Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes March 10, 2014

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION 

March 10, 2014

7:00pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present: Council Member Jeremy Johnson (non-voting), Tom Mitchell (Chair), Steven Hawk (Vice-Chair), Bill Wilken, Jack Burriss and Doug Eklof.

 

Members Absent: None.

 

Staff Present: Debi Walker, Village Planning & Zoning and Michael King, Law Director

 

Also Present: Julio Valenzuela, Debi Hartfield and Mary Frazell.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  No one appeared to speak under Citizen’s Comments.

 

 New Business:

 

130-138 North Prospect Street– Julio Valenzuela of Urban Restorations- Application #2014-18: Village Business District (VBD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of exterior modifications including: new windows, new fabric awnings, new suspended metal canopies, removal of existing greenhouse enclosure on the southern facade and replacement with new wood framed enclosure, and new steel doors on east facade.

 

Mr. Hawk made a motion to remove Application #2014-18 from the table and Mr. Burriss seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Debi Walker and Julio Valenzuela

 

Discussion: 

Mr. Valenzuela of Urban Restorations, for 130-138 North Prospect Street, is requesting architectural review and approval of exterior modifications. Mr. Valenzuela is proposing a major renovation outside and inside of the building located on North Prospect Street. They have been approved for a historic tax credit project by U.S. Department of Interior. They met U.S. standards of historic preservation. They are replacing existing windows with more historically accurate windows. Mr. Valenzuela provided a photograph of windows to reflect the historic windows that used to be in the building. All the awnings will be replaced with fabric and steel awnings on the west and north elevation. The applicant will be recovering the awnings with either navy or black fabric. The steel awnings will be attached to the brick. On the south elevation, the awning over the window will be replaced completely.

 

Mr. Wilken inquired about the canvas awnings and how they’ll weather.  Mr. Valenzuela stated he could not provide assurance about replacing weathered awnings; however, he has a good reputation of the upkeep of properties in the community.

 

Mr. Valenzuela would like to replace all smoked, tinted window glass with clear glass along the first floor store fronts. Mr. Valenzuela will leave all existing doors.

 

Mr. Wilken inquired about the signage on the second floor. He wanted to know if a tenant occupied those spaces, would they be allowed to post signs from the windows or building. Mr. Valenzuela stated there would be no signage on the second floor and if a tenant requested such, he would bring it before Planning Commission. Mr. Wilken questioned the signage as indicated on the elevations.  Mr. Valenzuela indicated the signage was suggestive only, but was not ready for approval by the Planning Commission. 

 

Mr. Burriss inquired about whether there would be aprons on the canopies and if there would be lighting. Mr. Valenzuela stated there would be no aprons on canopies and no lighting above canopies.

 

Mr. Wilken inquired about the ventilation system for any restaurants occupying the spaces in the building. Mr. Valenzuela stated there was only one (1) restaurant that was a possible tenant and the ventilation will go through the roof.

 

Mr. Valenzuela stated that their plans are to be completed with the project in June/July.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2014-18:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the                  Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the application is certainly consistent                         with other projects approved in the district. The Planning Commission                             concurred 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 certainly consistent by             instilling the historic character. The Planning Commission concurred with Mr.                Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the                         vitality is contributed to with the proposed improvements to the property. The                  Planning Commission concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past                                  generations lived. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE and The Planning Commission                         concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approved Application #2014-18. The motion was seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-18: Wilken (yes), Eklof (yes), Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes) and Mitchell (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

New Business:

327 West Maple Street-Debi Hatfield- Application #2014-24

Suburban Residential District (SRD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the following improvements: Second story addition on the northwestern side of structure; new two car garage addition on the eastern side of structure with a 1:2 roof pitch; removal of asphaltic shingle roofing and replacement with standing seam metal roofing with ice guards; removal of existing siding and replacement with board and batten siding; and removal of all existing windows and replacement with Jeld-Wen wood windows.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Debi Walker and Debi Hartfield

 

Discussion:

 

Ms. Hartfield introduced the project and stated she was open to feedback from The Planning Commission. Her intention is that both the house and rental property have a cohesive materials pallet. She stated there would be no changes to the chimney located on the north elevation. She intends to pull out the center front window on the upper level to make it appear more like a bay window. Similarly, she stated she intends to re-install a pair of existing doors (currently being utilized separately) on the Maple Street elevation as the front doors. She described the doors as having been crafted together as a pair originally.

