Granville Community Calendar

GPC Minutes December 10, 2018

 

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

December 10, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to OrderMr. Burriss (Chair Pro Tem) called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members PresentMr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Ms. Hoyt, Mr. Rhodes, Mr. Young (ex-officio member, GEVSD, non-voting representative), and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative).

 

Member Absentnone

 

Staff PresentSteven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner; Mike King, Village Law Director

 

Also PresentGreg Reis, Scott Hennick, Gerry Bird, John Jasinski, Teresa M. Jasinski, David Schmidt, Michelle Lerner, Lyle Wiley, and George Fackler.

 

Citizens’ Commentsnone

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application #2018-150, submitted by John and Teresa Jasinski, for the property located at 239 West Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a window installation.  The property is currently zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located in the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-151, submitted by Todd Willis on behalf of the Church of Latter-Day Saints, for the review and approval to split 7.7818 acres of parcel number 20-042864.01.000 located at 2578 Newark-Granville Road in order to combine it with the existing 2.361 acres of parcel number 020-041284-00.000 located at 2486 Newark-Granville Road.  The 2486 Newark-Granville Road parcel will become a 4.144-acre parcel and the 2578 Newark-Granville Road parcel will become a 6.006-acre parcel.  The 2486 Newark-Granville Road property is currently zoned

Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A), and the 2578 Newark-Granville Road property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD); both properties are located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Ms. Hoyt seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

New Business:

 

a)      Application #2018-153, submitted by Dave Schmidt, for the property located at 134 South Pearl Street.   The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of new windows, a shake-shingle roof, and three (3) east-facing roof dormers at the rear of the main body of the home.   The property is currently zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located in the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Dave Schmidt and Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner.

 

Discussion: 

 

Mr. Klingler liked the idea of three (3) dormers [on the upper rear roof, main body of the home], noting they were in keeping with the style of the house, and applauded the care being taken with the restoration of the house.  He asked if the new windows would be simulated divided-light.

 

Sherman Elliot, Shumaker Construction, stated:  he planned to do true divided-light by Jeld-Wen Windows, with a metal profile between the glass, and added the muntins would be three dimensional on both the inside and outside.  He added all existing trim would stay.

 

Ms. Hoyt echoed her approval of the dormers.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-153, Chapter 1159, Village Residential District; and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District. All commissioners agreed.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt any improvement, as well as this renovation in this location and situation, would contribute to the improvement of the neighborhood overall. All commissioners agreed.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that as above, any upgrade or renovation to an historic building would contribute to the continuing vitality of the District.  All commissioners agreed.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation will enhance the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All commissioners agreed.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-153:   Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes) and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)     Application #2018-156, submitted by Joe and Johnni Beckel, for the property located at 221 East Elm Street.  The request is for review and approval of a major renovation to the home.  The property is currently zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located in the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Scott Hennick, Joe Beckel, and Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner.

 

Discussion:

 

Steven Smedley explained:  the property owner wanted to do a major renovation to the house, and showed the four (4) elevations via a power point presentation.  He described the scope of work, listing what was proposed for each elevation.  He added all materials would be wood construction.

 

Mr. Klingler remarked about the beautiful plans and appreciated the detail, time, and care taken to keep an historic house looking the way it should.  He added the changes seemed well done and would make the house more livable.  Ms. Hoyt was in agreement.

 

Mr. Burriss reminisced about the history of the house, and noted the plans were beautifully drawn.  He asked if screening was required for air conditioning units, noting it could be done with landscaping.    Scott Hennick, Dave Fox Remodeling, said he was thinking of putting small retaining walls around the steps to the back porch.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-156, Chapter 1159, Village Residential District; and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.  All commissioners agreed.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, as one of the statelier homes in the Village District, he felt this renovation in this location and situation would contribute to the improvement of the neighborhood overall.  All commissioners agreed.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, as one of the jewels of the district, the implementation of this renovation in this situation will thereby contribute to the continuing vitality of the District.  All commissioners agreed.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that based on the drawings, the renovation will protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  All commissioners agreed.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-156:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-153; 134 South Pearl Street; Dave Schmidt; Windows, Roof, and Dormers

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-153, with the notation the windows would be simulated divided- light.   Mr. Potaracke seconded.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-156; 221 East Elm Street; Joe and Johnni Beckel; Major Renovation

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

Mr. Klingler moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-156.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Work Session:  Gerry Bird; Glenshire Development

Discussion and feedback for preliminary plans for the Glenshire Development property located at 1562 Newark-Granville Road.

 

Gerry Bird, owner of Glenshire, stated the following:

·         Presentation two (2) years ago requested thirty-seven (37) lots; the proposal had been amended to thirty (30) lots to lower the density; 

·         He increased lot depth, and anticipated public streets and water;

·         There would be cul-de-sacs, a 50-foot right-of-way and a 26-foot-wide roadway;

·         He requested Suburban Residential District (SRD) zoning; 

·         The lots would be about 10,000 square feet, similar in size to The Colony, and larger than Village Green lots;   

·         Village Council [has] approved the pre-annexation agreement; Glenshire was in the process for annexation; a public hearing would be February 20, 2019 before Council; 

·         There were no environmental issues other than a little floodway in the southeast corner; a 25-foot grade change, and storm water detention was anticipated as part of the Site Plan requirements; 

·         There had been three (3) traffic studies conducted, and Carpenter Marty was asked to revise the previous report per the 30-lot proposal instead of the previous 36-lot plan; 

·         Community meetings had been conducted; neighbors requested dust and storm water be controlled during construction;

·         Homes were proposed as one-story and story-and-a-half, 1200 square feet with partial basements, varied roof colors; models would be built; there would be four (4) plans from which to choose;

·         Would have a home owners association, and landscaping and snow removal would be handled by the HOA; 

·         Would need fewer variances:  50’ right-of-way, and 15’ front yard setback (like The Colony); 

·         Planned to be empty-nester housing with pricing in the $400,000’s;

·         The school district was supportive;

·         Would be near the bike trail, and proposed a connection later, if possible; 

·         Wanted to evoke a rural character at the entrance to the development so in large part, most of the housing wouldn’t be visible from Newark-Granville Road.

 

Mr. Burriss asked if there would be shared driveways.   Mr. Bird stated he wanted to combine driveways where he could; maybe 50% of the properties.  Mr. Burriss asked if internal sidewalks would be included.   Mr. Bird stated sidewalks would be on both sides of the street; he didn’t know [at this point in time] if they would tie into Newark-Granville Road.

 

Mr. Klingler liked the configuration better than the previous proposal, as it seemed friendlier, hidden, attractive, and included a cul-de-sac.

 

Mr. Potaracke asked if there would be additional or a reduction of green space at the south end.  Mr. Bird stated it would be about the same, with walk-out basements on some units. 

 

Mr. Bird stated he was proposing a board-and-batten look, incorporating lap siding, stone bases, farmhouse look, steeper roof pitches of 7/12 with a major gable, and porches front and back.  He anticipated one-third of the units being one-floor, and two-thirds having an upstairs.

 

Mr. Rhodes asked if a traffic light would be needed?   Mr. Bird said that traffic generated would not rise to the level of warranting [even] a middle-turn lane.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked about the need for variances.  Mr. Bird stated they were already granted a 50-foot right-of-way, front yard setback, and 4-foot sidewalk variances.

 

Mr. Burriss stated he felt better about the new proposal, and was glad to see the water element removed from the plan.

 

 

 

Work Session: George Fackler Project

Discussion and feedback related to a conceptual residential-housing plan for the properties located at 745 Cherry Valley Road.

 

Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner explained:  George Fackler wished to build twenty-six (26) homes/duplexes similar to the proposed Glenshire for empty nesters, with an HOA.   He shared an example of a proposed floor plan.

 

Lyle Wiley shared the following:

  • An exterior sketch, approximately 1,900 square feet, targeting empty-nesters and young professionals;

  • Property would be 6.5 acres, with the possible purchase of 1.5 acres along the southern property line to allow the plan the benefit of that additional space;

  • Plans intention was to incorporate more green space for the project community;

  • Described the qualities of homes:  some may have walk-out basements [along the southern property line – post acquisition of the aforementioned 1.5 acres], 30-foot setback from road, 30 feet apart, price in mid-high $200,000’s; impact on schools would be low, 1.5 people per house [on average], 1.5 cars per house [on average], contributing little traffic on Cherry Valley Road.

 

Mr. Burriss asked if there would be plenty of off-street parking.   Mr. Wiley stated the Fire Chief was fine with the turnaround at the end of the street.

 

Mr. Burriss asked if the one-story units would have a blind dormer.  Mr. Wiley confirmed they would.

 

Mr. Demarest asked if it would be a “55+ Certified Community”.   Mr. Wiley stated that designation would limit who could purchase a unit.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked if it was planned to extend the roadway.   Steven Smedley stated “no”.   Mr. Wiley offered that any future extension of the street to the east6 depended on whether he could buy the property from the Church of Latter-Day Saints. 

 

Mr. Klingler liked the price point, and asked if the windows would be simulated divided- light, as it would add a richer look.  Mr. Wiley said the windows would have a divider in between the glass as it would cost less.  Mr. Klingler didn’t like the side-light shown on the illustration, and thought it should be above or on both sides of the door.  Mr. Wiley said it would be easy to have transoms on both sides of door.  Mr. Klingler liked seeing stone, shingles, a roof pitch of 8/12, wide moldings, and the configuration of the big window.

 

Mr. Burris stated no objections to moving forward, and encouraged the development. 

 

Review and approval of meeting minutes from August 27, 2018 GPC Meeting.  ­­­­Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the August 27, 2018 GPC minutes.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Review and approval of meeting minutes from September 24, 2018 GPC Meeting.  ­­­­Mr. Klingler moved to approve the September 24, 2018 GPC minutes.  Ms. Hoyt seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Potaracke (yes), Motion carried 3-0.

 

Review and approval of meeting minutes from October 8, 2018 GPC Meeting.  ­­­­Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the October 8, 2018 GPC minutes.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Review and approval of meeting minutes from October 22, 2018 GPC Meeting.  ­­­­Mr. Klingler moved to approve the October 22, 2018 GPC minutes.  Ms. Hoyt seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Review and approval of meeting minutes from November 13, 2018 GPC Meeting.  ­­­­Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the November 13, 2018 GPC minutes.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote: Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Approval of GPC Meeting Dates for 2019.     Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the GPC meeting dates for 2019.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Rhodes (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

January 14, 2019

January 28, 2019

February 11, 2019

 

Motion for Adjournment:

 

Mr. Klingler moved the meeting be adjourned.   Mr. Potaracke seconded.   Motion carried.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Burriss adjourned the meeting at 8:08 pm.

GPC Minutes November 13, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

November 13, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to OrderMr. Burriss (Chair Pro Tem) called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members PresentMr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler, Ms. Hoyt, Mr. Rhodes, and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative). New Member, Mr. Rhodes was sworn in ahead of this meeting in the office of Village Law Director, King.

 

Member AbsentMr. Potaracke

 

Staff PresentDebra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Mike King, Village Law Director

 

Also PresentCasey Curtis, Sabrina Warner, Dan VanNess, Steve Pyles, Katie Richards, John Cory, Ben Ackley, Ryan Skeldon, Pete Foster, Denny Freudeman, and Dan Levanic.

 

Citizens’ CommentsNone

 

Old Business:

 

a)                Application #2018-108 (Modified), submitted by Hplex Solutions, (dba Hplex Granville MOB, LLC) for the 13.789-acre property located at 2780 Newark-Granville Road (parcel no. 020-043254-00.003), currently owned by Ben and Steve Ackley as Northwest Wind LLC, an Ackley Company.  The request is for review and approval of modifications to the elevations and materials for the Phase 1 Medical Office Building.  The property is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the front-most portion of the property is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Denny Freudeman, Dan Levanic, and Debra Yost.

 

Discussion:

 

Denny Freudeman, 65 Hidden Ravines Drive, Powell, Ohio stated: design changes had to be made to the previously approved medical office structure’s elevations as the result of the need to relocate the MRI machinery, and increasingly prohibitive budgetary issues related to site soil conditions.  The overall design/orientation/square footage of the building will be maintained, and site layout plans will remain as presented. The structures’ elevations will have an overall lower roofline, which may be viewed as being more neighbor friendly. 

 

Dan Levanic, Project Architect, explained the following detailed changes:

  • Lower roof structure with no peak/gable-end;

  • New lower pitched roofline will have a space in the center of the roof that will be the location of the air conditioner units - allowing adequate area around the units to provide service. The mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened by the structure in such a way as to provide virtually no line of sight to the elements;

  • The proposed roof peak will be 8’ shorter than originally presented; 

  • Changes in window placements are proposed as the result of the relocation of the MRI equipment – refer to elevations for specific locations and configurations.

 

Mr. Levanic showed two alternatives for the north and east elevations.

 

Debra Yost, Village Planner, reminded the Planning Commission that the structure’s footprint and function were the same, but there were alternate materials being considered for the main body of the structure.  Mike King, Village Law Director, agreed and stated a PUD required the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to Village Council, if the modifications were considered to rise to the level of changing the essential character of the project as previously approved. He offered further that should Planning Commission find the modifications proposed agreeable and that they did not change the essential character of the project, the developer would be to able to move the project forward without further Council review and approval.

 

Mr. Burriss asked for confirmation that the Planning Commission would be deciding if the modifications were a major or minor change.  Mr. King confirmed that was the case.

 

Mr. Klingler stated he liked the first [originally approved] elevations better, but the proposed changes didn’t change the overall appearance of the structure; the modifications were not a major change.  Mr. Rhodes agreed, stating it was the same footprint and the same shape.

 

Mr. Klingler moved that the Planning Commission agree the modification wasn’t a major change to what was originally approved.  Mr. Rhodes seconded.  Roll Call Vote to acknowledge modifications of Application #2018-108 as being minor:  Klingler (yes), Rhodes (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked if the dormers that were eliminated served a purpose.  Mr. Burriss explained the open roof didn’t require the air flow the dormers provided.  Mr. Levanic added the lack of dormers helped financially and with air flow. 

 

Mr. Klingler asked for confirmation the roof would have the same slope but would be open.  Mr. Levanic agreed, adding it would look like a functioning roof.  Mr. Klingler stated he liked the options shown with more windows and a different window on the north exposure.  Mr. Levanic stated he was willing to incorporate those changes. 

 

Mr. Freudeman added that spending money on windows was a better investment than on dormers.  He requested feedback on the front elevation.

 

Mr. Burriss asked if transom windows could be placed on the north elevation to be like the west entrance, providing consistency. The Planning Commission all liked the idea of punched windows on the front (north elevation) and their being repeated on the west entrance above the main entrance.  Mr. Burriss thought the entry would be stronger with similar windows being added at the top of the primary door – as a transom of sorts.  Mr. Klingler agreed the idea tied the north and west elevations together.  Mr. Freudeman said he was comfortable with the suggestion.

 

Mr. Levanic confirmed the height of the MRI machinery would be 9’ from the roof (from the road elevation plus 6-foot human height), with no pipes any higher. 

 

Mr. Demarest asked about snow removal for the open roof area.  Mr. Levanic stated it would be primary gutters and secondary gutters, per the building code. 

 

Debra Yost stated: the change in budget would not allow a wet pond, but there would be a detention pond.  The change would eliminate an “attractive nuisance”, but would handle storm water.  Mr. Freudeman added he would add plantings and work with the Parks Department to achieve and attractive solution for the nature trail.

 

Mr. Klingler moved the Planning Commission accept the changes with the agreements about punched windows on the north elevation, and the west elevation having a punched transom set of windows that would be over the main entry to the building, along with changes suggested by the architect about having windows in the physical therapy area, as an alternative to original approval.   Seconded by Ms. Hoyt.   Roll Call Vote to approve the Application #2018-108 modification:   Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Rhodes (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)                Application #2018-140, submitted by Granville Township, for the property located at 1833 Lancaster Road.  The request is for review and approval of a new fire station development.  The property is currently zoned Village Gateway District (VGD), and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Casey Curtis, Dan VanNess, and Debra Yost.

 

Discussion:

 

Mike King explained the Granville Township was not legally required to submit an application for the proposed fire station, and the Planning Commission’s roll was not to reject or approve the proposal.  He stated Granville Township needed to make a reasonable effort to comply with Village zoning, and the Planning Commission needed to continue conversation about issues but, more importantly, answer specific questions in the Staff Report on page 25.

 

Mr. Burriss queried the Planning Commission, and it was decided to visit [discuss] the building issues before the questions in the Staff Report. 

