Nov 15, 2023 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting

WELCOME, LADIES. EVERYBODY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I WANT TO WELCOME YOU TO TONIGHT'S ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING FOR CHARTER TOWNSHIP.

[00:00:07]

WITH THAT, I'LL DO A QUICK CALL TO ORDER FOR THE RECORD THERE FOR KEITH.

SO FIRST UP ON THE LIST IS APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.

[2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA]

IF NOT, I MOVE THE AGENDA BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

ALL RIGHT. SECOND MOVED IN SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, OR DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL? VOTE? I CAN'T REMEMBER, YOU'RE FINE.

WE'RE JUST DOING ALL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

THOSE OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON.

[3. CORRECTIONS, APPROVAL AND RATIFICATION OF MINUTES]

HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS GOT ALL HAD A CHANCE TO READ THOSE OR ANY CORRECTIONS OR ADDENDUMS TO THE MINUTES.

IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION? I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PROPOSED.

SUPPORT. MOTION TO SUPPORT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR AS WELL? ALL THOSE AGAINST. MOTION CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT. COMMUNICATIONS.

[4. COMMUNICATIONS]

I DON'T REMEMBER IF THERE'S ANY IN OUR PACKET, KEITH, THAT WE RECEIVED.

I TOTALLY LEFT THE PACKET IN MY OFFICE, I APOLOGIZE.

AND ALSO, I GOT A SCAPEGOAT.

BUT WE DO HAVE ANOTHER SET OF COMMUNICATIONS.

WAS THIS RECEIVED TODAY? IT WAS A WHILE AGO BUT YEAH, BUT IT'S FOR THE RECORD.

FOR THE RECORD. GOTCHA.

SO, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS ALL HAD A CHANCE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND READ IT.

YES. OKAY. WE WILL CONSIDER THAT.

[5.A. ZBA CASE NO. 23-08 (6329 Milenz), Craig Skcozylas, 6329 Milenz Street, Haslett, MI 48840]

THE LENS WE DO NEED BECAUSE THIS WAS A CASE THAT WAS CONSIDERED NEW BUSINESS A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO.

AND IT WAS TABLED BY THIS BOARD.

SO, WE DO NEED A MOTION TO TABLE IT.

SIMILAR TO PREVIOUS CASES IN THE PAST SO THAT WE CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ON IT.

IS THERE A MOTION TO TABLE? SO MOVED. SUPPORT.

ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SUPPORT TO TABLE.

ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING TO THE MOTION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE.

MOTION CARRIES. SO, THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE MR. CHAPMAN. GO AHEAD AND DO YOUR THING FOR THE BOARD.

YEAH. SO, THE APPLICANT, IF YOU REMEMBER PREVIOUSLY, THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE WETLANDS SETBACK, WHICH IS 40FT. AT THE SEPTEMBER 20TH MEETING, THE BOARD VOTED TO TABLE THE CASE, AND I DON'T REALLY HAVE TOO MUCH TO ADD TO THAT, OTHER THAN I PROVIDED A TOPOGRAPHY MAP THAT SHOWS THE PROPERTY.

AND FOR ANYTHING ELSE YOU CAN REFER TO THE PREVIOUS PACKET.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAPMAN. JUST TRYING TO CATCH UP WITH YOU IN THE PACKET HERE.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING FOR MR. CHAPMAN OR STAFF? NOPE. OKAY, THEN WE WILL GO INTO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF IT.

AND IF THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE OR IF THEY WANT TO COME UP AND SAY ANYTHING, IF NOT, IF THERE'S MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THIS, WE JUST ASK THAT IF YOU DO COME UP, COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

YES. GOOD EVENING AGAIN.

CRAIG SCOTT WITH 6329 MULLEN STREET.

DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH MORE AT THIS POINT HERE.

YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT THE PROPERTY AND LISTEN TO WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO SAY, AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE, I GUESS.

OKAY. WHAT? DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON THE TOPIC.

FEEL FREE PLEASE. HI, MY NAME IS CARLOS GONZALEZ AND MY QUESTION FOR YOU GUYS WAS IT WAS TABLED.

MY UNDERSTANDING IT WAS TABLED BECAUSE YOU WERE GOING TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT THE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT A NEIGHBOR AND COUPLE OTHER THINGS WE BROUGHT UP.

SO, I JUST WONDERED IF WHO IF YOU GUYS GOT OUT TO SEE IT, BUT IT'S CORRECT.

I DID GO OUT AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE MEMBERS WENT OUT.

I DID ALSO, I DID AS WELL.

SEEMS LIKE MOST OF US, IF NOT ALL OF US, DID GET THE CHANCE.

YOU ARE LOCATED AT THE SAME ADDRESS, MA'AM.

YOU LOCATED AT THE SAME ADDRESS? YES. THE SAME. OKAY.

SINCE YOU HAVE TO ASK THIS QUESTION, WE'VE GOT A LETTER HERE FROM AROUND 15 PEOPLE WHO ARE ASSERTING TO THIS COMMISSION THAT YOUR PROPERTY HAS BEEN LEFT IN DISREPAIR, LOGS AND JUNK LEFT OVER A REAL EYESORE FOR THE PAST YEAR.

ARE YOU AWARE OF THEIR CONCERN AND WHAT YOUR RESPONSE TO THEIR CONCERNS?

[00:05:06]

THE GENTLEMAN THAT I WAS THAT SAW WAS DOING THE PETITION.

I HAD FIVE NEIGHBORS ACTUALLY CALL ME AND SAID THAT THE GUY WAS GOING AROUND.

THEY TOLD HIM TO LEAVE, THAT I WAS TRYING TO BETTER THE COMMUNITY AND DO SOME STUFF.

I DON'T EVEN REALLY KNOW THE GENTLEMAN, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT HIS BEEF IS WITH ME.

I KNOW MERIDIAN'S LOOKING FORWARD TO COLLECTING SOME MORE TAX MONEY, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS LOOKING TO A NICE HOUSE BEING BUILT THERE.

THERE ARE THERE ARE LOGS ON THE PROPERTY.

WE ARE LOOKING AT LOGGING THEM, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, WE JUST HAD A DEVASTATING TORNADO THAT CAME THROUGH AND THAT DROPPED ALL THE PRICE OF LUMBER DRAMATICALLY.

SO INSTEAD OF SELLING IT, YOU ALMOST GOT TO PAY TO GET RID OF IT.

RIGHT NOW, THE LOT IS ALL I GAVE THEM KEY SOME PICTURES OF THE PROPERTY.

THE LAND IS ALL FLATTENED OUT WHERE WE CUT THE TREES DOWN.

AND AS YOU KNOW, ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, IT'S NOT A FINISHED SITE.

SO, THERE ARE LOGS ON THE SITE THAT WILL EITHER BE SOLD OFF.

WE'RE LOOKING AT MILLING THEM, BUT WE'LL PROBABLY END UP SELLING THEM OFF.

BUT IT'S A PROCESS AND IT'S NOT EVEN STARTED YET.

SO, WE CLEARED THE LOT.

THE PICTURE WILL INDICATE THAT ALL THE BRUSH HAS BEEN REMOVED, MANY STUMPS HAVE BEEN REMOVED, AND THE LAND IS AT A LEVEL POSITION FOR THE MOST PART, AND THE LOGS ARE ALL STACKED UP AS NEATLY AS POSSIBLE.

IT DOESN'T HAVE A DATE ON IT, BUT THE LETTER WE GOT STATES THAT THERE ARE NUMEROUS PILES OF JUNK, SCRAP METAL, TRAILERS AND OTHER DEBRIS ON THE PROPERTY.

IS THAT STILL THE CASE? THAT IS NOT SO THE CASE, SIR.

OKAY. HAVE YOU GOT PICTURES TO INDICATE THAT? I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SEE THAT.

I'VE BEEN GOING OUT ON THE WEEKENDS, WORKING SEVEN DAYS A WEEK AND GOING OUT AND CLEANING UP THE PROPERTY SO THAT THE DEBRIS AND STUFF IS CLEANED UP.

YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE ONE PERSON THAT'S GOING TO WANT TO COMPLAIN.

I DON'T KNOW IF HE WANTS TO BUY MY PROPERTY FOR HIMSELF OR THERE WERE ISSUES WHEN I FIRST MOVED OUT HERE.

ISSUES WERE THERE WAS COMPLAINTS, TOO.

COMPLAINTS A MONTH AND THE CITY GOT SICK AND TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT THEM, AND THEY KIND OF SQUISHED THOSE.

AND FOR THE LAST, LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THINGS HAVE BEEN PRETTY QUIET.

AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, THIS YEAR JUST CAME UP.

I DID TALK TO THE GENTLEMAN THAT STARTED THIS COMPLAINT, AND I FOUND OUT WHO HE WAS BECAUSE HE DIDN'T LIKE MY TRUCK PARKED OUT BACK, BUT I HAD SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS OF LANDSCAPE STONE STOLEN.

AND SO, HE HAD NO IDEA WHO I WAS OR WHY THE TRUCKS WERE PARKED THERE.

AND SO, THE VEHICLES HAVE SINCE BEEN MOVED.

AND I TOLD HIM IF HE HAD ANY QUESTIONS, LET ME KNOW AND I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE CARE OF THINGS.

AND HE ASKED HOW LONG THINGS WERE GOING TO BE THERE FOR.

I SAID, WELL, THE STONES WOULD PROBABLY BE THERE FOR THE YEAR AND THE COURSE OF BUILDING THE HOUSE, AND THEN THEY'LL BE USED ON THE PROPERTY PREMISE FOR LANDSCAPE PURPOSES.

OKAY. I'M SORRY.

AT THE LAST MEETING THAT YOU WERE HERE, YOU DID ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAD RELOCATED A BUNCH OF STONES INTO AN AREA WHICH IS, AGAIN, IN THE WETLANDS BUFFER ON REYNOLDS.

HAVE THOSE BEEN MOVED OR ARE THEY STILL THERE? OH, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN MOVED.

I DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY WERE ON WETLAND PROPERTY.

NOBODY HAS CONFIRMED OR I'VE HEARD NOTHING FROM THE CITY OR TOWNSHIP OR DNR OR ANYBODY OF THAT.

IT'S THE FIRST TIME.

COME BACK TO THE MEETING FOR WHERE WE LEFT OFF.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

REMEMBER SAYING MY APOLOGIES.

WAS THERE AN INCIDENT REQUIRING BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS, REQUIRING THE POLICE INVOLVEMENT RECENTLY? OH, THAT WAS FOR THE STOLEN STONES.

THEY CAME OUT TO DO A REPORT, AND THEN WE THOUGHT THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A CRIME WITH THE TRUCK, BUT IT WAS JUST A LIMB THAT FELL OFF OF A TREE.

OTHER THAN THAT, YEAH.

I'VE HAD NUMEROUS TIMES WHERE THE POLICE HAVE COME OUT FOR PEOPLE PARKING ON MY PROPERTY OR SITUATIONS, AND I KNEW HALF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THEY WERE HAPPY TO SEE THE HOUSE GETTING CLEANED UP.

IT WASN'T A DRUG HOUSE ANYMORE, BUT I'M INSIDE.

THEY COULDN'T BELIEVE WHAT WAS DONE INSIDE SO THEY WERE HAPPY TO SEE IT.

IT WASN'T A DRUG HOUSE AND THAT IT WAS GOING IN A BETTER DIRECTION.

OKAY, THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS.

MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER. CAN I COME ON? THE POLICE HAVE NOT BEEN CALLED OUT BECAUSE OF ANY VIOLENCE OR ANY DISRUPTION, OR IT'S EITHER PROPERTY BEING STOLEN, OR VIOLATIONS OF VEHICLES PARKED ON THE PROPERTY.

OKAY, I GOT THAT.

OKAY, SO MY APOLOGIES.

