Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call this plighting Commission June 1st, 2020 2026 meeting to order a roll call please.

Del Regno here Smith here Apple here Jones here Falcom here. We do have a quorum.

Approval the minutes next item on the agenda.

Can I get a motion for the May 11th minutes motion to approve the minutes from May 11th, 2026 second roll call please Smith.

Yes Apple abstain Jones. Yes, Belcon.

Yes, Del Regno.

Yes, motion carries.

Oh, I forgot. I apologize. I forgot the recording. Mr. Bedell, could you please play it?

Thank you. The procedure. The meeting will be called to order and the clerk will take the roll call. The commission will then approve the minutes of the previous meetings. then present the council report commission business when your project is called please come to the podium place your drawings on the documentation and they will then be projected on the screen for all to see the applicant or representative making a request will print their name and address on the attendance sheet and state their name and address for the record please make a short presentation speaking into the City staff will give a staff report on the project. We will then hear from the audience. Any member of the audience that wishes to speak will have to speak into the microphone after printing their name and address on the attendance sheet and stating their name and address for the record. We ask that audience members speak one at a time after giving their name and address. This is for the purpose of the minutes for the meeting. Please speak clearly. The applicant will respond to public comments. again we ask that people speak one at a time the planning commission members will have an opportunity to make comments and ask any questions that they may have the commission will then take action thank you um councilman doregno do we have a council report nothing report thank you uh starting with the business uh the first item on the agenda is tow car and company llc sign plan

Yes, this is 2510 Canterbury Road. It's a new two-sided monument sign for this office building. It's in the general business district. We have brick veneer columns with sandstone column caps, central sandstone panel topped with brick and containing a 12 square foot in gray sign. It will not be illuminated. The materials are all appropriate for this zone. There is an existing about 10 square foot wall sign for the current tenant. That's not changing. It's not part of this request. It does meet all code requirements, except for one. They should have a landscape bed of some sort at the base, and that's really to protect the sign from damage from mowers. So that's included as a condition of approval. It does show up in the code as being a requirement, and it's really something that is of benefit to the sign owner because it does protect it from damage. Thank you.

Great. Thank you very much. Welcome. Your name and address for the record, please. Can you get into the mic?

I'm sorry. One of the mics. There you go. Gail Fishbach, Valori Builders. Sorry. Address, too. 23550 Center Ridge Road, number 101, Westlake.

Great. Thank you. Anything to add to Mr. Burdell's report?

No, but we will do the landscape like you're mentioning.

Great. Would anyone from the audience like to speak on this one? Seeing none, Councilman DelRagno?

I have no issues. Mr Jones looks good, no comments.

Mrs Smith also looks good, no issues. Mrs Apple, I agree great. I do too. Can I get a motion please for approval?

Yes, based on the findings of fact that moved to approve the tow car and company sign plan with the following one, a landscape bed shall be installed at the base of the sign.

Second roll call please. Apple yes Jones yes Falcone yes Del Regno yes Smith yes motion carries great.

Thank you very much. Next item on the agenda is AC Orthodontics Bay Pediatric Dentistry Sign Plan.

Yes, this is 27519 Detroit Road. You may recall back February of last year, you recommended approval of an addition, and it did include a condition requiring the submission of a sign permit application because there was a monument sign shown at that time.

This is a little more complicated than normal.

There's some sign code things that come into play, but really it's regulated by the conditional use permit ordinance that allowed this home to be converted back in the 1990s. Actually, all the way back to 1989, but more recently 1996. At that point, it limited the size of the sign square footage to 20 square feet. The proposal here is 23.4 square feet, so it's only slightly higher, and it also did not allow interior illumination. This does have interior illumination. I would say this is the right kind of interior illumination. It's the metal sign face with routed letters, push-through letters, so there'll be no glare. It really makes an attractive sign at night. So ordinarily, I would say it would be just a modification for the interior illumination and then to be slightly larger than normal. However, because there is a conditional use permit that's in play as well, there's actually a little bit more work that has to be done that you'll see. So this is how it will look. It does have the appearance of two sign faces, as you see, and together they're only 23 square feet. And it's only four feet high total. as well. You can see that it's in an island, landscape island. So there's a couple things if you agree with this. One is the sign plan. I didn't mention just a condition that it be set back no less than 15 feet from the right of way. That's part of that CUP requirement, and it's designed that way anyways, but we'll go ahead and memorialize it here. any condition that 1965 55 condition number six is amended to permit a 25 square foot sign so I opted a little bit from 23 about 23 square feet up to 25 square feet with interior illumination and then interior illumination would be in accordance with 12 23.0 7 which is what they're wanting to do with the Sign that does not promote glare and a modification from 1223.07 to permit an internally eliminated monument sign in a residential district.

That's why I said it's a little more complicated than normal.

So you've got a couple conditions and modification. And then along with that, if you go ahead and approve, then you'll also recommend approval to amend ordinance 1965-55. And I won't read all that, but it allows the 25 square foot sign with the interior elimination.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Welcome. Your name and address?

Kathy Clark, 1260 Moore Road in Avon.

Thank you. Anything to add?

I think the only thing I have to add is right across the street, there's a lit sign too. So just to be fair.

Thank you. Would anyone from the audience like to speak on this project? Seeing none, Mrs. Apple, any comments?

I have no problem as long as we include the conditions and modifications that Mr. Bedell recommended.

Great.

Mrs. Smith? I agree. Okay.

Mr. Jones?

No issues. Just to clarify, though, your renderings show the address, I think, different than what the address is on the property. So just make sure that gets checked. Well, certainly. Will do. Other than that, I'm good. Good catch. I just randomly caught that as I was looking. I was like, I think those numbers are flips. Oh. Anyway.

Councilman Del Regno?

I have nothing. I'm good.

Great. Thanks. And I don't either. I think it's an attractive looking sign. Can I get a motion on this one, please?

Sure. Based upon the findings of fact, I move to approve the AC Orthodontics Bay Pediatric Dentistry sign plan with the following. One, condition that the sign be set back no less than 15 feet from the right-of-way. Two, condition that Ordinance 1996-55, condition number 6, is amended to permit a 25-square-foot sign with interior illumination in accordance with Section 1223.07. And three, modification from Section 1223.07 to permit an internally illuminated monument sign in a residential district.

Thank you. Second. Roll call, please. Jones. Yes. Valcone. Yes. Del Regno. Yes. Smith. Yes. Apple. Yes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much.

And then we have to do the motion first. Oh, sorry. Yes. So also a motion to recommend the council amend ordinance 1996-55, condition number six to read. Quote, not more than one ground sign limited to 25 square feet in area with interior illuminated permitted in accordance with section 1223.07 and set back 15 feet from front or side lot lines and one building identification wall sign limited to one by three feet.

Second. Roll call, please. Balcone. Yes. Del Regno.

Yes.

Smith. Yes. Apple. Yes. Jones. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you very much. Next item on the agenda, freehold investment group site improvements needs to be tabled to July 6th.

Motion to table the Freehold Investment Group site improvements to July 6, 2026.

Second. Roll call, please. Del Regno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Pelcone?

Yes.

Motion carries.

Great, thank you. Next item on the agenda is Farage Plaza Development Plan on Center Ridge Road.

Yes, 27210 Center Ridge Road. So as this has been discussed before, there has been a conceptual plan for Farage Plaza, which is a redevelopment of the former get-go gas station into a shopping center. The existing 2,367 square foot building will be expanded with a 2,373 square foot addition, 4740 square feet total, creating four units. And you'll see the existing building reskinned with brick and stone veneer, matching the addition. So there'll be stone added below the windows. There's been some minor variations from what you saw as a conceptual plan but largely things have not changed very much parking was reduced from 26 basis to 24 it will be 23 though there's one space that needs to be redesigned in order to provide fire department access to the rear of the building and I did hear from the architect project architect they will make that change their civil engineer just doesn't have it drawn up yet but they will make that change And that will satisfy the fire requirements, except for the ones that come later with the construction plans. That's the actual design, the layout right there. So their civil engineer will fix that. And that's been noted in the past as well. So just taking a look at the box score, modification does remain in place for landscaping. It is less than 25% required by code. It's going from 6% to 21%, which is really a huge win that's really gonna improve that corner dramatically. Then the other modification is for parking. It's necessary. The existing parking has the same encroachment that this will. There's some added landscaping to improve buffering. So again, that's really going to improve things dramatically. parking want to point out even if they go down if they go down to 23 spaces by code they're still over what's required by four spaces there you know for the future this will need a master signage plan and that's really something that the owner is going to want to have because it really greatly expedites approval of signage with master signage plan I can approve signs at the counter instead of having to come before this board So that's going to be needed. You also with that they should include the monument sign design at that at that time lighting. We do have data sheets for the fixtures that we needed. We know what the color temperature color renderings are and we so as part of this, so it still is lacking one key detail. So I would like a condition that exterior lighting does not exceed 4000 K and also that No lighting exceptions are granted by this approval. They've not asked for any, but I just want to make sure that it's clear that what you think you're getting is what's going to be installed. Trash enclosure modification. Prior modification still stands. It's really the best location for it. It won't be harmful for the neighboring property, which is the post office where it's located. But we do need to detail the dumpster enclosure, and that can be for administrative approval. We do have a material board that we'll pass around in a second so that you can take a look at things. So we've got the rooftop unit screening, mechanical screens. that you can see materials are all fine per the code. We do need them to clarify the rear dumpster and rear masonry materials. This is the last building you'll see in Westlake in the general business zone that will be allowed to have split face block. uh used this predated the change in the code so they are able to use that they're only using it on portions of the building that won't be visible to the public anyways but we do need to know a little bit more about that so these are solid concept plans obviously that you've seen before The March submittal, June submittal, that drawing didn't change. March submittal, this I think was just drawn in error. June submittal corrects it. So there used to be a bite taken out of the back of the building that they're going to fill in, as you can see. And June submittal, still lacking detailed dumpster enclosure drawings. So as I mentioned, we will need that. I guess I included all the civil plans. We don't have new civil plans for this submittal. I really don't think we need them for the most part. Really the main thing that's going to change is that access to the rear and that's really going to be one sheet. But I think by and large it'll stay the same. And this is kind of giving you an idea of signage, but a master signage plan will tell you exactly what those letters will look like and the height and the illumination and anything else that they would like to regulate. And this, of course, you have. This is what's being passed around, hopefully. As I mentioned, we do have the lighting plan and fixtures. There we go. A lot more detail with the fixtures. OK, so there's a number of conditions and modifications that are in the report. I think I've gone through these. I'm just going to skim them. Didn't mention one of the things one of the details that That we need and I'll check this with the construction plans They've got some wall fixtures our code doesn't allow wall fixtures higher than 16 feet above grade and that's prevent glare off-site so That's a that's a condition of approval. I think everything else I've mentioned though it looks like and I just want to point out that when when I do this on my own PC upstairs, it doesn't have all these breaks. It makes it very hard to read this. Yeah, no, it's not like that. It's all solid and it's a lot easier to read. Yeah, so I won't be doing this in the future. So we've got the landscaping modification I mentioned, the parking modification I mentioned, the dumpster modification, and there's also a modification to allow split-faced masonry units and standard size units for the rear and the dumpster enclosure, and that's because our code was requiring many units that they don't even make anymore, so that's become sort of a standard thing. And then number three is your standard condition.

Great, thank you, thank you.

Yeah.

Welcome.

Gary Fisher, Fisher and Associates Architects 554 West 9th St. Lorraine.

Great Brad Farage 4044 Harding Drive, West Lake, OH.

Welcome welcome. Anything to add to Mr. Bedell's report?

No exception to any of the comments from the fire department or from staff as well. You know, Mr. Bedell and Nicolette have been very helpful in helping to get this. We delayed it a couple of times because there was a potential tenant that was going to take the whole building, so now we're back on track with the four-tenant building.

Great. That sounds good. Would anyone from the audience like to comment on this one? You can come forward and state your name for the record. There's two people on this side. Do you want to come up first?

Will you clarify while they're coming up the split face block, how that's going to be, Gary? The split face block?

Well, if the board would rather not have split face, I can certainly work with staff. We aren't married to the split face on the black. We could go with smooth. We could go with a scored block, really whatever material you'd like to do.

It's not really. It's not something that's seen by the public.

Yeah, it really kind of faces the cell tower and it's almost invisible, so it could be.

It could be either one of those. It's just so you you basically you pick something and then you ask them if it's OK with the split face.

Great, thank you.

Then the color of that.

We were looking at matching the Gray that we have on the building, so we'll keep with the Gray block. It's it's not a concrete Gray. It's a color block, so it's not just plain concrete block, OK?

Great, thank you. Please come forward and state your name and address.

Daniel Zantbauer, 2519 Dover Center Road. Welcome. Certainly glad to see that building get renovated. Just one comment on traffic inflow and outflow from there, especially Dover Center. If you're going north, making a left into there is going to be next to impossible, so I'd like to see that prevented. especially because there's not much room to the intersection there and you'd have to cross three lanes of traffic to get in. So I think that's like a safety hazard and there's a lot of kids constantly walking from the schools through there. So definitely would like to see prevention of that entrance into their center ridge. ALSO CONCERNS WITH CENTER RIDGE, PROXIMITY TO THE INTERSECTION. YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT FOR BUSINESS. DEFINITELY A PLAN FOR TRAFFIC FLOW THROUGH THERE. THANK YOU.

WELCOME. WELCOME.

WELCOME.

