Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:25]

IT'S ABOUT 6:29 AND I'LL CALL TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION FOR SEPTEMBER 11TH,

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

2023. INITIAL ACTIVITIES.

TAKE THE ROLL.

. SNYDER HAS INDICATED SHE WOULD NOT BE IN ATTENDANCE, AS HAS THE CHAIR, MR. BLUMER. AND I'M HERE.

WE HAVE SIX MEMBERS AND A QUORUM HAVE [INAUDIBLE].

OH, THERE HE IS.[INAUDIBLE] ALL THE PEOPLE ARE MOVED BACK IN NOW.

OH, ITS DIFFERENT IN HERE.

THERE ARE NO CHAIRS.

THE MEETING IS IN SESSION.

YOUR MEETING IS IN SESSION. COME ON AND SIT DOWN, MR. BROOKS. YOU'RE NOW PRESENT.

I'M SORRY. MY BAD.

THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA NUMBER THREE.

AFTER THE ROLL CALL IS PUBLIC REMARKS.

I SEE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

WE'LL GO AROUND TO ITEM FOUR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.

[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

WE HAVE A PROPOSED AGENDA.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT? AS PRESENTED? SO MOVED.

TO THE AGENDA. SECOND, THE MOTION.

WE HAVE LOTS OF APPROVALS.

FIRST WAS WHO'S THE SECOND? I SECONDED COMMISSIONER SCALES'S FORMAL MOTION.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. MR. SCALES MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED AND COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL SUPPORTED.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE AGENDA SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. SIX ZERO.

NEXT, WE HAVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

LET'S TAKE THESE ONE BY ONE.

THE FIRST IS THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 14TH, 2023.

A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 14TH, 2023 AS PROPOSED.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 14TH, 2023 MEETING AS PRESENTED.

IS THERE SUPPORT FOR THAT MOTION? SUPPORT? SUPPORT FOR MR. COMMISSIONER SCALES.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER O'CONNELL.

MCCONNELL ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AUGUST 14TH MINUTES? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 14TH, 2023 AS PRESENTED SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE? AYE. OPPOSED.

WE ARE SIX ZERO APPROVAL NOW.

THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 28TH, 2023.

AGAIN, I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED FOR AUGUST 28TH, 2023.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

SECOND. MOTION FROM OKAY.

MR. BROOKS APPROVED BY MR. CURTIS. COMMISSIONERS ALL THOSE IN ANY DISCUSSION? YES. THIS IS A MINOR THING.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT MATTERS TO SENIOR PLANNER SHORKEY, BUT A NUMBER 12 PROJECT UPDATES.

I THINK YOU WERE VERY CAREFUL NOT TO BE SPECIFIC ABOUT THE SPECIALTY GROCER.

YES, THE NAME IS THERE, SO I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE AN IMPLICATION THAT YOU HAD DONE SOMETHING.

I'M GLAD YOU CAUGHT THAT.

WITH THAT CHANGE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 28TH, 2023 SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

OPPOSED. IT IS SIX ZERO.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

NOW I HAVE.

I'M SORRY. ONE MORE. YES, MA'AM.

NO. NEVER MIND.

SORRY. NOPE, I'M GOOD.

MR. CHAIR. COUNT? YES. MINUTES SHOULD PROBABLY REFLECT.

COMMISSIONER BROOKS IS WITH US NOW.

I DID INDICATE THAT MR. BROOKS WAS PRESENT, SO THANK YOU.

YES, THANK YOU.

SO, SEVEN, SEVEN, SEVEN AND ZERO.

YES, MY NUMBERS ARE OFF.

BOTH ALL MOTIONS HAVE BEEN APPROVED.

SEVEN ZERO. THAT'S CORRECT.

THANK YOU. COMMUNICATIONS.

WE HAVE NONE IN THE PACKET.

HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY? WE HAVE NOT. OKAY.

AND THAT'S PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE RRC ORDINANCE OVER THE SENIOR PLAN.

[7A. RRC Ordinance]

AND GIVE US A SUMMARY OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT,

[00:05:09]

THE ORDINANCE UPDATES THAT YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY SEEN.

THIS IS SIMPLY THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS BECAUSE IT IS A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT.

IT DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN PROPERLY NOTICED.

JUST VERY QUICKLY TO REVIEW, THIS WOULD ELIMINATE MINIMUM HOUSE SIZE.

THIS WOULD ALLOW MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS BY RIGHT IN MULTIPLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS.

THIS WOULD ALLOW SECOND FLOOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY AREA.

NOT MULTIPLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS.

JUST SECOND FLOOR WHERE YOU HAVE ALREADY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THIS WOULD CREATE A PROCESS TO ALLOW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONED AREAS AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE REMOVAL OF THE PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT FOR SITE PLANS.

IT'S AND I CAN GET INTO DETAIL ON WHY THAT AND I THINK WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION A LITTLE BIT BEFORE.

YOU DO HAVE AN ATTACHED ORDINANCE.

AGAIN, YOU HAVE SEEN THIS.

IT DESCRIBES THE CHANGES.

THIS THE TOWNSHIP BOARD HAS SEEN THESE AND REFERRED IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR ACTION.

AND ULTIMATELY, AS ALWAYS, YOU CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS WRITTEN APPROVAL OF A REVISED VERSION OR RECOMMENDED NILE.

AND WE WILL PROVIDE A RESOLUTION AT A FORMER MEETING OR FUTURE MEETING.

EXCUSE ME. ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR PLANNER SHORKEY? ONE ONE QUICK NOTE THIS.

THIS WAS NOTICED. I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY COMMENT FROM THE PUBLIC, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH.

THANK YOU. COMMENTS.

QUESTIONS. COULD YOU GO OVER THE RATIONALE BEHIND REMOVAL OF THE PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENT FOR SITE PLANS? SURE.

SO IN THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS THAT YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH, THERE'S A 300 FOOT NOTIFICATION AND IT'S IN THE NEWSPAPER AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S TELEVISED AND IT'S IN THIS BIG PUBLIC FORUM.

THE PUBLIC HEARING I DON'T EVEN LIKE USING THE WORD PUBLIC HEARING, BUT THAT IS THE PHRASE THAT APPEARS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE VIS THE SITE PLAN AND SITE PLAN REVIEW. THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.

SO AN EXAMPLE RECENTLY YOU DID THE SRP FOR GRAND RESERVE.

THAT WAS A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE HAD SOME PEOPLE COME IN AND COMMENT THAT WAS A VOTE.

IT WENT THROUGH YOU GUYS AND IT WAS PUBLICIZED.

WE'RE IN SITE PLAN REVIEW NOW.

SO YOU GUYS, BECAUSE THAT'S ADMINISTRATIVE THAT'S NOW OUT OF YOUR HANDS.

IT'S IN OUR HANDS.

SO WE HAVE A SITE PLAN, PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENT IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE THAT REQUIRES US TO SEND NOTICES NOT 300 FOOT OUT, BUT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND VERY OFTEN WE GET NO INTEREST FROM THE PUBLIC BECAUSE AT THAT POINT, LIKE I SAID, IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.

