Toledo City Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. This is a regularly scheduled meeting at the Toledo City Plan Commission. Ms. Cottrell, will you please call the roll?

Rachel Momine. Here. Brandon Rakoff. Here. Eric Grossweiler. Here. Mr. Chair, you have a quorum. A notice of this meeting was posted in the office of the Toledo County Plan Commissions. In the clerk of council's office in the lobby of one government center, a copy of that notice is available for inspections in our file in case anyone would care to do so.

Thank you, Ms. Cottrell. For the record, Commissioner Whittington emailed me today. He has a family emergency, so he will not be joining us. I believe Commissioner Ball will still be joining us today. We have a procedure here at the Toledo City Planning Commission that if you plan on speaking today, either in favor of any case or opposed to any case, we must swear you in. So at the beginning of each case, I will ask the applicant to step forward to the lectern. We'll take your name, address, we will swear you in, and an applicant will have a period of five minutes to present their case. At that point, we'll open it up to audience questions or testimony. Any audience member will have one opportunity of not more than three minutes to present testimony. And then once that is concluded, we will give the applicant some time for final remarks. Ms. Cottrell, do we have any minutes to approve?

We have the minutes from March 12th and May 14th, 2026.

I will accept a motion on those minutes. I'll take the motion with them together. And let the record reflect that Commissioner Ball has joined us.

Ball will make a motion to approve.

I'll second it.

We have a first and a second to approve the minutes. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That carries unanimously. Ms. Cottrell, do we have a director's report? We do. I'd like to handle that at the end of the hearing. Thank you. Do we have any final plats? We do not. And are there any requests for postponement, withdrawal, or advancement?

There is one request for deferral. Item number seven is case M1525, tax amendment for post-environmental change, certificates of appropriateness. We're requesting a 30-day deferral to the July agenda.

and that's of our own uh request correct that's correct okay um i'll accept a motion on the deferral of case m 15-25 mamani will make a motion for approval all seconds we have a first and a second to approve the deferral all those in favor say aye aye any opposed okay that carries unanimously that case will be heard on our july agenda if you are here today for the case involving post environmental change certificates if you plan to give testimony on that case we will not hear it today that'll be next month any other case any other deferrals uh we do not Please read case number one into the record.

Item number one is case SUP 260015, special use permit for a new cemetery at 722 East Bancroft Street. Staff recommends approval for the following three reasons. One, the proposed cemetery is consistent with the Ford Toledo plan. Two, the proposed use will reuse vacant lots in the city without negatively impacting nearby properties. And three, the health department has no objection to the cemetery. Staff further recommends approval subject to 12 conditions, which will be reflected in the minutes and not read into the record unless there is a request that I do so. Is the applicant present?

Yes.

Please come forward. Good afternoon. If you don't mind stepping up to the lectern, we'll take your name and address.

My name is Ahmad Kassem. I am the attorney for Toledo Measures Ellis Slam. My address is PO Box 350672, Toledo, Ohio, 43635. And I also- Are any of the other gentlemen going to talk? Are they going to speak at all?

The other gentlemen, are they going to speak?

They might.

Before we move forward, can we get their name and address?

Absolutely. My name is Ibrahim Abdulrahim. I'm the spiritual advisor at the Tulio Masjid of Al-Islam.

And address, please?

I live at 2491 Glenwood, Toledo, Ohio, 43620.

Thank you. Sir?

My name is Justice McNeil. I live at 722 East Bancroft Street, and I'm the administrative assistant.

Thank you. Council, you do not need to be sworn in. The other gentlemen, could you both raise your right hands? Do you swear that the testimony you're going to give today is the whole truth? If so, say I do.

I do.

Thank you. Sir, go ahead.

Okay, so I would like to start by giving some background on the mosque. It is the first purpose-built mosque in the state of Ohio and one of the first purpose-built mosques. I do believe the third or fourth purpose-built mosque in the entire nation. So this is a historical landmark. And the mosque, it provides community services to Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Such services include charitable aid, food distribution, clothing drives, participating in Habitat for Humanity builds, and weddings, communal prayers, and other religious services as well. Now, The surrounding area, it's surrounded by blight, abandoned and boarded up houses. For instance, the McDonald's on Bancroft, which is directly adjacent to the mosque, is boarded up. It's closed down. And I think that speaks to the nature of the surrounding area. and we're trying to stabilize the community stabilize the area and we intend to stay at that location for for the first foreseen future for generations and we believe that the mosque having a cemetery in order to provide dignified burials to its community members will not in any way be disruptive or destabilizing to the community. And I understand that there were concerns raised about potential environmental concerns. However, the science does not support that. Embalming is actually not required by law by any state whatsoever. Additionally, it's really an American and Canadian practice to preserve the bodies. And in any state that does require any type of embalming, it's where the body is not buried within 24 to 48 hours or subject to refrigeration. And pollution is actually caused by the embalming fluids such as formaldehyde, which could potentially leach heavy metals into the ground. However, the Islamic burial process, it's consistent with the green burial process, where we wash the body, we wrap it in a simple white cloth, and a funeral prayer is held at the mosque. And the body is usually buried within 24 hours. Now, I understand there was a concern raised that we do not use coffins or caskets. However, there is no law requiring that. And we will be using cement vaults in the ground, which the body will be placed in. And so there's really no concern about decomposition. There's no science to back it up. And we would just ask that you support us in our right to provide dignified burials to our congregants and to the community.

Thank you, sir. When we heard this case before, we had asked before making a decision on this case that you would hold a neighborhood meeting. I understand that the neighborhood meeting took place. Do you mind just talking about when the meeting took place, how many people attended? Just give us some background on that neighborhood meeting.

sure so we help we attempted to get in touch with the neighbor with the community uh group over the last couple of weeks in order to schedule a meeting and we were unable to do so we reached out to the plan commission in order to get their help to organize the meeting. The meeting was finally held this last Saturday and approximately, I want to say close to 20 members from the mosque showed up and about four or five members from the neighborhood group showed up. And I gave them a presentation about the Islamic burial process, the green burial process, the misconceptions regarding embalming, misconceptions regarding pollution concerns. I also mentioned that one of the first things that popped up in my research of this issue was It's a term called Islamic spatial Islamophobia, which is basically an attempt to use local zoning laws to create spatial barriers to constrain Muslims access to space and limited economic and and limit economic, political and social rights. The first thing that popped up, and I'm not saying this is the case here, but this is the very first thing that my research showed, was that this is actually a common tactic to make a claim of environmental concerns that do not have any factual scientific basis. our our burial process it's very similar to the green burial process which limits pollution it limits any detriment to the to groundwater and i'd also like to mention the source of local drinking water is nowhere near the proposed cemetery site and which has also been analyzed by the health department and they have recommended approval as well and It's important to note that there are other cemeteries within the immediate vicinity, and no concerns have been raised about those ever. And we would just like a fair shot in the opportunity to provide dignified burials to our community members and to remain an active and participating member of the community.