TURRY MACKIN. TURRY MACKIN. TURRY MACKIN. 2843 DOVER CENTER ROAD. 2843 DOVER CENTER ROAD. 2843 DOVER CENTER ROAD. I GUESS IT'S MORE JUST A POINT I GUESS IT'S MORE JUST A POINT I GUESS IT'S MORE JUST A POINT OF ORDER. OF ORDER. OF ORDER. I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS ACCIDENTALLY DESPITE THE FACT ACCIDENTALLY DESPITE THE FACT ACCIDENTALLY DESPITE THE FACT THAT I CAN SEE THIS LOT FROM MY THAT I CAN SEE THIS LOT FROM MY THAT I CAN SEE THIS LOT FROM MY FRONT YARD. FRONT YARD. FRONT YARD. I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED. I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED. I WAS NEVER NOT so i don't know i just want to make you aware of that that that's not fair a lot of these things that are right around our corner today we receive no notification despite being five houses from the intersection so um just want to let you know that thank you did you have anything to add though about the project i'm sorry uh just about the traffic okay thank you thank you and then if you guys want to address anything about the traffic that would be great

Certainly, you know obviously this is not we're not looking at high volume businesses like you know a drive through coffee shop or fast food place so it's a little more geared towards neighborhood businesses, I think is is more a reasonable approach so it's not like the high volume of traffic that we're anticipating there.

The driveways were also narrowed.

That's correct. Right.

They're 24 feet. Correct. And they're currently 55, 60 feet.

Yeah, they've been moved off the corners.

Yeah, as far from the corners as they can while still being safe to other properties.

So originally, the lot actually used to be about, I would say, two feet away from the street. And then they got pushed back about... They're probably seven eight feet back now away from use the mic, please Yeah, so they're both about closer to you seven eight feet away from the curb now So just little parking spaces you're talking about the parking spaces. Yeah. Yeah, that's true. That's another safety feature on Yeah, that was done about five years ago. So I

And you're going to maintain that same distance from the sidewalk?

Yes, correct.

I guess if I back it up, we'll see that.

Yeah, that's the original. Any other questions or comments?

Yeah, I'll turn it over to the board. Mrs. Zappel, do you have any comments or questions on this one?

No, no further comments. Thank you. I'm excited to see the improvements to this property. Thank you.

Mrs. Smith?

Yeah, I'm happy to see it go forward. I think with the conditions, all of my concerns are met. Thank you. Mr. Jones?

Thank you. Yeah, we've, you know, again, we've all, everybody on the board has seen this one in the past. I believe, yeah, you were on one of those. So the one, I did take a look at the original submittal with respect to the traffic flow on this site. And yeah, the point was made by Mr. Fisher that actually the traffic flow is a lot better in this configuration than what was on the site previously. Also, you know, it's important to note that the previous use of this site was a gas station historically or a service station prior to that Which has a lot more frequent and quicker turnover than than a sort of storefront type setup So the situation is certainly improved over what was what is historically occupied this site. So I think this is it This is a good layout. It's it's great that and I would agree with the residents have spoken about this that you know, this is a you know, to clean this corner up and activate that corner and get something in there as a good thing for the city. So no further issues with it.

Thank you. And if I may also, there was actually a third apron that was deleted as part of that project that was done a few years back. Correct, yeah, yeah.

And again, that's one thing I should, it is, you know, I know there are engineers not present today, but you know, it is best practice to move those driveways as far as you can from a signalized intersection, and they've done that. This is exactly how you're supposed to lay something like this out. So this is good.

Thank you. Councilman Deregna?

Yeah, so business-wise, who are we marketing to?

Have we come up with that yet? We don't have a tenant in place yet or any tenants that made a commitment to the site yet. So we've kind of been marketing it for two years without much traction. However, you know, back to that old phrase, if you build it, they will come type of thing. So we're going to give it a shot.

And knowing you're not looking for, like, pushing it towards a market or multiple markets, right? I mean, are we looking for a beauty salon? Are we looking for, you know, from a marketing standpoint, I would imagine you have some tenants that you'd like to bring in.

It could be a beauty salon. It could be an insurance office. You know, they might take some space. It could be a small medical clinic. So that, you know, it's kind of open to use as far as that. But other than that, I mean, we don't really have something, you know.

I'm looking more from the traffic flow side of things. I mean, if you said, hey, we're going to do a coffee shop and a convenience store, then obviously traffic is going to increase a little bit based on those two as opposed to office space or... Right, you know hair salon. I'll say so we're good with the parking.

It's really not kind of set up for that Yeah, most coffee shops. They want to have the drive-through window and you know little can be wants their own spots and all that You've got ten of them around at every other gas stations, right? Right.

Yeah, just making sure and as you know as the developer we'd like to Kind of be able to pick and choose what kind of goes in there just to make sure that there's not one that, you know, people are kind of like lingering, you know, that can fill up the whole parking lot. So we kind of got to be a little picky in who the tenant might be. So, but yeah, with consideration, as far as with the parking work, we're really tight. So we're taking that into consideration.

consideration as far as very good no yeah I think I'm you've seen it a couple of times down appreciate you guys making them changes to bring it up to what we're asking for so and I'd love to see something in that that spot clean it absolutely yeah I would agree we've talked about the spot for a while obviously and it was a part of the years at least record our plan too so I'm excited to see it activated so can I get a motion please on this one sure

Yeah, probably that modification where it talks about the split face probably should just add the color just so that we know what it is.

I was going to say gray to match the front facade. Perfect. Perfect. Okay. Perfect.

And that would be number two, I guess, at the end of number two.

Yeah.

Yeah. It's a modification, but you can put it in there too. Okay.

We can do that. Okay. All right. Thanks. Based on the fines effect, I move to recommend approval of the garage plaza development plan with the following one condition that The fire and engineering departments approve the redesign for emergency vehicle access to the rear of the building. A master signage plan is submitted for approval at a future meeting. A dumpster enclosure design in accordance with 1216.03J is submitted for administrative approval. An exterior lightening does not exceed 4000K, does not exceed 16 feet above grade, and complies with section 1230.03 with no exceptions granted by this approval. two modification to allow landscaping to be less than the minimum 25 requirement to allow parking to be located less than 20 feet from the right-of-way to allow the dumpster enclosure to be located less than 10 feet from the property line to permit the use of split face cmu and standard size units on the rear of the building and dumpster enclosure and for the split face to be to match the gray color on the front facade of the building three are standard conditions second

call please smith yes apple yes jones yes belcone yes del regno yes motion carries great thank you very much thanks very much thanks for all your help too thank you next item on the agenda is the creekside state subdivision preliminary plan uh yes so this was uh cuyahoga hardwood subdivision previously

And it's associated with Ordinance 2026-31, Planning Commission recommended approval on May 11th that rezoning go through to rezone the frontage from general business and office building to R1F80, which is the one family zone for this proposed 19 lot subdivision. It's just under, it's about 12 and a half, 12.61 acres to be exact. And let's see. So we do have This is really contingent on that rezoning going through because if it doesn't go through then you're gonna have some substandard Lots for those commercial zones. So that's the first thing that you're going to see There are some modifications Which are are not unusual and not excessive either for some of the Lots where the lot widths are for these interior lots are a little bit less than what they should be. They have been able to adjust these lots just by pushing the setback farther than 50 feet, 60 feet, which can be done when these are such large lots like they are. The next, we do have a corner lot and it does require the lot to be 120 feet in width. So sub lot one has a minimum lot width that is less than 120 feet. Again, it's a very large lot and you'll see in a minute that the area where the actual house can be built on that lot does have plenty of space. Same thing with minimum lot depth. Sub lots four, five, six, and 14, they are less than 170 feet. But if you look at how they average out, they're averaging out more than 170 feet. And that, again, is important, especially for the members of the BBCA, because you want to make sure there's enough room that they have room on their lot for their home and then for the back deck and pool and whatever else they want to put back there. So other than that It does meet the code requirements so modifications this is just what gives you the authorization to grant these zoning modifications these exceptions and We do see these in cases like this where you're you're dealing with an infill parcel. So you're working around existing businesses and subdivisions and Concept plan, you can see it's changed a little bit. You've got a little bit, the cul-de-sac bends down a little bit and that's in response to what was discovered and that there's riparian setbacks or setbacks from the high bank of the creek. So some changes were made based on that. So with that said, if you do make a recommendation, planning commission makes recommendations to council on subdivisions. It's number one, conditioned upon the adoption of Ordinance 202631, that rezoning, modifications that I just mentioned, and then the standard condition for subdivisions. And this is a subdivision preliminary plan as well. There's a final step in the process is the subdivision final plat along with the final plat is when you actually see the construction plans, grading and drainage and utilities and construction details. They come along with the final plat. Preliminary plan is just really taking a look at the lot lines and how they lay out. Thank you.

Thank you. The applicant come forward, please. Welcome.

Hi, good evening. Edward Pavasek, 1779 Granite Court with EFG Custom Homes and Development.

Kevin Hoffman, Polaris Engineering Surveying, 34600 Chardon Road, Willoughby Hills, Ohio.

Thank you. Anything to add to Mr. Bedell's report?

I don't think so. I think he covered all the bases.

okay um the only thing i would like to add to the uh commission here is i did work on an agreement with the plaza owners on the mounding and fencing and and things like that so we're just getting all the legals together before final plat but there will be mounding between all the properties a fence on top and large green arbs And we're going to work on the rezoning of that small parcel to be restricted during certain business hours that we'll present here before final. And we're going to bring that through with planning to rezone the residential section there to have a restricted use for like farmers markets and stuff like that during normal business hours. and other things but uh they will i know one of the concerns previously was when we went through rezoning and stuff was um any noise and stuff that could happen in the future so we're gonna make sure that these are in the hoa docs and also restricted in the um in the uh um on all the deeds as well so then we won't have those problems 50 years from now so be really disclosed there And we also added the houses. The houses that you see on there are 4200 square feet. So just to show you how big lots are. Just want to overemphasize that. I think that's pretty much it.

Great, thank you very much.

Just so as far as buffering, so you see the buffer mound of light green snake like object.

I guess I can.

point to it so this area this is all voluntary this is something that the developer has volunteered to do to provide some privacy for these homes here

um where this business is and it's what would you say about half and half on your property and half on their property perhaps the majority on lots one two and four um and the beginning of five is all on my property and then then five and six and that five and six are going to be about 10 feet on their property and 10 on ours then it goes would go down yes and it'll cover their their retaining pond there that we still have to work on giving access but one of the agreements that we're going to do is um is when we develop and do all the construction everything is it's not touching their parking lot they just redid their parking lot last week it looked really nice and they're planning on some more improvements on their whole plaza as well too but that will kind of eliminate noise and or visions from people on Dover Center and as well as alleviate any type of headaches down in the future for The residents as I go back there.

Yeah, so there is no code requirement there is a code requirement up here and They that they have buffer and they're they're actually providing it here and right here. So they are meeting that requirement and

Thank you.

Great, thank you. I think we have a lot of audience participation for tonight, which is great. But we are going to limit it to two minutes and one comment, just so we can get to hear everyone this evening. Because you can see we do have a pretty packed agenda. So residents, if you want to start coming up and name and address and comments.

Come on up.

Daniel Zantbauer, 2519 Dover Center Road.

Welcome again.

Guess my my one comment is just with the adjustments to the men lot sizes This is like 13 acres of land. I think they could fit appropriate lot sizes within that so I think giving adjustments to what's required is Shouldn't be done. I think they should resize these to make sure they meet all the requirements. Thank you.

Thank you Anyone else like to comment? Oh, you can come on up name and address

Hi, Sarah Thatch at 2425 Dover Center Road. Welcome. My comment is my neighbors and I on Dover Center, we live on obviously a very busy street, and our backyard and our views are our peace. That's really where we get the privacy and quiet, so I'm concerned about kind of an eyesore going from having beautiful woods in my backyard to having houses right there. So I would love if there could be trees that are left as much as possible or some kind of separation so I don't have to have, you know, a house in my backyard instead of privacy. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Would anyone else like to comment?

welcome and uh terry mackin 2843 dover center road uh the entrance on center ridge is that like a split entrance with one of those signs in the middle that a lot of developments have no it's just just a regular okay that's all i need to know great thank you thank you welcome

Hi, my name is Issa Canada 27490 Seneca Drive. I was just wondering if there was a traffic study done because they're building another. Well, they want to rezone on the other side of Dover Center as well, and it's going to create a lot of conjunction. So just wondering if they submitted a traffic study to the city yet.

It will let you know. Thank you. Anyone else have comments? You can come on up. Welcome. Hi.

Roberta Paul, 2461 Dover Center. I am concerned about flooding and the erosion of the bank, and that hasn't been commented on. So I wonder what you're going to do about that, because it does erode every year more and more.

Great, thank you. So we'll have the questions, and then we'll have the developers come back and answer all the answers. Thank you. Welcome. Hi.

Dalma Kovacs, 2447 Dover Center Road. I'm sorry, you slowed down. What was that? Dalma Kovacs, 2447 Dover Center Road. So I live right next to Sophie as well, and I have the same concerns as the erosion, the flooding, also loss of the view in the backyard. It's very peaceful. There's very little light. There's very little sound back there, and I'd prefer not to be looking into other backyards and listening to other people when I like to go outside. Great, thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to comment?

All right, seeing none, I'm gonna have the developers then answer the questions that you came up and asked. The first one was a question about lot size.

