Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, good morning. We'll go ahead and get this started with the Tuesday, July 8th, 2025 Alyria Planning Commission meeting here in council chambers. We'll call the meeting to order. Roll call. Mr. Aiden, Mr. Battle, Mr. Hubard here, director Pannowski here, Mr. Tedro here, Mayor Brewbaker here, Maggie Rivera here. And just for a point of order uh today, Maggie Rivera is joining us. Mr. Ardurko stepped down due to work commitment. Uh so I have appointed Maggie to this board and uh Maggie is a longtime resident of the city and we look forward to her contribution uh to this committee. With that being said, I'll entertain a motion to the approval of the minutes as distributed for June 3rd, 2025. Moved by director Ponowski, second by Mr. Ted. Any further discussion? All in favor? I I oppose. Nay. Motion carried. For the record, Mr. Battle has arrived. Um the second fourth item on the agenda. We have no miscellaneous correspondence. We have no new business. We have no old business. So we'll jump right to public hearings. And we have two. So we have public hearing 2025-100066. Nita Stevens, 836 Santawood Drive here in Yria, request a conditional use for the use of a type A child care facility. Are there any proponents? Are there any proponents? Miss Stevens, you'd like to come to the platform. State your name and address for the record. Hi, my name is Nita Stevens. I live at 836 Sanderwood Drive in Iri, Ohio.

I'm currently asking to be a type A. I'm currently a type B. Um, I have tried this before and there was been a little objections about why not. But just let me tell you a little bit about myself first. I have my name is Nia Stevens. I there's a lot of things that's going on with child care now as y'all see with the state government all that is changing. That's why I'm so adamant. That is why it's like for the kids. That's why I'm so adamant. It's like they about to change human services for they got to work 80 hours a month. They changing head starts. So they demoting the money that they giving the federal money. So it's like why am I back? It's really be basically for the kids and like I'm trying to help. So um I have what 35 years experience. I am the only licensed child care around me 24 hours, seven days a week. I um yes I'm back it's like I'm back again. So okay so um I do understand a lot of people concerns about traffic kids and people around me and all that. I have got some you know I have I am hiring people to help And it's like, okay, what else were we doing? What else? Why not? It's like

more like a why not. Like, this is about the kids. This is about me helping. This is about the community. Like, this is about to get bad. And I don't know if everybody understand that. Like, in child care and just the world, the things are changing. I did have some notes, but I ain't going by them. I'm just going to talk for a minute. It's just like everybody don't understand because we do have a older generation who already had their kids, grandkids, and probably don't live around here. But we also have this young younger generation that's coming up and it's like they need our help. They need our expertise on okay, can you help me? Like I said, SNAP is changing. Where can we get food from? What we can help them? Where can we get food from? Where can we is what do we call this? I just want to help with the young people and help raising their kids and help lifting young women, single moms especially because there's a lot of them who don't know nothing. And it's our job to mentor. It's my job to help. It's my job to do whatever um I can do to help. Like I don't know. It's like that's what I do. I was raised to do it. So that's why my heart is so intent of Okay, let's go back. Let's try this again. So I'm here. Y'all have any questions? I'm sorry. Okay. But I did have a paper in y'all thing that I don't know if anybody read it or whatever. So it was distributed Miss Stevens to the committee. Uh before we get into questions and reports, I do want to continue through to see if there are any proponents, any other proponents that would like to come and speak. Please come to the microphone, state your name and address for the record, please.

Hello, I'm Brandon Eagle. I live at 833 Rosewood Drive. And unfortunately, I would have to disagree with this woman having her daycare behind my house because I feel like it's a violation to my family and their privacy as these kids because they're outside playing. They're looking over the fence and just talking to my kids and this we can't, you know, do what we need to do. And I'm sure other people in the facility probably feels the same way. There was a family a couple houses, you know, down from us that had to move out because these kids were just kept on like boiling them. But I mean, it was a weird scenario where they were in a backyard where they were like almost naked, these kids playing, but they would just sit there and tease them. So, in my personal opinion, this daycare should be more in a commercial where she should run out of building somewhere else. Thank you. Uh, Miss Stevens, I'll come back to you in a minute. I just want to make sure that that was an opponent for obviously uh for the record. Are there any proponents? Anybody in favor? Any proponents? Any proponents? We did have one opponent. Is there any opponents? Any other opponents? Miss Stevens, if you wanted to briefly address that, please. Yes. Um, Mr. I don't know his name. Um, he stay like behind or whatever. We have a fence. We have a privacy fence and all that. We had a run in um about couple years ago. Couple years ago. And but I addressed all that with him and we I thought we was good. He had my phone number. He have everything in case something happened. This like I said