 

Mr. Burriss stated:

 

  • The revised drawings being presented incorporated architectural elements that addressed previously voiced concerns over the austerity of the sizable southern elevation by the incorporation of 6-over-6 windows, faux barn doors on the upper level, and a pent roof over the man door;

  • The proposed structure was in excess of the permissible maximum building size, but provides an essential service as it relates to the community’s public safety and welfare.  All agreed to provide the necessary relief of the requirement;

  • The regulation addressing the ten (10) proposed parking spaces located between the front façade and the roadway was relieved as the plan allowed for future improvement of the area – allowing for a possible future road easement along the eastern property line, and the benefit to the community outweighed a distance of 4-foot space.  All agreed providing relief was desirable;

  • The proposed site plan, and the parking as presented was necessary and convenient for both the community as well as those employees serving the community.  All agreed;

  • The radius required for a fire truck to negotiate the turn into the parking lot at the rear of the structure negated the requirement for an internal landscape island.  All agreed relief of this requirement was desirable;

  • Street trees located within the right-of-way could become a hazard for fire department apparatus entering and exiting the property, relief from their specific requirements was relieved;

  • The building had been designed per NEPA standards;

  • Debra Yost stated it was important to screen the parking areas directly behind the structure along the south elevation. She added there should be layered hedging along the southern and eastern parking lot planting areas in order to screen headlights projecting into adjacent properties; shrubs should be 36”-42” in height at maturity;

  • Debra Yost reviewed MS4 requirements regarding wash water: wash water from trucks should be ‘scrubbed’ and filtered before entering the stormwater or sanitary collection system. She stated this concern had been resolved;

  • There was confirmation that the air conditioner, generator and dumpster area screenings would be brick.

  • There were questions about site lighting.  Casey Curtis, Fire Chief, stated the lighting was designed to be at allowable minimums, downward facing as much as possible, and not intrusive.  Debra Yost confirmed there was minimal and appropriate lighting around the project.

 

Mr. Burriss asked, regarding Question #1, if the Planning Commission felt Granville Township had made every effort to comply with zoning restrictions.  All members agreed that yes, the Township had made every effort to comply with the district’s zoning restrictions. 

 

Mr. Klingler moved to proclaim the Granville Planning Commission realized Granville Township had made reasonable efforts to comply with the zoning restrictions.   Ms. Hoyt seconded.  All verbally agreed. 

 

Mr. Burriss stated, regarding Question #2, the proposed location for the fire station was good and would serve the community. 

 

Mr. Klingler moved the Granville Planning Commission found the essential nature of the proposed fire station, the impact of the proposed fire station upon surrounding property, and the alternative locations available for the proposed fire station weigh in favor of the requested deviations from the zoning restrictions.   Ms. Hoyt seconded.  All verbally agreed. 

 

Mr. Burriss asked for confirmation, and Debra Yost agreed, there would be minor landscaping changes and changes to plant sizes.

 

Casey Curtis explained the following changes to the fire station’s exterior:

  • There would be board and batten siding on the “tower” in part, instead of 3 stories of brick;

  • 6-over-6 windows had been added in certain locations as suggested, but the ‘watch windows’ on the tower will remain undivided at the bottom for better visibility;

  • Budget constraints are dictation the need for dimensional shingles on much of the building roof area with some standing seam utilized in specific locations;

  • Windows may be incorporated into the south elevation to allow more light into the adjacent spaces-budget allowing;

 

Dan VanNess stated Granville Township was trying to be conscientious and responsible with taxpayers’ dollars as it relates to roofing materials costs – adding that there may be some opportunity to receive a contribution of asphaltic shingles from Owens Corning.

 

Mr. Burriss expressed appreciation for the overall project and the ability to have input.

 

New Business:

 

a)    Application #2018-147, submitted by Katie and Ken Richards, for the property located at 1586 Newark-Granville Road.   The request is for review and recommendation of approval to Village Council for the rezoning of the property to Suburban Residential District-C (SRD-C).  The property is currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential (Township).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Katie Richards and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion: 

 

Debra Yost stated: the annexation of 1586 Newark-Granville Road has been completed, and the applicant’s property was now required to be rezoned from R-1 Single-family (Township designation) to Suburban Residential District-C (SRD-C), a single-family designation within the Village zoning classifications.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked if a change in zoning would apply to the surrounding area.  Debra Yost stated it would not.  Mike King explained the following:

·        Re-zoning was to be done at the time an individual annexed property was brought into the Village – the surrounding parcels remain located under the jurisdiction of the Township;

·        Should the surrounding property owners elect to annex to the Village, each property could individually apply, or a group of property owners could request to annex at the same time;

·        Village Council requires annexation for water and sewer services.

 

Mr. Demarest asked if Suburban Residential District-C (SRD-C) was the same zoning for the last annexation [referring to the Himes residence annexation].  Mrs. Yost confirmed that it was, yes.

 

Mike King stated: the recommendation would go on the next Village Council agenda.

 

Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Rhodes seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-147:   Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)    Application #2018-148, submitted by Wendy Hollinger, of Phoenix Graphix, on behalf of Knuckleheads, for the property located at 470 South Main Street.  The request is for review and approval of a wall sign.  The property is currently zoned Suburban Business District (SBD).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Sabrina Warner and Debra Yost.

 

Debra Yost summarized the situation:

 

  • Wendy Hollinger had been contracted by Knuckleheads owner as their graphic designer – the project was the creation of a sign that increased the businesses’ visibility;

  • Challenging location: large pine trees screen the business (Certified Station) and the general location of the building situation behind the Certified Station;

  • Existing freestanding tenant panel sign near street appears to be ineffective;

  • Challenges are size of sign and number of colors proposed 

Discussion:

 

Mrs. Yost stated she was challenged to support the proposed design, and staff would like to see the application tabled until something more appropriately fitting the criteria could be proposed.

 

Ms. Hoyt stated the size was overpowering for being located on the building.

 

Mr. Rhodes asked what size the sign could be.  Debra Yost explained the following details:

  • 51 square feet is allowed; proposal is 53 square feet; 

  • Remaining signage [for the shared parcel] is 31 square feet;

  • Existing window signs were installed without a permit;   

  • Reminded of Uberburger’s sign which needed a variance for the number of colors on the sign.

 

Mr. Rhodes suggested sending the application to BZBA.

 

Mr. Burriss didn’t feel the sign was in keeping with what had been supported in Granville and couldn’t approve the sign as proposed.  He added it was visually confusing, and too many things were going on compared to signage approved in the Village.  He was open to working with the applicant, but felt tabling the application would be the most beneficial action so the process could continue.  Debra Yost stated the owner could come back in December if she had a revised plan.

 

 

 

Sabrina Warner, 1618 Loudon Street, defended the urgency of the approval of visible signage and stated the business would have to shut down if approval couldn’t be attained quickly.

 

Mike King, Village Law Director, explained, from a legal perspective, Ms. Warner needed to decrease the number of colors to three so she didn’t have to go in front of the BZBA for a variance.

 

Mr. Demarest asked if the proposed sign could be incorporated if other signs were taken down.  Debra Yost stated it could.  Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner, explained the signage allowed [per page 2 of the Staff Report].  He added the maximum size allowed on the specific property was 33.2 square feet; taking down the current signs would allow a bigger sign; to retain the current signs would mean a smaller proposed sign.

 

Mr. Burriss explained the advantage of tabling the application.  He suggested possibly lighting the sign.  Mike King stated it would have to be lit from outside, as the Village didn’t allow internally lit signs. 

 

Mr. Klingler moved to table the application as submitted.  Mr. Rhodes seconded.  Roll Call Vote to table Application #2018-148:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Rhodes (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                Application #2018-108 (Modified); 2780 Newark-Granville Road (parcel no. 020-043254-00.003); Hplex Solutions; modifications

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-108 (Modified), naming all the standards, and to accept the changes about punched windows.   Ms. Hoyt seconded.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:   Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)                Application #2018-147; 1586 Newark-Granville Road; Katie and Ken Richards; Rezoning

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

Mr. Klingler moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-147.  Ms. Hoyt seconded.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Rhodes (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Work Session:  Ryan Skeldon of Stone Pillar Construction LLC.  Discussion and feedback for preliminary plans for the property located at 442 East Broadway.

 

Discussion:

Pete Foster, architect, 214 East Main Street, Columbus, described the proposed additions on the rear of the existing house, and noted they would act as porches.  He pointed out that the removal of the current back section of the home, and construction of a first-floor addition with a walk-out basement, and the creation of a much-needed garage would create a courtyard for the future homeowner.  He noted the lot topography stepped down from East Broadway to East College Street, and that the front elevation of the structure wouldn’t change.

 

Mr. Burriss expressed concern about the east elevation, saying it seemed/felt remarkably flat.  Mr. Klingler suggested reconfiguring the porch.  Mr. Burriss suggested a porch element which would “marry” the proposed addition and the current house, and would offer a friendlier elevation; it would also be an opportunity to do something with lighting. 

 

Mr. Foster drew the addition of an awning-style pent roof over the east door, which pleased the Planning Commission.    

 

Debra Yost queried the Planning Commission about how they would feel about an application in the near future.  Mr. Burriss stated they seemed to be in favor of the project, and the addition of the element on the east elevation made them more strongly in favor of the project, as they were trying to maintain the character of the Village. 

 

Motion to excuse a member’s absence, if necessary:

Mr. Klingler moved to excuse the absence of Mr. Potaracke from the November 14, 2018 Planning Commission meeting.  Ms. Hoyt seconded.  Roll Call Vote: Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Rhodes (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

November 26, 2018 meeting was cancelled

December 10, 2018 (Last meeting this year)

January 14, 2019

 

Motion for Adjournment:

 

Mr. Klingler moved the meeting be adjourned.   Ms. Hoyt seconded.   All verbally agreed.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Burriss adjourned the meeting at 9:14 pm.

GPC Minutes October 22, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

October 22, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

 

Call to OrderMr. Burriss (Vice-Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members PresentMr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Ms. Hoyt, and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative).

 

Member Absentnone

 

Staff PresentDebra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner

 

Also PresentDan VanNess, Bryn Bird, Casey Curtis, Steve Pyles, Dave Kintner, Diane Kintner, John Klauder, Jerry Miller, Kevin Bennett, Joe Malone, Cash Solarz, Sally Schaadt, Joe Weithman, Kyle Weber, Christian Robertson, Rich Long, Butch Curtis, Rodger Kessler, Ben Barton, Jennifer Lewis, and Jack Lucks.

 

Citizens’ CommentsNone

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                Application #2018-116, submitted by Hplex MOB LLC, on behalf of Ben Ackley, for the review and approval to Village Council to split 13.789 acres of parcel number 020-043254-00.003 located at 2750 Newark-Granville Road in order to create two (2) new lots.  Lot #1 will be a 5.879-acre parcel; Lot #2 will be a 7.91-acre parcel.  The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Burriss swore in Debra Yost, Village Planner, Steven Smedley, Rodger Kessler, and Cash Solarz.

 

Debra Yost, Village Planner, stated: the applicant requested a lot split. 

Cash Solarz, Hplex Solutions, confirmed what the Planning Commission would be voting on.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-116Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

b)                Application #2018-136, submitted by William and Mary Hoekstra, for the property located at 128 South Prospect Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval for the removal of a window to be replaced by a smaller window.  The property is currently zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Burriss swore in Debra Yost, Village Planner, and Steven Smedley.

 

Debra Yost, Village Planner, stated: the Hoekstras wanted to replace a full-size window with a smaller window because of an interior remodel. 

 

Mr. Potaracke  moved to approve the application as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Klingler.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-136Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

c)                 Application #2018-139, submitted by Richard Long, for the property located at 540 West Broadway.  The request is for review and approval of a fence replacement.  The property is currently zoned Suburban Residential District-C (SRD-C), and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Burriss swore in Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner, and Richard Long.

 

Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner, stated:  Mr. Long wanted to replace a white picket fence with a wrought iron fence, similar to that of his neighbor.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Seconded by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-139Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

New Business:

 

a)    Application #2018-140, submitted by Granville Township [Board of Trustees] for the property located at 1833 Lancaster Road.  The request is for review and approval of a new fire station development plan.  The property is currently zoned Village Gateway District (VGD), and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD). 

 

Swearing in of Witnesses:  Mr. Burriss swore in Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner, John Klauder, Jennifer Lewis, Dan VanNess, Casey Curtis, Joe Malone, Kyle Weber, Jack Lucks, Ben Barton, Karl Schneider, and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion: 

Joe Malone (Mull and Weithman), 4525 Indianola Avenue, Columbus, stated:  the location of the proposed Granville Township Fire Station, 500 South Main Street, was currently the Village Service Center.  Mr. Malone described the following details about the proposal:

  • Would save the curb cuts on River Road

  • Would connect the bike path to the property

  • Planned to include a total of thirty (30) parking spaces in different areas for which he requested relief from the Village’s parking regulations

  • An LED, blinking light would be provided at South Main Street as an alert for exiting emergency vehicles

  • Explained the planting of street trees and the issue of visibility on River Road

  • Explained he requested relief from the Village’s landscaping regulations for one (1) tree per ten (10) parking spaces, as this is a tight parking lot and that the inclusion of trees would reduce the number of parking spaces

  • Explained he requested relief from the Village’s regulations on building size, as 19,541 square feet included planning for the future

  • Grading and landscaping plan would include trees, boxwood, and hydrangeas

  • Explained the floor plan for both floors of the building

  • Explained the following materials would be used:

o   Standing seam metal roof

o   White downspouts and trim

o   HardiePanel board and batten siding

o   Brick as part of the siding

o   Overhead doors would include insulated glass panels

o   Double-hung windows with divided lite portion on top

o   White, 6-panel, hollow, metal man-doors

·         The street light in the front would be like the green Granville lights currently used; the lights in the rear would be similar to the green lights on the Verizon property

·         Covered awnings would be used over the man-doors

·         The HVAC unit would be enclosed, possibly with brick

 

Kyle Weber, Kleingers, explained the placement of utilities for the proposed site, as well as storm water management; he stated the location of utilities would mimic their current location

 

Joe Malone showed an animation/exterior tour of the proposed fire station.

 

Debra Yost stated the following:

  • Staff was pleased with the aesthetics of the building

  • She commended the two (2) entities working together in such a unique situation

  • There was a relief issue about additional screening of the building from the public right-of-way

  • She needed added detail about the dumpster enclosure

  • She needed more time to go through all the documents that had been submitted

 

Jack Lucks, 152 North Drexel, Bexley, adjacent property owner, had the following suggestions:  

  • Use white pine for screening instead of arborvitae  

  • Weathervane would be a nice addition

  • 6-over-6 double-hung windows with muntins on bottom as well as on top

  • Add shutters to the two (2) vents on the southern elevation

  • Consider tin for the roof

 

Karl Schneider, 9 Sessions Drive, Bexley, stated:  he was concerned that water might be dumped on the property of Mr. Lucks.  Mr. Malone said no water would be increased to any other property.

 

Ben Barton, (no address given): asked if plans for the fire station would be available online.  Debra Yost stated they could be posted.

 

John Klauder, 30 Old Farm Road, defended the western arborvitae [proposed in his landscaping plan] as not having the snow issue like arborvitae mentioned by Mr. Lucks; he added he wanted Mr. Lucks to have privacy, so could possibly double up the trees.  Mr. Klingler stated a good example of the western arborvitae was those used by the Granville Inn.

 

Jennifer Lewis, Burg Street: asked if the large tree could be eliminated for visibility, and if there would be a light alerting traffic about exiting emergency vehicles. Mr. Malone stated the tree was already gone.  Mr. Potaracke confirmed there would be a flashing light on South Main Street, as well as a flashing sign on the bike path.

 

John Klauder stated he hoped the existing sign [on South Main Street] would be relocated rather than have a new sign put up.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked if drivers would be able to get out of the way of an exiting emergency vehicle amidst congested traffic.  Casey Curtis, Granville Township Fire Chief, explained that widening the bridge on South Main Street would relieve some traffic congestion, and a center lane would be inserted on South Main Street.  He added ODOT’s project was scheduled to be finished October, 2021, and the fire station would be finished before the start of ODOT’s project.

 

Mr. Demarest suggested the use of impervious concrete might be good.

 

Mr. Potaracke requested confirmation that there would be enough room for a truck to exit the fire station with trees slated to be on the southwest corner of the property.  John Klauder said he looked at the situation, and stated the trees would be narrow, allowing about a 50-foot clearance.

 

Mr. Klingler commended the beautiful building plans, as well as all the work and planning that had taken place.  He added he particularly liked the brick, the weathervane, the color of stone, and the trees (he thought they would add privacy).  He also added he preferred 6-over-6 windows, and it might be good to check the warranty for steel versus tin as a standing seam roof.

 

Mr. Burriss asked about the sequence for fire fighters returning to the fire station.  Casey Curtis explained the sequence:  firefighters would clean up before going into the living quarters, being aware of the cancer-causing threat of substances having been used.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to table the application for further review, and to act on it at a later Planning Commission meeting.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  Roll Call Vote to table Application #2018-140:  Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

October 27, 2018 (GPC & BZBA Gathering at Bryn Du Mansion’s Laundry House, 9:00am until noon)

November 13, 2018 (Tuesday) (Mr. Potaracke would not be in attendance)

November 26, 2018 – Meeting was cancelled due to advanced notice of lack of a quorum

December 10, 2018 (Last meeting for 2018)

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Mr. Potaracke moved the meeting be adjourned.   Mr. Klingler seconded.   All verbally agreed.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Burriss adjourned the meeting at 7:50 pm.

