Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2014

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

November 10, 2014

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to Order:  Mr. Eklof (Vice-Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m.

 

Members Present:  Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Burriss, Mr. Eklof, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Mitchell, and Councilmember Johnson (non-voting, ex-officio). 

 

Vote to elect Vice-Chair: 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to elect Mr. Eklof as Vice-Chair of the Planning Commission.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Alison Terry, Planning Director.

 

Also Present:  Kevin Reiner, Anastasia Kakias, Marvin Rutter, Craig Severson, Maureen Severson, Michael Carey, Brenda Carey, Victor Terebuh, Patti Urbatis and Mike Urbatis.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Old Business:

130 South Mulberry Street - Kevin Reiner Design on behalf of Dan & Patricia Finkelman - Application #2014-124

The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the following items:

1)         Removal of existing stone steps at the northeast corner of the home and replacement with sandstone veneer concrete steps and sandstone flagging;

2)         Installation of a one hundred forty-three (143) square foot sandstone patio; and

3)         Installation of a pea gravel patio area with sandstone border. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Eklof swore in Alison Terry and Kevin Reiner.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Kevin Reiner, 130 S. Mulberry Street, stated the application was to remove unsafe steps and lay a 4 inch pad of concrete topped with a sandstone veneer finish.  He also stated that a 14’ in diameter round sandstone patio would be installed on a concrete pad topped with 2.25” sandstone with mortared joints. The sandstone finish would be compatible with the historical sandstone elsewhere on the property. Existing gravel in the patio area would be removed and replaced with pea gravel and a sandstone border.

The board asked Planner Terry if the proposed changes met criteria and she stated that they did.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-125:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the project is similar to other projects approved in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed materials are appropriate in color and appearance and contribute to the upgrading of the home and the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, that  as above in item b, the materials selected contribute to the vitality of an historic home with historically accurate improvements and contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, that although the proposed replacement materials are consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improve the home with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to approve Application #2014-124 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-124:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (absent).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Mr. Hawk arrived at the meeting at 7:12 p.m.

 

New Business:

119 East Elm Street – Anastasia Kakias; Aegean Ambitions - Application #2014-158

The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a window sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Anastasia Kakias.

 

Discussion:

Ms. Anastasia Kakias, 185 West Church Street, stated she was looking at gaining approval for two (2) signs at her business location, a window sign and a sidewalk sign.

 

Planner Terry indicated both signs met the zoning code requirements.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-158:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it’s consistent with other signage in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it does contribute to the improvement and upgrading of the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it does protect and enhance the business and structure.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2014-158 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-158:  Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

119 East Elm Street – Anastasia Kakias; Aegean Ambitions - Application #2014-159

The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a sidewalk sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Anastasia Kakias.

 

Discussion:

See discussion under Application #2014-158 above.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-159:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it’s consistent with other signage in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it does contribute to the improvement and upgrading of the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it does protect and enhance the business and structure.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2014-159 as submitted with the following conditions:  1) That the location of the sign shall be per Exhibit “A”; and 2) That the sidewalk sign shall be removed and secured indoors during non-business hours.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-159:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.


332 North Granger Street – Michael & Brenda Carey - Application #2014-160

The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the following modifications:

1)         Removal of a metal staircase to the second floor and associated hand railings surrounding a rooftop deck;

2)         Removal of an over-roof wood deck above the one-story addition at the rear of the structure;

3)         Removal of a door on the eastern elevations second floor;

4)         Removal of a window located near the southeastern corner of the second floor;

5)         Removal of an exterior light on the second floor adjacent to the door listed under item #3; and

6)         Replacement siding as needed to match existing vinyl siding.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Michael Carey.

 

Discussion:  

Mr. Michael Carey, 332 North Granger Street, stated he desires to enhance the property value with the improvements. 

 

Mr. Potracke asked why the window is being closed off.  Mr. Carey replied that the window was not originally part of the structure as seen in photographs dating back to 1925. The window would also interfere with his interior remodeling plans. 

