Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

December 14, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to Order:  Mr. Hawk (Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.

 

Members Present: Mr. Hawk, Mr. Eklof, Mr. Burris (arrived 7:08 PM), Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke

Members Absent:  None.

Staff Present: Debi Walker, Planning and Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present: Timothy Dunham, Jill Dunham, Ann Lowder, Director, Robbins Hunter Museum, William Heyer, Architect, Father David Getreu, and Kevin Kerr

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

319 Summit Street; Timothy Dunham; Application #2015-171: The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of an exterior chimney pipe in conjunction with the installation of a wood stove in the interior. The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Timothy Dunham and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Timothy Dunham, 319 Summit Street, stated: As described, the chimney for a wood stove may not be visible from the street.  It will be 6" in diameter and project three feet from the roof top.  The county has given a permit and Mr. Dunham will install.  Mr. Potaracke asked if there would be brackets for support.  Yes, there will be brackets to provide support from wind loading.  Mr. Eklof asked about another chimney at the back of the house.  Mr. Dunham responded stating it is a separate chimney for the furnace.  Ms. Walker stated the staff has no objections and recommends approval of the project.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-171:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr.Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed improvements are compatible with other similar 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 improvements are appropriate and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials 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, the proposed improvements enhance examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilkin made a motion to approve Application #2015-171 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-171:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

221 East Broadway; Application #2015-172; Ann Lowder, Director, on behalf of The Robbins Hunter Museum: The request is for architectural review and approval of a four hundred thirty (430) square foot garden folly in the rear yard. The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Ann Lowder, Director of The Robbins Hunter Museum, William Heyer, Architect, and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Ms. Ann Lowder, 5746 Bastille Place, Columbus, Ohio, stated: The Museum board is excited about the historic garden plans.  The application seeks to replace the existing storage shed with a garden folly which will be used as a garden shed and also be a focal point for weddings, poetry readings, concerts and the like.  It will be in line of sight from Broadway and will become a wonderful addition to historic Granville.  Mr. Hawk asked if the location is within setback limits and Ms. Walker stated the proposed garden folly meets all the Districts setback requirements.  The drawing submitted shows the stage/porch structure and the two storage areas.  Mr. Bill Heyer, 756 Grandin Avenue, Bexley, Ohio, is the architect commissioned by the museum to design the building.  He described the structure as being a wood structure, with a concrete foundation, Hardie board and cedar siding and trim works with either a metal roof or shingles, depending on budget.  Pressure treated lumber will be used as needed. The folly will not be heated or air conditioned, however, electrical service will be run from the museum.  Mr. Hawk inquired as to any proposed sound system.  Ms. Lowder responded stating performers would bring in their own speakers.  Mr. Eklof asked if the original gazebo idea had been replaced.  Mr. Heyer confirmed that it had been redesigned for budget reasons. Ms. Walker said staff is grateful for the incredible attention paid to detailing and siting the new structure and congratulate the applicant and their architect. Planning Commission was asked to establish parking requirements for the new garden folly as the structure falls into this particular category. After a brief discussion, Mr. Wilken moved to waive the parking requirement.  Mr. Burriss seconded.  Mr. Hawk asked Mr. Wilken to discuss his reasoning for waiving the requirement; Mr. Wilken stated that in his opinion, the folly is a glorified storage shed and to encumber it with a parking requirement would be too legalistic. Mr. Hawk agreed.  Parking will remain the same.  Roll call vote to waive the parking requirement Potaracke, (yes), Eklof (yes), Wilken (yes), Burriss (yes) and Hawk (yes). Motion passed 5-0.

 

Mr. Burriss went on to ask about any proposed lighting.  Ms. Lowder replied that some performers would bring their own lighting, or potentially the flood lighting on the mansion may be redirected. The question of a future hose bib to maintain the existing and future gardens arose; Ms. Lowder responded by stating that that had yet to be determined.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-172:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with 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, design and appearance are appropriate, keeping in style with the house and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials are consistent with the majority of the structure and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-172, as submitted, and with the understanding that there will be no off-street parking spaces required to be associated with this use. Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-172: Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Wilken (Yes) Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

Application #2015-171; Timothy Dunham, 319 Summit Street, Exterior Modifications: Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with Chapter 1159, Village Residential District (VRD), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD), and hereby gives approval of Application #2015-171. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-171. Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) Hawk (Yes). Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Application #2015-172: Ann Lowder on behalf of The Robbins Hunter Museum; 221 East Broadway; Garden Folly: The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with Chapter 1157, Accessory Structures, Chapter 1159, Village Business District (VBD), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD), and Chapter 1183, Off-street Parking and Loading and hereby gives approval of Application #2015-172. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-172.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) Hawk (Yes). Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from October 13th, 2015 Planning Commission hearing:  Mr. Burriss made a motion to approve the minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Eklof seconded.  All in favor voice vote: Motion carried 3-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from November 23rd, 2015 Planning Commission hearing:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the Nov. 23rd Planning Commission Meeting. Mr. Potaracke seconded. All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Status of Village Planner Search:  Steve Stilwell and Debi Walker.

 

Mr. Stilwell stated that the Village Planner search has not yielded a viable candidate so the process will be reopened. A candidate from Marysville was qualified but not forthcoming as to why he left his position there. The other two candidates, for various reasons, were not a good fit and what the Village is looking for in the future Planner. Mr. Burriss felt that a better candidate can be found. Mr. Hawk thanked Mr. Burriss for serving the committee (which included Rob Montgomery, Steve Matheny and Steve Stilwell) and asked him to continue.

 

Mr. Hawk asked what can be done to facilitate the running of the Village until a planner is found.  Discussion yielded the possible suspension of notice signs, using boards instead of PowerPoint presentation and disseminating information electronically to Commissioners. Mr. Potaracke inquired about the possibility of tablets being issued by the Village and was told that might be a possibility. Mr. Wilken agreed that these were sensible recommendations and this would be an opportunity for the Village Council to reconsider sending things to GPC, i.e.: the chimney application before us this evening, the funeral home low retaining wall, non-controversial window replacements, etc. – of course, wholesale structural changes need to be considered, but not non-controversial things. GPC should be aware but not necessarily have to hear an application. Additional discussion ensued. It was made known that any additional thoughts/methods to reduce Staff workload during the period of short staffing would be appreciated

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

January 11, 2016

January 25, 2016

February 8, 2016

 

Motion to Adjourn:  Mr. Hawk declared the Planning Commission meeting adjourned seeing as there was no further business before the Commission.

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes November 23, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

November 23, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:   Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Eklof, Mr. Burris, Jackie O’Keefe, (ex-officio member, Village Council), Jeremy Johnson (ex-officio member Village Council, Non-Voting, 1st Hearing of the Month), Tim Klingler (ex-officio member GEVSD, Non-Voting

Members Absent:  Mr. Hawk.

Staff Present: Debi Walker, Planning and Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present: Ken Rittenhouse, Marvin Rutter, Debi Hartfield, Scott Baker, Steve Flowers, John Klauder.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

214 South Cherry Street; Jim & Bonnie Fowler; Application #2015-162: The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of new sandstone on the front porch, new sandstone entry steps, and new sandstone walls within the front yard.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Eklof swore in Ken Rittenhouse and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Rittenhouse, 950 Old River Road, stated the plans including two small retaining walls, plans for boxwood planting, and restoration of the steps.  Mr. Klingler remarked that the plan will be a good improvement and seems historically proper.  The staff lends its approval to the project.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-162:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed improvements are compatible with other similar 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 improvements are appropriate and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials 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, the proposed improvements 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 #2015-162 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-162:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

1820 Newark – Granville Road Application #2015-164 Marvin Rutter on behalf of Spring Hills Baptist Church: The request is for review and approval of a minor site plan amendment to allow for the relocation of the existing dumpsters and construction of a new fenced enclosure along the edge of the western parking lot.  The property is zoned Planned Unit Development District (PUD).

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Eklof swore in Marvin Rutter and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Marvin Rutter, 1820 Newark Granville Rd, Granville stated for 18 years the dumpster was in the southwest corner of the property, then it was moved to the current location.  The church would like to relocate the dumpster to make it easier for Waste Management to access.  It would be enclosed with a solid enclosure with two gates and there may be the addition of a recycling bin to encourage responsible recycling.  Mr. Wilken asked if there were plans to secure the gates so that they would not be open and flapping in wind.  Mr. Rutter replied that they will anchor the gate with an L bracket mooring. 

 

Mr. Burriss suggested installation of bollard posts to prevent trucks from knocking over the fences.  Mr. Rutter said they could consider that.  Mr. Potaracke asked if clearance had been checked with the dumpster and the gates will open entirely, allowing plenty of room for the trucks to access. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-164:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with 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, design and appearance are appropriate and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-164 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-164: Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Wilken (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

232 West Elm Street Application #2015 – 167, Steve Flowers of CS Construction Group Ltd. On behalf of Bruce and Lisa Westall: The request is for architectural review and approval of exterior modifications including roofing materials change, new skylights, windows, air conditioning unit, generator and construction of a privacy fence along the eastern property line with a gated arbor. The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Eklof swore in Steve Flowers and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Steve Flowers, 1360 Loudon Street, Granville, Ohio stated the particulars about the materials to be used to replace the older shingle roof on their house.  The skylight will lighten the inside of the house.  Old vinyl windows will be replaced by Jeld Wen windows and fixed glass box units.  Central HVAC and generator will be located behind a fence.  Next year the owners will be considering a garage and front porch. 

 

Mr. Wilken asked about the level of noise a generator will put out and wondered if it could be moved to the rear of the house. That was considered but there is very little yard and that would move it closer to another neighbor, said Mr. Flowers. 

 

Mr. Burriss asked if the frame house is approved for a generator.  Debi Walker said she would have to check.  Mr. Burriss asked if the generator is within set back and the answer was “Yes”.  There was some discussion about existing neighbor concerns, but neighbors had been notified and did not attend the meeting.  Mr. Klingler said that moving the generator would impact neighbors on other sides if it was moved.  He suggested shrubbery and the future garage would mitigate that noise.   Staff recommends the improvements.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-167:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with 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, design and appearance are appropriate and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to approve Application #2015-167, as submitted, pending approval by the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals for the arbor.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-167:   Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Wilken (Yes). Eklof (Yes)   Motion carried 4-0.

 

327 West Maple Street; Application #2015-165; Scott Baker of SBA Studios, on behalf of Debi Hartfield:  The request is for architectural review and approval of the removal of a three season sunroom and construction of a new room addition on the southwestern corner of the home.  The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Swearing in of witnesses:  Mr. Eklof swore in Scott Baker, Debbie Hartfield and Debi Walker.

Discussion:

Scott Baker, 1565 Dale Court Road, and Debbie Hartfield, 327 W. Maple Street, Granville, Ohio stated the corner foundation area of the house is failing because of water damming up in that area.  The plan is to take off the corner of the house, repair the foundation and then put the corner back in, flush with the house.  The extent of the water damage is hard to assess until the corner comes off. Wooden windows will be replaced and will be double hung type to match other windows in the house.  The roof will be rubber and will be parallel to the floor.  A reclaimed door may work to replace the existing door.  There is also asbestos to be removed.  If the existing lap siding is in good shape, they may be able to reuse it.  Debbie Hartfield showed images of the floor plan and elevations.  They will also be adding downspouts to fix the water problem.  Staff approves of the proposed changes and materials.

 

Mr. Burriss complimented the character of the addition in keeping with the existing structure of the house.  He asked if the reclaimed door would have a storm door?  Debbie Hartfield answered yes, if one can be found. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-165:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with 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, design and appearance are appropriate and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2014-165 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-165:   Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Wilken (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

Application #2015-162: Ken Rittenhouse of John Klauder Associates on behalf of Jim and Bonny Fowler 214 South Cherry Street, Landscape Improvements: Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with Chapter 1159, Village Residential District and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District and hereby gives approval of Application #2015-162. 

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-162.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes).   Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Application #2015-164: Marvin Rutter on behalf of Spring Hills Baptist Church; PUD Minor Revision to a PUD to Allow for a New Fenced Dumpster Enclosure:  Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with Chapter 1171, Planned Unit Development and Chapter 1187, Height, Area and Yard Modifications and hereby gives approval of Application #2015-164.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-164.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote: Mr. Wilken (Yes), Mr. Potaracke (Yes), Mr. Burriss (Yes), and Mr. Eklof (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Application #2015-165: Scott Baker of SBA Studios, on behalf of Debi Hartfield; 327 West Maple Street; New Room Addition @ SW Corner of Home:  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 #2015-165. 

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-165.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.    Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes).  Motion Carried  4-0.Application #2015-167: Steve Flowers of CS Construction On Behalf of Bruce and Lisa Westall: Exterior Modifications of Fence Section with Arbor and Gate VRD and AROD:  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), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1187, Height, Area and Yard Modifications and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-167. 

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-167.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.    Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member (if necessary):  Mr. Wilken made a motion to excuse the absence of Mr. Hawk. Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from October 26th, 2015 Planning Commission hearing:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the October 26th Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Status of Village Planner Search:  Debi Walker said there would be interviews from 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM November 24th with the applicants.  Mr. Burriss will represent the GPC during the interviews.  December 18 will be Alison’s last day and there will be a celebration between1 and 3.  Deanna will also be included in the celebration as she is retiring.

 

Review and Approval of 2016 Planning Commission Hearing Dates:

Mr. Burriss made a motion to approve the 2016 Planning Commission Hearing Dates.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

December 14, 2015

January 11, 2016

January 25, 2016

 

Motion to Adjourn:  Mr. Eklof declared the Planning Commission meeting adjourned seeing as there was no further business before the Commission.

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

October 26, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to Order:  Mr. Hawk (Chair) called the meeting to order at _ p.m.

 

Members Present:   Mr. Eklof, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Hawk, Jeremy Johnson (ex-officio member, Village Council non-voting), and Tim Klingler (ex-officio member, GEVSD, Non-Voting)

Members Absent: Jack Burriss.

Staff Present: Deb Walker, Planning and Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present:  Philip and Charlene Ward, John Lyle, Tom Martin.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

239 West Broadway – Philip and Charlene Ward – Application #2015-152The 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 installation of a new air conditioning unit on the west side of the home.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Philip and Charlene Ward and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

 

Philip Ward, 239 W. Broadway, Granville, Ohio, stated they want to install an air-conditioning unit in the house.  They have gotten some estimates and intend to drop the unit into an existing fenced area that has a concrete base.  The staff is in support of the project, particularly as there is an existing screen to hide the unit.  There were no questions from the board.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-152:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; that, as above in item b, the proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application # 2015-152 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application # 2015-152:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

354 North Granger Street – John Lyle on behalf of Julie Dixon– Application #2015-153:  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 a replacement garden shed in the rear yard.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in John Lyle and Deb Walker.   

 

Discussion:

 

John Lyle, with Claggett and Son, Sharon Valley Road stated that Julie Dixon has retained their firm to demolish the existing, deteriorated shed and prepare the site by cleaning and grading and laying a two inch (2”) stone bed.  The shed will be erected by Lowes, from where it was purchased. 

 

Staff approves of the project.  The board agreed the existing shed is an eyesore.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-153:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; the proposed improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; that, as above in item b, the proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke. 

 

Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve Application # 2015-153 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application # 2015-153:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

115 West Broadway - Tom Martin on behalf of Granville Historical Society - Application 2015-154: 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 the installation of two ground mounted flood lights in the front garden. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Tom Martin and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Tom Martin, 3 Shepard Place, Granville, Ohio, 43023 stated the request is for two ground mounted flood lights to be placed in the front garden of the Historical Society property.  The lights would centrally illuminate the sign and door, plus the sidewalk and front stoop to make the area safer to negotiate. 