 

Ms. Hartfield stated that the garage was intended to be an enlarged/over-sized one (1) car garage, not a two (2) car garage, as stated in the application. She stated that after consideration, she felt that the garage could only go on the eastern side of the structure to achieve her desire to have a connected garage. She further stated that it was the only place that was both aesthetically pleasing and easily accessible from the street and the homes interior. Commission members shared their concerns over the removal of the homes eastern elevation; the most architecturally significant and attractive elevation, in order to locate the proposed garage. Ms. Hartfield shared her understanding of the fact that the elevation challenges were severe. Mr. Mitchell urged Ms. Hartfield to review the property again in an attempt to find a different, workable location for the garage. Mr. Burriss suggested the possibility of an underground garage option as has been done on other properties in Granville.

 

Mr. Hawk and Mr. Burriss were both concerned that the proposed changes to the house presented in the elevations were not preserving the unique historical elements of the existing house. They went on to express that the proposed changes essentially made the house more likely to fit in a suburban neighborhood. They shared their opposition to the use of board and batten siding stating it was not an historically accurate materials selection.

 

Mr. Burriss expressed strong concern regarding the removal of the front porch, as most of the historic homes in the Village have the unique aspect of porches; he encouraged her to retain them as she considers her remodeling project. The Planning Commission agreed they wanted her to preserve as many of the essential historic elements of the house as possible as she moves the project forward.

 

The Planning Commission suggested it may be very advantageous for Ms. Hartfield to work with an architect in order to accomplish her goals for the project and capitalize on the unique historic features of the house.

 

After further lengthy discussion, the applicant and the Planning Commission agreed to table the application until further notice.

 

Mr. Hawk made a motion to table Application # 2014-24. Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to table Application #2014-24: Wilken (yes), Eklof (yes), Burriss (yes), Hawk (yes) and Mitchell (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

New Business:

129 West College Street – Mary Frazell & Rob Cathcart - Application #2014-26

Village Business District (VRD) – Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for architectural review and approval of the removal of an existing wood deck measuring approximately 200 square feet and replacement with a new, slightly expanded wood deck measuring approximately 284 square feet with 36" high hand railings on the western and southern sides.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses – Mr. Mitchell swore in Debi Walker and Mary Frazell

 

Discussion: 

Ms. Frazell of 129 West College Street is requesting approval of the removal of an existing wood deck and replacement with a new wood deck.

 

Mr. Hawk questioned whether the wood would be finished.  In the past, Planning Commission has required some type of weatherproofing. Ms. Frazell stated she has not decided what they will do with the treated pine.

 

Mr. Burriss complimented the applicant on the railing design.  Ms. Walker stated that the applicant is well within the 10 foot setback requirement.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the Standards and Criteria pertaining to Application #2014-26:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the                  Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the application is certainly consistent                         with other renovations approved in the district. The Planning Commission                                     concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the               Village District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE and The Planning Commission                         concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE,               improving the safety and vitality of the proposed new deck and railing helps make                         the deck feel more architectural in contributing to the vitality of the district.  The                  Planning Commission concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past                                  generations lived. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, replacement of the deck that's                                     deteriorating helps enhance the physical surroundings and The Planning                                 Commission concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to recommend approval to the Village Council on Application# 2014-26 with the condition the finish will be applied within one year.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-26: Hawk (yes), Eklof (yes), Wilken (yes), Burriss (yes), and Mitchell (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

Application #2014-18: Julio Valenzuela; 130-138 North Prospect 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 #2014-18, as submitted by the applicant.

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-18. Seconded by Mr. Burriss. Roll Call Vote: Eklof (yes), Burriss (yes), Wilken (yes), Hawk (yes) and Mitchell (yes). Motion carried 5-0. 

 

New Business:

Application #2014-26: Mary Frazell; 129 West College Street; Replacement Wood Deck

 

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 #2014-26, as submitted by the applicant with the condition the finish will be applied within one year.

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-26. Seconded by Mr. Eklof. Roll Call Vote: Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), Wilken (yes) and Mitchell (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve meeting minutes for February 24, 2014:

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the minutes from February 24, 2014 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Motion carried 5-0. 

 

 

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.