On the agenda: Norton meeting — Data Center (Mar 24)

See CITY OF NORTON

&; % 4060 Columbia Woods Drive
« =< Norton, Ohio 44203

Offices: 330-825-7815 Fax: 330-825-3104
NORTON Website: www.cityofnorton.org

Mayor Mike Zita

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Tuesday, March 24, 2026

I. ROLL CALL
Il. Statement from Zoning Administrator
Ill. OLD BUSINESS
Data Center Zoning Regulations and Resolution
IV. NEW BUSINESS
Vv. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
February 24, 2026
March 10, 2026

vI. ADJOURNMENT

Spon, CITY OF NORTON

So es 4060 Columbia Woods Drive
=< ~ Norton, Ohio 44203

Offices: 330-825-7815 Fax: 330-825-3104
NORTON Website: www.cityofnorton.org

Mayor Mike Zita

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Tuesday, February 24, 2026 - 6:00 pm

Roll Call: Also Present:

Ralph Dowling Samantha Owen, Secretary
John Conklin Bill Braman

Marion Peterson

James Lada

Kaitlin Witzberger

Mr. Dowling called the meeting to order at 6:02 pm.

APPLICATION PC-5
Final Site Plan Review
3125 Eastern Road
PPN 46-09600

GSA Equipment

Adam Nichols

Mr. Braman presented the application. This parcel is on the corner of Eastern and Cleveland
Massillon was all rezoned from a partial B3 and a.B1 to a B3 and then split off with one parcel
rezoned to.R1. After that occurred, Mr. Nichols presented a preliminary plan for his building that
is being reviewed today for a final site plan. According to the engineer’s comments all
requirements have been met with the exception of proof of the storm water agreement which the
city engineer would.need a copy of and it would need to be recorded with Summit County; once
it's recorded, that proof will be given to our city engineer. This is all for the detention basin
which Mr. Nichols most likely has this as it’s standard for this process. This is zoned correctly
and all requirements have been met.

Mr. Dowling asked for the applicant to come to the podium to present his plan and answer
questions. Mr. Nichols approached the podium and clarified with Mr. Braman that the
stormwater management agreement was submitted last week but Mr. Nichols will be sure to
follow up on that tomorrow. Mr. Dowling stated that the things that the Planning Commission
were concerned with during the preliminary site plan review as far as dumpster locations, truck
access that would be coming off of Cleveland Massillon and Eastern Road were all addressed or
accommodated. Mr. Dowling asked if all motors are going to be stored either beside or behind
the building. Mr. Nichols explained there will be a showroom inside and then a large fenced-in
area behind the building with the plan being for that fence to be open chain link but if requested,

he would be willing to accommodate as the concern was not having the items in the fence being
seen. He did mention that he would need to look at the options for making the fence not be open
as the item that he is aware that can be put into the chain link will deteriorate and he would like
avoid the cost of replacement. Mr. Dowling commented that 44 parking spaces is more than the
business needs to which Mr. Nichols explained that trailers will need to be able to come to drop
off so the space is needed. Mr. Lada said that he looked at the original site plan review from
December of 2024 and asked why the septic system was positioned the way it was as it is far
away on the west side of the lot. Mr. Nichols explained that he simply did what he was told as far
as that and it allows for other storage buildings to be added, so the septic being closer to the
parcel lines would allow for that. Mr. Braman interjected, “The health department, they'll take
into consideration a replacement area. They don't fully tell you exactly where it is, but they give
an idea of where septic can and cannot be based on additions later down the road and if you have
to put a replacement in.”. Mr. Lada mentioned that the grade goes up as you go to the west from
where they’re building and normally you put the septic at the lower point. Mr. Nichols added that
area will be parking and that’s not ideal.

