Planning Commission

200 South Hamilton Road City of Gahanna Gahanna, Ohio 43230 Meeting Minutes Planning Commission Michael Tamarkin, Chair Thomas Shapaka, Vice Chair Michael Greenberg John Hicks James Mako Michael Suriano Thomas J. Wester Pam Ripley, Deputy Clerk of Council Wednesday, April 27, 2022 7:00 PM City Hall, Council Chambers A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL Gahanna Planning Commission met in regular session on April 27, 2022. The agenda for this meeting was published on April 22, 2022. Chair Michael Tamarkin called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Suriano. Present 6 - John Hicks, Michael Tamarkin, Michael Suriano, Thomas J. Wester, Michael Greenberg, and Thomas W. Shapaka Absent 1 - Bobbie Burba B. ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA Motion was made by Hicks, seconded by Greenberg, to change the order of the agenda to hear the Conditional Use Application CU-0003-2022 followed with the Variance Application V-0010-2022. Motion carried with the following vote: Yes: 6- Hicks, Tamarkin, Suriano, Wester, Greenberg and Shapaka Absent: 1- Burba C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Greenberg, seconded by Shapaka, to approve the minutes from the 3.3.2022 Workshop and the minutes from the 4.13.2022 meeting. The motion failed with the following vote. Yes: 3- Tamarkin, Greenberg and Shapaka Absent: 1- Burba Abstain: 3- Hicks, Suriano and Wester City of Gahanna Page 1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 2022-0123 Planning Commission Workshop Minutes 3.30.2022 After some discussion the minutes will be voted on individually. Motion was made by Shapaka, seconded by Greenberg, that the Minutes from the 3.30.2022 Workshop be Approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 5- Hicks, Tamarkin, Wester, Greenberg and Shapaka Absent: 1- Burba Abstain: 1- Suriano 2022-0127 Planning Commission Minutes 4.13.2022 Motion was made by Hicks, seconded by Greenberg, that the Minutes of the 4.13.2022 Meeting be approved. The motion carried with the following vote: Yes: 6- Hicks, Tamarkin, Suriano, Wester, Greenberg and Shapaka Absent: 1- Burba D. SWEAR IN APPLICANTS & SPEAKERS Assistant City Attorney Matt Roth administered an oath to those persons wishing to present testimony this evening. E. APPLICATIONS - PUBLIC COMMENT Fine Line Autobody CU-0003-2022 To consider a Conditional Use Application for property located at 4550 North Hamilton Rd.; Parcel ID: 025-010281; Current Zoning CC-2; Fine Line Autobody, John Oney and Glen Dugger, applicants In accordance with Planning Commission Rules Section 7.4.1.1., if there is more than one application on the same project, they may be discussed as one. Director of Planning Michael Blackford provided a summary of the application; see attached application for staff presentation. Blackford shared that the property is zoned CC2, Community Commercial modified. It is the exact same essentially as some of the adjacent properties which are zoned CC, Community Commercial. The property to the south is zoned ER2 and is the only single-family zoned parcel with frontage on Hamilton Road north of the 62/Hamilton Road intersection. All the properties you see north up to Morse Road are all either commercial or multi-family zoned except for the one property to the south. To the east of this property is Woods at Shagbark, to the west there are various multi-family developments, to the north is Stoneridge, Giant Eagle, and some other users. To the south is Vista Plaza that has Fresh Thyme, City of Gahanna Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 there is Valvoline and Firestone as well with frontage on Hamilton Road which is a four-lane roadway in this area. There are two applications before the Commission: A Conditional Use and a Variance. The Conditional Use is very straight forward and is to permit an auto repair facility. With the Conditional Use Application there is also a conceptual site plan that is just informational at this point. Future applications would be necessary if the conditional use and variances are approved. They show a 12,000 sq. ft. building that has seven bays and is a single story on 1.8 acres. It is a modest development total of about 6,600 square feet per acre. Future applications are necessary. If approved, there would need to be a Final Development Plan Application and a Design Review Application. The final development plan is what identifies exactly where the parking is, how many parking spaces, what the setbacks are, and where the location of the building is, that’s in the site plan. There might be some comments related to those tonight but at this stage it is just informational. Additional applications would be necessary to finalize that location. The Design Review Application is building design, materials, colors, landscaping, lighting, fencing, things of that nature. We can discuss it tonight, but it is conceptual at this stage. There will be additional applications necessary if these are approved. The history of this application started in February of 2020 pre-COVID. There was a workshop where they had a nice set of plans for the Commission to review. They were plans of their Bethel Road location. Workshops are non-binding feedback that’s provided by the Commission. In June 2021, an application for a Conditional Use and Variance was submitted. The code at that time allowed for auto repair facilities such as this. They were allowed by a conditional use. Code was changed later in 2021. Automotive uses such as auto repair facilities are no longer allowable by a conditional use in community commercial. However, they have the right to continue forward based on the rules that are in place at the time of the application. In June of 2021, Code did allow a conditional use for auto repair. They have been moving forward with their application. One of the elements that staff reviews for conditional use request and rezoning request, things of that nature, is consistency with the Land Use Plan. The Land Use Plan does call for this area to be mixed use, which means that they are recommending uses, density, and intensity development standards. The recommended uses are retail, office and residential. These are just recommended uses, and this particular use, as the applicant’s application points out, is not a retail use. Tire shops are considered a retail use from a zoning standpoint. From a zoning standpoint, this is a service use. Service uses are going to be found within mixed-use areas but that is not a use that the land use plan calls out as being a recommended use. It is not prohibited, but it’s not one of the recommended uses. It also recommends intensities that are well above, that might seem large to a lot of folks here, 60,000 sq. ft. or more per acre is what the plan recommends. The Land Use Plan was striving for development in these areas. We are about 6,500 sq. ft. per acre. There are some pros and cons to that. There was a lot of analysis that went into the Land Use Plan to determine what types of intensities properties should be developed, and less than 7.5% of the city’s property is commercial office or mixed use. That is a low percentage. When the Land Use Plan looked at our existing use of land it identified that we needed more commercial office mixed-use types of projects. That is one reason why that intensity figure of 60,000 sq. ft. is so high because it is contemplating and recommending multi-story vertical integrated mix of uses in these areas. This is what is preferred but not required. As staff, it is his job to look at the Land Use Plan and what those recommendations are and determine if the applications are consistent with that. Zoning code was changed City of Gahanna Page 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 to remove several different automotive related uses to align the zoning code more in line with the recommendations of the Land Use Plan. You do that by encouraging retail types of uses, office, and medical uses by eliminating some of those uses that were allowed. The Land Use Plan makes recommendations and does not mandate a particular decision. It is meant to guide Planning Commission and staff. Blackford showed the site plan and stated the applicant did an excellent job with their variance and conditional use by providing detailed site plans that would be perfectly submit able for final development plans. Blackford understands a lot of the details do not show up on the screen. On the left side, being west is Hamilton Road, Blackford showed the access point. Since this is a conditional use and a variance application, they did not have detail comments from other departments at the city. From past conversations about this and the adjacent properties, this will be a right-in and right-out. Engineering is not going to allow a full access point. There is a median in this area that would prevent a full access. It will be a right-in and a right-out development on this parcel. Blackford showed the retention area, parking, and the building location. The parking in the back is technically parking. There is a gate. So, it is really storage for vehicles and not for