(upbeat music) - Hello, and welcome to "The Journal".

I'm Steve Kendall.

City of Bowling Green is in the process of updating its zoning regulations, but some of the plans and some of the language are controversial.

A number of residents have concerns.

We're joined today by members of the group Save Our BG Neighborhoods.

I wanna thank John Zanfarndino, who's a former city councilman.

Had of here in that role a little bit to some degree, Ross Mazzupappa and Emily Dunipace from Save Our BG Neighborhoods.

And Emily, talk a little bit about why your group came into being and sort of how long you've been looking at what the city has been proposing regarding some of these zoning changes.

- Yes, absolutely.

The Save Our BG Neighborhoods Group officially organized in fall of 2022, but many of our members have been involved since the original proposed zoning was presented by the city in early summer of 2022.

So many of our members have attended all the planning commission meetings, and the readings, and the discussion that happened there, as well as all council meetings since then.

But what's beautiful about the Save Our BG Neighborhoods is it's a grassroots effort.

It's people who are concerned about this proposed zoning, as you mentioned.

We represent more than 600 people who have expressed opposition to the proposed zoning, as well as 28 business owners in downtown Bowling Green who are concerned about the idea that we could put businesses so close to the downtown, and take away their business.

All those people have signed a petition in opposition to the proposed zoning.

- Yeah, and the one thing that pops up, the one that people have seen in the media a lot, this proposal covers the whole city, but there's one particular zoning category called Pedestrian Residential that is at kind of at the core of what your group is concerned about.

And you touched on a little bit there that it basically, Pedestrian Residential sounds, oh, well, who would be against Pedestrian Residential?

And I know to make the areas, read these particular areas more walkable for pedestrians.

But I know when you guys read the language, and I will say too, we asked representatives of the city to come on this time and day, didn't work for any of them.

It's just one of those things.

But it brings, as you said, a different sort of activity into the neighborhood that doesn't exist for the most part now.

And that's your concern, businesses and probably increased density 'cause there's changes in some of the building regulations that are involved here.

So talk a little about those concerns, because that seems to be the one, there's several other pieces, but that's the one that seems to have gotten everybody's attention.

- Yeah, we also want to preserve the historic architecture in these 104 blocks.

The beautiful architecture that exists, it's a variety of what very well built buildings.

- [Steve] Sure.

- And also, the proposal is that they'll be continuing to be turned into rental, cut in half.

And once that architecture is damaged or changed in any way, we won't get it back.

And we also will lose the character of these neighborhoods with the historic architecture.

- Yeah, and to be clear, people, the area, and this has been referred to as kinda downtown as a center of a donut, and then these residential neighborhoods near the downtown are where this would go into effect if it comes through in the current language.

Ross, what are the concerns about, what are some of the things that could change in the neighborhoods versus the way they are now with this proposal?

- Well, these are the neighborhoods immediately around downtown.

- Yeah, right.

So highly populated, very close downtown.

This was, I think originally the PR zone was laid out as to improve walkability, to improve the downtown district.

But there's plenty of research and available data that these neighborhoods are already walkable.

And so what would change is that would allow the changing of these historic buildings or the some of the oldest homes, some of the oldest neighborhoods, and become two unit dwellings, which is different than duplexes.

As well as it would allow small, what they call low traffic businesses to also sort of branch out from downtown into these.

- And what would be some examples of those type of businesses that they would be talking about?

- Corner stores, salons.

What is it, tattoo parlors.

Yeah, they say low traffic, but.

- Art shows.

- Art studios.

- Art studios.

- And we're not necessarily against businesses, but that would increase the density and the lack of sort of on street parking as well.

'Cause any business needs some sort of accessibility, and it's just not present in these dense neighborhoods around there.

And I guess too, and again, not to, as I say, we did ask the city to come on to provide their responses to that.

There's already significant on street parking in most of these neighborhoods.

- [Ross] Yes.

- And I think one of the points that you folks were making is, why would we add to already a situation that is not a difficult thing, but why would we make it difficult when we already have on street parking, and because these businesses aren't necessarily gonna have a lot of off street parking?