THE OTHER DIFFERENCE IS MICHIGAN PLANNING CODE IS PRETTY EXPLICIT IN SAYING IF THE SITE PLAN MEETS OUR REQUIREMENTS, WE SHALL APPROVE. SO THERE'S REALLY NOT IT'S THERE'S REALLY NOT AS MUCH LEEWAY OR GIVE OR TAKE AT THAT POINT IN THE PROCESS DURING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW, AS THERE IS EARLIER DURING THE PUD OR THE SRP PROCESS, WHEN YOU GUYS ARE HEARING IT THE FIRST TIME.

THANK YOU. THAT'S MORE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC THAN THE BOARD.

SURE. IN ADDITION TO WHAT HAS BEEN THE HEARING, THERE ARE OTHER PLACES WHERE THE PUBLIC CAN WEIGH IN ON THIS.

IF THERE'S A REQUEST FOR A ZONING VARIANCE AND SOME THINGS LIKE THAT AT THE ZBA OR WHATEVER, THOSE ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THOSE ARE AVAILABLE AND THOSE ARE NOTICED.

ABSOLUTELY. THIS DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING RELATED TO ANY OTHER NOTICE REQUIREMENTS IN OUR ORDINANCE.

SO YOUR REVIEW OF THE SITE PLAN IS TO MAKE SURE IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE ZONING CODES.

AS FAR AS SETBACKS, ANY VARIANCE GIVEN BY THE ZBA AND MAKE SURE THAT IT DOES COMPLY WITH OUR ORDINANCE AS PUBLISHED.

CORRECT. I'LL ALSO NOTE, TOO, THAT WE DO MAKE USE OF OUR TOWNSHIP WEBSITE.

WE DO NEED TO DO A SLIGHTLY BETTER JOB OF THIS, BUT WE DO GET PDFS OF OUR SITE PLANS UP ON OUR WEBSITE AND PEOPLE ARE WELCOME TO CALL WITH COMMENTS ON THINGS THAT THEY SEE THERE.

AND I DO OCCASIONALLY RECEIVE PHONE CALLS FROM THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

BUT AGAIN, BY THE TIME IT GETS TO SITE PLAN, THERE'S A LOT LESS DISCRETIONARY ACTION THAT CAN BE TAKEN AT THAT POINT.

AND DO YOU WHEN YOU HOLD THESE QUOTE UNQUOTE HEARINGS FREQUENTLY HAVE NO ATTENDANCE OTHER THAN THE

[00:10:02]

PLANNING AND THE APPLICANT? FREQUENTLY, I WILL NOT SAY ALWAYS THE BIGGEST ATTENDANCE HANDS DOWN, THE BIGGEST ATTENDANCE I'VE HAD.

WHEN VILLAGE OF OKEMOS WENT THROUGH THEIR LATEST MUPAD APPROVAL, WHEN THEY HAD THE SITE PLAN, I HAD THIS ROOM RING A TABLE, YOU KNOW, IN A RING.

AND I HAD QUITE A FEW PEOPLE HERE ASKING QUESTIONS.

BUT AGAIN, NOTHING CHANGED ON THE SITE PLAN BASED ON THOSE COMMENTS BECAUSE YOU JUST DON'T HAVE THE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY TO DO ANYTHING AT THAT POINT.

OTHER THAN THAT, 1 OR 2 INTERESTED PEOPLE, CURIOUS PEOPLE WHO JUST WANT TO KNOW, HEY, WHAT'S THIS LOOK LIKE? WHAT'S IT MEAN FOR ME? WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO PUT THE UTILITIES, THAT KIND OF THING.

THANK YOU. SURE.

ANYTHING ELSE? YES, MR. SHREWSBURRY. TALKING ABOUT SITE PLAN.

JUST A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE APPEAL SECTION TO BE.

IT SAYS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON MAY APPEAL.

IS THAT THE APPLICANT OR IS THAT ANYBODY WHO IS AGGRIEVED? ANYBODY? OKAY. YEAH, THAT'S AN APPEAL PROCESS.

OKAY. THEY DIDN'T THINK THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE APPROVED IT.

JOE BLOW FROM THE PUBLIC WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME IN AND FILE AN APPEAL ON THE DECISION.

SURE. AND THEN I THINK THERE'S JUST A LITTLE TYPO WITH AN EXTRA COMMA IN THERE SOMEWHERE AND SHOW YOU WHERE IT IS AFTER.

THAT'S SECTION A ONE.

SECTION A ONE.

YES. I DON'T THINK THERE SHOULD BE A COMMA AFTER DEPARTMENTS ON THAT LAST LINE.

OR ELSE THERE SHOULDN'T BE THE WORD.

AND I'M SORRY.

SECTION. SECTION WHAT SECTION? I'M SORRY. SECTION TWO.

IN THAT SAME.

THE SECTION TWO.

A ONE.

A TWO.

A ONE. OKAY.

THAT LAST LINE.

OH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

THERE SHOULD NOT BE COMPARTMENTS.

AGENCIES AND STATE AND FEDERAL STATUTES.

OKAY. THAT'S IT.

AND THEN I HAD A QUESTION ON THE SECOND PART.

SHOULD I HOLD THAT UNTIL WE GET TO THAT OR.

NO, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING ELSE.

I JUST STARTED WITH THAT ONE.

SO. OKAY. JUST A REALLY QUICK QUESTION ON THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

SURE. THERE'S A SECTION HERE WHERE YOU SAY SECOND OPTION, AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU NEEDED US TO DISCUSS THAT OR IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'RE STILL WORKING ON.

LET ME FIND IT. NO, THAT'S A DISCUSSION.

DIRECTOR SCHMITT PUT THAT IN THERE.

AND AS EXPLAINED, I THINK PREVIOUSLY AND EXPLAINED TO ME THAT IS A PLACE WHERE THERE'S IT CAN GO EITHER WAY.

SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT.

WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO SEE IS THE ADUS BEING LIKE THE HOUSE LEASED OUT AND THE ADU LEASED OUT SITUATION.

ONE OR THE OTHER HAS GOT TO BE THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENT.

AND SO.

THE SECOND OPTION THERE, IT'S BASICALLY DETERMINING HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHO THE PRESIDENT.

THE RESIDENCE STATUS.

AND IF YOU GUYS LIKED IT BETTER, WE COULD USE.

ARE THEY RECEIVING PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE TAX EXEMPTION? KNOW THE HOMESTEAD, YOU KNOW, I.E..

SO THAT IS A DISCRETIONARY ITEM.

BUT IF YOU GUYS DON'T REALLY MIND, THE PREFERRED VERBIAGE IS JUST WHAT YOU SEE THERE.

IN RESPONSE TO THE TAX QUESTION.

I THINK THAT MAY BE CONFUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO MAY USE A RESIDENCE SOMEPLACE ELSE IN THE STATE AS THEIR PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE FOR THE SCHOOL TAX RATHER THAN THIS ONE IN THIS AREA.

SO, OKAY.

YES. I THINK MAYBE ANOTHER OPTION IS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE MULTIPLE RENTAL UNITS ON.

THERE IS ONLY ONE RENTAL LICENSE PER PROPERTY SITE OR PER SITE.

YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF NOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE AND MAYBE THE ONE SITE.

