[00:00:03]
IT IS NOW 6:30.[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER ]
TODAY IS APRIL 10TH, 2023.I'M CALLING TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION.
FIRST, WE'LL START WITH A ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER TREZISE PRESIDENT COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY HERE.
AND MR. RICHARDS NOTIFIED US HE WOULD NOT BE ATTENDING TONIGHT.
AND I, MARK BLUMER, THE CHAIR, AM ALSO PRESENT.
FIRST, LET ME GO WITH OPEN PUBLIC REMARKS.
I NOTICE THAT WE HAVE NUMEROUS FOLKS VISITING WITH US THIS EVENING.
DO ANY OF YOU WANT TO MAKE A GENERAL STATEMENT TO THE BOARD? SO WE'LL MOVE ON THEN TO APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA BY COMMISSIONER TRUSTEE.
[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA ]
SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. THERE ARE NO DISSENTS.NOW, ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 27TH MEETING.
[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ]
IS THERE A MOTION FOR THAT? SO MOVED. MS..SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY.
ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM MARCH 27TH HAVE WON.
ITEM SEVEN A, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ON ABOUT THE REZONING OF THE CHURCH PROPERTY AND MY COMMENTS THERE WERE THAT I THOUGHT THE PROJECT WAS A GREAT THING AND THAT WAS IN QUOTES SORT OF SCARE QUOTES, WHICH KIND OF SURPRISED ME BECAUSE I DON'T I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.
I WILL SAY WE DO HAVE A NEW ZACH.
ZACH THREE WORKING ON THE MINUTES NOW, SO THEY'RE EXCELLENT.
THERE WILL BE A THERE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT OF GROWING PAINS AS WE GET.
HE GETS USED TO OUR PROCESS SO WE WILL LET HIM OUT.
THE SCARE QUOTES ARE UNNECESSARY.
ALL RIGHT. AND ON ITEM TEN, JUST BEFORE THE SUB PARAGRAPH A, IT'S ON PAGE FOUR OF THE MINUTES, NOT PAGE FOUR OF THE PACKET, BUT IT WAS COMMENTING ON THE MULTI RESIDENTIAL STATUS OF THE BUILDING COMPARED TO THE SINGLE RESIDENCE HOUSING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I THINK MY COMMENT WAS ABOUT THE MULTI RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE ENVISIONED DEVELOPMENT COMPARED TO THE SINGLE RESIDENCE ZONING IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S IT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS OR IMPROVEMENTS? YES, THERE WAS ONE IN SECTION TEN.
IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS A MASTER PLAN UPDATE AND THIS MAY HAVE BEEN HOW IT WORKED.
IT WAS PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATELY IN PROJECT UPDATES OR REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
SO IT MAY HAVE CHRONOLOGICALLY COME THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK IT BELONGS THERE IN THE MINUTES.
I DON'T SEE IT. ACTUALLY, THE VERY BOTTOM ON PAGE SIX OF THE MINUTES, WHICH IS I DON'T KNOW WHAT PAGE IT IS OF THE WHOLE PACKET RIGHT ABOVE SECTION 11 OF THE MINUTES.
SO MENTIONED SOMETHING ACTUALLY I WOULDN'T COME TO THE PODIUM, BUT I DON'T HAVE A MICROPHONE OVER THERE. GOING BACK TO SEVEN A IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, I JUST NOTICED THAT SHOULD NOT BE REZONING 2307 TO 307.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU GUYS DO THAT BEFORE WE CHANGE.
WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
WE HAVE THREE FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS.
YES. ANY OTHERS ON THOSE? SO ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING WITH THE AMENDMENTS AS SUGGESTED, SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSITION? NO. ALL RIGHT.
NOW WE COME INTO ITEM NUMBER SIX.
[00:05:03]
SO THE MINUTES WE NEED TO FIX THAT IN THE MINUTES, TOO.I'M SORRY. I'LL FIX I'LL FIX THAT.
NOW YOU CAN GO. MR. SHIRKY. NOT A COMMUNICATION.
OH, OKAY. SO ARE THERE ANY COMMUNICATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO.
SO WE ARE NOW ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ESSER 23 004, THE VETERINARY CLINIC EXPANSION.
[7A. SUP #23004 – Schultz Veterinary Clinic Expansion – Rehearing ]
CORRECT. THIS IS, AS YOU SAID, SCP 23004 TO CONSTRUCT A 650 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE EXISTING BUSINESS KNOWN AS SCHULTZ VETERINARY CLINIC AT 2770 BENNETT ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 2.8 ACRE PARCEL.IT IS ZONED RURAL RESIDENTIAL.
THIS IS A VET CLINIC AND THEREFORE IT'S A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
RATHER THAN GOING THROUGH MY REPORT, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY JUST BRING IT UP HERE.
ON GOOGLE MAPS, STAFF ONLY HAD TWO CONCERNS.
ONE IS PRETTY EASY TO ADDRESS AND THE OTHER ONE IS GOING TO HAVE A BIT OF EXPLANATION.
SO THE FIRST THING YOU NOTICE IS THAT THERE IS A BIG WETLAND ON THE PROPERTY.
NO WETLAND PERMIT IS REQUIRED, THEREFORE, FOR THE EXPANSION OF THIS BUILDING.
THE WETLAND IS NOT GOING TO BE DISTURBED BY THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ADDITION.
NOW, THE OTHER THING THAT STAFF HAD A HAD AN ISSUE WITH, AND I'LL EXPLAIN HOW THIS GOT FIXED, THE 2006 SUP APPROVAL FOR THE PREVIOUS EXPANSION OF THIS BUILDING HAD WITH IT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT THEY WOULD EXPAND THE TOWNSHIP PATHWAY ACROSS THEIR PROPERTY.
AND SO NOW THAT NOW NOW THAT WE'RE WE'RE HERE, THAT IS STILL A VALID CONDITION THAT IS GOING TO NEED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE PATHWAY HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE FROM THE EAST.
AND HERE'S HOW THAT GOT ADDRESSED.
THIS IS A STANDARD PROCEDURE THAT APPARENTLY DPW DOES OFTEN.
NOW THE TOWNSHIP HAS THE TOWNSHIP, DPW HAS MOVED THEIR MONEY AROUND IN THEIR BUDGET AND HAS FIT THIS INTO THEIR PROJECT FOR THIS YEAR.
SO THEY'VE WRITTEN THE CHECK THAT THEY'VE BEEN REQUIRED TO WRITE BY DPW.
DPW HAS PUT THIS ON THEIR WORK SCHEDULE FOR THIS YEAR.
YOU WILL SEE A WETLAND PERMIT FROM TOWNSHIP STAFF.
EITHER DPW OR ENGINEERING LATER THIS YEAR BECAUSE THAT WILL AFFECT THE WETLAND, BUT THAT THE CONDITION OF THIS TRAIL HAVING TO BE PUT IN PLACE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THIS.
STAFF IS SATISFIED THAT THAT CONDITION HAS BEEN MET.
YES, YOU DEEMED THIS A REGULATED WETLAND, AND I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT'S A STATE REGULATED WETLAND, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS A TOWNSHIP REGULATED WETLAND.
THEREFORE, IT IS A STATE REGULATED WETLAND.
YES. WE HAVE A WETLAND PERMITTING PROCESS WITH THE TOWNSHIP THAT THAT THAT'S LESS THAN FIVE ACRES.
IT'S FOR IT GOES DOWN TO TWO ACRES.
BUT A STATE REGULATED WETLAND IS FIVE ACRES.
IS THIS A FIVE ACRE WETLAND? I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT SIZE OF THE WETLAND.
I KNOW IT IS A REGULATED WETLAND.
YES, I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU IF YOU NEED THAT FOR YOUR NEXT AT NEXT MEETING.
BECAUSE IF IT'S A STATE REGULATED WETLAND, THE WETLAND PERMITS GOING TO HAVE TO COME FROM THE STATE.
BUT THE TOWNSHIP ALSO THE THE STATE CAN GIVE A WETLAND PERMIT, BUT THE STATE BUT THE TOWNSHIP ALSO HAS A WETLAND PERMITTING PROCESS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH. THE TOWNSHIP HAS TO GO THROUGH AS WELL AS TOWNSHIP ENGINEERING IS PRETTY WELL VERSED WITH THIS AND AND THEY'LL FOLLOW THE PROPER PROCEDURES.
[00:10:06]
THAT IS A DIFFERENCE.IT IS BY DEFAULT A STATE REGULATED WETLAND BECAUSE IT IS A LOCAL REGULATED WETLAND.
OUR WETLAND REGULATION IS MORE STRINGENT THAN THE STATE'S.
YES, BUT YOU CAN'T TELL ME THE SIZE OF THIS WETLAND.
WELL, HERE I CAN SHOW IT TO YOU.
GIVE ME A SECOND. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT MAKES THIS A WETLAND? THE WETLAND VEGETATION AND THE MOISTURE CONTENT.
I HAVEN'T GONE OUT AND DONE A WETLAND I CAN'T FOLLOW.
I'LL SHOW YOU THE SIZE OF THE WETLAND.
IT MEETS THE DEFINITION OF WETLAND PER THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE MY MY QUESTION GOES TO THE POINT OF WHY THIS WASN'T DONE PREVIOUSLY, WHY.. IT'S AN ITEM THAT WASN'T FOLLOWED UP ON BY THE PREVIOUS DIRECTOR, AND WE'RE FOLLOWING UP ON IT NOW.
NO, NO, IT IS. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE PERMIT WAS EVER APPLIED FOR.
UM, THIS IS AN APPROXIMATION, NOT A PROPER DELINEATION, BUT THIS IS.
