So the way I run our meetings is uh we'll come up.

Um you'll present your case, get sworn in if necessary, present your case.

We'll have uh commentary from the Diaz here, and then anyone that has uh the speak for or against will have the opportunity, you'll have three minutes to discuss the project at hand, and it has to be focused to discuss specifically the project at hand and zoning issues, nothing outside of that, otherwise uh we can have a conversation outside of the um the time to discuss anything uh ancillary to the zoning request.

So that being said, Clerk, please call the rule.

Morris Martinez present Driscoll Gaddis Hobbes Colomives here, Meldon here, Sarantu Williams here for present.

Okay, so we do not have a quorum.

We need a quorum uh for five, and as soon as we have that, we'll be able to take an official vote, but that does not mean we're not going to go through with the presentations.

Clerk, please call the first uh case.

Case number one is a request for vacation of the 15 foot alley running east and west adjacent to lot 17 and 18 in the southern 55 feet of lot 17 in Clifton Park Platte.

Case number V 435-25.

The plan commission recommends disapproval.

Thank you.

Is the applicant here?

I'm guessing no, but I'll ask again.

Is the applicant here?

No.

Okay.

Um director.

So the request here was to vacate this portion of the alley to facilitate the development of a parking lot for this gentleman.

Um we don't have parking minimums anymore, so that concern kind of went away.

Um but this this area of right-away was a result of an earlier vacation, and it was the turnaround added from that vacation.

So vacating this leaves us with a stub alley with no way for people to turn around driving down that alley.

So we recommended disapproval as did transportation.

We've been working pretty closely with this applicant um to facilitate a zone change and getting his building plans through for a mixed use development there along the front, and he's aware of the reasons for the disapproval of the vacation.

That's why he's not here.

Okay.

Any questions from the Diaz?

President Williams.

I'll recommend it to go to the Board of Revisions as uh disapproved.

I guess we technically we can't make a recommendation since we don't have a quorum.

Oh, okay.

So we can come back to it.

Yep.

All right, thank you.

Clerk, next, please.

Case number two is a request for a zone change from CO office commercial to RD6 duplex residential for the property located at 1839 Tremainesville Road, case number Z25-0037.

The plan commission recommends approval.

Is the uh applicant here?

Oh uh this person did call in letting us know that she will be she's ill and not able to make it.

Um in the past, we have two options.

Uh we can hold this until the next zoning uh meeting, but uh councilman Hobbes is not here to make that recommendation.

This is a simple um down zoning.

Downzoning.

Um it's up to the body in which they would like to proceed.

Um Madam Director, anyway.

So the applicant is requesting the down zoning to refinance the property.

Uh the CO office commercial district is not permit the single the existing single family home.

Um President Williams?

Uh just a question.

Is it actually um so it's actually just the regular duplex and it's just one of them situations that we had?

Um I don't see why we hold it up, but I guess like you say Hobbes isn't here, it's just something that we've been doing uh for various properties.

I don't see why we uh couldn't do anything with it.

I I would I wouldn't recommend holding it, but we can't make recon that recommendations right now.

So we can't we have quorum now.

Oh okay.

Well, I would recommend that we send it to uh to city council as approved just because um I mean it's just what we've been doing and why hold up this constituent um because they're sick.

Especially with something like this, it's not controversial.

Sure.

Fantastic.

Okay.

Uh is there anyone to speak for or against this uh down zoning?

Going once, going twice.

Okay.

Um if we can go back to case number one, uh, Madam Chair, what is Madam President, what is your recommendation for case one?

I recommend it to the border revision is disapproved.

Thank you, ma'am.

All right.

Next, please.

Case number three is a request for an amendment to a special use permit originally granted by ordinance two eighteen-19 for Christ the King Church in school site expansion for the property located at 4757 Minro Street, case number SCP 25-0042.

The Planning Commission recommends approval subject to 24 conditions.

Uh applicant.

If you can please state your name and get sworn in.

Yes, good afternoon.

My name is Jerry Parker, one Seagate to Late Ohio attorney for uh Christ the King and the diocese, the applicant here.

With me is Brian Smith uh from Christ the King Church.

And uh I'm honored on behalf of the diocese and the church to concur with the staff and the planning commission's recommended recommendation approval and accept all conditions with one caveat.

I had requested a waiver of uh on the sign at the planning commission.

The vote was two to two on that.