I appreciate that, and thank you. Just for the record, the Health Department has recommended approval. The Health Department didn't have any concerns, so we have that in our file and our record as well. I have two more questions for you, and then I'll open it up to my fellow commissioners. Last time you were here, there were 12 conditions of approval, and you were comfortable with all 12 of those conditions, and you still are, correct? Okay. looking at your project I believe it would be in the best interest of both the cemetery itself and the neighborhood if there was some type of decorative fencing around the cemetery are you open to that there's that there's an alley that runs next to the building and what I'm afraid of is that people will use that alley and just cross over the cemetery grounds without thinking about it or without you know addressing that they're walking over you know The remains of people and so I think a fence around the perimeter of the cemetery would be a good idea to add to this project We agree. Okay Do you have any objection if I make a fence a 13th condition of approval that will do offense? No Okay, so I'm going to make a motion that we add that as a condition of approval. Is there a second to my motion? Mom, and you will second. Okay, we have a first and a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Okay, so that was my last question. Commissioners, any questions for the applicant?

No, thank you. The fence issue was my only concern also.

Okay.

Can I say something real quick? Alex, go ahead. Ryan, I didn't even see this. On their most recent plan that you have in your packets, looks like they do show a proposed fence around the cemetery. It's a little hard to see.

it was hard to see on the plan but i think that's in everyone's best interest and that's that's fantastic so at this time if there's no further questions from the commissioners i will ask is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak in favor of or opposed to this application we do have one person that would like to speak i believe so gentlemen if you could just sit down for a moment thank you sir Ma'am, name and address, please.

My name is Wanda Love, 22123 North 12th Street, Toledo, Ohio, 43620.

Will you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth? If so, say, I do.

I do.

Ma'am, go ahead.

Yes, sir. We did meet on this following, on this past Saturday. And yes, there was only about four or five people there. The four or five people that were there were representatives that was to be there. We had had two previous meetings prior to that with the community. As a result of that meeting, it was established, once talking with the others, that they wanted to have another meeting. And honestly to say, I don't know if another meeting is necessary because Um I really took offense because we know that the the McDonald's is closed and I mentioned when we was here that we're in the process of doing some different things in our community and not only that we have just been approached with a um developer to put houses and different things back in our community so every community go through a downfall so because the McDonald's closed and boarded up it's not significant enough for you to use as an as a reason to put up a cemetery now as president of the Warren Sherman I have not taken uh no stand for or against because that was not my job to do my job was to to my community what was asked, what was wanted, and to bring back what the community said. I felt, though, even when I talked with the attorney prior to this meeting, and he asked me a couple of questions, which I will tell in a minute, and I talked to him, I never expected for the community to be attacked. far as the condition that it's in, because we know our community is down right now, and we're trying to up-build it. So I told someone on yesterday, it's not a win-win situation anyway, because somebody is not going to be pleased. If it's decided not to have the cemetery, then those of the mosque is not going to be pleased. If it's decided to have the cemetery, those of the community is not going to be pleased. But I do not want to see or be a part of anyone being put down or insulted in order to accomplish whatever's got to be accomplished. I don't think that was necessary. I may be out of place. If I am, I apologize. But I don't think that was absolutely necessary because that was not what we're here for. We're here to determine if it's going to be feasible and if it's going to be detrimental to the community in any kind of way. I had spoke to him and I had told him that I had just left another meeting and that we would like to have a second one, at first I said with just us again, and he said that it would be better to have it with them because there was someone that was going to come in and speak to the community and help clarify some of the questions and maybe misunderstandings of what this type of burial is. Now I feel that if, I'm going to say me, I'm not going to say the community, If I feel that if I can go back to my community and ask my community so everything can be an easy transition and ask them to meet again, meet with them again, have someone come in that can explain to them with a better understanding than what they received on Saturday, then I don't think I'm going to use the term mudslinging. What's necessary about the environment, about the looks of the community? That wasn't necessary. But anyway, that was what we, he asked me what was my, what was I going to say today? And I was going to say that we wanted to meet with them again because the people, and I'm just going to be honest, and I told him, they want to do a petition. and get signatures not to have the cemetery. I asked them, no, let's wait, let's still clarify, because there's those that still want a better understanding. We live within a community together, and we have to find a way to survive in this community together. Now, like I said, it's not going to be a win-win either way it go, because they got what they want, and the community got what they want. you know, have their ideas of what they want. But I do believe that we can come to a medium, a medium ground here, and in a proper way. And that's talking with one another, coming out with an understanding, and then at least everybody will be on the same page.

Thank you, ma'am. Obviously, no one has any desire up here to insult the neighborhood or anyone who resides in the neighborhood. Outside of being offended on that point, in discussions with your neighbors and with your community, were there specific reasons why they don't want the cemetery

Their reasons were, number one, what's actually on the table now is they want a better yet understanding because they said the questions that were asked of them, they did not get a good understanding about the burial. And I had someone today, as I spoke, that would be willing to come in and speak to us, speak to the entire community and explain that she was telling me about the green burial or whatever. I'm not familiar. And one of our members of the council is here and that was what his concern was at the meeting was understanding. He said he didn't recognize, you know, he don't have enough information. And so I feel as though if the people are willing to want information, at least give them the information, and let's then, like I said, try to go about this thing in a reasonable way. I don't want to see a petition. And I'm going to be honest, as president, I don't want to see that, because that brings about discord. And we don't need discord. I don't see if that's what this was even about. And then in the meeting, a couple of people came out of the meeting and said that they were told that we were racist, you know, or we just didn't want it because of who they were. That's not true. That's not true. So I think it's still a lack of understanding. So I think if we just slow down, get some understanding, well then there might be no more need of us even coming here and they go on and do what they doing or whatever.

Thank you, ma'am. You're welcome. Sir, if you'd like to speak, would you please step forward? Take your time.

I want to tell the truth, so go ahead.

Name an address first. Name an address.

Pastor Charles Walden, 2123 North 13th Street, Toledo, Ohio, 43620.

Thank you. Now you can raise your right hand.

Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give today will be true and accurate? If so, say I do.