THIS IS THE AREA OF THE WETLAND.
UM, IT SHOWS UNDER THREE ACRES.
IT SHOWS? YEAH, UNDER THREE ACRES.
BUT THAT'S STILL REGULATED BY THE TOWNSHIP.
OKAY. I ENFORCE THE WETLAND LAW FOR 30 YEARS, AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION.
FAIR ENOUGH. AS A PERSON WHO ENFORCES THE LAW, I HAD A QUESTION, TOO, ALONG THE SAME LINES.
WHY WASN'T THIS CHARGED AS A CODE VIOLATION SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND ENFORCED THAT WAY? THERE'S NO RECORD IN THE FILES OF WHY THEY DID NOT FOLLOW UP ON IT.
ULTIMATELY, WE'RE AT A POSITION NOW WHERE WE CAN ADDRESS IT AND WE WILL BE ADDRESSING IT.
SO IT SAT AROUND AS AN UNENFORCED CODE ISSUE FOR MORE THAN TEN YEARS.
OKAY, WHEN WILL IT WHEN WILL CONSTRUCTION AND ALL THAT BEGIN FOR THIS PARTICULAR.
I DON'T. OH, THE ADDITION OR THE OR THE THE TRAIL.
THE TRAIL. I DON'T HAVE A DATE YET.
ACCORDING TO MR. OPSOMER, OUR HEAD OF DPW, THEY HAVE SCHEDULED IT FOR THIS YEAR, BUT I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN EXACT DATE AT THIS TIME.
AND I KNOW IF IT'S IF THE PERMIT, I KNOW THE WETLAND WILL MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS RIGHT.
IS THERE LIKE A POTENTIAL FOR, YOU KNOW, BAD DISTURBANCE FOR THE WETLAND THERE AND ALL THAT DURING CONSTRUCTION? YEAH. FIRST OF ALL, SO OUR WETLAND ORDINANCE HAS HAS HAS BUFFER LANGUAGE.
SO IF YOU'RE IN THE BUFFER YOU THAT'S YOU NEED YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S PERMITTING ABOUT THAT.
BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE IN THE WETLAND ITSELF.
AND WE HAVE A MITIGATION MECHANISM IN OUR WETLAND ORDINANCE.
OKAY. AND ONE LAST QUESTION ABOUT THE WALKWAY.
HOW WHAT ABOUT THE SAFETY OF IT BEING THAT IT'S GOING TO, I GUESS, CROSS OVER INTO A WETLAND SAFETY OR ACCESS BECAUSE WETLANDS, THEY HAVE A TENDENCY TO FLOOD AND ALL THAT STUFF AND YOU KNOW, IS THERE GOING TO BE ANYTHING SPECIAL DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ACCESSIBILITY IS, YOU KNOW, ALWAYS I MAY USE THIS AS A SEGWAY TO BRING THE APPLICANT UP.
I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATIONS ON THE SPECIFICATION OF THIS OF THE TRAIL.
BUT I DO I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED.
AND I KNOW THAT THEY ARE AWARE THAT THERE IS QUITE A DROP OFF AND THERE IS A WETLAND THERE.
SO WAS THAT ANYTHING? OKAY. OKAY.
IF BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING, BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY APPROVE THIS, IF YOU WISH.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF SOMETHING WOULD BE ABLE TO MITIGATE THIS.
I CAN I CAN ANSWER PART OF THAT IF.
LET ME SEE. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OTHERWISE, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE.
ONE. SURE. JUST TO SUMMARIZE SO I CAN WRAP MY HEAD AROUND THIS.
WE PUT A CONDITION ON THE SUP IN 2006.
[00:15:05]
YOU DON'T COMPLY WITH THE CONDITION THAT WE ESTABLISH AND THEN WE COME BACK AND YOU HAVE ANOTHER SUP BEFORE US AND THAT NON COMPLIANCE WE FIX IT FOR YOU.WE ARE NOT FIXING IT FOR THEM.
BUT IT'S BUT IT'S ONLY BUT THEY HAVE I MEAN, I PUT INFORMATION IN THE PACKET THEY HAVE PAID OVER.
IT'S PUBLIC. I PAID OVER $67,000 TO THE TOWNSHIP FOR THIS.
I MEAN, I'M GOING OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD MAYBE, BUT IT'S IN THE PACKET.
YES. SO I WILL SAY, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WERE HERE IN 2006.
AND I CAN ALSO SAY THAT WE HAVE RECOGNIZED THE ERROR AND ARE FIXING IT NOW.
OKAY. APPLICANTS ARE HERE IF THEY WANT TO HEAR ANYTHING FROM THEM. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. I REALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD EXCEPT FOR WHEN I SPOKE WITH.
WHO WAS THE ENGINEER, MA'AM? EXCUSE ME. COULD YOU TELL US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS? INGRID SCHULTZ, 1280 SEBRING ROAD, OKEMOS.
THANK YOU. DAN? YEAH. THE ENGINEER.
YEAH. OKAY. DAN? DAN, WHEN WE PAID THE MONIES, THEY SAID THAT THEY WOULD TAKE OVER THIS, SO I GUESS THEY WOULD BE THE PERSONS TO ASK AS FAR AS THEIR ENGINEERING.
WELL, ANYONE WILL BE WALKING DOWN THERE, YOU KNOW, BY THE WETLAND.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, THEY SAID THAT THEY WOULD TAKE CARE OF ALL THE ENGINEERING AND THOSE FACTORS.
SO I GUESS I WOULD ADDRESS THEM.
ANY OF YOUR CONCERNS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TELL ME HOW THEY WERE GOING TO CONSTRUCT IT SO COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL WELL, I HAVE A COMMENT IN RESPONSE TO NOT NECESSARILY A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT MY COMMENT WAS THAT THE TOWNSHIP IS CURRENTLY BUILDING PATHWAYS THROUGH WETLANDS AND DOES USE PRETTY INDUSTRY STANDARD TECHNIQUES FOR PILINGS THAT DON'T REQUIRE MOVING SOIL, WHICH IS NORMALLY YOUR MAIN WETLAND IMPACT IS IF YOU HAVE TO MOVE SOIL AROUND.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE STUFF THAT THE TOWNSHIP IS BUILDING RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, BEHIND THE PARKING LOT OVER TO THE TO THE LAKE AND SOME OF THE STUFF ALONG OKEMOS ROAD, THEY KNOW HOW TO BUILD REALLY GREAT PATHWAYS ACROSS WETLANDS.
ANYTHING FURTHER ON THIS ISSUE? NOTHING. WE WOULD WELCOME ANY STRAW VOTE THAT THE BOARD MIGHT TAKE AT THIS TIME.
IS THERE A PUBLIC COMMENT? WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PROPONENT.
IS THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT THIS ISSUE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THEN I GUESS WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT ON THE AGENDA.
YEAH. ALL RIGHT. WANT TO DO THIS TROUBLE FIRST BEFORE I THINK HE'S GOING TO.
OKAY. IT DIDN'T IT DIDN'T EVEN SEEM LIKE WE WERE FAR ENOUGH ALONG FOR A STRAW VOTE.
YOU KNOW THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT.
IS APPROVAL OF THE EXPANSION, CORRECT? YES. AND IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT THE PATHWAY WILL BE COMPLETED BY THE TOWNSHIP WITH THE FINANCING OF THE APPLICANT.
WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING, LET'S TAKE A STRAW VOTE TO SEE HOW THIS WILL GO.
ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER TREZISE.
YES. COMMISSIONER CURTIS SUPPORT.
YES. AND THE CHAIR VOTES YES ALSO.
[00:20:02]
OKAY. OKAY.WE WILL MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT THEN, WHICH IS SUP 23 007 502 RIVER TERRACE DRIVE.
[8A. SUP #23007 – 1502 River Terrace Drive ]
YOU HELD THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT AT YOUR LAST MEETING ON MARCH 27TH.NO MAJOR CONCERNS WERE RAISED AND YOU AGREED TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT RELIGIOUS OFFICES IN A RELIGIOUS DISTRICT IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AT 1502, RIVER TERRACE DRIVE AT YOUR NEXT MEETING AND WITH THAT STAFF HAS NO FURTHER COMMENT.
NO FURTHER COMMENT FROM THE PUBLIC AT ALL.
AND YOU HAVE A RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL IN YOUR PACKET.
OKAY. I THINK I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A WORD MISSING IN THE RESOLUTION.
OKAY. I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE SAID CONSTRUCT.
I LOOK AT PAGE 37 AND, UM, I'M LIKE THE FIRST, WHEREAS THE FIRST IS A REQUEST. OH, TO CONSTRUCT.
OR TO OPERATE BECAUSE I KNOW THEY'RE NOT ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTING ANYTHING, BUT IT SOUNDED LIKE A LOT LIKE PERHAPS BETTER THAN CONSTRUCT BECAUSE THEY, LIKE COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY SAID, THEY'RE NOT ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTING ANYTHING.
THEY'RE SIMPLY FIXING UP AN EXISTING BUILDING.
HOW ABOUT, SAY, ESTABLISH? ESTABLISH OR OPERATE A RELIGIOUS OFFICE? OKAY. ESTABLISH.
I LIKE THAT BETTER. YOU'RE RIGHT.
OKAY. DID EVERYBODY FOLLOW THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENT? YES. ARE THERE ANY OTHERS? WELL, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A MOTION TO ADOPT A MOTION.
I WILL MOVE TO ADOPT IT AS THAT SLIGHT AMENDMENT WITH A SLIGHT AMENDMENT.
