Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hypothetically. Good evening. This is the city of Twinsburg Planning Commission meeting for Monday, August 18th, 2025. Roll call. Mr. Shipley. Here. Mr. Walker. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Hoger, present. Mr. Cohen, present. Mr. She present. You please stand for pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. We begin with the work session. The first item on the agenda is the similar use determination for the data center in the IM zone. If the applicant can come forward, name and address and an overview of what you're looking for this evening. Uh, good evening, gentlemen. My name is Grace Morsini. Um, I'm here on behalf of Shelburn Global Solutions. Um, whose address is 2362 Nostrin Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, 11210. And we are requesting a similar use designation to allow for a data center to be developed within the innovation and manufacturing classification. Um, specifically, we would like an allowed use or allowed accessory use designation. Probably the allowed use here. Uh, but a conditionally allowed use would be acceptable as well. Shelurn currently owns three parcels within the IM zoning classification and is trying to figure out if it can go ahead and develop its property to enable data centers and to market the property to enable data centers to be developed. And um obviously the least amount of um hurdles that the developer would need to go through in constructing the data center would make this property more easil eas easily marketable and therefore quicker to develop here. Um and we think this is an excellent opportunity for Twinsburg. Um, as I was discuss discussing with Lynn a little bit before this meeting, um, you know, I think there could be some some direct benefits with, you know, the the smaller workforce, right? We're talking about maybe, um, 20 to 35 people, um, 20 people that would be working there per shift. um in addition obviously with the construction but also in an indirect instance where you know you're going to have some um inciliary industries around there trying to give support to the data center whether through you know providing utilities electrician computer software engineers etc um for the data center. So there's actually a lot of really good net benefits here um in

allowing this property to to have that use and we do feel that data centers are similar to the uses already permitted within IM zoning um due to the similar impact and the immediate land in addition to a couple of advantages are already over allowed uses within the zone. For example, data centers operate as warehouses for internet servers and networking equipment. Um the difference really is the water and electricity that you often see to really maintain the conditions for the data centers. In a sense, that's what data centers are, right? They're storage units for computer servers. Um, geographically, regionally, the data centers um do need to be located, you know, in or outside large metro regions, and this is exactly one of those. Um, so to, you know, provide a kind of a direct network into where everyone else is, right? I.e. where the internet, how everyone's connected. Um you know also similar some also sorry other similar uses listed in in uh medium industries such as scientific control instruments, laboratories um and manufacturing that would involve kind of you know advanced processing or assembling in the sense that these uses also um have to use large kind of complicated digital technology in order to have the manufacturing um occur. Um, and so those are uses obviously that we probably wouldn't think of more as like a 100% traditional manufacturing, right? These are things that would involve some kind of software component, some kind of digital um component here. And that's, you know, clearly obviously that's what data centers are trying to do. Um, and so we we also think that the location, you know, as I'm looking at the Twinsburg zoning map here, um, is actually an excellent location for a data center. Couldn't couldn't think of a better spot. Um, you know, I'm from Virginia. Um, in Virginia, we're having a lot of issues with data centers right now, particularly in Northern Virginia. Lowden County is one that was cited. That's a notorious example where we have data centers right tucked directly behind, I'm saying directly behind, you

know, suburban homes. And this isn't the instance there, right here. Um, they would be marketed and developed um, you know, in in spaces that are tucked away from all of that. So, the issues that we have as far as, you know, aesthetics, right? this this looks like a big honking warehouse behind my house. We're not going to have that. Um issues like noise. Um you know, these computer servers, although this is getting better, these computer servers do kind of generate like a very low humming sound, which you know, at 3 in the morning, you have your window open, you might hear. You're not going to have that issue because it's right because you know, you're tucked away in an industrial zone. um issues such as uh you know dust uh pollution um traffic that won't be there obviously due to the you know electronic digital nature of what we're doing here as well as the small amount of staff. So what you're going to have is a couple dozen 20 people per shift coming in and out of this data center. If they're repairs there repairs if they're going out for lunch they're going out for lunch. I mean really that's that's what we're talking about here. Um so traffic-wise this is going to be minimal. Um and so also you know too data centers unlike you know a lot of other industrial manufacturing uses don't really pose a health and safety hazard to nearby people. We don't have any you know large machinery that could explode. But I mean, obviously, we're going to have like, you know, it's another building, so fire, right? Um, but, you know, we're not going to have there's no um actual onset risk associated with just by virtue of being a data center, which which is good. Um to the extent that there are any noise concerns um you know particularly with the location that these are in these can definitely be mitigated with say like a vegetative buffer sound barrier um you know discussion about where to set the location of the data centers things like that can definitely be on the table. Um but again this is much less of a concern here than where we otherwise see may see in like a like a more densely populated