I do? Sir, go ahead. Okay. On June 6th, let me back up. I'm a member of the Warren Sherman Area Council. I've been sick for about three years and been out of circulation for anything. Very, very sick. And I came back, I say God miraculously healed me, and I came back to activities in my community. If you realize, Ms. Love gave her address as 2123 North 12th Street, and I'm on 2123 North 13th Street. We live in the same community. When I came back and went to the area council meeting, There was a petition, and we had a meeting, and it was really in opposition of the... What's the name of your mosque? Okay, you heard him. I can't say it. It was in opposition of them putting the cemetery up on their property. So... I really didn't know and have understanding of what was really going on. So there were some flyers that had been generated by Ms. Love and the area council. And I remember I said, I just had come back. I didn't, that was already done. So I went around in the neighborhood where the mosque is and passed out some of the flyers. And one of the issues on it was the building of a cemetery. So I asked some of the neighbors, what do you think of that? But I have to tell the truth. As I approached them, I told them what was told to me in the first meeting that we had. And it was, I'm not going to say it was what was told to me, but what was discussed was the bodies in the ground might secrete, because the Muslims do not embalm, that the bodies of the internal organs and everything might secrete down into the groundwater. And I'm ignorant of this. I don't know. Yeah, maybe so. We'll have another meeting on January 6th at the YMCA with Mr. Kasim and the Ironman, and like he said, what did you say, about 13 or 20 of your members? And they were. About five or six of us from the Warren Sherman attended the meeting. After Mr. Kasim gave his report of burial in the state of Ohio, in Lucas County, I had a different opinion about all of it, because everything that he told us was legal. And some of it wasn't even required by Ohio or Lucas County. And they said, because cemeteries require you put everybody, everybody in a vault when you put it in the ground. But they said, that's not even really required. He did his homework. And here's the key part that changed my mind about what I was thinking. They want to... construct this cemetery because of their loved ones and the worries of those who've gone before. And I'm a Native American, half. And I visited a cemetery in North Carolina where my mother is from, full-blooded Cherokee Indian. And right on the church ground is a cemetery But they got bodies in that's more great, great, great, great, great, going back far as you want to, 7,100 on the tombstones. So I understood their sentiment to want, you know, people of their faith and their families to be buried there, to construct this. I am a pastor of the Christian faith, okay? But I have no malice or dislike or discord for any faith. Jewish, Roman Catholic, Indian, any faith. Because Jesus told us to love everybody. And that's what I do. Now, Mr. Kassam explained that in that neighborhood, it's bright, it's poverty. They have a food bank that they feed the people in that neighborhood. And some of them don't live in that neighborhood, but they feed the people, they clothe the people, they help the people with needs. That's what Jesus told me to do in my Bible, and they're doing that. So I don't see any harm in them doing it. I know it was kind of lengthy, but I had to tell you all of it to make you understand. They're doing stuff over in that neighborhood, and they have the Islam and Muslim faith that Christians are not doing in that neighborhood. I can't see nothing wrong with it.

Thank you, sir.

All right.

Is there anyone else in the audience who'd like to speak on this case? Alex, did we get any calls, emails, or other correspondence in advance of today's hearing?

I did not, no.

Would the applicant please step forward one more time? What I did hear in our presentation is a request for perhaps a second meeting for an additional chance to get more information on what you plan to do with the cemetery. We're going to move forward with this case today. We're going to vote on this case today. But between now and when it goes to city council, I'm just asking if the neighborhood reaches out, would you be willing to have a second meeting with members of the neighborhood?

We're open to engaging with the community. We want to engage with the community. We've tried to have, we've tried to set up a meeting and we had to reach out to the plan commission to actually get the meeting set up. And then when we showed up to the meeting, we were informed that they held two prior meetings without us. And we just, we want to- Let me just interrupt.

What I'm asking is if you're invited to a meeting, would you attend?

Absolutely.

Okay, let's leave it at that.

and we do hold open houses and tours of the of the mosque we're we're open to engaging with the community we appreciate that thank you commissioners any final questions for the applicant sir any closing remarks

anything you want to add any closing remarks no sir okay thank you so at this time I will accept a motion on this case sup 26-0 0 1 5 well we'll make a motion for approval we have a first and a second to approve the application all those in favor say aye aye any opposed okay that carries unanimously and Lisa when will they be before City Council

July 15th at 4 o'clock in these chambers.

Good luck to you, gentlemen.

Thank you all.

Okay, case number two, please.

Item number two is case Z260009, zone change from CO, office commercial, and RS6, single dwelling residential, to RS6, single dwelling residential at 3740 West Alexis Road. Staff recommends approval for the following two reasons. The proposed zone change will permit the property's religious assembly use while simultaneously allowing the replacement of an EMC ground sign... And two, the proposed zone change will correct a split zone property issue.

Thank you. Is the applicant present? Sir, welcome. Name and address, please.

Lynn Thomas, 1122 Burnath Parkway.

Thank you. Will you please raise your right hand?

Do you swear and affirm that the testimony you're about to give today will be true and accurate? If so, say I do.

I do. Sir, please tell us about your request.

Okay. First of all, I'd like to ask, does anybody else want to come up?

Okay. We'll go ahead and swear everyone in right now. So if you could give your name and address for the microphone, and then we'll have you all raise your right hand.

Christina Rodriguez, 2346 Winterset Drive, Toledo, Ohio, 43614. Thank you.

Chaz Bose, 9177 Rolling Hill, Holland, Ohio. I don't remember my zip code. Do I need that? That's okay. Thank you.

Russ Allen, 408 West Northgate Parkway, Toledo, Ohio, 43612.

Thank you. Will you please all raise your right hand?

Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be true and accurate? If so, say I do.

I do.

Whoever would like to start, please go ahead. August 3rd, 2025, God brought together two congregations, two churches, Compassion on Airport Highway, Compassion Toledo on Airport Highway, combined with Calvary Bible Chapel, who is already at West Alexis Road. Bishop Bowes is our pastor. When we combined, we obviously wanted to change the name of our sign from Calvary Bible Chapel to our new name, which was Compassion at Calvary. We had a digital sign on top of our current sign that we have, and through the years, that digital sign has went out of repair. We had an opportunity to get another sign, another electronic sign. We're going to have half electronic sign and half not. Once we did that, within the current zone that we are, electronic signs are prohibited in that zone. So we were a split zone anyhow. So Alex had suggested for us to... go to both RS6 in both the north section and the south section. So that's why we went through with the zone request. And within that, we're still going to have to ask for a variance at another committee because of the square footage of the sign itself.

Thank you. Commissioners, any questions for the applicant? Hearing none, I will ask, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak in favor of or opposed to this case? Okay. And Alex, did we get any calls, emails, or other correspondence in advance of today's hearing?

Yes, I received four calls from neighbors around, and they were all general inquiries.

Thank you. And so if we approve this, the entire site will be RS6 and currently it's half and half? Correct. I don't have any additional questions for the applicant. Is there anything else you'd like to add?

