200 South Hamilton Road

Gahanna, Ohio 43230

City of Gahanna

Meeting Minutes

Planning Commission

John Hicks, Chair

Sarah Pollyea, Vice Chair

Michael Greenberg

James Mako

Thomas W. Shapaka

Michael Suriano

Michael Tamarkin

Sophia McGuire, Deputy Clerk of Council

Wednesday, February 26, 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 Wednesday,

February 26, 2025. The agenda for this meeting was published on

February 21, 2025. Vice Chair Sarah Pollyea called the meeting to

order at 7:00 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance led by James Mako.

5 -

Present

Absent

James Mako, Chair Sarah Pollyea, Vice Chair Michael Suriano, Thomas W.

Shapaka, and Michael Greenberg

2 - John Hicks, and Michael Tamarkin

ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA - NONE

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

2025-0046

Planning Commission meeting minutes 2.12.2025

A motion was made by Shapaka, seconded by Suriano, that the Minutes be

Approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

5 - Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Shapaka and Greenberg

2 - Hicks and Tamarkin

Yes:

Absent:

SWEAR IN APPLICANTS & SPEAKERS

Assistant City Attorney Matt Roth administered an oath to those persons

wishing to present testimony this evening.

APPLICATIONS - PUBLIC COMMENT

V-0005-2025

To consider a Variance Application to vary The Hunter's Ridge and

Kroger Master Sign Plan; for property located at 300 S. Hamilton Road;

Parcel ID 025-001135; Current Zoning GC - General Commercial; Zack

Cowan, applicant.

City Planner Maddie Capka introduced the application; see attached

staff presentation for details. The application is for Kroger at 300 South

Hamilton Road. Capka shared the location on a site map. It is located on

the east side of Hamilton Road just south of Rocky Fork Boulevard. The

applicant is requesting approval of a variance for a new larger wall sign.

Kroger is a part of the Hunter’s Ridge Shopping Center which has its

own Master Sign Plan. There is a section within that sign plan that refers

to regulations for Kroger. The main restriction for the primary Kroger wall

sign is that it is limited to a maximum height of 72 inches. There was a

sign permit approved for Kroger in October of 2024 and it was installed

per the approved plans. The sign that was installed was too small. The

sign that was on the building prior to October 2024 also met the 72-inch

requirement. The proposed sign included with the application would

replace the existing one and is 125 inches tall and around 235 square

feet. This is 53 inches taller than what the master sign plan permits. Also,

the total height of the sign band is 126 inches, so the proposed sign is

only one inch smaller than the sign band. Additionally, the zoning code

limits wall signs to 50 square feet. While the master sign plan does

supersede zoning code requirements, the sign greatly exceeds these

standard zoning code requirements as well, even though the master sign

plan is more permissive.

Capka shared additional images with the exact location of the sign. An

image in the top left corner showed the sign that is on the building

currently. This is what was approved through the October sign permit is

72 inches tall. The image in the bottom left-hand corner is the original

sign on the building, which met the 72-inch requirement. The master sign

plan was created with that sign in mind. The image on the bottom right is

the sign that's included with the variance application. This image shows

that the sign goes to the extreme limits of the sign band area.

There is one variance included with the application. Capka shared the

variance criteria that must be met for the application to be approved.

There were some new code changes that went into effect January 2025,

which included two new variance criteria. This application is the first

application that was filed with the new criteria in effect. The new criteria

are: 1) whether the variance is substantial and is the minimum necessary

to make possible the reasonable use of land or structures and 2) the

practical difficulty could be eliminated by some other method even if the

solution is less convenient or more costly to achieve.

Staff recommends disapproval of the variance as submitted. The existing

sign was installed as approved, and the new sign greatly exceeds Master

Sign Plan and standard code requirements. Capka stated that when the

applicant initially submitted their sign permit in October, they were

proposing a sign at 121 inches and ended up reducing that in order to

meet the master sign plan requirements. Because of the sign being

larger than what they initially proposed, staff does not believe that the

request is the minimum necessary. The sign could also be reworked to

move the word “Marketplace” either behind the word Kroger or up to be

in line with the lower part of the “G,” and be closer to meeting the 72-inch

requirement. However, the applicant has stated that the proposed sign is

the new standard Kroger branding. Capka stated that if Planning

Commission votes to approve the application, staff recommends adding

a condition to reduce the sign height from 125 inches.

