Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good morning everyone. Welcome to the Wednesday, December 9th, excuse me, this is not Wednesday, it's Tuesday, uh, planning commission meeting. Um, I'll call to order. Roll call. Mayor Brewbaker here. Director Panowski here. Sam Battle. Tom Aiden here. Derek Tedro here. Barry Hubard here. Maggie Rivera here. At this time, I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes as distributed from November 12th, 2025. So moved by Miss Rivera, second by Mr. Aiden. Any further discussion?

All in favor? I. I. Opposed. Nay. Motion carried. Uh item four, there's no miscellaneous correspondence. Item five, there's no old business. Item six, there is no new business. We do have one public hearing this morning. Um, it's the city of Ayria review of the proposed zoning code and recommendation from planning commission. The propo pro proposed zoning code will result in the reszoning of all parcels within the city of Ayria. Um, I will in a second here turn it over to Mr. Shoning, our city planner to introduce our consultant guest. Uh, but for all those that are here this morning, uh, he is calling in virtually and for him to be able to hear your questions, thoughts, and concerns, we need to have our microphones on as well as that microphone. um at the desk there. So, just keep that in mind if you have a question or a comment. Mr. Shing.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, uh we have Nolan with Zone Co. uh a available virtually here uh through Zoom. Uh he will be providing a brief 10-minute presentation regarding the proposed zoning code. Uh we will follow that with uh some revisions that the members have been provided with and open it up for questions. So Nolan, if you can hear me, if you could begin your presentation and uh if you're able to share your screen as well for the participants in the audience. Thank you. Very.

I'll share my screen at this time. Okay, that should be coming up for you momentarily. If if you can see my screen, Chris, can you confirm that that's sharing?

We can see it. Thank you. The consultancy Zoneco Zonco was hired by the city of Ayria uh along with and under as a subconsultant of a firm called MS Consultants. MS Consultants um was the prime contractor on this project and they worked on the first half of this project which was creating that comprehensive plan. [clears throat] Afterwards, MS hired us to implement that comprehensive plans objectives into the planning and zoning code or the updated planning and zoning code. And what we're going to be talking about today is that proposed planning and zoning code. um and hopefully um get this on uh on roll for adoption. So, I'll just provide a quick overview of some of the changes between this proposed planning and zoning code and the former planning and zoning code. And then after that, as Chris introduced, I will be happy to answer any questions as you consider this very important um and very large change to the regulations. First, I'll talk about the introduction and purpose of this project overall. I have my notes on another another that so the proposed planning and zoning code for Ayria represents a comprehensive effort to modernize land use regulations and align them with the city's long-term vision. The primary purpose of this update is to ensure consistencies with Ayria's newly adopted comprehensive plan which emphasized sustainable growth econ.

Additionally, the update aims to enhance clarity and usability by incorporating tables, graphics, and streamlined language throughout the code. These improvements will make the zoning regulations more accessible, we hope, for developers, property owning owners, and the city staff. reducing, support commercial corridors, protect natural resources, and create an environment in which we can have small businesses thrive. Ultimately, this initiative is about creating a zoning framework that promotes orderly development and encourages investment. I'm going to talk about the map overview. Um, this is something that on this particular presentation is going to be hard for you to see on a lot by lot basis. However, as you have um a copy of this document, the first page is the map and you should be able to zoom in quite far. I tried to print that onto that Adobe document as 300 dpi. So you should be able to when compared to the existing zoning map, the proposed version demonstrates a clear shift towards modernization and simplification. Several of the older districts uh that we deemed outdated based on the comprehensive plan have been removed or merged together to reduce redundancy and improve

Nolan, if you can hear me, we are having issues consistently of not hearing you. Um, if you could speak closer to your microphone. Yeah, what I might do, and I apologize for that, I'm going to go get some external headphones. Um, and I will put those in. So, I apologize. Um, but please take a couple minutes as I uh external headphones and hopefully that addresses the issue.

Mr. Chair, would do you uh prefer if I would just complete this presentation uh with a consultant online or

um I don't have a problem with that. uh depending on how long he's going to be uh to keep this moving forward. Looks like he's back. Chris. Okay, Chris. What I have done is I've put in some external headphones that include a mic.

