Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

both made that motion about 30 seconds. You guys have an original County, Maryland.

This February 25th, 2026 meeting of the Union Township Zoning Commission is now called to order. Uh, if you please rise and join us in the pledge of allegiance to the flag of our country. 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. Now call [clears throat] roll call for attendance. Mr. Wright. Thank you, sir. Uh, Mr. Campbell. Yes. Uh Mr. Lewis, yes. Uh Mr. Wing, yes. Mr. Beckman, yes. Mr. Honorlaw, as an alternate for Mr. Tooff,

yes. We have quum. Excellent. Um next item of business on the agenda's action on the minutes. Uh before I solicit a motion, I have two proposed changes to the minutes. Uh on page five. Sorry, I'm going to try to back. Hang on one second. M M Mr. Chairman. Uh Blake in the Can you adjust the microphones a little bit? We're getting a little bit of feedback. Perfect.

Okay. Thank you. Um again, resuming on page five, there's a roll call for a motion that records Mr. Lewis's votes abstained. Mr. Lewis made that motion and he voted in the affirmative. And continuing on page five, there was a second motion made by myself with with Mr. Lewis's second and he's recorded as abstaining and he voted in the affirmative. Yes, we can get that corrected. So, there's two both on page five. Correct.

Um, again, Mr. Lewis, uh, there's an abstension reflected and it should reflect a yes vote. Is that correct? That's correct. Both on page five. Can you uh circle the issue and put a note that that that is on the on the actual we're going to sign those? Yes, sir. I I've already crossed it out. Perfect. And we'll we'll make sure we attach a amended copy to that. That is provided. I uh I'm now soliciting a a motion u to take action on these minutes with those two corrections. I'll I'll move that we uh approve the minutes with the noted modifications. I'll second. Was that Mr. Wing with the second? Yep.

Correct. Um do I have any discussion on the minutes? Well, I've got a regularly made and seconded motion to approve the minutes with those two minor modifications. Uh Mr. Wright, if you would call role, please. Certainly, sir. Mr. Lewis, yes. Mr. Wang, yes. Mr. Beckman, yes. Mr. Honor, yes. M Mr. Campbell, yes. Motion carries. Okay.

Thank you. So, the uh next item of business is um see if [clears throat] there's any old business. There is not. So, we'll proceed to new business. We have a number of proposed text amendments to the Union Township zoning resolution to discuss this evening. We will start with case number one-26-T which is a discussion regarding proposed text amendments of the Union Township zoning resolution specifically with respect to article 5 section 525 regarding maintain natural lawns and platted subdivisions including a new definition to maintain natural lawns. This case also includes a new subsection in article six to recognize and allow short-term rentals in certain zoning districts as conditional uses, including a new definition for short shortterm rental. Um, Mr. Wright, do we have a staff report?

Sure. Uh, and and I'll be brief and I'll just kind of walk through the rationale. Excuse me, Mr. Chair. We've got a a paper on a speaker. Oh, goodness. Yes. if we can be cognizant to try not to uh cover uh our speakers. It uh I did that last month. I've heard [laughter] uh I've heard complaints from viewers on YouTube and uh and in person. We can try to be cognizant there's not as much room up here as you think there is. Uh but again u Mr. Wright if you uh sure provide a staff report. Thank you.

Certainly. Uh so uh the first uh part of case 126T this really deals with something you know we've been doing nuisance abatements for a long time here in the township 50587 of the revised code allows the township to abate noxious weeds, garbage, vegetation and debris. But sometimes uh we run into issues where homeowners desire to maintain uh natural areas on their properties. And uh the genesis of this was to come up with a way to better define this and I think the commission has had some considerable discussion on that, refined it with council's assistance and now here we are. Um so just set sort of some boundaries for people that want to have these natural areas. um you know has some property um has some property uh definitions in that. Um, you know, it gives us the ability to kind of mitigate some of the the enforcement concerns that come up because, you know, again, some people's natural vegetated wildlife or wildflower, you know, buffer zone might be somebody else's weeds because they like stripes in their grass and and this gives us the ability to sort of um mitigate those issues. So, that's the first part of that text amendment in that. The second and and obviously we have to have a definition as well. Um the second part is uh you know the rising instance of short-term rentals and currently the township does not have regulations on them. You know historically any use that's not permitted is prohibited. That stands up well until it's challenged in court uh which it generally tends it sometimes can fall flat and then we're stuck with it. Um so with that you know we look at the conditional use uh section and you know there are other types of uses that are you know maybe somewhat unique that

they might be in fringe areas or transitional areas um you know uh country clubs, bed and breakfast things like that. And we thought you know with conditional use process the best part about the conditional use process is it goes before a quasi judicial proceeding the board of zoning appeals. their sworn testimony and evidence presented and most importantly it's a noticed and scheduled public hearing. So when you adopt a set of regulations that go through the conditional use process, you basically end up with it's not you're not saying yes, they're allowed, you're saying yes, they can be allowed if they meet certain regulated conditions. So that's that's an important distinction for everybody. The second part of that is, you know, the regulations themselves deal a lot with safety and performance requirements as far as um fire extinguishers, carbonoxide extinguishers, you know, proper dryer event vents, proper occupancies, occupant occupant uh management, occupant occupant load and parking management, um you know, emergency contact information, kind of the rules of the road as you as it were for short-term rentals because again to be honest I mean a lot of these people that utilize these if they were in an approved instance would uh maybe not know who the local fire department is or know where to call when to call in, you know, the police department if they had a non-emergency issue or even potentially how to contact the landlord. So you know with that uh there there's some regulations on that. There are some annual inspection fees that are included in the uh in the proposed text ordinance. there's a revocation com component for non-performance and I as I understand there's been some discussion of you know the appropriateness and what location and where these should be and again I think that you know with the

conditional use process you're allowed to get very granular in your review of those because there is a public hearing and the neighborhood gets to decide whether they want to come and oppose that or maybe it's not a big deal and uh I think that's really the the kind of the justification as to why this is proposed in this manner. Now whether or not it should be, you know, I think whether it should be permitted in um what districts it should be permitted in, I think that's certainly a matter that's right for debate by by the zoning by the zoning commission in that. And if you see that um [clears throat] we just have to look at what what districts that the u the zoning commission would like to see that in. So that concludes my report on this particular testimony case.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wright. Um before we solicit for public comment, uh I have a point of order question if I may, Mr. Wright. Um

sure. We have one case 126-T which is addressing two separate text amendments. Would it be permissible for us to bifurcate those so that we can move we can have public comment on one side of it? We can have discussion. We can vote and then we can move on to the next part of that. I I think from a practical standpoint, you have to look at the way that the trustees initiated the text amendment and they elected to combine both of these in 2016. So, I think we have before us. We'll have to entertain probably a two-part discussion. Um, but it is one action. That's why that's why I asked the question. Yes, sir.

But I I would agree with that analysis. Thank you. So, um, at this point, I have a question on the text I don't quite understand, and it's, um, but it's it's deals with the rentals. Do we want to cover the, uh, the the lawn section first? I would say yeah if we if we can comi [clears throat] com com if we can work on exhibit A which is the if we can work through that we'll have to do a combined vote at the end but uh yeah I don't have any questions on the bond natural lawn section does anyone else on the commission have anything about maintain natural laws that they would like

we we've been through this uh not formally as a case but just as language that was being asked to be discussed. So I I don't have anything on that. Uh I will open it up for members of the public specifically on the topic of maintained natural lawns. Does anyone have any questions or find that information? So so to answer your question um all the meeting materials are posted publicly on the website in advance of the meeting. Um so that's where you would see that information. Mr. Okay. Well, I'm happy to pull up the um the actual definition to hear.

I would appreciate that. Thank you. Yes. Allow me to uh go full screen here. And I've got an extra text copy here. Yeah, I've got a text. Oh, do we have extra copy? Yeah. If any we can It's right here. So, I've got it up on the screen here. So, and if you would you like me to read the definition? I can read it if you wouldn't mind. That would be nice. Thank you.

So, the new definition is maintain natural lawn means the intentional planting and maintenance of perennial flora native to Ohio as defined by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. This may involve a variety of horicultural practices including but not limited to natural lawns, natural landscapes, native lawns, pollinator gardens, lawns, rain gardens, meadow vegetation, native prairie, prairie gardens, monarch way stations, native plantings, native gardens, and butterfly habitats. Overgrown grass or vegetation shall not be considered natural maintained natural law.

Thank you, Mr. Ryan. And I if I might add, we had a very very passionate lady come to a board meeting, I think early in 2025 on this very issue and really provided a lot of educational benefit to us about um pollinator gardens, things of that nature. So much so that we've actually included that on our website now for people just from anformational perspective. And I think we may have done a newsletter feature on it sort of encouraging that. So, one of our biggest property owners, Cincinnati Nature Center, advocates for this all the time. So, if I might

add two and prior to life, I had to try to enforce some of these high grasses from time to time. And that's that's difficult. I found the definition in this to be very well written and uh matter of fact, we used to refer to as urban thickets. Well, I like the phrasing here better. Uh but yeah, this I do too. I do too.