BUT I THINK WHAT THE PROBLEM WITH THE RESIDENCY SITUATION IS, YOU HAVE SOMEBODY WHO SPENDS FIVE MONTHS IN FLORIDA, CLAIMS MICHIGAN RESIDENCE AND THEN RENTS IT OUT FOR FIVE MONTHS.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I GUESS JUST HAVING THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE PERSON RESIDES THERE, I THINK IS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM ANY WAY YOU LOOK AT IT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT RESIDENTS,

[00:15:05]

WE ALL SOME OF US KNOW ABOUT PEOPLE CLAIMING TO LIVE ONE PLACE AND FOR VOTING PURPOSES AND LIVE SOMEPLACE ELSE.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF A CAN OF WORMS, BUT I GUESS MY THOUGHT WOULD BE WHAT TO HAVE THE ATTORNEYS WEIGH IN TO SEE WHAT IS THE MOST ENFORCEABLE, THE HIGHEST LIKELIHOOD THAT WE CAN ENFORCE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SET UP HERE, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S ANY OPTION PROBABLY HAS SOME WAY THAT SOMEBODY COULD PROBABLY WORK AROUND IT. BUT I GUESS ALL WE CAN DO IS THE BEST WE CAN DO.

AND I GUESS THE IDEA HERE IS THE AT LEAST IN MY BOOK IS NOT SO MUCH, YOU KNOW, THIS PROPERTY, BUT IT'S THE OTHER FOLKS THAT ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY IT OR RESIDING NEXT TO IT, BEHIND IT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT.

AND I THINK WE JUST WANT TO PUT AS MANY SAFEGUARDS IN THERE AS WE CAN.

SURE. WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT RENTAL LICENSE.

I THINK THAT SOUNDS INTERESTING TO ME, FRANKLY.

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL YEAH, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING COMMISSIONER RICHARD JUST SAID.

I THINK IN ADDITION TO ASKING THE ATTORNEYS TO LOOK AT IT, I WOULD CERTAINLY ASK MY CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, HOW WOULD YOU FIGURE THIS ONE? AND IF THERE IS A REQUIREMENT LIKE A HOMESTEAD THAT YOU CAN FALL BACK ON, GREAT.

IF IT WORKS. BUT I ALSO HAD A QUESTION ABOUT ANOTHER ASPECT.

IF WE'RE DONE WITH, WE'RE DONE WITH THAT.

I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS PIECE OF IT.

IF I COULD ADD GOING DOWN TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN.

YES. WHERE IT SAYS ANY ENTRANCE FOR AN ADU SHALL NOT FACE THE ROAD UNLESS THE ENTRANCE EXISTED PRIOR FOR THE STRUCTURE.

WHAT ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT GOES ON A CORNER LOT THAT FOR WHICH THAT MAY BE DIFFICULT? WOULD THAT BE A ZONING VARIANCE IF LIKE? OR IS THAT NOT ALLOWED? THEY WOULD HAVE TO REQUEST A VARIANCE.

THIS IS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

AND I NOTE THAT THIS DOES NOT SAY ENTRANCE SHOULD NOT FACE THE FRONT.

YOU KNOW, THE FRONT YARD, IT SAYS FACE THE ROAD.

SO IN A CORNER LOT I WOULD INTERPRET THIS AS SAYING YOU HAVE TWO ROADS, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO IT MAY NOT BE AN ISSUE.

I MEAN, IT MIGHT BE A VERY RANDOM CASE THAT SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO THIS AND THEY'RE IN A SITUATION.

AND I GUESS IF THERE'S A REASON THAT THIS THERE A REASON THAT THIS IS THERE OR WHAT IS THE REASON THAT THIS IS THERE? BECAUSE THAT MIGHT MAKE SENSE THAT SOMEBODY SHOULD GET A VARIANCE IF THEY WANT TO DO THIS IN A CORNER LOT.

BUT I JUST I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND SORT OF THE RATIONALE FOR INCLUDING THAT IN THERE.

SO SOMEONE SAID, YOU KNOW, MINIMIZE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORS.

THIS GOES TO THAT, YOU KNOW, AN ALREADY EXISTING ENTRANCE.

SO BACK IN THE DAY WHEN I OWNED A HOUSE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I INHERITED WAS AN WAS PRETTY OBVIOUSLY AN ADU AND IT WAS AN ATTACHED ONE. IT WAS IN THE UPSTAIRS.

IT WAS A BIG BEDROOM. IT HAD ITS OWN BATHROOM.

IT HAD HIS OWN KITCHEN, IT HAD ITS OWN YOU KNOW, IT WAS AND IT WAS A MOTHER IN LAW SUITE IN THE HOUSE.

THAT ENTRANCE CLEARLY FACED THE ROAD, BUT IT WAS AN ALREADY EXISTING BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF THE HOUSE.

WHAT THIS ORDINANCE SAYS IS YOU CAN'T DO THAT AND THEN BUILD A NEW ENTRANCE.

THAT WOULD BE NOTICEABLE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. SURE.

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL. YEAH, I'M AFRAID I DON'T HAVE ANY REFERENCES TO GIVE YOU, BUT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PLACES, BOTH IN THE PROPOSED AND IN THE EXISTING ORDINANCE WAS THE TERM MANUFACTURED HOME COMES UP IN DIFFERENT CONTEXTS, AND I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY A DEFINITION THAT INVOLVES A CHASSIS AND SOMETHING I'M THINKING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE MIGHT DO TO CONSTRUCT AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT COULD EASILY BE SOMETHING THAT'S MANUFACTURED OFFSITE AND COULD MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA FOR MANUFACTURED OR ASSEMBLED ON SITE.

SO IT'S JUST A MATTER OF MAKING SURE THAT THE CURRENT PROPOSALS ARE KIND OF CLEAR ON WHAT THIS IS AND WHAT SECTION ONE IS THE DEFINITION FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

AND THE SECOND, THE LAST SENTENCE SAYS A MANUFACTURED HOME IS NOT CONSIDERED AN ADU.

RIGHT. AND OUR CURRENT DEFINITION OF MANUFACTURED HOME, I BELIEVE, REQUIRES THAT IT BE MOVABLE.

IT'S ON CHASSIS, YOU CAN PUT IT ON WHEELS AND ROLL IT SOMEPLACE, WHEREAS OTHER MANUFACTURED HOMES DON'T HAVE THAT CHARACTERISTIC, BUT THEY'RE STILL MANUFACTURED OFFSITE AND BROUGHT IN ASSEMBLED.

REGARDLESS, THOUGH, A MANUFACTURED HOME IS NOT GOING TO BE AN ADU UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.

[00:20:03]

RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M QUESTIONING.

IS THAT WHAT WE REALLY INTEND HERE? YES. WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S WHAT THE DOCUMENT INTENDS.

SO ALSO BY OUR ORDINANCE, A MANUFACTURED HOME HAS TO BE BROUGHT IN, PUT ON A PERMANENT FOUNDATION AND HOOKED UP TO UTILITIES.

SO AND UTILITIES BROUGHT TO IT UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.

YOU'RE TALKING YOU CAN'T IT HAS TO CONNECT UP TO THE HOUSE.

LIKE IF IT'S A DETACHED ADU, IT HAS TO HOOK UP TO THE HOUSE'S UTILITIES.

BUT YOU CAN'T RUN NEW LINE TO THE ADU.

THERE IS A SEMANTIC DIFFERENCE.

YOUR COUNT. I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD MEET THE BUILDING CODE.

IF YOUR LIKE BUILDING COULD MEET THE BUILDING AS AN ADU, YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE A HABITABLE STRUCTURE.

