Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 2013

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 9, 2013

7:00pm

Minutes

 

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: Debi Walker; Asst. to Planning Dept., Michael King, Law Director

 

Also Present: Mark Clapsadle, Jodi Melfi, Alysa Reinoehl, Bob Gravitt, Kate Remillard, and Renee Terebuh. 

 

Citizens’ Comments:

No one appeared to speak under Citizen’s Comments.

 

Old Business:

454 South Main Street – Ben Pickrell/Millennium Irish Dance - Application #2013-107  AMENDED

Community Service District (CSD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a wall sign. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Deb Walker and Jodi Melfi. 

 

Discussion:

Jodi Melfi, 660 West Broadway, stated she is applying for an all-inclusive sign package by integrating the three existing signs into one.  She explained the signage would be used for all of the businesses located in the dance building.  Ms. Melfi stated this would also eliminate the need for a variance.

 

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-107 AMENDED as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-34:  Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

New Business:

223 North Granger Street– Alysa Reinoehl - Application #2013-109

Village Residential District (VRD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the removal of an exterior door and replacement with a new exterior door on the north side of the home. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Deb Walker and Alysa Reinoehl. 

 

Discussion:

Alysa Reinoehl, 223 North Granger Street, stated that she would like to replace a door on the north side of the home with a Jeldwyn steel door.  She stated the new door is being installed for aesthetics and security reasons.  Mr. Hawk asked the proposed color of the door.  Ms. Reinoehl stated white. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2013-109:

 

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.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)                  Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the new door is more historically appropriate.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the vitality and livability is improved by the installation of the door.   The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)                  Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the appearance of the proposed door is more pleasing architecturally than the existing door.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-109 as presented with the door to be in the color of white.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-109:  Hawk (yes), Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

205 South Pearl Street – Mark Clapsadle on behalf of Bob & Cris Gravitt - Application #2013-111

Village Residential District (VRD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a thirty-eight (38) replacement windows. 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Deb Walker, Mark Clapsadle, and Bob Gavitt.

 

Discussion:

Mark Clapsadle, 4380 Granview Road, stated he is the architect for the project.  Mr. Clapsadle explained the home is in need of repair on the interior and exterior.  He stated they plan to replace all of the siding and windows.  Mr. Clapsadle stated the current windows on the home do not open.  He went on to say the project would include demolishing the two existing porches on the home and adding on a two-story addition to the rear.  He stated the new porch would be a wrap around instead of two individual porches.  Mr. Clapsadle stated there is an extensive amount of interior work being done that is driving the entire project.  Mr. Clapsadle stated they would be replicating the existing house to a degree.  Ms. Walker stated the applicant would be required to receive variances for front yard and side yard setbacks on Elm Street and South Pearl Street.  The Planning Commission reviewed the powerpoint slides of the proposed renovation.  Mr. Clapsadle explained the current location where the door is would become a window.  He stated the new front door would be moved to the corner.  Mr. Mitchell asked if the shed roof would be replaced?  Mr. Clapsadle stated the look would remain the same, but new materials would be used.  Mr. Mitchell asked if the railing would be square pickets?  Mr. Clapsadle stated yes because they wanted to go for simplicity.  He stated he felt National was the closest style that could be designated to the home.  Mr. Mitchell asked if the applicant is switching from single light top sashes to double light top sashes.  Mr. Clapsadle stated yes.  Mr. Burriss stated he appreciates the completeness of the submittal.  Mr. Burriss stated the porches on the home now are not original to the home.    

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2013-36:

 

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. The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)                  Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the architectural changes that are proposed will bring the home into a more unified historical presence.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the livability is improved.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)                  Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the home will appear to be more historically correct than it currently is once the renovation is complete.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2013-111 with the condition the applicant receive the required variances from the BZBA.  Seconded by Mr. Hawk.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-111:  Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

 

 

 

218 South Mulberry Street – Damon & Kate Remillard- Application #2013-115

Village Residential District (VRD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the construction of two (2) sections of picket fence to enclose the rear yard.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Deb Walker and Kate Remillard.