In fact, I'm not even sure they're required to have any.

So any traffic that would come in would park on the street, and maybe aggravate an already difficult situation in some of the neighborhoods.

When you've brought these things to the city's attention, what has been their response to some of these points you've made?

Increased density, parking situations, businesses next to residences, the possibility of losing historic homes to turn them into a, basically apartments or something similar to that.

What's been their response?

- Let me try to jump in and just say some things to what Emily and Ross have already said.

I think I've been less involved, to be honest.

I'm a long-term council member that became reengaged during this discussion.

- Right.

- And, I think a lot of the questions that council gets asked is during lobby visitation.

And that by definition is almost rhetorical.

- [Steve] Right.

- You're bringing up something to seven people, and when I was on council, issues would be raised and we didn't automatically respond.

In fact, more times than not, we did not respond.

- [Steve] Sure.

- So there's that reality.

The group has been really good though about meeting with council members one-on-one.

- [Steve] Oh, okay.

- And perhaps that's where more response would be generated.

But the thing I'd like to say real quick is Bowling Green has duplexes now, but it's never really been an allowed use.

- [Steve] Ah.

- The duplexes that exist, in 1975, Bowling Green introduced the zoning that it already had.

And in fairness to the property owners, the landlords at that time, if something was already subdivided in a duplex, and frankly there are all places with six apartments in one of these old monstrosities.

- [Steve] It was sort of grandfathered into the, yeah.

- They were grandfathered in.

- [Steve] Correct.

- So, and that's always been a concern to those neighborhoods.

So, and again, I have a more nuanced response to the zoning issue than most of the group, but I know that all my time on council, all those neighborhoods lamented the grandfathered properties.

So one thing I really stand with the group on is purposely creating more of those, is antithetical to what I heard for 16 years.

- Okay, yeah, well, we come back, we can talk about what, again, what those are in maybe a little more detail and the concerns about it.

Because as you watch this from the outside, the media coverage of it, the one argument was, well, and we can address this in the next segment, that we don't have enough, we need more commercial availability, more commercial availability.

We need more affordable housing.

And yet some would say this proposal doesn't really get at that, it creates some other issues, as you've brought up.

So, back in just a moment with some representatives of Save Our BG Neighborhoods here on "The Journal".

Thanks for staying with us on "The Journal".

We're talking to representatives of Save Our BG Neighborhoods.

And the topic on the table is the proposed zoning changes in the city of Bowling Green.

Ross, talk a little about the background of this particular proposal, how it came about, who developed it, how the city came to the point where we're having this discussion about this zoning proposal.

- Great, thank you.

Yes, so from our understanding as a group, the Pedestrian Residential zoning came from an outside company, I believe Chicago based.

And that sort of their analysis of downtown Bowling Green is what council is working off of.

Now, as a group, we've asked to see that data and see that justification for their changes to our zoning, and council has not given us anything at request.

- Yeah, I know that one of the things that I saw and then watching these conversations go on, was that they said, "Well, there's not enough availability for additional businesses in the city."

We need more affordable housing.

Do you guys feel that this, oh, I'm pretty sure you feel this proposal doesn't really address those issues in a way that's compatible with the neighborhoods.

That's sort of why we're in this position that we're in.

- [Ross] Yes.

- Is that right?

- Sure.

- Yeah.

And what are some of those concerns, Emily, about that?

- I would say historically, I think Bowling Green has always been favorable to businesses.

And we identify the rental industry as a business.

- Sure.

- A thriving business in Bowling Green, and very influential.

And the fact that there's not been input from community members, and aside from our efforts to meet with them independently, not asking us what is in our best interest.

It appears that the interests are being influenced by the rental industry in Bowling Green unfortunately.

We are asking for small incremental changes.

We're not opposed to renters, but this neighborhood is already highly densely populated, as you mentioned.

We're also concerned about the impact of increasing the lot sizes and how that'll affect our environment.

No study has been done on that, but increased concrete all over these 104 very old neighborhoods and how that'll impact open spaces, trees, just water runoff.