I WAS NOT HERE WHEN THIS FIRST CAME UP.

SO, THESE QUESTIONS MAY HAVE ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED.

BUT SINCE WE ARE VOTING ON THIS TODAY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAVE A FULL UNDERSTANDING.

AS I WAS READING OVER THE MINUTES, THERE WERE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AS FAR AS WHETHER OR NOT THE DESIGN ACTUALLY MET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, OR THE MINIMUM STANDARDS THAT COULD BE USED TO GRANT A VARIANCE.

AND SO, I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION THAT CAME UP AS FAR AS THE LOCATION OF THE GARAGE AND MAKING THE GARAGE SMALLER, AND THERE WERE COMMENTS ABOUT THE GARAGE BEING SMALLER WOULD CHANGE THE VIEW.

[00:10:02]

EVERYTHING HAS BEEN DONE AS POSSIBLY CAN BE DONE, AND I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THEM TO MOVE EVERYTHING AS FAR AS THEY COULD SO THAT THERE WOULD BE AS LESS APPROACH ON ANYTHING. AND WE'RE ONLY LOOKING FOR ONE VARIANCE.

OR WE COULD POSSIBLY BE LOOKING AT THREE VARIANCES.

SO, WE HAVE A ONE VARIANCE.

AND I DID GO DRIVE.

SORRY. GO AHEAD.

AND I DID GO DRIVE BY THE PROPERTY BEFORE I CAME TO THE MEETING.

SO JUST FOR MY VISUAL I THERE WAS A THERE'S A HOUSE AND THEN THERE'S A LARGE VACANT LOT.

THE WETLANDS ARE BEHIND.

SO WHERE EXACTLY IS THE HOUSE THAT YOU'RE PLANNING ON BUILDING GOING? DO YOU HAVE ANY OF THE PICTURES I SHOWED YOU TODAY OR CARLA SENT YOU? I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY. NO, UNFORTUNATELY.

OKAY. UM, LET'S SEE IF YOU BRING UP THE.

OKAY. OH, YEAH. YEP.

THEY GOT IT RIGHT THERE.

AND THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S ON MY STREET.

THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT GOING TO BE A DRIVEWAY THERE.

THE ONE THAT'S THERE NOW.

YOU'RE TAKING THAT OUT.

NO. THE DRIVEWAY ON THE NEW GARAGE.

NOT GOING TO BE THERE. IT'S NOT A GARAGE.

IT'S ALL GREEN. OKAY.

KEITH, COULD YOU SCROLL UP TO THE PREVIOUS MAP THAT SHOWS WHERE THE ACTUAL WETLAND BOUNDARY IS? THE SETBACK THAT HAS THAT.

THERE YOU GO. SO, THERE YOU CAN SEE THE ACTUAL BUFFER RIGHT THERE.

THAT PIECE UP THERE ASKING FOR I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

SO, YOU JUST SAID THAT THAT DRIVEWAY IS NOT GOING TO EXIST LEADING TO MILAN STREET, CORRECT? CORRECT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER CHANGES WITH THE DESIGN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW? NO. OKAY.

SO, EVERYTHING IS BASICALLY THE SAME AS THE MEETING TWO MONTHS AGO BESIDES THAT DRIVEWAY.

YES. I HAD ON NOTICE ABOUT IT BEING PUT IN.

WE'LL JUST HAVE I THINK ON THE BUILDING CODE IT REQUIRES LIKE A 5 FOOT OR 8-FOOT KOENIG, THEY CALL IT.

BUT THAT'S ALL IT WILL BE THERE.

I'M NOT PUTTING I'M TRYING TO KEEP AS MUCH GREEN LAND AS POSSIBLE THERE.

JUST MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL LOOKING AT THE MOST UPDATED VERSION.

AND ALSO, I LIKE TO ASK, BESIDES, I DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME OR KNOW THE NAME OF THE MAN THAT STARTED THESE PETITIONS.

HAVE YOU COMMUNICATED OR TALKED AT ALL WITH ANY OF THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED THE PETITION OR HAD ANY ISSUES? SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT HAVE TALKED TO ME SAID THEY DIDN'T SIGN IT, SO I DON'T KNOW WHO HAS SIGNED IT, AND I WAS TOLD THAT WASN'T PART OF THE MEETING.

THE MEETING IS ABOUT A VARIANCE WHICH HAS TO DO WITH BUILDING A HOUSE, NOT WITH WHAT THE WHAT, NOT WITH THE NEIGHBORS COMPLAINING BECAUSE HE WANTS TO BUY MY PROPERTY OR TAKE IT OVER OR WHATEVER.

OKAY, I WAS JUST CONCERNED ABOUT AND WONDERING HOW THIS ALL FIT IN WITH THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.

I GET ALONG WITH MY NEIGHBORS, JOANNE AND GARY ACROSS THE STREET.

I WAS JUST OVER THERE BLOWING THEIR ROOF OFF THE JOHNSONS.

KEITH AND TRACY.

I HAVEN'T MET TOM YET.

HE BOUGHT ONE OF THE NEW HOUSES I MET THE PEOPLE THAT BOUGHT.

WE CALL IT THE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD HOUSE, WHICH IS NEXT TO THE EMPTY LOT, AND KNOW A FEW OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA.

OKAY. THAT'S IT FOR ME.

SAY ONE THING.

CAN'T I COME UP THERE? YEAH.

COME UP TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE, IF YOU CAN.

I SAW YOUR HAND UP. KEITH.

I'M SORRY. KIND OF LATE.

I SENT YOU THREE PICTURES I TEXTED.

I SHOULD HAVE SENT THEM EARLIER, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THE.

IT WAS ABOUT 1:00 THIS AFTERNOON, SO, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT UNTIMELY.

I TEXTED. I TRIED TO GET THEM INTO AN EMAIL, BUT DIDN'T HAVE SUCCESS, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE PICTURES WILL HELP, BUT WE HAVE CLEARED UP THE LANE AND CLEANED UP SOME PILES OF STUFF.

YOU KNOW, AS WE'VE BEEN CLEARING AND CLEANING UP THE LAND, YOU KNOW, TOOK BRUSH AWAY, JUST CLEARED UP JUNK AND STUFF TO TRY TO MAKE IT LOOK BETTER.

BUT, YOU KNOW, OUR GOAL WAS TO START, YOU KNOW, GET THE FOUNDATION IN AND START BUILDING THIS YEAR.

BUT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF OBVIOUSLY PUT THAT ON THE BACK BURNER.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE'VE BEEN CLEANING UP STUFF AND THAT KIND OF THING.

SO, WE WANT TO MAKE IT LOOK NICE FOR, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE GOING BY.

BUT THERE ARE STILL THE LOT OF THE BIG LOGS AND STUFF THAT ARE STILL THERE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL CUTTING DOWN TREES.

THANK YOU. MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER?

[00:15:02]

AND I SEE FROM THIS DESIGN THAT THE HOUSE IS KIND OF AT AN ANGLE.

SO, WITH THAT DRIVEWAY GOING AWAY, IS IT POSSIBLE TO KIND OF STRAIGHTEN OUT THAT THE HOUSE DESIGN, INSTEAD OF HAVING IT ON AN ANGLE, JUST KIND OF THE HOUSE ISN'T AT AN ANGLE? THE HOUSE HAD RUN PARALLEL TO LAKE DRIVE AND LIKE I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, BEING THE CORNER THERE, WE HAVE A VIEW OF THE LAKE.

AND THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THAT BEING THERE.

IF I JUST BUILT A 1000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, IT WOULD STILL BE OVER IN THAT AREA AND THE REST OF IT WOULDN'T BE THERE.

THAT'S ABOUT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF A VIEW.

YOU'RE SPENDING A PROPERTY ON A LAKE IS A LOT OF MONEY, AND YOU'RE PAYING A LOT OF MONEY FOR THAT, AND YOU'RE PAYING A LOT OF TAXES AND YOU'RE PAYING ADDITIONAL TAXES.

I'M ON TIER TWO.

I'M PAYING ADDITIONAL TAXES JUST TO BE THERE FOR THAT SPOT OF PROPERTY.

AND IT'S LIKE IF I CAN'T SEE WHAT I'M THERE, IF I CAN'T SEE WHAT I'M PAYING TO SEE AND ALMOST SOUNDS LIKE I'M GETTING RIPPED OFF.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU. OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK? IF NOT, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING AND WE'LL GO INTO OUR BOARD TIME.

SO, WITH THAT, REFERRING BACK TO THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PRESENTED IN THE PACKET IN THE RECORD, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO SAY ABOUT THE PETITION? ANY COMMENTS OR.

GO AHEAD. I STILL HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT ISSUES WITH THIS DESIGN, AND THAT IT'S INCURRING INTO THE WETLAND BUFFER BY A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT.

AT THE LAST MEETING, THERE WAS A STATEMENT THAT THE HOUSE AND THE GARAGE WERE UP ON A HILL.

I CHECKED THAT OUT.

THE HILL IS ABOUT FOUR FEET TALL.

AND FROM THE MAP THAT MR. CHAPMAN GAVE US TODAY, IT'S VERIFIED THAT THE WATER LEVEL IS ABOUT 854 AND THE TOP THERE IS 858.

THAT'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT HILL.

AND IF THE POST THAT HE'S GOT IN THERE WHERE INDICATES THE CORNER OF HIS HOUSE IS ACCURATE, THAT'S RIGHT AT THE BASE OF THE HILL AND INCURRING INTO THE WETLAND BUFFER SIGNIFICANTLY RIGHT AT THE LOWEST POINT ALMOST AT WATER LEVEL.

AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT INCURSION.

I DON'T SEE I UNDERSTAND HE WANTS A VIEW OF THE LAKE, BUT OUR ISSUE IS TO PRESERVE THE LAKE.

AND THAT'S WHAT SOME OF THE EXTRA TAXES ARE DESIGNED FOR.

AND PART OF THAT IS TO PROTECT THE WETLANDS AND ITS BUFFERS.

SO, I WOULD BE OPPOSED TO THIS AS PRESENTED.

CAN I SAY SOMETHING? TECHNICALLY, THIS IS THE BOARD TIME, BUT I THINK IT'S.

I MEAN, IT'S OUR DISCRETION IF WE ALLOW.

I GUESS IF. LET ME JUST.

KEITH, CAN YOU CLARIFY IF THE BOARD TIME, IF WE ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK UP AND SAY THAT'S ENTIRELY UP TO YOU IF YOU WANT TO SAY YES OR NO.

I WOULD SAY GO AHEAD.

OH, THE STAKE THAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT DOWN BY THE WATER, THAT IS DOWN BY THE WATER.

AND IT'S FORGETTING AN ELEVATION MARK ON.

THERE'S A LOT IT TAKES SOME PICTURES THAT THE HILL IS ALL RIGHT UP HERE, AND DOWN HERE IS WHERE THE LOWER LAND IS.

SO, IT'S 2020.

FROM THE CORNER, UP WHERE THE STAKES WERE, I HAVE GREEN AND RED, GREEN AND ORANGE STAKES MARKED UP HERE BY A TREE STUMP.

AND THE MARK THAT WAS RIGHT DOWN BY THE WATER.

I WAS USING THAT JUST FOR AN ELEVATION POST THAT I PUT IN THE GROUND, THAT THAT IS RIGHT BY THE WATER.

IT'S PROBABLY WITHIN A FOOT OR TWO.

THAT WAS WHERE THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF WATER WAS, AND I WAS TRYING TO GET ELEVATIONS.

SO, FOR BUILDING, I DON'T WANT TO BE BELOW THE HIGHEST WHATEVER THE HIGHEST WATER LINE HAS BEEN.

I DON'T WANT TO BE BELOW THAT WITH ANY FOOTINGS OR FOUNDATION.

BUT UP FURTHER ON THE HILL THERE WERE SOME LOGS AND THERE WERE SOME GREEN AND ORANGE WOODEN STAKES.