 

Discussion:

Kate Remillard, 218 South Mulberry Street, stated she would like to install the additional fence to complete the current look.  She stated the fence would be completely enclosed for her dog.  Ms. Walker stated this is kind of a unique setup in order to enclose the Remillard’s fence because they will have to run portions of the fence down the property line and then connect to the Hunt and VanOfferen properties.  She stated this is due in part to the way the existing fences were already installed.  Ms. Remillard stated the new fence would match the existing picket fence.  Ms. Walker stated the fence would go near the garage of one neighbor, but it would not connect.  She went on to explain there would be another connection near the window of the Hunt residence.  Law Director King stated the fence would go part way on both of the adjacent properties.  He stated they have suggested both adjacent property owners submit something in writing indicating they are in agreement to the placement of the fence.  Law Director King stated if any issue ever arises from the fence location it would be considered a civil matter. 

 

Mr. Mitchell acknowledged receiving written authorization from the Vanofferan’s to the north side and Lele Horrace.  Mr. Mitchell indicated Ms. Horrace is not the owner of this property, but a resident not objecting to the fence placement.  Law Director King suggested the property owner would need to submit written authorization.  Mr. Hawk agreed it would be good for the authorization letters to be in the Village files even though the fence placement is ultimately a civil matter.  Law Director King stated he reviewed the code and it does not say there needs to be separate application for each property the fence will encroach upon.  Mr. Mitchell asked if the applicant was aware they could potentially be required to take down the fence that encroaches on the adjacent property unless a recorded easement is in place.  Ms. Remillard stated yes.   

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2013-115:

 

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 fence requests approved in the district. The Planning Commission 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 other fences used in the district.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the vitality of the district is enhanced due to the proposal.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

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

 

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve Application #2013-115 on the condition the applicant receive written authorization from the property owners located on the adjacent properties’, 210 and 222 South Mulberry Street, and this information is filed with the Village Planning Department.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-115:  Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

224 East Broadway – Renee Terebuh - Application #2013-117

Village Business District (VBD) – Architectural Review Overlay District.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a sidewalk sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Deb Walker and Renee Terebuh.

 

Discussion:

Renee Terebuh was present to address any concerns by the Planning Commission.  Ms. Walker stated the application meets all requirements and was previously used in a different location and approved by the Planning Commission.  Ms. Terebuh stated she does not have the signage prepared for the building wall sign at this time.   Mr. Mitchell questioned if the sidewalk sign would block the sidewalk entrance into the business.  Ms. Terebuh stated the signage would not be obstructing the sidewalk and the presented picture is deceiving by depicting this. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2013-117:

 

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 sidewalk sign requests approved in the district.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)                  Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the graphics for the sidewalk sign are consistent with other sidewalk signs used in the district.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)                  Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE the vitality of the district is enhanced due to the proposal.  The Planning Commission agreed with Mr. Burriss.

 

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

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2013-117 with the condition the sidewalk sign is moved and secured indoors during non-business hours.  Seconded by Mr. Hawk.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2013-117:  Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Old Business:

Application #2013-107 AMENDED: Ben Pickrell; 454 South Main; Signage

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1167, Community Service District, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-107 AMENDED as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-107. Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

New Business:

Application #2013-109: Alysa Reinoehl; 223 North Granger Street; Exterior Modifications/Door

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 #2013-109 as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-109. Seconded by Mr. Eklof.

 

Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Application #2013-111: Mark Clapsadle on behalf of Bob & Cris Gravitt; 205 South Pearl Street; Exterior Modifications

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 #2013-111 as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-111. Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

Application #2013-115: Damon & Kate Remillard; 218 South Mulberry Street; Fence

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, Chapter 1187, Height, Area, and Yard Modifications, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2013-115 as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-115. Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Application #2013-117: Renee Terebuh; 224 East Broadway; Sidewalk Sign

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 #2013-117 as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2013-117. Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Mitchell (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member:

Mr. Hawk moved to excuse Jean Hoyt from the September 9, 2013 Planning Commission meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Motion to approve meeting minutes for August 26, 2013:

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the minutes from August 26, 2013 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Motion carried 3-0.  (Mr. Burriss abstained)

 

Adjournment:  7:45 PM

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

 

Next meetings:

Monday, September 23, 2013

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Monday, October 28, 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.