WHAT ABOUT A TINY HOUSE? WELL, THAT'S ONE THING. YEAH.

SO UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.

YEAH. THAT IS MORE ALONG THE LINES.

A TINY HOUSE IS NOT A MANUFACTURED HOUSE.

YOU ARE BUILDING A STICK STRUCTURE AT THAT POINT.

YOU ARE PUTTING ON A FOUNDATION.

IF YOU CAN GET IT ON THE SEWER, WATER OR AND OR, YOU KNOW, THE UTILITY ON THE HOUSE AND IT BECOMES STANDALONE.

AND THEN YOU'VE GOT TO MEET SETBACKS AND ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR IT.

IF I MEAN THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.

IF YOU HAVE HEARTBURN OR OVER THE MANUFACTURED HOUSING THING, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.

I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS RIGHT NOW.

I DON'T THE TINY HOUSE DOESN'T I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE TINY HOUSE.

I THINK WE HAVE. BUT THIS IS BUT PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO LOOK IN THEIR BACKYARD AND SEE.

WELL, BUT I'M ASKING THAT QUESTION IN RELATION TO WHAT COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL IS SAYING, THOUGH.

AND I COULD SEE A TINY HOUSE BEING BROUGHT IN AND THEN IT WOULD BE MANUFACTURED ELSEWHERE AND THEN JUST PLOP DOWN SOMEWHERE.

SO YOU'RE THINKING OF A TINY HOUSE THAT LIKE THE TYPE THAT'S ON WHEELS BECAUSE THERE ARE STICK BUILT ON FOUNDATION.

BUT THEN I'M JUST THINKING LIKE, I MEAN, YOU CAN PUT ANYTHING ON WHEELS TECHNICALLY, BUT LIKE YOU CAN BUY TINY HOUSES FAR AWAY AND THEN HAVE THEM SHIPPED SOMEWHERE AND THEN PUT ON A CONCRETE SLAB.

AND SO THAT'S STILL BE MANUFACTURED.

THAT IS NOT UNDER.

I SEE WHAT YOU'RE I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE DEFINITION OF A MANUFACTURED HOME AS PART OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.

IT'S A STICK BUILT STRUCTURE.

OKAY. WELL, THAT'S WHAT ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU WERE ASKING, THOUGH, IS WHAT'S THE DEFINITION OF A MANUFACTURED HOME AND HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO HEAR IDEAS.

RIGHT. AND IF THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO READ THE NEW ORDINANCE AND THEY'RE GOING TO GET DIRECTED TO OUR DEFINITION OF A MANUFACTURED HOME AND REALIZE IT'S GOT TO MEET THOSE CRITERIA, THEN THAT'S FINE.

IT JUST SEEMS UNNECESSARILY DISINVITING TO SOMEBODY WHO'S THINKING ALONG THOSE.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN WE'RE NOT? HERE WE GO. THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.

IF I WAS THINKING OF DOING IT AND I READ AN SAYS NO MANUFACTURED HOMES, I WOULDN'T EVEN APPLY FOR A PERMIT.

RIGHT. I JUST I'D SAY NO, I'M.

IF I TAKE THE TIME TO GO AND READ THE FORMAL DEFINITION.

SO WHAT I WANT TO BUILD DOESN'T MEET THAT PROHIBITION THAT I'M OKAY.

YOU JUST GET NERDS WHO CAN READ TOWNSHIP ORDINANCES, APPLY FOR PERMITS, OR MAYBE IT BECOMES COMMON KNOWLEDGE AND THAT'S WHY YOU GET APPROVAL. SO MANUFACTURED HOUSE IS A DWELLING CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE TOWNSHIP CODES, TRANSPORTABLE IN ONE OR MORE SECTIONS BUILT ON A CHASSIS AND DESIGNED TO BE USED WITH OR WITHOUT A PERMANENT FOUNDATION.

THAT'S NOT A TINY HOUSE.

IT MIGHT BE BUILT IN SECTION, BUT YOU'RE BRINGING IT IN IN SECTIONS.

IN SECTION.

IT'S NOT BEING PUT ON A CHASSIS AND WHEELED IN.

MAYBE MY UNDERLYING POINT IS THAT OUR CURRENT CODE GIVES AN OLD DEFINITION OLD TITLE TO A THING, AND WE'RE MANUFACTURING LOTS OF HOMES THESE DAYS AND LET'S NOT BE TIED TO THAT THING.

LET'S MAYBE THINK ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE THAT DEFINITION OF MANUFACTURED HOME THAT'S BEING EXCLUDED IN MANY CASES FROM.

RIGHT. I MEAN, IF WHEN I LOOK AT TINY HOMES, PEOPLE TRY TO SELL ME KITS, CORRECT? THAT'S THAT'S A MANUFACTURED HOME.

I BUY THE KITS. NOT BY THIS DEFINITION OF MANUFACTURED HOME.

SORRY. THAT'S MY SEMANTIC.

[00:25:02]

I GET IT.

YOU THINK COMMISSIONER SCALES HAD A YES? COMMISSIONER SCALES. I'M SORRY.

WHAT ABOUT WHERE YOU HAD THIS DEFINITION OF MANUFACTURED HOME? WHERE IS THAT? IT'S IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

OKAY. AND IN OUR DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE WORKING ON TODAY THAT SAYS A MANUFACTURED HOME IS NOT CONSIDERED A MANUFACTURED HOME AS DEFINED IN HERE.

JUST ADD THAT.

OKAY. AND THAT SHOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT WILL DIRECT YOU TO GO HERE TO SEE WHAT A MANUFACTURED HOME IS OR WHAT'S OUR DEFINITION OF A MANUFACTURED HOME.

AND THAT TIES THE TWO.

THAT'S THE BRIDGE THAT TIES THE TWO TOGETHER.

LOOKING AT THE STATE DEFINITION AND STATE STATUTE, AND IT APPEARS THAT WE'VE TAKEN THE STATE DEFINED MOBILE HOME AND MADE THAT USE THAT AS THE DEFINITION FOR MANUFACTURED HOME.

AND THAT MAY BE PART OF THE DISTINCTION THAT IT MAY NEED SOME CLARIFICATION AT SOME POINT.

BUT LIKE THE PART ABOUT INSPECTIONS ON A CHASSIS IS PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S IN STATE STATUTE AND THE STATE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT OF 66.

SO THAT JUST A THOUGHT THAT WE MAY WANT TO REDEFINE EVEN IF IT'S RELABELED AND THEN EITHER NOT HAVE A MANUFACTURED HOME DEFINITION OR REDEFINE MANUFACTURED HOME.

BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT'S GERMANE TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN OUR IN THE CODE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW.

BUT AS AN ASIDE.

YEAH, CERTAINLY COMMISSIONER SCALES SUGGESTION WILL FORCE THAT ISSUE AT SOME POINT DOWN THE ROAD AS WE GET INTO THAT DISCUSSION.

SURE. THAT'S EASY. I CAN ADD THAT LANGUAGE.

SURE. OVERALL, NITPICKY, I THINK MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE BROUGHT.

WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS A LITTLE BIT BEFORE IN PRIOR REVIEW OF THIS ORDINANCE AND SOME OTHERS.

THE DOCUMENT THAT CAME IN THE PACKET HAS SEVERAL SECTIONS AND FOR ME, THEY EACH SHOW CHANGES FROM EXISTING ORDINANCE IN DIFFERENT MANNERS, AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH MOST OF THEM.