But uh this is um this makes a lot of sense. I it's drawing a clear distinction between people who let their yards go wild versus a committed citizen and individual who's looking to benefit the surrounding environment. All all of these rules make considerable sense. And just another point of order for the commissioner or maybe a point of clarification, we do not conduct nuisance enforcement on vacant parcels. Otherwise, I mean, if they're vacant, it would I mean, you can't I mean, they're vacant. So, um, really, this is about properties that have a principally permitted use, have a residential unit or a commercial unit established on them. That is where this really would come into play. I also really like the percentages that were given too. 30% in one location, a total property and no more than 20 in the front.

Yeah, that makes sense. And it's important to have boundaries around it. Sure. In consideration of surrounding property owners. It's a well-crafted u piece of zoning resolution. Um we will move on from that unless there's any more comment. And Mr. Right. I if you would, I would go ahead and bring up uh your def the uh proposed definition for conditional for not conditional. You have short-term rentals, please. I got the wrong case here. So, first I'll open up for members of the commission uh initial thoughts on short-term rentals. [clears throat]

I've I've got a question on uh sub section 11-B8-1. There's no page numbers, but it's it's close to the end. It starts out with V III at the top. A guest room established within any short-term rental shall meet these minimum requirements. It's on that page, and it's the very first one. All guest rooms shall contain a bed, mattress, cot, andor other furniture intended for accommodating sleeping persons. It seems like we're requiring a cot to be in the room. The way it's it's written, it's uh again 11-B8-1. I would think it'd be mattress or cot, but it looks like it's going to we have to have a bed, a mattress, and a cot andor other furniture. So,

I don't think I'm actually missing a page. It's um yeah I I it's the third page be gotcha. Should that be Mr. R. Should that be like orcot a mattress or cot or Yeah, I'll have to let me look at the u let me look at the actual packet because I think my copies doesn't have the page that you're referencing. What page is it of your total packet? It's right here. Eight.

So, it's Roman numeral 8. Third page. Yeah. Roman numeral 8. Roman numeral Roman. Yeah, I am. I'm actually missing a page. Oh, there it is. I got it right here. Third page. Third page. I think you know to your point um to your point, Mr. Lewis, I think the way if I were to read that, all guest rooms shall contain a bed, mattress, cot, and or other furniture. So, I think it's a if you wanted to clarify, a bed or mattress or cot. And I mean, that's the point is what you don't want are people sleeping on the floor, right? Oh, I agree. Yeah.

Okay. I just wanted semantics if that was acceptable. Well, I just didn't want to make sure we didn't require a cod if they had a bed and mattress. Well, I think the uh I think it can be read as conjunctive or disjunctive depending on how you want to view it. But I think putting and or before other furniture intended for accommodating sleeping persons is meant to just broaden it out. For instance, if you had a sleeper sofa. Yeah. Sleeper sofa is not really a a bed nor a mattress and it's not a cot, but that would fulfill the definition of this. Okay.

But could you just use the wording or the word bed as a generic though everybody understands a bed is what you sleep on and not have to put all the additional wording in there? I I think if if you were to put that I I think what I would say is to contain a bed or other furniture intended for accommodating sleep. But what you don't want is to say, well, they sleep on the couch. It's not a sleeper sofa, right? But I think, you know, if you wanted to be clear, I think what you're it's about intent it's about intentionally setting that up, right? Okay.

I mean, you could you could do that. You could also include a bed or other furniture intended for accommodating sleeping purses such as Right. Yeah. I mean, you you can Yeah, I mean, we can put lots and lots of words on. Absolutely. Absolutely you can. Um, okay. My next question is on the next section in Nine uh 9-3. I apologize for this. I just don't I don't understand what the reference to subsection A or B is. Um uh that appear that appears that should be subsection one or two. Oh,

yeah. It's making reference to the the previous two sections. Oh, okay. So, that is that is a that's a scribner's error or actually it's probably a a reference error, but I I would Oh, okay. Yeah, it should be subsection one or two hereof as applicable. Okay. And I think it happens again on the next page and under section F where subsection Well, maybe that one's right. Subsection B is referenced. Maybe that's correct. Yes, subsection lowercase B hereof which refers back to two pages back.

Two pages back. three pages back. Yep. Conditional use. So if the way I read this Oh, okay. Yeah. Okay. That's all I've got. The performance standard listed in subsection B hereof. Yeah. So B would we would go all the way back because it's all one code section and then it's you know alphabetical alpha numeric reference from there. But that is that was a good catch Mr. Lewis on the the the the blank reference or the misguided reference there. So I've made a note to make that is that what I'm hearing is just if this goes forward to make that modification.

Well, that that would reference to me that's a scrier's error. Yeah, unless there were a unless we revised the entire section for whatever reason. Correct. But yeah, I I would I would I would incorporate that into your notes because I have a note here. So, so Cy when I was going through the existing resol resolutions, we have 6125, which is bed breakfast. Yes. Does this replace that? No, this goes in as new subsection 612.11. So, but they're virtually the same thing, are they not?

Um, to a certain extent they are. To a certain extent they aren't. I think the regulations are a little different with the bed and breakfast because there's some maybe some implied services that come with that whereas these are uh more of kind of you do your own thing. Okay. I got a question Corey on the last page uh which is 622 conditional usage above that where the fee is $1,000 for the inspection and that's paid got to be done annually. Correct. I can see an inspection, but the the $1,000 fees got annually would be paid annually. Yes.

Is there reasonable thousand? What's the I as a person who's as a landlord myself in city of Cincinnati long-term rentals that would put me out of business in some respects for a long for potentially for a long-term rental where your rent may only be $1,000 per month. But you most of these rent for multiple you know multiple hundreds of dollars per night

and so the volume and the turnover is higher. The thought is to uh when you do the inspection you're going to conduct a joint inspection with the zoning department and the fire department. And so that inspection presumptively could be two or three fire department personnel plus a member of the zoning department. You know we have administrative costs to track these things. um is a way to be able to basically monetize the value of that time commitment to regulate and track these things and to handle the inspections. Okay.

I mean, I think the, you know, it could be $1,000. Um I certainly wouldn't make it less than $500. Um just based on what I know with hourly rates, time, keeping the databases, etc., etc. So, We have any other uh preliminary comments, members of the commission?

Uh I do have one and maybe I'm I'm just a bit thick while I was reviewing this, but but back to uh subsection nine and specifically to the um to sub three there, which we just made a correction of a scribers error. Uh I'm trying to determine since a maximum of two additional adult persons shall be permitted in addition to those permitted in either subsection one or two hereof as applicable. Are we drawing a u we drawing a connection between another 70 square feet is what causes the addition of those individuals? I'm just I I feel like I'm missing connective tissue on on what.

So it so it follows you would say you have two persons for each 70 square ft. That's 7 by 7 by 10 room. Okay. And then you have a maximum of not more than one adult person for each guest room containing 70 square feet. So I think what I think what the intent there is is to limit the total occupancy uh subsection one subsection two. So for let's use an example of a three-bedroom home. Okay. Yeah. So you would have two for each guest room, right?

Exceeding 70 square feet. So that's six, right? And then the other thing is if you have a guest room that's less than 70 square feet, one additional. So if you have a three-bedroom home and you have two 70 foot bedrooms and one that's less than 70, you would get five. If they're all greater than 70, you would get six and then a potential two more. So a maximum for example for a three-bedroom with three large bed with three large bedrooms would be eight total persons. Okay. So you're so the instance so you're thinking is you've got guest rooms, you've got them set up, they have to be dedicated guest rooms,

right? There is some occupancy limitation. Yeah. Thank you for clarifying that. I appreciate it. Yes, sir. Thank you. Okay. At this time, if there's no further uh preliminary comments from the commission, we'll open up to public comment. I've got two uh testimony sheets in front of me. I will call them uh in the order in which I received them. Uh so Scott Kangro,

you don't have to be sworn. Oh, I don't. No, no, just a BZA. Oh, okay. I I should disclose for the record, Mr. Kangro is a member of the board of zoning appeals in the township. So, do you want my name and address and Yes, please. Okay. Scott Kangro, 4280 Main Drive. That's uh zip for 45.

Um, so I have some uh I have some reservations as you said. I I've seen people come in front of us before and the most of the most of the people do not want uh the uh STR short-term rentals. They don't want them in their in their community. Um but this was only one area so I can't but I have talked to my neighbors and stuff before and I asked them I what do you think about this and they don't they don't want it. Um, I I think with the conditional use, if I heard Mr. Right. Uh correctly. Under the conditional use, you could have it set up so that if somebody wants to uh have a a short-term rental in a particular neighborhood that they would be required to vote that neighborhood would be required to vote for that street or something like that, that mechanism in there to say whether they could have it there or not. Am I correct on that? I I if I misspoke, what the conditional use does is it gives the members in the immediate vicinity notice and the opportunity to comment like you're commenting tonight, but in front of the board of zoning appeals.