suburban area. Um and so you know with with there might be concerns also with you know potential electricity usage, potential water usage. Again I would say that the technologies for that for those are both getting much more efficient. Um but also you know placing them within kind of the industrial zone you're at least grouping those with with other potential uses that also have you know have a heavier you know toll on the electricity or the you know water there as well. So um you know all those reasons you know we think that this would be uh an appropriate use within the innovation and manufacturing zone. Um again we don't think that a conditional use is necessary here although if you guys feel feel the need to and we might we might have that discussion we can understand that. But we do think that the benefits of this you know creating jobs you know your Twinsburg would be upgrading its digital infrastructure. um you have higher faster connection rates. You're you're allowing the internet to kind of grow and AI and all the technologies that we're seeing right now kind of grow and blossom without, you know, causing a drag on Twinsburg's, you know, internet and electricity output. So that would be a big benefit for the town. Um so again, you know, it's kind of thinking about the innovation part of this, you know, innovation manufacturing zone. I really do think that having infrastructure in place like that is going to allow for you with with with the better internet and the better electricity kind of for that innovation. So, you know, for all those reasons and obviously you guys can think of dozens more in your head. We we guys we definitely think that um this should be a uh a a permit a similar use as opposed to a conditional use. But I'm happy to take any questions.

Thank you, Alen. before um I open it up to planning commission. Is there anything else that you would want to share uh for our uh knowledge? So, ironically, I wrote at the top of my notes, the data center center is essentially warehouse. So, yep. Yeah,

I think that it's primary characteristic. It's it's really our process that makes me lean towards finding the use similar to something we would call condition to make the data center a permitted use and to find it similar to our other permitted uses. I think we would want to put some parameters on on the use for screening, the location of generators, setbacks from a residential district. The way the charter is written, we can't really do that without going on a ballot. And so I think the most expedient option really is the conditional use pathway. which would make each individual site sort of subject to specific review because the way our language is written, we allow use, you know, at this site that we're speaking on this evening. We think that's great. It's next to I480. No harm in the file. That'd be a great location. But we're also permitting that on any other IM zone of property. And for this permitted use, I think we would want some use specific standards added to our zoning code language. And to develop those use specific standards, I think we may be looking at a ballot issue. And so we could go on a November ballot. We'd be potentially looking at May ballot. And I don't see that maybe necessary, but we can do the same thing for a conditional youth permit review. and it would probably be more expedient if the owner wants to start marketing this property.

Just one way of thinking about it.

Thank you. Um I kind of had those same thoughts and the same notes. Um similar to what you were just talking about. Well, if it was just sight specific what you're looking for conditionally probably wouldn't be necessary, but because it's for any property in that district, I think as Lynn said, we need that ability. Okay. um to be able to to look at it as you said it's a case by case basis. There may be nothing on on the properties owned by your client. However, some else that could be so well I think bless you. Well, I think it's um definitely a similar use and I think it would fit great in the IM district. Um I would promote

for a conditionally allowed use um for the motion because let me just join jump in um inappropriately here just while we're on this topic. Our current code allows a 100 foot setback from a residential zone but that's a building setback and I don't think that's what we're talking about here. We're talking about a setback for potentially a small substation, maybe generators and maybe storage of diesel fuel. I don't have what sugars look like, but we don't have anything in our current language that would outright control for some of that and the conditional use permit would allow for that or conditionally allowed. Ed,

uh, well, you you talked about and and I don't know if this is covered or not, but the electricity consumption. Is there um some sort of parameter as you talked about uh for this because it is you know it's the footprint isn't large but you will be using you know I assume a good amount of energy for that footprint and what's a standard or do we have something like that? No there's no standard. Yeah. Okay.