Mr. Wackerly came to the podium. He lives in the parcel that was rezoned to R1 that Mr.
Braman mentioned earlier which was purchased from Mr. Nichols. Mr. Wackerly stated,
“nobody wants to live beside a commercial enterprise. Nobody wants to live inside power lines
or a water tower or a power plant. I bought this from him knowing that there was a potential
someday for there to be a business. So, as much as I don't want to live by it, I have to accept
that.” Mr. Wackerly went on to state that commercial septic is governed by the EPA; Residential
is governed by Summit County Health Department, and he did not feel the leech lines as shown
will work. “I had to go through all this myself-a year ago. It's most likely going to...(inaudible).
Those are things you guys can figure out down the road once they actually...(inaudible).” Mr.
Wackerly expressed his dislike for the dosing tank aerator being 10 to 20 feet off the property
line. With the concerns of not.devaluing-his property and those properties around them, he
mentioned concerns for adverse impacts, whether visual or auditory. He questioned what the
lighting plan looked like as he wasn’t able to tell. He said that the detention pond looks great but
there is a concern about the area near the road and by his (Mr. Wackerly’s) driveway as it is
“super wet” there and he wants to make sure that’s not going to cause any problems since the
plans indicate that about 3 ft of fill dirt will be added. His concern with this is possible water
runoff. He informed:the group that there are lot of drainage tiles that he is sure they will find as
they begin construction.as he found these himself during the construction of his home. Mr.
Wackerly is concerned with noise caused by the rooftop AC. He mentioned that he wasn’t sure
what the building looked like and how tall it was; site plans required building height but he did
not see that. B3 says 25-foot max. He asked if there was going to be any landscaping; “there
were no plans of that included, which I think is a requirement.” He wanted to verify if there
would be anything to help this structure blend into the surrounding area. “These are all minor
things. I know they do cost money and I wouldn't want to spend the money if I were Mr.
Nichols, but just for the sake of blending in with the houses in the area, that would be my ask for
consideration.”

A gentleman approached the podium who was worried about the outside storage of mowers and
oil contamination as he has a well and is worried about the water.

Sean who lives on Eastern and drives past this parcel daily stated, “When I saw this was
originally for sale, I was surprised that it was intended for industrial at all because we know that
there's an industrial park across the street that we purchased from Summit County Metro Parks or
whomever it was. I might be incorrect on who that is, which is industrial. There are a lot of open
buildings in the city of Norton. Why aren't we moving this company, which I'd love to have in
Norton and I love the idea of that. Why don't they move into the Rite Aid building, which is
probably perfect for them, more indoor storage, etc. So, my concern is that area, while across the
street is more industrial, on this side of the street, outside of the church, which is always allowed
to be zoned in R1. Why are we building any kind of light industrial business in what seemingly
is majority a neighborhood? So, while that was a large field that's been empty for a long time, I
saw that there was a home built there and that was exciting to‘me because I like the idea that
we're building more homes. As you know, we took a golf course and we turned into a bunch of
homes. These are all great things for the city. I guess I'm just trying to figure out why we're
going to amongst a bunch of homes, build a mower shop when thete's plenty of open opportunity
for building or ever else, maybe even across the street, which I know it sucks because he's
already purchased this land. But I just don’t see why we're building industrial and what appears
to be a neighborhood. Now, I understand that it's zoned for, but when you drive down that street,
do you see any other businesses that are operating today? And I don't. I know there’s some other
buildings that might be a business, but they're not obviously a business. And then from a traffic
perspective, I can't imagine we want to drive a bunch of people towards there for what would be
more of a retail traffic when we have more of a retail area, which is much more towards the
center of Norton. I'm just confused as to why we were-even entertaining the idea of that.”

Mr. Dowling with the help of Mr: Braman explained that a year and a half ago, that area was a
combination of B1 which is neighborhood business, and the front part of that parcel which Mr.
Nichols currently owns was B3. Mr. Nichols rezoned the whole parcel B3. Then he parceled off
a piece and sold it because he didn't need it and Mr. Wackerly came and asked for it to be
rezoned R1 that made it residential. There never was any residential property on that parcel. The
parcels across the street previously owned by Metro Parks was a C wreck district and it was
rezoned toI1 at that point. Sean said he understands the zoning and what is zoned today as well
as what it was.in the past. “More of it is if you drive down there, do you see any other
businesses? So, whether it's zoned that or not, what I'm saying is for the feel of the
neighborhood. My concern is this - I'm on Eastern Road. Mr. Knight passed away and at some
point, in time that the farm that's there will be sold to someone. And what will come next is
whether it's a neighborhood or a business and I sure hope it's not a business because behind it is a
business. I understand that J.R. Wheel is back there. And so, there's a potential that in the very
near future when they decide to sell this, what is it going to be zoned as? and that’s going to
detract from my property and the reason I moved to Norton. I don't want to discourage business
in the city of Norton. I just know that there is a lot of buildings and what seems to be business
type property already existing. So, we're going to build more when we have a lot of empty just
seems foolish to me. That area has a rural feel, which is fantastic. I understand across the street,
the city of Norton made some great things. I'm hoping we bring industry to that area, because it's
far away from me. But the point is we're going to put a building here, which doesn't fit it in
whether it’s zoned that way or not.” Mr. Dowling explained that he felt the only reason that Mr.
Nichols actually did what he did because it was zoned appropriate and he was looking for a

bigger place to expand. Sean said that he feels the work Mr. Nichols has done to his existing
property is fantastic in how he went about cleaning it up. His main concern is how big of a
change this is from what’s there now. “It's nice to be rural. It's also nice to have people that helps
pay taxes and helps fund the schools. I know we're have a lot of issues there. So, I'm not against
it, but I do have a strong concern about the way that changes the feeling of that area because
there are no other businesses there today. If you cross the street and go farther down, we have
some businesses on the right-hand side, the storage unit, some of those other things.”