WE HAVE TO DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS.
ALL RIGHT. SO THE CHAIR VOTES SUPPORT COMMISSIONER RICHARDS.
OH, I'M SORRY. YES, COMMISSIONER SNYDER.
SUPPORT COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL.
SUPPORT AND COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY.
SUPPORT. COMMISSIONER TREZISE.
ALL RIGHT. SO NEXT THEN SWITCH BACK.
HERE WE ARE NOW ON THE LIGHTING ORDINANCE, ITEM NINE.
[9A. Lighting Ordinance – Presentation ]
SO WE HAVE HAD OUR INTERN, JOEY EMERY, WITH US FOR SOME TIME NOW.AND JOEY IS ENDING THE END OF HIS TERM.
THE LIGHTING ORDINANCE IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE NEWER ONES.
IT WAS ZERO SEVEN, BUT FUNCTIONALLY AT THE TIME IT WAS WRITTEN, IT WAS ALREADY OBSOLETE.
IT WAS ALREADY TALKING ABOUT OUTDATED TECHNOLOGY.
AND SO WE CUT JOEY LOOSE EARLIER THIS YEAR ON BEGINNING THE PROCESS OF REWRITING THAT ORDINANCE.
AND WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET THIS EVENING IS A BEGINNING DRAFT.
AND FRANKLY, WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE DRAFT THIS EVENING.
I WANTED TO GET IT TO YOU SO YOU COULD START TO SEE WHERE WE'RE HEADED WITH THIS.
I STILL HAVE TO RINSE IT THROUGH THE ATTORNEYS.
I HAVE TO GET A WAIVER PROVISION IN THERE BECAUSE TECHNICALLY IT'S OUTSIDE THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
SO THE ZBA CAN'T WEIGH IN ON THIS.
SO IT HAS TO HAVE ITS OWN WAIVER PROVISION.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT STILL NEED TO HAPPEN, BUT WE WANTED JOEY TO BE HERE THIS EVENING TO PRESENT HIS WORK AND GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES BEHIND THIS, BECAUSE IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT FROM HOW WE ARE DOING BUSINESS RIGHT NOW IN TERMS OF LIGHTING TOWARDS GOING TO THE DARK SKY PRINCIPLES THAT JOEY'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT. SO YOU WANTED TO THROW SOME LIGHT ON THE SUBJECT.
THROW SOME LIGHT ON THE SUBJECT.
EXCELLENT. SO I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO JOEY MASTERY, ALL OF THAT.
SO. SO LOOKING AT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, LIKE TIM HAS STATED, IT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THE MODERN DARK SKY PRINCIPLES AND AS GOT A LOT OF DISORGANIZATION ISSUES, A LOT OF THINGS LISTED UNDER GENERAL REQUIREMENTS THAT COULD BE CATEGORIZED TO MAKE IT READ BETTER AND FLOW BETTER AND JUST OVERALL BE MORE UNDERSTANDABLE.
SO THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS GOING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE MODERN PRACTICES AND IT'S GOING TO REDUCE A LOT OF THESE INCONVENIENCES THAT THE CURRENT ONE IS CAUSING WITH THE DISORGANIZATION. AND IT'S ALSO GOING TO CREATE SOME EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES WITH THE NEWLY IMPLEMENTED DEFINITIONS SUCH AS DARK SKY PRINCIPLES AND COLOR RENDERING INDEX CORRELATED COLOR TEMPERATURE.
[00:25:06]
SO HERE'S A GRAPHIC BASICALLY OF WHAT THE ORDINANCE IS AIMING TO DO.SO ON THE LEFT YOU SEE UNSHIELDED LIGHTING THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY DARK SKY CONTROLS TO IT.
SO WHAT THIS ORDINANCE AIMS TO DO IS TO IMPLEMENT THESE ROUGHLY 4 OR 5 PRINCIPLES THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO REDUCING OR ELIMINATING LIGHT POLLUTION.
SO WE HAVE SHIELDING, COLOR, TEMPERATURE, INTENSITY, WHICH IS HOW BRIGHT THE LIGHT IS ITSELF AND TIMING, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH LIGHTING BEING TURNED OFF WHEN IT'S NOT NECESSARY FOR USE.
SO HERE'S KIND OF A BACKGROUND OF WHY THIS IS, I GUESS, IMPORTANT.
THIS IS THE ACCEPTED SCALE FOR MEASURING LIGHT POLLUTION.
MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP IS AT A SIX AND A FIVE FOR MOST OF IT, AND THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS ARE.
SO I WOULD CONSIDER AS A WHOLE IT'S A HOTSPOT FOR LIGHT POLLUTION.
SO THIS IS KIND OF THE, I GUESS, LEG TO STAND ON WHEN LOOKING AT OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE AND EVALUATING IF IT'S DOING A GOOD JOB WITH MODERN PRINCIPLES OR NOT, WHICH I THINK YOU CAN SEE HERE, ARE THESE MODERN PRINCIPLES I'M TALKING ABOUT PROVIDED BY THE INTERNATIONAL DARK SKY ASSOCIATION THAT'D BE USEFUL, TARGETED, LOW LEVEL CONTROLLED AND COLOR.
THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT THE STANDARDS I'LL BE PROPOSING WILL BE AIMING TO ADDRESS.
SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE USEFUL.
AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH, YOU KNOW, TIMING AND WHERE LIGHTING IS ALLOWED IN THE SITE AND LOW LEVEL LIGHTING IS GOING TO BE LESS BRIGHT THAN IT WAS BEFORE.
THERE'S GOING TO BE COLOR CONTROLS OF HOW WARM THE COLOR OF THE LIGHT HAS TO BE.
SO THIS IS BASICALLY THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THIS ORDINANCE HERE.
SO SOME OF THESE KEY CHANGES I HAD MENTIONED WERE THE BEST PRACTICES IN AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY.
IT'S GOING TO BE MORE CONVENIENT FOR THE PUBLIC AND CREATE THESE EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES.
SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THOSE, WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT ADDING CONTROLS OF THE COLORS AND THE TRESPASS AND GLARE STANDARDS, REWORKING THE LIGHT OUTPUT STANDARDS, WHICH IS THINGS LIKE THE TOTAL SITE LUMEN AMOUNT AND LUMENS PER FIXTURE AND WILL BE HOPING TO ADD A CURFEW FOR UNNECESSARY LIGHTING, WHICH I'LL EXPLAIN SOME WHAT THAT MEANS A LITTLE AND SOME REASONS WHY IT'LL BE MORE CONVENIENT FOR THE PUBLIC.
OUR PREVIOUS ONE RIGHT NOW KIND OF HAS THEM SCATTERED ALL AROUND IN THE REQUIREMENTS, BUT THIS ORDINANCE IS GOING TO SUMMARIZE THEM AT THE BOTTOM AND MAKE IT EASY TO GO BACK UP AND LOOK AT WHICH ONES YOU NEED TO CHECK THE BOXES FOR.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES.
I THINK THAT ADDING IN SOME DEFINITIONS THAT AREN'T NECESSARILY USED FOR THE STANDARDS THEMSELVES IS A GOOD MOVE TO HELP THE PUBLIC JUST BETTER UNDERSTAND LIGHT POLLUTION AND DARK SKY PRINCIPLES AS A WHOLE.
SO I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF WHAT THESE REQUIREMENTS WOULD LOOK LIKE.
SO RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THE COLOR TEMPERATURE.
AND I THINK THE BEST ANALOGY I CAN GIVE IS WE'RE TOLD THAT, YOU KNOW, BLUE LIGHT LIKE FROM YOUR PHONE BEFORE YOU GO TO BED IS TYPICALLY BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH, BAD FOR YOUR SLEEP CYCLE.
SO THIS IS ROUGHLY THE SAME ANALOGY HERE.
SO WHAT WE'RE THE ORDINANCE IS PROPOSING A 3000 KELVIN CORRELATED COLOR TEMPERATURE.
THE DESIGN GOAL WOULD BE THE MINIMUM AMOUNT FOR ALL OF THESE.
SO THAT'S JUST BASICALLY WHAT 3000 KELVIN WOULD LOOK LIKE RIGHT THERE.
ANOTHER CONTROL I'M LOOKING AT IS COLOR RENDERING INDEX.
THIS IS BASICALLY HOW TRUE TO TONE.
A SOURCE OF LIGHT SHOWS COLOR OF AN OBJECT.
SO YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT THAT'S IT'S DULL.
THE COLORS ARE KIND OF BLENDED TOGETHER ON THE RIGHT, THEY'RE MORE VIBRANT.
[00:30:01]
THAT'S WHAT I'M PROPOSING.SO WITH A COMBINATION OF THE WARM TONE, LIGHT AND THE HIGH COLOR RENDERING INDEX, WE SHOULD BE GETTING DARK SKY LIGHTING THAT IS ALSO THE MOST MODERN TECHNOLOGY.
SO HERE IS EXPLAINING A LITTLE WHAT SHIELDING AND GLARE HAS TO DO WITH.
SO SHIELDING IS BASICALLY THE AMOUNT OF WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM.
THEY BLOCK THE LIGHTING, YOU COULD SAY AT AN ANGLE, DEPENDING ON HOW HORIZONTAL OR VERTICAL IT IS.
AND SO SHIELDING AND GLARE INTERRELATED BECAUSE WHEN WE HAVE THESE LOWER TRESPASS STANDARDS WILL ALSO BE ELIMINATING THE AMOUNT OF LIGHT THAT'S GOING AND BEING SEEN FROM OFFSITE.