We Nolan, we can hear you now. If you want to proceed with the presentation, be okay. Okay. Okay. Very good. Okay. So, I very much apologize that you weren't able to hear all of that. Would you like me to go back and start over, Chris? Uh, no, thank you. You can just proceed where you're at. Thank you.

Okay. Okay. So, what I'm going to do now, um, again, this map is very hard for me to show on a lot bylot basis on this particular presentation. So, I ask that you go into the PDF document that you received. Um, and you can use the plus and minus tool on Adobe Acrobat or Adobe Reader to zoom in a lot on a lot by basis. Um, but what I want to do now is just kind of go over how some of those districts were merged. This is a very chaotic illustration here and these were not merged necessarily on a equal to equal basis. So even though I have some arrows uh going from one district on the original zoning map to a new district, it doesn't mean that every single lot in that old district went to the new district. It's just saying maybe in general uh they went to to that. So, if you see here, I know it's small for you most likely, but um there were 15 zoning districts in the proposed code. We have nine. Um and this is a trend that we're seeing throughout is asking the question, do we need the specificity of more zoning districts or can we simplify the document, make it easier to use and really Nolan, we are still having issues hearing you. Um, at this time, I'm going to move forward with uh completing the presentation. Uh, as long as that's okay with our chair uh just to wrap this up and move forward with our revisions.

Absolutely.

Thank you. Uh so going through the presentation that our consultant provided overall we are reducing our zoning districts from 15 to 9. Uh purpose of that is to consolidate and to align with our comprehensive plan as well as to provide uh better opportunities for growth and opportunity within the city. Moving forward in our presentation here, the key differences include setback requirements have been reduced. Uh minimum lot areas have been reduced as well just to promote uh greater development within the city. Uh additions of tables and graphics have been added for user uh for to make the uh proposed zoning code more user friendly with uh people uh that are layman in the community to better explain requirements such as setbacks. What that means exactly. Visual representation usually will work a little bit better. Um, as indicated by our consultants, this does align with our comprehensive plan that was approved in 2024 with uh from the city council. Uh, this does encourage economic investment in the community. Mixed uses and walkability. Uh, younger generations uh have a preference for more walkable communities. Um, and to attract younger people in the city uh would be a goal based on the aging population. uh modernized regulations and transparency as also indicated by our consultant. The last time this was updated was back in 1998. A lot of differences have been made uh since then. Overall, uh just a briefing here. Planning commission public hearing will be held today. Uh also this will be provided as strategic planning next

Monday uh following regular council and there will be three public hearings as of right now uh with city council. Um this will be uploaded and if it does follow our uh projected path here we will be having approval in March of this year quarter 1 of 2026. Um from there uh Mr. chair if I may have permission to go through some of the revisions that I've provided all of the um planning commission members just to go through that in brief um and then from there we can go through uh any comments and questions that may uh exist. Thanks.

Thank you. So uh all of you were provided with a list of 13 revisions that I proposed based on the applica or rather based on the uh submitted uh version of the proposed zoning code from December 2nd. I'm just going to go through these briefly uh just to have an overview. Our first item here is a revision to the zoning map. As of right now, we are proposing to have corridor which allows for more flexibility and a significant amount of uh different uses from residential to businesses in this area. Due to the nature of East Avenue and West Avenue within the city, my proposal here is to revert these zoning districts uh on the frontages here from 8th Street on the west side of the street all the way down to Oberlin Road on the west side and then on the east side from uh Vic Janovic uh road or drive rather all the way to Oberlin road as well for West Avenue. Uh we will repeat this with the uh from East Avenue from south of Fifth Street to the city boundaries uh near 16th Street. Uh like I said, really the built environment in that area is more residential in nature. Having more concentration developments in that area wouldn't be uh preferred. And considering there are not a significant amount of vacant lots in that area, that may be a deterrent for property owners as well to uh own property within that area. Uh that is the first proposal here uh of a revision. Uh the second is um just a minor tweak in terms of the language that was provided. Minor spelling errors in terms of the word insure. Uh pond was misspelled. just brief uh tweaks that are made uh as you can see in the proposed text versus the

