Feb 08, 2021 Planning Commission

[00:01:36]

OK, IT IS 7:00 P.M., WE WILL CALL THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP PLANNING

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

FIRST ON OUR AGENDA IS PUBLIC REMARKS.

WE WILL HAVE TWO OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC REMARKS THIS EVENING.

RIGHT NOW. AND AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC REMARKS, YOU CAN RAISE YOUR HAND.

IF YOU ARE IN THE ZOOM MEETING.

OR IF YOU'RE AT HOME, YOU CAN GIVE US A CALL AT FIVE ONE SEVEN THREE FOUR NINE ONE, TWO, THREE, TWO. PUBLIC REMARKS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

AND WE DO ASK THAT YOU PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS AT THE BEGINNING FOR THE RECORD. WITH THAT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP THE FLOOR FOR ANYONE WHO WISHES TO CALL IN OR RAISE THEIR HAND. I DO SEE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE IN OUR PUBLIC SECTION OF THIS MEETING, SO WE'LL GIVE THE PHONES A MOMENT TO DIAL AND WE'LL GO ON FROM THERE.

AND WE'RE HEARING NO PHONES RINGING OVER HERE, I WILL INTERRUPT YOU IF THEY DO START RINGING. SIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OK, WELL, THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF

[3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

DO WE HAVE A SUPPORT? SUPPORTED BY COMMISSIONER CORDILL.

ANY CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA AS IT IS CURRENTLY? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? AND THE MOTION CARRIES, THANK YOU.

NEXT UP IS A MINUTES.

[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THE MINUTES? MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY.

WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER PREMOE. ANY CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS TO THE MINUTES? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS FIVE A,

[5.A. Senta Goertler RE: traffic at Chick fil A]

THANK YOU FOR THE NUMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO COMMUNICATED WITH US.

AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM SIX, PUBLIC HEARINGS, NONE.

AGENDA ITEM SEVEN, UNFINISHED BUSINESS, MIXED UNIT PLAN, MIXED USE PLAN, UNIT DEVELOPMENT

[7.A. Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MUPUD) ordinance review.]

I'M HEADPHONE GUY NOW, SO WELCOME TO THAT.

IT'S TOO ECHO=Y IN MY ROOM HERE, WE HAV HAVE WOOD FLOORS.

SO YOU SEE MY HEADPHONES IN.

IN YOUR PACKET IS MY FIRST TAKE ON THE MUPUD ORDINANCE.

SO I THINK THE CHALLENGING PART WAS GETTING IT TYPED UP INTO A FORMAT THAT I COULD ACTUALLY EDIT BECAUSE I'VE SEEN OUR ORDINANCE BEFORE, MOST OF US HOW IT ONLINE, THESE OLDER ONES, WE NEVER HAD A WORD VERSION OF IT TO START.

SO THAT WAS A GOOD CHALLENGE IN ITSELF.

AND THEN WHAT I'VE DONE OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS OR LAST MONTH OR SO IS GONE THROUGH, MADE A LOT OF THE CHANGES THAT THE COMMITTEE SUGGESTED AND THAT THE DISCUSSION OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS HAS YIELDED FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IT STARTS ON PAGE-- MY MEMO STARTS ON PAGE NINE OF THE PDF FOR TONIGHT'S PACKET.

[00:05:03]

I KNOW IT'S NOT EXACTLY A FUN TOPIC, BUT THAT'S OUR ONLY AGENDA ITEM.

SO I WAS HOPING WE COULD DELVE INTO IT.

SO PLEASE STOP ME ALONG THE WAY.

SO I SAID NEED TO HAVE A MONOLOGUE SOMETIMES ON SOME OF THESE.

OK, SO MY MEMO, REALLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, I THINK I'VE BOILED DOWN TO, AT LEAST IN MY MIND OF THE THREE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT AREAS I STILL FEEL LIKE THEY NEED SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. I DO WANT TO ADD I DID SEND AN INVITATION OUT TO MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO HOPEFULLY MEET THIS WEEK STILL AS A FOLLOW UP TO TONIGHT'S MEETING.

SO IF THERE ARE ANY REALLY IN-DEPTH TOPICS THAT YOU WANT THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO EXPLORE A LITTLE FURTHER, AT LEAST TWO OF US HAVE AGREED TO MEET THURSDAY SO THAT THERE'S MORE TIME TO DRILL DOWN WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE AGAIN IF WE NEED IT TO.

SO WHAT I STILL NEED SOME GUIDANCE ON, I THINK, IS AND WE NEED TO NARROW OUR SCOPE IS ON THE REVIEW PROCESS.

SO MY TAKE ON IT SO FAR, AND I CAN SEE THIS ORDINANCE IN MY EYEBALL, MY EYELIDS NOW AND I CLOSE MY EYES. SO I THINK I MIGHT BE A LITTLE TOO CLOSE TO IT.

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES I'M SEEING IS REMOVING OR LIMITING THE ROLE OF THE PLAYING COMMISSION OR THE BOARD IN THIS PROCESS IS GOING TO BE TOUGH BECAUSE IT KIND OF GOES AGAINST WHY YOU'RE-- THIS GROUP WAS ESTABLISHED AND THEN CERTAINLY TAKING THE BOARD OUT IS NOT AN OPTION. SO HOW DO WE-- THERE WAS A DEFINITELY A SENTIMENT THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THIS PROCESS FASTER, AND I JUST AM SEEING ROADBLOCKS ALONG THE WAY BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH TO COMPLETELY REMOVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OUT OF THE PROCESS.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY CHALLENGING.

AND I JUST IF I WAS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULDN'T WANT TO BE LIMITED TO JUST ONE MEETING TO DISCUSS WHAT COULD BE THE SCALE AND THE SCOPE OF THESE PROJECTS COULD RANGE FROM POTENTIALLY ONE BUILDING, BUT IT ALSO COULD BE THE VILLAGE OF OKEMOS OR SOMETHING MUCH MORE DETAILED. SO PUTTING SOME KIND OF SHOT CLOCK ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVIEW IN TERMS OF ONE MEETING COULD BE TOUGH.

AND THAT SAID, SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CONSIDER DOING FOR YOURSELVES.

SO HOW DO YOU REDUCE THE OVERALL TIME OF THE PROCESS WHILE STILL KEEPING BOTH GROUPS INVOLVED? SO LET'S CAN COME BACK TO THAT.

COMMERCIAL NONRESIDENTIAL USE OR NOT RESIDENTIAL SPACE IN A PROJECT, I THINK WE NEED TO TALK FURTHER ABOUT-- THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT ESTABLISHING MINIMUM SIZES FOR THE SPACES, AND I AM FROM HERE ON OUT REFERRING IT TO NONRESIDENTIAL.

SO PLEASE CONSIDER THAT ALSO MEANS COMMERCIAL OR OFFICE.

AND SO LIMITING THE OVERALL PROJECT DOES THAT IF WE WERE TO PLACING KIND OF LIMITATIONS ON THAT, WHETHER IT'S A MINIMUM SIZE OR A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE FLOOR AREA.

IS THAT GOING TO LIMIT THE OVERALL PROJECT AND SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR THAT PROJECT? I INITIALLY WAS PRETTY PRO DOING THAT AND NOW I'M STARTING TO SEE THERE MIGHT BE SOME CHALLENGES THERE IN TERMS OF FLEXIBILITY.

VERTICAL HORIZONTAL MIXED USES, THERE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS BOTH WAY ON THIS.

THEY WERE TALKING WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING CERTAIN SCENARIOS WHERE YOU'D REQUIRE A VERTICAL MIX VERSUS A HORIZONTAL MIX.

I THINK THE SAME CONCERN ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL SPACE.

DO YOU WANT TO BOX OURSELVES IN WITH A CERTAIN SPECIFIC TYPE OF PROJECT AND SAY, ALL MUPUDS HAVE TO BE MIXED VERTICALLY? JUST SOME OF THEM? SO IT'S SOMETHING TO COME BACK TO.

AMENITIES, THIS IS PROBABLY WHERE I PUT THE LEAST AMOUNT OF WORK.

THE ONLY THING I'VE DONE SO FAR IS GONE THROUGH AND ELIMINATED THE ONES THAT I THOUGHT WERE KIND OF A GIVEN FOR ANY PROJECT, BUT ALSO HAVE STARTED JUST ON MY OWN SEPARATELY, JUST A WISH LIST. AND I'M HOPING TO GET SOME IDEAS ON THAT.

AND MAYBE THAT TAKES PLACE FOR SOME TIME BEFORE OUR NEXT MEETING.

I DID GO THROUGH THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND SOME OTHER TYPES OF DOCUMENTS LIKE THAT.

AND I THINK THE REAL CHALLENGE IS FINDING ACTION ITEMS OUT OF THOSE THINGS.

A LOT OF THOSE ARE BIG CONCEPTS OR VALUES AND NOT SURE THEY TRANSLATE WELL TO IT SHALL BE THIS. WE ARE LOOKING FOR THIS EXACT PHYSICAL OBJECT ON THE SITE.

SO I HOPE I'M VERY, VERY OPEN TO MORE SUGGESTION ON THAT.

SO AND THEN MY MEMO GOES INTO REALLY FOR EACH OF THESE TOPICS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, WHAT WERE THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT? SO I DIVIDED INTO CONSIDERATIONS THEN ACTION ITEMS. SO I JUST LISTED WHAT THE IDEAS WERE AND THEN SAID WHAT I'VE DONE SO FAR.

SO IS IT WORTHWHILE GOING THROUGH THAT, WOULD YOU RATHER ME THROW THE ORDINANCE UP ON THE SCREEN? I THINK UNLESS THERE'S AN OBJECTION FROM THE REST OF THE MEMBERS, I MEAN, WE WERE ABLE TO READ THROUGH THE CHANGES THAT YOU'VE ADDED ALREADY.

I THINK IF WE WERE TO JUMP RIGHT INTO THE SPECIFIC ACTION AREAS THAT YOU WERE HOPING TO

[00:10:01]

I'LL LEAVE THAT OPEN FOR DEBATE UNLESS I SAW A COUPLE OF NODDING HEADS, BUT EVERYONE FEEL OK WITH THAT? ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD.

OK, SO FIRST IS THE REVIEW PROCESS.

I DO ACTUALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT DENSITY, TOO, AND MAYBE IF WE DO GET JUST A MINUTE TO FLASH THROUGH THE DRAFT ORDINANCE, BECAUSE I MADE A COUPLE OF CHANGES THAT WERE INTENDED TO INSPIRE CONVERSATION AND NOT NECESSARILY PLANT A FLAG ON A SPECIFIC POLICY.

SO LIKE YOU PROBABLY NOTICED, I BUMPED THE LOWEST DENSITY DOWN AND THE HIGHER DENSITY UP.

SO THOSE ARE JUST TO GET PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT DENSITY AND MUPUDS.

SO FIRST TOPIC IS REVIEW PROCESS.

I'VE KIND OF COME FULL CIRCLE ON THIS, REALLY.

I DON'T SEE HOW WE COULD REMOVE EITHER GROUP FROM THE PROCESS.

ONE OPTION IS TO NOT HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL.

IN TERMS OF OVERALL TIME THAT MAY BUY US A WEEK SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY.

BUT REALLY, THAT PUBLIC HEARING OUTSIDE OF MY TIME NOTICING IT DOESN'T REALLY IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IT DISCUSSED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING TO ME IS KIND OF I DON'T KNOW IF THAT NECESSARILY MATTERS.

IT'S MORE ABOUT THE FORMAT OF THE MEETING AND WHETHER OR NOT NOTICES GO OUT.

YEAH, I THINK THAT OUR FEELING, AT LEAST MY UNDERSTANDING OF OUR FEELING GENERALLY FROM THE LAST TIME WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS IS THAT WE WERE RELATIVELY UNWILLING TO HAND OVER THAT REVIEW TIME FRAME, AT LEAST FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND UPON FURTHER THOUGHT, I KNOW I WAS ONE OF THE FOLKS WHO WAS PUSHING FOR A SPEEDIER PROCESS, BUT, YOU KNOW, GIVING THE PUBLIC THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND WEIGH IN IN A MEANINGFUL WAY AND ALSO OFFER, YOU KNOW, WRITTEN NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN MEETINGS BASED ON OUR DISCUSSION. IT CERTAINLY IS HELPFUL IN FORMING OPINIONS.

SO I'M KIND OF I'VE KIND OF CHANGED MY TUNE ON THIS.

AND I AM MORE OF THE BELIEF THAT MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T-- MAYBE JUST LEAVE IT AS IT IS A REVIEW PROCESS AND UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S LONG.

BUT IT'S ALSO THESE ARE PROJECTS OF IMPORTANCE.

AND THEY'RE GENERALLY IN AREAS OF I MEAN, EVERY PROJECT IS IMPORTANT.

BUT THESE ARE ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT AS THEY COME UP IN SOME OF OUR [INAUDIBLE] AREAS ESPECIALLY. AND SO I'M SORT OF THE OPINION WE LEAVE IT AS IT IS.

