← All Meeting Records|02-02-26 PC Minutes
Westlake · Planning Commission

02-02-26 PC Minutes

2026-02-02View original PDF ↗View on cityofwestlake.org ↗
Summary not yet available.
Full Meeting Transcriptclick to expand
WESTLAKE PLANNING COMMISSION 
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 
FEBRUARY 2, 2026 
 
Present: 
Lauren Falcone, Matt Jones, Bonnie Smith, Councilman Dave Del Regno  
Also Present: 
Planning Director Jim Bedell, Assistant Law Director Dean Valore, Clerk of Commissions 
Nicolette Sackman 
 
The regular meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Falcone. 
 
ELECTION OF OFFICERS 
Mr. Del Regno moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to elect Lauren Falcone as Chairman, Matt Jones as Vice Chairman 
and Bonnie Smith as Secretary.  
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Jones, Del Regno, Smith 
Nays: None, motion carried 
 
APPROVAL OF MINUTES 
Mr. Del Regno moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 5, 2026. 
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Jones, Del Regno, Smith 
Nays: None, motion carried 
 
COUNCIL REPORT - none 
 
BUSINESS  
Century FCU, sign plan, 2207 Crocker Rd., PP#21126075, Ward 5 
Mr. Bedell, members of the planning commission and Mr. Brady (Brady Sign) reviewed the Century FCU sign plan 
for a new tenant space located at 2207 Crocker Road, between Chopped and Kitchen Social. Mr. Bedell explained 
that the proposal included new window and wall signage for Century Federal Credit Union. The previously 
approved storefront is not changing. He reported that the sign’s construction, materials, and total square footage, as 
well as the vinyl graphics, comply with applicable regulations; however, the proposed logo height exceeds the 
36-inch maximum established in Crocker Commons’s master sign criteria, requiring an 8.75-inch waiver. He 
presented both the original (larger) logo design and a code-compliant, scaled-down version, noting that reducing the 
logo to 36 inches makes the lettering and “FCU” component more difficult to read from the road and affects overall 
visibility and proportion. Mr. Brady addressed the Commission and stated that after reviewing both options with the 
architect and the client, they wished to proceed with the original design because it provides better visibility from the 
road and better fits the storefront. During Commission discussion, it was noted that, when viewed in context with 
adjacent storefronts, the larger logo appears proportionate. Several members expressed that the compliant, 
scaled-down version looks out of proportion and diminishes legibility, particularly of the “FCU” text. Commission 
members indicated they had no concerns with the increased logo size and felt the branding and visibility justified the 
requested waiver. 
 
Findings of Fact 
1. The proposed storefront complies with the Crocker Commons Master Sign Criteria, except the logo that 
requires an 8.75 inch height waiver. 
2. Despite the increased logo size, the sign remains proportional, centered between the masonry elements, and 
within the maximum height allowed by the sign code.

Planning Commission Minutes 
February 2, 2026 
 
Page 2 of 7 
3. Any further reduction would shrink the lettering and cabinet to a point where the text may be illegible from 
the street. 
 
Based upon the findings of fact, Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to approve the Century FCU sign plan 
with the following: 
1. Waiver from the Crocker Commons Master Sign Criteria for the logo height to exceed 36”. 
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Del Regno, Smith, Jones 
Nays: none, motion carried 
 
Achievement Centers for Children, dumpster, 28501 Clemens Rd., 
PP#21212016, Ward 3 
Mr. Bedell, members of the planning commission and Mr. Robar (architect) reviewed a request from the 
Achievement Centers for Children to modify a previously approved site improvement plan for their new 
headquarters at 28050 Clemens Road. The original plan included a brick dumpster enclosure with metal doors; the 
applicant requested changing this to an eight-foot-tall cedar wood plank enclosure with matching cedar doors due to 
cost concerns. Mr. Bedell noted the enclosure is located at the end of the new drive lane in a heavily wooded area 
and not visible from streets or adjacent properties, and that it would be an improvement over the prior unscreened 
dumpsters. Mr. Robar explained that the nonprofit owner intends to maintain the property and that the masonry 
option was significantly more expensive. Commission members discussed aesthetics, durability, and maintenance, 
generally finding the location acceptable for a cedar enclosure while expressing concern about long-term wear. In 
response, conditions were added to require bollards next to the wood posts on the gate side and a concrete curb on 
the interior of all three sides of the enclosure to protect it from impact.  
 
