Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Addition Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves rear addition and parking variance for cooling‑technology firm at 1847 W. Fifth Ave.
Summary
The Grandview Heights Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit and parking variance allowing OBR Cooling Towers to add a rear R&D addition to an existing commercial building at 1847 West Fifth Avenue while memorializing the site's existing 13 parking spaces.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Addition Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Grandview Heights Planning Commission on May 20 approved a conditional use permit and parking variance for work at 1847 West Fifth Avenue that will let OBR Cooling Towers add a rear research-and-development addition to an existing commercial building while keeping the existing onsite parking count.
The decision allows the company to create an enclosed R&D “clean lab” addition to a building currently used for office space and sales. Jordan Salmit, senior planner with Planning Next, told the commission staff determined the proposed workshop-style addition fits the zoning definition of a “warehouse facility located entirely within a closed building,” a use that requires conditional use approval in the C-2 (community commercial) zoning district.
The permit and variance were granted with conditions intended to reduce neighborhood impacts. Salmit said staff and the applicant agreed the addition’s east‑facing garage doors should remain closed during operations, that no outdoor storage would be allowed, and that the project should avoid encouraging overnight parking on adjacent residential streets. The motion passed with all commissioners voting yes.
Applicant representatives described the project as a modest expansion of the company’s Columbus presence to provide bench-scale testing, remote monitoring and other R&D functions. Phil Paul, introduced in the hearing as “the CEO of OBR Cooling Towers,” said the addition is “not contractor storage. It would not be garage per se. This is meant to be a place where they bring things in. They tinker with them.” He also said the company is not seeking to expand office capacity or immediately increase onsite staff dramatically.
Staff presented two parking calculations. If the full combined floor area were treated as office, the code would require 21 spaces; under the combination of primary office use and an enclosed warehouse/workshop addition staff calculated 16 required spaces. The site presently has 13 spaces; the applicant requested a variance to memorialize the existing 13 spaces rather than add new stalls. Salmit and the applicant told commissioners that the building’s existing interior layout (originally two residential structures converted to a single commercial building in 2008) limits the number of employees that can be located in the office portion and therefore that current parking provision is functionally sufficient for the proposed use.
Commissioners and public commenters asked about operational details: routine hours, delivery size and frequency, forklift use and future staffing. The applicant said typical hours would be similar to standard business hours, described deliveries as generally box‑truck size and said any service vehicles would leave site at night. The applicant said a small electric forklift might be used inside the enclosed addition.
Among public comments, an adjacent resident urged the applicant to choose durable landscape species rather than arborvitae, citing examples of specimen failure on nearby properties; the applicant said landscaping choices were not final. The commission included conditions addressing screening and mitigation of impacts on surrounding residences.
The commission’s approval record shows a unanimous vote in favor of the conditional use and related variance. The action, recorded as PC case 7-2025, included standard conditions recommended by staff; the applicant will return with final plans and any building permits required before construction begins.
The project moves forward under the City of Grandview Heights zoning code’s conditional use and variance processes and remains subject to standard building‑permit review.

