Granville Community Calendar

GPC Minutes January 24, 2011

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

January 24, 2011

7:00pm

Minutes

 

Members Present: Tom Mitchell, Jeremy Johnson, Councilmember O’Keefe (non-voting), Jack Burriss, Steven Hawk, and Tim Ryan (Chair).

Members Absent: None.

Staff Present: Village Planning Director, Alison Terry; Planning & Zoning Assistant, Debi Walker.

Also Present: John Noblick, Travis Ketron, Ann Borg, Flo Hoffman, Cynthia Cort, Jim Patin, and Ray Paumier.

 

Citizens’ Comments:

Tom Mitchell stated that the Planning Commission has seen a lot of issues before them that relate to air conditioning units and some other “mundane” issues that he thinks could easily be resolved by the Village Planner administratively.  He questioned if it might be  legal for the Planning Commission to have the Village Planner approve such things?  He went on to say that these types of matters would not need to go on the agenda and there would be less work related to public notifications and paperwork.  Mr. Mitchell stated that the Village Planner could discuss those matters that have been approved and rejected administratively with the Planning Commission at the meetings on a regular basis.  Mr. Burriss asked for Village Planner, Alison Terry’s, thoughts regarding this proposal by Mr. Mitchell.  Alison Terry stated that the Code, as it is currently written, doesn’t allow for these types of administrative approvals.  She suggested that the Planning Commission think about what types of parameters they would like to see for any administrative approvals.  She questioned, is it air conditioning units, fences, etc.?  Ms. Terry explained that there needs to be some idea of what the administrative approval would encompass.  She also stated that this proposal would be acceptable to staff, but the Code would need to be changed.  Mr. Burriss suggested that the approval of generators should be added to any list considered for administrative approval.  Mr. Ryan agreed that sometimes there are small things that need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and perhaps some administrative approvals are necessary.  Councilmember O’Keefe indicated that the Planning and Zoning Committee is going to be meeting soon and that they could discuss the issue of administrative reviews at their upcoming meeting.    Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Burriss agreed that the Village Planner should develop a list of items that she feels could be handled administratively and present this to the board.  Councilmember O’Keefe stated that the Planning and Zoning Committee meeting will be held on February 15th and this meeting is open to the public. 

 

Old Business:

 

223 East Elm Street – Keith and Courtney McWalter - Application #2010-181 AMENDED

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

The request is for architectural review and approval of an air conditioning unit to be constructed adjacent to the new the two - story detached accessory structure.

                             

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planning Director, Alison Terry, John Noblick.

 

Discussion:

John Noblick, Jerry McClain Company, indicated that the applicant would like to amend the application to include the location of the air conditioning unit.  He indicated that the unit would be located towards the rear of the property, facing the alley.  Mr. Noblick stated that the air conditioning unit would be shielded with bushes from the alley view.  The unit will already be screened on all other sides by a wall, a fence and the detached accessory structure.  Mr. Burriss suggested adding one additional boxwood for the screening of the unit.  

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2010-181 AMENDED:

 

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 proposal is consistent with other screenings of air conditioning units in the Village.  

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 applicant is proposing a good location for the air conditioning unit.

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  The Planning Commission concluded yes.  Mr. Burriss stated that the vitality of the district is enhanced by the proposed location of the air conditioning unit.

d)                  Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  The Planning Commission concluded yes. 

 

Mr. Mitchell made a motion to approve Application #2010-181 AMENDED, to include the new location for the air conditioning unit on the condition that the applicant add an additional boxwood bush for screening purposes to make a total of four boxwoods.

 

Seconded by Mr. Hawk.

 

Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Mitchell, Hawk, Burriss, Ryan.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

New Business:

 

329 North Granger Street – Ray and Katy Paumier - Application #2011-1

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

The request is for architectural review and approval of window replacements.

                       

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Ryan swore in Village Planner, Alison Terry, and Travis Ketron.

Discussion:

Travis Ketron, 3611 Deeds Road, Granville, Ketron Custom Builders, stated that the applicant is flipping the kitchen and dining room around.  He stated that the existing window he would like to remove is too short.  Mr. Ketron stated that the applicant currently has vinyl clad windows and they are proposing replacing the windows with an aluminum clad exterior and wood interior window.  Mr. Burriss asked if the window will be an awning or casement style.  Mr. Ketron stated that they are proposing a casement window that will only open from one side.  Mr. Burriss asked if the window will be divided.  Mr. Ketron stated no, and the other windows in the home are double hung.  Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Hawk and Mr. Johnson agreed that the proposal looked fine to them.  Mr. Burriss stated that the proposal reinforces the squareness of the house by raising the header and keeping styles consistent.  Mr. Mitchell asked if the new dining room header height of the windows will match those around the corner.  Mr. Ketron stated that they would keep with the existing part of the house and not match the addition so they create the same marginal reveal on the interior trim. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2011-1:

 

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 proposal is consistent with other requests for windows in the same zoning district.

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 applicant is completing a restoration on that side of the house. 

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  The Planning Commission concluded yes.  Mr. Burriss stated that the vitality of the district is enhanced by the proposed improvements to the home. 

d)                  Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  The Planning Commission concluded yes.  Mr. Burriss stated that the window being removed was not historically appropriate. 