WE'RE ALREADY IN THE MIDST OF DRAFTING THE FOREIGN BASED CODE ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD GIVE DEVELOPERS ANOTHER WAY IN OTHER AREAS TO DEVELOP MORE QUICKLY IF THEY WISH TO.

AND I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SORT OF DISTINGUISHES THIS ORDINANCE FROM THE FOREIGN BASE CODE WHERE WE'RE [INAUDIBLE].

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL. I WONDER IF SOME MIDDLE GROUND MIGHT BE THE EXPECTATION ABOUT A DECISION THE SAME NIGHT AS A PUBLIC HEARING.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, SOMETIMES APPLICANTS MAKE THAT REQUEST.

BUT IF THAT WERE MORE THE NORM THAN THE EXCEPTION, WOULD THAT CONSTITUTE A MIDDLE GROUND? YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THAT IS THE MIDDLE GROUND.

I JUST KNOW I ALSO KNOW THAT THIS BODY HAS BEEN GENERALLY UNWILLING TO SUSPEND ITS RULES WHEN THOSE APPLICANTS ASK ME.

WE DID IT ONCE, TO MY RECOLLECTION, IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.

BUT WE MAY NOT BE WILLING TO DO SO ON A TYPICAL BASIS.

COMMISSIONER CORDILL, THEN COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY.

IT SEEMS LIKE THE MINORITY OF CASES WE HAVE SUSPENDED OUR BYLAWS TO DECIDE THE SAME EVENING.

I WOULD DISCOURAGE TRYING TO DO THAT IN MOST INSTANCES, AND I WOULDN'T WANT TO CODIFY THAT POLICY FOR MIXED USE PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S JUST A LITTLE MORE INVOLVED.

EVEN WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT POSSIBLY GOING FROM 60 TO 30 DAYS.

I WAS WONDERING, YOU KNOW, ONCE THE CLOCK STARTS RUNNING, I THOUGHT, WELL, WHAT IF WE ASKED FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION? IS THAT STILL WITHIN THE TIME, THE 30 DAY TIME LIMIT OR DOES THE TIME WITH THE TIME STOP? AND ONCE WE HAVE REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION? ANYWAY, I WOULD DISCOURAGE IT OF A FEW INSTANCES.

WE I THINK WE CAN CONFIDENTLY DECIDE THE SAME NIGHT.

[00:15:01]

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CORDILL.

COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY. I THINK I WAS ONE OF THOSE WHO RAISED A LITTLE BIT OF A RED FLAG WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, AND I STILL AM MORE COMFORTABLE LEAVING THINGS AS THEY ARE JUST BECAUSE I THINK IT IS A DELIBERATIVE TIME.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHEN BECAUSE WE NEEDED MORE INFORMATION OR JUST WE NEEDED TO DIGEST THE THINGS THAT WE WERE HEARING AS PART OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE MAKING A DECISION. WE NEEDED THAT TIME.

AND SO I'M NOT OPPOSED IF THERE'S ONE THAT WE ARE ALL MUTUALLY SUPPORTIVE OF AND THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS WITH GIVING OURSELVES THE LIBERTY TO WAIVE THE BYLAWS.

BUT THEN THAT ALSO PUT SOME PRESSURE ON STAFF, BECAUSE PART OF THE DELAY IS TO GIVE THEM OUR STRAW POLL VOTE, TO BE ABLE TO PREPARE THE DOCUMENTATION THAT'S NEEDED FOR US TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION THAT'S ACCURATE AND CONTAINS WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO.

AND SO I DON'T WANT TO RUSH THAT IN AND POTENTIALLY MISS SOMETHING KEY BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT IT DOESN'T GET CAPTURED PROPERLY IN THE RESOLUTION.

SO LONG ANSWER TO SAY I'M SUPPORTIVE OF KEEPING THINGS AS THEY ARE BECAUSE I THINK THAT TIME IS VALUABLE AND THEN MAKING AN EXCEPTION TO THAT RULE WHERE IT SEEMS APPROPRIATE TO EVERYBODY. COMMISSIONER CORDILL . I GUESS IF WE DON'T REALLY SHORTEN THE TIMELINE, I MEAN, IF ATTEMPTS CAN BE MADE TO DO THAT, THAT'S FINE.

BUT I THINK ONE OF OUR MAJOR CONCERNS WITH THIS ORDINANCE WAS BEEFING UP THE AMENITIES.

AND IF WE FOCUS ON DOING THAT, I THINK WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED A LOT.

AND THE TOWNSHIP WOULD BE BETTER FOR IT.

YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE STILL MAKING SOME OTHER SIGNIFICANT CHANGES HERE.

I DON'T THINK IF WE DON'T CHANGE THE REVIEW PROCESS, I THINK THERE'S PLENTY OF GOOD CONTENT WE CAN ADD.

SO I WOULDN'T IT'S NOT AS THOUGH THIS IS A WASTE OF TIME IF WE DON'T DO THIS.

I THINK THIS IS JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF FURTHER THOUGHT AND REVIEW, WE END UP SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW WHAT, THEY HAD A PRETTY GOOD IDEA THE FIRST TIME AROUND.

THAT'S FINE.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS? OK, COMMISSIONER SNYDER.

UM, SO KIND OF LEARNING AS I'M GOING HERE, BUT JUST IN BRIEFLY REVIEWING THE LIKE THE REVIEW, THE PROCESS OF THE REVIEW, I MEAN, THIS SEEMS VERY REASONABLE TO ME.

AND SHORTENING IT ON PROJECTS OF THAT KIND OF SCALE JUST I DON'T KNOW.

IT DOESN'T--. I GUESS I WOULD JUST AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CORDILL AND COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY THAT MAYBE KEEPING IT AS IT IS IS PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE AND A SAFER BET JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S REVIEWED APPROPRIATELY AND IN DETAIL AND THEN LOOKING MORE CLOSELY AT, YOU KNOW, THE MEAT OF THE ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD BE THINGS LIKE THE AMENITIES AND WHAT IT HAS TO OFFER THE COMMUNITY IN THE LONG RUN.

SO I THINK THE REVIEW PROCESS LOOKS GOOD AS IT IS PERSONALLY.

FROM ANYONE WHO HASN'T WEIGHED IN YET, ARE YOU OPPOSED TO LEAVING THIS REVIEW PROCESS AS IS, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO WEIGH IN FURTHER? I SEE A THUMBS UP FROM COMMISSIONER PREMOE, COMMISSIONER BLUMER.

I FAVOR LEAVING IT AS IT IS.

OK. AND COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL, I DON'T THINK I GOT A FIRM YES OR NO FROM YOU ON THAT.

OK, ALL RIGHT, PETER, LOOKS LIKE WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE WAY IT WAS.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL. IT'S LIKE TWENTY FIVE PERCENT, RIGHT? YEAH, I CAN NARROW MY ENERGY.

SO THE COMMERCIAL NON RESIDENTIAL SPACE.

I JUST WANTED TO SPUR A BRIEF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.

I'M WONDERING IF YOU ARE SEEING SOME OF THE SAME LIMITATION, POTENTIAL FOR THE SAME LIMITATIONS THAT I MIGHT BE.

IT'S REALLY THE SAME CONVERSATION FOR THE COMMERCIAL SPACE AS THE VERTICAL HORIZONTAL MIX. DO WE REALLY WANT TO BE TOO PRESCRIPTIVE IN WHAT EXACTLY WE WANT TO SEE? DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE THAT KIND OF OPEN TO-- AND I THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT THE MALL BECAUSE WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GET VERTICAL STRATIFICATION AT THE MALL AT LEAST ANYTIME SOON IF THEY WERE TO USE THE MUPUD ORDINANCE OR HOPEFULLY A FUTURE [INAUDIBLE].

AND SO THE QUESTION HERE BEING, DO WE WANT TO BE MORE PRESCRIPTIVE IN DEFINING A MIX OF USES OR START REQUIRING FIRST FLOOR, FOR EXAMPLE, COMMERCIAL? OR DO WE LEAVE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE OPEN FOR A DISCUSSION ABOUT A PROJECT BY PROJECT

[00:20:05]

WHAT I KNOW ABOUT ECONOMICS IS NOT BIG, BUT CERTAINLY THAT'S THE TREND THAT WE'RE SEEING.

AND THEN HOW STRICT DO WE WANT TO BE? ONE OF THE CHALLENGES I FEEL LIKE EVEN IF WE WERE TO HAVE A STANDARD AND THE RED CEDAR FLATS, IT'S JUST THE BEST EXAMPLE AND THEY'RE NOT HERE, SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT.

THE WHAT WAS WHAT CAN WE DO TO THAT SPACE? IT'S KIND OF WE'RE IN A TOUGH SPOT.

SO THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TEN THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE IN THE FRONT. THEY NEVER FILL IT.

TOWNSHIP'S KIND OF WE'RE DARNED EITHER WAY.

WE CAN'T SAY YOU CAN'T USE THAT SPACE.

THAT'S NOT A POPULAR DECISION TO MAKE.

AND WE CERTAINLY CAN'T FORCE THEM TO SIGN A TENET.

SO WE JUST KIND OF THINK OF WHAT ARE THE REAL WORLD IMPLICATIONS OF A POLICY LIKE THAT.

RIGHT, YEAH, I MEAN, IS IT ENFORCEABLE AND LIKE, ARE WE SENDING A CODE ENFORCEMENT PERSON OVER THERE TO CHECK AND SEE HOW SEE IF THEY'RE CHECKING FOR NEW TENANTS, YOU KNOW, ON AN OCCASIONAL BASIS? NO, OF COURSE NOT IN THAT REALLY.

SO WHAT DO WE THINK, COMMISSIONER BLUMER? THE QUESTION I HAVE IS IF WE DISCOVER THAT THE SPACE IS NOT BEING USED AS ORIGINALLY PROGRAMED. DO THEY HAVE THE BURDEN OF JUSTIFYING WHY IT'S NOT? IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THAT WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON HOW WE JUDGE THIS SITUATION, IF THEY COME UP WITH A LEGITIMATE EXPLANATION FOR WHY THEY CAN'T FULFILL THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, THEN THAT WOULD RESOLVE THE ISSUE, AT LEAST TEMPORARILY.

ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THEY JUST SAY, SCREW YOU, WE DECIDED TO CHANGE OUR MINDS THEN THE BOARD SHOULD BE IN THE POSITION OF TAKING SOME ACTION.

WELL, I'M THINKING MORE ON THE FRONT END, TOO, IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY INITIALLY PROPOSED TO US, DOES IT HAVE TO HAVE X PERCENT OR X SQUARE FEET TO EVEN MAKE IT AS A CONSIDERATION? YEAH, I MEAN, I GUESS TO COMMISSIONER BLUMER'S POINT, THOUGH, LIKE EVEN IF WE DID REQUIRE THAT THERE BE X SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, IF THEY DIDN'T DO THAT, IF THEY THUMB THEIR NOSE AT US, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE MECHANISM FOR WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? WELL, CERTAINLY, I THINK IF IT WAS AS BLATANT AS WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO PUT 10000 SQUARE FEET ON THE GROUND FLOOR ALONG THE STREET.

BUT IT'S APARTMENTS.

WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING. WE COULD DEFINITELY GO BACK ON THE SITE PLAN WITH THEM AND WHETHER THERE'S A LEGAL PROCESS FOR THAT.

SO I'M NOT SO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

ALTHOUGH IT'S I MEAN, YEAH, THE TOWNSHIP IS GETTING BURNED IN THAT SITUATION.

I MEAN, WE'VE MENTIONED THIS EXAMPLE OF RED CEDAR FLATS ON NO LESS THAN 10 OCCASIONS OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST YEAR.

OBVIOUSLY, IT'S A PAIN POINT.

IS IT SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW AND NOT TO PICK ON THEM.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHERS, I'M SURE, THAT ARE IN A SIMILAR SITUATION.

BUT I MEAN, IS THAT JUST SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE LET GO AS A TOWNSHIP OR HAVE WE ASKED THEM, LIKE COMMISSIONER BLUMER SAID, TO SORT OF JUSTIFY WHAT'S HAPPENING? IN PRACTICE, I'M JUST CURIOUS.

MARK, DID YOU SAY SOMETHING? YEAH, I JUST WANT TO ADD AGAIN AS PETER'S EXAMPLE, IF IT WAS LIMITED TO TEN THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE, THE ALTERNATIVE IS EITHER PUT A COMMERCIAL TENANT IN THERE OR LEAVE IT UNOCCUPIED.

AND THAT'S BEEN THE ISSUE IS THAT THEY HAVE DIFFICULTY FINDING TENANTS FOR THE SPACE.

THEY DON'T HAVE PROBLEMS FILLING THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF IT.

AND TYPICALLY, SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS HAVE TOLD US THAT IF THEY FILL THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, THEY CAN AFFORD TO LEAVE THE COMMERCIAL VACANT AND NOT FILL IT.