 

Staff asked if the Planning Commission wanted to impose a time to have the floodlights turn off at night.  Mr. Martin said the Society would be open relatively few times at night or evening.  He agreed the lights would be on a timer and turn off around 10 p.m.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-154:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area...  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; the proposed improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; that, as above in item b, the proposed exterior lighting is consistent with and therefore contributes to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke. 

 

Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve Application # 2015-154 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application # 2015-154:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application # 2015-152; Philip and Charlene Ward, 239 West BroadwayApprove 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 (AROD)  and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-152. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve for Findings of Fact for Application #2015-152.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll call vote: Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-153; John Lyle on behalf of Julie Dixon, 354 North Granger Street; Replacement of Garden Shed in Rear Yard: Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with Chapter 1157, General Zoning Regulations, Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-153.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-153.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll call vote Burriss (yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-154; Keith Boone on behalf of the Granville Historical Society; 115 East Broadway; Two Ground Mounted Flood Lights in Front Garden: 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 Business District (VBD), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and, and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-154. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-154.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll call vote: Wilken, (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member (if necessary):  Mr. Eklof made a motion to excuse the absence of Jack Burriss.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll call vote: Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from September 28, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the meeting minutes for the September 28, 2015 Planning Commission meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof. Roll call vote: Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

November 9, 2015

November 23, 2015

December 14, 2015

Mr. Eklof declared the Planning Commission meeting adjourned seeing as there was no further business before the Commission.

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m.

 

Planning Commission Minutes October 13, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

October 13, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Eklof, Mr. Burris and Jackie O’Keefe, (ex-officio member, Village Council) and Tim Klingler (ex-officio member, GEVSD, Non-Voting)

Staff Present: Deb Walker, Planning and Zoning Assistant, Michael King, Law Director, Alison Terry, Planning Director and Steve Stilwell, Village Manager

 

Also Present:  Keith Eschbaugh, Jean Schorger Brown, John Noblick, Rod Talbott, Randy Talbott, Charlie Hartman, David English, Tod Frolking, and Dennis Cauchon.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

226 East Broadway – Jared Eschbaugh – Application #2015-146The 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 Keith Eschbaugh and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Keith Eschbaugh, 226 E. Broadway, Granville, Ohio, on behalf of Ila’s Popcorn, requested approval of an A-frame sidewalk sign which he brought with him to show to the board.  The sign is a black chalkboard type.  It would be put out in the daytime and secured inside at business closing.  It would be situated between the house and sidewalk. 

 

Staff approves of the sign, as it will be located as illustrated and secured when the business is not open. There were no questions from the Commission.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-146:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  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 improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application # 2015-146 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-146:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

324 West Elm Street – Jean Schorger Brown – Application #2015-147:  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 a six (6’) foot high wood privacy fence in the eastern side yard\ and a thirty (30”) inch picket fence in the eastern side yard with gate.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Jean Schorger Brown and Deb Walker.   

 

Discussion:

Jean Schorger Brown, 324 West Elm Street, said she was submitting the application for the fences as described. 

 

Mr. Hawk asked if these were replacement fences or new.  Ms. Brown answered yes. Mr. Hawk asked if a survey had been done.  Ms. Brown answered yes she knows where the property lines are. 

 

Mr. Klingler remarked that the proposed fence is attractive and fits the style of the house.  Staff is in favor of the fence.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-147:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  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 improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to approve Application # 2015-147 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-147:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

135 West Maple Street - Charlie Hartman - Application # 2015-148: 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 installation of a new air conditioning unit, replacement garage door and installation of chimney caps.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Charlie Hartman and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Charlie Hartman, 135 W. Maple, would like to install a replacement air conditioning unit on the West side of the house.  The current A/C unit is on the South side of the house and Mr. Hartman would like to do a renovation of that area in the future.  He would also like to replace the 1980 deteriorating garage door and install stainless chimney caps - one round for the hot water heater, and two square for gas fire place chimneys. 

 

The Staff approves of the project.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-148:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  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; proposed improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the livability and therefore 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; the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the district, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application # 2015-148 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-148:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

125 East College Street – John Noblick for Rod Talbott - Application 2015-149: The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). The request is for exterior modifications and improvements: New second floor sunroom addition, standing seam metal roofing, entire structure, New gutters and downspouts, change of siding from vinyl to polymer shake-look, entire structure, vinyl replacement windows first and second floors, glass block windows in east and west side of basement, new upper deck with railing, replacement exterior staircase including landing, new lattice screening panel beneath exterior staircase landing, replacement of existing concrete block first floor stoop rear of structure with masonry block with concrete finish, installation of hand-rail system on new stoop and staircase, remove and replace existing concrete patio with stamped concrete patio, installation of gravel between existing concrete driveway runners.  

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker and John Noblick, later in discussion Rod and Randy Talbott were sworn in.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Noblick, 372 Shamrock Lane, Newark, stated that the installation of gravel between existing concrete runners is already in existence.  He explained that the stamped concrete patio will be dark gray and will resemble slate.  The roof may have to be raised to replace the windows with vinyl windows.  The back of the house has a flat metal roof.  Existing sleeping quarters on the second story with a flat roof is only six feet (6’) high and is not habitable by Licking County standards.  The standing seam roof will be dark bronze in color.  The old staircase on the back of the house was removed as hazardous and will be replaced with a new staircase.  Windows will match existing openings. 

 

Ms. O’Keefe asked if the home had been a two family dwelling at one time.  The answer was yes, at one time, but because time has passed it has lost that nonconforming status. 

Randy Talbott stated that the aim is to maintain an historic look with the best quality products. 

 

Assistant Planner Walker said that the VBD allows for 70% lot coverage. 

 

Mr. Noblick explained that the original structure was a barn that had been added to several times.  The roof raising was a late breaking decision.  He indicated a portion of the front porch is in the public right of way, so the owners will need to get a general use permit from the Village Council. 

 

Rod Talbott explained that the reason for the change in the roof plan was that several valleys were going to create leakage issues, so they changed the plan to prevent that. 

 

Mr. Burriss asked if shutters could be added to the right side of the West elevation to make it more aesthetically pleasing.  Rod Talbott explained that they will be trying to add a garage and carriage house next year, but that they could add shutters for now. 

 

 

 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-149:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed improvements are similar in style 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, design and appearance are appropriate and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials contribute to the livability of the home and therefore 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. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed design and materials are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District and therefore achieve this.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2015-149 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-149:  Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Other Business:

 

Review of Proposed Zoning Code Revision, to amend Section 1135.01 and Section 1169.02 of the Codified Ordinances of the Village of Granville, Ohio Pertaining to Definitions and Permitted and Conditional Uses in the Institutional District (ID).

 

Discussion: 

 

Mr. Hawk declared this is a public hearing on these zoning code reviews.  He clarified that any recommendations to Council would be based on what is appropriate for Granville, not what is appropriate for any particular property. 

 

Planner Terry stated the Board has received a request from Denison to modify the conditional use section of the Institutional District zoning classification which could allow for a larger solar energy production facility. 

 

Law Director King and Steven Stilwell indicated the Village doesn’t currently have a definition of solar energy in the Zoning Code.  A solar energy production facility can have a larger combination of panels.  Solar energy equipment and voltage is part of these provisions. 

 

Law Director King indicated the Village received a letter from Denison on Sept 8, 2015, stating they were working with Granville Township to amend the Township’s Zoning Code in relation to solar energy.  Denison is asking for solar to be recognized as an accessory use in the Institutional District.  This is an opportunity to clarify this and to clarify that the proposed solar use is accessory use.  In looking at other areas to define the term solar energy production facility it was found that this would service an institution (Denison), eliminate their dependence on electric companies, but also clarifies that the production of electric cannot become a commercial use on a property (to make money.)  Conditional accessory use criteria concerns what the effect would be on neighbors, surrounding properties, etc. 

 

David English, 138 N. Main, Granville, was there as a representative of Denison.  He said he agreed with Law Director King and indicated the Township was considering the issue. 

 

Jim Cooper, 334 West Maple Street, Granville, Ohio, stated he was also representing Denison and the action on the proposed ordinance would not affect the common pleas court case.  It will be decided as it stands. 

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to recommend approval to the Village Council for the proposed revisions to the Codified Ordinance section 1135.01 and 1169.02, as proposed.  Mr. Burriss seconded.  Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), motion passed 3-0.

 

Option 1: Review of Proposed Zoning Code Revision, to amend section 1121.01 of the Codified Ordinances of the Village of Granville, Ohio Pertaining to Required Street Widths and Right of Way Widths in the Subdivision Regulations; and

 

Option 2: Review of Proposed Zoning Code Revision, to amends Section 1105.01, 1117.02, 1117.03, 1117.04 and 1121.01 of the Codified Ordinances of the Village of Granville, Ohio Pertaining to Definitions and Required Street Widths and Right of Way Widths in the Subdivision Regulations. 

 

Discussion on Option 1 and Option 2 Proposed Zoning Code Revisions:

Planner Terry explained that with Option 1 there is a section of the Code that allows the Village Council to grant deviations from the infrastructure requirements (roadway widths, right-of-way widths, sidewalks, etc.). In the last sentence of Section 1121.01, the code states that in no case may sidewalks, etc. be less than that of the county requirements.  The current proposal from the Frolking’s is to remove this requirement completely.  Planner Terry indicated the current code provision sets a standard, other than the Village’s, which should be maintained.  She went on to state that Staff is recommending this sentence not be eliminated completely, but instead, modified to allow for up to a 20% reduction.  Each request for such deviation would then be reviewed on a case by case basis.  

 

Planner Terry then discussed all of the code sections that would be addressed under Option 2, as requested by the Frolking’s.  The proposed modifications become much more complex and would affect all small scale future residential development in the Village. She went on to discuss the proposed public street changes, the more closely defined service streets, alleys, and public right of way.  Two (2) cross-sections of potential public street and right-of-way width modifications was reviewed and discussed in relation to access for public management vehicles and emergency vehicles. 

 

Brian Coghlan, Bird and Bull Engineering firm, Village Engineer, expressed concern over narrower roadway proposals.  The Police department and Fire Chief share the same concerns regarding parking enforcement issues and emergency access.

 

A letter from Board member Wilken was read into the record by Mr. Hawk.  Mr. Wilken is opposed to any reduction in code widths especially in the congested Village.  He said he has experienced such things in small towns elsewhere and it created a parking nightmare. 

Mr. King discussed the legal and policy changes proposed by the Frolkings.  An obstacle in the current Code relates to local category road widths.  He indicated currently Village Council can grant a variance, but cannot approve a reduction that is less than the county code.  Possible changes could be to create a new category of road specific to what is wanted – as outlined in Option 2.  Another change could be to amend the restrictions on the granting of variances below the County standards.  Is that smart?  The GPC is not here to make changes specific to the Frolking’s properties.  If the Village Council provides more latitude to make changes to variance procedures, it still cannot go below more than 20% of the county regulations.  Option 3 would be to make no changes at all to the Code.

 

Discussion then revolved around various areas of the community that are currently problematic in relation to traffic and parking. Creation of a private road would mean that multifamily units could be built on private roadways instead of public roadways.  Curb profiles were discussed as Granville requires a straight curb.  Angle bump out parking was also discussed as a problem because of interference with sidewalks, utilities, trees and lawns. 

 

Engineer Coghlan indicated these are the reasons codes have evolved. Columbus street width regulations are 26 feet minimum.  More discussion followed regarding on-street parking, delivery vehicles, appliance trucks, garbage trucks, moving trucks and emergency vehicles. 

 

Engineer Coghlan pointed out that historic roads are narrower and are difficult to maneuver through at times.  Such streets in Columbus neighborhoods are now one way for that very reason.   He said he could not endorse a narrower width for new roads.  He stated a twenty-two (22’) foot road will act like a construction zone.  Disallowing parking will become an enforcement issue.  Emergency and other vehicles would not be able to negotiate.  Snow removal and other vehicles previously discussed would have an issue.

 

Tod Frolking, 605 W. Broadway, Granville, said their proposal would only have nine (9) homes using the road. 

 

It was mentioned again that if someone had a party there would be significantly more traffic and parking enforcement problems.  Mr. Hawk stated the Board was not dealing with the Frolking property with these variances. 

 

Mr. Frolking contended the Board was and he wants it left to the Village Council. 

 

Mr. Klingler suggested that passing Option 1 would allow the Village Council to decide whether variances should be granted for individual properties. 

 

Mr. Eklof also favored Option 1.  The staff indicted there were also supportive of Option 1. 

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to recommend approval to the Village Council for the proposed revision to the Codified Ordinance section 1121.01, Option 1, as proposed.  Mr. Eklof seconded.  Burriss (yes), Eklof (yes), Hawk (yes), motion passed 3-0.

 

 

 

 

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application # 2015-146; Jared Eschbaugh, on behalf of Ila’s Gourmet Popcorn; 226 East Broadway C; Sidewalk SignApprove 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 Business District (VBD), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-146. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve for Findings of Fact for Application #2015-146.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Hawk (Yes), Motion carried 3-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-147; Jean Schorger Brown 324 West Elm Street; Fencing: 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), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1187, Height, Area and Yard Modifications and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-147.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-147.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote Burriss (yes), Eklof (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-148; Charlie Hartman; 135 West Maple 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 1159, Village Residential District (VRD), and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-148. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-148.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.   Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

d)                  Application 2015-149; John Noblick on behalf of Rodney Talbott; 125 East College Street; Remodeling and 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 1159, Village Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-149. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-149.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Members:  Mr. Eklof made a motion to excuse the absence of Bill Wilken and Craig Potaracke.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Burriss (yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

 

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

October 26, 2015

November 9, 2015

November 23, 2015

 

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

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes September 28, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 28, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Eklof (Vice Chair), Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Wilken, Jackie O’Keefe (non-voting ex-officio Council representative) and Tim Klingler (non-voting ex-officio GEVSD representative).

Members Absent: Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Burriss.

Staff Present:  Debi Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant, Steve Stilwell, Village Manager.

 

Also Present:  Julio Valenzuela, Mary Morales-Rivera and Jim Cooper.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Old Business:

 

128 South Pearl Street – Julio Valenzuela, on behalf of the Historic Buxton Inn, LLC– Amended Application #2015-121: 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 to include the removal of three tab asphaltic shingles and replacement with Owens Corning dimensional asphaltic shingles.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Julio Valenzuela and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Julio Valenzuela, 116 Donegal Dr., Granville, Ohio, indicated that as work was proceeding on the siding of this structure, the roof was determined to be beyond its lifespan. 

 

Staff indicated they appreciate the effort and work being done on that property and approves of the project.  Mr. Klingler expressed his support of the project.  The board had no questions.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Amended Application #2015-121:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed roofing material is similar to other materials which have been approved in the District.   All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed roofing material contributes to the upgrading of the building and condition of the house and therefore improves and upgrades the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; by contributing to the vitality of a business it contributes to the continuing vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed roofing material protects and enhances the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Amended Application #2015-121 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Amended Application #2015-121:   Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

New Business:

 

134 South Pearl Street and 316 East Elm Street – The Properties on Elm Street, LLC - Application #2015-125: The properties are zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and are located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).  The request is for review and approval of the Replat of Lots numbered 208 and 209 (Renumbered Lot Numbers).

