Apr 20, 2022 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting

SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF YOU HAVE.

[00:00:04]

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR TO HELP LLOYD OUT.

I APPRECIATE THAT, MR. HAYLOR.

THANK YOU. AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW RIGHT NOW.

[2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA]

DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS, MR. MOORE? YEAH. WHAT I'M GOING TO TELL YOU IS IF YOU BRING THIS PENCIL STRAIGHT OUT HERE.

YES. LOOKING AT THAT.

THAT'S WHERE THE AD WILL BE THIS WAY.

WHO WILL BE WHERE THE CORNER THAT JERRY'S.

THAT WOULD BE YOUR VIEW FROM YOUR HOME.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING? SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HELP HIM OUT?

[3. CORRECTIONS, APPROVAL AND RATIFICATION OF MINUTES]

BILL PIERS.

I'M A NEIGHBOR.

TWO HOUSES TO THE NORTH.

AND WHAT IS YOUR ADDRESS, SIR? 6103. GREAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

EAST LAKE DRIVE.

[4. COMMUNICATIONS]

HANG ON, HANG ON.

[5.A. ZBA CASE NO. 22-03-16-1 (2446 Jolly Road), E.W. Sparrow Hospital Association, 1215 East Michigan Avenue, Lansing, MI 48909]

YES, THAT'S OKAY. THIS IS VERY NEIGHBORLY.

I WILL SAY THIS IS QUITE A NEIGHBORHOOD YOU GOT.

IT LOOKS LIKE THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD IS HERE, WHICH I APPRECIATE.

IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYBODY HAS A STAKE IN THIS DECISION.

YES, SIR. GO AHEAD.

NO. WHAT JERRY IS SHOWING IS FROM THE GROUND SHOOTING UP.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT THIS WAY.

THIS IS STANDING ON LLOYD'S DECK, LOOKING PAST THE PROJECTION OF HIS HOUSE AT THAT SAME.

SO GERRI'S HOUSE ACTUALLY WILL BE OUT HERE.

IF YOU TAKE THIS LINE AND YOU GO ON A PERSPECTIVE FROM THE GROUND LEVEL, IT'S GOING TO BE OUT HERE NOT STRAIGHT UP AND DOWN LIKE THE PENCIL WAS.

YEAH. NOT LIKE THIS.

LIKE THIS IS.

GENTLEMEN, CAN YOU PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE THE LAKE IS IN REFERENCE TO WHERE THIS GIVES US THAT PERSPECTIVE LINE? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.

IF WE CAN GET THE KIND OF THE PERSPECTIVE AS OPPOSED TO I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT THE UPRIGHT OF THE HOME VERSUS THE THE DIAGONAL OF WHAT YOU ACTUALLY SEE WITH THAT PERSPECTIVE. BECAUSE, LOOK, THIS IS WHAT THIS IS THE VIEW LLOYD'S GOING TO HAVE, EXCEPT HIS VIEW.

HE'S GOT A SLIDING GLASS DOOR HERE AROUND THE CORNER AND HIS VIEW IS GOING TO START LIKE THIS.

AND THIS WAS THE HOUSE THAT GERRY WAS GOING TO HAVE HERE WITHOUT SHOWING THE DECK, BECAUSE HE HASN'T COME ON UP YET.

WE'RE GETTING AS MUCH, MUCH ASSISTANCE AS WE CAN HERE.

JUST YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

GATES ALL HERE. MY NAME IS LUKE BUTNER.

I LIVE AT 6097 EAST LAKE DRIVE, SO I'M.

THANK YOU, MR. BUTLER. YES.

JUST TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE, IF YOU BRING THE PHOTO BACK UP WHERE YOU COULD SEE THE DECK AND YOU ASK FOR ALIGNING IN RELATION IN RELATION TO WHERE THE LAKE IS.

SO YOU CAN SEE THAT EFFECT.

IF WE HAVE THAT, AGAIN, I CAN SHOW YOU WHERE WE ARE.

SO IF YOU HAVE THAT, IS THIS HERE? YES. THAT WAS THE PHOTO THEY WERE REFERENCING.

I FEEL THAT VERY QUICKLY.

SO THIS IS OUR DECK HERE, YOU CAN SEE.

SO THAT IS THE LINE GOING TO THE LAKE.

OKAY. SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY ORIENTATE YOURSELF TO SAY THAT THE BUILDING, IF IT COMES OUT TO SAY THIS POINT, THERE IS YOU KNOW, THIS IS THIS IS THE ANGLE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.

NOT NOT THAT WAY, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

YES. YES, THAT HELPS.

THANK YOU, MR. BUTLER. THIS IS ONE VIEW.

AND THIS IS THE VIEW LLOYD IS GOING TO SEE WHEN HE WALKS OUT ON HIS DECK.

EXCEPT THIS IS WHERE THE HOME WAS LOCATED, WHICH MEANS LLOYD IS LOOKING RIGHT DOWN HERE AT THE LAKE AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF IS NO LONGER VISIBLE

[00:05:10]

OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE, GENTLEMEN? YEAH. SHOULD WE PUT THIS ON? WELL, THAT'S A VIEW THROUGH YOUR . WE DO THIS ONE YET.

YEP. YEP.

THAT'S ACTUALLY HELPFUL.

WE DIDN'T SEE THIS ONE. BUT IF YOU COULD LEAVE THAT UP FOR JUST A MOMENT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE MORE.

BECAUSE YOU'RE PULLED BACK A LITTLE BIT MORE.

YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S HELPFUL.

THANK YOU. I REMEMBER FIELD-FOSTER HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU GENTLEMEN, JUST JUST SO THAT I AM BECAUSE WHEN YOU ASKED WHERE THE LINK WAS, I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IT WAS LIKE, EXACTLY.

AND AND SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONCERN IS.

SO THE DECK AT WHERE THE HOUSE WOULD BE, YOU'RE SAYING WHERE THE LATTICE IS RIGHT NOW AND THE TREE.

SO THE HOUSE ITSELF WOULD EXTEND TO, LET'S SAY, THAT SECOND TREE RIGHT THERE.

ONLY FURTHER THIS WAY.

BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TAKING INTO PERSPECTIVE.

I MEAN, YOU CAN'T GO LIKE THIS BECAUSE THAT ISN'T TRUE.

RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND YOU'D SEE THAT SIDE OF THE [INAUDIBLE] BUILDING THERE ALL THE WAY UP TO ABOUT RIGHT THERE, BECAUSE IT'S ON AN ANGLE.

AND SO I UNDERSTAND THE VIEW THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO THE LAKE.

SO I'M LOOKING AT THE SCREEN DOOR RIGHT HERE ON ON THIS FIRST HOUSE.

SO THE LAKE IS LITERALLY LIKE IN FRONT OF IT, THE LAKE TO THE SIDE TO THIS.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE PERIPHERY OF THE LAKE RIGHT OVER THERE.

LAKE GOES IN THAT DIRECTION.

THAT'S ABOUT THE EDGE OF THE LAKE THERE.

SO THEN IN ORDER TO SEE THE LAKE FROM THIS HOUSE WHERE THE WHERE THE SCREEN DOOR IS, YOU HAVE TO LOOK IN THAT.

NO, JUST STRAIGHT OUT.

SO, YEAH, THIS IS THE HARD TIME I'M HAVING.

SO THIS IS YOUR LAKEVIEW? YES. THIS IS THE INSIDE OF OUR HOUSE.

I'M JUANITA MOORE, LLOYD'S WIFE.

WELCOME. THANK YOU.

SO THIS IS THIS IS YOUR LAKE VIEW FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, NOW.

AND THIS IS WHAT YOU WOULD SEE IF YOU WERE STANDING ON YOUR DECK LOOKING AT THE LAKE WHERE I'M ACTUALLY INSIDE THE HOUSE.

WE HAVE A LOFT, BUT WE'VE GOT THE TRAPEZOID.

YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT TRAPEZOID.

YOU KNEW WHICH ONE I WAS TALKING ABOUT.

I'VE GOT TRAPEZOID, WINDOWS AND THEN WINDOWS ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE FRONT AND THE ONES ON THE LEFT, WE'RE.

JERRY STARTED WITH A STAKE.

THE FIRST STAKE THAT WAS IN THE GROUND WAS LIKE 20 FEET AHEAD OF THE LINE OF HOUSES.