SO, AGAIN, AS PETER SAID, IF IT'S GOING TO BE USED, YOU KNOW, IT WAS DEEMED TO BE FOR COMMERCIAL USE AND THEY TURN IT TO RESIDENTIAL, THAT'S A VIOLATION OF THE APPROVAL.

AND WE HAVE WE CAN GO BACK ON THEM TO TAKE CARE OF THAT PROBLEM.

BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IN THE WORLD OF PERVERSE INCENTIVES, WHAT WE'VE CREATED HERE IS AN ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS DEVELOPERS TO BUILD A FIVE STORY BUILDING AND THEN JUST LEAVE THE FIRST FLOOR VACANT ALWAYS, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? LIKE, IF THEY CAN PAY FOR THAT, IF THEY CAN DO IT AND THEY THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THAT THAT COMMERCIAL SPACE FILLED.

I SAW COMMISSIONER SNYDER AND THEN COMMISSIONER CORDILL AND COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL.

[00:25:06]

COMMISSIONER CORDILL.

I WAS JUST WONDERING, AND MAYBE THIS IS A LITTLE OFF FROM OUR SCOPE, IS ARE THERE PROPERTY TAX RAMIFICATIONS IF THEY'RE NOT FILLING A SPACE OR IF IT'S BEING USED AS A DIFFERENT SPACE? WOULD IT BE AFFECTING-- WOULD THEY BE PAYING MORE OR WOULD THEY BE PAYING LESS OR--? I'M JUST WONDERING HOW THEY-- IF THERE'S LIKE IF THERE'S SOMETHING WITH THE PROPERTY TAXES THAT WOULD DISCOURAGE THEM FROM ALTERING PLANS OR LEAVING IT EMPTY OR SWITCHING USES.

DON'T THINK NO, I DON'T THINK SO NECESSARILY.

I THINK IT'S IF ANYTHING, THERE BE IMPLICATIONS TO THE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX OF THE SPACE. SO IF IT'S EMPTY, I GUESS THAT MIGHT BE LESS TAXES.

I DON'T SEE THAT AS BEING A CONTROLLING FACTOR IN THIS CASE.

RIGHT. YOU WOULD THINK THAT EVEN THOUGH IF THEY CAN FLOAT A PROJECT WITHOUT FILLING THAT SPACE, I THINK OF WHAT IS AN ELEMENT IT'S ACROSS FROM WHAT IS IT? IS THAT [INAUDIBLE] RIVER AND THAT THEY HAVE NOT HAD A TENANT IN THERE FOR AS LONG IN EAST LANSING AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE RESIDENTIAL SPACES ARE FILLED.

I MEAN, I-- ANYWAY, IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES.

IF THEY CAN FLOAT THE PROJECT, THEY'VE JUST KEPT THE FIRST FLOOR VACANT.

THAT'S ABOUT IT. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL, THANK. YEAH, THANKS.

TO COMMISSIONER BLUMER'S COMMENT, I THINK WE'RE SEEING THAT JUSTIFICATION A LITTLE BIT PLAYING OUT WITH AMENDMENT BEING REQUESTED AT THE VILLAGE OF OKEMOS, NOT PERFECTLY ANALOGOUS, BUT THE ARGUMENT BEING MADE THERE IS THAT THE MARKET HAS SHIFTED AND WE'D LIKE TO SHIFT THE MIX BACK TO MORE RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE THE MARKET JUST DOESN'T SUPPORT IT.

SO THAT'S KIND OF THE RATIONALE FOR AN AMENDMENT IN THAT CASE.

TO THE BROADER KIND OF PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUE OF WE'D LIKE TO SEE MIXED USE.

THAT'S KIND OF THE MODEL. THAT'S THE VISION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.

BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING AND WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE DEVELOPING COMMUNITY IS THAT IT'S NOT REALLY SELLING AT THE MOMENT.

AND IT'S HARD TO SEE WHEN THAT REBOUNDS, PARTICULARLY WITH OFFICE.

AND THAT'S WHY I WAS INTERESTED IN SEEING SOME INFORMATION ON JUST WHAT THE SORT OF COMMERCIAL, ESPECIALLY OFFICE VACANCY IS.

IF WE'RE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO DEVELOP PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T RESPOND TO A MARKET DEMAND, THEN FEELS LIKE WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE PUSHING THAT ROCK UP THE HILL.

OK, COMMISSIONER SNYDER, NEXT.

SO I KNOW IT STINKS THAT I REALLY FEEL LIKE I'VE EVEN GOTTEN A CHANCE TO GET TO KNOW PEOPLE VERY WELL, BUT, YOU KNOW, FROM BEHIND A SCREEN.

BUT SO JUST SO YOU UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MYSELF, I TEND TO KIND OF BE A LITTLE BIT OF AN IDEALIST.

I'M A REALIST, TOO, BUT I WOULD SAY I KIND OF AIR ON THE SIDE OF IDEALISM.

AND AS I'M LOOKING AT THE CHAPTER 86, WHERE BASICALLY WHERE WE HAVE THE PURPOSE AND THE INTENT OF THE [INAUDIBLE] ALL OUTLINED.

PART ONE TALKS ABOUT BASICALLY ALL OF OUR GOALS, YOU KNOW, ENHANCING HEALTH AND SAFETY GOALS, PROSPERITY GOALS, PROPERTY APPRECIATION, CULTURAL HERITAGE, DIVERSITY GOALS, ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS.

AND I'M KIND OF SITTING HERE THINKING LIKE, OK, SO DEVELOPERS WILL COME IN, THEY'LL AGREE TO HAVING THIS COMMERCIAL COMPONENT ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR.

BUT THEY, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE A NOD AND A WINK.

WE KNOW IT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THE MARKET AND WHATEVER.

SO WE'RE HAPPY TO JUST PACK IT WITH OUR RESIDENTIAL WHATEVER AND JUST LEAVE THAT OPEN BECAUSE WE CAN EAT THAT COST.

SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SO TO GET BACK TO THE IDEALISM THING THAT I MENTIONED, MAYBE INSTEAD OF BEING SO SPECIFIC ABOUT REQUIRING A SQUARE FOOTAGE DEDICATED TO COMMERCIAL SPACE, MAYBE WE DRILL DOWN INTO WHAT WE MEAN BY NONRESIDENTIAL AND LOOK TO THESE GOALS TO DEFINE THAT. SO, YOU KNOW, LIKE, AGAIN, THIS IS OFF THE CUFF.

MAYBE IT'S NOT REALISTIC, BUT THINGS LIKE A COMMUNITY GARDEN, PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE

[00:30:05]

I DON'T KNOW THINGS LIKE HONORING OUR CULTURAL HERITAGE BY REALLY PROMOTING SOME OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE DO IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT ARE REALLY CREATIVE AND EXCITING.

SO LIKE THE BUSINESS OWNER OR EXCUSE ME, THE DEVELOPER AS PART OF THEIR SPACE, IF THEY'RE KNOW THEY'RE NOT GOING TO FILL IT WITH A COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, VERSION, THEY'RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE IT OPEN. WOULDN'T THEY ALSO MAYBE BE CONTENT TO ALLOW IT TO BE USED FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE COMMUNITY BY ONE OF THESE MEANS, EVEN IF IT'S LIKE A LITTLE MUSEUM OF SOME KIND? I DON'T KNOW.

THAT'S JUST ME BEING KIND OF IDEALISTIC AND CREATIVE AND I HAD TO PUT IT OUT THERE.

SO THAT'S IT. NO, I THINK THAT'S I MEAN, I PERSONALLY THINK THAT'S HELPFUL TO RETHINK WHAT WE'RE THINKING OF WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NONRESIDENTIAL.

AND PETER FRAMED IT THAT WAY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, TOO.

AND I SORT OF OVERLOOKED IT WHEN IT HAPPENED, BUT IT WAS THAT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION. AND IF WE CAN FIND A BETTER WAY TO SORT OF ACHIEVE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, THEN BY ALL MEANS.

PETER, NOW, FORGIVE ME, I DIDN'T CATCH THIS IN THE DEFINITION SECTION.

DID WE DEFINE NONRESIDENTIAL OR WE JUST SORT OF SAYING IT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL? NOT YET. AND SO THAT'LL HAVE TO HAPPEN.

THERE ARE YOU'LL FIND SOME SOME THINGS IN THERE, LIKE I KIND OF STOPPED AND STARTED WITH THE RENUMBERING THING, TOO.

SO WE WILL NEED TO ADD PROBABLY SOME DEFINITIONS AND THERE'S SOME OTHER TECHNICAL THINGS THAT NEED TO BE VERY MUCH CONSIDERING THIS.

A DRAFT. OH, OF COURSE.

YEAH. AND TWO THINGS.

ONE, I THINK DIRECTOR CLARK WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING THAT SHE TOOK HER HAND DOWN ON IF SHE STILL DOES BUT OFFER THAT TO HER.

BUT THEN ALSO I SENT TO YOU, I KNOW IT'S TOUGH DURING THE MEETING, I DID SEND THE LATEST MARTIN OFFICE MARKET INSIGHTS TO THE GROUP.

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL ALSO ASKED ABOUT OFFICE VACANCY RATES, SO THEY HAVE THAT IN THERE.

WE DON'T TRACK THAT INDEPENDENTLY RIGHT NOW, BUT THIS IS KIND OF HELP.

I THINK THEY CALL US THE EASTERN MARKET OR SOMETHING.

OK, DIRECTOR CLARK, WERE YOU LOOKING TO WEIGH IN? IT MIGHT BE MUTED, CAN'T HEAR YOU.

OK. SHE SAID SHE WAS TRYING OUT SOME NEW TAX, SO THAT MIGHT BE THE ISSUE TODAY.

GOT IT. OK.

ANYONE WITH ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS TOPIC? COMMISSIONER BLUMER. I'D LIKE TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SNYDER, NOT SO MUCH BECAUSE SHE'S IDEALISTIC, BUT I THINK IT'S THE CORE OF WHAT THIS WHOLE THING IS ABOUT.

THE MIXED-USE PLAN PROGRAM IS AN EFFORT BY THE TOWNSHIP TO INDUCE DIVERSITY INTO A PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND IF THE TOWNSHIP IS IN THE POSITION OF SURRENDERING TO A DEVELOPER BECAUSE THEY SAY, LOOK, OUR ORIGINAL PLAN DIDN'T WORK, SO THE HELL WITH YOU, THAT CHANGE IS GOING TO BE PERMANENT.

THE MINUTE THE TOWNSHIP SAYS, WELL, OK, CONDITIONS ARE DIFFERENT, WE'VE JUST SURRENDERED PERMANENTLY TO THE USE OF THAT PROPERTY TO WHATEVER THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT IN THERE. I'D RATHER SEE THEM KEEP IT VACANT SO THAT IN THE FUTURE, IF SOMETHING DOES COME UP LIKE A SCHOOL DISTRICT WANTS TO HAVE A HISTORICAL MUSEUM OR SOMETHING IN THAT AREA, AS COMMISSIONER SNYDER SUGGESTED, I THINK THAT'S PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE.

BUT TO LOOK AT THEM AND SAY, WELL, OK, THE COMMERCIAL PART DIDN'T WORK, SO GO AHEAD AND PUT ANOTHER FIVE RESIDENCES IN THAT SAME SPACE.

I THINK THAT JUST BLOWS THE WHOLE PROJECT RIGHT OUT OF THE WATER AND IT BECOMES A PERMANENT CHANGE THE MINUTE WE DO THAT.

MY FEELING IS THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, THAT WE GET WHAT WE WANT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. I MEAN, JUST PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

SO WE SET WHAT THE TERMS ARE AND FOLLOW THROUGH AND WHATEVER WITH WHATEVER MEANS WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO US. SO, PETER, JUST TO REFOCUS US A LITTLE BIT ON THE EXACT QUESTION THAT'S AT THE HEART OF THE ISSUE HERE, BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT AND I THINK WE'RE DOING A GOOD JOB OF SORT OF GETTING AN IDEA WHERE WE STAND ON IT.

CURRENTLY, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE PRE AMENDMENTS REQUIRES WHAT?

[00:35:03]

IT JUST SAYS REQUIRE A MIX, BUT IT DOESN'T DEFINE WHAT THAT MIX HAS TO BE.

AND WE'RE PROPOSING NO CHANGE TO THAT.

OK, SO FAR.

RIGHT, I MEAN, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, RIGHT, WHERE IT'S THERE IN THE NAME.

AND WHEN YOU USE THAT, WE'D LIKE TO SEE SOME KIND OF MIX GENERALLY.

BUT WHAT THAT MEANS, I GUESS, IS STILL OPEN FOR INTERPRETATION.

RIGHT. SO DO WE NEED MORE PRESCRIPTIVE THAN WHERE WE ARE TODAY? SEE, A LOT OF--. A LOT OF STILLNESS ALL OF A SUDDEN.

[LAUGHTER] I WOULD ADVOCATE TO LEAVE IT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF FLEXIBILITY.

