Aug 14, 2023 Planning Commission

[00:01:07]

MIC] ALL RIGHT. TODAY IS AUGUST 14TH.

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

FIRST THING WE DO IS CALL THE ROLL.

VICE CHAIR TREZISE HERE.

COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY NOTIFIED US SHE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MAKE IT.

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL HERE.

COMMISSIONER MCCURTIS HERE.

MR. SCALES HERE.

COMMISSIONER BROOKS HERE.

COMMISSIONER SNYDER HERE.

COMMISSIONER RICHARDS HERE.

AND THE CHAIR BLUMER IS HERE.

WE HAVE A QUORUM. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT THERE ARE NO PUBLIC PRESENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC REMARKS.

SO THE NEXT ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.

[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

A SECOND? SUPPORTED BY COMMISSIONER TREZISE.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. THERE'S NO OPPOSITION.

THE AGENDA IS APPROVED.

WE HAVE THE MINUTES FROM.

WE HAVE NO MORE SO MOVED.

DON'T FORGET, THAT'S WHAT OUR TRAINING TAUGHT US.

LET'S [INAUDIBLE].

MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.

ALL RIGHT. THE AGENDA IS APPROVED WITH THE CONDITION THAT WE'LL STRAIGHTEN OUT THE TERMINOLOGY.

[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JULY 24TH MEETING.

I MOVE WE APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JULY 24TH 2023 MEETING.

SUPPORT. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES.

THERE IS NO OPPOSITION.

THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED.

COMMUNICATIONS. ARE THERE COMMUNICATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO BE AWARE OF?

[6. COMMUNICATIONS]

OFFICIALLY, FOR THE RECORD, ONCE WE GET TO THAT POINT.

VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT.

PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THIS DOESN'T QUALIFY AS A PUBLIC HEARING, DOES IT? CORRECT. OKAY.

SO THERE ARE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON TODAY'S AGENDA.

THEREFORE, WE MOVE INTO UNFINISHED BUSINESS.

AND THIS. THERE IS NO UNFINISHED BUSINESS SCHEDULED FOR THIS MEETING.

OTHER BUSINESS? NONE.

SO WE ARE NOW ON ITEM TEN DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT MASTER PLAN.

[10A. Draft Master Plan Discussion]

AND WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL JUST BRIEFLY GO THROUGH THINGS FOR THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WEREN'T HERE LAST TIME AND FOR THOSE THAT WOULD LIKE A QUICK REFRESHER AS TO WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THE DRAFT. AND THEN I'D LIKE TO BRIEFLY THEN TOUCH ON COMMISSIONER BROOKS COMMENTS JUST OFF THE BAT SINCE I HAVE THOSE IN FRONT OF ME.

SO AGAIN, UPDATE TO THE FIVE YEAR MASTER PLAN, THIS STRESS ON THE UPDATE, GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE PANDEMIC, THAT WE ARE STILL TRUDGING THROUGH A LOT, A LOT BOTH HAS CHANGED AND HASN'T CHANGED.

AND SO FROM A DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, WE VIEW THIS AS AN ITERATION OF THE PREVIOUS PLAN, WHICH WAS A COMPLETE OVERHAUL OF OUR PLAN.

AND SO WE'VE SET IT UP IN CONSISTENT WITH THE FORMAT OF OUR BRAND STANDARDS FROM THE TOWNSHIP.

AND AGAIN, ALL THE APPRECIATION IN THE WORLD TO THE COMMUNICATIONS TEAM THAT HAVE WORKED ON THIS.

IT'S IT'S REALLY GOOD.

WE'RE REALLY WE'RE REALLY HAPPY WITH THE WAY IT LOOKS.

I WILL POINT OUT THAT ON EACH OF THESE ITEMS IN THE TABLE OF CONTENTS, YOU CAN CLICK ON IT AND GO DIRECTLY TO THAT PAGE IF YOU JUST WANT TO LOOK AT SOMETHING SPECIFIC.

UM, IT STARTS OFF WITH A BRIEF EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TALKING ABOUT THE UPDATE AND THE MINIMAL, THE RELATIVELY MINIMAL CHANGES THAT ARE MADE TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY AND THE REALLY THE BIG CHANGES IS UPDATING THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES TO OUR CURRENT SITUATION.

[00:05:05]

PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH IS IN THE PREVIOUS PLAN, ENHANCE THE VIABILITY OF TOWNSHIP BUSINESSES WHICH WAS IN THE PREVIOUS PLAN.

MAINTAIN OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICES WHICH IS SLIGHTLY TWEAKED.

I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.

WHAT WAS THE PASSWORD FOR THE [INAUDIBLE].

SO THE PASSWORD FOR THE WI-FI? YES. JUST ONE SECOND.

I APOLOGIZE. NO, NO, IT'S IT'S OKAY.

IT'S MERIDIAN GUEST IS OBVIOUSLY THE NETWORK AND THE PASSWORD IS CAPITAL M IN MERIDIAN GUEST ALL ONE WORD WITH AN EXCLAMATION POINT AT THE END.

THERE WE GO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU'RE WELCOME. AGAIN, MAINTAIN OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICES IS SORT OF A BLEND OF A COUPLE FROM THE PREVIOUS PLAN, TRYING TO STILL COVER THAT, FURTHER ANALYZE THE POTENTIAL INTENSITY CHANGE AREAS IS SOMETHING NEW THAT WE'VE ADDED BECAUSE WE WANT TO BUILD ON THOSE PIECES THAT WE SPENT TIME WORKING ON AND CREATING IN THE LAST PLAN.

AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS BALANCE, ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION AND STRATEGIC GROWTH.

THIS IS REALLY TRYING TO GET AT THE HEART OF SOME OF THE WORK THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE DOING IN THE FUTURE HERE.

UM, THERE'S ALSO A SERIES OF ITEMS THAT WE'VE INCLUDED THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, THESE SPECIFIC, RELATIVELY SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T WANT TO LOSE IN THE BLENDING THEM INTO ANOTHER GOAL OR THAT THEY DIDN'T REALLY FALL INTO ANOTHER GOAL SPECIFICALLY.

AND SO THIS REALLY IS WHAT I CONSIDER THE START OF SORT OF OUR IMPLEMENTATION.

LIKE THESE ARE SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT WE CAN TACKLE START TO TACKLE RELATIVELY QUICKLY.

THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IS WHAT IS THE NUTS AND BOLTS.

THIS IS THE MAP THAT SHOWS ROUGHLY WHERE THINGS ARE PROPOSED WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP.

WE HAVE WE DO NOW HAVE ACTIVE LINKS.

SO IF YOU CLICK ON THIS, IT IT WILL TAKE YOU DIRECTLY TO THE MAP.

THE PLAN ITSELF, ALL THIS TAX REALLY IS JUST GETTING INTO THE SPECIFICS OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE.

SO RELATIVELY FEW CHANGES IN THIS PLAN.

THE ZONING PLAN IS THE AS I SAID LAST TIME, SORT OF THE NEXUS BETWEEN THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THIS IS WHAT KIND OF CONNECTS THE TWO PIECES.

AND THEN THERE'S A COUPLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE.

THESE ARE ACTUALLY CARRYOVERS FROM THE PREVIOUS PLAN WE'LL CONTINUE TO IMPLEMENT THESE AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

THE POTENTIAL INTENSITY CHANGE AREAS.

SO STAFF'S APPROACH TO THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

UM, SO THIS IS THE INFORMATION THAT'S IN THE PREVIOUS PLAN.

WE HAVE IT POSTED TO THE WEBSITE AND EACH OF THE EACH OF THE THREE PICAS HAS A TWO PAGER OUT OF THE PREVIOUS PLAN.

WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING AS PART OF THIS UPDATE IS THAT WE BUILD ON THOSE AND GIVE THEM A LITTLE MORE FOCUS AS WE GO FORWARD AND SPEND SOME TIME CREATING SMALL AREA PLANS, YOU KNOW, GET SOME FOCUS ON THEM.

WE'VE HAD SUCCESS WITH HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE PICAS THAT WAS ONE OF THE PRIORITY SITES THROUGH THE MEDC, AND IT IS VERY CLOSE TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION.

I WAS HOPING TO BE ABLE TO SAY WHEN, BUT WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET.

SO WE THINK THAT BUILDING ON THIS PICA CONCEPT OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IS GOING TO BE A GOOD OUTCOME FOR THE TOWNSHIP.

THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY, AGAIN, AS I'VE MENTIONED MULTIPLE TIMES THROUGH MY TIME HERE, WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT.

WE HAVE TO STUDY IT EVERY TIME WE DO A MASTER PLAN.

UPDATE BECAUSE IT WAS ADOPTED AS PART OF THE MASTER PLAN, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TWO CHANGES THAT WE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD.

WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGAIN, LINKS ARE ACTIVE, SO YOU CAN CLICK ON IT AND GO TO THE OVERALL MAP.

THE BUILD OUT ANALYSIS IS THE NEWEST PIECE.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF WORKED ON TO TRY AND GET A SENSE OF WHERE ARE WE GOING FROM HERE IN TERMS OF RAW NUMBERS? THIS IS A FIRST GLANCE AT THIS.

WE HOPE TO SPEND SOME MORE TIME ON THIS OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS AND HAVE A MORE ROBUST ANALYSIS FOR THE NEXT MASTER PLAN UPDATE.

AND THEN WE WE KIND OF WE CLOSE THE PLAN WITH THE GOOD STUFF, THE NATURAL FEATURES THAT WE FIND IN THE TOWNSHIP.

AND WE'RE NOT, AGAIN, NOT TRYING TO RECREATE THE WHEEL.

A LOT OF THIS IS IN THE EXISTING PLAN.

A LOT OF THIS IS IN THE PARKS PLAN.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS TO GET PEOPLE AWARE OF THESE ITEMS SO THEY CAN GO SEEK MORE INFORMATION IF THEY SO DESIRE.

TALKING ABOUT TRANSPORTATION, THESE ALL THESE LINKS, AGAIN, ACTIVE LINKS TO THE TOPIC AT HAND.

THIS IS THE PATHWAY MASTER PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED LAST YEAR, EARLY LAST YEAR.

[00:10:02]

MY EYESIGHT IS TERRIBLE.

UM, THESE ARE [INAUDIBLE] AND LIGHT CONSUMERS ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PIECES.

AND THIS IS THE OTHER PLANS IN THE TOWNSHIP THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE SPECIFICALLY REFERENCED THE PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN, CLIMATE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND THE DDA INTEGRATED PLAN.

AND AS THESE PLANS GET UPDATED, WE WILL BE ABLE TO THESE LINKS WILL AUTOMATICALLY UPDATE.

SO YOU'LL HAVE THE MOST RECENT ONE AT EACH OF THESE PLACES.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE FIND OURSELVES WITH THE THE DRAFT MASTER PLAN.

AND IF YOU'LL INDULGE ME WHILE I HAVE THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEFLY TALK ABOUT COMMISSIONER BROOKS QUESTIONS BEFORE WE, UM, BUT YEAH.

I'M WONDERING IF OUR INTENTION IS TO GO SORT OF PARTICULAR ORDER AND IT'S ACTUALLY A FAIRLY LONG DOCUMENT, 26 PAGES.

YEAH. AND A LOT OF IT WE'VE SEEN BEFORE AND WE DON'T HAVE TO GO INTO GREAT DETAIL ON EVERYTHING.

BUT I'M JUST WONDERING, DO YOU WANT TO STRUCTURE THE DISCUSSION AROUND SORT OF HIGH LEVEL STUFF FIRST AND THEN START DRILLING DOWN IN THE DETAILS, SEE HOW FAR WE GET OR BECAUSE I COULD RATTLE OFF 30, BUT THAT DOESN'T SEEM INSTRUCTIVE.