The lot size is nothing I've developed here within the city of Westlake numerous subdivisions and and Have also bought off of other developers and this is the modification we're asking are pretty standard for infill projects So I just they're not they're not major or anything in that matter On it and there's some very there's some large lots in there as well to the accommodate the the small modifications are asking for regarding the flooding and draining I'm not sure the committee was aware of this but about a week and a half ago two weeks ago the Forest Park where the they had their HOA meeting and myself and a few councilmen and the city assistant engineer we all went we answered questions for them as well for about two hours and talked about a lot of the Concerns on erosion and flooding and just what to reiterate what we said everything there if some of the people I'm not sure Who are here tonight as well? We went over that there's there's gonna be less water discharge from this property So there'll be less erosion coming from this property into the creek going downstream so the water quality gets better and The the water discharge gets extremely better because we retain it all the water We retain the neighbors properties as well to anything up flows into this property We're gonna snag that and bring it into the pond and then discharge it over time And I think the buffering and stuff we have we'll work with typically when we clear we're gonna clearly The areas that need to be cleared to put the street in But we will like to work and keep as much trees we can near the riparian setback Which I believe we have to keep anyways and then anything on seven eight and nine work with the new homeowners when we build to maintain what we can for for the for the homes that it's part of the

those lots are ideal to keep the woods you want to keep as much as we possibly can great thank you traffic study pardon traffic study oh traffic kevin go ahead yeah generally uh i mean obviously the city engineer when we do our uh final improvement plans he'll he'll be able to comment on that uh from my experience just based on the number of lots This would not warrant a study based on ODOT standards. Sometimes, as I said, if there's a known issue in the area, the city engineer may request some type of study. But generally, this would not warrant it based on the number of trips projected.

Great. Thank you very much. To my fellow commissioners, Councilman DiRegno, comments?

NO, I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS IN MAKING SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO IT, THE BUFFERING ON THE BACK SIDE FOR THE BUSINESS OR THE SHOPPING PLAZA I THINK IS GOING TO PAY FOR ALL OF US IN THE END, IF YOU WILL. I THINK THAT'S A WISE MOVE ON EVERYBODY'S PART THERE. YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK ONCE WE GET FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD, LETTING THE CHIPS FALL, AS FAR AS THE ZONING GOES, WHICH IS COMING THROUGH, AND THEN seeing what it actually looks like when on a full layout size wise what i know you kind of you placed in there 4 000 square foot right now is that the intended sizes or what do you think in there at

From my experience building here, they come out between 35 and 4,200. Most residents want that in half-acre lots. The bigger lots at the end of the cul-de-sac could have a little bit bigger homes, but my average is right around there, about 4,000 at the most.

Yeah, and I believe that's actually because there's a coverage, I think it's 20% of the lot, so I think it ends up being around 4,000. Right, right.

You can't have anything bigger on these lots, maybe 4,300 or something like that.

Are you marketing it as a bigger, though? I mean, are you going to try and keep it all?

No, no. These are all customs, and it's just worth the cost to build. You price yourself out. Homes aren't ATMs, and so someone wants to build a – I have a private subdivision down the street that we have – In front of the in front of the board here and those are three $4,000,000 homes that are you know, right? I think the first one redesigns 8900 square feet. So these aren't designed for that.

Got it. No, I think you. It's not a terrible layout if you will. I think it's probably getting what you need and what it can handle and not be over. overburdening on the neighbors nor on the traffic on Center Ridge. Construction-wise, start to finish, are you, you're not piecemealing this out doing,

As of right now, I'm planning on building it all on it and being a Westlake resident, you know, still work with all the surrounding neighbors like I've stated many times. And I think overall time frame, probably two to three year project, streets probably by spring next year. So work on them, get them in the fall and in the winter and then getting houses to release sometime in the spring next year.

Good. That's all I have for now.

you very much mr. Jones thank you a couple of questions so we haven't really seen an aerial that shows how this aligns with whatever's on the south side of Center Ridge I'm just thinking about the location of where the street is hitting Center Ridge is it directly across from a driveway is that the intent of

It is and it I guess I don't know if you could zoom up on that if he has their way and it kind of gets cut off by our deed there a little detail we showed for the Other goes that that's a good one.

Mr. Bell, okay Yeah, so When I looked at the and I know that you're doing the same thing that Forest Parkway has currently with the angle which is a little bit steeper than we typically want to see at a three-way intersection but Of course, being a stop condition and a no outlet street, you know what I mean? The traffic's obviously gonna be very minimal. You're right, this is not to the level that's gonna justify a traffic study based on the volumes. It would only be based on if there was a existing condition that was a problem. So that's why I'm thinking like, is there anything across from there that would warrant it? I mean, I guess the city engineer can certainly take a closer look at that and require something if that's the case.

Yeah, and I think if we almost try to bend it more into 19 to make a perpendicular then I guess your your driveway But wouldn't line up.

Yeah, and that was my next concern is if we do because I was thinking well perpendicular would be the ideal situation Not if it's gonna create a stagger situation at a center ridge that makes this that that's that would Counteract the improvement that you'd get by doing that. So I think if you're aligned directly with a driveway I think I'm good with the way this is now and Also, I was thinking, I don't know what that does to sub lot 19, but it looks, I can't see what it looks like. That thing's already 0.9 acres. So I'm assuming you'd probably be okay on lot size if you had to do that. But no, I think that's fine. As long as it aligns with the driveway, I think that that's important. Also, so I know you've made some revisions to the plan to accommodate the riparian setback at the west end. So this may be more of a question for Jim, for Mr. Bedell. In those riparian setback areas, does the ordinance read that all the natural vegetation has to remain, or are they able to clear that out and regrade it? What are the restrictions on activities in the riparian setback?

I actually administered through our city engineer, so I'll have to defer to him.

Okay, and we're going to see this again at a final plan level, right? You do, yeah. I think a number of residents have brought this up, and it's also a concern that I have. If there's any way that... Really, the whole point of a riparian setback is to preserve the natural floodway, right? And a big part of that is preserving the natural vegetation that occurs in those floodways. So I'd want to make sure that... Once you get into the detailed grading and everything, is your intent to leave that area untouched?

For sure. Yeah, I think other than just installing the outlet from our pond.

Well, yeah, you might need to have a five-foot trench or something to get a pipe in. And then obviously, if there's any dead trees or whatever that need to be cleared out, just property maintenance-wise, that's something else. But the idea would be to keep all the healthy stuff, all the natural stuff clean. It helps the waterway, and it also helps preserve somewhat of a natural buffer for the residents of the West, which would hopefully allay some of their concerns. And you've already talked about the stormwater with the surrounding areas. I'm glad to hear that you met with the Forest Park HOA. That's good to hear. We'll see more details on that buffer, I guess when the detailed plans come in. So other than that, I'm good. I think, you know, again, as long as council agrees with our recommendationary zone, the front part, I think we're good to go here.

Thank you very much, Mrs. Smith. Mr. Jones already discussed my basic concerns for buffering the riparian setback and that driveway. So I think I'm good. Thank you. Mrs. Apple.

as Mr. Jones hit on my points as well. Sorry. So no, that's great. I'm glad we were all thinking that way. I also wanted to thank. We're in agreement. Yeah. And thank you for proactively reaching out to the plaza and again, participating in that HOA meeting. I appreciate you always being proactive and meeting with the neighbors. So, and addressing their concerns. So thank you very much for that.

Thank you, and I agree with my fellow commissioners. I think this looks like it's in a good place, and I'm excited about residential being there, and I have no other comments. Can I get a motion?

Sure. Based upon the finds of fact, I move to recommend approval of the Creekside Estates Preliminary Plan with the following. One, approval is conditioned upon the adoption of Ordinance 2026-31. 2 modification for sub lots 789 and 14 to be less than 100 feet wide of the building line and sub lot one to be less than 120 feet wide of the building line and for sub lots 456 and 14 to have a depth of less than 170 feet and. three approval is subject to approval the preliminary plan by engineering department and compliance with the code and the ordinances of the city of westlake and then the development process should there be any changes necessitated by engineering requirements that visually alter the appearance of the development approved by planning commission the plan should be resubmitted to planning commission second roll call please apple yes jones yes falcone yes del regno yes smith yes motion carries great thank you very much thank you for your time thanks next item on the agenda is westlake flex condos development plan

S28820 Rainy Parkway. So this is a light industrial flex condominium development. You did review the conceptual plan at the April meeting. And there's just been some minor variations since then. Four fewer parking spaces, still more than what's required by codes, no issues with that. And just some more, just really some refinement to what you've seen before. will still be potentially the proposed mix of office, contractor, light assembly, warehouse uses, and it does align with the guide plan and with code. There were some concerns, particularly with the fire department, and so just today we received some revisions. Fire lanes have been added where needed, which is really great. And you're going to see that in a minute. So that was really one of the main issues that the design before today had. So we'll get to that in a minute. So when we go through the box score, as you can see, everything is going to be working out here. Condition to revise the civil plans to show curb, the type of curb that you're going to use. And condition about a master signage plan for a future meeting is going to be required. You will still require a modification for the wet detention basin. We know it's wet now to be in the front yard setback with a four foot high fence. That's what has been volunteered and that makes a lot of sense because of the side slopes and the proximity to the public sidewalk. We do need a design for the trash enclosures to be provided. This is the industrial zone So actually split face is allowed in the industrial zone So there's really it's just more or less so that I know what I'm going to be reviewing when the construction plans come through Condition that exterior lighting fixtures do not exceed 4000 K building elevations That they don't exceed 16 feet above grade for that So Here's your conceptual plan. This is what you saw in June, and this has already been changed. This is what, if you checked your email today, this is what you've seen. So this is actually satisfying the needs of the fire department, but look at how much it's aligning with that conceptual plan that you've already seen. Really, I appreciated what they had done with the June submittal I really like this idea of having this big open space between the buildings and the potential for using that parking for other activities But we have to be practical and they have to be able to fight fires on all sides of buildings And so this does accomplish that Well we do have building elevations and they pretty much match what you've seen already with the conceptual designs. So June submittal and again the revision which more closely matches the conceptual plan. So we will need some updated civil plans. As a result, we do have, and we can pass them around, hopefully we've got them on the cart, but we do have materials, if they're not, are they there okay great excellent uh okay so let's see the uh only thing that's changed from what you've seen in the report before is a modification for the detention basins to be located in the front yard setback with a four foot tall uh black unless they would like a different color but typically it's a four foot tall black ornamental fence and i'm saying along the rainy park Rainy Parkway property line or which is the same as the right-of-way line And then nothing has changed with the other conditions and I've gone through everything else.

Thank you.

Thank you very much Welcome your name and address and I'm gonna excuse myself to get to graduation and turn it over to Matt as the vice chair But go ahead.

Okay Gregor and found design two seven one zero one East Oviatt suite 23 Bay Village, Ohio

Tom Lawrence, 2946 Forest Lake, West Lake, Ohio.

Any additional anything to add to the report?

I do have one question I would like to talk about with the fire apparatus access. Is it considered 360 degrees or one thing I thought right after I sent you the updated site plan was the possibility of extending the drive between the two buildings towards the retention pond so that they could then access the 150 feet from either side.

Well, I can't speak for the assistant fire chief. I think that might be possible, but one of the issues with doing it that way is, hopefully we can see this in one of these versions. You can see it a lot better. Let me see, is there anything else? No, I guess not. Is where you're beginning the slope. So where you've got the slope starting for the retention basin is like right up against the building. Right.

So I was wondering, is there a certain width and maybe we could work that out with the fire department?

You could. I mean, if you still, yeah, because this is, you know, this is clearly a good, you know, good option that you have as well. If you're going to do that, you'd have to have 20 feet clear in between the two buildings. Do you have that right now? 30 feet. You have 30 feet, okay. So I know they would be looking for that. I can't answer them. I think it would possibly be okay. It would work for the southern buildings. I don't know, would it work for the northern buildings? I guess you'd...

Over there. We don't have the pull straight in.

Yeah, you don't have the issue with ladders From what I understand if it's not more than 150 feet in length We don't need any kind of roundabout or cul-de-sac or anything like that so I hate to say this, but maybe you should ask them to table it then and it puts you off another month, but Get you what you're looking for that way Talking about putting a drive here I

So that they can attack a fire from 150 feet on either side without putting that drive in. Or the one up here. Right. So basically it's just doing that and this. But in order to, we would need to come back with that actual plan and after a discussion with the fire department to get it.

You have a couple that we were just discussing. So you have a couple options. I mean, you could, they could recommend approval for the way it is right now. And. then you're approved for this design. And then this still has to be approved by council. Of course, that would be on Thursday. But after it's approved, Planning Commission, you could always ask to reconsider this at the next meeting with the preferred design. That's a way to keep things moving.

That's not something that could be done administratively, I assume, after the fact?

No, because there's nothing... I mean, they're not seeing, if you had a version of it right now that they could look at, then yes, but they don't have, you know, that's too much, that goes beyond my capability. Okay.

Do you have any other comments or? I don't know. We don't have any other comments.

Okay, that's fine. Does anyone from the audience have any comments on this proposal? Okay, hearing none, we'll start with Ms. Apple.

I like this project. I'm excited to see it happen and thank you for what you've done.

Thank you.

Yeah, miss Smith I would agree and I think The fire department comments you can work toward those It'd be exciting to see this in the city Okay No, I think we're on the right track.

I like to see this use of that property back there. No, I think it's a it's a needed needed item here in the city of Westlake and Great.

Thank you. I agree. I think maybe just a point of clarification. So we did receive the revised drawings today that were placed into here. So if we were to recommend approval of this, we'd be approving it based on what was submitted today, which is the driveway that runs all the way across and is being constructed all the way to the eastern end of the property. So yeah. And then again, if... fire department uh if you're able to you know convince them to do something different you want to come back to us you know we can we'll certainly look at it um i i like the layout that was in our packet and i like your new one too they're both they i think they both are good so um i'd be fine with moving forward either way so um with that uh can i get a motion yeah

Let me get you there and then we should probably go. Let's make sure this is doing what it should. So I know I'm talking about conditioned civil plans indicate curbing. I think somehow it needs to read that the civil plans are revised, right? To match the...