Okay. I'd like to see it instead of being in an R1 or an R2, I'd like it to see it in a multifamily um district or something more like that. You break up the neighborhood. People in my neighborhood have been there for many, many years. they have relationships in that and they they they cherish that and they don't want something to come in between that. Um if if it wasn't allowed then then the people couldn't couldn't put that in their neighborhood. Um that's that's kind of my my input on that. I know that out in Butler County, I think they said that the um the uh short-term rentals in two years have gone up 77%. 77%.

Um us being closer to Cincinnati, I would think that we'd be the ones that would have the larger number in the Claremont County area of of people that would be wanting to be here for that. And I'd like to I' like to put the guardrails on that by putting it in those districts. And that's that that's my recommendation. Um that's pretty much what I have to say. Anybody have any questions for me? Not at this time, but if we have some, we'll feel free to ask. Okay. All right. Well, thank you guys for your time. Thank you.

We appreciate it. Thank you. So, I have another testimony sheet, but it looks like it's for 2-26-T, which we haven't arrived at yet. So, I just want to clarify. Yes, sir. If you bring up a form and then I don't have a form with me. Uh, there's one at the back of the room. I Yes, sir. Can I talk first and then bring it up? Why don't you grab it, bring it to with with you to the podium and then we'll And just for a point of clarification, that's to help us with the preparation of the minutes.

Correct. The these testimony sheets are are assist staff in putting together the minutes because when you speak at the meeting, you're part of the public meeting. So, you get credit. Oh, I'm sorry. No, you're fine. You're fine. I was going to get up here and talk, but this kind of struck a nerve. Tends to happen to people. Yeah. Um, my name is Tom Go and I live at 608 Brandy Way. Okay.

And I just retired last April. I was 45 years mostly commercial construction. So I got a little bit of knowledge about areas I built in, how they survived, how they went downhill. And Corey knows me. I love rules and regulations. I don't know if any of you gentlemen have getting phone calls from people. You want to buy your h you want to sell your house, right?

I get them all the time because I take care of my property. The last two projects I did, I did one downtown Hamilton. I got to know the building inspectors very well because I did whatever they told me to do. The other one was further out and that was in uh Springfield Township. Springfield Township. I got to know the building inspector. He came by and he rattled off several of these so-called homebuilders that want to buy your house asis. You don't have to do nothing. We will take care of everything. The one he says 18% of all his complaints on property falling apart is all related to those builders. One of them and Vinebrook Homes. Check them out. They own 26,000 properties. Another one that the there's B&B homes or CVG. They always got this good-looking young guys in there. We will take care of your problems. We will buy your homes and that's when you're start I don't know why we got to have shortterm rentals in residential areas to begin with. Cory knows I live on Brandy Way. We have no sidewalks. We have no street lights. We've got signs on the road. No parking anytime. Now, I've lived there since 91. I don't park on the street. I always park in my driveway. If I'm having too many people, I will rent out a place or I get people, don't park on the street. Other people have no problem parking on the street.

You call the police up and they said, we will go and warn them once and then next time we will start issuing tickets. Why make it complicated? But in my career, I've seen areas where I built that were wellmaintained and then they go downhill. So, I'm just asking, make it simple. If you want to have a short-term rental, go down to Hilton Head. You see the the requirements they have down there. You can't even paint your door a different color without them signing off. But what's the deal with the short-term rentals? This is residential property. Maintain it. And if you want a short-term rental, go in one of these high-rise apartments that you're building and deal with that. But don't put it in there. And then we end up calling and we end up being the dirty birds. But I'll tell you one thing, the Claremont County appraiser sits in my backyard and goes, "Oh, what's Mr. Go's done this year?" and watch writes up an additional increase in my property because I love to do it. And I got a lot of friends. We love to take care of our property, but we shouldn't have to deal with some Joe Blow that wants to put some gravel down in his front yard and so they can have six or eight cars or one weekend they got a street full of cars and then we're calling up and they know who's calling. Then they become the bad apple. If you don't want to own the property and maintain it and live there, go somewhere else. I'm done.

We appreciate your comments. Thank you. I'll fill this out and bring it up to you. I appreciate it. As soon as you get it, bring it on up. Um, any other members of the public wish to comment on this particular case? Okay. At this point, I I'm closing public discussion regarding our first case tonight. So, that's both the lawn issue and short-term rentals. and uh we'll turn back to the board and see what the uh commission has to say about these.

I'll make a couple quick comments. Uh I know exactly what the gentleman's talking about. I have long-term rentals in in Cincinnati and I have people wanting to buy them all the time. The way I stopped it was I had them put out a $5,000 deposit non- returnturnable and they stopped. But what they want to a lot of them want to do is they want you to sign a contract. They'll give you a lot of money for your property, but what they do in the contingency, they can always back out. And what they do is they get it sold to a third party before they ever buy it from you. And that's okay. Reading these over, I found the expectations and the requirements of short-term rentals to be excellent. Um, so that part of it I like. I don't disagree with a gentleman that would I want one across the street from my house. I don't think I would. I do know of indirectly one in Union Township that allegedly is doing very well. Um but I for one I rent a lot of short-term rentals because I travel a lot and uh uh but they're all in places where it's normal, you know, where that's the very common thing to do. Um, I don't know. But I do like the rules. They're tough. They're good. There's outs that we can prevent it in the future if somebody's a problem and creates a nuisance. That's all I got to say on it.

Thank you. Does anyone else have I just had one question on the parking requirements and I'm just thinking of the streets that I I'm very familiar with around our township. [clears throat] Uh, in essence, what it is is one off- streetet parking spot for every four guests. So, you got a short-term rental that has all adults. You got four cars now for that one that one room or what? Yeah. Um, you get in a culde-sac neighborhood, what do you do with all those cars? So it depends if they have curb gutter or not,

right? But but even so, correct, just thinking about it or for instance, you know, not my house because you've seen my driveways forever, but neighbors of mine whose car driveways are very short, we have no parking anywhere along that road. So I I you know, they're going to not do what this says at that point because, well, we rented it. We're going to park wherever we want. I just think that probably uh that needs to be maybe one spot for for every two guests. Well, that's why they lose their permit though, right? If they're in violation and they become a nuisance, then the regulations,

right? But what we're also trying to do is provide lack of nuisance calls by doing ahead of it. We don't want those calls. So, so under the current regulatory framework, which doesn't exist, um what we get is a phone call, right? Then we'll have to go out and investigate that. And then we enter the zoning citation and enforcement process. And then, you know, depending on how stubborn the property owner is, we could get end up in common place,

right? And so then it's completely out of the township's hands with regard to what does the zoning code say? Does any use not permitted? Is it truly prohibited? Is this a distinct enough use without any guard rails around it at all that allows us, the zoning director, whatever, to draw a distinction? Or do I leave it up to a magistrate or an elected judge? We that's kind of where we are right now. And uh so we're in a regulatory gray zone. You know, we fight a rule is valid or a position is valid until a court of competent jurisdiction proves otherwise. And so what I don't what I I think from in my professional opinion, I think it's better to have rules than it is to have no rules.

And that's just my because it's black and white right here. Now, I think what the rules say, that's a matter of debate. I think and where they're allowed, I think that's a matter of debate, but at least you've drawn a line in the sand. And you've said, you know, we don't think they should be in the the state residential district or we don't think they should be in the R1 district or whatever, or if we allow them visa via conditional use approval, they should have park enough parking spaces, one per every two guests,

right? Um, those would be the kind of things that I would recommend and then bestow that upon the board of zoning appeals, our membership of the board of zoning appeals to listen to their neighbors and friends uh, and colleagues and all of those the people that, you know, live here when they come out to the hearing and make a decision because, you know, you could have a neighborhood that's like, h, it's it's fine, you know. Um, or you could have a neighborhood that, you know, no, no, that's not what we signed up for. That's not what we want. And we're going to come out and we're going to fill the hearing room. And, you know, I I think that is, you know, democracy and action in that and part of the participatory process and I think that's what makes, you know, the process great.

Um, but I, Mr. wing. I do agree with you that we probably need to tighten up that parking. You know, particularly if you decided to say we don't want it in the R1 district, which typically has higher or the ER district, which has higher setbacks, but if you wanted it in the R2 district, that you know, you're going to have to maybe make some parking enhancements on your property potentially. So, you were thinking of changing one off street to one guest room, one one parking for for every single guest room, not two guests. Yes. So you you for every two people, every two guests, you'd have one one dedicated parking for every every guest, one off streetet parking for each guest room. Correct.

What about adult guests? Adult guests versus children. That's what that would be. It it really it's for it's guest rooms. So, uh, yeah, currently it says one off streetet parking for each two guest rooms. So, if we just did per guest room. Yeah. One off streetet parking per guest room for So, it would read for each guest room. Yes. Yes. Right. Or suite. Strike the ice. Yeah. I think our regulations in here are really tight. I mean,

they're tight. And and for those who do not following along because there was a comment made about gravel parking. Gravel is specifically prohibited in this. So that doesn't gravel doesn't count as off streetet parking for the purposes of this zoning regist. These places the requirements here they have to be wellmaintained.