I APOLOGIZE. I'M ALSO CURIOUS ABOUT KIND OF HOW WE WANT TO STRUCTURE THE CONVERSATION AND IF TONIGHT IS GOING TO BE OUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY OR . ABSOLUTELY NOT. SO I WILL SAY WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO GET OUT OF TONIGHT IS IF THERE ARE ANY MAJOR ISSUES OR CHANGES THAT WE NEED TO MAKE, WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THOSE NOW SO THAT WHAT OUR GOAL IS TO SO UNDER AND I SHOULD HAVE PREFACED THIS AT THE BEGINNING, AS I DID LAST TIME, BUT UNDER THE MICHIGAN ENABLING LEGISLATION, ONCE WE DO A NOTICE OF INTENT TO PLAN AT THE BEGINNING, WE TAKE OUR TIME, PUT THE PLAN TOGETHER, AND THEN ONCE WE HAVE A DRAFT, WE ESSENTIALLY GO INTO A QUIET PERIOD OF 63 DAYS, WHICH ALLOWS ALL THE SURROUNDING AGENCIES, ALL THE UTILITIES, ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE WHATEVER COMMENT THEY WANT TO MAKE.

AND SO OBVIOUSLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT AS MUCH AS WE WANT DURING THAT PERIOD.

BUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS WE NEED TO GET TO A POINT WHERE THAT DRAFT IS OUT THERE.

SO WHAT WE'RE HOPING IS TO GET A MAJOR HIGH LEVEL STUFF NOW AT THE NEXT MEETING, ASK THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION REFER THE MATTER TO THE TOWNSHIP BOARD FOR DISTRIBUTION ONLY. AND THEN I KNOW THAT THE CHAIRPERSON HAS HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SUPERVISOR ABOUT HAVING POTENTIALLY A JOINT MEETING.

CERTAINLY WE WILL GET COMMENT FROM SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES AND OTHER AGENCIES AND WHATEVER OTHER COMMENT THAT THE PUBLIC OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS OVER THE COURSE OF THIS OF THOSE 63 DAYS, TRY AND INCORPORATE THAT ALL INTO A PLAN THAT WE WILL HOPEFULLY ADOPT NOVEMBER.

IT SEEMS TO ME THE BEST WAY FOR US TO DO THIS IS TO START OFF BY ASKING IF ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY MAJOR QUESTIONS, CONFUSION ABOUT THE PROJECT OR THE OUTLINE THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED THUS FAR.

ANYBODY WANT TO RAISE ANY ISSUES SIMPLY ON WHERE WE'RE GOING IN TERMS OF PROCESS? YEAH. ARE YOU CLEAR ON THAT? ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS THAT THEY WANT TO MAKE ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE SEEN THUS FAR WITH THE PRESENTATION FROM THE FROM THE TOWNSHIP PLANNING STAFF? I'D LIKE US TO ADDRESS COMMISSIONER BROOKS ISSUE, SINCE WE HAVE THOSE HIGH AND LOW OUT IN FRONT OF US.

I'M SORRY. I THINK IN TERMS OF EXCUSE ME FOR BUTTING IN HERE, BUT I THOUGHT THE AGREEMENT WAS WE WERE GOING TO GET AT THE HIGH LEVEL AND SO WE'D HAVE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT HIS AND SEE WHICH ONES OF THOSE ARE HIGH LEVEL AND WHICH ONES AREN'T.

IF WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THE HIGH LEVEL FIRST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE FEEDBACK TO THE STAFF SO THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD.

YEAH. MY RECOMMENDATION, IF I MIGHT, MR. CHAIR, WAS THAT WE START WITH THE GOALS SINCE THERE'S A VERY LIMITED NUMBER OF THEM.

AND IF THE SORT OF IF WE'RE OKAY AT THAT LEVEL, THEN WE CAN MOVE INTO SOME OF THE MORE DETAILED PARTS.

DOES THAT MAKE SOME SENSE? NO, I AGREE WITH THAT AND I DON'T THINK THAT'LL TAKE US LONG BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN THESE BEFORE.

BUT SO AND I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT COMMISSIONER BROOKS COMMENTS TO SEE IF ANY OF THEM ADDRESS SOMETHING AT THE LEVEL OF A GOAL.

THEY ALL SEEM PRETTY SPECIFIC.

YEAH. AS I LOOK THEM OVER.

YEAH, I AGREE.

IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THESE ARE MORE DETAIL ORIENTED QUESTIONS RATHER THAN OVERALL GOALS.

[00:15:05]

YEAH. LET ME START IT OFF BY ASKING.

IT'S PRETTY CLEAR TO EVERYONE THAT MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP HAS TWO PRIMARY SISTER JURISDICTIONS, MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY AND EAST LANSING, THAT ARE VERY CLOSE TO US IN IN ALL ASPECTS.

IS ONE OF THE GOALS TO COORDINATE OUR MASTER PLAN WITH THE MASTER PLANS OF THOSE TWO OTHER AGENCIES.

WELL, SO TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN DO THAT, WE OBVIOUSLY THAT'S WHAT OUR THAT'S WHAT THE DISTRIBUTION AND COMMENT PROCESS IS INTENDED TO DO. IN THE SAME WHEN THEY WOULD SEND SOMETHING TO US.

WE'VE OBVIOUSLY AND I BELIEVE I'VE DISTRIBUTED THIS PREVIOUSLY TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT THE PLANNING PROCESS THAT OCCURRED IN THE LAST YEAR AT MICHIGAN STATE, AND I PARTICIPATED IN THAT MULTIPLE TIMES AND UNDERSTOOD WHERE WE CAN HAVE AN IMPACT AND WHERE WE CAN'T.

AND THERE ARE ACTUALLY A COUPLE OF GOALS WITHIN THE EXISTING PLAN ABOUT HOW DO WE FURTHER THAT, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF A COUPLE OF THINGS.

ONE, THAT WE'VE GOT THE VANCAMP CENTER ON DAWN AVENUE WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE GOING FORWARD? HOW DO WE SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES WITHIN THERE TO BE A PART, YOU KNOW, AS THEY'VE STARTED IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, HOW DO WE HELP GROW THEM IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP? AND THEN WHAT IS THE WHAT IS THE INTERACTION ON HAGEDORN ROAD LOOK LIKE GOING FORWARD? I THINK WITH MICHIGAN STATE'S NEW PLAN OF HAVING THE MEDICAL CAMPUS START TO TURN OUTWARDS TOWARDS HAGEDORN AND THE PURCHASE OF THE I PROPERTIES BY MICHIGAN STATE.

AND SO I THINK TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY ARE ALIGNED WITH US AND WE UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY'RE HEADED, I THINK THAT'S THE KEY TO WE CAN'T THEY TEND TO SWING A LITTLE HIGHER WEIGHT THAN I DO, BUT THEY ARE VERY MUCH TRYING TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AT ALL TIMES.

SO I WILL SAY THAT THERE IS SOME THERE IS COORDINATION TO THE EXTENT WE CAN COORDINATE.

QUESTIONS? WELL, I HAVE SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED TO ME ABOUT ONE OF THE ACTUALLY THE GOAL THAT'S ON HERE.

BUT IF WE'RE ARE WE AT THAT STAGE OF DIVING AT THE GOAL LEVEL? YEAH. IF IT'S A IF IT'S A GOAL QUESTION OR OBJECTIVE, GO FOR IT.

I THINK IT'S MAINLY WORDING AS I READ THAT THE TITLE, WHICH I THINK IS PROBABLY INHERITED FROM THE EXISTING MASTER PLAN.

IT IS, AND IT SOUNDS WONDERFUL.

I THINK A PLANNING CONSULTANT COULD EASILY COME UP WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BUT WHEN I LOOK AT PRESERVING AND A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO PRESERVE IT FROM. AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE SECTION THAT DESCRIBES SOMETHING THAT A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD BE PRESERVED FROM. AND I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS MEAN.

AS I READ FURTHER DOWN IN THE DETAILS, I SEE FUTURE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS, EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH IN MY EXPERIENCE TEND TO BE SINGLE FAMILY OR CONDO ASSOCIATIONS THAT HAVE THAT ASSOCIATE.

BUT THE OTHER HALF OF OUR POPULATION THAT LIVES IN MULTIFAMILY HOUSING IS NOT TYPICALLY A MEMBER OF AN ASSOCIATION OR I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

IS THAT HOW DOES THAT AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN MAYBE FIND SOME WORDS NOT AS A GROUP, BUT THAT SOMEHOW ALIGN BETTER WITH THE OBJECTIVES THAT ARE SPELLED OUT THERE, WHICH TO ME LOOK LIKE LET'S EVOLVE OUR HOUSING STOCK TO MEET CHANGING NEEDS, WHETHER IT'S FOR HOME BUSINESSES OR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS OR A BROADER RANGE OF PEOPLE AND A BROADER RANGE OF CONFIGURATIONS.

SEEMS TO ME THE GREAT STUFF THAT'S GOING ON IN THAT UNDER THAT GOAL.

BUT THE TITLE KIND OF FEELS LIKE, SORRY, IT'S PROTECTING PROPERTY VALUES.

YOU KNOW, IT KIND OF FEELS THAT AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THE THE SPECIFIC STUFF IN THERE IS ABOUT.

DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE? AM I AM I BEING TOO NITPICKY WITH THE WORDING? RIGHT. MY LISTENING TO YOU I SEE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.

PRESERVES IMPLIES STATUS QUO AND MUCH THAT IS IN THERE TALKS ABOUT CHANGING THE STATUS QUO.

WE STILL WANT TO PRESERVE THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE WANT TO MAINTAIN, WE HAVE GOOD HOUSING STOCK, WE WANT TO HAVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE.

BUT THE GOALS ARE LISTED UNDERNEATH THAT DO NOT REALLY LOOK AT PRESERVATION OF CURRENT SITUATION AS MUCH AS ADAPTING. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT.

[00:20:09]

AND SO AND WE'RE SEEING LOTS OF NEW COMING ON BOARD.

I GUESS I'D QUESTION IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS OR NOT AS OPPOSED TO, AGAIN, GETTING BACK TO THE SINGLE FAMILY OR THE SMALLER HOUSING UNITS, THAT SORT OF THING.

SO I GUESS TO ME, A MAJOR QUESTION IS DO WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE WITH EVERYTHING WE HAVE GOING ON NOW AND WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS? NEW MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS.

I GUESS I MYSELF WOULD SAY THE ENCOURAGE IS TOO STRONG FOR ME.

AND I KNOW THAT'S WHAT'S SELLING FINANCIALLY RIGHT NOW.

BUT I GUESS AT LEAST IN DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER WE REALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE NEW MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS AS THE FIRST THING UNDER PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

I JUST HAVE A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION.

SO ARE WE GOING TO GO ONE GOAL AT A TIME AND TALK ABOUT THE GOAL AND THEN CIRCLE BACK AND GO THROUGH EACH GOAL? OR ARE WE RIGHT NOW GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS GOAL INTO THE DETAILS? I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION SO THAT WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THIS IS THE ONLY THING THAT I REALLY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT UNDER THIS.

IT JUST HAPPENS TO BE I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS JUST HAPPENS TO BE FIRST.

BUT I DON'T I DON'T INTEND TO NITPICK THE WHOLE FIRST GOAL.

I'M JUST AFRAID IF WE KEEP GOING DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE WITH EACH GOAL, WE'LL JUST BE SPINNING OUR WHEELS ALL NIGHT AND NOT ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING.

SO I'D RATHER SEE AND THIS IS SUBJECT TO EVERYBODY ELSE'S APPROVAL.

BUT WHAT I ENVISIONED TONIGHT WAS FOR US TO DISCUSS THE GOALS THEMSELVES AND THEN THEREAFTER GO INTO THE DETAIL OF WHAT EACH GOAL MEANS AND HOW IT COULD BE RESTRUCTURED IF POSSIBLE.

SURE, I DO AGREE THAT PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS IS AN AWFULLY BROAD CATEGORY OF A GOAL. THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY BAD.

