Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision 259 East Main topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission advises owner of 259 East Main on utilities, fire access and setbacks for proposed lot split
Summary
An owner seeking to split a 0.36‑acre lot at 259 East Main was told to resolve right‑of‑way width, hydrant proximity and setback/easement issues before returning with revised plans.
Get email alerts on the Subdivision 259 East Main topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
An applicant seeking conceptual approval to divide 259 East Main Street into two lots received guidance from the Granville Planning Commission on March 6 to address fire‑access widths, hydrant location and utility hookups before formal approval.
The owner participated by phone and said the lot is 0.36 acres and that utilities and right‑of‑way width are his primary concerns. City planner Shay Stark and other staff discussed code requirements: a private lane that includes a fire hydrant typically must meet a 26‑foot minimum width under the International Fire Code to allow apparatus access; without a hydrant a 20‑foot width may be acceptable in limited conditions. Fire department staff advised that any new dwelling must be located within 500 feet of a hydrant.
Staff also noted that placing an access easement or private lane close to the existing house could eliminate required side setbacks, which would necessitate a joint‑easement agreement with the adjacent property owner and parking arrangements to avoid blocking the access route. Commissioners urged the owner to coordinate with the fire department on hydrant placement and to secure any needed joint‑right‑of‑way agreements with neighboring property owners before returning with revised plans.
The commission did not take formal action on the concept and asked the applicant to resolve utility and fire‑access issues — including possible hydrant relocation or addition, ensuring at least a 20‑foot private lane (26 feet if hydrant included) and meeting yard‑setback requirements or securing a joint‑access agreement — then return to the commission with updated drawings.
No vote was recorded; the discussion ended with the applicant saying he would work on hydrant proximity and the lane width and come back once those issues are resolved.