Yeah. The I mean to echo what Mr. rights. Quite frequently we are as the zoning commission and the BCA as well, we are placed in somewhat an uncomfortable position quite often of balancing the rights of an individual property owner versus the interest of the surrounding community. And right now there is no regulation regarding this kind of activity and we know that this kind of activity is actively is actively going on in our township. So the option is craft good resolutions that give the local authorities and the BCA teeth in which they can enforce this. They can there can be a declaration regarding a nuisance and they just revoke it and then if you continue to operate you're operating in violation. That makes perfect sense. And these we've informally gone through these multiple times and these have really tightened up. Um, so I do think it strikes a good balance between allowing a property owner to engage in activities on their property while taking into account their neighbors and their surrounding community and we've got a public hearing process built in. So

just just another point of casual observation through more than [clears throat] 20 years of doing code enforcement. To your point, Mr. Campbell, these rules, these properties will be exponentially better maintained than a lot of the average longer term rentals that you find throughout the community. I mean, just that's just a matter of fact.

That's right. Uh I do have a I do have a small question uh if I may because in previous informal drafts of this there had been discussion about lodging tax and about um owners of these uh having to participate in hotel and lodging associations and I believe that's been excised uh in favor of the annual inspections. Yeah, there's some, you know, there's some debate about whether or not the lodgings tax applies. Um, candidly, we're going to ask for their state of Ohio registration anyway as part of if one were to be approved and conditionally, you know, approved in that and when they come for a permit, the first question I'm going to instruct staff is where's your state of Ohio lodgings tax certificate

because you're breaking state law if you don't do that. Now, they may claim that they're not applicable. And you know what? That's between them and the Ohio Department of Taxation, but at the end of the day, we're going to ask them for that certificate. Okay. I appreciate the clarification on that. Thank you. So, these regulations we got before us, from what I've discerned, we're we're talking R1, R2, and B1. Is that what we're that that that's basically so if you look at the sections I believe Yeah, that's why I backtracked the the conditional sections back to R1, R2, and D.

So I think 612 is is is 612 the I I I don't have my book in front of me. I apolog the R2 references the R1 conditional uses. And so the the conditional use R1 covers the R2 because R2 references back to R1's conditional use and then you had a separate section for conditional use from it was under the B1 section. Yeah, I'm not generally a fan of uh uh C c uh circular references, but sometimes it beats having to put [clears throat] 10 pages of regulations in every set of codes. So

uh if you'll bear with me, I will um go to our And I'll just get I'll pull up the table of contents. Actually, you know what? We have slip sheets here that have updated table of contents in front of them. I don't know that we changed those. Let's just look at the table of contents and I'll verify for you. All right. So in actual so [clears throat] these actually right now 612 is in the estate residential 620 is in the R1 630 is in the R2. So really for the board um you know the question becomes what districts would you foresee these in we if there is a modification to what's presented what we would do is make those modifications to make these rules fit within those districts basically mirroring the text if there were any changes and then basically slide reorganize do whatever

to do that the reason I think they're in they start with 612 is that's where the original conditional use regulations are listed. And so you have the conditional use regulations in 612 and then the R the R1 regulations build upon I I think they're slightly different. Um and then the R2 it's that that circular reference back to R1. Yes.

Okay. [clears throat] So, for a just a point of order on these tech on this text amendment, you've got a 620, you've got six, you've got 612, 622. Um, and then, you know, we may have to look to modify those sections and those references. And I'm happy, you know, if to do that it at the direction of the commission. So, and to pull that forward to the trustees. I think maybe the thinking about not putting it in the R2 district is because the R2 setbacks are smaller. Yeah. Right.

Um but there is a reference in the R2 regulations where I believe it says any conditional use is permitted in the R1 district. Right. It does. So So again, the decision has to be do you want them to start in 612? Do you want us to move it to R1 only? Do you want to keep it in R2 or not? And then those are going to be, you know, those changes are going to follow and we would make we would modify the text and bring that forward to the board of trustees based on an affirmative motion by the zoning commission to make modifications and we would just have to specifically make those suggestions as to what you want change.

Okay. So I think we're we're now sort of at this central topic of where it's permissible if if it moves forward. Yeah. I mean I I would I I I seem to think you you need to have some room and I I I certainly think ER would be acceptable in R1, but I I don't think R2 would be. I think it's too crowded. I think your B&Bs typically are going to fall into an ER

and it makes sense because there is room for it. I'm not sure that I would, you know, the R1's because it goes from a halfacre to two acres. That halfacre lot could be a problem. The two acre lot probably not. But at that point, you know, well, you punt it to the BCA, right? And you trust their judgment. You let the community weigh in because we've got some big R1 lots for sure. Up to two acres. Yeah. Yeah. But we also have some smaller ones. Yeah. So up the minimum of half, right? Yeah. So R2 is quarter,

right? But if we if if we approve this for ER only and somebody in R1 takes it to the BZA and they've got that twoacre lot, everything looks great. More power to them. Oh, I see what you're saying. We're putting a guard on it so that we don't have a bunch of these put into halfacre lots where it would be difficult to in my mind to fit them in there. So, so is so maybe keep it at 612 and strike the reference in 622. That's I believe that's what's being discussed on on this end. Mr. Beckman, Mr. Honor Law

agrees. Yeah. So, no one wants to talk about making R4s eligible for I don't think that's a good idea. I I was just saying it out loud. Everyone was weighing in. A couple of things. So, you know, where you have multif family units, which are another candidate for that depending on the complex rules and those kind of things, right? Those are most likely in an R3. The older stuff's in an R3, right? Or in a PD. And so there is a process to amend that.

So whether it's a minor amendment now for a res for a for a apartment, a lot of the apartments offer they sell blocks of rooms to corporate partners now. And uh I know of several of the higher density products that do that so that they have blocks of rooms available for corporate travel, things of that nature, right? And that is fully within, you know, the permitted scope of that of that product. Um so I don't think that you necessarily have to have rules in an R3, right? An R4, that's a planned unit development. That's a exclusively basically exclusively single family attached and detached product.

Most if not all R4s are going to have HOAs, right? As we all know, HOAs are zoning on on steroids. Private zoning. Yeah, private zoning on steroids. Units contract law and the covenants are usually very restrictive. I know several of our larger R4 neighborhoods that you're not even allowed to build sheds in the backyard.

So I I would not foresee these even arising in an R like in an R4. And so I think that if you put guard rails on it and they're not permitted in somewhere else, I can point to any use not, you know, specifically permitted is prohibited because we have put them somewhere and we have a definition for it. Okay. So, I think [clears throat] that's kind of the question. So, if we do limit it to the ER, that does not prohibit someone in an R1, a large R1 going to the BZA to request an appeal. Right.

Well, um, so I'll look at the code section in the amendment. So, 622 pursuant. So, the R the R1 regulations, the condition, it's not a C a circular reference. They actually specify 622 one two three four five 6 7 and then you see a modification eight right short-term rentals. So if you don't want them in the R1 the commission would need to recommend to strike 622.8 eight point8 right okay

I I would be comfortable with doing that for now and then you know like you know do as we get our feet wet and see how this goes maybe expand it in a year or so but that would be my my preference would be to strike number eight and just keep it er and and see how it goes it's it's very tight regulations I think it's they're really well written I don't think you're going going to have anything that's a mess. But by keeping it in the state residential, that keeps it in a large parcel, right? And that that $1,000 inspection fee annually is going to also make sure they really are serious about doing this.

Well, I mean, there's a lot of work that has to be done to maintain I mean, just pursuant to these resolutions, if they were enacted, that there's a lot of upkeep you have to do uh to maintain it properly to be in compliance. Um, okay, Mr. Wright, I suppose we don't really have any statistics and if we did, they wouldn't necessarily be reliable on how many we have operating or we would have to go I think I don't even know. I did some research in a in a prior position and you know there's four or five big ones, but there's a host of them that just operate. Some of them are word of mouth, some of them are electronic. There's a new app every couple of weeks, you know.

So, at the time being, we would have no idea to say how many are operating in ER versus R1. I could I would I would say the ones that I know of that are in violation right now are in the R1 district. R1. Okay. Y and it is likely they may be in the R2 district as well. Okay. That is good information to know. So, what we've got current and Mr. right took notes and he's got a modification to that section 11B-81 with the cot and then also the uh 11B9-3.