I HAVE A THOUGHT HERE, AND I'M WONDERING IF WE ADD A SECOND GOAL TO GET TO EVERYTHING BUT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

SO I GUESS MY THOUGHT WOULD BE PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, HAVE THAT AS A GOAL.

AND THEN A SECOND GOAL REGARDING EVERYTHING OTHER THAN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR IF YOU WANT TO SAY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND CONDOMINIUMS OR SOMETHING.

BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF BECAUSE THEY ARE SO DIFFERENT IN A LOT OF WAYS AND WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT WE'RE SEEING SOME SINGLE FAMILY, BUT CERTAINLY A LOT MORE APARTMENT UNITS.

SO ANYWAY, THAT'S A THOUGHT IN TERMS OF THE BIG PICTURE.

WANT TO BREAK THAT INTO TWO GOALS.

MR. SCALES.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, CHAIR, WE'RE SITTING HERE HAVING A DISCUSSION LIKE THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE SAW THESE GOALS.

WE'VE SEEN THESE GOALS TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

AT WHAT POINT ARE WE GOING TO LOCK IN SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THIS FORWARD? THE WAY I SEE IT, WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE SKELETON IS, AND THEN WE'LL START PUTTING THE MEAT ON THE SKELETON AFTER WE FIGURE THAT OUT.

FOR INSTANCE, WHAT I SEE HERE IS ACTUALLY PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

THAT INCLUDES BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND CONDOMINIUMS AND EVEN APARTMENT COMPLEXES.

MAYBE IF WE BREAK IT DOWN INTO SEPARATE GOALS AND SAY PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AS ONE GOAL, PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN OR ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AS A SEPARATE GOAL.

AND THEN FROM THERE, WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN AND HOW DOES THAT WORK? YEAH. WHEN I LOOK AT THE DETAILS THAT ARE UNDERNEATH THAT GOAL, IT'S ABOUT TRYING TO INCREASE DENSITY WITH ACCELERATED DWELLING UNITS AND THINGS WHICH WE CAN AGREE OR DISAGREE ON. BUT IS THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING NOW OR IS THAT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING?

[00:25:01]

I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS GOAL THAT WE INHERITED HAS LATE IN THE DAY, I WILL AGREE, STRUCK ME AS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF ALL THE GREAT STUFF I SEE UNDERNEATH IT. I JUST DIDN'T DO IT FOR ME.

[INAUDIBLE] YEAH.

SO. BUT IF EVERYBODY ELSE LIKES IT, WE DON'T HAVE TO SPIN OUR WHEELS.

IT'S NOT BUGGING ANYBODY ELSE.

WELL, REMEMBER, THOUGH, THIS IS FAR FROM THE ONLY GOAL.

OH, YEAH. NO, AND THIS IS THE.

I PROMISE I'M NOT GOING TO WORDSMITH ANY OTHER GOALS? I THINK MAYBE A WORD LIKE BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE BENEATH IT TO ME IS MORE LIKE IT'S INNOVATIVE.

AND IT'S TO ME THE TONE IS IS LIKE A TONE OF LIKE A WILLINGNESS TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX AND PRESERVE KIND OF IS MORE INDICATIVE OF A DIGGING INTO WHAT WE HAVE ALWAYS DONE.

SO I WOULD AGREE THAT THAT WORD IS PROBLEMATIC AND MAYBE IT'S JUST A MATTER OF SWAPPING OUT FOR A MORE APPROPRIATE VERB THAT GETS AT THE VISION BETTER.

I WOULD ALSO AGREE I PERSONALLY PREFER THIS GOAL TO ENCAPSULATE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS MORE BROADLY, BECAUSE THEN IF YOU START KIND OF DISSECTING IT, I THINK THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SAME ISSUES IN THE OTHER SECTIONS TOO, LIKE WITH TOWNSHIP BUSINESSES.

WELL, THERE'S LOTS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF TOWNSHIP BUSINESSES, SO I LIKE THE BROADNESS OF IT.

I DON'T SEE THAT AS A PROBLEM.

BUT YEAH, MAYBE PRESERVE COULD JUST BE SWAPPED OUT FOR SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE MORE ACCURATE FOR WHERE WE'RE HEADED.

MAYBE THE WORD NEIGHBORHOOD IS THE ISSUE AND PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES TO AND ADD A PARAGRAPH IN THERE DEALING WITH SINGLE FAMILY AND MAINTAINING GOOD HOUSING STOCK AND WHATEVER AND INCLUDED IN THAT LIST.

I LOVE RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES.

THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I FEEL THAT SECTION TALKS ABOUT IS EXPANDING AND STRENGTHENING AND EXPANDING RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES TO ME IS ASPIRATIONAL.

AND I THINK THAT WOULD INCLUDE SOMETHING ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, WHICH IS NOT MENTIONED DIRECTLY IN THERE OTHER THAN AROUND LAKE LANSING.

BUT IF THERE WAS ALSO A LISTING OF PRESERVING THE VALUE OF OUR HOUSING STOCK AND QUALITY OF LIVING, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, THAT WOULD COMPLETE THAT GOAL AND BROADEN IT AND COVER ALL OF OUR DIFFERENT HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES.

THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT HIM HERE. RIGHT ON.

I LISTEN TO YOU GUYS LONG ENOUGH.

I COME UP WITH I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO SUGGEST STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES.

YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, WE CAN THAT FEELS LIKE A ENCAPSULATING THIS CONVERSATION AND THEN TRYING TO GET AT A LITTLE MORE SINGLE FAMILY CONVERSATION BELOW THAT.

I THINK WE CAN. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN GREAT DETAIL.

IT'S JUST MAKING SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES AND THE HOUSING STOCK IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO THE TOWNSHIP.

I DO LIKE THAT WORD EXPANDING, TOO, THOUGH.

EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IF YOU SAY EXPANDING NEIGHBORHOODS, THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GROWING THEM OUT, YOU KNOW, BUT WITH OPPORTUNITIES, THERE'S NO INDICATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO TAKE UP MORE LAND TO DO IT.

BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THE WORDS PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN ARE NECESSARY BECAUSE REMEMBER, THE FUNDAMENTAL BASIS OF THIS COMMUNITY IS PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL.

THERE IS A THERE IS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR OR TWO OKEMOS ROAD AND GRAND RIVER.

BUT ASIDE FROM THAT, BASICALLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OVERWHELMINGLY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.

AND I THINK I THINK A FUNDAMENTAL GOAL OF OF THE OF THE PLAN IS TO NOT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY.

YOU CAN PRESERVE IT. WE CAN ENCOURAGE GROWTH IN CERTAIN AREAS.

BUT PRESERVING THE FUNDAMENTAL NATURE OF THE COMMUNITY, I THINK IS FOREMOST.

WELL, DEVIL'S ADVOCATE, RIGHT THERE IS THERE ARE RESIDENCES IN THE COMMUNITY THAT WE DON'T WANT TO PRESERVE.

RIGHT. SOME OF THEM JUST GOT KNOCKED DOWN AND THEY BUILT SOMETHING REALLY NICE THERE.

OR THEY'RE GOING TO SOMETHING REALLY NICE.

SO NOT ALL OF OUR RESIDENTIAL STOCK IS WHAT WE'RE HOPING TO PRESERVE.

SO YEAH, THERE'S SOME A LOT OF REALLY NICE SINGLE FAMILY HOME RESIDENTS NEIGHBORHOODS THAT PEOPLE

[00:30:04]

BUT SO THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT KIND OF DRIVES ME.

YEAH. AND I DIDN'T MEAN TO IMPLY BY WHAT I SAID THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THIS TYPE OF HOUSE ONLY EXISTS IN THIS COMMUNITY.

OF COURSE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHY I THINK CHANGE TO THE PLACE OPPORTUNITIES, PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES I THINK IS IDEAL.

WHAT ABOUT THE NEXT GOAL? ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON ENHANCING VIABILITY OF TOWNSHIP BUSINESSES? I'M FOR IT. WHO SAYS NO? I MY COMMENT THAT I WAS GOING TO MAKE IS THAT WE DO TALK A LOT IN THE PREVIOUS GOAL ABOUT HOME BUSINESSES, AND THIS ONE IS MORE AIMED AT TRADITIONAL BRICK AND MORTAR.

SO AND HAVING THOSE CROSSWALKS BETWEEN THEM SO THEY'LL LOOK AT THE NEXT ONE FOR MORE ABOUT BUSINESS [INAUDIBLE]. OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICES.

PERFECT.

I JUST HAPPENED TO LOVE THE VERY LAST BULLET POINT ON THERE INVERT THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS.

IT CAME UP IN A CONVERSATION AND IT YOU KNOW, IT MAKES A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SENSE.

I MEAN, IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT, FRANKLY, WE'RE GOING TO STRUGGLE WITH BECAUSE WE DON'T CONTROL OUR ROADS, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT'S WELL WORTH LOOKING INTO TO SEE WHERE WE CAN HAVE AN IMPACT WITH THE STATE AND THE COUNTY GOING FORWARD.

AND I THINK I THINK WE ARE GOING TO FIND THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME LONG TERM CHANGES AS A RESULT OF THE PANDEMIC IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC PATTERNS.

I THINK IT'S STILL REALLY UNCLEAR AS TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH GOING FULL TIME OFFICE EMPLOYMENT.

IT'S STILL UNCLEAR IF CERTAIN RETAIL INDUSTRIES ARE EVER GOING TO FULLY RECOVER AND IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT SOME OF THESE THINGS AND HOW DO WE TACKLE THEM IN NEW BUILDS BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE DIFFERENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS.

SO I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF COMMISSIONER BROOKS COMMENTS AS WELL.

HIS THIRD COMMENT WAS ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS.

YEAH, AND I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW.

THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY RESPONSE TO THAT ONE WAS THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK INTO IN COMING YEARS AS TO WHAT IS WHAT DO WE NEED TO CHANGE TO BETTER ALIGN OURSELVES WITH THE NEW PARADIGM.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON MAINTAINING OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICES? [INAUDIBLE] I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR SOMEWHERE IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING A DEFINITION OF A PICA. IT'S IN THE SECTION WHERE WE TALK ABOUT IT.

WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO PUT THIS INTO ORDER WAS A BIT OF A CHALLENGE BECAUSE YOU DO DEFINE THINGS LATER ON, BUT THIS IS THE BEST WAY WE THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES SHOULD BE FOREMOST IN THIS DOCUMENT.

SO YOU GET THE DEFINITION LATER.

IS THE GOAL SIMPLY TO ANALYZE PICAS OR TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PICAS.

SO I THINK IT'S BOTH.

AND I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE SHOULD DO AND SOMETHING THAT I WOULD HAVE STARTED FIVE YEARS AGO, IS NOW WE HAVE THESE CONCEPTS OF THESE AREAS, OKAY, LET'S BUILD THEM OUT MORE, LET'S FLESH OUT THE IDEAS, LET'S, YOU KNOW, CREATE CREATE SOME MARKETING PLANS FOR THEM, WORK WITH THE MEDC TO GET THEM AS PART AS PART OF THE RC.

WE CAN HAVE OUR PRIORITY SITES OUT THERE.

YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THESE NEXT STEPS? ESPECIALLY NOW THAT WE'VE HAD SOME SUCCESS WITH HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE.

SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD TIME TO JUMP INTO THAT.

I THINK, FRANKLY, THE FIRST STEP IS PROBABLY THE MALL.

I THINK EVERYONE RECOGNIZES THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE NEXT ACT FOR THE MALL PROPERTY AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE.

AND I THINK BY CREATING DESIGNATING IT AS A PICA AND THEN STUDYING IT A LITTLE BIT AND FIGURING OUT WHAT WE DO, THE KINDS OF THINGS WE WOULD WANT THERE, THE

[00:35:07]

MAKE NO MISTAKE, IT'S NOT EASY.

IT MAY BE A GIANT PARKING LOT IN MANY SPACES, BUT IT WAS BUILT IN THE 70S.

