[00:00:14]
>> IF YOU'VE BEEN AROUND HIS DAD WAS THE BIG [INAUDIBLE] JUST CHECKING ON HIM.
ANYWAY HE SENT HIS DAD AND A PROJECT TO DO THERE AND THEY TURNED DOWN BECAUSE THE FLOODING AND [INAUDIBLE] ON THE GROUNDWATER, EVERYTHING ELSE? I STILL YEAH. HE MUST BE IN HIS DAD'S HOUSE BECAUSE THE HOUSE IS WAY OFF THE WRONG WAY BACK.
>> HE'S STAYING ON [INAUDIBLE].
>> I WENT TO A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
THAT DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN, BUT THEY HAD AN HOUR-AND-A-HALF LONG PRESENTATION FROM THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER.
THE WHOLE TIME THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW THEIR ALLEVIATING [INAUDIBLE] PARTICULARLY HARD TOP OF THE MERIDIAN MALL, ALL THE ALL THE CEILINGS AND ALL THE FLAT ROOFS AND THE PARKING AREA IS JUST [INAUDIBLE] THEY JUST MADE A VERY LONG PRESENTATION IN THE [INAUDIBLE] DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT.
I DIDN'T HAVE A QUORUM, SO IT DIDN'T MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE, BUT LISTEN POLITELY.
>> I WENT [INAUDIBLE] THE BUILD IT IS SO THAT CHRISTMAS TIME [INAUDIBLE].
>> IT USED TO BE [INAUDIBLE] REMEMBER WHERE IT WAS MR. GOLDEN IT'S TODAY.
>> [INAUDIBLE] CHRISTMAS TIME, IT WAS CRAZY.
>> THE NEW STORE OPENING THERE, MY WIFE SAID, LET'S GO SEE WHAT THE HISTORIANS.
>> NO THAT WAS NOT MY FAVORITE PERSON.
>> NOW YOU CAN ROLLER SKATE AROUND THERE AND NOT SEE ANYBODY.
MR. SCHMIDT, HOW ARE WE DOING WITH OUR RECORDERS? SET TO GO? TODAY IS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13.
[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
IT IS NOW TIME TO COMMENCE THE MEETING OF THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION.FIRST OF THE BUSINESS IS THE ROLL CALL.
>> COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL, INDICATED HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE IT THIS EVENING.
>> WE HAVE A QUORUM. THIS MEETING IS NOW IN ORDER.
THE NEXT ITEM IS PUBLIC REMARKS.
I NOTE THAT WE HAVE SEVERAL VISITORS WITH US HERE TODAY.
IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON A PARTICULAR ISSUE, YOU MAY WISH TO WAIT UNTIL WE CALL THAT PUBLIC HEARING.
IF YOU'RE JUST HERE TO EXPRESS SOME POSITION THAT YOU'D LIKE THE BOARD TO BE AWARE OF, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO DO THAT.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO JUST WISHES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON A GENERAL ISSUE? NO. VERY GOOD. THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.
[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA?>> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BROOKS? NO. I'M SORRY, MCCURTIS.
I'M SORRY. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE AGENDA SAY AYE.
NOW, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF OUR LAST MEETING,
[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
WHICH WAS OCTOBER 23.IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT.
I WAS SUPPOSED TO GET WITH THE STAFF ABOUT THE OCTOBER 23RD MINUTES,AND THE ISSUE WAS ON PAGE 4 WHERE WE TOOK A STRAW POLL AND THE BOATS THAT WILL TALLY STATES SHARE BLOOMER, AND THEN IT STATES VICE CHAIR BLOOMER.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MINUTES FOR THE PREVIOUS SEPTEMBER 25TH.
[00:05:09]
I WAS SUPPOSED GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT, AND I DIDN'T.>> I CAN MAKE THAT CORRECTION.
>> TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MADE THAT CORRECTION.
>> I'LL MAKE THAT NOTE, THANK YOU.
>> WHICH IS WORKING OVERTIME THAT DAY. THAT'S RIGHT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 23 MINUTES.
>> I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 23RD.
>> IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION?
IN THOSE MINUTES IT TALKS ABOUT I HAD A CORRECTION IN THE OCTOBER MINUTES.
>> WE SHOULDN'T SAY OCTOBER 9TH, THERE'S JUST SAY SEPTEMBER.
THEY SAID I HAD A CORRECTION IN THIS SEPTEMBER MINUTES, BUT IT HAD THE WRONG DATE FOR THE SEPTEMBER.
SHOULD BE SEPTEMBER 25TH, NOT SEPTEMBER 24TH.
>> IT'S VERY MINOR, BUT IN NUMBER FIVE, IN THAT SAME WAY, WE WERE JUST STILL EXTERNALLY WITH APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
IT SAYS COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR TREZISE, BOTH UP AT THE TOP AND IN BOTH OF THE VOTES.
WHEN I'M THINKING IT SHOULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER VICE CHAIR.
>> YOU'RE CORRECT. THAT'S COPY PASTE, SORRY.
>> SUBJECT TO THE CORRECTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN NOTED.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ARE THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MINUTES? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES AS CORRECTED BY THE TWO OBSERVATIONS SAY AYE.
COMMUNICATIONS STAFF INDICATES WE HAVE NO COMMUNICATIONS TO DEAL WITH AT THIS POINT IN THE HEARING.
>> THEREFORE, WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 7 OF THE AGENDA.
[7.A. REZ #23034 – 4660 Marsh Road, PO, Professional and Office, to C-2, Commercial]
7A IS RESOLUTION 23034, WHICH DEALS WITH C2 COMMERCIAL AT 4660 MARSH ROAD.>> BRINGING THIS UP FOR YOU, FOR YOUR INFORMATION.
THERE WE GO. BRING THAT UP SO YOU CAN SEE THE AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
MS. TAMARIND WHO IS IN ATTENDANCE HAS REQUESTED REZONING OVER PROPERTY AT 4660 MARSH ROAD IN ORDER TO BRING THE CURRENT BUILDING INTO CONFORMANCE WITH WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING ON THERE.
IT WAS REZONED FROM RC TO PROFESSIONAL AND OFFICE IN NOVEMBER OF 2015.
SINCE THEN, IT'S BEEN COMPLETELY UPDATED, REMODELED.
IT'S GONE BEYOND THE PURVIEW OF THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
I PUT SOME DESCRIPTION OF SOME BUSINESSES IN HERE, BUT THAT'S THE POINT.
WE NOW WE HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT FOR ONE LAST AREA FOR ONE CHAIR HAIR SALON SPECIFICALLY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO HAVE THEIR WEDDINGS THAT DAY.
THEY CAN COME IN AND HAVE IT DONE IN KIND OF A PRIVATE SETTING.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AND WE'RE THINKING, THIS ENLARGEMENT OF A NON-CONFORMING USE, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO PUNISH A SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS.
ULTIMATELY THAT'S WHERE WE'RE WHERE STAFF LANDED.
THREE FLOORS OF SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS, IF GOD FORBID SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THOSE BUSINESSES IN THERE.
SHE COMES IN AND WANTS TO REBUILD.
SORRY YOUR NONCONFORMING, WE CAN'T LET YOU DO IT.
BY REZONING THE PROPERTY, AND I WROTE IN MY REPORT, THE APPLICATIONS FOR C2, C1 WORKS AS WELL IT'S NOT INTENSE COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS.
BUT IT'S EITHER ONE BY REZONING THE PROPERTY BUT LEAVING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION BECAUSE WE REALIZED THAT IT'S MORE INTENSE THAN THE THAN THE THAN THE MR DESIGNATION, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
IT'S NOT COMMON FOR US TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AGAINST THAT MAP.
BUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, LET'S TAKE THIS BUSINESS WHICH IS SUCCESSFUL, SUPPORT IT IN THE FAR-FLUNG FUTURE OF THE PURVIEW OF THE 20-30 YEAR MASTER PLAN.
[00:10:01]
WE STILL ENVISIONED AT SOME POINT, THIS AREA COULD GO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO ENTERTAIN A MASTER PLAN CHANGE.THIS WAS THE SOLUTION WHERE WE LANDED.
THIS IS WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE.
THIS IS COMMONS CHURCH, ADJACENT TO THE NORTH.
IT IS COMMERCIALLY ZONE C2 ACROSS THE STREET, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT.
THAT'S BASICALLY WHERE WE'RE COMING FROM.
>> COMMISSIONERS, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER TREZISE?
>> I WOULD ASK THE QUESTION, WHAT IS THE FUNCTIONAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN C1 AND C2?
>> C2 IS A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSIVE BUSINESS.
I CAN SHOW YOU IF YOU WANT TO SEE SPECIFICS. LET ME BRING THAT UP.
IT'S LIKE I DO THIS ALL THE TIME.