Mr. L, just to clarify real quick with the cut, we just said we were going to say uh contain a bed and and or other furniture intended for accommodating sleeping person. Correct. That was my understanding. Yes. Yes. All right. So I have that noted to delete the words mattress, cod. Okay. And then that subsection A or B being changed to one and two. Yep. The bad reference corrected. And then I think we've only got the other striking um 622-8. Yes. Which would mean that and parking. Oh. Oh, and parking. Oh, parking. Right. So that would be

11-B. Yeah. And it would be one off street parking space shall be provided on the premises for each guest room. Did you have that, Mr.? Yes, I have uh I each guest room and I deleted the s's on the end of room or suite. Correct. Basically, so you can see my notes on 622 basically removing that from the proposal all together striking and removing. Great. Okay. Do we have any further discussion? I have nothing. Okay. Uh unless anyone really wants to, I'll go ahead and formulate a motion.

It Okay. Um, I hereby move in case number 1-26-T, zoning resolution text amendment, the zoning commission finds that the proposed text amendment to the Union Township zoning resolution is consistent with the intent of the zoning resolution and the comprehensive land use plan 2030. The modifications being considered apply to article 5 section 525 regarding maintain natural lawns and article six to recognize and allow short-term rentals in certain zoning districts as conditional uses and the respective definitions for short-term rentals and maintain natural lawns. This commission therefore recommends text amendments be adopted as submitted to the commission on February 25th, 2026 with the following recommendation. This commission reviewed the proposed changes to the zoning resolution and discussed and agreed to multiple modifications to the proposed text which Mr. Wright recorded during the commission's meeting. Our recommendation is to forward the proposed text amendment with the recorded modifications to board of trustees for consideration and approval. This concludes my motion. I'll second.

I've regularly made the second motion regarding case 1-26-T. Any discussion on the motion? No. Hearing no discussion, Mr. Wright, if you call roll. Yes, sir. Mr. Campbell? Yes. Mr. Wing? Yes. Mr. Beckman? Yes. Mr. Honor? Yes. Hang on a second. I got to look up for a second. Mr. Lewis, yes. I had to look up for a second. Motion carries. It wasn't to see Mr. Lewis. He's the most senior member of the commission. [laughter] I just haven't called the role in a long time. No, I I agree. I Well, not anymore. We appreciate you being here, Mr. Thank you. [clears throat] I'm not the most senior in age.

That's true. Just in years of service. Just in years of service. Oh, yeah. when we will get those uh we will get those changes crafted and uh get them uh prepared for a potential adoption and resolution for the upcoming trustees meeting. And when will just so that March 10th this will be before the Go ahead. I'm sorry. Yeah. Yeah. March 10th at 6:00 before the board of trustees. Yes.

So for members of the public, we are not the final word on zoning resolution changes. board of trustees are the ones empowered to make that decision. They'll hear it at that meeting. So members of the public can come out again, talk for or against. Okay. Okay. So, we are moving on to our second case of the evening, which is case number 2-26-T, which is a discussion regarding a proposed text amendment to the Union Township zoning resolutions, specifically with regard to article 6, section 662, items J and K, regarding the number and allowed locations of marijuana dispensaries and/or testing facilities. So, Mr. Right.

Yes, sir. Uh um give me one second. Yes, sir. I will get back into the

Well, I don't think we have a definition in this. This is pretty simple. So, um, if you recall in 2024, we established, uh, regulations that basically gave the township some teeth with regard to recently enacted, uh, I think it was, [snorts] uh, issue two and the recreational marijuana uh, movement because they're too poor. We had no regs. We were limited on the moratoriums and we had to do something and we knew or at least speculated that given the state of Ohio's track record that the medical dispensaries would be the first ones to receive, you know, authorization because it's rinse and repeat, right? So, so kudos to the zoning commission and the board for regulating those and getting some teeth and and being able to [clears throat] adopt a process in that. And so, it's been uh [cough] just where we are. Um, we have two dispensaries now. Uh, no issues. [clears throat] Uh, they pay for law enforcement, uh, flock cameras through an impact fee. They pay into, uh, their employees and businesses pay into a joint economic development district earnings tax. Uh, and we are receiving revenues now from the state of Ohio and will be moving forward. And the revenues received for the township and I think they were recently reported by WLWT and other sources. the back revenue was more than $750,000. So there's a significant tax revenue [clears throat] associated with these dispensaries that are not associated with other types of uses that are very frequent throughout the township. For one, vape shops, liquor stores, gas stations. I mean, those are self- storage facilities. Those are, you know, we have four big ones there and we don't receive any revenue off of that. So, and I think the discussion at the time was, let's look at this. We know we have we know we have two. We think this is what's going to happen. That is what happened. Let's lock this in. Let's put

some guard rails around this and then see what see what the state does importantly and see what what the issues are with these facilities. And we we have we have literally [clears throat] no issues other than um if I had to say the business with the one drive-thru probably needs more stacking for certain days out of the year. um that you know that's stacking in the drive-thru and part of that in in the memorandum that I provided to you uh there's really three points of order here um that we need to consider um and um I think what we should look at uh in addition to the cap and some practical elements of this we put a number in here six okay so go from two to six the practical reality of the matter is the department of cannabis control or cannabis regulation, the state department that regulates these things has put this one mile radius on these. Okay? And so the two that existed existed prior to the establishment of the onem radius from a practical standpoint and you look at the land use and the zoning in the township and you think about the township in four quadrants, northwest, northeast, southeast or southwest, southeast. The entire [clears throat] northeast part of the township, most of that is preserved in basically conservation easements or private nonprofit or it's extremely topographically challenged. Northwest mainly built out with lower density residential as the commission is well aware. South the south in 32 and 275 kind of being the the dividers. The southwest, you know, mixed use, smaller lots. uh southeast, you know, an emerging uh if you look at Eastgate South, emerging mixeduse area, very heavy concentrations of commercial,

and then very significant uh local retail development in and along 125. A good portion of that is shared with Pierce Township. [clears throat] Um Bach Buckston Industrial Area probably not the most desirable location for retail use, quite frankly. Um, so you look at with this one mile radius, how many could potentially if the these regulations were met, [clears throat] how many could potentially go in with this one mile separation? Reality is probably four and a half. Uh, if you really think about where they go absent a mass change in the in the zoning and land use scheme in the township, which is probably not going to occur. Um so if you look at that is the number four [clears throat] is it five that that's something for a dis that's something for for discussion. The second component of that is you really think about it is in the current regulations there are limitations on the hours of operation and what we are finding is uh and again these are businesses that have invested significant capital in the township and they are at a competitive disadvantage to other surrounding businesses that are or other surrounding communities specifically Milford and Anderson Township which are the closest competitors which allow later hours of operation and so that does two things. Number one, it compresses the drive-thru window, so you end up with more stacking. And then number two, it puts those businesses at a comparative disadvantage in relation to businesses that are at an easier drive one way or another. So that is something for discussion purposes. And I would note that there are other uses that are open later. Um, you know, gas stations are open late, uh, bars, restaurants and bars are open late, um, other retail uses are open late. So, so that's

something for the commission to consider. And then one other final thing, and this is rather unconventional because I looked at the zoning map and we have an increasing amount of PD district, you know, zoning. And so, if you remember, the original was can't go in the PD district, right? because it's a it's a a plan development all that got to go to the trustees. I'm gonna propose something novel here and you know with that permitted in the PD district because there's a lot of Eastgate South and a lot of areas that are sort of redeveloping that would almost be a two-step process because you would end up with potentially [clears throat] a minor or a major redevelopment plan before the board and then I would indicate that they still have to go through the conditional use rules and regulations. And so it's really a more robust process than it would be for a B1 lot or whatever. So that's really the three points that I'd like to, you know, have the board or have the zoning commission consider if there's the tolerance of that or if there's even any interest in that. But again, this was initiated via resolution by the trustees.

Thank you, Mr. Right. Okay. Preliminary comments among the commission. Mr. Right. When you were talking PD, we would exclude residential PD. [clears throat] Is that correct?

Yeah. Yes. I mean, at the, you know, at the end of the day, residential PD, if there's a PD and there's no retail use, the addition of a retail retail use, in my opinion, would require a major amendment that would have to go back to the board of trustees. And so if they go back to the board of trustees, the board of trustees would have to a authorize the conversion of some or part of that PD from an exclusively residential, you know, designation to uh accommodate mixes of use because that's a significant enough change in my opinion that would require you know some formal authorization. That's not something you can do on a staff level. Now, if it's a PD that already includes mixed use, I would say that that's probably a minor amendment to carve out a lot. Uh, if it's a new structure, it would require a [clears throat] major amendment. If it's a retrofitted of an existing structure, maybe a minor amendment, but it's still going to go back to the board of zoning appeals. Uh and so in looking at this text amendment, um if you look at that item K or within the plan development district, I would actually recommend adding comma subject to the require to the approval requirements of this section.

Okay. And we currently have a a dispensary in the south west and the northeast quadrant, but we do not have one in the in the southeast quadrant. And and the northeast quadrant is almost all residential. Northwest northwest and northeast are pretty much residential. We have one in the in the north. Is it is it one on seven? It's old 74. So it's really north central. It's like north central. It's it's right on old 74. It's almost in I mean it's it's basically [clears throat] it's it's in the commercial corridor that's sort of formed by old 74 and what is becoming basically Icico's road.