I GUESS IT OPENS THE DOORS AS WIDE AS POSSIBLE FOR ANY TYPE OF PROJECT THAT MIGHT COME IN.

AND AS I'VE HEARD A COUPLE MENTIONED HERE A COUPLE OF TIMES TONIGHT, WE'RE NOT ADVOCATING FOR THE WHOLESALE CHANGE OVER THESE SPACES.

IF THEY BUILD THEM AND THEY STAY VACANT, A, WE HAVE A BEVY OF LOCAL PRODUCTIVE USES THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO FIND FOR THEM THAN LETTING THEM DEDICATE IT TO THEIR GYM OR THE, YOU KNOW, FOR THEIR APARTMENTS.

AND AS LONG AS THE SPACE IS PHYSICALLY CONSTRUCTED, THEN I THINK WE'RE AT LEAST IN GOOD SHAPE IF THE ECONOMY TURNS AROUND OR THEY DO GET SOMEBODY THAT'S GREAT ON THEIR SIDE.

SO MAYBE THERE'S SOME WAY TO-- AND I DON'T HAVE THE WORDS RIGHT NOW TO ENSURE THAT THAT SPACE REMAINS ON ALLOCATED AND UNTIL SUCH TIME AS LEASE IS SIGNED.

YEAH, I MEAN, THAT BRINGS YOUR EXAMPLE THERE BRINGS UP AN INTERESTING POINT, BECAUSE A GYM COULD THEORETICALLY BE CONSIDERED NONRESIDENTIAL, COULD IT NOT? SURE, THE LINE THAT WE'VE TRIED TO DRAW WITH APPLICANTS AND A LOT OF THIS ENDS UP BEING KIND OF BEHIND THE SCENES CONVERSATIONS, FRANKLY, WITH SOMETIMES ESPECIALLY THIS PROJECT, WHAT WE'VE SAID AND WHAT YOU'LL SEE WITH RED CEDAR MANOR IS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN OPEN TO THE PUBLIC ARE ONLY OPEN TO THE MEMBERS OF THE RESIDENCES OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND EVEN THAT IS A LITTLE SLIPPERY BECAUSE WE ARE ESSENTIALLY DEMANDING PROOF THAT THESE PEOPLE CAN I CAN I FOR EXAMPLE, CAN I GET A MEMBERSHIP THERE? RATHER THAN JUST SOMEBODY WHO LIVES THERE, SO I SEE THAT BEING THE DIFFERENCE.

OK.

FOR A THIRD PARTY THAT OPERATES AT SOMEONE OUTSIDE OF THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY.

SO I SAW A COUPLE OF NODDING HEADS TO LEAVE IT AS IS TO REMAIN FLEXIBLE.

ARE WE ALL FEELING THAT WAY? I SEE MOSTLY NODDING HEADS.

ALL RIGHT. OK, WELL, THERE YOU HAVE IT, PETER.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO TAKE THAT SINCE IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE SAME TOPIC, THE SAME WITH THE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL MIX OF USES, KIND OF IN THE SAME VEIN.

OK, WELL, NOW WE COME BACK TO THE ONE THING THAT WE ARE ADAMANT THAT WE MUST CHANGE, WHICH IS THE AMENITIES.

SO THE ONLY INTRODUCTION I WOULD PROVIDE HERE IS I HAVE A WISH LIST THAT I'VE STARTED.

I'VE REACHED OUT TO A COUPLE OF MESSAGE BOARDS THAT I USE TO SEE WHAT THEY KIND OF THINGS THEY HAVE TO SAY. SO FAR, I HAVEN'T UNEARTHED ANYTHING TRULY EXCITING.

WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE SO FAR IS THIS ONE-- SORRY.

I'VE GOT A LOT OF DIFFERENT WINDOWS OPERATING HERE.

LET ME GET TO THAT SECTION, SORRY.

OK, I JUST WENT THERE AND ELIMINATED THE VERY MOST OBVIOUS ONES, SO I FEEL LIKE THOSE NEED TO BE REPLACED WITH SOMETHING MUCH BETTER.

I CAN COME BACK TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING WITH A MORE THOROUGH LIST OF IDEAS, BUT I'M HOPING YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SUPPLEMENT THAT AS WELL.

SO, COMMISSIONER PREMOE.

IN TERMS OF AMENITIES, I SUGGEST THAT IF WE AS A COMMITTEE PROVIDE SOME GENERAL PRINCIPLES THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, THEN WHY DON'T WE GO TO SUBCOMMITTEE ON THURSDAY?

[00:40:05]

SO, I MEAN, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING THAT THE COMMISSIONERS SAY, OK, YOU KNOW, WE WANT IT TO BE CLEAR THAT THEY'RE PUBLIC, FOR INSTANCE, AND NOT JUST FOR THE PROJECT OR WHATEVER THOSE MIGHT BE.

AND THEN BASED ON THOSE KINDS OF PRINCIPLES, I THINK WE CAN BEGIN TO DEVELOP A MORE SPECIFIC LIST IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU ALL.

COMMISSIONER CORDILL, I SAW YOUR HAND.

NO. OK. IF I CAN JUST ALSO VERY BRIEFLY, WHAT I'VE HEARD THE GROUP SAY A LOT IS NOT NECESSARILY AN ISSUE WITH SOME OF THE AMENITIES THAT WE'VE GOT.

I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, SOME OF THEM WERE VERY LOW HANGING FRUIT THAT NEEDED TO BE ELIMINATED BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT ANY QUALITY DEVELOPER WOULD PROVIDE IN A PROJECT LIKE THIS. BUT ALSO JUST, FOR EXAMPLE, ANY ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEM.

I THINK WHAT I HEARD WAS, LET'S QUANTIFY THIS.

LET'S MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT'S MEASURABLE, SOMETHING WE CAN DO THAT DEMONSTRATES SOME SORT OF GOOD TO THE PUBLIC.

AND PROVIDE SOME SORT OF QUANTITY OR QUANTIFY IT.

SO IF I WAS AN [INAUDIBLE].

DESCRIPTIVE WORD, BUT A DEVELOPER COULD WELL, YOU SAID ANY ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEM I PROVIDED ONE SOLAR PANEL.

WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS SOMETHING MORE ALONG THE LINES OF ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEM TO PROVIDE 20 PERCENT OF BUILDING POWER CONSUMPTION OR WHATEVER [INAUDIBLE] JUST TO THROW THE NUMBER OUT THERE.

BUT SOMETHING MORE LIKE THAT.

AND SINCE YOU MENTIONED THE PERCENTAGE THING I'M ALSO PRESENTED, I THINK, SOMEWHAT WITH THE CHALLENGE IS HOW DO WE LONG TERM QUANTIFY THIS STUFF? ARE WE GOING TO BE RELIANT ON REPORTS? THIS IS JUST NOT TO PICK ON YOUR I MEAN, I WAS JUST THINKING THE GENERAL TOPIC AND STUFF LIKE THIS LONG TERM.

HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT THAT'S HAPPENING? DO WE RELY ON THE DEVELOPER, THE PROPERTY OWNER, TO SUBMIT REPORTS TO US? YOU KNOW, HOW LONG DO WE DO THAT FOR? DO WE NEED THE THIRD PARTY TO VERIFY THAT KIND OF THING? THOSE ARE JUST WHEN I COME ACROSS AMENITIES LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF GREAT IDEAS THAT CENTER ON THAT KIND OF TOPIC.

I JUST WONDER WHAT THE BACK END IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL. YEAH, THANKS, PETER, FOR DIGGING INTO THE CLIMATE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN. I KNOW IT DOESN'T HAVE A REAL CLEAR SORT OF TARGETS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE THIS EVENING.

IN TERMS OF RENEWABLE ENERGY IT DOES STATE A GOAL OF OBTAINING TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF TOTAL ELECTRIC ENERGY USE FROM RENEWABLE RESOURCES.

AND SO THAT'S MAYBE ONE STARTING POINT TO THINK ABOUT.

WELL, HOW MUCH WOULD EACH PROJECT HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE MORE TO GET US TO A TWENTY FIVE PERCENT GOAL? AND I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT ENDS UP.

SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS, FOR EXAMPLE, MULTIFAMILY RECYCLING, THAT'S MORE BINARY.

IF THE DEVELOPER PROVIDES THE SPACE AND RESOURCES FOR TENANTS TO RECYCLE, THAT IS KIND OF AN EITHER OR THING.

STORMWATER. THAT'S A LOT TRICKIER.

RIGHT. BUT SOMETHING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE MINIMUM REQUIRED.

SOMETHING THAT SPEAKS TO PLANNING FOR THE STORM WATER WE EXPECT TO SEE IN THE NEXT 10, 20, 50 YEARS RATHER THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED BY CURRENT REGULATIONS WOULD BE CONSIDERED A MENITIES.

I'M SORRY, I'M NOT GIVING YOU HARD TARGETS TO WRITE INTO THE DRAFT, BUT THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF BUILDING MY THOUGHTS ON THAT.

THANKS. AND I THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO RUN INTO AS SOON AS WE DO START TO QUANTIFY IT, AND I THINK WE SHOULD DEFINE IT BETTER, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO RUN INTO IS ARE WE MAKING THESE AMENITIES EQUALLY ATTAINABLE? RIGHT. BECAUSE AS SOON AS WE SAY TWENTY FIVE PERCENT COMING FROM RENEWABLE SOURCES, AND THAT IS DEEMED BY, YOU KNOW, BY THE DEVELOPER, THAT THAT'S AN IMPOSSIBLE TASK.

WELL, THEY'LL JUST, YOU KNOW, CHECK THAT ONE OFF, FORGET IT, AND GO ON TO ONE OF THE EASIER AMENITIES.

RIGHT. LIKE IT'S EASIER FOR US TO PUT IN A COVERED BIKE PARKING SOMEWHERE THAN IT IS FOR US TO INSTALL SOLAR ARRAY TO PROVIDE TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF OUR BUILDINGS POWER.

[00:45:06]

AND SO WE SHOULD YOU KNOW, THERE'S ONE CHALLENGE, WHICH IS THINK OF GOOD AMENITIES THAT WE WANT TO REQUIRE AND THAT WILL BENEFIT THE PUBLIC.

AND THEN THERE'S THE SECOND CHALLENGE OF MAKE THEM EQUALLY ATTAINABLE SO THAT WE REALISTICALLY HAVE A TRUE MENU OF OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THOSE PEOPLE.

AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, A VERY GENERAL THAT'S VERY GENERALIZATION OF WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER BENEFITS TO SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS I SAID.

BUT COMMISSIONER PREMOE.

WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT I BELIEVE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AND QUANTIFYING IT IS A TOUGH ONE, BUT IF WE PUT A VALUE, HAVE A WAY OF EVALUATING OR PUTTING A VALUE ON THE AMENITY, AND WE SAY, OK.

THE MINIMUM IS SO MUCH.

SO MANY POINTS, SO MANY WIDGETS, HOWEVER WE VALUE IT, THEN WE CAN POINT TO SOMETHING THAT'S MORE SOPHISTICATED THAT THEY MAY BE LESS APT TO.

BUT IF THEY KNOW THAT ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS THAT ONE RATHER THAN FIVE OF THE LESSERS, IT MIGHT BE WORTH IT FOR THEM TO DO THAT.

IF THERE'S A WHAT-- YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? IF THERE'S A WAY TO--.

MM HMM. YEAH, I REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT THIS AND BEING EXCITED ABOUT THE AMENITY, THE AMENITY MENU WITH ALL THE VARIOUS PRICES, THE PRICE POINTS.

SO, YEAH, NO, I THINK THAT'S THAT WOULD BE A VALUABLE WAY OF ORDERING IT IF WE CAN DO IT.

IT'S JUST I THINK THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK ON THE FRONT END FOR US TO DO THAT, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SORT OF UNDERSTANDING HOW TO PRICE THINGS ON THAT AMENITY MENU.

COMMISSIONER BLUMER. I'M REMEMBERING JUST THE PUNCHLINE OF AN OLD JOKE ABOUT ORDERING FROM COLUMN A OR COLUMN B.

MAYBE THESE OUGHT TO BE CATEGORIZED INTO DIFFERENT JUST LIKE FOUR DIFFERENT QUALITIES OF AMENITIES. AND YOU CAN PICK ONE FROM EACH COLUMN.

I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY AN EXCITING DISCUSSION FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO HAVE ON THURSDAY BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE PETER AND THE COMMITTEE MIGHT NEED SOME ASSISTANCE IN HIGHLIGHTING AND COMMISSIONER PREMOE MENTIONED THIS, HIGHLIGHTING SOME OF THE AREAS IN WHICH WE'D LIKE TO SEE ADDITIONAL THINGS ADDED.

ANYONE WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THAT AT ALL? THERE IS A VERY ACTIVE GROUP THAT GATHERS ON THURSDAY EVENINGS AROUND SOLAR ENERGY.

AND THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF EXPERTISE IN THAT GROUP ABOUT WHAT THE LAW SAYS AND WHAT THE ECONOMICS ARE AND WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE INSTALLED.