So conditioned the civil plans are revised to match the... The layout that was submitted via email on June 1st.

You got it. You got it.

Got that, Dave? Yeah. All right.

ready ready based on the fine effects I moved recommend approval of Westlake flex condos development plan with the following one modification for detention basins too low to located in the to be located in the front yard setback with a four foot tall black ornamental fence along the rainy Parkway property line to condition that the civil plans are revised to match the June 1st submittal FOR CURBING, SHEET PH101 IS REVISED TO INDICATE 4000K MAXIMUM FOR FIXTURES AND BUILDING ELEVATIONS SHOW THE LOCATIONS OF ALL FIXTURES NOT TO EXCEED 16 FOOT IN HEIGHT ABOVE GRADE. A DETAILED DESIGN FOR THE TRASH ENCLOSURES IS PROVIDED. A MASTER SIGNAGE PLAN IS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL AT FUTURE MEETING. Three are standard conditions. Do I hear a second?

Second. As we're doing number four, civil plans shall be revised to match the layout of the plans submitted on 6-1.

I included that in number two. Any other discussion on the motion? Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll. Jones? Yes. Del Regno? Yes. Smith?

Yes. Apple? Yes. Motion carries. Great.

Thanks.

Thank you, guys. All right.

Next item on the agenda is the Cahoon Nursery Development Plan Storage Building.

Yes, 27630. So you may recall the conditional use permit back in 2025 ordinance 2025-105. It was a non-conforming nursery use. It was grandfathered. So this actually made it a conforming use by granting that conditional use permit. It did actually include with it the conceptual plan that showed this building at this location. So This is, for most of you anyways, I don't think you were here at that time yet, Linda, right? But for the rest of you, it's more or less review. And it's generally in the same location as where their maintenance building is now. It's larger than what they have now, but there's some... modifications that are needed, some setback modifications that are needed, really because it's where it needs to be on the site, but you've got I-90, you've got Cahoon, you've got the creek, and you've got a severe slope, and it's really, you've got a very small area where this can go. And so that's why you'll see that. And that was known at the time of the CUP. There were no objections to it at that time as well. So it's actually in the office zone, so it's a conditional use. The design of this is really appropriate for something that you would see in the office zone. It's got a pitched roof. It's a high-end appearance of stone and siding materials, high quality. Warm residential colors. Windows on all sides. It's actually very attractive, especially for what it is. And lighting is very limited. Understated downcast fixtures above doors. Under 16 feet or less, so no issues with that. Get past some of these here. There we go. Yeah, there it is. So that is really, did Steve design this, Steve Schill? Yeah, Steve did an outstanding job with the design. All four sides look great. That's your light fixture, it complies. Fire department, they're concerned about type five construction, it's not type five, so no issues with that. So the modifications, as I mentioned, really, there's no way you could build anything there and meet the code requirements. But these modifications are consistent with the setback modification discussed during the CEP review and approval. And if you were to try to meet the setback requirements, you'd have a building that's actually smaller than the one that is there today. So that would not work for the developer, or for the owner. Sorry, for Brian. Sorry, Brian. Would not work for Brian. Mr. Cahoon. It does require this against of your recommendation to counsel with the modification mentioned in the standard condition.

Thank you Okay, do you have anything to add our first I'm sorry, yeah, can you state your name is the addresses for the record Tom Baldwin Brimhall engineering 801 Moore Road Avon, Ohio.

Okay Brian Corrigan Two seven six three zero Detroit road. Kahuna nursery. Great.

Thank you. Do you have anything to add to Mr. Bedell's report?

I don't.

Um, I mean, based on that structure, uh, If you look at it and you know the property, Steve flattened out a lot of ground there. So know that that won't happen. And we're not planning on storing any pallets behind in trees because there's a cliff there and we'd be in the creek. But the building itself, I think, is an attractive building. Pretty nice building for a garage. So that's really all I gotta say about that.

Great, thank you. Any one from the audience wish to comment on this proposal? OK, hearing none, let's start with Miss Smith.

I think it's a great looking building and with kind of the care and attention you put into it, it's an investment in the community as well as your business. So I really appreciate what you're doing there.

Great, thank you Mr Del Regno. No, it looks great. I'm going to miss the old black building. No, I think it's definitely you're due for a good upgrade. So no, I think it looks great. I appreciate your efforts in taking over that odd piece of property and keeping it there, I guess. Yeah, thanks as Apple.

Yes, I would echo the comments of my other Commission members. This will be great and thank you for all you do for the community.

Great, thanks. I agree with everything that's been said. Again, this building reads like a residential garage to me, and that's a good thing, a very high-end, nice resident. Given the designer of this, Mr. Schill, who's done a number of high-end residential properties in the city, this looks a lot like the type of thing he'd do as a port-a-coach type situation. So that's great. I think it's a nice improvement for your property and for the area in general. So with that, can I get a motion?

Sure. Based on the finding of facts, I move to recommend approval of the Cahoon Nursery Development Plan with the following. One, a modification is granted to allow the proposed building and any parking use of the driveway to encroach into the required Cahoon Road 30-foot parking, 40-foot building, and north 40-foot building as setbacks and are standard conditions.

Second. Second.

Thank you.

Any discussion? Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Del Ragnall? Yes. Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Motion carries.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Next item is the Greens subdivision final plat.

Yes, this is the new street off Hilliard. So it's a major subdivision final plat for the greens. It's needed to construct the subdivision and sell lots for new homes. It's nearly identical to the preliminary plan that was approved in November of last year. Only change is being the addition of signature lines, utility easements and notes that were added. The modification minimum lot depth and this is again the same as before. It's a 15 foot modification sub lots 8 and 11 where they share a common line. And again, this is an infill parcel, so it does happen when you have infill parcels. Where there's no opportunity to have more property. So with that said, the If you are going to make a recommendation, there's other modifications. I didn't mention all the depth-to-width ratios. Basically, what that's talking about are lots that are a little bit more square than they are rectangular, and that's fine. Again, they're very big lots, so there shouldn't be any issues with setbacks and should be plenty of space for rear yard structures without needing to go to the Board of Building and Zoning Appeals. So with that said the modifications are all the same as previously Approved and with the standard condition for subdivisions.

Thank you Thank you. Can you state your names and addresses for the record?

Jeff plots with Neff and Associates 6405 York Road Parma Heights, Ohio 44130 John Chandler with Howard Hanna 19204 Detroit Road Rocky River 44116 Great, thank you. Do you have anything to add to Mr. Bedell's report? I think he's pretty much covered it all, but I mean, at the end of the day, I mean, the modifications haven't changed from what was already approved, and the plan hasn't changed honestly at all.

So, no. Thank you. Anyone from the audience wish to speak on this item? Hearing none, let's start with Councilman Del Regno.

No, I think I, you know, I think it's what we kind of thought we were going to see here at this point. So I really don't have much to say. Great. Ms. Apple?

Yeah, I was not present in November of 25, but based on all the notes and everything, it looks like all the work has already been done, and this is where we landed. So good work, everybody.

Okay. Ms. Smith?

Agreed. I think I'm good with the plan.

Yeah, again, there's you know we we already kind of hash this out in previous meetings. You know that this is in conformance with the preliminary plan that we were all pretty happy with, so I think we're good to move forward with this. With that, can I get emotion?

Based on the finding effects, I move to recommend approval of the green subdivision final plot with the following one modification for SL1, SL8, and SL11 to have a depth to width ratio that is less than 1.4 to 1 and 4 SL. 8 in SL 11 to have a depth of less than 100 170 feet and approval is subject to approval engineering department clients with the codes of the ordinance of the city of Westlake in the development process should there be any changes necessary by engineering requirements that visually alter the appearance of the development approved by the planning commission the planning the plan shall be resubmitted the planning commission second Any discussion?

Hearing none, please call the roll.

Jones? Yes. Del Regno?

Yes.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you for your time.

All right. Next item is, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. There we go. Okay. Sorry.

Ordinance 2026-58.

Yes.

This is to rezone 27059 Center Ridge Road from office building to general business. So this was the former Porter Library going way back. And it is, as you can see, it's all that pink area is all office building zone. And this aligns the parcel with the corridor as commercial character, expands future business use options and supports reinvestment. It applies only to this parcel, although the next one that you'll see is the adjacent owner that's sort of to the east, to the south, to the east, as well as also concurrently requested the same change. to her property. It's about .85 acres office building and so it's about almost 8,600 square feet for the building, has about 36 parking spaces, code requires 28 spaces if it's rezoned, so that should be fine. It's very limited interest with office building, and we've had lots of calls about different uses for it, resale shop or like a clothing resale shop or a restaurant or something like that. it's always no no no you can't do it it's only office so office is very limited so this will actually open this up for many more uses as you can see it's across the street from general business so that's an extension of the zone and not a spot zone as well and if it's rezoned and the property right next to it's also rezoned then you can see where that that red zone is really um stretching uh it's it's actually connecting across the two across Westwood Rd as well, so it's becoming a much bigger zone than it was before. So you've got, you know, a lot of uses that are very commercial in nature, obviously. General business uses, AccuCare, the Rusty Barrel. Got some residential vacant property that's to the south that is, I mean to the north rather, that's actually general business. You've got Russell Real Estate Services, Marathon. So you've got a lot of uses that are very commercial. Most of the area, like I said, is already general business, if you were to make that change. It is not consistent with what the guide plan shows. It's never been considered up until this point to rezone that area, that large area that's showing up as pink. So if this does get rezoned, then we'll be amending this guide plan map accordingly just so that it matches. I did do a zoning comparison, and there's some things that are going to be the same in both, as you can see in that very far left column. The main difference is you've got retail uses that are happening in the general business zone that you're not able to do in the office zone. So that's the main difference. There are a number of considerations for rezoning that you should consider. It's the physical and environmental conditions. Can they support general business uses? Well, this is existing. It's an existing property. Compatibility of potential uses with the surrounding development. Well, the neighbor that would be most affected is asking to rezone her property as well. for mental traffic impacts aesthetics Infrastructure you could potentially have more traffic depending on what use goes in there if it's general business It doesn't Establish an appropriate zoning pattern Does it create a spot zone? I don't think it does because it's across the street from general business It are the uses more suitable than those allowed under the current zoning I think the owner would tell you that they're having an issue with leasing the property as it currently is Have conditions changed to justify this amendment since it was first rezoned? Well, office has certainly changed a lot over the years, right? More people working from home than they did in the past. Is there a community need for this? And just property owners within 500 feet were notified of the rezoning request. So that said, I thank you.

Thank you. Yeah applicant, please state your name and address for the record.

Hello everyone, my name is Zeus Vega. And thank you and that your address for the record also you want just business address, you know. OK, so 29313 Clemens Rd Company is saying this financial great. Thank you. Do you have anything to add to Mr. Bill's report?

I do not. OK, would anyone from the audience wish to speak on this item? Okay, if you'd please come forward, state your name and address for the record. And again, as we stated with the previous items, if we can keep comments to a single trip up and keep it to two minutes in length, if at all possible, thank you.

Patty's Inn, 2750 Clark Parkway. My concerns about rezoning this are twofold. One is safety, and one is the traffic. This is a very popular route for kids biking, walking, and such to the intermediate and the high schools. You've already approved the Farage Plaza, which is also going to add more traffic onto Center Ridge Road. My concern is, depending on the type of business that you put into that area, how much will it impact? And will it impact late night business? I own the house that is the first behind it on Clark Parkway. So those are my concerns. Thank you.

Great, thanks. Anyone else wish to come forward? Okay. Then if, I'm sorry, I didn't, your name again? Zeus. Yes, okay, thank you. If you would like to respond to the residents' questions.

In this case, the property is, we're rezoning the property so we can add value to the community. That's it. Okay, thank you.

All right, then I'll turn it over to the commission. Let's start with Ms. Apple.

Sure, and just for, so we would rezone the property to general business. And then when businesses come forward, We would have discussions have opportunities to have discussions regarding the traffic and safety that for some businesses.

Yes, if it's a conditional use approved business, then you would. If it's a main use, then no right.

So regarding what we're talking about today, just the rezoning. I'm in favor of that. I think it makes perfect sense, especially given the properties surrounding it.

Thank you. Thank you, Miss Smith.

Well, we're just discussing the rezoning, so I'm in favor of it because that building has sat vacant for how long? A couple of years at least? Yes, ma'am. I think there was an eye doctor in there last. There was. SO I'M HOPEFUL, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE BUILDINGS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE STREET THERE, EAST AND WEST OF WESTWOOD ARE A LITTLE UNDERRENTED OR, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE A LITTLE DEAD. IT WOULD BE GOOD TO SEE THE AREA REVITALIZED AND NOT CONTINUE TO DECLINE.

I AGREE.

SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT.

THANK YOU. MR. DEL REGNO.

YEAH, SO THE ONLY, SO JIM, MAYBE YOU CAN, MR. BEDELL, I'M SORRY, YOU CAN CLARIFY FOR ME. Are we creating, and I don't know if it's even possible to do it opposite of a, we're not spot zoning, but if we were to do this and the next one.

Yes.

Russell Realty is still office and everything around is going to be general business. Is that, we're not intentionally creating that, right? It's just the nature of this.

Yeah, that would be the loan office zone parcel, but they're not considered a spot zone because you're not changing their zone. They're pre-existing. You're just changing the zoning around it. And we have lots of other properties like that in Westlake, too, where that's happened.