Findings of Fact 
1. The originally approved plan included a brick dumpster enclosure consistent with Zoning Code Section 
1218.06(i) and the applicant now seeks to substitute a cedar wood plank‑clad enclosure due to cost and 
because it is not visible from public streets or adjacent properties. 
2. The request was evaluated under the modification criteria in Sections 1220.05 and 1220.06 and those 
standards have been met.  
3. Bollards beside the wood posts on the gate side of the dumpster enclosure and curbing inside the closure is 
needed to prevent damage. 
 
Based upon the findings of fact, Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to recommend approval of the 
Achievement Centers for Children site improvements with the following: 
1. Modification for the dumpster enclosure and gate to be of cedar instead brick and metal previously 
approved. 
2. Condition bollards are installed next to the wood posts on the gate side of the dumpster enclosure. 
3. Condition that curbing is installed on all three sides of the interior of the dumpster enclosure. 
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Del Regno, Smith, Jones 
Nays: none, motion carried 
 
Jasin Lot Assembly, 27433 & 27437 Second St., PP#21205019 & 020, 
Ward 3 
Mr. Bedell, members of the planning commission and Ms. Hickey (legal representative) reviewed a request for the 
Jasin lot assembly for properties at 27433 and 27437 Second Street to combine two existing parcels—one with a 
single-family home and one with a detached garage—into a single lot to accommodate a future first-floor addition. 
Mr. Bedell reported that the request is consistent with the City’s Guide Plan designation for low-density single-
family residential use and meets the City’s standard conditions for lot assemblies. The applicant’s representative, 
Ms. Hickey, confirmed Mr. Bedell’s summary and had nothing further to add. Commission members raised no 
objections. 
 
Findings of Fact

Planning Commission Minutes 
February 2, 2026 
 
Page 3 of 7 
1. The request is consistent with the Guide Plan designation of Single‑Family Residential (Low Density) and 
will result in a residential lot within the R‑1F‑80 District, matching the intended land use and zoning and 
enabling the applicant to pursue a future addition to the home. 
2. Although the assembled lot remains below the required 20,000 square feet, the assembly reduces existing 
nonconformities and improves compliance with lot area, width, and depth‑to‑width ratio standards without 
creating any new nonconformities. 
 
Based upon the findings of fact, Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to approve the Jasin lot assembly 
involving permanent parcel numbers 212-05-019 and 020 with the condition that approval is subject to the plat 
meeting the requirements of the County and State as indicated in the Ohio Revised Code and approval by the 
Engineering Department in compliance with the code and the ordinances of the City of Westlake.  
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Del Regno, Smith, Jones 
Nays: none, motion carried 
 
Sheiban Park master sign criteria, Corporate Circle, PP#21126032 & 
066, Ward 5, tabled 11/10/25, 12/1/25, 1/5/26 
Mr. Bedell, members of the planning commission, Mr. Jason Sheiban, Mr. Vega-Peralta (architect), and Attorney 
Matheney discussed the proposal. Mr. Bedell explained that the proposal was primarily a cleanup and clarification 
of items from the prior meeting, with no substantive new elements. The applicant requested an additional monument 
sign and a slightly larger monument sign than otherwise permitted, resulting in a 30-square-foot modification, while 
the total building and site signage remained well below the maximum allowed by code. Clarifications were made 
regarding wayfinding and how signage would define the limits of Sheiban Park, including permitting Building One 
(the future Sheiban building) may have wall signage exceeding the standard 20-foot height limit—up to 33 feet 
above grade, with maximum letter height of 5 feet and logo height of 8 feet—provided it remains a single-tenant 
building. If the building is subdivided in the future, its signage must conform to the same standards as the rest of the 
center, including a maximum wall sign height of 20 feet above grade and 4-foot letters/logo. The criteria also clarify 
that a corner tenant may use both street frontages in calculating its signage allotment, that the maximum size of any 
single wall sign is 100 square feet (consistent with citywide standards but slightly larger than neighboring Crocker 
Park and Crocker Commons), and that wayfinding signs are excluded from the total maximum allowable site 
signage. Additional guidance covers signage placement on the rear facades of Buildings Five and Six (limited to rear 
service doors for identification and deliveries), standards for secondary tenant signage, and construction details such 
as acrylic faces with matte finishes to reduce glare.  
 
