Toledo City Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

Jack Jolly? Here. Chris Ball? Here. Brandon Rakoff? Here. Megan Malchowski? Here. Eric Rosweiler? Here. Don Muhert? Here. Grant Rombach? Here. Lisa Sebecki? Present. Mike Panuski? Here. Mr. Chair, you have a quorum. A notice of this meeting was posted in the office of the Toledo-Lukas County Planning Commission's eighth floor in the Lukas County Clerk's Office and the lobby of one government center. A copy of the notice is available for inspection in our files if anyone would care to do so.

We do approve two sets of minutes. The first one's April 22nd. Motion for approval. Second. Motion second to approve the April 22nd minutes. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? That motion carries. Now we have June 24th.

Motion for approval.

Second. Motion to approve June 24th, 2026 minutes. All those in favor? Aye. That motion carries. First case, please.

Case number one is Z34C38, review and approval of a complete rewrite of the Richfield Township and Village of Berkey comprehensive plan. Staff recommends approval.

Is there anybody here from Richfield? Maybe a representative when we come forward. Give us your name and address for the record, and Mr. Panuski will swear you in.

Doug Ronald, address is 3354 Washburn Road, representing Richfield Township as zoning chairperson.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so, say I do.

I do.

Thank you.

The staff has recommended approval of your plan. Do you have any questions or comments for us? No, I do not. Okay, is there anybody else in attendance that would like to speak on this case? Move to approve. Second. Motion and a second to approve case Z34-C38. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries unanimously. Thank you, sir. You're welcome. All set. Actually, you can stay right there. Next case.

Case number two is Z34-C39. Review and approval of complete rewrite of the Richfield Township zoning resolution. Staff recommends approval.

Move to approve.

Second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? That motion carries unanimously. Now you're all set. Thank you. You're welcome. Next case, please.

case number three is the 37 c 38 request for a tax amendment to add cottage industries and marijuana facilities to the harding township zoning resolution staff recommends approval anybody here from harding yes ma'am give us your name and address for the record sue trees one two six seven scott road zoning inspector for harding township okay

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so, say I do.

I do.

Thank you.

The staff has recommended approval of your proposal. Do you have any questions or comments?

No, I support the staff's recommendation.

Thank you. Is there anybody else in attendance that would like to speak on this case? Okay. Move approval. Second. Thank you. We have a motion and a second to approve staff recommendation on Z37-C38. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? That motion carries unanimously. Then go to Harding Township. Thank you, ma'am. Next case.

Case number four, Z22-C142, request for an amendment of the current off-premise sign section 12.8 for two electronic messaging signs above ground along US 24, Waterville Township. Staff recommends disapproval.

Is there anybody here from Waterville? Anybody else who would like to speak on this case? Mr. Parker? The record reflects Mr. Parker's an attorney and does not need to be sworn in.

Good morning, Jerry Parker, 1 Seagate, Toledo, Ohio. I'm representing Mr. Bolin and Mr. Moline, who are owners of one of the properties that the two billboards are targeted to exist at, be located at. I've been, as many of you know, I've been doing this land use work for decades, probably in many some people's opinion, too many decades. But in any event, I won't discuss this concept of visual blight. I think it's, you know, it's a term of art. In my opinion, visual blight is in the eye of the beholder. But in any event, and with respect to the specifics of this proposal, As you all know, under the Ohio Revised Code, 15-19-02, townships cannot prohibit outdoor advertising. Outdoor advertising under the code, Ohio Code, is defined as a business use. They can put limitations on it, and all those townships that have been cited by the Planning Commission staff Yes, they have. Those are their restrictions. But if you'll notice, there's no restriction on the number of signs you could have in those townships. Nor, I don't believe, do we have, as we do in this situation, a highway where the signs are going to be located. U.S. 24 is a major, major highway. Here, this is a township's proposal. This is their view of their restrictions on outdoor advertising in accordance with the Ohio Revised Code. Two signs. That's it. A height limitation of 35 feet. This is what they want. And if I can suggest to you, and I don't want to be presumptive, I don't think the staff or this planning commission should tell the township, you can't do what you want to do in limiting outdoor advertising. This is their proposal. This is their limitations, just like every other township. And I think in this situation, the township is eager to have this resolution passed because they believe that this outdoor advertising sign limited to two in the locations that they're at will benefit the township in many ways. And as a concluding remark, I drove the Ohio Turnpike, the Pennsylvania Turnpike, and the New Jersey Turnpike just recently. I must have seen a million outdoor advertising signs. Quite frankly, I never stopped and said, boy, that's ugly. Many of the signs were informative. Amber alerts, accidents, weather reports. There were even spiritual messages. So my point is simply this. The township wants this. This is their restriction on outdoor advertising. And I think the key is that it's a major highway and it's limited to two signs. That's it. Thank you for your attention.

Any questions for Mr. Parker?