Okay. Yeah, other than that, I think, you know, I think I understand you're polite with it. It's kind of the office industry is dead, for lack of better words, and it's probably hard to market right now as an office only. At this time, yes. I don't have a problem with it. The businesses that could go in there are probably limited based on the configuration of the lots, right? It's kind of difficult to, it's goofy. It's weird. I don't know how to say it. I still can't understand how it ever got split like that, but it is what it is. So yeah, I think it's, I'm okay with it.

Thank you. I would agree with my commissioners, my fellow commissioners. So again, to clarify, so if a business, CAME IN AND WANTED TO SAY THIS PROPERTY IS REZONED TO GENERAL BUSINESS AND SOMEONE CAME ALONG AND WANTED TO LEASE THAT SPACE AND THEY WERE A PRINCIPALLY PERMITTED USE AND THEY WEREN'T PROPOSING ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE BUILDING, THEN THIS COMMISSION WOULDN'T NECESSARILY SEE THE PROPOSAL. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE USE THAT CAME IN THERE REQUIRED additional parking or something like that, or if their needs were beyond what the site has. And at that point they would have to come to us because we'd have to give a modification. Correct. Right. Correct. Okay. So basically the way I see it is that we're, You know, we're protected in that, you know, the zone, you're limited by what's on the site currently and what the zoning allows. So I think that I'm comfortable with that. And, you know, I think I would fully agree that this is not a spot zoning situation, particularly as we consider the property to the east. So I think which... You know, we'll discuss separately, but I'm in favor of moving forward to this, so. I guess we have we have another comment from the everybody with us taking one more comment from the floor on this or. That's fine. Yeah, you can come forward. Please state your name and address for the record.

Terry Mackin, 2843 Dover Center Road. It's more a question of the combination of the two lots. If they're ever going to be combined, that would have to come forward and be reviewed. Yes.

Yes. Planning Commission would have to approve that.

Okay.

All right. Thank you. Great. Thanks. All right. Hearing no other comments from the board or the floor, do we have a motion? Sure.

Based on the fine effects, I move to recommend approval of ordinance 202658.

Second.

Any discussion? Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Del Regno? Yes. Motion carries.

Great, thank you.

All right.

Good evening, everyone. Thanks. Next item is ordinance 2026-59.

Yes, this is 26943 Westwood Road. And as you can see, it's the property that is next to it. This is a 1.524 acres office building. It's a couple of different properties right now. One lot actually is, it's vacant land, but also includes a corner of the building as well. Obviously, we'd like to see that cleaned up and all one property at some point in the future. It's been an office slash warehouse originally, but back in 1952. Currently office of LifeBridgeCare, the CUP that you recommended approval for, hair therapy as well. It's about 11,708 square feet. It has somewhere in the neighborhood of 36 parking spaces on the east side of the building, 21 on the west side of the building, for a total of about 57. Code requires about 45 spaces. And I forgot to mention, this has already obviously been through PZOs as well, and so you've seen their comments. That's in the report. So we've gone through a lot of this, you know, a lot of this same surrounded businesses. And again, the future land use has always anticipated this remaining office, which is what it is today. Same zoning comparison applies. And same considerations for rezoning would apply as well.

Okay.

Great, thank you. Can you state your name and address for the record, please?

Yong Fu, 30285 Bruce Industrial Parkway, Solon, Ohio 44139.

Okay, thank you. Do you have anything to add to Mr. Bedell's report?

No, Mr. Bedell summarized it very well. I don't have anything to add.

Great, thank you. Any comments from the audience? And again, if you could please restate your name and address for the record.

Patty's Inn, 2750 Clark Parkway. And if you look at the map that you all, so you can see that here is my property and we share somewhat of the fence. The fence, when we first purchased the property, it was understood that the owners of the fences would be maintaining the fences. A portion of this, so I don't own the fence. Your site is wonderful, no problem. There is a section of this fence, though, that has fallen disrepair. I had the city come do a survey to confirm that the actual fence does not belong to me. They've had a five-foot easement to be able to repair it. My concern, again, is safety with that fence falling down. My house has been robbed. neighbors witnessed the people leaving my house through the backyard, through the fence. So that's my concern.

Thank you. Any other comments from the floor? Okay, do you have any response to the comments?

I think when we put this building about 1520 16 years ago we repaired the fence and it's definitely probably need another repair, but I don't think I'm here to discuss the fence questions here I'm here to talking about the zoning so if there's a fancy issue we can discuss that but I'm here to answer the question about his own.

OK, thank you. Any other and no other comments from the floor? OK, hearing none will move on to the board will start with Mr Del Rigno.

Likewise, I think that it's, you know, similar to the last one. I get it, the. Office side of things isn't working out the way we intended, so I have no issues. Miss Smith.

I agree with Mr Del Rigno.

OK, Miss Apple.

Yes, I have no issues either, but I do have a question. Who should she address her fence concern with? Good question.

I'll share that with code enforcement tomorrow.

Thank you very much.

Great, thank you. And that was going to be my... I'm sorry, did you have anything else?

No, I'm good with the rezoning. I just wanted to make sure she knew where to go.

Yes, I agree.

I forgot whose fence it is.

Yeah, I didn't want to make it sound like we were ignoring that comment, but it really is kind of separate from the issue of rezoning. And it is something that we've taken note of. And Mr. Bedell, if you'd please... Check in with code enforcement on that and we'll see if we can get something done about that. So I Have no concerns with the zoning my comments for this parcel are the same as the ones for the previous submittal So with that do we have a motion?

Yes, I move to recommend It's not a thing in fact, I removed recommend approval of ordinance 26-20 26-59

Second.

Any discussion? Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Del Ragno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, next item is Ordinance 2026-60. Mr. Bedell?

Yes, so this is 27398, 27408, 27438, and 27450 Center Ridge Road from office building and R1F80 single family to RMF24 multifamily. the applicants are here tonight their purpose is to rezone this entire property to rmf24 potentially for a future multi-family cluster housing development as you can see it is split zone parcel there's approximately a 1.65 acres rmf24 multifamily 24. approximately 0.98 acres office building, approximately 1.62 acres R1F80, one family residential. So a total of approximately 4.3 acres. By area, if it is rezoned, You could see 12 cluster homes. However, due to setbacks, circulation, buffering, drainage, it would be fewer than that, probably seven or fewer cluster homes with them mostly clustered in the wide portion close to Center Ridge Road. It really narrows, as you can see, that back area, maybe one house back there someplace. As a cluster housing development, you need a 30-foot setback, perimeter setback, so it doesn't leave a lot of space for anything to go in there. The same would be, it would be the same for townhouses or low-rise buildings for multi-units, apartment-style buildings. There just isn't room, much room in that back area. It's very narrow. Tree preservation would require 86 trees and 430 caliper inches to be preserved or replaced. This was at the PCL committee. The applicant did state their intent to develop cluster homes and rezone the entire property to maximize the number of units, and they would need to consult. I did for that meeting, I didn't show it here, but I just did a study just to see kind of maybe how many units would fit on that front area, and I came up with about seven. But again, that's not anything realistic. It was just to try to do a density study. That's why I didn't include it here because it's not really germane. But it did give kind of an idea of what's realistic versus saying that if you rezone it, you could have 12 clusters, which simply would not fit. And the only matter under consideration really is the rezoning request, not the layout, so I didn't include it for that as well. If this advances, the rezoning would be required to appear on the November ballot for voter approval as a referendum vote. So Planning Commission is a recommending body to Council, and if Council does go ahead and approve, it still has to go on the ballot for a citywide approval as well. The proposal mostly aligns with the guide plan. So the guide plan actually did anticipate this being multifamily, except for that front lot that's zoned office. The guide plan, and this predates any of us when this was first developed here back 2010, I think. at that point they anticipated this all this back plan becoming multi-family like this but leaving that front parcel office um ironically that front parcel is really too small to build an office building on it But nevertheless, that's what was considered. This has many of the same considerations for rezoning that I mentioned previously. And I won't reread all those again. I think the only thing that made me different here is I did note that a cluster development would be subject to a 30-foot perimeter buffer setback for adjacent homes to the west and Seneca Drive properties to the north, and single-family residential subdivisions are not required to provide buffering. So again, density wise, this is what it looks like when you put the 30 foot buffering in. The yellow, the shaded yellow area, that's all an existing easement for the office park that's behind it. So none of that can be used for development as well. And mathematically, you could have lots of units on the property, but realistically, it only works out. You can see the area up front that's really developable. uh zoning comparison uh we've got you know a lot a lot of different things to look at here and uh obviously the areas that are zone one family residential mainly that's what you're going to do is one family on it there's there's some other institutional type things and park type things that are allowed but mainly that's what it's going to be used for and then when we get into actually doing the multi-family you're looking a lot more Obviously, office, the office zone property, that's really going to primarily be office, no residential at all.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks. Could you please state your names and addresses for the record?

I'm Salim Chaudhry, Shalini Arora, Chaudhry 29124, King Arthur Court, Westlake.

Great, thank you. Do you have anything to add to Mr. Bedell's report?

No, we just want to develop this in accordance to city guidelines, and our intention is we are working with architect Steve Schill to come up with some sort of a preliminary workup for cluster home development, whether it is five, six, seven, depending on what the city allows and what the rules are.

Okay, thank you. Anybody from the audience wants to speak on this item? Okay, well, so yeah, if you wouldn't mind stepping aside and then if you please come forward one at a time, state your names and addresses for the record. And if you could again, keep your comments germane to this proposal and to two minutes and one time up. Thank you.

Leslie Mazzola 27489 Seneca Westlake based on the map that we received with notification of this meeting. My property in lines directly back on this drawing. And so I've lived there for 27 years. All the residents on our street kind of value Seneca as kind of a hidden oasis. It's all wooded presently, and I'm very concerned about how this development will affect the aesthetics of our street. And I know it's still in the development phase, but If that were to occur, I would certainly be moving.

Thank you, thank you.

My name is Issa Kanda 27490 Seneca Dr. So I mean if you guys have kids and you take him to squat in Center Ridge, you guys know in the morning it's so congested you can't get anyone in there. Adding something else will clearly make that worse. And on top of that, Westlake's comprehensive land use and planning goals emphasize on preserving single family neighborhoods. This would just increase the density to the neighborhoods when there's no need for it. And that's all I have to add.

Great. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak on this?

Suzanne, Mico, 27504 Seneca. I live across from Leslie. My concern as well is we have the elementary school there as well. Traffic would increase. We already know that we lost a crossing guard by the high school you know it's just more traffic onto center ridge is just a major concern and as well as like leslie mentioned losing a lot of the forest and trees that are back behind our property thank you thank you anyone else wish to speak on this

Okay, then if the applicants could if you have anything to in response to the residents comments Our intention is to keep as much Green cover as possible like, you know These are going to be very few cluster home and where it is going in the back It is that's where the setback is going to be 30 feet and probably even more with the retention pond So the chances are the view is not really going to change from the back

OK, thank you.

Alright traffic. I'm sorry any thought.

Yeah, yeah. And there was also a question about traffic.

Increased density in traffic.

Yeah, well, I think actually before they say I think it probably one thing to clarify and Mr Bedell the way that our code reads by changing the zoning with the density with the potential density of this property actually increase or does it stay? I know you talked about. So it does potentially increase, but there's practical limitations on how much can be put onto the site due to its shape. Correct, yeah. But anyway, yeah, if you could comment on potential for traffic.

Certainly we can do a study if it is really required. But like I said, it is already zoned for office use, two lots. Then there is a multifamily already zoned for it. So I think the effect is going to be minimal, but we will be happy to do a study if needed.

OK, great, thank you. Appreciate that. Was it did that cover overall? OK, great. Alright, then I'll move on to comments from the board. Let's start with Miss Apple.

Mr Padel, can you go back to the drawing that shows how that property is currently zoned? Which parts of it are zoned in which way? Yes, so the property that backs up to the Seneca people is currently zoned R1F80, right? So a single family home could indeed go back there?

Right, yeah.

Right. Right. Okay. And a single-family home would not have the 30-foot buffering that is required?

Just a 30-foot setback, but it does not, yeah, not, they could, there wouldn't have to be anything in that 30-foot setback. There wouldn't have to be a screen, a landscape screen or anything like that.

Okay, whereas in this case with multi-family, there would be some type of screening that would be required?

Yeah, if it's a cluster, it's a 30-foot buffer. If it was a different type of a multifamily, like townhomes, then it becomes 50 feet minimum, and then the buildings would have a greater setback than that, more than likely.

Thank you for clarifying that. Okay. Yeah, based on the way the property is, what you build, if you can even get a layout, and all of that is way down the road. So I don't have a problem with the rezoning, especially because then it gets put to the voters. And I appreciate that opportunity for our community to have. So that's where I am.

Great. Thank you. Ms. Smith?

The only thing I would have to add is that the potential for commercial property on that lot And again, it's it's too small to develop but if it were to be developed commercially it could generate more traffic I believe than than residential That was my only additional comment

Okay, thank you. Councilman? Yeah, I think as Ms. Apple kind of alluded to there, that back section and what Jim has played out with the 30-foot buffer, I mean, the end of the alley, right, is kind of there's not a lot you recognize and all that you can do with it. Can't really do it. um it's probably going to be for the individuals on seneca it's going to be probably no change to be honest with you from review standpoint um just because it's not really feasible to build anything back there and as ms apple said it's it's rm r1f80 right now someone technically could have that lot and put a come 30 foot off your property line and put a pretty big home sitting there so um it's not such a I don't think it's going to affect it that much. Traffic-wise, I'll stay out of that. It's not my world. The interesting thing is, and I don't know, I didn't hear Jim bring it up, but the hashed areas, right, that is, I think you did, it's deeded on to...

Yeah, it's actually the playground and parking for the office development that's behind it, even though it's on this property.