I THINK I PUT THE GREEN STAKES IN, AND CABS PUT THE ORANGE STAKES IN, AND I SHOWED WHERE WE MOVED THINGS LIKE SIX FEET TO THE EAST, PULLING US OUT OF THE WETLAND AREA.

SO, THE CORNER THAT WE'D BE DIGGING INTO, THERE'S NOTHING GROWING ON TOP AND THAT WOULD BE ALL SAND.

AND THEN THIS CORNER HERE WOULD HAVE CONCRETE, SO WOULD BE MORE LIKE A RETAINING WALL.

SO, THIS WOULD BE A SAND RIGHT HERE.

AND THIS IS THE EMBANKMENT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

BUT DOWN HERE WHERE THE GENTLEMAN WAS SAYING WAS WHERE THE STAKE WAS DOWN OVER HERE WITH THE POST COMING OUT OF THE GROUND, AND THAT WAS JUST AN ELEVATION STAKE THAT WAS PUT IN THE GROUND FOR WHERE THE WATER LEVEL WAS WHEN WE HAD THE HIGHEST WATER JUST THIS PAST SEASON, I WAS NOT LOOKING AT THE TALL STAKE THAT YOU HAVE IN THERE WITH THE GREEN MARKER.

[00:20:07]

YEP, THAT WOULD BE THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE.

IS THAT. YES. THE ORANGE WAS WHERE CABS ORIGINALLY PUT IT.

AND THEN THE GREEN IS WHERE WE MOVED IT CLOSER.

THERE'RE ACTUALLY TWO ORANGE ONES BECAUSE THEY SHOW THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE THERE.

SO, I DIDN'T MOVE BOTH OF THEM.

I JUST MOVED THE FARTHEST CORNER TO THE GREEN.

SO, IT WAS A GREEN ONE IN BETWEEN THE ORANGE.

AND THAT'S WHERE THE GREEN IS, WHERE IT WOULD START.

AND THEN IT WOULD CONTINUE TO THE EAST.

BUT THERE STILL IS A GREEN STAKE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILL, WHICH I ASSUMED WAS THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE, NOT ON TOP OF THE HILL, BECAUSE YOU INDICATED YOU WERE GOING TO PUT A GREEN STAKE THERE TO INDICATE WHERE THE HOUSE WAS.

YEAH, I GOT YOU GOT THE I, WE HAD SOME PICTURES.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF LARGE LOGS THAT WERE RIGHT BY THEM AND SOME ORANGE CONES I BELIEVE THERE WAS UP ON TOP OF THE HILL.

THAT WAS. YEAH, ON TOP OF THE HILL.

AND THERE WAS ONE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILL, AND THERE WAS ONE FURTHER IN ON A POST.

I MIGHT HAVE JUST HAD OTHER STUFF MARKED FOR ELEVATIONS, BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO DO ELEVATION MARKINGS WITH THE WATER AND WITH THE ROAD WITH A TRANSIT.

I WAS TRYING TO GET ELEVATION MARKINGS, BUT THE WHERE THE STUMP IS AND THE GREEN, THE TWO ORANGE MARKERS WITH CABS AND THE GREEN ONE IN THE MIDDLE WAS THE ONE WHERE THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE IS GOING TO BE NOW, WHICH WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY UP ON THE HILL THERE.

TALKING ABOUT THAT ONE.

I GOT ALL THREE IN THERE.

IF YOU CAN SEE THE COLORS IN THERE.

LET'S SEE.

GUY APPROACH YOU? KEITH. KEITH, DO YOU HAVE AN OVERHEAD THAT WE CAN USE UP THERE? WE DO NOT KNOW.

OKAY, SO THAT'S KIND OF.

GO AHEAD. OKAY, SO THIS IS MILAN STREET OVER HERE.

RIGHT UP ON THE EMBANKMENT.

HERE IS WHERE THE LOG OR THE LOGS WERE.

AND THE STAKES WERE UP IN HERE.

AND THEN THE BANK DROPS OFF RIGHT HERE.

OH, HERE'S THE STAKE I WAS TALKING ABOUT HERE.

THAT TALL ONE. THERE'S ONE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT HILL ALSO.

OH, THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE HAD JUST FOR WATER REFERENCE OR THE EDGE OF WHERE THE WATER WAS UP.

UP. HERE IS WHERE, HERE'S, I THINK YOU SEE AN ORANGE STAKE RIGHT HERE UP ON THE HILL UP HERE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANKS. THANK YOU, SIR.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? FIELD-FOSTER LIKE YOU'RE PONDERING.

I AM, AND I KNOW JAN MANSOUR GOT PAST THE FIRST CRITERIA, BUT I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT THAT CONVERSATION WAS, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SEVERAL HOUSES IN THE LAKE LANSING AREA, AND THERE IS AN OVERLAY THAT IS THERE SPECIFIC FOR THESE TYPES OF HOUSES AND INCIDENTS.

SO, I'M JUST CURIOUS WHERE THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST.

AND PERHAPS THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT WHEN I WASN'T HERE.

SO, I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO HOW WE MET THAT CRITERION.

I HONESTLY DON'T REMEMBER.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE EVEN GOT THAT FAR, I CAN'T REMEMBER.

WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE CRITERIA.

WE SIMPLY KIND OF PUNTED, WANTED TO DO A SITE VISIT, AND THEN THIS MEETING WILL GO THROUGH THE CRITERIA.

GOT IT. OKAY.

YEAH, I COULDN'T REMEMBER.

OKAY. THANK YOU. MEMBER DESCHAINE? YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR QUESTION AT THE SAME THING? ARE YOU OKAY? YEAH.

OKAY. I ALSO VISITED THE SITE, AND IT WAS ALSO UNIMPRESSED WITH THE HILL THAT YOU DESCRIBED IN TERMS OF THE STAKES.

WE DID ASK YOU TO MAKE SURE THE STAKES WERE IN PLACE, BECAUSE WE WANTED TO SEE WHERE THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE WAS, SO I MADE THE SAME ASSUMPTIONS YOU DID.

AND THIS IS A THIS IS TOO CLOSE TO THE WETLAND.

IN MY OPINION. THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT VARIANCE.

AND WETLANDS ARE IMPORTANT ALL THROUGH THE TOWNSHIP.

THEY'RE PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT IN THE LAKE LANSING WATERSHED.

AND SO, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE LARGE HILL THAT WOULD HAVE, IN MY OPINION, ASSUAGE THE ISSUE, MY CONCERNS, THIS HOME, IN MY OPINION, IS TOO CLOSE TO THE WETLAND FOR US NOT TO HAVE A HUGE VARIANCE WITHOUT NECESSARILY A COMPELLING REASON TO.

WE UNDERSTAND YOU WOULD LIKE A VIEW, A BETTER VIEW, BUT IT APPEARS WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE HOUSE AND THE GARAGE PULLING THE HOUSE BACK A FEW FEET, IT SEEMS

[00:25:02]

AND HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO MOVE? WELL, YOU CAN SEE THE LINE OF THE WETLAND SETBACK LINE.

THAT WOULD BE YOUR GUIDE FOR THAT.

SO, NO.

NO. VERY WELL.

WE HAVEN'T MADE THAT VOTE YET.

AND ACTUALLY, THIS SHOULD BE AMONGST THE BOARD AS WELL.

NOT WE DON'T TYPICALLY DO THE DIRECT ENGAGEMENT LIKE THIS.

YEAH. THIS IS JUST THE BOARD TIME FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS TO SPEAK.

SO THAT WAS MY TAKE AFTER VISITING THE SITE.

ANYTHING ELSE. I HAD A COUPLE COMMENTS AS WELL.

I DID GO OUT AND TAKE A LOOK AND I HAD SOME PICTURES.

I DIDN'T SEE THE GREEN STICK YOU WERE LOOKING AT, BUT I KIND OF WALKED AROUND AND LOOKED AND I BELIEVE I SAW THE STICK THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED BETWEEN THE ORANGE CONES.

SO, I TRIED MY BEST TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT EXACTLY THE VIEW OF THE WATER WAS THAT YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE.

AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT GREAT.

IT'S NOT A BIG VIEW. IT'S YOU CAN SEE IT BACK THERE.

BUT I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AS WELL ON I THINK IT'S REYNOLDS.

THE AREA WHERE THE APPLICANT IS SAYING THERE'S A VIEW IS BECAUSE THERE'S A VACANT LOT, AND I KNOW THERE'S A DIFFERENT OWNER TO THAT VACANT LOT.

IS THAT LOT BUILDABLE BY CHANCE, DO YOU KNOW, IS IT A LEGAL LOT TO BE ABLE TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON? EVERY LOT OF RECORD IS A BUILDABLE LOT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

EVEN THOUGH IT'S IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ANY IMPACT OF THIS TIME ON OUR DECISION HERE.

BUT I WHEN I WENT AND LOOKED AT THAT AT THE I WANTED TO SEE WHAT'S CREATING THE VIEW OF THE WATER BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS NOT DIRECTLY ON THE WATER.

SO, I WANTED TO SEE HOW THAT VIEW WAS BEING CREATED.

AND I NOTICED THAT THE BIGGEST REASON WHY IT'S BEING CREATED IS BECAUSE THERE'S AN EMPTY LOT THERE.

NOW, HYPOTHETICALLY, SOMEBODY OWNS THAT PROPERTY.

THEY COULD ONE DAY IF THEY DECIDE TO SELL IT OR WHAT THEY DO NOW, THEY CAN BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE THERE AND YOUR VIEW IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE GONE OR IT'S GOING TO BE DIMINISHED PRETTY LOW TO WHERE IT IS RIGHT NOW, DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY PUT THAT HOUSE ON THAT PROPERTY.

THAT PROPERTY WAS ILLEGALLY FILLED IN AND CANNOT BE BUILT IN THE CITY WITHOUT THAT BEFORE.

BASED ON WHAT THE DIRECTOR SAID, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT COULD BE BUILT ON.

BUT REGARDLESS, THAT'S ALL HYPOTHETICAL BECAUSE WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S EVER GOING TO BE BUILT ON.

SO, I CAN'T, I'M NOT GOING TO BASE ANYTHING ON DECISION THAT I MAKE ON THAT BECAUSE THAT'S ALL HAPPENSTANCE DOWN THE FUTURE.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO SEE WHAT WAS CAUSING YOUR VIEW OF THE WATER.

AND NOW I UNDERSTAND IT'S A VACANT LOT THAT'S UP THERE NOW, BUT I DID HAVE KIND OF THE SAME.

QUESTIONS AND FEELINGS WHEN IT CAME TO LOOKING AT THIS, AND HOW MUCH OF THE BUILDING WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE IN THAT SETBACK? I TO ME IT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE THE BUILDING ACTUALLY MOVED CLOSER TO THE ROAD AND PULL THAT BUILDING OUT OF THE SETBACK.

EVEN THOUGH NOW YOU WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO HAVE A VARIANCE, OR THE APPLICANT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO REQUEST THE VARIANCE LIKE THEY MENTIONED, MULTIPLE VARIANCES TO THE ROAD SETBACK. THANK YOU. OKAY WITH THAT.

SO, TO ME THAT IS MORE PERTINENT OF BEING ABLE TO MAYBE GET AN APPROVAL, HAVING A SETBACK FROM A ROAD THAN HAVING A SETBACK IN THIS WETLAND AT THE TIME. BUT THAT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US TODAY.

SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN EVEN BE VOTED ON OR REALLY EVEN DISCUSSED ANY FURTHER THAN THAT.

THAT'S ALL HAPPENSTANCE AS WELL.

SO THAT WERE THOSE WERE MY MAIN COMMENTS.

IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY MORE COMMENTS, IF NOT, WE CAN GO INTO THE ACTUAL REVIEW CRITERIA.