- [Steve] Sure, yeah.

- Is something that people don't think about, but it's very, very important.

- Yeah, because if I look through some of the documentation, and there have been alternate proposals by some councilman to mitigate some of that, or at least try to.

But yeah, the use of side yards, and front yards, and things that normally now under current regulations in most parts of the city would be grass and whatever can now be used for parking and things like that.

If I'm not mistaken, to possibly situations where more of the actual available lot could be covered with a structure, versus some of the rules that are in place now.

So yeah, less green, less... Basically more building less green on every lot, which, yeah, which packs the neighborhoods in a different way as well.

- John has some experience with the rental regulations that are currently not enforced.

I mean, so John, can you wanna speak to that?

- Ah, sure.

I certainly wanted to get in my thoughts on what exists in Bowling Green, because it's very relevant to what we're discussing.

But I believe that Bowling Green has 65% rentals.

- [Steve] Right.

- And in this PR zone we're talking about, right around the downtown, it's probably closer to 70, 75% of those blocks are rentals.

- [Steve] Right.

- And again, it's not an issue of rental versus homeowner.

but where my concern comes in, and again, I have some slightly different feelings than the rest of the group, is we handle our rentals in the worst possible way in Bowling Green.

And again, I wish there was someone here from the city to counter my view, but I've always felt that.

I've been very critical in my entire time on council, once I had a grasp of what I felt was going on.

To give you some examples, every other city in Ohio that has a university has some type of inspections.

- [Steve] Correct.

- Oxford, if you own a rental, every two years, some city worker is gonna come in, check your fire extinguisher or your smoke detector, et cetera, and whatever else they check there.

Bowling Green has no such regulations.

In fact, after my last year on council, I was trying to argue, every other city has this, we really need to start to regulate these rentals.

Again, they're in town, they're gonna be just because there's a university here.

But if they're left unchecked, then the neighborhoods decline.

- [Steve] Sure.

- I'd hate to mention blocks, but if one takes a look, it's a much of North Enterprise, much of Clough Street and the two or 300 blocks.

These are heavy rentals streets that are really an eye sore.

And with greater regulation, that number's gonna happen, the 65%.

- [Steve] Right.

- But with greater regulation, those places would look different.

In one house, and I used to be very involved with the East Side Neighborhood Group, another group that's had issues with our approach to rentals all the time I was on council.

One house there, there are rules.

You can't have wood that's uncovered, it starts to rot.

- [Steve] Sure.

- You start to have holes in your wood, you start to have vermin.

There are issues that are supposed to be addressed in town.

- [Steve] Right.

- There's a given house on the 200 block of Clough that the Eastside group has been trying to get some satisfaction on for literally eight years, maybe a hundred emails.

- [Steve] Yeah.

- So when you're looking at that lack of enforcement, and that really not balanced approach to stakeholders involved, that's where my concern comes in.

Because if you all of a sudden take a lot of these grandfather duplexes and start just allowing them everywhere, a lot of Bowling Green is gonna wind up looking like Enterprise and Clough.

- Yeah, so the concern is that you already have difficulties with maintaining neighborhoods the way people believe they should be.

This would allow the expansion of that to other neighborhoods that right now aren't experiencing maybe that to that extent.

- We agree that it is time to update the zoning code in Bowling Green.

- [Steve] Sure.

- However, we are wondering why this intense effort to totally change the 104 blocks in the Pedestrian Residential.

So essentially what's happening is there, we have an unstable foundation, our zoning right now, and they're about to place a new layer of-- - Another building level on top of it.

- We question how it could be successful.

And again, we've asked that question, show us examples where this has been successful in a community like Bowling Green, but it doesn't exist.

So we're a little skeptical, needless to say.

- Yeah, now, and we've got just a minute in this segment.

We can continue this in the next one.

- [Emily] You wanna say something?

- But when we come back to talk about this, You've obviously brought forward alternatives to what the city is proposing in this particular, this 104 block area.

We can talk about what you've proposed and how they've responded to those proposals.