THE LAST TIME THEY MET, THEY HAD A GREAT PRESENTATION FROM THE FOLKS WHO DID THE INSTALLATIONS AT THE FIRE STATION AT FARMER'S MARKET.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF EXPERTISE AROUND NOT ONLY WHAT THE LAW SAYS, BUT WHAT DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES ARE DOING. AND THAT MIGHT BE A SOURCE TO TAP FOR MORE SPECIFIC TARGETS ON THE RENEWABLE ENERGY SIDE.

JOHN SARVER FACILITATES THAT GROUP.

AND LIKE I SAID, THERE'S A TON OF EXPERTISE THERE.

AND I THINK IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE IN THAT DOMAIN, WHETHER IT'S ELECTRIC VEHICLES OR PHOTOVOLTAIC OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, THAT THAT'S A GREAT SPOT TO TAP FOR EXPERTISE.

THEY CALLED THE SOLAR WORKGROUP SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

MY SOLAR STORY.

OK. I'M JUST BLOWN AWAY BY THE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE FROM THAT GROUP, BOTH ON THE POLICY SIDE AND ON THE ENGINEERING SIDE.

I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME GUIDANCE FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE DISCUSSION.

IF YOU DO RUN ACROSS A SPECIFIC AMENITY OR PROJECT FEATURE THAT YOU'VE IDENTIFIED THAT YOU THINK WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION TO OURS, PLEASE JUST EMAIL ME.

COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY TOO.

I WAS JUST GOING TO SUGGEST AND I CAN EMAIL THIS TO YOU, TOO, BUT SINCE YOU CALLED ON ME, I'M WONDERING IF THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE MIGHT HAVE SOME IDEAS ON SOME OF THE CONSERVATION PIECES, PARTICULARLY AS IT COMES TO WATER QUALITY THAT WE CAN TAP INTO.

AND THAT'S THE TRI REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION HAS SOME GREAT EXPERTISE ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IS ALREADY TAPPING FOR GREEN STORMWATER

[00:50:03]

SO THERE'S LOTS OF GOOD INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE IN THIS REGION IS DOING THERE. COMMISSIONER SNYDER.

SO I GUESS TO KIND OF PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS IN HERE ALREADY, BUT JUST LIKE RAIN GARDENS, IS THAT AN AMENITY? I'M NOT SEEING IT, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT THERE.

IS THAT A CHOICE? ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL PIECE OR NO? THOUGHT I SAW SOMETHING THAT WASN'T IT WASN'T THAT SPECIFIC AND BECAUSE I WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, I DIDN'T REALLY EVEN REALIZE THE FACT THAT THOSE HAD A NAME, SO I THOUGHT I MENTIONED THAT THERE.

BUT I HAD A QUESTION WITH THE AMENITIES IS IT ACCEPTABLE TO YOU TO SAY AND MAYBE THIS IS ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS AND I'M NOT FULLY AWARE, BUT CERTAIN AMENITIES ARE CAN WE REQUIRE CERTAIN AMENITIES? AND I'M ASKING ONLY BECAUSE I'VE BEEN THINKING A LOT ABOUT THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGE STATIONS. AND JUST LIKE WHERE WE'RE MOVING IN THE NEW ADMINISTRATION WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND JUST THE NEW THE AD FROM GM ON THE SUPER BOWL THEIR MOVE TOWARDS A JUST MORE ELECTRIC VEHICLES. I JUST WONDER IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS ALREADY MAYBE IN THIS AND I'M NOT AWARE OF IT AS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE REQUIRED AT ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT JUST TO BE PREPARED FOR THE FUTURE.

WHAT'S COMING OUR WAY? WE COULD CERTAINLY WE COULD REQUIRE THINGS, SURE, OR WE COULD LIKE, AS WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, BALANCE THEM OR WEIGHT THEM SO THAT THINGS LIKE THAT ARE MUCH HIGHER WEIGHTED THAN OTHERS. SO WE INCENTIVIZE THEM TO PICK THOSE VERSUS OTHERS.

OK. AND THEN, PETER, I'M SURE YOU'VE CONSIDERED THIS IN THE PAST, BUT OUR REGIONAL NEIGHBORS LIKE EAST LANSING AND LANSING, I'M SURE THEY'VE GOT MIXED USE ORDINANCES THAT HAVE AMENITIES IN THERE. HAVE THEY BEEN PULLED TO BE REVIEWED FOR IDEAS? YEAH, I'VE LOOKED AT THOSE.

I HAVEN'T GOTTEN A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS OUT OF THOSE.

SOME OF THEM ARE VERY SIMILAR TO OURS.

EAST LANSING HAS MORE OF AN OPEN.

THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE THE SAME KIND OF AMENITY TRADE OFF WAVE OR TRADE OFF THAT WE DO.

WELL, THANKS, BILL. BILL SHARED A LINK IN THE CHAT IF YOU GUYS FOLLOWED THE CHAT ON REQUIRING PARKING LOOKS LIKE ELECTRIC CHARGING IN PARKING AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS.

I MEAN, TO REPEAT SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER PREMOE IS FOND OF REMINDING US OF, IF IT'S IN THE BUILDER'S INTERESTS AND THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE MONEY OFF OF IT, THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT. IF THE TREND IS TO PUT IN EV STATIONS, THEY WILL TO SERVICE THEIR RESIDENTS.

BUT I THINK IT'S A FINE THING TO TO PRIORITIZE.

CERTAINLY WE KNOW THAT'S WHERE GM IS GOING SPECIFICALLY AND I'M SURE OTHERS WILL FOLLOW.

SO I THINK THAT'S THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO WEIGH HEAVILY ON.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS TOPIC BEFORE WE MOVE OFF OF AMENITIES? OK, SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO A MENU WITH COLUMNS AND POINTS AND A WHOLE SYSTEM OF DOING THINGS COMING OUT OF THIS WORK SESSION.

ALL RIGHT, PETER, WE'VE, I THINK, GONE THROUGH THE FOUR ITEMS THAT YOU HAD, THE BIG TOPICS, YOU UNLESS IT WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED US TO TOUCH ON HERE? NO, THOSE WERE I MEAN, THAT WAS MY IDEA, WHAT THE MAJOR TOPICS WERE.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE, AFTER HAVING READ THROUGH THE CHANGES I MADE, HAD ANY OTHER BIG IDEAS THAT THEY FEEL WEREN'T TACKLED IN THIS.

AND IF NOT, I WANTED TO JUST TOUCH ON DENSITY AND MAYBE JUST A COUPLE OTHER BULLET POINTS. THIS IS A NIT PICKY QUESTION, BUT ON THE SECTION ON STRUCTURE, ON PAGE 12, WHERE IT SAYS THEY SHALL INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF CONFLICTING. YEAH, UNDERSTOOD.

I SEE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

YEAH, I GET WHERE YOU'RE GOING, BUT YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

IF WE WANT IT, WE WANT IT.

IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THEM SOME FLEXIBILITY.

YEAH, I WENT ON A SHOULD HUNT.

YEAH, I FIGURED THAT ONE.

YEAH. THANK YOU, THOUGH. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? YEAH, ACTUALLY. THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN.

IF YOU READ IT, IT MEANS YOU HAVE TO HAVE ALL OF THOSE IN YOUR DEVELOPMENT.

[00:55:06]

ALL RIGHT, LET'S TALK ABOUT DENSITY THEN.

OK, SO IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE, DENSITY STARTS ON PAGE LOOKS LIKE FIVE.

AND IT'S NOT CALLED DENSITY, BUT IT'S IN USE, IT'S UNDER USES.

SO WHAT ARE TRADITIONALLY WHAT THIS ORDINANCE HAS SAID IS BASICALLY IT DIVIDES IT INTO A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.

FOR A PREVIOUSLY UNDEVELOPED OR A NEW GREENFIELD SITE A NEW SITE, WE WOULD ALLOW UP TO 10 UNITS PER ACRE, AND THAT'S IT.

FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE REDEVELOPMENT, WHICH AND MARK AND CORRECT ME, I DON'T REMEMBER A NEW A DEVELOPMENT THAT WASN'T REDEVELOPMENT, THEY GET A TOTAL OF 14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. AND THEN WITH THE PROVISION OF WHAT WE'VE KIND OF MYSTERIOUSLY CALLED FOR, ADDITIONAL UNIQUE AND EXTRAORDINARY AMENITIES ACCEPTABLE TO THE TOWNSHIP, WHICH WAS NEVER DEFINED, BUT HAS HAVE TYPICALLY TAKEN TO BE JUST WE DON'T ALWAYS SEE IT KIND OF THING.

SO WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE, I'M ACTUALLY SORRY I'M AHEAD OF MYSELF.

WE REALLY ONLY REQUIRE WE JUST SAY FOUR OR MORE, WILL WE SAY FOUR ADDITIONAL UNIQUE AND EXTRAORDINARY AMENITIES.

SO YOU GET 14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE WITH THESE FOUR AMENITIES, THEY CAN GET UP TO 18.

WHAT I'VE DONE IN HERE, REALLY FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION, SO PLEASE DON'T THINK TOO HARD ABOUT THIS PART IS I BUMPED UP 14 TO 20 AND 18 TO TWENTY FIVE.

AND THE LOGIC THERE IS I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GOT TO 14 AND 18 TO START WITH, I'M NOT SURE THAT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF, BUT THAT WAS A MAGIC NUMBER AND A SPECIFIC AND NO SHAME ON, YOU KNOW, WHO DEVELOPED THIS INITIALLY.

BUT I JUST IF WE DIDN'T HAVE IT, IF THERE WASN'T SPECIFIC REASON, I BUMPED IT UP.

WHAT I ALSO DID WAS IN THAT BUMP UP THE TWENTY FIVE, I ADDED SOME BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT CAME UP IN PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS.

I ADDED SOME AND YOU CAN SEE I DIDN'T FINISH IT, BUT I DID ADD SOME SPECIFIC THINGS TO GET THEM UP TO TWENTY FIVE.

SO THERE WAS SOME KIND OF INSTEAD OF JUST THIS GENERIC, UNIQUE AND EXTRAORDINARY, I TRIED TO PICK SOME VERY SPECIFIC THINGS.

SO A COUPLE OF THE THINGS MENTIONED IN THIS GROUP WERE A MIX OF UNIT TYPES AND THIS IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING [INAUDIBLE] DOES TALK ABOUT.

AND THEIR AUDIENCES YOU MIGHT SEE THEY GOT I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TROUBLE, BUT I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING ALL OF IT. THEY WERE REQUIRING A SPECIFIC UNIT MIX AND ACTUALLY I THINK THEY WERE REQUIRING CERTAIN WAS AN AGE GROUP.

I THOUGHT THEY WERE REQUIRING A CERTAIN AGE GROUP APARTMENTS, I HAD TO BE X PERCENT, WHATEVER THIS AGE LIMIT IS, AND MAYBE IT WASN'T SPECIFIC AGE, IT WAS SOMETHING--.

THEY WERE 55 AND OLDER.

OK, THANK YOU. YES. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT LEGALLY HAPPENED WITH THAT, BUT I KNOW IT WAS CONTROVERSIAL. SO BUT WE TALKED ABOUT UNIT MIXES, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE AGE THING. SO I JUST THREW IN HERE A MIX OF UNIT TYPES, NO MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF ONE TYPE. AND THESE ARE ALL SUBJECT TO CHANGE ARE JUST IDEAS, WE TALKED ABOUT BEDROOMS, A SPECIFIC SIZE OF A BEDROOM.

OR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. YES, AND THIS IS-- EXCUSE ME, CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF ONE BEDROOM, ONE OR TWO BEDROOM UNITS ON A PROJECT, MINIMUM AMOUNTS OF NON RESIDENTIAL SPACE, THAT KIND OF GOES BACK TO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE, MAYBE THEY DON'T NECESSARILY INCLUDE ANOTHER IN A PROJECT WITHOUT THIS DENSITY. BUT IF THEY WANT THIS BONUS, THEY'D HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIFIC NUMBER.

VERTICAL MIXING THE LAND USES AND THEN OPEN FOR OTHERS IF THERE ARE OTHERS.

JUST A LITTLE BIT HIGHER BAR TO GET THAT ADDITIONAL DENSITY.

AND THEN ALSO WHERE I REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DENSITY IN JUST THE PLANE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT FROM 10 TO FIVE AND THE ONLY THINKING THERE WAS TO DISCOURAGE IT.

AND THE REASON I PUT FIVE IS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU GET WITH OUR LOWEST MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS FIVE. I HAVE NO IDEA IF THE BOARD IS INTERESTED IN BUMPING UP THE NUMBERS IN THE PROJECTS.

I THINK GENERALLY IS A ZONING I MEAN, I JUST SAT THROUGH A SEMINAR TODAY ABOUT [INAUDIBLE], WE JUST HAD OUR TOWNSHIP MANAGER SENT AN ARTICLE NOT ADVOCATING FOR IT, BUT JUST SHARING IT WITH US ABOUT ANN ARBOR [INAUDIBLE] LOOKING AT HIGHER DENSITY ON THEIR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS.

