Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2014

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

August 11, 2014

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Tom Mitchell (Chair), Steven Hawk (Vice-Chair), Councilmember Jeremy Johnson (non-voting, ex-officio), Jack Burriss, Doug Eklof, Bill Wilken and Craig Potaracke (non-voting, ex-officio GEVSD).

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Deb Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present: Joseph Rosato and Demaris Rosato, Frank Rosato, Deborah Barber, Jay Callendar.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

217 E. College St. – Joseph & Demaris Rosato —Application #2014-100

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 improvements:

Front of the Home:

a)         New railing along both sides of the front porch steps to match the railings on the porch;

b)         New six (6’) foot wide limestone steps;

c)         New six (6’) foot wide Unilock Hollandstone paver sidewalk from the concrete steps to the public sidewalk;

Back of the Home:

a)         New concrete sidewalk and seventy-two (72) square foot concrete patio area;

b)         Two (2) new air conditioning units;

c)         New four foot one inch (4’1”) high wood, dog eared, fence section to screen refuse container area.  

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Mitchell swore in Deb Walker and Joseph Rosato.

 

Discussion:  

Joseph Rosato, 217 East College Street, stated there were two new front limestone steps with a paver walk in the front.  Then in the back there’s essentially a sidewalk connecting the driveway to the back door.  There are also two new air conditioning units as well.

 

Mr. Burriss stated that the improvements looked good overall, but that the Planning Commission usually requires air conditioner screening.  Would the applicant be willing to add a piece of fence, similar to the screening of the trash receptacles with fencing. Mr. Rosato indicated that he would have concerns with the air circulation to the units with any type of screening.  Mr. Mitchell stated that there would be room to screen the units on the west side.  Mr. Rosato indicated that there are actually trees along that side of the property that provide a natural screen for the units. Mr. Mitchell indicated that it looks like there is a lawn area there instead of trees.  Mr. Burriss stated that if everyone else is okay with it, then he’s okay; he’s concerned that the Commission has required screening for other air conditioning units and he wants there to be consistency.  Mr. Burriss was thinking the applicant could add another piece of fencing to screen the units. Mr. Burriss stated again that he was fine with the units if the other Commissioners think it’s adequately screened.

 

Ms. Walker stated that a portion of these improvements, in the front of the property, will require approval from the Village Council for a General Permit, to allow for the encroachment into the right-of-way.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-100:

 

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 materials chosen and their application are appropriate to the primary structure 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 by contributing to the vitality of an historic home with historically accurate improvements, it contributes 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 by improving the home with historically accurate materials and improvements it protects the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2014-100 as submitted with the understanding that the improvements on the front of the home receive a General Permit approval from the Village Council.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-100:  Burriss (Yes), Hawk (Yes), Mitchell (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

420 North Granger Street – Deborah Barber – Application #2014-104

The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) since the addition is an expansion of more than twenty (20%) percent of the gross livable area.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a rear one-story addition and carport. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Mitchell swore in Deb Walker and Deborah Barber.

 

Discussion:

Deborah Barber, 420 North Granger Street, stated that she felt the application sufficiently covered her request.

 

Chair Mitchell asked for Ms. Walker to explain the massing of the structure. Ms. Walker discussed the interior layout of the home and indicated the Staff was concerned with the north elevation, as there were no windows contained within this long elevation.  Otherwise, Staff is in favor of the application.

 

Chair Mitchell stated that he can see why there were no windows in the hallway, but why weren’t there any put within the master bedroom area.  Ms. Barber indicated her reasoning for not including windows.

 

Mr. Burriss discussed the gables and the possible addition of a trellis on the elevation to break up some of the horizontal finish which was proposed.  He also discussed the addition of awning windows to allow light within the rooms, and a trim detail helps repeat what’s going on in the front of the home.

 

Ms. Walker indicated that the carport will need to have a variance granted by the BZBA in order to be constructed as it does not meet the setback requirement.

 

Mr. Burriss questioned having the rear door open out instead of opening in.  This will not allow the applicant to install a screen door or storm door.  He stated the applicant would be able to modify it to have it open in instead, and would not be required to have it reapproved by the Commission.  He said that it would essentially have the same look he just wanted the applicant to consider this as she designs her home so that it’s functional.  He indicated most residential doorways don’t open out.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-104:

 

a)      Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the application is consistent with similar requests 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 proposed materials and details are consistent with the existing detailing on the original portion of the house.  The Planning Commission concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)      Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, by continuing to contribute to the vitality of a home within the District it contributes to the vitality of the District overall.  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, by using materials that are appropriate to the original structure the addition protects and enhances the existing house and surroundings in which past generations lived.  The Planning Commission concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to approve Application #2014-104 as submitted with the stipulation that the changes and inclusions on Exhibit “A” and “B” be executed and that the applicant receive approval from the BZBA for the variance request.  Seconded by Mr. Hawk.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-104:  Hawk (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Mitchell (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Application #2014-100, Joseph & Demaris Rosato; 217 East College Street; Site Modifications and 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 1159, Village Residential District (VRD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (ARPD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-100. 

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-100.  Seconded  by Mr. Burriss.   Roll Call Vote:  Hawk (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Mitchell (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Wilken (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-104, Deborah Barber; 420 North Granger Street; Rear Addition: 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 1163, Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-104 as submitted. 

 

Mr. Hawk moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-104 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss. Roll Call Vote: Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Hawk (Yes), Mitchell (Yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member (if necessary):  No members absent.

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from July 14 and July 28, 2014:

 

Mr. Hawk made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 14th Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Mitchell (Yes). Motion carried 3-0.

 

Mr. made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 28th Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Burriss (Yes), Hawk (Yes), Mitchell (Yes). Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

August 25, 2014

September 8, 2014

September 22, 2014

 

Mr. Mitchell moved to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting, seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Motion carried.

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.