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Jim Cooper, Julio Valenzuela and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Jim Cooper, Attorney, 33 W. Main St., Newark, Ohio, stated he was speaking on behalf of The Properties on Elm Street, LLC.  The proposal involves movement of a boundary line to the East to put it in the center of the driveway, which is a common driveway used by the two adjacent parcels.  A survey by Scott Harmon shows that the boundary line butts up against one of the structures.  Mr. Cooper referred to an aerial view and a drawing for perspective.  Mr. Hawk asked Assistant Planner Walker for staff input. 

 

Ms. Walker said the request would also require variance approvals from the BZBA.  She also indicated the staff approves of the proposal as it makes future sale of the property more attractive.  An easement may be needed for any future sale. 

 

Mr. Wilken asked if the Village would want that to be more than a village agreement.  

 

Ms. O'Keefe asked how the shared drive would work and could there be a conflict. 

 

Ms. Walker answered there is no issue presently because the properties have a common owner, but there could be concern in the future should the properties be sold.  Hopefully neighbors would work things out amicably.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-125:

 

(1)        All lots of the resulting subdivisions are contiguous to a dedicated public street right-of-way for such distance as is required by the applicable zoning district. All board members stated this was TRUE.

(2)        No opening, widening or extension of any road, street or other public way is involved. All board members stated this was TRUE.

(3)        No more than five (5) lots, each of which meets the established criteria for development, result after the original tract is completely subdivided.   All board members stated this was TRUE.

(4)        The request for subdivision is not contrary to platting, subdividing or zoning regulations of the Municipality.  All board members stated this was TRUE.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-125 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-125:   Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Mr. Wilken commented that he felt decisions such as this should be able to be decided by the Planner's administrative discretion.

 

134 East Broadway – Mary Morales-Rivera of Morales-Rivers, LLC, on behalf of Day y Noche - Application #2015-127: 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 the removal of four (4) wood double-hung windows and replacement with four (4) vinyl clad double-hung windows on the upper level, southern elevation.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Mary Morales-Rivera and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mary Morales-Rivera, 134 E. Broadway, Granville, Ohio, stated that Day Y Noche would like to replace old windows on the upper level with new energy efficient windows. 

 

Staff gives full support to the preservation of this historic structure.  The board had no questions.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-127:

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed replacement windows are similar to other windows which have been approved in the District.   All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed replacement windows contribute to the upgrading of the business and therefore improve and upgrade the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; by contributing to the vitality of a business it contributes to the continuing vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed replacement windows protect and enhance the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-127 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-127:  Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Old Business:

 

a)         Amended Application #2015-121; Julio Valenzuela – The Historic Buxton Inn, LLC; 128 South Pearl Street; Re-RoofingApprove 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Amended Application #2015-121.

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Amended Application #2015-121.  Mr. Wilken seconded.  Roll Call:  Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-125; The Properties on Elm Street, LLC; 134 South Pearl Street and 316 East Elm 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 1159, Village Residential District (VRD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-125.

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-125 as presented.  Second by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-127; Mary Morales-Rivera, on behalf of Day y Noche; 134 East Broadway; Window ReplacementsApprove 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-127.

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-127 as presented.  Second by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote: Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Planning Director Job Search Discussion:  Manager Stilwell, on behalf of the Village Council, thanked the members of the commission for their service.  Then he spoke regarding the vacancy created by Alison Terry's resignation.  "Finding a replacement to fill that void will not be easy, but Granville is a wonderful location".  Ads have been placed and the hope is to receive about 30 resumes.  Year end is the tentative time frame and Alison will help with the transition.  The job description is comprehensive, balancing strengths and potential.  Applicants must have analytic abilities, interest and personality that will fit the job.  Manager Stilwell anticipates needing help to choose the right candidate and asked for a commission member to volunteer to be part of a panel to interview potential candidates.  Other panel members will include someone from Village Council, Deb Walker, someone from the Chamber of Commerce, and the Advisory boards.  The expectation is to have 6 or 7 good prospects and pick three finalists.  There will be a set of questions and background interviews.  Determination will be based on which talents match community needs. 

 

Mr. Hawk asked where advertisements have been placed.  Manager Stilwell indicated the American Planners Association, locally and the Ohio City and County Managers Association.  Mr. Hawk asked about qualifications needed.  Manager Stilwell anticipates a graduate degree plus four years of experience will be necessary.  It will be a department head position and not right for someone straight out of grad school.  The intent is to "look high".  Mr. Hawk remarked that recent suggestions he’s heard have been to add economic development functions to the position and look at working with Granville Township.  Manager Stilwell replied that the job description does address those ideas.  Manager Stilwell indicated that Township Trustee, Melanie Schott, says the Trustees are interested in exchanging ideas, balancing growth and maintaining the tax base.  School district funding is suffering from millage fatigue.  Manager Stilwell pointed out a typo on page 5 of the application to be corrected. 

 

Mr. Wilken asked whether or not the township is included, to what extent is the Village Council willing to permit the staff less policing? Economic development is hard work.  It is realistic to expect the staff to allocate more time to that.  Ms. O'Keefe remarked that past discussions have mentioned making some things more administrative rather than having to come to the boards with everything.   Manager Stilwell replied that the changes Alison has brought have made things more streamlined and with less effort. One example is signs being approved administratively by staff when outside the historic district.  There is a general consensus of backing off having the boards approve everything.  What serves the community and streamlines the operation? 

Mr. Hawk asked about the pay grade for this position.  That is to be determined but will probably be in the mid-sixties to seventy thousand.  Discussion centered on whether that is an adequate pay for the range of expertise desired.  School teachers start at fifty thousand.  Manager Stilwell replied the village will extend an attractive package and gave the example of the procedure for hiring the police chief.  Ms. O'Keefe remarked that the administration has hired all quality employees.  The week of October 26 will most likely be when top candidates will be interviewed.  Mr. Eklof volunteered to serve on the interview panel.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from September 14, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the September 14, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Motion to excuse absent board members Potoracke and Burriss was made by Mr. Wilken, seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

October 13, 2015 (Tuesday)

October 26, 2015 (Mr. Hawk will be absent)

November 9, 2015

 

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

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.

 

Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 14, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:   Mr. Eklof (Vice Chair), Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Wilken, Jeremy Johnson (non-voting ex-officio Council representative) and Tim Klingler (non-voting ex-officio GEVSD representative).

Member Absent: Mr. Burriss.

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

 

Also Present:  Garrett Martin, Joyce Mitchell, Bryon Reed and Julio Valenzuela.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Old Business:

 

124 East Broadway – Garrett Martin of Stand Alone Media House, on behalf of the Broadway Pub – Amended Application #2015-100: 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 wall sign.  The original approval was for a thirteen point five nine (13.59) square foot wall sign. The new proposal is for a ten (10) square foot wall sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Garrett Martin and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Garrett Martin, 665 Ridgefield Rd., Newark, Ohio, indicated he was speaking on behalf of the Broadway Pub.  The amended application requests approval for a sign that is smaller in size and which will have a raised gold font, more relevant to the style of the pub.  The change is also due to a possible copyright infringement of the originally approved sign.  The material will be different as well, made of recycled wood with a ¾-inch thickness. 

The staff feels the sign is appropriate and aesthetically pleasing.  Mr. Klingler remarked that he liked the sign style, colors and felt it is appropriate.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Amended Application #2015-100:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed sign is similar to other signs which have been approved in the District.   All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed wall sign contributes to the upgrading of the business and therefore improves and upgrades the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it contributes to the continuing vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations livedMr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed wall sign protects and enhances the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Amended Application #2015-100 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Amended Application #2015-100:   Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

124 East Broadway – Garrett Martin of Stand Alone Media House, on behalf of the Broadway Pub – Amended Application #2015-101: 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 double sided projecting sign.  The original approval was for a nine point nine (9.9) square foot double sided projecting sign. The new proposal is for a nine point sixty-one (9.61) square foot double sided projecting sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Garrett Martin and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Garrett Martin, 665 Ridgefield Rd., Newark, Ohio, indicated the double sided projecting sign would have more of a classic appeal and look with the monogram style center.  Staff approves of the change and feels it is appropriate. 

Mr. Klingler indicated he likes the look and the old town style of the proposed sign. 

Mr. Hawk commented the Broadway Pub has done a good job of following the rules and making appropriate applications before proceeding with changes, rather than coming before the Commission after improvements were already made.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Amended Application #2015-101:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed sign is similar to other signs which have been approved in the District.   All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed projecting sign contributes to the upgrading of the business and therefore improves and upgrades the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, by contributing to the vitality of a business it contributes to the continuing vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations livedMr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed projecting sign protects and enhances the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Amended Application #2015-101 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Amended Application #2015-101: Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

New Business:

 

303 South Main Street – Tom Mitchell - Application #2015-119: 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:

1)         Dismantling of existing southern side porch and relocation on the southwestern elevation;

2)         Construction of a new one-story kitchen addition on the southwestern elevation of the home;

3)         Removal of a casement window on the first floor of the western elevation and first floor of the northern elevation at the northwestern corner of the home and replacement with two (2) single-hung vinyl windows;

5)         Removal of three-tab asphaltic shingles on the existing kitchen addition and replacement with Owens Corning Berkshire slate-look asphaltic shingles; and

6)         Installation of ten (10) pairs of restored vintage shutters on select windows.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Joyce Mitchell and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Joyce Mitchell, 303 South Main Street, stated the request is to add a new kitchen and do some exterior modification as described. 

Ms. Walker showed picture of the windows to be replaced, the porch, a schematic floor plan, drawings of the interior and materials choices.  The widow’s walk will be ten inch high wrought iron.  Shutters will be refinished and functional. 

 

Mr. Klingler asked if the shutters will be hinged and have shutter dogs.  Mrs. Mitchell was not sure.  Mr. Klingler expressed appreciation for all the materials and Mr. Wilken said he liked all the work that the Mitchell’s have put into the renovation of the house.  Staff approves of the changes.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-119:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed addition and remodeling is in keeping with the style and architecture of the building and the surrounding area and is similar to other projects which have been approved previously.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed addition and remodeling contributes to the upgrading of the property and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; that as above in item b, the proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed addition and remodeling is consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-119 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-119:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes),  Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

931 Newark-Granville Road – Bryon Reed, Terra Nova Builders, on behalf of Russ & Melissa Bow - Application #2015-120: The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A).  The request is for review and approval of a replat of Lots 3& 4 of the Tall Pines Subdivision, along with Parcel #20-044838-00.001.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Bryon Reed and Debi Walker.

 

Discussion:

Bryon Reed of Terra Nova Builders, 134 Stone Valley Drive, Granville, Ohio, stated he was representing Russ and Melissa Bow.  Mr. Reed passed out copies of the lot layout. The application is to replat lots three and four and re-parcel another adjacent lot in preparation for a future home.  Due to the size of the home and location on the lot, the request is to move the lot line to the east.  The lot meets all requirements in the Suburban Residential District-A zoning classification, including frontage and side yard setbacks.  The number of lots will remain the same.

 

Law Director King stated he believes the application meets all requirements, following a meeting and discussion with Planner Terry.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-120:

 

1)         All lots of the resulting subdivisions are contiguous to a dedicated public street right-of-way for such distance as is required by the applicable zoning district. The lots are currently platted on a private drive, however, the applicant is not proposing additional building lots, simply a reconfiguration of the three (3) commonly owned parcels.  Therefore, the proposed replat and lot split meet the SRD-A zoning district ninety (90’) foot minimum frontage distance requirement, as follows:

a.         Lot #3A will have private drive frontage a total distance of ninety point twenty-five (90.25’) feet;

b.         Lot #4A will have private drive frontage a total distance of ninety point seventy-seven (90.77’) feet; and

c.         Parcel #20-044838-00.001 will have private drive frontage a total distance of three hundred twenty-two feet point fifty-one (322.51) feet.  This lot is not a part of the Tall Pines subdivision.

2)         No opening, widening or extension of any road, street or other public way is involved.   No opening, widening or extension will be needed for this replat and lot split proposal. 

3)         No more than five (5) lots, each of which meets the established criteria for development, result after the original tract is completely subdivided.   The proposed replat and lot split will not result in an additional building site, to meet this requirement.

4)         The request for subdivision is not contrary to platting, subdividing or zoning regulations of the Municipality. The proposed replat and lot split meets all platting, subdividing and zoning regulations of the Village Codified Ordinances.

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-120 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-120:  Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

128 South Pearl Street – The Historic Buxton Inn, LLC - Application #2015-121: 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 the removal of aluminum siding on the entire structure and then refinishing the original wood siding.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Julio Valenzuela and Debi Walker.

 

Julio Valenzuela, 116 Donegal Drive, Granville, Ohio, stated this is one of the homes in the complex of the Buxton Inn structures.  The aluminum siding covers the cedar boards and trim, including holes in the siding where insulation was blown into the sidewalls.  Some details were covered or removed.  The plan is to restore those details, scrape, prime and repaint the wood siding. 

 

The Staff likes the restoration of wood from the aluminum siding. 

Mr. Klingler stated he likes seeing the aluminum come off, but is disturbed the project was started before permission was granted.  It should have been approved before starting the project.  Mr. Valenzuela said that other partners were involved and they pushed the project to move forward to ensure the work could be completed in a timely fashion.  Mr. Hawk pointed out that proceeding without permission risks denial by the board.  Mr. Valenzuela said he understands.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-121:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed remodeling is in keeping with the style and architecture of the building and the surrounding area and is similar to other projects which have been approved previously.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed remodeling contributes to the upgrading of the property and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; that as above in item b, the proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE; the proposed remodeling is consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-121 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-121:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes),  Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Old Business:

 

a)         Amended Application #2015-100; Garett Martin – Stand Alone Media House, on behalf of The Broadway Pub; 124 East Broadway; Wall SignApprove 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), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Amended Application #2015-100. 

 

            Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-100, Amended.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll call vote to approve: Mr. Wilken (yes), Mr. Potaracke (yes), Mr. Eklof (yes), and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 4-0

 

b)         Amended Application #2015-101; Garett Martin – Stand Alone Media House, on behalf of The Broadway Pub; 126 East Broadway; Projecting SignApprove 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), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Amended Application #2015-101.

 

            Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-101, Amended. Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll Call Vote Mr. Potaracke (yes), Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken (yes), and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-119; Tom Mitchell; 303 South Main Street; Addition & Exterior 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 (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-119.

            Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-119, as presented.  Second by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-120; Bryon Reed – Terra Nova Builders, on behalf of Russ & Melissa Bow; 931 Newark-Granville Road; ReplatApprove Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1113, Procedure for Plat Approval and Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-120.

 

            Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-120, as presented.  Second by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote: (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-121; The Historic Buxton Inn, LLC; 128 South Pearl Street; Exterior 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-112. 

 

            Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-121, as presented.  Second by Mr. Wilken.  Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from August 24, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the August 24, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

September 28, 2015

October 13, 2015 (Tuesday)

October 26, 2015

 

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

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

August 24, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Burriss, Mr. Eklof (Vice Chair), Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Wilken, Tim Klingler (non-voting ex officio member GEVSD) and Jackie O’Keefe (non-voting ex-officio member).

Members Absent: None.

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

 

Also Present:  Jonathon Sosebee, Adam Johnson, Jeff Mullett, William Hoekstra, and Ryan Pearson.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

403 East Broadway – Jonathon Sosebee & Adam Johnson - Application #2015-110: 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 removal of aluminum siding on the entire structure and then refinishing the original wood siding. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Jonathon Sosebee, Adam Johnson and Alison Terry.