THERE IS THERE IS A LINE.

AND THE MAIN HAS TO BE DETERMINED BY SOMEBODY OTHER THAN LLOYD OR JERRY.

BUT THE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH DOES THAT IS THIS SHOWING WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO WITH THE LINE THAT DOES THIS? I SEE A FLAG OR SOMETHING THERE IN ONE OF THESE WINDOWS.

NOW THAT'S WHAT I WAS THE THE FLAG WHERE HE STARTED.

MRS. MOORE, IF YOU COULD JUST COME BACK UP TO THE MICROPHONE JUST SO WE MAKE SURE ALL OF THIS IS IN THE PUBLIC RECORD.

THANK YOU, MA'AM. OKAY.

I SEE WHERE LLOYD IS STANDING THERE.

FROM THE INSIDE OF OUR HOUSE WAS WHERE GERRY'S HOUSE HAD HAD.

I HAVE A PICTURE OF A STAKE THAT SAID NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE HOUSE.

NOW, TO CLARIFY AND I WILL ASK MR. [INAUDIBLE] TO BE ABLE TO TO CLEAR THIS UP FOR US.

[00:10:03]

I IT'S NOT RELEVANT IF THAT'S NOT WHERE THIS HOUSE IS.

IT'S ABOUT JURY TOOK IT THE STAKEOUT TWO OR THREE DAYS AGO AND MOVED IT BACK TOWARDS THE EAST ABOUT SIX, SEVEN FEET TOWARDS THE ROAD.

TOWARD THE ROAD, EIGHT FEET SOMEWHERE.

OKAY. I APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT IN OUR ESTIMATION OF WHERE THE LINE OF THE ESTABLISHED COTTAGES, THE HOUSES, THE LINE THAT THAT WE CAN'T GO BEYOND BECAUSE OF A COVENANT IN A WARRANTY DEED. RIGHT.

YEAH. EVERYBODY IN THAT SUBDIVISIONS WARRANTY DEED.

YES. BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT.

AND I WILL BRING I WANT TO DISCUSS THAT WHEN WE GET TO OUR BOARD TIME BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.

SO I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT.

CAN IF YOU COULD TELL US MORE ABOUT THAT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR OUR DISCUSSION.

IT MAY BE THAT SOMEONE ELSE HAS THIS TASK TO DETERMINE THAT LINE BECAUSE LLOYD HAS DETERMINED IT AND JURY AND THEY'RE NOT IN AGREEMENT.

GERRY BROUGHT SOMEONE OUT AND HE PUT THE STATE THERE.

BUT WE'RE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH WHERE IT WAS.

OKAY. LET ME SHOW YOU SOMETHING HERE.

GRAB THIS HONEY.

YOU GOT IT. OH, DARN.

I GOTCHA. CAN YOU GET THAT WHOLE THING IN THERE SOMEHOW? WE'RE GOING TO TRY. HERE WE GO.

THAT'S HELPFUL. WELL, IT GO THAT WAYS A LITTLE BIT MORE? NO, THAT'S AS FAR AS I CAN GO. WELL, I THINK WE CAN GATHER.

THIS IS THE LINE OF WHERE THE HOMES ARE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.

LET ME CAN WE JUST CONFIRM THAT THIS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS THIS THIS CASE IN PARTICULAR WITH MR. [INAUDIBLE] HOUSE. IS THAT THE CURRENT PLAN THAT YOU HAVE, EVEN WITH REGARDS TO THE EIGHT FEET ADDITIONAL THAT YOU WERE YOU'RE REQUESTING

[6.A. ZBA CASE NO. 22-04-20-1 (6059 E. Lake Dr.), Jerry Fedewa Homes, 5570 Okemos Road, East Lansing, MI 48823]

SAY AGAIN, IS THIS THE CURRENT PLAN WHERE THEY HAVE THIS HOUSE? THAT PLAN IS NOT THE CURRENT PLAN.

SO UNFORTUNATELY, THE.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS VISUAL REFERENCE BECAUSE WE WANT TO SEE THAT LINE BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL.

BUT IF THIS IS NOT THE CURRENT PLAN, THIS ISN'T GOING TO HELP US TO MAKE A TRUE DETERMINATION.

LET ME TAKE A LOOK AT IT.

LET ME MENTION THIS TO YOU.

YES, MR. MOORE, GO AHEAD.

THERE'S TWO MEN AND A TRUCK HERE.

THEN THEY JOG OUT, MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW, 15, 20 FOOT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THEN YOU GOT A ONE, TWO, THREE.

AH, HONEST.

YOU COULDN'T GET IT ANY STRAIGHTER.

AND THEN BILL AND NANCY'S.

THEN HALF OF THEY'RE THE WAY FROM SIDE TO SIDE.

THE LINE TURNS TO THE SOUTH WEST SLIGHTLY.

YOU CAN SEE IT ON THERE.

HERE'S WHERE YOU LIVE.

THE I RUN A STRING FROM BILL AND NANCY'S DOOR HIT HER PEAK.

OF COURSE, WENT ACROSS GERRY'S DECK.

HIT THE CORNER OF LUKE'S HOUSE.

IT'S PERFECTLY STRAIGHT, DIDN'T WEAVE OR NOTHING.

I HAD TO PULL TIGHT AND NOTHING WAS INTRUDING IN THE WAY OF THAT STRING.

TODAY, IN FACT, LATE THIS AFTERNOON, I DID ANOTHER STRING FROM JERRY'S DECK.

SAME LINE WENT RIGHT BY LUKE'S HOUSE.

CLOSE TO IT.

MAYBE THREE INCHES.

BECAUSE THERE WAS A TROUGH THERE.

[00:15:03]

WHICH IS THAT IT'S SET BACK, ALWAYS HAS BEEN FOR 60 YEARS OR LONGER.

COME BY DON AND BRENDA'S HOUSE.

THE SAME LINE.

SAME STRING CAME BY ROGERS HOUSE BY ABOUT A FOOT.

IS SIT THERE? YEAH.

ROGER. GINA.

SEE HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THAT LINE.

AND THEY'RE EIGHT, NINE DOWN TO THE LAST HOUSE.

YOU CAN SEE THAT RIGHT THERE WAS WITHIN THE FOOT OF IT.

SO THAT THOSE LINES RIGHT THERE WERE WITHIN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER ABOUT SIX INCHES.

NOW, MR. MOORE, SO WE'RE CLARIFYING THIS LINE WOULD BE THE DEED LINE.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO OR OR THE LINE WITH WHICH THE HOMES ARE THE THE THE EDGES OF THE HOMES? SO NOTHING.

THE CHALLENGE FOR US IS GOING TO BE THIS IS NOTHING NECESSARILY ENFORCEABLE, BUT JUST MAYBE HOW THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN BUILT TO ACCOMMODATE ALL THE NEIGHBORS.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY? AMAZING HOW STRAIGHT THAT WAS.

BUT ONE OTHER THING.

RIGHT HERE ON GERRY'S HOUSE.

WHERE IS IT? IT'S RIGHT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN.

RIGHT THERE. WHERE YOUR FINGER. THERE YOU GO.

RIGHT WHERE YOUR WHERE YOUR INDEX FINGER IS.

THERE. THERE.

YES. YOU CAN SEE.

WERE THAT WERE, IN FACT, THAT STRING GOES KITTY CORNER ACROSS HIS DECK RIGHT THERE.

NOW, THIS IS WHAT'S EXISTING.

THIS THIS LINE IS WHAT'S EXISTING.

THE DECK THAT'S THERE, NOT WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED.

CORRECT. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

MEMBER DESCHAINE, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I CAN MAKE A MOTION.

EXCUSE ME, SIR. I APPRECIATE YOUR INFORMATION, BUT THE APPLICANT IS PREPARED TO AMEND HIS PROPOSAL, WHICH WILL CHANGE ALL THE MATERIAL FACTS WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW.

AND I WOULD PROPOSE WE TABLE THIS APPLICATION FOR ZBA CASE NUMBER 2204 20 26099 EAST LAKE DRIVE ONTO OUR NEXT MEETING.

WE HAVE SOME NEW DRAWINGS OF THE PROPOSAL WITH THE PROPOSED REVISIONS IN THERE AND THE LAYOUT OF THE HOME ON THIS LOT.

