Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2013

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

August 12, 2013

7:00pm

 

Call to Order:  Mr. Mitchell called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. 

Members Present: Councilmember Johnson (non-voting), Doug Eklof, Jack Burriss, Steven Hawk (Vice-Chair), Jean Hoyt, and Tom Mitchell (Chair.) 

Members Absent:  None.  

Staff Present: Alison Terry, Village Planning Director; Michael King, Law Director. 

Also Present: Richard Liebson, Darren Moore, Eric Rosenberg, Sherri Cummins, Karl Schneider, Dan Rogers, Barbara Franks, Panchadsaram Arumugasaamy, Jack Lucks, Gary Gray, and Tyler Lucks.  

Citizens’ Comments:

No one appeared to speak under Citizen’s Comments. 

New Business:

134 South Mulberry Street – Richard Liebson - Application #2013-97

Village Residential District (VRD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of four groupings of replacement windows at the rear of the first floor of the home on the north, east, and south sides.  

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Alison Terry and Richard Liebson.  

Discussion:

Richard Liebson, 134 Mulberry Street, stated the existing windows are not functional because they are leaky, cold in the wintertime, and the prairie style window is not appropriate for a Victorian house.  He stated he has chosen a three over one style window which is a better match to the style of the home.  Mr. Hawk questioned if the proposed windows would be operable.  Mr. Liebson stated yes.  Mr. Liebson stated he is proposing Anderson Series 400 replacement windows.  Ms. Hoyt stated it sounds like a much needed project that is fitting to the home.  

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2013-97: 

a)                  Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated true, the application is consistent with other window replacement requests approved in the district. All other Planning Commission members agreed with Mr. Burriss.  

b)                  Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated true, the request is consistent with maintenance for a structure already in this district. All other Planning Commission members agreed with Mr. Burriss.  

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated true, the vitality of the district is maintained.   All other Planning Commission members agreed with Mr. Burriss.  

d)                  Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated true, the applicant’s request is a move towards restoration of the home.    All other Planning Commission members agreed with Mr. Burriss.  

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-97 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss. Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-97:  Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Hoyt (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

411 & 417 Bryn Du Drive– Darren & Nadia Moore - Application #2013-101

Planned Unit Development (PUD).  The request is for review and approval of the re-platting of Lot 61 (411 Bryn Du Drive) & Lot 62 (417 Bryn Du Drive); Bryn Du Woods Phase 3.  

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Alison Terry and Darren Moore.  

Discussion:

Darren Moore, 120 East Elm Street, stated they purchased the lot next door to them with the intention of installing a new driveway with a more gradual grade to their home.  He stated his existing driveway is referred to as “suicide drive” with a 32% grade driveway, which is really steep.  Mr. Moore stated they purchased the lot next door in the hope of building a new driveway for safety reasons.  He explained they have had 4-5 ambulance calls to their home over the years because they have a child with epilepsy.  

Panchadsaram Anumugasaamy stated he has lived on Lot 63 next to the property in question since 1996.  He explained he received a lot of harassment from neighbors when he built his home and he was forced to change some of his plans.  Mr. Anumugasaamy stated he is requesting the Planning Commission to not approve the proposed driveway unless an adequate landscaping plan is in place.  Mr. Mitchell stated the application before the Planning Commission is not for a driveway, but rather a replat.  Ms. Terry explained approval for a driveway would be considered administrative approval and landscaping is not required for the driveway according to code.  Mr. Anumugasaamy stated he would look out his window at the proposed driveway and he prefers to not have the view of pavement in place of the green space.  Mr. Moore and Ms. Terry explained the proposed location of the driveway.  Mr. Anumugasaamy indicated he thought the driveway was closer to his property and within his view.  He stated he would like to withdraw his concern.    

Ms. Terry stated the plat needs to be revised to show the roadway as Pren Tel Way, instead of Bryn Du Drive.  Councilmember Johnson inquired if variances would have to be obtained if someone wanted to build on the vacant property.  Ms. Terry stated the property could still be built on without variances if one builds a particular style of home.  She went on to say variances can be requested for any property.  Ms. Terry stated she does not believe the re-platting is creating a situation where a house could not fit on the property due to the sliver of land being used for the driveway.     

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-101 on the condition the technical requirements be met to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.  Seconded by Ms. Hoyt. Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-101:  Hawk (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

401 North Pearl Street – Eric Rosenberg - Application #2013-102

Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a sunroom addition and front and rear decks. 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Alison Terry and Eric Rosenberg. 

Discussion:

Eric Rosenberg, 401 North Pearl Street, stated the decks would be built to create wheelchair access.  Ms. Terry stated the proposed sunroom is 280 square foot, 136 square foot for the front deck, 365 square foot for the rear deck.  Ms. Terry stated variances were granted for a five-foot encroachment.  Mr. Rosenberg stated the finish will be white stucco with Anderson double-hung windows.  He added you cannot see this from the street due to the steep incline.  Mr. Hawk asked about the service director’s concerns regarding water runoff.  Mr. Rosenberg stated this has been addressed by day lighting the downspouts on the hill.  Ms. Terry indicated the service director, Terry Hopkins, would review the final plan for water runoff.        