The Commission discussed concerns that wayfinding signs could potentially function as advertising, but Mr. Bedell 
noted that while size can be regulated, content cannot be controlled under applicable legal precedent, and there is a 
shared understanding that these are to function as directional signs only. Commissioners expressed appreciation for 
the clarity and organization of the revised criteria and for the collaborative work between staff and the applicant. 
 
Findings of Fact 
1. While the Master Sign Criteria establishes a cohesive signage strategy for Sheiban Park, it will require 
modifications in order to remain consistent with Westlake’s sign regulations.  
2. It provides a unified identity for the development, while allowing flexibility through administrative review 
and Planning Commission oversight. 
 
Based upon the findings of fact, Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to approve the Sheiban Park master sign 
criteria with the following modifications: 
1. An additional 30 SF monument sign at the location area “B” driveway and for one monument sign at 36 SF. 
2. Wayfinding signage is excluded from total maximum allowable site signage. 
3. For Building 1, the maximum height for wall signs is 33’ above grade and the maximum height within a sign 
of a single letter is 5’ or for a logo is 8’ provided it continues to operate as a single‑tenant building. In the 
event Building 1 is no longer a single-tenant building the maximum height of a single letter or logo is 4’, and 
the maximum height for a wall sign above grade is 20’. 
4. The second building frontage of a corner unit is included in total frontage allotment for that unit. 
5. Secondary signage is permitted and may include: wall signs at 0.5 square feet; freestanding/A‑frame signs at 
0.1 square feet (limited to one freestanding sign per tenant, not to exceed 3 square feet per side); and window

Planning Commission Minutes 
February 2, 2026 
 
Page 4 of 7 
signs at 0.225 square feet per linear foot of tenant frontage. 
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Del Regno, Smith, Jones 
Nays: none, motion carried 
 
ChanceLight site improvements (playground in parking lot), 24650 
Center Ridge Rd., PP#21328010, Ward 1, tabled 9/8/25, 10/6/25, 
11/10/25, 12/1/25, 1/5/26 
Mr. Bedell, members of the planning commission, Ms. Wolf (architect), Mr. Chattha and Mr. Trusco reviewed the 
ChanceLight site improvements, focusing on the relocation and enlargement of a school playground within the 
existing parking lot. The revised plan increases the playground area by approximately 700 square feet and relocates 
it further within the parking field, away from the adjacent residential development and building entrance, to reduce 
distractions and improve student safety. Access between the building and playground will be via a direct path of 
about 74 feet, with three permanent warning signs and movable safety signage to be placed at the crosswalk when 
the playground is in use. Vehicle impact protection will be provided by bollards spaced four feet apart, with final 
specifications to be approved by the city engineer and fire department. The proposal removes 36 of parking spaces 
but maintains a surplus of approximately 66 spaces, and Mr. Bedell noted that school uses require fewer spaces than 
office uses under the code. Due to the site layout and adjacent three‑story building, the Commission agreed that 
traditional buffering would be difficult and likely unnecessary, particularly since the existing parking lot is not 
buffered. 
 
The applicant’s team spoke in support of the plan and confirmed that prior staff and Commission recommendations 
had been incorporated. Commissioners discussed traffic circulation, particularly their concerns with angled parking 
near the playground and the potential for conflicting traffic movements. After discussion, the Commission 
determined that converting the two affected drive aisles to one‑way northbound traffic and restriping all adjacent 
stalls as angled spaces, with appropriate one‑way signage, would provide a clearer and safer circulation pattern; it 
was noted that any additional loss of spaces would not impact required parking. 
 
Findings of Fact 
1. The proposed playground is an allowed accessory use.  
2. The buffering requirement is waived , pursuant to Section 1133.02, because the playground’s location on a 
pre‑existing parking lot makes buffering impracticable, and eliminating the requirement remains reasonable 
and consistent with the intent of the regulations. 
 
