Granville Community Calendar

Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

February 23, 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. Burriss, Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Hawk and Councilmember Johnson (non-voting, ex-officio).

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present: Deb Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present: Victor Terebuh, Jared Eschbaugh, Donald Contini, and Matt and Cheryl Durst.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

203 East Elm Street – Victor Terebuh —Application #2014-190

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 thirty-four (34) replacement windows on all elevations of the structure.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker and Victor Terebuh

 

Discussion:

 

Victor Terebuh, 308 Bryn Du Drive, stated that several windows on the dwelling have already been replaced with vinyl replacement windows and the remaining windows are non-operable.  The applicant wishes to replace all of the remaining windows with similar vinyl windows.  The project will likely take two years to complete because the windows will be replaced as tenants vacate the apartments.  The staff approves of the plan.  Mr. Burriss asked if storm windows would be gone and would full screens be a part of the project.  The answer was yes to both questions.  The applicant affirmed the screens would also be white vinyl. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-01

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr.Burriss stated TRUE, the replacement windows are 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 replacement windows contribute 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 replacement windows 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 replacement windows 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 #2014-190 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-190: Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Mr. Burriss (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

226 East Broadway, Suite C – Jared Eschbaugh; Ila’s Gourmet Popcorn —Application #2015-13

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 projecting sign.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker and Jared Eschbaugh.

 

Discussion: 

Jared Eschbaugh, 226 East Broadway, Suite C, stated he would like to replace the existing sign with a Barbershop style sign with yellow and white stripes and a brown frame that will match the Goumas sign frame.  Discussion about the different fonts on the Goumas sign (Greek) versus the old fashioned font on the sign mockup was duly noted and approved.  The staff approves of the design and location of the sign.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-13:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the projecting sign is similar to other projecting signs approved in the District and is interesting.  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 location of the projecting sign is appropriate 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 sign contributes to a business 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 livedMr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed projecting sign 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 #2015-2, as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-2:  Mr. Burriss (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

444 East Broadway – Donald Contini —Application #2015-14

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 a roof replacement project. This application was deferred to the end of the session as the applicant was late. Applicant arrived at 7:20 PM.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker and Donald Contini.

 

Donald Contini, 431 N. Pearl St, in reference to property at 444 East Broadway, stated he would like to replace his 1995 roof. There is not enough airflow as the original frame was made of 2x4 rafters with insulation and the owner would like to add a 2x2 to the 2x4s to allow for better air flow.  Mr. Wilken asked how the dormers would be affected by adding the 2x2s.  Apparently the dormers have enough leeway to allow for the modification.  There would be three ridge vents, and the shingles would be asphalt OCF Oakridge, in driftwood, which would match the garage. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-14:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the roof replacement project is similar to other 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 materials selected for the roofing project are compatible with the primary structure and the project 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 roofing project contributes to the livability of an historic 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 livedMr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed roofing 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.Potaracke made a motion to approve Application #2015-14. Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2015-14: Mr. Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

338 North Granger – Matt Durst —Application #2015-15

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 an 8’ window and replacement with an 8’ sliding glass door.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker and Matt Durst.

 

Discussion:

 

Matt Durst, 338 North Granger Street, stated he would like to replace a south facing 8’ side window with a sliding glass door, matched as closely as possible with the existing windows.  Staff stated this would allow for more energy efficiency and traffic flow.  The door would be of Anderson perma-shield and also allow for more light in the home. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-15:

 

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 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 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 contributes to the vitality and livability 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 livedMr. 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 #2015-15. Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2015-15: Mr. Eklof (Yes),  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

Application #2014-190, Victor Terebuh; 203 East Elm Street; 34 Replacement Windows:  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 #2014-190. 

     

Mr.Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-190.  Seconded  by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote:  Burriss (Yes) Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application #2015-13, Jared Eschbaugh on behalf of Ila’s Gourmet Popcorn; 226 East Broadway, Suite C; 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) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-13. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-13.  Seconded  by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes) Burriss (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application #2015-14, Donald Contini; 444 East Broadway; Roof Replacement Project:  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 #2015-14. 