SO, OKAY, YOU KNOW, A WHOLE PAGE OF UNCHANGED, I CAN KEEP IT.

BUT THEN ANOTHER SECTION IS HIGHLIGHTING IN BLUE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED AND OTHERS.

IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY TRACKING OF CHANGES FOR THE PUBLIC WHEN THEY HAVE A FORMAL MOTION.

THAT VERSION THAT WE PASS SHOULD ANYBODY SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOOK AND SEE THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE NOW AND THIS IS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO.

SURE. YOU'LL HAVE TWO VERSIONS.

YOU'LL HAVE A RED LINE VERSION, YOU'LL HAVE A CLEAN VERSION, AND WE'LL HAVE A RESOLUTION.

SO YEAH.

OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS.

YES, SIR. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE MANUFACTURED HOME LABEL.

SO IF WE WANTED IF THERE WAS A HOW WOULD WE GO ABOUT CHANGING A LABEL LIKE THAT IN THE ORDINANCE? I WOULD BE CAREFUL BECAUSE MANUFACTURED HOUSE, LIKE THERE'S A MOBILE, THERE'S A MANUFACTURED HOUSING COMMISSION IN MICHIGAN, LIKE THAT'S A PRETTY REGULATED TYPE OF HOUSING.

AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I'M A MANUFACTURED WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN THE ORDINANCE SAYING YOU CAN'T BUILD A PUT A MANUFACTURED HOUSING MANUFACTURED HOUSE ON A LOT.

THERE MIGHT BE HOMEOWNER RESTRICTIONS ON SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST TAKE A PIECE OF PROPERTY OUT IN THE TOWNSHIP AND MANUFACTURED HOUSE CAN HOLD A FAMILY.

IT'S GOING TO BE SEVERAL HUNDRED SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.

THIS IS NOT WHAT THIS IS INTENDED TO BE.

THIS LIMITS TO PEOPLE, PERIOD.

IN THE ADU.

THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A SECOND RESIDENCE ON A LOT.

IT'S A PLACE WHERE SOMEBODY IS COHABITATING.

IT'S A MOTHER WHO ISN'T READY.

YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T WANT TO PUT HER IN A HOME, BUT SHE NEEDS TO BE CLOSE.

SHE WANTS HER INDEPENDENCE.

IT'S A SON WHO'S BACK FROM COLLEGE WAITING TO GET GOING, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S WHAT THOSE ARE THE CALLS WE GET.

THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF CALLS WE GET.

MY MOM NEEDS A PLACE TO STAY.

CAN I TURN MY LOFT IN MY GARAGE INTO A UNIT?

[00:30:03]

AND WE HAVE TO ANSWER? NO. THIS LETS US ANSWER YES.

ARE WE NOT COVERING THE ISSUE OF THE MANUFACTURED HOME BY LIMITING THE SIZE THAT CAN BE BUILT? AND WE COULD JUST SAY, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET A FAMILY SIZE MANUFACTURED HOME AND JUST SAY THAT ANY FACILITY, WHETHER MANUFACTURED ON SITE OR NOT, HAS TO HAVE A PERMANENT FOUNDATION.

YOU WELL, TO YOUR FIRST POINT, YOU DO HAVE AN ADU SHALL NOT BE LARGER THAN SIX.

I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT DOES THAT COVER THE ISSUE OF MANUFACTURED HOMES AS LONG AS IT'S GOT A PERMANENTLY FIXED FOUNDATION, IS THERE SOMETHING DIFFERENT ABOUT A MANUFACTURED HOME ON A 600FT² OR WHATEVER IT IS, THAN A STICK BUILT HOME? IS THERE A REASON TO CHANGE OR TO DIFFERENTIATE? I'M ASKING BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW.

I AGREE. WE DON'T NECESSARILY WANT A TRAILER MOVING IN THE BACK OF A PERSON'S HOUSE AND SITTING ON HIS WHEELS AS AN ADU.

BUT IF HAND IF IT'S A STRUCTURE THAT'S BUILT, WHEELED IN, AS SOMEONE DESCRIBED, PUT DOWN ON A FIXED FOUNDATION, HOOKED UP TO THE SEWER AND ELECTRIC OF THE HOUSE.

LET ME ASK THE QUESTION.

OKAY. LET ME SEE WHERE WE FALL ON THAT.

600 SQUARE FOOT MANUFACTURED HOUSE IS AWFULLY SMALL, BUT IT MAY NEVER EXIST AND PROBABLY DOESN'T BECAUSE THE SIZE MAKES IT NON-PROFITABLE. BUT THAT'S CLEARLY WOULD COVER THE SITUATION WITH A TINY HOUSE THAT COMES IN ON A TRAILER AND GETS DROPPED ONTO A PERMANENT SLAB OR WHATEVER AND ATTACHED.

LET ME LOOK INTO IT.

WOULD YOUR AVERAGE RV FIT, TOO? NO. IT'S ON WHEELS.

IT'S MOVABLE. WE WOULDN'T LET YOU LIVE IN AN RV IN THE BACKYARD.

FOUNDATION, WHAT LOOKS LIKE A BARN.

I MEAN, WHAT IF IT'S A SCHOOL BUS THAT'S.

ACTUALLY HABITABLE? NO MOD CONS.

JUST TAKE THE WHEELS OFF. SET IT DOWN.

JUST DECORATIVE. NO, IT'S GOING UP IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

YEAH. AND THESE SHOULD NOT BE OVERLY OBTRUSIVE.

THESE SHOULD BE. THEY SHOULD FIT INTO THE FABRIC OF THE COMMUNITY.

IT'S LIKE A HOME BUSINESS.

YOU SHOULD NOT KNOW A HOME BUSINESS IS GOING ON INSIDE OF A HOME, RIGHT? YOU BUY IN THEORY, YOU SHOULDN'T KNOW THAT THERE'S AN ADU ON THE PROPERTY EITHER.

I MEAN, YOU DON'T EVEN GET AN EXTRA PARKING PLACE, RIGHT? YES. I THINK PRACTICALLY, IF I UNDERSTOOD IT RIGHT, THAT THE STRUCTURE HAS TO MEET THE SETBACKS AND EVERYTHING, THESE ARE GOING TO END UP ON LARGER LOTS.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ENDING UP ON SMALLER RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

SO THAT'S, I THINK, WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THESE AND METES AND BOUNDS LOTS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, ACRES OR ACRE, THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THESE AS OPPOSED TO EVEN A 80 FOOT LOT WIDE LOT.

I MEAN, TRY TO POSITION THIS AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE WHERE I JUST THINK THAT TYPICALLY IT'S GOING TO BE ON A BIGGER LOT.

I MEAN, JUST FOR THINKING PURPOSES IN TERMS OF HOW IS THIS GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED, I THINK THAT IT'S MOST LIKELY NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE, BUT MOST LIKELY IN A LARGER LOT.

YOU'RE RIGHT. YEAH, WE KIND OF SEE THE SAME WAY.

I MEAN, A DETACHED ADU HAS, YOU KNOW, DETACHED STRUCTURE, SETBACKS THEY HAVE TO MEET BUT ON A SMALLER LOT LIKE AROUND THE LAKE.

THAT'S THAT'S STILL IT'S PROBLEMATIC TO BUILD A SHED IN THE FIRST PLACE.

