Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, we will call to order here the North Canton Planning Commission meeting.

It is July 8, 2026, and it is 6.02 p.m. First thing on the agenda is our roll call.

Mr. Del Pais?

Here.

Mr. Mahausen?

Here.

Mr. Serra?

Here.

Mr. LePage?

Here.

Mr. Reid?

Here. All right, next on the agenda is our minutes for consideration. This would be submitting our June 3rd, 2026 meeting minutes for approval.

I'll make a motion to approve the June 3rd, 2026 meeting minutes. Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Mr. Reid? I was present. Mr. LePage? Yes. Mr. Serra?

Yes.

Mr. Mahausen?

Yes.

Mr. Duffeys?

Yes. All right. Next on the agenda is a public hearing portion of the meeting. This is to hear Ordinance 16-2026. This is an ordinance repealing Chapter 1139, Industrial District Regulations, and amending various provisions of Chapter 1137, Business District Regulations, of the codified ordinances of the City of North Canton. to update, modify and clarify the regulations governing the city's business districts.

Okay.

Someone from the city like to lead us off.

I can take the lead on it. So this is the second time you've seen this. We had the original version put up to you guys and you had some comments. So we took it back to council's committee with your comments in mind and had to make some amendments. Uh, so I'll just go ahead and run through the list of amendments real quick. Uh, so the first is establishing that data centers known in the legislation as computer data centers will be set as a conditional use in the limited industrial district or the limited industrial district, but will be a prohibited use everywhere else. JUST KIND OF ADDING A LITTLE BIT OF COLOR TO THAT, THE CITY HAS VERY FEW LIMITED INDUSTRIAL PARCELS REMAINING. THERE'S ONLY FOUR OR FIVE AT PRESENT. AND NOWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY PRESENTLY, AND MARTIN, YOU CAN SPEAK TO THIS AS WELL, WOULD REALLY SUPPORT A LIMITED INDUSTRIAL USE FOR FUTURE REZONING PURPOSES. SO THIS WOULD EFFECTIVELY LIMIT A DATA CENTER FROM GOING ANYWHERE OTHER THAN WHAT IS PRESENTLY THE DEBOLD-NIXDORFF COMPLEX. There is a point of clarity. There have been no proposals for a data center in the city. Um, you guys just wanted to see something about it included in this chapter. So that is covered, um, as a conditional use. All of those applications would appear before the planning commission for approval. Um, and talking with Marty, that's pretty consistent with how we do things right now. Uh, so those would appear before you guys as conditional uses. Another change was we had to restore the office building, the OB designation. So we had initially proposed removing that designation from the code. But we, after talking about a little further, decided that it's a bit premature to do that. There are still currently eight parcels with that office building designation. So we didn't want to eliminate the code that guides those properties. And in keeping with the spirit of the legislation to not forcibly rezone anybody, we wanted to keep them at their present designation, which required keeping that in the code for right now. As we evaluate the existing office building parcels and see if they would be better served as rezoning into a different district, whether that's the to be created neighborhood business district or another business district. We'll evaluate that in the future. And the idea being that eventually we will do away with the office building code. We set conditional uses for multifamily residential and all of the commercial districts, which was consistent with what you guys had expressed last time. We set conditional uses for restaurants in the limited industrial district. You guys have mentioned that as well. So we took that to council. They were on board with that. We set a conditional use for everything in neighborhood business that was not otherwise prohibited. So anything that already had the existing non-permitted definition in the code kept that. And then anything that had a permitted or conditional use was just automatically set to conditional. Anything in the future that would be rezoned to neighborhood business and any development plan submitted would appear before you guys in anything going in a neighborhood business district. Live work units would be permitted in the office building, neighborhood business, GBA and GBB districts would be prohibited or would be conditional in the limited industrial. A limited or live work unit would be where the lower level is a business and the proprietor occupies a residence in the upper level. and a permitted use established for commercial kitchens and catering services in the GBA, GBB, and Limited Industrial District, and prohibited in the neighborhood business and office building. That's pretty much all of the changes we made. Marty, if you want to add anything else, you're welcome to. No, you did a great job covering that. Thank you, Liam.

Okay.

Thank you for the summary on that. Absolutely.

Any comments from commission members?