daily traffic. There is a 40.5-foot setback. Code requires a 41-foot. It does meet setback from the Shagbark property to the east. Not shown on the plan is a 15-foot buffer that is required, and it is required to have opaque screening and vegetation. These are things that would be refined through the design review process. There are four variances that are being requested. Two are pretty much the same; it is to the side yard setbacks and the perimeter buffer on the south because the adjacent property is zoned for residential uses. They are requesting four-feet setback along the southern property line; 28-feet is required. They are requesting four-feet setback for the buffer; 15-foot is required. Staff does have concerns and objects to these two variances. Part of the reason why is that this is a 1.8-acre piece of property, a 12,000 sq. ft. facility. There seems that there would be opportunities to reposition the building; perhaps, in the northwest corner of the property, get it closer to Hamilton Road getting it away from the adjacent residentially zoned property. Staff does have concerns with those variances and there are two other variances that relate to the parking area to the rear of the site and just the sheer number of parking spaces. Code requires 124 parking spaces based off a 12,000 sq. ft. facility, which is obscene and would be so over parked. Blackford cannot imagine any building this size ever needing that. From research, this particular use on a square footage basis requires more parking than any other use in the zoning codes; shopping centers, restaurants, gas stations, high turnover types of places do not require this level of parking. They are providing 61, which in staff’s opinion is more than sufficient. Code also says it could be based on the number of bays. There are seven bays. Code says it is three spaces per bay, which would only be 21 spaces, but it is the greater of the two. In this case, it could have been 21 but it is 124. That is the danger of having parking calculations in zoning codes. They can be inaccurate, and we don’t want to see giant parking lots that are unoccupied and unused. They tend to be unsightly and tough to maintain. The other variances are to the rear of the property that would be behind the fencing that they have proposed. They are requesting no landscaping in this parking area. There are no objections from staff. For the area of the internal parking lot variance, Code says that there needs to be some trees and landscape island running in between the rows of parking. The Commission has routinely granted that type of variance. The zoning code rewrite will not require landscaping in between two rows of parking like it currently does. It serves no purpose. Blackford knows that some residents have sent in emails with concerns to this variance. He said this landscaping wouldn’t do too much in the way of screening vehicles because there would be a fence. He believes they are proposing an opaque brick fence which would be refined through the design review City of Gahanna Page 4 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 process. The back-parking lot would have buffering with vegetation. If Planning Commission was inclined to grant this variance, it could always have a condition. Variances can be conditioned to require those internal plantings be located on the exterior of the parking area in this 41-foot setback. In the area on the southern piece of property, where the single-family home is, is where they are requesting four-feet in lieu of a 15-foot buffer or 20+ foot building setback. Blackford reviewed the variance and conditional use criteria. There are three conditions for a variance approval. The criteria, are special condition of property, building or use. Is it necessary for the preservation of the property rights, and thirdly would it adversely affect surrounding properties? There are four conditions for conditional use. Is it a conditional use of the zone district? Blackford said it was when the application was filed, so that is a yes. Is the zoning standard met? Some of the zoning standards are not met. That is why there is the variance application. If you approve the variance application, then those zoning standards are met. Is it in accord with appropriate plans for the area? Blackford talked about the Land Use Plan and some of the recommendations and staff’s opinion that it not consistent with the recommendations of the Land Use Plan. Will the request have undesirable effects on surrounding property? His opinion is that there could be undesirable effects and maybe ways to mitigate that if desired. Is the proposed development consistent with development of the area? The applicant’s application provided some analysis of Hamilton Road in Gahanna and the abundance of auto-related uses. Staff would agree with them that this is consistent with development of the area. Blackford showed some renderings of the building showing building materials, which is informational at this stage. He said he believes the renderings are mislabeled. The facade labeled north is facing west to Hamilton Road. The other rendering is the south facade. The facade labeled south is the rear of the property that would be fenced and is facing east. Staff recommendation is that this is not consistent with the zoning code. Auto repair sometimes can have negative impacts. One of those could be noise from the way they operate. There is a chapter within Zoning Code 1167.19(b)(1) which talks about noise levels at property lines between developments being at a level that is not discernible from other developments or the usual street traffic. Along the east property line that abuts to residential development, noise at that property line from this development should be that of any other developments in that area or the same as normal street traffic. Also, these uses can be unsightly a lot of times. A lot of jurisdictions and zoning codes, especially suburban zoning codes, will have automotive repair facilities in high intensity commercial area. Those areas are typically not located frequently adjacent to residential development. That is one reason the Zoning Code was modified. They are proposing some opaque fencing. Code would require screening. That would help with the unsightliness. Staff does have experience with similar types of developments and sometimes those areas, especially that fenced in area to the rear, does on occasion tend to be an accumulation of vehicles and parts and things of that nature. It kind of morphs into a junk yard or scrap yard because of inoperable vehicles. That is the possibility. All of these are operated differently, and a lot of it depends on the operator and how well they keep things up, but there are some unsightly components with these types of uses. It is not consistent with the Land Use Plan, which is recommendations and not law like the Zoning Code. It is not a recommended use and not a recommended intensity by the Land Use Plan. Staff doesn’t find that the criteria for the variance and conditional use are met. When you look at the variance criteria, it talks about a special condition of property, building, or use. You don’t really find one related to this property or to this use. Related to parking, kind of see that being that our code is antiquated and not realistic with the parking demands. As far as the building setback and the variance to the building City of Gahanna Page 5 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 setback and to the buffer, a 12,000 sq. ft. building on 1.8 acres is low intensity. It seems like there would be opportunities, perhaps, to reposition the building. If it was flipped and oriented towards the northwest corner of the property, they wouldn’t need to have the variance. There does seem to be some possibilities and options there for redeveloping the site where some of those variances might not be necessary. Regarding the conditional use, the criteria are in accord with the zoning district based off the Zoning Code that was in place at the time of application filing. Staff doesn’t believe that the zoning standards are met; that is why they are asking for the variance, but staff does not recommend approval of the variance. They don’t find that it is in accord with the plans for the area and staff does have some concerns that there would be undesirable effects on the surrounding area due to noise and appearance. Blackford wanted to remind everybody that this property is zoned community commercial and is zoned for commercial development and is located within a mixed-use land use. It is on a four-lane major arterial roadway. That is where you locate commercial. All up and down Hamilton Road is almost all multi-family and commercial uses like this. At some point in time, commercial will be developed on this property. The zoning does allow for office, general professional medical offices, retail, restaurants. Those are all similar types of uses and they all come with positives and negatives associated with those. It is highly doubtful the property develops with any non-commercial uses other than multi-family. If it was zoned multi-family, we