AND SO THAT IMAGE ON THE RIGHT THERE I THINK EXPLAINS PRETTY WELL WHY LIMITING GLARE IS IMPORTANT.
THAT WAS TAKEN FROM SOMEONE'S BEDROOM WINDOW, I BELIEVE.
SO RIGHT NOW WE ALLOW ONE FOOT CANDLE ADJACENT TO COMMERCIAL AND HALF FOOT.
A FOOT CANDLE IS BASICALLY THE MEASURE OF AMOUNT OF LUMENS SHINING ON ONE SQUARE FOOT.
SO OUR PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS GOING TO CUT THESE NUMBERS QUITE A BIT.
AND THESE THAT I'M GETTING FROM ARE FROM THE MODEL LIGHTING ORDINANCE PROVIDED BY INTERNATIONAL DARK SKIES AND THE ILLUMINATING ENGINEERING SOCIETY AND THEN OTHER MORE MODERN BEST PRACTICE PLANNING DOCUMENTS.
SO THAT'S JUST A PREFACE FOR THOSE NUMBERS.
ANOTHER THING WE'LL BE LOOKING AT IS THE LUMEN FOOT CANDLE LEVELS.
I JUST MENTIONED THAT CURRENTLY OUR ORDINANCE ALLOWS 200,000 LUMENS AN ACRE FOR THE MAXIMUM DENSITY DISTRICTS, WHICH IS WAY OUT OF PROPORTION OF WHAT THE RECOMMENDED STANDARD IS.
SO THAT TRANSLATES TO ABOUT 4.6 LUMENS, A SQUARE FOOT ON AVERAGE.
SO OUR PROPOSED ORDINANCE WILL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 2.5 LUMENS SQUARE FOOT.
AND THEN IN LOWER DENSITIES IT WILL BE 1.25 LUMENS A SQUARE FOOT.
CURRENTLY WE ALLOW FIXTURES TO BE UP TO 9000 LUMENS BY AN INDIVIDUAL ONE.
AND I THINK THE NUMBERS SAY WE SHOULD REDUCE THAT TO AROUND 3000 PER FIXTURE.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO REGULATIONS ABOUT MAXIMUM NUMBERS ON SIGHT, NOT AVERAGES.
AND WE WOULD LIKE TO REDUCE THOSE AS WELL.
AND THIS HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE MORE CORRELATED WITH APPEARED SAFETY THAN LIGHTING LEVEL ITSELF.
SO I BELIEVE IT'D BE REALLY IMPORTANT TO INCLUDE THAT IN THIS NEWER ORDINANCE.
AND SO HERE'S THIS LIGHTING CURFEW I TALKED ABOUT AS GOAL IS TO REDUCE OR EXTINGUISH THE UNNECESSARY LIGHTING IN EFFORT TO PREVENT LIGHT POLLUTION AND LIGHT POLLUTION.
AND IT APPLIES REALLY TO ANY TYPE OF LIGHTING THAT IS NOT BEING USED FOR AN ACTIVE PURPOSE.
RIGHT? SO THE PURPOSE OF THE LIGHT CURFEW WOULD BE TO ALLOW FOR LIGHTING, THAT IS FOR HIGHER SECURITY, HIGHER SAFETY REASONS AND HIGHER VEHICLE TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
BUT FOR OTHER CASES, WE WOULD WANT TO EITHER DIM OR TURN THOSE OFF COMPLETELY FOR PURPOSES OF, YOU KNOW, ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND THAT TYPE OF NATURE. SO THIS IS ANOTHER THIS IS A NEW THING WE'LL BE ADDING.
THERE ISN'T ANYTHING LIKE IT CURRENTLY IN THE ORDINANCE.
SO AFTER HOURS LIGHTING THAT I TALKED ABOUT WOULD BE PERMITTED UP TO TWO FOOT CANDLES, WHICH IS MUCH LOWER THAN THE BEFORE HOURS LIGHTING.
AND WHEN I SAY AFTER HOURS, THERE'S A NEW DEFINITION CALLED BUSINESS HOURS.
AND I THINK A COOL THING I LIKE ABOUT A LOT OF THESE NEW DARK SKY PRINCIPLES IS THE USE OF MOTION ACTIVATION AND AUTOMATED TIMER SYSTEMS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T REQUIRE RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S A VERY SIMPLE MEASURE THAT CAN REALLY HELP A LOT IN THE ENERGY SIDE.
[00:35:01]
SO SO HERE'S JUST SOME IMAGE EXAMPLES OF THIS DARK SKY FRIENDLY LIGHTING.SO YOU'VE GOT THE STAIRS ON THE LEFT.
IT'S STILL ESTHETICALLY PLEASING.
AND I THINK BASICALLY THE GOAL OF THIS IS TO SHOW YOU THAT IT CAN STILL MAINTAIN THAT DESIGN CHARACTER WHILE FOLLOWING THESE DARK SKY PRINCIPLES. SO THESE ARE KIND OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
WE HAVE THE WALL MOUNTED ONE, THE STREET LIGHTS UNDER CANOPY LIGHTS.
AND I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE DEFINITIONS THAT I'D MENTIONED A COUPLE OF TIMES.
IT'S MORE THAN JUST WHAT IT IS RIGHT NOW.
IT WILL TALK ABOUT CLUTTER GLARE, LIGHT TRESPASS.
SOME EFFECTS ON THE HUMAN AND NOCTURNAL ENVIRONMENT.
SO AND THEN I THINK IT MIGHT ALSO BE USEFUL TO ADD SOME TYPE OF IMAGERY LIKE YOU SEE RIGHT THERE OF WAS ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT IS UNACCEPTABLE AND I'M NOT SHOWING THE UNACCEPTABLE ONES, BUT THESE ARE JUST KIND OF SIMILAR TO THIS LAST SLIDE HERE, JUST SOME TYPE OF THING IN THE ORDINANCE WE CAN USE.
AND THEN HERE ARE SOME RESOURCE LINKS OF DIFFERENT THINGS FOR WHAT I USE TO RESEARCH FOR THIS ORDINANCE AND WHAT MIGHT HELP YOU UNDERSTAND MORE OF WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT.
THERE'S THE LIGHT POLLUTION MAP IN THERE.
THERE'S THE DARK SKY TERMS GLOSSARY AND THE MODEL LIGHTING ORDINANCE THAT HAS MOST OF THESE NUMBERS.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOU'LL FIND MOST OF ALL THIS INFORMATION.
YES. FIRST OF ALL, YOU DID AN EXCELLENT JOB.
THERE'S A LOT OF WORK REPRESENTED HERE.
SURE. BECAUSE THEY COULD GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
THEY COULD CHANGE THEIR MIND AND CHANGE SOMETHING DRASTIC.
AND THEN IT HAS TO GET REFLECTED BACK INTO OUR STATUTE OR OUR LAW.
SO WRITE IT UP IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT USES THE THE LEVELS AND THE TERMINOLOGY THAT YOU CONSIDER TO BE IMPORTANT, BUT DON'T MAKE IT SPECIFICALLY REFERABLE TO AN OUTSIDE SOURCE BECAUSE THAT SOURCE COULD CHANGE OR DISAPPEAR.
OKAY. ASIDE FROM THAT, I THINK YOU DID A WONDERFUL JOB HERE.
THANK YOU. YES, I AGREE WITH THE GREAT JOB.
AND I KNOW DON'T NOT TAKING QUESTIONS PER SE, BUT JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT THAT THAT JUST CAME TO CAME TO MIND DURING THE PRESENTATION. ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
I MEAN, THE LEDS TYPICALLY YOU CAN I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT TECHNOLOGY IS.
YOU CAN DIAL THEM IN A LITTLE MORE EFFECTIVELY.
USUALLY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, I MEAN, FUNCTIONALLY, THAT'S WHERE THAT'S WHERE THE INDUSTRY IS GOING ANYWAY BECAUSE THEY'RE SO MUCH MORE EFFICIENT BECAUSE YOU CAN DIAL THEM IN SO MUCH MORE EFFECTIVELY TO WHAT YOU WANT TO SHOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO SAY IT.
THAT'S WHAT'S LIKELY TO GET INSTALLED IN MOST CASES AS WE GO FORWARD.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING. IT'S JUST CHANGED SINCE I'VE STARTED BEING A PLANNER.
AND YOU HAD YOU WERE FIGHTING TO GET METAL HALIDES OVER THE YELLOW SODIUM'S BACK IN THE DAY.
I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS, BUT THAT WAS THE BIGGEST ONE.
SO BUT PLEASE, AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FEEDBACK, PLEASE PASS IT ALONG TO ME AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND FINISH UP, WRAP UP THE ORDINANCE HERE AND GET IT BACK FOR PUBLIC HEARING IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
OH, I THOUGHT ABOUT THE OTHER ONE. I'M SORRY.
I'M SORRY. THE OTHER ONE SAID 12 MIDNIGHT UNTIL 6:00.
A LOT OF TIMES IN TERMS OF SAFETY, YOU MIGHT CONSIDER GOING BEYOND MIDNIGHT JUST BECAUSE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, MAYBE 2:00 IN THE MORNING JUST BECAUSE OF THE SAFETY, YOU KNOW, ISSUE OF IT.
[00:40:03]
WHEN PEOPLE ARE WALKING, THEY FEEL SAFER TO HAVE LIGHT.SO IF IT'S CUT OFF AT MIDNIGHT, SOMETIMES FOLKS ARE OUT A LITTLE BIT BEYOND MIDNIGHT.
THAT WAS THE OTHER THING. THANKS.
YEAH. YOU INDICATED THAT THIS IS NOT PART OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
I LOOKED THIS UP TODAY AND I'VE ALREADY FORGOTTEN.