So yeah I mean that's that's that's right there there's no set standard here. I mean, for like a 200,000 square foot data center, for example, you're looking at 200 megawatts per year for electricity. Um, which is a lot of houses worth of electricity. You can imagine that. Um, but, um, as far as looking at that issue from a land use zoning perspective, I don't think that's really what's going on. I mean, you're I think at least in Virginia, my experience is that's been more kind of addressed with the regulators, Dominion Energy, which is the big power company there. um and and through that that way. And so I think that's kind of would be the route there.

I guess the other question is with this being a topic and the other topic earlier um does the city have a forecast for energy usage if we build something like this and then households 20 30% of households want to get electric cars. How would we manage that since we're talking about energy consumption? Yeah, I think it's just in terms of servicing this data center use right on the electric provider can can that can they support that use probably separate engagements with first energy right because that's where the I mean the equipment isn't sent to

they're going to have to do a power sharing agreement you know PPA uh you know a connection agreement or whatever right there's there's a million different things that they would have to do with the electric the electric company to get to connect that. Um, again, my experience is in Virginia with Dominion, but it sounds like there's a similar situation here. Um, so that would be subject to all of that. 100,000 square foot data center here in Verizon that started off that data center started off it looks to me like as an accessory use to the office and then it expanded and planning commission or planning consultant whomever I don't think anything was thought of that particularly it's in the part of the what was the i3 district it backs up to other industrial users and I don't think there was really an aesthetic concern and clearly theological needs have been met.

Anything else Steve? So the good thing is the proximity of of this area because it's service from the uh Chamberl substation which they recently upgraded and they keep expanding. So I think First Energy knows because the whole issue with electric cars and charges and stuff that we're behind the eightball and they're trying to build the grid to support all this stuff. But um they run a very efficient operation most of these data centers do and they're not like spiking spiking the curve. I think it's uh I mean this is this is the new the new frontier if you will. It's a new

absolutely I mean cuz you know everybody's in the cloud goes to the server. Well, if it's done right and it's the right local I've got a friend who's director of general services for Loun County, so I exactly that is a different kind of hopefully you didn't give him a call before I know I didn't know. No, but it's it's a different it's a location-wise,

right? That's that's exactly right. Yeah. So their focus seems to be on redundancy and and and backups so that they don't have outages because when the servers aren't running the data is not flowing and that's the problem, right? But you know I this is the new the new new I mean this is what we're data warehousing. You're right. It's warehousing. Um and I've been in a couple data centers and they're pretty phenomenal. They are just like blow your mind. So, um I think the location I think is, you know, it's not going to be impactful to anybody. So, I I I would support it, but it's just a matter of how we do that.

Well, I didn't ask that. I mean, are you uh in favor of of a conditionally permitted use versus just Yeah, I was just more questioning do do they do we consult the energy, you know, provider at one point and say, you know, can you support it or not? I mean, do they have an opinion on this? That that was my question in the process that does you know first energy or someone have a are they notified you know so fortunately I mean for us they had geared up cuz cuz when Chrysler was there they were supplying a ton of power now it's kind of dropped off yeah that was so that time yeah but that substation

and they've actually made a ton of improvement what I've seen just I don't know for a fact but they made a ton of improvements but they you know there's a demand, they're going to make it. Well, I understand. I just didn't know if if they're they were part of the process to say they can support it or not, cuz if there's a finite amount of energy, 97 degree day, you know, you know, where does it go? Yeah. You know, no, I mean that's a valid concern and I I guess to the extent that I can say something there is um we are looking at with data centers now. I mean, the technology is improving pretty quickly here. I mean, we're not just talking about like you know what we even put in with Verizon. I mean this is

as as this site gets developed and as it gets redeveloped or reunifurished or whatever I think they would start it would start having a less and less you know toe on the local power strain and I'm not just saying that like that is actually the case like I know in Virginia for example they're looking at putting solar panels all over the roof of this thing. So again like that but but for that I think that is before we want to talk about it in this room that's we have to have that discussion private and public with with the regulators with power companies you and see what their what their stances is on that ultimately end of the day what they're willing to do or not willing to do is really kind of they're really kind of the umpires here you know but the upside is the technology is getting more efficient as well.

