Powell Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Summary – September 9, 2026

The Powell Planning & Zoning Commission met Wednesday, September 9, 2026, in Council Chambers at 47 Hall Street, Powell, Ohio. The Commission acted as an advisory body to City Council on the Powell Gateway final development plan and as the deciding body on the demolition certificate of appropriateness; it also provided sketch-plan feedback. A quorum was present, the Pledge of Allegiance was recited, and the July 15, 2026 minutes were approved.

Administrative Items

• The Commission approved the July 15, 2026 minutes by voice vote.
• No visitor spoke under hearing of visitors for items not on the agenda.

Powell Gateway Final Development Plan Review (Case 2026-06 FDP)

• Request: Equity, represented by Sarah Freiheit and Patrick Wathan, asked the Commission to recommend approval of a Final Development Plan to City Council for a roughly 21,600-square-foot commercial building on 1.93 acres on the north side of East Olentangy Street, west of Liberty Road. The site is zoned Planned Commercial District on the east and Downtown Business District on the west.
• Staff presentation: Staff said the application was postponed from August and the prior rezoning of the two parcels into one commercial district is pending City Council action. Staff evaluated nine criteria and determined two were not met: adherence to the Comprehensive Plan and coordination/compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods. Staff remained concerned about the eastern gateway into the city and recommended disapproval.
• Applicant presentation: Patrick Wathan said the prior owner's five-story concept and structured/underground parking were not financially feasible. He showed a 15-unit residential-over-commercial scenario with construction cost above $5.6 million, valuation around $3.2 million, and a nearly $2.4 million gap, with $1,800 average rent near the top of the market. Sarah Freiheit described changes from prior feedback: a pass-through opening between two building masses, relocated dumpsters, reduced east-side patio, increased buffering and landscaping, a new north elevation, and a revised architectural style. The third access point was moved from Beech Ridge Drive to Susan Lane, and the applicant offered to eliminate that access if the city preferred. They asked for FDP approval, citing strong interest from dining, services, and fitness tenants.

Public Comments & Testimony

Powell Gateway FDP

• Carol McGuire, 293 Hopewell Drive, stated opposition to the project.
• Carol Stillman, 233 East Olentangy Street, said she was not anti-development but questioned long-term business sustainability, questioned the cost/rent estimates, and asked how drainage would handle multiple 10-year flood events in a single season.
• Kevin Jameson, 117 Beech Ridge Drive, said a Susan Lane to Grace Drive cut-through was promised when Harper's Point was built and asked when it would occur; he also raised major traffic concerns at the Beech Ridge/Olentangy/Powell Road intersection.
• William Bretz, 80 Barrington, opposed the new Susan Lane parking-lot entrance, citing elevation issues, site-distance limits on landscaping, and parking-lot light spill; he accepted the applicant's offer to remove the entrance and add buffering.
• Denise Weibel, 226 Beach Trail Court, said the design did not look like Powell Road, suggested a brick/stone wall and green buffer north of Susan Lane, and preferred access via Grace Drive instead of Susan Lane.
• Catherine Gray, 385 Hopewell Drive, said the gateway entrance should look like it belongs to Powell and should inspire people entering town.
• Heather Luke, 225 Esquires Court, said the building felt too large for a small site, preferred more open/park space, and questioned fit under the older and newer zoning codes.
• One resident said the site was a missed opportunity for a distinctive gateway building.
• John Bratz, Harper's Point/Barrington, called the property a tipping point and said the current facade would make Powell look like a strip mall; he asked for small, meaningful design changes.
• John Patterson, 214 Beach Trail Court, said the community wants continuity and cohesiveness and suggested drawing from old Powell rather than a fresh new style.
• Dr. Charles Cook, 300 Beach Trail Court, said the presentation was confusing and non-transparent, particularly site orientation.
• A resident said Powell is charming because of old, comfortable architecture and asked the developer to blend in rather than stand out as new.
• Avery Weber, 56 Barrington Place, opposed the two Susan Lane entrances/exits because of headlights, light pollution, and cut-through traffic.
• Debbie Russo, 247 Wood Edge Circle West, wanted architecture that fits Powell, noted existing vacancies, and supported using only the Grace Drive entrance with limited Beech Ridge/Susan Lane access.
• Jonathan Weber, 56 Barrington Place, said he did not oppose development or architecture but opposed the Susan Lane punch-through as harmful to Harper's Point.
• Amy Cotter, 184 Olentangy Ridge Place, said evening traffic at Beech Ridge and East Olentangy is already a nightmare and supported the Grace Drive option because a traffic light exists there; she also asked about tying the design to the Village Green area.
• Mary Beth Butcher, 45 Barrington Place, said the city previously declined a streetlight on Susan Lane and asked for landscaping/trees to shield her home from new parking-lot lighting.