I don't think I have any comments. Thank you for explaining the parcels in the OB district. I assume that's why that made it back in here. Yeah. Appreciate the color on that for sure. Okay. If there's no questions for commission members at this time, I would open it up to the public for any comments that you would like to have or speak on this matter. If you could, if you'd like to speak, state your name and address. Please step to the podium, and we'd be glad to hear any comments or suggestions.

This is for or against

Pardon? For or against, yes.

Okay. Yes. We usually have one or the other.

Yes. Any comments do you have? Any comments? Yes.

Melanie J. Roll, 308 Gordon Street, North Canton. Indulge me in a little history here. In 2003, North Canton City Council changed the zoning code, Ordinance 5003, affecting the city's core. from residential single-family to RMFB residential multi-family. That zoning change affected the neighborhoods of the area west of the city square. Investors took that opportunity to make many of the older two-story homes into two-unit rentals. In two years' time, Council saw that they had made a mistake with that zoning change. In 2005, Ordinance 9405 was passed to rezone the area back to residential single family. However, the rental properties were grandfathered. And until those properties are reconfigured to single family use, the two unit dwellings remain. I witnessed what happens to neighborhoods when ill-advised zoning changes occur. This evening, I'm asking the zoning classification neighborhood business to be stricken from the proposed Chapter 1137 zoning update. Questions? Comments?

I don't think I have any questions. Thank you for the concern.

History lesson? Yeah, no, the history. No, it's good.

It's very good. I would just, my only comment would be, I think the intent of the creation of the neighborhood business district is that we have a somewhat substantial difference currently from GBA and GBB business districts down to residential properties. The intent of this is to create a stepping stone between the two so that the difference between residential and GBA and BBB are much closer so that there's a step down. That way there's less likelihood of a property, a business or use going right next to a residential district that you may not want. So that is the intent of the neighborhood business district. So I just want to, just, that is the intent of it. I just wanted to bring that up. Because we did talk about that a lot last week, last month, sorry, regarding the creation of this.

I would just say that always the intent is not what happens.

Sure, understood, understood. Okay, anyone else from the public like to speak? Do you want me to stand? Sure.

City Council at large, we did talk about this in committee and at the time, of course in committee there's no opportunity for public to speak, so Ms. Roll and others were not able to come to us with those opinions. We did have brief dialogue and we did make the edits that we uncovered. One of the conversations held that evening, our deputy administration, person Jason Segany did clarify for us at council that it was perfectly acceptable for us to skip this update and not include the NB district at this time. It was an option thrown out at us. Without any input from the city after that conversation that evening, we move forward with the changes that you have in front of us. I will stand on my own word here and say that I have been contacted by at least one or more constituents since then. I HAVE REVIEWED THIS FURTHER AT THIS TIME, AND I TOO WOULD FULLY SUPPORT THE LEADING OUT THAT CAN BE DESCRIBED IN THIS UPDATE. I'M NOT CERTAIN THERE IS A VIRGIN NEED FOR IT AT THIS EXACT MOMENT IN TIME. THE CITY IS GOING THROUGH A LOT OF SIGNIFICANT DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES RIGHT NOW AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL, AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THAT I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE MORE TIME TO CONSIDER ADDING TO THE BRAND-NEW POSITION. Thank you. Any other members of the public like to speak? Andrew Brad, 604 Everhart.

and talks with folks. And I think I feel the same way with the Holly Sheridan in regards to the neighborhood business section. I think that's the only real concern I have with any of these changes. And I just think that I look at empty businesses down Main Street, buildings that are already for lease, feel like we might reduce the number of single family homes, turn them more into business and residential, you know, business and residential one. I just feel like it might hurt us more than it helps us. And so for those reasons, I would also