Yes. So um yeah absolutely I mean but the needs are continually growing that is not slowing down a lot of these data centers putting solar panels around the roof generating their own power and everything for sure and like with the water for example hey every little bit

like the water for the cooling technology I mean that's getting a a little bit better too I mean they're getting easier and easier to recycle this watery which is good um you know they're not having to go back into the water I mean it's not that this water is really like contaminated with anything it's really just for coolant that's running through a pipe, but obviously would go back to the water treatment plant to go back into the system. So, that's becoming less and less. So, um you know, I it it's I think I think ultimately what we're going to see is you're going to have data centers that are I think they're always going to be on the high end of energy consumption. They're probably always going to be on the higher end of water consumption, but as far as like, you know, for example, oh, I don't know, like uh I know there might be a push one day for, you know, computer chips coming to America, right? And and like what's the demand there because that's going to have a high electricity usage. And I think that those kinds of things are going to probably get matched a little bit more and you know you're probably going to see it more like that that ball ballpark. So um you know I I think you know there the benefits for allowing it here I think are are really good especially you know it is it is the future. Um you know Twinsburg doesn't have it. I think it'll go somewhere else and that place will be the data center. they'll have a data center and you know there's going to need to be x number of data centers for x population and x metro region right and so this is a good location for that for this area and it just it all kind of fits together really really well here

so I think I support the conditional use permit but I think you're right we're going to have to look toward towards the future because this is is going to be re it's going to come back that's why I said I wouldn't even and the permitted use they think it would be doable But we have we want some you specific regulations and I don't I that can't happen in the short term. Understood. Because I think even if I got really creative I I still think we have a dimensional standard that wouldn't meet the criteria of our charter and it would mean going back.

Yeah. Agreed. So I I personally know of a few that are not impactful until the lights go out and those big generators kick in because they're they're big because they have to power a place. So that's so I think

you know in this area that's not going to be an issue because there's no residential impact but as you know he alluded to if you know get the residential area backing up to it could get a little wonky. So it's something you need to put on our radar I think. And again, there's there's plenty of things that data centers have done to mask that. I mean, we've obviously seen like egregious examples in the news of like, you know, giant warehouse next to like, you know, suburban house, but like, you know, you could do a vegetative buffer that's pretty thick where like you couldn't see that on the other side would also provide a sound buffer. See that with solar farms a lot actually. Um, you know, setbacks obviously just that space limitations there as well. Um, you know, sound they have, you know, specially made sound barriers for these things. Um, which is which is really helpful. Um, but to to your point, I mean, the really the the time you're gonna see the the humming, you know, and then, you know, um, is is going to be like generators. Yep.

Um, you know, where I live, the concern is always always hurricanes. And when that happens, then you do go to the generators and it does go. Um, but, you know, I maybe I mean, I don't I'm not familiar with the weather concerns here. Obviously, maybe it gets cold and snows really bad or something and that happens then. Um uh but that that tends to be the largest issue there. You think we Craig? Yeah. I mean I support the conditional use. I think it's a good uh addition to I guess the the clientele here in Winsburg. Um

I guess detailed like on 50ft height and all that. We'll have to go through those as they come back for review because there's obviously 30 foot setbacks and all this for when you if you want to go that high. And obviously I think buffering the noise is probably my biggest concern of the generators. Um Nick gives us the leeway by doing it conditionally per. Yeah. Where we can we can write our own rules that they have to abide by. Right. For sure. And I think in that instance conditional use does make most sense. Right. I mean if it's tucked down way at the bottom of that map there. Maybe not so much if you put it maybe right next to that tan area the residential. Right. Like it's obviously case by case. That's fair. I support it. All right. Thank you. Michael

Steve makes a good point. I mean, we could be bleeding edge or bloody leftovers. And um this this is an industry that's going to continue to grow. And unlike chips, if you read about the Intel factory, this is not dependent on orders from for the company that has the chip factory. Um on what level I know about the the overall stuff, this is a this is a smart application. They're they're looking to to find the right spot. We've got it here. Uh there are other things and as someone who has learned very much in recent months to on what lanes to stay in um the you know everything with First Energy and utility providers that will be taken care of down range. Um and I trust Lyn and her guidance that that the conditional use is the way to go here. Um because but I also concur with Steve. this is this could be a good model for what we want to do down range and we got an applicant who seems willing to do that. I mean I you know this is where I'm like it's where can we have high school students come and visit and learn and stuff like that which has nothing to do with our our authority but I'm fully in support of it by conditional use.