YEAH I WOULD SUPPORT.

SUPPORTED BY THIS IS A MOTION TO TABLE WITH SUPPORT FROM FROM MEMBER KULHANEK.

I WOULD TO TO DISCUSS THIS MOTION.

I WANT TO I WANT TO SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS.

DO ANY OF THE OTHER I WOULD LIKE EVERYBODY TO BE ABLE TO BE HEARD TONIGHT.

THEY WANT TO BE HEARD. SO IF YOU CAME AND YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD, I WOULD LOVE YOU TO BE ABLE TO COME UP.

AND TO ADD, I DO APPRECIATE THE MATERIALS THAT YOU BROUGHT FORWARD.

AND I THINK WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO US IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE CHALLENGING BECAUSE THIS ISN'T WHAT THE PROPOSED BUILD IS.

AND WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT THAT IN ORDER TO MAKE A GOOD DECISION EITHER WAY.

SO THAT SAID, WHILE ALL THESE MATERIALS ARE REALLY HELPFUL VISUALLY, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE CURRENT WITH THAT EIGHT FOOT, I WANT TO SEE THAT EIGHT FOOT SO WE CAN SEE WHERE IT SITS ON THAT LOT IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE NEIGHBORS.

MR. FEDOWA, COME ON UP.

THE OTHER THING I WILL SAY, AND I THINK I CAN SPEAK FOR MOST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HERE, AND AS MR. BEDOYA COMES UP, HE CAN HE CAN JOIN US WITH THE STATEMENT.

BUT CAN I SAY ONE OTHER THING? YES, GO AHEAD, MR. MOORE.

OH. WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT TEN, 11 FEET, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

ACTUALLY, IT'S 13 FEET BEFORE I THINK JERRY MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT MOVING IT TOWARDS THE LAKE EIGHT FEET OR SO.

NO, MOVING IT TOWARDS THE ROAD.

SEE, THIS IS THE IMPORTANT TO THE ROAD.

I'M SORRY. YES, YES, YES.

BUT JERRY'S WHERE HIS PARKING AREA IS.

HE'S GOT PLENTY OF, I BELIEVE HE COULD PARK EIGHT OR NINE CARS THERE.

HE'S WORRIED ABOUT PARKING CARS AND HIS DRIVEWAY AND THE ROAD SIDE.

[00:20:05]

GET HIM IN LINE WITH THIS HERE, LINE HERE.

I THINK IF I CAN, IF I MAY, I THINK TO SUMMARIZE WHAT I'M HEARING FROM A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORS IS YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN EQUAL VIEW OF THE LAKE FOR ALL THE HOMES IN THE LINE THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED PREVIOUSLY.

CAN I MAKE THAT STATEMENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE SPOKEN? SO THAT SAID, I DO THINK THAT WE OWE IT TO MR. FEDOWA AS YOUR NEIGHBOR, TO GIVE HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A CASE THAT IS MORE IN LINE WITH THE VIEW AND WITH THE THE SETBACKS, BECAUSE IT'S A CHALLENGE ONE THING.

SO I DO I VERY, VERY MUCH RESPECT THAT, THAT EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS TO SEE THE SAME RESULT, WHICH IS MR. FEDOWA BEING ABLE TO BUILD, BUT ALSO EVERYBODY ELSE MAINTAINING WHAT THEY HAVE CURRENTLY.

ONE THING IN PARTICULAR, EVEN IF HIS HOUSE IS BACK IN LINE.

SITTING IN OUR LIVING ROOM, WE CAN SEE THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS LEGAL, WHICH IS OKAY.

YES. I THINK, UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET YOU AN UNIMPEDED VIEW OF THE LAKE.

BUT WE WILL TRY TO AS WE DO AS A BOARD TO MAKE THE BEST DECISION FOR THE TOWNSHIP AND FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS.

THAT IS GOING TO BE EQUITABLE FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS.

CLARIFICATION. YES, MRS. MOORE, COME OVER TO THE MICROPHONE JUST SO WE CAN HEAR YOU A LITTLE BIT TABLING THIS.

WILL WHO WILL DECIDE WHAT THE LINE IS? WE CAN'T DEFEND OR DISAGREE ABOUT WHERE THE LINE IS.

WE HAVE TO KNOW WHERE THE LINE IS TO KNOW WHETHER SOMEONE'S GOING OVER IT OR NOT.

SO UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS NOT ENFORCEABLE BY THE TOWNSHIP.

IT IS NOT. THIS IS NOT, MY UNDERSTANDING, AND I WOULD ASK KEITH TO KIND OF GIVE ME THE THE PROPER VERBIAGE, BUT THAT THIS IS A DEED RESTRICTION WHICH IS NOT ENFORCEABLE BY THE TOWNSHIP.

SO WE DON'T HAVE WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO CREATE THAT LINE.

I THINK THAT AS NEIGHBORS, IF YOU CAN COME TO A RESOLUTION, THAT IS THE BEST CASE, BECAUSE THAT IS EVERYBODY HAS A STAKE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE HAVE SO DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT THINK THEY HAVE THE RIGHT LINE, THOUGH.

WELL, I WILL POINT OUT, WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE DIFFERING OPINIONS AND COME TO A CONSENSUS.

SO I DO THINK THAT I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL OF YOU NEIGHBORS TO SPEAK AND COME UP WITH A DETERMINATION TOGETHER AND TO LISTEN TO ONE ANOTHER AND TO WORK WELL BECAUSE BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS TO HAVE AN UNPLEASANT SITUATION IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

CORRECT. WE ALL WANT TO I MEAN, CAN YOU IMAGINE IF EVERYBODY WAS ARGUING ABOUT THESE WHERE THESE HOMES ARE LOCATED AND YOU ALL HAVE SIT OUT THERE ON YOUR DECKS AND LOOK AT THE LAKE AND GO, OH, WELL, I DON'T LIKE THAT NEIGHBOR.

I MEAN, WE HAVE TO LIVE NEXT TO EACH OTHER SO WE CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO THIS.

I PROMISE YOU THAT.

SO WHAT I WANT TO HEAR IS THAT EVERYBODY IS WORKING TOGETHER.

WE'RE ALL BEING NICE ON THE PLAYGROUND AND COMING UP WITH AN EQUITABLE SOLUTION.

I WILL SIT DOWN.

MRS. MOORE, I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO LEAD THAT DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

AND I AND I. YEP.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU COMING UP HERE.

REMEMBER. GO AHEAD. WELL, FIRST, LET ME HAVE MR. CHAPMAN, YOU WERE GOING TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE COVENANT.

YES. TO MY SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.

THE CHAIR EXPLAINED IT WONDERFULLY.

THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, AND ALSO ENCOURAGE THE RESIDENTS TO COME TO A CONSENSUS ON THE COVENANT LINE AS WELL.

I THINK I THINK IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH THAT, THAT IS THE BEST CASE SCENARIO.

AND I WOULD SAY AS OUR BOARD, THOUGH, THE TOWNSHIP CANNOT RECOGNIZE IT AND WE CAN'T ENFORCE IT, THAT WE CAN USE THAT COVENANT LINE IN FURTHER TERMINATIONS IF NECESSARY.

IF SOMEBODY IS ESTABLISHED, WE CAN WE CAN APPLY THAT, WE CAN'T ENFORCE IT, BUT WE COULD USE THAT IN OUR IN OUR DELIBERATIONS, IF NECESSARY, FOR ANYTHING GOING FURTHER.

SO I THINK IT BEHOOVES EVERYBODY TO COME UP WITH THAT SOLUTION.

YEAH. MR. PEARCE PEARCE, I HAVE JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS TO ADD SINCE YOU'RE MAKING A DETERMINATION WHERE THIS IS POSSIBLE.

WE ARE NOT MAKING A DETERMINATION TONIGHT.

WE DON'T YOU TAKE A LOOK AT HIS ENGINEER'S DRAWING OR SURVEYOR DRAWING.

[00:25:04]

ON THIS SIDE OF THE HOUSE, IT'S FIVE AND A QUARTER.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE SEVEN FOOT SETBACK OBSERVED FOR A 36 FOOT WIDE HOUSE ON A 50 FOOT LOT.

I WOULD ASK FOR CLARIFICATION.