Just a couple points of clarity. So ultimately, those decisions, whether to leave it in or leave it out, are council's decision when they ultimately come back. And again, Mr. DelPay, just to speak to your point, the intent of this is to act as a stopgap between the larger, more permissive commercial zoning districts and the residential. So there are several locations throughout the city looking at the zoning map where heavier use, whether that's GBA or GBB parcels, do abut directly next to residential lots, with the intent of this legislation being that neighborhood business parcels would be established entirely Pretty much voluntarily by the property owners to establish that stop gap district. And again, with all of those uses being established as conditionals in the neighborhood business district, everything would appear before planning commission. In addition to any rezoning applications, all of those would be considered. All resumings would be considered by both council and the planning commission. So the overall intent of this, I do believe, is still good in having a ramp up or ramp down between your business districts. A couple that we had mentioned were the blocks of businesses along the Main Street corridor, along Maple. As you head towards Walsh University, there's a few tax firms and lawyers' offices. Those are presently zoned as the Main Street Center District, which is much more permissive than the Neighborhood Business District. And as you kind of ramp up into the Hoover District, that encompasses the eastern portion of the Diebold-Nixdorf office buildings, and that DBAT, that kind of area. The main street districts are much more permissive. That happens along the main street corridor in general, both north and south. There are parts where the backside of those main street businesses do abut directly to the surrounding neighborhoods. Those would be good use cases for the neighborhood business district, just to allow for a much more restricted business use to happen in those areas. That's kind of the intent behind where we came with this. We do not anticipate, Marty, you can speak to this too, that there would be a proliferation of home-based businesses in neighborhood districts. And again, as you see, or as somebody would seek a rezoning to the neighborhood business that's going to appear before you guys and Marty, where he would evaluate that, yes, this rezoning would substantially alter the makeup of the surrounding neighborhood. whether that's for the better or worse, that would be a part of the decision to consider that rezoning.

And I would add that would also go before city council as well. Correct. The map amendment. So there is a lengthy process.

If I may add, I sit on city council as well. Councilman Stocker, I'm going to say that.

Mr. Stocker.

Yeah, so. Oh, absolutely. I'll make it quick. So Jeff Stocker, 1463 Wilbur Drive, Northeast, North Canton, also City Council of March. I don't have a statement. I have more questions than those statements, frankly. So the GBB and GBA was just termed as more permissive. And so in speaking to ms roll's comment about you know you know there's intentions and then there's actually the results if there was no neighborhood business would it be conceivable that a totally different people whether it be with this group the planning or council could potentially permit a business that might be frankly far more egregious than what the neighborhood business status would permit.

In theory, that chapter could be amended to be more permissive. Generally speaking, when you have an established precedent that this district is intended to be lighter use, similar to how we have GBA and GBB are vastly different in what's permitted, with GBA being the lighter commercial uses, but still heavier than what we would otherwise permit in a neighborhood business. And then the GBB, which is significantly heavier use, and then obviously your LI. And with anything, when it comes to rezonings, anybody can apply for a rezoning of any parcel to any designation. So it could be a neighborhood business, and they would say, well, maybe I would like to make it a limited industrial on this one small lot. When that appears before the commission and before city council, those merits would be evaluated. I still would hold that the intent of it is good in that this is to allow for lighter areas. much lighter uses than what would be allowed in GBA and GBB, with them all being conditional. Evaluating whether that will have a negative effect on the neighborhood would be up to both bodies that sit at the top.

So I will just make a very brief statement. Ms. Roll, I share your concern. I really do.

Thank you.

And I think that is, frankly, why council... insisted that instead of there be just some automatic approvals, that everything in the NB was to be considered conditional. So not only do you have the planning commission to approve, but now there's also council as well. So it's a two-fold safety net, if you will. So I would not want a lot of businesses being next to my home. I share that, but I would very respectfully say that I do feel that after a lot of consideration of this and attending multiple meetings, I do feel that it's appropriate. Thank you.

Yeah, to your example, just an example, a couple examples. If you have a GBA lot currently next to a residential lot, a bank could go in there and it would be permitted. No questions asked. That bank could have a drive-thru. That could be right beside a house. Same thing with membership sport fitness club. Somebody could buy that lot, put a building on it that's a fitness club. Most people probably wouldn't want all that traffic right next to their house. By creating the neighborhood business, those things would either become not permitted or conditional, right? So it's like you had tried to explain. It is meant to be an in-between to ease that. So that everyone has a chance to look at those things and says it's being permitted right off the get-go. Yeah, and I guess my question is for some of the council members here tonight that have had heard concerns or have concerns. Is it partially, is it possibly that it's what it's called? That it's called neighborhood business? Just merely... the name of it kind of, if you're a homeowner, just hearing neighborhood business might imply that, oh, you're going to make a district that's right beside my house that allows businesses. I don't.

I don't think the name has influenced me. I think it's just the sheer fact that a resident.

I just wanted maybe the residents.