I would just like to add that the only reason that this is happening is because the sign company that we're working with told us, you know, it was a-okay, just do it, order the sign. So we ordered the digital part out from South Carolina. and it was sent non-refundable and all of that so uh it's two different companies uh in one and so really we hate to actually burden you with this but uh the money is spent and so now we're just trying to do the best that we can to be good stewards of our members monies because if not we will have wasted 15 000 and then have to come up with another 15 to grandfather and just change the surface of what that is so we really appreciate that we're just trying to be good stewards appreciate it absolutely thank you for that commissioners any final questions okay at this time i will accept a motion on this case z26-0009 mamini will make a motion for approval

seconds we have a first and a second to approve the application all those in favor say aye aye any opposed that carries unanimously and you will also be before City Council on July 15th okay good luck to you thank you miss Cottrell case number three please

Item number three is case Z260010, a zone change from CR, regional commercial, to RS6, single-dwelling residential at 5860 Secor Road. Staff recommends approval for the following two reasons. The proposed zone change will allow for the structure to be used as a single-family dwelling for which it was originally built. And two, the proposed zone change is compatible with the Ford-Toledo plan.

Thank you. Is the applicant present? Please step forward.

Steven Heaney, I live at 8763 Big Cypress Circle, Sylvania, Ohio, 43560.

Please raise your right hand.

Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is true and accurate? If so, say I do. I do.

Sir, tell us about your request.

I own a property at 5860 Secor Road. It was originally built as a house over the period of its existence. It's primarily been a residence. It had just been used for other purposes. I acquired it to use it as office space just because it was convenient because I had a property across the street. But it was a house. It's built as a house. It looks like a house. I'm interested in selling it. My realtor tells me in the current market the absolute best use of it is as a home. And I was under the impression that there is some level of need for homes in the community. So that seemed to be a win-win for everybody.

Thank you very much. Commissioners, any questions for the applicant? No. Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak in favor or oppose to this application? And Lisa, did we get any calls, emails, or other correspondence in advance of today's hearing?

We did not receive any calls or comments.

Thank you very much. Sir, I would agree with you. It's a residential structure. Let's zone a residential and move on. I'll accept a motion on this case, Z26-0010. nominee will make a motion for approval both seconds we have a first and a second to approve the application all those in favor say aye aye any opposed that carries unanimously and sir you'll be in front of city council on july 15th thank you elisa for your help on board i appreciate your time thank you good luck to you case number four please

Item number four is case Z260008, zone change from RS12 single dwelling residential to CN. Neighborhood commercial at 640 Wyman Street. Staff recommends disapproval for the following three reasons. The proposed zone change is not consistent with the forward Toledo plan. The proposed zone change is not compatible with the existing residential neighborhood within the general vicinity of the site. And while the proposed zone change will permit the expansion of the existing use on site, the use standards in the zoning code still could not be met. Thank you, is the applicant present?

Sir, please step forward. Sir, name and address please.

Yeah, Steve Kiesling, I'm the Director of Toledo Animal Rescue. My home address is 947 Maple Street, Perrysburg, Ohio, 43551.

Please raise your right hand.

Do you swear or affirm the testimony you give will be true or accurate? If so, say I do.

I do. Sir, tell us about your request.

So, kind of have to go a little bit of history. Toledo Animal Rescue, which was formerly, is officially Toledo Animal Shelter, has been a staple in Toledo since 1927. Our facility that we currently are in, we've been at that location since December of 1930, so we've been a staple in the neighborhood for 96 years now. Over the course of those years, you can understand that the facility has changed. Most recent change was an expansion in 2003. we're at a point in our growth as an organization where we're outgrowing our current space and so we want to expand our facility and renovate the the inside of our facility the only way to do that to the extent that we want which is about 23 2400 extra square feet on a 3600 square foot building is to change the zoning because current zoning only allows a 10 increase so that is why we are proposing the zoning change

Thank you. The site as it exists now, the use is, it's an animal shelter?

It has been, yep, for 96 years. Okay.

And the use would remain unchanged after the- That is correct.

We're just looking to increase capacity and build the facility to the best practices in the animal welfare world.

Okay. Commissioners, questions for the applicant? Hearing none, I'm going to ask if there's anyone in the audience who would like to speak in favor of or oppose this application. I did see a hand. Sir, if you could please step forward.

My name is Lanny May. I live at 540 Wyman or 3609 Toledo, Ohio. Please raise your right hand.

Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be true and accurate? If so, say I do.

I do. Thank you. Sir, go ahead.

I was reading the analysis and they're non-existent and non-conforming right now. And they want to change the zoning so they're more conformed and can add on. If you've looked at the property, there's a house on Mercer that they will surround. The streets, I see them walk the dogs down the street. If you've heard about Wyman and Lisa's been down the street, the edges are broken. Their facility has even put a request in to engage Toledo and was on YouTube too. Fix the roads. They can't safely walk down there. Those roads were from Adams Township when it was annexed in 1960. They have not been improved for truck traffic. We have tow trucks going down constantly, semis. When I pulled out to go down here today, I pulled out behind a Kerrigan oil truck going down Wyman that used to have a 6,000 pound load limit to turn on South Street so he could go down to Integrity across the railroad tracks. Now the state route to be used by trucks in the neighborhood was Westwood. It's been ignored. I get Mohawk semi-trailers. There's an auto parts type dealer at the corner that used to be the forklift place. They do a good job. They have trucks come down, car haulers, and they unload. They do a good job. The people with the tow trucks, they dropped the car in front of the house not long ago, completely off the hook. There are parts thrown all along the side of the road. And two cars don't seem to be able to go down the road without running off the road, resulting in broken edges and everything else. Now, if they want to change this zoning, that's a big step. And it opened up a whole world of what can go in there should they not be there. Now, I don't want to shut them down. It's a great place. But I've been a resident there since the early 70s. And I've been the recipient of, let's say, a dozen dogs at least that are dropped off. Because when they go to the facility, they're either enclosed, they have to make an appointment, or they get charged to drop off a dog or a cat. That didn't happen when I first moved in. Now when it changed, you don't know. So as a result, They don't have the money, and they get to Wyman and South, and we've had dogs, cats, and even the dog house and food bowls dropped off. And it still continues. Pit bowls, people don't want them, they get rid of them. And I don't see this being a good fix for their problem. Maybe they should be looking at a larger facility that they can go to and be legal, and not change the zoning. in this neighborhood. Because once it's done, it's done. And I understand from their financial records that they have a significant amount of money. I'm not going to tell them how to use it, but it's an endowment. But if they're looking for the future of the dogs and the animals, the runs aren't good. That much won't help. You can see that in 2002, they added on, and now they're at the end. And now they want to change the zoning so they can do more. Just got to be opposed. Like I said, I see the people walking the dogs down the street. No sidewalks. Haven't been any since I moved in and since it was annexed as Adams Township. So if you can get the roads fixed, please. I already put some more complaints in, but yeah. The only time I ever saw The police out with the load limit and the scales was probably the 80s, and they gave them a ticket. The 6,000 pound load limit signs are gone. The dump trucks, by the way, that cleared out the old Greens Pond across Burn Road, guess where they came down? South Street, Wyman, and Mercer to get on to Burn. And then they turned on Mercer, down Wyman, and out. The bottleneck that's been created at Airport and Byrne, everybody goes that way. The neighbors are complaining. Two semis are coming down the street. He says, what happened? I never had that. And if you are ever in that neighborhood and go down there, you'll understand. So that's it. Thank you very much.