Vice Chair opened public comment at 7:09 p.m.

Rebecca Green, 74 Glen Drive, Worthington, introduced herself as a

representative of Sign Vision, the sign company working on the project.

Ms. Green said there were some changes that Kroger was willing to

make regarding the sign, such as moving the “Marketplace” portion

behind the letter G. The applicant provided graphics that Deputy Clerk

McGuire shared. Ms. Green stated that the new proposed sign aligns

with what staff suggested. It still needs a variance at 96 inches in height. It

is a part of Kroger’s new branding happening across the country. She

noted that the store is set back quite a bit from Hamilton Road and they

hope to make the sign a little bit larger. She said that Kroger has many

different aspects to its business such as online shopping, an in-person

and drive-thru pharmacy, Minute Clinic, Starbucks, and a liquor store.

Thus, the branding must be unique to capture the many facets of Kroger’s

business. She apologized that the drawing was not submitted

beforehand.

Vice Chair closed public comment at 7:12 p.m.

Mr. Shapaka asked if the logo’s cart and letters were individual or if this

was a box sign. Ms. Green stated they are individual channel letters. They

are base illuminated white acrylic. Mr. Shapaka noted how small the

existing sign is, which was put up in October of 2024. He asked Ms.

Green how the issue of the sign being too small was brought to Kroger’s

attention. Ms. Green said there were multiple comments from customers.

The entrance is a primary entrance for the store and there should be a

larger landmark to indicate it as an entrance. She said the word

“Marketplace” is typically kept underneath the word “Kroger” because it

limits the area that the sign takes up.

Mr. Mako reiterated that the letters would be 96 inches. Ms. Green stated

that it would be 96 inches from the bottom of the letter “g” to the top of the

letter “K.” The original ask was for 125 inches. The new one will be a

face-lit illuminated sign. Mr. Mako asked if the existing sign was

illuminated. Ms. Green said it was similar to the proposed sign. It is

face-lit white illuminated letters. Mr. Mako asked staff if this variance was

specific to the Master Sign Plan rather than code, which Ms. Green

confirmed.

Mr. Greenberg asked Ms. Green if Kroger would accept an amendment

to the Variance to approve 96 inches. Ms. Green confirmed that although

Kroger originally applied for a 125-inch sign, they were willing to modify it

to the proposed 96 inches. Mr. Greenberg asked Ms. Capka if the

Master Sign Plan could be amended. Ms. Capka said it could be, but the

applicant would need to submit a new Master Sign Plan application. It

would have to be filed by the landlord or property owner. Mr. Greenberg

noted he drove by Kroger and felt the sign was small and a larger one

would help.

Mr. Suriano agreed the existing sign was too small, judging from the

photos. He acknowledged it was a rebranding campaign and a large

expense went into it. He felt the “K” and “G” would cause issues if it was

not reworked.

Vice Chair Pollyea asked Ms. Capka what the Master Sign Plan

permitted. It permitted 72 inches in height. Capka explained that in the

zoning code, wall signs are regulated by square feet and there is no

maximum width or height, unless it is a multi-tenant development or the

site has a Master Sign Plan. There is no maximum length or area for

Kroger’s Master Sign Plan, though they are limited to 72 inches in height.

Pollyea asked Ms. Green if there was any consideration to reduce the

height of the sign to work it within the MSP. Ms. Green explained that an

issue across Kroger in Ohio municipalities is that most measure area

with an imaginary rectangle method, and the “K” and “G,” which are

called ascenders and descenders, make the imaginary rectangle very

large.

A motion was made by Greenberg, seconded by Suriano, that the Variance be

Approved with a condition that the sign is limited to 96 inches and the word

"Marketplace" be positioned to the right of the "g" in "Kroger."

Discussion on the motion:

Mr. Suriano stated his intent to vote in favor of the application with the

amendment. He feels it makes the sign a more appropriate size and increases

visibility in a positive way.

Mr. Shapaka also stated that he was in favor of the application. He felt the

existing sign was a blur due to its size, and that Kroger would be penalized to

adhere to the 72-inch requirement. He also felt moving the word

“marketplace” to the side made it more dynamic.

The motion carried by the following vote:

5 - Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Shapaka and Greenberg

2 - Hicks and Tamarkin

Yes:

Absent:

V-0007-2025

To consider a Variance Application to amend V-0029-2024 for property

located at 1070 Tech Center Dr.; Parcel ID 025-013634; Current Zoning

IM - Innovation & Manufacturing; Burns & Scalo Roofing; Stephen Butsko,

applicant.