[01:00:10]

IT WOULD BE A BIG JUMP AND I JUST WANT TO AT LEAST TALK ABOUT IT.

WE CAN LEAVE AT THE SAME TO.

COMMISSIONER SNYDER AND THEN COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC ANSWER OR NOT, BUT LIKE THE MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES UP TO A DENSITY OF AND THEN THE YOU KNOW, THE EDIT HERE IS FIVE RATHER THAN 10 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

I'M JUST WONDERING IS, IS THERE LIKE A IS THERE A STANDARD THAT IS REQUIRED IN ANY KIND OF, I DON'T KNOW, BY ANY KIND OF LEGISLATIVE BODY OR SOMETHING? BECAUSE EVEN THE TENANT THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT TO ME, A DENSITY OF 10 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS PER ACRE.

I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE I'M JUST ENVISIONING THIS WRONG.

BUT THAT JUST SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF FAMILIES IN A VERY SMALL SPACE.

I PERSONALLY PROBABLY WOULDN'T ENJOY THAT MYSELF.

BUT IS THERE A STANDARD? IS THERE A RULE? NOT NECESSARILY. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS LEFT UP TO LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES TO MAKE THE CALL ON IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.

THERE'S NO SPECIFIC RULE OF THUMB, RIGHT? AND THE REASON I PICKED FIVE WAS THAT'S THE LOWEST.

SO IN OUR MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT RIGHT NOW, THAT IS THE LOWEST YOU CAN GO.

BUT AS FAR AS I CAN TELL AND THAT'S A-- OH, DID ANYONE ELSE JUST GET A CLOSED CAPTIONING BOX UP? YEAH, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, THE NUMBERS THAT WE USED INITIALLY WEREN'T NECESSARILY BASED ON SOME SORT OF MATH OR FORMULA THAT FIT WELL WITH A SITE.

COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY, THEN COMMISSIONER CORDILL.

I HAD A QUESTION AND I APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I KNOW YOU SHOWED SOME EXAMPLES OF RECENT APPROVALS THAT HAVE GONE FORWARD [INAUDIBLE] AND I DON'T RECALL DID ANY OF THOSE PROJECTS HAVE LIKE DID THEY ASK FOR DENSITY WAIVERS OR HOW WOULD THEY HAVE FIT WITHIN THE CRITERIA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE? BUT THIS IS LIKELY TO BE SOMETHING THAT FITS OR WE GOING TO BE CONSISTENTLY BEING ASKED TO WAIVE IT AND ALLOW MORE DENSITY OR.

I CAN GET THE EXACT I CAN FIND EXACTLY WHAT THE ANSWER IS, I DON'T KNOW IT RIGHT NOW, BUT I CAN TELL YOU, YES, WE DO GET THE REQUEST FOR THE ADDITIONAL DENSITY OF EVERY PROJECT ALMOST. YEAH.

SO I GUESS WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS SET UP THE STANDARD THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONSTANTLY HAVE TO DEVIATE FROM.

I'D LIKE IT TO BE SOMEWHAT REALISTIC, BUT I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO TRADE DENSITY FOR AMENITIES.

AND SO SETTING IT AT SOMETHING THAT'S NOT SO EXPENSIVE THAT THEY END UP NEVER AGREEING TO DO AN AMENITY, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT SWEETEN THE DEAL A LITTLE BIT IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THE BONUS AND THE BENEFIT OF THE DENSITY.

SO WHAT I COULD DO BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING IS PUT A TABLE TOGETHER WITH SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS I MENTIONED AND PUT WHAT THEY WERE ALLOWED, MAYBE WHAT THEY ASKED FOR AND THEN WHAT THE STANDARD IS SOME JUST SOMETHING TO THIS.

WE HAVE SOME COMPARISON.

THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF THAT'S NOT TOO MUCH TROUBLE AND OTHERS SHOULD BE HELPFUL.

YEAH. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CORDILL. YOU'RE MUTED, COMMISSIONER.

SORRY, I THINK THIS IS WHAT I'M TYING INTO WHAT WAS JUST SAID, IT'S LIKE MAYBE IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO GET A HANDLE ON WHAT SOME EXISTING PROJECTS HAVE IN WAY OF DENSITY.

HAVING LIVED IN SOMETHING THAT WAS LIKE AT LEAST 40 UNITS PER ACRE, I MEAN, WE HAD PARKING UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING SO THAT THAT ALLOWED FOR A HIGHER DENSITY BUILDING.

BUT ANYWAY. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

OK, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THE DENSITY ISSUE? I'M CURIOUS IN KNOWING WHAT'S THE HIGHEST DENSITY WE HAVE IN THE TOWNSHIP? IT'S OUR R D IS IT R DD MARK? RCC? THAT'S RACC. THIRTY FOUR UNITS PER ACRE.

WE DON'T HAVE-- WE'VE NOT HAD ANYTHING ZONED IN THAT CATEGORY SINCE THE 1970S.

THAT'S THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED, THE ACTUAL EXISTING MAXIMUM? WELL, THAT'S THE ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR YOU.

I THINK THE ONLY PROJECT IS THE I THINK IT'S CALLED THE TOWER NOW ON NORTHLAND.

MARK, IS THAT THE ONLY AREA OUT THERE?

[01:05:04]

I WANT TO SAY IT'S CHANGED.

IT WAS TWICKENHAM OVER ON [INAUDIBLE] HAS CHANGED THE [INAUDIBLE] PROJECT.

SO THERE WAS A FEW DONE THAT AT THAT HIGHER DENSITY.

BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY APPROVALS FOR REZONING SINCE THEN.

COMMISSIONER CORDILL. YOU'RE MUTED AGAIN, HOLLY.

SORRY TO REFRESH MY MEMORY.

IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT THE INTENSITY WAS FOR HANNAH FARMS. YEAH, I'LL PULL TOGETHER A COUPLE RECENT MUPUDS THAT HOPEFULLY WILL GIVE US A LITTLE INSIGHT INTO THAT. THANK YOU.

PETER, WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO CHAT ABOUT ON THIS TOPIC? I DON'T THINK SO. FOR THE MOST PART, I'VE IN MOST CASES WAS ABLE TO GET TO THE HEART OF WHAT THE SUGGESTIONS WERE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE DENSITY WAS ONE THING I HAD A BIG QUESTION ABOUT THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE WHICH IS SO MUCH HERE AT THE MALL INTO THE HIGHER DENSITY AREAS RIGHT NOW WOULD BE.

DOWNTOWN OKEMOS, DOWNTOWN HASLETT AND THEN THIS ORDINANCE WOULD ALSO BE THE MALL, THERE'S A MISSING MAP. I'LL HAVE TO AT SOME POINT TO A MAP HERE THAT WOULD SUPPORT THAT.

I DID REQUIRE PARKING ONLY INSIDE A REAR LOT.

REQUIRED SOME MAYBE NOT JUSTIFICATION, OR AT LEAST DESCRIPTIONS OF AMENITIES AND WAIVERS TO MAKE THAT MORE CLEAR MOVING FORWARD.

I ELIMINATED SOME THINGS FROM THE APPLICATION THAT JUST SEEMED KIND OF DUPLICATIVE OR MAYBE THINGS THAT WERE NEVER GETTING GOOD RESPONSES ON IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AND OH, AND DID PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGE THE MAJOR AND MINOR AMENDMENTS, IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.

BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHAT I DID IS IT WOULD BE MORE DIFFICULT UNDER THIS ORDINANCE FOR A PROJECT TO GET A MINOR AMENDMENT.

SO MOST PROJECTS BASICALLY ANY CHANGE TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING, ANY CHANGE IN THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDINGS, ANYTHING THAT WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PARKING OR CREATE MORE TRAFFIC OR CHANGE EVEN THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING, SO THE ONE OF THE PROVISIONS I MADE HERE WAS ANY ADDITION OF 50 OR MORE RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO THE MIXED USE PUD.

SO ANYTHING THAT EVEN KIND OF CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THE PROJECT WOULD GO BACK THROUGH THE MAJOR AMENDMENT PROCESS.

AND IN THIS CASE, AT LEAST, WHAT I'M PROPOSING HERE, OR AT LEAST WHAT I'M FLOATING, I DON'T SAY I'M PROPOSING I'M FLOATING, IS THAT THAT WOULD JUST GO TO THE BOARD, NOT THE PLANNING COMMISSION. JUST BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING FOR PLACES OF WHERE TIMING, WHERE COULD WE SHAVE TIME? THAT'S ONE OF THE FEW THAT REALLY I IDENTIFIED.

AND I DID IT DIDN'T THINK COMMISSIONER CORDILL MENTIONED IT EARLIER, I DID CHANGE KIND OF THE SHOT CLOCK THAT'S PUT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD FROM 60 TO 30 DAYS.

WE REALLY HAVE NEVER HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THAT TO START WITH.

MOST OF THE DELAYS ARE ON THE APPLICANTS END AND THEY'LL END UP GRANTING THAT TIME TO EXTEND FURTHER AND FURTHER OUT.

BUT JUST IN THIS, IF IT EVER DOES COME UP, WILL THAT CLOCK IS NOW 30 DAYS SHORTER.

I THINK THOSE ARE ALL THE BIG ONES, THANKS FOR ALL THE DISCUSSION.

HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET THE SUBCOMMITTEE TOGETHER TO HAVE ANOTHER CHAT ON THIS BEFORE WE BRING IT BACK TO YOU. ANYONE WITH ANY FINAL COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER BLUMER.

I JUST WANT TO COMPLIMENT THE SUBCOMMITTEE, THERE'S A HECK OF A LOT OF WORK THAT'S GOING INTO THIS AND IT REALLY SHOWS.

YEAH, THANK YOU TO EVERYONE THAT'S SERVING IN THAT CAPACITY.

WANT TO GIVE ACCOLADES TO PETER.

THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO SAY I REALLY APPRECIATED HOW WELL ORGANIZED THIS WAS AND SORT OF THE WAY YOU DID THE HEADING IN THE FRONT TO EXPLAIN WHAT WAS CHANGE, [INAUDIBLE] WAS TOGETHER WAS REALLY HELPFUL TO ME WHEN I WAS REVIEWING IT.

GOOD. WELL THANK YOU ALL BECAUSE I AM NOT AN IDEA PERSON TYPICALLY.

I'M A PROCESS ORDNANCE PERSON, SO I'M NOT VERY CREATIVE.

SO I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S INPUT.

MY BRAIN JUST I JUST DON'T THINK OF THINGS LIKE THAT EASILY.

PETER, HAVE YOU COME UP WITH-- DID YOU DECIDE ON THREE OR THREE THIRTY FOR THURSDAY?

[01:10:01]

THANK YOU.

OK, WITH THAT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM EIGHT, OTHER BUSINESS, NONE.

AGENDA ITEM NINE A TOWNSHIP BOARD UPDATE.

[9.A. Township Board update]

OK, SO WE DID CANCEL THE LAST MEETING ON JANUARY TWENTY FIVE.

SO IN THAT TIME THE BOARD HAS MET SEVERAL TIMES.

MOST THEY MET ON JANUARY 19.

AT THAT MEETING, THE [INAUDIBLE] PROJECT WAS APPROVED FOR INTRODUCTION.

THAT WAS THE REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY THIRTY ONE ACRES OVER THERE IN CENTRAL PARK DRIVE, POWELL AND GRAND RIVER.

SO THEY DID APPROVE THAT FOR INTRODUCTION.

THE MERIDIAN MALL PROJECT WAS INITIALLY GOING TO BE ON THAT MEETING IN A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AFTER THAT. AND THAT'S WHEN I SAY MERIDIAN MALL, I MEAN, THE DRIVE THRU BANK THAT IS PROPOSED OUT FRONT ALONG GRAND RIVER WITH THE MALL.

THEY HAVE NOT COME BACK TO US YET.

SO THEY'RE STILL LOOKING AT THAT PROJECT.

THEY WERE WORKING WITH THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE.

AND AFTER THEY HAD GOTTEN INITIAL SOME INITIAL FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD HAVE KIND OF DONE A ARE CONSIDERING SOME CHANGES TO THAT OR AT LEAST MAYBE CHANGES IN THEIR APPROACH.

SO WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING BACK ON THAT PROJECT YET.

HOPING THEY'LL BE BACK IN FEBRUARY AT SOME POINT OR EARLY MARCH ON THE BOARD AGENDA.

THE BOARD DID MEET ON THE TWENTY SIXTH.

AND THANK YOU TO THOSE THAT WERE ABLE TO ATTEND THAT JOINT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT WEREN'T ABLE TO AND NO PROBLEM IS TOTALLY OPTIONAL.

SO IT IS AVAILABLE IF YOU WANT TO WATCH IT.

REALLY WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT MEETING IS ALL THE DIFFERENT GROUPS LIKE THIS ONE WILL TALK ABOUT THEIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE YEAR, THEIR GOALS FOR NEXT YEAR.