would have a proposal in tomorrow. Likely development of this site, if this application doesn’t go forward, would be similar types of commercial uses or multi-family. With the Zoning Code changes, auto repair is no longer an allowed use, it is allowed in office commerce technology (OCT), which is one of our largest geographical areas of zoning. It is south of Taylor Road and is essentially 100 percent zoned OCT. It is also in community service allowed by a conditional use. There is other zoning where these uses are permitted. If there is an inclination, desire to approve the application staff would recommend there be conditions. This is up to Planning Commission and obviously because both the variance and the conditional use can either be approved, denied, or approved with conditions. Blackford has talked about noise, sound proofing, some zoning codes requires certain uses to be sound proofing. We do not have specific language on that. He doesn’t know if the building is already planned to be sound proofed, but that might be one tool to mitigate noise. If there is a concern about inoperable vehicles and that morphing into a different type of use, the Commission could require additional screening, a certain type of fencing, and can also say that as part of the conditional use it is not allowed to have outside parking or it is very limited. The Commission has options, if desired. Chair Tamarkin thanked Mr. Blackford for the thoroughness of the presentation. Chair opened public comment at 7:33 p.m. Applicant Glen Dugger, 37 W. Broad Street, attorney representing Ty Safaryan and Fine Line Auto. Also, in attendance is John Oney, Architect, and Ty Safaryan. Dugger would like to address the conditional use application first then the variance application. If we can’t find that this is an appropriate conditional use, then he is quite frankly at a loss as to whether they should explore the variance process here as well. Dugger has stood in front of this Commission countless times and always says he agrees with Mr. Blackford. He does here also, with one exception. He thinks that we need to understand the context in which this application is in front of the Commission. This property was brought to the Commission in February of 2020. Dugger has read the minutes of that meeting and what he sees occurring at that meeting was not significant opposition to this use but questions about solving technical problems so that this conditional use can go forward. Some of the Commission members were here City of Gahanna Page 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 but Dugger was not. He believes that we have to understand the context in which we got to where we are today. Mr. Safaryan comes to that meeting, has a good discussion with the Commission, goes out in the intervening months, purchases the property, and tears the building down that was there. That was done at obviously considerable expense. That would not have been done if there was an expectation that they couldn’t locate this use on this particular property. It would be foolhardy to think otherwise. In the intervening time, the city chose to rezone it. The city plans for the area, he thinks, have taken maybe a little bit different direction. They couldn’t file the application, simple fact. They were able to file it as soon they were able to essentially process it, and that application, he thinks, as staff pointed out and as the city attorneys indicated, is an application which has to be judged by the time and date of the filing of that application, which was the property zoned with this as a conditional use. They took a little bit of time, unfortunately for them, to obtain one of the elements of the conditional use that staff has asked all applicants to prepare. It is an economic analysis, which they were able to obtain after some delay from Bill LaFayette, who has done a lot of planning and has performed that function on numerous occasions and submitted these to the city. He found that there is a significant need for this use in this location. We have, he believes, a conditional use which the applicant believed was an appropriate use of this property when he took significant steps towards that in purchasing the property and then tearing down the building that was there. This gets us to where we are today. We have to ask ourselves what is really fundamentally fair. For this applicant, the city has changed a lot of things, and he is appreciative that the city acknowledges that we have to operate under the rules that existed at the time. But the applicant and is asking the Commission to approve this based on having taken this series of steps in reliance on his discussion with the Commission in February of 2020 and not the rules that exist in 2022. He believes they can deal with a lot of the technical issues. Mr. Blackford has indicated a number of questions and objections. He thinks Mr. Blackford did say one thing that he doesn’t want to nitpick. Blackford’s presentation indicated that this type of use is usually found in high intensity commercial areas. Dugger believes that North Hamilton Road is about highly intensive commercial area as Gahanna has. In fact, that is what Mr. LaFayette found. He doesn’t think anyone would say that North Hamilton Road is not a high intensity commercial area. That is where we put this type of use and all they are asking for the Commission to do is to be fair to Mr. Safaryan. He came to the Commission, showed what his plans were. There were technical questions about it. In Mr. Safaryan’s mind, he felt that those were resolvable and now they find that for whatever reason that’s not, and he does not believe that is being fair to the applicant. That is essentially there please to the Commission. He is sure there are a lot of people here who want to talk about the technical components of this, which they are happy to do. He thinks that initially they need to come to some understanding that this is an acceptable conditional use. They are happy to have the discussion about all the elements of the site plan. They believe they can address several of the potential variances in a way that maybe makes those variances not necessary. Maybe that is one way of reducing the level of intensity and questionable objection to this potential application. Public Comments: Sandra Winemiller Sexton, 294 Villa Oaks Ln. Ms. Sexton said she had a speech prepared but (changed her remarks) after hearing the request summary, which she thought was well done. One thing she didn’t hear was, as far as a heavy industry like a body shop, is the idea of the pollution that will be released. Her first degree is in chemistry. She was an R&D Chemist for heavy industry. Try as they might, the kind of solvents that are going to get used, the particulate matter that’s going to be generated City of Gahanna Page 7 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 and the noise were a concern. She knows they have talked about mitigation of the noise, but those bays are going to be going up and down all day long regardless of the filtration system they have, regardless of the sound proofing. In the summertime in warm weather, these operations typically have their bays open. So, all these mitigation things that were being talked about become moot when those seven bay doors are open. A lot of the chemicals they use are carcinogenic in nature and can cause nerve disease and stuff like that. She is a long hauler COVID person and has chronic asthma now. She is several houses/buildings away from Hamilton Road and is really concerned about the kind of pollution that a heavy industry kind of operation like this will be producing. She thinks it belongs in a heavier industry setting. If you drive down the main drag of the Villas of Gahanna, Villa Oaks Lane, there is Columbus Academy. So, less than a half mile away we have a school, an athletic field there, and we have an operation like this that’s going to be releasing these toxic emissions. That is the point she wanted to make. She appreciates the Commission’s time. George Mrus, 1217 Sanctuary Place. Mr. Mrus said that he and his wife have lived in the Wood of Shagbark for almost 16 years. He thanked the Commission for allowing him to speak and the opportunity to address and state his opposition to the proposed Fine Line Autobody shop on North Hamilton Road. A few facts about the Woods of Shagbark: it is a 118-unit community and has a real estate value of close to seven million dollars per acre or $35 million in aggregate for the five acres of this property, making it one of the highest valued residential real estate parcels in the City of Gahanna. Shagbark directly contributes, on an annualized basis, over a million dollars to property taxes, of which six hundred thousand go to the Gahanna Jefferson School District. There are about five or six students within their community. It is truly a net positive for the schools. Almost 32 thousand dollars goes to the City of Gahanna as well. He is opposed to the proposed development because it will reduce the quality of life, the curb appeal, and therefore, the value of his community. He asks that the Commission