200 South Hamilton Road

Gahanna, Ohio 43230

City of Gahanna

Meeting Minutes

Planning Commission

Sarah Pollyea, Chair

Michael Suriano, Vice Chair

Michael Greenberg

Elizabeth Laser

James Mako

Thomas Shapaka

Michael Tamarkin

Sophia McGuire, Deputy Clerk of Council

Wednesday, September 10, 2025

7:00 PM

City Hall, Council Chambers

CALL MEETING TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/ROLL CALL

Gahanna Planning Commission met in regular session on September

10, 2025. The agenda for this meeting was published on September 5,

2025. Chair Sarah Pollyea called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with

the Pledge of Allegiance led by Michael Tamarkin.

Prior to Roll Call, the Chair moved the Additions and Corrections

section of the agenda to note the Mayor’s appointment and

swearing-in of Elizabeth Laser to the Planning Commission.

Mayor Jadwin remarked on Mr. Hicks’ departure from Planning

Commission due to no longer residing in the City. Mayor Jadwin

introduced Elizabeth Laser and described Ms. Laser as a local

entrepreneur from Gahanna’s west side, who is also active in the

schools. Ms. Laser brings both business acumen and an interest in

serving the community to the Planning Commission. Mayor Jadwin

then administered the oath of office to Ms. Laser.

7 -

Present

James Mako, Chair Sarah Pollyea, Vice Chair Michael Suriano, Michael

Tamarkin, Thomas W. Shapaka, Michael Greenberg, and Elizabeth Laser

ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA

There were no additional additions or corrections.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

2025-0174

Planning Commission meeting minutes 8.27.2025

A motion was made by Tamarkin, seconded by Greenberg, that the Minutes be

Approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

7 -

Yes:

Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Tamarkin, Shapaka, Greenberg

and Laser

SWEAR IN APPLICANTS & SPEAKERS

City Attorney Tamilarasan administered an oath to those persons

wishing to present testimony this evening.

APPLICATIONS - PUBLIC COMMENT

V-0022-2025

To consider a Variance Application to vary Section 1103.07(e) - Large

Lot Residential of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Gahanna; for

property located at 747 Jonsol Court; Parcel ID 025-004177; Current

Zoning R-1 - Large Lot Residential; David Marshall, applicant.

City Planner Maddie Capka provided a summary of the application; see

attached staff presentation for details. The site is in a neighborhood on

the southern side of Havens Corners Road which is zoned R-1, Large Lot

Residential. The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to allow

an addition of approximately 171 square feet within a side yard setback.

All properties zoned R-1 have a standard side yard setback of 15 feet,

while the proposed addition is 11 feet 9 inches from the southern side

property line. The addition is located fully to the rear of the house and is

in line with the existing home, which is also 11 feet 9 inches from the

south property line. All other setback and zoning requirements are met.

Under the previous zoning code, the property was zoned SF-2 and at that

time the side yard setback was 10 feet. Therefore, under the former

zoning code, a variance application would not have been required for the

addition. Capka shared a site plan. The location of the addition was

shown in a purple box with a green line showing the buildable area of the

site. Capka then shared an aerial view of the site, noting that the addition

will be replacing an existing concrete patio. She also provided elevations

of the side and a view from the rear yard, as well as a street view image

of the home.

Capka explained the addition would be slightly shorter than the existing

house. There is a fence three-to-four feet high, which will provide partial

screening for the proposed addition. There is also some taller

landscaping on the adjacent property to the south. There is one variance

included in the application, which states that the principal structure must

be at least 15 feet from the side property line.

Capka provided the specific variance criteria most relevant to this

application. The first is that the variance is not likely to result in

substantial damage to the essential character of the neighborhood. Due

to the setback having been increased recently, there are multiple other

homes in the neighborhood that are less than 15 feet from the side yard

setback. The addition is therefore not out of character. The second

specific criterion is that the variance is not likely to result in damage to

adjoining properties. The addition is partially screened from the southern

property and the adjacent property to the south. The house on that

property is a greater distance from the shared property line. The last

criterion is whether the variance is substantial and is the minimum

necessary to make possible the reasonable use of land or structures.

The addition is the exact same setback as the existing home and does

not encroach any further into the existing setback. It is therefore the

minimum necessary.

Staff recommended approval of the variance as submitted. Capka

reiterated that the addition is in line with the existing house and matches

several other homes in the neighborhood that are closer than 15 feet to

the side property lines, and there is a short fence and landscaping

between the addition and the adjacent property to the south. Capka also

noted that Planning Commission approved a similar variance at 3590

Clotts Road in April. In that case, the addition was 11 feet 2 inches from

the side property line and was also in line with the existing house. That

property is zoned R-1 as well and was previously zoned SF-3.

Chair Pollyea opened public comment at 7:10 p.m.

Shannon Overmyer introduced himself as a representative with the

design firm for the property owner.

Chair Pollyea closed public comment at 7:11 p.m.