 

Mr.Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-14.  Seconded  by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Burriss (Yes) Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

 

 

Application #2015-15, Matt Durst; 338 North Granger; Removal of an 8’ Window and Replacement with an 8’ Sliding Glass Door: 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 #2015-15. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-15.  Seconded  by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Burriss (Yes) Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from February 9th, 2015:  Mr.Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the February 9th, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr.Potaracke seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

March 9, 2015

March 23, 2015

April 13, 2015

 

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

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:37 pm.

Planning Commission Minutes February 9, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

February 9, 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. 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: Jeremy Johnson, Pete Confar, Steve Mershon, Kyle and Joanna Bartholomew.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Old Business:

314, 334 & 384 East Broadway – The Historic Granville Inn —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 amendments to the original approvals authorized for the Granville Inn in 2014.  The proposed amendments are as follows:

1)         To modify the light fixtures from the GranVille II LED Classic Standard, Holophane light fixture to the LA441, ANP Lighting fixture;

2)         To modify the carriage house doors;

3)         To modify the mechanical screening located on the second floor of the north elevation;

4)         To modify the ground mounted light fixture from GR2 (AFL10) to Kichler #16208BBR42 in bronze.

5)         To modify light pole ‘Charleston’ cast aluminum pole w/4” diameter shaft painted ‘Granville’ green to ANP Lighting model #CB054 in black.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Debi Walker, Jeremy Johnson and Pete Confar.

 

Discussion:  

The Planning Commission chose to hear testimony for all five proposed material modifications.   Jeremy Johnson, Vice-President of Robertson Construction, 1801 Thornwood Drive, Heath, Ohio 43056 and Pete Confar, Architect of Acock Associates Architects, 383 North Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215 represented The Historic Granville Inn and addressed each of the proposed modifications collectively.

 

Item #1 - Modification of the post head light fixture - Denison University is currently considering utilizing the proposed light fixture (and pole) in other areas on campus. The post head will have a black finish, a white LED light (which was demonstrated to the Commissioners by Mr. Johnson and Mr. Confar), and full cutoff capability reducing potential light spillage. The applicants’ submitted specifications summarizing the light temperature. The proposed post head will be mounted on a complementary 12-foot pole in black (Item #5). Mr. Johnson described the proposed ground mounted light fixtures (Item #4) as being set to illuminate the stone veneer on the first floor bay area yielding a smaller pool of light to reduce potential light spillage.

 

Item #2 - Modification of the carriage doors – the previously approved French door design will be modified to a carriage house door style as recommended by the Ohio Historical Preservation Office.

 

Item #3 - Discussion ensued about modification to the appearance of mechanical units screening on the north side of the Inn.  The existing units are galvanized metal and are elevated in order to allow changes required internally for air flow. A sound attenuation cap would be added to mitigate noise.  Mr. Confar presented a series of PowerPoint slides illustrating the history of the mechanical units and potential screening options. After considerable discussion, the Commission agreed to painting the mechanical units in their entirety with a weather durable covering (paint) in a tone that would be in keeping with the Inn’s sandstone cladding. Mr. Johnson agreed to do research of potential epoxies, Fiberglas or other possible coatings. The Commission further discussed the need to provide metal screening of the skirting to cover the additional structural members and agreed that the height of the hand rail would be the minimum maximum height of the screening. Ms. O’Keefe queried about the increase in sound by way of galvanized metal. Mr. Confar responded that most of the sound will travel upwards.  Mr. Burriss suggested the metal screening/skirting be painted in a tone to complement the tone used on the mechanical units. The use of color in this manner would give the appearance of receding layers in much the same way as the Inns’ overall appearance. Following a summary of the discussion, the Commission asked staff’s opinion. Staff approved the modifications.  The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to the amended application. 

 

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 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 contribute to the upgrading of this significant historical structure and therefore to 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 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 livedMr. 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. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2014-33, AMENDED, as submitted with the following conditions: 1) The galvanized metal, rooftop, mechanical units located at the rear of the structure are to be painted with a durable coating in a dark tone simulating the color of the structures existing sandstone veneer; and 2) the mechanical units will be screened from the rooftop/deck to a height sufficient to obstruct the view of all exposed supporting members; and 3) the mechanical units screening will be painted in a shade different from, but compatible with, the tone (color) used to paint the mechanical units in an effort to create a stepped coordinated appearance.