deny this application based on the variances as the proposed development will be injurious to the Woods of Shagbark surrounding residential areas. The parking lot in the back, regardless of the number of spaces, will ultimately resemble an impound lot or a junkyard. He noted the possible noise pollution, with pneumatic hammers, pneumatic drills, and the general noise. The conditional uses will have a deterrent and will support the undesirable effects in the surrounding area. He is opposed because each Fine Line Autobody shop in Central Ohio borders a main thoroughfare: High Street multiple times, Olentangy River Road, Bethel Road, Morse Road, over by Twins Buick. This part of North Hamilton is not. He is not against an auto body shop, but he is opposed to the location in a residential area when there are plenty of other parcels as noted earlier, such as the industrial area that would be far more appropriate for an auto body shop. The applicant provides what they consider to be a very upbeat, yet, with all due respect misleading, picture of the economic value and the beneficial nature that the auto body shop will bring to not only residents but the City of Gahanna as well. Their report fails to take into account or even discuss the collateral impact on the values and quality of life of the surrounding residential properties including the Woods at Shagbark. He is asking the Commission to deny this application as ultimately this proposed development will be injurious to property and have untold and undesirable effects of the surrounding area. It will materially affect the health and quality of life of those that reside next to the proposed development. It is detrimental to the preservation and enjoyment of our property rights. He asked the Commission if they would personally purchase a residential property and live next to an auto body shop. He thanked the Commission for allowing him to speak this evening and state the reasons why he opposes this proposed development. Bill Miller 1198 Sanctuary Place. Mr. Miller said he opposes both the conditional use City of Gahanna Page 8 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 and variance. He is an architect with almost 50 years’ experience and said that this project concerns him quite a bit. As far as the conditional use, Bill LaFayette’s study says that 20 people will work at this shop, but of the 30 shops he surveyed, only three had more people than that. Most of them had many less, so the economic impact of this is going to be a lot less than people think. LaFayette also mentions that there is need here. There are 30 shops within a convenient distance including one that’s only a little over a mile away. The body shop does not meet the desired land use in general of this generally upscale area. Other people have already spoke to that. He is against the variance with the side yard setback. He thinks that it precludes a lot of options for the future for people. The rear parking is what he is really interested in. Mr. Miller shared some pictures with the Commission. He said the site is three feet below the average line of the complex and the fence is a six-foot fence, and in effect, it’s only three feet high because you can look right over it. Several of the people here have patios that look out onto that area directly. He showed a view from one of the houses. Miller said they recommended putting a six-foot wall around this. They put a six-foot wall around the one on High Street and it has barbed wire at the top of it. It is not the prettiest thing in the world. Also, if you put a brick wall next to the standard wall, there is a no man’s land between the two and this is the same condition that is at the High Street facility that they did. There are issues about upkeep and general appearance. There are a lot of other issues: barbed wire, drainage, these cars are wrecked, and they drain into a catch basin and the catch basin goes into the retention pond and that goes into the public sewers. There are issues there that need, to me, looked at. Tamarkin stated the phots will be entered into the record (attached under Public Hearing distributed materials). Jane Miller, 1198 Sanctuary Place. Mrs. Miller thanked the Commission for listening to them about their concerns. Miller said the Commission just heard from her retired architect husband. Mrs. Miller is a retired attorney who practiced for 40 some years. As relevant to this she concurs what was stated by the first speaker who introduced herself as a chemist. Miller has all the same concerns. The first three years of her legal practice was at Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA). Miller left for the Commission some regulations that she obtained from the OEPA. She also spoke to a number of their staff members. Miller practiced state and federal environmental law, including air pollution control that was addressed, and which is maybe the most significant. There can be oil spills. She also represented the emergency response team at OEPA that deals with oil spills. That’s federal law, too. All these fields are state and federal law with overlaps. The state laws were more stringent, but usually it dovetails pretty much most of the time. She pulled material from their website. There are two compliance guides and all the regulations and detailed rules that include potential permits that they are going to have to be obtained from OEPA, depending on the type of equipment and their operations and their volume of how much business they are doing and the kinds of chemicals they are using. The regulations track the operations of the business which are all going to have to be identified and then property either permitted or exempted from permits but then they have to follow these detail regulations. You can enter that into the record. There may be some new ones but regulations, she can tell you from practicing law for a long period of time, do not tend to diminish. They tend to increase. Those opposed to this are here to show primarily they are very concerned that the granting of this application not materially adversely affect the health or safety of a person residing or working in the neighborhood. It’s our position that they will. She believes the proposed use will be materially detrimental to City of Gahanna Page 9 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 the public welfare or injurious to property and improvements in such neighborhood. Some of the issue’s safety, and privacy. A couple of speakers have already touched on this. She is very concerned about the prospects of a six-foot brick wall that they can look right over, especially from the upstairs of people’s units and out on their patios because of the lay of the land and the slope of it. People can access their neighborhood even though they live in a gated community to try keep people out that don’t belong there, that are not conducting business with them or are friends or relatives. That is one of the reasons they moved there. They don’t want people driving through all hours of the night and anybody just coming over and doing whatever they feel like. They may try to crawl over that fence. It is not going to be hard. Maybe that is why they put barbed wire over the High Street one. She has no idea. That’s a problem for them safety and security wise, as well as privacy. Miller said her other issues are eyesore, which has already been touched on. Based on Bill LaFayette’s work for Regionomics that the applicant submitted, she knows LaFayette tends to do pretty good work, except he is kind of off on some of the items presented. He does a good job in general. In LaFayette’s work, on one of the first pages that says this type of business auto body is under a different national code, which also allows them to fix trailer bodies. She has no idea what the nature of their business is going to be. That’s going to affect the regulations and what they have to do, but it also may be more of an eyesore if you’ve got some big semi back there or some big, long trailer. She has no clue what they are going to do. There will be pollution problems, huge, air pollution is only one wastewater, drinking water, groundwater pollution, hazardous waste both solid and liquid, oil spills that may drain from the parked storage vehicles down the hill and over to where they have a planned dry detention basin so that when it gets waterized and fluidized it’s going to run down and it may seep into the ground water either in the detention basin or elsewhere. She can’t tell from the application if the fire department has even approved this. It sounds like they are not happy with it. She is very concerned about fire. There are woods on each side of the property running north and south. They have woods along all their residences that are very close to where this auto body is going. There are fire issues. The economics are very strange. They have had 27 complaints to the Better Business Bureau on their existing facilities that they say people are happy with. Well, apparently, they are not. They have had 27 complaints to the Better Business Bureau in the last three years. There is a traffic pattern