SO IT'S GREAT TO SEE EVERYBODY WAS A BIG CALL.

WHICH IS ALWAYS CHALLENGING BECAUSE IF YOU'VE NOTICED, I READ THIS RECENTLY, PICTURE QUALITY GOES DOWN FOR EVERY PERSON YOU ADD TO A CALL.

SO WE WERE A LITTLE FUZZY BY THE END.

OK, SO THEN THE BOARD DID MEET FEBRUARY TWO AND FOR FINAL ADOPTION, THEY DID APPROVE THE REZONING OF THE REZONING OVER THERE.

SO AND I KNOW AFTER THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAW THIS, THERE WERE SOME CONDITIONS ADDED TO THAT THAT MADE THE BOARD FEEL A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE PROPOSAL.

SO WHAT I'M EXPECTING HERE IN THE FUTURE IS FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

SO ANYTHING THREE OR MORE UNITS, WHICH WE KNOW IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO THERE'LL BE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT THAT WILL GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION. THERE WILL BE A SECOND SPECIAL USE PERMIT THAT WOULD GO WITH THIS PROJECT.

THAT WOULD BE FOR THE BUILDINGS OR GROUP BUILDINGS GREATER THAN TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET IN SIZE. SO YOU WILL SEE THAT AS A PUBLIC HEARING AND FOR A RECOMMENDATION, THEN THEY'LL BE A WETLAND USE PERMIT THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT AS WELL.

THAT'S BASED ON OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE APPLICANT.

SO THEN THAT GOES THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RECOMMENDATION, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION FOR A RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN THE TOWNSHIP BOARD FOR A FINAL DECISION.

SO A LOT OF VETTING ON THAT ONE, WHICH IS THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK.

RIGHT. SO MORE TO COME ON THAT SITE.

PETER, YOU KNOW? OH, GOSH.

I BELIEVE ONE WAS THAT SUP AND THE OTHER HAD TO DO WITH A CLUSTERING OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE WESTERN ONE THIRD TO KIND OF PUSH TO THE DENSITY MORE TOWARDS CENTRAL PARK THAN POWELL. YEAH, THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT THE NUMBER, I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE A PULLED UP RIGHT NOW, BUT THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY UNITS AND THEY BASICALLY DEMARCATED A LINE AND TO SHOW TO THE EAST OF WHICH THEY WOULD ONLY BE SINGLE FAMILY. SO ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE, YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO SEE SINGLE FAMILY THAT'S NEAREST POWELL ROAD.

SO SURE, LET US REZONE IT, BUT WE'LL [INAUDIBLE].

AND THEN THEY DID PUT A CLOCK ON.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A YEAR OR TWO YEARS TO [INAUDIBLE] THOUGH, WILL THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT A PROJECT WITHIN.

SO THAT'S I THINK THAT'S USEFUL FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED IN THAT.

SO, YEAH, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE A PROJECT ON THAT SITE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

LET ME GET BACK TO MY PAGE HERE.

THOSE ARE THE ONLY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS, SO THE FEBRUARY 16TH, I BROUGHT THIS UP BEFORE, BUT NEXT TUESDAY NIGHT, THE BOARD HAS A STUDY SESSION ABOUT RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA. AND SO I'LL JUST GIVE YOU MY VERY BRIEF SPIEL ON THIS.

THE BOARD IS CONSIDERING LOOKING AT RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS, THE TOWNSHIP DID ADOPT A NON ZONING ORDINANCE AND A ZONING ORDINANCE FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA, AND WE'VE OPTED OUT OF RECREATIONAL THUS FAR.

SO WE HAVEN'T HAD ANYBODY OPEN A FACILITY HERE IN THE TOWNSHIP YET FOR MEDICAL.

I THINK THEY'RE ALL KIND OF IN A HOLDING PERIOD OR HOLDING PATTERN.

[01:15:01]

SO THE BOARD IS GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THAT SOON.

THE RAMIFICATIONS, WHICH I JUST DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW.

SO IF YOU HAVE THE TIME OR INTERESTED, PLEASE DO JOIN US AT THAT MEETING ON THE 16TH.

AND I'M SURE THAT THIS CONVERSATION WILL PLAY OUT IN THE COMMUNITY EVEN AFTER THAT.

SO I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE FINAL WORD ON RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

AND WOULD THERE BE, SIMILARLY TO PREVIOUS VENTURE, A ZONING AND NON ZONING TO GO WITH THESE OR INITIALLY? I'M THINKING SO.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THAT.

THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE VERY UP IN THE AIR.

AND IT REALLY JUST KIND OF DEPENDS ON WHICH DIRECTION THE BOARD GOES IN.

SO MORE TO COME ON THAT SOON AND I WILL KEEP YOU IN THE LOOP ON IT.

JUST SO LONG AS WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING HOW MANY SECURE TRANSPORTERS AND GROWERS AND, YOU KNOW, GET INTO THAT WEEDS AGAIN.

IT MIGHT COME UP. I THINK EVERYTHING'S ON THE TABLE AT THIS POINT.

I'M SURE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR PETER ON TOWNSHIP BOARD STUFF? I WOULD GO ON TO LIAISON REPORTS THEN.

[9.B. Liaison reports.]

I JUST WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO THE GROUP.

I'VE ALREADY APOLOGIZED TO DIRECTOR CLARK.

I WAS SUPPOSED TO PARTICIPATE AS OUR LIAISON TO THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AND I MISREAD THE TIMING.

I THOUGHT IT WAS SEVEN THIRTY IN THE EVENING AT SEVEN THIRTY IN THE MORNING.

I DON'T KNOW WHO GOES TO A MEETING AT SEVEN THIRTY IN THE MORNING, BUT I MISSED IT.

BUT I'LL BE AWAKE FOR THE NEXT ONE, SO.

OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD.

COMMISSIONER CORDILL.

AT THE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY, OUR CHAIR PRESENTED ON THE FORM BASE CODE.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE CENTERPIECES OF THE MEETING THAT WE HAD EARLIER.

THEY WERE FAVORABLE TO IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD TO IT, THE GOOD PRESENTATION.

YEAH, AND I THINK THAT THEY'LL BE WEIGHING IN VIA LETTER TO THE BOARD AND ON THAT TOPIC.

PETER, DID YOU BY ANY CHANCE SEND OVER THE DRAFT TO THE BOARD FOR THEIR REVIEW? NO, I HAVE NOT SENT IT TO THE BOARD YET.

I WAS GOING INCLUDE YOU ON THAT.

AND IF YOU WANTED TO DO A COVER LETTER OR HAVE ME DRAFT ONE FROM YOU.

OH, WE COULD DO IT THAT WAY.

BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN IT YET BECAUSE I HAVEN'T ADDED THAT USE TABLE INTO THE MEAT OF THE ORDINANCE YET.

I SAY, YEAH, I'M HAPPY TO DRAFT THAT COVER LETTER TO BE INCLUDED.

I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF IT HAD GONE YET.

SO I'LL DEFINITELY LET YOU KNOW.

MY PERSONAL GOAL IS JUST THAT IT WAS TO GET THIS AT LEAST TO WHERE WE'RE AT TONIGHT AND THEN TURN MY ENERGY TO THAT.

COMMISSIONER CORDILL.

I DID WANT TO POINT SOMETHING OUT TO THE COMMISSION.

APPARENTLY WITH THE FORM BASE CODE, THERE'S BEEN RELUCTANCE TO ADDING RESIDENTIAL TO GO AHEAD AND CLARIFY THE YOU FEEL THE NEED.

BUT THERE'S BEEN A RELUCTANCE ON THE PART OF THE BOARD TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF THE FORM BASE CODE.

AND THERE'S A CONCERN FOR THAT BECAUSE THAT USUALLY IS A GOOD CHUNK OF THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS.

IF YOU LOOK IN THE CAPITAL AREA OR IF YOU LOOK BEYOND OUR OWN TRI COUNTY AREA.

SO I DON'T WANT THAT TO DISAPPEAR ON THAT USE TABLE, AT THE VERY LEAST, HAVE IT AS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AS PART OF THAT FORM BASE CODE.

BUT I THINK THAT WOULD REALLY DRAG ANY MOMENTUM THAT WE COULD HAVE WITH SOME FORM BASED PROJECTS IN THE TOWNSHIP.

YEAH, AND THIS WAS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD FROM THE BOARD AND BACK IN FEBRUARY OF TWENTY TWENTY WHEN WE INITIALLY PROPOSED OUR WORK TO THE BOARD AT THAT TIME.

I THINK WE REMOVED IT WENT FROM THE DRAFT OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST YEAR.

BUT IF YOU KNOW, PART OF THE WHOLE REASON WHY WE DECIDED THAT WE WERE GOING TO SEND IT TO

[01:20:01]

AND I THINK WHAT WE HEARD FROM [INAUDIBLE] AT THAT MEETING LAST WEEK WAS, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE RESIDENTIAL IN THIS AREA AND WE THINK THESE PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE MORE PALATABLE IF IT COMES WITH THAT.

AND THAT'S FEEDBACK THAT ABSOLUTELY SHOULD MAKE IT BACK TO THE BOARD AS THEY'RE HELPING TO SORT OF BUILD ON OUR WORK AS WELL AS THIS ORDINANCE MOVES FORWARD.

SO I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY FODDER FOR OUR COMMUNICATION TO THE BOARD.

AND I FULLY UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY ARE COMING FROM WITH THAT COMMENT.

COMMISSIONER SNYDER. YOU'RE MUTED.

ALL RIGHT. SOMETIMES I WISH LIFE IN REAL LIFE WOULD MUTE ME.

IF WE'RE STILL ON LIAISON REPORTS.

I HAVE A REPORT FROM THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING.

SO THAT WAS AT THE END OF JANUARY ON THE TWENTY FIRST.

SO JUST A COUPLE OF TIDBITS HERE.

BASICALLY, THERE ARE THREE MAJOR ITEMS OF DISCUSSION.

ONE WAS THE LOCAL ROAD PROGRAM, THE 10 YEAR GOALS TO GET TO A [INAUDIBLE] RATING OF AN EIGHT THAT'S ON A SCALE OF ONE TO 10.

EIGHT IS GOOD.

AND AREAS OF FOCUS THIS YEAR ARE GOING TO BE LIKE THE RESIDENTIAL ROADS THAT ARE JUST SOUTH WEST OF LAKE LANSING.

SO [INAUDIBLE] THEY'LL BE RESURFACED.

AND THEN JUST SOMETHING OF NOTE, DURING THE MEETING THAT COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE] MENTIONED WAS THAT SOCIOECONOMIC EQUITY WAS AT THE FOREFRONT OF THE TOWNSHIPS ROAD IMPROVEMENT GOALS. SO IF YOU LOOK AT ANY OF THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT MAPS AVAILABLE ON THE TOWNSHIP WEBSITE, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S JUST A VARIETY OF AREAS THAT ARE GETTING FOCUS IN THIS PLAN. SO LOCAL ROAD PROGRAM, TOWNSHIP PATHWAYS PROJECT DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MAJOR FOCUS FOR THE PATHWAYS PROJECT IS THE PATHWAY FROM MSU TO LAKE LANSING.

A COUPLE OF INTERESTING POINTS.

THEY'RE LOOKING AT ADDING PERHAPS A RESTROOM ALONG THE ROUTE, PERHAPS ON OKEMOS ROAD NEAR THE INTER-URBAN TRAIL.

AND THEN ALSO AS THOSE ROADS THAT I MENTIONED ARE BEING RESURFACED SOUTHWEST OF LAKE LANSING THERE, PART OF THIS PATHWAY WILL TRAVERSE ALONG SHAW TO GET TO THAT FINAL CONNECTING POINT OF THE PARK AND THE LAKE, RATHER THAN HAVE THAT PATH BE ALONG MARSH ROAD, WHICH IS JUST NOT QUITE AS ENJOYABLE AS BEING ON A LESS BUSY ROAD.

A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS.

A NEW PATHWAY WAS PROPOSED TO INCREASE ACCESS TO EAST LANSING SPORTS COMPLEXES, AND THAT PATH WOULD CONNECT THE TOWNSHIP TO THE CITY OF EAST LANSING SPORTS COMPLEXES.

THAT'S ALONG TOWER AVENUE.

THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT SOME CONCERNS WITH THE LACK OF A SIDEWALK ON LAKE LANSING BETWEEN HAGEDORN AND HIGHGATE RIGHT IN FRONT OF [INAUDIBLE] ELEMENTARY.

CONCERNS ABOUT HIGH PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC, SPECIFICALLY KIDS.

AND DIRECTOR PERRY NOTED THAT THERE IS A PROPOSED PATHWAY THERE ON THE MAP.

SO THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF FOR ANYONE WHO HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.

COMMISSIONER TIM POTTER, HE DISCUSSED CONCERNS HE'S HEARD FROM RESIDENTS ABOUT SNOW AND ICE ALONG PATHWAYS.