Right, so it's shrinking your lot down substantially on what you could put in there. I'm glad to hear you did take our advice from the PZL meeting to get someone involved and start looking at it, recognizing that it was kind of a time thing. I think they brought it to us so that we could get it on the ballot. Is the is a bigger thing and then sorting it out afterwards is you know, that's to come so I'm I'm I'm okay with it I think we're gonna see a lot more and I think you're gonna learn a lot more in this as the process proceeds.

So Okay, thank you So I have a little bit of a concern with the potential for rezoning this, only in that, not so much because I have any concerns about what you're proposing. I think that if you had Mr. Schill come in and design a seven or eight home, which might even be more than is possible, whatever, even if it's that many, cluster home development, In our using RMF 24 and have and requiring a buffer and just thinking of configuration a lot I think you would have something that would that would be really nice would fit really well and would be an improvement In general to the area and would not be a detriment to the adjacent residents. However, what I'm concerned with is What if the residents property owners etc to the West decide they want to start trying to rezone? I Because then at that point, you could end up with a much larger RMF 24. And again, that would be in conformance with the guide plan. So it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility that, you know, say the owner of the owners of the next two to three houses of the West, which I believe had been, I know I've seen them on the market over the years. I don't know if they've ever sold or whatever. But, you know, if... you know what would happen if those properties were also to go rmf24 then i think we might be in a situation where you could have a much larger multi-family development that could that could go in there right jim Well, no, they're zoned the same. We're looking at this map here. It looks like they're zoned the same way in the back as our one.

Yeah, they're also split zoned.

They're split zoned, right. So, you know, and I guess, you know, you could have that situation now because, you know, potentially somebody could buy this property on the ones to the west and develop it under the existing zoning. put a single family residential subdivision back there right up against the properties on Seneca, or not right up against it, but, you know, with the, you know, just align the way a single family subdivision would be. RMF 24, even in that case, would probably give those residents more protection because then at that point there'd be buffering required. And we'd have a little bit more, the commission at least would have a little bit more flexibility on, you know, making comments and requiring certain conditions and things like that. So, Even in that case, it might be better. But I do, and I guess the reason I'm bringing this up is because I was a little bit surprised when we received this that there was no concept plan submitted with it. I feel like in the past we've seen, and I don't know if concept plans are required for something like this.

They're not.

They're not. But we have seen them to accompany proposals like this in the past. The Creekside subdivision is a prime example of that. We saw a conceptual plan that went along with the rezoning request we're not seeing that with this so it's a little bit hard you know again we understand what you're saying we understand what your intent is based on what you're telling us i'd have more of a comfort level with this if i if i saw a plan that you've already prepared to show what it is that you want to do here that being said there's also the factor that this has to go to the voters so what is the time frame for that how soon does the board have to act on that in order for them to be able to get on the november ballot yeah i think this is uh this is it yeah okay yeah um then i think at that point we let the voters speak on it so i'll Again, I do have some thoughts on it, but I think that as this develops, I'll certainly be making more comments on what the actual development plan would look like. Again, in general, the concept, I don't have an issue with the rezoning. I just have concerns with what it would actually look like. I wish we had a concept plan to review, but given the time constraints, I understand that I'm willing to move forward with it.

Well, and as you know, too, if it's rezone multifamily 24, it doesn't necessarily have to be clusters, even though they they're saying right now they'd like to do clusters. They could sell the property to someone else and they could do any any use that's allowed in our MF 24. So you could look at townhomes or townhomes or three story apartment building.

Right, right. So, OK, well, again, you know, we'll see what happens with that and we'll see what the voters say. Do I? I guess we'll move into a motion then.

Based on the finding the facts, I move recommend approval of ordinance 2026 dash 60 second.

Any discussion? Hearing none, please call the roll Jones. You had to put me first, huh? Yes.

Del Regno?

Yes.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Motion carries.

I know, I know. It's predetermined. I got it. All right. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. Moving on then to the next item, which is Ordinance 2026-61.

Yes. This is 2116 and 2154 Dover Center to zone it from RMF 24 multifamily to health campus. This is for Concord Reserve. The request is quoting them to more fully serve and promote the health care and health maintenance needs of the community. What that means, less skilled nursing, assisted living, more independent living units, and then other improvements to the property such as a central dining, a central dining, I've got this, a central kitchen, sorry, new central kitchen, auditorium improvements to their Main Street and then some of the buildings that you see in that aerial photo go away and they get replaced by new buildings this property is it's technically it's It's legally nonconforming.

Not really, though. The code does allow them to continue.

So it's a little bit better than being legally nonconforming. But what it says is they're allowed to be there, but they can't expand or they can't really substantially change what they're doing. So in order to do that, they have to rezone to health campus. And Health Campus is the zone where senior services such like this exist now. And that was a more recent change that's happened. And as part of the Health Campus zone, they actually have a master plan on the site. So kind of unlike the last one where you didn't have an idea of what's planned, they do have this all mapped out, what they would like to do with it. And you'll get a better explanation of that in a minute. So anyway, site details, it's approximately 23.29 acres. Again, before the code changed, they would have been perfectly fine doing this under RMF 24. It's just the change that was made to the health campus zone that's really driving this. Looking at the different uses that can exist in the mean and conditional uses in the RMF24 zone, currently you could do any of the things we just talked about. So they could literally tear everything down and build three-story, low-rise apartment buildings in the entire site. and have hundreds of units, and that's not what they're proposing to do at all. It's really going to continue on as a senior service facility, just in a much more up-to-date way, in a way that they say it will better serve our community. This is what I mentioned earlier. They're in the way of their grandfather. 1211.34, after that change occurred in the code back in 2020, this was put in place that would basically say that if you're a senior service existing at the time of the code change, you can continue on. There's no issues, provided that the uses of the building or land or other uses on the property shall not be expanded or enlarged. So this allows them to change the campus and make it the way they want it to be. And this is showing senior services. Previously they were allowed as a conditional use permit in certain RMF 24 zones, and then that's what changed in 2020 where they were put only in the health campus district so that whenever there was a need for a new senior service in the community that you would actually rezone that property and then you'd have a say over what was done with it.

So give them a little bit more control of the city.

These are just all the senior services definitions. And these are all things that they do there already, assisted living, independent living, and skilled nursing or nursing home. The guide plan hasn't changed. Right now it's saying multifamily residential medium density. That's what the current zoning is right now. So if approved, this map would just get updated accordingly. And I'm going to have them go through their master plan for the site. Now, you're not approving the master plan at this point. That is something that the code doesn't specify. You'd have to have an approved master plan in order to do the rezoning. But they already have one that's in pretty good shape. It's real close to... to what you would need to approve. But it's not before you. What's before you right now is the rezoning. But you will see a master plan for this. did some preliminary planning um back in 2025 and they can go over what the the units of the independent living apartments will be when done the total number of what they are so i can tell you that it's uh far fewer than based on acreage alone if If they were doing the entire property, all this independent living, it's about 100 units less than what they would be able to do. So far less dense than what they could do with the property. So if this is rezoned, future approvals, and this type of rezoning also will not be going on the ballot. Their density is exactly the same density as it currently has, and so that doesn't trigger the referendum vote. Unlike the last one, which was changing from single family and office to a multifamily zone, that's what triggers that referendum vote. So if this moves forward, there's other things that would need to happen. There's a conditional use permit that's required. Master plan, that's this. Well, prior slide, I don't want to go back there, but the master plan, then a preliminary development plan, and a final development plan. So there's lots more to happen with this property. At this point, the considerations are for rezoning. These are the same considerations that I mentioned previously. And we'll have them go through these in detail for you.

So, yeah, that's it. Thank you. Great, thanks. Will the applicant please step forward? And if you please state your names and addresses for the record. I think they do extend a little bit. Yeah, we do. No, they just bend. Yeah, sorry.

I think there should be on the side, hopefully.

Yeah, I'll see if we can figure that out.

While he's doing that, if you guys want to state your names and addresses for the record.

Sure.

Becky Stambaugh, Michael Graves, Architecture, 341 Nassau Street, Princeton, New Jersey, 08540. Okay.

I'm Dane Sohoza with Michael Graves Architecture, also from Princeton, New Jersey, 341 Nassau.

OK. Give him a minute to get the.

I need a tech. Do you know how to open that? john homer life enriching communities 6279 tri-ridge boulevard suite 320 loveland ohio 45140 i put together a little presentation just to provide some context to some of the information that mr bedell shared And as soon as it pulls up here, I'll get started. But in general, you know. Life reaching communities we've been around for 127 years in senior living or from Cincinnati were considered the premier senior living provider in Cincinnati. Luther House Concord Reserve has a long history as well, 88 years before we affiliated with them in 2020. Here we go. Yeah, I'm on the next page here. At the time of the affiliation, They had 80 units of independent living under construction and another 24 that were approved. Life enriching communities model is heavy independent living. We do have assisted living memory care and then we have enough skilled to actuarially take care of our residents should they need it. Obviously you have ebbs and flows and sometimes you have to provide from the outside. But that that's our model. But you can see from from here Luther Holmes model was quite a bit different. It was heavy skilled nursing and less independent living. Fortunately, at the time, what we saw was the market for independent living was strong, continues to be strong. It's getting stronger. So we knew we were going to have to right size the campus. So That 80 independent living, we finished up that construction by 2024. It was stabilized, meaning 93% occupied. We have basically had 95% occupancy throughout. It's been a very strong market for us. So that just further enhanced our idea that, hey, we just got to add some more independent living. And in order to do that, we need the rezoning. So we have started down that path. Marketing, we've created what we're calling a priority list. And already 30 days in, we have 77 people that have signed up with a... It's a refundable cash deposit, but the excitement is real and we're excited about that. So we're going to talk a little bit about the plan or these folks are. But yeah, we have a three THREE PHASE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WE THINK IT'S ABOUT A FOUR TO SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE. I'LL LET THE ARCHITECTS CORRECT ME ON THAT IF THEY THINK IT'S DIFFERENT. THESE ARE KIND OF THE UNITS THAT ARE PLAN WITHIN EACH PHASE. So total estimated units were at 190 to 225 additional units that we think would be appropriate. And so this is kind of that phasing. So the first phase down here to the south, I'll call it, independent living units, that 51 to 60 that we saw on the other page. This is the main street. We're calling it the commons now. So have you heard that name?

OK, all right.

A lot of debate about the name here. So that's brand new kitchen, eating areas. I'll let them talk about all this. Second phase, again, some more amenity spaces and additional independent living units. And then the last phase out here in the blue would be just independent living. We're excited for the opportunity and being part of this community, and I will now turn it over to the architects.

So we represent Michael Graves Architecture, and we're a 60-year-old firm with expertise in senior living. I've personally been working with LEC for the past 10 years and have participated in work in all their different campuses. So I'm really excited to be here in Concord Reserve. We have, for the past four years, we've been working with the team here locally to reposition this campus. The market has changed. I'm sure everyone has heard the expectations of the baby boomers and the retirees coming into this market. is setting up a demand and Life Enriching Communities is positioning themselves to deliver a higher product, a more active community, and greater services that is expected in the marketplace.

So one of the things when we talk about this new market and how to reposition a project like this is the sensitivity of doing this type of construction in an existing community. One of the things that's interesting about a project like this is not all projects do the goals of our clients and the investors and the developer or in fact the operator align so well with the community. Because what we need to do for this campus in order for it to be successful is, number one, to modernize it, make it look less institutional. And that's something that goes very well with the community normally. Also, you want to go ahead and deal with some of the perimeters and how it affects the adjacent properties. So if you go to the next slide, if you look at the north side of the site, You look closely, you get your eyes adjusted to the different textures. That existing building has 550 feet of flat wall all along that rear property line. And so what we've done, let's go back a slide, not forward, but back. WE'VE TAKEN THAT BUILDING AND ARTICULATED THE BACK SIDE OF IT TO GIVE IT A NATURAL BREAK TO THOSE NEIGHBORS SO IT SHOULD BE LESS IMPACTFUL TO THEM AND IDEALLY A LITTLE MORE COMPATIBLE AND IT SHOULD MEET A LITTLE LESS RESISTANCE. and so we think that's a big move we can we can articulate it that way we call it the sawtooth and we'll be bringing in um you know landscaping and breaking these new shadow lines and all of that and then the last thing is the third real big thing modernization the perimeters kind And the parking so all these buildings now we're putting parking underneath them. So that's a big deal so it and so at the end let's go to the next slide then for that next slide the next next okay, that's it. So if you look at this, this is our first pass at our master plan. And what's interesting about it is we're threading the new construction all the way through the campus, which really opens up some opportunities to really affect the footprint or the overall feel. Normally what you would see is you've got some new stuff up front where nobody can see what's in the back. But all sides, this thing threads all the way through. And by modernizing it, what we want to do is we're going to have multiple roof types. We'll have some sloped roofs. We'll have some flat roofs that we can put some of the compressors and things on and hide them, and some hip roofs. So that mix allows you to break this thing up, again, make it a little less institutional. The brighter colors, larger windows, modernize it. It's good for sales because you walk into a unit and you have all this light and air coming in sunlight, but also makes the thing look far less institutional. And then in senior living, you try to break quarters up and things like that into neighborhoods and clusters of groups of people. Well, that telegraphs to the outside. And so we'll have a couple of areas that set up a little higher. So when you look out over the community, it doesn't look like a monotone, flat-roofed, institutional, and aging community. It'll look more modern, and you'll see clustering going on just as we organize it inside. So we're really excited about the potential here. And this area is really our first pass at, you know, we've kind of grayed out the existing so you can see the new, but it'll be very impactful. I think it's going to it's already the goal. Some of the graphics, the market's receiving it well, and I think the community is going to receive it well, too. I think it's going to be we're pretty excited about it's going to be a big deal.