issue of how people are going to access that business and get out of it. If you’re going to head north out of it, you’ve got to go straight. You’re going to have to get over somewhere else because you can’t go left out of the side of the street they want to build on and vice versa going south. They can’t go directly into their business; they’re going to go down to Vista Plaza. There will be damage to the Woods at Shagbark, potential pollution, potential fire, potential loss of property values, and noise. There are OSHA requirements for employees for hazardous chemicals, flammables. There are fire concerns, dust and particulate matter that was already discussed, and ventilation of facilities properly to prevent buildup of toxic fumes. Some of the stuff they may have in there may have asbestos. They are required to have hearing protection and ear plugs for their employees-- OSHA requirements. It’s not just the OEPA, it’s OSHA. Miller reached her time limit. Tamarkin asked to include the regulations that were brought added to the record (attached under Public Hearing distributed materials). Ron Young, 1202 Sanctuary Place. Mr. Young is opposed to this. The issues to him is the automotive use of the area and the building itself, which, once built, will only be usable by an automotive type of a business. So, if the business falters, we have a bunch of building along there: Valvoline, Firestone, this proposed body shop that will City of Gahanna Page 10 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 really be there for years and years to come with one purpose. That is to either work on automobiles, boats, motorcycles, something that’s automotive that requires that type of bay setup. His issue is he is thinking about it as a Shagbark resident looking out. They have the backs of all these very unsightly businesses. They sit right at Giant Eagle, which isn’t the prettiest thing from the back side. It is a great store, but not the most attractive thing. His fear is it will damage the property values, especially for those people in his community that live right where that fence is and has been noted one can easily look into that vehicle parking area and be looking at it at all times. He is opposed to a body shop being put in that location mostly because of the impact upon his community and how that would change the aesthetics. Connie Boyce, 296 Villa Oaks Lane. Ms. Boyce said she has nothing against auto body shops. She honestly doesn’t believe this is the proper place. It would be sandwiched directly between two condominiums. These are their homes. None of us want to live near an auto body shop with the fumes. Everything everyone has said she concurs with, and she hopes that the Commission will consider the two condominium projects that she does believe sometimes Gahanna neglects. They forget about them. They are homeowners that are happy in Gahanna. They want to stay here. She doesn’t think she will if Fine Line Autobody moves in. There is an industrial area for that type of business. Tamarkin asked the applicant to respond. Dugger said that they have represented Fine Line on a number of these around town and a lot of these same kind of questions come up. He thinks it’s in part because of the historic nature of the industry. This is a very heavily regulated industry as Mrs. Miller pointed out. There used to be things called volatile organic chemicals which were used in processes. These are hazardous problems, hazardous waste. Today, an auto body shop is one of the most heavily regulated service industries out there, number one. Number two is that all the materials, paints etc. are all water-based. These are not the types of chemicals that become problematic off-site. Ask any automobile dealer what their most expensive operation is and they would tell you that it is the auto body shop. So, we can’t have these types of things there by virtue of both federal and state regulations. For the record, he thinks they should be talking about what auto body shops are now with current best available technology and what auto body shops used to be, which, in fact, were problematic. That is why they became very heavily regulated. They were not regulated in a lot of places. A six-foot fence he believes is the tallest they can build if the city allows them to build a six-foot fence. It doesn’t allow them to build an eight-foot fence and doesn’t allow them to put barbed wire on it to his knowledge unless the city has changed. Dugger said Blackford is shaking his head. Barbed wire is not permitted in the City of Gahanna, nor could they put barbed wire on that fence. They can only build that fence six-feet tall because that’s as tall a fence as they can. They didn’t choose to build a wood fence. They didn’t choose to build some other form of fence. They chose to build a fence that would be as stout, guaranteed the most privacy, and be as permanent as they possible could make it. They would make that fence taller if that was something that this board felt would be appropriate to do. Unfortunately, that then, he believes, becomes no longer a fence but a structure and then is subject to all the setback requirements that would be applicable to a structure. There was a comment he thinks was about his client’s poor business practices because there were complaints to the Better Business Bureau. He services about 120 cars a week, which is over 6000 cars in a year. If he has had 27 complaints, that is less than a half of a percent. In that business, in that industry where people are dealing with collisions, dealing with interruptions in their life, he thinks that’s quite good. He thinks it speaks well to his client’s business and how City of Gahanna Page 11 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 he is running his business. They want to be good neighbors; this property is zoned commercially. This is a low traffic use. They believed that this board was somewhat supportive of it a year and a half ago. They would like the opportunity to continue to go forward. He thanked the Commission. Tamarkin shared those three pieces of communication was received and will go into the record (attached). Chair closed the public comment at 8:08 p.m. Questions from the Commission: Hicks asked Mr. Dugger if the commission could ask questions of Mr. Safaryan or would he prefer they ask Dugger the questions. Dugger said Safaryan is perfectly capable of answering whatever questions the Commission might ask. Hicks asked Safaryan if he was at the February 2020 meeting. Hicks said that the Commission was at that meeting. He remembers, and the records show, that Mr. Dyssemaliyev was in attendance. Safaryan said he was at the meeting. Safaryan said he would have opened this location a long time ago but COVID hit us. That is why it took so long. His business was down 80 percent. Hicks asked how many other locations Safaryan owns. Safaryan said he owns eight locations. Hicks asked how they typically source their customers; do they rely on drive-by or way finding? How do they get their customers? Safaryan said obviously Gahanna doesn’t want him to be there. There is no reason for him to be there actually. He hears from his neighbors that’s what’s more important than anything else. If his neighbors don’t want him to be there actually, he thinks they shouldn’t be here right now. There is a lot of business in Gahanna, so he wanted a business. Hicks asked how Fine Line Autobody received customers. Is it insurance referrals typically? Safaryan said it is from neighbors. Shapaka asked for an explanation of the auto repair and kind of go into detail what they are expecting to do in Gahanna so that they can get the comment about the trailer bodies being used. Is this for a very specific car? Safaryan said they do not fix semi-trucks; they just fix cars that got in car accidents. Shapaka asked if it includes engine work. Safaryan said no, just body work, fender, bumper, and door. Shapaka asked if they have a paint booth. Safaryan said yes, it’s all waterproof, it is all water-based paint, there are no chemicals involved. It is all water-based. Shapaka said it is all automotive. Safaryan said it is, yes, just cars. Shapaka asked how the cars are delivered to the site. Safaryan said if the car is not drivable, they will tow it in. Shapaka asked if it is towed in during off hours, is it something that just parks out front. Safaryan said they have their own tow trucks, and they pull it into the back. Shapaka said, regarding the six-foot fence, he believes they can get a variance for a fence higher than that. He thinks that they have barbed wire because they have somewhat created a pick and pull with a bunch of cars in the back that aren’t there for a long time and people know they are there make and model they will hop over the fence and steal something from it. Shapaka doesn’t know if he would envision that happening in Gahanna. Shapaka asked how fast the turnover was for a car that is on his property. Safaryan said that 99 percent of the cars are all insurance work and one percent maybe cash customers. Safaryan said they are fast. Shapaka asked if a car is there for a week or ten days. Safaryan