this is the first time I'm hearing about it because this was like a couple years ago. Okay. Thank you. So since we have the proponents and the opponents, I do want to go to staff reports. So we'll start over to the building department. Uh Mr. Chair, through you I will defer to Mr. Shing for the report. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Mr. Farcus. Mr. Shy from planning. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, the request is for conditional use of a type A child care facility in the residential medium density district. Current site is a single family dwelling unit and is being utilized as a type B child care facility. The uh per the Ohio Revised Code, type B child care homes are permitted outright in any zoning district and cannot be restricted by local zoning ordinances. uh type a child care facility operates between seven to uh 12 children at one time. Uh is a permanent residence of the administrator in which the child care is provided for for 4 to 12 children at one time if four or more children at one time are under two years of age. Uh to give a brief history on this proposal, the conditional use was made in 2023 and was disapproved by planning commission in 2024 last year. This conditional use request was made and was approved with conditions. The conditions included section 1144.04D 1-4. Variances were not sought for this and did not receive final approval from city council. Um, moving forward here, some of the requirements uh that are needed in terms of variances at a later time. Uh if this were to be approved, uh the minimum square footage of a uh lot for a child care facility type A a is 30,000 square ft. The current lot area is 8,100 square ft.

Lot frontage is 175 ft required. The current lot frontage of this property is 60 ft. Uh variances are needed for the front and sideyard setbacks as indicated in the report in front of you. Uh the home is uh in the heart of an existing single family subdivision and does not meet the criteria uh listed as well. Uh various variances are required at the end of the day for this. Staff recommends disapproval uh due to the potential adverse effects to the surrounding residential home size limitations of the existing property and is the request does not adhere to the spirit and intent of the zoning code. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Shing. Before I get to questions, any comments from engineering? Engineering has no comments. Any comments from fire? Fire department has no comment. Thank you. Uh questions from the committee to staff first. Yeah. Uh Darl, I think you've been involved in this from the beginning. What where from our last approval on planning commission to wherever it was turned down? Was it turned on at city council? U Mr. Chair, through you. From memory, I'm not 100% sure. I just know variances were needed to be pursued because it meet met virtually none of the requirements per our eight standards to do a daycare of this size. So, so Miss Stevens is required if she gained approval today. That's not what you know. So, so there was variances that were needed that you did not pursue. Well, uh well, that's something you Yeah, we went to zoning. I went to zoning to get the approval and then I had an objection by Mr. Kenneth and there was two other people there, whatever. And they didn't vote at all. They just it died there. So that's what happened. They didn't even do a motion. So they didn't even do a

motion to vote. So So I guess it' be Yes. So it just died right there and everything stopped. You said Mr. Oswald was there? Yes. Can you can you explain to us what happened, Mr. Oswwell, please? Please state your name and address. Mr. Mr. Oswwell, please state your name and address for the record. Kenny Oswald, 237 Pepperdine Drive. Um, yeah, this has come up to us a few different times and I don't know the exact scenario, but I think that it went back for her to get some of these this information on these variances such as the the setbacks in the driveway and things like that and that wasn't produced. Um, I'm I'm sorry this is an unfortunate situation, but it doesn't come close to meeting what we need in a daycare for that many people. And the the problem will occur is if we let this one situation go by, then we let the next one go by. And there is, like we've said, there's too many of these variants that they're asking for is it doesn't come close when you're looking at the square footage, you know, and the size of the driveway. And I believe that she would do a great job, but there's these rules and I don't know if she was kind of thinking that when we were changing our ordinances that I think they still need to be tweaked, you know, with some of the things in the variance or in the ordinance for that. But for right now, I I feel that I wouldn't be voting for it just because there's too many of these issues that I don't think that she can meet requirements. So, okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Any other questions from the committee to staff? Mr. Schneider, please state your name and address for the record. Good afternoon. Chad Schneider, 211 Harvard Avenue, LI, Ohio. Uh this is to Mr. Shoning and Mr. Farcus. Is the uh recent uh the proposed zoning and uh code update that we're doing, does it address any changes that would um reduce any of this to where it's closer to the mark where she's at? Thank you. Yeah. Through the uh chair to you, Mr. Schneider, uh the new zoning code, the proposed zoning code does not have the same requirements for the uh lot area as well as the lot frontage. Uh so those requirements have been removed from the proposed zoning code. Uh requirements are reflecting similar uh cities, pure cities within the state of Ohio such as fence requirements and such for the safety of the children um and uh buffer requirements from certain uses such as adult uses, marijuana facilities, liquor stores, etc. So there are changes. Uh the concern uh with the new code is it addresses more of a safety aspect, less of the lot frontage uh and area concerns that are in the current code. Okay. And what about the square footage requirement? Square footage requirement has been removed as well on the proposed zoning code as is. Mhm. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And Mr. Shing, just for the purposes for this committee and particularly our our newest member here, that proposed zoning change has not gone to committee nor has it gone through council. Correct. That is correct. Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from the committee? Mr. Battle to staff? No, not just that. Okay. Any other Mr. Powski? Director Panowski. This question I'll start with staff, but it might end up going to the applicant at some point. There's multiple mentions in the application of a comprehensive