>> THE PROPERTY CONFORMS LOT SIZE AND EVERYTHING EITHER WAY.
OFFICES OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS, I'M LOOKING AT THE C1 DISTRICT.
THAT'S REALLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE OFFICE DISTRICT AND THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS THAT THAT PERSONAL SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT WHERE YOU START TALKING ABOUT BEAUTY SALONS, NAIL SALONS, EYELASH SALONS, THAT SHE HAS ONE IN THERE.
THERE'S A PROFESSIONAL AND THEY'RE DOING BOTOX INJECTIONS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
THAT'S WHAT ELEVATES THIS ABOVE THE PO ZONING DISTRICT.
WHEN YOU GET INTO THE C2 DISTRICT, YOU START GETTING INTO INSTRUCTIONAL CENTERS, CHURCHES, LIBRARIES, RESTAURANTS, THAT'S THE BIG THING.
YOU DON'T SEE RESTAURANTS IN THE C1 DISTRICT.
SHE DOES NOT HAVE ANY RESTAURANT PLANS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT GOING ON IN HERE.
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, YOU GET INTO RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AT THE C2 DISTRICT, THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL USE.
WHAT SHE'S GOT GOING ON IN THERE, LIKE I SAID, IS THE SERVICE BUSINESSES.
THEREFORE, THE C1 WOULD FIT AND I VIEW IT AS A SINGLE-STEP.
IT'S PO TO C1, NOT AS INTENSE TO C2.
I THINK IT'S IT'S AN EASIER STUFF.
>> THAT STAFF IS ULTIMATELY PLANNING ON OR ASKING TO CONSOLIDATE C1, C2, AND C3 IN THE FUTURE ANYWAY, ANDREW.
>> THAT IS LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE MASTER PLAN.
WE HAVE NOT BEGAN ANY WORK ON THAT.
>> CAN YOU PULL UP THE MAP THAT SHOWS THE BIGGER MAP OF THAT AREA WITH WHAT THE ZONING CRITERIA ARE? IS THAT POSSIBLE?
>> YEAH. HOLD ON. I DON'T WANT TO BRING THAT UP.
NEVER MIND. YEAH. THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?
>> YEAH. BUT I THOUGHT WE COULD GO BIGGER THAN THAT.
>> I CAN. I CAN MAKE THAT BIGGER.
>> MICK. WELL, I MEANT MORE LIKE GEOGRAPHICALLY LARGER ROUTE.
NOT NOT NOT LIKE BLOWN UP BECAUSE I COULDN'T SEE IT.
>> I'M GOING TO BRING THE GIS MAP UP, BUT JUST PLEASE BE AWARE THAT WE'VE HAD SOME GIS ISSUES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK OUT WITH OUR GIS COORDINATOR, BUT I'LL BRING IT UP AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT.
I CAN SHOW YOU THE AERIAL, HOLD ON.
>> COMING DOWN HERE, MARSH ROAD.
THIS IS THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, MARKETPLACE, COMMONS CHURCH, AND IF I TURN THE ZONING ON, THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE.
SEE. THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS PIECE, AND I BROUGHT THIS TO OUR GIS COORDINATORS ATTENTION.
THIS PIECE SHOULD BE SHOWN AS P0.
IT'S SHOWN INCORRECTLY AS RC ON OUR ONLINE DATA.
EVERYTHING AROUND IT IS CORRECT. THIS IS ALL RC.
I THINK YOU SEE THAT ACTUALLY BETTER IF I SHUT THE PARCELS OFF.
YEAH. THERE YOU GO. SEE, IT'S ALL THAT C2 ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY.
[00:15:06]
>> WHAT THIS MADE ME THINK OF IS I WAS LIKE, SO THIS IS ZONE RESIDENTIAL, BUT THEN THERE'S ALL THESE BUILDINGS THAT AREN'T RESIDENTIAL IN IT.
I WAS LIKE, HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
FIRST OF ALL, THE RC IS A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
BUT THIS IS NOT ZONE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, THIS IS ZONE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
>> WELL, THEN NOW I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE ON THE PDF DOCUMENT, IT SHOWS THAT WHOLE AREA IS THE SAME COLOR.
>> ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, IT DOES, YES.
>> THE FIRST MAP HERE IS THE 2017 FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN ZONED LIKE THIS OR AT LEAST SUPPORT THROUGHOUT WHATEVER RECENT HISTORY WE HAVE.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT. THANKS.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR.
>> FORTY SIX, 60 MARSH, IS THAT I'M LOOKING AT IT ON MY PHONE JUST TO TRY TO GET THE SATELLITE.
YOU SURE THAT'S ONE BUILDING BECAUSE IT SEEMS RATHER LARGE, BUT [OVERLAPPING].
>> THERE'S ONE MAJOR BUILDING.
THERE'S A SMALLER I'LL CALL IT AN OLD BUILDING ON THE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PARKING LOT.
THAT'S NOT UNDER CONSIDERATION.
THAT'S THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE.
IT ACTUALLY SHOWS IT BETTER AND GOOGLE EARTH, BUT THAT'S THE MAIN BUILDING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IT IS A FAIRLY LARGE BUILDING.
TWO STOREYS AND THEN A BASEMENT THAT ARE BUILT OUT.
ESSENTIALLY THREE FLOORS OF OFFICES AND SERVICE BUSINESSES.
>> ALL OF THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION.
>> IT'S THE ENTIRE PROPERTY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION.
YOU CAN'T JUST REZONE ON THE BUILDING.
>> BUT IT'S THE PARCEL AND CONSIDERATION. YES.
>> WHEN I WAS READING THE PACKET, IT LISTED THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF BUSINESSES THAT WERE THERE.
THEN IT SAYS THAT THEY WANT TO BRING IN A HAIR SALON?
>> WHEN I DID RESEARCH ON THAT, I SAW ADVERTISEMENTS FOR HAIR SALON DATING BACK TO 2019 IN THAT LOCATION.
>> IS THIS AN ADDITIONAL HAIR SALON JUST LIKE THAT?
>> WHATEVER MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN 2019, WHAT TRIGGERED THIS ISN'T JUST A BUSINESS GOING OUT AND A NEW BUSINESS COMING IN.
I DON'T THINK WHETHER THAT MIGHT HAVE FLOWN UNDER THE RADAR LIKE THEY HAVE BEEN QUITE FRANKLY, THIS IS AN ADDITIONAL, THIS IS AN EXPANSION.
THIS IS A STORAGE AREA THAT'S BEING CONVERTED TO A SINGLE CHAIR HAIR HAIR SALON.
IT WAS THAT EXPANSION THAT IT'S AN ENLARGEMENT OF THE USE THAT TRIGGERED THE REZONING.
>> BECAUSE SHE APPLIED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT?
>> SHE APPLIED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, SO, THE BEAUTY SALON WAS NOT THERE ALREADY?
>> WHAT I'M SAYING IS, THERE WAS A BEAUTY SALON THAT IS THERE.
>> THERE IS NOT A BEAUTY SALON THERE NOW.
>> THERE'S A NAIL SALON, THERE'S AN EYELASH SALON.
OH, THAT'S RIGHT. THAT NO, THERE IS NONE. I APOLOGIZE.
THERE'S OTHER TYPES OF SALONS IN THERE, BUT NOT A HAIR SALON AT THIS TIME.
>> KASS BEAUTY SALON IS NOT THERE?
>> SHE DOES EYELASHES ONLY, BECAUSE SHE DOES NOT HAVE [INAUDIBLE].
>> THE ADVERTISEMENT SAYS HERE.
>> I CAN'T SPEAK TO AN ADVERTISEMENT.
WHEN I PUT THIS REPORT TOGETHER,
[00:20:01]
I LOOKED AT GOOGLE EARTH TO SEE WHAT WAS LISTED THERE AND I SAW AN EYELASH SALON.THE APPLICANT HAS SEEN THE APPLICATION AND HAD NO COMMENT ON THIS VIDEO.
>> HOLD ON PLEASE, DON'T WAIT FOR THE APPLICANT WHEN SHE SPEAKS AND MAYBE SHE'LL CLARIFY THAT FOR ME.
WHAT DO WE NORMALLY DO WHEN WE FIND PEOPLE OUT OF COMPLIANCE? WHAT'S YOUR NORMAL RESPONSE?
>> YES. THAT'S A RELATIVELY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE.
WHEN A SITUATION LIKE THIS ARISES WHERE PERMANENT COMES TO US IN THE DUE COURSE OF BUSINESS. WE DO NOT HAVE PERMANENT.
GIVEN THAT AS WE LOOKED INTO THIS, THIS WAS A RELATIVELY BORDERLINE CASE AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A SINGLE SPACE WITHIN THE BUILDING.