GPC Minutes October 8, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

October 8, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to OrderMr. Burriss (Vice Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members Present Mr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Ms. Hoyt, Mr. Young (ex-officio member, GEVSD, non-voting representative), and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative).

 

Member Absentnone

 

Staff PresentSteven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner

 

Also PresentSteve Pyles, Rusty Fletcher, John Noblick, and Andy Franks

 

Citizens’ CommentsNone

 

New Business:

 

a)                Application #2018-131, submitted by John Noblick, for the property located at 1197 Newark-Granville Road.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a major renovation to the existing home.  The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Rusty Fletcher, John Noblick and Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner.

 

Discussion:

Rusty Fletcher, 1194 Newark-Granville Road, representing Carol Kelly, owner of the property at 1197 Newark-Granville Road, stated the following information about the request:

·        Wanted to expand the house but keep the charm 

·        Planned to take down the garage and replace it with a master suite

·        Planned to add a two-car garage with gable ends and standing seam roof, and connect it to the house via an arbor

·        Materials would suit the age of the house (board and batten)

·        Roof would be a combination of standing seam and dimensional shingles

·        Windows would be simulated divided light 

 

Ms. Hoyt and Mr. Klingler both applauded the way the architecture was being maintained, as well as the charm of the property.

 

Mr. Fletcher confirmed the fact that none of the original structure would come down; the only part that would come down would be what was added in the 1980’s.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Seconded by Mr. Potaracke.   Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-131Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

b)                Application #2018-132, submitted by Aimee Parsley-White, for the property located at 338 North Pearl Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the removal of a fixed glass side panel and two (2) doors.   The property is currently zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Aimee Parsley-White and Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner.

 

Discussion: 

Steven Smedley stated the homeowners wanted to remove the existing windowed door and fixed glass side panel to gain more privacy since you can see right into the home from their neighbor’s.  He explained that siding that matches the existing siding will be used to replace what is removed.  There were no questions or comments from the Planning Commission.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-132, Chapter 1159, Village Residential District; and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt this renovation in this location and situation would contribute to the improvement of the neighborhood and neighbor relations.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the proposed changes would contribute to the continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, the renovation will protect the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-132:  Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)                 Application #2018-133, submitted by Andy Franks, for the property located at 121 South Prospect Street.  The request is for review and approval of a sidewalk sign.  The property is currently zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Burriss swore in Andy Franks and Steven Smedley, Assistant Village Planner.

 

Discussion:

Andy Franks, 210 East Maple Street, stated he wanted to put a sidewalk sign on the property for the purpose of advertising bands and to give a little more information about the business located at 121 South Prospect Street.  He summarized that he had been previously informed that he already had the maximum number of signs, and had the option of paying $250 and applying to the BZBA for a variance, or replacing one of the signs with the sidewalk sign.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked if it would be possible to combine signs already on the property.   Steven Smedley stated they could consolidate signs, but the allowed number of signs in the Business District was four (4). 

 

Andy Franks stated he probably wouldn’t want to pursue a variance, so would probably pursue the consolidation of signs, as the sidewalk sign would only be used rarely.

 

Mr. Burriss confirmed to Mr. Franks he would need to secure the sidewalk sign indoors when the business was not open.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-133, Chapter 1159, Village Business District (VBD); Chapter 1189, Signs; and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the sign is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt the sign in this location and situation would contribute to the improvement of the historical character of the Village District.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, the sign contributes to the vitality of an existing business and will contribute to the continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, the sign enhances the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted, with the conditions of (1) removal of one of the current signs or getting a variance, and (2) the securing of the sidewalk sign indoors when the business was not open.   Ms. Hoyt seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-133:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                Application #2018-131; 1147 Newark-Granville Road; Carol Kelly; Major Renovation

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

Mr. Klingler moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-131.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:   Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)                Application #2018-132; 338; North Pearl Street; Aimee Parsley-White; Removal of Doors

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.           Mr. Klingler moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-132.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)                 Application #2018-133; 121 South Prospect Street; Andy Franks; Sidewalk Sign

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.           Mr. Klingler moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-133.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from September 10, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the minutes from the September 10, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Potaracke seconded.  Roll Call Vote: Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from September 18, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the minutes from the September 18, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote: Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Burriss (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

October 22, 2018

October 237, 2018 (Tentative GPC & BZBA Gathering)

November 13, 2018

November 26, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Mr. Potaracke moved the meeting be adjourned.  Mr. Klingler seconded.   All verbally agreed.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Burriss adjourned the meeting at 7:19 pm.

GPC Minutes September 24, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 24, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to OrderMr. Wilken (Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members PresentMr. Wilken, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Ms. Hoyt, and Mr. Young (ex-officio member, GEVSD, non-voting representative).

 

Member AbsentMr. Burriss

 

Staff PresentDebra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Mike King, Village Law Director

 

Also PresentSteven Smedley (Assistant Village Planner), Joe Malone (Mull and Weithman), Dan VanNess (Granville Township Trustee), and Philip Johnson (Robertson Construction).

 

Citizens’ CommentsNone

 

New Business:

 

a)                Application #2018-127, submitted by Peter Russell, for the property located at 198 Welsh Hills Road.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the replacement of the existing shingle roof with a standing seam metal roof and the addition of a skylight and window.  The property is currently zoned Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A), and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion: 

Debra Yost, Village Planner, stated: she was representing Peter Russell, as he lived near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  She added he was putting in a sky light and window, and replacing his shingle roof with a standing-seam roof.

 

Mr. Klingler and Ms. Hoyt said it was a nice improvement to the existing farm structure, especially the standing-seam roof.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr Klingler seconded.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-127:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)    Application #2018-127; 198 Welsh Hills Road; Peter Russell; Roof Replacement and Window Installations

      Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

      Mr. Klingler moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-127.  Ms.

      Hoyt seconded.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:   Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Work Session:  Granville Township Board of Trustees:  Fire Department Station Preliminary Plan Discussion:  Discussion and feedback for a preliminary site plan for the property located at 1833 South Main Street, currently owned by the Village of Granville, and leased by Granville Township.  The proposed plan would illustrate a fire station use.

 

Joe Malone, Mull and Weithman, stated the following details related to the proposed fire station:

  • The building footplate will be approximately 18,700 square feet;

  • There will be five (5) pull-through (truck/equipment) bays, staff office space, a triage room, and a small conference room for trustees use;

  • Located at 1833 South Main Street on two-plus acres;

  • Maintain Old River Road alignment, with direct access to South Main Street;

  • Solar-powered LED lights for responding apparatus to alert exit of fire truck;

  • Extend bike path to main entrance (from area just south of pedestrian bridge); planning to have bike racks near front door;

  • Trying to comply with setbacks on property and meet programmatic needs;

  • Site coverage would be approximately 63.1%, but could be 55.5% if necessary; may need to ask for relief from district requirement of 60% max;

  • Three (3) parking areas with majority of parking in rear; may need to ask for relief; total number of parking spaces planned well under the maximum 75 permitted;

  • May need to ask for relief related to required landscaping islands which were to be one (island) per ten parking spaces;

  • Planned to reduce impervious surfaces to greatest extent possible;

  • John Klauder will be working on landscaping plan;

  • Will be working on a lighting plan; Chief Curtis has requested that the site to be as dark as possible – while addressing health and safety requirements;

  • Proposed the current monument sign naming businesses on Old River Road be relocated

 

Joe Malone, Architect, shared preliminary sketch elevations of the fire station with the following details:

  • Metal roof, brick base, tower for added height and visual appeal, white metal siding;

  • Possible use of metal board-and-batten siding;    

  • Possible use of shingles over the main body of the structure in conjunction with select areas of standing-seam metal roof. 

Mr. Klingler voiced approval of the preliminary sketch for the sake of antiquity.  Ms. Hoyt was also impressed.

 

Other information gleaned from questions asked by Planning Commission members:

  • Vehicles would exit from the front of the fire station onto South Main Street;

  • Location is the present site of the Village Service Department on Main Street, just west of Hudson Lake;

  • (Per Mike King, Village Law Director) Lot just south of the proposed fire station is owned by Jack Lucks; most recent proposal for his property was for a medical office building or small theater; neither would interfere with the proposed fire station;

  • Village had requested the design reserve enough area paralleling the east property line for a future connective road

  • (Per Mike King) Property behind the proposed fire station was owned by Roger Kessler who might develop it; the right-of-way was for future development

  • Space was planned for ten firefighters to sleep on the second floor, and room for two firefighterds to sleep on the first floor 

  • (per Dan VanNess) Runs were currently at 2200 runs per year; the proposed building was designed to handle 4000 runs per year

  • The top area of the tower would not be functional

  • John Klauder would be designing the landscaping plan to be submitted October 22, 2018

 

Mr. Wilken applauded the three-dimensional, birds-eye view of the facility and voiced his preference of shiplap siding for the building rather than board-and-batten; suggested Hardiplank or a metal product.  He asked if the capacity of the proposed fire station would serve the service area.  Dan VanNess defended the proposal based on statistics for runs and mutual aid calls.

 

Mr. Wilken suggested moving the fire station closer to Old River Road and moving the parking elsewhere, in order to create a left-turn lane from South Main Street.  Mike King stated Village Council had determined the existence of a legal issue which would not allow the left-turn lane.  Mr. Wilken stood up and resigned from the Planning Commission, effective immediately, as he felt Village Council wanted to act as the Planning Commission; he said he would submit his resignation in writing.  Mike King continued to explain the legal issue, and stated Village Council was not subverting the Planning Commission’s role.  Mr. VanNess asked for clarification as to how moving the building would make room for a left-turn lane, as he said it appeared the bridge would have to be rebuilt.

 

Mr. Malone stated there would be a radio-activated, flashing signal which would be triggered from within the fire station; he added the five bays would be longer and wider than those currently used.  Mr. VanNess added trucks would be able to activate the signal; Township trustees had looked at properties, and the proposed property was the only real choice for the location of the fire station.

 

Mr. Klingler asked about the pitch of the roof on the tower portion of the proposed fire station.   Mr. Malone stated it was a 4:12 pitch, and was added as an aesthetic variation from the other roof line.  Mr. Klingler suggested adding a fire-station-related weather vane to the top of the tower, as it was a focal point of the building.

 

Regarding the timing of breaking ground, the current Village Service Center needed to be demolished first, then the Township Fire Station would be started; it was hoped the new building would be finished by July, 2020.  Mike King explained the situation that existed when two government entities worked together; he hoped it would be a collaborative effort. 

 

Mr. Potaracke volunteered to be the facilitator for the remainder of the meeting.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked if any information had been received about the walking trail proposed for the Hplex Solutions project.  Mike King stated it would be installed, and added Hplex Solutions would present to Village Council on October 3, 2018, and possibly two meetings after that.  Mr. King described particulars during the Village Council meeting, but stated there had been no hang-ups or negative public comments.

 

Motion to excuse a member’s absence, if necessary:

Mr. Klingler moved to excuse the absence of Mr. Burriss from the September 24, 2018 Planning Commission meeting.  Ms. Hoyt seconded.  Roll Call Vote: Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), and Klingler (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

October 8, 2018

October 22, 2018

October 27, 2018 (Tentative GPC & BZBA Gathering)

November 13, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Ms. Hoyt moved the meeting be adjourned.   Motion passed.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Potaracke adjourned the meeting at 7:55 pm.

GPC Minutes Special Meeting September 18, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 18, 2018

Special Meeting

7:00pm

Minutes

 

Call to OrderMr. Wilken (Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members PresentMr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Ms. Hoyt, and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative).

 

Member AbsentNone

 

Staff PresentDebra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Mike King, Village Law Director

 

Also PresentSteve Pyles, Steven Smedley, Ed Westerheide, Michael Culler, Steve Gagliardi, Denny Freudeman, and Ben Ackley

 

Citizens’ CommentsNone

 

New Business:

 

Application #2018-108, submitted by Hplex Solutions, (dba Hplex Granville MOB, LLC) for the 13.789-acre property located at 2780 Newark-Granville Road (parcel no. 020-043254-00.003), currently owned by Ben and Steve Ackley as Northwest Wind LLC, an Ackley Company. The request is for review and recommendation of approval to Village Council of a Preliminary Development Plan for the property, and Preliminary Plat Review for Phase 1. The property is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the front-most portion of the property is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD). This will be the 2nd public hearing regarding this application.

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Denny Freudeman, six others who did not speak, and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion:

Denny Freudeman, 65 Hidden Ravine Drive, Powell, Ohio, stated the following points:

  • Explained the realignment of the proposed walking path away from the parking areas;

  • Showed the final development plan for the site with HVAC unit and dumpster;

  • Recapped the 40% lot coverage and parking reduction deviation requests;

  • Path would be installed in park by Hplex should the Licking County Park District be unable to collaborate on the project. LCPD Board of Directors to meet September 19th to discuss proposed project;

  • The traffic study would be finished the week of September 24, 2018; advance conversations indicated nothing out of the ordinary.

 

 

Mr. Wilkin mentioned a concern that there might be a second entrance; Mr. Freudeman said they had no intention of creating a second entrance.

 

Debra Yost, Village Planner, stated: Denny Freudeman and his design and engineering team, have addressed all planning aspects in a timely manner and been most cooperative with staff throughout the review processes; she urged the Planning Commission to review all materials provided and note any conditions for approval.  She added that Planning Commissions three options related to the application are the following:  approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval.  She added that she and Mike King, Village Law Director, would draft the required letter of recommendation of approval to Village Council. – should that be their determination.

 

Mr. Klingler stated that while he was not a fan of the chosen architecture, he commended Hplex on proposing a business use that would benefit Granville’s tax base.  He added he would have preferred to see a standing-seam roof on the structure, but appreciated their amending plans to address the previously discussed issues, for example the pathway routing.  He also said he understood the project would be located outside the historic downtown district, and admitted the [economic and community] benefits of the project outweighed his preference for a different architectural style.  Mr. Freudeman stated he would have liked to have a standing-seam roof, but other costly issues prohibited that as an option [site work related costs have increased as the result of the hydrologic soils structure].

 

Councilmember Phil Demarest asked if Hplex had conducted follow-up conversations with the resident whose property was directly across the road from the proposed entrance (Chad Gummer at 2825 Newark-Granville Road), especially concerning the traffic study.  Mr. Freudeman stated that that resident hadn’t attended any project related meetings since the first GPC meeting (Introduction on August 20th, 2018), and that when constructed, visitors exiting medical office structure driveway will yield to that residential driveway naturally.  Mr. Demarest recommended they reach out to the resident again.

 

Mr. Potaracke stated that a condition of approval should be that the traffic study findings being within reason.  Mike King stated approval should also be based on a revised and suitable landscape plan being submitted to staff and the Tree and Landscape Commission, and a favorable review by Bird and Bull of engineering aspects of the project.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted, with the conditions previously mentioned by Mike King.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.   Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-108:  Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes) Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Mike King confirmed that the recommendation would go before Village Council at the October 3, 2018 meeting.  He also said he would prepare a letter of recommendation to Village Council, circulate it, and transmit it to Village Council. 

 

Meeting Announcements:

September 24, 2018

October 8, 2018

October 22, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Mr. Potaracke moved the meeting be adjourned.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.   All verbally approved.  Motion passed.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 7:16 pm.

GPC Minutes September 10, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

September 10, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

Call to OrderMr. Wilken (Chair) called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Members Present:  Mr. Burriss, Ms. Hoyt, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Wilken and Mr. Young (GEVSD ex-officio member).

 

Member AbsentMr. Klingler and Mr. Demarest (Village Council ex-officio member)

 

Staff PresentDebra Walker Yost, Planner; Steven Smedley, Assistant Planner; Mike King, Law Director

 

Also PresentChris Fleming, Dan Livanec, Sean P. Bice, Don Hostetter, Terrie Hostetter, Ben Ackley, Susan Gilhauser, Steve Pyles, Rose Wingert, Susan Ryan, and Denny Freudeman.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Old Business:

 

a)                  Application #2018-108, continuation of application submitted by Hplex Solutions, (dba Hplex Granville MOB, LLC) for the 13.789-acre property located at 2780 Newark-Granville Road (parcel no. 020-043524-00.003), currently owned by Ben and Steve Ackley as Northwest Wind LLC, an Ackley Company.  The request is for review and recommendation of approval to Village Council of a Preliminary Development Plan for the property and a Preliminary Plat Review for Phase 1.  The property is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) with the front-most portion of the property located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Discussion:

Denny Freudeman, Hplex Solutions, 65 Hidden Ravines Drive, Suite 100, Powell, Ohio, stated the following review of details about the proposal:

  • 20,000 square foot medical office building on the site;

  • Property to be purchased, then later a lot split which would result on two lots;

  • $5.3M project;

  • Phase 1 medical office building on Lot 1, facing west;

  • Allowing access to Lot 2, giving frontage to Lot 2 for a lot split, with a permanent cross access easement to Lot 2;

  • Patient parking in front of the building (west side of structure), staff parking in rear (east side of structure); parking spaces 5/1000 square feet or 1/200 square feet (current best practice);

  • Maintain a portion of the hill on the east side;

  • Add parking in the rear with a dedicated nature walkway to be leased to Licking County Park District;

  • Retention pond to manage on-site stormwater detention;

  • Walking path on the west side of property originating at Newark-Granville Road turning south into the property and circling around lower portion of the property;

  • Traffic study is underway and is to be completed by September 25, 2018; initial results indicate no warrant for a westbound left turn lane from Newark-Granville Road.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)         Application #2018-120, submitted by Brian Crumley, on behalf of Sonny’s on Broadway, for property located at 116 East Broadway.  The request is for review and approval of the installation of an awning sign to the property.   The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-120:  Burriss (yes); Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes) and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

b)                 Application #2018-124, submitted by Tim Lyle, on behalf of Denison University, for property located at 135 North Main Street.  The request is for review and approval of the front doors and locks for both of the apartments.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-124:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes); Burriss (yes); and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-125, submitted by Lisa Cholewa, on behalf of Eat Up, for property located at 138 East Broadway.  The request is for review and approval of the installation of a suspended sign.  The property is currently zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-125:  Potaracke (yes); Burriss (yes); Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

d)         Application #2018-126, submitted by Lisa Cholewa, on behalf of Eat Up, for property located at 138 East Broadway.  The request is for review and approval of a sidewalk sign.  The property is currently zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-125:  Burriss (yes); Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes); and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

New Business:

 

a)        Application #2018-118, submitted by Jeremy King for the property located at 316 Welsh Hills Road.   The request is for review and approval of the expansion of the existing porch and the back deck.  The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Susan King and Debra Yost.