traffic management plan. Yet, we weren't provided with that. Were was the city provided with that? Is was that ever provided to you, Mr. Shig? The city was not provided with that. Okay, great. All right, if there's no other questions for staff, I'll open it up to the committee for questions to the proponent. Miss Stevens, do I have any questions? Mr. Battle, uh, Miss Stevens, seems like you're very dedicated to this cause. Uh, could you talk a little about about a staff because it' be a change in staff and the the requirements you would hire for or uh training? Yes. For every six kids there, it got to be at least one dog at all times. We have to have our CPR. We have to have extra training just for the state because we are state from state. State comes in every every one to two years. Every one year twice a year. One announced, one unannounced, but the other one could it could be up to three because the other one can be unannounced too. So they're coming in. So and then we have to have a fire inspection. Um, you have, like I said, you have to have all the training through state to even get through there with fire inspection, building inspection. Um, yeah. So, everybody have to be you do back, we do background checks, that's mandatory. Um, yeah, it's a whole list of things. Um, what else? by inspection, medical, even we have have to have physicals to make sure we're up to hard to even do it. And so do our staff. So everybody had to have all this done before they even get hired. Just like any other normal place, you got to have the background checks and all these other we have to have it too. And they have to be presented to state. So yeah. So for every six is one, but if you have like two

kids under the age of two, you got to have two staff members. Thank you. Anything else, Mr. Battle? Any Mr. Director Panowski? Miss Stevens, I want to make sure that you understand that our review here today is not about the staffing that you might have or the state requirements. It's about the location that you're conducting the business at. You understand that, right? Okay. All right. I just want to make sure that that was clear because you've been doing it for a while. It sounds like you do a nice job and and all that kind of stuff, but this is about the location that you're asking to do it at and whether you should be able to have more kids there. So, that's it's simply about the location. Okay. You ask also about parking. If you looked in the papers, did you see it's like two is a street you can park on either side. We have a driveway. is an in-n-out thing like you drop your kids off at daycare and you leave and then you you know it's not like it's a traffic jam anywhere. It's not like you know we never had nothing like that cuz it's one by one. Everybody come at different times. If if you think about families if you got four families that's four cars. Everybody come. I'm 247. So they got night shift maybe one car day shift maybe two cars but not at the same time. It's like somebody get off at come at 6:00, somebody get off at 2, somebody come at 4, get off at 10:00. Things like that. So it's not like a daycare center where everybody come in the morning and you got three, four or five different cars coming in the morning and leaving about the same time. Five or six. That's not like that. I just wanted to let you know it's not like that. It's like one person coming in at a time, drop your kids off and leave. It's not, oh, let's sit around, talk all day. It's not like that. It's like come get your kids and go. They tired. We tired. So that's what it is. Any other questions for the proponent? Uh, sorry, Mr. Ted. Yeah, I don't uh so this is this