They said there have been at least one or two of the councilmen made an alternative proposal, which moves it sort of in your direction, but obviously not as much as your group would be comfortable with.

So when we come back, let's talk about what you've proposed.

And again, I know that you've said the city doesn't necessarily respond to proposals, but that's, I don't wanna put words in their mouth, but that's what we've kind of said.

Back in just a moment.

We were talking about Save Our BG Neighborhoods, the zoning resolution plan for the city of Bowling Green that will be on the table in front of City Council for readings very shortly.

Back in just a moment here on "The Journal".

Thanks for staying with us on "The Journal".

We're talking about a proposed zoning resolution for the city of Bowling Green, and some of the sections, particularly one called Pedestrian Residential, that has gotten the attention of a lot of residents of the city.

One of the things that's come up in this discussion has been the potential to increase rental properties in the neighborhood that right now has some, but this is believed would increase that.

And obviously this is not a renter versus homeowner situation, but some have tried to position it that way.

I know, Ross, you've had experience as being a renter in the city.

So talk a little about your experience there, and what your concern would be if this particular proposal goes through in these neighborhoods that we've been talking about.

- Right.

So I moved to Bowling Green as a young professional, and my wife and I rented for several years.

And we found it very difficult to find quality, clean, decent living spaces in Bowling Green.

We were living amongst students that I teach, other community members as well that choose to rent over owning.

And it was difficult at times.

It took us three years to actually find our home in Bowling Green.

Just due, there is a lack of entry level affordable housing.

- [Steve] Yeah.

- And I think with the PR zone adding nice duplexes and places to rent are great, but I believe if we wanna attract young professionals to grow our city and to grow the businesses, we need to have affordable single family homes, especially close to downtown as well.

And I just don't see the PR zone actually addressing that.

We just see that as increasing rental density, and not really any initiatives for young professionals to live and stay in the city of Bowling Green.

- Yeah, yeah.

- And then getting back to what you were saying, John, is that your concern is that we're not regulating existing situations like this, and so we're gonna add it in, as you said, Emily too.

We're gonna add maybe to a situation some people consider not a good situation right now, and build on a bad foundation of that.

When you look at the proposals you've made back to the city, what are some of the things you would like to see done differently?

Or what would you like to see them change about the PR proposal that would make it more acceptable to the residents in that 104 block area?

- And you're right, we wanted to be solution oriented.

We created an alternative proposal that we call the Central Residential District.

- Ah, okay.

- And in the 104 blocks, essentially what we wanna do, we believe that the character in charm in these neighborhoods is worth preserving.

So that we are not increasing lot sizes, that they're staying as they are.

We're asking that they only permit one unit dwellings.

Previous can be grandfathered, but moving forward, no more.

That there's no uses that would diminish the character of these neighborhoods, so the potential for commercial and, (clears throat) excuse me, businesses, that needs to stop.

Because as I said, we need to preserve this, because once it's gone, we won't have it anymore.

- [Steve] Right.

- So we wanna keep the neighborhoods as neighborhoods.

They're beautiful.

- Yeah, well, and I think one of the things, and people would, and I guess if you look around those neighborhoods, and I obviously don't go through every single one of them, it appears that, yeah, people move into a residential area because they believe they're going to live with residences not businesses near them.

- [Emily] Yeah.

- And there's always going to be someplace where that starts to cross.

But that typically is not consider, typical residential neighborhoods, at least in my experience, don't have businesses on every corner in a residential area.

- [Emily] Sure.

- There's a buffering area somewhere between the two.

This seems to, it appears in my opinion only, that it looks like this is gonna be the buffer for the next neighborhood to the west or the east.

- [Emily] Yeah.

- And I think it makes it difficult for the people that live there say, "Well, I thought I was living in a residential area, I appear now to be living in a sort of semi-commercial area, which is not what I signed up for."

- And the city is saying that they need, and Ross mentioning that we need more affordable housing.

- [Steve] Yeah.

- But yet no proposals are made anywhere outside of these 104 blocks.

We've asked why and we've not getting any response.

In fact, some council members have said, "No, not in my neighborhood," essentially is what they've said.