City Planner Maddie Capka provided an overview of the application; see

attached staff presentation. She stated that the applicant is seeking

approval of a variance for a new monument sign. In November of last

year, Planning Commission approved a variance for two wall signs at this

site that exceeded zoning code requirements. The south front side was

around 91.5 square feet and the east sign was 30.5 square feet.

Planning Commission also added a condition of approval that a new

variance application must be filed if the applicant wanted to place a

monument sign on the site. The applicant is now requesting one

monument sign to replace the proposed sign on the east side of the

building. A variance application is required due to the previous condition.

The proposed sign is 78 inches tall, 32 square feet, and is 31 feet from

the edge of the right-of-way. Capka shared a site plan of the property,

showing the first two approved signs in orange. Sign 1 will still be

installed but sign 2 is no longer proposed.

The one requested variance is technically an amendment to

V-0029-2024, the previously approved variance application. Capka

shared the variance criteria. Staff recommends approval of the variance

as submitted. The monument sign meets all code requirements and

having one wall sign and one monument sign aligns more closely with the

code.

Vice Chair Pollyea opened public comment at 7:29 p.m.

Stephen Butsko, Branham Sign, 111 West Cumberland Street, Hebron.

Mr. Butsko reiterated they would like to amend the previous variance so

they can remove the east wall sign and replace it with a monument sign.

The company felt the monument sign was a better option than an

additional wall sign.

Vice Chair Pollyea closed public comment at 7:31 p.m.

A motion was made by Suriano, seconded by Greenberg, that the Variance be

Approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

5 - Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Shapaka and Greenberg

2 - Hicks and Tamarkin

Yes:

Absent:

Taylor Commercial Park

V-0006-2025

To consider a Variance Application to vary Section 1155.04(b)(1) Site

Planning of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Gahanna; for property

located at 1641-1687 Taylor Road; Parcel ID 027-000008; Current

Zoning OCT - Office, Commerce, and Technology; Taylor Industrial Park;

Robert LeVeck, applicant.

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.

City Planner Maddie Capka provided an overview of the application; see

attached staff presentation. The project includes three applications and is

located on the southern side of Taylor Road. These applications were

filed under the former zoning code and the zoning district at that time was

Office, Commerce, and Technology. The applicant is requesting approval

of a final development plan, design review, and variance for a new

industrial building. The building is 21,000 square feet and would be

located in the front northwest corner of the Taylor Industrial Park site

adjacent to Taylor Road. The proposed building matches the existing

development on the site both in use and in exterior colors. The colors for

the exterior materials are tumble weed and light tan with some stone

accents. The project also includes 31 new parking spaces, around 840

square feet of landscaping, and some new parking lot trees. The site was

approved for two flex industrial buildings, eight storage buildings, and

one larger industrial building in 2021 with a total of around 250,000

square feet. The application proposes to develop the portion of the site

that has no approvals yet.

Capka provided an aerial view of the entire site, which is outlined in red.

The shaded area in the upper lefthand corner shows the scope of this

project. Capka provided a zoomed-in site plan. The green area is the

21,000 square foot building, and blue shows the edge of the proposed

right-of-way. The setback between the building and the right-of-way is

around 40 feet. The new parking lot to the rear of the building is also

visible. There are some new sidewalks proposed as well.

Capka shared elevations of the building. The top rendering shows the

front elevation that would face Taylor Road, showing the light tan color

with the stone accents. The elevation on the bottom is the rear that would

face the parking lot and it is made up of tan metal panels.

There is one variance included with this application, which is to chapter

1155.04(b)(1), which requires a front setback of 75 feet for all

warehouse, manufacturing, and industrial uses. The proposed building is

only setback 40 feet, so the variance, design review, and final

development plan criteria are all from the former code.

Capka highlighted three applicable criteria. They are: compatibility with

existing structures, the plan meets applicable development standards,

and and it's consistent with land use character and development of the

area. Staff recommends approval of all three applications. The site is

already mostly developed, and the proposed building matches the

existing buildings in both use and appearance. Additionally, the variance

would not be required under the current zoning code. The new setback

for all sites zoned Innovation and Manufacturing is only 20 feet instead of

the 75 feet that was required under the the former zoning code. The

applicant also states that there is a stream to the rear of the building

which caused the plan to be shifted forward toward Taylor Road.