YES, SIR. WHAT IF THERE'S IT'S KIND OF A CRAZY QUESTION, BUT LIKE YOU HAVE A HOUSING ASSOCIATION THAT SAYS THE LOTS HAVE TO BE WHAT THEY ARE, THE HOUSE.

EVEN IF YOU HAVE LIKE A THREE AND A HALF ACRE LOT, YOU CAN'T BUILD ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, OH, THEN HOA WOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE.

YEP. IF AN HOA SAYS YOU CAN'T DO AN ADU, WE CAN WRITE ALL THE ORDINANCES IN THE WORLD.

YOU DON'T GET TO DO AN ADU.

THAT'S CRAZY. ANYONE ELSE.

[00:35:08]

WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE FROM US TONIGHT? I DON'T NEED ANYTHING.

YOU TYPICALLY DO THE STRAW VOTE THING.

I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS TO GO LOOK INTO.

WHAT IF YOU FIND A 600 SQUARE FOOT MANUFACTURED HOME? I WOULD SAY UNDER THIS SCENARIO, YOU'D NEED A VARIANCE FROM THE DEFINITION OF A MANUFACTURED HOME TO DO THAT.

THE OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT, WE'LL LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF JUST GOING BY RENTAL.

YOU SAY ONLY.

I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY NOT A BAD THING TO INSERT ANYWAY, EVEN IF WE DON'T MAKE IT PART OF THE OWNER OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT.

YEAH. ONLY ONE RENTAL LICENSE ON THE PROPERTY.

SOUNDS LIKE A THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO GET WE DON'T WANT TO SEE TWO RENTAL UNITS ON ONE LOT.

WE CAN LOOK INTO ASKING SOME PROFESSIONALS ABOUT IT AND WE GOT THE TYPO ON THE REVIEW PROCESS.

AND YEAH, IF YOU WANT TO STRAW VOTE, THAT'S FINE.

BUT AFTER YOU READ THROUGH THAT, WHY DON'T WE WANT MORE THAN ONE UNIT ON A LOT? IT'S VERY TYPICAL IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

THE ORDINANCE SAYS ONE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE.

YEAH, IT'S SO AN ADU IS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

YOU GET ONE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE ON A SINGLE FAMILY UNIT ON A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

WELL, I KNOW THAT WE.

I KNOW. IT'S SO I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S STANDARD IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA, BUT BASED ON OUR HOUSING NEEDS, WHY IS WHY DO WE NOT WANT MORE THAN ONE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT? IF YOU'RE BUILDING MORE THAN ONE UNIT ON A LOT, THAT REQUIRES A REZONING TO A MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT.

THIS IS THING THIS IS INTENDED TO ALLEVIATE THAT AFFORDABILITY.

THIS IS A SOLUTION, NOT THE SOLUTION TOWARD THAT.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, BUT YOU DON'T YEAH WE DON'T ALLOW TWO PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES ON A SINGLE LOT.

SO I JUST HAVE ONE LAST COMMENT AND THEN I'LL.

WELL, MAYBE NOT.

BUT SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THE THING THAT I KEEP THINKING ABOUT IN RELATION TO THIS IS THAT IT'S SORT OF SOUNDS LIKE A WAY TO LET SORT OF HIGHER INCOME FOLKS UP, SORT OF INCREASE THEIR PROPERTY VALUE AT SOME LEVEL, BUT THEN IT RESTRICTS OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS WHO MAY NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND SO WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT, NOT THAT I THINK THIS IS NECESSARILY GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT WHAT I THINK ONE OF THE RISKS MIGHT BE IS THAT IT CREATES MORE PROPERTY DISPARITY.

IF WE HAD A BUNCH OF HOUSES THAT HAD ADAS ATTACHED TO THEM.

AND THEN IT JUST CREATES MORE OF A GAP IN AND RESIDENCES THAT ARE ATTAINABLE BY THE LOCAL POPULATION.

I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.

I THINK IT MORE LOOKS AT CHANGING ALL OF THE ZONING LAWS AS FAR AS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, SETBACKS, MINIMUM SIZE, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE US RIGHT NOW.

THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT THE TOWNSHIP WANTS TO LOOK INTO AS FAR AS MODIFYING THOSE AND MAKING IT MORE FLEXIBLE FOR SMALLER HOMES OR MULTIPLE HOMES ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY. BUT WE'RE NOT THERE AT THIS POINT.

WELL, I THINK THAT I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I ALSO THINK THIS IS PART OF THIS REDEVELOPMENT READY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM AND SO.

IF THEY ARE RELATED.

IT MAY NOT BE BEFORE US DIRECTLY, BUT I DO THINK THEY ARE RELATED.

AND WE HAVE OTHER THINGS IN HERE ABOUT LIKE ELIMINATING THE MINIMUM HOUSE UNIT SIZE.

THOSE ARE ALL RELATE TO THIS KIND OF ISSUE.

THIS EXERCISE BEGAN WHEN WE STARTED LOOKING AT WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO RECERTIFY OUR REDEVELOPMENT READY CERTIFICATION STATUS WITH THE STATE.

THAT IS TRUE.

IT JUST GOT ME THINKING. I'M NOT SAYING THESE AREN'T NECESSARY AMENDMENTS, BUT THE ADU THING PARTICULARLY, YOU KNOW, EARLIER WHEN WE PRESENTED THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING STUDY THAT WE PUT TOGETHER, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF THAT WAS A POTENTIAL SOLUTION TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUES IS THE

[00:40:06]

CONSTRUCTION OF ADUS.

WE'VE SEEN THAT IN OTHER COMMUNITIES WORK SUCCESSFULLY BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, BABY BOOMERS WHO WANT TO AGE IN PLACE.

AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I'VE MY I'VE GOT A FRIEND WHO'S IN A HOME IN NORTHERN MICHIGAN AND IT'S $4,000 A MONTH.

AND THAT'S A BARGAIN.

YOU KNOW, THIS LETS YOU KEEP THAT LOVED ONE CLOSE WITH THEIR INDEPENDENCE, BUT STILL CLOSE BY IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENS.

AND THAT'S ONE OF THE POINTS OF THIS.

I DO HEAR YOUR CONCERN, YOU KNOW, BUT AGAIN, THE CALLS WE'RE GETTING ARE WE'RE NOT I'M NOT GETTING A LOT OF CALLS ASKING, CAN I BUILD SOMETHING IN THE BACKYARD? I'M GETTING PEOPLE ASKING, CAN WE PUT TRAILERS IN THE BACKYARD AND RUN EXTENSION CORDS AND.

NO, YOU CAN'T.

BUT I'M GETTING PEOPLE ASKING, CAN I CONVERT THE LOFT? CAN I ADD A CAN I BUILD ON TO THE HOUSE THAT I'M GETTING THOSE CALLS AND YEAH, YOU CAN BUILD ON TO THE HOUSE, BUT YOU CAN'T BUILD IT AS A SECOND DWELLING, AS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

SO THIS SO I'M REALLY CURIOUS ABOUT THOSE CALLS ACTUALLY.

SO FOR THOSE CALLS.

SO YOU GET DO WE TRACK THOSE CALLS? NO. I'M CURIOUS WHO THE WHERE THE PEOPLE LIVE ARE, WHO THE PEOPLE ARE AND WHERE THEY LIVE, WHO ARE CALLING TO ADD TRAILERS VERSUS THOSE WHO ARE CALLING TO ADD.