I guess my question is, did this come through the township or did you request it from the township planning commission that has to come to us?

I'm sorry I didn't hear that.

so my understanding did did you propose this to the township and by law it has to come to us they have to forward it to us i know that but the township is the one that passed the resolution forwarding this to you but they're required to pass it and pass it on to us is that not correct so they're required you made the request to the township by law they have to forward it on to us because it has to go through the process So did this come from the Township Zoning Commission by their own volition?

I have talked to the trustees on this, two of them. I've been in communication with them. He's very much in favor of this proposal.

Why aren't they not here then?

I can't answer that. I'm just telling you that's what the situation is, and I've never misrepresented anything to this body or anybody else in 53 years.

I'm not saying that.

Mr. Parker, that's enough. Hang on. Mr. Padusky, what's the relevance of your question?

I'm just curious. He stated that this came from the township. It did come from the township, right? Well, but there's a difference between it. So the way the law works is that anybody can make a request to change the zoning code and it has to come through us through the process or did it come because they wanted to do it of their own volition?

So why is that relevant?

Because it basically determines who's behind bringing this up. Is it a township issue or is this something that Mr. Parker and his clients want to bring before us?

kate molly you're shaking your head would you like to speak yes sir uh what happened was mr parker and his client presented this information to the township this was not brought on by the township solely so it was presented as an amendment in favor and request of the project at hand so this was not initiated by the zi this was initiated by the applicant presenting himself to the township

Yeah, did anybody attend the zoning commission when this was forwarded? They voted on it, and they forwarded to this commission. They had a serious discussion at the township zoning commission about this proposed resolution, and it was decided to forward it to you, and it was consented to by the zoning commission. I was at the hearing, testimony was taken, and it's before you. And I'm here to tell you the trustees that I've talked to are very much in favor of it.

Okay. So my question, my second question is, this seems like to be to allow something significantly out of place than what's present in this county. I don't see any other township allowing it along any other freeway. What would make this different and what would be the impact on the community that it would make?

Once again, the township under the Ohio Revised Code cannot ban outdoor billboard signs. Those restrictions are there for a reason. The reason is they're mandated by statute. This township would like to see these restrictions imposed on outdoor billboard signs. Those restrictions, I don't notice any limitation on the number of outdoor billboard signs you can have in those townships. Here, the limitation is two.

Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else in attendance that would like to speak on this case?

Thank you.

mr chairman i have a question also i understand and staff's recommendation it says this would be the largest and tallest billboard in lucas county i find that not to be true unless toledo is not part of lucas county

city of toledo does not have a sign of this magnitude we have stopped putting up billboards and i checked with the city we do not have anything of this magnitude so this sign would be higher and taller than anything we have including the city of toledo and other municipalities within lucas county we don't have anything this size in full disclosure what's the basis for your research I actually have done, we did this the same thing with Sylvania Township when I had to research for them two years ago. It was exactly the same issue where they- I understand the issue.

What's the basis for your research if this is the tallest sign in Lucas County?

I actually checked the Ohio, the city of Toledo permits as well, and then I checked the county signs as well. So I actually checked every township and looked at every township code to verify that this is the largest that we have.

And from my perspective, full disclosure, I used to run Root Outdoor Advertising. I was president of it. Height limitation in Toledo was 50 feet. The one I just passed along, 475, is 70 feet.

And what I have here in my staff report, I show that each one can get up to... 15 feet with throughout lucas county and the size being the 72 feet so everything was consistent throughout lucas county this water bill one is completely different than the rest of the townships when i come to this plan commission you always ask me to compare to the other townships and this one is significantly different than the other 10.

Okay, and then also a question I noticed in Springfield Township, there is a billboard right across the street on Airport Highway. From the Kroger standpoint, somewhere around there, it's a lot larger than 100 square feet. It's owned by Key Ads.

Is that one owned by the Village, though? Is that in the Village of Holland and not Springfield Township?

I have no idea for sure. That is Village of Holland. Holland goes out that far? Yes, sir. Okay, thank you.

Okay, Mr. Chairman, then I will move to approve case.

Z22-C142. I'll second it.

All right. Mr. Chair. For clarification, we're not approving the staff recommendation. We're approving what's been presented by the township. Is that correct, Mr. Jolly?

That is correct.

We have a motion to second. Is there any discussion?

Mr. Chair, before we vote, can I ask one more question of Molly? I apologize, but have you done any research into the legality of restricting this to just two billboards? Whether that is a viable limitation in this ordinance.

It's viable because I think it can be challenged and an applicant can go to the BZA and challenge that and possibly win and have a third or fourth or fifth sign. Okay, thank you. I don't think there's any validity to keeping it just a two.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay. Mr. Panuski and Mr. Rakoff. Yes. Okay, that motion carries and will now be sent back out to the township. Any other business, Lisa, for us?

No other business. All right.

We're adjourned.