 

Discussion:

Adam Johnson, 403 East Broadway, indicated he would like to remove the atrocious metal siding from the home and refinish the original wood siding.  He has checked the cedar siding in three places and it appears to be sound.  Staff recommends the project.  The board members had no questions and were pleased with the project.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-110:

 

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 that have been 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 removal of the aluminum siding and restoration of original wood siding contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore improve and upgrade the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the restoration of the original materials contribute to the vitality of a historic home with 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 livedMr. Burriss stated TRUE; that the restoration of the original materials protects and enhances the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-110 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-110:  Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

201 North Pearl Street – Jeff Mullett - Application #2015-111: 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:

1)         Replacement of all windows on the first and second floor, except for the garage; and

2)         Replacing the front door on the Pearl Street entry and the door to the basement in the courtyard. 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Jeff Mullett and Alison Terry.

 

Discussion:

Jeff Mullett, 201 North Pearl Street, stated the project is to replace the windows except for the mother in law suite section.  The existing windows have inconsistent storm windows, old lead glass and cracks in places.  He plans to paint the house next year.  The windows would be wooden double-hung and Staff indicated approval.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-111:

 

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 that have been 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 improvements contribute to the upgrading of the historical appearance of the home and therefore improve and upgrade the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the materials and design selected contribute to the vitality of a 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 livedMr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed application is historically accurate and architecturally appropriate with the surrounding area and thereby improves 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. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-111 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-111:  Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

133 South Prospect Street – William & Mary Hoekstra- Application #2015-112: 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 the removal of the existing brick retaining wall along Elm Street and replacement with Briar Hill Sandstone. 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Bill Hoekstra and Alison Terry.

 

Discussion:

Bill Hoekstra, 133 South Prospect Street, stated he would like to remove the deteriorating brick retaining wall and replace it with a more historically correct sandstone wall.  It would remain the same elevation and the same length. 

 

Planner Terry commented the Village Council will be reviewing the project because it is in the right-of-way.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-112:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed retaining wall replacement is in keeping with the style and architecture of the building and the surrounding area and is similar to other projects which have been approved previously.  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 material for the retaining wall replacement contributes to the upgrading of the property and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and as a major business and home therefore 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; the proposed retaining wall replacement is consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-112 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-112:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

1500 Weaver Drive – Raccoon Creek Senior Housing, LLC - Application #2015-114: The property is zoned Village Gateway District (VGD).  The request is for review and approval of additional sidewalks, landscaping and signage.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Ryan Pearson, and Alison Terry.

 

Discussion:

Ryan Pearson of the Edge Group, 330 West Spring Street, Suite 350, Columbus, Ohio, stated he represents Raccoon Creek Senior Housing, LLC. He is seeking to landscape two main courtyards, one for the memory group and one for another courtyard.  A northwest corner will be used for gardening, next to Columbus Road.  The landscaping will consist of indigenous trees, viburnum, and boxwood. 

 

Mr. Hawk had a question about the proposed sidewalks and access and Planner Terry said that the sidewalk plans are to link service areas and doorways.  Concrete and brick pavers would be used and meet all criteria.  Mr. Hawk asked about the concrete finish on the sidewalks and Mr. Pearson replied it would probably be a brush finish.  The fire lane would be crushed stone, asphalt or gravel.

 

Mr. Burriss asked about previous discussion concerning a screen of trees between Columbus Road and the buildings.  Planner Terry indicated they’re still providing screening in this area; they’ve just increased the landscaping and added walkways between the assisted living facility and the emergency access lane to the west for emergency services.  

 

In response to a question by Mr. Wilken, Mr. Pearson clarified that retail parcels adjacent to the property and to the west would be developed additionally.  Ms. O’Keefe asked if the parcels would be related to the senior apartments and Mr. Pearson replied it is unknown at this time.  

 

Mr. Wilken asked about the bridge over the culvert and Planner Terry said it will have a wooden guardrail and this curb cut will serve both the assisted living and commercial properties.  Mr. Hawk stated that he liked the choice of landscaping plants. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-114 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-114:  Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Other Business:

 

Review of Proposed Code Chapter, to establish Chapter 523, Property Maintenance Code, to the Codified Ordinances of the Village  

Law Director King opened remarks by discussing the rationale behind establishing a property maintenance code.  He indicated when a violation has been detected and has not been corrected through informal remediation (as is done now) the Village would work with the property owner rather than posting notices and taking legal action. He indicated remediation is remedy of the problem through actual correction. 

Mr. Wilken indicated protective covenants are already in place for the majority of the newer subdivisions – Bryn Du, the Colony, Donald Ross condominiums, Erinwood, Village Green, etc.; so the majority of the population are already covered.  If the Village enacts this Ordinance Homeowner’s may attempt to bypass the contract law (deed restrictions) and go straight to the Village without utilizing the restrictive covenants, thereby undermining the deed restrictions and getting the Village involved in a legal battle they have no business being involved in.  He indicated the Village has not had significant issues in terms of property maintenance in the past.  This could cause the Village to incur a lot of legal fees trying to uphold this Code.  He asked if Council felt there was a real manifest problem at this point.  He encouraged Council to limit access to this Ordinance until any and all remedies had been exhausted to resolve the property maintenance issue.

 

Law Director King stated he was not concerned from a legal perspective regarding a Homeowner’s Association in terms of enforcement of the Code.  It would be treated the same whether the property was regulated under an HOA or not.  This is the area when it comes to case law and litigation these cases tend to be emotionally charged and litigation happens when neighbors disagree regarding the proper maintenance of properties.  He indicated he had drafted an ordinance that utilized a “scalpel” and not a “hatchet.”

 

Councilmember O’Keefe stated residents have mentioned aesthetic considerations be made within the Code, which she said would not be addressed under this ordinance. 

 

Law Director King agreed with Councilmember O’Keefe that this Ordinance was not drafted to address aesthetics.

 

Mr. Hawk asked if this was the proverbial “squeaky wheel” driving the need for a Property Maintenance Code, rather than actual issues within the Village proper.  He doesn’t think this Code is really necessary.

 

Law Director King indicated any currently non-complying properties will most likely be revitalized, mainly because of the strong real estate market in Granville.  He indicated the counterbalance to this is the LDS church property, which has been allowed to deteriorate to the point that it’s not salvageable.  This property was in such a state of disrepair that the Village had the right, under the Ohio Revised Code, to go in and secure the property with recoupment paid by the property owner.  There has been discussion regarding establishing an alternate program, such as a “Paint the Town Program,” which would address some of the property maintenance issues prior to a citation by the Village.

 

Planner Terry stated the proposed code will deal with safety and securing of properties, similar to the work that was completed by the Village at the LDS church property.  However, it would not require an aesthetically pleasing securing of a building in say the Historic District.  So, there could be boarding up of windows within the Historic District which would comply with the property maintenance code, but would not address the aesthetic concerns some residents have raised to Village Council.

 

Mr. Hawk asked Councilmember O’Keefe why the property maintenance code was back before the Planning Commission for review and what Council’s true interest was in this Code.

Councilmember O’Keefe stated that Law Director King had articulated the viewpoint of Council earlier in the meeting, and reiterated that Council doesn’t want a sledgehammer approach, Council wants a tool.

 

Mr. Hawk inquired whether this tool already exists.

 

Law Director King stated that really wasn’t accurate.  If the LDS church property would have been brought to the Village’s attention sooner, and a property maintenance code were in effect at that time, then that property may not have deteriorated to the point that it has.

Mr. Hawk asked if this Code would strengthen the ability to defend the Village.  Would the Village be better off than it is now?

Law Director King stated if the Village is going to have a Code, he feels it should be a narrow Code that has many of the items that the Ohio Supreme Court has said it’s okay to enforce and as few items as possible which have not been supported by the Ohio Supreme Court.

 

Councilmember O’Keefe stated the reason the Village even started looking at a Property Maintenance Code was because of the residents.  She indicated the Village officials need to listen to their residents. 

 

Mr. Wilken asked what role the other Licking County agencies have in regards to health, safety and welfare.

 

Law Director King indicated the Licking County Health Department and the Licking County Building Code Department can be involved in issues which affect the health, safety and welfare of Village residents.  A property maintenance code would allow for the Village to also step in, beyond what the LCHD and LCBD can enforce.

 

Mr. Wilken had a suggestion for the Commission and Village Staff.  He suggested that the areas already covered by deed restrictions and covenants be exempted.  For instance, could this code cover only the Historic District area?

 

Law Director King indicated the Village would not be able to apply this Code only to specific areas or specific districts that would be subject to an equal protection of due process challenge and the Supreme Court would not look favorably on that type of situation.

 

Law Director King indicated that it could not be applicable only to certain types of properties.

 

Planner Terry said the Council had requested the GPC address the question one more time before the public hearing. 

 

Councilmember O’Keefe said there will be two public hearings for this proposed Code.

 

Mr. Burriss made a motion to recommend approval to the Village Council of the Property Maintenance Code.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke. 

 

Further discussion on the proposed motion:

Mr. Wilken stated he hopes Council has the courage to not enact legislation simply in response to a few “squeaky wheels.”  He stated that to a majority of Village residents this is not a problem.  There are some isolated cases and it’s not good public policy to adopt something to address just a few cases.

 

Roll Call Vote: Mr. Potaracke (no), Mr. Eklof (no), Mr. Burriss (no), Mr. Wilken (no) and Mr. Hawk (no).  Motion failed, 5-0.

 

Further discussion on the Property Maintenance Code:

Mr. Eklof indicated the subjective nature of the text troubles him (i.e. reference to peeling paint, etc.).  He stated where homes are owner occupied there may be issues related to a loss of job fixed income or some other circumstance which is legitimate which prevents the homeowner from rehabilitating their property.  This becomes troublesome if one of the neighbors is coming to the Village to lodge a complaint.  On the other hand, he’s noticed a lot of “for rent” signs cropping up in the Village and thinks if a home is not owner occupied and it’s basically a business then the neighborhood should have a protection against the owner allowing the property to be neglected.  He felt that maybe there should be a protection for that type of instance, but an owner occupied property should get assistance from neighbors and/or the Village to rehab the property in question. 

 

Law Director King stated on page 7 of the draft there is a paragraph which discusses a property owner and occupant being jointly responsible for the maintenance of the property.

 

Mr. Wilken inquired if this code could be applicable only to business properties?

 

Mr. Eklof expressed concerns that if this code were enforced in Court that some homeowner may be so negatively impacted that they may be forced to move or forfeit their home.  And that’s his objection to a property maintenance code.

 

Law Director King indicated that he supposed in the case of extreme violations of this Code that a home could potentially be forfeited. However, he didn’t see that happening.

 

Councilmember O’Keefe stated that Council has discussed a community outreach effort that could be utilized in conjunction with this Code to address property maintenance issues.

 

Mr. Wilken asked if there was a way to require business licensing for rental properties so the Village could identify properties that might be neglected. 

 

Planner Terry indicated that currently the Village does not require business licensing and it would be difficult for the Village to track who is renting single family structures, as opposed to them being owner occupied.

 

Law Director King encouraged the Commission members to attend the Village Council meeting on September 2nd and provide input during the Public Hearing session, not as representing the Planning Commission, but as individual members and Village residents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-110, Jonathon Sosebee & Adam Johnson; 403 East Broadway; Exterior 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 1163, Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-119.

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-110 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-111, Jeff Mullett; 201 North Pearl Street; Window & Door ReplacementsApprove 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 (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-111.

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-111 as presented.  Seconded by Mr.  Wilken. Roll call vote: Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-112, William & Mary Hoekstra; 133 South Prospect Street; Retaining Wall 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-112. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-112 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

d)         Application #2015-114, Raccoon Creek Senior Housing, LLC; 1500 Weaver Drive; Sidewalks, Landscaping & 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 1173, Village Gateway District (VGD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-114. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-114 as presented.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from August 10, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the August 10, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 5-0.

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

September 14, 2015

September 28, 2015

October 13, 2015 (Tuesday)

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

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:26 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes August 10, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

August 10, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to Order:  Mr. Hawk (Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:00pm.

 

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

Members Absent: None.

Staff Present:  Deb Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present:  Debora Jardine, David & Judy Horning, Tim Klingler, Joe Rosato, Kate and Christopher Kenah.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

223 East College Street – Debora Jardine - Application #2015-102: 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 removal of wood double hung windows on the ground floor and second floor and replacement with vinyl clad wood double hung windows on the ground floor and second floor. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Debora Jardine and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Debora Jardine, 223 East College Street, indicated she was replacing her existing paver patio and steps with stamped concrete.  The patio was no longer level and the steps were deteriorating.  The concrete would be an aged, gray color with no stamping on the steps.  The existing pedestals would stay.  Assistant Planner Walker advised that staff approved the plan. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-102:

 

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 that have been 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 improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore improve and upgrade the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, that the materials and design selected contribute to the vitality of a 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 livedMr. Burriss stated TRUE; that although the proposed replacement materials are modern, the appearance is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improving the home with historically accurate materials and improvements protects the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-102 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-102:  Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

116 South Plum Street – David & Judy Horning - Application #2015-105: 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:

1)         Enclose lower porch on the north elevation and add an entry door and a window;

2)         Enclose upper porch on the north elevation and add a window; and

3)         Replace a window on the second floor of the north elevation with an entry door.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in David Horning, Judy Horning, Christopher Kenah, Kate Kenah and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

David Horning, 116 South Plum Street, stated the application request is to enclose the lower open porch area and improve the entrance as well as insulate the bathroom above that area.  They also intend to enclose the second floor porch and replace the existing window with a door.  The siding and trim will match the existing.   Assistant Planner Walker advised that staff approved the plan and found the materials to be appropriate.

 

Christopher Kenah, 339 West Broadway, indicated his support for the project and renovations as an immediate neighbor.

Kate Kenah, 339 West Broadway, also indicated her support for the project as it would improve the overall appearance of the property.  The other neighbor James Hale is also in support.

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-105:

 

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 that have been 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 improvements contribute to the upgrading of the historical appearance of the home and therefore improve and upgrade the overall District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the materials and design selected contribute to the vitality of a 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 livedMr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed application is historically accurate and architecturally appropriate with the surrounding area and thereby improves 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. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-105 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-105:  Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

141 East Broadway – Mollie Prasher on behalf of The Village of Granville - Application #2015-106: 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 the removal of wood double hung windows on the ground floor and second floor and replacement with vinyl clad wood double hung windows on the ground floor and second floor.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Mollie Prasher and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mollie Prasher, 141 East Broadway, stated that the all Village double-hung windows would be replaced in Village Hall.  All windows on the north and east side of the building would be replaced with two over two wood windows with vinyl exterior as well as two second floor windows on the west side.  All windows on the south side of the building and the remaining second floor windows would be replaced with one over one wood windows with vinyl exterior.  All windows would have full screens and the windows will be a Putty color.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-106:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the proposed window replacements are in keeping with the style and architecture of the building and the surrounding area.  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 window replacements contribute to the upgrading of the building and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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; the proposed window replacements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-106 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-106:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-102, Debora Jardine; 223 East College Street; Rear Paver Patio 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 Residential District (VRD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-102. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-102 as presented.  Second by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-106, David & Judy Horning; 116 South Plum Street; RemodelingApprove 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 (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-106.

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-106 as presented.  Second by Mr.  Wilken. Roll call vote: Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-107, submitted by Mollie Prasher, on behalf of The Village of Granville; 141 East Broadway; Window Replacements: 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-107. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-107 as presented.  Second by Mr. Wilken.  Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from July 27, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 27, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

August 24, 2015

September 14, 2015

September 28, 2015

 

Assistant Planner Walker advised the Commission they would be reviewing the property maintenance code again at the next meeting.

 

Mr. Wilken reported he would not be in attendance at the September 14, 2015 meeting.

 

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

 

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:24pm.

Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

July 27, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

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

Members Absent: None.