I would like a deferral on a decision on that uh uh waiver uh to some uncertain time in the future when we reapply for it, uh given certain uh developments within the city.

So with that exception, we concur with all the conditions to approval.

Madam Director?

I believe the applicants are requesting that the copy from the sign be removed for the time being until we take a second look at the sign code, which we're about to do.

Uh staff is in support of that.

Councilman Meldon.

Thank you.

Just quickly, you you said the copy is taken off the sign?

Right.

So removing any of the imagery or the I think it's is it all blacked out right now?

It's all kind of there's no signage on it.

Just leave it blank.

That sign looks like an ash Wednesday, it kind of had a little bit of a gosh ones there yesterday.

But I'm just saying it's I don't know what we're taking.

So go ahead.

The code wouldn't, and I apologize.

The code would require it being brought down to a monument sign uh maximum height of twelve feet set back with a base that matches the building, of course the building is gone.

What they're requesting is just to remove the copy for now and leave it blank and not use it until the sign code.

I appreciate that.

So and only in a zoning planning meeting would we have such a such a detailed question that I might want to ask here.

I appreciate that.

I I think what I understand uh is that the you're asking for a deferral on the decision of that sign altogether, but in the meantime, we want this the the copy of that sign.

And I'm saying that the copy of the sign has been covered up.

It looks like it was like painted over.

So I think if we're to accomplish that, it feels like we almost probably metal and plastic.

We just take that out.

I don't know how you would take down the copy.

It's been a there's no copy, it's all black.

There's no sign it's on.

So I don't know what you would do to remove it, is my that's my question.

The current state that the sign is in is acceptable for staff for now.

You we can re-review the special use permit in a year if you'd like to to readdress the sign issue, but we are planning a amendment to that code section.

So we deemed it as acceptable for now until we determine the the changes to the sign code.

Okay, yeah, just for what it's worth, I'm only getting I'm only getting caught up on the comment of taking down the copy because it just threw me off.

So I don't have another question though.

Okay.

Is there anyone to speak for or against uh the requested uh special use permit?

Going once.

Anyone to speak for or against the special use permit?

Going twice?

Three times, Councilman Meldon.

What is your recommendation?

Thank you.

So I want to be super clear on what I'm saying.

Um I say this goes to the council uh as approved, that does not include this sign just being swapped over to a a new Christ the King sign in its current state that we're deferring that piece of this work.

That is correct.

Is that really is that articulated well in the in the copy of this?

We can revise that condition.

I would just I would just hate to get caught up in some sort of yeah, and then we can we can revise to say that the sign shall remain blank for a year until the special use permit is re-reviewed in one year.

And then you can take a second look at it next time.

That's fine.

That's fine with those.

Yes.

We're just deferring.

There was a vote on a waiver.

We requested a waiver of the sign regulations as it pertains to the sign.

The vote was two to two.

I understand the situation, and we're asking for a deferral of your vote on that recommendation that for the sign itself, and it will stay blank.

Nothing will be advertised on it.

Yeah.

So the and the concept being that.

And that can be incorporated into the ordinance as well.

That section of the code might be reviewed, and then this is kind of almost a moot point.

And it might leave for a waiver right.

Right.

It might have changed, it might not, but this is fun stuff.

Okay, great.

Uh yeah, I recommend the full council approved.

Thanks.

Okay, great.

There are signatures required, and then this will be uh go to the full council on March 3rd.

Thank you very much.

Have a good evening, everyone.

Madam Director, the floor is yours.

So the next case is uh okay.

Uh case number four is a zoning study and map amendment of the Vistula neighborhood.

Case number M-9-25, the plan commission recommends approval.

And this was referred to us by council to look at a down zoning for the entire Vistula neighborhood in keeping with their land use plan, in keeping with the forward Toledo plan and finding more appropriate zoning classifications to address the need for more of uh a mixed-use community mixed use retail in that area.

And I will let uh Alex take it from here.

Hello everyone.

Um as Lisa said, this was referred to us uh last year by resolution to study uh zoning in the Vistula neighborhood.

Um I didn't put my aids up, but I believe you should be able to see some maps right there.

Um so we did take a look at current zoning.

Um could you do exhibit E?

If you could.

Thanks.

We did look at current zoning along the uh in the study area here.

Um currently there's a lot of uh industrial that's exhibited here.

There we go.

Uh currently there's one yes.

Now we have a right.