Is there anyone else? May I? Sir, you'll have a moment. Is there anyone else in the audience? Okay. Lisa, did we get any calls, emails, or other correspondence in advance of today's hearing?

We did. We've actually had four calls. One was the gentleman you just heard from. Another was in support. They'd like to see them, the ability for them to expand. And then we had two other calls that while they're in support of what the existing shelter is, they do have a concern similar to Lanny that what that CR zoning means for their neighborhood. Should they not be there? The other person Also noted that he is the adjacent neighbor and his concern was How their expansion might affect him because he is surrounded by it and that That there might be barking dogs that might be an issue but he is supportive of what's currently there just a concern that it would couldn't be in his words a kennel that would potentially have barking dogs that would be obviously disruptive to him.

Thank you. Sir, please step back forward. I'm going to give you a chance to respond. I have a couple questions for you, but I'll give you a chance first. So here's the concern. Obviously, as we analyze this case, this has nothing to do with your use. Obviously, what you're doing is a good thing. The question is whether CR zoning is appropriate to bring into this neighborhood.

Correct.

Because our concern, what we have to look at as the plan commission is, if you leave, what else can go in there? We're opening up a lot of potential uses within the neighborhood, which is not something we traditionally do. Have you considered looking, I see on the map, I see on the maps that the property to the rear of you that fronts burn that that is vacant land have you looked into potentially acquiring the land to the rear view that runs along burn road because that would be a more suitable site for a cr zoning than we we have not um and i understand the concern um there's unfortunately there's no avenue between only 10 increase in property size or facility size

which is negligible, 360 square feet, to what we're looking to do to improve it. I understand the gentleman's concerns. Unfortunately, I wish he had showed up at our community forum to discuss it with us when we sent out 60 letters and only two people showed up. And one was very much talking about the traffic. I want to address that the traffic is not ours. we have car traffic we have FedEx UPS occasional box trucks we don't have semis we don't have any of that traffic coming into our facility so that the truck the traffic he's speaking of and I agree with him 100% it's a it's can be a nuisance to the neighborhood I if there was another avenue for us to be able to improve our facility and expand without having to go to this, I'm all for it. As for the non-conforming use, as we've been there for 96 years and we changed the facility and improved the facility, well, the rules change on you. and so because of the non-conforming use and i understand and speaking with lisa regardless if we get approved or not any expansion or renovation we do we're not going to be permitted to have any additional outdoor exercise areas so that area that you see on the map that you have on the corner of mercer and wyman cannot be used as an enclosed fenced-in area We mitigate the noise by having a solid six, seven foot fence, I'm not sure how tall they are, in the areas where our dogs do exercise. with the number of dogs that we typically have out two and three we have more dogs than that out in the neighborhood i mean i can go on and on if there's a way for us to do this without the concern of yeah i don't want this property 50 years from now turning into a cvs or a you know a gas station or anything else but i think our history of that being there um are FINANCIAL STABILITY, WHICH ISN'T JUST ENDOWMENTS, THAT'S ONLY A PORTION OF WHAT OUR FINANCES ARE. OUR ORGANIZATION IS WILLING TO PUT IN A MILLION AND A HALF OF OUR OWN DOLLARS INTO THIS PROJECT AND STILL HAVE PLENTY LEFT OVER FOR THE RAINY DAY FUND. IF THERE'S AN AVENUE I CAN EXPLORE, I'M ALL FOR IT. not being able to expand limits us, and therefore limits the need in the community. We get more, and we're not alone, every organization in the greater Toledo area, country for that matter, gets more requests for assistance for help than we're able to accommodate. Having a new facility increases our capacity, increases the health and well-being of the animals, and all those things that go for best practices in animal welfare.

Thank you, sir. And we empathize with your position. We understand that what you're attempting to do here is a good thing. It's just potentially a bad fit with the location you've been in for 90 years. I'm not aware, Lisa, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but there's really no other alternative. They cannot expand this use unless the zoning is changed.

They cannot. The zoning code limits the expansion of a nonconforming use 10% legal nonconforming use.

Okay. My idea was to see if the land fronting burn is available for purchase you could always do your expansion behind your facility on that other parcel and Pursue I think you'd have a higher likelihood of success getting CR zoning on the the parcel that fronts burn correct That would be a complete rebuild and that's not financially feasible force nor would it be

I mean, who's going to buy our property in a residential neighborhood that is a dog and cat rescue shelter? So for us, the financial feasibility of that and the potential of getting what the property we believe was valued, doesn't seem feasible to us at all there's no reason for us when we own the place free and clear not to put money into our own our own place and if we were to relocate it wouldn't be there i mean it wouldn't make sense to relocate to that that location uh half a block away understood commissioners any additional questions for the applicant

I do have an additional question, Mr. Chair. As I'm looking at the addition, I was wondering, do you have outdoor kennels today?

We have outdoor exercise areas. no so yards yards but in the outdoor kennels are the dogs stored there overnight no no no okay no and if the plan and unfortunately on paper it looks terrible the dog the the rent of the expansion area yeah it says indoor outdoor kennels we're actually meeting with the with the architects next week because we've realized that that doesn't make sense in our in our climate to have to have that. And so we did a whole needs assessment with them. And that was kind of what came out of the needs assessment. Now we're in the let's fine tune the design and realize that those kennels that are on that, you know, if you look at the paper on the left hand side of it are all going to be indoor kennels. The dogs go out with staff and volunteers. They're not unattended. a couple few at a time if they play well together. And so they're outside just as if you were taking your dog into your own yard.

Okay. My concern there was just the noise. Oh, 100%. For the residents that are adjacent.

Yeah, no, that's not something we want to be. We want to be good neighbors, and I think we've succeeded at that so far.

Okay. Anything else? No, thank you.

At this time, staff has recommended disapproval of the application. I am going to open the floor for a motion on this case, Z26-0008.

Paul will make a motion for disapproval.