certainly isn't a a question. It's more of a I just want to kind of express my thoughts and feelings on so since co I think uh members of this committee have been me and Mr. battle and uh uh our uh building department head. Uh we've seen an influx of these daycarees into neighborhoods and uh most of them that came before us were approved. You know, they met the criteria. Uh I think after Miss Stevens after we met with her for her approval on the last time, I think we kind of thought that this was probably where we needed to start phasing these out. But but I think we I think uh for myself, I'm going to go ahead and uh when we do vote, I'm going to respect the approval that we gave last time when we were here. Give her one more chance to get this in line. Get seek out these variances. Do what you got to do. Uh uh and you know, that's just my personal thought. I I believe in what you're trying to do. I understand there's a need. I believe you're the person to do it. Uh I'm confident that you'll do it the right way. Uh, so, uh, I just wanted to state that for the record. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chedro. Any further questions from the committee? Mr. Oswald, let me restate my name. No need to, sir. Um, okay. So, this Mr. Shoning, um, in our new ordinance, we still haven't voted on that through the chair, through you. Yes. Um it uh it has not been approved. It is still our legal department is reviewing it. I am going through it with them. Uh there are questions uh as to how the uh new zoning code appears. Um and revisions are still being made at this time. It will still need to go through planning commission committee as well as the three readings with council. So if you if this does go through the way

that you're drafting, you said that the square footage number would come down and maybe a few other things. So maybe as a suggestion, I hate to see you keep paying every time because it's expensive and she's, you know, firm on what she wants to do and I think she would be good, but these restrictions are what we need to iron out. So, I don't know if until we get that passed, maybe they could put this on hold so that when they come back, then there's solid information on the restrictions and maybe vote at that point. I I would like to see it go through, but right now with the restrictions that we have in the code in the zoning, you know, it doesn't come close, which I've said before as far as doing it. But I think she would be a real asset, but these are something I think that we need to to square away and maybe I don't know how long that's going to be until we pass that. Um, so it was just a suggestion. So, thank you, Mr. Robert. Uh, yes. I guess a couple questions more for the uh building department. I mean, we've we've gone through this a number of times with different thing with different properties. And I know the 8 or 30,000 ft and 175 ft frontage almost acts like a uh a lot that would be more conducive to a full commercial daycare uh rather than an inhome daycare. And I understand we're just talking about a inh home daycare, but I was curious if the building department had any concept of um I guess the overall uh common area in a in a home of this size or or uh in a lot of this size. I mean, more than the 30,000 square ft. I guess I have a little bit of a concern with just how much usable space there would be in the home for up to 12 children, especially given the fact that we do have some

concern with maybe neighbors as far as Okay. How how much is that impacting neighboring properties? You know, I don't know if you have any any thoughts as far as either where where we might ultimately land as far as maybe not 30,000 square feet, but we want to see at least this much of a minimum, you know, non-bedroom structure, something along those lines. Mr. Chair, you Mr. Hubard, it it's that's a multiaceted question. We're touching on proposed zoning. We're touching on some building code requirements. um from the proposed zoning. Mr. Shoning and I in the draft phase did consider this because as indicated it is a hot topic and it has been for several years. We did take in consideration to try to reduce the the requirements that we currently have. As right now our current code is geared for commercial atmosphere and it's purposeful. It's designed to give what I always have said, elbow room between homes and other businesses. In a commercial atmosphere, this requirement gives the children area to play, go out and run around and and do things that kids do. In a residential home, it's a very confined requirement. You have an existing footprint. We have an existing house, unknown interior layout, square footage that does touch the building code to make sure that we have enough facilities for the children to use, enough habitable space for the children to congregate. Is it in the basement? Is it in the living room or they are they going to take naps? Where are those naps going to be? So there are some life safety aspects but from a zoning code we are considering that to try to make this a little bit easier but the challenge from a building code will always be there unless the building code changes. So there this is a multiaceted process. This is step one. Hope that helped. And then I'm assuming then that the building code aspects that's where we had asked for those variances before that haven't been sought. The Mr. chair through you. The variances

being sought are purely from a zoning perspective as we stand now from from memory and looking at this past memo. The variances were sought for number one through four per our current zoning code. Those variances number one is singular to one variance, but when you get to number three, number three consists of three separate variances. So in total, you're actually pursuing five or six variances for this entire site. Anything else? I have a follow-up question to that. As the number of uh the square footage is that I'm sorry, the number of children within the daycare, does that impact the square footage that she needs to meet for the variances? The Mr. Chair through you. The variances being sought are purely from a zoning code perspective. That is all before us today. the anything that is being sought if sought from a building code perspective will be heard at the state board of building standards if she decides to pursue depending on what comes of it. So step one is right now for the variances if approved contingent variances are sought that'll go back to the board of zoning appeals if I'm not mistaken and be sought through that route. Thank you. And just to comment for the record, you know, nationwide affordable or affordable child care providers is right in trouble nationwide is there crisis, right? And there's no LIA is no exception. Uh and the number one barrier to that is access to capital. Number two is zoning for childhood nationwide and something that we need to take in consideration as we continue with this proposal. Thank you. Anything else from the committee? I I will say this and I'll leave it to the committee. Uh I am leaning towards tableabling this for a couple reasons. several of them based on what Mr. Oswald said. One is based on the potential change in the zoning code. But the biggest concern I have are there are multiple uh variances that are needed