JUST, MR. PEARCE. I ASK MR. CHAPMAN, IS THIS WITHIN THE SETBACK? SO THE SETBACK IS SEVEN FEET.

HOWEVER, IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, YOU CAN GO DOWN TO FIVE FEET IF YOU BUILD WITH FIRE RESISTANT MATERIAL.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

SO THIS SO SO MR. PIERCE, THIS WOULD BE ALLOWED IF IT WAS BUILT WITH FIRE RESISTANT MATERIALS.

I WOULD, THOUGH, GENTLEMEN, LIKE TO GIVE MR. DOYLE, BECAUSE HE IS THE APPLICANT, THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE.

YES, WE DO HAVE. WELL, WE HAVE.

YES, WE MOVE ON THE MOTION, PLEASE.

YES, WE HAVE. WE WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, GENTLEMEN.

SO I WANT TO IF YOU MOVE IT THAT WAY, THAT IMPROVES HIS VIEW.

SIR, I WOULD VERY MUCH ENCOURAGE YOU TO.

NOW, THIS IS NOT A VARIANCE THAT WE HAVE ANY SAY IN.

THIS IS NOT AS LONG AS HE BUILDS WITH FIRE RESISTANT MATERIALS, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DETERMINE.

SO, AGAIN, I WOULD ENCOURAGE NEIGHBORS TO SPEAK WITH NEIGHBORS AND COME UP WITH A CONSENSUS.

BUT I WOULD LOVE TO ALLOW MR. FEDOWA TO COME UP BECAUSE I HAVE ONE MORE THING TO SAY AND I'M THE CHAIR SO I CAN SAY WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY.

MATERIALS. BUT THIS IS PERTAINING TO THIS.

BUT SIR, WE ARE GOING TO POSTPONE THIS CASE.

THIS WILL BE DISCUSSED AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

WILL BE DISCUSSED AGAIN AT THE NEXT MEETING BEFORE THEN.

WE HAVE YOU ALL, AS NEIGHBORS CAN COME TOGETHER AND DISCUSS THIS AND THEN COME BACK BASED ON HIS NEWEST PLAN.

YES. MEMBER KULHANEK? TONIGHT IT WILL NOT.

MEMBER KULHANEK, GO AHEAD. THANK YOU.

I DID JUST WANT TO REALLY QUICKLY.

GENTLEMEN, ONE OF OUR MEMBERS IS SPEAKING.

THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO REALLY QUICKLY SPEAK TO WHY I SUPPORTED THE MOTION, IS THAT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION BEFORE US IS FOR THE VARIANCE OF THE 14.1.

GENTLEMEN, ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD IS CURRENTLY SPEAKING.

THANK YOU.

MEMBER KULHANEK, GO AHEAD.

SO THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE IS TO BE WITHIN 14 OR SO FEET.

[INAUDIBLE] I'M JUST PARAPHRASING HERE 14.6 IN THE MEANTIME, WE'VE HEARD THAT THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO POTENTIALLY CHANGE THAT TO MAKE IT SMALLER.

AND FORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT WHAT'S BEEN IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT AND THEREFORE THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS ADVERTISED OUT TO THE PUBLIC IS A VARIANCE OF 14 FEET.

HE WANTS TO CHANGE IT TO, LET'S SAY, SIX FEET OR SOMETHING, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT'S ADVERTISED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION.

SO THAT'S WHY I WAS SUPPORTING THE MOTION TO TABLE THIS IN ORDER TO GIVE ALL THESE GENTLEMEN, INCLUDING THE APPLICANT, TIME TO KIND OF WORK THESE THINGS OUT. BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S STILL SOME I DON'T WANT TO SAY MISCOMMUNICATION I GOT, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM.

THAT'S WHAT I'LL SAY. BUT IT'LL GIVE MORE TIME.

I KNOW THAT PROBABLY DOESN'T HELP THE APPLICANT WITH MOVING THIS BACK POTENTIALLY INTO MAY, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE AT THIS TIME THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST OPTION FOR YOU RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

MEMBER KULHANEK. ON THAT NOTE, I WILL SAY MY MY LAST BIT OF DISCUSSION WITH THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS MR. FEDORA. THANK YOU.

I'M GOING TO SAY SOMETHING FIRST.

I DON'T WANT TO LOOK AT THE MAP AGAIN FOR THIS MOMENT.

I JUST WANT A COUPLE OF MOMENTS OF LISTENING, AS I SAID TO THE OTHER MEMBERS AND EVERYBODY HERE THAT'S IN ATTENDANCE, I THINK IT BEHOOVES YOU TO TAKE THIS TIME TO SPEAK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT IS GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO LIVE COMFORTABLY AND AMICABLY IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS.

SO I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS TRYING TO GET IT BACK AND TRYING TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS.

BUT WE NEED TO SEE THAT.

AND THE HARD PART IS WITH EVERYBODY ELSE'S MATERIALS IS NOT HAVING THE DIRECT AND NEWEST VERSION, WHICH IS ACTUALLY AN ADDITIONAL.

SO THE 14.67, HE WANTS TO ADD EIGHT FEET TO THAT.

SO I WENT THE OTHER WAY.

YEAH. MY APOLOGIES.

SO THAT'S WE NEED TO SEE IT.

ABSOLUTELY. SO AND I THINK I TRULY BELIEVE THAT ESPECIALLY WITH THIS COVENANT LINE IT IS IN YOUR BEST INTEREST TO GO TO YOUR NEIGHBORS.

YOU'RE BUILDING ALSO IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO YOU REALLY YOU HAVE A STAKE HERE.

YEAH. SO AND YOU HAVE ROOTS HERE.

WHEN YOU SAY YOU WANT TO SEE IT.

I WOULD MAYBE A FIELD TRIP TO THE SITE AND LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT .

[00:30:03]

I MEAN, THOSE WERE THOSE WERE FANTASTIC.

BY DOING THAT, YOU WILL SEE THE COMPROMISE THAT I AM PROPOSING IS VERY REASONABLE.

YES. AND THE JUST SO YOU KNOW.

CAN YOU HELP ME? YEAH.

BUT MR. PETER, THE CHALLENGE HERE IS THAT WE'RE.

[INAUDIBLE] THAT WE'RE GOING TO VOTE TO POSTPONE.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO LOOK AT ANY MORE MAPS BECAUSE WE MOVE ON.

CORRECT? WE DO WANT TO MOVE ON.

WE WANT TO MOVE ON BECAUSE WE WANT TO GIVE YOU THE CHANCE.

YOU'RE GOING TO TELL US STUFF, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT MAKING A DETERMINATION ON THIS VARIANCE TONIGHT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE EVERYTHING WE NEED IN HERE.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY AND WE WANT TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY.

I'M JUST ASKING YOU ALL TO COME TOGETHER, TO WORK TOGETHER, FIGURE IT OUT, AND COME BACK TO US WITH EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.

AND WE CAN GO FROM THAT, THAT WE HAVEN'T INTERACTED FOR THE LAST TWO WEEKS ON THIS.

YEAH. NO, I CAN TELL THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INTERACTION WE'VE TRIED.

YES, BUT I THINK WE CAN, WE CAN ALL TRY HARD.

NOT DONE TRYING. YEAH.

WE'RE GOING TO KEEP TRYING.

YOU GOT HIM ON. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

THIS IS A VOTE TO APPROVE TABLING THIS CASE FOR ZBA CASE NUMBER 22-04-20-2 6099 EAST LAKE DRIVE AND.

MEMBER KULHANEK? YES.

AND MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER? YES. MEMBER DESCHAINE? YES. AND THE CHAIR VOTES YES.

SO YOUR VARIANCE REQUEST HAS BEEN TABLED AND WE WILL SEE YOU NEXT.

BLOCK YOU KNOW WHAT, THE DATE, MAY 18TH.

THERE YOU GO. ALL RIGHT.

WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON BECAUSE WE SAW TWO MORE CASES, ZBA CASE NUMBER 22-04-20-3 4790 SOUTH HAGEDORN ROAD.

I HAD A PLAZA 300 SOUTH WASHINGTON, LANSING, MICHIGAN, 48933.

MR. CHAPMAN, GO AHEAD.

OKAY. SO.