There's kind of a narrow band on either side of 32 where there's a commercial corridor. Oops. Yeah. Right next to that. Yeah. So, so it's it's ostensibly basically right in the middle of the township. And then you have one um basically in mount in Mount Carmel, which is south kind of the north southwest quadrant, right? So that's sort of the Let's make it more complex. Yeah. North [laughter] southwest. Yeah. North southwest. How do the current hours of operation compare to state store hours of operation? [clears throat] State stores.

Yeah. I I did the research on that. Um, so the Ohio Liquor Control actually allows allows the state stores the hours of 5:30 to 1A Monday to Saturday. Sunday can be that, but it is adjusted according to the uh, now that being said, very few of the state stores here have those hours. We have three state stores plus RJ Cinema, which is considered [clears throat] a state store, although they only sell their brand. Um, and most of those state stores are closed by 10:00, I believe.

Well, and they would know because they set their hours not by what's allowed, but what's profitable. Right. So, right. The two of them are in little strip plazas and then Jungle Gyms is the big one. Right. And Jungle Gyms is the quantity supplier in our township.

How does it how does the current limitation on dispensary hours compare to Jungle Jim's hours? Currently, our dispensaries have to be closed by 9. And I I don't remember the morning hour. Did we put morning hours on? Um day. Is Is there morning hours on here? Uh I [clears throat] think we just said that it's uh It's 3. Okay. Hours of operation for these shall not extend beyond 9 p.m. 9 p.m. Right. So if we were to kick that out another hour.

Um and again this is always fluid. We find later that that's still not enough competitively if we're really trying to make these guys as profitable as possible. And again that it's what the voters asked for. So not to make it profitable but to have this available. Right.

Um, so yeah, the I would on that I'd be comfortable with 10 o'clock. We did nine o'clock based on let's just see how it flows. Let's see what kind of problems the police [clears throat] have, which apparently are none. Um, the residential homes in both of those areas because I drive through there constantly, they're already well lit up with traffic be almost midnight every night. um with all the other stuff around there. So, I don't think that would be an issue. Uh I don't want to see it going much later than that right now, though. I think we do baby steps on this if we're going to do it. Sure. If I may.

Yes. Um for the purpose of transparency, um I spent 30 years as a policeman. Of that 38 years, I headed the drug task force. I it's very difficult for me to change directions of what I fought against, right? I understand the voters paid for it or voted for it and um but I'm going to have a difficulty and I hope the commission understands that supporting this. Any other preliminary thoughts?

The other thing was the number. So Corey, the onem radius puts a mile between each store. Correct. That yes, as I understand it, Department of Cannabis Control has a has a onem radius. So you end up with basically these bubbles. So if they were to put one on 125 in the southwestern sector, it's going to have to be fairly far into it's going to be past with. It's going to be at least Wamsville. Yes. Yes. because of the one on in Anderson right on the border.

Yes. So you have the one on Anderson that's kind of here as I understand it anecdotally. Now I didn't confirm this with Pierce Township. I but I've heard from folks in the industry that there is one going in kind of in the vicinity of Merwin 10 mileish on the south side of the road. So what and then there's also a permit that was awarded back either I believe in the first round when [clears throat] Amelia existed for one in Amelia that never subsequently was constructed I believe. So you know if you kind of look at that there's a very limited area where one could go in on 125 probably in the immediate Cherry Grove area kind of right at Cherry Grove. Uh, Tabasco Road maybe. I'd have to look at where the Anderson one is by map, but probably kind of that. What's that intersection, Mr. Wang? Is that uh Williams where the White C nearby? Near the White Castle,

right? Probably. And boundary going the other way maybe to maybe not even to Banks Road. So, or where the closed fridgees is. Yeah, somewhere in there potentially. Yeah, it it's kind of in that area going over to sort of where the old pool place used to be, right? It it'd be close to 275. Yeah, because you have that Pierce Township influence that's going to push the other way. So

So there's there's not a lot of available space if Pierce does theirs along that corridor. You'd have very limited space. Um the northern sector there's plenty of space and the only thing we would be the Milford dispensary would be what would require. So yeah I mean I don't see that we could even get six in as it stands right now. Right. Um I estimated four and a half. If you [clears throat] draw the bubbles on the map you might get four and a half potentially. Yeah.

And and then did was was this brought forward because we see it as a revenue stream or Well, do we actually have people waiting? Well, there there there I can tell you there is considerable market interest in our area and that's predominantly because, you know, we have 55,000 residents that live here and our daytime population probably doubles and it has to do with tra trip counts, economic activity, all of those things. I mean, they're like any other business, right? They want to be where economic activity is.

Um, it's also about drive times and accessibility. For example, um, where I live, I think there's one three miles eastish [clears throat] that's very difficult to get to most times. That's in go Township. I live in Miami Township, 300 yards from Goa Township line. I'd say that one that store probably does not do as well because of how difficult from a regional perspective because of how difficult it is to access to use state route 28. Um the Milford store on the other hand, if you looked at the revenues, they did nearly as much with one store as we did and those are um th remember those are acred revenues that the state sat. Okay, but I think their number was well into the 600s for one store where ours was 750 something. And if you look at stores like Columbia Township has, which they have one on Ridge and I think another one on Kennedy or something like that, they received over a million and a half dollars in in revenue. And again, but that area is exceptionally dense. It's, you know, high commercial corridors, you know, high density. You got high density communities. You have high density communities nearby. So, it's all about economic activity. It's all about population density. It's all about market area search. I mean, just like anything else. So, um, but yeah, I mean, I think but they also produce revenue. And I think that's a that's a fortunate, you know, circumstance in that that, you know, as ways to offset,

you know, additional increases and and and all those other things. Okay. Well, we have members of the public in attendance tonight, so I I want to open it up so that we can hear. I've got one person that has turned in a testimony. If I may, in the I believe in the board's packet, there were some correspondence provided from [clears throat] I've read all those. Yeah. Yes. Uh we've had a number of uh writeins. Um more than I can remember getting in quite some time. Yeah. A lot of them are um there's there's one lady who's been very kind who's compiling comments that she's receiving and forwarding them to us.

So, but uh Tracy Joe Small. Yes.

I would like to say that I am so impressed. I've never been to a a zoning commission meeting before. So, I'm just tickled that you all take this so seriously with caution and care and concern. I Bruce prepared to come in here and just have to raise my voice and it's like, "Oh, wow. You're all sane, intelligent, wonderful men. Welcoming to look, there's three more chairs. You could have some women in here, too." Um, but so thank you. Thank you for uh for sharing your experience and thank you for uh sharing you know your experience of you know driving up and down old State Rail 74 as you know I do all the time.

I'm here to say um I would I would ask for four rather than six. I would ask for nine o'clock rather than 10. I had prepared and it's all very very small print uh a number of studies that I looked at. the higher concentration that we have, no matter where you are in the United States, but a lot of this information comes out of Colorado because we know they they did that that did it first. The higher concentration that we have of cannabis dispensaries, the more ER visits and the higher crime rate, but crime excluding murder, so murder does not enter into that. In Ohio alone in 2025, uh we had a 41% increase in children. 41% increase in children consuming edibles, you know, I mean, I can almost guarantee that you have beautiful dear children in your lives. And the just the thought of that, you know, does closing the store at 10:00 change that? Probably not. [clears throat] But I really really appreciate that you are all considering going slow, being cautious. There's so much we don't know. It's really hard to pull things back. But if you start slow and do four, do 9:00, you can expand later. Uh I don't perceive that you are all in the business of making their business more profitable. No. But you're here to protect and serve the people of Union Township. I really really appreciate everything that you've done and said. Um so thank you. So again that real specifically four rather than six 10 rather than nine and maybe you know put an hour in the morning you know when you when you can open. So thank you. Thank you gentlemen.