YEAH, IT'S COMPLETELY OUTSIDE.
IT'S IN MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS CHAPTER 38 OF THE OVERALL CODE OF ORDINANCES.
SO WE THOUGHT WE WOULD JUST START HERE.
I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHETHER IT SHOULD BE PART OF EITHER THE BUILDING CODE OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S BAILIWICK OF ZONING.
SO I THINK MY GUESS IS THE REASON IT'S NOT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS THAT IT AVOIDS.
THAT MIGHT NOT BE SOMETHING THAT'S PROBABLY UP THE ZBER'S ALLEY.
WELL, IT WASN'T PART OF THE ZONING WHEN THEY.
EXACTLY. IT WASN'T ORIGINALLY PART OF ZONING, SO IT MIGHT BE WHERE IT CAME FROM.
YOU MAY WANT TO LOOK AND SEE IF THERE'S A BETTER PLACE TO PUT IT.
MAYBE IN THE BUILDING CODE THAT IT'S IMPLEMENTED WITH THE SITE PLAN REVIEWS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
ABSOLUTELY. ARE YOU LOOKING FOR THE FEEDBACK NOW OR DO YOU WANT IT IN WRITING ANY FEEDBACK? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. OKAY.
SO I USED TO WORK AT CONSUMERS ENERGY AND THEY'RE LIKE ONE OF THE MAIN STREETLIGHT OWNERS.
AND SO I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY IN THAT RESPECT AND HOW YOU WOULD THEY'VE BEEN INSTALLING NEW LIGHTS AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY ACTUALLY ADHERE TO THIS PRACTICE, AT LEAST IN OTTAWA HILLS.
THE SECOND THING I WAS THINKING ABOUT FOR THIS ORDINANCE WAS LOW INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS.
MANY TIMES THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS GET TARGETED FOR HIGHER AMOUNTS OF LIGHTING, WHICH BECAUSE THEY'RE TYPICALLY ANYWAYS, THEY GET TARGETED FOR MORE, MORE LIGHTING BASICALLY, WHICH ISN'T ALWAYS A JUST METHOD OF DEPLOYING LIGHTING.
THE SECOND THING I WAS THINKING ABOUT WAS HOA'S AND HOW THOSE STAKEHOLDERS SET THEIR OWN CRITERIA FOR SORTS OF THINGS LIKE THIS, WHICH LED ME TO THINK ABOUT CURFEWS ON LIGHTING AND CHRISTMAS LIGHTS.
SO I JUST WAS LIKE, IS THIS GOING TO CAUSE A HUGE UPROAR BASICALLY FROM PEOPLE LIKE JUST LIKE SCREAMING? WE HAVE HAD THAT CONVERSATION, ACTUALLY.
WE THINK WE'VE WORKED THAT ONE OUT.
LET'S JUST WHAT WAS GOING THROUGH MY HEAD? IT'S A VERY IT'S A VERY GOOD CATCH, ACTUALLY.
SO IF THERE'S A IF THERE IS A RURAL, BASICALLY THE RURAL URBAN DIVIDE THAT GOES THROUGH THE TOWNSHIP AND HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT LIGHTING REGULATIONS SPECIFICALLY, AND THAT'S THAT'S EVERYTHING.
BUT THAT LAST ONE MADE ME JUST BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THAT BOUNDARY.
SO MY KIND OF QUESTION SLASH COMMENT, I GUESS IS MORE OF A QUESTION.
I GUESS HOW DOES THIS DOES IT CONNECT WITH THE SIGN ORDINANCE AT ALL? HOW DOES LIKE LIT SIGNS PLAY INTO ALL THIS, TOO? JUST IT DOES NOT.
THE SIGN ORDINANCE ACTUALLY HAS A PROVISION THAT ALL ILLUMINATION FOR SIGNAGE IS APPROVED SOLELY BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND IT HAS TO BE DOWN LIT OR INTERNALLY LIT BASICALLY.
SO EITHER INSIDE THE SIGN WHERE I CAN'T SEE THE FIXTURE OR POINTING DOWN TOWARDS THE GROUND, ARE THEY SUBJECT TO ALREADY ANY KIND OF CURFEW? NO SIGN LIGHTS.
AND WOULD THEY BE? THEY WOULD NOT. IT'S A SEPARATE, SEPARATE.
[00:45:01]
DIRECTION FOR THINKING ABOUT HOW DO WE ACTUALLY PLAN OUT GUIDE RAILS AROUND TOWNSHIP PLANNING.AND IT WAS A I THOUGHT IT WAS AN EFFECTIVE USE OF YOUR TIME BASED ON YOUR PRESENTATION.
QUICK QUESTION. DO YOU KNOW IF ANY OTHER COMMUNITIES IN THIS AREA OR IN MICHIGAN HAVE ADOPTED THE MODEL MODEL CODE OR ARE LEANING IN THIS DIRECTION? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IS GAINING POPULARITY IN THE STATE? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY IT IS.
SO TOOK SOME LESSONS THAT THEY HAD AS WELL.
BUT ANN ARBOR HAS ONE I CAN'T THINK OF OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD RIGHT NOW.
BUT I KNOW THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, ALSO HAD A VERY SIMILAR ORDINANCE TO THIS.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, I THINK IT IS AN UPWARD TRENDING TYPE OF ORDINANCE.
THANK YOU. DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY CAMPUS? ARE THEY FOLLOWING THIS? I DON'T BELIEVE. THEY HAVE ANY TYPE OF SPECIFIC REGULATIONS TO IT.
THEY MIGHT BE BY DESIGN, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE A PLAN PER SE.
SO. I'M NOT I'M NOT BEING FACETIOUS HERE WITH THIS QUESTION, BUT I HAVE TO ASK, HOW DOES THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE APPLY TO CHRISTMAS LIGHTS? SO THE CHRISTMAS LIGHTS WOULD BE ALLOWED, TEMPORARY LIGHTING WOULD BE ALLOWED IN NON COMMERCIAL AREAS, SO RESIDENTIAL AND IT WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR, I THINK, 90 CONSECUTIVE DAYS, NOT CONSECUTIVE DAYS OF THE YEAR.
SO AROUND THE HOLIDAY SEASON, CHRISTMAS LIGHTING WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED.
THE LIGHTING CURFEW I'M PROPOSING WOULD STILL APPLY TO THE CHRISTMAS LIGHTING.
TIME WINDOW. SO THAT'S HOW IT'D BE PROPOSED.
I LEARNED ABOUT TEN YEARS AGO THAT WE REGULATE CHRISTMAS LIGHTS HERE.
WE JUST DON'T TELL ANYBODY, REALLY.
SO THAT WAS THAT WAS THE BASIS OF MY QUESTION.
I KNEW THIS HAD SOME TYPE OF IMPACT.
BUT THANK YOU FOR SUCH A WONDERFUL JOB THAT YOU DID.
THANK YOU. NOT TO ARGUE WITH VICE CHAIR, BUT I JUST WANTED TO STATE THAT I, I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THIS IN THE MISCELLANEOUS ORDINANCES SECTION.
SO MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO LEAVE IT IN MISCELLANEOUS.
THANK YOU. IT FEELS LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE CLAPPING WHEN WE DO THESE THINGS.
JUST AN INTERN. HAS DONE A GREAT JOB.
I'M GLAD THAT WE WERE ABLE TO GET THIS TOGETHER FOR YOU GUYS THIS EVENING.
[10A. Goals and Objectives – Handout ]
I'M SORRY. SO, MR. CHAIR, I JUST I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEFLY GO OVER THE LAST TWO ITEMS UNDER THE MASTER PLAN UPDATE.SO WE'VE FUNCTIONALLY GOT THE FIVE OVERARCHING GOALS THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.
AND PART OF THE REASON WE'RE BRINGING THIS BACK AGAIN IS BECAUSE WE DO HAVE NEW MEMBERS.
SO WE WANT TO GET THIS BACK TOP OF MIND SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AT THE NEXT MEETING.
AND THEN THE PICAS ARE SORT OF BEING PULLED OUT AND GIVEN THEIR OWN.
NOW THAT WE'VE DEVELOPED THAT IDEA IN THE LAST PLAN, WE'RE GOING TO BUILD ON IT IN THIS PLAN.
UNDER EACH OF THOSE GOALS, 7 TO 10 BIG STATEMENTS.
AND THEN WE NEED TO BEGIN CONTINUE TO POPULATE SORT OF OUR IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX, SORT OF THE SPECIFIC HOW TO'S THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT FIVE, TEN, 20 YEARS.
BUT IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS SPECIFIC RIGHT NOW, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM NOW.
[00:50:03]
OKAY. THE MORE THE BIGGER TOPIC THAT I WANTED TO DISCUSS THIS EVENING IS TO TRY AND PUT A PUT A NOTE OF ENDING ON[10B. Urban Service Boundary – Discussion ]
THE ANY POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY.AND SO AGAIN, WE DISCUSSED THIS BRIEFLY PRIOR TO OUR NEWEST MEMBERS JOINING US.
AND SO WE WANTED TO COME BACK AT THIS TIME TO SORT OF FINALIZE WHERE WE'RE AT.
PREVIOUSLY, WE LOOKED AT THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY IN THIRDS NORTH, CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN.
I THINK EVERYONE CAN AGREE GENERALLY THE SOUTHERN AREA OF GRAND RIVER SOUTH, THERE'S REALLY NO CHANGE THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN THAT AREA BASED ON THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AND ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS.