existing text and that is found on page 33 of the proposed zoning code. Uh the third item here is a minor tweak as well. Developers provide a performance guarantee. Uh further transparency was recommended to uh if improvements are not completed per the city engineer including that language just for the point of clarification was recommended as well. Uh moving along here further, page 67 to page 68, street construction, just a minor tweak as well in terms of the verbiage that was provided. Uh 26 ft or less uh is to be uh indicated uh for parking on streets per coordination with our city engineer. Uh so that has been clarified. Uh item number five here 11 section 11506 rear lot lines. Once again, just a clarification of the definition for further transparency for uh people in the community as well as any developer that we are working with. Uh corner lots for the sake of the commission here uh currently require two front yards. We have moved away from that to be more user friendly uh to allow for grayer development within the city. Um so that's sort of where that comes from. Moving on here to item number six, section 111506, rules of measurement. Uh that is once again clarification of our corner lots and double frontages on pages 86 to 87. Um and that is reflected as well for side setback item number 7 section 11156 page 87. Uh just a clarification that side setback requirements for corner lots will be double the required. For example, if your side setback requirement in for the property that you have is 5 ft, it would be 10 ft to ensure that there is line of sight uh addressed for anyone uh driving in a

vehicle. Moving on here to uh item number eight, density. Uh per uh recent meeting that we had with some developers in the community, we have increased the density requirements for town homes from five units per acre to eight. uh similar communities such as Alliance, Ohio, they do have uh even greater amounts such as 12 units per acre, but we found the happy medium to go with eight. That is the the recommendation that I'm providing today to the commission. Um item number nine, residential to district. Uh currently short-term rentals in the proposed draft are indicated as administrative review. Um this has been uh indicated as being conditional across the board. Uh this is just a minor tweak that I'm recommending here as well. Uh moving on to item number 10, accessory use regulations. This is just a clarification for any uh accessory uses on properties that they must meet if they are not defined in the zoning code that they shall be 3 ft from any lot line. Uh moving on to item number 11 in the document provided to you. Uh this is once again uh just a clarification of verbiage here for parking spaces. Uh shall not be uh within 10 ft of any uh structure and uh shall not be required within the required front yard or sideyard of any lots. Item 12 is once again a clarification of the dumpster requirements of the property distance from property lines due to concerns of noise or not noise but rather odor smells. Uh we are recommending a further distance from the property lines. Uh as opposed to the 3-foot requirement we were increasing this to 6 ft but allowing flexibility in the side or rear yard. Currently they are only permitted

in the rear yard for dumpsters. Uh the final item here is just a minor tweak to our chapter se or chapter 165 uh section 165.28. Currently the city planner position is not listed. We are recommending of course adding that uh to ensure compliance uh with the zoning code that is being uh recommended for approval. Uh if you have any further questions I am available for comment. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Shing. Uh before we get to questions, engineer Schneider, comments? No additional comments. Fire Marshall G. Our department has no comments. All right. At this time, I'll open it up to questions from the commission.

Uh just a real quick one for that item, that change one. Just so I understand, the map that you show up here right now, that's the existing. Is that correct? So, we're changing these from corridor to residential two. This is for the proposed code. Um, all of this right here, what this would revert to on West Avenue and East Avenue, you do you see that beigish yellow color there uh indicated there? It would all be reverted to that color because these are 90 plus% of them are residential uh houses. None of them are businesses. So based on some feedback we had from the public, I believe that this would be a better recommendation to not have such a high concentration in those areas of the city.

Other questions? Braden?