Currently there's a lot of industrial zoning along Summit Street uh and a lot of uh auto-oriented uh regional commercial along the Grange Street.

Um it's not really in line with um any of our plans, whether citywide or neighborhood wide.

Um so that's why we studied it.

Uh started off with the um citywide master plan, the forward Toledo plan.

Um part of that plan has a uh a uh future land use map that shows what land uses should be used on these sites.

Um and then I looked at the five themes and the 33 goals of that plan, took that into consideration.

Second piece was the uh Vistula Master Plan, which is instead of citywide, it zooms in right on this neighborhood uh and looks at um what land uses should be used there and the goals of the neighborhood.

Uh and then the third piece I looked at was what is current, what is each parcel currently used for.

We didn't want to close down any businesses that are currently operating in in a somewhat distressed neighborhood.

Um we don't want to disrupt those things.

So took those three things and the goals of Ford Toledo and Vistula Master Plans and determined what the best zoning classification for each property would be.

Uh I actually took the e-bike and rode around the whole neighborhood to double check everything.

Um we did have two neighborhood meetings.

Um we had one uh on December 4th.

Um not too many people showed up, um, but those who did were supportive after it was explained what we were proposing.

Uh and then uh we had a plan commission meeting where we had some changes that the plan commission made to our proposals based on comments from the community.

Uh held a second neighborhood meeting just because there seemed to be more people who had opinions.

Uh that meeting went pretty well, I think.

Um they were overall supportive of this proposed change, but had some more concerns about the neighborhood that um there were some council people there that I think were there's a lot of moving pieces to bring back Vistula.

So this is one piece um that brings us to uh a little bit closer to that goal.

So if you have any questions, ask away.

So I I just had a quick question because I was looking at the exhibit D.

What was the right and I don't expect you to know the answer.

What was the rationale by having industrial on the river?

Uh back in the day, that was historically what the riverfront was used for.

Um, you know, you there was a lot of shipping and all the industry happened right on the river there.

And then we just kind of got away from it.

Yeah, it just stayed, and no one ever redeveloped it.

Gotcha.

And then so your proposal is now exhibit E?

Correct.

Yes.

Okay.

Um before I move on to Councilman Driscoll, I do want to recognize Councilman Saratu and Councilman Driscoll for attendance.

Uh Councilman Driscoll.

Thank you, Chair.

So I understand at the first Plan Commission hearing there were some property owners who expressed um some issues with this.

So is exhibit E ultimately what we're getting out of this?

Yeah, exhibit E um has the changes requested on the floor of the Plan Commission hearing and voted change the plan commission.

So there's a little bit of industrial, but it's it's active and it's Lafarge and it's Norfolk Southern on the government side.

The places that are proposed to remain industrial are active used as industrial.

Okay.

Um this came from Council uh Council President Williams and I.

Uh so I appreciate the work that you did on this.

I appreciate uh the depth uh of research that you did and the alacrity with which you did it, and I'll use the Dungeons and Dragons word because I know you'll appreciate that, Alex.

Um this this uh there were a few comments made.

I want to really distinguish here between the Plan Commission and the staff of the Plan Commission.

Uh so the appointment members of the board had a had a few issues, and we ran into this with the re-down zoning in the warehouse district too.

I think just because a property owner doesn't want us to rezone something, that isn't good enough for us not to do it.

And we had we had a couple parcels like that in the warehouse district too.

And I think it it beggars the question why we do this at all.

Why we why we plan to begin with, and then why we ultimately enforce the code.

And it's because we I think the people around this room, it seems understand that the redevelopment potential of this neighborhood is uh is a mixed-use commercial district, hopefully with more housing infill, and then the zoning ought to reflect that.

But that might not always be in the best interest of individual property owners.

In fact, in many cases it isn't.

Uh they want to hang on to land.

We have a huge speculation problem.

One of the one of the best things we can do in this community uh to work towards rooting out speculation in our community is downzoning.

And so we need to take this seriously.

And I uh some of the comments from the original, again, distinguishing clearly here from the staff and the plan commission, but some of the original comments from members of the plan commission uh gave me real pause about uh about uh how it is we approach land use questions, and we we better have some some guts when we go to to rewriting our code over the course of the next couple of years here because yeah, sometimes what's in the best interest of an individual property owner is not what's in the best interest of a community.

What I think this reflects and the hard work that was done in the forward Toledo plan and the hard work that's been done and numerous planning exercises in addition to that uh reflect what's in the best interest of the community.