Staff Present:  Deb Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present:  Laura Frame, Gerald Martin, Michael Lemar, Pat Kelley and Eileen Arant.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

133 South Pearl Street – Laura Frame - Application #2015-97: 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 replacement of twenty-nine (29) windows on all elevations of the home and three (3) doors on the front, side and rear of the home. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Laura Frame and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Laura Frame, 133 South Pearl Street, Granville Ohio stated she would like to have approval for the improvements she has done on her house, which included the replacement of all windows and three doors.  She has one door which still needs to be replaced and is requesting permission for this improvement as well.  Ms. Walker remarked that the windows and doors, which were installed just recently, are a compliment to the home.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-97:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burris.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and will extend the life of this historic house and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct as reproduction and are appropriate with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-97 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-97:  Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

116 East Broadway – Gerald Martin on behalf of the Village Brewing Company, LLC - Application #2015-98: 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 forty-four (2.44) square foot awning sign.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Gerald Martin and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Gerald Martin, 2276 Hankinson Road, Granville, Ohio stated he would like approval for the awning sign for his business, 1 Linden Alley.  Ms. Walker stated the staff approves of the proposed signage, which replicates the existing Granville street signs.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-98:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed awning sign is compatible with other signs which have been approved within 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 awning sign with its font and styling contributes to the upgrading of a business and therefore contributes to the improvement and upgrading of 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed awning sign is consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-98, as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-98:  Potaracke, (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

124 & 126 East Broadway – Michael Lemar on behalf of The Broadway Pub - Application #2015-100: 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 thirteen point five nine (13.59) square foot wall sign.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Michael Lemar and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Michael Lemar, 1012 E. Main Street, Newark, stated he is representing Broadway Pub in the approval of a flat wall sign to be constructed of High Density Urethane over the entrance of 124 East Broadway.  Ms. Walker said the staff appreciates the creative design of the sign and feels it is most architecturally appropriate for the upcoming renovations to the Pubs facades.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-100:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed wall sign is in keeping with the style and architecture of the building and the surrounding signage.  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 wall sign contributes to the historical standards and upgrading of the structure and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed wall sign is consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-100 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-100:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

124 & 126 East Broadway – Michael Lemar on behalf of The Broadway Pub - Application #2015-101: 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 nine point nine (9.9) square foot, double sided, projecting sign. 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Michael Lemar and Deb Walker were already sworn in.

 

Discussion:

Michael Lemar, 1012 E. Main Street, Newark, stated he was proposing a projecting sign on the eastern end of the front façade which would be designed in the same style as the flat wall sign to the west.  Ms. Walker stated staff approves of the styling and creative intent of the sign and its’  proposed bracket. 

 

Mr. Potaracke questioned the stability of the sign in windy conditions.  Mr. Lemar explained that the wrought iron bracket is designed as a windbreak and will be stabilized by aircraft wire.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-101:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed projecting sign is in keeping with the style and architecture of the building and consistent with similar projects approved within 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 projecting sign is historically appropriate and contributes to the upgrading of the building and therefore the District overall.  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 contribute to the continuing vitality of the District.  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, the proposed projecting sign is consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to Approve Application #2015-101, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-101:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Work Session for 141 East Broadway window replacements: 

Mollie Prasher presented a proposal to replace the upper and first floor windows in the Village Hall.  The Village acquired the building in 1996-1997, and the building is now about 65 years old. Mollie presented examples of the types of windows being considered and indicated this would be a bid project.  The existing windows are double hung with no dividers with interior storm windows.  The proposed new windows will be double hung, with no muntins, and will also have screens.  The color scheme is proposed to be a taupe shade rather than white.  The aim is to have more energy efficient windows and improved aesthetics.

 

Mr. Burriss inquired about previous architectural designs which were commissioned by the Village in the late 1990’s.  Suggestions were discussed as to potential fenestration patterns for the proposed windows.  Statements by Mr. Wilken and Mr. Eklof favored Pella for its quality.  Mr. Wilken suggested it might be a good idea to have a plan for the entire building, prior to approval of window replacements.

 

The discussion was suspended for the time being, but the plan is to replace the windows before cold weather.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-97, Laura Frame; 133 South Pearl Street; Replacement Windows & Doors: 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 (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-97. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-97.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-98, submitted by Gerald Martin on behalf of the Village Brewing Company, LLC; 116 East Broadway; Awning SignApprove 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 Business District (VBD), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-98.

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-98.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote: Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-100, submitted by Michael Lemar on behalf of The Broadway Pub; 124 & 126 East Broadway; Wall 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 1159, Village Business District (VBD), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-100. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-100.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

d)         Application #2015-101, submitted by Michael Lemar on behalf of The Broadway Pub; 124 & 126 East Broadway; Projecting 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 1159, Village Business District (VBD), Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-101. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-101.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke. Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from July 13, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 13, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Burriss seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 5-0.

 

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

August 10, 2015

August 24, 2015

September 14, 2015

 

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

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:27 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes July 13, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

July 13, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Eklof (Vice Chair) and Jackie O’Keefe

Members Absent: Mr. Burriss.

Staff Present:  Deb Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant, and Mike King, Law Director

 

Also Present:  Janet Jordan, Mark Smith, Cheryl Houser, Pat Kelley, Eileen and Jim Arant and Gerald Martin.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

217 South Main Street – Janet Jordan - Application #2015-89: 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 iron handrails at the front entry steps

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Janet Jordan, Mark Smith and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Mark Smith, on behalf of Janet Jordan, 217 South Main Street, Granville Ohio stated he would like to install handrails so Janet Jordan can safely use the front steps of her home.  The handrails would be wrought iron in a black finish.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-89:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed improvements contribute to the upgrading and safer environment of the home and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, that as above in item b, the proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, and will make the dwelling more accessible and livable thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-89 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-89:   Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

329 West Elm Street – Cheryl Houser - Application #2015-93: 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 removal of four (4) wood windows and replacement with vinyl windows. 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Cheryl Houser and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Cheryl Houser, 329 West Elm Street, stated that the two previous owners of the home had replaced several windows with vinyl windows. However, there are four windows that had not been replaced and are molded and deteriorating.  One window is cracked, another is separating in the interior of the home, and the other two are deteriorating. The plan is to match the replacement vinyl windows with the others already installed in the home; two of which will be double-hung and two which will be picture window style. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-93:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed replacement windows are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the remaining windows which have already been replaced.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

 

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed replacement windows contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, that as above in item b, the proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed replacement windows are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-93, as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-93:  Potaracke, (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

124 & 126 East Broadway – Pat Kelley on behalf of The Broadway Pub - Application #2015-94: 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 new front windows, new front door, front exterior façade changes, rear exterior façade change and rooftop mechanical units.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Pat Kelley, Eileen Arant and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Pat Kelley, of Kelley and Associates, Architects, 51 N. 4th Street, Newark, stated the project was for the proposed modifications to the front façade of Broadway Pub and the James Store as the Pub incorporates both into a larger space. The main entrance would be relocated from the east of the property to the west. Two sets of accordion style commercial windows would have the ability to open completely in good weather.  Other improvements would be made, as well. Assistant Planner Walker said the accordion style windows would resemble those she had distributed to the commissioners this evening. She went on to explain the proposed color scheme for the front elevation, the style and intent of the project and the particular materials that will be utilized in the façade renovations. Assistant Planner Walker discussed the propose changes occurring at the rear of the structure and on the roof as mechanical systems are upgraded to accommodate the expansion of the kitchen: an additional hood vent, windows of glass block and an air conditioning unit on the roof. 

 

Mr. Kelley explained there would be a compressor for the freezer and the A/C unit would straddle the two buildings.  Ms. O’Keefe questioned the amount of noise that would come through the louvered windows and Eileen Arant explained they would be aware of any excessive noise and address issues as they arise. As a practice, she stated the ambient music and TVs would not be too loud.

 

Ben Rader, 130 W. Broadway, questioned the compatibility of the proposed changes with the adjacent buildings.  Mr. Wilken asked if it is within the power of GPC to keep the back of the building and Petunia Park in general more orderly.  Assistant Planner Walker stated the rear of these buildings has historically been a problem in the past as there is limited space and the property is all private. 

 

Staff recommended approval of the application, as submitted.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-94:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed exterior modifications are in keeping with the style and architecture of the building and the surrounding area.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed exterior modifications contribute a unity of style to the upgrading of the building and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, that as above in item b, the proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore contribute to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed exterior modifications are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-94 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-94:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

124 & 126 East Broadway – Pat Kelley on behalf of The Broadway Pub - Application #2015-95: 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 handicap ramp with metal handrails within the right-of-way of East Broadway, and adjacent to the front of the building.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk reminded the witnesses they were still under oath. Pat Kelley, Eileen Arant, Ben Rader and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Pat Kelley, of Kelley and Associates, Architects, 51 N. 4th Street, Newark, stated the existing entrance on the East side of the Broadway Pub would be removed and a new front door with a handicapped ramp would be installed on the West side of the space at 124 East Broadway.  The handicap ramp and platform riser will extend a total of 5’3” into the public right-of-way. 

 

Mr. Hawk asked if the threshold would comply with ADA regulations and the answer was, “yes.”  Mr. Wilken asked how long the ramp would be and the answer was 10’6”. Assistant Planner Walker stated that the ramp – in and of itself- would project four feet into the public right-of-way. 

 

There was discussion concerning the entrances of other buildings along Broadway. Mr. Wilken asked if raising the sidewalk along the entire northern side of the street would be an option rather than wind up with a series of ramps up and down the business district along East Broadway.  Mr. Hawk disagreed with Mr. Wilken in principal but reminded the Commission that that particular topic was not the subject of this application or the responsibility of the applicant. 

 

Mr. Potaracke stated he felt the design was well incorporated and unobtrusive, looks newer and serves multiple purposes.  Ms. O’Keefe asked Law Director King if the ADA requires a handicap access.  Law Director King answered it depends because they tend to be flexible with small businesses due to economics and old building designs.  ADA requires removal of barriers to access when possible.  He also pointed out that tax credits and deductions are available for businesses to do this. 

 

Ben Rader said he felt the ramp was obtrusive, ugly and could be put in the alleyway instead.  Mr. Kelley explained the alley is full of impediments such as gas and electric meters and lines, and a fire escape plus uneven pavement.  Mr. Kelley said that handicapped individuals should have the right to go into the building with the rest of their party. 

 

Mr. Eklof commented the ramp design looks just like the one in front of the Village Offices and if Mr. Rader wanted access he could ask to extend the ramp to his business.  Mr. Wilken agreed with that, especially since Council still needs to give permission.  GPC, Assistant Planner Walker, Village Manager and Planner Terry need to confer.  Staff recommends the project.  Mr. Wilken abstained from further discussion and from voting.

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-95:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE, the proposed handicap ramp and handrails are in keeping with the newer style and architecture of the building and consistent with similar projects approved within the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE, the proposed handicap ramp and handrails contribute to the upgrading of the building and therefore the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke.

 

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

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE, the proposed handicap ramp and handrails are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potaracke. 

 

Mr. Potaracke made a motion to recommend approval of Application #2015-95, as submitted, to the Village Council.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to recommend Approval of Application #2015-95:  Wilken (abstained), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes),and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-89, Janet Jordan; 217 South Main Street; Iron Handrails at front Entry Steps: 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 (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-89. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-89.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-93, Cheryl Houser; 329 West Elm Street; Window ReplacementsApprove 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 and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-93.

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-93.  Seconded by Mr.  Wilken. Roll call vote: Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-94, submitted by Pat Kelley on behalf of The Broadway Pub; 124 & 126 East Broadway; 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-94. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-94.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

 

d)         Application #2015-95, submitted by Pat Kelley on behalf of The Broadway Pub; 124 & 126 East Broadway; Handicap Ramp & Handrails: 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-86. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-95.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke. Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes),  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to excuse Mr. Burriss. Mr. Potaracke seconded.  All in favor voice vote, motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from June 22, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the June 22, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

July 27, 2015

August 10, 2015

August 24, 2015

 

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

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.

 

Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

June 22, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Eklof (Vice Chair) and Jackie O’Keefe (non-voting ex-officio member).

Members Absent: Mr. Potaracke.

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

 

Also Present:  Terri Charles, Pat Kelley, Angela Walter and Tim Klingler.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

418 East Broadway – Terri Charles - Application 2015-83: 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 exterior improvements:

1)                  Replacement of a gravel driveway with concrete;

2)                  New concrete floor in garage;

3)                  Removal of two basement level windows and replacement with glass block; and

4)                  Installation of a wood board skirting on the western side porch from the decking to grade.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Terri Charles and Alison Terry.

 

Discussion:

Terri Charles, 418 East Broadway, Granville Ohio stated her plans as summarized above.  Planner Terry stated there is a slight encroachment on the neighbor’s driveway, but the neighbor has no problem with the submitted plans.  Planner Terry asked if the windows will be operable and Ms. Charles indicated “No”. 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-83:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed improvements are consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  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 improvements contribute to the upgrading of the home and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed improvements are consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-83 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-83:  Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

410 North Granger Street – Pat Kelley on behalf of Greg & Angela Walter - Application #2015-85: 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 structural demolition of a two-story detached garage located at the rear of the property.

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Pat Kelley, Angela Walter and Alison Terry.

 

Pat Kelley, 51 N. 4th Street, Newark, Ohio, stated the plans for the demolition of the garage.  Planner Terry indicated the Historical Society submitted a letter indicating the garage has no historical significance.  Planner Terry explained the plan was to remove and replace the structure with a more appropriate style building.  The Village Council will need to authorize the demolition and BZBA will be reviewing a variance dealing with setback and lot coverage issues at their next meeting. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-85:

 

a)         The removal of the structure shall not inappropriately interrupt the continuous street built edge of any adjacent street or right of way.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed demolition is in the rear yard of the property and will not interrupt the continuous street built edge. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

b)         The proposed structure is of no or little historical significance.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the Granville Historical Society has indicated the structure has no historical significance and the Commission agrees with that assessment.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         The demolition of the proposed structure will in no way adversely affect the health, safety or general welfare of the neighboring properties or community in general.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the removal of the structure will not affect the health, safety or general welfare of the neighboring properties or community.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to recommend approval of Application #2015-85 to the Village Council for the requested demolition project. Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-85:  Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

410 North Granger Street – Pat Kelley on behalf of Greg & Angela Walter - Application #2015-86: 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 construction of a one and one-half story detached garage located at the rear of the property. 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Pat Kelley, Angela Walter and Alison Terry.

 

Pat Kelley, 51 N. 4th Street, Newark, Ohio, stated the applicant is proposing to build a structure designed as a garage on the ground level and an office for the homeowner above.  Ms. O’Keefe asked if the structure is really a story and a half or a two story.  Planner Terry answered that the second level is not a true second story because of the dormers.

Mr. Burriss questioned whether there would be a full bathroom located in the upstairs space and the applicant responded “yes.”  Planner Terry indicated that only a half bath could be provided in this accessory structure so that in the future it could not be converted to a separate living unit.  Mr. Wilken suggested a shower should be allowed, as his former office space had a shower located in it, however Planner Terry again pointed out that subsequent owners might use the structure incorrectly and that this property was not zoned for a commercial use. 