that I'm not sure the proponent uh and I'm just speaking from my own view of reading what was submitted is not fully aware of all the variances. So my suggestion would be to table this pending the outcome of um the proposed zoning changes. I I don't want to personally I don't want to vote on something today, shoot it down or vote for it when the zoning code could change. But there are multiple variances that are going to have to be done. And I want to make sure the proponent, Miss Stevens, is fully aware, working with uh the building department and the zoning or planning department to make sure she's fully aware of all the steps, all those variances that are going to be needed, whether this passes at this body the way it currently is or whether uh after the zoning change is done as proposed. um and those other restrictions are removed from it. So, is there any thought process from the committee? I know it's the chairman's uh right to table it uh until such time as those things are worked out and potentially the proposed uh zoning change happens. Is there any thoughts or thinking on that? Mr. Pronowski, my only concern uh Mr. Chair is that um that time frame is uncertain. Mhm. And so that that's my only concern is that we don't know. It's not as if that's on an agenda for an upcoming meeting. We're still working through a number of details. And so I I would just ask if we're going to do that that um the applicant uh understands that the time frame in which she might be cons the application might be considered again is uncertain. But it might be to her benefit if she were to wait until some of those things those changes might be implemented or we had clearer vision as to whether they're going to be changed. But uh that that time frame is uncertain and I would I would just like for the record for Miss Stevens to hear that if we were to go that route, it might ultimately be to our benefit, but the time frame is uncertain at this point. And

and Mr. Penowski, that is a concern I have as well. I was looking at it from the financial. If we were to vote on this, I don't know where it would go. If it voted down and she waited until after the zoning change and she reapplied, there's an additional cost to her to reapply by tableabling it. There is no additional cost to her. Mr. Craig, through you, Mr. Chairman, section 4.12 of the city charter requires the planning commission within 60 days of a referral to cause the ordinance or resol resolution to be returned to the clerk of council together with the written recommendations of the majority of members of such commission. Um there is no provision for planning commission to table any matters. It's not contained in our rules. And through discussions with the law director's office as part of the zoning change, we pointed out that there's no real authority. We we are bound by this 60-day requirement. So, your choices would be to vote on it today or the applicant could withdraw it and and resubmit it later. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Craig. And I do not believe or have confidence that this would get before council and approved by council, particularly when you're talking three readings within the 60-day window. Um, so unless the proponent is willing to withdraw, um, I don't know if that is something you're willing to do or we can certainly otherwise our only other option is to take a vote on it. Is uh, is there uh, let's see, I'm sorry. Is there any can we give uh Miss Stevens a a brief description of what the consequences or the uh or what the uh advantages would be if we if she withdrew today? Is there someone that can do that if she if she uh withdrew? That's what you said an option was, right? Have us vote or withdraw. So can can you give a brief description to her what what the consequences or advantages of withdrawing instead of having us vote

would be the with Mr. Tedro the advantage of withdrawing is just simply is there's no vote taken there's no denial or there's no approval um that she would still have to come back to this body when the uh zoning change is made. If it's if it's approved then it moves on. If it's denied then uh it's the same thing as if it was withdrawal. She would have to wait until the zoning code was done and then once again come back to this body based on that new zoning. All right. If she withdrew, would she have to pay the fee again? I believe so. Yeah. Any other comments? Well, seeing as that, I will entertain a motion to approve 2025-100066 Nita Stevens 836 with Drive Ayria's request for conditional use for the use of a type A child care facility. Do I have a motion? So moved. Moved by Mr. Tedra. Do I have a second? Second by Mr. Battle. All in favor to approve the conditional use as presented signify by I. I. I. Nay. Nay. Nay. Motion fails. 4 to2 at this time. We'll do a roll call vote. Mr. Hubard. Nay. Mr. Tedro. Yay. M. Director Powski. Nay. Mayor Brewaker. Nay. Miss Rivera. Hi. Mr. Battle. Nay. Nay. Thank you. The next uh public hearing for us this morning is 2025-100069 South Abbey Road Plaza LLC 260 South Logan Street Yria. Procedure to vacate rightway that was not previously vacated per ordinance 1959-156.