THIS IS 60 121 GREEN ROAD AND 6117 6117 GREEN ROAD ARE SPLIT IN HALF.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO FIX IT AND EITHER PUT THEM BOTH IN OR PUT THEM BOTH OUT.
THERE'S ALREADY A HOUSE ON BOTH PROPERTIES.
THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT ANTICIPATED FOR EITHER PROPERTY.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF CLEANING THE MAP UP BECAUSE IT DRIVES ME NUTS.
WELL, ISN'T THERE A FINANCIAL ISSUE THERE? THERE IS NOT. IT HAS NO BEARING, GIVEN THAT THEY'RE ALREADY DEVELOPED PROPERTIES.
IT HAS NO BEARING ON THE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY.
NO, NO, NO. DO THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR SEWER HOOKUP? THEY DO NOT. THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO ANYTHING.
WE ARE CUTTING THEIR PROPERTY IN HALF.
OKAY. ARE THEY THOSE PROPERTIES ALREADY SERVED WITH THE UTILITIES THAT THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY IS MEANT TO LIMIT? I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY'RE SERVED.
I BELIEVE THE SEWER STOPS JUST TO THE SOUTH OF BOTH OF THEM.
SO ANY EXTENSION WOULD BE COST PROHIBITIVE JUST TO TAP INTO THEM.
WELL, WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY DON'T HOOK UP TO THE SEWER? NOTHING. THEY CAN CONTINUE TO ACT AS LONG AS THEIR SEPTIC FIELD IS IS IN WORKING CONDITION IF THEY EVER NEEDED TO HOOK UP AND IT WAS AVAILABLE, THEY COULD.
AND DO WE KNOW THE CONDITIONS OF THOSE SEWERS, OF THOSE FIELDS? WE DO NOT. IF YOU MOVE THEM OUT OF THE SERVICE BOUNDARY, THEY COULD NOT HOOK UP.
IS THAT CORRECT? IT WOULD BE THE TOWNSHIP'S INTENTION THAT THEY NOT HOOK UP.
NOW, IF SOMEONE HAD A FAILING FIELD AND THERE WAS A CONNECTION NEARBY, I THINK CERTAINLY WE WOULD BE HAVING A CONVERSATION OF HOW BEST TO SERVE OUR RESIDENTS.
BUT THE IDEA OF THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO EXTEND SERVICES, RIGHT? I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE ISSUE WAS, BUT THERE WAS A BIG ISSUE ABOUT THIS WHEN THIS BOUNDARY WAS INITIALLY ESTABLISHED, AND I NEED TO GO BACK MYSELF AND RESEARCH THAT.
WHAT DID THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE AFFECTED RIGHT THERE? THOSE RESIDENTS LIKELY HAVE NO IDEA THAT THEY'RE IN OR OUT.
THEY AND THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT OUR LAST MEETING ABOUT A DIFFERENT PROPERTY, THAT IF THIS IS A CHANGE THAT'S MADE WITHIN THE MASTER PLAN, THERE WOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT THAT THESE PROPERTIES ARE ANY OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES BE NOTIFIED TO HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE COMMENT ON IT.
BUT BUT I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE GIVEN THEM AN OPPORTUNITY, NOT JUST I HOPE THAT THEY DECIDE TO READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE THAT THE MASTER PLAN IS BEING UPDATED.
AND I HOPE THAT THEY SEE THE LITTLE LINE THAT SAYS THAT SOMETHING'S CHANGING ON THEIR PROPERTY.
BUT I KNOW THERE'S NOT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT AND I KNOW IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE TO DO THAT.
BUT I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT ENOUGH THAT SOMEHOW KNOWING WHAT THEY THINK OR THAT GIVING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AT LEAST PLEASE READ THIS MASTER PLAN CAREFULLY AND COME COMMENT IF YOU WANT TO BECAUSE IT IMPACTS YOUR PROPERTY AND THEN ON THEM TO DO ANYTHING
[00:55:05]
MORE WITH IT. BUT JUST TAKING A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A STEP TO GET..HAPPY TO REACH OUT TO THESE TWO PROPERTIES SPECIFICALLY.
LONG WAY AROUND TO SAY THAT, BUT I WOULD BE MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE IF THAT HAPPENED.
YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. IF THERE IF WE PUT THEM IN THE SERVICE.
AND SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIR.
IF WE PUT THEM IN THE SERVICE BOUNDARY AND THEIR FIELD FAILS, AREN'T THEY THEN REQUIRED TO HOOK UP AT THAT POINT? IF SEWER IS NOT AVAILABLE, THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HOOK UP.
CORRECT. BUT IF WE PUT THEM IN THE SERVICE BOUNDARY, SEWER IS AVAILABLE.
OKAY. IT IS JUST A LINE ON A MAP.
THERE STILL HAS TO BE AN EXTENSION TO THEIR PROPERTY TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE.
AND SO THEN THERE BECOMES A COST BENEFIT FOR THE HOMEOWNER THAT IF THEY ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BENEFIT FROM A 200 FOOT EXTENSION OF OUR SEWER LINE, IS THAT COST MORE THAN THE COST OF RE-ENGINEERING A FIELD? OKAY. WHO BEARS THAT COST? IT WOULD BE ON THEM AT THAT POINT.
THAT'S IT'S YEAH, IT'S LITERALLY JUST IT'S UNLIKELY TO EVER BE A SCENARIO THAT OCCURS BECAUSE THE COST OF RE-ENGINEERING A FIELD IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE CHEAPER THAN EXTENDING SEWER FOR ONE PROPERTY IN ONE HOUSE.
SO MAYBE YOU CAN REMIND ME THE SUBDIVISION RIGHT BELOW THAT.
DO WE KNOW WHEN THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED? THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.
I MEAN, THERE MAY NOT BE ANY IMMEDIATE INTEREST IN SUBDIVIDING THOSE PROPERTIES, BUT IT HAPPENS, RIGHT? I CAN TELL YOU THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE SUBDIVIDED BASED ON OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE STANDARDS.
THEY MIGHT HAVE TO BE AGGLOMERATED BEFORE THEY WERE THEN SUBDIVIDED, I GUESS.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET MORE THAN TWO PROPERTIES UNDER A CURRENT ORDINANCE.
WELL, I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF INVOLVING THE OWNERS OF THOSE PROPERTIES IN THE CONVERSATION.
SUPPORT. WE WILL REACH OUT TO THEM AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
THIS RUNS BASICALLY FROM BOY, IT JUST SLIPPED OUT OF MY TONGUE HERE JUST SOUTH OF MY TIE HEART, THE SUBDIVISION JUST SOUTH OF TIE HART DOWN TO GRAND RIVER.
AND REALLY RIGHT NOW, THE PROPERTY, THE LINE GOES SORT OF DOWN POWELL, JOGS IN, JOGS OUT AND THEN JOGS BACK DOWN GRAND RIVER.
THAT'S GEORGETOWN ISN'T IT. GEORGETOWN.
THANK YOU. IT WOULD HAVE IT WOULD HAVE CAME EVENTUALLY.
SO THE QUESTION IN FRONT OF YOU IS, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THAT WE HAVE NOW THE SILVERSTONE SUBDIVISION CLEARLY STICKS INTO THIS LINE AND YOU HAVE A PORTION OF THE DRIVING RANGE IN, BUT NOT THE MAJORITY OF IT.
ACTUALLY, THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE.
UM, DO WE LEAVE THE LINE WHERE IT IS? MOVE IT TO BE A FUNCTIONALLY A STRAIGHT LINE FROM GEORGETOWN DOWN TO GRAND RIVER, INCLUDING THE PROPERTIES ON POWELL ROAD OR THE OTHER OPTION WHICH STAFF WOULD NOT RECOMMEND, IS GOING ALL THE WAY TO CORNELL, ALTHOUGH FUNCTIONALLY THIS DOESN'T CHANGE MUCH BECAUSE THIS IS A SINGLE PROPERTY WITH A TON OF WETLANDS ON IT AND IT'S NEVER GOING TO DEVELOP ANYWAY.
THIS IS THE DOGGIE DAYCARE, WHICH IS ALSO OUTSIDE OF THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY.
SO THIS IS THE ONLY OTHER AREA TO DISCUSS.
WE WOULD WELCOME ANY FEEDBACK ON IT.
STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE TAKE THE LINE FROM GEORGETOWN DOWN TO GRAND RIVER, INCLUDING THE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR VACANT PROPERTIES HERE, THESE TWO VACANT PROPERTIES AND THE DRIVING RANGE PROPERTY.
THIS IS WHERE THE THE PAYBACK DISTRICT USED TO BE, ISN'T IT? CORRECT. PORTION OF IT?
[01:00:03]
YES. AND THAT'S NO LONGER IN EFFECT.OKAY. SO IF WE WERE TO MAKE A CHANGE LIKE THAT, DOESN'T DOES THAT GO ALONG WITH SORT OF THE BELIEF THAT THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY IS JUST CONTINUING TO EXPAND EASTWARD? I DON'T SUBSCRIBE TO THAT BELIEF.
I MEAN, FUNCTIONALLY, THIS IS THE ONLY CHANGE YOU'RE EVER GOING TO MAKE.
I MEAN, IT'S EITHER GOING TO BE, POWELL, THIS LINE OF PROPERTIES OR CORNELL, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GO EAST OF CORNELL BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. THERE'S FUNCTIONALLY ONE PROPERTY THAT COULD THEORETICALLY DEVELOP OF ANY SCALE TO THE EAST OF CORNELL.