Mr. Kelley indicated the new structure will have matching faux board and batten siding painted rustic red which will match the house color with matching vinyl trim.  The upstairs will have a rear deck and plumbing for a half bathroom and small kitchenette but no bathing facility.  Mr. Burriss asked if a ground mounted air conditioning unit would be installed and the answer was “yes.”  The Commission indicated the air conditioning unit will need to be screened somehow similar to what has been required of other applications. 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-86:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed garage is consistent with the style and architecture of the home and the surrounding area.  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 garage contributes to the upgrading of the home and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and therefore 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, the proposed garage is consistent and historically correct with other projects previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-83 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-83:  Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Property Maintenance Code Review:

 

Discussion:

Planner Terry opened the discussion with a brief overview about why the Planning Commission was reviewing a proposed property maintenance code for Granville.  A new code section would address the need for properties to be structurally safe, in good repair to keep structures free of vermin, etc.  The Code would not address aesthetic issues or concerns.  Planner Terry also indicated the Licking County Building Code Department does not enforce property maintenance issues – those issues are addressed by individual municipalities.  At present inspections and/or property violations are addressed by the Planning Department on a complaint driven basis.  The property is visually assessed by the Planning Department and a written notice is served to the owner if a violation of the Code is evident.  The intent of a property maintenance code would be to work with the property owner to achieve code compliance. 

Law Director King said that the Ohio Supreme Court has heard cases regarding property values, aesthetics, and blight and used language such as safety and sustainability.  Any proposal would need to be consistent and practical in its enforcement.  There are legitimate concerns in some areas, but the Village wants to work with property owners to resolve compliance issues rather than sending them through Mayor’s Court and imposing fines.  Law Director King indicated there should be a balance of fairness in any Code.  There is always a potential for stigmatizing and embarrassment of property owners and the Village will work hard to mitigate those concerns.  Aesthetics and cosmetics are tough territories to assess.  The goal should be to not over-regulate and to focus on health and safety concerns first and foremost.  Junk around a property can be handled by a current code.  Law Director King discussed the process relative to violation notices sent, indicating that the property owner could request a hearing before the Village Manager to discuss bringing the property into compliance.  The Commission had several questions regarding process, which individuals could appear at the hearing with the Village Manager, whether the property owner could find out who had filed a complaint against them, etc. Law Director King indicated he would need to look into these items further and respond back to the Planning Commission.

The Planning Commission asked if the community could help some of the people who receive violation notices.  A suggestion was made that perhaps community service hours from the Mayor’s Court could be utilized with this program.  Planner Terry and Law Director King will work to address some of the concerns and come back to the Commission with clarification.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-83, Terri Charles; 418 East Broadway; Driveway Replacement, Window Replacements and Deck Renovations: 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 #2015-83. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-83.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

 

b)         Application #2015-85, submitted by Pat Kelley on behalf of Greg & Angela Walter; 410 North Granger Street; Demolition of Detached GarageApprove Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1162, Structural Demolition and hereby recommends approval of Application #2015-85 to the Village Council. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-85.  Seconded by Mr.  Wilken. Roll call vote: Eklof (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-86, submitted by Pat Kelley on behalf of Greg & Angela Walter; 410 North Granger Street; Detached Garage: 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 #2015-86. 

 

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-86.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to excuse Mr. Potaracke and Mr. Burriss seconded.  All in favor voice vote, motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from June 8, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the June 8, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Burriss seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

July 13, 2015

July 27, 2015

August 10, 2015

 

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

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes June 8, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

June 8, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Hawk (Chair), Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss and Jeremy Johnson (non-voting ex-officio member)

Members Absent: Mr. Eklof and Mr. Potaracke

Staff Present:  Debi Walker, Planning and Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present:  Lisa Sandman and Stephen Matheny

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

230 East Broadway - Lisa Sandman - Application 2015-77: 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 the re-facing of the existing freestanding sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Lisa Sandman and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

Lisa Sandman, 4950 Dry Creek Rd, Newark, Ohio stated she would like permission to resurface the existing sign for her business.  Ms. Walker said it would be the same panel as previously approved with a different font in burgundy lettering.  The Board had no questions.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-77:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed sign re-facing is consistent with the style and architecture of the previously approved sign and the surrounding signage.  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 sign refacing contributes to the upgrading of the business within the structure and therefore 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 proposed design and materials are consistent and supportive and therefore 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, the proposed sign re-facing materials are consistent and historically correct with other signs previously approved in the District, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss. 

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-77 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-77:  Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

125 East Broadway - Stephen Matheny - Application #2015-80: 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 non-permanent sidewalk seating area.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Stephen Matheny and Deb Walker.

 

Mr. Matheny requested permission to place two wrought iron chairs in front of the Chamber for overflow seating outside the office.  He felt it would also add to the character of Granville.  The chairs would be secured by cables and they would also like to find a small table to match the chairs.

 

Ms.  Walker said the proposal will go before council and would be like a small café space, installed annually. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-80.

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed non-permanent sidewalk seating is consistent with the style and architecture of the structure and the surrounding 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, the proposed materials, design and appearance are appropriate to the historical nature of the area and contribute to the upgrading of the area 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 proposed design and materials contribute to the vitality of the District overall and provide a welcoming atmosphere of outdoor seating.  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, the proposed style of non-permanent sidewalk seating is in keeping with the architecture of the area, thereby protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations have lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-80 contingent on approval by Village Council of the sidewalk café seating area.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-80:  Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Broadway Pub Work Session:

Architect Pat Kelly discussed proposed changes as the Broadway Pub expands into the James Store location in the same building.  He presented a proposed plan which would allow the Pub to become handicap accessible with a wheelchair ramp in front of the structure and a new entry on the western side of the building.  The new entrance would also include a vestibule area and the building will be equipped with handicap accessible restrooms as well.  He gave an example of the ramp built for PNB in relation to the plan to move the entranceway. 

 

He also indicated there would be matching wood panels below the windows across the front and new, large plate glass windows.  The owners would like to install windows which would have an accordion style window system that could be opened in good weather.

 

Mr. Hawk asked if the façade would be a unified style and color and Mr. Kelly answered, “Yes.” Mr. Burriss commented that it would be nice if the double doors could be utilized in some way rather than being scrapped.

 

Discussion then centered on the measurements and height of the windows and sills.  Mr. Johnson asked about sprinkler systems and water usage.  Ms. Walker indicated this has already been completed a new water line was installed prior to the East Broadway paving project. 

 

A question arose about the two signage panels.  There may be an allowance for both panels to be used such as “Broadway Pub” on one sign and “Dining” on the other, or some such arrangement.  Kitchen size will be doubled, and seating capacity will increase from a total occupancy of 70 people to 155 people.  The owners want to keep the pub atmosphere with the planned renovations.  Remodeling of the kitchen will begin in July and the James Store will vacate by August 15.  The applicants will be coming back with a full application within the next month.

 

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business:

 

a)         Application #2015-77, Lisa Sandman on behalf of Greystone Antiques 230 East Broadway; Resurfacing of Existing Freestanding 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, Signage and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-77. 

 

            Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-77.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss, Roll call vote Mr. Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

b)         Application 2015-80, Stephen Matheny, on behalf of the Granville Area Chamber of Commerce; 125 East Broadway; Non-Permanent Sidewalk Seating Area:  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 (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-80. 

 

            Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-80.  Seconded by Mr. Burriss.  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Members Potaracke and Eklof:  Mr. Burriss made a motion to excuse the absentee members and Mr. Wilken seconded.  All in favor voice vote, motion carried 3-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from May 26, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the May 26, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Burriss seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 3-0.

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

June 22, 2015

July 13, 2015

July 27, 2015

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

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes May 26, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 26, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Eklof, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Hawk, Mr. Burriss and Mr. Potaracke and Council Member O’Keefe (ex-officio)

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Debi Walker, Planning and Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present:  Luther and Nancy Brede, Kurt and Amy Klein.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

115 West Elm Street – Jean Lesnick on behalf of Margaretta Mathis - Application #2015-67:  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 installation of wrought iron railing on the front porch and iron railing in the back yard. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Debi Walker and Nancy and Luther Brede.

 

Discussion:

Nancy Brede, 115 West Elm Street, stated she was representing their daughter and property owner, Margaretta Mathis, this evening. She discussed the need for the installation of a wrought iron railing along the eastern side of the property to provide access the back yard safely, and wrought iron styled railings and handrails on the front porch.

 

Planning and Zoning Assistant Walker discussed the need for all parties involved with the project to have a firm understanding of the location of the eastern property line in that it appears the side yard may be only approximately four (4) feet in width. She added a description of the proposed railings on the eastern side of the home being black iron pipe, hand built and 34” to 36” inches in height. Ms. Walker added that there will also be paver stepping stones set into the grass to matching the existing pavers in the rear yard.

 

Mr. Potaracke asked if the railing proposed between the porch columns are something that is consistent with the homes architecture. Mr. Burriss stated that yes; it would be appropriate to the home and is similar to other projects approved in the District. Mr. Hawk asked if the Historical Society had been notified of the change. Ms. Walker responded that, yes, they had been notified and the Planning and Zoning Office had not had any communication from them.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-67:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the railing projects are 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 railing projects increase the livability of a home within the District, with something better than what is there now, thereby upgrading the property and the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the installation of the railing contributes to the vitality, safety and livability of the residence and therefore 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, the proposed materials are consistent with other projects within the District. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve Application #2015-67, as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-67:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

225 West Elm Street – Kurt Klein —Application #2015-68:  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 removal of an existing concrete patio and installation of a deck with lattice work in the rear yard.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Debi Walker and Kurt Klein.

 

Discussion:

Kurt Klein, 225 West Elm Street, stated he would like to construct a deck at the rear of the home and above the existing concrete slabs/patio. The application was submitted with the intention of using a composite decking material. Given materials costs and an inability to decide on color, the project will now be completed with pressure treated lumber. He stated he was aware that the wood needs to season for 9 to 12 months before it can be painted – which would be done in a color to compliment the home.

 

Mr. Burriss asked for more details regarding the built in bench seating. Mr. Klein stated he intended the benches be simple rectangular boxes. Mr. Hawk inquired as to the necessity of railings given the height of the deck from surrounding grade. Ms. O’Keefe asked if the county has to inspect the construction. Mr. Hawk asked if the county has to issue a permit for the construction.  Staff indicated those are questions for the Building Code Department. Planning and Zoning Assistant Walker stated Staff understands the family’s need for more outdoor entertainment space and favors approval.

 

Mr. Burriss commented that the Staff will need to approve any railing if the county requires it.  Language was suggested that as a condition of approval the Planning Director review any required railings if mandated by the Licking County Building Code Department.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-68:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed deck is similar to other projects previously 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 deck upgrades and increases the functionality of the home and by doing so, the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed deck contributes to the vitality of a residence and therefore 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, the proposed materials are consistent with similar projects approved within the District and will be visually more pleasing. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve #2015-68, as submitted, with the understanding that the deck will be treated lumber and sealed/finished within one year; and that the applicant will check on the railing requirements with the Licking County Building Code Department, and if required, the details of the railing will be approved by the Planning Director.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-68:  Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes) Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business

 

a)         Application #2015-67, Jean Lesnick on behalf of Margaretta Mathis; 115 West Elm Street; Railings: 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 (AROD).

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-67 with understanding of definition of the property line.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-67: Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-68, Kurt Klein; 225 West Elm Street; 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 Residential District (VRD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-68 with understanding of the wood finishing to take place within 12 months and county requirements for the railing being met and approve by the Planning Director.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-68: Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from May 11, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the May 11, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

June 8, 2015

June 22, 2015 (Commissioner Potaracke unable to attend)

July 13, 2015

 

Mr. Hawk stated that seeing no further business before the Commission the meeting was adjourned.

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:20 P.M.

Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 11, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Eklof, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Hawk, Mr. Burriss and Mr. Potaracke.

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Alison Terry, Village Planning Director

 

Also Present:  Christopher Schilling, Jodi Melfi, Allison Walker and Jonathan Walker.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

 

565 West Broadway - Christopher and Lindsay Schilling - Application #2015-56:  The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-C (SRD-C) and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD). The request is for review and approval of the installation of a driveway on the western side of the home.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Christopher Schilling.

 

Discussion:

Christopher Schilling, 565 West Broadway, stated he would like to put in a new driveway to provide additional parking for his property. 

 

Planner Terry added that there is an existing drive on the east side of the home, but the applicant has no garage and the driveway is only one car wide.  She added that the applicant will also need to receive a variance from the BZBA to reduce the side yard setback requirement for a driveway.

 

Mr. Schilling said he has spoken with neighbors and they have no objections to his project.

 

The Planning Commission did not review any standards or criteria, since this application was before them only because it’s located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve Application #2015-56 contingent upon BZBA approval of the required variance.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. 

 

Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-56:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

565 West Broadway – Christopher and Lindsay Schilling —Application #2015-57:  The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-C (SRD-C) and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD). The request is for review and approval of the removal of the front porch and side porch concrete steps and replacement with larger wooden porches/decks.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Christopher Schilling.

 

Discussion:

Christopher Schilling, 565 West Broadway, stated he wishes to replace his old concrete porches with larger porches/decks of treated wood, to be painted at a later date. 

 

Mr. Hawk commented that, though the color has not yet been chosen, it should be of a neutral hue. 

 

Planner Terry indicated the application meets all code requirements. 

 

 The Planning Commission did not review any standards or criteria, since this application was before them only because it’s located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve #2015-57, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof. 

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-57:  Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes) Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

138 North Prospect Street – Jodi Melfi on behalf of Scott Wilkins for Mai Chau on North Prospect — Application #2015-58: 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 the installation of sidewalk café seating.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry, and Jodi Melfi.

 

Discussion:

Jodi Melfi, 130 North Prospect –Suite #K, stated she has been helping Scott at Mai Chau and the plan is to add two or three teakwood tables and chairs as a small sidewalk café area.  Mr. Hawk commented there was not much room for tables and chairs.

 

Planner Terry indicated the staff likes the furniture and the Board will need authorize to make a recommendation to the Village Council for this application.  Mr. Burriss expressed appreciation for the furniture and the style of the building. 

 

Ms. Melfi said the total number of tables will depend on their size, she indicated they might down size them slightly, or whether they can fit two or three in the small space.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-58:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed sidewalk café seating is similar to other projects previously 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 sidewalk café seating is the same style as the building and it contributes to the District overall.  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 within the District we 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, by being of an appropriate style it contributes to the vitality of a business within the District which contributes to the vitality of the District overall and protects the physical surrounding in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve #2015-58, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. 

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-58:  Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes) Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

138 North Prospect Street – Jodi Melfi on behalf of Scott Wilkins for Mai Chau on North Prospect — Application #2015-59: 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 7.9 square foot window sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry, and Jodi Melfi.

 

Discussion:

Jodi Melfi, 130 North Prospect –Suite #K, stated the business would like to install a simple white vinyl sign with the Mai Chau logo in the window. 

 

Planner Terry indicated the proposed signage meets all code requirements. The Board stated they liked the style of the sign.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-59:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed window sign is similar to other projects previously 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 window sign contributes to the vitality of a business within the District and by doing so, it contributes to the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, a business needs a sign and by contributing to the vitality of a business within the District we 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, by contributing to the vitality of a business within the District we contribute to the vitality of the District overall and protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve #2015-59, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke. 

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-59:  Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes) Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

343 West Maple Street – Jonathan and Allison Walker — Application #2015-63: 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 a concrete driveway and concrete sidewalks.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry, Allison Walker and Jonathan Walker.

 

Discussion:

Jonathan Walker, 343 West Maple Street, stated they would like to replace their old driveway, which is a mixture of gravel and asphalt, with a new concrete driveway; replace the old sidewalk which is uneven brick, with new concrete and add a new sidewalk to enable the family to access the back of the house. 

 

Mr. Hawk inquired about the finish of the concrete and whether it would be brushed concrete.  The applicant indicated the finish will have a clean look. 