Thank you. I'll note unofficially for the record we rarely get praise. Uh, so [laughter] I'm not used to that. Um, [laughter] and you, sir, [clears throat] you owe me a testimony sheet. If you'd bring it up. Okay. [clears throat]

We'll see what we can do about that in the minutes. Thank you. Again, I'm Palm Go 608 Brandy Way and I have the greatest appreciation for law enforcement and that's one reason I'm here. I did hear several times you talk about money, income. I'm getting old and I've seen a lot of changes [clears throat] in my time. I remember when the so-called lottery was going to solve all the problems with the public school system. So, we went from the lottery and now we've got uh sports gambling and that's bringing up a whole new mess with corruption amongst the players. I got a concealed carry. I went through training. Four of the six in my class failed. I passed. But the woman that taught it screamed and hollered like a Marine Corps drill sergeant. And she taught us how to shoot. Now we got constitutional carry. You got people out there that probably don't know which end [clears throat] of the the weapon to use. [snorts] And you just heard we finally took one father. I think he's in court now because his son had numerous problems. And what's he do? He goes out and buys him a gun. And the son goes at a school shooting and kills multiple people. Now they're bringing the parent up to be responsible and they're going to charge him. Again, this marijuana, recreational marijuana, they say it's 10 times stronger from the Woodstock era. I don't know. My father, my uncle, and one of my good friends [clears throat] because the World War II generation

smoked cigarettes. They're all dead from cancer. I don't know what do we need mar recreational marijuana for in [clears throat] the first place, but I'm sure it's about income. Like same thing with the gambling. Why do we have casinos, we got boats, we got this, we got it's all about the income. But I'm looking at these little stores that sell the lottery tickets and I was doing a job over by one and I went in. They had two cash registers. One for just regular products, the other one was lottery tickets. There were people lined up for the lottery tickets throwing out change. They shouldn't be buying lottery tickets. So, I'm just asking you, let's look at the bigger picture and what it does to our communities. Recreational marijuana is [snorts] still out there, what it's going to do. It doesn't need to be. It's all about this, guys. Think about it. Let's think about what it does to our people and our community. We're we're in a really mess right now. I've got friends of mine, she was just graduated. She was She's going to be a school teacher and after four months what you saw she's quit because she can't stand to deal with the parents and the kids. And the same thing you said about these gummy bears that they put out there. Parents aren't keeping them locked up. The kids are getting a hold of them and taking numerous ones. My wife's got a new job. She her worker took her dog to the vet and the vet goes, "This vet has consumed marijuana. I know the reaction of it now and tested

for it." So you got people that can't even responsible. [clears throat] So that's the big picture. It's not all about money, guys. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Do you, sir? All right. Thank you. Um, well, with uh two members of the public having spoken and no one else wanting to, uh, we'll close the public uh, comment portion. You're more than welcome to stay to see how it goes. We're just comments that came online. Well, members of the commission, we we all read them

and take them at pretty much the same weight of anybody who steps up here. Um, and they it all goes into uh the public record. Yeah. Just for the record, a member of the public asked what we do with public comments that we receive electronically, and Mr. Wing responded to that in that the commission does consider them as though they were present in person. And if we continue to receive more because we're we're not the last stop, the trustees are correct. We package all that up [clears throat] and they get everything that becomes part of the record that goes to the trustees. Yes. And this will be heard March 10th 6 o'clock. Okay.

So for those who are passionate about this issue in either direction, it's important to show up and let your elected officials know and weigh in on that. So uh we're now closed to public comments. the commission can uh have further discussion. So all six or more of these are in the negative towards making any changes to add more if you have not read through all of them. I read them all. Yeah. So,

you know, one thing that I think people forget because it happened so long ago, but we this country went through prohibition and you see what happened with prohibition. When you go to prohibit something that the general populace wants, you you load in a tr a level of crime that's just unbelievable. And and that's where we, you know, we've seen. So alcohol was made was prohibited and crime rose exponentially. Uh they got rid of prohibition. That level of crime in [clears throat] that area disappeared because it was then available. Uh in in Ohio it's it's it's made illegal. It it's been made legal. And part of that was to try to get the people from going to illegal sources to legal sources and again to reduce crime. And I I don't know what their statistics are, but from a a perspective, I I like the the change that Mr. Wright recommended on the uh on the locations, and I but I'm I'm at a point where I'm I'm not willing to increase it to more than three. I I don't we we [clears throat] discussed this when we made it two and wanted to see what happens. And I I'm comfortable with that, and I could expand it to three. I I just don't see needing more than than uh than three. Um and and and to match the number of state stores we have. I mean, we've got three state stores and that's kind of got Mr. Wing put that in a category. It's to me that's that's a good comparison. You know, keep it at the number of state stores and and the hours of operation for me. I extending it to 10. What Mr. Wing mentioned was the uh the hours for the current state stores at jungle gyms. Anyway, I'm I'm comfortable with that, but I'm not enthusiastic about going beyond. I could leave it a two or go to three, but that's as far as I could go.

If I may also again to go back to I have a real problem with it. And um basically in my occupation and some family issues occurred in my personal family, um the marijuana is harmful. Um, I will tell you I had an experience. I I'm a I was a combat soldier in Vietnam and certainly uh we almost all smoked it and a lot of good soldiers failed to do their job under the influence of marijuana. Now, same thing goes with driving cars. I had a brother that when he was 21 drove his car into a telephone pole up in Washington, spent 40 years as an immut smoking dope and drinking. So which one was worse? I don't know. But I can't support any change.

But everything you and I appreciate that everything you've said though, it applies to alcohol as well. It does. But there's also this marijuana does lead to other drugs. You a lot of people that uh I don't know anybody I arrested uh for, you know, cocaine or anything other that high that didn't start on marijuana. That doesn't mean everybody goes to marijuana and goes up to cocaine or heroin. Um, but I've arrested doctors. I've arrested nurses andist that that statement and I just want to this is on research I I've read and I'm not pro this is not a pro or

I understand I and I'm not going to be argumentative with the commission particular stand fight though.

Yeah. One of the things that they brought out about that is the difference between now and then. When it was illegal, drug dealers don't make a whole lot of money selling weed. They [snorts] sell they make a lot of money selling the drugs that So, it's a lot of that had to do with the drug dealers. You want you go and buy your weed and the drug dealers like, "Hey, [clears throat] you know, here I've got this. You'll love this." you know, so I take that into account having read about all that and and I I have a lot of family in law enforcement and I was firefighter medic. So, I mean, I have a lot of thoughts about all this stuff. I, you know, I pulled people out of uh wrecks for a variety of reasons, you know, including I never never could say specifically marijuana, but alcohol, you know, just I hate watch I hate going by bars at night and watching people

I understand. Um, so and and I agree marijuana we, you know, if we're going to allow it, we need to find something like a breathalyzer for it, which doesn't exist right now, to give our police some way to control it more. One of these was one of these emails we got was very specific. I can't go outside without smelling it. I don't see that so much in Union Township, but when I'm in very urban areas, it's constant. and I ride motorcycles a lot and it's constant on the highways, people vaping in their cars or smoking in their cars. I don't know how to control that. I mean, that's that's a whole another game. But, um, so c getting back to this though, um, it's here. We're just trying we're trying to keep it as controlled as we can. I don't necessarily think that we need to go up to another one. I mean, it's it's really we're we're looking at recommend, you know, what what the township's asking for. Um, I'd be fine with not changing anything, but at the same time, if the board believes we need to have more or we, you know, at least give the township the ability to do more, So I I'm torn on this issue because I I don't re it is legal and it's permissible within this township. There's nothing we can do about you know the smell of it wafting and and and the number of dispensaries is not we don't have a correlation to that. If someone wants it they will go and find it

and they will smoke it where they live. I don't know that it is a good thing for society but that I'm not also not in a position by which to enforce that right

um but I also believe in our system and if people didn't want it they wouldn't s these businesses would go out of business they they would not succeed and it is a legal and permissible use so that's where we're at and and we've done I think our best job trying to when this all initially came out to try to regulate it. Um, and we're being asked to adjust that which is not in any way out of order. I do believe that the uh the state uh has taken action in terms of trying to limit access to edibles. So that market will be shifting away from other easy more easily accessible

right

u avenues. So that should hopefully protect individuals who should not be exposed to that. But again that's beyond our set purview here. So there are really three questions before us which is do we recommend an increase in number which again that's just number that's feasible within the township. It's not the, you know, if the one mile radius blocks a store out, it blocks a store down. We can't possibly have one. And I would agree jumping from two to six is a big jump, even if it's not feasible. But I could see going three or four, even though it's unlikely we'd get to four. But if one closes and it opens up, if one if one of the border stores closes, I can see that becoming a possibility. The other question we're asked is hours of operation. We've had people weigh in from the public like to keep it 900 pm. I think we I I think the latest we'd go is 10 p.m. to match the practice. of

the liquor stores, the liquor stores. And then what are we going to do about restrictions within PD? I think if it's kept out of residential PD, I'm okay with that. Well, I think to Mr. Wright's point, right? Yeah. And that's if if you were if you had a residential PD and they came in and they want to use it for commercial purposes, like that's not going any. That's That's a horse that won't run just like we wouldn't put it in an R1, right? Yeah. Know, I thought the way Mr. Wright worded it, I think that would cover it. You know, there are PDs where, you know, that it could work out. Certainly.