Sketch Plan

• No public comments were offered.

Certificate of Appropriateness

• One resident asked whether taxpayers would fund the demolition; the Chair said funding decisions are a City Council matter, not this Commission's purview.

Powell Gateway Commission Discussion

• After public comment, the architectural advisor acknowledged the applicant's flexibility but said the design had moved in large steps rather than small refinements; he liked the emerging pass-through massing and said the southeast corner needs special design attention.
• One commissioner said the city gateway should be a landmark, not a flat-roof retail center, and warned that the next proposal could be taller and have a larger footprint.
• Another commissioner disagreed with the applicant's negligible traffic increase claim because no traffic impact study had been performed.
• The Chair suggested making Susan Lane a one-way road heading east to west to reduce traffic conflicts.
• Additional suggestions included darker tones, more roof depth, a lighting study for night views from SR 750, and using 80 East Olentangy Street as a possible reference.
• Vote: A motion to approve the Final Development Plan was made and seconded. Roll call was taken, and the motion failed; every recorded vote was no, so the Commission did not recommend approval to City Council.

Sketch Plan Review (2026-21SP) – 110 South Liberty Street

• Request: The applicant asked for review and feedback on a proposed mixed-use building on a 0.6-acre vacant site at 110 South Liberty Street, east of South Liberty Street, 680 feet south of Olentangy Street, zoned Downtown Business District. No formal approval vote was requested.
• Staff presentation: Staff said the site is part of the Liberty Green development approved in 2014; the original building was demolished and Corinthian is completing the residential portion. The proposed commercial building would include ground-floor arcade and restaurant/speculative space, second-floor event/tenant space, possible rooftop space, and eight new parking spaces on the south side. Parking was not a concern because the square footage is within the original approved parking calculations.
• Applicant presentation: Mike Scholdy of Creative Studio Architects described a two-story building with an optional third-story/rooftop element set back from the street, a south-side arcade, north-side speculative tenant space, a large front patio, and brick details with a Pac-Man nod to the arcade history. The design would mimic small-scale development in the area.
• Commission feedback: The Commission and architectural advisor were broadly supportive, calling it the highest and best use of the parcel and an experience-driven concept that could draw people downtown. They appreciated the added parking and encouraged the applicant to refine lighting, landscaping, rooftop/third-story details, and the east-side elevation facing future multifamily development. No formal vote was taken.

Certificate of Appropriateness (2026-22CA) – 55 East Olentangy Street

• Request: Vincent Margello requested approval to demolish an approximately 2,000-square-foot commercial structure at 55 East Olentangy Street, south side, west of Grace Drive, zoned Downtown Business District.
• Staff and applicant: Staff recommended approval because the Commission is the deciding body for demolitions in the Downtown Business District and the building has deteriorated. Mr. Margello said he bought the property in the 1980s and that the exterior is rotted, trusses need replacement, and remodeling is too expensive; after demolition he plans to widen the parking lot entrance and add public parking to help downtown parking.
• Vote: The Commission approved the Certificate of Appropriateness on a unanimous roll-call vote.

Key Outcomes

• The July 15, 2026 minutes were approved, and no off-agenda public comments were received.
• Powell Gateway FDP: The motion to recommend approval failed; the Commission did not recommend approval to City Council. Commission feedback called for further design, lighting, and traffic-access changes.
• Sketch Plan 2026-21SP: The Commission provided feedback only; the concept was generally supported with suggested refinements.
• Certificate of Appropriateness 2026-22CA: Approved unanimously, permitting demolition of the 55 East Olentangy Street structure.
• The next Commission meeting is tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, October 28, 2026.