 

Mr. Wilken stated that the siding should therefore run between the two remaining windows as a continuous siding rather that a piecemeal look, to which Mr. Carey agreed.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-160:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is compatible with other new, renovated and old structures.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by restoring the structure to its previous appearance it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a residence it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it does protect and enhance examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2014-160 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-160:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

1820 Newark-Granville Road – Spring Hills Baptist Church - Application #2014-161

The property is zoned Planned Unit Development District (PUD).  The request is for approval of a minor revision to a PUD to allow for the following improvements, in association with the softball field:

1)         Four (4’) foot high chain link fencing, with a vinyl guard on top, to be located around the perimeter of the outfield and on both of the foul lines;

2)         Six (6’) foot high chain link fencing to be located on the north side of the softball field, adjacent to the foul line fencing. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Marvin Rutter.

 

Discussion:  

Mr. Marvin Rutter, 1820 Newark-Granville Road, stated how the proposed fencing would be constructed and Planner Terry clarified the zoning requirements.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-161:

 

(a)                A more useful pattern of open space and recreation areas and more convenience in the location of accessory commercial uses and services.   Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it does lead to a more useful pattern of open space and recreation areas.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

 

(b)               A development pattern which preserves and utilizes natural topography and geologic features, scenic vistas, trees and other vegetation, and prevents the disruption of normal drainage patterns.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it does preserve and utilize the natural features.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)                A more efficient use of the land than is generally achieved through conventional development resulting in substantial savings through shorter utility lines and streets.  Mr. Hawk stated TRUE, the proposed softball field fencing will not require or influence utility lines in the area of installation.  All other members concurred with Mr. Hawk.

 

(d)       Commercial areas that: reflect the pedestrian scale and varied traditional architectural styles of the commercial downtown Granville: increase tax revenues to both the local schools and the Village, while minimizing costs to the Village for infrastructure acquisition and maintenance; and preserving or enhance, rather than harm, neighborhood, Village and Granville Township quality of life and property values.  Mr. Hawk stated TRUE, the proposed softball field fencing will be installed adjacent to and in conjunction with the existing recreational fields on the lower level of the parcel and is sited well within the Spring Hills Baptist Church property.  All other members concurred with Mr. Hawk.

 

(e)                A development pattern in harmony with land use density, transportation facilities, and community facilities objectives of the comprehensive plan.   Mr. Hawk stated TRUE, it is in keeping with this requirement.  All other members concurred with Mr. Hawk.

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2014-161 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-161:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

120 East Broadway – Patti Urbatis - Application #2014-162

The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a seventeen point five (17.5) square foot awning sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Patti Urbatis.

 

Discussion:

Ms. Patti Urbatis, 120 East Broadway, stated the name of the business is changing and there would be new colors of cream and cabernet replacing the old colors.  The name change and color would apply to all four of the proposals.  Mr. Potracke asked if there would be any lighting added and Ms. Urbatis said “No”. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-162:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it’s consistent with other signage in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is historically appropriate in its presentation.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is consistent with historical signage and does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2014-162 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-162:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

120 East Broadway – Patti Urbatis - Application #2014-163

The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a one (1) square foot window/door sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Patti Urbatis.

 

Discussion:

See discussion under Application #2014-162 above.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-163:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it’s consistent with other signage in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is historically appropriate in its presentation.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is consistent with historical signage and does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2014-163 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-163:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

120 ½ East Broadway – Patti Urbatis - Application #2014-164

The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a two point six (2.06) square foot window/door sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Patti Urbatis.

 

Discussion:

See discussion under Application #2014-162 above.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-164:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it’s consistent with other signage in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is historically appropriate in its presentation.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is consistent with historical signage and does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2014-164 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-164:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

 

120 East Broadway – Patti Urbatis - Application #2014-167

The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of a fourteen point thirty-two (14.32) square foot sidewalk sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Patti Urbatis.

 

Discussion:

See discussion under Application #2014-162 above.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-167:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it’s consistent with other signage in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is historically appropriate in its presentation.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is consistent with historical signage and does achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2014-167 as submitted with the following conditions:  1) That the location of the sign shall be per Exhibit “A”; and 2) That the sidewalk sign shall be removed and secured indoors during non-business hours..  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-167:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Mr. Eklof recused himself from the next agenda item, as he is a neighboring property owner, and went to sit in the audience.