We have a first and a second to accept the staff's recommendation to disapprove of the zone change. A vote in the affirmative is a vote of disapproval. All those in favor of the disapproval say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, the disapproval carries unanimously. That will go to city council. on july 15th if this ultimately isn't approved it does not prevent you from continuing to operate your site as it exists now sure it just would not allow for the expansion in the in the method that you're seeking i understand good luck to you sir thank you case number five please

Item number five is case SUP 26-0011, special use permit for scrap and salvage facility. At 4103 LaGrange Street, staff recommends approval for the following three reasons. Scrap and salvage facility has been in operation north of the railroad tracks for over 20 years. The conditions of approval ensure an adequate visual screen between the scrap and salvage facility and adjacent rights-of-way and residential uses, and the conditions of approval enhance site safety of an existing business. by bringing it closer into compliance with the zoning code. staff further recommends approval subject to 45 conditions which will be reflected in the minutes and not read into the record unless there's a request that i do so there's a revised staff report in your folders revisions include modifications to plan commission conditions on pages 514 and 515 and then on page 514 there's a typo that we'll remove from here uh referencing so conditions 30 and 31 reference tmc 1108 or 203h that will be removed the condition will stay the same just that reference that code section will be removed thank you ms cutrell is the applicant present

Sir, name and address, please.

Troy Barman with Verdantas, 219 South Avery Street, Toledo, Ohio, 43604, representing R&M Recycling.

sir matt fisher from marshall and melhorn for seagate eighth floor representing r m recycling and the owner of the property junkie real estate thank you sir will you please raise your right hand mr fisher you don't need to be sworn in do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be true and accurate if so say i do i do

Okay, big project. Tell us about the project.

All right, yeah, I'm, like I said, I'm Trev Armand with Verdana, representing RNM Recycling, 4103 LaGrange. RNM Recycling is a family-owned business with four locations in Northwest Ohio and Southeast Michigan. Their total facility employs roughly 40 to 50. They accept ferrous and non-ferrous metals. They bail or cut them down on site, and then they ship them off for off-site processing. They serve both commercial and private residents with recycling metals. The facility does not shred or process the materials on-site. That is all done off-site. The SUP amendment is for the addition of a new cold storage building to be used for storage of non-ferrous metals, to add the existing trailer and roll-off storage lot to the SUP, and to address comments from Plan Commission's recent site inspection from last year. We've been working with both Planning Commission and Traffic Management regarding this SUP. Planning Commission staff recommended or requested RNM to hold a neighborhood meeting prior to today's meeting. That meeting was held last Thursday at Kent Branch Library with one neighbor in attendance that we discussed some items with her. We've reviewed the staff report and we'd like to discuss the following five items. The first item is a request for approval of Waiver C to maintain the existing parking north of the building, which is within 30 foot of the right-of-way. This parking outside of the facility's security fence is used by employees who arrive early to the facility I've spoken with Gary Stuckey with traffic management, and he is not opposed to this being maintained if we revise the site plan to show 25-foot drive aisles in front of those spaces to allow for two-way traffic. With that taken into consideration, we respectfully request approval of the waiver, of that, of Waiver C. Did you want me to go through all five items first or did you want to discuss them? I do want to identify all five items and then we'll work through them.

Okay.

The second item is a request for approval of Waiver E to maintain the existing asphalt grinding surface for the storage of empty trailers and roll-offs on the parcel south of the railroad tracks. This lot is just under two acres and is solely for the storage of their roll-offs and trailers. Paving of this two-acre lot would add substantial cost and is not financially feasible. In addition to the asphalt pavement, an underground detention system would be required to meet the City of Toledo code. We've worked with the Planning Commission and Traffic Management with this SUP agreement, amendment, agreeing to close a drive on the Green Street, narrow the drive on Detroit Avenue, install a type A buffer with trees, bushes, and a solid eight-foot high fence along Detroit Avenue and along the residential properties south of this lot. We have also held a neighborhood meeting regarding the SUP, and we respectfully request approval of this waiver to maintain the existing asphalt grindings trailer storage lot with the added landscape and screening along the residential properties. The third item is a request for removal of comments 16 and 17 by Soil and Drainage Services, which require cleaning, inspecting, and videoing of the sanitary sewer taps. The proposed amendment you have in front of you does not impact the existing building. There's no new sanitary lines, no new sanitary services. And the sanitary service that's currently at the facility, there's no issues with it. so we don't see a real need for videoing and cleaning a system that they don't have any issues with. The fourth item is a request for removal of item 31, which is a requirement for scrap piles to not be visible from the residential streets. This requirement makes the feasibility and operation of the facility not possible in order to reduce those down to a height where you can't see them for those residential streets currently those piles they range in size depending on when they can move the metals off site but they can get 15 20 foot tall eight foot high fence you will be able to see them over top of that and that's how they've been operating for 20 years they've had those piles there We're not asking for any change in operational procedures. There's nothing new. No piles are going to get closer to the fence. No piles are going to get closer to the neighbor's properties. We are agreeable with item 30, which limits the stockpiles within 100 feet of Detroit to be no higher than the fence line. We are in agreement with that. It's just item 31, it seems to read that it's for the entire site. uh... in that one to to meet that one makes reading the uh... the facility that's uh... not feasible uh... final item they have is request for more item forty uh... requires the updating of the existing pole sign to current city standards uh... talk to thank mission ironically that's next on your agenda is a text amendment or text and we request to maintain the existing polo sign. This is in keeping of other businesses and other signs down LaGrange Street in the area that have polo signs. So we request for removal of item 40. We are in agreement with all other items in the Planning Commission staff report, and with that, I'd like to address any questions you may have.

Thank you. We will come back to the waivers and to these items you've requested in a moment. A couple questions. The southern lot, the lot below the tracks, what's the primary purpose for that lot? How is it utilized right now?

So that lot is currently being utilized for STORAGE OF TRAILERS AND ROLLOFFS. I SHOULD SPECIFY EMPTY TRAILERS, EMPTY ROLLOFFS. SO THERE'S NO PRODUCT BEING STORED THERE. IT'S PURELY THEY DROP A TRAILER THERE, THEY DROP THE ROLLOFF, AND THAT'S WHERE THEY STORE THE EMPTIES. THERE'S NO MATERIAL THAT GOES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE TRACKS, ALL MATERIALS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE TRACKS.

And we're talking about potentially putting in a landscaping buffer along that southern boundary line? Adjacent to the residential. To the residential, not to the other industrial users. Correct. and so there's no materials stored on that southern site and so your concerns with the height is that the main site which is on the other side of the tracks there's really no feasible way to lower all of the scrap piles to a level where they're not visible from those side streets is that that's that's the issue correct now one at one point another it's gonna the piles will will they will be visible from those horizontal streets correct okay um There is a curb cut to this site on Detroit Avenue, correct?

Correct, and that's used by the employees only, again, to get those empty trailers in. That's not for customers.

And then on the Grange are the main entrances?

Yes.

And that's where that additional parking is to the front of the fencing for the employees to park? Correct.