OKAY, SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO INSTALL A 100.5 SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING SIGN AT 4790 HAGEDORN ROAD.

MEMBERS OF THE CROWD. I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO PLEASE ALLOW MR. CHAPMAN THE CHANCE TO STATE HIS CASE, AND YOU CAN SPEAK OUTSIDE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. GO AHEAD. I'LL START OVER.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO INSTALL A 100.5 SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING SIGN AT 4790 HAGEDORN ROAD.

THIS PROPOSED SIGN WILL REPLACE AN 18 FOOT TALL 122 SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING SIGN, WHICH WAS LEGALLY INSTALLED IN 1993.

SO RECENTLY THIS SIGN WAS DESTROYED BY A TRAIN THAT RIPPED DOWN THE POWER LINES, CAUSING THE SIGN TO CATCH FIRE.

SO ON THE SIGN LISTED VARIOUS TENANTS THAT OCCUPY THE HANNAH PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER.

AND AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION, THE SIGN MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THERE WAS A ZONING AMENDMENT IN 1996 WHICH GAVE US OUR CURRENT STANDARDS AND SUBSEQUENTLY MADE THAT SIGN NON-CONFORMING.

SO HANNA PLAZA IS A 75,000, APPROXIMATELY 75,000 SQUARE FOOT SHOPPING CENTER ON A 9.9 ACRE PARCEL AT 4790. HAGEDORN ROAD WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1983, AND THE PROPOSED 100.5 SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING SIGN IS 11 FEET TALL ON THE MAIN CABINET DISPLAYS TENANTS, WHICH WILL BE 80.5 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.

AND THEN ON TOP THERE'S A 18 SQUARE FOOT SECTION THAT SAYS KIND OF PLAZA.

SO OUR ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT SIGNS THAT ARE TALLER THAN FIVE FEET BE NO GREATER THAN 28 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.

AND THE SIGN BEING 100.5 SQUARE FEET REQUIRES A VARIANCE OF 72.5 SQUARE FEET.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN, WITH THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE TO COME UP AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

SIR, THANK YOU FOR BEING PATIENT WITH US TODAY FOR AN INTERESTING EVENING.

HAVING LIVED DOWN THE LAKE FOR MANY YEARS, I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR CONCERNS.

THERE YOU GO. WELCOME.

ANOTHER LAKE LANSING RESIDENT.

I DON'T LIVE THERE ANY LONGER, BUT I DID FOR A LONG TIME.

I APPRECIATE ALL THE INTEREST AND CONCERNS.

FANTASTIC. HAVING BUILT A NEW HOME THERE AT ONE TIME.

AND I MEAN, SO I UNDERSTAND YOU'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE, I THINK.

NO, I ACTUALLY BUILT MINE WITHIN ALL THE.

IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT, BUT IT WAS A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO.

WELL, THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE THAT.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MARK KLAUS AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF IDE HANNA PLAZA.

ACTUALLY, I DEVELOPMENT, BUT THE ENTITY THAT OWNS THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS CALLED IDE HANNA PLAZA.

[00:35:06]

BUT THE WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW IS WHAT THE SIGN LOOKED AT HANNA PLAZA ON DECEMBER 10TH OF 2021.

HOW HOPE I GOT THESE ALL ON DECEMBER 11TH.

THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE.

THE I REFER TO IT AS THE TRAIN VERSUS THE POWER POLES FIASCO.

ON THAT DAY WHEN WE HAD I LOOKED IT UP, I WAS SITTING HERE TONIGHT, I DON'T REMEMBER.

IT WAS VERY WINDY, ALTHOUGH WE'VE HAD SOME WINDY DAYS RECENTLY, BUT APPARENTLY THE GUSTS WERE 50 TO 60 MILES AN HOUR ON DECEMBER 11TH.

AND AS I'M SURE ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE, BEING RESIDENTS OF THE TOWNSHIP, THE WIND CAUGHT THE POWER LINES.

THE POWER LINES BECAME AT ONE WITH THE TRAIN AND THE TRAIN MANAGED TO GO DOWN THE TRACKS ALONG ADJACENT TO HAGEDORN THERE AND PULL POWER LINE PULL ACTUALLY PULL THE POWER POLES RIGHT OUT OF THE GROUND, BROKE THEM.

AND THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THE POWER LINES ABOVE THE SIGN CAME DOWN ON THE SIGN AND BURNED THE SIGN, DESTROYED IT, KNOCKED IT, WHATEVER.

I MEAN, IT JUST THE SIGN IS GONE NOW.

IT WAS IT WAS NOT SALVAGEABLE.

THE RESULT WAS THAT THE TENANTS THERE OF HANNA PLAZA HAVE NOW HAD NO VISIBILITY FROM HAGEDORN ROAD.

THE, UNLIKE MANY OF OUR RETAIL CENTERS TODAY THAT ARE BUILT UP CLOSE TO A ROAD WHICH IS VERY POPULAR WITH THE PARKING BEHIND AND TRYING TO MAKE IT A WALKABLE AREA, THIS WAS DEVELOPED IN 1993 AND THE DESIGN WAS TO PUT THE BUILDING BACK FURTHER.

SOME OF THE LOCATIONS ARE ABOUT 700 FEET FROM HAGEDORN ROAD AND THE PARKING IS IN FRONT.

SO THOSE, ESPECIALLY THE TENANTS THAT ARE ALONG THE BACK PART, THE FURTHER THE VISIBILITY, NO ONE CAN SEE THEIR SIGNAGE OR EVEN KNOW THAT THEY'RE THERE WITHOUT HAVING THE VISIBILITY ALONG.

HAGEDORN. HAGEDORN ALSO IS A BOULEVARD, SO AS LONG AS YOU ARE TRAVELING HERE, IF YOU'RE TRAVELING NORTH ON HAGEDORN, YOU MAY HAVE A LITTLE BETTER VISIBILITY. IF YOU'RE TRAVELING SOUTH ON HAGEDORN, YOU HAVE EVEN LESS BECAUSE YOU'RE ANOTHER A COUPLE OF HUNDRED FEET AWAY FROM THE SITE.

OUR REQUEST IS SIMPLY TO ALLOW US TO PROVIDE OUR TENANTS WITH THE SAME TYPE, THE SAME FRONTAGE, IF YOU WILL, OR FACE SIZE OF A SIGN THAT THEY HAD ON DECEMBER 10TH.

THE WE HAVE REDUCED THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING OR THE SIGN ITSELF FROM 18 FEET DOWN TO 11.

SO WE'VE TAKEN IT DOWN SEVEN FEET, BUT WE'VE MAINTAINED THE SAME, IF YOU WILL, FACE OF THAT SIGN BEING 16 AND A HALF FEET WIDE.

AND I THINK WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 101 HALF SQUARE FEET OF OF OF SIGNAGE, OF WHICH I THINK A PORTION OF THAT WHICH IN THE DOCUMENT I PROVIDED YOU IS MAINLY FOR THE HANNA PLAZA NAME, BECAUSE AS LONG AS IT'S BEEN HERE SINCE 1993, MANY PEOPLE REFER TO IT THAT WAY.

AND IT HELPS PEOPLE TO KNOW THE NAME AS OPPOSED TO THE THE NAME OF THE TENANT SPECIFICALLY.

AND ALSO WHAT WE DIDN'T HAVE BEFORE IS THE ADDRESS, THE 4790, WHICH IS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE NOW, AND CERTAINLY A GOOD IDEA TO PUT THE ADDRESS RIGHT THERE IN FRONT.

SO WE'RE ADDING THAT AS WELL.

SO OUR REQUEST IS TO REPLACE THE SIGN.

I REALIZE THAT THERE IS A VARIANCE REQUIRED.

WE CERTAINLY IT IS NOT CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE HAD ANY CONTROL OVER.

AND I DID PROVIDE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE CRITERIA THAT THE ORDINANCE HAS.

AND I BELIEVE WE'VE MET EACH ONE OF THOSE.

AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF EMAILS AND LETTERS FROM OUR TENANTS.

I DIDN'T THEY DIDN'T GET YOU.

I HAVE THOSE IF THAT HAS ANY IMPACT ON YOU.

BUT I'M SURE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THAT EVERYONE THAT RENTS FROM US IS SAYING, PLEASE GET THIS BACK AS SOON AS YOU CAN.