 

Discussion: 

Susan King, 316 Welsh Hills Road, stated the existing porch addition on the southern side of their home has foundation issues, and that through some investigation, they’ve determined that now may the time to take the addition down to the ground and rebuild. The new enclosed porch area will only be slightly larger. Additionally, the existing uncovered deck area will be enlarged slightly to align with the new porch lines. Materials will match the main body of the house.

 

Planner Yost added that this application was in front of the Commission as the property is located within the TCOD. She further added that she appreciates the care and massing of the newly remodeled spaces and feels the changes will be an asset to the home.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-118, Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A), and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt the expansion would contribute to an upgrading of the neighborhood.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, as above in item b, this renovation will contribute to the upgrading and continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation will protect and upgrade the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-118:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)         Application #2018-123, submitted by Pamela Clements for the property located at 341 East College Street.   The request is for review and approval of landscape ad improvement projects to the rear yard.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Debra Yost.

 

Discussion:

Planner Yost stated that Ms. Clements had recently invested in a new rear addition to this historic home, and now she was turning her attention to the rear yard improvements she hopes to make over the next year or two. Phase 1 of the improvements will include a picket fence with gate paralleling the driveway, stepping stones within the space the picket fence creates, a privacy fence at 6 feet in height that will extend from the southwest corner of the garage westward about 8 feet. The fence will be designed to look like an extension of the garage wall, and will have a top cap to shed water.

 

Commissioners asked about the “finished side faces out” guideline in this case. Planner Yost indicated that the fence could be conditioned on the fact that the fence is effectively double-sided. The Commissioners felt that was an agreeable solution.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-123, Chapter 1159, Village Residential District (VRD), and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the

Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt the renovation would contribute to an upgrading of the neighborhood.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, as above in item b, this renovation will contribute to the upgrading and continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that the renovation will protect and upgrade the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-123:  Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-118; 316 Welsh Hills Road; Jeremy King; Small Addition

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

 

Mr. Potaracke moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-118.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.   Roll call vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Burriss (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

 

b)         Application #2018-123; 341 East College Street; Pamela Clements; Landscaping & Improvement Projects

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.           

 

Mr. Potaracke moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-123.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to excuse a member’s absence.

Mr. Burriss moved to excuse the absence of Mr. Klingler.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from August 27, 2018 Planning Commission meeting:

The minutes were not submitted, so the vote was postponed until the September 24, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

Meeting Announcements:

September 24, 2018

October 8, 2018

October 22, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Mr. Potaracke moved the meeting be adjourned.   Second by Mr. Burriss. Motion approved 4-0.   Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 7:50 pm.

GPC Minutes Special Meeting August 20, 2018

 

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

Special Meeting

August 20, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, and Ms. Hoyt.

 

Member Absent:  None

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Chris Fleming, Dan Livanec, Sean P. Bice, Don Hostetter, Terrie Hostetter, Ben Ackley, Susan Gilhauser, Steve Pyles, Rose Wingert, Susan Ryan, and Denny Freudeman.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None

 

New Business:

 

a)                  Application #2018-108, Introduction of an application submitted by Hplex Solutions, (dba Hplex Granville MOB, LLC) for the 13.789-acre property located at 2780 Newark-Granville Road (parcel no. 020-043524-00.003), currently owned by Ben and Steve Ackley as Northwest Wind LLC, an Ackley Company.  The request is for review and recommendation of approval to Village Council of a Preliminary Development Plan for the property, and Preliminary Plat Review for Phase 1.  The property is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the front-most portion of the property is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Discussion:

Denny Freudeman, Hplex Solutions, 65 Hidden Ravines Drive, Suite 100, Powell, Ohio, stated the following review of details about the proposal:

  • 20,000 square foot building on the site
  • Would be buying the property, then do a lot split
  • Would be a $5.3M project
  • Building would be on Lot 1, front facing west 
  • Would allow access to Lot 2, giving frontage to Lot 2 for a lot split, with a permanent easement to Lot 2
  • Patient parking would be in front of the building, staff parking would be in the rear; parking spaces would be 5/1000 square feet
  • Would keep some of the hill on the east side
  • Would have added parking in the rear dedicated to the natural walkway which they would build and lease to Newark Parks and Recreation
  • Would build a retention pond to reduce bad soil
  • Would build a walking path on the west side
  • Traffic study was underway, and would be completed by September 25, 2018; said there was no warrant for a left-turn lane from Newark-Granville Road

 

Mr. Wilken asked how the slope from Newark-Granville Road would be handled.

Dan Levanic, Project Architect, Trinity Architecture, 827 Yard Street, Columbus, Ohio, stated:  the majority of the slope would happen within the first 100’ of the lot; he added the building would be lower than the road by 13’.  He showed the preliminary exterior of the proposed building, and noted the following details:

  • Greek Revival elements
  • Pilasters
  • Mix of store-front for therapy area and gym space
  • Dormers included
  • Simple, symmetrical Granville architecture 
  • Gable roof on south elevation with pediment
  • Brick water table maintained around perimeter of building
  • Windows incorporated where possible 

 

Mr. Klingler asked what the Greek Revival elements were, and if a standing-seam roof would be used.  Mr. Levanic stated Greek Revival had been mixed with a contemporary office building.  He added a dimensional shingle would probably be used, but it might be standing-seam; pilasters would be a Greek Revival element as well as materials of brick, stone, and masonry.

 

Ms. Hoyt talked favorably about the proposed project, and stated it would have the least impact to the community for the following reasons: 

  • No negative influence on the school population, but revenue would benefit the schools
  • It shouldn’t produce traffic influence within the Village, as most would be on Route 16 and/or Thornwood Crossing
  • The 13.7 acres with the building comprising a small percentage of the total acreage would leave more green space and vegetation  
  • A walking trail would be a positive addition 

Ms. Hoyt added she was in favor of this type of project, and confirmed architectural details would certainly be discussed later. 

 

Mr. Klingler dittoed Ms. Hoyt’s points, but added he didn’t agree the project was Granville architecture, as was originally described; he added the positive points outweighed that concern.  He liked the nice structure and the redesign of the setting. 

 

Mr. Wilken shared his concern about the lot split, as it would be a relatively small space for a second building.  He also stated the second building should be complimentary to first building, rather than something completely different.  Mr. Freudeman stated the second lot wouldn’t be owned by Hplex; they were looking for another health care owner; he agreed the second building should look like the first building.  Ben Ackley, current owner of the property, agreed that cohesive architecture should happen.

 

Mr. Wilken reiterated he was concerned with the slope.  Chris Fleming, Project Engineer, KORDA/NEMETH Engineering, Inc., described the plan of coming off Newark-Granville Road on a steep slope, taking the grade down around the building with the first level built into the hillside, and parking would be in the low area.  He added the following details:

  • A basin would sit on top of the hill
  • Would add dirt to create a pond 
  • Discharge would go into a defined area 
  • Trees on the hillside would remain
  • Would try to save trees by the road, but he was concerned they would block views for a safe exit from the property. 

Mr. Wilken asked if he would anticipate a flat area by the road.  Mr. Fleming confirmed that it would likely be flat for about 20’ into the property. 

 

Mr. Burriss applauded the change of the building on the site plan, as well as the green space.  He asked if there was a possibility of putting more tree lawn between the walking path and the parking lot. He suggested adding a few more trees to make a more pleasant space to walk.  Mr. Fleming said he was meeting Code with the parking lots, and didn’t want to lose that.  Mr. Burriss suggested vacating a couple of parking spaces to make a connection to the building, adding the west parking lot was for patients, and suggested a connection would reinforce the architecture of the building; he liked an architectural element that would say “entry”.  Mr. Freudeman stated Newark Parks and Recreation would build the pathway per an agreement; most would probably not be paved; it might happen a year after the opening of the building.  Mr. Burriss confirmed an 8’ pathway in the right-of-way, and stated he liked reinforcing an entrance with landscaping.  Debra Yost, Village Planner, stated the pathway could be crushed stone, and echoed favor of a strong visual connection statement. 

 

Mr. Wilken addressed signage at the entrance to advertise the entrance to the building, as well as the issue of deliveries. Mr. Freudeman said they would likely erect a monument sign. Mrs. Yost added it would be uplit.  Mr. Freudeman confirmed patient access would be on the west side, deliveries would happen on the east side. 

 

Mr. Potaracke addressed lighting of the parking lot and pathway, and asked how the impact of lighting on neighbors would be lessened.  Mrs. Yost mentioned lighting standards in Granville, and said she would like to see a less-is-more approach.  Mr. Potaracke asked who would be responsible to light the walking path.  Mr. Freudeman anticipated it would not be lit, and would prefer it not be used at night.  Mr. Potaracke suggested having a gate so runners/walkers would be discouraged from walking there in the dark.

 

Mrs. Yost addressed the review process that had transpired over the last week: 

  • Hplex needed a general development plan; Hplex was required to have preliminary plat drawings 
  • She was in support of the reduction of parking spaces
  • The Tree and Landscape Commission would provide comments; she wanted Hplex to save the healthy trees by the road
  • With the slope coming from 2780 Newark-Granville Road, she suggested building a retaining wall to help with the trees
  • Regarding Stopping Sight Distance, the plan showed new trees would be planted
  • A traffic study would be forthcoming after schools were back in session
  • The Phase 1 Environmental Study was being done
  • She suggested having a sidewalk surround the structure, as well as adding one on the east side of the structure
  • Screening from other properties would be required
  • A lighting plan would be needed
  • Off-street parking/loading would require three spaces 
  • Service areas would need to be screened
  • Engineering review would be forthcoming

 

Sean Bice, 2845 Newark-Granville Road stated: he had no problem with the project, but emphasized traffic would be impacted; he hoped the Village would extend the bike path to the Village limit.  Mrs. Yost said the Village was trying to extend the bike path.  Mr. Bice was also concerned about the speed of traffic at the top of the hill approaching the traffic light at Thornwood Crossing, and added it would be a problem if people were turning left into the proposed property.  Mr. Wilken acknowledged the concern, and said communication had happened with the Granville Police Department about strong enforcement.  Steve Pyles, Village Manager, said he asked for speed data to be taken in that area.

 

Terrie Hostetter, 19 Victoria Drive, objected to not having a left-turn lane at the entrance to the proposed property, and requested that be rethought. 

 

Mr. Wilken asked when questions and concerns would likely be answered.  Mr. Freudeman estimated in one or two weeks.

 

Mrs. Yost mentioned the new PUD sign at the proposed location, and added the proposal might again be discussed at the August 27, 2018 meeting.

 

Meeting Announcements:

August 27, 2018

September 10, 2018

September 24, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Mr. Potaracke moved the meeting be adjourned.   Mr. Burriss seconded.   All verbally approved.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 8:02 pm.

GPC Minutes August 13, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

August 13, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler, Ms. Hoyt, and Mr. Young (ex-officio member, GEVSD, non-voting representative).

 

Members Absent:  Mr. Potaracke and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative)

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Daniel DiYanni, Diane DiYanni, Bruce Westall, Lisa Westall, Todd Parker, Chuck Davis, and Kim Keethler Ball.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application #2018-102, submitted by Leah Swan, for the property located at 341 North Granger Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a four-foot (4’) high picket fence around the rear yard, and the addition of window boxes to the structure.   The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-102Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

b)                 Application #2018-104, submitted by Bruce and Lisa Westall, for the property located at 231 East Maple Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of eleven (11) replacement windows, and the rebuilding of a deck/balcony on the rear of the house.  The deck will be enlarged from five point five (5.5’) feet deep by eight (8’) feet wide to ten (10’) feet deep by twelve (12’) feet wide.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-104:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-105, submitted by Linda Ailes, for the property located at 352 North Pearl Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of a three-foot (3’) picket fence with one (1) gate along the north and east sides of the rear yard.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-105:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

New Business:

 

a)        Application #2018-100, submitted by Jill Waddell of DaNite Signs, on behalf of CVS, for the property located at 200 East Broadway.   The request is for architectural review and approval of the replacement of the current freestanding sign faces.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Wilken reported the applicant had requested the request be tabled until the August 27, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

b)         Application #2018-103, submitted by Daniel DiYanni, for the property located at 351 North Granger Street.   The request is for architectural review and approval of a one-and-a-half story addition with a full basement to the existing home, and construction of a new freestanding/detached garage in the rear yard.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Daniel DiYanni and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion:

Daniel DiYanni, 351 North Granger Street, showed illustrations of the proposed views of his property, including the following details: 

  • The side facing Spellman Street would become the focus of the home
  • He would  be adding an extra story and a full basement to the western portion of the house  
  • He would be reusing existing windows as much as possible
  • The side facing neighbors to the south would not receive much change
  • He would be adding an “eyebrow” over the second-story window on the portion facing Granger Street  
  • He explained details about the demolition as well as the proposed garage and courtyard, stating the garage doors would not face the street

 

Ms. Hoyt applauded the renovation, and asked what would be done with the current siding.  Mr. DiYanni stated his plan was to remove it, and replace it with horizontal siding. 

 

Mr. Klingler stated it was the best rendition he had seen, and asked if the new windows would be simulated divided light.  Mr. DiYanni said they would probably have dividers between the glass for maintenance and energy reasons.  He added he originally wanted a 3-car garage, but reduced it to a 2-car garage to save trees. 

 

Mr. Burriss stated the information he saw didn’t describe the rear porch, but he eliminated his concern because he liked the proposal.

 

Mr. Wilken Second comments already made.   He asked if there were any concerns about downspouts.   Mr. DiYanni stated he would be putting new aluminum downspouts on the house, and the driveway would be concrete.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-103, Chapter 1159, Village Residential District (VRD); and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD),

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated True, that the renovation is stylistically very consistent and compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated True, that he felt the renovation will contribute to an upgrading of the neighborhood, the details were historically correct, and he appreciated the porch addition.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated True that, as above in item b, this renovation will contribute to the upgrading and continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated True, that the renovation will protect and upgrade the physical surroundings in which past generations lived, and the proposal will actually be more historically correct than the original house.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Burriss Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-103:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

d)                 Application #2018-106, submitted by Todd Parker of F5 Design/Architecture, Inc., on behalf of David and Kim Ball, for the property located at 112 Chapin Place.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a proposed carport that will be roughly 49% of the existing structure’s square footage.  The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Todd Parker and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion:

 

 

Todd Parker, 508 West College Street, stated the following details about the property:

  • 112 Chapin Place was at the northwest part of the cul-de-sac 
  • The house was 40’ x 40’
  • The roof was larger than the house and was supported by stone piers 

He described where the 2-car carport would be as well as the small storage area for lawn mowers, etc.   

He provided the following details about the proposal:

  • Other homes in the area had carports 
  • Materials would mimic those of the existing structure, not matching exactly
  • Cement board would be used
  • Fascias would match those on the house
  • Storage area structure would match the house’s brown color
  • The carport roof  would be black, but wouldn’t be visible from the street 
  • He would be adding windows to the house  
  • A swimming pool would be added in the future

 

Mr. Wilken stated the connection of the house and carport looked different from the front as compared with the rear view.  Mr. Parker stated it was because of the design of the house, and described his answer using a large illustration.  Mr. Wilken had a concern about snow accumulation on the roof, and wondered if there should be a separation in the roof.   Mr. Parker said the residents wanted to be able to walk from the house to the carport, and he would be sorting through details soon; he added there was enough fall for drainage purposes.

 

Mr. Klingler suggested using a heat strip on the roof, and added he liked the design of the project as well as the setting of the property.  Mr. Parker stated a heat strip could be used.

 

Mr. Burriss stated the proposed addition could have been there originally and was in keeping with the house and the neighborhood. 