So I I just want to say I I really appreciate the work that you did on this, Alex, and the other members of the plan commission that I know worked on it.

Uh Director Cotrell had a role in this as well.

This is fantastic.

This is what we should want.

This is what by the way, this is what community input suggests we should want as well.

Multiple plans, the downtime master plan, Vestrulla Master Plan, uh the Ford Toledo Plan.

So this this is moving in the right direction, but if this body isn't ever willing to sometimes upset one individual speculative property owner, then we might not as well have these seats.

So I I appreciate this work and uh look forward to its passing.

Thank you.

So just before I go on to Council um President Williams, what would you like to see ideally all of it mixed use in that central commercial or like what is what gives you pause?

No, nothing here.

Nothing here gives me any pause at all.

This is exactly I think what we should want out of it.

The active industrial uses that have made investment, there's there's people employed there.

Um they're still here.

But if if people are sitting on quote unquote industrial land hoping to make a killing someday by selling that land in the future, and we think there's redevelopment potential, we owe it to the citizens of Toledo to work towards that redevelopment, and that's that's that's what we're doing when we down zone.

But giving somebody an excuse to hold on to land for generations thinking that they can sell it someday.

Um we have we have responsibility.

So what's done here is is perfect.

I'll vote for this and support this wholeheartedly.

Gotcha.

So nothing in the current plan.

Absolutely not.

Yeah.

Okay.

Absolutely.

Um Madam President.

Thank you.

Um I'm excited to see uh this finally.

Uh it's been a long time coming, and I do believe that the neighborhood was put into place.

So the biggest thing for me with Vestula is community driven, not just business driven.

And um a lot of the stuff I've seen in Vestula has been business driven and been moving away from the community, but I'm glad that it's coming back.

And a lot of the folks that actually live over there have a lot of input in this.

So definitely appreciate it.

Um, I'm excited for it, and I want to thank my colleague uh Councilman Drisco.

He's really been um diving in and and helping using his knowledge because I don't have this the knowledge that he has is as the planning goes, but working with the plan commission and getting it done for the neighborhood.

I appreciate it, and I uh definitely am loving this and loving to see what's to come.

Great.

Um could you by chance switch those so the audience can see?

I know they can see them up here, but all your hard work on your uh vignettes want to share with the community.

Thank you.

And then so I guess so.

I'll open it up to public comment if there's anyone to speak for or against uh this change.

We'd like to hear from you.

Yes, ma'am, if you can come up, sign in and get sworn in, and then you will have three minutes to speak for or against.

Hi guys.

Hi, Alex.

Hello everyone.

My name is Deborah Sue Pearson.

I am a an investor in the area.

Um just a second.

Sorry.

Can you raise your right hand?

Yeah, yeah, sure.

Hi.

Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is true and accurate?

If so, say I do.

I do.

Um, yes, I am a business owner in the uh Vistula area.

Uh I sit on the uh historic vestibule board.

I'm executive director of H director of HVCAC, a nonprofit directly in the middle of the neighborhood.

Um I am president of Beach House Leading Families Home.

Meaning to say I sit on probably several boards in the city of Talil you all are familiar with.

Um I know Alex and his team and appreciate the work that they have done, and we have been looking forward to this upgrade for many years.

Uh we believe that it encourages other uh businesses to come into the area unre I don't want to say unrestricted, but it's a little bit more open to encourage investment and uh and so uh happy to see this, and I will strongly suggest and and we would as business owners be very happy if this thing is uh approved by you all.

Thank you.

Thank you much.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak for or against this proposal?

Okay, if you can um sign in and then uh you'll get sworn in and you'll have three minutes.

I'd have to write down.

Hello, I'm willing to please raise your right hand.

Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be true and accurate?

If so, say I do.

I do.

Hello, my my name is Valerie Garforth, and um I am also on the board of Beach House.

I'm the former president, and my husband and I are investors in this neighborhood.

We have renovated a house which was built in 1857, and it was really near to being demolished, and we brought it right up to very modern standards, and we have professional, young two young professionals living there, a couple.

We just recently completed the renovation of a duplex on the same uh stretch of Lagrange, um, which was built in 1912, and which also has been completely renovated.

And we now think that we have our first tenants.

These are also young professionals.

So we're very uh keen to see this uh happening, the interest that is being um shown to this neighborhood.

We want to bring people back to live there as well as to work there, and they'll be paying taxes and they'll be voting.

