The Reynoldsburg Planning and Zoning Board on July 17 tabled variances and a linked conditional‑use application for a proposed Take 5 oil‑change at 7041 East Main Street, after staff and engineers raised safety and design questions and requested additional engineering review. The applicant, identified in the record as Driven Brands Inc. represented by attorney John Slick, asked the board to table the variance requests and the conditional‑use hearing so the team could resubmit revised plans; the board agreed and set the resubmittal deadline to meet the August 21 meeting (July 31 submittal deadline). Staff had earlier recommended denial of two of three variance requests: (1) denial was recommended for not providing required abort/escape lanes for stacking vehicles (section 11‑0‑5‑13.l.2 per the staff report) and (2) denial for a landscape buffer variance because staff found the buffering code section inapplicable to most of the parcel. Staff recommended approval only for a requested increase in the maximum front building setback to 52.76 feet (section 11‑0‑5‑15). Attorney John Slick said the property is long and narrow and that Driven Brands plans a smaller, two‑bay building (about 1,300 square feet) that they contend better fits the parcel and reduces conflicts; he also said the applicant withdrew the landscape buffer variance. Engineer Brandy Zachary of Arnold Consulting Engineering told the board she tested turning movements and said "a standard size passenger car can, although they'll probably have to make, like, a 3 point turn to do that, they can make the 3 point turn and get out of that escape lane on that side," but she cautioned larger vehicles would have difficulty. The applicant supplied average and peak customer figures drawn from the firm's portfolio ("typically 4 in an hour" average, "peak time shows 7 in an hour"), and offered to add on‑site management and signage as conditions. Planning staff emphasized that the city's forthcoming Bus Rapid Transit work — which the staff said is planned to install a median on this section of Main Street around 2027 — also affects curb‑cut operations and is a reason to require more detailed engineering review. Staff and several board members urged the applicant to present a revised site plan showing alternative escape lanes or removing side landscaping adjacent to stacking lanes so vehicles could use paved areas to exit; the applicant agreed to resubmit and accepted a tabling motion. The board's motion to table the variance and the linked conditional‑use matter passed by roll call; staff noted additional engineering review may require new review fees. The applicant formally requested the matter be tabled to the Aug. 21 meeting and will resubmit revised plans by the July 31 deadline for packet inclusion and engineering review.