Mr. Dowling stated, “He agrees, but for this not much can be done because it is zoned properly
but I would say on those future ones, further west on Eastern it's things to keep informed. If
we’re doing any rezoning there, you would be informed and there's still land available for the
industrial area but that's more for factory type businesses.

Karen Sabori of 3104 Eastern Road, zoned B3 approached the podium. She did not come to the
rezoning meeting because she felt if her property is zoned B3, why can't Mr. Nichols’ property
be? She expressed her biggest concern would bedue to her house being directly across the street
from the building and she will be looking at all these tractors. “I was really hoping that I could
fil...(inaudible due to turning to talk to Mr. Nichols at the back of the room);

Mr. Nichols responded to her; however, this was also inaudible due to him being distanced from
a microphone

Mr. Braman explained that those wanting to speak need to speak into the microphone and asked
if questions could be asked and then the board would give Mr. Nichols an opportunity to come
up and speak to answer.

Ms. Sabori stated her other concern is that her second parcel beside her home is partially on a
flood plain and the neighbor to the east of her is completely in a flood plain. One road that's
exiting onto Eastern Road is right at the-area that when the water comes down, it's going to flow
into that area. There is.a concern about flooding there because there is currently a problem on
that corner with flooding.

Mr. Dowling-had Mr. Nichols come to the podium where he addressed a few of the items that
were voiced by those from neighboring parcels. It was learned that all equipment maintenance is
done inside. Mowers are dropped off; they will sit in the fenced in lot and then they are serviced
inside the building. Once completed, they are taken back outside for the customer to pick up or
the shop to deliver to the customer.

This building is going to be 9,000 square foot building. A portion is going to be a showroom, a
parts department and then a service department.

The area behind the building will be a hard surface that will be packed down and stable enough
for a forklift to be driven across it such as limestone or asphalt millings - grass wouldn't make
any sense. There wouldn’t be any oil changed in this area — yes, a motor could be dripping oil in
theory, but there are not foreseeable oil spills. Mr. Nichols explained that one day he plans to sell
this and he does not want to have any EPA issues that would delay the selling of the property.
Mr. Nichols shares the same concern.

Mr. Dowling reiterated that there would be a retention pond where drainage from the property
will be directed to and the water that would be coming down eastern wouldn’t be from Mr.
Nichol’s property.

Mr. Braman explained that part of the SWIP plan provides that Mr. Nichols can’t discharge any
water off his property - that’s the whole meaning of the detention and retention. There is no
additional water coming off of his property. Mr. Nichols can't change what previously flows, but
what new water would come off of it, he has to deal with on his property.

Ms. Sabori questioned about the asphalt being put in and how that would affect the water. Mr.
Braman and Mr. Dowling explained that the water off the asphalt will drain it to his own lot
detention area. There is a large detention basin that's going to-go across the front by the road
which is designed to collect any water coming off the asphalt plus runoff from the field and
everywhere else that'll go into that detention basin. This is all a predetermined requirement by
the city engineer and the county storm water management which has already been provided as
that is a part of being able to get your engineering plans approved by the city engineer.

Mr. Wackerly asked if we had the storm water calculations. Mr. Wackerly stated that he did look
at requirements of the major site plan review and one of the requirements is to’provide the storm
water and they're not in there. Mr. Braman explained that it may not be in this specific plan
packet, but he could guarantee our engineer has those storm water totals. Mr. Dowling explained
that it may not be specifically drawings, but more calculations.on runoff. The comments
provided by the city engineer stated, “the applicant/has provideda storm water management
agreement” concluding that-all the calculations and information on the detention basins was
provided.

This parcel is B3 and the-applicant is authorized to build there. Noise was addressed by Mr.
Dowling who explained thatthe noise issues would-be resolved with knowing that Mr. Nichols
would be working inside. He also addressed. the concerns for storage and categorized those
concerns as visual issues. Mr. Dowling said thatthe applicant may want to look at what options
there are to cover some of that up and.protect the items on at least one side.