It's on the very north end of the parking lot, a very north end of the building. There's a small, it's about five space parking lot right there that, again, their employees who get there early, they use that. Like I said, they employ 30 to 40 people at the Toledo facility, so they do use up the parking. All the parking in front of the building, is used by their employees uh... the parking directly on the other side of that fence is used by the employees it's the parking behind the building that is where their customers park uh... leads them right into where the scales are that they can have the the metal weighed and when you when you talk to gary about waiver c did you did you speak to him about waiver e about paving that southern parking area uh... no i did not

Okay. Commissioners, other questions for the applicant?

Mr.

Chair, I have a question. Mr. Ball, go ahead.

Regarding item number 40, or request number 40, is outside of just retaining the existing sign, is there a hardship associated with replacing the sign so that it's in conformance?

No, I mean, it's a nice-looking sign right now. It is in compliance. It looks similar to other ones on the area. Okay. But it's purely, it's one that, you know, it's a nice-looking sign currently, and it matches the neighborhood. And, yeah, so that's the reason. All right.

Thank you. Additional questions, commissioners? Yes. While we're talking about the sign, I know we have the next case which will give us, which if passed by council, will give us some authority to do some different things with these signs. But as it sits right now with that unpassed, we don't have any authority to waive that condition.

We really don't, and I'm not actually sure that the text amendment would still allow this sign anyway. It had to look a little bit closer as to the building addition, when the building additions occurred, that kind of thing. The other option you have is to put a base on the sign to make it a monument sign and request a BZA waiver for the height. That's the route we've been telling people to take when they want to keep their existing sign.

Yeah, so as the law exists right now, this body cannot grant you a waiver of that requirement. Okay.

There's just nothing we can do about that.

If the law changes, then we could revisit it, but we have to decide based on what the law is right this minute. Okay.

Would they have to go to the BZA then for approval or for waiver or variance?

If you wanted to change the sign to a monument sign and get a waiver as to the height, you could take that to the BZA.

Poll signs are prohibited. You'd have to add a base to it and then request a height waiver.

Okay.

Okay, before we get to the other waivers and other items, I'm gonna ask, is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak in favor of or opposed to this application? Seeing none, Alex, did we get any calls, emails, or other correspondence in advance of today's hearing?

Yes, we did. We received five calls from either people who live around there or people who work or own property. One was a general inquiry. The other four had concerns, environmental concerns. Most of them similar or the same to there's that table from the actual formal vision of environmental services complaints. The only one that's not the same as those is I received a call yesterday from a neighbor complaining about vibrations from their operations. She said it hasn't happened recently, but it is a thing that happens, so. Say that one more time.

Vibrations.

Vibrations, okay, thanks.

And there's a large amount of industrial users surrounding these residential neighborhoods. Correct. Yeah. Okay. So what we're going to do is, there's a lot of waivers on this case. We're going to start working through these one by one, even some of the ones we haven't discussed yet. And so I want to start with the first requested waiver, which is to allow the scrap and salvage operations within 100 feet of Detroit Avenue. Staff has recommended approval of that waiver. Subject to no scrap out any time shall exceed the height of the screen fence along North Detroit. And you are in agreement with that restriction?

Yes.

Okay. So commissioners, do I have a motion to recommend that waiver to council?

Motion for approval recommendation. Seconded.

We have a first and a second to approve the first waiver of 11042701. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, so that waiver will be recommended to council. The next one is for Section 1104-2701 as well, and this is to allow the scrap and salvage operations and empty dumpster storage within 100 feet of the residential area. So this would fall on that southern, the parcel south of the railroad tracks? Correct. So you'd be able to use the site up to the landscape buffer essentially? Correct. And you're in agreement with that? Correct. Okay. The issue you're gonna have is is part two one of the conditions is no scrap out any time shall be visible from Sampson Street or Shelley Street So we're gonna need to talk about that issue When we say nothing will be visible, I mean What what do we what are we trying to prevent like just in general if anyone's standing on Shelley Street? They cannot see any piles of scrap

Right, I mean, we get a lot of complaints from residents nearby these types of facilities. You can see the large piles of scrap from their backyards or whatever. It's kind of the unfortunate consequence of having industrial in the middle of a residential neighborhood. There needs to be some control, some protection to the neighbors, but the intent was not to see the pile above the fence.

And what's also challenging is, in this case, it's really we have a small residential use surrounded by industrial uses. It's surrounded. Fair point, yeah.

If I may, I'm wondering if a compromise there might be to extend the length of the landscape and fence the type A buffer just one more parcel further in either direction of the street. That way you're prohibiting the views from the backyards of those residential properties as well as from the side and the front yards.

This buffer would be trees, right? And fence. And fence. So, I mean, the trees would block out some of those site lines.

It would be helpful for that long view.

Yeah. And initially, if I may, initially we did have the buffer adjacent to all the residential properties. Well, the one furthest to the east, it's actually, there's one industrial lot buffer between us and the residential parcel. And Planning Commission asked us if we could extend it all the way to the end of the property to the east. And we did do that. So we extended all the way to the end of our property Going to the east. And then to the west we went to the residential properties to buffer them. And the Type A landscape buffer, it's a 10 foot landscape strip with trees and bushes. And then the eight foot fence at the edge of the 10 foot buffer. Like I said, if these scrap piles have been there, these stockpiles have been there for 20 years. And we had a neighborhood meeting that was not a concern. It doesn't sound like it was, that there were calls to Planning Commission with concerns about, let's talk about heights with this amendment. I think RNM's been a good steward in the area. I know the one person who came to the meeting, she talked to RNM and said, oh yeah, my son's gonna be taking some metal over to your place probably tomorrow or the next day to recycle and earn a little bit of extra money.

The goal of this would be to plant trees that grow higher than the fence, correct?

Correct. And the trees we have proposed will grow 30 foot tall or so, 30, 35 foot tall.

Okay.

Alex, do you mind talking about this condition for a few minutes and what the staff's thought process was behind it?

I think Lisa hit it pretty well on the head. I actually did, I know a site visit, and I went on Chalet Street, is apparently how it's supposed to be pronounced, and Samson Street, and I did see scrap piles, and yeah.

So they're visible now?

Yes, currently.

So if we don't grant this waiver, let's say this case does not move forward, is that non-conforming or is it conforming under the current standards?

So a lot of this site was expanded in 2005, I think, after the special use permit requirement, and there has not been a special use permit. For the buildings? For the use. For the use. The entire use. There is a small section that is grandfathered, but most of the site is not, based on our research.

So it's generally non-conforming?

Generally. There's a small part that is.

And I think the concern is you do have residences there, you do have homeowners, you do have people living there, and to limit the negative effects of having piles of scrap that are visible. We've not had complaints on this specific site regarding this issue, but we've certainly had complaints over the years from others. It's been an issue we've talked about back and forth with the staff for a very long time about how to address. The homes are right there on top of it, so that's our concern.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, if I may ask a question, just for clarification. So this site has been operating as a scrap yard. That is a permitted use in the zoning classification, isn't it?