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2013-102: 

a)                  Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated true, the proposed project is consistent with similar projects in the district.  All other members agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

b)                  Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated true, the improvements make it more consistent with neighboring properties.  All other members agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated true, the livability is improved.   All other members agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

d)                  Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated true, the gable on the front along with the deck is a more pleasant appearance.    All other members agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

Ms. Hoyt made a motion to approve Application #2013-102 as proposed.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-102:  Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), Hoyt (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.  

1205 Cherry Valley Road – Sherri Cummins/Friends of Jesus - Application #2013-103

Planned Commercial District (PCD). The request is for review and approval of two (2) ADA compliant handicapped ramps.  

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Alison Terry and Sherri Cummins. 

Discussion:

Sherri Cummins was present to address any questions by the Planning Commission.  Ms. Terry stated pressure treated lumber is being used and this ramp is necessary to be compliant with ADA standards.  Mr. Burriss stated the Planning Commission has required pressure treated lumber be stained in the past so it doesn’t look like raw wood.  He stated the applicant may need to wait a certain amount of time in order to apply a finish.  Ms. Cummins stated she has every intention to stain the wood material.    

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-103 with the condition the applicant stain or finish the ramp after the pressure treated lumber has been aged.  Seconded by Ms. Hoyt. Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-103:  Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), Hoyt (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.  

121 South Prospect Street – Barbara Franks - Application #2013-106

Village Business District (VBD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of an emergency stand-by generator on the western side of the accessory structure.   

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Alison Terry, Dan Roger, and Barbara

Franks.  

Discussion:

Barbara Franks, 210 East Maple Street, stated the proposed generator is to allow the various businesses located on her property to function in the event of a power outage. 

Sam Sagaria, 117 South Prospect Street, stated he would like to know the purpose of the generator.  Mr. Mitchell stated it would be used when power is not available.  Mr. Sagaria stated, more specifically, what part of the establishment would the generator serve?  Ms. Franks stated her entire property which includes five meters would be serviced by the generator.  Mr. Sagaria asked “where is the heart of the operation?”  Ms. Franks stated the unit would be placed next to the barn.  She went on to say they originally proposed to place the generator in the back because they felt this location would have the least impact on the neighborhood.  Ms. Franks stated she has learned the rear location would not work.  She indicated she could move it behind the fence and at the northern edge of the barn if Mr. Sagaria prefers, but she felt this would be more intrusive to him.  Mr. Hawk asked if cars park in the proposed area of placement of the generator.  Ms. Franks stated this is an old parking space and cars do not park in this location.  Mr. Sagaria asked what advantages there are for the applicant to install a permanent generator over a portable generator.  Mr. Mitchell stated the permanent generator offers more capacity at 20kw and a permanent generator is generally quieter than a portable generator.  Ms. Franks stated getting gas for a portable generator can be a nuisance.  She indicated the permanent generator uses natural gas.  Mr. Hawk asked if there is natural gas service in place.  Ms. Franks stated yes.  Ms. Franks stated there are already two permanent generators in place very close to Mr. Sagaria’s property.  She questioned if Mr. Sagaria had attended the Planning Commission meetings to oppose the installation for the telephone company and the Village offices.  Mr. Mitchell questioned if the generator could be installed near the supply lines.  He stated the location may have to change due to this.  Ms. Franks stated the Licking County Building Department and the electrician should have adequate information regarding what is allowed by code.  

Mr. Sagaria stated the applicant was approved for 400 square feet to operate Taco Dan’s and now they are using a basement, first floor, front porch, and back porch for the operation of Taco Dan’s.  Mr. Sagaria stated his concern is approving something else when the applicants are currently not complying with the zoning requirements.  Law Director King stated the Planning Commission is to review the AROD criteria associated with this request.  He explained there is a built in zoning condition indicating the applicant shall comply with village ordinances.  Law Director King stated there is currently a stop order for operation of Taco Dan’s in the expanded areas and the condition that is built in would already be subject to meet that condition.  Ms. Hoyt asked if there is pedestrian traffic in the area where the generator would be located.  Ms. Franks stated no.  Ms. Terry stated if the location of the generator were to  change, the applicant would have to come back to the Planning Commission with a revised application.  Mr. Burriss asked if Ms. Franks would be eliminating a parking space, since the generator is shown in a location on the site plan in the same location as a parking space.  Ms. Franks stated no.  Ms. Terry stated the drawing before the Planning Commission is an old drawing the applicant had previously submitted which they are now using simply to depict the location of the proposed generator.  

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2013-106: 

a)                  Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated true, the application is consistent with other generator install requests approved in the district.  All other members agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

b)                  Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated true, the request allows the structure to function in the event of a power outage and allows a business to operate.  All other members agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated true, the vitality of a business is enhanced with the capability to function in the event of a power outage.   All other members agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

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

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-106 as presented with replacement of the generator on the eastern side of the accessory structure (which differs from the original proposed location indicated on the application.)  Seconded by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-106:  Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Hoyt (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Weaver Road/Columbus Road – Karl Schneider – Raccoon Creek, LLC - Application #2013-104

Village Gateway District (VGD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of building elevations, site plan, landscape plan, and lighting plan.  