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-106, Chapter 1163, Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A); and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD),

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Burriss stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Burriss stated True, that he felt the renovation will contribute to an upgrading of the neighborhood, and even though the property is modern, it compliments the existing structure.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Burriss stated True that, as above in item b, this renovation will contribute to the upgrading and continuing vitality of the District.

 

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Burriss stated True, that the renovation will protect and upgrade the physical surroundings in which past generations lived, and complimented the proposal as being seamless.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-103:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-100;  200 East Broadway ; Jill Waddell of DaNite Signs on behalf of CVS; Freestanding Sign Re-facing.

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

There were no Findings of Fact as the application was tabled until the August 27, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

b)         Application #2018-103; 351 North Granger Street; Daniel DiYanni; Major Renovation and New Garage Structure.

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.           Mr. Burriss moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-1030.  Mr. Klingler Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)         Application #2018-106; 112 Chapin Place; Todd Parker of F5 Design/Architecture on behalf of David and Kim Ball; Carport Addition.

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.           Mr. Burriss moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-106.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Discussion Points:  GPC and BZBA Late Fall Retreat

Mr. Wilken suggested several fall dates for the joint retreat for the Planning Commission and the BZBA.  It was determined the date of October 27, 2018 might be best, but he would confirm that date at an upcoming meeting.

 

Motion to excuse a member’s absence, if necessary:

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the absence of Mr. Potaracke from the August 13, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Klingler Second.  All verbally approved.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from July 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the minutes from the July 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Klingler Second.  All verbally approved.  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Meeting Announcements:

August 20, 2018 (Special Meeting: Hplex MOB Project)

August 27, 2018

September 10, 2018

September 24, 2018

 

Adjournment:

GPC Minutes July 23, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

July 23, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Ms. Hoyt, Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative), and Mr. Young (ex-officio member, GEVSD, non-voting representative).

 

Member Absent:  None

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Mike King, Village Law Director

 

Also Present:  Steve Pyles, Steven Smedley, Jake Preston, Keith Imhoff, Ed Westerheide, Jennifer Westerheide, Art Chonko, and Chad Gummer.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application #2018-089, submitted by Jake Preston and Art Chonko, on behalf of Denison University, for the property located at 131 West Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of a radon mitigation system.   The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-089:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0. 

 

b)                 Application #2018-091, submitted by Jodi Melfi, on behalf of The Granville Investment Group, for the property located at 124 South Pearl Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a wall sign, measuring fifteen (15”) inches by ten point five (10.5”) inches.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-091:  Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-094, submitted by Matt McGowan, for the property located at 330 Spellman Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a roof replacement, changing from 3-tab shingles to dimensional shingles.  The property is currently zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Klingler.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-094:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

d)         Application #2018-097, submitted by Robert Willison, on behalf of Prospect Street Smoothies, for the property located at 134 North Prospect Street.  The request is for review and approval of the installation of a 3’ x 3’ window sign on the south-facing window.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Klingler.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-097:  Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

e)         Application #2018-098, submitted by Robert Willison, on behalf of Prospect Street Smoothies, for the property located at 134 North Prospect Street.  The request is for review and approval of the installation of a 3’ x 3’ window sign on the west-facing window.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-098:  Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

f)                   Application #2018-088, submitted by Stefanie Lauvray, on behalf of Just WRITE Fine Paper and Stationery, for the property located at 221 East Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a sidewalk/easel sign.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-088:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

New Business:

 

a)        Application #2018-090, submitted by Jake Preston and Art Chonko, on behalf of Denison University, for the property located at 204 West Broadway (Monomoy House).   The request is for architectural review and approval of the replacement of sheet metal fascia trim around the perimeter of the home.  The trim is located at the soffit and will be replaced with new copper trim of the same shape/profile.  The property is zoned Village Institutional District (VID), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

Mr. Wilken swore in Jake Preston and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion: 

Jake Preston, 6383 Marion Road, Newark, stated: he was in the process of stripping the paint on the house, doing spot repairs, piecing in siding amidst the original siding, and doing some structural repairs.  He added the present galvanized fascia would be replaced with copper, the home would be repainted, and smooth HardieSoffit panels would be used under the soffit.  He estimated the project would take about 8 weeks.

 

Debra Yost, Mr. Klingler and Mr. Wilken each expressed appreciation for the care being taken with this historic structure.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-090, Chapter 1159, Village Institutional District (VID), and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt the copper would contribute to an upgrading of the neighborhood.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, as above in item b, this renovation will contribute to the upgrading and continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation will protect and upgrade the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the application as submitted.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-090:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2018-095, submitted by Robert Ney, for the property located at 339 West Elm Street.   The request is for architectural review and approval of the replacement of seventeen (17) old windows with new double-hung windows.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Robert Ney and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

 

 

Discussion:

Robert Ney, 147 Terrace Avenue, Newark, stated:  he purchased 339 West Elm Street through a court auction, and found the house in horrible condition.  He added he and Dr. Ackers wished to have 17 old windows replaced, as the windows were in bad condition.  He had a complete engineering study done on the house, which included inspection of the foundation and water flow, and took down the fence in the back yard before.  He also noted the house was once a duplex, based on some house archeology.

 

Debra Yost stated the new windows are historically accurate, and she appreciated their investment in the property. 

 

Mr. Klingler and Ms. Hoyt both said they approved of the windows, and appreciated his saving the house and doing the clean-up. 

 

Mr. Ney expressed thanks to the Granville Water Department for their expedient work.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-095, Chapter 1159, Village Residential District (VRD), and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the

Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt the renovation would contribute to an upgrading of the neighborhood.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, as above in item b, this renovation will contribute to the upgrading and continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that the renovation will protect and upgrade the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Potaracke Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-095:  Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-090; 204 West Broadway; Jake Preston and Art Chonko, on behalf of Denison University; New Copper Trim at Fascia-Monomoy House.

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

Mr. Burriss moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-090.  Mr. Potaracke Second.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:   Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)         Application #2018-095; 339 West Elm Street; Robert Ney; Replacement of Seventeen (17) Old Windows.

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.           Mr. Burriss moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-095.  Mr. Potaracke Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Mr. Wilken introduced the upcoming fall retreat, and said he would email members of the Planning Commission to determine an agreeable date.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from June 25, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the minutes from the June 25, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Klingler Second.  All approved.  Motion passed.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from June 11, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the minutes from the June 11, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  All approved.  Motion passed. 

 

Motion to approve Minutes from May 29, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the minutes from the May 29, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Potaracke Second.  All approved.  Motion passed.

 

Work Session:  Hplex Solutions:  Preliminary Development Plan Discussion

Discussion and feedback for a preliminary development plan for the property located at 2780 Newark-Granville Road, currently owned by Ben Ackley as Northwest Wind LLC.  The proposed plan will illustrate a medical office use.

 

Discussion:

Denny Freudeman, Hplex Solutions, 65 Hidden Ravines Drive, Suite 100, Powell, Ohio, stated the proposed project would:

·         Be built on approximately 5 acres (Site would be total of 13.5 acres);

·         Be approximately 18,000-20,000 square feet; 

·         Be a fully occupied, orthopedic practice, which would include diagnosis, rehabilitation, time-share space for rotation, sports medicine, and orthopedic services;

·         Provide substantial new payroll dollars to Granville;

·         Provide a rural look in terms of the proposed architecture;   

·         Include no retail;

·         Potentially include a nature preserve/park accessible by the public;

·         Have one access from Newark-Granville Road;

·         Only be built when tenants had contracted with Hplex (no speculative construction)

·         Include areas of glass and a natural look

 

Debra Yost stated the project would benefit the community, as high-income earners would be employed by the practice in the building, and traffic impact to Newark-Granville Road would be less than what it might be as another land use (multifamily housing) as it would be used primarily during the day; she also reported the topography would aid in visually camouflaging the project, and added several engineering issues warranted further investigation. 

 

Mike King, Village Law Director, stated the property was zoned PUD, in which residential, civic, and limited mixed-use commercial uses were allowed, but said there would be no residential use on the property.  He added the park would be a civic use open and accessible to Granville residents. 

 

Mr. Demarest asked if Mr. Freudeman had spoken to neighbors, and if he had commissioned a traffic study.  Mr. Freudeman said he had had a meeting with neighbors who expressed favorable positions on the project, but did mention some concerns; he planned to commission a traffic study, as he wished to begin construction by the end of October, 2018. 

 

Ms. Hoyt said she liked the way the buildings were placed on the property, and liked the bike/ped trail; she added traffic was a concern to her, but would await the traffic study results.  Mr. King agreed that traffic would have a minimal impact.  Mr. Wilken dittoed Ms. Hoyt’s comments.

 

Mr. Klingler stated he was excited about the idea and liked the potential bike path, but added the design seemed contemporary rather than rural, which was described in the project narrative.  Mr. Freudeman said his architectural team had taken their architectural ques from in the community, and described how the newest proposal had morphed from the open glass building that was originally proposed.  He emphasized that he wanted a lot of light in order to provide a healing environment, but would put non-glass products on the buildings.

 

Mr. Wilken explained a formal public introduction and subsequent hearing would be required, since the property was zoned PUD. 

 

Keith Imhoff, 2847 Newark-Granville Road, stated he was in favor of the project, said speed was an issue in front of his house, added there would be more traffic with the proposed project, and was concerned with the noise involved with the project; he asked if a sidewalk would be considered for the south side of Newark-Granville Road, which would extend to the Village limits.

 

Debra Yost said that she had been in discussion with the property owners and developer to add a sidewalk connection from the current terminus at Thornwood Crossing.

 

Chad Gummer, 2825 Newark-Granville Road, stated he lived across from the proposed site, and described how the plan for the property had changed from what he had been told originally (4-5 homes); he described the following concerns:

  • Traffic would be impacted, as cars would be speeding down the side of the hill;
  • He was concerned about safety, as his driveway was directly across from the proposed site’s entrance;
  • Other possible sites outside Granville would not impact homes

 

Mr. Wilken addressed the traffic’s speed coming off Route 16 onto Newark-

Granville Road, and asked Steve Pyles, Village Manager, if anything could be done about the issue.  Mr. Pyles suggested police patrol, and added pedestrian crossings would slow down traffic and break up the speed.

 

Keith Imhoff asked if the westbound exit from Route 16 could be closed, since there was access to Newark-Granville Road from Thornwood Crossing.  Mr. Wilken explained that would be beyond the control of the Planning Commission.  Mrs. Yost added it was likely the ramp remained open based on comments from neighboring Westwood and the adjacent Newark neighborhoods.  Mike King said he would talk to [Police] Chief Caskey about enforcement in that area.  Mrs. Yost said she would contact Brian Moorehead, City Engineer for Newark, for suggestions.  Mr. Freudeman said an attraction to his proposal would be the lack of traffic on weekends and after 5:00 pm.  Mr. Imhoff asked the best way to encourage a sidewalk; Mr. Wilken suggested writing a note to Mrs. Yost. 

 

Chad Gummer stated his concern for where the road was being proposed, and suggested putting the driveway further west.  Mrs. Yost defended the proposed location as the best possible solution – as a best practice for driveways is to align at 90 degrees, reducing the potential points of conflict.

 

Mr. Demarest stated his support for putting the complex near the Bob Evans restaurant, but Mr. Freudeman said the project would not be possible there for multiple reasons.

 

Mr. Klingler asked what the maximum density would be if the property were proposed for houses, in order to compare what could be built.  Ben Ackley stated the site included 13.6 acres.  Mrs. Yost stated 13.6 acres with 5 houses per acre would be many houses (approximately 68 multi-family units).

 

Mr. Demarest asked if the substantial change in the driveway agreement (5 homes to community development) had an impact.  Mr. King stated it did not, and it was the best plan for alignment.  Mr. Demarest asked if there had been any thought to a turn lane on Newark-Granville Road.  Mr. Freudeman said there had not.  Mr. King stated roundabouts would likely appear on Newark-Granville Road in the next 10 years.

 

Mike Sobol, Treasurer for Granville Exempted Village School District, stated he was in favor of the project, as it would support the Comprehensive Plan and would provide added revenue for both the village and the school district.   Mr. Klingler stated he was encouraged as he hoped revenue would come from sources other than property taxes and still be within the zoning guidelines.

 

 

Dr. Westerheide, 800 Westwood Drive, reported he had lived in his house 20 years, and thought traffic wouldn’t be a problem because of the hours of operation of the medical facility.  He added, if the sidewalk could be extended, it would provide safe travel to Granville, and he thought the proposed development would be good for the Granville Exempted Village School District.

 

Mr. Wilken confirmed signage would be posted about the upcoming public hearing concerning the proposed project.  Mrs. Yost asked if the Planning Commission would like to see this project move forward.  Mr. Wilken voiced support of the project and shared that the concern about the driveway should be addressed.  Mr. Klingler voiced that he would like to see a different look on the buildings. 

 

Meeting Announcements:

August 13, 2018

August 27, 2018

September 10, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Mr. Klingler moved the meeting be adjourned.   Mr. Potaracke Second.   All verbally approved.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 8:19 pm.

GPC Minutes June 25, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

June 25, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Klingler, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Burriss, and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative).

 

Member Absent:  Ms. Hoyt

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Mike King, Village Law Director

 

Also Present:  Don Hostetter, Terrie Hostetter, Lisa Wade, Jeremy King, Tom Bunyard, Jodi Melfi, Kevin Bennett, Bill Decker, Shelley Decker, Jerry Wise, Steve Mighton, Beth Eckels, Rich Eckels, Kristin McGonagle, and Frank Rosato.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application 2018-079, submitted by Elizabeth Osborne, for the property located at 119-A East Elm Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of a window sign measuring four point five (4.5) square feet.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-079Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

New Business:

 

a)      Application #2018-076, submitted by Denison University c/o Jeremy King, for the property located at 314 East Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of a dual electric vehicle (EV) charging station at the northwest corner of the property’s parking lot.  The installation will need an additional General Use Permit, and Right-of-Way Permit before installation.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Jeremy King and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

 

Discussion: 

Mike King, Village Law Director, suggested that the Planning Commission members think of this application as if it were an air conditioner or similar appliance.

 

Jeremy King, 3164 Welsh Hills Rd, on behalf of Denison University/Historic Granville Inn LLC:  stated the dual electric vehicle charger will require the opportunity to tap into the closest available source which is a pole located within the North Pearl Street right-of-way adjacent to the westernmost Granville Inn parking lot, and went on to describe exactly where the tap would occur and what the unit would look like.  

 

Debra Yost, Village Planner, applauded Denison University’s sustainability effort.  She explained the charger would be just inside the right-of-way and screened by an existing hedgerow located to the west of the westernmost Granville Inn parking area.  She added that she has no concerns but added Mr. King must ask for a General Use Permit from Village Council.

 

Mr. King provided the following information through the answering of several questions:

  • Chargers will be specifically for Tesla cars;
  • Tesla will provide the chargers without cost to the University.  They will likely be free of charge if the user is a patron of the Granville Inn, and will limit usage to Granville Inn patrons in the beginning;
  • Tesla chargers will not be able to be used by other electric vehicles;
  • The charger will be able to charge two vehicles at the same time;
  • The chargers will be in compliance with Licking County standards;
  • An explanation of how the charger works; cords are approximately 20’ long;
  • Parking won’t be restricted to only Teslas, but a gas-powered automobile might be asked to move for a waiting Tesla user;
  • Chief Curtis, Fire Chief, will have the option to “kill” the appliance in case of an emergency

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-076, Chapter 1189, Signs, and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District, due to the existing screening and lack of any major changes to the immediate project area.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt this renovation in this location and situation would contribute to the improvement of the neighborhood.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, as above in item by pushing into the future, the implementation of this renovation in this situation will contribute to the continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that the physical surroundings in which past generations lived would certainly be improved with the inclusion of alternate and current energy source availability.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Potaracke Second.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-076:  Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)     Application #2018-083, submitted by Jodi Melfi, on behalf of Ryan Mills, for the property located at 124 South Pearl Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of a freestanding sign measuring ten (10) square feet.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Jodi Melfi and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion: 

Jodi Melfi, Jodi Melfi Design, 119 West Broadway, on behalf of Ryan Mills, stated: she is requesting a freestanding sign to be installed in the front yard of 124 South Pearl Street, a former residence now being used as administrative office for a financial planner.  She added it would have a white metal post with two mast arms and described the sign; she added that the sign will be set back in the yard 22 feet from street and will have no lighting.

 

Debra Yost stated it meets all the requirements of the sign code. 

 

Mr. Klingler asked for confirmation that it will be a 4x4 post, to which Ms. Melfi said that it would be.

 

Mr. Wilken asked why the post would be white when the fence is black wrought iron.   Ms. Melfi stated there are actually a number of white fences around The Buxton Inn and that the trim on the structure is painted white.

 

Mr. Wilken mentioned the possibility that the Planning Commission might think about restricting signs to a smaller size in the business district when they are near residential areas.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-083, Chapter 1165, Open Space District, and Chapter 1143, Amendments.