I do. Um, so I'm glad to see the change on West Avenue to remain more consistent with what it is currently. Uh, and East Avenue. I still have a question and I understand everything is about give and take but I have a question of if we uh if we want walking community I think that's a smart thing to do but where are they walking to if with our downtown so vacant uh and God knows that I wish uh you know it's in my prayer list every night that it becomes thriving again and really filled uh why would we offer any other location except for downtown for those, you know, uh just like it says, you know, the uh the food park or the indoor sales and service or or any of those, you know, the small entertainment, small restaurant, uh for indoor dining and and that why would we want to to offer It'd be nice if our downtown was filled. And I understand yes, we need to give them more space to to uh to move into, but until then I you know I don't I just don't understand that. Mr. Chair, through you to address uh Mr. Aiden's comment um the way we look at this this zoning code is projected for the next 20 30 years as the recent one has been. Um the momentum that will be hopefully built off of this zoning code will see development in the downtown area. We've updated the terms and everything, but this does give opportunity for areas such as Middle Avenue, Cleveland Street, and other areas of the city that have had historically um retail business and, you know, different restaurants, bars in those areas to, you know, prosper in those areas, too. Eliminating the West and East Avenue was not a concern of mine, uh, as I discussed with the mayor, as well as other individuals with the

city staff. Um, but this does give us the opportunity to expand development outside of the downtown area. To have just a solely concentrated pocket of development just in the downtown area, I I believe would be a disservice to the community. Having it spread out on our main arterial roadways as the consultant has uh provided to us, I believe would be the best compromise and would be the most beneficial. The and then the one other question that I have is uh so currently for the landmarks commission the inind determination is is all uh referred to your office uh and I also feel as being on the landmarks commission for 30 something years uh that that's not the best way to go. I think that it still should come before the landmarks commission. They act on that very quickly. I'm sure you're a very busy individual with all the growth we're going to be having in the city the next few years. Uh, and I also do not agree with that. And there might be other things, but to really go through this 270 pages in a weekend, it's way more than this old guy can do and comprehend anything. So, just just being honest with you. and I hand it to all of all of our other commission members except for the mayor because I know he's been probably looking at this all along. If you guys did it, I got to stand up and applaud you.

Thank you, Mr. Aiden. Any further comments, Mr. Shing?

In terms of the inind issue uh addressed by Mr. Aiden um based on the for the sake of efficiency um and the method in which we are approaching this proposed zoning code we did find it best practice to allow that the zoning administrator does review these items. uh that does not say that landmarks does not have an opportunity to provide comments on them as the uh it may be determined that the item may not be uh determined to be inind or existing and therefore it would still be referred to landmarks commission. They still would have a function of this now um it would not automatically be referred to them. it would have to be reviewed by city staff, but that does align with the proposed zoning code in which administrative review is applied to a significant amount of projects within the city if it is principally permitted in that district. So that's sort of my roundabout way of answering the uh question addressed by Mr. Aiden. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions from the commission?

I still have one more comment if I if I may. So, uh, in kind is, uh, through the training that we've had from the Ohio Historic Center. Uh, so we just we'll just talk about roofing because that comes up a lot. So, if you have a three tab, uh, shingle, which is really being um being obso sort of obsolete as as the years go by, but if you currently have it, but you can still purchase it. So, if you have a three tab shingle on your 1890s house, uh, which three tab wasn't produced at that time, inind could mean to someone, well, that's what he's got on there now, so it's inind. So, that would be an inkind application, but that wasn't what was on there originally. So, and not that we're going to say you need to put slate on there because the only person in my in our district that's put slate on new slate on a house is me. uh but I wouldn't expect somebody to go to that expense uh you know it's my choice to to to spend that much money. So those kind of issues come up, you know, in in case like uh they want to change a window in the front of their house or the side of their house that's visible from public view and say that they had a very inexpensive uh uh vinyl window installed prior to the the district's formation in kind would be yes, you can put another vinyl window in there which which which if I was if I was reviewing it, I would say well that wasn't appropriate for this particular your house. Let's And we've done it multiple times, not for primary windows, but for storm windows. Let's You need to put a double hung window in there. Uh some of my Amish contacts will make you a window that'll be cheaper than any of those. We'll use Sassifras as our as our frame because that's what the Amish use on their buggies. It's incredibly rot resistant if if somebody doesn't believe