 

Planner Terry stated the project meets all code requirements and recommends approval. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-63:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed concrete driveway and sidewalks are similar to other projects previously 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 concrete driveway and sidewalks will provide unification of materials and will contribute to the livability of a home within the District and by doing so, it contributes to the improvement of the District overall.  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 and livability of a home within the District we 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, by contributing to the vitality of a home within the District we contribute to the vitality of the District overall and protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve #2015-63, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke. 

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-63:  Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes) Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business

 

a)         Application #2015-56, Christopher and Lindsay Schilling; 565 West Broadway; Driveway on Western Side of Home: 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-C (SRD-C) and Chapter 1176, Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-56.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-56.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-56: Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-57, Christopher and Lindsay Schilling; 565 West Broadway: Porches:  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-C (SRD-C) and Chapter 1176, Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-57.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-57.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-57: Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-58, Jodi Melfi on behalf of Scott Wilkins of Mai Chau; 138 North Prospect Street; Sidewalk Café Seating:  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 Business District (VBD), and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-58.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-58.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-58: Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

d)         Application #2015-59, Jodi Melfi on behalf of Scott Wilkins of Mai Chau; 138 North Prospect 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 #2015-59.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-59.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-59: Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

e)         Application #2015-63, Jonathan and Allison Walker; 343 West Maple Street; Concrete Driveway and Sidewalks:  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-B (SRD-B) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD), and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-63.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-63.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-63: Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from May 4, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the May 4, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

May 26, 2015 (Tuesday)

June 8, 2015

June 22, 2015  

 

Mr. Hawk stated that seeing no further business before the Commission the meeting was adjourned.

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:30 P.M.

Planning Commission Minutes May 4, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 4, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Eklof, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Hawk, Mr. Burriss and Mr. Potaracke.

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Alison Terry, Planning Director.

 

Also Present:  Stephen Applegate, Steve Flowers.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Old Business:

 

107 East Broadway – St. Luke’s Episcopal Church —Application #2015-42:  The property is zoned Village Square District (VSD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). The request is for architectural review and approval of the removal and reconstruction of the eastern side entry.

 

Mr. Wilken recused himself from the table at 7:01 p.m.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Stephen Applegate.

 

Discussion:

Stephen Applegate, 107 East Broadway, stated this was a slightly different proposal than the last set of plans which were approved by the Planning Commission.  It will be the exact same footprint as the addition now, but with materials which are more compatible and similar to the rest of the structure.

 

Mr. Burriss inquired about the detailing in the base at the northeast corner of the proposed addition.  He stated he would prefer to see an equally articulated base on both the north and east corner of the structure and the south and east corner of the structure.

 

Rector Applegate indicated he was okay with this suggested modification and that he would make sure the architect was aware of this change.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-42:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the remodeling 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 remodeling of the side entry does upgrade the property and the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the remodeling of the site entry contributes to the vitality of a structure and therefore 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, the proposed materials are consistent. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve Application #2015-42, with the understanding that the bases of the corner elements be articulated.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-42:  Eklof (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Mr. Wilken rejoined the Commission at 7:09 p.m.

 

Mr. Hawk recused himself from the table at 7:09 p.m. Mr. Eklof took over as Chair of the meeting.

 

236 West Elm Street – Steven Hawk —Application #2015-43:  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:

1)         Removal of 3-tab asphalt shingles and replacement with Owens Corning Duration asphalt shingles in either a Brownwood, Teak or Driftwood color; and

2)         Removal of exposed aggregate concrete driveway and replacement with a concrete driveway with a broom finish.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Eklof swore in Alison Terry, Steven Hawk and Steve Flowers.

 

Discussion:

Steven Hawk, 236 West Elm Street, stated his home was built in 1824-1825 and the previous owners had installed a driveway which is deteriorating and cracking.  Also, the roof was installed when the previous owners were doing other remodeling to the structure in the 1990’s and needed to be replaced.

 

Mr. Burriss stated that at one point water did accumulate in the driveway area, did the applicant know if there was any drainage controls installed?  Mr. Hawk indicated to his knowledge there were no drainage controls in the driveway area.

 

Mr. Wilken mentioned he does like the softer color of the existing exposed aggregate driveway and wondered if the new concrete could be a similar buff color.  Mr. Hawk agreed with Mr. Wilken and indicated he would check in to the possibility of the color mixture for the concrete driveway. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-43:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the remodeling and driveway 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 remodeling of the roof and driveway replacement upgrades the property and the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the roof and driveway replacements contribute to the vitality of a residence and therefore 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, the proposed materials are consistent. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve #2015-43, as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-43:  Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Eklof (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Mr. Hawk rejoined the Commission at 7:14 p.m.

 

Findings of Fact Approvals:

 

Old Business

 

a)         Application #2015-42, St. Luke’s Episcopal Church; 107 East Broadway; Remodeling of Side Entry:  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 and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-42.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-42.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-42: Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-43, Steven Hawk; 236 West Elm Street: Remodeling & Driveway:  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 and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-43.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-43.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-43: Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes) and Eklof (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from April 27, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the April 27 Planning Commission Meeting.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

May 11, 2015

May 26, 2015 (Tuesday)

June 8, 2015

   

Mr. Hawk stated that seeing no further business before the Commission the meeting was adjourned.

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:22 P.M.

Planning Commission Minutes April 27, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

April 27, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Eklof, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Hawk .

 

Members Absent:  Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Burriss and Councilmember Johnson (non-voting ex-officio).

 

Staff Present:  Deb Walker, Planning and Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present: Shad Evans, Tom Martin, Cynthia Cort, James Browder, Art Sayre, Stephen Applegate.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

312 East College Street – Radon Be Gone; on behalf of Michael & Amelia Smith —Application #2015-36:  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 a radon mitigation system on the western side of the home.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker and Shad Evans.

 

Discussion:

Shad Evans, 5605 Westerville Rd., Suite A, Westerville, Ohio, stated the sale of the home at 312 E. College Street required radon testing, which necessitated radon mitigation due to a high reading of radon in the home.  The system was installed and the radon was reduced to safe levels. The installer then learned a zoning permit was necessary after the installation of the system. 

 

Mr. Hawk asked how they installed the venting system.  Mr. Evans explained a cut was made through the outside floor joist and a vent extended 12 inches above the roof.  Termite damage had compromised an 8x8 post and several layers of wood had been used to patch various areas, so they came out through the door.  Mr. Hawk asked about the fan and learned it can be placed anywhere. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-36:

 

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

                                              

(b)        Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.   Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the installation of the radon mitigation system upgrades the property and the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the radon mitigation system contributes to the vitality of a residence and therefore contributes to the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed materials are consistent. All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to Approve Application #2015-36, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll call vote to Approve Application #2015-36: Wilken (yes), Eklof (yes) and Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

115 East Broadway – Granville Historical Society —Application #2015-38:  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 the installation of a full glass storm door on the front entry door.

 

Mr. Hawk made a disclosure statement informing the witnesses that he has retained CS Construction, the company that will be doing the work on the Historical Society building, to do work on his home.  He asked if there was any objection from the witnesses to him voting on these applications.  There were no objections.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker, Tom Martin and Cynthia Cort.

 

Discussion:

Tom Martin, 115 East Broadway, stated the need for the storm door is to protect the entrance and enable energy efficiency and humidity control as well as make it obvious to the public that the museum is open.  At this time it is difficult for people to know when the museum is open.

 

Staff stated they feel the storm door is appropriate and helps to protect the building. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-38:

 

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the storm door is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District. All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(b)        Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.   Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the storm door contributes to the improvement and upgrading of a structure, making it viable for use and therefore contributes to the upgrading of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.   Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, that as in above item b, the storm door contributes to the vitality of the District overall.   All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(d)        Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed storm door is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the property, protecting it from moisture and humidity with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to Approve Application #2015-38, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof. Roll call vote to Approve Application #2015-38:  Eklof (Yes), Wilken (yes) and Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

115 East Broadway – Granville Historical Society —Application #2015-39:  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 nine point six (9.6) square foot wall sign to be located above the front entry door.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker, Tom Martin and Cynthia Cort.

 

Discussion:

Cynthia Cort, 1632 Newark-Granville Road, Granville, Ohio stated the new sign will replace the sign that merely reads “Museum” and identify the property more fully.

 

Staff stated that the sign is within the square footage allowed and is appropriately designed and does not detract from the property. Board members liked the shape and design of the sign.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-38:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the wall sign is similar to other signs approved in the District.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

(b)        Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District. Wilken stated TRUE, the wall sign upgrades the structure and makes it more recognizable, upgrades the structure and contributes to the upgrading of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, that as above in item b, the sign contributes to the vitality of a structure within the District and the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

.

(d)        Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed project is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to Approve Application #2015-39, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof. Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-39:  Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken, (yes) and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

115 East Broadway – Granville Historical Society — Application #2015-40:  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 six point four nine five (6.495) square foot freestanding sign to be located by the western side entry door.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker, Tom Martin and Cynthia Cort.

 

Discussion:

Cynthia Cort, 1632 Newark-Granville Road, Granville, Ohio, stated the proposed freestanding sign is similar in characteristic to the wall sign, but with different wording.  It will be placed in the western yard as a hanging sign that would also state the hours of operation.  Ms. Cort clarified that the sign would be double-sided. 

 

Staff stated they particularly like the post and arm construction and appearance of the sign.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-40:

 

a)       Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the freestanding is stylistically compatible with other signs approved in the District. All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(b)        Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.   Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the freestanding sign contributes to the upgrading of the property and the District overall and informs people of access to the museum.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.   Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, that as in above item b, the freestanding sign contributes to the vitality of the District overall.   All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(d)        Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the freestanding sign is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the property with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to Approve Application #2015-40, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-40: Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken (yes) and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

326 East College Street – Art Sayre of Rooftek; on behalf of James Browder — Application #2015-41:  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 removal of 3-tab asphalt shingles and replacement with GAF Timberline asphalt dimensional shingles in a charcoal gray color.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker, James Browder and Art Sayre.

 

Discussion:

James Browder, 326 East College Street, stated the existing roof on his house needs to be replaced.  The color of the shingles is more of a charcoal-black color than a charcoal gray. 

 

Staff indicated their approval of the materials and the project.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-41:

 

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

 

(b)        Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the materials selected are appropriate and consistent with the primary structure, prevent degradation of the structure and contribute to the upgrading of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, that as above in item b, the selected materials contribute to the vitality of a home within the District and the vitality of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

(d)        Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed project is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a Motion to Approve Application #2015-41, as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-41: Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken (yes) and Mr.  Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Applications 2015-42 and 2015-43 needed to be tabled for lack of quorum.  Mr. Wilken would have had to recuse himself for 2015-42 and Mr. Hawk would have had to recuse himself for 2015-43.  Mr. Eklof moved to table the two applications for lack of a quorum, Mr. Wilken seconded. The board unanimously agreed to table these two items until the next Planning Commission meeting.

 

107 East Broadway – St. Luke’s Episcopal Church —Application #2015-42:  The property is zoned Village Square District (VSD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). The request is for architectural review and approval of the removal and reconstruction of the eastern side entry.

 

Mr. Wilken indicated he would need to recuse himself from Application #2015-42, as he has a conflict.  With his recusal there was not a quorum present to discuss or take action on the application.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to table Application #2015-42 until the next Planning Commission meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

236 West Elm Street – Steven Hawk —Application #2015-43:  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:

1)         Removal of 3-tab asphalt shingles and replacement with Owens Corning Duration asphalt shingles in either a Brownwood, Teak or Driftwood color; and

2)         Removal of exposed aggregate concrete driveway and replacement with a concrete driveway with a broom finish.

 

Mr. Hawk he would need to recuse himself from Application #2015-43, as he is the applicant. With his recusal there was not a quorum present to discuss or take action on the application.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to table Application #2015-43 until the next Planning Commission meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business

 

a)         Application #2015-36, Shad Evans, Radon Be Gone; on behalf of Michael & Amelia Smith; 312 East College Street: Radon Mitigation System:  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 hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-36.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-36.  Seconded  by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-36: Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-38, Granville Historical Society Museum; 115 East Broadway: 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 and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-38.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-38.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-38: Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-39, Granville Historical Society Museum; 115 East Broadway; Wall 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, Sign and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-39.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-39.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-39: Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

d)         Application #2015-40, Granville Historical Society Museum;115 East Broadway; Freestanding 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 #2015-40.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-40.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approval the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-40: Wilken (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

e)         Application #2015-41, Art Sayre of Rooftek; on behalf of James Browder; 326 East College 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 hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-41.

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-41.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote to Approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-41:  Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Motion to excuse the absence of Planning Commission Members:

Mr. Eklof moved to excuse Mr. Burriss and Mr. Potaracke.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Motion carried 3-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from April 13, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the April 13 Planning Commission Meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

May 11, 2015

May 26, 2015 (Tuesday)

June 8, 2015

   

Mr. Hawk stated that seeing no further business before the Commission the meeting was adjourned.

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:31 P.M.

Planning Commission Minutes April 13, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

April 13, 2015

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

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

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Alison Terry, Planning Director.

 

Also Present: Mark Clapsadle, Mike Flood, Iris Taylor, John Klauder, Mike Hoy, Jason Adamkosky and Dena McKinley.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

314 East Broadway – Columbus Hospitality —Application #2015-18:  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 replacement face on the freestanding sign. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Mike Hoy.

 

Discussion:

Mike Hoy, 1515 Fifth Street, Columbus, Ohio, stated that the new design of the sign for the Granville Inn will be a refacing of the existing sign with floodlights on top.  It was felt that utilizing the existing sign design was making use of a design already accepted and the colors are more pleasing. 

 

Planner Terry stated the new sign will exceed the maximum sign size and height requirement and will be subject to approval by the BZBA on April 30th. 

 

The floodlights will be LED and the commission agreed that the lighting would need to be on from dusk to dawn to accommodate late arrivals to the Inn.  Mr. Hawk asked why the sign design appears to superimpose the “G” over the “I” as if the “I” is the more important part of the logo.  There was no definitive answer other than that was the approved design. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-18:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the sign is similar to other signs 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 refacing of the existing sign is appropriate and contributes to the upgrading of the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the materials selected 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; the proposed materials are consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improve the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application 2015-18, as submitted with the condition that the applicant receive the necessary variances from the BZBA and that the lighting on the sign shall be allowed from dusk to dawn.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll call vote to approve Application 2015-18 Wilken (yes), Burriss (yes) Potaracke (yes), Eklof (yes), and Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

316 West Elm Street – Doug & Maria Hoyt —Application #2015-21:  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 a six (6’) foot board-on-board fence in the rear yard and a six (6’) foot white picket fence on the eastern side of the home. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Jason Adamkosky.

 

Discussion:

Jason Adamkosky, 317 West Elm Street, stated he was representing the owners of the property.  He said the church approves of the project (the property abuts the Hoyt property), and the project is to replace a dilapidated fence and build a fence to screen the air conditioning unit.  There will also be a gate in the fence to allow rear access to the property.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-21:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District? Mr. Burriss stated TRUE; the fencing is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village 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 fencing contributes to the upgrading of the property 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 in above item b, the fencing 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; the proposed fencing is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the property with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application 2015-21 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Roll call vote to approve Application 2015-21 Burriss (yes), Potaracke (yes), Eklof (Yes), Wilken (yes) and Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

317 East Maple Street – Mark Clapsadle —Application #2015-22:  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 a twenty (20’) foot by twenty (20’) foot rear single-story addition with walkout basement. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Mark Clapsadle.