GO INTO IT. OKAY. SO, NUMBER ONE SAYS UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND OR STRUCTURE THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND OR STRUCTURES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT. AND THESE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT SELF-CREATED.

SO TYPICALLY, I KNOW THAT WHEN THE CHAIR MANSOUR IS HERE, SHE LIKES TO COMMENT ON THOSE FIRST AND THEN GOES INTO IT.

I'M GOING TO DO IT LIKE I DID THE LAST TIME I KIND OF STEPPED IN FOR HER AND LET THE OTHERS SPEAK BEFORE I GO AHEAD AND SPEAK ON IT.

SO, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR NOT QUESTIONS, BUT COMMENTS ON THAT CRITERION? NUMBER ONE, I WOULD AGREE THAT THE LAND IS UNIQUE WITH THAT MUCH WETLAND.

IT DOES LIMIT SOME THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO ON IT.

WHETHER THAT JUSTIFIES VARIANCE IS ANOTHER QUESTION, BUT I THINK THAT THAT PARTICULAR CRITERION IS MET IN THIS SITUATION.

MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER. GO AHEAD.

I DON'T EXACTLY KNOW IF I AGREE WITH THAT.

I MEAN, THE WHOLE AREA IS WETLANDS.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, I MEAN, YOU LOOK ACROSS THE STREET, THERE'S WETLANDS, YOU LOOK, YOU DRIVE DOWN TO THE OTHER HOUSES IN THAT GENERAL AREA AND THERE'S WETLANDS ALL OVER THE PLACE.

SO, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS UNIQUE IN THE FACT THAT IT'S GOT IT'S GOT WETLANDS BEHIND IT.

SO, I DON'T THINK THAT I CAN MEET NUMBER ONE.

[00:30:01]

I'M TOTALLY OPEN, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT WETLANDS BEHIND THE HOUSE GETS ME TO THE POINT WHERE I THINK IT'S UNIQUE.

I WOULD CONCUR IN A SENSE THAT THESE APPEAR TO BE SELF-CREATED BY THE PLACE IN THE LOT CLOSEST TO THE TO THE WETLAND.

IT'S NOT AS IF NO HOUSE CAN BE BUILT IN THIS PROPERTY.

A HOUSE CAN BE BUILT IN MANY WITH A DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION ON THIS LOT AND WOULD AVOID THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE.

SO, TO ME, THE PLACEMENT ON THE LOT IS A SELF-CREATED PROBLEM FOR THE FOR THE APPLICANT.

I WOULD AGREE, I JUST DON'T SEE HOW IT'S A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE AND.

YOU KNOW, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HAS BEEN SAYING, IT'S THE TYPE OF THING WHERE IT WAS LIMITED TO ONE VARIANCE, BUT IT'S ALMOST THE WRONG VARIANTS BECAUSE IT'S ONLY VIOLATING ONE.

BUT IT'S THE WETLAND BUFFER.

AND I FEEL LIKE THE OTHER VARIANCES COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH MORE REASONABLE.

YEAH, I WOULD AGREE TO SOME EXTENT.

I CAN SEE BOTH SIDES.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COULD BE SEEN AS A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE, JUST BECAUSE OF THE WETLANDS BEING ON THE PROPERTY, WHEN OTHER AREAS MAY NOT HAVE THE WETLANDS ON THERE, AND THEY HAVE A BIG BODY OF WATER IN THE BACK OF IT OR IN THE FRONT OF IT.

BUT I ALSO DO AGREE THAT I'M LEANING TOWARD THAT.

THE NEED FOR THE VARIANCE IS MORE SELF-CREATED THAN IT WAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL PROPERTY THAT'S FORCING THE OWNER TO PUT THIS BUILDING IN THAT SPECIFIC AREA.

HAVING HEARD THE COMMENTS FROM THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, I CONCUR WITH THEIR REASONING IN THIS TOO.

WELL, WITH THAT, LET'S MOVE ON TO CRITERIA NUMBER TWO.

WE CAN JUST CONTINUE TO GO THROUGH THESE.

SO, NUMBER TWO SETS THE STRICT INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE LITERAL TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER WOULD RESULT IN PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES THAT WOULD PREVENT THE OWNER FROM USING THE PROPERTY FOR A PERMITTED PURPOSE.

SO FAR, I'VE HEARD, AND I DO AGREE, THAT I THINK THE OWNER PROBABLY COULD USE THIS FOR THE PURPOSES THAT THEY WISH TO DO IT, AND THE DIFFICULTIES ARE, IN MY OPINION, ARE BEING CREATED FROM THE WAY THE APPLICANT WANTS TO SET THAT PROPERTY OR NOT THE PROPERTY, BUT THE BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF.

ALBEIT HE HAS HIS REASONS FOR WANTING TO DO THAT BECAUSE HE WANTS THE VIEW.

I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT, AND HE HAS HIS RIGHT TO COME AND ASK AND BE AFFORDED THAT.

BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT INTERPRETATION OF THIS WOULDN'T PREVENT THE PROPERTY OWNER FROM BUILDING SOMETHING ELSE ON THAT PROPERTY.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT IT? I AGREE, I AGREE ALSO, I AGREE.

WELL, NUMBER THREE GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS A MINIMUM ACTION NECESSARY WHICH WOULD CARRY OUT THE SPIRIT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SECURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE. ANY COMMENTS ON NUMBER THREE? I DON'T BELIEVE THAT GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD.

FURTHER THE PURPOSE OF THE ORDINANCE AND PROTECTING THE PUBLIC IN AN EXTENT THAT IT IMPACTS THE WETLANDS AROUND THE LAKE.

AND SO, I WOULD SAY THAT HAS NOT BEEN MET IN MY OPINION.

ANYBODY ELSE. I AGREE.

NUMBER FOUR GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND OR THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY.

COMMENTS ON THAT? NUMBER FOUR, FOR ME, THIS WOULD IMPACT THE ADJACENT WETLANDS, AND IT WOULD VIOLATE THE BUFFER THAT WE'VE CREATED FOR THE WETLANDS. AND SO, THIS APPLICATION DOES NOT MEET THE FOURTH CRITERIA EITHER.

I AGREE, THE SAME WETLAND BORDERS OTHER LOTS AS WELL.

SO, YOU'RE INFECTING ONE PART.

IT'S VERY LIKELY TO AFFECT ANOTHER LOT.

SO. OKAY.

NUMBER FIVE. GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL BE GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE PURPOSES AND INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER.

COMMENTS ON NUMBER FIVE. CRITERIA NUMBER FIVE.

I DON'T BELIEVE GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD DO SO.

OKAY, AGREE.

JUST ONE COMMENT.

TO ADD TO THAT AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS.

THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE OTHER VARIANCES THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE TO GET IF YOU POSITION THE HOUSE DIFFERENTLY.

SO, I WOULD RECOMMEND, SINCE IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE NOT APPROVED, IS THAT YOU GO BACK TO YOUR DEVELOPER OR ARCHITECT AND BASICALLY PRESENT PROBABLY A VARIANCE THAT IS A SETBACK OFF OF THE ROAD ITSELF, MOVING THE

[00:35:07]

IT SEEMS THAT IS THE WAY THE DISCUSSION IS GOING.

SO, IF YOU WANT A DIRECTION ON WHAT YOU SHOULD COME BACK WITH, I WOULD SUGGEST DOING THAT.

THAT'S A GOOD COMMENT.

I JUST CHOSE THE WRONG DIRECTION OF THE VARIANCE.

THANK YOU. MEMBER DESCHAINE.

GO AHEAD. I MOVE TO DENY ZBA CASE NUMBER 23-08 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6329 MULLINS.

THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

OKAY. LET ME SCROLL BACK UP.

I'M SORRY, I'M GETTING TO THE ACTUAL VARIANCE HERE AGAIN.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? NO. IF ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ALL THOSE HAVE TO BE ROLL CALLED.

I'M SORRY. YES. YES.

REMEMBER TO SAY YES TO DENY.

MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER YESTERDAY? YES. AND THE ACTING CHAIR DOES SAY YES AS WELL.

SO, I DO BELIEVE THAT WITH THE ADVICE THAT YOU'VE GOT FROM MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER, I WOULD RECOMMEND HIGHLY GOING BACK AND TALK WITH YOUR BUILDER AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO PULL THAT OUT OF THERE AND TRY TO KEEP THE VIEW IF YOU WANT THAT VIEW, BUT JUST TRY TO MINIMIZE THAT IMPACT AND NOT GO INTO THAT WETLAND BUFFER.

BE OF YOUR BEST INTEREST.

YEAH, I COULD DEFINITELY PULL TOWARDS LAKE DRIVE.

I WAS TALKING TO THEM AT THE TIME ABOUT DOING THAT, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS MORE OF AN IMPACT THE CLOSER TO THE STREET WITH THE HOUSE GETTING STRUCK BY A CAR OR VEHICLE, WE CAN GO IN THAT DIRECTION. I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

THANK YOU. WE THANK YOU FOR COMING AND FOR PRESENTING.

WE APPRECIATE IT. SO NEXT WE MOVE ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND WE'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE ZBA CASE NUMBER 23-10, LOCATED AT

[6.A. ZBA CASE NO. 23-10 (2470 Burcham), East Lansing – Meridian Water & Sewer Authority, 2470 Burcham Drive, East Lansing, MI 48823]

IT'S MERIDIAN WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY LOOKING AT THE SAME ADDRESS, 2470 BERTRAM DRIVE, EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN, 48823.

MR. CHAPMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE US A BACKGROUND ON THE CASE? YEAH. SO, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR THAT DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIRED WETLAND SETBACK.

LOCATED AT 2470 BERTRAM DRIVE, THIS PROPOSED RESERVOIR WILL BE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING AND WEST OF THE EXISTING RESERVOIR.

THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 79.32 ACRES IN SIZE AND IS ZONED RR RURAL RESIDENTIAL.

THERE IS ONE AFFECTED WETLAND ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS NORTH OF THE PROPOSED RESERVOIR, AND IS APPROXIMATELY 0.46 ACRES IN OVERALL SIZE, AND BECAUSE THIS WETLAND IS LOCATED WITHIN 500FT OF THE RABY DRAIN, WHICH IS A TRIBUTARY TO THE RED CEDAR RIVER, IT IS REGULATED BY BOTH THE STATE OF MICHIGAN AND THE TOWNSHIP.

ALSO, THE APPLICANT MUST RECEIVE A WETLAND USE PERMIT FROM THE TOWNSHIP FOR EXCAVATION, FILLING AND CLEARING THAT WILL TAKE PLACE WITHIN THE WETLAND ITSELF.

SO, OUR ORDINANCE SPECIFIES THE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE 20 FOOT AND 40-FOOT WETLAND.

SETBACKS. THE 40-FOOT WETLAND SETBACK PROHIBITS STRUCTURES AND GRADING, AND THE 20-FOOT WETLAND SETBACK.

ALLOWS FOR SELECTIVELY PRUNING TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUND COVER.

LET'S SEE.

AT THE CLOSEST POINT, THE RESERVOIR WILL BE LOCATED ZERO FEET FROM THE WETLAND BOUNDARY, ENCROACHING 20FT INTO THE 20-FOOT NATIONAL NATURAL VEGETATION STRIP AND 40FT INTO THE 40-FOOT WETLAND SETBACK.

SO, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 20-FOOT VARIANCE AND A 40-FOOT VARIANCE.

AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAPMAN.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE BY CHANCE? WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND SAY ANYTHING.

PLEASE FEEL FREE. AGAIN, JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, IF YOU CAN, PLEASE.

YES. THANK YOU.

SO, MY NAME IS NATE COFFIN.

I'M A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WITH ROTH AND CLARK CONSULTING ENGINEERS.