And we just, again, wanting to preserve the area the way it is.

- Well, I know, and I don't know, it has been played both ways in the media.

I know there was a question that came up that said, well, if this is such a great idea, why aren't we applying it to the whole city?

And some people took that as sarcasm, but the reality was it's a legitimate question to some degree.

- [Emily] That's right.

- To say, well, if this is such a great idea, why not four more blocks or out toward, why not the golf course, why not the neighborhoods, why not the bird streets, why not those kind of things?

And yet for some reason it's in this donut around the downtown.

- Yeah, so the new zone, as it's being referred to, that was proposed by council members Phipps and Dennis, once again, we are very concerned about the fact that no homeowners around this area were consulted or asked, and no, to our knowledge, any consideration of the impact of they're proposing these as business, and well, multi-use business and residential.

But again, no input from anybody who lives in the area who will be impacted directly.

- [Steve] Who lives there.

Right, right.

- We choose to live in Bowling Green.

I know the majority of BGSU faculty and staff don't live in Bowling Green.

And some of us who do choose, we love the city.

We wanna see it grow and prosper as well.

But we wanna do so as part of the community.

And so we'd like to see incremental change, but we'd like to see also community input as well.

- Yeah, well, and I guess when you talk about that, you'd like to say, yes, we have an input, here's what we think works in our neighborhood versus in this case, as you said, an outside entity.

Which, okay, comes in under the guise of we're objective because we aren't involved in the neighborhood.

We're not caught up in any of the local activity.

But sometimes there's a difference between being objective and not being accessible, and finding out the needs of the area versus just saying, "Well, this is what we think will work here."

When you've brought forward proposals, I know that we've talked about this a little bit.

The city has, as you said, maybe the two councilmen have come up with an alternative proposal.

What's the next thing is this, 'cause obviously this is moving forward, it went through the plan commission, it's now before counsel and obviously hearings and things like that.

Eventually it'll be readings of a proposal, which they will vote on.

What's the next step for your group to continue to focus on this, to maybe get a different response from counsel at this point?

- Well, they say this is a living document.

So things, until there's a reading, things can always continue to change.

And so I think our efforts are just trying to talk to city council, trying to see the data that they're looking at, to share that with us so that we can be a part of the conversation of how the new zoning, which I think is needed, can move forward with.

- Ah okay.

Now, if people wanna guess... We're down to about 30 seconds.

If someone wants to get in contact with you, find out more about it, what's the easiest way for them to do that, Emily?

- Well, we do have a Facebook page.

- Okay.

- Save Our BG neighborhoods.

So certainly you can en engage with us through that.

We encourage you to attend our city council meeting.

The next one is April 17th.

- [Ross] 17th.

- Okay.

- And we believe that our efforts have been an amazing example of people engaging our elected officials and asking them to listen to us as they make decisions.

We wanna be involved in the decision making process.

- [Steve] Sure, sure.

- We're learning every day more and more people have opinions and opposition to this proposed zoning.

- [Steve] Okay.

- You wanna add something to that too.

- Okay, we got about 30 seconds to get out the gate.

(laughs) - Oh, okay.

- All right, sure.

Ross mentioned that Bowling Green needs more affordable housing.

If this plan goes forward, it's ahead as it's looking, even forget about the commercial part.

But if there are more converted houses to duplexes, sixplexes, whatever happens in those neighborhoods, it's not gonna create the kind of affordable housing that's helpful.

It's gonna create more dilapidated rentals.

I had one young man came, told me he needed to go to the nine places before he could find a place that was acceptable.

- [Steve] That he was comfortable with.

- It sounds like Ross's experience was similar.

We don't need more of that.

- Yeah, we'll have to leave it here, but obviously there's still more to come on this.

And we'll see what develops on this.

Hopefully everyone will come to a conclusion that satisfies everybody.

Hopefully that's the case.

You can check us out at wbgu.org.

You can watch us every Thursday night at eight o'clock on WBGU-PBS.

We will see you again next time.

Goodnight and good luck.

(upbeat music)