So um we think this is very important, and we fully support uh this rezoning change.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And may I say you have a beautiful accent?

Uh anyone else that would like to speak for or against the zone change.

Okay.

Going twice.

Anyone else that would like to speak for or against seeing none?

Um this will go to the full body for vote on March 3rd, 2026, and I make a recommendation to go as approved.

Clerk, next please.

Case number five is a request for a text amendment modifying to little municipal code section 1104-0100 use table adding special use requirement for storage units.

Case number M21-25.

The Plan Commission recommends approval.

Madam Director.

So we were asked to reconsider our recommendation for storage units from the study last year.

Went back and took a look at it and decided adding the special use permit criteria just gave council a chance to look at the highest and best use for each site.

Make a decision based on your standard special use permit criteria, but it just gives you a little bit of review to make sure that the land use is appropriate.

I'm sorry, I only made one copy, but um it's a normal use of way to prohibit development and hold it back.

It just gives us a chance to look at special use permits from a higher level.

I would tell you we're going to restructure our development services soon anyway.

Removing site plan criteria from special uses where you're just looking at the special use itself, whether you think it should be there or not.

And then the site plan uh details are reviewed administratively.

So you're gonna see this more and more.

This is the first use we're trying.

So um it's really standard standard criteria that you're gonna see for all special uses that you would measure whether you you would want to see that use there or not.

So Madam President.

Thank you.

Um I appreciate uh this study and they used to review of the study because there is someone actually wanted to put a storage unit on Summit Street in the Vistula neighborhood.

So hopefully, yeah.

So it hopefully this uh is uh a good way to look at that and make sure that it's in line with what uh this ordinance is.

So I'm glad that we're finally getting this through because you were changing the zoning um for uh a neighborhood to increase development, and we gonna have a storage unit.

It's crazy work.

So thank you for uh the planning commission.

Um the planners uh doing this.

That's great.

Thanks.

Councilman Driscoll.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh thank you, Director.

Thank you to the Plant Commission staff for the work on this.

Uh yeah, and that letter from Economic Development.

I think you all be interested to know that there was a there's a market study on uh on storage space in a given community, and it turns out we're actually short.

So that means there probably are more storage space companies looking to come to Toledo.

So now more than ever, we do need to be careful about where it is we decide to put them.

And I think right in the heart of like walkable mixed use areas that we're trying to redevelopment, that is not right, is not the right place.

Special use permit gives us that ability to just pause and think a little bit harder on it.

Um I really appreciate the change uh from the development services standpoint.

That's gonna be a good uh step in the right direction for how we review these, because I think the land use is more important than whether or not they're putting a tree somewhere.

You know, so I think this is we will definitely, and I appreciate that.

Thank you.

You'll definitely have a say in looking at more of what use goes there versus what doesn't, what's the highest and best use, but we'll keep the detail of the fences, signs, etc.

at an administrative level, and I think that's probably the direction I I hope council wants to do.

Yeah, I think that's uh a really good change.

Thank you, Director.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anyone to speak for or against the uh special use permit for storage facilities?

Uh if you'd like to, if you can sign in and then you'll get sworn in, and then you can speak.

You'll have three minutes on the clock.

Will you please raise your right hand?

Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be true and accurate?

If so, say I do.

I do.

Um hello, my name is Travis Truesdale.

Um local business owner here.

Uh last November of 20, I think it would have been 24.

We acquired a building uh office size, 3823 Size Avenue.

Uh 40,000 square foot light industrial.

Um, hopes at that time was to go in and actually create uh public storage.

We did a feasibility report and everything we got back.

It looked like a really viable option.

So someone that doesn't normally get into this, we're a little bit lost in it.

We've been working with a few professionals, but things don't move as quickly as you would like them to go, or else we'd have already submitted a permit, and I don't think I'd be here today.

So I guess my question is um how and when will we know if that identified property uh if we would have the opportunity to do self-storage there?

We're not looking to add to the building.

We're just taking a standing light industrial building, and what we'd like to do is uh 25% of it public storage, and then the rest of the 75% would be uh contractor suites, which I think still fall under the storage.

And so I'm just trying to get ahead of it and see what does it what does it look like where you can get some uh definitive answers.

Director?

So after the moratorium ends, you would uh assuming that the criteria was added for a special use permit, you would submit through our portal for a special use, and we would take that to plan commission and city council.