 

Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2014-33, AMENDED:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

126 South Main Street – Lakeholm Company - Harvest of Memories —Application #2015-08

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 projecting sign.  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 Debi Walker and Steve Mershon.  Mr. Burriss recused himself from the discussion for this application.

 

Discussion: 

Steve Mershon, 128 South Main Street, Granville, Ohio  43023, stated two tenants will occupy his building.  He discussed both signs with the Commission in an effort to be expeditious. The upper level tenant will be occupied by Harvest of Memories, a photography studio /wedding photography business. Harvest of Memories will utilize the upper level primarily as a planning/business office space. The first floor space will be occupied by Denise’s (Hair) Salon. Signage for each business has been designed in such a way as to be easily changed should the business occupants change.  Denise’s Salon will have a wall sign of 12 square feet in silver, gray and black of PCV composition.  The projecting sign for Harvest of Memories will be two-sided in plum and teal.  It will be 7.5 square feet. The sign will be mounted on a metal scrollwork arm similar to the Mershon Law bracket.  Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-08:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the 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.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the location of the proposed wall sign is appropriate to the primary 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 materials selected 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 livedMr. Wilken 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. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-08 as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2015-08:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (recused), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

126 South Main Street – Lakeholm Company - Denise’s Salon on South Main —Application #2015-09   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. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Debi Walker and Steve Mershon.

 

Discussion: 

Steve Mershon, 128 South Main Street, stated that information relating to this application had been discussed with the 2015-8 application.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-09:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the 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.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the location of the proposed wall sign is appropriate to the primary 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 materials selected 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 livedMr. Wilken 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. Wilken.

 

Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve Application #2015-09, as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2015-09:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (recused), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

Mr. Burriss rejoined the meeting at 7:55 P.M.

 

218 South Mulberry Street – Kyle & Joanna Bartholomew —Application #2015-10 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 three replacement windows. 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Debi Walker and Kyle Bartholomew.

 

Discussion: 

Kyle Bartholomew, 218 South Mulberry Street, stated that they bought the house in August 2014.  The kitchen windows are double pane, double hung windows with broken seals, which they would like to replace.  The upstairs windows are old style with hinges and broken seals.  The back window also needs replaced moving it slightly to the right.  Staff approved the application. The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-10:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated TRUE, the proposed replacement windows are similar to other windows 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 replacement 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 livedMr. 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 protecting the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All other members concurred with Mr. Burriss.

 

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2015-10, as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2015-10:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Application #2014-33, AMENDED; Denison University for The Historic Granville Inn; 314, 334 & 384 East Broadway; Exterior Remodeling & Lighting 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 #2014-33, AMENDED as submitted with the following conditions: 1) The galvanized metal, rooftop, mechanical units located at the rear of the structure are to be painted with a durable coating in a dark tone simulating the color of the structures existing sandstone veneer; 2) the mechanical units will be screened from the rooftop/deck to a height sufficient to obstruct the view of all exposed supporting members; and 3) the mechanical units screening will be painted in a shade different from – but compatible with -the tone (color) used to paint the mechanical units in an effort to create a stepped coordinated appearance.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-33, AMENDED.  Second by Mr. Eklof.  Roll call vote:  Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application #2015-08, Lakeholm Company; Harvest of Memories; 126 South Main Street; 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 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-8. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-08.  Second by Mr. Burriss. Roll call vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (recused) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Application #2015-09, Lakeholm Company - Denise’s Salon on South Main; 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, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-09. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #20150-9.  Second by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (recused) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Application #2015-10, Kyle & Joanna Bartholomew; 218 South Mulberry Street; 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 Residential District (VRD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-10. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-10.  Second by Mr. Wilken. Roll call vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes from January 26, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the January 26, 2015 Planning Commission meeting.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 3-0. (Hawk, Wilken, Potaracke only)

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

February 23, 2015

March 9, 2015

March 23, 2015

 

Mr. Hawk declared the February 9, 2015 Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:12pm, seeing no further business before the Commission.

 

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:12pm.

Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

January 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. Potaracke, Mr. Hawk and Councilmember O’Keefe (non-voting, ex-officio).

 

Members Absent:  Mr. Burriss.