Yeah, I picture a scenario where I wouldn't want a dance studio opened up next to my house because So initial conversations around this were like, oh, these are intended to be eight to five businesses. But a lot of the things that are listed here that would be conditional, they often come in, are businesses that will extend beyond eight to five. A dance studio could have lessons well into nine o'clock tonight, right? We have kids and things after school. So there's things on the list and the land use categories that fit outside of normal business hours and are in this NB district. For me, it's more of that. I just don't want to interrupt the residential quality of life.

Understood. And just back to what I commented on, the dance studio is a prime example too. If that's a GBA lot now, it's permitted. So the intent here is to Possibly make that and be so that it's conditional and then it gets reviewed. Because right now it won't even be reviewed.

And then if somebody moves out of their home, it remains that forevermore, correct? Right.

Correct. Yeah. So, yeah, this, it's, I understand, I do understand and understand the concern and everything.

I understand besides that I'm really just representing the situation.

Yeah, I understand that.

Yes. With that, the next person that moves in, as long as it's the same light years, they don't have to go through any permission process.

Correct. Whereas if it was conditional, if it changed hands, then it would have to come back again.

Additionally, I don't know if you want to add to this, it's not been Extremely common that residential parcels are rezoned into commercial uses. It's more so that commercial uses transition into other types of uses. I wouldn't envision a significant run on, I'm going to rezone my residential parcel into a commercial lot that will stay a commercial lot forevermore, because then that does preclude most residential uses. So that house that looks like a house without knocking it down would still look like a house. would be a really out of place looking commercial use in most characteristics. So it would be more that existing commercial lots would seek rezonings into the neighborhood business district or would otherwise be rezoned to be that more limited dialed back use with everything being conditional that would appear before the board and city council as well.

And just a reminder that this is merely creating the district. No parcels will re-rezone part of this. That is TBD later. Any other comments from the public?

None? Okay. Any other comments, questions from commission members? I don't know how many years I've served on the planning commission. I know it's got a few. But this has been a struggle. The whole time I've been on here is how we classify this. I've always felt the best way is for change use to come back to the Planning Commission for review and to allow the public to be able to speak about that change and then for it to go on to consult, which is what we do today. even though I agree with some of the comments stated about the neighborhood business, the reality is we are heavy as a residential city. We're trying to get businesses in the city. So it's a tough one. I like the approach we have right now where Most of it is conditional, and it has to come back to be evaluated independently from another rezoning.

Okay.

Any other comments?

Liam, you stated earlier this was councils to decide. What are we supposed to be doing with that?

Ultimately, the planning commission is an advisory body. So it's just to recommend either recommend changes and move it forward or recommend as submitted. And those final decisions would rest with city council to amend it before it takes effect. So procedurally speaking from here, it would move from planning commission back to city council. They will set another public hearing. which has a 30-day notification deadline. So it would be after they return from their summer break, and then it will receive three readings from there. So all in all, there would be ultimately four opportunities besides this one for public comment, and it takes a couple more months from here. I think based on the readings calendar, we would be done with the full change somewhere in mid-late September. So there's still ample opportunity for consideration by council on any amendments that would need to be made.

Any other comments? If there's no other comments from the public, I'll go back to Pratt. Either way.

I guess just Andrew Pratt again. Council at large, 604 Eberhard. In all of your professional opinions, do you think that we would HAVE AN INCREASE IN LIKELIHOOD OF BUSINESSES GOING IN NEXT TO EXISTING HOMES BY DOING IT THIS WAY VERSUS THE LIKELIHOOD OF A BUSINESS LIKE A BANK GOING IN NEXT TO SOMETHING. WHAT'S MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN?

WELL, AT THIS TIME, I WOULD be surprised if anything would happen because they would have to come in and get rezoned for that and as Liam mentioned that would come back through and have everyone's eyes on it both here and the council now if we now if this was implemented and then the city took a look at rezoning some properties I don't know if it would increase, it would change any of that. I guess it would depend if properties were rezoned from residential to this or if it was more of rezoning a GBA to this to make the step happen.

With the NV, the neighborhood district, it would probably be fair to say that you might see an uptick in businesses going in to places where under current circumstances they'd like to report. Is that accurate?

I don't know.

I don't know if that's correct. Yeah. I think the possibilities there that may attract more developers in understanding that this can occur. Right. Yeah. So it could possibly stir some more development.

So I guess my thinking, you know, I'm just thinking it probably will put more of a likelihood that the residents want, the people want to sit next to it.

It does consider the surrounding infrastructure. I would not imagine that somebody is going to take a, for example, a lot that sits in the middle of a residential street and