WE THOUGHT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO BRING IT FOR DIRECT THE APPLICANTS TO REQUEST THE REZONING, TO GIVE THEM SOME FLEXIBILITY UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THIS PROPERTY DEVELOPS IN THE FUTURE.
IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT WE FIND USE IN A MULTI-TENANT BUILDING THAT IS NOT PERMITTED BECAUSE MOST ARE MULTI-TENANT BUILDINGS ARE PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
IT'S A COMMERCIAL STRIP CENTER.
IT'S AN OFFICE BUILDING. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
THAT'S WHY WE FIND OURSELVES HERE THIS EVENING.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION?
>> WE HAVE THE PETITIONER HERE TODAY?
>> MA'AM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? TELL US WHO YOU ARE IN YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE.
>> OH, MY NAME IS CAMERON KNOWE AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF MARSH PLACE.
WE PURCHASED THE BUILDING TWO YEARS AGO.
KASS BEAUTY, THAT DOES EYELASHES.
SHE WAS THERE WHEN I PURCHASED THE BUILDING, I HAD NO IDEA SHE WAS OUT OF COMPLIANCE.
I DIDN'T KNOW WAS EVEN AN ISSUE.
I CAME TO APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT TO MOVE THE HAIR DRESSER IN, AND THAT'S WHEN I BECAME AWARE THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE.
>> MAY I ASK IN THE TIME THAT YOU HAVE NOW OWN THE BUILDING, HAVE YOU GOTTEN ANY COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORS ABOUT OUT OF COMPLIANCE USE OF THE BUILDING?
>> NO, I HAVEN'T HAD ANY COMPLAINTS AT ALL.
>> WHAT ARE THE OTHER OCCUPANTS OF THAT BUILDING DOING?
>> TO TRY TO DIVERSIFY A LITTLE BIT.
WE HAVE MASSAGE THERE THAT WAS THERE WHEN WE GOT THERE.
THE EYELASH PERSON WHEN WE GOT THERE.
I HAVE A TRUCKING COMPANY THAT THEY'RE JUST SPITS OUT OF THE ROOM.
THEY GO INTO HOMES FOR ELDERLY AND TAKE CARE OF THEM.
THEY DO THEIR PAPERWORK AT THE OFFICE.
I HAVE AN ATTORNEY. I THINK I SAID THAT.
JUST SOME OTHER HEALTH AND BEAUTY STUFF.
>> IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'RE GOING FROM AN OFFICE STRUCTURE TO A TRUCK REPAIR SHOP?
>> THIS IS FAIRLY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE BUILDING HAS BEEN USED FOR UP UNTIL NOW?
>> YES, I'M JUST ADDING ANOTHER HEALTH AND BEAUTY. THE HAIRDRESSER.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER STAVE.
>> WHO'S GOING TO BE THE HAIRDRESSER? WHAT'S THE NAME OF THAT?
IT'S H AND I, BRIDAL AND HAIR.
>> NO. CASS DOES EYELASHES ONLY. THAT'S ALL SHE DOES.
SHE MAY DO HAIR OUT OF HER HOME, BUT I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
SHE DOES NOT DO IT IN MY BUILDING.
>> THERE WAS A JANUARY 2019 ADVERTISEMENT, NEW LOCATION, 4660 MARSH ROAD, FOR KASS BEAUTY, AND THAT TAKES YOU TO A FACEBOOK PAGE.
THEN THE FACEBOOK PAGE ADVERTISES KASS BEAUTY AND IT SAYS HERE, LASHES AND SKIN.
>> I DIDN'T OWN THE BUILDING AT THAT TIME.
SHE DOES NOT DO HERE ON OUR BUILDING.
SHE ONLY DOES EYELASHES AND SHE'S THE WORKER.
NOW SHE DOES NOT DO HERE IN OUR BUILDING.
>> YOU'RE WELCOME. ANYTHING ELSE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. KNOWE.
>> I'VE GOT A QUESTION AS STAFF.
I'M LOOKING UP THE HISTORY OF THIS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY TIMELINES ON PRIOR TO 2019? AS MY RECOLLECTION, YEAH.
AT SOME POINT BETWEEN '92 AND 2019, THAT BUILDING WENT FROM RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE. WHEN THAT TOOK PLACE.
>> IN NOVEMBER OF 2015, IT WAS REZONED FROM RC TO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
[00:25:09]
>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE STAFF?
>> WHEN IT WAS REZONED, DO YOU KNOW IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS SUPPORTIVE OF THAT CHANGE OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD DID [NOISE]
>> I'D HAVE TO GET THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU.
I DON'T RECALL IT BEING A PARTICULARLY, WHEN I LOOKED IT UP, BUT I DIDN'T FILE AND GO THROUGH MINUTES OR ANYTHING.
>> SORRY. THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO BRING THIS UP TO THE C2 LEVEL AND CAN YOU REMIND ME AGAIN.
WHAT ARE THE LEVELS ON THE PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO IT?
>> THE PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF MARSH, ALL OF THAT WHOLE AREA IS C2.
EVERYTHING TO THE SOUTH, EAST, AND WEST IS RC.
THE CURRENT PROPERTY IS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.
RC IS A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION.
>> EVEN THE CHURCH AREA IS A RC DESIGNATE?
>> CAN I JUST POINT OUT, I THINK, IS THE ACTUAL REZONING REQUEST FOR C2?
STAFF NOTES THAT YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY UNDER MICHIGAN PLANNING LAW TO RECOMMEND A DIFFERENT CATEGORY.
>> YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY RECOMMENDING, OR IS IT STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING C2, C1, OR LEAVE IT THE SAME?
>> STAFF IS NOT MAKING A RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT, STAFF IS ONLY POINTING OUT THAT C1 WOULD WORK IF YOU DIDN'T FEEL.
BECAUSE IF YOU DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE GOING TO C2, UNLESS THE APPLICANT WAS TO START GIVING CONDITIONS, GRANOLA WOULD ALLOW POTENTIALLY RESTAURANTS AND REPAIR SHOP, THINGS LIKE THAT.
RATHER THAN PUT UP CONDITIONAL REZONING ON THIS, YOU SEE ONE WOULD WORK FOR EVERYTHING THAT SHE'S DOING THERE.
>> I GUESS ONE OTHER POINT, THE PART OF THE CONFUSION, PARTICULARLY PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING, IS THAT THE ONLY SPOT THAT THEY WERE ACTUALLY ALLOW WAS IN RESIDENTIAL WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
THAT'S THAT'S HOW THEY END UP IN RESIDENTIAL FILMING.
THERE WASN'T A PUBLIC INSTITUTION TYPE ZONING THAT FIT.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S STILL AS IT WAS UNDER RESIDENTIAL BRIGHTER REQUIRED A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
>> THAT EXPLAINS THE CHURCH PART, AND THEN I WAS ALSO JUST CURIOUS THOUGH ABOUT THE ZONING FOR THE OTHER PLACES.
BUT THAT MAKES SENSE WHAT YOU GUYS JUST TALKED ABOUT.
>> MR. SHARKEY, MY RECOLLECTION IS THE BUILDING TO THE SOUTH WEST OF THIS HAND, ON THE CORNER OF MARSH AND HAMILTON ARE BOTH COMMERCIAL, OR?
>> THERE ISN'T OPTOMETRY PLACE RIGHT HERE. THAT IS CORRECT.
>> YES. ISN'T THERE A COMPUTER PLACE IN-BETWEEN THEM?
>> MAYBE. PROPERTY RIGHT THERE, MAYBE.
>> I MAYBE LOOKING AT THE MAP INCORRECTLY, BUT YEAH.
>> YEAH. THAT LOOKS LIKE A DUPLICATE.
>> THIS IS THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
>> THIS IS A DUPLEX, THIS IS AN OPTOMETRY OFFICE.
>> THE OPTOMETRY WOULD ALSO BE A NON-CONFORMING USED IT THIS MORNING.
>> THAT IS CORRECT, BUT WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING WITH IT.
>> JUST SO THAT I'M CLEAR ON THIS, THE REQUESTED CHANGE IS 100% CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY ACROSS THE ROAD FROM IT?
>> AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE OF THAT OF THAT ZONE?
>> NO. THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THIS PROPERTY WHICH IS R3.
IT CORRELATES WITH YOUR RA, RB, RX, DUPLEXES, THE ZONING DESIGNATION.
NOTE, YOU'VE GOT THE OPTOMETRY HERE, THE DUPLEX FITS INTO THAT, SO THE CURRENT ZONING ALSO IS NOT.
[00:30:02]
WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, WE STILL ENVISIONED THAT WITHIN THE 20-30 YEAR PURVIEW OF THE MASTER PLAN, THIS WHOLE AREA COULD GO MULTIFAMILY, DUPLEX SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE HAVE A SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS IN THE TOWNSHIP THAT LOOK LIKE T SCORE.