I HAVE THIS BRIEF PRESENTATION FOR YOU ON BEHALF OF ELMWSA.

QUICK QUESTION ON THE ADDRESS. DO YOU WANT MY ADDRESS OR WHO I'M PRESENTING FOR? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. PROBABLY YOUR ADDRESS.

MY ADDRESS, 1431 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, DETROIT, MICHIGAN.

SO AGAIN, I HAVE THIS PRESENTATION HERE.

I WANT TO TAKE.

5 TO 10 MINUTES TO GO OVER PROJECT BACKGROUND WITH YOU GUYS, AND THEN ANOTHER 5 TO 10 MINUTES TO PROVIDE SUPPORTING INFORMATION ON THE FIVE

[00:40:06]

SO, TO GIVE YOU SOME PROJECT BACKGROUND, WHAT YOU SEE HERE, THIS IS ELMWSA'S DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT, THE EAST LANSING MERIDIAN WATER SEWER AUTHORITY.

THEY HAVE 30 GROUNDWATER WELLS THAT IN THE SURROUNDING AREA OF THE PLANT.

THEY'RE TREATED HERE AT THIS WATER TREATMENT PLANT BEFORE BEING DISTRIBUTED TO RESIDENTS OF BOTH THE CITY OF EAST LANSING AND ALL OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

THERE'S A PROJECT OCCURRING AT THIS SITE IN THIS ROUGH AREA OVER HERE.

WE'RE PROPOSING TO BUILD A NEW RESERVOIR IDENTICAL TO THIS EXISTING RESERVOIR THAT YOU CAN SEE HERE.

AND THE REASON WE'RE BUILDING THIS RESERVOIR IS TO IMPROVE WATER QUALITY THROUGH DISINFECTION BY INCREASING THE AVAILABLE DRINKING WATER STORAGE.

WE'RE ALSO INCREASING THE WATER STORAGE TO IMPROVE THE WATER TREATMENT PLANTS OPERATIONS.

AND THEN LASTLY, BY BUILDING THIS RESERVOIR, THE ELMWSA WILL BE ABLE TO REHAB THEIR EXISTING RESERVOIR HERE AS THIS EXISTING RESERVOIR IS 50 YEARS OLD WITHOUT ANOTHER RESERVOIR.

BEING ABLE TO DO THAT IS NOT COST EFFECTIVE.

SO, A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BACKGROUND.

WE RECENTLY RECEIVED $60 MILLION IN STATE FUNDING THROUGH THE STATE REVOLVING FUND.

AND THEY RECEIVED $16 MILLION IN FUNDING, 4 MILLION OF THAT WHICH IS GRANT AND 12 MILLION OF THAT WHICH IS LOW INTEREST LOAN.

THAT LOW INTEREST LOAN IS MUCH MORE FAVORABLE THAN WHAT THE AUTHORITY COULD ACHIEVE ON THE CURRENT BOND MARKET.

SO, THEY RECEIVED THIS $60 MILLION FOR ONE PROJECT PLAN.

AND THIS ONE PROJECT PLAN IS MADE UP OF FOUR PROJECTS.

AND ONE OF THESE PROJECTS IS I'LL CALL IT THE RESERVOIR PROJECT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY.

AND THE BIG THING IS, WHAT'S AT STAKE HERE IS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THIS MONEY FOR ALL FOUR PROJECTS, ALL FOUR PROJECTS NEED TO BE ABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED.

ALL FOUR PROJECTS NEED TO MEET THE REQUIRED CRITERIA.

AND IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD.

IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THIS FUNDING, ALL PROJECTS NEED TO MOVE FORWARD.

SO, ALL THE OTHER PROJECTS ARE SET TO GO, WHICH I CAN BRIEFLY TELL YOU HERE.

THIS IS THE OKEMOS ROAD WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT.

THERE'S THE PARK LAKE ROAD WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT.

THE THIRD PROJECT IS THE CITY'S ACQUIRING MORE GROUNDWATER WELLS.

AND THEN OUR FOURTH PROJECT IS THAT RESERVOIR PROJECT WHICH IS OCCURRING ON THE TREATMENT PLANT PROPERTY.

SO, THIS IS THE LAST ONE THAT WE NEED THIS.

WE'RE REQUESTING THIS VARIANCE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THIS, TO GET THE FUNDING FOR ALL FOUR OF THESE PROJECTS WITHOUT THIS STATE FUNDING.

THIS IS THE LAST THING I WANT TO SAY WITHOUT THIS STATE FUNDING, IF THE AUTHORITY WERE TO HAVE TO SELF-FINANCE ALL THESE PROJECTS COMBINED COULD COST UPWARDS OF AT THE LOW END, PROBABLY $10 MILLION.

AND THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE 4 MILLION IN GRANT THAT THEY WOULD RECEIVE.

SO, THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT THESE PROJECTS.

THE FIGURE THAT YOU HAVE HERE, THIS IS A SCREEN CLIPPING FROM MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP'S GIS PARCEL VIEWER.

WHAT'S OUTLINED IN YELLOW.

THAT IS ELMWSA PROPERTY AND THE WETLANDS THAT IS IN QUESTION HERE THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH, WHICH IS THE TOPIC OF OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

THE WETLANDS THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS OVER HERE.

I WANT TO TAKE A SECOND TO POINT OUT THEIR ENTIRE PROPERTY, BECAUSE THEY DO OWN, AS WE SAID, 79, ROUGHLY 79 ACRES OF PROPERTY.

YOU CAN SEE THE ENTIRE EAST SIDE OF THE SITE.

IT'S FULLY IT'S UNDEVELOPED.

IT'S PREVALENT WITH WETLANDS.

AND TO GIVE YOU A BETTER IDEA, WHEN OVERLAID WITH GOOGLE MAPS, THIS IS AN ENTIRE AREA THAT IS PROTECTED SINCE THE 1970S, SINCE THIS PLANT HAS BEEN ACTIVE.

SO, THIS IS AN UNTOUCHED SITE, AND ELMSWA WOULD PREFER TO CONTINUE CONSTRUCTION OVER IN THIS DEVELOPED PORTION OF THE SITE THAT THEY HAVE.

WE'LL QUICKLY ZOOMING IN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

THIS IS THIS IS THEIR WATER TREATMENT PLANT.

HERE WE HAVE THEIR EXISTING RESERVOIR.

THE PROPOSED RESERVOIR IS ROUGHLY IN THIS LOCATION.

AND THEN THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE WETLANDS ACTUALLY RIGHT HERE AS SHOWN.

AND THESE WETLANDS ARE CONNECTED BY A CULVERT FROM THESE ISOLATED WETLANDS TO THESE LARGER WETLANDS OVER HERE THAT DRAINS TO THE RABY DRAIN.

SO THAT'S THE SITE THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH.

AND MOVING IN JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

SO, THIS IS A BLOWN-UP FIGURE OF FIGURE ONE IN THE ZBA PACKET.

I'VE ANNOTATED A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR THIS MEETING.

[00:45:01]

THIS IS THE LOCATION OF IT.

AND PER DRINKING WATER STANDARDS A NEW RESERVOIR HAS TO BE BUILT.

IT CANNOT HAVE IT CANNOT BE WITHIN 50FT OF AN OPEN WATER SOURCE, WHICH A WETLAND IS CONSIDERED AN OPEN WATER SOURCE.

SO, THIS ORANGE SHADED AREA THAT I HAVE HERE, THIS WAS THE AREA THAT WE WERE ALREADY GOING TO HAVE TO IMPACT BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS NEW RESERVOIR. ALSO, BECAUSE OF THE ELEVATION CHANGES, WE'RE DROPPING ROUGHLY 15FT OVER 50FT TO THE EDGE OF EDGE OF THIS ORANGE CIRCLE HERE.

SO, WE'RE ACTUALLY. ARE YOU GOING TO BE MOVING EVEN FURTHER INTO THESE EXISTING WETLANDS? NOW, ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT ELMWSA IS WORKING WITH MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP AND OBTAINING A WETLAND USE PERMIT CURRENTLY.

SO, REMOVING THESE WETLANDS, THIS ISN'T WHY I'M BEFORE YOU TODAY, BUT I REALLY WANT TO DISCUSS IS THIS PURPLE SHADED SECTION HERE.

THIS IS THAT 40-FOOT SETBACK FROM THESE ADJACENT WETLANDS TO THE WEST.

SO, MEASURING 40FT OFF FROM HERE, THERE'S THIS LITTLE SLIVER WHERE WE WOULD PREFER, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT IN HERE.

AND WITHOUT A WITHOUT THIS VARIANCE, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO THEN WHAT I HAVE HERE, I JUST KIND OF BROKE DOWN THE FIVE CRITERIA THAT WE HAD ANSWERED IN THE PACKET.

BUT I JUST WANT TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE SUPPORTING INFORMATION FOR YOU GUYS WITH THIS PRESENTATION.

SO GOING THROUGH THEM, THE FIRST CRITERIA, THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PROPOSED RESERVOIR LOCATION IS IT'S IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WATER TREATMENT PLANTS FUTURE LAND USE PLAN THAT THEY'VE HAD SINCE 1970, WHEN THIS PLANT WAS BUILT FOR THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES.

THE LOCATION, THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED RESERVOIR IS THE MOST FAVORABLE FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATIONS, AND IT'S ALSO THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE LOCATION FOR THIS RESERVOIR. IN REGARDS THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE, CONSTRUCTING THIS NEW RESERVOIR.

CONSTRUCTING THIS NEW RESERVOIR IN THIS LOCATION IS IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC GOOD BECAUSE OF THE COST EFFECTIVENESS, OF COST EFFECTIVENESS, OF WHERE THIS RESERVOIR CAN BE FOR THE FOURTH ONE, FOR THE ADVERSE EFFECTS.

WE THINK BEING ABLE TO WORK IN THAT SETBACK, WE ACTUALLY THINK WE CAN MAINTAIN EXISTING CONDITIONS ON THE SITE, OR WE CAN EVEN IMPROVE THEM IF WE'RE ABLE TO WORK IN THAT WETLANDS SETBACK THAT WE'RE REQUESTING.

AND THEN LASTLY, FOR PUBLIC INTEREST, AGAIN, CONSTRUCTING THIS RESERVOIR WILL RESULT IN IMPROVED WATER QUALITY FOR THE RESIDENTS OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP AND THE CITY OF EAST LANSING. SO REALLY QUICKLY, I WANT TO RUN THROUGH JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE SPORTING INFORMATION FOR EACH CRITERION.

SO, FOR THE FIRST ONE, UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES.

WHAT'S SHOWN HERE IS WHAT IS ATTACHMENT TWO IN YOUR ZBA PACKET.

SO, THIS PLANT HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT BASED OFF THIS FUTURE LAND USE THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE EARLY 1970S.

SO, THIS BOBBLED IN AREA HERE.

THIS NEW FILTER ADDITIONS PROJECT CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

THIS ONE IS ALMOST COMPLETE AND HAS THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS WHAT WAS WHAT WAS SET FORWARD IN THE 1970S.

AND ALSO OVER HERE, THIS IS OUR PROPOSED RESERVOIR LOCATION, WHICH YOU CAN SEE THIS DASHED LINE OVER HERE.

THIS IS THEIR ROOM FOR FUTURE EXPANSION.

SO, THIS IS WHAT THEY HAVE ALLOCATED.

SO, THIS IS ROUGHLY THE CLOSEST WE CAN GET BACK TO THE PLANT IN ORDER TO KEEP THE SPIRIT OF THE FUTURE LAND USE TO BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THAT.

SO THEN FOR CRITERIA TWO PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES.

SO YES, ELMWSA OWNS QUITE A SIZABLE PROPERTY.

SO, SEVERAL ALTERNATIVES WERE CONSIDERED BEFORE PICKING THAT PROPOSED RESERVOIR LOCATION, AS SHOWN IN THE RED CIRCLE, WHICH AGAIN IS THE MOST VIABLE FOR OPERATIONS.