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that the improvement(sign) is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True, that he felt this sign would contribute to the visibility of a business within the District, thereby contributing to the improvement of the District overall.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that, as above in item b, the installation of a sign allowing greater visibility to a newly established business within the District, we contribute directly to the continuing vitality of the District overall.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Potaracke stated True that by contributing to the vitality of the District, we contribute to the preservation of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Klingler Second.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-083:   Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)      Application #2018-084, submitted by the Board of Granville Township Trustees, for the property located at 347 East Maple Street.  The request is for recommendation of approval to Village Council for a zoning amendment of the property to Open Space District (OSD).  The property is currently zoned Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Kevin Bennett and Debra Walker Yost.

 

Discussion: 

Kevin Bennett, Granville Township Trustee, stated:  the Granville Township Trustees purchased a lot beside the entrance to Maple Grove Cemetery with the intent for it to become an Open Space/park area.  He added that the house located on the parcel had been demolished, which occurred in part as the result of a larger project to widen the entrance to the cemetery, demolish the current garage and construct a more fitting entrance to the cemetery.  He referred to the cemetery as the most-visited open space in Granville, and added plans call for a more inviting park, specifically with a veterans’ monument, to be complete with an obelisk and benches.

 

Debra Yost stated that it is a lovely plan, and the rezoning is logical, reasonable and required as the Township Trustees move their project forward.   She added an additional necessity will be to remove the parcel from the AROD district, which she and the law director were currently exploring in terms of process.

 

Mr. Burriss asked for an explanation of the separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and asked about the pedestrian experience as they approached the cemetery -pointing out the fact that there were no sidewalks illustrated on the proposed plans accommodating pedestrians from West Maple Street into the space.  Mr. Bennett stated the following:

  • The entry road [from West Maple Street] will be straightened and widened to a more comfortable and appropriate width – over which most pedestrians were likely to navigate should they walk into the cemetery;
  • The entry feature will move the actual entrance to the facility back 20’ or greater to allow vehicles to stack inside the effective entrance to the cemetery;
  • One can walk through the cemetery proper over paver pathways and lawns;

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Klingler.  Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-084:  Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-076; 314 East Broadway; Denison University c/o Jeremy King; Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Station

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

Mr. Burriss moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-076.  Mr. Potaracke Second.   Roll call vote to approve Findings of Fact:   Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-083; 124 South Pearl Street; Jodi Melfi Design, on behalf of Granville Investment Group; Freestanding Sign

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.     Mr. Burriss moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-083.  Mr. Potaracke Second.  Roll call vote to approve Findings of Fact: Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-084; 347 East Maple Street; The Board of Granville Township Trustees; Rezoning

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.     Mr. Burriss moved for approval of the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-084.   Mr. Potaracke Second.  Roll call vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Klingler (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Work Session – Southgate Corporation:  Revised Plan Layout

Requested by the Southgate Corporation for the Eaton Woods project, a 57.5-acre parcel located along Newark-Granville Road at the northeast corner of Newark-Granville Road and North Cherry Valley Road.  During this Work Session, representatives from the Southgate Corporation will be discussing proposed revisions to the previously approved Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Plat.

 

Discussion: 

Frank Rosato, Southgate Corporation:  reviewed the Preliminary Development Plan for which the Planning Commission gave approval on May 9, 2018. Mr. Rosato verbally illustrated the previously approved commercial portion of Eaton Square on the southeast corner of the property.   He stated:

  • Southgate Corporation now wants to put the commercial portion of the plan adjacent to the existing Erinwood commercial buildings along the western property line, essentially flipping the development.
  • Proposal shows an open space beside Sub-Area B (proposed townhomes} with approximately 100’ from the edge of the proposed associated western parking area to the westernmost property line which abuts the single-family parcels on Kerry Court;
  • Density remains as it was – there will be no increase in density.
  • No change to square footage of Sub-Area A;
  • The proposal has evolved out of the expressed concerns of the neighboring property owners.

 

Debra Yost stated:

  • Bartlett Way, the illustrated loop road near the eastern property line serving the now relocated single-family ‘cluster’ homes, is proposed as being one-way per the Planning Department’s concern increased points of conflict should a left-hand turn be made too near the intersection of Wilken Drive and Newark-Granville Road;
  • The retail building and parking has been put at the rear of the building which provides for a better line of sight from Newark-Granville Road;
  • Townhouses are evolving; she confirmed this is the Phase 1 layout, and Southgate Corporation can fine-tune Sub-Areas B and C at a future date.

 

Mr. Demarest asked if the size of the lots in Sub-Area B were decreased.   Mr. Rosato said that they had not been decreased; the cluster homes are a little less deep than they were, but width may have been added.

 

Mr. Burriss suggested the following (refer to provided modified site layout for greater understanding of the following comments):

  • Relocating Lot 32 beside Lot 1 would give Lots 26 and 25 a clear view of open space; 
  • Eliminating Lot 16 would allow the townhomes a little ‘breathing space’; they seem too close to other components of the plan; 
  • Sub-Area B could be more pleasant with more space on the sides-to effectively separate the uses;
  • Lots 26 and 25 would be improved if no houses were behind them, namely the cluster homes; the cluster homes detract from them; 
  • Moving the commercial and business portion makes sense; he favored the change.

 

Mr. Klingler stated the following:

  • He sees the point of moving retail adjacent to the Erinwood offices, which flips the cluster homes to the east side of Eaton Square;
  • The flip puts much more density beside Erinwood – in terms of the actual number of homes/units – is this desirable?
  • Even though the two Erinwood property owners on Kerry Court have greater open space, more units are behind them, again is this something that is desirable?

 

Mr. Wilken stated moving the business section, Sub-Area A, adjacent to Erinwood offices is a positive move.  He asked if the infiltration basin by the office space will be adequate to handle water run-off.  Mr. Rosato stated he has been assured [by his consulting engineer] that the basins are adequate, and no more than what’s shown is needed. 

 

Mr. Wilken stated, Lots 18-24 that are currently structured to have driveways backing up to the commercial area and could cause a safety/traffic problem.  He asked if Southgate would consider a carriage way separating Lots 17/18.  He added Lots 25-31 don’t create the problem others do.  He suggested Bartlett Way be designed in such a way as to provide a slight increase in the ‘wiggle room’ needed to utilize a carriage way concept. Mr. Rosato was not sure how that would work with the zoning code but would be open to discussion. 

 

Mr. Wilken asked if the Sub-Area B parking area will be shielded with a fence [to the west, facing the properties on Kerry Court].   Mr. Rosato stated he is looking at fencing that will extend from Wilkin Drive, going west in the area of the parking lots, and adding plantings so the vehicles would effectively disappear. 

 

Mr. Demarest asked if any of the existing [vegetative] screening can be reserved.  Mr. Rosato stated no trees have been touched yet, and plans are to not take any more trees down.  Mr. Wilken said it would be wise to leave the wooded area where it is unless a tree is diseased.  Mr. Demarest suggested, regarding the curb cuts for lots 18-24, putting in a grass median like on West Broadway.  Mr. Rosato said they may explore the idea of a barrier between the business and residential areas. 

 

Mr. Klingler suggested moving the townhomes into the southeast corner of Eaton Square, and keeping the retail where it is illustrated on the plan [before them].   

 

Tom Bunyard, 135 Kerry Court, said he was pleasantly surprised about the changes to the plan being presented, and that he felt better about the distance between his property and the townhomes.  He asked if planting could be started along the property line to make a barrier.   Mr. Rosato said that is a little premature right now, but certainly something that will discussed with the proposed resident committee.

 

Jerry Wise, 163 Brennan, asked what happens with emergency ingress.   Mr. Rosato explained that emergency vehicles would have access to the site across the lawn area-by way of grass pavers just west of the westernmost retention basin. He further added that grass pavers are virtually invisible – and that most people wouldn’t even realize that they were there.

 

Kristen McGonagle, 112 Shawn Court, asked if there will be trees between the emergency ingress and the Erinwood offices.    Mr. Rosato said one won’t know the emergency ingress is there, and it will not be conspicuous; it will not be a connection point.   He added there will be no traffic there, and he plans to leave as many trees as possible on the west property line. 

 

There were questions and concerns regarding Southgate selling Sub-Areas B and C in the future, but Mike King, Village Law Director stated a new owner would be bound by the same development plan approved by the Village Council.  Mike King went on to explain what would happen if a new owner would desire to make changes to what has already been approved:  minor changes like layout could be submitted to the Planning Commission, but major changes (such as density, setback, lot coverage and character of the development) would have to go before Village Council.  Mike King added that he is trying to vacate the existing northern right-of-way between the Eaton Woods project and the existing neighborhood to the west for the sake of future owners.

 

Mr. Rosato confirmed the following through questions:

  • There will be no entrance from the Eaton Square development into Erinwood;
  • The pediatrician is still planning to be located in Eaton Square although their timing may be changing; 
  • All the buildings for Sub-Area A will probably be built all at same time.

 

Planning Discussion; Sign Code Revisions:  Workshop update. 

Discussion:  The discussion was postponed until the July 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

Motion to excuse a member’s absence, if necessary:

This was postponed until the July 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from June 11, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

This was postponed until the July 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing. 

 

Motion to approve Minutes from May 29, 2018 Planning Commission hearing:

This was postponed until the July 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

Meeting Announcements:

July 9, 2018

July 23, 2018

August 13, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Mr. Potaracke moved the meeting be adjourned.    All verbally approved.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 8:42 pm.

GPC Minutes June 11, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

June 11, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Klingler, Ms. Hoyt, and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative).

 

Member Absent:  Mr. Burriss and Mr. Potaracke

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Kevin Reiner, Karl Sandin, Derek Sandin, Amanda Love, Ken Rittenhouse, Jamie LeJeune, George Maciejunes, Heidi Ames, Joseph Leithauser, Bill Decker, Shirley Decker, and Steve Thaxton

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application 2018-066, submitted by Jay Young, for the property located at 142 East Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of two (2) window signs, each measuring eight (8) inches by eight (8) inches and located on the two first-floor storefront windows of the property.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-066Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0. 

 

b)                 Application #2018-069, submitted by Ken Rittenhouse, on behalf of Doug and Cheryl Houser, for the property located at 329 West Elm Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of landscape modifications including timber wall and paver walkway replacements, and new sandstone steps on the back patio.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the application as submitted.  Mr. Klingler Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-069:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-075, submitted by Kevin Reiner, on behalf of Keith McWalter, for the property located at 223 East Elm Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a forty-two (42) inch picket fence on the east side yard property line to fill in the missing fence gap.  The proposed fence will include a gate.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-075:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

New Business:

 

a)      Application #2018-057, submitted by Karl Sandin, for the property located at 217 South Plum Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the construction of a replacement shed measuring eight (8) feet wide by four (4) feet long.  The shed will be located inside the footprint of the existing shed which was destroyed during a storm.  The location of the new structure will require a variance for setback regulations, for which the applicant has applied, and will be heard by the BZBA at the June 14, 2018 meeting.   The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Karl Sandin and Debra Walker Yost.

 

Discussion: 

Karl Sandin, 217 South Plum Street, stated:   that he had a 9’ x 9’ x 15’ shed destroyed by weather on January 23rd, 2017.  His proposed replacement plan is for a 4’ x 8’ single-story shed, using the same shingle style as are on the house, and using the colors of the previous shed.

 

Debra Yost, Village Planner, stated a variance is required for setback regulations, and added that the new shed will be a charming structure, a welcome addition to the neighborhood.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-057, Chapter 1159, Village Zoning, and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Klingler stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District and improves the District overall.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Klingler stated True, that he felt this renovation in this location and situation would contribute to the improvement of the neighborhood and neighbor relations and will be functional.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Klingler stated True that, as above in item b, the implementation of this renovation in this situation will contribute to livability of a home within the historic district and thereby contribute to the continuing vitality of the District.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Klingler stated True that, by improving the livability of a home within the District, we preserve the surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the application as submitted, pending approval of a variance by the BZBA.  Second by Mr. Klingler.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-057:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

b)     Application #2018-065, submitted by Jamie LeJeune, for the property located at 512 West Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the construction of a paved driveway in place of the existing gravel driveway on the property.  Paving the existing gravel driveway will require a variance, for which the applicant has applied, and will be heard by the BZBA at the June 14, 2018 meeting.  The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B) and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Jamie LeJeune and Debra Walker Yost.

 

Discussion: 

Jamie LeJeune, 512 West Broadway, stated:   he wants to replace the existing gravel driveway with concrete, which will require the approval of a variance. He added his neighbors on both sides wrote letters supporting the project.

 

Debra Yost stated Jamie LeJeune lives in the TCOD, which requires any change in the first 100’ of right-of-way be brought to the Planning Commission.  She added approval of a variance will be required for installing the driveway less than 5’ from the property line, but added the proposed plan is his only path forward given the unique nature of the parcel and how the home is sited on the parcel.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-065:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

c)      Application #2018-068, submitted by Brett Black of Gilbraltar Custom Builders, on behalf of Brett and Heidi Ames, for the property located at 335 East College Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the construction of a new garage measuring twenty-four (24) feet by twenty-four (24) feet at the rear of the property.  The location of the new structure will require a variance for setback regulations, for which the Applicant has applied, and will be heard by the BZBA at the June 14, 2018 meeting.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD). 

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Brett Ames and Debra Walker Yost.

 

Discussion

Brett Ames, 335 East College Street, stated he is requesting approval to build a 24’ x 24’ garage at the rear of the property which will be architecturally consistent the home and other projects throughout the village.  His plan is to build a driveway leading to the garage, and eventually add a pea-gravel patio to the rear of his property.  He stated he will need a variance in order to proceed with his garage plans.

 

Debra Yost stated Staff has no particular concerns, as the proposed garage is similar to other structures on the same side of East College Street.

 

Ms. Hoyt stated the proposed structure will be conforming to the area, as other property owners on East College Street have garages.  Mr. Klingler expressed his approval of the garage doors, the window mirroring a window in the house, and the choice of molding, and he appreciated the architecturally-sensitive considerations.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-068, Chapter 1159, Village Zoning, and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Klingler stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District, and improves the District, and stated the property owner should be commended for the features he will be using.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Klingler stated True, that he felt this renovation in this location and situation would contribute to the improvement of the neighborhood and would make the property more functional for the homeowner.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Klingler stated True that, as above in item b, the implementation of this renovation in this situation will contribute to the vitality of the historic district and make the property more functional.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Klingler stated True that by utilizing details from the historic home, the project will protect and enhance examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the application as submitted, with the condition the variance is approved.  Mr. Klingler Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-068:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

d)     Application #2018-072, submitted by Amanda Love and Brian Fuller, for the property located at 1098 Newark-Granville Road.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a second curb cut and associated u-shaped driveway.  The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A) and is located within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD). 

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Kevin Reiner, Amanda Love, and Debra Walker Yost.

 

Discussion: 

Amanda Love, 1098 Newark-Granville Road, stated:   she was proposing a semi-circular driveway for her property, as the existing driveway has proven to be a hazard thus far.

 

Kevin Reiner, of Kevin Reiner Design, explained:   he is requesting a second curb cut in order to have a semi-circular driveway, which would be one-way and also safer than the present driveway.  He added the design is in keeping with the neighborhood, and he wants to design the driveway in such a manner that it visually respects the massing of the house, and to protect as many trees as possible during the construction.

 

Debra Yost stated the construction would be taking place in the TCOD, so any change within the first 100’ of right-of-way must be reviewed by the Planning Commission.

 

Ms. Hoyt stated it will provide a much safer ingress and egress and will be more attractive.  Mr. Wilken also complimented the design.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-072:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0. 

 

e)      Application #2018-074, submitted by Kevin Reiner, on behalf of Keith McWalter, for the property located at 207 South Pearl Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a seventy-two (72) inch privacy fence along the north and south side yard property lines, and a forty-two (42) inch picket fence along the east/front property line.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Debra Walker Yost.  (Kevin Reiner being already sworn in.)

Discussion: 

Kevin Reiner, Kevin Reiner Design, on behalf of Keith McWalters, 207 South Pearl Street, stated:   the application pertains to the open, empty lot south of 205 South Pearl Street.  He explained he is proposing privacy fencing on the north and south property lines and added the privacy fence will be the same look as that on 223 West Elm Street.   He described the following details:

·         Privacy fence will be 4’ from the edge of the alley;

·         Privacy fence will be mirrored on the north side of the property, connecting to the current and existing fence for the 223 West Elm property;

·         Picket fence setback from the South Pearl Street back-of-curb will be 28’

·         Picket fence will be 42” high and painted at the appropriate time;

 

Mr. Klingler clarified a typographical error on the Staff report about a 42’ privacy fence, but stated the illustration provided was fine, and he agreed with all the fencing for the practicality of the homeowner.

 

Debra Yost stated she will make sure the Findings of Fact show the correction.

 

The Planning Commission reviewed the standards and criteria pertaining to                 Application #2018-074, Chapter 1159, Village Zoning, and Chapter 1161, Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

a)         Is stylistically compatible with other new, renovated and old structures in the Village District?  Mr. Klingler stated True, that the renovation is stylistically compatible with similar projects previously approved in the District and will be an asset to the homeowner and the neighborhood.