And the comments that John referred to is is all the amenities and the social service and the social commitment LAC has to programming opportunities. Isolation and depression, things like that are of the greatest concern with seniors as they grow over and lose their independence. So the repositioning and the reimagining of that commons area, which is all their social services where the new kitchen is, the cultural arts center, the chapel, the community life center, The theater room all of those things will have a new life in and of themselves in a community that is already Thriving and has a spirit of life to it.

You know our impression of Westlake is a very high-end community very great It's very nice to be here and of all the campuses that we work on. This is one of our premier campuses So I don't think anybody at this table is going to let you all down so

Thank you, appreciate that. Anyone from the audience wish to comment on this?

And we did and we did hear yet wait.

I'm sorry we do have one comment from the audience. So if we can. So if you please state your name and address for the record, sure.

My name is Randy Dougal 27822 Sonoma Court here in Westlake. Good evening. My name is, as I mentioned, Randy Dougal. I'm the president of the Capitol Vale Homeowners Association. There's been quite a bit of talk about what's being proposed here. I want to review just kind of some of the concerns that have been shared with myself. That includes increased traffic congestion along Dover Center Road. increased noise and lighting affecting nearby homes drainage stormwater issues expanded commercial type activity adjacent to the residential property lines there for Campbell Vale and Really a lot of the Homeowners that purchased, they purchased at a time when they thought things as they looked would remain. And now there's quite a bit of concern that that's not gonna be the case. So they're concerned about the building height, the overall scale, and really the structure's significantly larger than the surrounding residential development. Could affect privacy sight lines and just kind of the character of the other neighborhood. So that's really why I wanted to share on behalf of the other residents.

OK, thanks for your comments. Anyone anyone else from the floor wish to comment? OK, then if the applicants care to respond.

I would say all of those concerns are concerns that we would have as well. We don't know that we're going to be increasing traffic. In fact, the buy right I think would be larger. I think the other concern about height is I think we're maintaining heights that are allowed there. We may or may not have one or two portions in board that are a little taller, maybe a fourth story. Traffic, again, I think is not going up. What was the other item?

traffic lighting drainage.

Yeah, I think lighting the only flight that we're going to be doing not going to be uploading any buildings and we did hear your ordinance on the maximum height of lights. There's no need for that what what you really want to do in some of these courtyards is create little streets. So you know that's all pedestrian height and that's most of its import on the outside you have some that most of the traffic or the parking is in the cluster in the front and there's a little bit around the perimeter so that's not going to change. And I don't recall.

Bringing your building's activities closer to residencies. So the existing residents.

The general activities are staying exactly in the same spot, which is central hub.

And you're bringing, I think their concern is the new structure is getting closer to their property lines, essentially.

expanding it it's getting closer to the existing property yeah actually we're pulling it back and as remember the sawtooth we're bending it away so that there's more of our we don't have a 550 foot continuous wall along the neighborhood that concerned me as well and so as the designer i master planted so we could break that up and it's better for the for our units and it's definitely better for the for the for the others plus we're putting in modernized loading docks and things that we're going to clean up that whole back Commercial area. So I think I think those are good general comments for any development this size that I heard and I think as a seasoned design team that word we will address all of those well, we Anticipating that will submit a master development plan and go through that whole process, correct?

so many if not all of those items Will have to be addressed, right?

And I think when you know when we get around to me, I'll have some thoughts on that as well. But you know, I think it's just important to keep that in mind that that's what the as you develop that master plan should this go forward? You know the things you're going to need to keep in mind, you know, because the board is going to certainly share those same concerns.

I think I think we can say that those we fully respect all those comments and that's what we would see on I guess any project like this our concern that's put this in in a Responsible way into an existing community is what really this whole all the stakeholders are all about on this project that's the sensitivity to the neighborhood has always been at the forefront of our conversations and

which is why we took that hard existing edge down and articulated it into smaller neighborhoods. That's not only for those neighbors, but for the living, for the residents inside the communities to have a smaller neighborhood where they feel that they're a part of. And then one of the other topics that is at the forefront forefront of all of senior living and senior service conversation is just that intergenerational connection back to the larger community. So that with this very residential beautiful neighborhood that it already resides in, has been the guiding force of how we've been master planning this property.

This is kind of exciting stuff. Right now we're talking about a physical rezoning. But this campus and some of the new operational items, it will integrate itself into the community. There will be shared resources and things like that. And it's pretty exciting to talk about that stuff and think about it. And it is part of the community, the seniors. Becky and I absolutely just love this stuff.

Life-enriching community has been, like John mentioned, at the forefront, not only in Ohio, but nationally. They're one of the most respected, most profitable senior living communities. They invest in their residents and in the neighborhoods.

And we did hear you ask about having some conceptual plans at these things, so be careful what you ask for. Because we brought it on.

And again, we might be jumping the gun here, but I was going to make that exact same comment. It's a lot easier for me as a board member to get behind a rezoning at the early stage when we at least see what the applicant's intent is. So I do appreciate the level of detail that you've taken this to already. Great. So no other comments from the floor. So I think we'll move on to comments from the board. I'll start with Mr. Del Regno.

Thank you. All right. So 23, a little over 23 acres, I believe, if I'm not mistaken. Yeah, 23.29 acres total site. My... First thought is I and I mentioned it at our PZL meeting. I'm I'm concerned with rezoning it. to medical, not because I think, again, I love the community you have there now. I think your plan is good and it's, you know, I see the need and it's gonna definitely benefit the city of Westlake. My concern is down the road and yes, you've been in business for a very long time. Do I think it's gonna go away? Most likely not, but my concern is it does. And that property then opens up to having full-fledged hospital be sold off to you know a Mercy Hospital to build a campus there at that point so when we rezone this and Nothing against that it's more down the road and what we're doing right is we're we're potentially opening up We can't it's a main use is as mr. Bedell put up before there's a lot of things in there that we don't We can't say no to so if for whatever reason they got out of the out of the senior living Element and said hey, we're closing shop. We're selling off our properties. It could go to a Something that we have no stopping at that point and that's my biggest concern with it and I hate rezoning something for a niche that is very broad, right? It's opening up to a lot of different things that we don't have any control over and don't think you're going anywhere again. So but it's a concern of mine. Second concern I have is when did the last last major construction project finish there? That was just recently, right? It was.

The 80 units? Yeah. Yeah, that was in 2021.

2021.

And we affiliated in 2020. We finished up the construction, I think it was June of 2021. Right.

So 2021, so five years ago, we'll call it, right? Five years ago, we went through the neighborhood, went through, it was a pretty... large development project. There was a lot of traffic. There was a lot of construction that went on during that, if I'm not mistaken. So now we're turning around and saying, hey, We're looking to redo it again. And by the way, you're going to look at four to six years of construction in your backyard or in your yard that they just got finished listening to or seeing for that period of time. So I have concerns over that. Royal Forest, Sonoma, Bordeaux Way, Beringer, Dover Center, all are going to be impacted yet again by another substantial construction project in their backyard. It's hard for... IT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR THE BUILD, IT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR THE CITY, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MANAGE THAT IF IT GOES THROUGH. WHAT ARE YOU ANTICIPATING FROM A STAFFING INCREASE WITH THIS, NUMBERS-WISE? I MEAN, WHERE ARE YOU AT NOW AND WHAT IS THE ANTICIPATED INCREASE?

I THINK WE MAY HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT PZL, BUT PART OF THIS WHOLE PLAN IS REDUCING uh skilled and those reductions um independent living does not increase staffing so i have my executive director here i think he could confirm our staffing now is higher than it will be at any point moving forward and it's probably going the other way

You'll have to come up on the mic. I apologize. And we do need to put, if you could say your name and address for the record also, just so we have you.

Chris Clawiter, home address? Business address is fine. 2116 Dover Center, Westlake. End of year, we were sitting at about 225 employees. Just on last payroll, probably sitting at about 170 with the drawdown of skilled nursing that we've been continually doing. I can't anticipate that we'll stay below 200 through this. The only bump in associate payroll would probably come through an increase in dining. To his point, there's really not much staffing when it comes to more independent living. It's going to be the dining venue on our commons, the Main Street area. We might see a little bit more of a bump, but

I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY AT END POINT END GAME RIGHT NOW WITH STAFFING BELOW 200 BUT YEAH OKAY SO IN SURE WE MIGHT LOOK AT IT AND SAY THAT'S WE'RE DECREASING TRAFFIC BUT WE'RE ALSO OBVIOUSLY FINANCIALLY DECREASING OUR taxes on that, right? So it's not like we want you to cut staff. Believe me, we're all for it, but it's the nature of the business. I'm just trying to get ahead of where we're at with it as far as the staffing mentality goes with it. So yeah, I'm fine with that. You're decreasing your You're increasing your dining, which I'm assuming is going to increase services as far as food deliveries and that kind of thing. And how are we going to manage that from a residential neighborhood with Morning deliveries and all of that. I think that's, you know, a concern. I'm just, I'm voicing concerns with it. Not looking for answers on it more. Just letting you know where our head's at. Yes, we're going to increase our, we're going to improve our dock system. Great. It's in, well, a lot of us sitting up here understand how that operates. The drainage questions that come up. you're probably going to improve the drainage and the property in the areas, right? I mean, these are all things that we get, but we also have to understand we're going to have a large number of individuals that are going to come in here and ask these same questions. So preparing you for that and also letting you, giving you an opportunity to explain to us what the thoughts are on it. So, yeah, I think after that, I have, you know, Biggest issue is we are going to rezone something that could in the long run turn into something that we don't necessarily feel is the right application for that area. So that's my stance on it.

Alright, thanks. Let's go with Miss Apple.

Thank you. So I mean, there's drainage on this property now. Yeah, and are you are?

No, I'm just addressing, I think Mr. Dougal brought it up, that the neighbors are going to be concerned with drainage. Right.

I guess I'm still puzzled about, I just don't, I mean, unless they're having drainage issues now, there's no reason to believe they'll have drainage.

And I think they're just looking at it saying, well, they're going to try the old system and not going to do any improvements on infrastructure, so it's all going to wash into our neighborhoods. I'm just trying to be proactive to that one.

It's going to get better, don't I know that it will get better and they will maintain the water and they'll hold the water on the property like they've been doing all along. Yes, OK. So that's good. Of the issues you brought up, the one that I didn't think of that concerned me. Can you bring up those different uses again, Mr Bedell?

Sure.

I mean, could a hospital really go on 23 acres? Or a satellite medical building? Is that what your concern is?

Yeah, I mean, it could, if, I don't know what, you know, you look at some of these campuses right now, they're tight. Yeah. I mean, you look at University Hospital, main campus, it's not a large parcel of land, but there's a lot of buildings sitting out.

There's a lot on there. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. OK, so I see where you're coming from with with that concern. And why did we? Because if this had remained RMF? 40 whatever yeah 2424.

Thank you. It was so the idea before was that you didn't want to see. new uh senior services and residential right i remember those discussions neighbor yeah so instead they would you know we didn't so you needed to put them somewhere and health campus made sense because it is health related right you know every aspect of this has some component to to the health of the individuals who live there so this was a logical place to put it okay and yes it does open it up to there's you know Hospital, emergency care, medical arts, rehab centers, outpatient care facility. I mean, there's a number of things that could coexist on that site or could be the only use of that site. I really don't know a workaround other than zone it to something. They make all the changes and then you zone it to something different, which you're not going to do. Right. That would be the only thing. Or you at some point change the code and... put some of these things somewhere different. I don't know.

But what about, couldn't they do a, could they do a conditional use on any of our current zones?

no i don't think so i mean it's no it it was a it was allowed as a conditional use for rmf 24 in only some specific areas on center ridge road uh one on crocker and uh and this property and that that's what was changed so that those would be could continue As they are, but if they wanted to expand. Or or do different things with their property. Then they needed to rezone.

Yeah, I guess I'm I love your idea. I think you're meeting the needs of our community. I appreciate that you've been good neighbors. I appreciate Mr Del Rigno having concerns about the development and the disruption. to people's lives, but that happens. I mean, the improvements happen to properties and people get grumpy about that, but that does, people are always making improvements. Your neighbor can put an addition on their house and that takes six months. So I really want to, like this makes so much sense to allow them to do this, Now I'm all of a sudden concerned that he's right. I mean, what happens in 20 years? So I don't know. I am in favor of the rezoning. I'm in favor of your project, but I'm struggling. Is there any other way to allow them to meet the needs of our community with their project without rezoning? There is not.

No.

And, yeah. And what you're doing now, I mean, meets the needs, but we have growing needs. You have 77 people who have already put down deposits because they're excited about what you have to offer. I think that's fantastic. All right. Yeah, okay, well, that's all. You know where I stand.

Yeah, yeah, I understand. Yes, I got you. Ms. Smith?

I have a concern that you are basically doubling the amount of building area on the site, which, as Ms. Apple is very enthusiastic about, you're working very hard to try to meet WHAT YOU SEE AS A MARKET NEED IN THE COMMUNITY. I THINK IT DOES, IT WILL BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION FOR QUITE A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. BUT THESE PROJECTS DO, YOU KNOW, IT'S GREAT. IT WILL ALL BE BUILT OUT. THE PROJECTS DO GET SOLD, THOUGH. LAND GETS SOLD. AND THAT MR. DEL REGNO'S POINT IS VERY GOOD. IF WE OPEN IT UP TO SOMETHING THAT HAS SO MANY BROAD USES, what are the future implications of that? So I... I guess, what did you say at the end? I don't know. I said you know where I stand, and I'm not even sure I know where I stand.