IT'S THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE LOCATION THAT WE COULD COME UP WITH, PLACING THE RESERVOIR FURTHER SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED RESERVOIR IN THIS AREA. AGAIN, THAT WOULD WIPE OUT ANY ROOM FOR FUTURE EXPANSION FOR THIS TREATMENT PLANT.

IF WE WERE TO DO THAT, MOVING FARTHER NORTH, IF THE RESERVOIR IS PLACED FARTHER NORTH, YES, IT COULD STILL BE CONNECTED TO THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT, BUT IT'S FAR MORE EXPENSIVE THAN PLACING IT WHERE IT IS, AND ALSO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RESERVOIR ITSELF AT PROVIDING IMPROVED WATER QUALITY, PROVIDING VALUABLE STORAGE. IT'S NOT AS HIGH QUALITY AS IF IT'S CLOSER TO THE TREATMENT PLANT BECAUSE OF THE PLANT HYDRAULICS.

AND THEN LASTLY, WE LOOKED AT THIS ENTIRE EAST SIDE.

SO, WHAT WE HAVE SHOWN HERE WITH THE BLUE HATCHING, THAT'S ROUGHLY THE EXISTING WETLANDS THAT ARE ON THE EASTERN PART OF THE PROPERTY.

[00:50:02]

IT'S ALL FORESTED.

AND LASTLY, I WANT TO POINT OUT THIS, THIS ORANGE LINE HERE, THAT'S AN EIGHT-INCH OIL PIPELINE THAT ACTUALLY RUNS THROUGH THIS PROPERTY.

SO HAVING TO DEVELOP, HAVING TO EVEN JUST PLACE THIS RESERVOIR OVER HERE, EVEN LIKE WHEN I WAS DISCUSSING ABOUT MOVING IT FARTHER NORTH, IF WE MOVED TO EVEN FARTHER EAST, THAT BECOMES EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE.

AND THEN BECAUSE IT WOULD BE SO FAR AWAY FROM THE TREATMENT OPERATIONS OF THE PLANT AS THEY EXIST RIGHT NOW, YOU'D ACTUALLY END UP HAVING TO BUILD A SECOND WATER TREATMENT PLANT ON THE EAST SIDE, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, FAR MORE EXPENSIVE THAN WHAT WE CAN DO RIGHT NOW.

SO, MOVING ON TO CRITERIA THREE, THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE.

I WANT TO BRING THIS FIGURE UP ONCE AGAIN, BECAUSE I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON WHERE WE'RE REQUESTING THE VARIANCE FOR.

AND IT'S THIS PURPLE SHADED AREA RIGHT HERE.

AGAIN, THE WETLANDS, THE EXISTING WETLANDS TO BE REMOVED THAT IS BEING HANDLED ON WAS WORKING WITH MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP ON OBTAINING THAT WETLAND USE PERMIT CURRENTLY.

SO, TO DISCUSS THIS PURPLE STRIP OF LAND THAT WE HAVE HERE, WHICH IS ROUGHLY 0.05 ACRES, IF WE WERE TO LEAVE THIS, IF WE WERE TO NOT HAVE THE ZONING VARIANCE, IF WE WERE TO STILL CLEAR THIS PORTION OF THE WETLANDS AND WE JUST LEFT THIS STRIP OVER TIME, THIS PURPLE STRIP WOULD MOST LIKELY NO LONGER BECOME A VIABLE WETLAND.

UM, SO WE ACTUALLY THINK IF WE'RE ABLE TO WORK IN THIS AREA, WE CAN ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE SITE CONDITIONS, OR WE CAN AT LEAST GET BACK TO EXISTING CONDITIONS AS THEY ARE TODAY, WHICH THAT BRINGS ME TO CRITERIA FOUR, WHICH IS ADVERSE EFFECTS OF CONSTRUCTION IN THAT WETLAND SETBACK.

SO, I WANT TO START WITH, WELL FIRSTLY IF THIS IF THIS IS FAMILIAR THAT LEFT SIDE THAT'S ACTUALLY FIGURE FOUR IN YOUR PACKET. AND THE KEY I DO WANT TO POINT OUT IS THE WETLANDS ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.

SO WEST OF THE WETLANDS THAT ARE ON ELMWSA'S PROPERTY WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BECAUSE OF CONSTRUCTION.

SO, I HAVE THESE TWO PHOTOS HERE.

THESE ARE THIS IS THE BERM THAT SEPARATES THOSE SMALLER WETLANDS FROM THE LARGER WETLANDS THAT DRAIN TO THE RABY DRAIN TO THE WEST.

THERE'S THIS BERM HERE.

WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THIS TOP PHOTO, THIS SECTION IS ON VISAS.

AND THEN THIS IS THE LARGER, LARGER WETLANDS TO THE WEST.

WE ARE HOPING TO CONSTRUCT IN THIS AREA, BUT WE WILL NOT BE CONSTRUCTING ON THIS BERM AT ALL.

ALL CONSTRUCTION EFFORTS WOULD BE TO THE EAST OF THIS BERM ON THIS PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD PHYSICALLY CHANGE THE PHYSICALLY UNCHANGED THE WETLANDS TO THE WEST. WE WILL NOT BE IMPACTING THOSE WETLANDS.

THE LAST THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IN THIS FIGURE IS THE WAY WE HAVE IT DESIGNED RIGHT NOW.

WE ACTUALLY THINK I BROUGHT UP WE CAN IMPROVE THE SITE DRAINAGE ON THIS PORTION IF WE'RE ABLE TO WORK WITH THE ENTIRE WETLANDS AND WORK WITHIN THAT SETBACK. SO, WHAT YOU HAVE SHOWN HERE IN THESE GRADING PROFILES, THESE DASHED LINES ARE THE EXISTING AS THE EXISTING GRADE AS IT IS TODAY.

AND THESE BOLD LINES ARE OUR PROPOSED GRADE.

SO, WE'RE ACTUALLY PLANNING TO DEEPEN THE WETLANDS.

SIGNIFICANT? NO.

WE'RE PLANNING TO DEEPEN THE WETLANDS FOR MORE WATER STORAGE ON THIS PROPERTY, AND WE PLAN TO PUT BACK AN EMERGENT WETLAND SEED MIX IN THIS LOW POINT SO THAT ONE DAY IT WILL EVENTUALLY COME BACK TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AS THEY ARE TODAY.

AND AGAIN, BECAUSE OF WHERE WE'RE AT, WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO DO THIS AND CREATE THIS LOW POINT, WE'RE WITHIN THAT PURPLE STRIP, THAT WETLAND SETBACK.

AND THE LAST ITEM I HAVE IS JUST CRITERIA FIVE, PUBLIC INTEREST.

SO, WHAT YOU'VE WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE, THIS IS THE MOST UP TO DATE AERIAL VIEW OF THE TREATMENT PLANT SITE.

YOU CAN SEE THAT RIGHT HERE.

THIS LIGHTER SHADED BUILDING.

THAT'S A RECENT ADDITION THAT NASA HAS JUST COMPLETED.

THEY HAVE A NEW TANK HERE.

AND WE'RE ALSO PLANNING TO PUT IN, AS YOU KNOW, THIS PROPOSED RESERVOIR HERE.

SO, WE SEE TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT ONLY MAINTAINING THEIR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, BUT THEY'RE ALSO REALLY TRYING TO KEEP WORKING IN THEIR ALREADY DEVELOPED SECTION OF THEIR SITE AND IMPROVE THEIR WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND REALLY IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY FOR BOTH THE CITY OF EAST LANSING AND MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I CAN TRY AND ANSWER.

THANK YOU. WOULD YOU GO BACK A FEW SLIDES THAT SHOWS THE RESERVOIR AND THE PROPOSED RESERVOIR AND THE WETLAND IMPACT?

[00:55:08]

I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND.

START A LITTLE SLOW. IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY.

I SEE THE CIRCLE WHERE THE RESERVOIR IS.

AND THEN THE ORANGE CIRCLE AROUND THAT 50FT OFF.

WHY ARE YOU REMOVING THE EXISTING WETLANDS TO THE NORTH AND THE PURPLE AREA? IS THERE MORE CONSTRUCTION THERE THAT YOU HAVEN'T DIAGRAMED YET? YES. AND THIS WAS I THINK MAYBE THIS WILL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

SO, OUR NEW RESERVOIR IS BEING BUILT TO MATCH THE EXISTING AND WITH FOR DRINKING WATER STANDARDS.

THERE'S A CERTAIN THERE'S A CERTAIN DEPTH THAT THIS NEW RESERVOIR NEEDS TO BE BURIED.

AND SO, THE WAY WE ACHIEVE THAT IS BY BUILDING UP TO THE SIDE OF THE RESERVOIR TO KEEP THAT DRINKING WATER RESERVOIR INSULATED.

AND SO, YOU CAN SEE OVER HERE FOR THE EXISTING RESERVOIR, WE'RE LOOKING AT 864 ROUGHLY IN ELEVATION.

AND BY THE TIME THAT WE GET DOWN TO HERE.

SO, OVER A 50-FOOT SPAN IT'S ROUGHLY 847.

SO, YOU'RE GOING DOWN 20FT OR SO? YEAH. IT'S MY POINT BEING, IT'S A PRETTY STEEP DROP.

THE WAY WE WOULD HAVE TO MITIGATE THAT IS IF WE.

BECAUSE WE'D ALREADY HAVE TO WORK IN THIS NARROW ORANGE STRIP.

BUT IN ORDER TO MITIGATE THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO BUILD A RELATIVELY DEEP RETAINING WALL.

IT WOULD REQUIRE MASSIVE FOOTINGS.

IT'S REALLY NOT A CHEAP PROJECT.

IT'S A MILLIONS TYPE OF PROJECT TO BUILD THAT RETAINING WALL TO, TO REALLY KEEP THAT ELEVATION, TO MAINTAIN THAT ELEVATION CHANGE.

SO, I SEE SO INSTEAD YOU'RE JUST PROPOSING TO REMOVE THE WETLANDS AND ALLOW FOR THE NATURAL FEATURES TO RETAIN THE WATER.

CORRECT. AND IF YOU DON'T MIND, I THINK THIS ONE DOES A DECENT JOB AT SHOWING OUR GRADING OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. SO ESPECIALLY THIS GRADING PROFILE HERE.

THIS IS THE EXISTING GROUND AS IT IS RIGHT NOW OKAY.

THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE DECIDED IS KIND OF THE MINIMUM SLOPE OF THE LAND FOR OKEMOS TO BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THIS LAND.

SO, WE DID THIS, AND WE MADE IT AS STEEP AS WE COULD.

AND THEN WHEN WE GOT TO A SPOT, WE DEEPENED IT.

WE DEEPENED IT FOR WATER STORAGE.

SO THAT'S THAT ENDED UP IMPACTING MORE OF THE WETLANDS BY BEING ABLE TO DO THAT.

MAKES SENSE. ARE YOU PROPOSING ANY MITIGATING COMPENSATORY WETLANDS TO MITIGATE THE LOSS OF THESE THAT WILL BE DESTROYED BY THE NEW RESERVOIR? YEAH. SO, THE EXISTING WETLANDS I'LL GO BACK TO THE EXISTING WETLANDS TO BE REMOVED.

THOSE ELMWSA IS WORKING WITH THE TOWNSHIP TO OBTAIN THAT WETLAND USE PERMIT.

THEY WILL BE MITIGATING FOR THE LOSS OF THESE WETLANDS.

YES. AND THEY ARE, IT'S NOT ON PROPERTY WHERE THEY'LL BE MITIGATING, BUT THEY WILL BE EXPANDING WETLANDS IN THE SAME WATERSHED IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP. GREAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YEP.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER, GO AHEAD.