 

931 Newark-Granville Road – Victor Terebuh - Application #2014-151

The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A) and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).  The request is for review and approval of a three-rail horse fence, and stone pillars with a gate.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry, Victor Terebuh and Craig Severson.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Victor Terebuh, 308 Bryn Du Drive, stated his intent is to enhance the property and he was considering installing an automatic gate next spring.  Mr. Hawk asked if the automatic gate is addressed in the code and Planner Terry indicated there is nothing in the code which specifically regulates gates.

 

Discussion followed about lights on the stone columns, the brightness of the lights, localization of light, warmth and times the lights would be on.  Mr. Terebuh stated he would comply with whatever the Commission wants with the lighting. Mr. Hawk asked what would happen if there was a power failure with the gate and there was some discussion about how the fire department would be able to access the property. Mr. Terebuh indicated he would investigate those questions.

 

Mr. Craig Severson, 941 Newark-Granville Road, asked whether a real survey had been done of the property to ensure there would not be encroachment on his property.  He said he is not against the project but wanted to be on record as questioning the property line.  Planner Terry stated that the property owner had submitted drawings which were considered acceptable and that the planning office does not survey the property lines when inspecting post holes.  She also indicated if there was a potential encroachment issue it would be considered a civil issue, not a zoning issue. When asked if Mr. Terebuh had discovered any of the survey pins on the property he stated he had not.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-151:

 

1)         Fences, Walls or Barriers.  No fence, wall or other artificial barrier shall be erected and/or constructed in this district without approval of the Planning Commission.  Approval shall be based upon review of an application as set forth in Section 1137.05 of the Codified Ordinances of Granville, Ohio.  Planning Commission review shall include type, location, height, compatibility with the area and such other features or characteristics as may be appropriate.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, it is compatible with the area.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to approve Application #2014-151 as submitted with the understanding:  1) That the project be contained within the boundaries of the property; 2)          That the light shall be contained within the property boundary; 3) That the light shall be a warm colors: and 4)  That the light shall be on a timer to be turned off between midnight and 2 a.m. Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-151:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Recused), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Old Business:

Application #2014-124, Kevin Reiner, on behalf of Dan & Patricia Finkelman; 130 South Mulberry Street; Landscape 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 Residential District and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-125. 

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-124.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Abstain).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

New Business:

Application #2014-158, Anastasia Kakias Aegean Ambitions; 119 East Elm Street; Window Sign: 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 (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-158. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-158.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-159, Anastasia Kakias Aegean Ambitions; 119 East Elm Street; Sidewalk Sign: 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 (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-159. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-159.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-160, Michael & Brenda Carey; 332 North Granger Street; Remodeling: 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 (AROD) and Chapter 1162, Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-160. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-160.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

 

Application #2014-161, Marvin Rutter, Spring Hills Baptist Church; 1820 Newark-Granville Road; Softball Field Improvements: Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1171, Planned Unit Development District (PUD) and Chapter 1187, Height, Area and Yard Modifications and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-161. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-161.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-162, Patti Urbatis; 120 East Broadway; Awning Sign: 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 (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-162. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-162.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-163, Patti Urbatis; 120 East Broadway; Window/Door Sign: 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 (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-163. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-163.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-164, Patti Urbatis; 120 ½ East Broadway; Window/Door Sign: 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 (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-164. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-164.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-167, Patti Urbatis; 120 East Broadway; Sidewalk Sign: 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 (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-167. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-167.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-151, Victor Terebuh; 931 Newark-Granville Road; Fencing, Pillars, Gates: Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A) and Chapter 1187, Height, Area and Yard Modifications and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-151. 

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-151.  Seconded by Mr. Potracke. Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Abstain), Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member (if necessary):  None.

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from October 27, 2014:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the October 27th Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Burriss seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

November 24, 2014

December 8, 2014

 

Mr. Hawk declared the November 10, 2014 Planning Commission meeting adjourned seeing as there was no further business before the Commission.

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m.

 

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.