Thank you. Scott, any questions or comments? Uh no I I would uh I don't get to vote but I echo the sentiments of my peers here. Okay. Um, looking at the permitted uses in an IM facility, I mean, I can tell you that I would rather have a data center uh above a parcel that I owned than um casting of non-ferris metals, for example. Right. I So, just in that vein, I I and you know, to the point that that Steve you made, um, there's going to be a need for this. So, I think the opportunity to welcome it to uh the community is probably a good thing.

All right. Thank you. Um All right. Well, we're going to come back to you, but don't go far away because it won't be very long. Excellent. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. Um if and nobody has issue, I would think that we could take the second item from work session and just push it into the regular meeting portion and have you go over it then? I 100% fine with that. Everyone's okay with that? Yep. Okay, then it's uh 6:54. We'll jump into the regular meeting agenda. Uh the first item is the approval of the June 16, 2025 minutes. So moved

as submitted. Any comments or discussion? Roll call. Mr. Shley. Yes. Mr. Mayor. Oh, yes, ma'am. Mr. Yes. Mr. Yes. Mr. Yes. All right. So, the minutes will be accepted as submitted. Uh, second item is the similar use determination. I told you not to go way too far. Um, if you want to come back up to the podium. Uh, is there's anything else that you'd like to share with planning commission?

Uh, no. I mean, just that. Um, you guys actually were right, Michael, to your point, um, our client searched far and wide for a location for this. It the stars are lining up really great. Um, it's it's a great location spatially, just even on a micro level, even on a macro level. Um, and, uh, they're excited. They're excited to market it. Um, and hopefully, you know, we're going to get a good good buyer and something something really great will happen there. All right. Uh, Ed, anything else? Steve? Uh, no. I'm good. Thank you, Craig. Nope. Michael, no sir.

Like to make the following motion upon reliance upon representations made by the applicant and their representative along with the submitted application and narrative for similar use determination from Shelburn Global Solutions and its affiliates dated July 30th, 2025. I move that planning commission recommend to city council that data center facilities be considered a similar use to those permitted in the IM innovation and manufacturing zone and that the zoning and development regulations be amended to include data center facilities as a conditionally permitted use in the IM zone.

Second by Michael. Any discussion? Roll call. Mr. Cohen. Yes. Mr. Walker. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Shipley. Yes. Mr. Hoger. Yes. Mr. She. Yes. So, you have a positive recommendation from uh planning commission. Yeah. I don't know if you realize that. We didn't really mention that before that that we we don't have the final say that it does go to um city council for the final determination of course. Um but it has our positive recommendation and take that with as you will. Great. That would be September 9th. September 9th. Yeah. Okay. I'll wake up at 4 in the morning again. Uhuh. Next Tuesday. Not tomorrow. Wow.

Oh, when this makes it to the I don't don't know if Shannon will get a chance to I got you. All right. No worries. Did you drive from Hampton Roads? No, I flew. I I was going to say horrible drive. Oh, yeah. Well, hopefully you got to enjoy while you were hanging out waiting for us. Oh, yeah. No, I I I'm staying in Cleveland right now. Should have stayed in here, though. this beautiful town. Um, you guys are great. I really appreciate it. This has been one of the better uh planning commission meetings I had with this stuff. So, no, I I really appreciate it. Thank you guys so much. Thank you. All right. Thank you, sir. All right. Next item uh on the agenda is the text amendments to the planning and zoning code. Lynn,

some of these are kind of housekeeping. There's not a lot of substance to most of these. I'm just going to go through them down the line here and start with the storm water detention item. This language to add the infiltration practices as listed in the Ohio general permit authorization. This is required language. We're required to have Okay. I don't I don't

This is basically OC direct. Exactly. So that that one's that one this isn't going to really mean any discussion to us here this evening. The second one this one's kind of embarrassing. Um this looks like a cut and paste error with our new code. We've got the same um definition for child daycare as we have for cemeteries because they next to each other in those definitions. Oh, see he's got a story to tell all his friends in Virginia.