 

b)         Contributes to the improvement and upgrading of the historical character of the Village District.  Mr. Klingler stated True, that he felt this renovation in this location and situation would contribute to the improvement of the neighborhood by utilizing fencing that has historic stylings.

 

c)         Contributes to the continuing vitality of the District.  Mr. Klingler stated True that, as above in item b, the installation of the proposed fencing will contribute historic notes to neighborhood, through which the continuing vitality of the District will be supported.

 

d)         Protects and enhances examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.  Mr. Klingler stated True that the proposed improvements enhance the properties associated with the project and in turn, the physical surroundings in which past generations lived.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as described on the schematic plan provided, including setbacks.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-074:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-057; 217 South Plum Street; Karl Sandin; Replacement Shed

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-057.  Ms. Hoyt Second.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:   Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-065; 512 West Broadway; Jamie LeJeune; Paved Driveway

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  Mr. Klingler moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-065.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-068; 335 East College Street; Brett Black of Gilbraltar Custom Builders, on behalf of Brett and Ames; New Garage

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  Mr. Klingler moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-068.   Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

d)                 Application #2018-072; 1098 Newark-Granville Road; Amanda Love and Brian Fuller; Curb Cut and Associated U-shaped Driveway

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  Mr. Klingler moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-072.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

e)                  Application #2018-074; 207 South Pearl Street; Kevin Reiner, on behalf of Keith McWalter; Seventy-two (72) inch Privacy Fence, and forty-two (42) inch Privacy Fence

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.  Mr. Klingler moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-074.  Ms. Hoyt Second.  Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:  Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Work Session – Southgate Corporation:  Revised Plan Layout

Mr. Wilken announced that the work session with Southgate Corporation had been rescheduled for the June 25, 2018 Planning Commission meeting.  He added Southgate is not interested in changing density, but is just moving project elements within the property, possibly moving the townhouses from the east side of the property to the west side, which would create a 150’ buffer between the structures and the property lines of Erinwood property owners.  He also explained Southgate is considering separate townhomes with common walls and individual roofs.  The July 9, 2018 Planning Commission will probably be a public hearing.  He stated, if the Planning Commission decides there is no fundamental change in Southgate’s proposal at that time, the Planning Commission’s ruling to reject or approve won’t have to go to Village Council; if Southgate’s proposal represents a fundamental change, the matter will go to Village Council for consideration.

 

Debra Yost explained Southgate was listening to the Erinwood neighbors, and in response to those concerns, they are choosing to reorganize the elements of the project within the boundaries of the property; they are not, at this time, doing further design development for Sub Area B or C – that will occur at a later date.  She added she believes the neighbors will be pleased with the rearrangement.

 

Mr. Wilken explained the commercial area will be the same, with some minor changes of where parking lots are located.  He added Southgate is giving consideration to the relocation of the townhomes to the east side of the property, with possibly one row of houses. No determination has been made as of yet.

 

Planning Discussion; Sign Code Revisions:  Workshop update.  Tentative:  June 15, 9-11 am, at Bryn Du Mansion Carriage House.

Debra Yost reminded Planning Commission members of the discussion of Sign Code Revisions on June 15, 2018, and explained that merchants, residents, and others have been invited to the Bryn Du Carriage House to express their feelings about the pedestrian experience in Granville.  The Planning Department wants to glean ideas about sidewalk signs.

 

Planning Discussion; Parklet Program:  Parklet Update.  North Prospect Street stakeholders not willing to give up parking.

Debra Yost explained the responses of North Prospect Street property owners and merchants concerning the proposed Parklet Program and added that this is likely not the time for the endeavor.  Most people polled are convinced there is a parking problem downtown, but that this may be something that can be revisited after the disposition of the fire station properties, post their relocation.

 

Planning Reading & Discussion:  Planned Unit Developments

Debra Yost provided each commissioner with some reading about PUD’s and mentioned that she will initiate conversations about PUD’s this summer with the Commissioners. The intention is to make needed revisions to the current PUD code sections.

 

Mr. Wilken shared some thoughts about development north of Newark-Granville Road, and who is in control of that (referring to property located under the jurisdiction of the Granville Township).  He stated the future of those particular properties is out of the hands of the Village, and in the clearly hands of the Township.  He had been asked to provide a list of empty/vacant lots along Newark-Granville Road in the Township and said there may be a discussion about open space.  He added undeveloped property north of Newark-Granville Road is not nearly as much as south of Newark-Granville Road.

The Motion to excuse the absences of Mr. Burriss and Mr. Potaracke was postponed until the June 25, 2018 meeting.

 

The Motion to approve the Minutes from the May 29, 2018 Planning Commission hearings was postponed until the June 25, 2018 meeting.

 

Meeting Announcements:

June 25, 2018

July 9, 2018 (Tuesday)

July 23, 2018

 

Motion for Adjournment:

Ms. Hoyt moved the meeting be adjourned.  Mr. Klingler Second.  All verbally approved.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 7:55 pm.

GPC Minutes May 29, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 29, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Klingler, and Ms. Hoyt.

 

Member Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Steve Pyles, Village Manager

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application #2018-054, submitted by Lisa Cholewa, on behalf of Charles and Lisa Whitman, for the property located at 138 East Broadway (Upper Level).  The request is for architectural review and approval of three (3) window replacements on the second story of the structure.  The replacement windows will include three (3) double-hung, Jeld-Wen, wood windows.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Discussion:

Mr. Klingler stated that mullions are in the current windows and asked for confirmation that the Planning Commission was reviewing double-hung windows.  Debra Yost stated that was correct.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Klingler.   Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-054.   Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-060, submitted by James Browder, for the property located at 326 East College Street.  The request is for review and approval of the installation of a seventy-two (72) inch cedar privacy fence with dog-eared pickets along the rear and west-side property lines.  The property is currently zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Burriss suggested a stipulation be included in the motion that the fence be finished/stained/painted within one year.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the application as submitted, with the stipulation the fence is finished/stained/painted within one year.   Second by Mr. Potaracke.   Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-060.  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-062, submitted by Mary Rose O’Brien-Bernini, for the property located at 338 West Elm Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of a sixty (60) inch cedar privacy/lattice fence along a portion of the rear and east-side property lines.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD) and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted, with the stipulation the fence is finished/stained/painted within one year.  Second by Mr. Burriss.   Roll call vote to approve Application #2018-062.  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Planning Discussion; Sign Code Revisions:  Workshop Update.  Tentative date: June 8, 2018, 9:00-11:00am.

 

Discussion:

Debra Yost explained the Planning Department will be working with Denison University and inviting Granville merchants to attend a “design thinking exercise” concerning sidewalk signs on June 8, 2018, from 9:00-11:00am.  She invited members of the Planning Commission to attend the workshop and express their thoughts.  Mr. Klingler was supportive of the idea.

 

Mr. Wilken reported that a draft recommendation for Village Council has been written regarding the South Main Street/River Road/Weaver Drive Task Force, and Bryn Bird, Township Trustee, will submit the draft to Debra Yost.  It will be shared with task force members for additions or corrections and is intended to be finished by July 4, 2018.

 

Mr. Wilken shared his thoughts about the future of Granville with the following thoughts:

  • Principal strategic concerns: 

o   A mini-research triangle park on Route 16, maybe as part of the Ohio State University; might be able to be a JEDD (Joint Economic Development District); cautioned that if residential subdivisions appear, it will impede a research triangle;

  • Principal concerns related to planned protection of Village’s western flank:  

o   Suggested talking with the Township and working together to make sure the development that occurs at Granville’s western flank compliments the community;

  • Principal sustainability concerns: 

o   Described property taxes and their impact on the community; limited commercial base is an ongoing problem;

o   Granville has grown by 300 people since 2010, most aged 60+; number of school-aged children is declining; he compared Granville to Bexley, New Albany, and Westerville, whose school-aged population is growing; Granville doesn’t seem to be drawing younger families-and the question is why?

  • Principal operational concerns:  will Granville evolve from village to city? (at least 5000 residents):

o   Annexations will trigger the threshold; Denison University students declared themselves citizens of Granville in order to vote in the 2016 election; that impacted the threshold;

o   In 2020, Granville may face the renewal of the Village Charter 

o   What concerns would need to be addressed (fire/emergency services and/or other issues) 

  • Principal tactical concerns: 

1.      Importance of preserving the Mill District by creating a spur road (connecting River Road and South Main Street at the rear of the Mill District property):

o   Implications for the fire station…

o   Will the proposed fire station fit where it has been proposed to be located?

2.      Has concerns about location of proposed Village Service Department structure (off Cherry Street/State Route 16)

o   Location does nothing to enhance the entrance to the Village;

o   Original intent when land was purchased was to resell;

3.      Village Council needs to consider the role of the Planning Commission

o   Concerned about residents going to Village Council and having Planning Commission decision changed; should there be a Planning Commission?

 

Mr. Wilken suggested having a retreat with the BZBA to consider the above-mentioned issues.

 

Steve Pyles mentioned a meeting with Nate Strom (Grow Licking County) regarding Alexandria’s future; will be at the Alexandria Fire Station, May 30, 2018, 6:00-7:30pm.

 

Mr. Wilken also mentioned the following issues:

  • Natural growth [of the village’s population] may be 4000 by 2020 and what would the implications be at that time;
  • Would like the Township to meet for work sessions with the Planning Commission regarding the fire station before work begins;
  • The need for a forum about development around Granville;
  • Development along Newark-Granville Road; how can we protect that area?
  • Concerned about relationship with Village Council;
  • Need to make sure there is major publicity before hearings such as Eaton Woods

 

Mr. Burriss offered encouragement about the relationship with Village Council and agreed that a retreat in August, 2018 would be good.

 

Ms. Hoyt expressed concerns about the relationship with Village Council, and hopes they respect the Planning Commission’s decisions more than has been recently exhibited.  She added Planning Commission sees details Village Council doesn’t see, as Village Council is looking at the final outcomes of a long review process.

 

Mr. Burriss described the representation of Village Council in previous Planning Commission meetings, the verbal report that was given at each Village Council meeting, and how communication between the two boards seemed to be better at that point in time.  He suggested encouraging Village Council to always have a representative at the Planning Commission’s meetings.

 

Mr. Klingler stated it is important the overall plan for development be addressed.  He added zoning can’t be changed after someone has purchased a property and agreed that a conversation about available land is important.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from May 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the minutes from the May 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Potaracke Second.   Mr. Wilken asked for a verbal vote of approval.  Minutes were approved. 

 

Meeting Announcements:

            June 11, 2018

            June 25, 2018

            July 9, 2018

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 8:09 pm.

 

 

Planning Commission Minutes May 14, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

May 14, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Klingler, and Ms. Hoyt.

 

Members Absent:  Mr. Demarest (ex-officio, Village Council, non-voting), and Mr. Young (ex-officio, GEVSD, non-voting).

 

Staff Present: Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Bryan Reed and Meghan Reed

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the applications with consideration to Consent Agenda.  Mr. Klingler second.  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application #2018-042, submitted by Meghan Reed for the property located at 427 East College Street.  The request is for review and approval of a seventy-two (72) inch, board-on-board privacy fence along the rear property line.  The property is currently zoned Suburban Residential District-B (SRD-B), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve Application #2018-042.  Mr. Klingler second.  Roll Call Vote:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-052, submitted by Bob Jude of Denison University, for King Hall located at 150 North Plum Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of the installation of a Bilco basement door to the lower level on the south side of the building, which will include the removal of the at-grade windows at that location.  The property is zoned Village Institutional District (VID), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve Application #2018-052.  Ms. Hoyt second.  Roll Call Vote:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

Not necessary, as both applications were moved to Consent Agenda.

 

Work Session:  George Martin: 

The discussion of Cherry Valley Road SE properties’ development potential with George Martin was postponed.

 

Planning Discussion:  Sign Code Revisions:  Discussion of proposed revision to Chapter 1189, Signs of the Codified Ordinances of Granville.  Proposed Revisions include the addition of a definition for Identification signs, general clean-up of unnecessary redundancies, alternate provisions for sidewalk signs, and the inclusion of the Open Space District (OSD).

 

Discussion:

Jon Miller, Assistant Village Planner, stated the only real point of contention with the Sign Code was sidewalk signs.  He added Debra Yost spoke with Steve Matheny, and Mr. Krak, Coordinator of Denison University’s Red Frame Design Thinking Lab, and will set up a series of meetings in early June to begin discussions with area merchants, residents and Planning Commissioners. 

 

Planning Discussion:  Parklet Pilot Program Updates:  Updates to the discussion of a pilot program for parklets in Granville.

 

Discussion:

Jon Miller stated he received 6 non-verbal responses regarding a survey he sent out via email about parklets.  He said the responses were split between positive and negative.

 

There was discussion about parking on East College Street, and First Federal’s desire to add a parking lot.  Mr. Burriss gave a history of previous attempts to add parking in that area, and the Village’s denial of support.  The discussion continued with the possibility of parking spaces when the current fire station is no longer located on North Prospect Street.

 

Mr. Wilken stated George Martin was approached about the placement of medical office buildings on Cherry Valley Road SE, where the previously proposed Linford apartment complex was to be located.  Mr. Martin would like to talk about lot splits when he appears before the Planning Commission, but needed to have more plans in-hand before he was ready to present in a work session format.

 

Mr. Wilken confirmed that the next meeting would be on Tuesday, May 29, 2018, as a result of the Memorial Day holiday.

 

Discussion followed about the May 8, 2018 vote of approval by Village Council for the development plan and preliminary plat for the Eaton Woods project on Newark-Granville Road.  Topics included:

 

  • Review of the voting;
  • Discussion that took place as Village Council considered the Ordinance;
  • Confirmation of what was actually approved at the Village Council meeting (Jon Miller stated Sub-Area A’s preliminary plat was approved, and the rest was approved in concept: for example, general density)
  • Assistant Planner Miller also confirmed that no engineering has been done for storm water, etc.

 

There was also discussion about the current trend nationwide for doctors wanting to get away from “mega hospitals”, and opening their own offices.  Mr. Wilken confirmed that, it is his understanding that most medical office buildings are commonly 10,000 square feet in area.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from April 23, 2018 Planning Commission

hearing:

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the minutes from the April 23, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Second by Mr. Burriss.   Roll Call Vote:  Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes). Motion carried 5-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

May 29, 2018 (Tuesday)

June 11, 2018

June 25, 2018

 

Motion to Adjourn:

Mr. Klingler moved to adjourn the Planning Commission hearing.  Mr. Burriss second.    Motion carried 5-0.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 7:32 pm.

Planning Commission April 23, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

April 23, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Klingler, Ms. Hoyt, and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio member, Village Council, non-voting representative).

 

Member Absent:  Mr. Burriss

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Ray Lynn, Kessler Sign Company, Kelly Prince, and Lisa Cholewa.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application #2018-037, submitted by Blanchard Construction, on behalf of Kappa Kappa Gamma, for the property located at 110 North Mulberry Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a window replacement on the second story of the residence.   The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Klingler.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-037:  Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-040, submitted by Kessler Sign Company, on behalf of Village Family Dentist, for the property located at 127 South Prospect Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval to replace the existing projecting sign.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-040:  Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

 

 

 

New Business:

 

a)   Application #2018-041,  submitted by Kelly Prince, on behalf of Doug and Lisa Cholewa, for the property located at 1007 Newark-Granville Road.  The request is for architectural review and approval of an addition to the west side of the residence.   The property is zoned Suburban Residential District-A (SRD-A) and, because of its location within the Transportation Corridor Overlay District (TCOD), requires review by the Granville Planning Commission.

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Kelly Prince and Debra Walker Yost.

 

Discussion

 

Kelly Prince, 4143 Pleasant Chapel Road, Newark, stated:  the goal of the project is to add a new kitchen, new windows, new siding, and a crawl space with a vapor barrier.  The siding color will be gray, post construction to match the balance of the home, but the owner would like to paint the house white eventually.

 

Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner, added: details regarding the 297 square feet west side addition to the house; noting that it will be 28’ from the western lot line.  He also confirmed that no variances would be necessary to execute the project. 

 

Debra Yost, Village Planner:  explained the process to the applicant, specifically the appeal period, through which they must wait until they may actually begin construction.  She also explained that no questions regarding criteria and standards needed to be answered by the Planning Commission, as the property is located in the Transportation Corridor Overlay District.

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.   Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-041:  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0. 

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-041; 1007 Newark-Granville Road; Kelly Prince, on behalf of Doug and Lisa Cholewa; Home Addition:

Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria. 

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the Findings of Fact for Application #2018-041.

Mr. Klingler Second.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact:   Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Planning Discussion: Parklet Pilot Program:  Discussion of a pilot program for a seasonal parklet in Granville.  The proposed parklet program includes the benefits of parklets, and potential obstacles to instituting a pilot program.