Mr. Shapaka asked if the exterior finish would be different from the

existing house. Mr. Overmyer explained that the proposed plan is the first

phase of the project. The finishes would be matched in the second phase

of the overall project. They planned to use Hardie Plank Siding.

Mr. Mako asked the administration whether the home adhered to the

setbacks when it was constructed. Ms. Capka said it did likely conform.

Mr. Mako wondered what type of easement was along the south side of

the property, but staff was unsure.

Mr. Greenberg asked Deputy Clerk McGuire if there were comments

from neighbors. Ms. McGuire replied there were not.

Ms. Pollyea asked if the addition would be in the exact location as the

existing cement pad. Mr. Overmyer stated that the existing pad does not

extend all the way to the end of the house. The entire pad would be

removed and new concrete would be laid to the homeowner’s

specifications. Ms. Pollyea then asked whether any variances would be

needed for the second phase, to which Mr. Overmyer replied he was not

aware of a need for additional variances at the time.

Mr. Suriano asked whether the applicant would be required to return for a

Design Review and Final Development Plan. Ms. Capka explained that it

will be handled through a building permit.

A motion was made by Mako, seconded by Shapaka, that the Variance be

Approved.

Discussion on the motion:

Mr. Shapaka stated his support for the application and remarked that the

project seemed like a nice addition to the home.

Mr. Mako expressed that the variance request met all conditions to grant the

variance and stated his support for the application.

Mr. Suriano also stated his support for the application.

The motion carried by the following vote:

7 -

Yes:

Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Tamarkin, Shapaka, Greenberg

and Laser

CU-0001-2025

To consider a Conditional Use Application for property located at 254 W.

Johnstown Road; Parcel ID 025-000908; Current Zoning - General

Commercial; Trujillo Quality Concrete; Marcus Trujillo, applicant.

City Planner Maddie Capka provided a summary of the application; see

attached staff presentation for details. The property is located at 254

West Johnstown Road and is zoned GC - General Commercial. It shares

the same zoning district as many other properties in the area, as well as

multifamily sites. The Conditional Use Application is to allow a trade

contractor use to occupy the site with an existing office building and a

paved gravel area to the rear. The business is a residential concrete

company that specializes in driveways, sidewalks, patios, foundations,

and similar projects. Trade contractors are only permitted as a

conditional use in the General Commercial zoning district. Capka

explained that existing office building on the site would remain and would

partially be used as an office for the concrete company. Office space not

used by the company would continue to be leased to other tenants as it is

now.

There are no exterior modifications or new structures proposed with this

application. However, the applicant did include on their site plan the

rough location of a possible future 2,100 square foot building garage that

would be used for storing equipment and materials. The applicant also

stated in their Conditional Use statement that there will be no outdoor

storage of equipment and materials on the site. Outdoor storage is

prohibited in general commercial.

Capka shared an aerial view of the site, with US-62 to the north and

Johnstown Road to the south. To the east of the property is the Gahanna

Professional Plaza, which is also zoned general commercial. To the west

are the Gahanna Manor apartments. Capka also shared an image

submitted by the applicant, indicating the anticipated location of a future

garage building. Capka then shared street view images from the views of

both Johnstown Road and US-62. The view from US-62 was partially

screened by existing landscaping. It is partially visible and more so in

winter.

Capka shared the Conditional Use criteria. They are: the proposed use

is a conditional use of the zoning district; the development is in accord

with appropriate plans for the area; it will not have undesirable effects on

the surrounding area; and it will be in keeping with the existing land use

character. Staff had no objection to the conditional use as submitted.

There are several other sites that are also zoned General Commercial in

the area, many of which are occupied by trade contract or similar uses.

However, staff recommended adding a condition to prohibit any future

outdoor storage if the application is approved.

Chair Pollyea opened public comment at 7:20 p.m.

No one from the public wished to speak.

Chair Pollyea closed public comment at 7:20 p.m.

Mr. Mako asked the applicant if the intent was to strictly use the existing

building as office space. Marcus Trujillo, owner of Trujillo Quality

Concrete, introduced himself. He confirmed that office space is the only

intended use at this time, and that a building may be added in the future

depending on capital. Mr. Mako asked Mr. Trujillo how much traffic he

might anticipate in the future if an additional structure is added to the site.

Mr. Trujillo replied that he has one crew and hopes to grow to two or three

crews. It would be difficult to determine how much traffic there might be.

Mr. Mako asked, if a new building is built, what the thresholds are for

bringing the project to Planning Commission. Ms. Capka explained that if

a structure or building is below 5,000 square feet it is reviewed internally

through a minor development plan. Anything above 5,000 square feet is

considered a major development plan and requires Planning

Commission approval. However, any variances necessary for a minor

development plan would come before Planning Commission. Mr. Mako

noted that the staff recommendation was provided with a condition

prohibiting outdoor storage. He asked Mr. Trujillo if he felt the condition

could be adhered to. Mr. Trujillo noted that some trucks and employee

vehicles may need to be parked there, but equipment would be stored in

a building. Mr. Trujillo wondered if concrete walls blocking storage would

also be prohibited with the condition, which Ms. Capka confirmed.