said sometimes one day. If it is a big damage, it could be two or three weeks. Safaryan has been in business for 26 years in Columbus. He never heard of this stuff. Shapaka said it sounds like Safaryan is very successful and good at what he does, and he can see what he is up against. Safaryan said he also owns Twins Buick GMC, and they have a body shop there, too. Shapaka said the parking count is 64. He asked if they needed 64 spaces. Safaryan said they City of Gahanna Page 12 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 do not. Shapaka said there is some leeway and some designs. Safaryan said they probably need 20 parking spaces max. Shapaka said that could alleviate some of the other variances they are going to ask for later if the conditional use is approved. Shapaka asked if Safaryan had looked at other sites in or around Gahanna. Safaryan said no. He was here in February 2020. Before he purchased the property, he came here and asked if it’s okay to purchase. He purchased the property, which was a medical office. He tore down the medical office because he thought it was okay for him to build a body shop, and he now hears all these bad things about his company. Shapaka said there is nobody here that’s going to come out and say it’s a great idea. Safaryan said when he was here in February, nobody said no. Everybody said yes and now he hears absolutely no. He cares about these customers. He knows that they said in the last three years they have had 27 complaints; in the last three years, they have fixed 18,000 cars. So, 27 complaints in three years is not that bad. Regarding their Google reviews, the lowest they have for locations is 4.6 and the highest 4.9. They have good customer service. Greenberg had some questions about the environmental aspects and asked if the EPA has ever cited one of his facilities. Safaryan said he doesn’t think so. Greenberg asked if he has received any EPA written notices. Safaryan said absolutely not. Greenberg asked if they have been inspected by the EPA. Safaryan said they get inspected and are certified through PPF and then they have all the stuff for the EPA. The EPA will come and inspect them. They just show up. They have had no problems. Greenberg asked if they have environmental permits that are required through the state. Safaryan said yes, through the Fire Department and the EPA. Greenberg asked if it was for specific emissions. Safaryan said yes, for paint. It is water paint, but you still have to have all that stuff. Greenberg said you have never received anything that says you violated any of those. Safaryan said no. Greenberg asked if all the runoff is going to go to the dry basin that is going to be planned for out front. Safaryan said that way it works the car is inside the paint booth and it goes through four filters before it goes out. Tamarkin asked how much work is done outside. There are seven bays but there are cars in the lot. How much of it, say, on a nice summer day, let’s not talk January, let’s talk May, June, July. Safaryan said that no work is done outside. It is inside. It is 12,000 sq. ft. It is a big building. It is only seven bays, so the cars are inside. Tamarkin asked how many cars will fit inside. Safaryan said about 15. Tamarkin said no preliminary work, no removing of damaged parts. Safaryan said absolutely not. Tamarkin said cars are stored outside but no work is done outside. In the summer is the air conditioning on in the building or are the doors open. Safaryan said there is air conditioning inside. Safaryan said there is a fence inside the shop and then air conditioning inside office. Tamarkin said so when you’re working in the shop the seven garage doors are up or down in the summer. Safaryan said they are down. Safaryan said you can inspect other locations. Tamarkin talked about the pictures distributed. The white fence is a Woods of Shagbark fence. The six-foot fence would not have barbed wire on it. There is the potential to make it higher with a variance. The land that is in between to the east is their land. You propose no landscaping. Is it possible to landscape it, to put in trees? Safaryan said absolutely. Tamarkin asked if there is a reason not to landscape it. Safaryan said they can do it. Tamarkin said there are no natural trees in the area now. It’s a field, he believes. Dugger said that is correct. Tamarkin said the potential is there to landscape it, should the Commission require it, with trees for shielding. Dugger said yes. Tamarkin asked about the drainage. We have heard from some of the residents. We have heard from his colleagues no real emissions and four filters in City of Gahanna Page 13 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 the building. Do the cars leak oil, do the cars leak when they are towed to the site after an accident? Safaryan said that, first of all, if there is a car accident the oil usually leaks right there at the accident scene. Tamarkin asked once it comes to the shop. Safaryan said they have never had a problem; they have a tank for oil and a tank for antifreeze. Tamarkin said where do you drain it and is it leaking in the lot until the car gets into the building. Safaryan said no. Mr. Oney, 49 East 3rd Street, the architect, said that regarding drainage, everything will go to Hamilton Road. Everything will be collected outside in storm drains that go through their water quality and water quantity controls of all the current regulations for runoff and control. As far as inside, anything on a floor drain would go through an oil interceptor as you would in other automotive uses. Tamarkin said one of the regulations was no undue noise, no noise. It was brought up there could be a lot of equipment, a lot of pneumatic guns; if he is standing outside the building, or if he is on the patio at the home closest to them, what is he going to hear? Safaryan said absolutely nothing. He has never heard that question before about noise. What noise can that be in a body shop when you take a fender out and you put a fender back on. You fix it. What noise are you talking about? From the property to the closest house there is 100-feet at least, maybe 200-feet. If you hit the fender with the hammer to fix that fender, what noise are we talking about? There is no noise. If you are taking the fender out, you put a fender back on. If there is a dent on the fender or dent on the door, you fix the dent on the door and that’s it. They are not a manufacturer. They don’t manufacture cars. They fix cars. Tamarkin said they are using tools and they are using equipment and tools and equipment makes noise. The question is how much of that noise escapes the building. Safaryan said once you walk around the body shop and see what noise you have. He has never heard of this. On Bethel Road, they are right next to a hotel. They have never said anything. Greenberg asked if there have ever been any measurements of noise. It is a big concern of the residents and it getting to the property line and disturbing the neighborhood. Have they ever measured the noise during operations? Safaryan said no. Greenberg asked Blackford if he made a recommendation about sound proofing if the Commission were to approve this. Blackford said that sometimes sound proofing is an effective tool at mitigating noise. Some uses have noise, what’s offend able or noise depends on who you are and what you’re doing. Since conditions can be added to conditional uses, if that is a concern, the Commission could require sound proofing of the building and require that the bay doors be closed during business hours and all work is done inside the building. It is something that some zoning codes have in them for certain uses. Greenberg said it is not in city code, so it would have to be added as a condition. Blackford said the city has it for one other use. It was added for kenneling of dogs, doggy daycares, and stuff like that. That is something some zoning codes have for certain uses. Oney said that they do a lot of auto dealerships and most of the body shops are done as pre-engineered buildings. This is all masonry and all Safaryan’s buildings they have done are brick masonry walls and are insulated, which is soundproofing. He has always put the seven bays and the doors of those facing the main street, both for transparency so that people can see what’s going in there, the type of operation, and also any noise that would escape is heading to the road noise, if the door is open. Safaryan has had that as a priority in all his facilities, the new ones that they have built. There are some that have been renovated. The reason they oriented the building was to put any open-door situation towards Hamilton Road. There is a door in the back that would be very occasionally used. One of the doors is a parts door and the other is if you had to bring cars in from the back that were stored, there is a way to get them into the building. City of Gahanna Page 14 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 Oney said as far as the variances and listening to the setbacks on the south property line they originally did the orientation because that’s the preferred way to locate the