>> IT'S NOT THE ONLY INCONSISTENT USE IN THAT PLANT?
>> THEN WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE IF WE RECOMMENDED A C-1 VERSUS A C-2 DESIGNATION?
>> THE LAND USES THAT THE C-1 ALLOWS VERSUS THE LAND USES THAT THE C-2 ALLOWS, SO LIKE WE DESCRIBED.
>> THEN SO THEN COULD THE C-1 STILL MEET THE NEEDS?
>> THE THING THAT I GUESS I'M THINKING ABOUT IS, IF IT WENT UP TO C-2 AND SOMEBODY WANTED TO BUILD A RESTAURANT THERE, THAT SEEMS DOESN'T FIT THE CHARACTER OF THAT AREA IS.
I'M CURIOUS AS TO LIKE, WHY GO TO THE C-2 VERSUS THE C-1.
>> CORRECT. THAT'S WHY STAFF BROUGHT THE POINT UP.
>> HISTORICALLY THOUGH, THERE WAS A RESTAURANT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT.
>> MAYBE ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT, BUT THAT'S IN THE C-2 DISTRICT.
>> WELL, USED TO BE A FARM THERE PROBABLY TOO.
>> THERE WAS THE TUBE OR MUSEUM.
>> THE TUBE OR MUSEUM IS CLOSER TO OAKNESS VILLAGE.
>> I GUESS I'D ASK THE APPLICANT IF THERE WAS THERE A SPECIFIC REASON WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING C-2 INSTEAD OF C-1.
>> NO, I DON'T CARE WHICH ONE AT ALL.
I'M JUST LEARNING, AND SO I GET AS MUCH HELP FROM THE TOWNSHIP AS I CAN.
WHEN I REALIZED THERE WAS A PROBLEM, I WANT TO FIX THEM.
>> SOMEONE WILL FIT YOUR NECK.
>> YEAH, I'M NOT RUNNING A RESTAURANT.
>> NOBODY WANTS ME TO RUN A RESTAURANT. WE'RE GOOD.
>> COMMISSIONER SHREWSBURY, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION?
I'M LOOKING AT THE C-1 AND THE ZONING, AND IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE A RESTAURANT IS A PERMITTED USE IN C-1, SO I JUST DON'T WANT THERE TO BE CONFUSION.
JUST FOR CLARITY IF ANYBODY'S PAYING ATTENTION, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
>> FOR CONSUMPTION OFF THE PREMISES, SO LIKE A TAKEOUT.
>> I JUST DON'T WANT THERE TO BE CONFUSION BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY CONFUSING TO ME, SO I CAN IMAGINE IT WOULD BE TO OTHER PEOPLE TOO.
>> IF IT WOULD HELP, ON MY FOLLOW-UP STAFF REPORT, I CAN GO INTO A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL AND GIVE YOU A TABLE OF WHAT'S A C-1 VERSUS A C-2.
>> I'M LOOKING AT I THINK I GET IT.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT FOR THE RECORD, IF SOMEBODY IS LISTENING AND HEARD, IT SAID THAT RESTAURANT WASN'T ALLOWED, BUT IT ACTUALLY IS.
I DIDN'T WANT THERE TO BE CONFUSION.
BUT THAT SAID, I'M COMFORTABLE IF THE APPLICANT IS COMFORTABLE WITH THE C-1 THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE.
I THINK THE STAFF MADE A GOOD POINT THAT WHY OVER-ZONE IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO BECAUSE OF ALL THINGS THAT WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW, ERIC.
>> IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ISSUE?
>> I KNOW IT'S BEEN ASKED AND THE APPLICANT SAYS SHE DOESN'T CARE.
HOW DID IT GO FROM PO TO C-2, HE'S SKIPPED THE WHOLE C-1.
WAS THAT A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU?
>> I'M TRYING TO PUT A POSITIVE SPIN ON THIS.
WE HAD A MEETING AND I WORKED WITH HER ON FILLING THE APPLICATION OUT AND I DO THAT WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE.
JUST IN THE COURSE OF CONVERSATION, I DIDN'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF ME AND I'LL COP TO THIS, I JUST SAID, HEY, C-2 WILL WORK.
THEN AFTER THE FACT I GOT CONSIDERING IT, WILL C-1 WOULD WORK AS WELL.
BUT BY THEN, THE APPLICATIONS FILLED OUT, THE LEGAL NOTICE IS PUBLISHED.
>> SO DON'T FEEL AS NOT AS CONFUSED.
>> IN OUR DECISION-MAKING TREE HERE,
[00:35:01]
WE NEED TO ALSO CONSIDER WHAT WE DO WITH THIS SMALL PIECE AS IT APPLIES TO THE ENTIRE AREA, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE HAVE AN OUTER COMPLIANCE FACILITY RIGHT THERE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.I'M JUST TRYING TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE HERE BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING IS, I DON'T HEAR ANY OPPOSITION TO MAKING A CHANGE, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, CHAIR, WHAT I'M HEARING IS WE'RE DECIDING C-1 OR C-2.
AM I WRONG IN WHAT I'M SAYING?
>> WELL, THAT'S BEEN THE FLOW OF THE CONVERSATION.
>> THERE HASN'T BEEN STRUGGLE RIGHT HERE.
>> THERE HASN'T BEEN A STRUGGLE.
>> I SAID YOU COULD STILL VOTE NO, BUT I GUESS I HAVE SOME HISTORY AS MOST OF YOU KNOW HERE.
I DON'T PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT THAT CORNER IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE.
I SPECIFICALLY REMEMBER THAT PROJECT COMING FORWARD AND WHETHER IT WAS A CONDITIONAL REZONING, WHATEVER THE CASE MIGHT HAVE BEEN AND THE STAFF CAN CHECK THAT OUT.
BUT I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S NOT ON NO COMPLAINTS.
WASN'T AT THE TIME THAT IT WAS CREATED? EXACTLY I REMEMBER HEARINGS, LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.
>> SO I DON'T KNOW THAT OR DEALING WITH HERE IS A BUILDING THAT IS CURRENTLY NOT CONFORMING TO ITS EXISTING ZONING.
IF SOMETHING CATASTROPHIC HAPPENED TO THE BUILDING, IT COULD NOT BE REPLACED IN ITS CURRENT FORM AND ITS CURRENT USAGE.
I THINK ALL WE'RE ASKING OR WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO IS TO PUT THIS INTO A ZONING CODE CLASSIFICATION THAT ALLOWS THE BUSINESS TO CONTINUE AND TO CONTINUE OPERATING AS IT DOES HAS DONE FOR MANY YEARS.
I DOUBT IN MY OWN MIND WHETHER THAT'S EVER GOING TO CHANGE TO RESIDENTIAL.
BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS YEARS DOWN THE ROAD AND I THINK WE SHOULD IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE BUSINESS OR TO HAVE SOME PROTECTION FOR HER OWN INVESTMENT AND OPERATION THAT WE SHOULD PUT IT INTO A C1 DISTRICT TO ALLOW HER TO CONTINUE HER BUSINESS.
>> AS LONG AS THAT BUSINESS IS CONSISTENT WITH TODAY, IT'S BEEN RUN UP UNTIL NOW?
>> RIGHT. I THINK C1 IS AS CLOSE TO WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE SHE'S BEEN DOING IN THERE AS WE CAN GET.
>> I THINK WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO HAVE STRUGGLED TO GIVE GUIDANCE TO THE STAFF.
>> THERE'S SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION.
>> THEN THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION IS WHETHER OR NOT TO APPROVE A REEF ZONING OF THIS PROPERTY TO C1.
THAT WOULD BE BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH ITS CURRENT USE. COMMISSIONERS, GUESS?
>> I WAS THINKING THAT YOU'RE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO CLOSE THE HEARING.
>> THERE WERE NO PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ISSUE.
THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE WILL TAKE A STRAW VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO APPROVE THE CODE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THIS TO BE OPERATED AS A C1.
>> BECAUSE IT'S A RECOMMENDATION, IF WE'RE NOT APPROVING IT WE WILL SEND YOU A RECOMMENDATION LETTER.
>> THAT IS CORRECT. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW TO DO THIS, SO IT DOESN'T SHOW UP IN THE MIDDLE.
>> I WILL SIMPLY SAY PLANNING COMMISSION INDICATED SUPPORT OR DID NOT INDICATE SOMETHING.
>> THEN LET'S JUST DO IT AS IT GROWS.
ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS CHANGE TO C1, SAY AYE.
>> LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THAT.
>> I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT WE DID. GO AHEAD.