AND REALISTICALLY, THERE'S ONLY ONE PROPERTY THAT HASN'T BEEN SUBDIVIDED IN ANY WAY TO THE EAST OF CORNELL THAT WOULD BE HAVE ANY PRESSURE ON IT, WHICH IS ALSO PART OF THE REASON NOT TO GO ALL THE WAY TO CORNELL FRANKLY.
THIS IS WHERE THE RESIDENTS START GETTING UP IN ARMS AS WE START MOVING THAT BOUNDARY EASTWARD AND THEIR FEAR OF MORE DEVELOPMENT COMING ON THE EASTERN PART OF THE TOWNSHIP GETS A LOT OF FEEDBACK.
I THINK FROM A FUNCTIONAL PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S NO WAY TO GET WATER AND SEWER OUT THERE IN A REMOTELY AFFORDABLE WAY, SO YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO HAVE ANY SORT OF DENSITY.
YOU DO UNDERSTAND THE SENTIMENT THAT I'M SHARING WITH YOU? I DO. AND I'M SIMPLY SHARING FROM A PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE, RIGHT? THIS IF THIS LINE COULD NOT EXIST AND WE'RE NOT DEVELOPING OUT TO VANNATTER ROAD, IT'S JUST NOT A REALISTIC POSSIBILITY.
I WASN'T THAT INVOLVED IN THE DISCUSSION OF THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY WHEN IT WAS DRAWN.
WHEN I SEE THAT BUMP OUT, MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT IS THAT THAT DEVELOPMENT WAS FAR ENOUGH ALONG THAT TRYING TO CUT IT OFF AT THAT POINT WAS GOING TO BE PROBLEMATIC.
AND THE FACT THAT A PLAN WAS APPROVED AND BUILT THAT HAS THE STUB STREET, WHICH STAFF MEMO MENTIONED, NOT JUST TO THE SOUTH BUT ALSO FROM DOWN FROM THE NORTH, IT WAS THE EXPECTATION THAT YOU LAID THESE OUT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO CONNECT TO SOMETHING.
THEN IT BECOMES A QUESTION OF UNDER WHAT CONDITION WOULD YOU WANT TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION TO THE BOUNDARY, WHETHER IT'S REDUCED LIGHTING OR WHETHER IT'S SOME OTHER FACETS OF WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING TO DO THERE THAT ARE WORTHY OF RELAXING THE RESTRICTION ON THAT BOUNDARY? SO YOU COULD THINK, FOR INSTANCE, IF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO DEAL WITH STORMWATER SO WELL THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO PUT FURTHER PRESSURE ON A STORMWATER SYSTEM, THEN MAYBE WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT PROVIDING, YOU KNOW, DRINKING WATER AND SANITARY SEWER TO THAT AREA.
SO THAT'S KIND OF MY PHILOSOPHICAL TAKE ON IS, IS IT ALWAYS GOING TO BE A HARD BOUNDARY OR IS IT, YOU KNOW, AS THINGS MOVE OUT INTO THE BUILD OUT AND I'M NOT THAT FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THE PROVISIONS FOR EXCEPTIONS CURRENTLY ARE.
YOU MAY NOTE ONE OF THE OBJECTIVES THAT WE HAVE FOR THE FUTURE IS TO ACTUALLY SORT OF ESTABLISH HOW WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW THIS IN THE FUTURE, BECAUSE THERE ARE NONE FROM A PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE OTHER THAN MAKING THE MAP EASIER TO READ AND MAYBE LETTING YOU SLEEP BETTER AT NIGHT. I HAVE A FIVE YEAR OLD.
I DON'T SLEEP. WHAT IS WHAT IS THE MOTIVATION FOR ACTUALLY CHANGING THE EXISTING LINE? SO MY POINT ALL ALONG HAS BEEN THAT IF WE DO NOT AT LEAST DISCUSS IT ROBUSTLY EVERY TIME THAT WE HAVE A MASTER PLAN UPDATE, WE ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE CHALLENGED.
SO STAFF IS PROVIDING YOU WITH THE ARGUMENT TO CHANGE IT.
AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN IN FIVE YEARS WHEN WE DO THE MASTER PLAN.
[01:05:04]
IT MAY NOT BE THIS EXACT CHANGE, BUT THERE WILL BE OTHER CHANGES THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE VETTING THIS THING AT ALL STAGES, BECAUSE THERE WILL BE A POINT AT WHICH WE GET CHALLENGED ON IT.THERE'S NO QUESTION IN MY MIND.
SO THERE'S NO NO REQUIREMENT AT ALL TO TO MAKE THAT CHANGE.
WE'RE SIMPLY MAKING SURE THAT WE REVIEW IT PROPERLY.
SO IT'LL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHEN IT GETS TO THEIR LEVEL.
AND I THINK WE'LL LEARN A LOT ABOUT HOW THIS SITUATION CAME ABOUT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.
YEAH, I GUESS MY LAST COMMENT WOULD BE IS SO I'M I'M LIKE FUNDAMENTALLY IN SUPPORT OF THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY PHILOSOPHICALLY, BECAUSE IT'S LIKE THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF HOUSING.
AND SO IT FEELS LIKE IN THEORY THAT IF A DEVELOPER WANTED TO DEVELOP MORE HOUSING IN THIS AREA, IF IT WAS TO SHIFT EAST OFF OF POWELL ROAD, THEN THAT COULD BECOME ADDITIONAL HOUSING BECAUSE IT WOULD THEN BE SERVED BY OUR MAIN SEWER.
IS THAT A CORRECT ASSUMPTION? CERTAINLY IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE GOING TO IF YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE THE BOUNDARY, IT'S IT'S ONLY GOING TO BE HOUSING WITH THE EXCEPTION, I WOULD SAY, OF THE THE DRIVING RANGE IS ON GRAND RIVER. THERE'S CERTAINLY A IT'S CERTAINLY A VIABLE COMMERCIAL OR MIXED USE SITE.
BUT EVERYTHING ELSE, IT'S GOING TO BE HOUSING.
IT'S IT'S GOING TO BE HOUSING PROBABLY AT THE EXACT SAME SIZE AND ROUGH LAYOUT AS GEORGETOWN AND SILVERSTONE BECAUSE THAT IS THE ESTABLISHED PATTERN IN THE AREA.
WELL, ONE OF THE LARGE PARCELS THERE IS ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
THERE'S A WHOLE NOTHER COMPLICATION.
AND I DO HAVE A CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL OPINION DISCUSSING THAT WHICH I AM UNABLE TO SHARE WITH YOU.
WHAT HOW DOES THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY INTERACT WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SITE? AND IT'S COMPLICATED.
MUDDY AS THE AS THE RED CEDAR WAS LAST WEEK.
AND JUST SO FOR MY OWN AWARENESS.
SO THE STATE OWNS THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
NO. NO. THEY'RE LOCALLY OWNED PROPERTY.
OKAY. BUT THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR ZONING REGULATIONS.
YEAH, THAT WAS MY SECOND QUESTION.
THE QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE THEY SUBJECT TO? AND THAT IS A TOPIC OF SOME DEBATE.
OKAY. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO SOIL EROSION CONTROL AND THEY ARE SUBJECT.
TO LOCATION OF CURB CUTS BECAUSE THAT AFFECTS THE LOCAL ROADS.
THEY ARE CERTAINLY SUBJECT TO WATER AND SEWER DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
THEY HAVE TO BUILD IT THE WAY WE WOULD EXPECT IT TO BE BUILT.
ONCE YOU GET BEYOND THAT, IT GETS PRETTY CLEAR THAT THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO A LOT ELSE.
THAT'S INTERESTING. AND JUST TO CIRCLE BACK TO THE QUESTION OF THE NEIGHBORING SUBDIVISION ON GREEN ROAD IS 1960 WERE THOSE HOUSES LARGELY BUILT? THANK YOU TIM.
THE BUILDOUT OF GEORGETOWN AND THE THERE'S A SUBDIVISION ACROSS TO THE EAST OF GEORGETOWN THAT'S DOWN BY JUST NORTH OF DOGGIE DAYCARE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE ROAD.
MY QUESTION IS, WHAT'S THE WATER PRESSURE LIKE IN THAT AREA NOW? AND DO WE HAVE SUFFICIENT WATER FOR OUR FIREFIGHTERS TO DEAL WITH A PROBLEM OVER THERE? UM, I'M I'M HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY PRESSURE ISSUES ANYWHERE IN OUR SYSTEM.
WE RUN AT A PRETTY HIGH PSI AND IT'S PRETTY CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT.
BUT CERTAINLY WHEN YOU GET TO DEAD ENDS, YOU DO HAVE PROBLEMS OCCASIONALLY.
I CAN FOLLOW UP ON THAT, THOUGH.
SO THE FIRST THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT AT FIRST UP IN THAT SUBDIVISION YOU JUST MENTIONED, AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT MOVING THE BOUNDARY BECAUSE IT GOES RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF A PARCEL.
[01:10:01]
BUT CAN YOU I'M SORRY, CAN YOU CAN YOU JUST SAY ONE MORE TIME? WHY THE OTHER ONE? IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO SPLIT A PARCEL OR DOES IT? I'M LOOKING AT THE PARCEL VIEWER AND IT SEEMS TO ALIGN WITH WHY SPECIFICALLY THIS ONE? BECAUSE THERE ARE LOTS OF PLACES WHERE IT'S SUPER JAGGED.SO IF IT WAS A THINNER LINE, YOU COULD SEE THAT THE PARCEL IN THE BACK COMES AROUND TO THE ROAD.
SO IT'S THE BACK TAIL OF IT THAT GETS CUT OFF.
SO THE BLUE LINE IS A LITTLE THICK HERE, BUT ON THE GREEN ROAD.