Based upon the findings of fact, Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to recommend approval of the 
ChanceLight site improvements with the following: 
1. Modification to waive the requirement for buffering. 
2. Condition that the playground shall remain locked when not in use with use restricted to school operations 
only and bollard specifications are administratively approved by the City Engineer and moveable safety 
signage is placed at the crosswalk when the playground is in use. 
3. Condition that the two impacted drive lane aisles will be converted to one way north bound and all parking 
spaces adjacent to those aisles will be converted to angle parking. 
4. Condition that the parking lot striping plan be submitted for administrative approval.  
5. Approval is subject to comments in Part III of the 1/29/26 staff report and approval of the final plans by the 
Building and Engineering Departments in compliance with the code and the ordinances of the City of 
Westlake; and, in the development process, should there be any changes necessitated by engineering 
requirements that visually alter the appearance of the development approved by the Planning Commission, 
the plan shall be re-submitted to the Planning Commission. 
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Del Regno, Smith, Jones 
Nays: none, motion carried 
 
La Centre development plan addition, 25689 Detroit Rd., 
PP#21321006 & 007, Ward 1, tabled 1/5/26 
Mr. Bedell, members of the planning commission, and Mr. Foster discussed the La Centre development plan 
addition. The proposal is for an approximately 11,806 square foot addition at 25689 Detroit Road, including an

Planning Commission Minutes 
February 2, 2026 
 
Page 5 of 7 
expanded ballroom, a two-story event space, new restrooms, a parking lot, a covered drop-off area, and an entrance. 
The applicant confirmed that materials and colors for the outdoor pavilion and canopy would match the existing 
building, with a wood-grain metal underside. Mr. Bedell noted that the proposal was largely unchanged from the 
prior review, with remaining clarifications focused on the required lot split and assembly plat, which must be 
completed before building permits can be issued. Adjustments to the land banked parking were made to meet 
setback and buffering requirements, resulting in a reduction of four parking spaces and an overall parking deficit, 
which was discussed at length by the Commission. It was explained that the deficit is mitigated by staggered peak 
demand between office and event uses on the site, and that additional parking needs could be accommodated by 
underutilized spaces during events. Design details were reviewed, including ODOT type 6 curbing, future buffering 
and tree preservation plans, building and accent lighting that complies with code, and a roof-mounted equipment 
screening system using white metal panels to match the existing architecture. The Commission also discussed the 
pavilion (confirmed to have no lighting, heating, ceiling fans, or audio-visual components) and the relationship of 
the expansion to a previously approved coffee shop and associated bollards at the Houlihan’s corner; it was 
determined that the bollards remain appropriate and the addition does not negatively impact that approval.  
  
Findings of Fact 
1. The architecture presents an attractive design that complements the existing building while offering its own 
artistic interpretation. 
2. The site plan provides safe and efficient access, circulation, and parking. 
3. A reduction from the 788 parking space required by code to the 650 existing parking spaces is appropriate 
due to the non‑overlapping peak demand periods of the event center (533 spaces required by code) and 
office tenants (255 spaces required by code). 
4. As conditioned, the project will not create adverse impacts on neighboring properties and is compatible 
with the character of the surrounding area. However, a lot split and assembly plat must be approved prior to 
construction, as the addition cannot span two separate parcels. 
 
Based upon the findings of fact, Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to recommend approval of the La Centre 
development plan with the following: 
1. Modification to allow a parking deficit due to the staggering peak demand times per uses on the site (650 
parking spaces is the minimum number of spaces required). 
2. Condition that a lot split and assembly plat indicating the new property boundary is approved prior to 
construction of the proposed improvements. 
3. Condition the pavilion will have no lighting, heating, ceiling fans, or audio‑visual components. 
4. Approval is subject to comments in Part III of the 1/30/26 staff report and approval of the final plans by the 
Building and Engineering Departments in compliance with the code and the ordinances of the City of 
Westlake; and, in the development process, should there be any changes necessitated by engineering 
requirements that visually alter the appearance of the development approved by the Planning Commission, 
the plan shall be re-submitted to the Planning Commission. 
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Del Regno, Smith, Jones 
Nays: none, motion carried 
 
Rockefeller Estates, conceptual development plan (5 single family 
cluster homes), 1636 Dover Center Rd., PP#21222021, Ward 3 
Mr. Bedell, members of the planning commission, Mr. Chandler (developer), Mr. Dardir (owner) and Mr. Kelly 
(engineer) reviewed the conceptual development plan for Rockefeller Estates at 1636 Dover Center Road, proposing 
a five-unit single-family cluster development to replace the previously approved eight-unit townhome project. Mr. 
Bedell summarized the conceptual nature of the plan, key design elements (private drive with T-shaped turnaround, 
retention basins, buffering/landscaping, parking, and sidewalk connection), and noted that the property is designated 
multi-family residential, which allows cluster homes. The applicants described a low-density, higher-end detached 
cluster product primarily for downsizing residents, with ranch and story-and-a-half options and explained the 
general approach to drainage and basin maintenance.  
 