me because you don't spine sassifrass at Home Depot or at Carter. uh you've got to go to an Amish facility to get it. Uh if you go on the wood database uh.com and look up the the uh this the rot resistance and uh fungi resistance on that wood compared to compared to whatever even compared to cedar compare it to uh sassifras because sassifras now is commercially grown. Uh uh and I mean it's about as good as white oak, but white oak's very very expensive compared to sassifras and it's also about three times heavier. So you'd have to change your weights and do all that other kind of thing. So that again would not be an inkind application in my point of view. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any comments from the audience? Mr. bird. Jump to the microphone and state your name and address for the record, please. Hello. There you go. Good now. Never can tell with these Billboard 235 Eastern Heights Boulevard Yria. I'm here as the current chair of Ayria Landmarks Commission and I would like to uh address the issue of the inind uh which Mr. Aiden has been talking about. Uh, I believe in your packet you received a letter from me relevant to a motion and I'm not going to reiterate all that. I'm sure that you can read. I hope that you do take time to to read that. uh beginning at the end of September, which is less than two months ago, I think. No, just over two months ago, uh we found out that u the role of landmarks was proposed to be changed significantly by the new zoning code. And so this uh took to a large amount of work on our part to come

up with discussion points and I appreciate Mr. Shonig's willingness to uh change some of the things that were suggested. I don't believe that those changes occurred because of anything I had to say unfortunately, but more because of administrative input. But however it happens, it happens. So that's all good. But you know the inind uh there there's so many ways that people on the commission have been helpful to the residents in that district and a lot of times they just fill out an application very very generally. I have 20 years of experience with this and because we can meet with people uh we're familiar with their properties especially Mr. Aiden but but some of the rest of us too and you know help get details in there that are acceptable and uh move things to a successful conclusion. And I guess I have to ask why would you want to pay a staff person here to do what community volunteers are now doing very very adequately. There have been very very few complaints to council over the 30 plus years that landmarks has existed. So uh I I hope that you will reconsider that specific part of it. Uh the other thing that's been a a moving target is the uh

zoning relevant to the quarter district. I'm glad that to see that that's been moved back. Uh truthfully, from a standpoint of a large percentage of residents, uh I I would say move it even further south. But but that's just me looking at the map and knowing the houses. Um the historic district on West Avenue and adjoining streets is a very very small pocket. You can almost think of it like these pocket parks. There's 70 buildings there out of 25,000 buildings in the community. And there's special rules relevant to that. It's kind of like a condo association without having an association. And I really think that that good work has been done there. It's not perfect, but progress has been made. uh multifamily homes have been returned to single family because of rules that were put in place by the zoning that currently exists. I would encourage you to consider the local historic district. There's only one in the town to have a different approach to multifamily within there. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bird. And as a followup to that, I did ask and was concerned about the inind as well. And and I'm kind of curious as to why we would want to do that inhouse um versus leaving that in the hands of landmarks as it's been. So Mr. Shy, you or Mr. Craig or Miss Scott can share with that.

Mr. chair through you. Uh the per the intent behind switching the inind over to staff review uh as I indicated earlier was for the point of efficiency. Uh it does take a couple weeks for usually uh these meetings to be held following our design review standards that we do have currently with the city. This could be treated as such and be reviewed within a week or two. Uh a little bit more efficient than what we are seeing there. Uh there was also concerns of affordability as indicated uh by Mr. Aiden. Uh some individuals have been requested to have uh certain materials for their roofing. Uh these costs are cost prohibitive in some instances. They are significantly more um and that was deemed almost a hardship from a legal point of view. Um but if outside of that though that's sort of where this stemmed from was for the point of efficiency as well as uh due to hardships uh that residents in that area may be subjected to uh due to the requirements of having for example slate shingles which are maybe double or three. I don't have a number in front of me right now but you understand what I'm trying to say with that.

Thank you. And Miss Scott, I'm going to put you on the the microscope here as being one that's been involved from your office at least standpoint. Um, as you take the uh intake of these, have we received complaints or concerns about the length, we'll start with the length of time that it takes to get things processed

through you. Um, yes, we have received a few complaints here and there. um not a significant amount. I don't have an exact number here for you today. Um over the years um comparative to how many applications that have been processed, I I don't have that comparison. Um now, as far as um you know, complaints received for incind uh work, there have been discrepancies over opinions of what inkind is. Um I think Mr. Bird or Mr. Aiden touched on it um with roofing material um as an example. So there have been discrepancies and complaints regarding that um as well as windows um is another one that we receive.