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Alison Terry, Karl Schneider, Jack Lucks, Gary Gray, and Tyler Lucks. 

Discussion:

Karl Schneider, Metropolitan Partners, stated the outside of the structure would be a rough finish with painted white brick.  Mr. Schneider stated the footprint has changed due to flood plain issues.  

Jack Lucks, Metropolitan Partners, presented an example of the proposed roofing material.  He stated it has a 50-year life and is made of recycled rubber tires.  Mr. Lucks stated they are looking at two different charcoal gray colors.   

Gary Gray, Metropolitan Partners Architect, stated the plan changed with an increase in the number of dormers.  He indicated they would use hardi-plank board on what is being referred to as the chapel.  He stated this would make this area stand out and feel unique.  

Mr. Gray stated they were going for a New England style chapel and even modeled some of the look from St. Lukes Episcopal Church and the Old Academy building in town.  Mr. Lucks stated they have increased the number of plant materials.  Ms. Terry stated review of landscaping and plant materials would be done by the Tree and Landscape Commission.  Mr. Lucks stated they have upgraded the proposed columns to now be made of stone.  Ms. Terry stated all of the architectural requirements have been met.  She stated the Village Gateway District calls for lighting fixtures to be acorn style, but the Planning Commission had approved more downcast lighting for a project at 1919 Lancaster Road.  Mr. Mitchell and other members of the Planning Commission agreed the acorn style lighting is nice, but much of the light is diffused in the air and it is not always practical.  Mr. Mitchell asked if there are any exposed gutters and ridges.  Mr. Gray stated they are using rectangular aluminum gutters and they are wanting to minimize and not draw more attention to the roof to keep the eyes down.  He stated there would be some painted metal.  Councilmember Johnson asked if the building would be fully suppressed (fire suppression).  Mr. Lucks stated yes.  Mr. Mitchell asked about the entrance off of Weaver Drive connecting to the back parking lot.  Ms. Terry stated Village Engineer, Doyle Clear, has approved this access point.  Mr. Hawk asked the timeframe for construction.  Mr. Lucks stated they would like to move dirt in the next few weeks and they still need to have a review of the construction plans.  Mr. Hawk asked what would become of the other side of the property.  Mr. Lucks indicated this is a separate parcel with separate ownership.  Mr. Burriss asked if a lantern was considered for the chapel.  Mr. Gray stated he tried six different ones and they felt it was too much of a religious overture.  He indicated they were wanting a more civic feel to the space to emulate a grange hall or meeting hall.  Mr. Burriss asked if the dormers would be functional.  Mr. Lucks stated no.  Mr. Gray stated the windows would be real windows.  Mr. Burriss asked if imitation florescent lighting would be used in the dormers.  Mr. Gray stated no.    

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-104 on the condition the landscaping for the application meets the Tree and Landscape Committee’s approval, and the lighting shall be steel straight pole lighting PM40/R920 without light bulb industrial cage.  Seconded by Ms. Hoyt.   Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-104:  Hoyt (yes), Hawk (yes), Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Finding of Fact Approvals: 

New Business:

Application #2013-97: Richard Liebson; 134 South Mulberry Street; 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 District, Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-97 as submitted by the applicant. 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-97. Seconded by Ms. Hoyt. Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hoyt (yes), Hawk (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Application #2013-101: Darren & Nadia Moore; 411&417 Bryn Du Drive; Re-Platting of Lots 61&62

The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinance Chapter 1113, Procedure for Plat Approval, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-101 as submitted by the applicant. 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-101. Seconded by Mr. Hawk. Roll Call Vote: Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Application #2013-102: Eric Rosenberg; 401 North Pearl Street; Sunroom Addition and Front & Rear Decks

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District and Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-102 as submitted by the applicant. 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-102. Seconded by Mr. Hawk.  Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Hoyt (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Application #2013-103: Sherri Cummins/Friends of Jesus; 1205 Cherry Valley Road; Exterior Modification

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinance Chapter 1171, Planned Development District and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-103 as submitted by the applicant. 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-103. Seconded by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Hoyt (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Application #2013-106: Barbara Franks; 121 South Prospect Street; Generator

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, Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-106 as submitted by the applicant. 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-106. Seconded by Ms. Hoyt. Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hoyt (yes), Hawk (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Application #2013-104: Karl Schneider/Raccoon Creek, LLC; Weaver Road and Columbus Road; Building Elevation, Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Lighting Plan

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1173, Village Gateway District, Chapter 1187, Height, Area and Yard Modifications and Chapter 1195, Traffic Impact Study Ordinance, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-104 as submitted by the applicant. 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-104. Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hoyt (yes), Hawk (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

Motion to approve meeting minutes for July 22, 2013:

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the minutes from July 22, 2013 as presented.  Seconded by Ms. Hoyt.  Motion carried 5-0. 

Adjournment:  8:45 PM

Mr. Eklof moved to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting, seconded by Ms. Hoyt.  Motion carried 5-0.   

Next meetings:

Monday, August 26, 2013

Monday, September 9, 2013

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

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.