>> I CAN'T MANIPULATE WHAT YOU HAVE HERE ON THE SCREEN BUT I'M GOING TO ASSUME THAT A C1 DOES NOT ALLOW FOR A BAR,
[00:40:08]
ESPECIALLY WITH THE PROXIMITY TO THE CHURCH.>> WELL, THAT WOULD PROBABLY NOT FLY BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY, BUT THERE'S A 500-FOOT REQUIREMENT IN STATE LAW SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT IS ALLOWED OR NOT, IT'S ADJACENT, IT WOULDN'T.
>> THIS IS WITHIN 500 FEET OR?
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
>> LET'S CALL FOR THE VOTE THEN.
ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE CHANGE TO C1, SAY AYE.
>> STAFF HAS THE RECOMMENDATION.
>> THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW MOVE INTO ITEM 7B,
[7.B. SUP #23035 – Elevation 4 Floodplain]
WHICH IS ELEVATION FOR FLOODPLAIN.>> GETTING TO ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST MONTH WAS JUST SO THAT THE APPLICANT KNOWS NEXT STEPS IN THIS PROCESS BECAUSE OF THIS CHARCOAL.
WE'VE WORKED WITH COMMUNICATIONS.
WE PUT SOMETHING IN A PROPER FORMAT AND THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A PERFECT PLACE TO PUT IT IN THERE. I'M SORRY.
>> YOU COULD HAVE SHARED IT WITH HER TOO.
>> THE NEXT STEP, THIS WILL COME BACK ON THE DECEMBER 11TH AGENDA FOR A FINAL VOTE.
THAT WILL BE A RECOMMENDATION.
YOUR APPLICATION FOR REZONING THEN GOES TO THE TOWNSHIP BOARD FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND I'LL BE IN TOUCH. SURE.
>> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO SHRINK THIS A LITTLE BIT.
THIS IS TO CONSTRUCT A PORTION OF THE REQUIRED PATHWAY WITHIN A FLOODPLAIN.
WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF SITE PLAN REVIEW, WHICH IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS REMINDER FOR ELEVATION PHASE 4, FOURTH AND FINAL PHASE OF ELEVATION.
PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT IS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWNSHIP PATHWAY.
THAT TOWNSHIP PATHWAY COMES DOWN HERE, TURNS TO THE EAST, AND THEN DOES THIS.
DURING OUR SITE PLAN REVIEW, WE NOTED THAT THAT PATHWAY IS GOING THROUGH A FLOODPLAIN, NOT A WETLAND.
WETLANDS ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THIS.
I ONLY BRING THAT UP BECAUSE I HAD A QUESTION COME UP.
THE APPLICANT TRIED TO GET AROUND THE FLOODPLAIN AND NOT HAVE TO BE HERE TONIGHT, BUT IT JUST DOESN'T WORK.
THE PATHWAY IS REQUIRED, BUT NOW THE SQP IS REQUIRED TO BUILD THE REQUIRED PATHWAY.
ENGINEERING HAS LOOKED AT THIS AND IT'S FINE WITH THIS.
HAS NO COMMENT ON THEIR CUT-AND-FILL PLAN.
THEY'RE GOING TO FILL 31/1/2 CUBIC YARDS OF FLOODPLAIN.
THAT'S BEING COMPENSATED WITH 63.1 CUBIC YARDS OF COMPENSATING CUT.
THAT IS SHOWN ON THE FLOODPLAIN DISTURBANCE SITE PLAN THAT IS IN YOUR PACKET SOMEWHERE.
AS I KNOW I REALIZE IT'S A BIG PACKET THIS MONTH, BUT IT IS IN YOUR PACKET.
THAT'S REALLY THE CUT-AND-DRY VERSION OF THIS.
APPLICANTS, OBVIOUSLY, HERE THEY CAN SPEAK TO THIS FURTHER.
THIS DOES NOT GIVE THEM SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
THEY COULD HE SAID THEY'RE STILL IN THAT PROCESS.
ENGINEERING, I TALKED TO THEM TODAY BUT THEY STILL HAVE COMMENTS ON THE SITE PLAN THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.
ONCE AGAIN, OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT IS FINE WITH THE COMPENSATING CUT AND FILL THAT THEY'RE SHOWING.
WHEN I BROUGHT THIS UP BECAUSE THIS IS THE AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WRITING HERE. I'M SORRY.
>> YOU SAID THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT WAS OKAY WITH THE CUT AND FILL SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
IF THE FLOODPLAIN IS FILLED THEN WILL THAT CREATE ANY PROBLEM WITH WATER BEING DIVERTED OR BEING THAT IS FILLED?
[00:45:01]
>> NO, BECAUSE THEY'RE DOING A CUT.
THE NUMBERS THAT I READ TO YOU.
THEY'RE FILLING 31/1/2 YARDS OF A FLOODPLAIN.
THEY'RE DOING A COMPENSATING CUT TO CREATE MORE CAPACITY IN THE FLOODPLAIN, 63.1 CUBIC YARDS.
>> I'M ASSUMING THIS IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE STATE LAW AND THAT THERE ARE MITIGATING TWO-TO-ONE FOR WHAT THEY'RE DISTURBING, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THEY HAVE APPLIED FOR THE EAGLE APPLICATIONS IN YOUR PACKET.
I CAN LET THE ENGINEER FOR THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO THAT FURTHER.
>> CAN YOU POINT OUT ON THE MAP, PLEASE, WHERE THE COMPENSATING CUT WILL BE?
>> ADJACENT. THIS IS THE FILL TO BUILD THE PATHWAY.
>> I'M SORRY. BUT THE CUT HAPPENS BECAUSE THEY BUILDING A PATHWAY, SO THEY'RE DOING THE CUT TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT.
>> WE HAVE THE PETITIONER HERE TODAY.
>> TELL US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE SIR.
I'M WITH CABS INCORPORATED, THE CIVIL ENGINEER 2116 HASLETT ROAD.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WITH THIS GENTLEMAN?
>> YES. CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR EXPLANATION OF WHERE YOU'RE AT WITH THE STATE PERMITS IN THE FLOODPLAIN AT?
>> YES. THE APPLICATION HAS PUT IS TOGETHER AND SUBMITTED TO EAGLE.
WE'RE WAITING IN THE PROCESS FOR THEM TO PUT IT THROUGH THEIR SYSTEM AND THEN GET THEIR FINAL APPROVAL.
BUT IT IS A TWO-TO-ONE COMPENSATION OF CUT COMPARED TO THE FILL THAT WE'RE ASKING.
>> OKAY. IT WAS JUST MY QUESTION. THANK YOU CHAIR.
>> THE AREA THAT WAS JUST DEMONSTRATED TO ME AS WHERE THE CUT IS GOING TO BE, IS THAT ALSO PART OF THE FLOODPLAIN? [NOISE]
>> YOU'RE SIMPLY ENHANCING THE EXISTING FLOODPLAIN?
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS GENTLEMAN? YES.
>> I WOULD NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS, ESPECIALLY SINCE WHAT THEY'RE PUTTING IN HERE IS A PATHWAY.
WHICH IS REQUIRED EVERYWHERE. IF YOU WERE TO FLOOD IT HADN'T DAMAGED ANYTHING.
>> IT'S CONSISTENT WITH MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO INTERFERE IN THERE, YOU MUST MITIGATE ABOVE AND BEYOND, SO I'M COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT I HEAR HERE.
IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE A VERY RESTRICTED AREA TOO.
IT'LL THROW HUNDREDS OF ACRES OUT OF WHACK.
>> RIGHT. IT'S JUST THE VERY UPPER END IN A SMALL AREA THAT WE'RE IMPACTING.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU, SIR. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ISSUE? ANYONE WISH TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE? NO. THEN WE'LL CLOSE THE OPEN HEARING ON THIS.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION AMONG THE PANEL MEMBERS? NOW LET ME JUST START IT OFF BY SAYING I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE].
IT'S NOT A MAJOR INVOLVEMENT IN THE COMMUNITY ACTIVITY IF IT DOES FLOOD AND PEOPLE WON'T USE THE PATHWAY FOR ABOUT A DAY OR TWO.
PLUS THE FACT THAT THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE FLOODPLAIN LAW, AND IT'S A RELATIVELY RESTRICTED AREA.
IT'S JUST A SMALL AREA, A COMPENSATING CUT.
I SIMPLY WOULD EXPRESS THAT I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED HERE.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? DO WE NEED TO STRUGGLE ON THIS ONE TOO? ALL RIGHT THEN.
NOW THIS ONE WOULD NOT GO TO THE BOARD.
THIS ONE IS JUST SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD APPROVE.
LET'S JUST GIVE STAFF GUIDANCE, WE'LL TAKE A STRAW VOTE ON THOSE WHO WOULD APPROVE THE CUT AS PROPOSED BY THE PROPONENT HERE.
[00:50:04]
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.>> NOW WE'RE ON ITEM 7C WHICH IS THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP MASTER PLAN.
