Granville Community Calendar

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.

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.