Full Document
1 MINUTES OF THE HOUSING, PLANNING, & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MARCH 2, 2026 COUNCIL CHAMBERS Present: Councilmembers Evans, Bullock, Baker Also Present: Councilmembers Bixenstine, Kepple, Strebig, Steiner, Council staff, Assistant Director of Planning & Development Baas, Planning Director Byington Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. Approval of the minutes of the February 17, 2026 Housing, Planning & Development Committee meeting. Motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes of the February 17, 2026 Housing, Planning & Development Committee meeting. All members in favor. Motion passed. Minutes approved. Communication from Assistant Planning Director Baas regarding Proposed Code Amendments ( Chapter 1129, 1161) – Pet Grooming Services. ( referred to HPD 11/17/25) Motion made and seconded to receive and file the communication. All members in favor. Motion passed. ORDINANCE 39-2025 - AN ORDINANCE to take effect immediately provided it receives the vote of at least two thirds of the members of Council, or otherwise to take effect at the earliest period allowed by law, amending or repealing various sections of the Lakewood Codified Ordinances to update definitions and regulations related to pet grooming services within the City of Lakewood. ( 1st read and referred to HPD 11/17/25; 2nd reading 12/1/25) Assistant Director Baas reviewed the proposed ordinance, which he explained is responsive to issues encountered by business owners over the years. He noted that while more comprehensive zoning changes are forthcoming as part of the Zoning Refresh Project, that this minor change will help keep businesses in Lakewood. Mr. Baas explained the three areas of the zoning code proposed to be amended by Ord. 39-2025: 1. Section 1129.02 – proposes to modify the table of permitted uses in commercial districts to allow pet grooming without conditions in the C2 district. 2. Section 1129.18 – is a proposed new section to add supplemental regulation specific to pet grooming. 3. Section 1161.03 – addresses broad supplemental regulations related to pet grooming and is proposed to be repealed. Mr. Baas stated that the ordinance was recommended out of Planning Commission with the condition that pet grooming and pet daycare, including overnight boarding, be clearly distinguished from one another. After further thought on the matter, he feels that the ordinance in its current form accomplishes this. Docusign Envelope ID: 023F8BF6- 2709-878D-814F-AE8ADBFF51EA 2 Mr. Baas noted that the Permitted Uses table in existing Section 1129.02 covers three separate pet-related services: clinics/ hospitals, veterinarian offices, and grooming. Currently, all three pet- related services are treated the same. All three pet-related services are allowed by right in the C3 District and allowed as a conditional use in the C2 District. Mr. Baas explained that currently, if an applicant applies for a permit for pet grooming, a clinic, or vet office in the C2 District, they must abide by the supplemental regulations in 1161.03. He added that not all conditional uses require this extra layer of regulation. Mr. Baas noted that the supplemental regulations in 1161.03 were last updated in 1996 and are outdated. He pointed to the regulation in 1161.03 that requires four off-street parking spaces and noted that this was out of step with parking requirements elsewhere in the City. He stated that this requirement is a burden on small storefronts and that parking should not be that significant of a concern when customers are continuously picking up and dropping off their pets. Mr. Baas stated that currently 1161.03 also prohibits pet grooming, an animal clinic, or vet office in any structure that has a residential use. He noted that due to the high volume of mixed- use properties in the commercial district, this regulation puts serious limits on the available locations for these types of businesses. Noting that there are no such limitations in the C3 District and the similarities between the C2 and C3 Districts, he concluded that this is an equity issue. To address these challenges, Mr. Baas explained that Ord. 39-2025 proposes to permit pet grooming in the C2 District under 1129.02. He explained the rationale for this, noting that pet grooming is similar to a retail use and is a less intensive use as the animal is on site for a relatively. short period of time. He acknowledged that pet boarding is not currently addressed in the Zoning Code and because of its intensive use and characteristics that are distinct from grooming and vet care, Ord. 39-2025 calls it out as a specific use in 1129.02 and makes it conditional in the C2 District. He noted that Ohio Revised Code regulates all pet boarding the same whether the pet is boarded for a few hours, overnight, or longer. He explained the outcome of the proposed ordinance on a pet boarding business that wanted to move to the C2 District. The business would go through the conditional use process with Planning Commission and would abide by the general standards. There would be no additional supplemental regulations. To distinguish pet grooming from pet boarding and daycare, Mr. Baas explained that the ordinance proposes a new Section 1129.18 with supplemental regulations specific to pet grooming. The regulations prohibit pet groomers from boarding animals and from maintaining outdoor animal runs, stalls, or cages. The regulations also requires that a pet groomer adjacent to a residential space certifies that the facility has adequate ventilation, noise, and odor control. Finally, Mr. Baas explained that the overly restrictive parking regulations on all pet service businesses have been removed to be consistent with the rest of the Code. Councilmember Evans responded that the proposed changes make sense and asked for clarification about pets having overnight stays at an animal hospital or clinic. Assistant Director Baas replied that Ord. 