The city engineer has approved 'this project and all the zoning requirements have been met. A
civil engineer and.an architect were involved as far as the design and logistics of the building
plans. Mr. Nichols did show the board and those in the audience the stick frame building layout
and design on his tablet: Mr. Lada reassured the audience that the neighbors shouldn’t be
concerned about a there being something built that is outside of the code because he recalls the
elevations and such being included in the original site plan. Mr. Wackerly approached the
podium and said that he appreciated Mr. Nichols showing the drawings to everyone and his
concerns about height or ugliness are addressed but he would like to see some sort of screening
around the fencing so that he wouldn’t need to look at mowers because his property is roughly
the same value as what he's (Mr. Nichols) proposing, and he would like reassurance that in 50
years or whenever that the property can sell for a reasonable value as well.

Mr. Dowling wasn’t sure how to address oil dripping from mowers and equipment on the ground
due to the fact that some businesses that same issue is happening in parking lots with cars and
maybe even in our own garages with our cars.

Mr. Lada asked Mr. Braman who would enforce the comment from the engineer regarding
scheduling a meeting with the representatives from Summit Soil and Water with Mr. Nichols.
Mr. Braman explained anytime that anyone is going to be disturbing land to do construction,
they'll need the Summit Soil and Water to obtain a permit. Once a permit is issued, that allows
work to start and the specifics of where to put the silt fence and so on are established. Mr. Lada
mentioned to Mr. Nichols that he needs to be aware of that as that's an important box to check
off in the process going forward. Mr. Braman said that he believes if the applicant/builder would
not do that for some unknown reason, final occupancy would never be granted because they will
sign off on the plan that they approved and ensure that it’s completed as intended.

Mr. Dowling said, usually putting all this fencing up is the first‘step that you have to do before
you even disturb the land. I would think that's something a builder would know. He asked if
there was a builder chosen yet to which Mr. Nichols said'there was. Mr. Braman said that
everything's current on that even when you do pull your building permit that SWIP plan needs to
be in there with that permit.

Mr. Wackerly approached the podium and asked if that builder will be managing all the site
work, all the excavation and everything to which Mr. Nichols responded, “Yes”.

Mr. Conklin made a motion to approve application PC-5 Final Site Plan for 3125 Eastern Road
parcel 46-9600 - GSA equipment. Mr. Peterson seconded. The motion passed 5-0.

Mr. Lada wanted to point out to the concerned neighbors, the planning commission is just a
recommending board that recommends whether the application is perceived as being complete,
meeting the code, meeting the zoning and our recommendation is forwarded to council.

Mr. Dowling interjected and clarified that council won’t take action on this, but it’s forwarded to
them for informational purposes and they can address it if they wish — site plans do not require
council approval like a rezoning does. Council will have access to copies of all this and full-size
drawings and everything along with our comments.

Mr. Nichols asked when he would receive the approval to which Ms. Owen explained it
wouldn’t be today, but tomorrow through his OpenGov portal which he will take to Barberton to
obtain a building permit.

New Business
Appointment of Michael Rorar to the housing council.

Ms. Witzberger made a motion to appoint Michael Rorar to the housing council. Mr. Conklin
seconded. Motion passes 5-0.

Consideration of Minutes

Mr. Dowling had a few concerns within the minutes that he recommended Mr. Braman and
Samantha review to ensure what was said matches the zoning map.

Mr. Lada made a motion to approve the meeting minutes from January 27th, 2026. Ms.
Witzberger seconded. Motion passes 5-0.

Mr. Dowling asked if there were upcoming applications. Mr. Braman said nothing unless they
file something tomorrow and in the near future there could be a home occupancy permit coming
your way.

Meeting was adjourned at 6:44 PM

Respectfully submitted, Approved:

Samantha Owen, Secretary Ralph Dowling, Chair Date

Note: These minutes are not verbatim. A full recording is available on the city website.

a CITY OF NORTON

S
ey a 4060 Columbia Woods Drive
< = Norton, Ohio 44203
Offices: 330-825-7815 Fax: 330-825-3104
NORTON Website: www.cityofnorton.org

Mayor Mike Zita

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Tuesday, March 10, 2026.->6:00 pm

Roll Call: Also Present:

Ralph Dowling Samantha Owen, Secretary
John Conklin

Marion Peterson

Kaitlin Witzberger

Mr. Dowling called the meeting to order at 6:09 pm.

2026 PC-MD1
Zoning of Marijuana Dispensaries within the City of Norton

Chairman Dowling opened discussion stating that City Council requested the
Planning Commission develop recommendations regarding zoning regulations
for marijuana dispensaries within the City of Norton. He noted that research
had been conducted using ordinances from other municipalities, including
Tallmadge;-Seville and Ravenna, as.well as guidance from the State of Ohio. He
indicated that state-regulations are broad and lack specificity, making local
refinement necessary. Chairman Dowling explained that he focused primarily
on Ravenna’s Ordinance Chapter.862 and proposed modifications to better
align with Norton’s zoning structure and development patterns.

