Trending
WEIRTON -- Weirton Council took its first step Monday toward rewriting the document which regulates zoning and development in the city, although not without some debate.
As part of its agenda, council was asked to consider an ordinance repealing Ordinance 2155, as amended, codified as Article 1301.01, and re-enacting Article 1301.
City Manager Mike Adams explained the plan is to repeal the current version of the city's Unified Development Ordinance, enacted by council in 2021, and re-enacting the previous UDO which had been on the books since 2005.
Adams said since the 2021 vintage of the UDO went into effect, there have been inconsistencies found within the regulations, in particular as it relates to Weirton's Comprehensive Development Plan, which was established to act as a guidebook, of sorts, for future development and land use in the city.
"We're going to go back and try to fix this one with what's going on now," Adams said.
Planning and Development Director Mark Miller, later in the meeting, explained the inconsistencies found within the newer UDO have created obstacles in moving some projects in the city forward.
"It has made development and my job more difficult than it needs to be," Miller said.
Not everyone was on board with the proposal, though, as Ward 4 Councilman George Ash, participating by telephone, recommended an amendment to the ordinance fully repealing all versions of the UDO, with the idea of creating a new document at some point in the future if it is warranted.
"We can start from the beginning if we really need it," Ash said.
Ward 6 Councilman Enzo Fracasso told Ash some form of regulations is needed, saying there is no need to throw the entire document out.
"We just need to clean up the bad parts," Fracasso said, adding a full repeal would set the city back at least two years at a time when new industries and businesses are considering Weirton for their operations.
Fracasso also reminded Ash the two of them had voted against the 2021 version of the UDO because they each had concerns.
Ultimately, a vote was not taken on Ash's proposal, with the original ordinance approved on first reading 6-1 with Ash voting against.
Ward 7 Councilman Terry Weigel asked where recommendations for a future UDO would be derived. It was noted Mackin Engineering has, again, offered to assist in the UDO's creation.
Mackin previously had been involved in the development of the 2021 UDO, but parted ways before it was completed, according to Adams.
"The consultant was dismissed," Adams said, adding final drafting of the UDO was performed by city staff. City Attorney Vince Gurrera pointed out the staff involved are no longer employed by the city.
Miller said the city's Planning Commission also would have an increased role this time around, noting Mackin also has been involved in an ongoing housing study being performed for the city.