Yeah. I I've never been to one because I don't don't utilize it. But um according to our police department, we have no problems with them here right now. I don't want to create a problem either. So I don't want Union Township to become the destination for weed. Um but we do have residents here that are users. So, I mean, based on just anecdotal evidence myself, because I I live not far from here in the township, I regularly drive by the one on Old 74

uh constantly, and it is just anecdotally from the parking lot, it's filled and I can't imagine the business that takes you there takes terribly long. So, that means people are coming in and out on a regular basis. I'm down by the other one less frequently, but The traffic flow on both of them seems to be similar. The mornings there's not a lot of business and I don't know what hours they even open at this point, but I believe um I think it's 8 8:00 in the morning,

but as we're getting deeper into the evening, it tends to build up. you know, dinner, dinner time actually or when people are going home from work seems to be the most he heavy use, which is that is what they indicate. They're kind of their peak trip volumes are really say 300 p.m. to maybe 7 p.m. Yeah. And that that's what I observe

and that's what correct as far as anecdotal not putting trap trip counters out there. It's really about nobody buys it on their way to their commute, but on the way home they will make that part of I mean it's no different than stopping at the gas station or if I go to you know escape wine and spirits on the way home and pick up you know something or whatever to take home with me. Um you know or if you were to go to Jungle Gyms before you head home and go get some groceries and then stop at the the state store there or whatever. I mean that's typically when most people would make their purchases their hours are 9 to 8 on Sunday 10 to 6

that the the dispensaries the one so they're 9 to 8 right now they're closing before [clears throat] they can they are they can stay open till 9. So that's telling us we don't need to go to 10 um because if if that we did not hear from them. What we what we are hearing is the one that's closer to Anderson is being impacted more because so they're the ones that want more hours that that that we are hearing that that is because of their proximity and accessibility with cloth and 8 mile and all that. So they would they would be against us allowing a third one down on 125 because that's really going to impact him.

You know, to Mr. Campbell's point, it's it's the market. It's the market. The market will drive what occurs. So, there's been a fair bit of conversation. I think at this point, um, we're going to do some informal polling before anyone formulates a motion. We'll take it issue by issue to see if there's any kind of consensus regarding the issues. So, we'll start with how they're listed here, which is the number permitted, which is specifically in subsection J here. Currently, it reads two locations. I I've heard different numbers. So, Mr. Wing,

you know, I'm honestly I'm okay with two. Um, if the board feels three as a number, I could be persuaded. I definitely don't want to see six. Mr. Lewis, I'm three. Maximum of three. Mr. Honor, I leave be maximum of three. Two. Stay two. I would go to three.

Cory Corey. Yes, sir. Township [clears throat] in terms of if the third one came in, we can kind of control where it goes to a degree, right? Certainly. Okay. I mean, you know, particularly with the PD district regulations and then just look at just look at your map, your B1, look at your B1 properties, 125 East Gate, West Gate, East Gate, you know, logically, if you were planning these, this would be something that would go out towards the Amelia area almost because that's the, you know, that's the area that I don't think there's any out there right now,

right? And I think with what I'm hearing from, you know, with Pierce Township being basically from Merwin or from Merwin east, the entire south side of 125 is Pierce Township, right? So I think [clears throat] that sort of fills that. Okay. So in a way that further crimps down the available place where that to to our discussion earlier that if there ever were going to be one on 125 it would be in a very narrow band in a very sort of congested mixeduse neighborhood retail kind of area.

So in which you actually have a state store down there kind of in that same area right. Yeah. Now that they do have to stay 500 feet from that, correct? Yeah. So it's 500 feet. So under our regulations, right? They have to be 500 ft from the boundary. So this was before the state put the this is what I call the um dry county wet county rule that that the uh the state put in. So, if anybody's been to places where they have dry counties, no alcohol sales, and then you cross the border and there's like 12 liquor stores all boom, boom, boom, boom.

Um, that's kind of what I think the state's nexus to that was. They didn't want that. So, that's why they could have put the one mile radius on it. So, it's 500 ft from the boundaries of a same or similar use, the boundaries of a property containing a school, daycare, church, public library, public playground, or public park, or the boundaries of a drug rehabilitation clinic. Okay. Yeah. I I didn't know about the onem radius. And uh in my travels, especially out in Colorado, there are plazas that are bookended with these dispensaries, right?

And that that's the last thing I'd want to see here. So it's good to know that we have that mile [clears throat] radius, right? And then in addition, there's a 100 foot setback to a residential news sore zone. So which to your point about residential PDS that right there that Yeah. Okay. So, we have an informal poll regarding the increase in the number. There's some support at least among the commission for increasing from two to three. The next uh informal poll will be hours of operation. Mr. Wing,

based on what Corey said, and I understand it, but I I think 9:00 is adequate. I I and uh when they have when we've been having problems with the stacking at the drive-thru, are they dealing with that well or are they blocking the road with it? Um I I've heard anecdotal I've heard a couple of reports where there's been some blocking but it it gets resolved very quickly. Um it's kind of like Starbucks. Yeah. And a classic example is I have literally seen people get p handed tickets because they will block an intersection to get $5 coffees. Y

defies all logic. I don't I don't understand it. But um and I understand this business has peak certain peak days are different than others. You know, it's probably Thursdays and Fridays are busier. I think Saturday mornings could be very busy before a snowstorm, right? Oh, or a major holiday, right?

Um, you know, like a Fourth of July, a Labor Day, I don't you know, whatever. Um, so there's some of that that goes on or a long weekend, the day before Thanksgiving, the day before Thanksgiving. I mean, it's probably very much like the state liquor stores are very busy. um some of that I mean and and from my understanding because I've talked to these businesses and we only have one that has a drive-through right now, right?

Um a lot of these are done by appointment like you it's not just you just pull up and you say, "Hey, I want this and I want that." It's there you order and it's almost like a CVS prescription's ready kind of thing. And so again, some of it's volume, maybe some of it's the ability of them to fill orders quickly or prefill orders or whatever. I don't I don't know. I think everybody sort of is they're getting more efficient as it at it. And and you know, let's be honest, um a lot of the congestion in the area probably isn't helping things with the ongoing road construction, right? Yeah. So,

so getting back to the hours, I I'd be happy just keeping it at nine at this point. Okay, Mr. I'm I'm good with mapping almost directly to state liquor stores. I'm I'm good with the 10 with the number of three and the hours of 10. [clears throat] I I think more I think about this, I I really think it's pretty much in line with what's going on at a state liquor store. It's the same. It's an intoxicant. It's uh it needs to be regulated. Uh I'm I'm good with 10 o'clock. Mr. Honoring I like to keep it the same. Okay. So nine. It is at nine. It is nine. Okay. Okay. And I could I would not you not

I would not say no on on a nine. Okay. Okay. The last item is a consideration of the districts that it would be permitted in at at present just so everyone knows section everything we've been talking about shall be prohibited with any within any residential district or within the PD plan development district and that means it can't be in correct so we would need to strike that. So so we would be striking that. You would strike that. All right. I'm good with that. Um yeah to Mr. Rex's point um zoning [snorts] resolution what what comes after [clears throat] K J K L L

if you added an L sorry it's late night it's yeah

u you uh what I would recommend if you're going to strike that provision um to add language the uses basically mirror this the uses regulated by this I'm going to write this on the Apply section shall be further permitted uh within the planned the PD planned development district. subject to the conditional use approval process uh processes right prescribed in this section. That's if you were I that's what I would add as item out.

Yeah, I I'm okay with I am too the PDS. I am too. Yeah, so it's almost a more restrictive process, right? You just got to get through Well, right because it's a d it's a double double, right? Yeah. Okay. Any further discussion by me? Okay. Well, then um again, unless anyone really wants to, I will uh formulate a motion. You're so good at it. Mr. Lewis is the best at it. I will I will add I don't plan on making many more motions. We'll let other people take control of that that wild horse.

Just give me give me a moment. [clears throat] Okay. Um, case [clears throat] number 2-26-T, zoning resolution text amendment. I hereby move that the zoning commission find that the proposed text amendment to the Union Township zoning resolution is consistent with the intent of the zoning resolution and the comprehensive land use plan 2030. Modifications being considered apply to article six section 662 J and K regarding the number uh of allowed locations marijuana dispensaries and/or testing facilities and the zoning districts that they can u exist in. This commission therefore recommends the text amendments be adopted as submitted to the commission. Um well it's discussed by the commission on the February 25th 2026 [clears throat] meeting with the following recommendations. So these changes would be would read the following. J. The maximum number of medical marijuana and/or recreational marijuana dispensaries, marijuana testing facilities, or other similar uses shall be limited to a cumulative total of three locations within the unincorporated limits of Union Township, Claremont County, Ohio. K would be modified to read as follows. The uses regulated by this section shall be prohibited within any residential district. stricken will be or within the PD plan development district. We're recommending the addition of a 662 L. Um would you like me to read that?

I wrote it, but if you wouldn't mind, Mr. Wright, I trust your handwriting better than mine, I think. So new subsection L the uses regulated by this section shall be further permitted within the plan the PD plan development district subject to the conditional use approval processes prescribed in this section. Okay, that concludes my motion. I'll second it. A regularly made and seconded motion. We can now discuss the text of the motion or any elements of it. Any further conversation about that? I'm good. Okay. Hearing none. Uh, Mr. Wright, if you would call roll. Mr. Campbell?

Yes. Mr. Lewis? Yes. Mr. Wang? Yes. Mr. Honorlaw? Yes. Mr. Beckman? No. Motion carries. Okay. Does anyone have any further business come before this commission before we proceed to adjourn? No further business for the commission this evening. I was going to say there's nothing on the agenda, so there would be an issue if we did. Uh so I now uh adjourn this commission meeting at 8:53 p.m. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Like you cut the