Secretary Samantha Owen read a statement from Zoning Administrator Bill
Braman, who was unable-to attend. Mr. Braman indicated that the Planning
Commission had been.tasked by Council to assist in establishing zoning
regulations. He stated that he reviewed multiple municipalities and is
comfortable with state-level regulatory requirements. He recommended that
dispensaries be limited to I1 (Light Industrial) districts and that a conditional
use permit be required, which would necessitate review by both the Planning
Commission and City Council.

Chairman Dowling stated that while he incorporated the conditional use
requirement into draft language, he recommended broader zoning flexibility
beyond I1. He identified Barber Road, State Route 261 and State Route 585 as
primary corridors for consideration, noting that these areas contain a mix of
industrial and business zoning and would be more appropriate for such uses.

He expressed support for allowing dispensaries within B2, B3, I1, and I2
districts, explaining that Barber Road includes a mix of B3 and I1 zoning that
could accommodate such development. He further noted that expanding
allowable districts to include B2 and B3 would increase opportunities,
particularly along State Route 585 near the J.R. Wheel area, while restricting
locations solely to 11 could unnecessarily limit economic opportunities and
available sites.

The Commission discussed additional location considerations, including the
industrial park on Eastern Road and the limited availability of suitable
industrial land within the city. Members emphasized the importance of
proximity to major roadways, noting that most viable locations would likely be
concentrated along Barber Road and highway-adjacent commercial areas.

The Commission reviewed state regulatory requirements, noting that
dispensaries are prohibited from being located within 500 feet of schools,
churches, libraries, public parks and playgrounds. Chairman. Dowling
confirmed that this requirement was incorporated into the proposed language.

Further discussion addressed-additional regulatory considerations derived from
other municipalities. The Commission discussed increasing separation
distances from residential areas, potentially to 1,000 feet, prohibiting drive-
through service, and restricting outdoor sales and storage. Chairman Dowling
also discussed removing or modifying certain provisions that were considered
redundant or overly restrictive, includingdimitations.on multiple dispensaries
within the same building, additional parking and lighting regulations already
addressed through site.plan review, and fencing requirements where sufficient
setbacks already exist. He emphasized that the Law Director would need to
review_and revise all.proposed language-to ensure consistency with the City’s
codified ordinances.

The Commission discussed the conditional use requirement and confirmed
that, regardless of zoning designation, any proposed dispensary would require
approval from both the Planning Commission and City Council. This process
would allow for case-by-case evaluation even in permitted districts.

Discussion also included broader community and economic considerations.
Members noted the potential for increased municipal revenue and referenced
revenue figures from other municipalities such as Ravenna. Feedback from law
enforcement in other communities indicated that dispensaries have not created
significant operational issues, and it was noted that such facilities are highly
regulated by the State Pharmacy Board. Chairman Dowling stated that the
regulatory structure requires strict compliance for both licensing and ongoing
operations and suggested that dispensaries may present fewer issues than
establishments selling alcohol. It was also noted that Norton voters approved

legalization by approximately 55 percent, and while community opinions vary,
many residents expressed neutrality unless directly impacted.

The Commission discussed the need to establish clear zoning limitations,
noting that no specific restrictions currently exist. Chairman Dowling
emphasized that without such regulations, dispensaries could potentially
locate within a wide range of business districts without limitation. The
Commission agreed that it is important to balance economic opportunity with
community compatibility and adherence to state requirements.

Motion

Mr. Conklin made a motion to recommend that City Council consider adopting
an ordinance similar to the City of Ravenna’s Chapter 862 regarding marijuana
dispensaries, with modifications outlined in the March 10,-2026 draft and
inclusion of Chapter 860, subject to revisions necessary to conform to the City
of Norton Codified Ordinances.

The motion passed by a vote of 4-0.

Additional Business

The Commission discussed’a request from City Council to develop zoning
regulations for data. centers, noting that a 180-day moratorium is currently in
place and is set to expire on May 30, 2026. Members discussed the limited
availability of existing models fordata center zoning and expressed concerns
related to energy usage and infrastructure demands. It was noted that
additional research would be necessary before drafting regulations. The
Commission agreed that.this matter would be addressed at an upcoming
meeting on March 24%, 2026.

Adjournment

Chairman Dowling adjourned the meeting at 6:44 PM.

Respectfully submitted, Approved:

Samantha Owen, Secretary Ralph Dowling, Chair Date

Note: These minutes are not verbatim. A full recording is available on the city
website.