Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pataskala BZA approves landscaping and setback variances for Parkway commercial project
Summary
The Pataskala Board of Zoning Appeals approved multiple variances allowing a commercial development at 300110 Parkway to reduce parking setbacks and alter required mound/landscaping standards, subject to permits within one year and agency conditions.
Get email alerts on the Commercial Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Pataskala City Board of Zoning Appeals on Tuesday approved multiple variances for a commercial project at 300110 Parkway, allowing reduced parking setbacks and altered screening requirements so the developer can retain truck turnaround and parking operations.
The action, taken after staff presentation and public comment, clears the way for the applicant to proceed provided the project obtains all required permits from the city and Licking County within one year and meets stormwater and health‑department conditions. The board combined two separate variance applications for the same property and approved them with conditions.
City planning staff member Jack summarized the proposal as trimming screening and mound requirements along the Parkway and Refugee Road frontages while increasing some setbacks elsewhere on the site. Jack said the site contains roughly 17.15 acres in the PM (planned manufacturing) zone and that the project was initially approved under an earlier PM code in February 2020; the code was amended in February 2023 and the applicant updated the plan accordingly. He said the revised layout reduced the front parking count to 55 from 57, added three ADA spaces, and shifted the building so the south parking setback increased to 86.67 feet from 62 feet.
Staff described seven separate variance requests tied to landscaping/mound standards in the PM code, including requests to: remove the minimum mound requirement for the parking setback, allow 3‑foot shrubs and a reduced tree spacing in place of the standard L2 screen, and to permit landscaping partially outside the minimum parking setback along Refugee Road to avoid impacting an existing roadside ditch. Jack summarized the applicant’s narrative: the reduced setback and placement of landscaping outside the setback were intended "to provide adequate turnaround for trucks to enter and exit the parking garage without doing so on Avenue Road," and to avoid impacting the existing ditch.
Board members questioned the truck turning radius and reviewed updated site shifts since the previous hearing. The applicant’s representative, Mr. Baus, was present to answer questions; Baus confirmed the truck sizes discussed were full‑size rigs and that the building was shifted to improve turning clearance. Public service and health department comments were included in the staff report; the public service department required stormwater calculations and culvert sizing to be shown on plans, and the Licking County Health Department said any existing septic must be abandoned and a permit obtained from that office. Staff recommended approval subject to department conditions and the one‑year permit timeline.
After reviewing the BZA findings of fact (the board found the variances necessary to enable reasonable use and not to substantially alter neighborhood character), a board member moved to approve VA‑25‑005 and VA‑25‑006 with the stated conditions. The motion passed on roll call and the board recorded approval. The minutes show the roll calls with board members recorded in favor and the motion carried; the approvals included the requirement that the applicant obtain all necessary permits from the city of Pataskala and Licking County Building Department within one year of approval.
The approvals do not eliminate departmental review. Staff and the board noted that detailed stormwater plans, culvert sizing and any required health‑department approvals remain outstanding and must be resolved during permitting. The board also noted that any required grading, mound construction or retaining‑wall details would need to conform to department standards or return to the board if amended.