Is there a proponent here? Are there a prop Is there a proponent? Is there a proponent? Is there an opponent? Is there an opponent? There an opponent. Mr. Craig, would you like to weigh in on this, please? Through you, Mr. Chairman. What would you like me to weigh in about? What this is relative to tonight or this morning? Um I'll I will uh defer to the city planner. Okay. He's he's investigated this and we've u found some information that's of use to the council here. Okay. Mr. Shy. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you. Uh this was previously referred by city council on the June 2nd meeting. Uh the applicant, Mr. Yoast indicated he had a desire to for the city to vacate property that was part of the former Eastern Heights Boulevard located off of South Abbey Road. This is the current Marco's Pizza in that area. Uh upon review, it appeared based on ordinance 1959 that this portion of the property was missed uh in the vacating of it by the city. Um, as you can see in the appendix A of your staff report, the location map, that is what our county auditor is currently indicating uh that area as right away. Uh, upon further review, uh, the quick claim deed for the applicant indicated a, uh, vacating of the, uh, property or the area in question in 1991. um that ordinance was not uh affiliated with that whatsoever. Um further research just to summarize all this uh we found out that the uh

applicants uh quit claim deed is incorrect. The proper ordinance of vacating this portion of the Eastern Heights Boulevard was vacated under ordinance 1990-158. the applicant's quit claim deed indicates 1991-58. Uh so they need to update their quit claim deed for the property. Um we did uh I did correspond with our engineering department. However, and we do not have a record of a on-site utility easement uh being available to the city. Um there are concerns from the engineering department regarding that. If you do look at your appendix I on page 13, you can see that sanitary sewer does run along that property uh and access would be needed. So the point of this report at the end of the day, we were under the impression that we were in need of vacating property uh to or there was a need for vacating property. Um but that is not the truth. Um, we have a quit claim deed issue or the rather the applicant does uh and that needs to be clarified on their end. But we do need a easement because the applicant is uh intending on doing a consolidation of property as well as a split in that area uh which may come to this body at a later time. Uh so like I said the applicant this was brought forth through city council referred to you guys on June 2nd. Um and these this is the result of that research. So Mr. Shon, your recommendation would be to what there so to speak is not a recommendation here uh to vote on. Um there is uh a later time there is a need for uh a easement. Like I said, there's nothing to really vote on here, but because it was referred to you by council, I thought it'd be best practice to sit here and

have a little background for all of you as to what this was. Uh that was only discovered last week actually. Uh that this was properly vacated in 1990 due to the ordinance misunderstanding. So with that being said, there I think you stated there is no there is no need for a vote on this, Mr. Craig. Yeah. Through through you, Mr. Chairman, there's no need for any action because what they're asking for has already been granted. Okay. And just for the purpose of my sanity, engineer Schneider, you have any further comments? Uh, Mr. Shony hit the nail on the head. No, no additional comments. Okay. Assistant Chief G. Excuse me there, Chief. Uh, fire department has no comment. Okay. Seeing there's no action, we will move on. Mers comments from the committee. Okay. Next item on the agenda. That is all our public hearings. Our next item on the agenda is a planning commission case. We have 1 1225-1 00066 Marcelos Hammond's post office box 2011 AR Ohio request a waiver of design review guidelines for for a mural on the second street bridge. Um and I know I communicated with Mr. Hammonds last night but is there anybody here that wants to speak to it? Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record, please. Hi everyone, my name is Amanda Belchure. Um, address 12200 Garford Avenue in Alyrio, Ohio. Do you want to share what the project is to the committee? They should be fairly familiar because he did something similar on Musav. So, correct. Yes. This is our actually our third largest scale mural. We have the mural on Musav. Uh, we have one on the back of the South Branch Ayria Library. Uh we also have had some temporary murals. We have the mural by Stina Aaliyah which is now uh placed in the plot of land behind South Branch Library