Okay. Thank you. Do you know the time frame average time frame on turning an application around the time you receive it until landmarks? Is it a couple weeks? Is it eight weeks? So through you um from the time an application is received um the landmark secretary will go ahead and forward that to the commission and the commission will typically you know come take a look at the application or they'll review it online. they will have a conversation with the homeowner um within a few days I believe and if it has to go to the landmarks commission for further review and approval that's when time is extended um based on the meeting dates.

Okay, great. Thank you. Are there any other questions from the commission? Mr. Hubard?

Yes. I mean, I guess relative to everything else that is being changed in the the you know, among these proposed changes, I guess the question I would have is the the historical district there seems to be a rather unique thing within the city. U is that really the efficiency we're trying to improve with these changes? It it seems like there's a little extra protection there. I'm just kind of curious why that was why why such the focus on that or or if that would be something that really would would mess things up if we removed that provision and and gave the control back over to the the um u landmark commission.

Mr. Chair, through you uh the intent behind this uh not only like I said was efficiency but also in terms of allowing for a more clear set of rules. um one point of contact if you will uh to distill this. Now this still can be referred to landmarks if it is deemed by the zoning administrator that it does not meet the requirements of inind or existing material. It could still be referred to the landmarks commission. So they they have not been completely eliminated from this process at all. What this does is give a clear or a cleaner look at it from our perspective of allowing to be distilled through the zoning administrator. Staff can have a review of it and from there they can make a determination of whether it meets the inind requirements or it needs to be distributed to the landmarks commission for their review. I will add too um there uh has been conversation with landmarks per our last meeting that a set of guidelines be established by the landmarks commission clear concise guidelines that can be provided to the public for greater transparency of what the requirements are within that district and if they would approve that I would re use that as my review. So it would be coming from the landmarks commission. They would provide me a document that it would have to meet meet X Y and Z. If it meets those requirements, then it would move on per their recommendation. Um if that hopefully makes sense to you that that is something that we have been working on in the background as of right now, not to cause confusion, but they would provide a clear set of guidelines that we currently do not have at this time. At at this juncture, I I'm not so sure that handing this off at at this point to our planner without a little bit more

thought on these guidelines because we can always go back and and adjust this zoning code provided we work through some of the things, but without having these guidelines that you're speaking to and taking this out of the hands, I'm not sure that that's where we want to go with it at this juncture. In my opinion, um I think leaving it in their hands and working with them on these guidelines and if we can make that change in the future might be a better route. Um again, that's just my opinion on this. um the fact that I I've been around a few years. I've never heard of any crazy complaints when it came to landmarks in regards to some of the inkind stuff and the things that a home over there homeowner over there would be asked to do within that. But I think creating those guidelines, but I think those guidelines got to come from landmarks and I think the the opportunity to create those um before we move to just handing it off to the planner might be in our best interest. Again, my opinion, thoughts from the commission.

Yeah, Mr. Mayor, I just want to second that. And also, I'd be curious to see, you know, with any of these reports if there's anything that could be done or what work is being done to collaborate between the two in terms of increasing the operational efficiency for anything going forward.

So, just for the rest of the commission members, Landmarks meets twice a month from April through October. We've met we've had um in fact it was just a couple months ago for 346 Fourth Street. We had three meetings. We had the meeting we did it I think some of us thought we were just cancing the one meeting and making it the week later but we had three meetings that month because we had another individual um who didn't show up. So it was an automatic denial uh and uh and the uh inind so uh our secretary if she calls someone you know usually it's Bill or myself and says this might be in kind. This person thinks it's inind so I try to get it taken care of in two or three days. The only reason it would take longer is if the So we had one this year again at 428 West Avenue. The lady said that it was it was this. And I said, "Well, you've got to your roofer is going to doom your roof." Okay. It's a flat roof. Doesn't have to go to landmark commission. You don't you're not going to see it. But what's he going to do? So, it was just probably took the roofer about three or four days before he called me and I said, "Hey, just fill that out and we'll approve it that same day we get it in into the into the secretary." My intent is never to slow anybody down. It's try to make things easier for everybody and keep this ball rolling because, you know, I'm I'm I'm always happy when somebody's doing something else to their house in our district. Um, just so you everybody on the commission knew what the timelines were. And truly, I mean, uh, I'm I guess I'm going to be chair next year again. Bill has given me a a repeat for a couple years. Uh, so, and thanks, Bill. Uh, but you know, if we need to go to have a special meeting in in December, we're having it. I'm calling it.