The following residents were present: Bruce Brady, 1686 Dover Center Road; Andrea Scala, 1726 Dover Center 
Road and Kelly Coleman, 1613 Dover Center Road. They raised questions and concerns regarding the types of units 
(ranch vs. townhouse vs. colonial), square footage, base pricing, and whether surrounding apartment buildings and

Planning Commission Minutes 
February 2, 2026 
 
Page 6 of 7 
site context had been considered in 
the project’s economic 
assumptions. Residents also asked 
about the maintenance and 
appearance of the retention basins, 
potential fencing and screening 
along the south and west edges 
adjacent to  apartments, and the 
feasibility of selling high-priced 
homes “in someone’s backyard” 
and in a more densely developed 
corridor. A neighboring property 
owner expressed concern that the 
neighbors should not have to 
“suffer” if the prior investment 
decision was problematic and 
noted the density contrast with her larger single-home parcel. Another resident questioned the proposed gate and 
mailbox configuration and compatibility with the character of the area. In response, the development team reiterated 
that the product is intended as single-family detached cluster housing with strong market demand, particularly 
among Westlake homeowners seeking to downsize but remain in the city, and provided additional detail on unit 
types, sizes, and pricing. Price range: approximately $850,000 to $1.2 million. Minimum square footage: about 
2,200 sq. ft. for ranches, with larger square footages for story-and-a-half and two‑story units. They emphasized that 
the plan reduces overall density and traffic compared to both the previously approved townhomes and potential 
multi-family apartment build-out under existing zoning. They confirmed that a detailed fence and buffering plan, 
particularly along the west property line adjacent to apartments and at the retention basins, will be submitted at the 
development plan stage, with the intent to integrate both landscaping and fencing to provide screening.  
 
Mr. Jones explained that the retention basins must be maintained under a formal operations and maintenance 
agreement, enforced via annual reporting and city inspections in compliance with Ohio EPA stormwater regulations, 
ensuring that basins are not neglected. Commission members generally expressed support for the cluster concept as 
a less intensive and more compatible use than the previously approved eight-unit townhome plan or additional 
apartments and recognized the strength of the prior landscaping scheme as a model for the new configuration. 
However, they voiced strong concerns about the proposed gate. Key issues cited included potential traffic backup 
and disruption on Dover Center Road, delivery vehicle idling and turnarounds at the gate, impacts on nearby 
residents, and a view that a gate is unnecessary and undesirable in this context. They requested a formal legal 
opinion regarding gated communities on private streets (legal opinion regarding gated communities under Chapters 
11 and 12 of the City code), but members also made clear their present opposition to gating this project. The 
Commission further affirmed that vinyl siding is not acceptable per Chapter 1237 and consistent with recent Council 
action on a similar request, while indicating that vinyl trim products, such as those manufactured by AZEK may be 
acceptable. 
 
Findings of Fact 
1. The proposed conceptual plans and design requirements generally conform to the Zoning Code; however, 
as currently designed, certain zoning modifications and conditions would need to be incorporated into any 
motion for approval of the final development plan if it reflects the conceptual plan. 
2. The Planning Commission and the applicant have discussed revisions needed to bring the proposal into 
fuller compliance with the Zoning Code, and it is anticipated that the final development plan will be 
redesigned accordingly. 
 
Based upon the findings of fact, Mr. Jones moved, seconded by Mrs. Smith to approve the Rockefeller Estates 
conceptual plan with the following: 
1. Condition that the community shall not be gated. 
2. Condition that vinyl siding shall be removed as an allowable material. 
3. Condition that Azek can remain as an allowable material.  
ROLL CALL ON APPROVAL: 
Yeas: Falcone, Del Regno, Smith, Jones

Planning Commission Minutes 
February 2, 2026 
Page 7 of 7 
Nays: none, motion carried 
MISCELLANEOUS 
None 
ADJOURNMENT 
Meeting adjourned at 8:02 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, March 2, 2026, in the Westlake 
City Hall Council Chambers. 
_______________________________ 
____________________________________ 
Chairman Lauren Falcone  
Nicolette Sackman, MMC 
Clerk of Commissions 
Approved: 
Lauren Falcone 
 
 
 
Nicolette Sackman
March 2, 2026
02-02-26 PC Minutes — 2026-02-02 | Urbyn