Mr. Suriano noted that the zoning district prohibits outdoor storage and

wondered if the condition was necessary. Ms. Capka stated it would be

an added layer of protection.

Mr. Tamarkin clarified that what is really being approved today is for the

ability for Trujillo Quality Concrete to operate their business out of the

existing office. Mr. Trujillo agreed, noting that employees may park there

and there may be trucks on site overnight. Mr. Tamarkin asked the

administration if this was permitted, to which Director Blackford stated

that parking is permitted but it had to be on a sealed surface. The lot is

100% gravel, though Mr. Trujillo stated he could have it paved. Mr.

Tamarkin asked if all equipment was left in the morning and returned in

the evening. Mr. Trujillo stated that is currently how the business

operates. Mr. Tamarkin said that he wanted to ensure any conditions

placed on the conditional use application could be complied with. Mr.

Trujillo expressed that any equipment the business has goes with the

crew to the worksites. He assured the Planning Commission he intended

to follow any rules regarding outdoor storage.

Mr. Greenberg confirmed with Deputy Clerk McGuire that there was no

communication from the public regarding the application. He then asked

Mr. Trujillo if there was lighting on the property. Mr. Trujillo said there was

lighting on the house. He said he planned to install lighting and fencing

and would ensure some safety protocols were in place. Mr. Greenberg

asked staff whether there were requirements for lighting, to which Ms.

Capka replied there would be requirements triggered for more than ten

spaces on a site. Mr. Greenberg inquired about rain runoff, and whether

there were sewers on the site. Mr. Trujillo explained he was unsure, and

that he was currently in negotiations with the property owner.

Ms. Pollyea wondered if there was ever a situation in which the applicant

could not deliver materials to a job site because of security or because

the job site would not permit it. Mr. Trujillo explained that in such a case,

the materials would be picked up in a trailer.

Mr. Shapaka asked for clarification whether outdoor storage specifically

meant materials, rather than vehicles. Director Blackford noted there was

nuance, though he believed that equipment would be classified as

vehicles and would need to be parked on pavement, rather than being

classified as materials. He explained that staff recommended the

condition because occasionally outdoor storage becomes excessive. He

said there have been previous code violations on this property, though

they were unaffiliated with this applicant. Ms. Pollyea asked Director

Blackford of the result of the code violations. He stated they were

resolved.

Mr. Greenberg asked Director Blackford if there were any issues with

issuing the conditional use permit for someone other than the property

owner. Director Blackford said that an owner’s authorization is required

by the applicant. Mr. Greenberg asked the applicant when he anticipated

a structure being built on the site. Mr. Trujillo stated that if he purchased

the property, it would happen within the next year. He acknowledged that

this would depend on capital and weather constraints.

A motion was made by Shapaka, seconded by Greenberg, that the Conditional

Use be Approved.

Discussion on the motion:

Mr. Shapaka stated he was excited at the prospect of having a new property

owner who was passionate about improving the site.

Mr. Mako stated he would be in favor of the request, and also suggested that

Mr. Trujillo consider the feedback provided by the Commission. He appreciated

having a new business that wanted to invest in the community.

Mr. Suriano noted the motion should be amended to add a condition that there

would be no outdoor storage permitted on the site.

A motion was made by Mr. Suriano, seconded by Greenberg, that the motion

be amended to include a condition that there would be no outdoor storage

permitted on the site.

The motion carried by the following vote:

7 -

Yes:

Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Tamarkin, Shapaka, Greenberg

and Laser

A motion was made by Shapaka, seconded by Greenberg, that the Conditional

Use be Approved with a condition that there would be no outdoor storage

permitted on the site. The motion carried by the following vote:

7 -

Yes:

Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Tamarkin, Shapaka, Greenberg

and Laser

UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE

NEW BUSINESS - NONE

OFFICIAL REPORTS

Director of Planning

Director Blackford said the next meeting on September 24, 2025, would

include a project on Granville Street. He also shared updates on the Our

Gahanna Strategic Plan on behalf of Mayor Jadwin. Director Blackford

has been involved in the events, which were well-attended by the

community. Upcoming events include September 12, 2025 at the YMCA

and September 20, 2025, at Hannah Park. He encouraged members to

provide feedback online. A second project focused on reimagining the

Creekside Plaza is also underway.

Council Liaison

Ms. Pollyea noted there was a request to City Council to pay off

Community Improvement Corporation (CIC) loans to demolish buildings

at Creekside by the end of the year. They cannot be demolished with

mortgages. The appropriation would be supplemental, from an

unrestricted, unencumbered account. It will be voted on during the

Council meeting on Monday, September 15, 2025.

CORRESPONDENCE AND ACTIONS

Ms. McGuire reported that there were seats available at the Council

Office table for the MORPC Summit on Sustainability event on

September 30, 2025, and invited Planning Commission members to

attend.