YOU KNOW, IT'S GOT DSL INTERNET ON THE PROPERTY.

IT HAS VIRTUALLY NO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.

SO THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES TO REDEVELOPING THE SITE AND WE NEED TO GO INTO IT WITH EYES WIDE OPEN.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AN OVERNIGHT PROCESS.

LET ME ASK YOU, BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCE AND THIS HAS TO DO WITH HOW WE STRUCTURE THE GOAL.

WHEN YOU HAVE AN AREA DESIGNATED AS A PICA AND THERE ARE, WHAT, FOUR OF THEM RIGHT NOW? THERE ARE THREE RIGHT NOW WE'RE RECOMMENDING A FOURTH.

DO THEY HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO CHANGE BECAUSE OF WHAT THE TOWNSHIP DOES TO THE PICA OR BECAUSE A BUILDER COMES AND SAYS, I WANT TO BUY THAT PROPERTY AND BUILD ON IT, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? WELL, SO I WOULD SAY WITH HASLETT, PART OF THE REASON THERE WAS A BUILDER THAT LOOKED AT IT WAS BECAUSE WE HAD ALREADY IDENTIFIED HERE'S A ROUGH LAYOUT OF WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON THIS PROPERTY.

IF YOU COME FORWARD WITH SOMETHING IN THIS BALLPARK, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALREADY BEEN VETTED THROUGH OUR MASTER PLAN.

AND FUNCTIONALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE IN THE EXISTING PLAN VERSUS THE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED, YOU CAN SEE A LOT OF THE SHADOWS BETWEEN THE TWO.

THEY ALIGN IN MANY WAYS.

AND SO I THINK WHAT IT DOES IS IT PUTS THE INFORMATION OUT THERE TO THE TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND THE INVESTMENT COMMUNITY THAT, LOOK, WE'RE INTERESTED IN TALKING ABOUT THESE PROPERTIES. WE'RE INTERESTED IN WHETHER IT'S HIGHER DENSITY OR WHETHER IT'S A DIFFERENT FORM OF DEVELOPMENT OR WHETHER IT'S A SPECIFIC TYPE OF USE.

THESE ARE THE AREAS WHERE WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT.

AND HERE'S HERE'S WHY AND HERE'S, YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF THAT PATH FORWARD UNDER THE THE DESIGNATION, IT JUST MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE VIABLE AND FRIENDLY GOING FORWARD.

I COULD ADD THAT THERE HAS BEEN DISCUSSION OVER THE YEARS OF WHAT THAT PROPERTY MIGHT LOOK LIKE.

AND OBVIOUSLY THE MALL OWNERS HAVE COME OUT PUBLICLY AND SAID THAT THAT'S THEIR VISION, SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

SO HAVING A BASIS FROM OUR STANDPOINT TO SAY THIS IS WHAT KINDS OF THINGS WE'D LIKE TO SEE THERE, IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO ME.

AND CONNECTING IT TO FOUR CORNERS MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.

IT SEEMS TO ME FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ANALYZING THE GOAL ITSELF, THE TOWNSHIP IS BETTER OFF IF THE GOAL SAYS THAT WE WILL TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE WAITING FOR AN OWNER TO COME TO US AND SAY, I WANT TO PUT $40 MILLION INTO THAT PROPERTY. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, I'LL TAKE MY MONEY ELSEWHERE.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE CAN BOTH CONTROL IT BETTER AND ENCOURAGE GROWTH IF WE PROPOSE DEVELOPMENT OF PICAS ANALYZE AND PROPOSE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE REASON THEY'RE PICAS IS BECAUSE IT'S ESSENTIALLY COMMERCIALLY DEAD PROPERTY.

YEAH, I WAS THINKING ALONG SIMILAR LINES, LIKE MAYBE THE GOAL SHOULD BE ANALYZE FURTHER, ANALYZE POTENTIAL INTENSITY CHANGE AREAS AND FORM STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS TO ENCOURAGE REDEVELOPMENT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT STUFF IS IN THE BULLETS WORK WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND SO THAT STUFF THERE, IT'S A MATTER OF HOW MUCH TO TRY AND PUT IN THAT.

I LIKE HAVING THE DEFINITION OF PICAS IN THERE.

IF WE'RE GOING TO KEEP USING PICAS IN THAT TERM [INAUDIBLE].

UM, BUT THE WHILE THEY'RE THOSE TWO PAGES IN THE IN THE EXISTING PLAN ACTUALLY CONTAIN MAPS AND THAT'S WHERE THE CONCEPTUAL SORT OF LAYOUT WAS PRESENTED TO THE POTENTIAL BUILDERS.

AND AS DIRECTOR SCHMITT WAS SAYING IN HASLETT THEY SAID, YEAH, WE'LL BUILD THAT AND OKEMOS ARE NOT QUITE SETTLED ON SOMETHING. WELL, I THINK THE SECOND PARAGRAPH TALKING ABOUT DEVELOP SMALL AREA PLANS FOR PICAS IS ESSENTIALLY SAYING WE NEED TO GO BACK TO WHAT WAS DONE FIVE YEARS AGO, LOOK AT THE MAP STRUCTURE, WHATEVER, AND SEE IF THEY NEED TO BE TWEAKED.

BUT WE CAN DESIGN THESE THINGS TO SUCH A POINT THAT NO BUILDER IS GOING TO WANT TO BUILD THEM TOO.

SO WE HAVE TO REMAIN FLEXIBILITY OR WE WILL HAVE NOBODY SHOPPING THERE FOR US.

AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THE ONE THE BIGGEST POSITIVE I WON'T SAY THE ONE THE BIGGEST POSITIVE OUT OF THE WAY THEY ORIGINALLY ESTABLISHED THEM IS THEY LEFT IT PRETTY

[00:40:06]

HERE'S SOME DEMOGRAPHICS.

HERE'S THE HERE'S WHAT WE THINK COULD POTENTIALLY GO HERE.

I THINK WE CAN TAKE THAT TO A LITTLE FURTHER.

WELL, THE OTHER THING WE DID AS PART OF THAT WAS TO DO THE STUDY AS TO PUBLIC DEMAND, WHAT NEEDS TO GO IN THERE THAT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED FOR THE CARRIAGE HILLS FOR IF WE DO MERIDIAN MALL TO HAVE SOME DETAILS TO DANGLE IN FRONT OF A DEVELOPER SAYING WE KNOW PEOPLE WANT THIS.

WE KNOW OUR COMMUNITY WANTS THIS, THEY WILL SUPPORT YOU.

THIS IS WHAT WE THINK WILL GO IN THERE.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? BUT I THINK IT'S A IT'S ALMOST A CHICKEN AND EGG.

IF YOU GIVE THEM SOMETHING TO LOOK AT, THEY'LL COME AND MAYBE LOOK AT IT.

IF YOU GIVE THEM A BLANK SLATE, YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE ANYBODY THERE.

I AGREE. I THINK THE BLANK SLATE TENDS TO LEAD TOWARDS MORE CONTENTIOUS ISSUES IN THESE REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES.

I THINK IF WE ARE ABLE TO PUT FORWARD A CONCEPT OF WHAT ROUGHLY THE TOWNSHIP IS LOOKING FOR, YOU ARE GOING TO ATTRACT THE RIGHT KIND OF DEVELOPER TOO BECAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT.

YOU KNOW, A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPER PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE DABBLING IN MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS IN MOST CASES BECAUSE IT'S OUT OF THEIR GENERAL WHEELHOUSE.

IT'S NOT TO SAY THERE AREN'T EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE, BUT I TEND TO APPRECIATE IT WHEN YOU GET SOMEONE WITH COMMERCIAL EXPERIENCE DOING A COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT.

SO I THINK I THINK WHAT WE CAN DO IS TRY AND GET A LITTLE MORE ACTION WORDY HERE ON THIS ONE.

AND TO COMMISSIONER SNYDER'S POINT AND SOME OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR, I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY TWEAK THIS ONE A LITTLE TINY BIT AND MAKE IT WORK.

YEAH, I AGREE. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR GOAL? JUST THE STRATEGIC GROWTH.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN SOMEBODY SEES THAT, THEY JUST CAN'T HELP BUT ENVISION, YOU KNOW, OUTWARD SPRAWL.

BUT DON'T YOU THINK THERE'S A WAY TO HAVE THAT IN THE TOWNSHIP? THERE'S NOWHERE TO SPRAWL TO.

SO, I DON'T KNOW.

I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS IF STRATEGIC GROWTH.

I DON'T I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE RIGHT LANGUAGE.

I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I SEE IN MY MIND WHEN I THINK STRATEGIC GROWTH, THIS SPRAWL OF DEVELOPMENT.

AND I THINK THAT'S MISLEADING BECAUSE THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE AFTER, IN THIS ONE.

OKAY. YEAH, I HAVE LOOKED HARD AT THAT ONE FOR YEARS AND I'M PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH IT.

OKAY. WE DO HAVE SOME VERY STRATEGIC GROWTH PRINCIPLES EMBEDDED IN THE PLAN.

SO WE'RE NOT SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO GROW.

WE KNOW THAT PEOPLE WANT TO COME AND LIVE HERE AND WE WANT TO ACCOMMODATE THEM.

WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO DO IT THOUGHTFULLY.

SO I'M PERSONALLY NOT.

WE DO HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF LAND THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED.

AND OUR QUESTION IN WHEN WE GET TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OUTSIDE THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY AT SOME POINT, THEN THAT'S THE QUESTION IS HOW CAN WE BE STRATEGIC ABOUT GETTING THE SORT OF DEVELOPMENT THERE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT SERVES THE DEMOGRAPHICS THAT WE THINK ARE IMPORTANT, THAT PROVIDES THE ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS THAT WE KNOW ARE NEEDED? SO I THINK WE'VE STILL GOT A WHOLE LOT MORE STRATEGIZING TO DO.

I WOULD THINK THAT STRATEGIC GROWTH IN THIS CONTEXT IS THE ABSOLUTE OPPOSITE OF SPRAWL.

IT IS TO CHOOSE YOUR PLACES, DO IT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT, INFILL WHERE POSSIBLE, AND PRESERVE AS MUCH OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLUSES AS YOU CAN.

AND THAT'S THE STRATEGY, I WOULD SAY THEN MAYBE SWAP THEM SO THAT THE EMPHASIS ENDS WITH PRESERVATION.

SORRY, I'M BEING NITPICKY, BUT NO, THAT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE.

THAT MAKES SENSE.

MR. SCALES. I THINK THIS GOAL AND THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS DOCUMENTATION UNDERNEATH THE GOAL THAT SUMS UP WHO WE ARE HERE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, AND I LIKE IT JUST AS IT IS.

THIS ONE DOES FEEL LIKE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

I AGREE. THIS IS AND THIS IS A NEW ONE ACTUALLY.

THIS IS ONE WE'RE TRYING TO COBBLE SOME THINGS TOGETHER FROM THE PREVIOUS PLAN, ALONG WITH ADDING SOME THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TALKED ABOUT.

[00:45:02]

I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SCALES THAT THIS IS CENTRAL TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, ALTHOUGH I DO HAVE TO SAY I AGREE WITH CHRISTINA THAT JUST SIMPLY SWITCHING THE LAST TWO BALANCE, ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIC GROWTH AND PRESERVATION SEEMS TO REBALANCE THE EMPHASIS.

I SUPPORT THAT AS WELL.

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR YOU WHEN YOU SAID THAT.

THAT'S OKAY. SURE.

I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE THAT, YOU WOULD BALANCE STRATEGIC GROWTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION.

YES. YEAH. YEAH.

JUST TO GET IT CLEAR.

DID I SAY IT WRONG? WELL, YOU LEFT OUT.

YOU LEFT ENVIRONMENTAL WITH STRATEGIC GROWTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL YEAH. IT'S ALL ABOUT PRESERVING.

YES. IT'S A SMART MOVE.