THEY'VE ALREADY GONE WITHOUT IT FOR FOUR MONTHS.

IT'S A DIFFICULT TIME FOR RETAILERS ANYWAY, AND IT HAS BEEN THIS HAS BEEN A VERY DIFFICULT LAST OVER TWO YEARS.

AND WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN.

OWNERS OF THAT BUILDING TO ASSIST OUR TENANTS IN BEING SUCCESSFUL IN THEIR BUSINESSES HERE IN THE TOWNSHIP.

SO I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME ON DOING THIS THIS EVENING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. REMIND ME OF YOUR NAME AGAIN, SIR.

I BEG YOUR PARDON? YOUR NAME AGAIN, MARK KLAUS.

THANK YOU, MR. KLAUS.

ON THAT NOTE, IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE THIS EVENING, WE WILL GET INTO OUR BOARD TIME, WHICH I NEVER GOT TO GET INTO LAST TIME TODAY.

THAT'S OKAY.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

WHEN I FIRST REVIEWED THIS, I JUST WANT TO.

I HAD A LOT OF THOUGHTS, BUT I KIND OF.

I GUESS. LET ME BACK UP. LET ME I JUST WANT TO QUICKLY SAY THAT I PERSONALLY DON'T SEE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THIS.

[00:40:03]

YOU CAN CALL IT AN ACT OF NATURE.

I'M NOT SURE. I MEAN, THE WIND IS AN ACT OF NATURE.

TRAIN BEING POWERED BY MAN, HITTING A POLE AND DROPPING THE LINES.

THAT'S DEBATABLE AND PROBABLY BE MORE OF A QUESTION FOR STAFF, BUT IT WAS A LEGAL SIGN BEFOREHAND AND EVEN THEN IT WAS IT WAS NONCONFORMING WITH MULTIPLE ASPECTS, WITH SIZE, WITH HEIGHT. WE TOTALLY APPRECIATE OR AT LEAST APPRECIATE AS A BOARD MEMBER THAT YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY GOING TO DECREASE THE SIZE OF THIS, NOT THE SIZE, BUT THE HEIGHT OF THE SIGN TO MAKE THE HEIGHT THEY ACTUALLY CONFORMING NOW.

SO YOU'RE ACTUALLY DECREASING THAT PART OF THE NON-CONFORMITY OF THE SIGN, WHICH IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.

AND TYPICALLY, IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE A STRUCTURE THAT'S NONCONFORMING, THAT'S DESTROYED BY NATURE, YOU'RE MORE OR LESS ALLOWED TO ALMOST PUT IT BACK TO WHAT IT WAS BEFOREHAND, BEFORE IT.

AND YOU'RE NOT EXACTLY DOING THAT.

YOU'RE ACTUALLY DECREASING THAT NONCONFORMITY WHEN YOU'RE PUTTING IT BACK, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE YOU'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF SIGN, BUT YOU'RE KEEPING IT THE EXACT SAME. SO YOU'RE NOT INCREASING THAT NONCONFORMITY OR THAT SIZE OF THAT SIGN.

SO THAT'S MY POINTS OF WHY I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE AN ISSUE WITH THIS BEING THAT IT WAS A MANMADE DESTRUCTION AND NO POWER OF THEIR OWN.

AND THE EFFECT OF THE SIGN IS ACTUALLY BEING LESSEN FROM THE DECREASE IN THE HEIGHT.

SO I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT.

[INAUDIBLE] I THINK YOU MAKE EXCELLENT POINTS AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT MY THINKING READING THIS IN MY PACKET SO THANK YOU ELOQUENTLY PUT.

MEMBER DESCHAINE? AND I'M LOOKING AT YOUR THE PROPOSED RENOVATION THAT YOU HAD PLANNED FOR THIS COMPARED TO THE NEW SIGN I LIKE THE NEW SIGN BETTER THE LOWER PROFILE CLOSER TO THE GROUND.

I THINK IT'LL ACTUALLY BE MUCH EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO FIND THE COMMERCIAL TENANTS ARE LOOKING FOR BEING UP HIGH, SPREAD OUT LIKE THAT.

SO I THINK YOUR NEW SIGN IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE PROPOSED REVISION TO THE SITE.

I HAVE TO GIVE TO JIM JOHNSON FROM JOHNSON SIDE THE CREDIT FOR HELPING US DO THAT.

BUT I THINK OUR INTENT WAS TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT AND TO HELP OUR TENANTS BE SEEN.

SO I CERTAINLY WHEN HE COMES BEFORE YOU NEXT TIME, MAKE SURE YOU THANK HIM AS WELL, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT.

ON THAT NOTE. ON THAT NOTE, I THINK I CAN JUST GO THROUGH CRITERIA.

AND TO BE HONEST, I DON'T I CAN MEET ALL THESE FAIRLY EASILY.

SO CRITERIA, ONE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST.

I CAN MEET THAT. AND THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT SELF CREATED.

THIS IS THE THE EPITOME OF NOT SELF CREATED CIRCUMSTANCES.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CALL IT.

I DON'T THINK WE CALL IT AN ACT OF NATURE NECESSARILY, BUT IT'S AN ACT OF WE DIDN'T DO THIS AS CRITERIA NUMBER THREE, A STRICT INTERPRETATION ENFORCEMENT OF THE LITERAL TERMS OF PROVISIONS WHICH RESULT IN PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES.

IT'S A SLAM DUNK IN THAT IN MY REGARD BECAUSE I COULDN'T AGREE MORE THAT WE CANNOT SEE THOSE THE TENANTS ARE AT THE BACK AND THIS IS VERY HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE DRIVING SO MUCH IS DONE ON GPS RIGHT NOW.

I MEAN, THIS IS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE TO ME.

IF PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AROUND, THEY CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT.

THEY'RE PAUSING. I MEAN, WAGONS ARE ALWAYS A MESS ANYWAY WITH STUDENTS AND SCOOTERS AND BIKES AND AND THE TRAIN ON TOP OF IT ALL.

SO I DEFINITELY CAN SEE THAT BEING A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY TO NOT HAVE THIS MONUMENT SIGN.

THE ALLEGED CRITERIA NUMBER FOR THE ALLEGED PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES RESULT IN A FAILURE TO GRANT THE VARIANCE WOULD UNREASONABLY PREVENT THE OWNER FROM USING THE PROPERTY.

I DO BELIEVE FOR THE TENANTS THAT THIS SIGNAGE IS ESSENTIAL FOR THEIR FOR ALL THESE BUSINESSES TO OPERATE.

AND SO I CAN MEET THAT CRITERIA.

CRITERIA NUMBER FIVE RANGE OF THE VARIANCE IS THE MINIMUM ACTION.

WE'RE, AS MEMBER KULHANEK ELOQUENTLY POINTED OUT, WE'RE REDUCING THE HEIGHT AND OTHERWISE KEEPING THE SAME FOOTPRINT THAT WE HAD.

SO I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT'S A MINIMUM ACTION SO I CAN MEET THAT CRITERIA.

NUMBER SIX TO THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND.

I WILL BE HAPPY TO NOT SEE THAT.

SO THRILLED TO SEE THAT.

I THINK EVERYBODY WILL BE THRILLED TO SEE SOMETHING NEW THERE.

AND I THINK THAT WILL NOT ADVERSELY EFFECT.

SO I CAN MEET THAT CRITERIA.

CRITERIA NUMBER SEVEN, CONDITIONS PERTAINING TO THE LAND OR STRUCTURE, NOT SO GENERAL RECURRENT.

I CERTAINLY HOPE THIS ISN'T A RECURRENCE IN OUR TOWNSHIP.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL MOVE ON TO CRITERIA NUMBER EIGHT, WHICH IS GRANTED.

THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC INTEREST, AND I ABSOLUTELY CAN MEET THAT.

SO WITH THAT, DO I HAVE A MOTION? OOH! I GOT LOTS OF ACTION.

REMEMBER FIELD-FOSTER? I MOVE TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE IN 22-04-20-3 AT 4790 SOUTH HAGEDORN ROAD TO GRANT THE VARIANCE OF 72.5 SQUARE FEET.

I THINK THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT.

SUPPORT. AND SUPPORTED BY.

MEMBER DESCHAINE.