39-2025 is not changing any requirements for clinics or animal hospitals, just adding more flexibility for pet grooming. Docusign Envelope ID: 023F8BF6- 2709-878D-814F-AE8ADBFF51EA 3 Councilmember Baker questioned why pet services were not allowed in C1. Assistant Director Baas replied that C1 is the City’s primary downtown office space and the Planning Dept. felt it was important to hold this line between C1 and C2. The Committee and Mr. Baas further discussed the City’ s zoning map relevant to this topic. Mr. Baas stated that more comprehensive changes would be forthcoming as part of the zoning refresh project. In response to a question, Mr. Baas explained the impetus for the change. He mentioned a grooming business that was searching for space. When they found suitable space, it happened to be in the C2 District where pet grooming is not permitted. The space was very similar to other spaces in the C3 District nearby. The business went before Planning Commission and was granted a conditional use permit with the understanding that this legislation would be introduced. Councilmember Bullock expressed support for pet grooming businesses and asked if the Board of Health has any regulatory role. Mr. Baas responded that pet groomers get licensed by the State, but he’s not familiar with the oversight beyond that. Council president Kepple asked if residents sharing a building with these businesses have experienced problems. Mr. Baas responded that he is not aware of any problems and that business owners try to be sensitive to their neighbors. He noted that the pet grooming business at Madison and Elmwood has been in place over 20 years and there have been no complaints reported to the City. Chair Evans expressed interest in ensuring that the zoning code refresh incorporate the committee’ s suggestions regarding the C1 District and Assistant Dir. Baas stated that he expected it would. A motion was made and seconded to recommend Ord. 39-2025 to Council for adoption. All members voted in favor. Motion passed. Housing, Planning, & Development Committee adjourned at 7:27 p.m. Approved: Bryan Evans, Chair Housing, Planning, & Development Committee Maureen M. Bach, Clerk of Council 3/9/2026 Docusign Envelope ID: 023F8BF6- 2709-878D-814F-AE8ADBFF51EA Council/ HPD Committee e ––– Proposed Code AmendmentPD Committeee P Conditional Use/ Pet oposed CoroPrP ettte Grooming d Co ngng ode Amendmod Co gg ( Ordinance 39 ndm 99- mentmdm 99- 2025 nt 55) Request: Following review by Planning Commission, approval/ adoption of Proposed Code Amendment pursuant to: Schedule 1129.02 (Permitted Uses in Commercial Districts) Section 1129.18 (Commercial Districts - Supplemental Regulations) Section 1161.03 (Conditional Uses; Supplemental Regulations) 1161. 03 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS FOR SPECIFIC USES. b) ) ) ANIMAL CLINICS/ HOSPITALS, VETERINARIAN OFFICES, AND GROOMING SERERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRVICES. In a C2 Retail District, animal clinics/ hospitals, veterinarian offices, and grooming services may be permitted as a conditiotioooonalnaala use provided that: 1) There shall be four ( 4) offoff- fffffffffff----ff street parking spaces for each veterinarian or groomer practicing at the location of the proposed ususessssee; 2) No outside animal runs, stalls, or cages shall be permitted on the lot; and 3) The proposed use shall notott be located ininn any structure housing a residential useseeee. Ord. 9199- 111-- 95. Passed 101010- 000- 7-- 7777777- 1996.) Current Code – Pet Grooming ( Council Docket 11/ 17/ 2025) SCHEDULE 1129.02: PERMITTED USES IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS C1 OFFICE C2 RETAIL C3 GENERAL BUSINESS C4 PUBLIC SCHOOL OTHER RETAIL/ SERVICES Including: Animal Clinics/ Hospitals, - C P C7 Veterinarian Offices, and - C P C7 Grooming Services. - C P C7 Key Issues: No discernable difference between interspersed C-2/ C-3 districts; predominance of mixed- use structures. Prohibition on mixed- use is counter to Community Vision ( Economic Development) Parking requirement appears arbitrary; vastly exceeds other retail uses with similar business models, customer turnover, etc. Code Amendment – Pet Grooming ( Council Docket 11/ 17/ 2025) Permitsts Pet et Grooming ng (less intense/ retail use) e) in CC-CC- 2. Addresses inconsistent standard for same mixed use building type across interspersed C Add CC- dressdAdd CCCC- 2/ C ress C/ C- es inconsistent standard for same mixed use building typeseress CCCC- 3 zoning blocks along commercial corridors for retail use. Delineateses Groomingng fromm Pet Boarding ( defined/ covered by ORC Chapter 956). ORC Chapter 956 ( Regulation And Licensing Of Dog Kennels) s))– –morere intensive usesse ( duration, exercise, etct. tcccc.) p ( g g g Pet Boarding” would remain as Conditional “ C” in C g CC- g CCC- 2, Permitted “ P” in CCC- CCC- 3-33333. PC Condition: Pet Daycare ( No Overnight), per ORC 956, falls under Boarding. Boardingn g g ng differs from Grooming use in duration/ turnover, expectation for exercise/ noise, etc. General Standards would apply in CC- CC- 2 for Pet Boarding, Clinics/ Vet Offices. Establishes common pet grooming supplemental regulations (1129.18) No overnight boarding or outside animal runs, stalls, or cages shall be permitted… If adjacent to residential use, provide for adequate ventilation/ odor control, soundndd-dddd- proofing If adjacent t measures to ent t eses… Parkingnng ( grooming, clinics, etc.) c.) treated like any other retail use. Current requirement for four parking spaces per er groomererr/ veteett ( dating to 1996) isis inconsistentnt w Curr wwwwwwwwwwith rr tt t requirenrenrr hhthth current ement for four parkingquire ntnt ( 2016) parking code. C2C2 C3 Docusign Envelope ID: 023F8BF6- 2709-878D-814F-AE8ADBFF51EA Recommendation – Proposed Code Amendment Referto full Council with recommendation for approval/ adoption. Docusign Envelope ID: 023F8BF6- 2709-878D-814F-AE8ADBFF51EA