and uh they in partnership with the with Luring County Public Health, we did a temporary mural on the road of Musty Avenue and West Avenue. We've also worked with uh high school youth to create multiple I think we're over 20 at this point large scale 8 foot by 4 foot murals as well. I met with for the committee I met with Mr. Hammonds a couple times on this project. We looked at a couple different ideas and settled on on this bridge as it is a main artery into the city. Um, also with the work they did on Mussy, as you're most of you, if not all of you are aware of the work that they did and they they did uh work with engineer Schneider and his office in regards to the protection of the river. I do know that there is a recommendation and I'll get to Mr. Shony here in a second uh for approval of the conditions that they work with engineering department and I've committed to Mr. Hammonds uh from a city standpoint. We would work with um the engineering department to make sure that the river is protected um as well as the uh green space around the bridge as the work is done. Um I shared with uh Mr. Hammonds from the mayoral standpoint and we'll vote here shortly, but from mayoral standpoint, I'm in uh agreement with this project. It's been great for the kids. It's been great for the community. Um but I do want to uh ask Mr. Showing to to weigh in on his report for the record. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, um the scope of work here is at the Second Street Bridge mural. Uh in terms of zoning, there are no concerns from zoning. Zoning has been approved. Uh regarding the design review component of this, uh due to previous history, the guidelines do discourage the use of high intensity, high reflective, fluorescent, and metallic colors uh on building trim. uh proposed mural does utilize highintensity colors and the applicant has requested a waiver to the guidelines. Our engineering department

did provide uh several comments regarding this issue um regarding the preparation of work uh due to the close proximity of the river uh as well as the paint materials. All of that has been provided in the report uh in front of you as well as storm water protection and the uh traffic control for the area. So I will defer to Mr. Schneider of any further comments that he may have. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Showing. Mr. Schneider, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh engineer obviously is concerned when it comes to the environmental aspect of uh painting a bridge over the water. Um we did ask uh some questions and uh we did receive some information as far as how the it was going to be protected and and we're pretty satisfied with the the means and methods as far as what they're they're looking to do out there. Uh, one item I did receive that's conflicting is the type of paint they're using. One of the things we want to make sure is the correct paints are used and and actually recommend that a test strip be done before anything is done because uh we believe the existing bridge has an epoxy urethane coating on it now. So, we just want to make sure that whatever goes on there isn't something that's just going to peel off. Uh so that's that's one of the I guess miscellaneous things we'd like to see performed before uh uh we actually paint the entire bridge and it just falls apart. So but other than that uh the environment is the most important things to be protect out there. So thank you Miss Belchure. Did you have comment? Yes, we have uh we're going to be using peel stop binding primer that's specified for masonry. And then when it comes to the masonry primer and sealer, we have a Lexon acrylic. Seals porous concrete and improves adhesion of the top coat. We're using a sheer elastic elastoic coating which is a flexible breathable coating designed for vertical

concrete. helps bridge small gaps, resists water and carbonation and stays durable in changing weather. Has a matte finish and then axon XP waterproof masonry coating which is an elastoic like acrylic with excellent water resistance and weather protection. Mr. Snder, have you received that information? I I saw thought there was an email that came through late this morning, but I'm not sure if it was relative to that. I did receive that one. The original one had the Zenzer paint and a Bears paint and then the one this morning had the Sherman Williams paint. Okay. So, you'll you'll review that. Uh the only issue we have is we don't really know what the coating on the existing bridge is. It's okay. 25 30 years old. Uh that's why we would recommend that a test strip be done. A small test strip uh be completed prior to you basically paint a small area, let it cure, put an X in it, put a special tape on there, pull it off, make sure it has a proper cohesion and and whatnot. So, uh we just want to make sure that's done so that it just doesn't fall apart. And thank you, Mr. Meltzer. Is that something we could do? Oh, absolutely. Yes. uh the muralist that we're working with, Chad Federovich, has extensive experience in this type of thing. So, yes. Great. Um any comments from the committee, questions, concerns? Okay. I will entertain a motion to approve with the conditions as described um and with working with the engineering department for 2025-100066 Marcelos Hammond's PO box 211 2011 Ayria requesting a waiver of design review guides for a mural on the second street bridge. Do I have a motion? Moved by Mr. Hubard. Second. Second by Mr. Rivera. Any further discussion? All in favor? I I oppose. Nay. Motion carried. Item number nine on your agenda is the

summary reports of design applications that have been approved. Um there are multiple on there. Are there any questions regarding those? All right. Any staff or commission reports this morning? No. At this time, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. Our next meeting is August 12th, 2025 here at 11:00. Entertaination. Motion to adjurnn. Moved by Mr. Powski. Second. Second by Mr. Hover. All in favor signify by I. I oppose. Nay. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned. Thank you everyone. Um, Good morning.

[Music] This [Music] I came in.