[7.C. 2023 Meridian Township Master Plan]
>> THANK YOU. CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW, WE INITIATED THE REQUIRED 63-DAY REVIEW PERIOD EARLIER THIS FALL, AND HAVE NOW GOTTEN TO THE POINT OF HAVING RECEIVED COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK FROM NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES.
WE DID RECEIVE OFFICIAL WRITTEN WORD FROM MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.
THEY DO LIKE OUR PLAN A LOT, SO THERE'S THAT.
AT THIS POINT, THIS IS A REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARINGS INTO THE STATE LAW.
WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY FEEDBACK, AND THEN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE TALK ABOUT NEXT STEPS UNDER ITEM 10 THIS EVENING.
>> THANK YOU. THEN BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF, I'M NOW OPENING THIS ISSUE TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO COMMENT ON THE ISSUE OF THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN UPDATES? THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT NO ONE PRESENT HAS EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO SPEAK.
I'M SORRY COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE].
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION TO STAFF.
>> CAN YOU BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE THE RESPONSE OF THE BOARD?
>> THE TOWNSHIP BOARD HAS NOT REVIEWED THIS YET.
THEY WILL REVIEW IT AFTER THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER.
>> THE RECORD SHOULD ALSO REFLECT THAT THERE WERE A LARGE NUMBER OF COMMENTS FILED WITH YOUR OFFICE OF THE PROPOSED PLAN THAT WERE INCLUDED IN OUR PACKAGE.
>> YEAH. WE WANTED TO INCLUDE EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE GOTTEN SO FAR, SO YOU CAN SEE THE FULL GAMUT.
WE HAVE RECEIVED COMMENTS OVER THE COURSE OF THIS REVIEW.
>> YOU PREFER TO DELAY DISCUSSION OF THAT UNTIL ITEM 10?
>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S DO THAT THEN.
[8.A. ZA #2023-06 – CV: Conservancy District Updates]
UNFINISHED BUSINESS WHICH IS THE 2023-06-CV CONSERVANCY DISTRICT UPDATE.>> THANK YOU. THIS IS THE FOLLOW-UP MEETING FOR TEXT AMENDMENT 2023-08.
THIS DOES AMEND THE CONSERVANCY DISTRICT IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.
IT ACHIEVES TWO MAJOR OBJECTIVES.
IT MOVES DECKS FROM BEING SPECIAL USE PERMITS TO PERMITTED USES IN FLOODWAY AREAS AND IT ALLOWS OUR FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE CUT AND FILLS UP TO 10 CUBIC YARDS.
NOTE THAT ELEVATION FOR STILL WOULD BE HERE IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT.
IT'S GOING TO HELP THE PUBLIC, IT'S GOING TO MAKE THE PROCESS EASIER.
IT'S GOING TO JUST MAKE THINGS RUN MORE SMOOTHLY BEHIND THE SCENES WHERE THE SAUSAGE IS MADE.
>> IS THAT A TECHNICAL TERM? [LAUGHTER].
>> I LEARNED IT AT THE PLANNING SCHOOL, SIR.
>> YOU HAD A PROPOSED ORDER IN HERE SOMEWHERE BUT THERE'S SOMEBODY.
WOULD YOU RECALL WHAT PAGE IT WAS? [OVERLAPPING]
>> THERE WAS A DRAFT RESOLUTION.
>> I WARNED YOU ABOUT PACKETS THAT HAD MORE THAN A HUNDRED PAGES.
>> IT WAS A TACTIC TO INCLUDE ALL THE COMMENTS FOR THE MASTER PLAN.
>> I APPRECIATE ADDING ALL THE COMMENTS TO THE MASTER PLANNER.
>> IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO MOVE APPROVAL OF ZONING AMENDMENT NUMBER 2023-08 CONSERVANCY DISTRICT AMENDMENT?
>> I'LL SECOND THAT. MAYBE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. I'M SORRY, WHAT?
>> I HAVE ONE SIMPLE QUESTION FOR MR. SHARKEY.
WHO SUPPLIES TO DECKS ONLINE NUTS STRUCTURES?
>> IT WOULD APPLY TO STRUCTURES AS LONG AS THE FILL WAS LESS THAN 10 CUBIC YARDS.
>> IF SOMEONE COULD PUT AN ADDITION ON THAT?
>> CORRECT. IT'S JUST IF WE DON'T TAKE THE STEP OF MOVING DECKS INTO USES BY RIGHT, PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO BE IN FRONT OF THIS BODY FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU
[00:55:02]
LET THEM ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE THE FLOOD.>> ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A DEFINITION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A DECK?
>> I GOT THE ZONING ORDINANCE OPEN.
PROBABLY NOT BECAUSE OUR DEFINITIONS ARE PRETTY.
>> YEAH, IT'S GOING TO BE A BUILDING CODE.
IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE A ROOF.
HOWEVER THE BUILDING CODE DEFINES IT.
>> THERE IS AN AUTHORIZED DEFINITION SOMEWHERE THOUGH, BECAUSE SPEAKING AS AN ATTORNEY, IF YOU LEAVE A HOLE OPEN LIKE THAT, THE WEEK AFTER WE PASS THIS SOMEONE'S GOING TO COME IN WITH A.
>> YEAH. IT'S JUST NOT A ZONING DEFINITION. IT'S A BUILDING DEFINITION.
>> ALL RIGHT. BUT THERE IS A DEFINITION YOU CAN FALL BACK ON AND SAY THAT'S NOT A DECK.
>> A TREE HOUSE IS NOT A DECK?
>> THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE A LOT OF FILL LATER.
>> WHERE DO WE TIE IN THE DEFINITION?
>> WE DON'T NEED TO TIE IN A DEFINITION.
THE BUILDING CODE HAS A DEFINITION FOR WHAT A DECK IS.
SOMEONE'S GOING TO COME IN WITH A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION TO BUILD A DECK, THEY'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH OUR BUILDING INSPECTOR WHO'S THEN GOING TO LOOK AT IT AND MAKE SURE IT CONFORMS TO MICHIGAN BUILDING CODE DEFINITION OF WHAT A DECK IS.
THEY'RE THE ONES WHO ARE GOING TO SAY, THIS IS NOT A DECK, THIS IS A TREE HOUSE.
>> OR MORE COMMONLY A SUNROOM.
THERE IS A DEFINED DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SUNROOM AND A DECK.
>> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS BEFORE WE CALL THE BOARD? THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING AMENDMENT 2023-08 CONSERVANCY DISTRICT AMENDMENT.
THERE HAS BEEN A SECOND. I'LL CALL A ROLL-CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER RICHARDS?
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL GET THIS TO THE BOARD.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD POINT OUT THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD, NOT A FINAL APPROVAL.
>> CORRECT. THIS IS A TEXT AMENDMENT. WE WILL SEND SOME MORE.
>> NOW, WE ARE BACK TO ITEM NUMBER TEN.
[10. MASTER PLAN UPDATE]
FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MASTER PLAN UPDATE.>> I KNOW THE STATE LAW, THERE ARE TWO WAYS.
IT IS A PLANNING COMMISSION DOCUMENT BECAUSE IT IS A PLANNING DOCUMENT, HOWEVER, A COMMUNITY CAN CHOOSE TO VEST THE APPROVAL ABILITY IN THE HANDS OF THE ELECTED BOARD, OR COMMISSION, OR COUNCIL, DEPENDING ON THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP HAS PREVIOUSLY TAKEN THAT OPTION, AND THEREFORE, THE TOWNSHIP BOARD HAS THE FINAL ADOPTION OF THE MASTER PLAN IN THIS COMMUNITY.
WHAT'S BEING ASKED OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THIS POINT IS A RECOMMENDATION ON THE PLAN.
WE'VE MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY UNDER STATE LAW TO MOVE THIS FORWARD.
FROM THE STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S NO HUGE ERASURE AT THIS POINT.
THIS WILL BE THE LAST PIECE OF OUR REDEVELOPMENT-READY COMMUNITY'S RECERTIFICATION PROCESS.
THEY KNOW WE'RE IN THE FINAL STAGES.
IT WILL NOT HURT US TO TAKE ANOTHER MEETING ON THIS.
[NOISE] ADDITIONALLY, TECHNICALLY, THE PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS WOULD NEED TO BE WAIVED TONIGHT TO TAKE ACTION.
I CANNOT STAND HERE WITH A STRAIGHT FACE AND GIVE YOU A JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO WAIVE THOSE BYLAWS.
[NOISE] MY RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT IS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO TAKE ONE LAST READ-THROUGH OF THE PLAN OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS AND COME BACK AT OUR DECEMBER MEETING PREPARED TO MAKE A FINAL RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD ON THE PLAN.
THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT.
HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT ANY SPECIFICS AT THIS POINT OR AT THE DECEMBER MEETING, COMPLETELY UP TO THE PREVIEW OF THE COMMISSION.
WE, AGAIN, WELCOME ANY FEEDBACK.
I WILL I STILL HAVE A FEW CHANGES THAT COMMISSIONER SNYDER RECOMMENDED THAT I NEED TO TWEAK A COUPLE OF SENTENCES JUST TO MAKE SURE THEY READ A LITTLE BETTER.
BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY LAST FEEDBACK, NOW IT'D BE A GREAT TIME TO GET IT TO US AND WE'LL GET IT TAKEN CARE OF BEFORE OUR DECEMBER 11TH MEETING.
>> ANY DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I DON'T REMEMBER OR RECALL WHAT THE DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT
[01:00:03]
THE ACCESSIBILITY OF THE DOCUMENT OR IF THERE WAS A SPECIFIC PLAN IN PLACE FOR THAT.>> MY UNDERSTANDING WITH COMMUNICATIONS AND WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THEM IS THAT THE WAY THIS FORMAT WORKS THROUGH OUR WEBSITE MAKES IT MORE ACCESSIBLE TO A BROADER GROUP OF PEOPLE UNLIKE JUST DOING A PDF OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH IS WHY WE CHOSE THIS FORMAT.
BECAUSE THIS IS THE FORMAT OUR NEWSLETTER GOES OUT AND THIS IS THE FORMAT THAT WE'VE REALLY MOVED TO.
BUT WE WILL FOLLOW UP TO CONFIRM THAT.
>> THERE'S, FOR EXAMPLE, SOME FORM OF AUDIO VERSION THAT IS POSSIBLE WITH THIS FORMAT.
>> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, BUT LET ME LET ME CONFIRM THAT BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.
>> THANK YOU. ONE OTHER THING.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHO ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THIS.
I FEEL LIKE IT WAS COMMISSIONER MCCONNELL, BUT I APOLOGIZE. I'M NOT SURE.
SOMEBODY RECOMMENDED THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING A LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT IN THE DOCUMENT.
I WASN'T SURE WHERE WE ARE AT ON THAT EITHER.
>> WE WILL WORK SOMETHING OUT FOR THAT.
IT MIGHT HAVE MADE IT INTO THE FINAL OF OUR [OVERLAPPING]
>> LET US FINALIZE THAT WILL GET THAT IN THERE AS WELL.
I'M LOOKING AT THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP WEBSITE AND IT'S NOT READILY APPARENT HOW TO GET TO THIS DOCUMENT.
POSSIBLY ESPECIALLY SINCE WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO A FINAL VERSION, IT SHOULD BE PROMOTED ON THE WEBSITE IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT'S EASY TO SEE FROM THE HOMEPAGE.
>> WE'LL GET IT SOME MORE SPOTLIGHT.
>> BUT I CAN'T FIND IT REAL QUICK.
>> WE'LL GET IT MORE OUT THERE.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT FOR THE RECORD.
A LARGE NUMBER OF CITIZEN COMMENTS WERE INCLUDED IN OUR PACKAGE.
I FOUND THEM REALLY QUITE INTERESTING.
IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN THEIR CONSISTENCY, IT SEEMS LIKE A LARGE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTS WHO CHOSE TO GIVE INPUT AGREED ON THE SAME BASIC PRINCIPLES.
PRESERVING GREEN SPACE, INFILL DEVELOPMENT, LAND REUSE, RATHER THAN BREAKING NEW GROUND WHEREVER POSSIBLE.
IT WAS INTERESTING HOW CONSISTENT THE INPUT WAS IN MOST CASES.
WHICH I THINK IS PROBABLY HELPFUL BOTH FOR US AND FOR STAFF.
>> CAN I TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS?
>> WE WILL GET THAT PUBLIC COMMENT IN A MINUTE ANYWAY.
>> LET'S SEE. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THIS ISSUE?
>> ANYTHING FURTHER, MR. SMITH?
>> NO. I'VE SAID MY PIECE ON THIS.
I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S WORK ON THIS OVER THE LAST YEAR ROUGHLY, AND WOULD APPRECIATE ONE LAST POLISH LOOK AT IT IF YOU DON'T MIND.
>> VERY GOOD. WELL, THANK YOU TO THE STAFF AND ALL THE WORK THAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE ON [OVERLAPPING]
THIS PROCESS HAS GONE MUCH MORE SMOOTHLY THAN IN THE PAST, AND IT IS BECAUSE OF THE EFFORTS THAT THE STAFF HAS HELPED PUT FORTH.
I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BROOKS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE.
>> THEN I'M GOING TO CLOSE THIS ITEM AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO
[11.A. Township Board update.]
ITEM 11, REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.FIRST IS TOWNSHIP BOARD UPDATE.
FROM OCTOBER-NOVEMBER SINCE WE DIDN'T MISS A MEETING IN THERE AND WE HAD A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON, I JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH THE CELESTIAL BRIEFLY.
TOWNSHIP BOARD HAS APPROVED THE FRAMEWORK FOR THE CIA TIP AT THIS POINT.
THAT WILL START MOVING FORWARD NOW.
THE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY WILL START TO BECOME MORE ACTIVE, HOPEFULLY.
RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE A FUNDING MECHANISM ON THE SUBWAY.
THE BOARD DID APPROVE THE RFC HOUSING UPDATES SINCE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHOLEHEARTEDLY RECOMMENDED ABOUT SIX WEEKS AGO.
THAT WILL NOW BE IN PLACE AND I'VE ALREADY GOT SOMEONE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.
>> THERE IS A DEMAND OUT THERE.
THE BOARD IS EXPECTED TO TAKE UP RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA STANDARDS FOR THEIR LICENSE REVIEW AT
[01:05:03]
THEIR NEXT MEETING WITH AN EYE TOWARDS POTENTIALLY OPENING A WINDOW FOR ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS AFTER THE FIRST OF THE YEAR.THE BOARD HELD A STUDY SESSION ON THE LOCATION DESIGN STATUS OF THE SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT THAT'S FLOATING AROUND OUT THERE.
WE'RE STILL VERY EARLY IN THE PROCESS.
I HAVE LITTLE THAT I CAN SHARE WITH YOU OTHER THAN THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION TO BRING ON A DESIGN CONSULTING FIRM TO START THE PROCESS OF GETTING SOME BASIC CONCEPTS DOWN AND GETTING SOME BASIC COSTS DOWN SO WE CAN FIND A DIRECTION TO MOVE IN.
>> MAY I ASK, DOES THAT INVOLVE BUILDING A NEW STRUCTURE OR TAKING OVER AN EXISTING BUILDING?
>> TO BE DETERMINED. WE HAVE OFFICIALLY AS OF ABOUT 05:30 THIS AFTERNOON, APPLIED FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT HOUSING, IMPROVING LIVING.
I'M BLANKING ON THE SECOND. I'LL APOLOGIZE.
GRANT THROUGH MICHIGAN STATE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
THEY LOVE THEIR ACRONYMS AND THEY ARE ALWAYS CHEWING THEM. EDC AND MISSION.
IT'S ALWAYS RELATED TO WATER OR ICE OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
$480,000 REQUESTS TO DO HOME REHABS IN THE TOWER GARDENS AND THREE SEPARATE NEIGHBORHOODS IN HASLET AROUND THE LAKE.
WE EXPECT TO BE SUCCESSFUL GIVEN THAT THEY DID NOT GET ENOUGH REQUESTS TO FILL THEIR FUNDING QUOTA.
WE EXPECT THAT WE WILL GET THIS MONEY.
WE WILL PARTNER WITH [INAUDIBLE] HOUSING PARTNERSHIP, WHO HAS BEEN DOING THIS KIND OF WORK FOR DECADES, FOR THEM TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM, PLUS IT GETS US ACCESS TO THERE.
CONTRACTOR LISTS AND RELATIONSHIPS WHICH SHOULD HELP US.
WE HOPE TO GET MORE INFORMATION OUT ABOUT THIS ONCE WE KNOW.
BECAUSE IT'S REALLY JUST GOING TO BE WORD OF MOUTH AND IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF FIRST-COME, FIRST-SERVE.
IT'S INTENDED TO SERVE LOW TO MODERATE-INCOME INDIVIDUALS WHO OWN THEIR HOMES.
WE'RE TRYING TO HELP THEM STAY IN THEIR HOMES AND STAY IN THE COMMUNITY.
LASTLY, FROM THE BOARD'S PERSPECTIVE, THEY HONORED THE VOLUNTEERS OF THE YEAR AT THEIR LAST MEETING, STEVE THOMAS, AND ONE PETER [INAUDIBLE] CONGRATULATIONS TO [INAUDIBLE] ON THAT HONOR.