NO IDEA. NO IDEA.

YEAH. NO, I GET THAT.

I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT WHAT KIND OF NEIGHBORHOODS PEOPLE WOULD BE FROM IF THEY WERE CALLING ABOUT THINGS LIKE THAT.

TO AY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE JUST A LITTLE BIT ON THIS, ONE OF THE WAYS I'VE SEEN ADUS USED IN OTHER COMMUNITIES WITH BIGGER CITIES IS TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF AN INCOME FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER SO THAT SOMEBODY WHO MAYBE WANTS TO BUY A HOUSE IN THIS COMMUNITY BECAUSE IT'S A GREAT COMMUNITY TO LIVE IN BUT CAN'T NECESSARILY AFFORD THE STANDALONE MORTGAGE, CAN DO A LITTLE BIT OF MODIFICATION, CREATE AN ADU AND BRING IN A LITTLE BIT OF INCOME THROUGH THE RENTAL OF THAT SPACE AND THEREBY ALSO CREATE SOMEWHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE USING IT.

SO I THINK IT'S UNCERTAIN TO ME HOW IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT I COULD SEE IT GOING PERHAPS IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING OR WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, TOO. SO I THINK IT REALLY IS GOING TO DEPEND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SEE LIKE WHERE DO THESE FIT? WE HAVE A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS WITH HOA'S THAT I DON'T THINK WILL ALLOW IT, EVEN IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO.

AND THOSE ARE USUALLY, I WOULD THINK, THE HIGHER INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO I THINK IT IS MORE LIKELY TO BE IN THE INFILL IN AN OLDER HOUSE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S NOT PART OF AN HOA.

SO I DON'T KNOW.

I WAS INITIALLY WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS SEVERAL YEARS AGO, KIND OF SKEPTICAL BECAUSE THERE'S JUST SO MUCH NEWNESS TO THIS THAT WE DON'T REALLY KNOW ABOUT.

BUT I'M ALSO I MEAN, AS I'VE HEARD IT DESCRIBED AND KIND OF THINKING ABOUT THE THOUGHTFUL WAY I THINK YOU'VE PUT IT TOGETHER, I'M MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH IT THAN I WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE HOW IT HOW IT PLAYS OUT AND WHAT THE DEMAND REALLY IS AND WHAT HAPPENS.

AND I THINK WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT, BOY, IF THIS GOES A LITTLE CRAZY OR WE RUN INTO SITUATIONS THAT WE WEREN'T ANTICIPATING, THAT WE HAVE A PROMISE TO OURSELVES TO REVISIT IT OR. SURE, THIS IS A ZONING ORDINANCE.

WE COULD ALWAYS WE'RE AMENDING IT ONCE.

WE COULD ALWAYS AMEND IT AGAIN.

BUT IT'S A VALID POINT.

BUT I THINK YOU'VE PUT SOME THOUGHTFUL THINGS IN THERE.

IT SOUNDED LIKE WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, THAT YOU'RE KIND OF BASING THIS ON SORT OF STANDARD PRACTICE AND OTHER COMMUNITIES.

YEAH, WE DID.

WE DID A LOT OF RESEARCH ON OTHER COMMUNITIES.

I DIDN'T DO THAT. SO PLEASE DON'T ASK ME WHICH COMMUNITIES WE LOOKED AT.

BUT I KNOW WE I KNOW THE DEPARTMENT DID LOOK INTO WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES WERE DOING.

SO I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERN, BUT I ALSO THINK IT COULD POTENTIALLY GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, TOO.

SO I'M LESS WORRIED, I THINK.

AND I HOPE I'M RIGHT. I HOPE.

OFFERS DON'T COME TRUE.

HAD SOMETHING JUST REAL QUICK I WAS GOING TO SAY, SIMILAR TO COMMISSIONER SAID HERE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, LANSING HAS THE SAME TYPE OF ORDINANCE.

OKAY? IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, BECAUSE I WILL SEE HOUSING THEN AND TELL ME IF IT'S THE SAME THING WHERE THE HOUSE IS.

LET'S JUST SAY THE ADDRESS IS 147 AND THEN YOU HAVE ONE 47.5.

IS THAT THE SAME TYPE OF THING? DIFFERENT ENTRANCE MIGHT ACTUALLY BE OPERATING AS A DUPLEX? YEAH, IT'S A SIMILAR IDEA, RIGHT? YOU'VE GOT A HOUSE.

YOU SEE THIS A LOT IN THE COLLEGE AREAS.

YOU'VE GOT A HOUSE AND IT'S A HOUSE.

IT'S A HOME. IT LOOKS LIKE A STANDALONE HOUSE, BUT THEN THERE'S LIKE AN ENTRANCE ON THE SIDE.

[00:45:06]

AND MAYBE BECAUSE I DID CENSUS.

WHEN WAS THAT? LIKE 15 YEARS AGO.

WHENEVER. 2020 TEN.

SO. RIGHT. IT WOULD BE SOMEONE'S RELATIVE THAT LIVES IN THE HALF ADDRESS.

AND IT MAY BE, BUT IT MIGHT BE IT MIGHT BE OWNED BY A THIRD PARTY.

AND THAT'S THAT'S A DIFFERENCE.

THIS WOULDN'T LET YOU DO THIS.

THAT MIGHT BE OWNED BY A THIRD PARTY.

AND BOTH HALVES OF THAT HOUSE RENTED.

OKAY. THIS WOULDN'T LET YOU DO THAT.

ALSO, YOU WOULDN'T GET THE WHOLE FLOOR.

THIS INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THIS LIMITS YOU TO 600FT².

GOT YOU TO THAT.

SO IT SHOULDN'T BE A SEPARATE ADDRESS.

GOTCHA. THIS IS NOT A PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

SORRY I INTERRUPTED YOU.

NO. AND I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY AND ALONG WITH THAT, BUT THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT PART.

BUT ALONG WITH THE HOA'S HERE.

THAT'S WHY I ASKED THAT QUESTION BEFORE, JUST BECAUSE IN THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT I LIVED IN WAS PROBABLY WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR SURE WHAT YOU WERE SAYING.

COMMISSIONER BROOKS IN TERMS OF THE.

BECAUSE IT'LL JUST BE CROWDED.

YEAH. LIKE ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS ON ONE PARCEL ANYWAY.

COMMISSIONER SCALES, DID I SEE YOUR HAND UP? YOU DID, BUT I THINK I HEARD THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION.

WHAT I WAS GOING TO SPEAK ABOUT WAS AGGREGATE THIS FROM A CRITICAL VIEWPOINT.

LIVING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T MAKE SOME CHANGES THAT CAUSE SOMEONE TO MOVE INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOW THEY DON'T WANT TO LIVE THERE BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES THAT WE'RE MAKING.

SO I WAS JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

SURE. NO, THAT WAS SUCH A GOOD POINT.

I LOST MY THREAD.

I'M SORRY. NO, IT HAD TO DO WITH THE ADDRESSES.

YEAH. COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL WAS MAKING THE POINT ABOUT SEPARATE ADDRESSES.

AND YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS NOT A PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE, SO THEY HAVE TO SHARE THE POST OFFICE? YEAH. WE'D GO TO WOULD BE A SINGLE.