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL BASIC GOALS? OH, WE'RE AT THE PRECIPICE OF DIVING INTO THE WEEDS.

COMMISSIONER SCALES ANYTHING ADDITIONAL ON THE BASIC GOALS THEMSELVES? NO. VERY GOOD.

ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHO WANTS TO START? I THINK THE PHRASE WAS DIVE INTO THE WEEDS.

LET'S START WITH STAFF.

DID YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC THINGS YOU WANTED TO DISCUSS WITH US ON THESE? NO. I MEAN, WE'RE GIVEN THESE FEW CHANGES TO THE TOP LINE GOALS.

I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE REASONABLY COMFORTABLE WITH WHERE WE'RE AT.

I'M HAPPY TO GET DOWN INTO EACH OF THE FIVE TONIGHT OR WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE REMAINDER OF THE PLAN.

IT'S ENTIRELY THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DISCUSSION.

THAT WOULD BE OF MOST USE TO YOU.

IT WOULD BE, I THINK, BENEFICIAL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THROUGH ALL THE TOP LINE STUFF.

SO GET THROUGH THE REST OF THE PLAN AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION ON HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED IN GETTING INTO THE NUTS AND BOLTS.

BECAUSE THE NUTS AND BOLTS LIKE I THINK WE'RE ALL WE ALL KNOW.

I MEAN, THIS IS IT'S FUNCTIONALLY THREE PIECES, FOUR, YOU'VE GOT ALL THE STUFF THAT WE NEED TO INCLUDE THE TALKING ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE, TALKING ABOUT TRANSPORTATION, TALKING ABOUT NATURAL FEATURES, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, ALL THAT STUFF.

BY AND LARGE. HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THAT AS MUCH AS YOU WANT, BUT THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE THERE UNLESS YOU WANT TO GET INTO SPECIFIC LANGUAGE CHANGES.

YOU'VE GOT THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES WHICH OF THE FIVE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE TOP LINE.

NOW WE CAN MAKE THOSE CHANGES AND COORDINATE THAT.

YOU'VE GOT THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, WHICH HAS UNDER TEN CHANGES PROPOSED THIS TIME AROUND, AND YOU'VE GOT THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY, WHICH HAS TWO CHANGES.

SO IF WE CAN GET THROUGH THOSE SORT OF THREE BIG TOP LINE THINGS, GET INTO A GOOD PLACE WITH THOSE SO THAT AT OUR NEXT MEETING, WE CAN GET INTO THE WEEDS OF THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, WE CAN GET IN THE WEEDS OF JUST ONE OF THEM IF WE WANTED TO.

AND AS LONG AS WE'RE COMFORTABLE, WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE IS AT THE NEXT MEETING COMFORTABLE WITH THE DRAFT TO BE ABLE TO AT LEAST GET IT OUT IN THE WORLD.

WE CAN KEEP CHANGING IT.

WE CAN KEEP TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET IT OUT IN THE WORLD.

THAT'S THE KEY. I THINK A PROCESS SUGGESTION IN TERMS OF THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS, WE HAVE SEEN ALL THOSE.

THEY ALL LOOK FAMILIAR TO ME AND I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THEM THE WAY THEY'RE PRESENTED.

I THINK, YEAH, SOME OF THEM DON'T MATCH AN EXISTING GOAL, BUT MOST OF THEM DO.

AND THE MORE THEY CAN BE MAPPED OR GROUPED TOGETHER, THE MORE IT'S GOING TO HELP THE READER TO SAY, OKAY, THESE ARE THE MORE SPECIFIC STUFF THAT PERTAIN TO THAT.

BUT WE DON'T WANT TO TRY TO DO THAT AS A GROUP, I'M SURE.

SO MY REQUEST WOULD BE I CAN CERTAINLY MAKE SUGGESTIONS OFFLINE TO STAFF ABOUT WAYS THAT MIGHT BE MORE CLEARLY PRESENTED AND TAKE A SWING RATHER THAN TRYING TO GET INTO ALL THAT.

AS I'VE SAID ALL ALONG, WE ARE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY AND ALL COMMENTS ON OR OFFLINE.

WE'LL COORDINATE THEM AS BEST WE CAN.

ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE I DO THINK WE WANT TO SPEND TIME TALKING ABOUT THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY AND THE FUTURE, WELL, FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

WE SHOULD AGAIN LOOK AT IT, BUT WE'VE SEEN IT IN DETAIL, RIGHT.

THOSE TWO CHANGES.

[00:50:17]

SO IT IS AN IT'S OBVIOUSLY AN IMPORTANT GOAL FOR THE TOWNSHIP IN GENERAL, BUT IT'S HOW TO WORK IT INTO A DEVELOPMENT ORIENTED PLAN IS A BIT OF A STRUGGLE AND THAT'S OUR PREVIOUS PLAN HAD A SPECIFIC SET OF GOALS ABOUT THE PUBLIC SERVICE GOAL WAS A LOT BROADER AND IT TALKED ABOUT SPECIFIC THINGS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT, WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP AS A WHOLE.

AND IT'S THE ONE SECTION I WOULD ARGUE THAT ALMOST NOTHING REALLY GOT DONE WHILE EVERYTHING GOT DONE BECAUSE IT WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT OPERATIONS KIND OF THING. THE CERTAINLY OPEN TO HAVING THAT CONVERSATION, BUT THERE REALLY WASN'T A GOOD WAY FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE TO SORT OF PUT IT IN HERE. IT'S REALLY MORE OF A TOWNSHIP BOARD ANNUAL OR BIANNUAL GOAL AND A GOAL FOR THE BOARD.

OKAY. BECAUSE I WAS THINKING LIKE THINGS LIKE LIGHTING, STREET LIGHTING, TRAFFIC SIGNALS, THOSE ARE PROBABLY MORE.

YEAH. AND THAT'S REALLY NUTS AND BOLTS OF ALTHOUGH TO YOUR POINT AND CIRCLING BACK TO THE CONVERSATION WE HAD ABOUT INVERTING THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING MODEL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S CERTAINLY THE KIND OF THING THAT'S GOING TO COME UP DURING A CONVERSATION OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.

SO IT MIGHT JUST BE ONE OF THOSE SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT COMES UP DURING A DISCUSSION ELSEWHERE.

THANKS [INAUDIBLE].

I WAS JUST THINKING IT ALSO COULD COME UNDER MAINTAINING OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE.

RIGHT. RIGHT.

WE CAN LET US TAKE A CRACK AT AND SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH SOME LANGUAGE ON THAT.

SO FUTURE LAND USE IS THE NEXT BIG PIECE.

IT'S REALLY BROKEN IN.

IT BREAKS ITSELF INTO TWO PARTS REALLY EASILY.

YOU'VE GOT THE RELATIVELY EASY CHANGES WHICH ARE FRANKLY, WE FOUND SOME ERRORS IN THE EXISTING MAP, NOTABLY COUNTY LINE ROAD MARGATE, WHERE IT'S THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE DESIGNATED AS PARK THAT ARE ACTUALLY PEOPLE'S HOUSES.

WE SHOULD PROBABLY CHANGE THAT.

THE SCHULTZ VET CLINIC, WHICH AS WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION ABOUT THEIR EXPANSION, THE FACT THAT IT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND THEY ARE GETTING TO THE POINT OF TALKING RETIREMENT, ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT BECOMES A VERY DIFFICULT PROPERTY TO HAVE A SECOND LIFE IF THEY ARE NO LONGER THERE.

SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THAT BE CONVERTED TO OFFICE BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SO IT COULD BE REZONED TO OFFICE IN THE FUTURE AND USED AS AN OFFICE BUILDING SINCE IT IS AN OFFICE BUILDING AT ITS HEART.

AND THEN LASTLY, ADDING THE MERIDIAN MALL AS A PICA, WHICH I THINK EVERYONE AGREES IS PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA.

SO THOSE ARE THE RELATIVELY EASY ONES.

AND THE OTHER ONES WHICH AREN'T THAT BIG OF A CHANGE, BUT ARE BIGGER CHANGES.

THE VACANT LAND ADJACENT TO COPPER CREEK, WHICH WAS ALWAYS INTENDED TO BE THE EXPANSION OF COPPER CREEK, IS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED.

SO IT'S CONSISTENT WITH COPPER CREEK AND THE OTHER SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.

IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

THE NORTHERN THIRD OF FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH, WHICH THE CHURCH HAS DISCUSSED WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION MULTIPLE TIMES OF CONVERTING THAT TO A MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS ONE OF THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES.

AND THE LAST ONE IS THE THE DRIVING RANGE ON GRAND RIVER, JUST EAST OF POWELL ROAD, IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED FOR RESIDENTIAL, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ON GRAND RIVER AND IT'S CURRENTLY USED AS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THAT BE DESIGNATED AS COMMERCIAL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH ITS USE.

THAT'S REALLY THE EXTENT OF THE CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, AGAIN, THIS IS AN UPDATE.

WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY MAJOR OVERHAUL AT THIS POINT.

[00:55:01]

THAT BECOMES ITS OWN STUDY.

YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT WILL COME OUT AND POTENTIALLY BE CHANGES IN THE FUTURE.

BUT BUT WE'RE NOT AT A POSITION, I THINK, TO MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AT THIS POINT.

ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE SAGINAW ROAD CORRIDOR.

I MEAN, THAT'S BASICALLY THE BUILDABLE AREA WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP.

AND LIKE WE WERE SPEAKING ABOUT THE MALL, WE WANT TO PRESENT SOME TYPE OF FRAMEWORK OF WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE THERE OR TAKE WHAT WE GET.

SO I THINK WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING IN THIS DOCUMENT, I'M TRYING TO FIND IT REAL QUICK, IS THAT WE ACTUALLY DO A CORRIDOR STUDY ON THAT AREA.

TO YOUR POINT, TO PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK FOR WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THAT AREA, BECAUSE THERE'S IT'S UNDER THE ENHANCED THE VIABILITY OF TOWN TOWNSHIP BUSINESSES.

SO EVALUATE THE M-78 CORRIDOR FOR MORE DETAILED ANALYSIS OF FUTURE LAND USE GIVEN MARKET CHANGES SINCE THE COVID 19 PANDEMIC.

AND I THINK WE AGREE WE SHOULD PROBABLY GIVE IT A LITTLE MORE THOUGHT, BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT THE ANSWER IS BECAUSE WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE MARKET MIGHT BE. AFTER ALL THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL.

SO THE CORRIDOR HAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT ZONINGS THERE IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL, THERE'S INDUSTRIAL.

I THINK THERE'S ALSO SOME RURAL IN THERE.

SO IT WOULD BEHOOVE US TO GET A LITTLE MORE COHESIVE THERE.

I DON'T SEE I DON'T SEE INDUSTRIAL ON THE KEY FOR THE FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

IS THAT IS IT CHANGING TO BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY? SO IS IT? NO, NOT INSTITUTIONAL.

COULD YOU JUST PLAY THAT FOR US, PLEASE? YEAH, I JUST GOT TO GET TO THE RIGHT SPOT.

SO THE, I'M NOT ON THE RIGHT PAGE.

I APOLOGIZE.

UM, LET'S GO AND DO THIS.

ACTUALLY, THIS WILL HELP.

THERE WE GO. UM, SO IT'S.

IT'S THE LIGHT BLUE, RIGHT? HELP ME OUT. I WAS GOING TO GUESS THAT.

YEAH. THE LIGHT BLUE. THAT IS CORRECT.

OKAY, SO THAT'S.

IT'S. IT FALLS UNDER THE BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY.

YEAH. SO YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT IN THIS AREA AND THEN YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT UP HERE.

I GUESS, HOW DOES HOW IS THAT GOING TO WORK WITH ORDNANCE AND WITH PREVIOUS ITERATIONS OF THE MAP? SO IT'S CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS ITERATIONS.

WE HAVEN'T CHANGED THAT.