Vice Chair Pollyea opened public comment at 7:37 p.m.

Robert LeVeck, 625 Eastgate Parkway, Gahanna, introduced himself as

the owner.

Mr. LeVeck stated that when he typically builds this style of building, the

automobile parking will be in the front and the loading and unloading of

the warehouse will be in the rear. Due to the constraints between the

creek and Taylor Road itself, there isn't room to have parking in the front

with loading in the rear, so those areas are combined in the proposed

footprint. Additionally, flex-style warehouse space needs to be a certain

depth for tenants to be able to utilize the space, so the building cannot be

too shallow.

Vice Chair Pollyea closed public comment at 7:39 p.m.

Mr. Greenberg asked Ms. Capka if there is a requirement for sidewalks

at this site. Capka explained that the Engineering Department requires

sidewalks in the right-of-way. The zoning code has a minimum width for

sidewalks and requires sidewalks from the parking lot to the entrances of

the building, which is included in the proposal. Mr. LeVeck added that he

put in a multi-use path along Taylor Road.

Mr. Shapaka asked if there was a tenant for the building. Mr. LeVeck

replied there is not currently a tenant. Mr. Shapaka asked if there were

many visitors, to which Mr. LeVeck replied that most of the businesses

operate with employees that pick up company vehicles and work off-site,

and he did not believe there were many visitors. Mr. Shapaka questioned

if the access road to the east already existed, to which Mr. LeVeck

replied it did. Mr. Shapaka wondered if there was also a landscape plan.

Ms. Capka stated there was, and it was not part of her presentation but

was included in the online application materials.

Mr. Mako asked if his assumption was correct that the flex warehouse

space would essentially be a building shell and tenant finishes would be

added as clients were acquired. Mr. LeVeck confirmed, stating that all

these types of properties he has built have been on speculation. Mr.

Mako noted that the storm water detention is on the west side and asked

whether everything has been adequately sized and piped for the

detention. Mr. LeVeck stated that everything north of the stream is

currently running to the detention basin.

Ms. Pollyea asked what kind of tenants would be occupying the space.

Mr. LeVeck shared some of his current tenants, including lawn care

company ExperiGreen, a Taekwondo studio, PIRTEK, a food packaging

company, and a goods repackaging company.

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

Approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

5 - Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Shapaka and Greenberg

2 - Hicks and Tamarkin

Yes:

Absent:

DR-0001-2025

To consider a Design Review Application for site plan, landscaping, and

building design for 13 acres for property located at 1641-1687 Taylor

Road; Parcel ID 027-000008; Current Zoning OCT - Office, Commerce,

and Technology; Taylor Commercial Park; Robert LeVeck, applicant.

A motion was made by Mako, seconded by Shapaka, that the Design Review

be Approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

5 - Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Shapaka and Greenberg

2 - Hicks and Tamarkin

Yes:

Absent:

FDP-0001-2025

To consider a Final Development Plan Application for property located at

1641-1687 Taylor Road; Parcel ID 027-000008; Current Zoning OCT -

Office, Commerce, and Technology; Taylor Commercial Park; Robert

LeVeck, applicant.

A motion was made by Mako, seconded by Shapaka, that the Final

Development Plan be Approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

5 - Mako, Chair Pollyea, Vice Chair Suriano, Shapaka and Greenberg

2 - Hicks and Tamarkin

Yes:

Absent:

UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE

NEW BUSINESS - NONE

OFFICIAL REPORTS

Director of Planning

Director Blackford reported that the Taylor Commercial Park

applications were the last ones outstanding that were filed under the prior

zoning code. A development plan for a site adjacent to Burns & Scalo

was recently submitted and would be coming forward to Planning

Commission. There are around a half dozen administratively approvable

minor development plans in the office. Finally, the Planning team has

been involved in outreach with parties interested in development beyond

multi-family and industrial uses.

Council Liaison

Ms. Pollyea reported that the Sustainability 2050 initiative was discussed

during recent council meetings. The initiative is a voluntary certification

program to help local governments achieve sustainability goals. It relates

to the regional sustainability agenda. Additional information can be found

online.

CORRESPONDENCE AND ACTIONS - NONE

POLL MEMBERS FOR COMMENT

Members of the Planning Commission commended Vice Chair Pollyea

for successfully running her first meeting.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business before the Planning Commission, the

meeting was adjourned at 7:51 p.m.