 

Discussion:

Mark Clapsadle, Mark Clapsadle, 4380 Grandview Rd, stated the addition will be a family room and bedroom with a walkout.  It will be board and batten with a darker chocolate black trim along the windows and roof.  The foundation will be like the old sandstone color.  Alison Terry stated the application will need to be contingent upon approval by the BZBA as the lot coverage will increase from 20% to 21.3%. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-22:

 

(a)        Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District? Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, that the project is similar to other remodeling 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 selected are appropriate and consistent to the primary structure and contributes to the upgrading of 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 selected materials contribute to the vitality of a home within the District and 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; the proposed project is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve application 2015-22.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote to approve Application 2015-22 Mr. Potaracke (yes), Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken, (yes), Mr. Burriss and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

314 East Broadway – Robertson Construction Services, on behalf of the Historic Granville Inn, LLC —Application #2015-27:  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 the following landscape improvements:

1)         Sandstone patio in the front of the structure, with stairs and low retaining wall; and

2)         Brick paver patio in the courtyard space in front of the carriage house.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry, Jeremy Johnson and John Klauder.

 

Discussion:

John Klauder, 30 Old Farm Road, stated the landscape design will replicate the existing stone wall and indicated samples of the pavers to be used.  There will be a courtyard northwest of the Inn behind the wall.  There will be two gates inserted into the pre-approved fence.  Mr. Klauder stated there will be two sandstone patios 16 inches wide on the soldier’s course with a retaining wall up to the outside terrace.  The staff approves of the submitted plan.

 

Mr. Johnson pointed out that of the three proposed landscape plans, only one and three are currently funded, but they would like for all three plans to be approved.  Mr. Wilken asked if any of the three landscape trees will eventually block parking.  Mr. Klauder answered that they are slow growing maple trees and will not.  Raised concrete pads with pavers for the parking islands will match the other pavers and have a sealant.  There will be no plants in that area.  Mr. Johnson added that the bench by the main entry will be relocated to the “S” in the sidewalk on a more level area by the light post.     

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-27:

 

 

 

a)       Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District? Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the landscaping is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village 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 landscaping contributes to the upgrading of the property 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 in above item b, the landscaping 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; the proposed landscaping is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the property with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve Application 2015-27 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken (yes), Mr. Burriss (yes), Mr. Potaracke (yes), and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion on Application #2015-27 passed 5-0.

 

217 South Plum Street – Mike Flood, on behalf of Karl & Linda Sandin —Application #2015-31:  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 removal of a five (5’) foot high failing stone retaining wall and stone steps and replacement with a five (5’) foot high cut sandstone retaining wall with cut sandstone steps.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry, Mike Flood and Iris Taylor.

 

Discussion:

Mr. Flood, 240 E. College Street, stated the present retaining walls are leaning toward the house, and the wall is failing.  The plan is to replace the wall with a sandstone wall, possibly with two terraces of Briarhill natural stone. 

 

Planner Terry indicated that the work would all be done in the back yard where it backs up to Sugar Loaf.  Even with the slight reshaping of the wall it meets all of the requirements. 

 

Iris Taylor, 335 W. Elm, asked if Mr. Flood could construct a set back or nook to hide his trash cans.  Staff said the application is for the back yard, not the front yard.  The Commission asked the neighbors to work things out privately.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-31:

 

(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 landscape projects approved by 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 selected are appropriate and consistent with the primary structure and contributes to the upgrading of 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 selected materials contribute to the vitality of a home within the District and 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; the proposed project is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a Motion to Approve Application 2015-31 Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken (yes), Mr. Burriss, (yes) Mr. Potaracke, (yes), and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

335 West Elm Street – Iris Taylor —Application #2015-32:  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 construction of a picket fence with gate in the rear yard and exterior lighting.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Alison Terry and Iris Taylor.

 

Discussion:

Iris Taylor, 335 West Elm Street, stated she has a small flower and vegetable garden and would like to put up the fence to keep dogs out.  The lighting would be along the front walkway and side of house down the driveway and is replacement of existing lighting.  Staff approves the fence height and lighting requirements.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application 2015-32:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated the fencing is stylistically compatible with other properties within the Village 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 fencing contributes to the upgrading of the property and the District overall.  All members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

(c)        Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District. Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, that as above item b, the fencing 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; the fencing is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the property with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve Application 2015-32 as submitted.  Mr. Eklof Second the motion.  Roll Call Vote: Mr. Wilkin (yes), Mr. Burriss (yes), Mr. Potaracke (yes), Mr. Eklof (yes), and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion was carried 5-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business

 

a)         Application #2015-18, Columbus Hospitality, on behalf of The Historic Granville Inn, LLC; 314 East Broadway: Refacing of Freestanding 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 #2015-18.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-18.  Second by Mr. Eklof. Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-18:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2015-21, Doug & Maria Hoyt; 316 West Elm Street: Two Fence Sections:  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 1187, Height, Area and Yard Modifications and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-21.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-21.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-21:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

c)         Application #2015-22, Mark Clapsadle, on behalf of Steve & Elizabeth Gaubert; 317 East Maple 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 #2015-22.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-22.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-22:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

d)         Application #2015-27, Robertson Construction, on behalf of The Historic Granville Inn; 314 East Broadway; Landscape 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 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-27.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-27.  Second by Mr. Eklof. Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-27:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

e)         Application #2015-31, Michael Flood of Albyn’s Landscape, on behalf of Karl and Linda Sandin; 217 South Plum Street; Five (5’) Foot Stone Retaining Wall and Steps:  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 #2015-31.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-31.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-31:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

f)         Application #2015-32, Iris Taylor; 335 West Elm Street; Picket Fence with Gate in Rear Yard and Exterior Lighting:  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 (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-32.

 

Mr. Wilken moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-32.  Second by Mr. Eklof. Roll Call Vote to Approval Application #2015-32:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from March 23, 2015:  Mr. Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 23rd Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Wilken Second.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

April 27, 2015

May 11, 2015

May 26, 2015 (Tuesday)

   

Mr. Hawk stated that seeing no further business before the Commission the meeting was adjourned.

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:50 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes March 23, 2015

Granville Planning Commission

Minutes

March 23, 2015

7:00pm

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Eklof, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Hawk and Councilmember O’Keefe (non-voting, ex-officio)

 

Members Absent:  None

 

Staff Present:  Debi Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant

 

Also Present: John Noblick, Scott Kennedy, Jules Steinberg and Rochelle Steinberg

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None

 

New Business:

423 East College Street – John Noblick, on behalf of Scott Kennedy —Application #2015-19:

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 a two-story addition with an upper level open deck, on the eastern side of the structure located at 423 East College Street.

 

Mr. Hawk stated that he may have a future business relationship with C.S. Construction and Mr. Noblick, but there are no plans in place at this time.  Mr. Hawk said there would be no conflict of interest keeping him from rendering a fair decision at this meeting.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in John Noblick and Deb Walker.

 

Discussion:

John Noblick, 12037 Bolen Road, Newark, Ohio, on behalf of Scott Kennedy, stated that at a recent meeting with the contractor, the Kennedy’s finalized plans to include changing the existing aluminum siding to HardiePlank siding with a 7-inch exposure to be painted the same color as the rest of the existing siding. In due time (and as budget allows) the rest of the home will also be resided with HardiePlank to match. The roof shingle materials will be Owens Corning ‘Duration’ in the Estate Gray color.  The upper level in the rear of the home will have a wood double French glider door. The addition will be 561 square feet and will be similar in appearance to the other side of the house in an effort to balance the massing of the structure.  Additionally, the window on the back of the garage will be eliminated. The electric service will be relocated to the northwest corner of the house and the garage doors will be centered more in the elevations as the result of the electrical service relocation.

 

Mr. Hawk inquired as to the brand of windows to be used in the project. Mr. Noblick shared that they will be Anderson and in white. The upper level decking will be pressure treated wood. 

Mr. Burriss asked to see the modified drawing and it was submitted as Exhibit A for inspection. Mr. Noblick explained that the existing foundation will be raised as will the yard to offset drainage issues involving both the yard and garage.  

 

Staff expressed appreciation for the care and consideration taken to accommodate the neighbors’ concerns. There we no further questions.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-19:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed modifications are consistent with the style and architecture of the structure and surrounding 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, the proposed modifications, use of materials and balancing of the structures mass, contributes to the upgrading of this structure and therefore to the District overall. All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of residences in the District.  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed materials 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; the proposed materials are consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improve the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-19, as submitted, with the inclusion of Exhibit ‘A’ – a revised drawing. Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-19:  Wilken (yes), Burriss (yes), Potaracke (yes), Eklof (yes) and Hawk (yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business

Application #2015-19, John Noblick, on behalf of Scott Kennedy; 423 East College Street: Two Story Addition with Upper Level Deck, on Eastern Side of Home: 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 (AROD) and hereby votes to approve Application #2015-19.

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-19 as amended.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote:  Mr. Burriss (yes), Mr. Potaracke (yes), Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Wilken (yes) and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes from March 9, 2015:  Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 9, 2015 Planning Commission meeting.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcement:  Next meeting is scheduled for April 13, 2015.

 

Mr. Hawk declared the April 9, 2015 Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m., seeing no further business before the Commission.

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m.

Planning Communission Minutes March 9, 2015

Granville Planning Commission

Minutes

March 9, 2015

7:00pm

 

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

 

Members Present: Doug Eklof, Craig Potaracke, Jack Burriss, Steven Hawk and Councilmember Jeremy Johnson (non-voting, ex-officio).

 

Members Absent:  Mr. Bill Wilken.

 

Staff Present: Alison Terry, Planning Director

 

Also Present: Robert Ryan and Richard Lott.

 

Citizen’s Comments: None.

 

New Business:

273 East Maple Street – Grace & Steven Michael —Application #2015-16

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 exterior modifications:

1)         To replace the existing 4” aluminum siding with Hardie Plank Lap siding in 4” exposure, in a Cedarmill finish with gray select color; and the corners and window trim in a white color; and

2)         To replace the wood trim on the top of the front and rear porches with Hardie Plank siding in an Iron Gray color.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Robert Ryan and Alison Terry.

 

Discussion:

Robert Ryan, 1283 Licking Valley Road, Newark, Ohio 43055, stated that the plan is to replace the existing aluminum siding with HardiePlank in the same size for the horizontal boards and trim.  Planner Terry recommended the project as presented.  There were no questions from the Commission.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-16:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the siding and trim replacement is stylistically compatible with other new renovated and old structures in the Village 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 siding and trim replacement contributes to the upgrading of the structure 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 siding and trim replacement 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, the proposed siding and trim replacement is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

  

Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve Application #2015-16 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Eklof .  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-16:  Potaracke (Yes), Mr. Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

314 East Broadway – The Historic Granville Inn, LLC —Application #2015-18

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 freestanding sign. 

 

Planner Terry indicated that the applicant has requested that this sign application be tabled.  The applicants are working on further revisions to the proposed signage.

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to table Application #2015-18.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll call vote to table Application #2015-18: Mr. Potaracke (Yes), Mr. Burriss (Yes), Mr. Eklof (Yes) and Mr. Hawk (Yes). Motion carried 4-0.

 

Jeremy Johnson left the table and became part of the audience at this point.

 

314 East Broadway – The Historic Granville Inn, LLC —Application #2014-33, AMENDED

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 an amendment to the original approvals authorized for the Granville Inn in 2014.  The proposed amendment is for an awning to be installed over the stairway on the eastern side of the building.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Jeremy Johnson and Alison Terry

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion:

Mr. Jeremy Johnson, 1801 Thornwood, stated the proposed awning would be 12’x12’ and would act as a canopy to shed heavy rain to the front of the stone walls and into gravel drains.  Without the awning rain could flood the basement.  The awning will line up with the wall.  It will not flash into the building. 

 

Mr. Hawk asked about ice or snow damage.  Mr. Johnson explained that the gutters will be larger and be raised.  Snow rail on the slate roof will be replaced. 

 

Planner Terry said that the application meets all requirements, is historically correct and will alleviate future storm water issues.  

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-33, AMENDED:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed awning is stylistically compatible with other new renovated and old structures in the Village 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 awning contributes to the upgrading of the structure 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 awning 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, the proposed awning is consistent with the architecture of the area and thereby improves the structure with historically accurate materials and improvements which protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

  

Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve Application #2014-33 (Amended) as submitted.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-33 (Amended): Mr.  Potaracke (Yes), Mr. Burriss (Yes), Mr. Eklof (Yes) and Mr. Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Other Business:

Note: These agenda items are open to the public and are public hearings.  All individuals will be permitted to speak regarding the review of these proposed Zoning Code revisions.

 

Review of Proposed Zoning Code Revision, to amend Section 1165.03 of the Codified Ordinances of the Village of Granville, Ohio Pertaining to Minimum Lot Frontage in the Open Space District (OSD).

 

Planner Terry reviewed the proposed code change within the Open Space District.  She stated there is no minimum lot frontage in this code section currently.  This could allow for a 5-acre lot to be landlocked if no road frontage is required.  Staff recommended a minimum road frontage requirement of 100 feet to a public right-of-way. 

 

Mr. Burriss inquired about the possibility of flag lots and Mr. Johnson wanted to know why a one hundred (100’) foot distance was selected as opposed to a larger or smaller number.  Planner Terry indicated that flag lots could be a possibility and that in this district a 50 ft. front, side and rear yard setback is required.  She also indicated that the majority of the other residential districts in the Village require anywhere from sixty (60’) feet to ninety (90’) feet of road frontage.  Staff felt that a one hundred (100’) foot lot frontage requirement would allow some flexibility for lot splits, as the Open Space District area is also farmed.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to recommend to the Village Council approval of the Code Change for Chapter 1165.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion was carried 4-0.

 

Review of Proposed Zoning Code Revision, to amend Section 1171.02 of the Codified Ordinances of the Village of Granville, Ohio Pertaining to Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses in the Planned Commercial District (PCD).

Planner Terry reviewed the proposed code change within the Planned Commercial District.  She stated that the planned commercial district area will change with the future construction of the Cherry Valley Road Interchange.  The area is currently not served by public sanitary sewer. Existing single family properties can continue to exist but cannot expand, significantly renovate or erect accessory structures to serve a residential purpose (i.e. a swimming pool).  Modifying the code to allow for single family as a conditional use could allow for some of these properties to be rejuvenated and offers another use besides strictly commercial.  Many of these properties have significant constraints which prevent them from being converted to a commercial use (i.e. no parking allowed in the front of the structure and no way to gain access to the rear yard because of setback issues; significant rehabilitation to bring the structures up to commercial code compliance; etc.).

 

Mr. Eklof moved to recommend to the Village Council approval of the Code Change for Chapter 1171.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion was carried 4-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approvals:

 

New Business

 

  1. Application #2015-16: Grace & Steven Michael; 273 East Maple Street; Exterior Remodeling: Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria

            Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-16.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll call vote Mr. Burriss (yes), Mr. Eklof (yes), Mr. Potaracke (yes), and Mr. Hawk (yes).  Motioni carried 4-0.

b.         Application #2014-33, AMENDED, Historic Granville Inn, LLC; 314 East Broadway; Exterior Remodeling:  Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for application 2014-33 AMENDED.  Mr. Potaracke Second.  Roll call vote: Burriss (yes), Potaracke (yes), Eklof (yes) and Hawk (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve absent Commission Member:

Mr. Burriss made a motion to excuse Bill Wilken’s absence.  Second by Mr. Potaracke. Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Minutes from the February 23, 2015 Planning Commission hearing: Mr.

Eklof moved to approve the minutes from February 23, 2015. Second by Mr. Burriss.  Motion carried

4-0.

 

Adjournment:  7:40 PM

Mr. Hawk adjourned the meeting as there was no further business before the Commission.

 

Next meeting:

Monday, March 23, 2015

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.