IT WASN'T PREVIOUSLY TERMED INDUSTRIAL.

YEAH, IT HASN'T BEEN TERMED INDUSTRIAL IN THE LAST COUPLE PLANS.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE EVER TURNED AN INDUSTRIAL, BUT IT IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL.

IT IS. AND IT DOESN'T HAVE A CROSS REFERENCE [INAUDIBLE] ZONING PLAN.

WELL, THEN WE HAVE FOUND AN ERROR.

AND I THINK JUST AS A, YOU KNOW, A COMMON JUST A COMMON LAYPERSON, IF I SEE BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY, I'M NOT THINKING INDUSTRIAL.

RIGHT. SO SEE IF I CAN ZOOM IN ON IT ENOUGH HERE.

SO IT SHOWS UP RIGHT HERE WITH THE BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY.

OH, THERE'S INDUSTRIAL. OKAY.

THERE'S THAT LITTLE I.

I THINK, THOUGH, IT'S STILL MISLEADING.

IT SHOULD PROBABLY BE INCLUDED IN THE LIGHT BLUE BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY/INDUSTRIAL.

LIKE IN THE LEGEND. YEAH.

YEAH. HOW OLD IS THAT? WE CAN ABSOLUTELY MAKE THAT CHANGE.

[INAUDIBLE] THAT'S EASY. I'M DON'T PARTICULARLY WANT TO ADD A NEW CATEGORY AT THIS POINT RIGHT NOW.

BECOMES SLIGHTLY MORE COMPLICATED WHEN YOUR GOAL IS ELIMINATING SOME OF THE CATEGORIES.

THIS IS MY COMMENT ON YOUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IS I WOULD SUPPORT ALL OF THOSE REASONABLE CHANGES IN THE SITUATION, ESPECIALLY WITH THE STUDY AND THE M-78 CORRIDOR COMING UP.

[01:00:02]

I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE STATED.

I AGREE THE SECTION IS PERFECT WITH THE ADDITION OF A SLASH AND AN I IN A LEGEND. NOT LEGEND.

I GOT IT. SO REALLY, THE LAST OF THE TOP LINE PIECES IS THE IS THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY TWO PROPOSED CHANGES. LET'S DO THIS.

THAT IS THE GREEN ROAD CHANGE.

AGAIN, THIS IS ME HATING THE FACT THAT WE DON'T SPLIT THINGS.

IT'S JUST NOT HOW PLANNERS WORK.

I'M SORRY. I WANT TO MAKE A QUICK POINT ABOUT THAT.

WHEN WE DISCUSSED THAT YOU ASKED US TO REACH OUT TO THE LANDOWNERS.

WE DID GET ONE, YES AND ONE NO.

SO THAT'S HOW THAT WAS DETERMINED, HOW THAT LINE WAS GOING TO GO.

THAT IS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S REQUEST.

ONE YES AND ONE NO TO WHAT? THERE ARE TWO LANDOWNERS THAT WERE SPLIT BY THE ORIGINAL LINE.

ONE SAID, YES, THEY WANT TO BE IN.

ONE SAID NO. THEY WANT TO BE OUT.

SOLOMON'S CHOICE. PERFECT.

THAT'S WHY IT JOGS THE WAY IT DOES.

FUNCTIONALLY, IT WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON EITHER OF THEIR LIVES.

IT'S JUST [INAUDIBLE] MY ADHD SELF NEEDED THAT LINE CLEANED UP.

AND THEN THE OTHER CHANGE, AS WE'VE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, IS THE IS THE POWELL ROAD CHANGE.

PREVIOUS GOES IN AND OUT, CUTS THE DRIVING RANGE IN HALF INCLUDED AT THE TIME, WHICH THIS WASN'T THERE AT THE TIME IT WAS OBVIOUSLY UNDER DEVELOPMENT.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING STRAIGHT LINE INCLUDING ALL THE PROPERTIES ON POWELL ROAD.

IT AVOIDS A LOT OF POTENTIAL PROBLEMS, THE LEAST OF WHICH NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH WAS THE THE DISCUSSION WHEN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WANTED TO BUILD CERTAINLY A NUMBER OF HEADS TURNED TOWARD ME AND SAID, OKAY, WHAT EFFECT DOES THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY HAVE ON THAT? AND WE NEVER GOT TO A FINAL ANSWER BECAUSE WE DIDN'T NEED TO.

BUT AT SOME POINT THERE WILL NEED TO BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT IF THEY'RE OUT OF THE URBAN SERVICE ROUNDER BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THEY FUNCTIONALLY OVERRIDE US IN ALL BUT FOUR AREAS LOCALLY, OUR ZONING HAS NO SAY PRETTY MUCH WHATSOEVER ON SCHOOLS.

IT'S REALLY CURB CUTS, UTILITY CONNECTIONS, SOIL EROSION CONTROL.

AND THERE'S ALWAYS A FOURTH THAT I FORGET.

WETLANDS. I'M SORRY, WETLANDS.

NOPE, THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM OUR ZONING.

THEY'RE ON THE STATE.

THEY'RE UNDER STATE. YES.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING THEY WOULD BE UNDER.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT BECAME CLEAR THAT THAT PROPERTY PROBABLY NEEDED TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE BOUNDARY.

THE GOLF COURSE CUT IN HALF ALREADY.

AND SO AND THE FACT THAT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WAS IN THIS PROPERTY IS ALREADY DEVELOPED AND THIS PROPERTY WILL NEVER DEVELOP, GIVEN THE NATURE OF THAT PROPERTY, THIS SEEMED LIKE A NATURAL INCLUSION.

AND THEN YOU'RE LEFT WITH THESE FOUR PROPERTIES UP HERE, WHICH HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN SUBJECT TO THREATENED LITIGATION.

AND SO IT JUST MAKES SENSE TO FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE WHERE THAT RED LINE IS NOW.

BUT OBVIOUSLY IT IS NOT MY PLAN QUESTION.

I'M TRYING TO LOOK AND I DON'T SEE IT ON THE PHONE EITHER, BUT WHAT IS THE DOTTED LINE? IS THERE A LEGEND HERE? SO THE DOTTED LINE IS THE EXISTING WHERE THE LINE IS NOW, THE RED LINE IS IN THE CURRENT MAP.

THE RED IS THE PROPOSED LINE.

GOTCHA. OH, PROPOSED.

GOT IT. THAT'S THE PRIMARY BENEFIT IS IT ELIMINATES GUESSWORK.

THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. MAKES IT VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

I'M GOING TO NITPICK WORDSMITH FOR A SECOND HERE, AND I'M SURE I'VE SEEN THIS PARAGRAPH BEFORE, BUT IT'S I'VE TRIED TO MAKE SENSE OF IT ON A TRAIN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, AND I COULDN'T.

THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF THIS SECTION DESCRIBES THE LOGIC BY WHICH THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED, SHOULD BE BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT SURROUNDING THE USB, THE LACK OF DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES IN THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE TOWNSHIP, ECONOMIC BENEFIT AND BURDEN AND MODIFYING THE BOUNDARY OR COMPELLING PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY ISSUE.

[01:05:02]

THEN THE FIRST CASE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THOSE CRITERIA.

SO IT WOULD SEEM POLITIC TO SAY SOMETHING IN THERE ABOUT OR SOMETHING THAT JUST WAS PROBABLY A MAP ERROR BUT DOESN'T RISE TO ANY OF THE CRITERIA THAT HAVE JUST BEEN LAID OUT.

AND I THINK WE WILL BE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT CRITERIA WE MIGHT USE IN PROPOSING CHANGES TO THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY.

BUT I GET THE IMPRESSION THAT WE MIGHT NOT PULL THAT OFF BY THE TIME WE GET THIS PLAN DONE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

SO I'M JUST FOCUSING ON THAT PARAGRAPH AND SAYING, ARE WE ESTABLISHING A POLICY HERE THAT INCLUDES THE CRITERIA BY WHICH FUTURE SUGGESTIONS WILL BE JUDGED? AND IF SO, LET'S GIVE THEM A GOOD HARD LOOK.

I WILL ONLY SAY THAT THE MAJORITY OF THIS LANGUAGE IS IN THE EXISTING PLAN AS WELL.

YEAH, THIS IS JUST US TRYING TO PUT IT IN MORE READABLE FORMAT.

SO WE COULD JUST JUSTIFY THAT.

YEAH, WE CAN. WE CAN ADD THE MAP AREA COMMENT.

NO PROBLEM. I THINK I USE THAT AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SMALL ADJUSTMENT AT THE END.

I MEAN RATHER THAN FOR ANYTHING ELSE, IT JUST MAKES IT EASIER FROM PROPERTY OWNER STANDPOINT TO KNOW, YEAH, THEY BUILT A HOUSE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE.

COULD THEY GET SEWAGE? AND IF ONE OF THEM WAS GOING TO SELL THAT, IT COULD BE A VERY COMPELLING ECONOMIC ISSUE.

IT COULD BE AN ECONOMIC BURDEN.

AND THAT'S KIND OF IN THERE.

BUT I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE TO THEM THEY BUILD IT ON THE RIGHT SIDE.

PAGE, AND IT'S THE SECOND FULL SENTENCE THAT SAYS PREVIOUSLY THE BOUNDARY INCLUDED SOME BUT NOT ALL PROPERTIES LEADING TO A SITUATION WHERE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES MAY BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY FROM A DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE.

THAT'S KIND OF LAYING OUT THE RATIONALE FOR WHY YOU WOULD STRAIGHTEN THAT LINE, BECAUSE NEIGHBORS WERE TREATED DIFFERENTLY BY THE SHAPE OF THE LINE.

AND I FINALLY CAME TO REALIZE THAT WHAT THAT SENTENCE IS TALKING ABOUT IS LITERALLY THE DEFINITION OF ZONING.

IF MY PROPERTY IS THIS SIDE OF THE LINE, THEN I HAVE THESE RIGHTS.

AND IF YOUR PROPERTY IS THAT SIDE OF THE LINE, THEN YOU HAVE THOSE RIGHTS.

SO HAVING A CONDITION WHERE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY AS A CAUSE FOR CHANGE, WELL, THAT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE CASE.

THAT'S AS SOON AS YOU DRAW THE LINE.

PEOPLE ARE BEING TREATED DIFFERENTLY.

MOVE THE LINE. PEOPLE ARE BEING TREATED.

SO AS A AS A RATIONALE FOR WHY YOU WOULD MAKE THIS CHANGE, IT DOESN'T I CAN'T SQUARE IT.

NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, THERE'S GOING TO BE NEIGHBORS TREATED DIFFERENTLY.

I THINK IF NEIGHBORS WERE TREATED UNFAIRLY OR SOMETHING, THEN I WOULD WANT TO RECTIFY BUT I THE FIRST ONE WAS AN ERROR.

SOMEBODY DREW THE LINE WRONG.

THIS ONE, THE LINE WAS DRAWN.

AND THE QUESTION IS, IS THIS THE TIME WHERE WE UNDO THAT STRAIGHT LINE? AND I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, WE WANT TO HAVE AGAIN, WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA THAT ARE LISTED IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH HERE? HOW DO THEY JUSTIFY THE SECOND CASE? I DON'T. IF IT'S THE ECONOMIC BURDEN THAT IS PRESUMABLY IMPOSED ON THE OWNERS OF THE PARCELS NOW TO BE INCLUDED BY THE PRIOR EXCLUSION, THEN IF THAT'S THE BASIS ON WHICH WE'RE MAKING THE DECISION.

WHEN WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS IN THE PAST, I'VE HEARD THE ARGUMENT MADE THAT STRAIGHT LINES ARE MORE DEFENSIBLE.

AND WHEN YOU'RE OUT IN THE PRAIRIE, THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.

BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT AND I KNOW THAT STAFF HAVE HAVE BEEN CLEAR THAT THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY IS A TRICKY PLANNING TOOL ANYWAY.

IT'S RARE. IT'S AND IT GETS CHALLENGED.