WOULD BE A SINGLE ADDRESS.

SO ANYBODY LIVING IN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT HAS TO CHANGE THEIR POSTAL ADDRESS TO THE PERSON WHOSE HOUSE THEY'RE IN.

THE ACCESSORY. CORRECT? CORRECT. THERE'S ANOTHER SCENARIO IN THIS, TOO.

YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT THE AGING IN PLACE.

IT COULD BE THAT THE EMPTY NESTERS ARE READY TO DOWNSIZE.

THEY CAN GO INTO THE ADU AND THEN RENT THE HOUSE TO THE YOUNG PROFESSIONAL COUPLE THAT CAN'T GET A MORTGAGE YET.

THAT SCENARIO IS POSSIBLE UNDER THIS.

WE'RE DONE. AND I NEED TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT WE WERE ASKING.

MR. SHORKEY TO BRING BACK TO US AS FAR AS THE RESOLUTION.

AND WE CAN DO A STRAW POLL OR YOU CAN EXPRESS YOUR INTEREST ONE AT A TIME.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THIS? IF WE WANT TO DO A STRAW POLL, THEN I THINK WE'VE TALKED IT THROUGH.

YEAH. AGAIN, THIS IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE FOR ANYBODY CAN CHANGE YOUR MIND BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE FINAL RESOLUTION. SO AT THIS POINT, WHAT IS YOUR FEELING ABOUT THIS? MR. SCALES I AM COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT I SEE AT THIS POINT.

COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL YOU KNOW, GIVEN SHORKEY'S SUMMARY OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO ADDRESS NEXT TIME, RIGHT? I'M GOOD WITH IT. MS. SHREWSBURY? I SUPPORT IT AS WELL.

MR. RICHARDS? SUPPORT.

[INAUDIBLE] I SUPPORT WITH COMMISSIONER SCALES MAKING SURE THAT WE PUT THE DEFINITION OF MANUFACTURING HOME REFERENCE IN THERE.

SURE, I'LL SUPPORT, AS DO I.

SO I THINK YOU HAVE GUIDANCE FROM US TO GO FORWARD.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

I'LL HAVE THAT IN YOUR NEXT MEETING.

UM, ITEM EIGHT ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT IS UNFINISHED BUSINESS.

WE HAVE NONE.

OTHER BUSINESS.

I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY REPORT FROM THE TOWNSHIP BOARD? I DO NOT HAVE ANY REPORT.

THE LIAISON REPORTS.

IT'S BEEN A QUIET TWO WEEKS.

PROJECT UPDATES.

[12A. Project Report]

I HAVEN'T UPDATED PROJECT REPORT IN YOUR PACKET.

I WILL NOTE THAT THE ONE OF THE THREE NEW APPLICATIONS HAS DROPPED OFF.

THEY'VE WITHDRAWN THEIR APPLICATION AT THE BOARD LEVEL.

OTHER THAN THAT, I'M GOING TO LET YOU KNOW TOO THAT IN THE NEXT MEETING OR TWO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A DRAFT AMENDMENT TO OUR CONSERVATION DISTRICT.

[00:50:04]

WE'RE LOOKING AT ALLOWING ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF SMALL LIKE TEN CUBIC YARD FLOODPLAIN WHEN YEAH, WE'RE GETTING A LOT.

WE'RE GETTING SOME APPLICATIONS WHERE DISTURBANCES, THAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR.

THANK YOU. THAT STILL REQUIRE EGLE APPROVAL.

THEY STILL REQUIRE COMPENSATING CUTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

THERE'S CASES AROUND THE LAKE WHERE THAT ISN'T THE CASE ANYWAY.

BUT. BUT NEITHER HERE NOR THERE.

THE POINT IS, RATHER, RIGHT NOW ANY FLOODPLAIN DISTURBANCE TRIGGERS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, AND WE'RE GETTING PEOPLE WITH FOUR CUBIC YARDS OF DISTURBANCE.

AND THAT'S.

YEAH, WE'RE YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING TO ADDRESS THAT.

YOU'RE GETTING INUNDATED BY THE WETLAND.

OH, LIKE THAT.

WELL PLAYED. GET THAT MINUTES IN.

SORRY. YES.

IS THERE AN UPDATE ON THE SITE ACROSS FROM WHOLE FOODS THAT I THINK WAS INITIALLY GOING TO BE A TRADER JOE'S? I HAVE NO FURTHER UPDATE OVER WHAT I SAID AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING.

THEY HAVE THE SPECIALTY GROCER HAS PULLED A BUILDING PERMIT THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO PROCEED WITH BUILDING THE SHELL, THE STRUCTURE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER UPDATE ON THAT AT THIS TIME.

OKAY. WHAT WOULD BE THEIR NEXT PROCESSES WITH US? TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT UNDER THE BUILDING PERMIT THAT'S BEEN ISSUED.

SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE US.

NO. THEY'VE GONE THROUGH ALL OUR RULES.

THEY'RE IN THE BUILDING PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

THEY'VE REMEMBERED THEY'VE PUT A FOUNDATION IN.

OKAY. YEAH, THEY CAN PUT THE FOUNDATION IN.

BUT THEN THEY EXPIRED.

THE. THE PREVIOUS BUILDING PERMIT HAD EXPIRED.

THEY PULLED ANOTHER BUILDING PERMIT.

IT'S THE SAME PERMIT WITH A DIFFERENT NAME ON IT.

AND THAT HAD THAT DID NOT HAVE TO COME BEFORE US.

NO, IT DID NOT. IT WAS NOT AN AMENDMENT OF THE SITE PLAN OR THE VARIANCE.

EVEN THAT WAS BECAUSE THIS HAS A VARIANCE FOR PARKING ASSOCIATED WITH IT AS WELL.

SO THEY WERE SO THEY WERE THEN AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. SURE.

LET'S GET BACK TO MY AGENDA.

NEXT IS PUBLIC REMARKS.

AND WE STILL HAVE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE, SO WE HAVE NO ONE FOR REMARKS.

COMMISSIONER, COMMENTS? ANYBODY? ANYTHING TO BRING UP?

[14. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS]

YES. COMMISSIONER SCALES.

IT'S NICE TO SEE THIS BUILDING IS OPEN AGAIN.

SO TRUE YET.

BUT IT IS NICE TO SEE THAT THE BUILDING IS OPEN AGAIN.

AND IF THE PUBLIC IS LISTENING, THE TOWNSHIP'S BACK IN BUSINESS AT 5151 MARSHALL ROAD.

MR. SHORKEY, HAS EVERYBODY MOVED BACK TO THE BUILDING OR ARE THEY STILL OFFICES OVER IN THE 242? AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, NO.

THERE'S NO MORE 242 OFFICES.

THAT WAS OUR BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

THEY COULDN'T GET IT. THEY GOT HERE RIGHT AWAY.

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE CLERK AND THE TREASURER.

YEAH, THEY'RE ALL BACK.

I THINK ALL THE ENGINEERING STAFF IS BACK NOW TOO.

I THINK WE'RE ALL BACK.

GOOD. ANY OTHER BOARD COMMENTS? OKAY. UM.

WE'RE OPEN FOR ADJOURNMENT.

I MOVE, WE ADJOURN.

I SUPPORT. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. I'VE NEVER HEARD ANY OPPOSITION TO AN ADJOURNMENT.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.