THAT IS ALL I HAVE FROM THE TOWNSHIP BOARD.
>> DO WE HAVE LIAISON REPORTS?
[11.B. Liaison reports.]
>> I JUST HAD A QUESTION REGARDING THE LATE, SO I'M THE LIAISON TO THE CIA.
WAS THERE ANOTHER CIA MEETING WHERE ALL THIS FALL?
IT WAS JUST THE BOARD HAD TO TAKE ACTION ON THE STEPS TOWARDS THE TIP.
>> THAT'S WHAT I FIGURED, SO I WAS SURPRISED THAT IT GOT ADOPTED.
I'M GLAD I JUST WAS SURPRISED, BUT YEAH, THAT'S GOOD.
>> I THINK NOW THAT THAT HAS HAPPENED, THERE'LL BE ANOTHER MEETING.
>> I WENT TO WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING.
THEY DID NOT HAVE A QUORUM, SO IT WAS NOT A FORMAL MEETING, BUT WHAT WAS INTERESTING WAS THEY HAD A SIGNIFICANT PRESENTATION FROM THE COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER TALKING ABOUT RESOLUTION OF DRAINAGE ISSUES IN THE MERIDIAN MALL AND MEYER AREAS.
AND WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT WAS THERE CONCERNED.
THE MERIDIAN MALL IS BASICALLY A GIGANTIC FLOODPLAIN.
IT'S ALL ONE GIGANTIC PARKING LOT WITH A BUNCH OF FLAT ROOF BUILDINGS.
WHEN IT RAINS, IT COLLECTS WATER, AND THEY ARE CONCERNED WITH REDIRECTING THAT AND CONTROLLING IT BECAUSE THEY FORESEE THAT FLOODING IS ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE.
THE OTHER ISSUE THAT CAME UP IS THE MEYER PARKING LOT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT, AND THEY PRAISED MEYER.
THEY SAID MAYOR IS FULLY COOPERATIVE WITH ALL OF THEIR ISSUES AND ALL OF THEIR EFFORTS AND IS HELPING FUND THE CORRECTIONS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO CONTROL THE WATER FLOW OFF OF THEIR VERY LARGE PARKING LOT.
IT WAS AN INTERESTING PRESENTATION, IT'S JUST TOO BAD THAT IT WASN'T A FORMALIZED MEETING.
ANYWAY, IT WASN'T ACTUALLY A MEETING, IT WAS JUST A PRESENTATION.
>> ANY OTHER LIAISON REPORTS? [NOISE]
>> I ATTENDED THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MEETING.
THEY HAD A PRESENTATION THERE FROM LIAISING 501 RETENTION ATTRACTION PROGRAM.
THEY WORKED ON THEIR 2024 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
[01:10:02]
CORPORATION MEETING CALENDAR DURING THAT MEETING.BUT I ALSO ATTENDED THE BOARD'S STUDY SESSION THAT DIRECTOR SMITH WAS TALKING ABOUT AND I CAME AWAY WITH MORE INFORMATION THERE ABOUT THE SENIOR CENTER, THEN I HEARD AT THE ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD LISTENING SESSION AND IT WAS A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT, AND I WAS GLAD TO HEAR THAT.
I HEARD AT THE LISTENING SESSION, IT WAS OPENED UP AS A QUESTION OF WHO WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY MORE TAXES TO DO THIS.
I GOT A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AT THE BOARD'S MEETING WORK SESSION.
THEY WERE TALKING MORE ABOUT HOW TO DO THIS WITHOUT DOING A TAX INCREASE.
AND I WAS GLAD TO HEAR THAT BECAUSE THEY WERE COMBINING A SENIOR CENTER WITH A COMMUNITY CENTER, AND I THINK THAT'S MORE SOLUBLE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD USE.
THEY WERE THERE TALKING ABOUT REPURPOSING YONKERS, WHERE PREVIOUSLY IT WAS A RESPONSE OF THAT'S NOT AN OPTION BECAUSE WE NEED TO BUY ABILITY WITH THE FIVE MILLION DOLLARS THAT THEY GOT FROM THE LEGISLATURE.
SO NOW THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE YONKERS.
NUMBERS THAT WERE THROWN OUT THERE OF HOW MUCH IS NEEDED TO DO THIS PROJECT WAS AS HIGH AS $20 MILLION.
THE TOWNSHIP MANAGER SPOKE ABOUT OTHER MONIES THAT THEY CAN GAIN A SAVINGS FROM TO APPLY TO THIS PROJECT.
ONE THING THEY SPOKE ABOUT WAS A CONCERN OF MINE AND THAT IS, IF WE DO GET A COMMUNITY CENTER, WHAT'S IT GOING TO LOOK LIKE, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR, AND LET US SEE YOUR VISION, AND ALSO THINK ABOUT LONG-TERM STAFFING OF THIS.
SOMEBODY'S GOT TO RUN THIS PLACE, SO IT'S MORE THAN JUST BUYING A FACILITY, IT'S AN INVESTMENT IN A FUTURE.
AND ONE THING THAT THEY THOUGHT OF WAS MOVING THE PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT INTO THIS NEW FACILITY.
THAT WOULD HELP SOLVE SOME ISSUES SUCH AS RECEPTION AREA.
IN MY MIND, I'M LOOKING AT OKAY, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR IN A COMMUNITY CENTER? WELL, EVERY YEAR I GIVE A YOUTH WORKSHOP THROUGH MACRO ETERNITY AND WE USE THE HANNA CENTER.
THAT'S THE COMMUNITY CENTER, THAT'S THE SENIOR CENTER.
I WALK IN THERE, THERE'S TWO PEOPLE AT A RECEPTION DESK, THERE'S PEOPLE OPERATING OFFICES THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING, THAT'S A MAJOR OPERATION, BUT THEY ALSO RENT THAT OUT.
THEIR PRICES HAVE CHANGED FROM LAST YEAR TO THIS YEAR.
I JUST RENTED IT AND IT WAS $1,100 LAST YEAR, IT WAS ALMOST $1,700 THIS YEAR BECAUSE THEY START CHARGING ME FIVE DOLLARS A TABLE TO PUT A TABLE COVERING ON THEIR FOR THE SMALL TABLES.
IN ESSENCE, WHAT I'M SAYING, THERE'S WAYS WHERE THIS COMMUNITY CENTER CAN ALSO GENERATE MONIES, AND I'M JUST IMPRESSED WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE CONVERSATION IS NOW GOING.
>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT ANY LIAISON GOVERNMENT? [NOISE].
>> THANK YOU, MR. SMITH. WE ARE NOW ON PROJECT UPDATES ITEM 12 ON OUR AGENDA.
[12.A. Project Report]
>> YOU HAVE AN UPDATED PROJECT REPORT IN YOUR PACKET?
>> NOTHING IN ADDITION TO THAT.
>> WELL, PROBABLY SHOULDN'T MAKE AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT.
[01:15:04]
NOW IT'S PUBLIC REMARKS.WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO HAVE BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING THROUGH THE ENTIRE MEETING.
DO ANY OF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD? NO? COMMISSIONER COMMENTS?
[14. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS]
>> THIS IS IN REGARDS TO THE COMMENT I MADE ABOUT THE POTHOLE IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO HOME PLACE, HAS THERE BEEN ANY MOVEMENT ON THAT? I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE DRAINAGE OFFICE.
I JUST KEEP DRIVING BY THIS POTHOLE AND IT IS SO HUGE AND I'M LIKE, SOMEBODY'S GOING TO-
>> REMIND ME OF WHICH SIDE IT'S ON.
>> WELL, NO, IT'S ON THE NORTHERN SIDE OF HOUSE TO HOME.
IT'S ON THE ENTRANCE THAT'S ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CHIPOTLE WAY PARKING LOT.
>> SO IT'S ON THE ENTRANCE DRIVE?
>> YEAH. THE THING IS MASSIVE.
>> WE'LL REACH OUT AGAIN. IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY, SO THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH WE CAN DO.
I GUESS IN THEORY WE COULD ISSUE A CODE VIOLATION, BUT WE'LL LOOK INTO IT AGAIN.
>> I'M NOT TRYING TO START A FIGHT OR ANYTHING, IT'S JUST LIKE, I JUST DON'T WANT SOMEBODY'S CAR TO GET BROKEN AND THEN NOT KNOW WHO THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY IS, WHO SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE IF YOU HAVE THAT DAMAGE.
>> WE WILL FOLLOW UP ON THAT AGAIN.
>> ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER COMMENTS? NO? THEN I SEE THAT WE'RE ON THE LAST ITEM OF THE AGENDA, WHICH IS ADJOURNMENT.
CHAIR ENTERTAINS A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
>> THANK YOU. WE'RE ADJOURNING.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.