SO, THE FUTURE EXPANSION OF THE PROPERTY.

WHAT IS THAT? DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS GOING TO ENTAIL? AND INSTEAD OF GOING OUT, CAN IT GO UP.

WHAT IS THE WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR THAT EXPANSION? RIGHT. YEAH. SO, WHEN THIS PLANT WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED IT'S RELATIVELY TOUGH TO SEE IN THIS FIGURE.

BUT WHEN THIS PLANT WAS DESIGNED, IT WAS DESIGNED WITH THIS MAIN BUILDING AND ITS TREATMENT WHICH DOES HAVE TREATMENT OPERATIONS.

BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO TREATMENT OPERATIONS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

AS MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP EXPANDED, AS EAST LANSING EXPANDED, THE PLAN THEY HAD IN THE 70S WAS FOR THE SITE TO BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY MIRROR ITSELF SO THEY COULD DOUBLE ITS CAPACITY OVER TIME.

SO, AND RIGHT NOW, THE WAY IT IS, THE BUILDING IS ROUGHLY, I WOULD SAY IF YOU'VE IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN TO THE TREATMENT PLANT, I'D SAY IT'S ROUGHLY A TWO-STORY BUILDING. IT GOES DOWN PRETTY DEEP.

BUT FOR DRINKING WATER, HYDRAULICS, THERE'S A LOT HAPPENING BELOW GRADE THAT YOU DON'T REALLY SEE.

SO, YOU KNOW, BUILDING UP IS A GOOD QUESTION, BUT THEN YOU CAN'T WORK WITH GRAVITY ANYMORE FOR YOUR OPERATIONS.

EVERYTHING WOULD HAVE TO BE PUMPED.

IT BECOMES MORE EXPENSIVE TO OPERATE AND TO MAINTAIN AND THE CAPITAL COST TO PUT IT IN AS WELL.

SO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.

MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER DAN OPSOMMER, DEPUTY TOWNSHIP MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING.

JUST TO BUILD ON NATE'S POINT, THE TREATMENT PLANT WAS NOT PICKED ON AN IDEAL SITE BACK IN THE 70S.

[01:00:02]

TYPICALLY, YOU WOULD BUILD IT ON A STEEP DECLINE SO THAT GRAVITY CAN DO THE WORK FOR YOU.

SO, WE'RE ALREADY WORKING WITH LESS THAN IDEAL CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE TREATMENT PLANT.

SO, IT'S A RELATIVELY FLAT SITE.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY, IT'S VERY LOW LYING TO BEGIN WITH.

SO, APPEARANCES AND CONCEALING THE ESTHETICS OR LACK THEREOF, OF THE PLANT WAS PRIORITIZED OVER THE HYDRAULICS OF OPERATING A WATER TREATMENT PLANT ALREADY.

SO THOSE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS THAT WE'RE ALREADY WORKING WITH.

WAIT. GO AHEAD.

YOU WOULD PROBABLY BETTER BE ABLE TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.

SO HOW ARE THE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE TOWNSHIPS GOING? ONE OF MY QUESTIONS MEMBER DESCHAINE ASKED, THAT WAS THE MITIGATION.

AS FAR AS ARE WE GOING TO MAKE UP FOR THE REMOVAL OF THIS SOMEWHERE ELSE? AND SO, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT, HOW ARE THOSE DISCUSSIONS GOING? ARE THERE ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF? NO. THE TOWNSHIP'S WETLAND ORDINANCE POLICY IS NO NET LOSS WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP.

TO SATISFY THE STATE EGLE REQUIREMENTS, THE APPLICANT HAS PURCHASED WETLAND BANK CREDITS OUTSIDE OF THE TOWNSHIP AND THEN AS PART OF PHASE TWO OF THE MSU TO LAKE LANSING TRAIL ON TOWNSHIP LAND PRESERVATION PROPERTY.

THERE WILL BE A COMPLETE COMPENSATION OF THE WETLAND.

OKAY. GO AHEAD.

AND JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT I WAS READING THE INFORMATION CORRECTLY, THE STATE HAS GRANTED APPROVAL FOR THIS ALREADY.

OKAY, THAT'S ALL I GOT.

THANK YOU, MR. ASHMAN. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OR AN ENGINEER? THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR OPSOMMER.

WHAT PERCENTAGE, DAN, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE WATER IS CONSUMED BY MERIDIAN RESIDENTS AND WHAT PERCENTAGE BY EAST LANSING RESIDENTS? IT'S ROUGHLY A 5545 SPLIT, 55% MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

AND THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO PREDOMINANTLY CONTINUE TO GROW AS THE CITY IS LANDLOCKED AND THE TOWNSHIP IS NOT.

OKAY. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A PEAK CAPACITY OF ABOUT 19 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY.

PEAK CONSUMPTION COULD TOP OUT AROUND 14 MILLION, SO PLAN EXPANSION WILL NEED TO OCCUR IN THE FUTURE.

AS TO THE ESTHETICS OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN, I BET ONE OUT OF 100 PEOPLE IN THE TOWNSHIP COULD NAME WHERE THE WATER PLANT IS, SO IT IS WELL DISGUISED UP THERE.

AND IF YOU TOLD ME THE WATER PLANT UP THERE, PEOPLE MIGHT BE UPSET THAT THIS BIG 15 MILLION GALLON A DAY WATER PLANT GOING ON.

YEAH. SO, THE.

YEAH, THE CONCEALMENT AND THE LOW PROFILE SIMILAR TO THIS BUILDING.

RIGHT. SO, WE'RE NOTICING A TREND RIGHT IN THE 1970S.

LOW PROFILE BUILDINGS THAT ARE KIND OF SCREENED BY NATURE, BUT MUCH TO THE PLANT MANAGEMENT TEAM'S OPERATIONS. YES.

THE CONCEALMENT WORKED WELL, BUT THE LACK OF GRAVITY CAN BE PROBLEMATIC.

BUT THE RESERVOIR IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT WILL BE A RIGIDITY FOR THE PLANT, AND RIGIDITY IS LOOPING.

THINGS LIKE THAT CAN BE VERY IMPORTANT WHEN THINGS GO WRONG.

ONE MORE VALVE AT THE PLANT WOULD HAVE HELPED US A LOT BACK IN JANUARY OF 2023, FOR INSTANCE.

SO DIFFERENT PIECE OF INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE PLANT, BUT HAVING RIGIDITIES AND DUPLICATION CAN BE VERY, VERY BENEFICIAL.

RIGIDITY MUST BE A TERM, A TERM OF ART THERE.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY RIGIDITY.

WELL, WE'RE GOING TO BUILD A SECOND RESERVOIR SO WE CAN REHAB THE EXISTING RESERVOIR.

SO, WE'LL HAVE TWO RESERVOIRS.

SO MUCH LIKE HOW WE TRY TO LOOP OUR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, THE WATER MAINS, SO THAT IF WE HAVE A BREAK AT ONE END OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE CAN LOOP AND FEED FROM THE OPPOSITE.

SO, FOR INSTANCE, CORNELL WOODS IN FOREST HILLS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S LOTS OF LOOPS THROUGH THERE.

SO ANYTIME WE CAN CREATE RIGIDITIES OR DUPLICATION IT'S A BENEFIT TO THE RESIDENTS.

THANK YOU. GO AHEAD.

AND SO AS MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP CONTINUES TO GROW, WILL THIS DUPLICATION OR REDUNDANCY BE ABLE TO MANAGE THE INCREASED POPULATION.

AND WHAT DOES THAT TOP OUT AT.

WHAT DOES THE POPULATION TOP OUT AT.

NO. WHAT IS THIS RESERVOIR? HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL THIS BE ABLE TO BASICALLY CLEAN WATER FOR? WHERE IS OUR MAX? SO, THESE PROJECTS ARE NOT ACTUALLY EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF GALLONS THAT WE CAN PRODUCE IN A DAY.

BUT THE FUTURE PLAN EXPANSION WOULD ALLOW FOR US TO GROW UP TO, I THINK, A TOP OF 40, 30 MILLION GALLONS.

SO HOW MANY PEOPLE?

[01:05:01]

SO, WE COULD GO WE COULD INCREASE BY ABOUT 50% FROM THERE.

SO, WE DON'T ANTICIPATE, OR DO YOU ANTICIPATE ANY FURTHER EXPANSIONS OR THE NEED FOR ANY NEW RESERVOIRS IN THE DISTANT FUTURE? IN THE DISTANT FUTURE? CERTAINLY NOT IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE.

AND ANY IDEA WHERE THAT RESERVOIR WOULD GO? OH, NOT RESERVOIRS SPECIFICALLY, BUT PLANT EXPANSION IN TERMS OF INCREASING CAPACITY FOR THE PLANT IN THE FUTURE.

AND WE SAID, GO AHEAD AND ATTEND THE ANNUAL MEETING A COUPLE OF YEARS BACK.

AND THERE'S AN INVERSE CORRELATION IS GOING ON BECAUSE OF WATER, PEOPLE BEING CAREFUL ABOUT WATER CONSUMPTION, USING LOW, LOW VOLUME TOILETS AND SO FORTH.

BASICALLY, THAT THE POPULATION HAS INCREASED BY 20% THE PAST 20 YEARS.

CONSUMPTION IS ACTUALLY GONE DOWN BY 20%.

IS THAT TREND LIKELY TO CONTINUE OR ARE WE HAVE WE KIND OF FLATTENED OUT IN TERMS OF EFFICIENCIES.

SO AVERAGE CONSUMPTION FOR THE AVERAGE USER IS STILL TRENDING DOWN SOMEWHAT.

IT'S HOW MUCH IT'S DECLINING BY IS STARTING TO KIND OF LEVEL OFF BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY SO MANY WAYS TO CONSERVE WATER.

YEAH. BUT YEAH, THAT CERTAINLY HAS BEEN A TREND OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.

BUT AS WE ADD MORE DEVELOPMENT, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT TOTAL CONSUMPTION GOES DOWN.

BUT THE AVERAGE CONSUMPTION PER HOUSEHOLD HAS BEEN GOING DOWN FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? THANK YOU BOTH. APPRECIATE ALL YOUR TIME TONIGHT.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICATION? IF NOT, THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? COME ON UP TO THE PODIUM.

JUST ONCE AGAIN, I KNOW WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM YOU, BUT STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE.

FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

YES. CRAIG SKOCZYLAS, 6329 MULLEN STREET.

UP ON THE PRINT THAT THEY HAD WITH THE PURPLE AREA, THEY'RE TALKING ALMOST A HALF-ACRE.

THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT FOR ACTUALLY GOING INTO THE WETLAND.

I DIDN'T KNOW THAT I COULD BUY CREDITS, AS THAT'S SOMETHING I COULD DO ON MY PROPERTY TO BUY CREDITS AND ALLOW THAT, BECAUSE I'M NOT TOUCHING ANY WETLAND.

I'M ONLY IN A BUFFER ZONE AND I'M NOT CHANGING.

I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING TO DISRUPT THE WATERWAYS OR ANYTHING.

THAT WOULD BE A GOOD QUESTION, PROBABLY FOR THE STAFF.

OKAY, AFTER THE MEETING, I WOULD TALK WITH THEM ABOUT THAT GUY.

IF THEY CAN WORK WITH ME WITH THAT, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

I'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK? IF NOT, WE'LL CLOSE THE.

THANK YOU. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING, AND WE'LL GO INTO THE BOARD TIME.

SO, DOES ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THE APPLICATION BEFORE US? I THINK WE CAN MOVE RIGHT TO THE CRITERIA.

ALL RIGHT. TO THE CRITERIA. OKAY.

I'LL START WITH CRITERIA NUMBER ONE.

AGAIN, THIS IS UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND OR STRUCTURE THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LAND OR STRUCTURES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT.

AND THESE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT SELF-CREATED.