doors towards the street. They do have a plan with them that rotates the building 90 degrees that could eliminate their request for any variances on the south side. It increases their green area 7.6 percent. So, developed over 50 percent of the site is still green. If it would be Planning Commission’s request, he has the drawing available to share with them. They would be willing to rotate that building to eliminate the variances to the south. Greenberg asked Blackford a question on a conditional use and whether the request for conditional use is approved when the following four conditions are met. The first one indicated they fulfill that one, but the second and third he believes Blackford had concerns about. He asked Blackford to elaborate a little more on those two. Blackford said that those two are the ones that have staff concerns. The second one is in accord with appropriate plans for the area. There is only one land use plan in the city. This area is mixed use. It talks about recommending certain uses and certain intensities. It doesn’t require those uses but it specifically says retail is one of those uses. The other uses were not service uses. As it was talked about applicant’s applications in detail and they correctly pointed out, this is a service use. This is how it’s a little bit different than the tire change facilities because those are retail shop. The plan doesn’t call for service uses here. There was a lot of research that went into the Land Use Plan and that was based off the current use of property identifying where Gahanna is deficient. Where do we need additional uses? What are the deficiencies in the marketplace? It called for retail as a use not service, so there is the use component with the Land Use Plan and there is also the intensity. The recommended intensities are very aggressive. 60,000 sq. ft. is the low end of that. The high end, he believes, is 200,000 sq. ft., which is hard to imagine that is going to be done in Gahanna. It’s probably not what those residents in attendance would like to see the property developed as. The reason why that was selected as a recommendation is because of inefficient development. Property has now placed a burden on Gahanna to develop the vacant property with certain types of uses and at certain intensities. About five percent of the city’s property is vacant and developable, probably less than that at this point and time. Again, it just places emphasis on developing things with certain types of uses and certain intensities and that’s why staff has some concerns. The third one, will the request have undesirable effects on the surrounding area. That’s a little bit more subjective. He said we have heard testimony and maybe some of these things are addressed through other agencies such as environmental. Maybe noise is or isn’t an issue, but there are question marks and usually when staff has questions around a use you know that might be an indication that this isn’t the right location for that particular use. If a site plan needs to be conditioned, which the Commission has the right to do, it becomes very difficult for shorthanded staff to do any type of enforcement on a document five years from now, 10 years from now. You can’t have a bay door up. Well, last Tuesday you had it up for an hour. There really is no policing of that. It gets very difficult and is something to consider. Yes, you can add conditions but, again, once staff start looking at things and starting to anticipate undesirable effects, they think that there could be. There might be ways to mitigate that, but when you have questions marks that usually leads you down the path of conditions or denial rather than approval. That is his thought process. Tamarkin stated the zoning has not changed on this property; the Land Use Plan has changed. Blackford said to clarify that, the Land Use Plan was in effect prior to the February 2020 workshop. The zoning code was changed, not the zoning of the property but the allowed uses within the zoning. There were no changes to the zoning of this property or any other properties in the area. The property is community City of Gahanna Page 15 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 commercial (CC2) on the map. Community commercial was modified and the allowed uses no longer allow some automotive related uses and no longer allowed as a conditional use. Zoning has not changed but the uses within the zoning has changed. Part of that was because the Land Use Plan was done in 2019 and it takes a while to make some of those updates. It was sort of related to the Land Use Plan and was also related to high intensity commercial. When he says high intensity commercial, he would say that probably more what he means is in the industrial area as far as uses away from residential. Certainly, this is a very heavily trafficked area for Gahanna. From a traffic standpoint there is a lot of traffic in this area. When he was talking about high intensity, he wasn’t referring to the number of vehicles on the roadway or other types of commercial uses. A lot of times zoning codes will say certain uses will not be in close proximity to residential. Sometimes those include auto repair, sometimes they don’t. Shapaka asked Blackford how high can we build on that property underneath the current zoning? Blackford said he can’t give a specific because the way zoning code is written it refers to John Glenn International Airport. Within the flight path 200 yards from the runway, it is about a 100-feet, a ten-story building. We don’t have any in Gahanna, as far as he knows. That could go there, and it wouldn’t be any issues from the airport. But what exactly that height limit is, he is not certain, but it would be over 100-feet. Motion was made by Hicks, seconded by Shapaka, that the Conditional Use be approved. Discussion on the motion: Suriano thanked everyone for coming out and voicing concerns and being part of the public process. He thanked the applicant. Being a part of this Commission for a certain amount of time and seeing what we are seeing in our city, there is going to be more pressure put on our commercial corridors as our city continues to grow. It is the nature of living in a desirable, economically healthy community. We do have residential plats and communities that are immediately adjacent to commercial corridors. It is the way our city is developed and just a reality. We are going to have commercial uses along four-lane commercial thoroughfares. Timing notwithstanding, Mr. Blackford indicated code was amended to be more consistent with the Land Use Plan. We are very much in the infancy of seeing this through. Development and those its affects tend to be slow just by the nature of building. He was on the Land Use Committee and he sees this particular use as more of a service and less in the spirit of retail or mixed use as staff indicated. Some mixed-use developments potentially could have a very high intensity, whether it’s multi-family, retail center, whatever that might be. It could have a high intensity as compared to an auto body shop. Mixed use also implies that the uses tend to be mutually beneficial and he sees this type of use as a relatively insular type of service. It doesn’t necessarily benefit or benefit from being next to other retail centers or communities like Shagbark. Whether it is foot traffic, walk ability, accessibility, those types of things. Suriano is only speaking to the conditional use and not necessarily the potential variances, as we don’t have a final development plan or a design review. He appreciates the architect’s suggestion of a different type of plan. He doesn’t think that it is appropriate at this point, as the Commission is voting on a conditional use. Generally, from what he has seen, some of the architecture seems fine relative to what is around. As he looks at the number of variances as a planning commissioner, the number of variances and the type generally seem to be a City of Gahanna Page 16 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 good indicator of whether the site can accommodate the use and whether it is appropriate. There are four variances, two of which he doesn’t like. We know the Land Use Plan is not a mandate but it’s a guideline and it does represent a vision for how our city wants to grow. He doesn’t think this use is in that spirit. He is not going to be in support. Greenberg shared he is, as well, very concerned with the proposed development being in the appropriate plan area. Even though the plan is not law, it is important. The city spent a lot of time developing the plan. It is important for that to be a guide. He is concerned about the undesirable effects on the surrounding areas as discussed. He will also not be in support. Wester will also not be in support for the concerns that his colleagues iterated just a moment ago. He is in support of the work that Blackford and the Department of Planning did with regards to this. He thinks Blackford’s recommendations are spot on and as are the comments of his colleagues. Hicks said it has been noted that these lots will be commercial in some form or manner. They have been