All right. Okay, so any other comments? Okay, so here's my thought. I think we're all on the same page here that we like what they're proposing, right? Okay. We're all kind of struggling with the fact that the only way that they can physically do this is by rezoning this to a zoning district that has a bunch of things in it that we'd rather not see on this site, right?

Correct.

Okay, well... Think we're pretty comfortable with the fact that they're putting all this effort into doing this right now Okay, they've got a four to six year plan to put this together. It's gonna take them some time They have multiple steps that they still have to come to us. They're not going anywhere at least in the immediate term, right? My thought is let's go ahead and recommend that this be rezoned and then concurrently or immediately thereafter take a look at what this zoning district really is and maybe start working on creating another zoning district or something or making some other sort of modification of the zoning code that would allow us to restrict this to something similar to this in the future. And I don't know if that's, and I realize that that would require, they would have to request it, right? Or the owner.

No, you just plan a commission. You can request changes to the zoning.

Even better. So I think that's what we do.

I guess we need to make that a priority for our.

Yeah, if we're all in agreement that that's what we want to do, we'll just make sure internally we make this a priority. We're going to take a look at this particular zoning district, see if we need to create another zoning district and potentially have this potentially go in. through ourselves to look to rezone this property to something more aligned with what they want to do.

I think Dan might have some input on this one. I've seen on other jurisdictions where they have a zone like this that has a level 1, level 2, level 3. This is a perfect one for that because you really want to separate those densities. And maybe that's how you expand it.

Excuse me, do you have other cities that we could contact for model

I can look for that, but I've seen this in every single, you know, we practice all over the world.

If you could forward a couple examples of that to staff.

And it's like in residential. You know how you have residential? You can do it in any jurisdiction or any zoning, and I think this is one. I'll look for that.

think that's that's what we'd like to see so i think um i'm in support of rezoning this with the with the caveat that i'd like staff to work on taking a look at this to protect this from a future use of something other than this so all right um any other thoughts from the board on this great okay then uh can i get a motion by the way i do love what you guys are doing i don't mean to be the pain in the neck but Yeah, and I'll have more thoughts on the actual plan when it comes to that. I don't even want to comment on it right now because, in general, I like what you're doing. I think this is a step in the right direction.

Thank you. Based upon the finding facts, I move to recommend approval of Ordinance 2026-61.

Second.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Del Regno?

Yes. Smith?

Yes.

Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes.

Motion carries. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. All right, next item is ordinance 2026-52.

Yes, this is a code amendment for preschool facilities and shopping center districts. So this actually... It goes back to the Conditional Use Permit Ordinance 2026-25 for Rye School. During the review, you did recommend a condition requiring the preschool parcel that it be assembled with the larger WCMA parcel. Good practice to do that. Later, we determined it created a conflict in the shopping center district. It requires a preschool to be the sole use on a parcel in the exclusive use of the building once parcel assembly was proposed. So it created a catch-22 situation. Hey, assemble your properties like we're making you do it. And as soon as they assemble it, well, you can't have a preschool there anymore. So this fixes that situation. And what it does is it says that, well, let me just go one forward. So it fixes it. And this pertains to the shopping center and general business and executive office park zones. And it says, licensed child daycare center or preschool facility shall be the sole use within the building and the sole use on the parcel when located in the shopping center or general business district. So it's only those two, sorry, I said the other one, but those only two. But it's sole use except when operated as a conditional accessory use to a place of worship, in which case the sole use requirement does not apply. So what we don't want to have happen is we don't want daycare centers or preschool centers That are in shopping centers that are a storefront in a shopping center. So that presents that from happening We have exactly one place of worship worship in a shopping center or a general business zone. This is it So I don't think this is going to be we're not going to have a whole bunch of these in the future But it does fix that so So this is staff initiated, I guess you could say. OK, great.

All right, thank you. So no applicant to request. Let the record reflect that the audience has retired. So any comments from the board? Let's go to Ms. Apple.

No comment. This makes sense. It makes sense. No comment.

Thanks for cleaning it up. Likewise. Can I get a motion? I move to recommend approval of ordinance 2026-52.

Second.

Any discussion?

Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Del Regno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Motion carries. Okay.

Okay, continuing on our record number of ordinances for a meeting.

Yes, I think we made double our previous record.

Gosh, never had this many. So 2026-44, you've seen this before. These are the code amendments as to fee schedules, notice and application updates. So this actually started with Planning Commission, and then it goes to... Council goes to PZL, an ordinance is drafted, and then the ordinance comes back to you. I'm sorry, there's not a way to streamline that. It's just the way it has to work. So these are all the same changes you've previously seen. If you'd like, I'd be happy to read every little bubble there, but if not, I'm happy with that too. None of that has changed. It just now is part of this formal ordinance, so it looks a little bit different than it did when you saw it last time, but all the same language as before.

Okay, thank you. Great, thanks. Comments from the board? Councilman?

No, thank you again. I've seen it too many times, to be honest. I had a feeling. Ms. Smith?

It's good, thanks.

Ms. Apple?

I'm good, thank you.

Yep, same. I don't have any issues with it. Can I get a motion? I move to recommend approval of ordinance 2026-44.

Second.

Any discussion? Hearing none, clerk, please call the roll.

Smith? Yes. Apple? Yes. Jones? Yes. Del Regno? Yes. Motion carries.

Okay, this next one is actually coming from PZL. And what this will do is shorten the process for changing zoning codes. It allows PZL to request legislation for zoning amendments, as is currently allowed for recommendations that they make for other types of ordinances. Unfortunately, 1235, what that does is it requires that if there is a zoning ordinance, a zoning code change, PZL Has to make a recommendation to Council and then Council has to direct the law Department to draft the ordinance so that can add to two weeks a month sometimes longer. So really shortens things nicely. So that's it.

Nice easy, great thanks. Smith.

No, no discussion. It's it's makes sense is Apple. I concur Councilman.

I'm good Everybody still gets a bite at the bite at the Apple so to speak You know that it's just that the the orders changing and it streamlines the process. That's the whole point of it, right? Yeah, great That's no issues then. Can I get a motion? I would recommend approval of ordinance 2026 35 Second any discussion hearing none. Please call the roll. I

Apple? Yes. Jones?

Yes.

Del Regno? Yes. Smith? Yes. Motion carries.

Okay. uh... last okay this is uh... this is me again on behalf of our service department uh... this has to the size of clay park and then soon at the recreation center and community services along hilliard you may recall you uh... approved the replacement of the the old hideous clay park sign there with a new one that actually has an electronic message center And what they would like to do is they would like to have the ability to change the message on that more than once a day.

When I first discussed it with them,

It's kind of funny, it's all about communication, and we had a little communication breakdown. So at first it looked like they were trying to say they wanted to match what is happening next door at the high school with four messages a day. I said, no, no, rewrite it. The high school only has two messages a day. And so they rewrote it, and that's what you got in your packet was the request for two messages a day. But what they really meant is they want four messages a day, and they want to acknowledge, you know, I just said, hey, you want to acknowledge next door it's two, but if you want four, ask for four. Well, they only asked for two. They really want four messages a day. They'd like it to change four times a day. And the two messages, they could be community events such as a car show from a nonprofit. A couple other messages could be for city messages like the computer roundup, for example. So they'd like the ability to maybe do a couple in the morning. Get different people earlier in the morning and a couple hours later maybe something different. And then a couple different in the afternoon or maybe one in the afternoon and one in the evening. But four is what they want. No animation. To improve the ability to communicate city events and site specific information to the public this one thing I will say that maybe is going for this is that these are classified as community identification signs So they're intended for information And directional message for public and major recreational facilities So it's it's not precedent-setting for any other organization the only other The thing that I can think of that's like this is maybe at the high school would be considered a community services sign. All the rest of them are commercial signs. So you're not necessarily setting precedent. I think the key thing we don't want to have happen And this is why it's been so successful changing once a day is you don't have scrolling messages, you don't have flashing, blinking messages, animation, because you're only allowing changing once a day. Four times a day, and if you happen to be looking at the sign when it changes, I guess once a day you could be looking at it when it changes, and you're going to see two messages back to back. So it does increase that. that message. I'm neutral on this. This is, like I said, this is something that they're requesting. They think this would be very useful for them. The way that he described it is you might have a message on their where you've gotten bigger letters on a sign, big letters advertising a community, like a non-profit type event, smaller letters, smaller text would be advertising a city thing like the Computer Roundup. And they might do that at 8 a.m. and then at noon they might flip-flop it. So that what was the big text now becomes a little text and vice versa. That's how it was described to me, not necessarily having a different message.

I mean, who knows? But that's what they're asking for anyways.

So if you are so inclined, this actually changes. It says to display two messages. No, this, I did change this already. Yeah, to display two messages in the morning and two different messages in the afternoon.

That is their request.

All right. Let's, I don't know, I'll start with Ms. Apple.

I'm just cracking up because I was here way back when, when they started the digital signs, and it was only going to be one message a day. And the police didn't want it to distract anyone, and we were so concerned about that. So I don't have a problem with this. I don't want the animation. So it's not like we're flip-flopping. Like, you know, there will be a message, then there will be another. Yeah, you explained it. I get it. It's fine. I think that makes sense. Let's advertise what we have going on in the city. Thank you.

All right, Miss Smith.

Four messages a day doesn't sound excessive. I mean, I don't imagine anyone will really notice. So I'm good with it.

Tell him to go over there and put the letters up on the other one four times a day. Rewrite the whole message on the old Clegg board. Let's see how that goes. No, I don't. I guess I don't have a problem with it other than do so. What is? I haven't looked at it. What's digital signage currently for commercial businesses? What do we restrict? Once a day. Once.

Once in a 24-hour period.

Somebody enforcing that.

When we catch them, and usually somebody, in fact, somebody brought it to my attention today about a couple places that are in violation, and I will turn them over to... Want me to add to your list? Jason, well, it depends. It's either Chris or Jason in code enforcement. Okay. Or the two gentlemen, depending on which side of the city.

Chat with those guys and see what they're at, which ones they have on their list.

Yeah, it's a chronic, it really is a chronic thing. And do we allow animation on those? We do not allow any animation. That was the whole purpose of not changing the message more than once a day, because then you can't have animation. Or it's the world's slowest animation.

We're not going to set any precedents then because it's already been set with everybody else that's doing it. We've got that happening everywhere.

I'm good from that standpoint. Thanks. I actually think that our electronic signage regulations for everybody, including private businesses, are too strict. In my opinion, I think that we should take a look at Loosening that up to something closer to what the city's requesting here. I I totally understand the rationale behind limiting animation Restricting the number of colors on display all those types of things I totally get because now the the new technology in electronic signage allows for unlimited combinations of colors you know you could you could be showing a 1080p high def video on one of these things and you know at a fraction of the cost of what these things cost you know even a decade ago so i get it you know we have to stay ahead of what the technology is able to pull off but only allowing one message a day in my mind is overkill and i think that we probably i even if this were precedent setting i don't i wouldn't have an issue with it being precedent setting because i think it's a precedent i'd kind of actually like to see set Think that's this might be something that we may want to look at Updating and giving people a little bit more flexibility on these things and allowing Allowing messages to update a certain number of times a day.

Is that because I'll move that up the list if everyone agrees No, no, Dave says no.

He says no, okay Again I totally understand the rationale behind

We gave them, if we're giving them like, again, I didn't, if we're giving them one a day and they're taking it to four, if we open it up to four, it's, they're going to be at just a rolling sign. And I'm, I don't necessarily think that that's the intention of them. Right. I mean, Brennan's Party Center advertises their monthly schedule on that thing throughout the day. It's a constant rotation. It's a distraction at that light. It's got to be a nuisance for everybody that comes through it. And it's animated. It's different colors. It's everything else.

And I fully agree that that type of thing should not be allowed.

Who's that? The Party Center at...

Wait, wait, wait. We'll let code enforcement. Code enforcement will let them know.

The laser wash right down the street from us doing the same thing. They're doing the same thing? Yeah. I mean, I drive by it all the time. So it's just like, I just think that you can... If they want to advertise... their specials of the day or whatever it is, that's I'm okay with it, but I don't need to see the Elvis impersonators coming on Monday. And then I miss it. And the next thing you know, I'm stuck at the light waiting for it to scroll through to see what the date is on it. And it's, it's a distraction in my opinion, but I, I, I,

Yeah, I would say that it only becomes a distraction if it's changing while you're sitting at the light, and you see the thing change five, six times while you're sitting at a light, which in a lot of communities, you can legally do that. Yes. In fact, the majority of communities that I represent, you can do that. And I agree. I'm not in favor of allowing that, and I think that, you know, but I... We're struggling to enforce the one time a day.

We're going to really struggle to enforce the four.

Well, it's probably becomes impossible, right? Because how are you going to count four times around the day, right?

Well, I think well, I think what you can, you can still enforce the situation you're talking about, though, where you're seeing a constant change. And that's true. Yeah, that's an easy change. You can. Yeah, you can enforce that now and we could continue to enforce it if we allowed one thing. You know what?

I think this is a good project for our intern. I'll have our intern research. This sounds like a great project for your intern. We'll see what other communities are doing and what best practices are. Let's do that.

Let's see dry so I can watch him sit at Wagner's and count the sign. Anyway, I'm good with this going from two to five. Two in the morning, two in the afternoon. Okay, great. Make the motion.

Yeah, go ahead and make the motion. No, I'm good. I've already kind of said where I'm at, so I'm good if you want to make the motion.

Based on the finding of facts, I move the grant modification allowing community identification monument signs at Clay Park and Recreation Center slash Community Services to display two messages in the morning and two different messages in the afternoon. Second.

Second.

Any discussion?

Hearing none, please call the roll.

Jones?