 

Staff Present:  Deb Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present: Stephen Applegate and Mary Morales-Rivera.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

107 East Broadway – Stephen Applegate; St. Luke’s Episcopal Church —Application #2015-1

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 a replacement staircase on the west side of the building.

 

Swearing in of Witnesses: Mr. Hawk swore in Deb Walker and Stephen Applegate.  (Mr. Wilken recused himself because he is a parishioner of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church.)

 

Discussion: 

Stephen Applegate, 107 East Broadway, stated the need to maintain the rear entrance stairway of the church due to improper drainage, the need for new tile and repairs to allow for re-landscaping.  The staff is in favor of the project because it will be tasteful and historically acceptable and appropriate.  Staff further indicated the plans are sensitive to the design and historical character of the area.

 

Mr. Potaracke asked what would become of the existing white railing surrounding a lower level depression in the property.  Mr. Applegate answered that code required the existence of the railing for safety’s sake.  He also indicated the improvements of the property will entail a minimal increase in the property footprint which will be brought before the Village Council.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-1:

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE, the improvement is stylistically compatible with other new renovated and old structures in the Village 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 enlargement of the staircase area contributes to the upgrading of the structure and the District overall.  All other members concurred with Mr. Potatacke.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated TRUE, that as above in item b, the enlargement of the staircase 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 livedMr. Potaracke 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. Potaracke.

  

Mr. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2015-1 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-1:  Wilken (abstain), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 3-0.

 

At 7:11 P.M. Mr. Wilken returned to the commission meeting.

 

134 East Broadway – Mary Morales-Rivera; Day Y Noche —Application #2015-2

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 four (4) gooseneck lights to be located above, and to illuminate, the Day Y Noche wall sign.

 

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

 

Discussion: 

Mary Morales-Rivera, 134 East Broadway, stated the purpose of the gooseneck lighting was to  better illuminate the business sign and entranceway and let people know the business is open in the evenings.  The building has been purchased by the Morales-Rivera, who plan to operate three hotel rooms on the upper floor.  The increased lighting would keep the stairway to the upper level safer.  The lights will be placed evenly above the sign in an attractive balance and have a 120 watt yellow incandescent appearance.  Ms. O’Keefe pointed out that the application states the lighting could be as high as 200 watts and be either white or yellow.  Mrs. Morales-Rivera stated that the lighting would be yellow and 120 watts.  Staff recommended approval and stated they like the balanced look of the lighting plan.  Mr. Eklof pointed out that Day Y Noche is the only business in that block that does not have either an awning or distinctive outside lighting.

 

 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2015-2:

 

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

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Wilken stated TRUE, the location of the proposed lighting is appropriate to the primary 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 materials selected 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 livedMr. Wilken stated TRUE, the proposed lighting 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 #2015-2, as submitted, with a condition that the lights be limited to business hours or midnight, whichever was later.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Eklof.  

 

Ms. Morales-Rivera clarified that an interior stairway light would remain on for patrons of the hotel rooms.

 

Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2015-2:  Wilken (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 4-0.

 

314, 334 & 384 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 amendments to the original approvals authorized for the Granville Inn in 2014.  The proposed amendments are as follows:

1)         To modify the light fixtures from the GranVille II LED Classic Standard, Holophane light fixture to the LA441, ANP lighting fixture;

2)         To modify the carriage house doors; and

3)         To modify the mechanical screening located on the second floor of the north elevation.

 

Ms. Walker addressed the Commission and indicated the applicant requested this application be tabled until the February 9, 2015 meeting.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

 

Application #2015-1, Stephen Applegate; St. Luke’s Episcopal Church; 107 East Broadway; Staircase:  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 #2015-1. 

     

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-1.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Application #2015-2, Mary Morales-Rivera; Day Y Noche; 134 East Broadway; 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 Business District (VBD) and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and hereby gives their approval of Application #2015-2. 

 

Mr. Eklof moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2015-2.  Seconded by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to excuse Jack Burriss’ absence from the January 26, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to excuse Jack Burris’ absence from the January 26th  Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from January 12, 2015:  Mr. Wilken made a motion to approve the minutes from the January 12th Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  Roll call vote Eklof (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) and Hawk (Yes)  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

February 9, 2015

February 23, 2015

March 9, 2015

 

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

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:28 p.m.

Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 2015

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

January 12, 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. Potaracke, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Hawk and Councilmember Johnson (non-voting, ex-officio).

 

Members Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Deb Walker, Planning & Zoning Assistant.

 

Also Present: Julio Valenzuela. See further notes, Mr. Valenzuela arrived at 7:14 PM.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

New Business:

203 East College Street, Suite A – Fly Method Cycle, LLC —Application #2014-192

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 one point two forty-five (1.245) square foot window sign.

 

Mr. Valenzuela was not present at the meeting.

 

Mr. Potaracke made a motion to table Application # 2014-192 and #2014-193.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll call vote to table Application #2014-192 and #2014-193: Eklof (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), Wilken (no) and Hawk (yes).

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from November 24, 2014:  Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve the minutes from the November 24 Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Eklof seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 3-0. (Hawk, Wilken, Potaracke only)

 

Motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from December 8, 2014:  Mr. Potaracke made a motion to approve the minutes from the December 8th Planning Commission Meeting.  Mr. Eklof seconded.  All in favor voice vote:  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements – next meetings:

January 26, 2015

February 9, 2015

February 23, 2015

 

Mr. Hawk declared the January 12, 2014 Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 7:08 p.m.

 

Following adjournment by the commission, Mr. Valenzuela arrived and the commission voted to re-convene the meeting by an all in favor voice vote. 

 

Mr. Potaracke made a motion to remove Application #2014-192 and #2014-193 from the table.  Seconded by Mr. Eklof.  Roll call vote to remove Application #2014-192 and #2014-193 from the table:  Eklof (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), Wilken (no) and Hawk (yes).

 

New Business:

203 East College Street, Suite A – Fly Method Cycle, LLC —Application #2014-192

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 one point two forty-five (1.245) square foot window sign.

 

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

 

Discussion: 

Julio Valenzuela, 140 Pembroke Lane, stated that he wished to have permission for a permanent sign on the glass door window of Fly Method Cycle.  The sign is already in place. A picture of the sign was shown and the staff recommended approval.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-192:

 

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 location of the proposed window sign is appropriate 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 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 livedMr. 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. Eklof made a motion to approve Application #2014-192 as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-192:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

203 East College Street, Suite A – Fly Method Cycle, LLC —Application #2014-193

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 (6) square foot sidewalk sign. 

 

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

 

Discussion: 

Julio Valenzuela, 140 Pembroke Lane, stated that he wanted to use a sandwich board sign on the sidewalk at 203 East College Street to advertise Fly Method Cycle classes.  He stated that the sign does not impede pedestrians.  The sign is constructed of wood and slate and would be taken in at day’s end.  Mr. Burriss made a comment that zoning requirements actually rule against a changeable copy sandwich board, though several do exist in Granville.  He also stated he was in favor of the style of board, because it is historical in character.  Also mentioned was that only one sandwich board sign is allowed per zone lot (or building in this case), so future building occupants would not be able to have their own sandwich sign boards without pursuing variances. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to Application #2014-193:

 

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 location of the proposed sidewalk sign is appropriate 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 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 livedMr. 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 #2014-193, as submitted, with the condition that the sidewalk sign must be removed and secured indoors during non-business hours.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to Approve Application #2014-193:  Wilken (Yes), Burriss (Yes), Potaracke (Yes), Eklof (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion Carried 5-0.

 

Finding of Fact Approvals:

Application #2014-192, Julio Valenzuela; Fly Method Cycle, LLC; 203 East College Street, Suite A; Window Sign:  Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-192. 

     

Mr. Eklof  moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-192.  Seconded  by Mr. Potaracke. Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Application #2014-193, Julio Valenzuela; Fly Method Cycle, LLC; 203 East College Street, Suite A; Sidewalk Sign:  Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  The Planning Commission found the request to be consistent with The Granville Codified Ordinances Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD) and Chapter 1189, Signs and hereby gives their approval of Application #2014-193. 

 

Mr. Eklof  moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2014-193.  Seconded  by Mr. Wilken. Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (Yes), Wilken (Yes) Eklof (Yes), Burris (Yes) and Hawk (Yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

   

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

 

The Planning Commission adjourned at 7:27 pm.

 

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.