vacant for quite a number of years. As a Commission they have heard some applications about this area. Hicks would love to see Mr. Safaryan open the Fine Line Autobody Shop in Gahanna. It is a high-quality business. The question to him and the Commission is whether here is the best place for it. Fine Line Autobody is very well known and very reputable and he would love to see a facility in Gahanna at some point. The Commission hears on rezoning applications sometimes whether a proposed business is the highest and best use. This is not a rezoning application, but it is something that the Commission needs to consider whether the physical development potential of the area is being met. As a commissioner, if any one of the following reasons is not met for the conditional use, then it is the Commission’s purview to deny, and he will also not be in support of the conditional use application for those reasons. Shapaka said he doesn’t have a problem with the conditional use. Is he going to vote for it, he is not sure for this site? For the people that are here, the conditional use, the applicant has a right to develop that property as you have a right to keep the value of your property up. Shapaka directed his comments to the public. Since he has been on the Commission, every project that has been proposed on that property the neighboring community has been against it. Something is going to go on that site. So, saying that he has looked at the meeting minutes from the meeting in 2000 and commented something is going to go on this site, currently they are looking at a one-story building. We can landscape it, he can rotate it, which he wouldn’t want to rotate it. In his mind, having the front doors open and the noise going to the street, you will not feel that impact that he thinks they are looking at. The parking lot can be switched around and put the landscaping strips in to give you more landscaping between the two, then you would not have that. He would be doing them a favor by putting this in there, because what that would do is that divides a big piece of property where a big project can go on and somebody combines them. Shapaka is looking at the votes against the applicant and he is telling them this just because something’s going to come across here before the vote’s going to be a little bit closer. For the conditional use, he is in favor of it. Tamarkin said his thought process is with Mr. Shapaka. He is not sure if an City of Gahanna Page 17 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 auto body shop is the best use of this land, but he thinks dividing those three parcels you could get a 100-foot building in there. He is not sure how desirable that is with parking and traffic. He gets, as one of the residents brought up, the ingress and egress is difficult on these three parcels. It is a good business. It’s a clean business. He understands the view, but he thinks things can be done to mitigate it and given the opportunity with taller fencing with landscaping and a review of the building it might be able to make it work. The motion failed with the following vote: Yes: 2- Tamarkin and Shapaka No: 4- Hicks, Suriano, Wester and Greenberg Absent: 1- Burba V-0010-2022 To consider a Variance Application to vary Chapters1153.03(c)(4), 1163.02(a), 1163.08, and 1167.20(b)(2) of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Gahanna, for property located at 4550 North Hamilton Rd.; Parcel ID: 025-010281; Current Zoning CC-2; Fine Line Autobody; John Oney and Glenn Dugger, applicants. Dugger withdrew the Variance Application on behalf of the applicant. 2022-0137 Public Hearing distributed materials 2022-0138 Communications received F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE G. NEW BUSINESS - NONE H. OFFICIAL REPORTS Assistant City Attorney - none Director of Planning Blackford shared that are around 30 different applications in the review process. The High School submitted their project about two weeks ago. It is in staff review and a long way off from coming to a hearing. Council Liaison Council Liaison - nothing from Mr. Blackford. Tamarkin said Councilwoman Bowers is in attendance to speak on Fair Housing. Tamarkin shared that he reminded Councilwoman Bowers that the City of Gahanna Page 18 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 Commission has no say nor jurisdiction of who occupies house, but they do see housing in front of the Commission, usually multi-family. Councilwoman Bowers thanked the Commission and staff for putting their meetings on YouTube. It has made it a lot easier to watch the Planning Commission meetings and particularly the Workshop with the High School project. Bowers said that we are all aware of the regional growth that is going on in our area and the projections that our region is going to house three million people by the year 2050. We are also noticing serious housing strain on our community and across the region. People’s homes are selling for 20 percent over list. People are being encouraged to waive inspection because of the competition. There is a lot of pressure and the housing costs are continuing to go up. As we are looking at what can we do for our community, multi-family, and different types rather than just a standard single-family housing is coming more in front of the Commission and she knows that there are more projects pending. Speaking for herself she acknowledges that it is a need for our community, and it is something we need to make sure that we are communicating to our constituents, to our residents about why this is important. How to do it effectively and how to do it well. Bowers appreciates the Commission’s comments that it has no jurisdiction over who goes in housing. Bowers shared an aspect of housing access that she is working on. Fair Housing ordinances and non-discrimination in housing is something that’s being asked of policymakers across Central Ohio. Currently across Franklin County every city except for three, Gahanna, Whitehall and Grove City has a fair housing ordinance. Bowers is looking to bring forward a Fair Housing ordinance that would include comprehensive non-discrimination. She is looking at options that would have a minimal cost and administrative impact on our community and city. She hopes that this would be a foundational piece that would bring us in line with our regional partners, neighboring communities, and it will help us grow in terms of next steps for housing access. To make sure that Gahanna is an inclusive community for all who want to live here. At the Committee of the Whole meeting on February 28, 2022, Bowers gave a presentation on Fair Housing Policy, and updates on what housing discrimination complaints look like across the state. She followed up on April 25, 2022, with some updates on zip code specific data. The presentation is available online. Chair asked the Mayor for comments. Mayor Jadwin said the week of May 9, 2022, is National Economic Development Week. The city will be holding an event this year at La Navona, on Thursday, May 12, 2022. The hope is to talk about the Intel Project from a statewide, regional, and local impact and what we are already seeing and how we are responding to that. The Commission will be invited to attend. Chair - none I. CORRESPONDENCE AND ACTIONS City of Gahanna Page 19 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2022 J. POLL MEMBERS FOR COMMENT Wester said he read the minutes from the Workshop on the school facility. Wester said he didn’t see any mention of the Ohio School Facilities Commission. It is an Ohio resource for school boards that generally do not have design or construction experience for school facilities. In the late 90’s, they were under the direction of the state architect, but he thinks it has been combined now. He also thinks there could be money available for a school facility if they were engaged in that. He says that only because, again, the minutes did not name that commission or even whether it was investigated as being a resource for the school board. He thinks it is something that can be investigated. Hicks said the meeting this evening was a little contentious, but the Commission performed admirably again, and not all on the same page. But still he believes it got to the right decision and the right information got out there. Mayor Jadwin commended Planning Commission. They are getting their share of difficult projects to deal with. Going into this evening, they had received some reach outs from some of the residents and emails which were attached to the packets tonight. Knowing it would be a challenging meeting, the Mayor had every confidence that the Commission would come prepared, would understand the issues, would have thoughtful questions to consider and that the responses, however the Commission decided to vote on this, would be educated and informed. Mayor Jadwin thanked the Commission for how they explained their positions and how they continue to conduct themselves as a body. It is very enlightening and refreshing and it is a very positive impact for the city. K. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m. City of Gahanna Page 20