AND YOU WOULD LIKE NOT TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT CAUSES YOU TO END UP SPEND ALL YOUR TIME IN COURT.

SO I THINK MY SUGGESTION IS THAT IF MAYBE THE TOWNSHIPS ATTORNEYS COULD LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S KIND OF JUSTIFYING THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, BECAUSE I THINK THE BOARD MAY WELL HAVE THOSE QUESTIONS AS WELL.

AND IF IT'S JUST COMING FROM THE OLD PLAN THAT IT'S THEIR FAULT BECAUSE THEY WERE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE TIME.

AND I WOULD ASK STAFF, HAVE YOU IDENTIFIED OR DETERMINED WHETHER OR NOT THIS CHANGE HAS ANY ADVERSE IMPACT ON ANY RESIDENT? BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT AS WELL.

[01:10:05]

THERE IS NOT AN OBVIOUS ADVERSE IMPACT ON ANY RESIDENT.

I MEAN, TO THE NORTH YOU HAVE LITERALLY A STUB COMING TO THE SOUTH.

SO DEVELOPMENT CERTAINLY ANTICIPATED HERE YOU HAVE A STUB THAT THE TOWNSHIP REQUIRED HERE TO THE NORTH.

I'M THINKING MORE OF THE OTHER PICTURE.

OH, IN THIS ONE, YES.

FUNCTIONALLY THIS, THIS THERE'S A HOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY AND THERE'S A HOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY ALREADY.

SO IT SHOULD HAVE NO IMPACT ON EITHER PROPERTY OWNER.

I THINK THEY GOT TO CHOOSE.

RIGHT. WAIT A MINUTE. WILL THAT REQUIRE THEM TO HOOK UP TO A SEWER LINE? IT WILL NOT, NO. OKAY.

SO THE LETTER THE LETTER THAT I SENT TO THE OWNERS MADE THAT CLEAR.

THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HOOK UP.

IT GAVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY.

IF THEIR SEPTIC FAILS, THEN WILL THAT REQUIRE THEM TO HOOK UP TO A SEWER? IT WOULD BE CHEAPER TO FIX THEIR SEPTIC SYSTEM THAN TO EXTEND THE LINE TO HOOK UP.

BUT THAT DOESN'T ANSWER. THAT DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION.

MY QUESTION IS, IF THEIR SEPTIC FAILS, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT.

[INAUDIBLE] IT OCCURS TO OCCURS TO A COUPLE OF US AT LEAST, THAT THE WORD WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS RATIONALIZE THE BOUNDARY.

YES, WE CAN WORK ON BETTER RATIONALIZING THAT.

YOU KNOW, I GO BACK TO IT WAS FUNNY, I WAS ACTUALLY ON A CALL ABOUT THIS BEFORE I EVEN STARTED THIS JOB WITH OUR ATTORNEYS BECAUSE THE EXISTING MAP ACTUALLY HAS AN EXCEPTION WRITTEN INTO IT ALREADY FOR THESE FOUR PROPERTIES, BECAUSE WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT BEING SUED BECAUSE WE WERE IN ACTIVE LITIGATION OVER THE SEWER DISTRICT THERE, THE PAYBACK DISTRICT PAYBACK DISTRICT.

AND SO THERE WAS ALREADY AN EXCEPTION, SORT OF CASUALLY WRITTEN IN THAT FUNCTIONALLY COVERED THESE FOUR PROPERTIES.

AND IN THEORY, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY, IF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT EVER SOLD IT.

BUT THEY HAD NO NO INTENTION TO DO SO.

SO WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO TAKE OUT THE EXCEPTIONS AND MAKE THIS A LINE THAT IS VERY EASILY DEFENSIBLE.

SO WE'LL WORK ON RATIONALIZING IT A LITTLE BETTER AND WE'LL TOUCH BASE WITH THE ATTORNEYS AND SEE IF THEY HAVE.

THEY ALWAYS HAVE A SUGGESTION.

I LIKE EVERYTHING YOU JUST SAID.

THE FACT THAT THE STUB STREETS ARE THERE, THE EXCEPTION WAS WRITTEN IN THOSE ARE REALLY THE REASONS WE'RE DOING THIS.

SO LET'S, YOU KNOW, GIVE THE INFO AND BE STRAIGHT UP.

I REMEMBER THOSE LAWSUITS.

AND IT.

ISN'T CORNELL ISN'T A NATURAL BEAUTY, DESIGNATED NATURAL BEAUTY, TOO.

DOES THAT HELP TO RATIONALIZE? I THINK FROM OUR FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, IT'S YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO DEVELOP ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL ON CORNELL ROAD.

I MEAN, THE THE AMOUNT OF THE AMOUNT OF EVEN THOUGH CORNELL TO THE SOUTH IS IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT ANIMAL NORTH OF GRAND RIVER. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.

THAT'S RIGHT.

US TO GO FROM HERE, TIM? SO FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, WE'VE GOT THE TOP LINE STUFF.

WE'RE PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH THIS CONVERSATION.

MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THIS DISCUSSION AND AND BRING IT BACK NEXT NEXT MEETING.

AND YOU GUYS CAN GET INTO THE WEEDS ON GOALS AND OBJECTIVES IF YOU'D LIKE.

OR WE CAN CONTINUE WHATEVER CONVERSATION YOU'D LIKE.

I MEAN, I CAN CERTAINLY GO THROUGH THE BUILD OUT FURTHER.

I MEAN, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WITH THIS IS THIS IS JUST A JUMPING OFF POINT FOR US.

WE ANTICIPATE SPENDING A LOT MORE TIME ON THIS IN THE YEARS TO COME.

AND THIS IS I'LL BE HONEST, THIS IS JUST ONE OF MY PET PROJECTS.

I'VE DONE THIS AT EVERY COMMUNITY I'VE BEEN AT.

IT'S AN INTERESTING MATH PROBLEM, REALLY, FOR US TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHERE THE COMMUNITY IS GOING.

UM, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS THAT MR. BROOKS SUBMITTED? I WAS WONDERING IF I DON'T KNOW, I KNOW THIS CAME UP IN THE PAST, UM, A MAP OF THESE AREAS, I THINK THAT CAME UP DURING ONE OF OUR MEETINGS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE OR IF THAT'S JUST GOING TO

[01:15:02]

BUT I UNDERSTAND TOO, IT'S OBVIOUSLY PROBABLY NOT NECESSARY.

IT WILL BE. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE WANT TO CREATE IS A BETTER VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF THIS, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE FOUND IN OUR DATA WAS THAT IT'S PICKING UP EVERY COMMON AREA FOR EVERY SUBDIVISION.

SO THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS PUT OUT A MAP THAT SHOWS, YOU KNOW, CORNELL WOODS COMMON AREA BEING DEVELOPED FOR APARTMENTS.

YEAH. SO WE JUST NEED TO REFINE THAT DATA.

BUT THAT IS DEFINITELY ON OUR LIST.

COMMISSIONER SNYDER HAS SUGGESTED THIS IN THE PAST AND I THINK STAFF SAID IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE SINCE WE HAVE THE BIG URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY DISCUSSION AND WE HAVE THIS BUILDOUT ANALYSIS COMES RIGHT AFTER IT.

THE NATURAL QUESTION PEOPLE ASK IS, YOU KNOW, IS IT 60 OVER 40? HOW MUCH IS IN? HOW MUCH IS OUT? WITHOUT PUBLISHING A DETAILED MAP THAT SHOWS CORNELL WOODS PROPERTY ASSOCIATION, BUT AT LEAST SAYS OF THIS PORTION.

RIGHT. SO YOU'RE TALKING BUILD OUT ANALYSIS, RIGHT.

OF THE 375 OF THE 3,528, HOW MANY OF THEM ARE OUT THERE IN THE BOONIES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE AND HOW MANY OF THEM ARE INFILL? AND YOU ALREADY SAID A THOUSAND OF THEM ARE ALREADY APPROVED.

SO WE KNOW ABOUT THAT.

BUT THE REST IS THE DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE COMING FROM GOING TO BE SATISFIED WITHIN OR OUTSIDE THAT BOUNDARY.

POTENTIALLY. IT SEEMS LIKE A FAIRLY EASY MAP OPERATION, BUT THERE'S THOSE LITTLE BITS AND PIECES.

SO A ROUGH PIE CHART, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GIVE YOU A ROUGH IN VERSUS OUT.

THAT'S NOT THAT HARD.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE STAFF.

YOU REALLY HAVE DONE A REAL GOOD JOB IN PUTTING THIS TOGETHER AND HELPING TO LEAD US THROUGH THIS AND MAKING IT A LOT LESS PAINFUL AND A LOT EASIER ON US TO COMPREHEND AND UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. AND FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WE APPRECIATE THE PLANNING COMMISSION INDULGING US ALONG THE WAY OF DRIP FEEDING THIS BECAUSE THIS IS BECAUSE IT'S AN UPDATE WE DIDN'T WANT TO JUST DROP. OKAY. IT'S NOT THAT BIG OF A DOCUMENT, ESPECIALLY COMPARED TO THE LAST ONE.

BUT IT WAS HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION ALONG THE WAY AND MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK.

AS BRIAN WAS WRITING A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUFF THAT I WE THEN GOT IN AND PUT IT WITH COMMUNICATIONS AND TOLD THEM TO MAKE IT LOOK PRETTY.

IF YOU WANT TO CATCH COMMISSIONER BROOKS'S QUESTION ABOUT DEVELOP MORE ROBUST BUILD OUT ANALYSIS, TAKING NATURAL FEATURES INTO ACCOUNT CAN BE MORE SPECIFIC.

AND WHAT IS THE PURCHASE ABOUT? WHAT ABOUT PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS? THOSE ARE GREAT THINGS.

YEAH. SO THE IDEA OF THE MORE ROBUST BUILD OUT ANALYSIS AND TAKING NATURAL FEATURES INTO ACCOUNT IS RIGHT NOW FUNCTIONALLY WHAT IT DOES IS WE TOOK AND BRIAN PULLED A MAP OF ALL OF THE VACANT PROPERTIES.

I'M SORRY, SENIOR PLANNER SHORKEY PUT A MAP OF ALL THE VACANT PROPERTIES.

AND THEN WHAT WE DID IS WE JUST APPLIED A FACTOR TO IT OF 75% YIELD FOR ANY PROPERTY.

IN THEORY, WE BELIEVE YOU COULD GET 75% BUILDABLE AREA.

IT'S A VERY CRUDE TOOL RIGHT NOW.

WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO AS WE GO FORWARD IS START TO OVERLAY THAT MAP WITH THE WETLANDS MAP, OVERLAY THAT MAP WITH KNOWN DRAINAGE COURSES, OVERLAY THAT MAP WITH THINGS LIKE WITH OTHER NATURAL FEATURES, ITEMS THAT ARE GOING TO POTENTIALLY ON CERTAIN PROPERTIES, DROP THAT 75 DOWN TO 25, 50, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS.

WHEREAS IN OTHER AREAS YOU MIGHT ALREADY HAVE ACCESS TO UTILITIES, YOU MIGHT ALREADY HAVE ROAD NETWORK THERE THAT YOUR YIELD CAN GO UP AND YOU MIGHT GET A COUPLE MORE UNITS OVER THERE. AND SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE WANT TO JUST GET A LITTLE MORE GRANULAR IN HOW WE DO THIS ANALYSIS.

SO WE'RE GIVING PEOPLE A BETTER SENSE OF WHAT MIGHT COME.

AND THEN THE PURCHASE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS IDEA IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE KICKED AROUND IN THE BACK OF MY HEAD.

I'VE MENTIONED IT TO PARKS A COUPLE TIMES.

THE IDEA OF A PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS IS YOU ARE ACQUIRING AS A TOWNSHIP, AS A MUNICIPALITY, ACQUIRING THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY.

SO USUALLY IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ON A BUNCH OF ACREAGE.