 

Mr. Mitchell made a motion recommend approval of Application #2011-1 as submitted.

Seconded by Mr. Hawk.

 

Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Mitchell, Hawk, Burriss, Ryan.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Work Session:

Representatives from the Granville Historical Society were present to discuss an addition to the existing structure.  The property is located at 115 East Broadway, is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located in the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The applicant did not present a formal application for this project at this time.  Cynthia Cort, President of Granville Historical Society, stated that the addition to the museum would be built to the rear of the existing structure. She stated that when the Lifestyle Museum closed they acquired a lot of their artifacts and it is a tremendous archive of things from Granville.  Ms. Cort stated that they have been talking about a stucco finish because they can’t afford to do the addition all in stone.  Mr. Burriss indicated that he was pleased to see the windows added to the plans.  He stated that he does not like the look of the stone rounding the corner and then stopping at the door.  He stated that in this case the rear part of the structure will be seen by the public.  Ms. Cort suggested that they could do some landscaping in the back part of the building.   Mr. Ryan agreed with Mr. Burriss’s comments.  Mr. Patin stated that they have been told by AEP that they would most likely need to add an additional pole for electric.  Ms. Cort indicated that they are not proposing to put a roof over the doors, as depicted in the drawing.  Ms. Cort questioned if the Planning Commission preferred the detailing at the gable.  Mr. Burriss indicated that he was unsure and wondered what solutions they have for venting heating/cooling.  Mr. Mitchell asked which plan the proposed addition aligns with.  Mr. Patin stated that they have two plans and one is on the east side and there were several concerns with the bank foundation being compromised.  He stated that they can move to the west, but this moves them into the Village Square property.  Ms. Cort stated that the museum as it sits today is eight feet over the line in the Village Square.  She stated that they have located a 1952 easement (Resolution) for this.  Mr. Mitchell asked the museum distance from the bank.  Mr. Patin stated the closest is 2.6 feet at the corner.  Mr. Mitchell asked the distance from the foundation to the bank and Mr. Patin stated six foot.  

Mr. Johnson stated that if the applicant is proposing a basement he would suggest moving the structure to the west.  He also indicated that water run off is another reason to move the structure to the west.  Mr. Patin stated that the east footprint allows them to keep the stone wall that currently exists, although it would have to be reset.  Mr. Johnson stated that he would be surprised if they could keep the stone wall in place during the construction of the project.  Mr. Mitchell suggested that the building should maybe go up to the property line to avoid the undermining of the bank foundation.  Mr. Johnson asked if the proposed stucco would be an integral color.  Flo Hoffman stated that they were looking at having colored stucco.  Mr. Johnson suggested that the applicant may want to price synthetic stone because he believes that these costs often rival that of integral colored stucco.  Ms. Cort asked if the Planning Commission would prefer stucco or stone.  Mr. Burriss stated that he knows that with the Presbyterian Church there were three shades of stucco used and the color faded in the past ten years.  Mr. Burriss commended the work done so far and encouraged the applicants to not hesitate in requesting another work session.  He went on to say that he would prefer to see the addition look more like a normal building and not so industrial.  He stated that he likes the look of the windows and would even be in favor of fake windows when necessary.  Ms. Cort explained that having natural light with the archives is not good.  He added that he is not saying that he wouldn’t vote for approval of the application if the structure didn’t have additional windows.  Mr. Hawk agreed with Mr. Burriss’s comments and stated that he thinks windows would help ease the massing of the building.  Mr. Patin asked if the Planning Commission had any comments on the imbalance of windows on the west elevation.  Mr. Hawk and Mr. Mitchell agreed that they would add more fake windows for balance and symmetry.  Ms. Terry stated that moving the structure more to the west could cause an issue with creating a blind corner for the alley.  She indicated that variances for setbacks and lot coverage would most likely be required with this application.  Mr. Mitchell suggested not being close enough to the bank that the structure requires underpinning.  He stated that this can be very costly.  The Planning Commission discussed the location of the trash cans.  Ms. Cort stated that they propose keeping them inside the double doors at the rear of the building.  Councilmember O’Keefe questioned if this would work if the museum allows events with food service.  The work session ended and the Granville Historical Society representatives indicated that they would review the comments and possibly return for another work session with the Planning Commission.       

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Old Business:

Application #2010-181 AMENDED: Keith and Courtney McWalter; Accessory Structure

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 Business District and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2010-181 AMENDED as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Mitchell moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2010-181 AMENDED.  Seconded by Mr. Johnson.

 

Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Hawk, Mitchell, Burriss, Ryan.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

New Business:

Application #2011-1: Ray and Katy Paumier; Window Replacement

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 Residential District and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2011-1 as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Mitchell moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2011-1.  Seconded by Mr. Hawk.

 

Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Hawk, Mitchell, Burriss, Ryan.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to Approve Minutes:

Mr. Mitchell moved to approve the minutes from the January 3, 2011 Planning Commission meeting as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Johnson.  Motion carried 5-0.  

Adjournment:  8:00 PM

Mr. Burriss moved to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting, seconded by Mr. Johnson.  Motion carried 5-0.   

Next meetings:

Monday, February 7, 2011

Monday, February 28, 2011

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.