AND DIRECTOR PERRY ADDRESSED THOSE CONCERNS.

HE EXPLAINED THAT WE DON'T USE SALT BECAUSE IT DAMAGES THE SEWERS OVER TIME AND ALSO BECAUSE IT DAMAGES PROPERTY AND LANDSCAPING.

SO THOSE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT DIFFERENT COMMISSIONERS HAD AND I MYSELF HAD.

AND IT WAS NICE TO GET ANSWERS TO THAT.

WHY WE DON'T USE SALT ON THE PATHWAYS.

INTERESTINGLY, WE HAVE SEVENTY FIVE MILES OF PATHWAYS AND IT TAKES FOUR TO SIX HOURS TO CLEAR THEM AND THEY START CLEARING THEM WHEN THERE'S TWO INCHES OF SNOW ON THEM, IN CASE YOU'RE WONDERING. AND COMMISSIONER POTTER ALSO AFTER DISCUSSING THE SALT AND HOW IT CAN BE NOT SO ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY.

HE MENTIONED SOMETHING CALLED A BEET JUICE [INAUDIBLE], WHICH I WAS VERY FASCINATED WITH.

I'D RECOMMEND CHECKING THAT OUT IF YOU'RE A NERD LIKE ME.

BUT BEET JUICE DEICER IS NON CORROSIVE AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS IN A RECENT MICHIGAN SENATE BILL APPARENTLY IN DECEMBER, THE GOVERNOR APPROVED A SENATE BILL 379 TO PILOT A

[01:25:03]

SO ANYWAY, IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING, INTERESTING THINGS.

AND THE BEET JUICE DEICER IS ACTUALLY BEING USED IN SOME MUNICIPALITIES ALREADY, LIKE FRANKENMUTH AND [INAUDIBLE].

AND THEN THE LAST DISCUSSION ITEM AT THAT MEETING WAS THE OKEMOS ROAD DOWNTOWN AREA DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT BRIDGE, THE OKEMOS ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT, CAMELBACK BRIDGE, RIGHT OVER THERE BY MOUNT HOPE AND FERGUSON PARK.

JUST THE DISCUSSION OF MAINTAINING A HISTORIC LOOK.

AND ALSO THERE IS DISCUSSION OF PLANS TO INCLUDE A PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK AND BRIDGE UNDERNEATH THE, YOU KNOW, THE I GUESS, THE TRAFFIC BRIDGE.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING.

SO THAT ABOUT SUMS IT UP.

ALL RIGHT. I'VE NEVER HAD TO CONSIDER GOING TO RESEARCH BEETS AFTER ONE OF THESE MEETINGS, BUT I MIGHT HAVE TO NOW.

ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY REPORTS? I CAN REPORT THAT THE ZBA HAS NOT MET SINCE I LAST TOLD YOU THAT THEY HAD NOT MET AND WE WILL SEE IF WE MEET ON THE 24TH.

WE'VE GOT A POTENTIAL-- PETER SHAKING HIS HEAD.

MAYBE NOT. WE HAVE INSIDE KNOWLEDGE.

I THOUGHT YOU HAD A MEETING SCHEDULED.

WELL, IT HASN'T BEEN CANCELED YET, RIGHT? I USUALLY FIND OUT ABOUT TOMORROW IF IT'S BEEN CANCELED, SO WE SHALL SEE.

YOU DO HAVE CASES FOR THE 24TH AND WE JUST GOT AN APPLICATION FOR THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH FOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.

I WILL HAVE A MORE INTERESTING LIAISON REPORT FOR YOU ALL NEXT TIME.

ANY OTHER LIAISON ON REPORTS? COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL. THANK YOU.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MET ON FEBRUARY 3RD.

MAIN TOPIC IS SOME FUNDS THAT THE TOWNSHIP BOARD HAS DEDICATED TO GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS TO SCHOOLS.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL REALLY INTERESTING PROPOSALS, PRE-PROPOSALS THAT HAVE BEEN FORWARDED TO STAFF FOR RAIN GARDENS AND OTHER KIND OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, BOTH AT HASLET AND OKEMOS SCHOOLS.

SO THE QUESTION BEFORE THE COMMISSION NOW IS HOW TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE BALANCED OVER TIME. THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IS ALSO PURSUING A TREE CITY USA DESIGNATION FOR THE TOWNSHIP, A LITTLE TRICKY BECAUSE THE WHOLE PROGRAM IS KIND OF AIMED MORE AT CITIES THAT OWN THEIR STREETS AND THEREFORE MANAGE THEIR OWN URBAN FORESTS.

AND THAT'S NOT REALLY THE SITUATION HERE IN A TOWNSHIP.

SO KIND OF STRUGGLING WITH THAT ONE.

AND JUST TO BUILD ON COMMISSIONER SNYDER'S REPORT ON THE ICING, THERE WAS A BIG DISCUSSION AT THE FOLLOWING GREEN DIALOGS THAT HAPPENS ON WEDNESDAY MORNINGS AT 9:00 ABOUT ALL THE POSSIBLE THINGS THAT YOU CAN PUT ON THE SIDEWALK TO MAKE THE ICE MELT.

AND IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, THE BEET JUICE WAS FOUND TO BE A CHALLENGE AT MSU, BECAUSE IF YOU PUT IT ON WHEN IT'S TOO WARM, THEN IT'S ACTUALLY A GROWTH MEDIUM AND IT PRODUCES A SLIPPERY CONDITION WITH SOME SLIME.

SO THEY'RE NOW USING SOME SORT OF A SALT BRINE AND IT'S A WHOLE RESEARCH AREA.

SO LUCKILY, WE'VE GOT THIS BIG UNIVERSITY NEXT TO US IS DOING ALL THE EXPERIMENTATION.

WE CAN BENEFIT FROM THAT.

SO WE'LL KEEP A CLOSE EYE ON IT.

AND EVERY TIME YOU GO FOR A WALK, IT SMELLS LIKE PICKLES.

COMMISSIONER BLUMER.

ONE MORE THING ABOUT SALT ON YOUR WALKWAY, I SALTED MY FRONT WALK, AND NOW I HAVE DEER OUT THERE EVERY NIGHT LICKING THE SIDEWALK.

DO THEIR TONGUES STICK TO THE PAVEMENT WHEN THEY LICK IT? ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE? ONCE, TWICE SOLD.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, EVERYONE.

APPRECIATE THE REPORT.

WE'LL GO ON TO ITEM-- EXCUSE ME, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10, PROJECT UPDATES, NEW APPLICATIONS WE HAVE NONE, SITE PLANS RECEIVED.

WE HAVE NONE. SITE PLANS APPROVED.

WE HAVE NONE. WHICH BRINGS US TO ITEM-- COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL.

YEAH, THANKS. I WAS WALKING THE OTHER DAY AND I SPOTTED AN OLD NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING STUCK IN FRONT OF THE OLD WHAT, BURGER KING OUT THERE ON GRAND RIVER ACROSS FROM THERE.

AND I COULDN'T QUITE READ IT.

AND I DON'T RECALL THAT.

I WAS WONDERING IF SOMEBODY CAN REMIND ME WHAT THAT ONE WAS.

YEAH. SO I HAVE TO PICK THAT ONE UP.

THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER. WE PUT THESE SIGNS UP AND THEN NEED TO GO BACK OUT AND PICK THEM UP. SO WE HAD SIGHT PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE DEMOLITION OF BURGER KING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW IT'S CALLED BUDDY'S PIZZA WITH A Y BUDDY'S PIZZA, NOT LIKE UNLIKE THE BUDDIES THAT'S HERE RIGHT NOW.

[01:30:01]

IT COMES VERY HERALDED IN TERMS OF BEING GOOD PIZZA.

SO WE DID A IT WAS ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT DIDN'T REQUIRE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL.

JUST ONE SITE PLAN REVIEW, WHICH WE DO HAVE A HEARING.

WE DO HAVE AN WE DO NOTICE FOR IT TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

SO WE APPROVE THAT.

I'M EMBARRASSED TO SAY IT WAS LATE SUMMER, SO I DO NEED TO PICK THAT SIGN UP.

I DIDN'T FORGET IT WAS STILL OUT THERE, BUT SO HOPEFULLY SOON THEY'RE GOING TO GET A DEMO PERMIT TO DEMO THAT BURGER KING, AND WE'LL START ON THAT BUDDY'S.

THERE WAS A ZBA MEETING THAT WE HAD ABOUT SIGN VARIANCES THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR.

THAT THEY WERE ONLY PARTIALLY APPROVED FOR.

SO THAT CAME IN FRONT OF US BACK IN JULY.

I THINK IT WAS THE SUMMER TIME LIKE THAT.

BUT, YEAH, I'M EXCITED AS A DETROIT EXPATRIATE, BUDDY'S PIZZA IS TERRIFIC AND IT'LL BE A WELCOME ADDITION TO THIS AREA.

NOT THAT WE DON'T HAVE GOOD PIZZA ALREADY.

OUR PIZZA IS FINE, BUT I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO IT.

ALL RIGHT, WE'LL GO ON TO PUBLIC REMARKS THEN AGENDA ITEM 11, LOOKS LIKE WE DO NOT HAVE

[11. PUBLIC REMARKS]

SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO JOIN THE MEETING QUICKLY, YOU CAN DO THAT AND RAISE YOUR HAND.

OTHERWISE YOU CAN GIVE US A CALL.

ONCE AGAIN, THE PHONE NUMBER IS FIVE ONE SEVEN THREE FOUR NINE ONE, TWO, THREE, TWO.

AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

AND WE ASK THAT YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AT THE BEGINNING FOR THE RECORD.

IT WILL GIVE EVERYONE A MOMENT TO DIAL THEIR PHONES AND WE'LL BE BACK VERY SHORTLY.

AND AS A NOTE FOR STEPHEN, IF WE CAN TYPE IN THE JEOPARDY THEME MUSIC FOR THIS POINT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AND ENTERTAINING.

WE FOUND A 10 HOUR RECORDING OF JEOPARDY MUSIC FOR YOU.

ANYONE ON THE PHONE, STEVEN? AND WITH HIS SILENCE WILL ASSUME NOT AND WILL GO ON TO ADJOURNMENT.

COMMISSIONER BLUMER DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? I JUST I HAD A QUESTION.

I RAN ACROSS, I WAS TRYING TO PREPARE FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE THAT I WAS APPOINTED TO AND SIGN AMENDMENTS.

I JUST WANTED TO LET PEOPLE KNOW I'VE READ THE SUPREME COURT CASE THAT THAT ALL CAME DOWN TO IT WAS A 2015 U.S.

SUPREME COURT CASE WRITTEN BY JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS.

BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY A MAJORITY, BUT IT WAS A UNANIMOUS OPINION.

THEY JUST WROTE SEVERAL DIFFERENT CONCURRING OPINIONS, BUT THEY ALL AGREED ON THAT ON THE TOPIC. BUT THEN I TRIED TO COPY AND PRINT BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE STARING AT A COMPUTER ALL DAY LONG. I JUST ASSUMED PRINT IT OFF AND READ IT.

THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE.

AND I RAN INTO SOMETHING I'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE, AND I WAS WONDERING IF IT WAS AN ANOMALY THAT PERHAPS PETER COULD GET AROUND FOR ME, AND THAT IS I WAS TOLD I HAD TO GET AN E CODE 360 PERMIT IN ORDER TO DOWNLOAD A COPY OF THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE.

I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT BEFORE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

I APPLIED FOR IT. AND THAT WAS LIKE A WEEK AND A HALF AGO AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING.

THEY ASKED YOU FOR AN E CODE THREE SIXTY WHAT? PERMIT. PERMIT? YEAH. TO COPY AND DOWNLOAD THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE.

AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I'LL LOOK INTO THAT BEFORE.

I HAVEN'T RUN ACROSS THAT EITHER.

I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIAL PERMISSIONS TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

BUT I CAN TAKE A LOOK AND LET YOU KNOW.

THANK YOU. YEAH. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO JUST DOWNLOAD THEM.

YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT.

RIGHT. OK, I'LL LOOK INTO IT.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

AND SPEAKING OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES, I DO PLAN ON STARTING TO ASSEMBLE THOSE AND I HAVE A TON OF INFORMATION PARTICULARLY ABOUT THAT TOPIC TO SHARE.

I'M JUST TRYING TO TACKLE ONE THING AT A TIME.

SO THAT'S MY GOAL IS TO AS WE GET KIND OF INTO THE NEXT PHASE OF THIS IN THE FORM BASED CODE, START TO GET SOME OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES GOING.

THANK YOU, PETER. WELL, THAT WILL GO AHEAD-- WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC REMARKS THAT DIDN'T HEAR ANY ANYONE TALKING ABOUT PHONE CALLS THAT WE HAD AND MOVE ON TO ADJOURNMENT.

ANYONE WHO WISHED TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

MOVED COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ADJOURNMENT SAY AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED.

AND THE MERIDIEN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION STANDS ADJOURNED AT EIGHT THIRTY THREE P.M..

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.