Thank you, Mr. Hayden. Sure.

We've been on this for the city's been on this for two years, Mr. Shoning. Better part of a year on this and we're at the point in time to where we're ready to take this to strategic planning and start getting these public hearings going because we've got to get this done. I think the historic district is such a unique um spot in our city. As Mr. Bird said, it's the only one that we have. Um I don't want to potentially hold up or cause conflict within this zoning code um for an issue such as who is going to review the inind stuff. So, with that being said, we're we're we're going to have a motion here in a second to adopt the zoning code, but I am going to make a motion um to revert back to leaving the inind um at least for the foreseeable future to landmarks um as it was prior. So, I will make that motion. Do I have a second for that? I'll second.

Second by Mr. Tedro. Is there any further discussion on that? Just so I understand, what we're doing is we're basically saying yes, we like this with that one section being modified to leaving that the way that it was before those decisions going to to landmarks. That is correct.

Question. So if there's a couple other issues that I haven't had the time to look through for one is like uh currently in residential districts, if you have a dumpster, it has to be enclosed. I don't know if that's in the new one. I haven't I haven't had a chance to look through it. There's another one that uh if a property is uh uh a non-conforming property has been uh vacant for uh for a year or has been utilized as a single family say for instance then it reverts to the new the current zoning. I haven't seen if that's there uh and uh so are we still able to speak to that issue? Uh

well the motion is on to to leave it as that. Then we can come back to further discussion because that those aren't that is not relative to the motion on the floor. Okay. So I do have a motion and a second. Do I have any further discussion on that piece? Seeing none, all in favor? I I oppose. Nay. Motion carried. Now we have uh the second item. If there is no more further discussion in regards to the zoning code as it is, I will entertain a motion to approve the zoning code. um as presented uh today with obviously the change that was just made. Do I have a motion for that? So moved. Moved by Mr. Tedro. Do I have a second? Second by Mr. Rivera. Is there any further discussion?

Okay. So So those [clears throat] issues that I just brought up. Um should we I'm looking to you for recommendation. Mr. Shing, do you have a uh answer to that?

Mr. Chair, through you. Um, looking at our proposed zoning code that we have in front of us, the dumpsters do not refer to a specific district. So, therefore, my determination would be if there's a dumpster present on that site, we would refer to the requirements of the dumpsters. Uh, follow the rules as indicated during the presentation earlier, for example, 6 feet from any lot line. And of course, any screening requirements are provided uh per the proposed code that you guys do have. So in order to address that that would be uh how we would look at that. Okay. And your second my second question can you repeat that Mr.

Oh absolutely. So if a property is is non-conforming within the district and it rem and it becomes vacant and it sets vacant for one year or if it's utilized as its use sort of like a single family if it's in a single family district then it reverts to the it loses its uh grandfathered clause and becomes uh the zoning of the district. Is that one still in there?

Mr. chair through you. I would need to look into this further to have a better determination without me spending significant amount of time going through our current code. Uh just because I don't do not have it committed to exact memory at this time. Um, but we do have uh a section here that does refer to um changes of a non-conforming use to an allowed use as well as um we do have uh non-conforming status attached to the land, but like I did say, I will need to look into that further for clarification.

Yes, M if you would prior to it going to strategic planning, if you would reach out to Mr. Aiden and the commission quite frankly uh with that information. Absolutely. No problem. Anything else, Mr. Aiden? Uh not currently. So we can still talk about this further down the road. I don't want to I don't want to be the one that's holding things up. You know what I mean? Uh we will vote to it'll go to strategic planning on the 15th. Mr. Shoning will get you the answer on that. If you have any other questions between now and then, I would suggest you reach out to Mr. Shing. Okay. Um but at strategic planning there will be another before council votes on it there'll be another discussion on Monday night at strategic planning. Is that open to the public? That is open to the public and it is a discussion point. Okay. Okay.