OKAY. YES. YEAH, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE GREEN ROAD.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER ONE.
WHY IS THAT ONE AN AREA OF FOCUS? FUNCTIONALLY, IT'S THE ONLY THERE.
WE JUST SPLIT THE LINE UP INTO THREE PARTS IS THAT YOU HAVE A NORTHERN MIDDLE AND A SOUTHERN.
THE DRIVING RANGE PARCEL IS SPLIT A PORTION OF ITS END PORTION OF ITS OUT.
OKAY. UM, ALSO IT HAS GRAND RIVER FRONTAGE.
AND AT THAT POINT THEN YOU JUST HAVE THOSE FOUR REMAINING PARCELS TO THE NORTH AND IT WOULD LOOK EVEN MORE OUT OF PLACE IF YOU ONLY CHANGED IT FOR THE SCHOOL AND THE GRAND RIVER PARCEL.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S BEEN GERRYMANDERED TO GET AROUND THE GEORGETOWN SUBDIVISION.
WELL, I DON'T LIKE GERRYMANDERING.
I KNOW, BUT IT LOOKS THAT WAY.
AND I NOTICED ON YOUR YOUR DRAWING THERE, YOU'VE GOT TWO YELLOW LINES, ONE ON CORNELL AND ONE LOOKS LIKE THE REAR PROPERTY LINES OF THOSE PARCELS. YES.
AND TO MY MIND IT WOULD MAKE SOME SORT OF SENSE TO GO TO THE EASTERN LINE, NOT ON POWELL ROAD BUT THE REAR OF THOSE PARCELS AS A STRAIGHT LINE DOWN.
AT LEAST IT TREATS ALL OF THE PROPERTY ON IMMEDIATELY ON POWELL ROAD, JUST TO THE EAST.
SIMILARLY. WHERE YOU GO OVER TO CORNELL? YEAH. THEY MADE THE ISSUE.
YEAH. SO BUT THAT'S THAT'S MY THINKING ON IT BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THOSE FOUR PROPERTIES HAVE JUST BEEN INTENTIONALLY EXCLUDED TO MAKE WAY FOR THE GEORGETOWN.
YEAH. AND THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S ASKING FOR SOME LEGAL CHALLENGE.
WELL, WE APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK AS WE TRY TO START FINALIZING PIECES OF THE PLAN.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE NOW ON ITEM NUMBER 11, TOWNSHIP BOARD UPDATE.
[11A. Township Board update. ]
I WILL GIVE A BRIEF UPDATE.AND THEY COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE SHOULD PROBABLY TAKE CARE OF THIS.
I CAN ALSO TELL YOU THAT THE TOWNSHIP BOARD HAD AN EXCELLENT DISCUSSION ABOUT THE SIGN ORDINANCE RECENTLY AND HAS FORMALLY INTRODUCED IT FOR ADOPTION AT THE IT WILL BE ADOPTED AT THE NEXT MEETING.
I DON'T, THE INTENTION IS FOR IT TO BE ADOPTED.
I DON'T PRESUME TO SPEAK FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS.
I APOLOGIZE, MADAM SUPERVISOR.
THEY DID HAVE ONE RECOMMENDED CHANGE WITH RESPECT TO A NOT REALLY ABANDONED SIGNS, BUT FUNCTIONALLY THAT'S WHAT WE ENDED UP CATEGORIZING AT, IS WHEN A BUSINESS LEAVES AND THE SIGN IS NOT REMOVED IN A TIMELY FASHION.
THERE WAS A DESIRE TO ADDRESS THAT.
IT'S A STICKY TOPIC THAT WE'VE TRIED.
I'VE TRIED IN PREVIOUS COMMUNITIES TO ADDRESS, AND WE'RE THE ATTORNEYS.
OUR ATTORNEYS DEVELOPED A GOOD APPROACH THAT WE THINK WILL WORK HERE.
[01:15:03]
SO IT'S A SMALL PROBLEM, BUT IT'S A PROBLEM NONETHELESS, AND WE THINK WE HAVE A GOOD WAY TO ADDRESS IT.AFTER FIVE YEARS, I'M GOING TO BE GLAD TO BE NOT BE TALKING ABOUT SIGNS AGAIN.
UNTIL IT'S ADOPTED AND SOMEONE COMES AND COMPLAINS ABOUT THE NEW SIGN ORDINANCE.
WE'RE TRYING. ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE TOWNSHIP? THAT IS WHAT I HAVE RIGHT NOW.
DO YOU HAVE ANY LIAISON REPORTS?
[11B. Liaison reports. ]
THE ONLY REPORT I'VE GOT I ATTEND.I ATTENDED THE MOST RECENT MEETING OF THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
THEY FINALLY HAD A MEETING WITH THE QUORUM, WHICH HAS BEEN A MAJOR ISSUE FOR THEM.
AND THEY ELECTED NEW, NEW OFFICERS.
AND THAT'S ABOUT AS MUCH AS THEY WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH.
BUT IT WAS A MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENT GIVEN THE HISTORY OF THAT ORGANIZATION.
SO THEY NOW HAVE A FUNCTIONAL QUORUM AND AND A NEW SET OF OFFICERS.
OKAY. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY LIAISON REPORTS PROJECT UPDATES? OH, DID YOU HAVE THEM? I ATTENDED THE EDC MEETING, BUT THERE WAS NOT A LOT TAKING PLACE THERE THAT WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE MEETING BEFORE THAT I REPORTED ON THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
SO YOU'RE CONTINUING TO MOVE FORWARD.
THEY DO HAVE ONE ANNOUNCEMENT.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A JUNETEENTH EVENT AND THAT IS SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 17TH THROUGH THE 19TH.
THERE WILL BE A CELEBRATION OF JUNETEENTH, WHICH IS JUNE 19TH, BUT THE EVENTS WILL BE TAKING PLACE ON THAT FRIDAY AND SATURDAY, JUNE 19TH, I BELIEVE, IS ON A SUNDAY.
AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THINGS.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ADVERTISEMENT AND A LISTING ON THE TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE WITH THE EVENTS THAT ARE COMING UP.
THEY'LL BE SHOWING A MOVIE, TWO MOVIES.
THAT'S CORRECT. THEY'LL BE SHOWING TWO MOVIES OUTSIDE AT THE THE CHAPEL IN THE HISTORIC VILLAGE.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH JUNETEENTH, JUNETEENTH, BUT JUNETEENTH IS THE CELEBRATION OF THE ACTUAL ENDING OF SLAVERY A YEAR AND A HALF AFTER IT ENDED.
SO TO GIVE YOU A JUST A ROUGH IDEA.
VERY GOOD. INCIDENTALLY, I JUST WANT TO TAKE A SECOND TO THANK COMMISSIONER SCALES FOR SENDING OUT THAT COPIES OF THAT DOCUMENT THAT YOU HAD, PROVED TO BE VERY HELPFUL.
THANK YOU. PARDON? I'M SORRY. YOU SENT OUT AN EMAIL TO ALL OF US WITH THAT DOCUMENT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE INFORMATION WE SHARE BECAUSE WE CARE.
AND WE SHOULD THANK DIRECTOR SCHMITT FOR SETTING IT UP SO I COULD ATTEND.
WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOU FORWARDING AROUND.
ANY TIME YOU HAVE, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEND PEOPLE TO TRAINING.
WE ALWAYS APPRECIATE IT WHEN THEY SHARE THE INFORMATION.
CAN I PILE ON AND CONGRATULATE? THANK DIRECTOR SCHMITT FOR SENDING ALONG THE NOTICE OF MSU'S OPEN HOUSE ON THEIR LAND USE PLAN.
THERE'S SOME FAIRLY INTERESTING IDEAS THAT ARE IN THOSE MAPS, SO IF YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO GO TO THE BUILDING AND LOOK AT IT, I THINK IT'S KIND OF A FREE FLOW EVENT. IT IS.
SO BUT THEY'VE GOT SOME INTERACTIVE STUFF, GOGGLES AND COOL STUFF BECAUSE IT'S A STEM BUILDING VR FLY THROUGH THE PROPOSED CHANGES. AND I WILL SAY THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES, THEY HAVE REALLY TRIED TO REACH OUT TO US BECAUSE THEIR VISION FOR THE HEALTH SCIENCES CORRIDOR REALLY DOES DIRECTLY IMPACT MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.
[01:20:06]
TO SHARE OUR INPUT EARLY AND OFTEN.IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, CAN WE REQUEST THERE MAYBE NOT THEM, BUT THE STAFF TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION ON THAT STUFF? I'M HAPPY TO REACH OUT TO CAMPUS PLANNER AND SEE WHAT THEIR ROAD SHOW LOOKS LIKE BECAUSE AS THEY'RE ROLLING IT OUT NOW, I WOULD CONSIDER STEVE A FRIEND, SO I'M HAPPY TO TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT THAT.
I JUST YOU MADE ME THINK OF LIKE SO I WORK IN INSURANCE BUT SO I MEAN, WE HAVE INSURANCE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES HERE IN THE TOWNSHIP, WHICH WOULD BE A VIABLE PARTNERSHIP IN THAT CORRIDOR, I WOULD SUSPECT.
ABSOLUTELY. WORST CASE, I KNOW THE HIGH LEVEL.
I JUST LOOKED AT THE DATES, BUT I WASN'T SURE IF I WAS GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT.
SO ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE WE ARE ON PUBLIC REMARKS AND REMARKS.
ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT NO ONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHES TO MAKE PRESENTATIONS.
SO WE'RE NOW AT THE LAST ITEM, WHICH IS ADJOURNMENT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.