Definition that I've um concocted really comes from Harvard Vice Code. Draw my kid off at the cemetery. Good lord. I I saw this. I was having a conversation with a planner in Hudson and they they had a question about columbarians. And then she said, "Hey, your cemetery definition's pretty messed up there, but then yeah,

so this is a little um survey of definitions that I did. I looked at the AI overview and that didn't have much to offer and said the one that I've chosen really comes from the Ohio device code. Mhm. Looked at what the city of Hudson had since she was bashing me there and have the city of Green had a decent definition in the city of St. but um

comfortable with it. It allows for burials. It allows for a mausoleum which we have at Crown Hill. We It allows for calivarians which we also have several of those at Crown Hill. that this definition in the revised code allows for like a scattering garden of sorts. That would be something new.

Okay. Did you want do you want to see if anyone has comments as we go through each one? I'm assuming nobody had a comment on the first one. I mean that's required. We really don't have much choice. So the second one I mean I think it seems uh better than what we had and it makes sense. Any anybody else have any issue with it or what? I'm all a fan whenever you're tracking OC definitions. Okay. That's where I go. I think that'll make our daycare owners happy. All right. So, good. Good on that one.

Okay. So, then the third item in the downtown district, we have a table note that um maxes out attach cluster homes at four units. And I this language is found in our cluster home district. I think this note was erroneous in this downtown district chart. I think it just carried over. Um it is in conflict with other language in the downtown district that would allow for more of a town home scenario. Any issues with anybody with this one? So it's just an error of having the wrong

table. We very much struggle with formatting. Okay.

Um the next item is a certificate of appropriateness. That's something that we require for demolition of a historic structure. We in other in other portions of this section we had changed the language to local landmark list. Changing this historic register in this sentence to local landmark list keeps it consistent with the other language. And what it's doing really is expanding ARB review anything on our local list, not just things buildings that would be listed on the national register.

Just so somebody asked the question, this doesn't mean that it's easier to get rid of NHRP or an HRP eligible stuff because that's already separately. Yeah, it's already separate. This doesn't um doesn't really make anything. It it really just clarifies, right? Doesn't really make it more difficult or easier. It just it just really clarification. I could just see somebody asking that. So, I wanted to make sure I got that on. So, so the local landmark local landmark list isn't more doesn't have more more things on it than the historic registry. So, so it should make it more more restrictive. Yeah. More restrictive. Yeah, exactly.

Contains all the properties and then ones we would consider to be a local market. Got anybody else in the right direction? All right, good to go on that.

Um, the next one is regarding signs. We had in our old code language that allowed the zoning enforcement official to go out and physically remove any political sign placed within the public right away. And we did that. Um, typically the signs if they were pulled out of an intersection or a public rightway, the signs ended up in a pile at the back of city hall and if people were aggravated with that, they come and collect their sign up. But we we have historically removed those signs. This um this being specific to political science, it's not being content neutral. So how should not have had that language in there. Um, but we did. Um, the administration likes the ability for code enforcement to remove those signs and I think several council people like the ability for us to remove the signs. Um, we're we're adding this language that we can destroy them without notice. We're not doing that. We are holding on to the signs for quite some time before they would end up in a dumpster. Um

well there there are a bunch of advertising signs that are showing up now. Power wash this. Yeah. Snow plowing power washing yard. Typically they end up in front of the sidewalk or in the intersection. So that just really just allows us to we line up and blow it out of the ground. And sometimes people will call us and want the signings another community. Um I guess but um If that seems offensive or aggressive that we can destroy without notice, we don't. They There is a time period there where people can

I kind of like that. I seems like they should have a 30-day notice to come pick up your signs or you can destroy something. Um cuz then they may not know that they're not allowed to put them there. Like I don't know how we we have to say, well, this sign's been here for 20 days. that becomes a little bit problematic, but they're sitting there for more than 30 days. And authorized to order is a May type is May type language, so you're still able to do exactly what you're talking about. Exactly. And I think that's how we that's how we've always handled it and that's how we will continue to handle it.