Permitted by a special use permit. Okay, thank you.

And it at one point did receive a special use permit back in 2005? No. Did not? Okay.

But so the current use would have been grandfathered in, but it's been expanded. Is that the issue here?

Yeah, so it looks like it was in 2004 when the special use permit requirement was put in. At that time, the facility was somewhere just around here um but in 2005 that's when they purchased all the land up to about here and then they expanded here um so yeah this is the only part that is grandfathered as far as our research shows

Okay, so absent this special use permit, a majority of their site is not legally non-conforming. It is just, it is improper in its current form. Correct. Okay. All right. So at this time, commissioners, I'll open it up. If anyone would like to make a motion or make an amendment to this condition to remove the no scrap out any time shall be visible from Samson Street or Shaley Street? Chalet Street. Chalet Street, okay. Mr. Chairman. Yes, Mr. Grossweiler. degree to extend the trees down along the residential area from what i understand that they are going to have that full landscape buffer along all the residential areas just yes we agree to that yes we're landscaping that uh we're landscaping putting a type a buffer along detroit

So we've been working with Transportation and Planning Commission on making improvements to the site. Remember, this original SUP is to add a small building, a cold storage building. But we do want to bring everything, work with the city to bring things up. We have to.

Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion for a recommendation of approval.

to to remove that that that i'm going to call an exception to the waiver okay yeah okay is there a second ball seconds okay so what i'm going to do is i'm going to do a roll call vote on this so in the if you vote yay you are agreeing to remove that exception from this waiver we're not voting on the waiver as a whole yet uh miss cutrell will you call the roll

Rachel Mominey? Aye. Brandon Rakoff?

Aye.

Chris Ball?

Aye. Eric Rosweiler? Aye. All right, and just for the record, that's the same condition as in item- 31. 31, so 31 will also be removed. So now we're going to vote on the waiver as a whole with the commitment to still install the landscape buffer, okay? So this would allow them to be within 100 feet of residential use. So waiver B, a waiver of 1104.2701, I'll accept a motion on the waiver.

Ball will make a motion for approval.

I'll second it.

We have a first and a second to approve the waiver. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye, any opposed? Nay. Nay, okay. Three to one, that waiver will be recommended to council. Okay. Waiver C, so staff recommends disapproval of this. This is that exterior parking area along the Grange. I don't know if we can put the map up. Alex, can you identify what we're?

on the map we're actually talking about here yes so this is um right here there's a little area this part is grandfathered but this area was expanded um without without approvals okay and

Is that inside the fence line or outside the fence line?

It's outside the security fence and it's for some of the early employees to park there for access to the building. And like I said, it's purely, only employees park outside the fence line. So it's all employee parking in the front.

Alex, how many spots are we talking about from the grandfathered area to the non-grandfathered area?

I don't know how many are currently there. I know on this proposal they'd make some changes if they were granted this waiver. There would be, what is that, five spaces, Troy?

Correct. We maintain five spaces in that area.

Do you have any idea how many of those are part of the grandfathered section and what's the expansion? Is that the whole five or is that? So the five is just the non-grandfathered section.

These angled spots are grandfathered.

Okay. Lisa, is this our condition or was this Gary's condition originally?

I believe this is our condition, Alex, if you could confirm.

Yes, I believe this was our condition.

So if we don't recommend this waiver, they're gonna have to move those five spots.

They're gonna have to develop parking elsewhere.

They're they're gonna have to Move more parking towards behind the fence or they could readjust where the fence is if they wanted to well actually in theory We've removed the parking minimums.

We really wouldn't require them to replace the parking Commissioners any quit any other questions on this waiver? I'll open this up for a motion Paul will make a motion for disapproval. I'll second that. It's just five parking spots. Lisa, let's go ahead and call a roll call vote.

Rachel Romney. Yay. Brennan Rykoff.

So yay, meaning disapproval, yay. Chris ball yeah Eric Grossweiler yeah okay so that that waiver will not be recommended to council you may still discuss it with them but it'll go without our recommendation okay so we're gonna go to waiver D to approve the dirt or gravel portions of the north of the of the site north of the railroad tracks where the heaviest equipment is used and the staff has recommended approval of that waiver are there any questions on that waiver from the commissioners

I make a motion for approval of the waiver.

I'll second that. We have a first and a second to approve waiver D. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Is there any opposed? Okay, so that one will be recommended to council, four to zero. The final waiver is waiver E, which is to allow the grindings to remain on that southern strip south of the railroad tracks where the trucks and the trailers are stored. The staff has recommended disapproval. Questions and comments on this request? My major concern with it is the dust that might be generated for the residential neighbors.

It is asphalt grinding, which is considered a dust-free type of surface. And they do maintain it. as a gravel, as asphalt grindings, as opposed to like a 304 type of a material which does create dust. The asphalt grindings, because it still has some asphalt on it, does not create the dust that you typically would see.

But the purpose of this southern lot is essentially truck and trailer parking.

No, it's purely trailer and roll offs. No trucks. So it doesn't get a whole lot of use. It's limited use its storage of their of their trailers and You know the trucks have to bring those trailers on yes, yeah, so they do go in there and pick them up You know we have had projects in another place in Toledo where we've put in asphalt grinding trailer lots Okay Alex was this our condition this one come from transportation I

Let me double check that for you. This one might have come from transportation.

Transportation usually asks us to require these paved areas, so usually it's...

It is from transportation, yes.

Yeah.

And you did not talk to Gary about this one?

I did not bring this up, so I apologize for that one.

Okay. Any other questions, commissioners? At this time, I'll accept a motion on this waiver E. Staff is recommending disapproval.

Paul will make a motion for disapproval.

Mom and you will second.

okay we have a first and a second to disapprove the request for waiver e uh all those in favor say aye aye any opposed so that'll go three to one to council with the recommendation not to grant the waiver you may still discuss it with them when you have your your case so i think the next The only items left are items 16 and 17, cleaning and inspecting the sewer lines and recording their condition after the clean out. We've had this before, so I'll leave it up to the commissioners whether they want to vote to remove or leave this condition in. should i make a motion to leave the condition in someone's got to make a motion to remove them essentially so if you want to leave them in then you wouldn't make a motion okay hearing none those conditions will remain part of the application okay and we address 40 which we are not able to waive at this time correct I'm not certain on whether council can or not, but we cannot. So is there anything else that we haven't addressed yet that you wanted to address today?

No. I believe you addressed everything before, yeah.

So at this time, I'm going to accept a motion on the case as a whole with the recommended waivers and as we've amended it. This is SUP 26-0011. I'll accept a motion. Staff has recommended this for approval. I'll make a motion. motion to approve as amended we have a first and a second to approve the application all those in favor say aye aye any opposed so that'll go to City Council in this form as we've discussed today with a with a recommendation for approval