 

Jonathan Miller:  proposed the Parklet Pilot Program presenting the following information:

  • A parklet is defined as a sidewalk extension that provides more space for pedestrians, better use of pedestrian space, and looks like a very small park; 
  • A parklet would occupy one or two public parking spaces; 
  • A parklet is generally sponsored by a local business or organization; 
  • Addressing parklet obstacles/concerns (safety/liability issues, and the reduced number of parking spaces), whomever sponsors a parklet would be responsible for providing liability insurance for the space; per Jonathan’s research, there would be little or no cost to a business owner to insure a parklet;
  • A parklet would be located within a single parking space, but wouldn’t be built out as wide as the space allows – to allow for approximately an additional 2’ wide buffer zone between the travel lane and the occupants of the parklet; 
  • Parklets are easily installed, and sponsors are responsible for their upkeep;
  • Proposed location for a “test drive” could be North Prospect Street;
  • If a parklet were in disrepair, it would have to be removed at the sponsor’s expense;
  • Would give pedestrians a place to linger in the downtown Granville area – in particular along North Prospect Street where there are narrower sidewalks and no areas of significant space to linger;
  • Granville Planning Commission would have the final design decision.

 

There was discussion about the following topics:

  • Location of a pilot parklet;
  • What happens to parklet during winter months, including storage of it;
  • How to handle agreement/disagreement of neighboring business owners;
  • How to do a “test drive”;
  • Purpose of a parklet would not be as a retail outlet area for a particular business; it would be intended for sitting/relaxing for all pedestrians.

 

The following suggestions were shared:

  • Enclose the streetside aspect of the parklet in order to add an additional safety measure:  railing, rope, planters, etc.;
  • Pedestrians would be naturally encouraged to visit the parklet in the North Prospect Street area;  an area that would benefit from additional foot traffic, according to business owners;
  • When the fire station moves, more parking spaces may be available in front of the structure and across North Prospect where no-parking lines are presently;
  • It was suggested that in order to introduce the concept of a parklet, blocking off a space with a picnic table for a “test drive” might be a place to start versus just a sign and barricades. This approach  make a test-drive space inviting; possibly post a sign saying “Soon to be a parklet”;
  • Post a box in a test-run space asking for input regarding parklet idea;
  • Provide checkerboards for use in parklet.

 

Debra Yost will speak to business owners and report back to the Planning Commission.

 

Planning Discussion; Sign Code Revisions:  Discussion of proposed revision to Chapter 1189, Signs of the Codified Ordinances of Granville.  Proposed Revisions include the addition of a definition for identification signs, general clean-up of unnecessary redundancies, alternate provisions for sidewalk signs, and the inclusion of the Open Space District (OSD).

 

Discussion:

 

Debra Yost:  asked for comments from Planning Commission members regarding the Sign Code Revisions included in their binders. 

 

Several commissioners were in favor of eliminating sidewalk signs, especially on Broadway, but suggested there must be an alternative for businesses that do not have street frontage.  Mrs. Yost suggested that menu boards are very functional, either in a window or attached to the façade of the building in a tasteful way.

 

Mr. Klingler encouraged that there be a discussion with local businesses before a ruling would be enacted.  Mrs. Yost said that would be difficult.  Mr. Wilken suggested there be well-advertised public hearings about the matter. Mrs. Yost agreed to look into gathering the opinions of the Chamber of Commerce.

 

Mrs. Yost explained Chapter 1189 of the Codified Ordinances of Granville should include signage requirements for the Open Space District (OSD), as it current does not provide for any signage.  She also stated the Village is considering how to recognize the donor for Denison University’s Performing Arts Center, which has not been allowed by the current provisions under the VID. She added she will carry this discussion over one more time, but would like to have some decisions made at the next Planning Commission meeting. 

 

Motion to excuse a member’s absence:

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to excuse the absence of Mr. Burriss.   Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote:    Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from April 9, 2018 Planning Commission

hearings:

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the minutes from the April 9, 2018 Planning Commission hearings.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.  Roll Call Vote:   Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

May 4, 2018

May 29, 2018 (Tuesday)

June 11, 2018

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 8:00pm.

 

 

Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

April 9, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Potaracke, Mr. Klingler, Ms. Hoyt, Mr. Young (ex-officio member, GEVSD, non-voting), and Mr. Demarest (ex-officio, Village Council, non-voting).

 

Member Absent:  None.

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Mike King, Village Law Director; Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Ryan Badger, Karl Schneider, and Rose Siddle.

 

Citizens’ Comments:  None.

 

Consent Agenda:

 

a)                  Application #2018-028, submitted by Stephanie Lauvray, on behalf of Alternative Hitches, DBA Just Write, for the property located at 221 East Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a projecting sign, measuring two (2) feet tall by three (3) feet wide, in the location of the previous occupant’s projecting sign.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Klingler.  Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-028.  Potaracke (yes), Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Old Business:

 

a)                  Application #2018-019, submitted by Ryan Badger of ADR & Associates, on behalf of Karl Schneider of Raccoon Creek Senior Living LLC, for two properties located on Weaver Drive (Lot 15, Township 2, Range 13) and the southeast corner of Weaver Drive and Columbus Road.  The request is for review and approval of a Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Plat for the project’s Phases III and IV of the Middleton Garden Cottages development.  The property is currently zoned Village Gateway District (VGD).

 

Mr. Wilken swore in Ryan Badger, Karl Schneider, Rose Siddle, Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner, and Debra Yost, Village Planner.

 

Discussion:

 

Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner, reviewed the revision to the original application which addressed the following:

  • A line of hedges on the east property line of Phase III;
  • A line of trees along the road in Phase IV;
  • Removal of the railing/balustrade on the garages;
  • Revised lighting;
  • Cut sheets for light fixtures;
  • Two parking spaces that were removed so as not to be in the setback in Phase IV;
  • Two other parking spaces in Phase IV received a line of hedges for screening;
  • More sidewalks in both Phase III and IV

 

Ryan Badger, 88 West Church Street, Newark, Ohio, stated he also provided a crosswalk with bright white striping at the easternmost driveway of Phase IV better indicating to Weaver Drive traffic of a crossing.

 

Mr. Burriss stated that he is unhappy with the fact that there aren’t full sidewalks located throughout both Phases, necessitating residents walking in the parking lot from their home to the main building for meals; he also commented the density feels excessive and noted that he would prefer to see additional outdoor spaces.   Mr. Klingler also commented that Phase IV density for the space available is far too dense.

 

Karl Schneider, Raccoon Creek Senior Living LLC, 115 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio, defended that the plan is meeting the density allowed by the Village Code. 

 

Ryan Badger, ADR & Associates, stated: in Phase IV only, there is 57% open space.  Debra Yost stated that the lot shape for Phase IV is irregular, and actually projects across State Route 16.  Mr. Klingler reiterated that the space looked cramped with the proximity of Route 16.  Karl Schneider said noise from the freeway would be buffered.  Ryan Badger added that he moved the patios associate with the Phase IV homes 10’ (ten feet) north in order to have more screening along the southern property line. 

 

Mr. Potaracke asked if the proximity of Phase IV to State Route 16 had been shared with potential residents, and if there had been any concerns raised.  Ms. Siddle defended that deposits have been received, and there have been no concerns expressed.

 

Ms. Hoyt asked if the crosswalk from Phase IV across Weaver Drive actually takes residents to the front door of the main building.  Mr. Schneider said residents would cross the street to the main campus parking lot, and then to the front door, actually walking on a private drive.  Ms. Hoyt asked if there would be painted lines on the asphalt indicating a ‘walking lane’.  Mr. Badger said a lined area would only be in the higher traffic area, but he could certainly expand the idea through the project.  Ms. Hoyt said she would like to see more safe walking pathways for people with mobility issues.

 

Mr. Wilken asked if the only issue still open for rectification is that Staff is still investigating the proper avenues for vacating the north portion of the right-of-way in Phase IV; there exists ample space to vacate the right-of-way and still maintain the acceptable right-of-way, and still maintain acceptable width for the roadway (60 minimum feet).  Mrs. Yost confirmed that only one issue still remains.  She added she believes it to be counterintuitive to ask residents to use the driveway as a walkway, and added a walking lane or sidewalk throughout the project is needed for assistance in order to separate pedestrians from vehicles.  Mr. Badger said he would include assistance in both sections.  Mr. Wilken suggested, instead of striping, differentiating the feel of the pavement for those walking with limited vision.

 

Mr. Burriss praised the tree lawn and internal asphalt pathways which are separate from roads at Kendal at Granville, and stated he doesn’t see a good separation of pedestrian walkways from roads at Middleton’s Phases III and IV.  He added that he didn’t see any communal outdoor spaces, as there are too many buildings.  He also asked about garbage pick-up for residents.  Ms. Siddle said employees will take residents’ trash to a separate location in order to eliminate the garbage truck from coming into the community. 

 

Mr. Klingler asked for a description of the buffer between Phase IV and the freeway.  Mr. Badger said the trees would be installed along the State Route 16 right-of-way line, but would be staggered.

 

Mr. Burriss repeated the following:

  • It scares him to have residents walking across the road (Weaver Drive);
  • The crosswalk is too far from the front door of the main facility ;
  • He has concerns about connections from housing to the main building. 

 

Mr. Schneider said he might suggest people not live in Phase IV if they aren’t able to walk to the main building.

 

Mrs. Yost stated it is likely Weaver Drive will have an increase in traffic as the South Main Street/Weaver Drive/River Road/Bridge construction occurs.  She encouraged Mr. Schneider to install an increased number of flashing/blinking signs on Weaver Drive for increased driver awareness as they approach the pedestrian crossing.  Mr. Schneider was agreeable.

 

Mr. Burriss said he didn’t see any screening of the air-conditioning units proposed.  Mr. Schneider assured him they would be screened.  Mr. Badger added there would be more landscaping than is seen on the plan.  Mr. Burriss asked if units would be equipped with hose bibbs (outside spigots).  Mr. Schneider said they probably would be provided to allow residents to water plantings.

 

Mr. Wilken asked if, during peak periods, it would be possible to have a blinking/flashing light become a stop light.  Mike King, Village Law Director, said the request was probably not possible, but it could become a target enforcement area for the Granville Police Department.  Other options were discussed that would provide more safety for residents, for example speed bumps and elevated crosswalks.

 

Mr. Wilken confirmed the only open issue is the right-of-way option in Phase IV.  Mike King added that another issue is the application for Conditional Use which will be reviewed by BZBA at their April 12, 2018 meeting. 

 

Mr. Schneider was asked how many units would be included in Middleton; 148 is the total unit count.

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to approve the application as submitted, with the following stipulations:

  • Staff decides on proper avenues for vacating the north portion of the right-of-way in Phase IV
  • A Conditional Use permit is approved by BZBA on April 12, 2018

 

Second by Ms. Hoyt.   Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-019.  Klingler (no), Hoyt (“yes, reluctantly”), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (no), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 3-0.

 

Findings of Fact Approval:

 

a)                  Application #2018-019, Two Parcels – Weaver Drive (Lot 15, Township 2, Range 13) and the Southeast Corner of Weaver Drive and Columbus Road; Ryan Badger of ADR & Associates, on behalf of Karl Schneider of Raccoon Creek Senior Living, LLC; Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Development Plan for Phase III and Phase IV – Middleton Senior Living:  Approve Findings of Fact and Associated Standards and Criteria.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the Findings of Fact for the preliminary plan and plat for Phases III and IV of Middleton.  Second by Mr. Potaracke.   Roll Call Vote to approve Findings of Fact.  Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Potaracke (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 5-0.

 

Planning Discussion; Sign Code Revisions:  Discussion of proposed revision to Chapter 1189, Signs, of the Codified Ordinances of Granville.  Proposed Revisions include the addition of a definition for Identification signs, general cleanup of unnecessary redundancies, alternate provisions for sidewalk signs, and the inclusion of the Open Space District (OSD).

 

Discussion: 

 

Mrs. Yost introduced discussion about proposed revision to the sign code. 

 

Mr. Burriss asked about plastic signs being allowed, as he remembered several times in the past when plastic signs were denied.  No decisions were made, and the discussion was delayed until the next Planning Commission meeting. 

 

Mr. Wilken suggested that Village Council grant more authority to the Planning Commission, as he thinks there should be a discretionary body, which does not currently exist. 

 

Motion to approve Minutes from March 26, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.

 

Mr. Burriss moved to approve the minutes from the March 26, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.   Ms. Hoyt second.  Approved. 

 

Meeting Announcements:

            April 23, 2018

            May 14, 2018

            May 29, 2018

 

Motion to Adjourn:

 

Mr. Potaracke moved to adjourn the meeting.  Second by Mr. Klingler.  Approved.

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 7:58pm.

Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2018

GRANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

March 26, 2018

7:00 pm

Minutes

 

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

 

Members Present:  Mr. Wilken, Mr. Burriss, Mr. Klingler and Ms. Hoyt.

 

Member Absent:  Mr. Potaracke

 

Staff Present:  Debra Walker Yost, Village Planner; Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner

 

Also Present:  Dwight Davidson, Rick Adkins, Drew Adkins, Frank Rosato, Jeremy King, and Steve Mershon.

 

Citizens’ Comments: 

Frank Rosato, Southgate Corporation, 1499 West Main Street: reflected on the results from Carpenter Marty’s traffic report, which agreed with Southgate’s traffic study presented previously to Planning Commission.  He reviewed his experience with the Planning Department and Planning Commission, and expressed appreciation for how the process has transpired.  Mr. Wilkin mentioned that the need for empty-nester housing is increasing, and relayed statistics about how the aging population of Granville between 2000 and 2016 has grown.   Debra Yost, Village Planner, stated that there will be a public hearing concerning the Southgate project on April 4, 2018 during the Village Council meeting; it will be the first of possibly two public hearings.

 

Consent Agenda:  Mr. Wilkin stated that each of the Consent Agenda applications would be looked at individually, and voted on separately.

 

a)                  Application #2018-021, submitted by Granville Co-op Parent Preschool, for the property located at 119 West Broadway.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a replacement fence in the rear part of the property.  The property is zoned Village Residential District (VRD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.   Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-021.    Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

b)                 Application #2018-022, submitted by Dala Bishop, for the property located at 128 South Main Street.  The request is for architectural review and approval of a freestanding tenant panel sign.  The sign will be hung from a post that is already in the front of the building.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Mr. Klingler moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Ms. Hoyt.   Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-022.    Klingler (yes), Hoyt (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

c)                  Application #2018-023, submitted by The Lakeholm Company, for the property located at 128 South Main Street. The request is for architectural review and approval of a freestanding tenant panel sign.  The sign will be hung from a post that is already in the front of the building.  The property is zoned Village Business District (VBD), and is located within the Architectural Review Overlay District (AROD).

 

Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the application as submitted.  Second by Mr. Klingler.   Roll Call Vote to approve Application #2018-023.   Hoyt (yes), Klingler (yes), Burriss (yes), and Wilken (yes).  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Planning Discussion:  Discussion of the results from the Newark-Granville Road Traffic Study performed by Carpenter Marty.

Jonathan Miller, Assistant Village Planner, gave a summary of the traffic study performed by Carpenter Marty.  He stated that the eight intersections that were studied, and the concept of “LOS” – Level of Service.  He explained the different levels of service (A-E) as pertaining to the length of time it would take traffic to stop and start again.  He also said that operating at an acceptable level of delay would be LOS A-D. 

 

Debra Yost explained that 45-60 seconds feels like an acceptable level of delay, which was what the study found.  Jon Miller explained that the traffic study’s prediction is applicable for 20 years in the future (until 2038).  Mrs. Yost also stated that Steve Pyles, Village Manager, has asked Carpenter Marty to expand the study to include additional unbuilt parcels adjacent to Newark-Granville Road, in the anticipation of future development.   Carpenter Marty will make a presentation to Village Council at the April 4, 2018 meeting [rescheduled to April 18, 2018 to allow for the expanded scope].

 

Rick Adkins, 343 West Maple Street, asked if the traffic study would show different results for foggy or rainy days.  Jon Miller stated that the study is based on an average day, not with specific weather conditions. 

 

Mr. Wilken compared traffic in Granville to traffic in Washington D.C., and expressed appreciation for Granville.  Mr. Klingler offered that the more a town accommodates traffic, the more traffic the town must accommodate.  Mr. Wilken talked about trying to adjust traffic in and out of Eaton Woods so that Newark-Granville Road isn’t adversely affected. 

 

Mr. Wilken stated that he and Debra Yost had attended an initial proposal of the Southgate project to Village Council last week, and that Southgate will be meeting with the president of Erinwood Homeowners’ Association to answer questions and concerns or their residents.  He suggested that, at the April 4, 2018 Village Council meeting, the Planning Commission and Village Planner brief the Village Council on the following:

  • The process that was followed concerning the development of the project
  • To what extent the project comports with the Village Code
  • The Village Planner should go through the central elements of the proposal

 

Motion to excuse a member’s absence.

Mr. Burriss moved to excuse the absence of Mr. Potaracke.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Motion to approve Minutes from March 12, 2018 Planning Commission

hearing:

Ms. Hoyt moved to approve the minutes from the March 12, 2018 Planning Commission hearing.  Second by Mr. Burriss.  Motion carried 4-0.

 

Meeting Announcements:

April 9, 2018

April 23, 2018

May 14, 2018

 

Adjournment:  Mr. Wilken adjourned the meeting at 7:37pm.

 

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.