I mean, I but to Craig's point, we stay consistent that way we don't invite scrutiny. So, okay. As is okay, I guess. Okay. We could to date them would be a little be hard. There's probably signs back there from the last election cycle. I mean, in all fairness, I mean, but so without notice, you're at least going to contact them and say, "We have your sign." No, we do not do that. They know. That's why it has So, it has to be without notice then. Yeah, there's any of my old board election signs for four years.

They know it's gone. Just just read Twinsburg round table or Twinsburg. I was going to say they know they'll be there. That's why I'm worried about them being all pissed off that they destroyed without notice. Yeah. Well, most of the time they know that they don't belong there, but they don't have anywhere else to put them. So, that's where they put them. And they long as until they get removed, they're they're getting their point across. Right. Sometimes it's calculated risk. Yeah, exactly. Well, the larger election candidates don't remove their signs. Yeah, only the local candidates do. That's exactly right. You're right. I've noticed that.

Yeah. All right. So, it seems like you have a majority support for for that as well.

Okay. We touched on at our last meeting. remove the three foot required setback for the wash and um sort of reel that in a little bit to allow the cycle brush to sit in front of the primary home area right now with that exact scenario. Summer's building has the threec car attached garage which maybe angles off the front of the of the home to the to the one side but it definitely extends well beyond the front of the house. This this by altering this would allow for that configuration but uh

and specific to front loaded garage that's that's the key. Yeah. If it's not, it takes away the three foot setback and allows it to not extend beyond the front of the house. Side loading. Do we have any rules on side loading garages? So, we're just changing the front loading here. Be silent on the side. Yeah, side loading still has to be whatever front yard set back there is for the for the in general, but 15 ft in front of the house. Yeah. As long you want to take a massive garage in front of your house, but you just only see the the window wallfully,

right? This allows for a little bit more flexibility doing it this way without making it into a big ordeal with mass and um you know of components of the front of the house. And given the very limited inventory of aging vacant residential lots, I would think this would be enough for our purposes. No issue. Anyone else issue? No. Okay. Got support on that. That was the last one, right? Yeah. Okay. They're all easy ones. Thank you.

All right. Uh just so everybody again understands that we do not have the final say on this. This motion will be a recommendation to city council for their final approval. I move that planning commission recommend to city council the miscellaneous zoning and development regulations proposed text amendments as submitted for the August 18th, 2025 planning commission meeting. So moved. Second by Steve. Just as a note, the reason why I based it on tonight's meeting date is because it was submitted without a date stamp on it. So that way at least we can tie it to what we reviewed. Any other comments? Local. Mr. Cohen. Yes. Mr. Sheck. Yes. Mr. Shipley. Yes.

Mr. Walker. Yes, ma'am. Mr. Hog. Yes. All right. Recommend 5 Scotland. That's in your good hands in front of the big boys. We'll get we'll get it handled. All right. Uh, next item is public participation. Members for the community to address planning commission. Seeing none, communications and miscellaneous. Ed, anything? No, sir. Steve, I have nothing. Craig, no. I have nothing. Michael? No, sir. Scott, next city council meeting is the 26th of this month. We'll be back from uh recess. So, right. Thank you very much. Lynn, what's up? Anything else to add at this time?

Nothing uh uh for any future submissions for I don't have anything for next month's meeting. All right. Well, in the pipeline, nothing. That um meeting date is the 15th of September with a deadline of August 26th. So, there's still a little time that something could come in, but we'll checking our emails as always to see if uh we're having a meeting, right? The storage unit that was on the agenda, off the agenda, goes to the ballot in November for the reasoning. Oh,

and so that one's hanging out there in the leaves, but they they can't move it forward without the resoning. Yep. All right. Well, thank you everybody. With that said, we have a 712 adjournment. Thank you