City council would ultimately make that decision whether they would approve it or not, and they're gonna look at you know, standard uh standard trackers that we look at for all special uses, compliance with the zoning code, compliance with our forage leader plan, does it meet all applicable provisions of the zoning code?

Um you would know probably about two months after you submitted.

Um but that again has to wait for the moratorium.

And I think is this a site on the Sylvania Phillips area?

Yes, ma'am.

Yeah, uh so I could tell you it's an industrial site, kind of surrounded by industrial zoning.

Um's the highest best use of that property there.

I know it's an existing industrial building.

Um we're gonna look at all those criteria.

My guess is it would it would vote in your favor.

We'd have to see, you know, uh, we would look at all those criteria, but I am aware of the site and familiar with it, so we'll work with you as best we can.

Yes, ma'am, thank you.

That's all I have.

Councilman Driscoll.

Thank you, Chair.

I just want to say too, the planning commission still makes a recommendation in these cases.

So ultimately, you know, it's not doesn't just go to council.

So if there's a a a good call for one or bad call for one, they'll make that judgment and then send it to council.

That's something that we are equipped with when we get to that decision making point.

Thank you.

And contractor suites, that's a very creative solution.

Uh next, please.

Um case number six is a request for a text amendment modifying to lead to municipal code section 1106.040, multi-dwelling lot area bonuses and amenities in CM and C D to remove the major site plan requirement for density bonuses.

You replace with an administrative review.

Case numbers M-22-25, the plan commission recommends approval.

Thank you, Madam Clerk, but I forgot to take action on the previous um case.

So I'm going to make a recommendation that it goes to the full council as approved.

Um to be read at the March 3rd, 2026 uh full council meeting.

Thank you.

My apologies.

Okay, so I'm excited about this tax amendment.

This tax amendment is to allow us basically to reduce a regulatory barrier for housing right now to get a density bonus in the CM or CD districts.

You need to um have certain amenities for you need to present those to us, such as washer dryer, uh parking spaces, that type of thing.

Um but you have to go through the major site plan review all the way through plan commission hearing.

This takes it down to an administrative review.

We can look at even the building plan level, and you're not you're not holding up the density bonus in an area.

I obviously I mean, a good example is like the Hill Crest Hotel.

Little class departments have never been conforming.

The density bonuses allow it to be conforming, but they'd have to go through this whole site plan review process.

This is makes it administrative, makes it easier to get that conforming.

Um the four corners is another good example for them to get the densities they need.

We just want to make an administrative review, not changing the criteria, just make it a little simpler for them.

Okay.

Any questions from council?

See none.

Anyone to speak for or against the administrative uh review uh as recommended by the plan commission?

Go in once.

Anyone to speak for or against the administrative review from the plan commission?

Going twice.

Three sold.

Clerk, let's move on, please.

Oh, hold on.

Uh I would make a recommendation that this gets approved of to the full city council has approved, and we'll be read at the March 3rd, 2026 meeting.

Case number seven is a request for a text amendment regarding legacy zone changes.

Case number N 13-25, the plan commission recommends approval.

Okay, so this tax amendment deals with uh an old zoning tool that really disappeared after the 2004 zoning code rewrite.

We would to ensure we could have a site plan review, we would add the criteria of a commercial industrial plat on a zone change.

If we thought the zone change was controversial, we had no tool for site plan review at the time.

This was the only tool for that.

Uh we have not used this since 2004 because now we have site plan review criteria and a path for that.

So anything, any of these legacy zone changes where you had a zone change, say um RS6 to CR subject to a plat, has been hanging out there for at least 22 years.

And at this point, we feel that it lacks a little transparency with the neighbors.

You know, if someone were to do a uh the commercial platform change from 1982, and all of a sudden you've got a commercial use popping up there that the neighbors weren't expecting.

At this point, we've got the tools for site plan review.

This just isn't needed anymore, but we do feel that any of these zone changes still hanging out there.

If they haven't been developed by now, if it hasn't been platted by now, the zoning is not reverted, it's probably not going to be.

Um, it has also led to some barriers of people trying to refinance, and a good example is the one the site at 1400 East Broadway that you saw last year where we had to revoke an ordinance so they could refinance because they had a zone change from 1982 that was clouding the title work.

Um it's really an example to to kind of get rid of another barrier for development, but also not to surprise residents with the zone change that occurred 50, 60 years ago, and just now it was never platted.

So thank you.

