  Seconded by Ms. Reeves. 

Roll Call Vote: Reeves, Mitchell, Burriss, Ryan.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to Approve absent Planning Commission Members:

Mr. Burriss made a motion to excuse Mr. McClow from the August 11th Planning Commission meeting.  Second by Mr. Mitchell.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Approval of the Minutes:

May 27, 2008

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the may 27, 2008 minutes as presented.  Seconded by Ms. Reeves.  Motion carried 4-0.

Roll Call Vote: Reeves, Burriss, Mitchell (abstain), Ryan.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

August 25, 2008

Mr. Mitchell moved to approve the August 25, 2008 minutes as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Motion carried 4-0.

Roll Call Vote: Reeves (abstain), Mitchell, Burriss, Ryan.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

 

Adjournment:  8:10 PM. 

Ms. Reeves moved to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting, seconded by Mr. Mitchell.  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Next meetings:

September 22, 2008

October 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.