Yep. Thank you. Any other questions? So I have a motion and a second to move forward with this zoning. Do I have uh all in favor signify by I? I I oppose. Nay. Motion carried. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Shy. Mr. Chair Scott. Yes. Quick question just to clarify that the revisions that were provided were were they part of the motion? They were included with the motion. Yes. Thank you.

All right. That is the end of the public hearings. We have no other public hearings. We have one planning commission case 2025-1000153 649 South Abby Road Plaza LLC requesting a uh for a lot split and a lot consolidation. Mr. Yoast, Bob Yost 260 South Logan. Um, what we're requesting is, you know, where uh number one Kitchens is, Marcos Pizza, that whole strip center. Somehow in 1988 when we built all this, there were multiple different lots, maybe nine, 10 of them. There was also a vacation of Eastern Heights Boulevard that we never knew didn't exist on part of the street if I'm correct. Right, Chris? Yeah. And and so what we're trying to do is just take and combine and split so that each building has its own piece of property. So there's a piece of property south of Marcos that's vacant. It would be a parcel. Where Marcos is would be a parcel. and then where the number one kitchens building would be or unit would be that would be a separate parcel. So it takes nine or 10 pieces combines them into three and all three face Abbey Road.

Great. Thank you, Mr. Shy. [clears throat] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, uh, this application was submitted to us previously back in July of this year. Uh, Mr. Yos did correct his deed. The deed was incorrect. did not indicate the correct ordinance pertaining to the vacating of uh the land. Uh that has been cleared up. The county auditor has cleared it up on their end as well. So as indicated by the applicant, the intent is to consolidate and to split uh two splits which would result in three which would be considered a minor subdivision per if the consolidation is completed prior it would be split to three parcels which would be considered a minor subdivision. Um this was routed to our city engineer for comments. I got with uh Mr. Schneider. Uh we did get from the applicant clarification of the uh access. Uh there were concerns due to it being a one-way, one way out parking lot that access is granted if the property owners do change in the future. The applicant has provided a draft document that is exhibit G on page 18 of your staff report. Um also the concerns of the easement for utilities was provided. A uh boundary description was provided by the applicant as well for clarification. Uh that way the engineering department can access any utilities on the site. Overall recommendation of approval contingent on approval from the county. Uh there will also be a need for variances at a later time uh based on the site plan that was provided to us due to the concerns of the building not being set back uh properly uh along with other concerns that were mentioned in your staff report and I'm available for any comments or questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Shing. Engineer Schneider, any comments? Uh the only additional comment I believe Mr. Shing might have missed was the storm water. The commission understands that impervious area of a of a site uh we have a storm water calculation fee that we assess to all properties. So we would just need to know what those are for both lots. Great. Thank you. Any comments, sis chief G? Uh no additional comment.

Okay. Any questions from the commission? Seeing none, I will entertain a motion to approve planning commission case 2025-1000153 649 South Abbey Road Plaza LLC request for a lot split and lot consolidation and the motion will include provided all things with the county are approved as well. Do I have a motion? So moved by Mr. Aiden second. Second by Mr. Tedro. Any further discussion? All in favor? I I oppose. Nay. Motion carried. Item number nine. Thank you Mr. Yoast.

Thank you. Item Number nine on the agenda, designer review applications. Uh those were all submitted and approved by city staff. Are there any questions on those? Uh staff and commission reports. There are none, but at your desk this afternoon, uh Mr. Shony provided the uh planning commission deadlines and meeting dates for 2026. So, please take note of that. Um further no further business before the commission. I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. So, moved by Mr. Aiden, second by Mr. Hubard. Any further discussion? All in favor of adjournment. I I oppose. Nay. Motion carried. Uh please make sure you stick around to sign the committee report, please. Thank you and have a good day.

Goodbye.