SO THAT PROPERTY WOULD NEVER BE DEVELOPED, BUT IT WOULD STILL BE OWNED BY THE PEOPLE.

YOU'D HAVE AN EASEMENT OVER IT.

SO YOU CONSERVE THE PROPERTY OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.

IT'S A BIT OF A HYBRID BETWEEN OUR LAND PRESERVATION PURCHASES AND SORT OF WHAT AREAS AROUND A LOT OF LARGER COMMUNITIES.

ANN ARBOR HAS THAT. I BELIEVE KALAMAZOO HAS IT WHERE THEY PURCHASE THE RIGHTS OF FARM FIELDS SO THAT YOU'LL ALWAYS HAVE THE FARM FIELDS THERE AND IT CREATES SORT OF THE GREEN RING AROUND THE COMMUNITY.

JUST A CONCEPT.

[01:20:01]

BUT AS WE TRANSITION AWAY FROM FLAT OUT BUYING PROPERTIES UNDER THE LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM, IT MIGHT BE AN INTERESTING ALTERNATIVE IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

SO SOMETHING WE WANTED TO LOOK INTO GOING FORWARD.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, FOR SOME TIME, THE STANDARD PRESERVE ON DOBIE WAS HELD IN A KIND OF A ROLLING TEN YEAR EASEMENT FASHION, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, CONVERTED TO TOWNSHIP.

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

SO THERE ARE MECHANISMS OUT THERE AND THE MORE WE EXPLORE THEM, THE BETTER IT OCCURS TO ME.

I'M SORRY.

WHEN I WAS READING THIS, AND THAT IS I THINK WE NEED A CLEARER DEFINITION OF WHAT A BUILDOUT ANALYSIS IS.

OKAY, IT'S NOT ALL TOWNSHIP OFFICIALS OR TOWNSHIP ATTORNEYS WHO ARE GOING TO BE READING THIS, AND I THINK THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO GET LOST WHEN THEY LOOK AT THIS AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS YOU'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT.

AND I THINK THAT WOULD HELP COMMISSIONER BROOKS, IN ANSWERING THIS QUESTION.

THAT'S GREAT FEEDBACK. I ALSO THINK THAT THIS SECTION, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT WE HAVE NOW, IS VERY PRELIMINARY AND ROUGH.

IT SHOULD BE MORE ASPIRATIONAL AND FUTURE PLANNING AS OPPOSED TO THIS SORT OF LAYS IT OUT AS THIS IS WHAT IT IS TO INDICATE THAT YOU'RE GOING FORWARD WITH A MORE DETAILED AND MORE ROBUST ANALYSIS.

THAT BRINGS INTO QUESTION IS, IS THIS STRICTLY A MATHEMATICAL GUESS AS TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OR DOES IT INCLUDE THE ASPIRATIONAL ASPECT OF THE MASTER PLAN? IT IS A MATHEMATICAL GUESS BASED ON CURRENT ZONING.

ARE YOU DOING THIS FOR RESIDENTIAL OR FOR ALL PROPERTY? PURELY RESIDENTIAL RIGHT NOW.

AND MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU PUT UNDER THE PRESERVE AND ENHANCE RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES AS IMPROVE EXPANDING ON A BUILD OUT ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE WHAT THE OPPORTUNITIES ARE WITHIN THIS GOAL, OR AT LEAST REFERENCE IT.

I SUGGESTED A BAR CHART, BUT FOLLOWING OUR CHAIR SUGGESTION I THINK A HISTOGRAM WOULD BE MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN JUST LET THE TAIL GO OUT AND NOBODY CARES.

YOU UNDERSTAND IT'S A BUNCH OF MAPPING ERRORS, BUT THERE'S SOME BIG ONES AND THEN WE'LL KNOW, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME GREAT BIG ONES AND THEN A WHOLE BUNCH OF SMALL ONES.

RIGHT? SO I THINK THAT'LL THAT AVOIDS THE MAPPING ISSUE, BUT IT'LL GIVE PEOPLE A FEEL FOR WHERE THAT WHAT KINDS OF LOTS THAT STUFF'S GOING TO GO ON.

EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT POINTING OUT INDIVIDUALS, ARCGIS WILL GIVE YOU A NICE LITTLE HISTOGRAM.

ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS SECTION? OH, I'VE GOT A WHOLE BUNCH OF LITTLE MARKS I'M GOING TO GIVE HIM AFTERWARDS.

BUT SAME WITH THE TRANSPORTATION.

I LIKE EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THERE, JUST EDITING.

COPY EDITING. I'M SORRY.

JUST COPY EDITING.

OKAY. THANK YOU. IN THOSE TWO SECTIONS AT THIS POINT.

MR. SCHMITT, LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING.

ARE THERE ARE OTHER SUBDIVISIONS OF TOWNSHIP GOVERNMENT THAT ALSO CONTROL LAND USE PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES? THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.

IS THAT SUBORDINATE TO THE MASTER PLAN OR DO THEY FOLLOW THEIR OWN PLAN? SO THEY HAVE AN INTEGRATED PLAN, BUT IT IS NOT A IT'S NOT A LAND USE PLAN IN THE TRADITIONAL SENSE.

THE DDA INTEGRATED PLAN ESSENTIALLY OUTLINES HOW THEY WILL SPEND THEIR TAX CAPTURE DOLLARS AND WHAT THEY CAN SPEND THAT ON.

IT GETS INTO A LITTLE BIT.

IT PLAYS IN THE FIELD BECAUSE IT TALKS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BEAUTIFICATION EFFORTS AND IT TALKS ABOUT SUPPORTING EXISTING BUSINESSES AND IT TALKS ABOUT FAÇADE IMPROVEMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

[01:25:01]

AND I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'VE GIVEN IT SOME REFERENCE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HELP THE WE NEED TO HELP THE DDA UPDATE THAT IT'S TIME.

SAME WITH PARKS. YOU KNOW, WE'LL BE WE'LL HOPEFULLY PLAY A BIGGER ROLE IN HELPING THE PARKS COMMISSION UPDATE THEIR PLAN IN TWO YEARS.

I THINK IT IS.

AND SO HOPEFULLY OUR CONCEPT HERE IS THAT WE KIND OF BECOME THE UMBRELLA AND WE KIND OF HELP EVERYBODY.

YEAH, THAT'S BEEN A CONSTANT QUESTION IN MY MIND AS I LIAISON WITH THE WITH THE DDA.

IT'S ALMOST LIKE THEY'RE A SEPARATE CITY COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY THE TOWNSHIP.

AND IN MANY COMMUNITIES THEY ARE IN MANY COMMUNITIES, THEY ARE SEPARATE FROM THE GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL.

THEY HAVE THEIR OWN STAFF AND THEIR OWN BOARD AND THEIR OWN BUILDING.

IT REALLY JUST DEPENDS ON HOW THE COMMUNITY REALLY HAS IT FUNCTION.

SO THE MASTER PLAN SHOULD SIMPLY REFERENCE THEM AS ONE OF THE UNITS THAT WE HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH.

YES, WE TAKE MORE OF A CONTROL ON LAND USE, BUT THEY TAKE MORE OF A CONTROL ON THE NUTS AND BOLTS IN THEIR AREA.

YEAH, I THINK THE CIA ALSO NOW HAS TAX CAPTURE AUTHORITY, SO IT'S GOING TO BE VERY SIMILAR.

THOSE LINKS ARE THEY'LL BE ESPECIALLY INVOLVED IN THOSE THOSE MICRO PLANS.

I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE TERMINOLOGY IN THE PICAS SMALL AREA PLAN? SMALLER AREA PLANS? THAT'S I THINK, WHERE WE ENGAGE MOST CLOSELY WITH THOSE GROUPS.

I WOULD AGREE. OKAY.

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? WE'RE IN GREAT SHAPE FOR THIS EVENING.

THIS HELPS US GET TO A DRAFT.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, WITH THE [INAUDIBLE].

GRACE, WE WILL MAKE SOME OF THESE CHANGES, TRY TO GET THIS LANGUAGE AND TIGHTEN IT UP.

AND THEN IF YOU GUYS WANT TO NEXT MEETING, GET INTO THE NUTS AND NITTY GRITTY OF THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

THAT'S TO YOUR PURVIEW.

BUT I THINK WHAT WE'LL DO AT THE NEXT MEETING IS SORT OF PRESENT WHAT WE HOPE IS A FINAL PRELIMINARY DRAFT TO BE DISTRIBUTED.

ALL RIGHT. BUT THANK YOU.

THIS IS AN EXCELLENT CONVERSATION.

IT HELPS US TREMENDOUSLY.

AND WE CAN REPORT BACK TO COMMISSIONER BROOKS THAT WE DID, IN FACT, CONSIDER SOME OF HIS SUGGESTIONS.

AND WE'LL DISCUSS THEM I THINK, ONCE A LITTLE MORE ONCE WE GET INTO THE NUTS AND BOLTS.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM 11 ON OUR AGENDA REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.

[11A. Township Board update.]

I WILL JUST POINT OUT THAT THE TOWNSHIP BOARD IS TAKING UP THE SUPS FOR THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA LICENSES.

STILL, THERE'S SCHEDULING.

WE'RE GETTING THERE.

THAT'S REALLY THE MAIN ITEM AT THIS POINT.

OKAY. LIAISON REPORTS.

[11B. Liaison reports.]

I APPEARED AT THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, AND THEY ARE I GAVE BRIAN A COMPREHENSIVE.

IT WAS MORE THAN JUST AN AGENDA.

THEY ARE GOING THROUGH FAÇADE IMPROVEMENT, FINANCING AND AND REGULATION FOR THE BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN THE DDA.

IT'S VERY COMPREHENSIVE.

A LOT OF MONEY INVOLVED AND THEIR CONCERN IS HOW THEY RETAIN CONTROL OVER THE FAÇADE AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY GIVE SOMEBODY MONEY AND THEN HE GOES OUT OF BUSINESS BEFORE HE MAKES THE IMPROVEMENT, THAT TYPE OF THING.

BUT IT'S AN EXTENSIVE DOCUMENT.

I GAVE IT TO BRIAN AND ANYONE WHO'S INTERESTED IN TAKING A LOOK THROUGH THAT.

IT IS INTERESTING AND HE HAS IT AVAILABLE FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SEE IT, BUT THEY'RE DOING A LOT OF WORK.

I'M VERY IMPRESSED WITH THEIR STAFF.

SHE'S QUITE AN IMPRESSIVE LADY.

SHE DOES A LOT OF WORK FOR THEM.

SO ANY OTHER LIAISONS? YOU KNOW, WE WERE TALKING EARLIER, I SAW A COPY OF THE TOWNSHIP'S HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT THE BOARD JUST ADOPTED. AND IT JUST OCCURRED TO ME THAT THAT DOESN'T GET MENTIONED IN HERE.

AND THERE MAY BE A SPOT WHERE FOLKS CAN BE POINTED TO IT IF IT'S OF INTEREST DOCUMENT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH LINKS.

I READ THE MINUTES THAT THE DOCUMENT HAD TOO MANY LINKS.

I HAVE NOT BEEN TRYING THE LINKS, BUT I'M A BIG FAN OF LINKS THAT WORK.

[01:30:06]

YEAH. YEAH.

ENTRY NUMBER 12 PROJECT.

PROJECT REPORT. WE HAVE NOTHING MAJOR THIS EVENING.

[12A. Project Report]

THERE'S A LOT OF A LOT OF THINGS GETTING READY TO POP.

ITEM 13 THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THERE ARE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE FOR PUBLIC REMARKS, COMMISSIONER COMMENTS.

THIS IS SOMETHING WE PUT IN AFTER A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO WHEN PEOPLE JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS SOMETHING AT THE END OF THE MEETING.

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS THEY WISH TO PLACE? NO. THEN IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? I MOVE TO ADJOURN.

I SUPPORT THE MOTION TO ADJOURN.

ALL IN FAVOR? WE ARE ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU, FOLKS.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.