ANY DISCUSSION? I THINK WE'RE ALL OUT OF DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

SO WE'LL GO TO THE VOTE.

MEMBER KULHANEK? YES. MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER?

[00:45:02]

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. KLAUS. THANK YOU AND GOOD LUCK.

THIS IS GOING TO BE FANTASTIC FOR THE ENTIRE HANNA PLAZA.

I KNOW THAT OAK MOTION APPROVED AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO NEW BUSINESS LETTER D ZBA CASE NUMBER 22-04-20-4 2755 EAST GRAND RIVER SHG-2755 LLC.

I LOVE THE IT'S VERY JAMES BOND TYPE OF LLC NAME, BUT WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

SO WITH THAT I WILL PASS IT OVER TO MR. CHAPMAN FOR HIS PRESENTATION.

SO THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING A VARIANCE THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 2.2 ACRES IN HIS ZONED C-2 COMMERCIAL.

A SITE PLAN APPLICATION HAS BEEN APPROVED TO CONSTRUCT A 13,500 SQUARE FOOT TRADER JOE'S SPECIALTY GROCERY STORE.

IT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO INSTALL TWO WALL SIGNS, ONE BEING 123 SQUARE FOOT TRADER JOE'S SIGN ON THE NORTH ELEVATION AND ONE 122 SQUARE FOOT TRADER JOE'S SIGN ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION.

SO THE ZONING ORDINANCE ONLY ALLOWS FOR WALL SIGNS TO BE LOCATED ON THE FRONT FACADE.

AND IN THE CASE OF CORNER LOTS FACADES WITH ROAD FRONTAGE, THEY EACH GET A SIGN.

SO IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE PERMITTED TO HAVE A SIGN ON BOTH THE NORTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS.

SO THE PROPOSAL DOESN'T SHOW A SIGN ON THE WEST FACADE AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO PLACE THE SIGN ON THE SOUTH FACADE WHERE THERE'S NO ROAD FRONTAGE ON THE PUBLIC STREET.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAPMAN, WITH THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE TO COME UP AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD.

AND MY NAME IS MIKE AHRENS.

I'M AN ENGINEER WITH [INAUDIBLE] DESIGN.

I LIVE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, LIVINGSTON COUNTY, 1365 NORTH ALSTON DRIVE.

I'M THE ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THE CIVIL PORTION OF THE PROJECT.

OKAY. AND AS WAS INDICATED, WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING THAT THE WEST FACING SIGN BE LOCATED TO THE SOUTH FACE AND THE REASONS ARE ALL DETAILED IN THE RATIONALE.

I HATE TO REPEAT, BUT JUST VERY BRIEFLY, WE FEEL THE WEST FACING SIGN AS IT'S PROPOSED IS REDUNDANT WITH THE MONUMENT SIGN, WHICH IS RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF THE LOT.

AND WE JUST TO REINFORCE THE THE SOUTH FACE IS WOULD BE A MORE APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR THE SIGN.

THAT'S WHERE THE ENTRY IS TO IDENTIFY THE ENTRY TO FACILITATE VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC THERE, WHICH OBVIOUSLY MAKES IT SAFER.

AND WITHOUT THAT WALL SIGN AT THE SOUTH END, AS CUSTOMERS WOULD EXPECT, VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC WOULD BE MORE CONFUSED, LESS CERTAIN AND PERHAPS LESS SAFE.

THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES HERE, AS YOU SEE, THE ACTUAL FRONT OF THE BUILDING WHERE THE ENTRY IS LOCATED, IS TECHNICALLY UNDER THE ORDINANCE, THE REAR.

[6.B. ZBA CASE NO. 22-04-20-2 (6099 E. Lake Dr.), Jerry Fedewa Homes, 5570 Okemos Road, East Lansing, MI 48823]

BUT IN DOING SO, THAT PUT THE PARKING IN THE ENTRY TO THE SOUTH OF THE BUILDING.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S HIDDEN FROM THE MAIN FRONTING STREETS AND SO THAT THE SOUTH ACTUALLY BECOMES THE FRONT.

I THINK THE OTHER POINTS ARE ADDRESSED, I HOPE AND I CAN ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK IT'S A SIMPLE REQUEST IN THE LIGHT OF TRAIN WRECKS AND NEIGHBORHOOD DISPUTES.

YES, BUT WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

OKAY. THANKS, MR. AHRENS.

ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NOBODY ELSE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE TONIGHT, WE WILL GO INTO OUR BOARD TIME.

ALL RIGHT. AND THAT CASE? ANYONE WANT TO GET STARTED? I THINK I JUST HAVE A GENERAL STATEMENT AND THIS MIGHT BE FOR WHOEVER WE HAVE COMING UP ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

EVENTUALLY. IS THERE DISCUSSION ON SIGN ORDINANCE CHANGING WITH THE MOVE TO MOVE MORE THINGS TO FRONTAGE AND PARKING IN THE REAR? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S IN THE WORKS, MR. CHAPMAN? SO YEAH, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE SIGN ORDINANCE AND I KNOW WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT SOME SORT OF ALLOWANCE FOR THIS CIRCUMSTANCE? FOR A SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S WRITTEN INTO IT YET, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY, EVERYTHING'S BEING LOOKED AT WITH THE SIGN ORDINANCE.

I DON'T, I'M GOING TO PROBABLY GET TO WE'LL GET TO NUMBER SEVEN.

[00:50:02]

THAT SAID, I CAN MEET THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THIS LOCATION AND THAT IN WORKING TOGETHER TO DEVELOP THIS LAND WITH THE TOWNSHIP AND THE THAT THIS IS NOT SELF CREATED.

THIS HAS COME TO THE TERMINATION TOGETHER AS A AS A WAY TO PROPERLY AND BEST DEVELOP THIS LOCATION.

I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS DONE, THAT THESE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE CREATED IN ORDER TO LESSEN THE PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THAT KIND OF [INAUDIBLE] SO WHAT I NEEDED THE WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE FORM PRE CODE? FORM, BASE CODE. BASE CODE.

THANK YOU. I THINK THAT IS WHAT WE'RE, WHAT THIS IS INTENDING TO GET TO.

SO THAT SAID, I CAN MEET CRITERIA ONE AND TWO VERY EASILY.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS VARIANCE WHATSOEVER MEETING ANY OF THE CRITERIA WITH THIS.

SO I WELCOME ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

IF WE'RE IF THERE IS HESITATION ON ANY OF THESE.

YES, MEMBER KULHANEK? I CAN SAY ONE THING REAL QUICK.

YES, WE CAN BLAME THE TOWNSHIP FOR ASKING THEM TO MOVE THIS BUILDING FORWARD BECAUSE OF THE VARIANCE.

I'M JUST KIDDING, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S UPGRADED.

I THINK THIS WAS A MUTUAL DECISION.

I AGREE WITH YOU, MADAM CHAIR, THAT I DON'T SEE MUCH OF AN ISSUE WITH THIS.

THE ONLY MINOR ISSUE THAT I HAVE, AND THIS IS JUST ME BEING PICKY, IS THE ANSWER STATEMENT TO NUMBER FOUR.

AND I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THAT.

BUT YEAH, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE THAT FAILURE OF THE GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD PREVENT THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS CASE THE GROCER FROM USING THE PROPERTIES PERMITTED.

IT'S A PRETTY LARGE PROPERTY.

I THINK THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO USE IT IF THE VARIANCE FOR THAT THOSE WORDS WEREN'T ON THE BACK, THEY'D STILL BE ABLE TO USE THAT PROPERTY.

BUT REGARDLESS, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF A MOOT POINT AT THIS POINT.

I UNDERSTAND WHY THE NEED TO MOVE THOSE WORDS SO THAT THEY'RE SEEN FROM THE SOUTH SIDE AS WELL AS FROM THE NORTH, AND THE REDUNDANCY WITH THE WELL SIGNED MONUMENT SIGN SAYING THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY ONLY OTHER QUESTION IS, YEAH, I PROBABLY ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT IS THE MONUMENT SIGN ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY? I KNOW IT WAS PROBABLY ALREADY APPROVED AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN, BUT IS IT IF IT'S ALREADY GOING TO BE KIND OF REDUNDANT, IS IT ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO BE ON THE PROPERTY? IT WOULD BE IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR EAST FACING TRAFFIC.

IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR EASTBOUND TRAFFIC IF THIS VARIANCE IS GRANTED.

YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I FIGURED THE ANSWER WAS.

YES. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

OH, OKAY. THANK YOU, MEMBER KULHANEK.

YEAH, I, IT'S, A VERY THINLY, THINLY ABLE TO REACH NUMBER FOUR BECAUSE TRUE THE BUSINESS CAN OPERATE.

I THINK WE GET INTO WITH A LOT OF THESE SIGNS IS IT NECESSARY FOR THEM TO OPERATE.

SURE THEY CAN OPEN THEIR DOORS WITHOUT A SIGN ON THE BUILDING.

ABSOLUTELY. BUT DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR THE CUSTOMER, THIS PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE OF WHERE ARE WE GOING IN THIS BUILDING WHERE PEOPLE YOU KNOW, DIRECTIONALLY, I CAN MAKE THAT ARGUMENT THAT, YES, I SEE THE NEED FOR THAT TO DIRECT PEOPLE THAT THIS IS WHERE WE'RE COMING INTO THE BUILDING.

I DO I CAN MAKE A CASE FOR THAT.

I DO UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THAT WITH THIS BEING THIS NEW TYPE OF BUILDING, WITH THE PARKING IN THE BACK.

YES. MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER? GOING TO BE THE STRONGER CASE FOR NUMBER FOUR GOES BACK TO WHAT MEMBER KULHANEK BASICALLY MENTIONED AND THE FACT THAT THE MUNICIPALITY THAT WE LITERALLY PUT THIS REQUIREMENT ON TRADER JOE'S TO ULTIMATELY HAVE THE PARKING LOT IN THE BACK, WHICH THEN ULTIMATELY CREATED THIS WHOLE SCENARIO.

AND BUT FOR THE FACT THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH WHAT MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP HAS SAID, THEN IF WE DON'T ULTIMATELY GIVE THEM THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT, THEN HONESTLY THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE PROPERTY FOR ITS PREVENTIVE PURPOSES. SO I THINK JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT IS FAIR ARGUMENT.

YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

MEMBER DESCHAINE, GO AHEAD.

[00:55:01]

SO I DO THINK IT'S WORTH THIS BEING LOOKED AT AS A CIRCUMSTANCE THAT'S GOING TO ARISE.

AND I WHAT I COULD APPRECIATE IS THAT WE'RE WE'RE JUST MOVING THE SIGN SO WE'RE NOT ADDING TO. SO THAT'S WHERE WE GET INTO MINIMUM ACTION.

THIS IS ACTUALLY JUST INSTEAD OF HAVING THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL SIGN.

IT'S JUST TO MOVE THE SIGN TO MAKE IT MORE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THE BUILDING AND WHERE THEY'RE ACTUAL FRONTAGES VERSUS WHAT THE STREET VIEW IS BECAUSE THEIR FRONTAGE IS TO THE SOUTH.

SO IF WE LOOK AT IT THIS WAY, I KIND OF ALMOST FEEL LIKE WITH THE MONUMENT SIGN, MAYBE THE NORTH FACING SIGN ISN'T AS ISN'T AS NECESSARY, BUT IT'S ALLOWED. SO, I CAN MAKE A CASE FOR THIS ONE.

SHALL I GO THROUGH? SHALL ITAKE A STAB AT THE CRITERIA NUMBER ONE? UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND OR STRUCTURE.

AGAIN, I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT.

AND YES, WE CAN MEET THAT.

SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT SELF CREATED THANKS TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, SO WE CAN MEET THAT CRITERIA.

NUMBER THREE IS STRICT INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE LITERAL TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER WOULD RESULT IN PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES.

I DO SEE THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY OF HAVING THE ACTUAL ENTRANCE TO THE STORE ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION AND NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE A SIGN ON THE ACTUAL ENTRANCE TO THE STORE.

CRITERIA. NUMBER FOUR THAT THE ALLEGED PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES WILL RESULT IN A FAILURE TO GRANT WOULD REASONABLY PREVENT THE OWNER FROM USING THE PROPERTY.

AND AS MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER STATED, THIS IS THE CORNER WE'VE BACKED THEM INTO.

SO IN ORDER FOR THEM TO USE IT FOR THEIR PERMITTED PURPOSE, THIS VARIANCE IS NECESSARY.

CRITERIA FIVE GRANTED, THE VARIANCE IS THE MINIMUM ACTION AND I AGAIN, AS I JUST STATED, I THINK JUST INSTEAD OF AN ADDITIONAL SIGN, JUST MOVING THE SIGN TO THE SOUTH ELEVATION, I DO BELIEVE IS THE MINIMUM ACTION AND CRITERIA.

NUMBER SIX, GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND.

I THINK WE DISCUSSED THIS AT LENGTH WHEN WE HAD THE CASE WITH US INITIALLY, AND I THINK THIS IS ONLY GOING TO IMPROVE THAT ADJACENT LAND AND CHARACTER OF THE VICINITY.

CRITERIA NUMBER SEVEN THAT THE CONDITIONS PERTAINING OR NOT SO GENERAL RECURRENT AND I WOULD I JUST WOULD PUT THAT ON OUR PUT THAT ON OUR RADAR.

I THINK AS DIRECTOR SCHMIDT STATED WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THE CRITERIA THAT WHEN WE KNOW THESE TYPES OF CASES ARE COMING UP AND REMEMBER DESCHAINE POINTED OUT ABOUT THE MARATHON STATION. WE KNOW THESE TYPES OF CASES ARE STARTING TO BE MORE PREVALENT THAN SOMETHING FOR THE TOWNSHIP TO TAKE A LOOK AT.

BUT IT WOULD NOT PREVENT ME FROM APPROVING THIS END CRITERIA.

NUMBER EIGHT. GRANTED, THE VARIANCE WILL BE GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE PURPOSES OF THIS CHAPTER.

I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT IT WOULD.

SO WITH THAT, IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION OR IS THERE A MOTION PASSED. HANDS? GOES TO MEMBERSHIP? I MOVE THE APPROVAL OF THE ZONING VARIANCE REQUESTED IN ZBA CASE 22-04-20-4 2755 EAST GRAND RIVER SHG2755 LLC 530 NORTH END DRIVE, SUITE 120 IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

SECOND. SUPPORT BY MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. ON THAT NOTE, WE ARE GOING TO VOTE AS A MOTION TO APPROVE AND MEMBER KULHANEK ? YES. MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER? YES. MEEMBER DESCHAINE? YES. AND THE CHAIR VOTES YES.

SO YOUR VARIANCE REQUEST HAS BEEN APPROVED.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. ON THAT NOTE, LOOK AT THAT.

WE GOT THROUGH IT.

WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA NO OTHER BUSINESS.

SO I WILL GO STRAIGHT TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND MAKE A REMARK FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, YOU MAY DO SO AT THIS TIME.

JUST ASK THAT YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD.

THAT BEING SAID, I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC REMARKS AND WE WILL GO INTO BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS.

ANYONE WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? I THINK EVERYBODY'S READY TO GO.

REMEMBER FIELD-FOSTER.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE CHAIR FOR HOW YOU'VE HANDLED THE MEETING AND FOR KEEPING EVERYTHING ON TRACK SO WELL.

[01:00:04]

THAT WAS AN INTERESTING ADD TO THAT, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ENCOURAGEMENT THAT THE NEIGHBORS FIND A WAY TO WORK IT OUT THEMSELVES AND HOPE THAT THEY WILL.

AND I UNDERSTAND OTHER EFFORTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE IN THAT IN THAT REGARD, AND THAT HOPEFULLY THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT ON THEIR OWN AND NOT BRING THIS BACK TO US, MAKE US DECIDE WHAT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO RESOLVE THEMSELVES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MEMBER DESCHAINE.

I THINK THAT THAT IS VERY, VERY MUCH EXACTLY WHAT I WAS HOPING FOR IS THAT THIS IS NOT REALLY OUR DECISION TO MAKE EVEN LEGALLY, SO THAT WE CAN ONLY DEAL WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.

SO THAT SAID, WE HAVE NO OTHER COMMENTS.

MOVE TO ADJOURN. SO APPROVED.

BAM, WE'RE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU, MR. PEARCE.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.