ANY COMMENTS ON CRITERIA? NUMBER ONE? MEMBER, I THINK QUITE OBVIOUSLY IT'S A VERY UNIQUE STRUCTURE.

SO, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THE BUILDINGS AROUND THERE DO QUITE THE SAME GOAL.

SO, I THINK IT'S VERY WELL MET IN THAT ONE.

AGREED. I DEFINITELY THINK THE NEED FOR ELEVATION FOR THE HYDRAULICS, AS WAS DESCRIBED, DEFINITELY MAKES THIS THIS PROPERTY UNIQUE.

AND. YEAH, WE CAN MEET CRITERIA ONE, I THINK.

AND THANK YOU, KEITH, FOR BRINGING UP THAT AREA THERE, BECAUSE I DEFINITELY BELIEVE THAT BASED ON WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS SAID ON THE RECORD AND LOOKING AT THE AREA THERE, THAT THE REST OF THAT PROPERTY IS, I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT'S UNBUILDABLE, BUT IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO PUT SOMETHING OVER THERE.

AND THAT TO ME IS DEFINITELY A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

I UNDERSTAND THERE'S OTHER AREAS WHERE YOU COULD PUT THE RESERVOIR THAT YOU MENTIONED.

OTHER AREAS BUT BASED ON OTHER CONSTRAINTS IT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT.

BUT I THINK YOU'RE VERY LIMITED TO WHERE YOU CAN PLACE THIS BASED ON WHAT ELSE IS OUT THERE ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.

IT ALSO WOULD HAVE IMPACT ON WETLANDS ELSEWHERE ON THE PROPERTIES.

RIGHT? CORRECT.

OTHER COMMENTS? WE CAN MOVE ON. NUMBER TWO.

NUMBER TWO. SO STRICT INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE LITERAL TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER WOULD RESULT IN PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES THAT WOULD PREVENT THE OWNER FROM USING THE PROPERTY FOR A PERMITTED PURPOSE.

COMMENTS. NUMBER TWO.

I THINK COUPLED WITH THE COMPENSATORY WETLAND AND

[01:10:09]

I BELIEVE THAT HAS BEEN MET.

THAT THIS IS REALLY THE ONLY.

ONLY WAY TO GET WHAT THEY NEED IN ORDER TO PROCEED FURTHER AND PROTECT THE TOWNSHIP IN THE FUTURE.

AND SO, I WOULD SAY THAT'S BEEN MET.

I AGREE. I WOULD AGREE.

I CONCUR. I WOULD AGREE AS WELL.

NUMBER THREE CRITERIA NUMBER THREE IS GRANTING THE VARIANCE IS THE MINIMUM ACTION NECESSARY WHICH WOULD CARRY OUT THE SPIRIT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SECURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE.

COMMENTS ON CRITERIA NUMBER THREE.

YEAH. MOVING THIS TO THE EAST SIDE WHERE THERE'S MORE SPACE, WOULD BE A MUCH MORE RADICAL STEP TO MAKE IN REDUCING THE EFFICIENCIES OF IT.

SO, THIS DOES SEEM TO BE THE MINIMAL ACTION TAKEN TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL WITHOUT FURTHER DISRUPTING THE WETLANDS TO THE EAST. SO, THIS DOES APPEAR TO BE THE MINIMUM.

I AGREE, ESPECIALLY SINCE YOU'VE GOT THAT OIL LINE THAT CUTS THROUGH THE PROPERTY.

SO, I DEFINITELY AGREE.

AND GIVEN THE FACT AS WAS DESCRIBED WITH THE EXPANSION, AND AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE NEED TO HAVE THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE LAND ALLOW FOR THE GRAVITY, THEY CAN'T GO UP.

SO, I DEFINITELY AGREE THIS IS THE MINIMUM ACTION NECESSARY.

I WOULD AGREE AS WELL.

ANY MORE COMMENTS ON NUMBER THREE? NOW, WE'LL MOVE ON TO CRITERIA NUMBER FOUR.

GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND OR THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY.

COMMENTS ON CRITERIA NUMBER FOUR.

SO, I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE MITIGATING THE REMOVAL OF THE WETLANDS AND FINDING A DIFFERENT LOCATION TO PUT THAT WETLAND.

I KNOW IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S DEFINITELY IMPORTANT TO BOTH THE STATE AND THE TOWNSHIP, SO I APPRECIATED HEARING THAT.

ALSO, THE FACT THAT THEY'RE TAKING THE ACTIONS TO MAKE THE WETLANDS BETTER SO THAT WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY LOSING THOSE DUE TO TIME, BUT THEY ARE DIGGING DEEPER TO REGROW THOSE WETLANDS, I THINK IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ADVERSELY AFFECTING IT, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY IMPROVING IT.

IN THE ADJACENT LAND IS ESSENTIALLY A WATER PLANT CAMPUS, IF YOU WILL, AND I THINK THERE TO BE.

THEY'VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB OF KEEPING THE EAST AREA UNTOUCHED AND TRULY MAINTAINING A NATURAL AREA THERE INSTEAD OF EXPANDING IN THAT DIRECTION.

SO, OF THIS, OF ALL THESE ACRES THAT ARE TAKING UP LESS THAN A QUARTER AND WHERE THIS OTHER PLANT WOULD BE, WELL, IT WOULD AFFECT THE IMMEDIATE AREA WETLANDS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED.

THE OVERALL FOOTPRINT IS ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED.

YEAH. WHEN I REVIEW THESE CRITERIA, THIS WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT I REALLY KIND OF HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A QUESTION ABOUT JUST BECAUSE OF THE ONE ADVERSELY AFFECTS ADJACENT LAND.

AND I NOTICED THAT DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS APPEARS LIKE THERE ARE SOME SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES.

I FORGOT TO ASK THE QUESTION OF THE STAFF, BUT DID ANYBODY FROM THE CITY OR NOT? THE CITY, BUT THE TOWNSHIP OR THE CITY OF EAST LANSING, SPEAK TO ANY OF THOSE RESIDENTS NEARBY AND LET THEM KNOW THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

DO THEY HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR ANYTHING BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO BE DIRECTLY NEXT TO THEM, WELL SHIELDED PER SE BY ALL THE TREES, BUT IT'S SO CLOSE TO THEM THEY HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT IT. SO, THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE WEST IS BILL CAYWOOD.

HE'S A MEMBER OF THE TOWNSHIP DDA.

HE IS AWARE OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION AND ACTIVITIES THAT ARE GOING ON AT THE ELMWSA PLANT.

HE HAS EXPRESSED NO CONCERNS TO THE TOWNSHIP.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO THAT WAS MY ONLY CONCERN WITH CRITERIA NUMBER FOUR AND THE CENTRAL CHARACTER.

I DO BELIEVE WITH ALL THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE ALREADY MADE WITH THE LOCATION OF THIS, I UNDERSTAND THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME WETLAND THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THIS, BUT BEING THAT IT'S GOING TO BE MITIGATED, I THINK HELPS ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR THE CENTRAL CHARACTER OF IT.

THEN MOVING ON TO CRITERIA NUMBER FIVE, NO OTHER QUESTIONS ON NUMBER FOUR.

COMMENTS. NUMBER FIVE SAYS GRANTING THE VARIANCE.

SORRY, PETER WENT OFF. GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL BE GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE PURPOSES AND INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER.

SO, COMMENTS ON CRITERIA NUMBER FIVE.

WELL, WE GOT TO HAVE DRINKING WATER.

YEAH, I DON'T THINK THERE'S MUCH BIGGER PUBLIC INTEREST THAN WATER.

SO, WE'VE GOT TO HAVE WATER.

EXACTLY. I WOULD TEND TO AGREE.

SO, SEEING THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED AND COULD MEET ALL FIVE CRITERIA.

DOES ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION ON THE BOARD? I WILL MOVE THAT. WE APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR A ZONING VARIANCE.

[01:15:06]

23 1023.

TEN SECOND MOTION.

OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? IF NOT, I WILL DO THE ROLL CALL.

I FORGOT TO DO THAT THE LAST TIME.

REMEMBER TO SAY YES.

REMEMBER TO SAY YES. MEMBER FIELD-FOSTER.

YES. MEMBER BENNETT.

YES. AND ACTING AS THE CHAIR.

SAY YES AS WELL. SO, VARIANCE HAS BEEN APPROVED.

THANK YOU, GUYS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

MOVING ON TO OTHER BUSINESS, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS SOMETHING ON HERE ABOUT THE 2024 MEETING SCHEDULE.

[7.A. 2024 Meeting Schedule]

NO BIG CHANGES.

STILL MEETING THE THIRD WEDNESDAY OF EACH MONTH.

YEAH. THAT'S IT.

IS THIS AN ACTION ITEM? DO YOU NEED ACTION FROM THE BOARD ON IT? YEAH. OKAY. ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS TO STAFF FIRST BEFORE YOU MAKE THE MOTION? I WAS ON THE ZBA SEVEN YEARS AGO WHEN THE WHEN THE ZBA MET TWICE A MONTH.

SO, THANK YOU AGAIN.

I MOVE THE ZBA APPROVE THIS 2024 MEETING SCHEDULE AS PROPOSED BY ASSISTANT PLANNER KEITH CHAPMAN.

SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? IF NOT, GO TO A VOTE.

THANK YOU, KEITH, FOR BRINGING THAT FOR PUBLIC REMARKS.

AT THIS TIME, IF THERE'S ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND GIVE PUBLIC REMARKS, I BELIEVE THESE ARE PUBLIC REMARKS, SOME THINGS THAT WERE NOT ON THE AGENDA. IS THAT CORRECT, OR IS IT? YOU CAN SPEAK ON ANYTHING. THEY CAN SPEAK ON ANYTHING.

SO, ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON ANYTHING NOW IS YOUR CHANCE.

GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. MOVE ON.

BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS.

ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY COMMENTS THEY WOULD LIKE TO GIVE?

[9. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS]

SO, I HAVE ENJOYED SITTING ON THE ZBA.

THIS HAS BEEN A BLAST.

I CAN'T. I'M TRYING TO THINK IT'S BEEN THREE FOUR YEARS.

I THINK I'VE BEEN ON IT.

OTHER THAN THAT, IT COULD BE LONGER THAN THAT BECAUSE WE WERE DOING 22 A MONTH AND I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE GOING DOWN TO ONE.

BUT WITH MY SCHEDULE, I AM NOT ABLE TO DEDICATE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT I REALLY NEED TO THE ZBA.

SO, IF WE'VE GOT A MEETING IN DECEMBER, I WILL DEFINITELY BE ATTENDING THAT MEETING.

BUT MY TERM ENDS AT THE END OF THIS YEAR AND SO I WILL NOT BE ASKING TO RE UP MY TERM.

AND SO, I JUST WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW I HAVE DEFINITELY HAD A GOOD TIME.

WE'RE DEFINITELY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

I'VE BEEN ON HERE FOR, I THINK, A YEAR AND A HALF NOW, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT LONGER.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU'VE ALWAYS HAD GOOD QUESTIONS AND I APPRECIATE SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THAT. SO, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE REST OF THE BOARD, BUT FOR MYSELF, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME ON THE BOARD.

AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE FOR THE TOWNSHIP.

THANK YOU. WISH YOU WELL.

THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE A DECEMBER MEETING, SO I'LL SEE.

ALL RIGHT. SO, WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT MONTH.

I WAS ABOUT TO SAY I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY SCHEDULE IS, BUT.

YEAH. AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE TOWNSHIP MAY HAVE SOMEONE THAT MAY APPLY FOR YOUR POSITION, I KNOW.

YEAH. GO BACK TO ZERO AGAIN, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE. SO, ANY OTHER BOARD COMMENTS BEFORE WE ADJOURN? IF NOT, WE CAN ADJOURN AT 7:49.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.