Um Madam Director, yeah.

So this was a study that I had asked to be done back in July, August.

So I appreciate your willingness to do that.

I I think this is a great opportunity to kind of clean up some of the um I guess some of the codes and and help be proactive in terms of how we're developing and making sure that our community is aware of what's going on in their neighborhood.

Um questions regarding this.

Any questions from anyone in the audience to speak for or against the uh text amendment regarding legacy zone changes?

Going once.

Going twice, three seeing none.

This I'll make a recommendation that this gets approved to the full city council and will be uh read on March 3rd, 2026.

Next, please.

Um, number eight is this review of outstanding studies within the plan commission.

So upcoming in the next month or two, you will see the healthy food overlay.

You will see the revocation of certificates of appropriateness and a modification to that consent decree that drove that text amendment.

Uh, but the big thing you're gonna see is zoning code rewrite.

Uh bids are in, we're scoring them next week.

Then we will interview those candidates and we will start that rewrite.

Um that's gonna start soon.

Uh we have a few other minor text amendments.

Uh we have the native plant study coming soon, and uh kind of a heritage tree or tree preservation study uh coming soon and um a demolition by neglect text amendment that we had to step back a little bit.

We're gonna have to put a little bit more effort and and form a committee and meet on that, but that you'll probably see that within a few months.

Madam Kirk, next um number nine is just review of upcoming moratorium expiration dates.

So that would be the storage units and then the historic demo, and we're close to having that second historic study done for public buildings.

Uh plan commission has approved that portion of that study.

You will see that at your next planning and zoning.

Okay, fantastic.

Any questions regarding those?

Okay.

And we did have a request uh from Mr.

Arnold to address this body on a specific issue regarding zoning.

Will you raise your right hand?

Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is true and accurate?

If so, say I do.

I do.

Uh thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I'll be brief.

Last week at Plan Commission, you uh they heard a special use permit for community recreation active.

It was for 2858 Lagrange.

No controversy at all.

But the person who did the speaking was the architect and really could not answer the plan commission's questions about what kind of programming will you have here?

Uh so it's approved, and you guys will get it uh next month.

But the the plan commission did make a request that we take a look at this category called Community Recreation Active.

Uh examples of what it's been used for, and these were all approved.

On Hill Avenue, you have a community health center.

On Deer Park Court, you have a facility for the developmentally disabled.

If you want to go back a few years when uh Cherry Street Commission moved all of their operations over to the old Mac Cumber building, that was community recreation active.

Warren Commons over on Franklin, which is housing for people with substance use, that's a recreation active.

These can be controversial, and in my opinion, the phrase community recreation active is kind of misleading.

So I'm very much in favor of studying this.

But can we get some community input on this?

I'm thinking, can we run this by the ability center?

Uh the Board of Developmental Disabilities, the Mental Health and Recovery Services Board, Children's Service Board, the agencies that we know are involved in human services because we're going to see more of these in the future.

And can we also make sure that we have plenty of opportunity for public input both at uh plan commission and here at Cities Zoning and Planning, so that people can talk about this is the best way?

Because should a human service facility have the same zoning as say a soccer field.

Maybe we do need to clarify this because in my opinion, community recreation active, I don't know what it means.

It's a clear, it's it's a vaguely defined category, and we do need to take a look at it.

So I'm just going on record.

I am in agreement that we need to take a look at this.

Can we make sure there's public input?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um do you want to answer that?

So there are actually several uses we're going through right now to re reevaluate whether they really need to be in the special use category or not.

Can we make them just site plan interviews?

Can we make that that path a little easier?

We with community rec active is uh is a wide category that we need to redefine a little bit better and maybe add a subcategory.

But again, with the zoning code rewrite, you're gonna see that change anyway.

But for now, is it's kind of uh a patch a patchwork for lack of a better word, kind of thing.

We do want to take a look at it because we do have people just trying to activate a small space like uh a house on on saying like Lagrange, where they just want after school tutoring for kids.

Should we put that all the way through the special use permit process?

Probably not.

Doesn't have the same impacts that say Schneider Field or a big soccer complex would have.

That's what we're gonna look at.

We're gonna try to do some uh patch tax amendment to fix that uh before the rewrite because that's gonna take about two years.

So we definitely will make sure there's input though.

All right, fantastic.

Hopefully that uh Mr.

Alba answers your question.

Um and do we know that it's on the record?

So seeing no further business, meeting adjourned.